This is true, but now apply it to the MWC.
The teams they took have won every conference title since 2016 except the Covid year of 2020. (SJSU). Boise, Fresno, USU and SDSU.
Last edited:
CSU/USU suing MW over exit fees
- Thread starter rebeltob
- Start date
This is true, but now apply it to the MWC.
The teams they took have won every conference title since 2016 except the Covid year of 2020. (SJSU). Boise, Fresno, USU and SDSU.
PACs idea of poaching the best MWC teams was the right approach (create the strongest G5 possible) but the execution was piss poor, allowing ego to dictate decisions. They should have made a sweetheart deal for UNLV and SJSU as well, and also allow for free or low-cost exit fees if invited to a P4. Every G5 school goal is to get a P4 invite and making it easy to make the leap only incentivizes the schools to invest more in their programs. Then as you said also go after the top AAC schools and any potential additions from an ACC breakup. You’d then have a very competitive conference potentially challenging B12 status. Instead their egos ruled the day and now they’re chasing small market teams that will only dilute their status. MWC is in that same boat but the difference is the PAC put themselves in that situation. Idiots.
The Pac leadership (and WSU/OSU) doesn't look at themselves as a G5 and there in lies their problem...
In terms of media fat, They left SJSU, UNM, Reno. Wyoming probably isn't great in terms of media, Hawaii is so so. Utah State is probably middle of the pack in terms of media in thencireent MW. Maybe bottom third. So yes if Utah State is their worst, we have 4-5 teams lower than their worst. They may add a team worst than our worst, but even if they do they are doing better. Especially given that they took 4 of our best 6. Utah is third tier in that state, but they have done decent well in the past in terms of attendance of that is any indication. Certainly better than Reno, SJSU, and UNM in football.
I think that teams keep half of the tournament credits and bowl revenue in the new PAC. That helps the bottom line. Gonzaga can still contribute to the conference considering their pedigree. Maybe not earn the rest of their share but definitely.
Not sure why you think CSU is at the bottom. They have done well in media and attendance.
I don't think that truly what they think. They are trying to sell the idea hard that they are P5 worthy, but there is no way think they will be AQ status. Noone is really buying it.
If we look back 3 years from now and 1. we are in a sub-par MWC and 2. the PAC is the top G5 conference and 3. the P4 are similar to where they are now we will be very sorry we weren't included in the new PAC. But if we are in a re-structure B 12 and it is still considered a power conference we 'll be deliriously happy looking at Harper as a genius. IMO, the entire gambit will depend on our getting in a P4 conference or not.
3 years isn't enough time. Big 12 probably isn't adding teams before 2030. Invite might be on table but we won't be playing in it yet in 3 years. I think the better argument will be is in 3 yrs, are we dominating the conference in multiple sports winning titles, and B is Boise being challenged by anyone in the new Pac.. if the first is yes and second no, then we made a better decision. If the answer for both is no or no, yes, then we didn't. The whole point is we need our premier programs to dominate regularly in the new conference.
They've already said, b12, they won't be adding more schools until their next media contract in 6 years. The only way we can make it happen is to get an invite for zero to 1/4 media revenue. Otherwise, what does it give them to add us before that next media deal as it just dilutes the revenue from existing schools. Our men's basketball is just for giggles so there is no incentive there.
You 100% take a reduced share if given the chance.
After a conversation with @Bullmastiff 1, I took the time to make a spread sheet based on total wins. Now, we know total wins is not the only metric that they are using. They're going off of potential value (witch craft magic), market area, viewership, and current market value. This is not including the covid year. But, here are the last three years of wins. Happy to include 2024 on request.
Any one notice the win total fraud amongst the pac group? If I were Air Force or Wyoming, I'd be really mad. Lets put it this way. In that same span of time, UTEP had more wins than CSU.
I do have the totals going back to 2018 ready (minus covid). I didn't include 2024, because that was an unknown when they started talking this last July.
| Year | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | ||
| Total wins | |||||
| Air Force | 10–3 (6–2 MW) | 10–3 (5–3 MW) | 9–4 (5–3 MW) | 29 | |
| Wyoming | 7–6 (2–6 MW) | 7–6 (5–3 MW) | 9–4 (5–3 MW) | 23 | |
| San Jose State | 5–7 (3–5 MW) | 7–5 (5–3 MW) | 7–6 (6–2 MW) | 19 | |
| UNLV | 2–10 (2–6 MW) | 5–7 (3–5 MW) | 9–5 (6–2 MW) | 16 | |
| Hawai'i | 6–7 (3–5 MW) | 3–10 (2–6 MW) | 5–8 (3–5 MW) | 14 | |
| reno | 8–5 (5–3 MW) | 2–10 (0–8 MW) | 2–10 (2–6 MW) | 12 | |
| New Mexico | 3–9 (1–7 MW) | 2–10 (0–8 MW) | 4–8 (2–6 MW) | 9 | |
| MW Total | 122 | ||||
| Fresno State | 10–3 (6–2 MW) | #24 10–4 (7–1 MW) | 9–4 (4–4 MW) | 29 | |
| Boise State | 7–5 (5–3 MW) | 10–4 (8–0 MW) | 8–6 (6–2 MW) | 25 | |
| Utah State | #24 11–3 (6–2 MW) | 6–7 (5–3 MW) | 6–7 (4–4 MW) | 23 | |
| San Diego State | #25 12–2 (7–1 MW) | 7–6 (5–3 MW) | 4–8 (2–6 MW) | 23 | |
| Colorado State | 3–9 (2–6 MW) | 3–9 (3–5 MW) | 5–7 (3–5 MW) | 11 | |
| Pac total | 111 |
Any one notice the win total fraud amongst the pac group? If I were Air Force or Wyoming, I'd be really mad. Lets put it this way. In that same span of time, UTEP had more wins than CSU.
I do have the totals going back to 2018 ready (minus covid). I didn't include 2024, because that was an unknown when they started talking this last July.
Last edited:
Just get a deal with Netflix..
It was glorious watching Beyoncé halftime show..
UNLV is not forward thinking at all.
I started thinking on this. If I were, let's say Memphis and Tulane. If trying to make the Playoff is a consideration, that means they have to play and beat BSU. My Cougs could also be in the mix. Do they really want that? So it comes down to the illusive Pac-X media contract vs exit fees, travel, etc.
And UNLV folks, I hadn't realized that our Kyle Williams came from UNLV. Thanks - hope he catches 3 TD's tomorrow.
I understand the media contract timing and I hear what the Big 12 has said. But it looks to me that starting in the 4th year we will most likely look back and think being in the "MWC light" was a bad move. And each year it goes on will make it worse. Our home schedule will suck ( and we will play our OOC P4 games away with only a very occasional exceptions) , we'll lose out on CFP probabilities to a PAC with a similar OOC schedule because their conference schedule will be much more compelling, we'll bring in considerably less media $$ (undetermined based on future contracts and legal issues) and each year we'll look less and less desirable compared to our PAC competitors.
Wait - all along I have thought that Scrub was heralded as the voice of knowledge and reason on this site.
Wait - all along I have thought that Scrub was heralded as the voice of knowledge and reason on this site.
I assure you..He is not.
Wait - all along I have thought that Scrub was heralded as the voice of knowledge and reason on this site.
He lost me at that part about "reason". Getting thrown out of a Volleyball game for twerking on fans or players or whatever the hell he was doing would disqualify you from having any "reason". 🤣
Hate to break it, but we're a G5 and most our OOC games will be road games against P4 competition. UCLA is kind of a standalone in that they needed opponents and we got a home and home scheduled a while ago when we weren't good. We aren't going to bring in good OOC teams because those teams don't travel for away games.
If you ask any Syracuse fan today, they would love a home-home with UNLV. Perspectives are changing with UNLV as a football school. Man, that hurts as I typed it.
I am the all knowing seeing eye of the internet.Wait - all along I have thought that Scrub was heralded as the voice of knowledge and reason on this site.
Christmas football game was streamed for the first time on Netflix. It was subtitled, and Beyoncé was schilling her album from last year singing Dolly pardon’s Jolene.
And I hate Beyoncé. That bitch shares the same birthday with me
Of the first 6, I ranked CSU lowest, but maybe it’s Fresno State? No real point was being made there other than saying that the overall balance was fairly equal with Boise being on top and CSU or Fresno being at the bottom of that group.
If you look at attendance numbers over the last couple years… SDSU, USU, SJSU, UNM, and UNR have all averaged 16,000-18,300 per home game. Hawaii is the bottom outlier at about 13,000.
Of that group I’d toss out SDSU as being a “bottom feeder” because their market IS better and their “brand” is “ok”.
The others all feel about the same to me and any single one of them COULD have a good season and boost those numbers. So if you’re gonna call UNM, SJSU, and UNR “fat”, you gotta include USU as “fat” as well.
I’m not including Hawaii on that list because they were only a partial member and were being paid as such.
So USU is “fat” even though they could have a good season, just like the others, and you have to add another team in ALL sports, who is gonna be PURE FAT.
That makes 25% of your teams “fat”, that you were, oh by the way, trying to shed. I think Gonzaga at a full share is actually a drag on overall revenue, but that’s harder to quantify, so illyleave them out of the equation.
Saying they took our four best markets/teams (of which UNLV would actually be one) is irrelevant to my point. I’m not arguing the PAC isn’t better, I’m arguing they’re worse off than what they would be had a merger taken place.
In a new MW/PAC with 14 teams you’d have those same 4 as “fat”, which is about 28%. I think WYO is kind of neutral and Hawaii is also kind of neutral because their market is decent and they’re only getting a partial share. But if you include those two and say the new conference has 6 “fat” teams you’re up to 42% vs 25% fat.
Admittedly 17% is a pretty decent difference… it’s the difference between $5 mil per year and $5.85 mil per year.
But now look at the cost…
The final cost remains to be seen, but it’s going to be a decent amount, even after things likely get negotiated down. Even if it gets negotiated down to a third it takes 7 years to overcome the difference. And that doesn’t include any poaching fees that are ultimately paid by the PAC 2.
Now look at a comparison of what the new PAC would look like versus a new PAC/MW conference. That conference would be far and away the best G5 conference and I would think more valuable on a per team basis.
Add to that the fact that you could have structured the payouts of that new conference as such to reward the better teams, which would easily overcome any difference in who is “fat” and who is not.
Again, it’s neither here nor there at this point, and there’s a lot still to play out. But it definitely feels like a “cut off your nose to spite your face” situation to me.
SJSU's attendance numbers are puzzling. Its true that they averaged 16,058 for home games this season. But just two years ago they were at 23,970. By comparison SDSU was at 24,770 for this season, but just 2 years ago they were at 29,892.
BUT despite what both schools have averaged this season, the 5 year averages point to SJSU adding 2.51% to their average attendance, which is almost similar to the percentage of people that SDSU lost (-2.28%).
It might have to do with the exodus of people who are being priced out of California. Except Fresno's numbers have only gone up. Their attendance is up 15.69% over the last 5 years.
BUT despite what both schools have averaged this season, the 5 year averages point to SJSU adding 2.51% to their average attendance, which is almost similar to the percentage of people that SDSU lost (-2.28%).
It might have to do with the exodus of people who are being priced out of California. Except Fresno's numbers have only gone up. Their attendance is up 15.69% over the last 5 years.
The teams leaving for the PAC have won every single conference title since 2012 except the Covid year with SJSU. Every single one.
Utah states had the biggest negative delta this past season with attendance. They lost their coach in a scandal and just hired a really good one. It is safe to say that they will likely get the same crowds they were getting or better soon.
These numbers show that SDSU has been averaging around 24K and these are 2 of the worst years they have had in a long time. Which brings me to this point outside of Boise, and maybe CSU, all of the other defectors had down years for them, but still had decent attendance.
Mountain West football attendance analysis: Biggest risers and fallers year-over-year
College football games hosted by Mountain West schools drew their largest average home crowds since 2013, albeit with a caveat. This year's non-Hawaii games dr
nevadasportsnet.com
I see the the new PAC as having 1 team of "fat" currently in Utah State, but averaging 18-20k per year if they return to form is pretty good. Remember last season was a bit of a down year from what they are used to.
I agree that the Hawaii numbers are a bit deceptive. I think they have more fans spread across the islands and a good amount in the Vegas valley considering how many show up to the island show down game here. But they have been a partial partner in the past for a reason. So It's hard to call them fat or big positive.
But SJSU is good, but fans don't care. They have zero penetration in that very good market. Their ceiling is especially low from a media perspective. A perennial bowl team that won the conference in the past 5 years and they near the bottom of the list in attendance every year. SDSU being terrible and averaging nearly 25k? Very strong.
So taking out the majority of the top markets, and and the worst the best bottom team vs taking all of the fat and averaging it out, I still think there is a decent difference there. How much? I don't know if there is a good estimation, but I think our bottom is pretty bad and moves the needle substantially. I think attendance is a decent way to compare, but it is really more about eyeballs on TVs. Some teams have more lurkers or nationwide fans than others. Safe to Say Boise has the best brand and probably leads the way there. I would think actually CSU is up there as well just because is one of 2 large state schools in a pretty big state, a state bigger than every other state in our conference by a large amount (besides California of course).
The up front costs do make a difference, and right now, yes it does seem like it will take a good amount of time for them to break even. But if the poaching fees get thrown out and they pay only a portion of the negotiated exit fees, then it may not take long at all.
All you have to do is watch an sdsu home game and you know there is no way they are getting 24k in attendance. They are lucky to be getting 10k if that. They do some funny math at SNAPOUTOFIT stadium.Utah states had the biggest negative delta this past season with attendance. They lost their coach in a scandal and just hired a really good one. It is safe to say that they will likely get the same crowds they were getting or better soon.
These numbers show that SDSU has been averaging around 24K and these are 2 of the worst years they have had in a long time. Which brings me to this point outside of Boise, and maybe CSU, all of the other defectors had down years for them, but still had decent attendance.
Mountain West football attendance analysis: Biggest risers and fallers year-over-year
College football games hosted by Mountain West schools drew their largest average home crowds since 2013, albeit with a caveat. This year's non-Hawaii games dr
I see the the new PAC as having 1 team of "fat" currently in Utah State, but averaging 18-20k per year if they return to form is pretty good. Remember last season was a bit of a down year from what they are used to.
I agree that the Hawaii numbers are a bit deceptive. I think they have more fans spread across the islands and a good amount in the Vegas valley considering how many show up to the island show down game here. But they have been a partial partner in the past for a reason. So It's hard to call them fat or big positive.
But SJSU is good, but fans don't care. They have zero penetration in that very good market. Their ceiling is especially low from a media perspective. A perennial bowl team that won the conference in the past 5 years and they near the bottom of the list in attendance every year. SDSU being terrible and averaging nearly 25k? Very strong.
So taking out the majority of the top markets, and and the worst the best bottom team vs taking all of the fat and averaging it out, I still think there is a decent difference there. How much? I don't know if there is a good estimation, but I think our bottom is pretty bad and moves the needle substantially. I think attendance is a decent way to compare, but it is really more about eyeballs on TVs. Some teams have more lurkers or nationwide fans than others. Safe to Say Boise has the best brand and probably leads the way there. I would think actually CSU is up there as well just because is one of 2 large state schools in a pretty big state, a state bigger than every other state in our conference by a large amount (besides California of course).
The up front costs do make a difference, and right now, yes it does seem like it will take a good amount of time for them to break even. But if the poaching fees get thrown out and they pay only a portion of the negotiated exit fees, then it may not take long at all.
I think which market at particular team does matter, but less than it ever has before. Previously, most conferences had their own "channel" and by getting a team located in a particular market that would expand the brand because that channel would be available by default and more games may be watched than before.
But that means little now. Most college games are available everywhere. Fewer people actually watch traditional cable and satellite than ever, so when they search "college football" on their boxes, adding a team to a market doesn't move the needle much at all.
What matters is how many fans watch these games on TV. Market does help in terms of potential to a certain extent, but there is enough historical data to show that SJSU does very little for that market. UNLV is the other side, with good (not great) crowds showing up for football. There is potential there. But is has come around slowly.
Which is why we have been left out. People think it was a stupid move or we were blocked by other jealous teams in the conference, but I don't believe it. Why snuff out a team that will increase your bottom line, when all of expansion has been 99% been about that.
Our historical data hasn't been good enough. Now if they would have waited and done it now, would we be there? More likely. For sure they would have rather had us than Utah State.
But that means little now. Most college games are available everywhere. Fewer people actually watch traditional cable and satellite than ever, so when they search "college football" on their boxes, adding a team to a market doesn't move the needle much at all.
What matters is how many fans watch these games on TV. Market does help in terms of potential to a certain extent, but there is enough historical data to show that SJSU does very little for that market. UNLV is the other side, with good (not great) crowds showing up for football. There is potential there. But is has come around slowly.
Which is why we have been left out. People think it was a stupid move or we were blocked by other jealous teams in the conference, but I don't believe it. Why snuff out a team that will increase your bottom line, when all of expansion has been 99% been about that.
Our historical data hasn't been good enough. Now if they would have waited and done it now, would we be there? More likely. For sure they would have rather had us than Utah State.
Paid attendance is paid attendance, just look at our basketball members.
Yeah… stupid Google AI was conflating San Diego State with South Dakota State. The San Diego Tribune however lists home attendance at 18,183 avg for the first 5 games of 2023… so who the hell knows. Based on the individual game numbers this past season it’s right at about 25,000, so yes you’re correct.Utah states had the biggest negative delta this past season with attendance. They lost their coach in a scandal and just hired a really good one. It is safe to say that they will likely get the same crowds they were getting or better soon.
These numbers show that SDSU has been averaging around 24K and these are 2 of the worst years they have had in a long time. Which brings me to this point outside of Boise, and maybe CSU, all of the other defectors had down years for them, but still had decent attendance.
Mountain West football attendance analysis: Biggest risers and fallers year-over-year
College football games hosted by Mountain West schools drew their largest average home crowds since 2013, albeit with a caveat. This year's non-Hawaii games dr
I see the the new PAC as having 1 team of "fat" currently in Utah State, but averaging 18-20k per year if they return to form is pretty good. Remember last season was a bit of a down year from what they are used to.
I agree that the Hawaii numbers are a bit deceptive. I think they have more fans spread across the islands and a good amount in the Vegas valley considering how many show up to the island show down game here. But they have been a partial partner in the past for a reason. So It's hard to call them fat or big positive.
But SJSU is good, but fans don't care. They have zero penetration in that very good market. Their ceiling is especially low from a media perspective. A perennial bowl team that won the conference in the past 5 years and they near the bottom of the list in attendance every year. SDSU being terrible and averaging nearly 25k? Very strong.
So taking out the majority of the top markets, and and the worst the best bottom team vs taking all of the fat and averaging it out, I still think there is a decent difference there. How much? I don't know if there is a good estimation, but I think our bottom is pretty bad and moves the needle substantially. I think attendance is a decent way to compare, but it is really more about eyeballs on TVs. Some teams have more lurkers or nationwide fans than others. Safe to Say Boise has the best brand and probably leads the way there. I would think actually CSU is up there as well just because is one of 2 large state schools in a pretty big state, a state bigger than every other state in our conference by a large amount (besides California of course).
The up front costs do make a difference, and right now, yes it does seem like it will take a good amount of time for them to break even. But if the poaching fees get thrown out and they pay only a portion of the negotiated exit fees, then it may not take long at all.
I didn’t include them though as “fat” for obvious reasons. Is USU the best of the “fat” that was in the MW? I don’t think they are any more or less capable than any of the other fat teams of having a decent season. Add to that the fact that I’m not sure what exactly their media market share is. At least with your UNMs, WYOs, and UNRs you have an idea of what the value of their media market is because they’re not playing third fiddle to two big brother teams.
I’m not arguing that they won’t have a more valuable league on a per team basis. What I am arguing is that those teams that provide that value in the PAC would have provided the same value to the MW, and collectively they would add even more value in the MW than they will in this new PAC.
Their percentage of fat WILL be lower… I just think they would have overcome that with the strength of a combined conference and maybe some tweaks that incentivized the better performing teams.
Another thing to think about is what happens when they start beating up on each other? If there’s so much parity then it’s bound to happen. What happens when your teams don’t bring back any quality wins in the OOC, or a couple of them do and then go lose to CSU or USU in a blizzard?
The Boise v UNLV championship was the highest rated championship ever for the MW, because both teams had created the stakes for it.
Will the PAC be better than the MW? Yes.
Will they get more money than the MW? Yes.
Will the PAC be better than a merged league?No.
Would the PAC teams end up better off in a merged league competitively? I don’t know, but I think yes.
Would they be better off financially? I don’t know but I’d suspect no unless they’re somehow able to cheat the penalties, and I don’t think they can or will cheat them completely.
| School | 2024 averages | 2023 average | year to year % | 5 year average | 5 year to year % | |
| UNLV | 32,203 | 23,661 | 36.10% | 20,963 | 53.61% | |
| Air Force | 26,226 | 29,616 | -11.45% | 26,832 | -2.26% | |
| Wyoming | 21,937 | 23,163 | -5.29% | 21,277 | 3.11% | |
| UTEP | 19,393 | 18,160 | 6.79% | 17,071 | 13.60% | |
| reno | 17,419 | 16,998 | 2.48% | 17,368 | 0.30% | |
| San Jose State | 16,058 | 16,804 | -4.44% | 15,665 | 2.51% | |
| New Mexico | 16,001 | 15,982 | 0.12% | 15,923 | 0.49% | |
| Hawaii | 12,963 | 11,251 | 15.21% | 14,380 | -9.85% | |
| Fresno State | 40,600 | 39,969 | 1.58% | 35,095 | 15.69% | |
| Boise State | 37,235 | 35,867 | 3.81% | 34,161 | 9.00% | |
| Oregon State | 35,799 | 36,969 | -3.16% | 33,325 | 7.43% | |
| Colorado State | 33,082 | 26,509 | 24.80% | 26,668 | 24.05% | |
| San Diego State | 24,770 | 24,832 | -0.25% | 25,347 | -2.28% | |
| Washington State | 22,413 | 28,023 | -20.02% | 27,211 | -17.63% | |
| Utah State | 16,992 | 19,282 | -11.88% | 19,188 | -11.44% |
Last edited:
| School | 2023 averages | 2022 average | year to year % | 5 year average | 5 year to year % | |
| Air Force | 29,616 | 26,926 | 9.99% | 26,739 | 10.76% | |
| UNLV | 23,661 | 22,112 | 7.00% | 19,721 | 19.98% | |
| Wyoming | 23,163 | 19,707 | 17.54% | 20,767 | 11.54% | |
| UTEP | 18,160 | 19,134 | -5.09% | 17,348 | 4.68% | |
| reno | 16,998 | 14,905 | 14.04% | 17,313 | -1.82% | |
| San Jose State | 16,804 | 16,422 | 2.33% | 15,145 | 10.95% | |
| New Mexico | 15,982 | 14,966 | 6.79% | 16,965 | -5.80% | |
| Hawaii | 11,251 | 9,210 | 22.17% | 16,978 | -33.73% | |
| Fresno State | 39,969 | 39,067 | 2.31% | 33,228 | 20.29% | |
| Oregon State | 36,969 | 31,498 | 17.37% | 32,882 | 12.43% | |
| Boise State | 35,867 | 35,121 | 2.12% | 33,213 | 7.99% | |
| Washington State | 28,023 | 26,185 | 7.02% | 28,003 | 0.07% | |
| Colorado State | 26,509 | 26,891 | -1.42% | 27,778 | -4.57% | |
| San Diego State | 24,832 | 29,892 | -16.93% | 28,250 | -12.10% | |
| Utah State | 19,282 | 16,954 | 13.73% | 19,353 | -0.37% |
Exactly. In 23 we had our best season in 20 yrs and it only jumped 1k from the previous season. They made their move early this football season and we didn't exactly start the year with great attendance numbers and our Houston game kinda had an embarrassing viewership considering.
We were left out at that time because the numbers supported to NOT invite us. At least not initially the first group.
Wyoming was probably excluded because of travel costs/ growth potential. No clue on Afa, but they might have been excluded from the original just because its a service academy.
Going off of the 4 AAC schools averages for that same timeframe, its easy to see why they would have wanted them over any of us. Completely remove the 2024 averages and only look at the 2023. Its clear that they thought that the AAC 4 would pull similar numbers to the pac
| School | Conference | 2023 attendance average |
| Fresno State | New pac | 39,969 |
| South Florida | American | 37,944 |
| Boise State | New pac | 35,867 |
| Oregon State | Pac | 36,969 |
| Memphis | American | 29,782 |
| UNLV | Mountain West | 29,616 |
| UTSA | American | 28,876 |
| Washington State | Pac | 28,023 |
| Colorado State | New pac | 26,509 |
| Tulane | American | 25,021 |
| San Diego State | New pac | 24,832 |
| Air Force | Mountain West | 23,661 |
| Wyoming | Mountain West | 23,163 |
| Utah State | New pac | 19,282 |
| UTEP | C-USA | 18,160 |
| reno | Mountain West | 16,998 |
| San Jose State | Mountain West | 16,804 |
| New Mexico | Mountain West | 15,982 |
| Hawaii | Mountain West | 11,251 |
Compare those to the 2024 numbers. No one was expecting the AAC schools to decline, and UNLV to boom. I thought OSU and WSU would be in decline. But WSU is not in decline, its in freefall along with the 4 named AAC schools.
| School | Conference | 2024 averages | year to year % compared with 2023 |
| Fresno State | New pac | 40,600 | 1.58% |
| Boise State | New pac | 37,235 | 3.81% |
| Oregon State | Pac | 35,799 | -3.16% |
| Colorado State | New pac | 33,082 | 24.80% |
| UNLV | Mountain West | 32,203 | 36.10% |
| South Florida | American | 31,424 | -17.18% |
| Air Force | Mountain West | 26,226 | -11.45% |
| San Diego State | New pac | 24,770 | -0.25% |
| Memphis | American | 24,552 | -17.56% |
| Tulane | American | 23,980 | -4.16% |
| Washington State | Pac | 22,413 | -20.02% |
| Wyoming | Mountain West | 21,937 | -5.29% |
| UTSA | American | 21,059 | -27.07% |
| UTEP | C-USA | 19,393 | 6.79% |
| reno | Mountain West | 17,419 | 2.48% |
| San Jose State | Mountain West | 16,058 | -4.44% |
| New Mexico | Mountain West | 16,001 | 0.12% |
| Hawaii | Mountain West | 12,963 | 15.21% |
| Utah State | New pac | 16,992 | -11.88% |
UNM numbers are pathetic...
Maybe more pathetic are the SJSU numbers. They've actually been pretty good the last few years, are in a massive metro area and nobody gives a damn.
If I watch football the same as the stock market I would be high on UTEP. Only OSU has a better recruitment ranking. UNLV and WSU were higher than them but, with the coaching changes we've dropped. We may have awakened a sleeping giant in UTEP just like UNLV has awakened. Just keep an eye on their attendance numbers once they join the MWC. The fans hated CUSA and they are thrilled to be joining the MWC.
That being said make sure you add my two seats in next years count as I didn't have season tickets this year. lol.
That being said make sure you add my two seats in next years count as I didn't have season tickets this year. lol.
