BYU announced that, starting in 2011, it is going independent in football and joining the West Coast Conference (WCC) in other sports accommodated by the WCC.
For me, it has been a roller coaster of emotions. I was initially excited when Boise State joined the MWC. Then I was deflated with Utah left for the PAC. Then I was worried that BYU would join the WAC again, which would have been disastrous. Now I am happy again (but not without concern) that BYU is aiming for higher goals by going independent in football.
There are some drawbacks to the plan, but due to lack of time, I will list only the points that come to mind.
1. BYU's main goal is exposure, not money, although the money is nice when you don't have to share it with other conference members.
2. The WCC is a good fit because all the WCC schools are faith-based institutions (mostly Catholic, I think).
3. We can watch all BYU games, both football and basketball, and many other sports.
4. BYU signed a nice contract with ESPN for home games and announced a six game series with Notre Dame.
5. BYU has already been getting calls from various universities for scheduling requests because BYU draws fans extremely well where ever they go. That means money for the scheduled university.
6. The BCS is out of the question for the first few years of independence, but down the road they might be able to work out a Notre Dame-like deal, provided that they perform well enough.
7. Poor Boise State. They thought they were getting into a competitive conference. Now they are left with a conference that very much resembles the WAC they left.
8. Craig Thompson, the MWC commissioner, is upset at BYU, but it was his clumsy, ill-conceived TV contract that he signed several years ago that started the problem. Then he raids the WAC, probably utterly destroying it to head off BYU. Now he must deal with the problem of his own making.
9. Now I must absolutely get that big, flat screen TV I have been dreaming about.
8 comments:
I agree on all points including #9 that made me laugh...we all more alike than we think!
But, there is always a but, I agree with the local radio stations that are suggesting over and over again that BYU is beyond jealous with Utah's good fortune and simply could not be left behind, that they would have stayed had Utah not left for the PAC-12, exposure be damned.
Boise State can claim misfortune only if they end up dealing well with TCU (who will soon leave as well) and consistently dominate the MW. But that is not so certain. Air Force always eventually beats you sometime. Boise has beaten WYO twice and never lost, but they did not blow them out. Visiting Ft. Worth is very different from visiting Fresno or Reno.
They may.
Finally (for this comment anyway), Craig Thompson is now without a team in Utah, no presence along the populous Wasatch Front (which is why in my opinion he offered membership to Utah State as a deal to hold on to BYU and add a Wasatch Front team: he didn't really want USU). TV ratings will suffer mightily...the demise of the Mtn Channel?
Deric, sound off on this!
I totally disagree that the move is based on jealousy. BYU has long been dissatisfied with its TV deals, which were imposed on BYU by the conference, and BYU has always tossed about the idea of going independent in football because it has such a nicely dispersed fan base. It is true, though, that BYU would not have made the jump to independence had Utah not left for the PAC. Utah's move made the timing right for BYU. Jealousy? I think not. BYU has long toyed with the idea and Utah simply created the opportune time to do it.
With a nice Contract with ESPN and ESON having a large number of contracts to show bowl games and BCS games, BYU has a better shot at getting into those howls. Getting into a big bowl and not having to share the revenue I think was a HUGE plus. BYU/Notre Dame will always be a big seller because of the religious perspective. Could become a big rivalry like Army/Navy every year.
Conference wise, honestly since Utah left, BYU would have had no real rivalry except maybe a potential one with BSU. Every school needs a couple of rivalry games every year...Ohio State/Michigan, Army/Navy, Notre Dame/Boston College, Texas/Oklahoma, etc. I think BYU is looking for a new rivalry game with a national audience instead of a Wasatch audience.
Next, BSU is the one left out in the cold. They should have tried for the PAC-10 instead of Utah. They have shown that they can hold their own (constantly beating Oregon and Bowl games). But, do you really think ANY big name school wants to travel to Boise, Idaho? Seriously, I can't see them playing in any big time conference. If they want lasting respect, they may have to go independent also. Just a thought.
The only way to successfully go independent is to have a widespread fan base. Notre Dame and BYU have that for tradition and religious reasons. Army and Navy (and AF if they wanted to) have that for military service reasons. Boise State's fan base is mostly local in the Boise area (Ada County). In fact many Idahoans (Panhandle and Pocatello) hate BSU. BSU would not be successful as an independent because of their limited fan base. As you say, who wants to play in Boise and get their butts kicked on that ugly blue field (an abomination IMHO)? And who wants to have BSU in their stadium when their fans won't or can't travel to every away game.
Comment to come when I get to a hotel and have time to put in my thoughts.
Awaiting Brian's response.
No sense in disputing the jealousy point. The truth can't be know.
I agree with Alan. BSU cannot go independent. It does not have the fan base. But I disagree that they (BSU's fan base) do not travel well.
They do indeed, as well as any Mtn. school and better than most of them.
They traveled very well to Seattle, Eugene, Washington DC, Logan (I was there), 6,000 to Utah a number of years ago not to speak of the two Fiesta Bowls. And of course, Oregon, Oregon State, BYU, Utah have all traveled to the Blue. Other schools are just not willing to risk losing there. BSU is now attempting to raise $ to expand their stadium capacity from 33G to 53G thereby guaranteeing more $ for a visit (and near certain L) to the City of Trees.
If the Broncos do not dominate the MWC, this discussion will not matter a great deal.
I disagree with Deric on one point: it may well not be easier for BYU to be invited to bowls. ESPN does not determine who is invited. The majority of bowls have automatic conference bowl tie-ins...there will remain only a handful of them with flexibility to invite who they want. On the other hand, at least BYU will not be obliged by a conference tie-in to go to LAS VEGAS... ever again!
I concede your point on how well BSU fans travel. I was clumsily trying to make the point that BYU is more likely to fill seats in opponents stadiums than BSU.
Now there is a rumor that BSU demanded $1 million for a visit to Nebraska and Nebraska balked, of course, because they could offer $250k to another team who would be happy to go to Lincoln and lose. If this rumor is true, BSU is getting a little ahead of itself. BSU needs several more years of high rankings to achieve such influence. For many in the large conferences, BSU is still a flash in the pan that will fade away in a few years.
It could indeed be just a flash-in-the- pan...but Lincoln, Nebraska is no metropolis and has been able to establish itself, despite the hinterlands, as what it is. I figure BSU has Nebraska-like potential. Asking a million is a lot, but you can't get it if you don't ask for it.
BYU is essentially banking on such optimism as well in its bid to make a lot more money and gain a lot more notoriety.
Post a Comment