I wouldn’t give much credence to what Hamilton says.

Moves the MWC more into the Texas Market, gives TCU a traveling partner and they are a better football school.

But adding Nevada and Fresno as well? I would rather have Houston and then decide between Fresno and Tulsa. Also, whats up with this news coming from DC?

But if it gets us to where we want to be, so be it.

Whatever it takes so that our conference champion has a legitimate shot at the BCS title game. I would recommend Houston, Fresno State, Boise State and SMU. For the first time in a long time the Ponies appear to be on the upswing and bring in the Dallas market as well as natural rivalries with Houston and TCU, as well as getting the Ponies reacquainted with BYU who they staged an all time classic with.

With three Texas teams, I believe recruiting would open up not only for football, but for Basketball as well.

Houston makes so much more sense, for all the reasons already stated. Don’t know about having two Cougars in the same conference though…

Houston, SMU, and TUlsa a enot being considered, becasue Conf USA is also going to strengthen and there will be 2 more BCS conferences. Notre Dame will be forced to join a conference. Army and Navy will join the Big Least.

All BCS conferences except Pac 10 and Big 10 will go to a 12 team format with a playoff.

You heard it here – and yes I made it up – but it would make sense. Better yet take all to a 12 team format by adding Hawaii and NM State to the PAC 10 and Notre Dame to the BIg 10.

Go Cougs

Houston needs to be a little more consistent before we lump them in with the likes of Boise State and the MWC big 3…1 great year in the last 30 means nothing (last one being in 1979 11-1)…so let’s hold our horses on Houston…for God’s sake, with this logic, we should bring SMU back! Remember, it wasn’t that long ago that Miami (Ohio) was "good"!

would get them into the Bay Area television market. The Spartans have a terrible football team. They could be considered if we are talking markets.

Nevada makes sense because they would have a natural rival with UNLV.

UTEP would fit geographically and is in Texas which is always nice. Plus they could help bring in the Sun Bowl as a MWC bowl.

I think it is smart for the Mountain West to take the first strike and expand first before other leagues grab teams and prevent us from adding teams we want.

Some have argued that we should slow down the Houston talk because they have only had one good year, while there is some legitimacy to that, the reason you add Houston is for recruiting and further opening the Texas market. Utah recruits Houston and Texas as a whole like crazy, being able to tell a recruit they can come back and play in their home town would make a difference. Also, just playing in Houston would raise conference awareness.

As for expansion, for whatever reason, I am completely against adding Fresno. I know they play the big boys (and always lose) and they have a great Baseball team, but who cares? Fresno sucks and they really bring nothing. At the same time I really favor adding Nevada. They have decent Fball team, a good BBall team, would create a great rivalry in Nevada with UNLV (and maybe get some fan interest in UNLV). Sure Reno is a hole, and they offer nothing recruiting wise, but I like ’em.

The two no-brainers to me are Boise State and Houston. That should have been done yesterday (if we do want to go to Twelve teams, I actually would prefer just adding Boise and staying with 10 teams).

For the Twelfth teams, my ideas in preferred order are:
1) Convince Colorado to ditch the Big-12 (not a chance, but how great would an annual Utah-Colorado meeting be!, I might like that more than playing BYU each year)
2) Add Nevada or SMU (natural TCU rival, more texas is good, historically solid program before the death sentence)
3) Add Montana from Div 1-AA
4) Do nothing and add no teams
5) Add Fresno or San Jose State

Getting the BCS AQ is a matter of the aggregate scores of all the conference teams. The way it’s structured, it’s very difficult to make it if you have too many teams on the bottom end acting as anchors. As things stand at the moment, Colorado State, UNLV, and San Diego State are the biggest aggregate anchors on the conference, with Wyoming and New Mexico not far off. Their total deficit is nearly impossible for the remainder of the conference to overcome.

The purely Macchiavellian approach to getting the AQ (if the MWC could actually do this) would be to eject out from the bottom end at the same time that they add to the top. Add Boise, remove SDSU. Add Fresno, remove UNLV, or whatever. They could numerically force their way in that way.

But since they can’t just up and kick teams out (so far as I understand), simply adding quality points may not be enough. So it may be a decision of whether to go for the short-term value for a chance at AQ, or try to pick up teams that will make sense in a longer term. With a team like Boise, the decision is easy. But some of the other options on the table may take some thought.

I’m trying to be a bit vague about it because I don’t have the numbers in front of me. (It’s worth understanding the BCS evaluation metric if you’re a MWC fan, though.) But after a conference picks up its BCS points from the top end (i.e. end-of-season rankings), look to the bottom end to see whether the conference has a chance.

I may be at Tennessee for grad school, but I grew up in Wyoming, got my bachelor’s there, and pull for the MWC whenever I can. At this point, I no longer care which team it is; if they’re in a nonconference game, I want them to win. The MWC has to grab every quality point they can.

Timing is everything. When the BCS re-evaluates, their bylaws state that it doesn’t matter which conference a team is with when it earns value. A team’s points belong to the team, not the conference. (Call it the ACC/Big East rule.) It also takes one year after accepting an invite before a team is considered a conference member.

If the MWC offers at the right time, then Boise, etc. will earn their quality points against WAC teams but count for the MWC. They won’t have to beat MWC teams to gain those points, which means that the MWC gets points for free. If Boise were a part of the conference today, then every win against Wyoming, UNLV, etc. would only hurt those teams while helping Boise – a null effect of sorts.

I firmly believe there’s an under-the-table deal in place between Boise and the MWC for this reason. That, and I believe the WAC is screwed. (Serves ’em right for blowing up the old WAC.)

(as these reports would indicate) then the three criteria used by the BCS to determine future automatic qualifications should be used to measure teams.

So who are the top teams from outside the BCS automatic qualifications base on these measures over the past 4 years (the window the BCS uses)?

1) Boise State
2) TCU
3) Utah
4) BYU
5) Hawaii
6) Houston

After this the next group are very dense and indistinguishable:

7) Central Michigan
8) Air Force
9) East Carolina
10) Troy
11) Tulsa
12) Nevada
13) Ball State
14) Fresno State
15) Western Michigan
16) Southern Mississippi

Boise State is an obvious asset. The MWC should expand to 10 this summer.

Hawaii may be a one hit wonder and 2007 will roll off the BCS window before the next evaluation. This year they are performing far worse than the “Air Force” pack. They also add travel costs that would rival any increase in BCS revenue.

Houston has been consistently equal to those in the pack behind them and this year are at a significantly higher level. Even if this is just a blip, it is a blip that would count in the next evaluation period. TV market share, a travel partner for TCU and increased presence in Texas for recruiting are some of the other intangibles that make Houtson a viable candidate if 12 is the number. Other than scheduling issues, 11 might be a good number.

If we rule out all teams from states that don’t boarder a state with a MWC team, we are left with the following list of nearly equal teams from a BCS perspective: Tulsa, Nevada and Fresno State. My question is, does the MWC really need another Air Force?

Adding one of these teams would allow the MWC to add a championship game which could bring in more revenue than any two of the MWC’s existing guaranteed bowl bids.

How will bowl allegiances change? You’d have to think that, if the MWC gets only Boise, that one or two of the WAC bowls would look around for better deals. If the MWC grabs more, it could get quite interesting.

Outside the BCS, having Utah, BYU, Boise, and TCU all in the same conference is enough to pretty much guarantee at least two high-quality teams available for any game (along with well-traveling fans).

1. It’s never going to happen; Southern California has more football talent than anywhere else in the country and is a huge market.

2. As soon as SDSU finds a coach that can start getting some of that talent to stay, (which we already have 4 star recruits from San Diego making early commits and Brady Hoke is one hell of a recruiter), we have the money, facilities, and fan base to compete with the big 3 very soon (we already gave BYU a run for their money one season after going 2-10).

So stop hatin’ and forget about it because you will eat your words soon, I guarantee it.

to get the MWC to 12 teams and a Conf. Title game, I’d pick n order:

1) Boise St. (this one seems obvious)
2) Nevada. (good football program, old WAC ties to UNLV and Col. St)
3) UTEP (Tie to New Mexico, tie to West Texas recruiting, and would bring the Sun Bowl, which has been around since 1935)
4) Fresno St (fits geographically especially if Nevada is added. They at least have a national reputation and name, even if the program hasn’t done anything in awhile)
5) Houston (ok, I’m not crazy about this one as others here, as I don’t think it fits geographically, and I’m not sure they aren’t a one year flash. They are a small private school, and not important in their own market, even if it’s a big one. there is neither a mountain there, nor in the west)
6) Idaho, Utah St, New Mexico St, Northern Colorado, Montana and/or Montana St. (they fit geographically, which I think is the number one issue for a stable conference)

The Mountain West needs a bowl game. One that’s been around for some time, and one in or near the Mtn West Region. One that could step up a level to a New Year’s day time game like the Gator Bowl level. That is what I think the Sun Bowl could be. El Paso and the Big Bend area is really very nice place to be in the winter time.

Glad you like my UTEP and Sun Bowl suggestion.

All this talk about expansion is amazing. Going to 12 teams and adding a championship that could be played in Denver at Invesco Field would be great.

Don’t forget that both these schools are very good at Basketball. That is a big part of why they are in the conference as well.

Wouldn’t be worth it to drop them for that reason alone.