(05-15-2017 07:09 PM)RunnerBall Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:03 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:00 PM)gleadley Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:44 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:41 PM)Clarity Wrote:  Probably not much this was CBU's only shot at D1 and they took it.

Hurd has a negotiating skill that helps incoming schools and not the conference.

Didn't CBU say to expect a big athletics announcement some time this week, too? I will take a guess and say the WAC will vote to make CBU immediately eligible to participate in all conference tournaments when the join in 2018-19. It was an option with GCU, too, but didn't have support from enough WAC members. I say the re-write the rules on it and let the Lancers in.

I wouldn't have a problem with it, but it would also be really hypocritical of me to oppose it because I have been wanting GCU to be in it the last couple of years.

I personally would have an issue, being that GCU wasn't afforded the opportunity. It really should be a conference POLICY that could be overriden with a certain percentage of members IF extenuating circumstances arose.

But my point is that I can't say my team deserves it, but another team doesn't just because they aren't my team.

(05-16-2017 12:09 AM)RunnerBall Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 12:05 AM)gleadley Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 07:09 PM)RunnerBall Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:03 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:00 PM)gleadley Wrote:  Didn't CBU say to expect a big athletics announcement some time this week, too? I will take a guess and say the WAC will vote to make CBU immediately eligible to participate in all conference tournaments when the join in 2018-19. It was an option with GCU, too, but didn't have support from enough WAC members. I say the re-write the rules on it and let the Lancers in.

I wouldn't have a problem with it, but it would also be really hypocritical of me to oppose it because I have been wanting GCU to be in it the last couple of years.

I personally would have an issue, being that GCU wasn't afforded the opportunity. It really should be a conference POLICY that could be overriden with a certain percentage of members IF extenuating circumstances arose.

It looks like NKU was not eligible for the ASun tourney during the first 2 seasons of transition, as they didn't play in it until Year 3. Even something like that modified conference tourney eligibility timetable would be a step in the right direction for the WAC. Stonewalling CBU "because everyone else had to wait 4 years, too" isn't very original or progressive thinking.

If CBU can meet agreed upon academic, facilities, attendance, and performance benchmarks determined in advance by WAC members, I say let them play early. If GCU is the last school that has to wait a full 4 years to compete in WAC tourneys, I'd chalk it up as progress and take pride in the fact that GCU's successes during transition probably made it possible.

Ok so why technically does the NCAA make schools go through a 4 year transition? I'm not an expert, but I know some has to do with satisfaction of funding scholarships, programs, school compliance, etc. (A buddy of mine who works at CSUB told me back when, how many positions they had to hire such as SA support, tutoring, etc)
However, I also understand and believe it is for the school to go through a culture change. Also, how would athletes/fans feel who loose to an NCAA ineligible transitional team in a conference tourney, and it costs the eligible school a spot in the NCAAs? Not cool, IMO. Then too, the transition team that wins in conference is pissed as they can't go either. IOW, I think its very progressive for all to make them follow the course laid out.

Link to CSUB's transition page just FYI who cares to browse it

The DI schools want to limit new DI schools. The transition used to be one year, then two, then five, now four but a school has to have a conference invite. The Atlantic Sun and Big South were entire DII conference that just moved up. That can't happen any more. The DI pie needs more protection according to DI schools' actions.

(05-15-2017 05:00 PM)gleadley Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:44 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:41 PM)Clarity Wrote:  Probably not much this was CBU's only shot at D1 and they took it.

Hurd has a negotiating skill that helps incoming schools and not the conference.

Didn't CBU say to expect a big athletics announcement some time this week, too? I will take a guess and say the WAC will vote to make CBU immediately eligible to participate in all conference tournaments when the join in 2018-19. It was an option with GCU, too, but didn't have support from enough WAC members. I say the re-write the rules on it and let the Lancers in.

I agree. Not letting Grand Canyon play in tourney was a loss of revenue. The environment would have been better with the Grand Canyon fans. This year in Vegas I want to buy a beer for all the Grand Canyon posters on this site in Vegas.

This also got me thinking about WACt structure once we are an 8 and 9 team league. I'm sure I've said it before, but I'm actually okay with still only allowing 7 teams in. The #1 seed keeps the earned/well-deserved bye. It also puts pressure on teams in the bottom half of the league to not finish last. I think it makes the regular season and a spot in the WACt actually worth something.

(05-16-2017 09:14 AM)gleadley Wrote:  This also got me thinking about WACt structure once we are an 8 and 9 team league. I'm sure I've said it before, but I'm actually okay with still only allowing 7 teams in. The #1 seed keeps the earned/well-deserved bye. It also puts pressure on teams in the bottom half of the league to not finish last. I think it makes the regular season and a spot in the WACt actually worth something.

Just getting back to the WAC structure when it had football in the conference.

NMSU's AD Tweeted these out

(05-16-2017 08:51 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:00 PM)gleadley Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:44 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:41 PM)Clarity Wrote:  Probably not much this was CBU's only shot at D1 and they took it.

Hurd has a negotiating skill that helps incoming schools and not the conference.

Didn't CBU say to expect a big athletics announcement some time this week, too? I will take a guess and say the WAC will vote to make CBU immediately eligible to participate in all conference tournaments when the join in 2018-19. It was an option with GCU, too, but didn't have support from enough WAC members. I say the re-write the rules on it and let the Lancers in.

I agree. Not letting Grand Canyon play in tourney was a loss of revenue. The environment would have been better with the Grand Canyon fans. This year in Vegas I want to buy a beer for all the Grand Canyon posters on this site in Vegas.

Well all but one

(05-16-2017 01:24 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 08:51 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:00 PM)gleadley Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:44 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:41 PM)Clarity Wrote:  Probably not much this was CBU's only shot at D1 and they took it.

Hurd has a negotiating skill that helps incoming schools and not the conference.

Didn't CBU say to expect a big athletics announcement some time this week, too? I will take a guess and say the WAC will vote to make CBU immediately eligible to participate in all conference tournaments when the join in 2018-19. It was an option with GCU, too, but didn't have support from enough WAC members. I say the re-write the rules on it and let the Lancers in.

I agree. Not letting Grand Canyon play in tourney was a loss of revenue. The environment would have been better with the Grand Canyon fans. This year in Vegas I want to buy a beer for all the Grand Canyon posters on this site in Vegas.

Well all but one

Is there an interesting story here? lol

(05-16-2017 04:08 PM)Clarity Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 01:24 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 08:51 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:00 PM)gleadley Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:44 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  Hurd has a negotiating skill that helps incoming schools and not the conference.

Didn't CBU say to expect a big athletics announcement some time this week, too? I will take a guess and say the WAC will vote to make CBU immediately eligible to participate in all conference tournaments when the join in 2018-19. It was an option with GCU, too, but didn't have support from enough WAC members. I say the re-write the rules on it and let the Lancers in.

I agree. Not letting Grand Canyon play in tourney was a loss of revenue. The environment would have been better with the Grand Canyon fans. This year in Vegas I want to buy a beer for all the Grand Canyon posters on this site in Vegas.

Well all but one

Is there an interesting story here? lol

No, not really. I just won't be 21 until a month after the tourney and I assume dancing would rather not get arrested for providing alcohol to someone who is underage.

(05-16-2017 01:00 AM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 07:09 PM)RunnerBall Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:03 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:00 PM)gleadley Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 04:44 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  Hurd has a negotiating skill that helps incoming schools and not the conference.

Didn't CBU say to expect a big athletics announcement some time this week, too? I will take a guess and say the WAC will vote to make CBU immediately eligible to participate in all conference tournaments when the join in 2018-19. It was an option with GCU, too, but didn't have support from enough WAC members. I say the re-write the rules on it and let the Lancers in.

I wouldn't have a problem with it, but it would also be really hypocritical of me to oppose it because I have been wanting GCU to be in it the last couple of years.

I personally would have an issue, being that GCU wasn't afforded the opportunity. It really should be a conference POLICY that could be overriden with a certain percentage of members IF extenuating circumstances arose.

But my point is that I can't say my team deserves it, but another team doesn't just because they aren't my team.

Sure you can! We have all had to pay our dues and put in our time in our lives at some point and I at least know I'm better, more appreciative and was hungrier for it.
I know that remark doesn't necessarily make or break this debate though, by itself, but, FWIW.

(05-16-2017 04:38 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 04:08 PM)Clarity Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 01:24 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 08:51 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 05:00 PM)gleadley Wrote:  Didn't CBU say to expect a big athletics announcement some time this week, too? I will take a guess and say the WAC will vote to make CBU immediately eligible to participate in all conference tournaments when the join in 2018-19. It was an option with GCU, too, but didn't have support from enough WAC members. I say the re-write the rules on it and let the Lancers in.

I agree. Not letting Grand Canyon play in tourney was a loss of revenue. The environment would have been better with the Grand Canyon fans. This year in Vegas I want to buy a beer for all the Grand Canyon posters on this site in Vegas.

Well all but one

Is there an interesting story here? lol

No, not really. I just won't be 21 until a month after the tourney and I assume dancing would rather not get arrested for providing alcohol to someone who is underage.

LOL! OT post: I was actually carded at Trader Joes last week, ...and I'll turn 50 next month!!!!

(05-16-2017 05:18 PM)RunnerBall Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 04:38 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 04:08 PM)Clarity Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 01:24 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 08:51 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  I agree. Not letting Grand Canyon play in tourney was a loss of revenue. The environment would have been better with the Grand Canyon fans. This year in Vegas I want to buy a beer for all the Grand Canyon posters on this site in Vegas.

Well all but one

Is there an interesting story here? lol

No, not really. I just won't be 21 until a month after the tourney and I assume dancing would rather not get arrested for providing alcohol to someone who is underage.

LOL! OT post: I was actually carded at Trader Joes last week, ...and I'll turn 50 next month!!!!

Youngster - and super youngster!