Holmoe is playing them like a fiddle

vancouvercougar wrote:

Utah St didn't turn the MWC bid down due to loyalty. They turned it down because they didn't have the money to buy their way out.

DIdn't Hair & the MWC (minus BYU) offer to assist with the $5 million for FSU & UNR?

Yes, except FSU and UNR aren't USU. Assisting with payment isn't the same as making the payment.



Perhaps the MWC is only paying $1M and FSU and UNR are covering the rest. Perhaps USU doesn't have the remaining $4M.

craigoscarson wrote:

USU is not an option for the MWC, unless BYU leaves.

I agree with you but Craig Thompson doesn't seem to.

When the possibility of BYU leaving became known, MWC leadership contacted three WAC members inquiring about their interest in joining the MWC. Utah State was the first of these three contacts.

http://www.utahstateaggies.com/genrel/081910aab.html



Hair invited the WAC schools in hopes of foiling BYU's plans and thus keeping BYU in the MWC. Utah State was the FIRST invite. If Utah State had accepted the invite then we are looking at a MWC that includes both BYU and USU.

I just heard that the MWC talked to Houston and they declined interest. Why would they do that unless they thought BYU was leaving or there was a MWC-Conf USA deal coming up.

scott715 wrote:
I just heard that the MWC talked to Houston and they declined interest. Why would they do that unless they thought BYU was leaving or there was a MWC-Conf USA deal coming up.

Source?

hawkwing wrote:

I just heard that the MWC talked to Houston and they declined interest. Why would they do that unless they thought BYU was leaving or there was a MWC-Conf USA deal coming up.

Source?

I heard Bill Riley talking about it on KALL700 yesterday.

That is great that the MWC and C-USA have a deal in place, but umm, don't the BCS commissioners have to approve it to make it matter? At this point, simply a proposal.



Personally, I consider it similar to an NCAA play-in game, and I think it is a horrible idea. Imagine a #2 Boise State or #3 TCU having to do a play in game v. Houston or Tulsa, when no other high ranked BCS team would. Dumb idea all the way around. Diminishes both teams to 2nd class status.

KYCoug wrote:
They [USU] do nothing for us and can't be considered a revelry game because they have no chance to beat us.



Go Cougs!

L Hatton

Louisville KY

Do you call this a revelry game because of USU's reputation as a party school?

Florwood wrote:

They [USU] do nothing for us and can't be considered a revelry game because they have no chance to beat us.



Go Cougs!

L Hatton

Louisville KY

Do you call this a revelry game because of USU's reputation as a party school?

Hey, I've never been accused of being a good speller! Maybe i could use some of that revelry!!! ;)

craigoscarson wrote:
Why the hell would you add a team that right now cannot recruit against BYU, just to put them on the same footing as us?



USU is not an option for the MWC, unless BYU leaves.



BYU just has to hold out and see what concessions they can get out of the MWC. If they get nothing, they still stay and wait for a better time to reconsider leaving.



We can let pride cloud our judgement here, the chance to go indy just came and went with the WAC implosion. The WCC is nice but it's a major step back, especially considering we dont' have the WAC to lean on now for football scheduling.

Even if USU was in the MWC they wouldn't be able to compete in recruiting. That is like saying WSU competes with USC in recruiting just because they are in the same conference.



I don't think BYU needs to hold out, they need to find out what other opportunities are out there. If they can find a better situation then they can give the MWC a chance to match the exposure and money.



I am torn about the WCC. I don't know that the athletics would be that bad, but BYU could end up totally dominating the conference, winning the conference in most sports. That could wear out their welcome pretty quickly.

Lawboy wrote:
That is great that the MWC and C-USA have a deal in place, but umm, don't the BCS commissioners have to approve it to make it matter? At this point, simply a proposal.



Personally, I consider it similar to an NCAA play-in game, and I think it is a horrible idea. Imagine a #2 Boise State or #3 TCU having to do a play in game v. Houston or Tulsa, when no other high ranked BCS team would. Dumb idea all the way around. Diminishes both teams to 2nd class status.

That is excactly how I feel about it. I know Bronco has been a proponent of it but I cannot condone it. It relegates the two conferences to second class status.