How the Mountain West might expand

With the PAC-12 looking for replacements for USC and UCLA, and possible further expansion of the Big 12, it appears that a decimation of the MWC is inevitable.  I think the MWC will eventually lose 4 or 5 schools, but what ends up happening is still in process and changes every day. 

I was a proponent of the Mountain West adding UTSA before the American did.  That was two years ago.  But, who listens. Now who is going to leave the American for the Mountain?  Probably no one.  Sometimes you pay the price when you are not proactive. Proactivity is not the MWC DNA, a trait they learned from the PAC-12.  If it was, Boise State and Fresno State would have been added years before Utah, BYU and TCU left when everyone else was at 12 schools

I know some snarky commenter is going to say, the New Mountain West will include Stanford, California, Oregon State and Washington State after the PAC-12 collapses.  That the MW will have nothing to fret about.  I will eat a bag of kale chips if that happens.  It probably won't. Someone will figure out how work it out.

I don't have access to the same analytics that the real MWC would have access to.  I spent an entire home sick day figuring this out.

My analysis included the following: Market size, facilities, football, men's basketball, women's and Olympic sports, academic reputation based upon US News and World Report, and weather or not they play in the shadow of larger programs.  I did not consider any college that resides in a city of less than 100,000.  I was surprised by the final outcome.  Here it is.

The Top 4 prospects for expansion

1. University of Texas at El Paso.  Surprised?  I'm not.  UTEP is a natural fit for the MWC and arguably should have been included when the conference first formed. They have a history in Men's Basketball and Track and Field.  It is tough to beat six national championships, which their track and field team boasts.  The Front Range 4 of the Mountain West Conference (Air Force, Colorado State, New Mexico and Wyoming) have rivalries with UTEP going back to the old WAC days.  New Mexico even longer.  UTEP is isolated for the rest of Texas and is not likely to be in the shadow of the big schools in the state: Texas, Texas A&M, etc.  These school rarely go all the way to El Paso to recruit.  The biggest threat from the Power 5 in El Paso, is Arizona, which is much closer than any of the big Texas schools. Oh yea, the Sun Bowl is in El Paso. There are two things that drag UTEP down. First, they are in a smaller market, but at a little short of 1 million, it's larger than most on this list.  The second is that their academic reputation is less than stellar.  The second they can fix.  Overall, if the Mountain West only adds one school, UTEP is the logical first choice.

The main arguments against UTEP are two-fold.   First, while they have a great history, their present is lack-luster.  They may make bowl games, but they are rarely a top-25 program.  Even in their more storied basketball and track programs, their success was decades ago.  While their distance from the rest of Texas keeps them out of the shadow of Texas A&M and Texas and other such schools, it also isolates them for the sweet, sweet recruiting base that is most of Texas.  Therefore, they offer no recruiting advantages.  But considering all other things, UTEP is the best option for the Mountain West Conference.

2. University of Montana.  In addition to being among the athletic elites in the Big Sky Conference, Montana is a good academic school, which attracts a nationwide if not world-wide student body.  Their facilities are already FBS ready, and they regularly sell out the 25,000 seat Washington-Grizzly Stadium.  They have been regulars in the NCAA tourney, making 12 appearance. Not too shabby, but second to Weber State.  They fit naturally in the geography of the Mountain West Conference.  Montana's athletic director has said publicly that they are not interested in a move to the FBS at this time, but under the right circumstances, in a situation where they could succeed, don't count on them saying no.  No doubt the Grizzlies are a good fit for the Mountain West.  The biggest weakness is the smaller market and the distance of Missoula from other large cities in the State of Montana.  Given it's academics and tradition of excellence, Montana is a great choice for the Mountain West.

It has also been said that Montana will not join another conference without Montana State.  That was their excuse for not joining the WAC 13 years ago.  That may not be true today.  The Brawl of the Wild could still happen.  That would also not prohibit Montana State form having another cash grab game against another FBS school, but that would prohibit Montana from playing another FCS school  That would complicate the rivalry.  The real reason was likely that Montana would not have made enough money joining a WAC made up of mostly other Big Sky rivals.  That money would not have been there for them at the time.  It was the right decision for them to remain in the Big Sky Conference then.  But what is different now?  Boise State doesn't seem to be getting interest from the PAC-12 or Big 12.  It also seems as if Air Force, Nevada, New Mexico, San Jose State, Utah State and Wyoming will remain in the Mountain West forever.  That may make the money equation better.

3. Sacramento State.  This is probably a surprise to most readers, but not a surprise to me.  Sacramento, while not quite the population of San Diego comes close. California's capitol city is the 2nd largest metro without an FBS football program.  Sacramento State has a stellar academic program, like most schools in California.  They have an FBS-ready stadium, which means they will not have to expand to move up.  Their success on the gridiron is a recent phenomenon, they have been successful in some Olympic sports, especially track and field.  While they are close geographically to California and Stanford, those schools have been so poor on in football in recent years, there is an opportunity to strike and gain some recruiting advantages.  Their biggest weakness is a lack NCAA men's basketball tournament appearances and their small basketball arena, one that not even Air Force would be jealous of.  They would need to pay more attention to the basketball program if they join the MWC.  They may have to work out a scheduling agreement with the Kings for use of the Golden 1 Center for some games.  Despite lack of success in on the basketball court, markets are going to rule the day.  Sacramento is an untapped market at the FBS level and that makes Sacramento State a solid choice, but probably not a top choice.

4.  Weber State University.  This is a surprise.  Please forget about my affiliation to WSU.  I am an alum.  I tried not to let my bias influence my analysis.  But hear me out.  The Wildcats are a basketball power and most teams dread a trip to the Purple Palace.  In basketball WSU has 23 Big Sky Conference championships, 16 NCAA appearances, twice advancing to the Sweet 16.  Their Alumni include Damian Lillard, Bruce Collins, Willie Sorjourner and Wat Mikasa.  Their basketball resume is as good as anyone currently in the MWC.  They have taken steps to keep things interesting before basketball season begins. They have been to the NCAA playoffs 6 of the past 7 seasons. There are upgrades in process to Stuart Stadium, which seats about 17,000.  They have grown to one of the largest campuses in the west, giving them a large alumni base.  Their biggest strike against them very large shadow of Utah and BYU.  And there is one other elephant in the room to discuss.

My original analysis has them at #2, but I had to bring them down a little.  Many readers will say that Utah State would block Weber State going into the Mountain West.  How would USU do that other than to convince the other members of the conference to vote against them?  Like every other school in the state, USU has only one vote on the board of regents.  That would be no avenue except as a symbolic gesture.  If Weber State has a good case to join, USU's objection would only be a symbolic voice.  I don't think USU could block Weber State even if they wanted to.  But do they have to?

Utah State is located in Logan, which is not part of the Greater Salt Lake Combined Statistical area.  When traveling to Logan, you rarely fly directly there.  Go to Expedia and see where it takes you?  That is right, to Salt Lake City.  The drive from Salt Lake City to Logan goes through Ogden.  Logan isn't large enough to employ a large share of Utah State's alumni. Most find jobs in Salt Lake.  Utah State already provides access to the Salt Lake media market.  And therefore, the MWC already has access to the rich Salt Lake recruiting base. Therefore, Weber State would not provide an additional market or recruiting base to Mountain West Schools that they don't already have.  It's an Oz/Tin Man argument, similar to the PAC-12 adding BYU or Colorado State or the Big 12 adding Rice or the Big 10 adding Pitt.  Utah State doesn't have to block Weber State. Their location is already an argument against it. Even so, there are advantages to having two schools close to each other.  The MW used to have BYU and Utah.  The WAC used to have both TCU and SMU.  Wyoming and Colorado State are close to each other.  For road trips in some sports, you can visit both schools the same weekend and stay in the same hotel, cutting down on travel expenses and travel fatigue.

Even if you only count Ogden/Layton by itself, this would still be the third largest market I considered.  (Except for some basketball-only schools)  Here you also have a proven ability to succeed consistently at the FCS level, and a large alumni base.  It has also the community support to succeed at a higher level.  Weber State may not be a top choice, but they are a solid one.  They haven't switch conferences in my lifetime and would probably bring stability as well.

The next four best targets 

5. University of California at Davis.  UCD is also in the Sacramento area.  They reason they are lower than Sacramento State is because their football stadium only seats 10,000.  While it is expandable to over 20,000, it will take some cash to do it.  It would be much cheaper than building anew, but it would not be free.  At least they have a better basketball arena than Sacramento State.  But have also been mostly a no-show in the NCAA tournament.  2016-17 is the answer to this trivial pursuit question. That is UCD's one and only NCAA men's basketball tournament appearance. Otherwise, they are very equal to Sacramento State, including academic.  In many books, perhaps slightly better.  If one of the other schools higher on this list does not want to join the MWC, then UCD is a solid choice.  Plus you get the two schools in the same market travel cost advantage if you also add Sacramento State.

6. New Mexico State.  They are lower on this list for two reasons.  One is that their academic reputation is not quite up to others on this list.  The other is that the recent hazing scandal will likely be the most brutal penalty on a school since the SMU death penalty.  This one self-imposed.  The Aggies have a good basketball history, too.  In football, two bowl games in the past five seasons is nothing to sneeze at.  That as an independent after the Sun Belt decided that it was too costly to keep Idaho and NMSU.  But today, they are members of Conference USA with their arch-rival UTEP and no longer independent in football and a member of the WAC in other sports.  They should get extra credit for lasting that long in independence.  They should be a force in Conference USA.   Technically Las Cruces is in the El Paso metro, the MWC is unlikely to add both.  As a side note, it would be funny if the MWC adds UC Davis and NMSU to the conference, you would have three schools who call themselves Aggies.  One a bull, one a horse and one a cowboy.  New Mexico State was likely the school that kept the WAC alive after the last round of conference expansion.

7. Eastern Washington.  There are two reasons why EWU is lower on this list.  First is Spokane and the 2nd is Gonzaga.  The Zags do not play football, which gives the Eagles a chance at recruiting in football locally.  (If Gonzaga kept football, EWU wouldn't be in the Big Sky Conference.)  While the Eagles have recently held their own on the court, but still not the power that the Zags are.  EWU has only three NCAA tournament appearances.  It should have been 4 but  they didn't survive this year's Big Sky Tournament.  It is what has happened on the turf at Roos Field that makes them special.  There are already plans afoot to expand the stadium to 18,000+.  If a school wants the MWC, they are trying to make a case for it.  But that was announced 10 years ago and it has yet to happen.  It can happen to an FCS school without FBS money, just look at Montana and Montana State.  Some things take cash and sometimes raising enough cash takes time, especially when a pandemic is afoot.  Would the prospects of moving up put some urgency into the alumni base and community?  That remains to be seen.

8.  North Dakota State.  They are the Alabama of the FCS, why are they not higher on my list?  Yes, they are in a small market, but Fargo is larger than Missoula.  They play in the 25,000 seat Fargodome, which is probably the nicest FCS facility.  But three big issues where Montana is a solid choice and NDSU is a weaker choice.  First, they have 4 NCAA men's tournament appearances compared to Montana's 12.  NDSU has never advanced to the Sweet 16.  Second, their academics are a tier lower than Montana.  While yes, they are in a larger market than Montana, Fargo is not so much larger than Missoula where it would make up the difference when it comes to media market options, NIL and recruiting.  NDSU can't do much about the market size, they can work on the academics and work on sports other than football.  But on the plus side, they have shown Idaho how to use a dome, and they don't play basketball there.

I previously wrote a post about non-football schools that could add football and be of value to the Mountain West Conference, they would all be below North Dakota State.  If the MW loses four or more schools, I will also write a post about basketball-only schools.

Not making the cut, but considered

Portland State University.  PSU is in the largest market not only in the west, but in the entire country that does not have at least one FBS school nearby.  Oregon State and Oregon are as close to Portland as Baltimore is to Philly.  You can't really count Corvallis and Eugene as being in the Portland metro.  But, a lot of grads from Oregon and Oregon State find jobs after graduation in Portland.  This is not the reason why.  

The largest problem is no on-campus football field and a smaller basketball arena.  They no longer share a stadium with the Portland Timbers of Major League Soccer.  That hasn't been a thing for years.  Lately, they have been playing about 20 miles away in Hillsboro.  PSU also lacks any sort of athletic reputation.  Sure, it wasn't long ago that they were a Division II school.  But most colleges that are serious about athletics are more successful once they move up.  If Portland State took athletics seriously, they would have better facilities, closer to campus.  Perhaps the Timbers would let them move back to Providence Park (fat chance of that happening.) and the Blazers would let them play some games at Moda Arena (chances are only slightly better.)  But the school simply doesn't put a premium price on sports.  That's OK.  It's still a good school.  I may have a future post about gridiron football vs. Major League Soccer and why more colleges don't play in NBA arenas and visa versa.  Portland State will be the poster child.

California Polytechnic University at San Luis Obispo.  Alex G. Spanos Stadium is one of the nicest facilities at the FCS level, and would likely easily be expandable to 30,000.  But SLO brags about being halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco, which really means they are in the middle of nowhere.  LA and City by the bay are not exactly next-door neighbors.  I also didn't consider any schools in towns less than 100,000.  I had to draw the line somewhere.  SLO simply fell below the line.  Too bad, its a nice town.  It would be a great place for a bowl game.  But you are not going to land a big media deal by adding SLO when you already have Laramie.  There are only so many small towns a FBS conference can have.  The MWC already has enough.

Montana State.  Pretty much the same argument as Cal Poly, only its colder there.  Good school, nice town, great spot for a summer vacation, just too small and too far away from something better.  If Billings were 100 miles closer, then maybe.  But at least the fishing in Bozeman is good.  I should note that Bozeman is a growing town, and a place to consider living if your job and the job of your significant other is 100% remote and likely to state that way.  That is, if you don't mind enduring those Southern Montana winters.

Other possibilities, but not written about in this post include: Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, South Dakota State, Northern Iowa and Louisiana Tech.  Geography will prevent them from poaching more of Conference USA or the Sun Belt.