+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: WACbbs (/forum-376.html)
+---- Forum: WAC Smack and Off Topic (/forum-996.html)
+---- Thread: The WAC's Next Move (/thread-835371.html)
RE: The WAC's Next Move - joeben69 - 12-05-2017 12:39 AM
Alexander: With Big West expansion, what’s WAC’s (and CBU’s) future?
http://www.pe.com/2017/12/04/alexander-with-big-west-expansion-whats-wacs-and-cbus-future/
RE: The WAC's Next Move - SDHornet - 12-05-2017 01:02 AM
LOL at CBU thinking they'll just slide right into the WCC after their transition is complete...
...oh and Bako (wish Clarity was around for this) lost to NAU at home...NAU is one of the BSC's worst teams so far...should go over well on the BW board.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - NMSUPistolPete - 12-05-2017 01:05 AM
It won't happen, it would be just another mouth to feed in the WCC. Gonzaga is happy with the present WCC setup. They don't need to tie up two more games in conference when they can utilize those games to schedule big OOC. I don't see the WCC changing much as long as Gonzaga is a member.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - WACfan86 - 12-05-2017 01:41 AM
Good because most of the Southland Conference fans would moan like Big West Conference fans did when Bakersfield was allowed into the conference.
(12-04-2017 02:54 PM)RunnerBall Wrote:(12-04-2017 01:43 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: RunnerBall,
Nebraska Omaha.
Tarleton is investing in Football, not dropping it.
......a nice travel partner for UMKC.
I know the UNO idea was floated years ago on the old Scout boards.
A baseball school too....a plus!
Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app
RE: The WAC's Next Move - Stugray2 - 12-05-2017 02:23 AM
(12-05-2017 12:39 AM)joeben69 Wrote: Alexander: With Big West expansion, what’s WAC’s (and CBU’s) future?
http://www.pe.com/2017/12/04/alexander-with-big-west-expansion-whats-wacs-and-cbus-future/
LOL, the WCC would not give them the time of day.
UMKC will try to go back to the Summit. I am pretty sure that is accurate. Committees do studies to reinforce decisions already made or pending. And I think that is what the UMKC study was all about.
But CBU will come on as UMKC likely departs. The WAC needs a replacement for CSUB before 2020, and it can't be something as gawd awful skunk as Art U. I cannot see how that would make a case for anyone wanting to stay. That has a barf level of Chicago State proportions - even worse IMO. I think Asuza Pacific is the best bet. But definitely I'd take a flyer at Tarleton State, and see if they can be wooed from the SLC.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - NMSUPistolPete - 12-05-2017 11:52 AM
(12-05-2017 02:23 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:(12-05-2017 12:39 AM)joeben69 Wrote: Alexander: With Big West expansion, what’s WAC’s (and CBU’s) future?
http://www.pe.com/2017/12/04/alexander-with-big-west-expansion-whats-wacs-and-cbus-future/
LOL, the WCC would not give them the time of day.
UMKC will try to go back to the Summit. I am pretty sure that is accurate. Committees do studies to reinforce decisions already made or pending. And I think that is what the UMKC study was all about.
But CBU will come on as UMKC likely departs. The WAC needs a replacement for CSUB before 2020, and it can't be something as gawd awful skunk as Art U. I cannot see how that would make a case for anyone wanting to stay. That has a barf level of Chicago State proportions - even worse IMO. I think Asuza Pacific is the best bet. But definitely I'd take a flyer at Tarleton State, and see if they can be wooed from the SLC.
Unless the WAC is willing to start up an FCS level conference or schools like Azuza Pacific, Dixie State, and Tarleton State are willing to drop football or work independently to find their respect football programs a home outside the WAC, I don't see any football playing D2 schools joining the WAC.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - Stugray2 - 12-05-2017 12:03 PM
WAC has to work with Big Sky to absorb a football school
RE: The WAC's Next Move - NMSUPistolPete - 12-05-2017 12:34 PM
(12-05-2017 12:03 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: WAC has to work with Big Sky to absorb a football school
The Big Sky is already bloated with 14 football schools. I don't think they want to add more football only schools.
1. Montana
2. Montana State
3. Idaho
4. Idaho State
5. Northern Colorado
6. North Dakota (football only)
7. Northern Arizona
8. Eastern Washington
9. Weber State
10. Southern Utah
11. Portland State
12. Sacramento State
13. Cal Poly (football only)
14. UC Davis (football only)
RE: The WAC's Next Move - RunnerBall - 12-05-2017 01:13 PM
(12-05-2017 12:34 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:Large conference. I'd think some would find it in their interest to split (of some sort) and flee to WAC. Less competition for an autobid.(12-05-2017 12:03 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: WAC has to work with Big Sky to absorb a football school
The Big Sky is already bloated with 14 football schools. I don't think they want to add more football only schools.
1. Montana
2. Montana State
3. Idaho
4. Idaho State
5. Northern Colorado
6. North Dakota (football only)
7. Northern Arizona
8. Eastern Washington
9. Weber State
10. Southern Utah
11. Portland State
12. Sacramento State
13. Cal Poly (football only)
14. UC Davis (football only)
Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app
RE: The WAC's Next Move - SoCalBobcat78 - 12-05-2017 01:14 PM
(12-05-2017 02:23 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:(12-05-2017 12:39 AM)joeben69 Wrote: Alexander: With Big West expansion, what’s WAC’s (and CBU’s) future?
http://www.pe.com/2017/12/04/alexander-with-big-west-expansion-whats-wacs-and-cbus-future/
LOL, the WCC would not give them the time of day.
UMKC will try to go back to the Summit. I am pretty sure that is accurate. Committees do studies to reinforce decisions already made or pending. And I think that is what the UMKC study was all about.
But CBU will come on as UMKC likely departs. The WAC needs a replacement for CSUB before 2020, and it can't be something as gawd awful skunk as Art U. I cannot see how that would make a case for anyone wanting to stay. That has a barf level of Chicago State proportions - even worse IMO. I think Asuza Pacific is the best bet. But definitely I'd take a flyer at Tarleton State, and see if they can be wooed from the SLC.
I think the key quote from the article is the last paragraph: "They’ll never say it. But as extensively as the people at that university plan and prepare for everything, I can’t believe they aren’t thinking it."
CBU leadership will be prepared and they will be an asset to the WAC. The CBU home opener in their new arena against Cal State Dominguez Hills drew 4,982 fans.
Azuza Pacific is not ready. Maybe in three or four years. Tarleton State is a natural fit for the SLC. Art U is a bad joke.
There are no easy answers to the WAC adding schools. Every idea has flaws. I don't see football coming back, although a case could be made for a WAC FCS conference.
I think putting the center of the WAC universe in Denver is an idea. That would entail convincing Northern Colorado to move their Olympic sports to the WAC and might work for the Big Sky. That would get the Big Sky to an even ten for basketball. If UNC joined, with the WAC headquarters already in Denver, maybe the conference could convince the Denver Pioneers to come back to the WAC.
I recognize the difficulty in that move for Denver. They would have to pay a $1 million exit fee to the Summit. They may not be excited about the some members of the WAC. But it would be a better league for their basketball program.
Two schools in Denver could also help with travel for UMKC and might be attractive to other schools. I don't think UMKC is interested in the Summit and UMKC is just not appealing to the MVC at this point in time. UMKC has a revenue problem and a move to the Summit does not solve that issue.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - NMSUPistolPete - 12-05-2017 01:37 PM
(12-05-2017 01:14 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:(12-05-2017 02:23 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:(12-05-2017 12:39 AM)joeben69 Wrote: Alexander: With Big West expansion, what’s WAC’s (and CBU’s) future?
http://www.pe.com/2017/12/04/alexander-with-big-west-expansion-whats-wacs-and-cbus-future/
LOL, the WCC would not give them the time of day.
UMKC will try to go back to the Summit. I am pretty sure that is accurate. Committees do studies to reinforce decisions already made or pending. And I think that is what the UMKC study was all about.
But CBU will come on as UMKC likely departs. The WAC needs a replacement for CSUB before 2020, and it can't be something as gawd awful skunk as Art U. I cannot see how that would make a case for anyone wanting to stay. That has a barf level of Chicago State proportions - even worse IMO. I think Asuza Pacific is the best bet. But definitely I'd take a flyer at Tarleton State, and see if they can be wooed from the SLC.
I think the key quote from the article is the last paragraph: "They’ll never say it. But as extensively as the people at that university plan and prepare for everything, I can’t believe they aren’t thinking it."
CBU leadership will be prepared and they will be an asset to the WAC. The CBU home opener in their new arena against Cal State Dominguez Hills drew 4,982 fans.
Azuza Pacific is not ready. Maybe in three or four years. Tarleton State is a natural fit for the SLC. Art U is a bad joke.
There are no easy answers to the WAC adding schools. Every idea has flaws. I don't see football coming back, although a case could be made for a WAC FCS conference.
I think putting the center of the WAC universe in Denver is an idea. That would entail convincing Northern Colorado to move their Olympic sports to the WAC and might work for the Big Sky. That would get the Big Sky to an even ten for basketball. If UNC joined, with the WAC headquarters already in Denver, maybe the conference could convince the Denver Pioneers to come back to the WAC.
I recognize the difficulty in that move for Denver. They would have to pay a $1 million exit fee to the Summit. They may not be excited about the some members of the WAC. But it would be a better league for their basketball program.
Two schools in Denver could also help with travel for UMKC and might be attractive to other schools. I don't think UMKC is interested in the Summit and UMKC is just not appealing to the MVC at this point in time. UMKC has a revenue problem and a move to the Summit does not solve that issue.
What I could see happening is for the WAC, Big West, and Big Sky working together. In 2020, North Dakota leaves the Big Sky for the (Summit/Missouri Valley football combo like the other Dakota schools) leaving BSC with 11 Olympic Sports schools and 13 football playing schools. I think the last spot has been left open by the BSC with the hopes that NMSU would eventually drop down to the FCS like Idaho. However, I don't think NMSU is thinking in those terms for at least the next 4-5 years. So, here is a scenario where all three conferences could benefit (in 2020)...
First, when North Dakota finally leaves, the Big Sky and Big West should agree to move Sacramento State Olympic sports the BWC. This would drop the BSC to an even number (10) in Olympic sport. And, also put the BWC at an even number (12) to split into two divisions and reduce travel costs even further.
Second, the WAC should add either Dixie State or Asuza Pacific as a full member. And, work with the BSC to accept their football program. This would bring the BSC to an even number in football (14) and also give the WAC a replacement for Cal State Bakersfield by 2020.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - Stugray2 - 12-05-2017 04:45 PM
(12-05-2017 01:13 PM)RunnerBall Wrote:(12-05-2017 12:34 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:Large conference. I'd think some would find it in their interest to split (of some sort) and flee to WAC. Less competition for an autobid.(12-05-2017 12:03 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: WAC has to work with Big Sky to absorb a football school
The Big Sky is already bloated with 14 football schools. I don't think they want to add more football only schools.
1. Montana
2. Montana State
3. Idaho
4. Idaho State
5. Northern Colorado
6. North Dakota (football only)
7. Northern Arizona
8. Eastern Washington
9. Weber State
10. Southern Utah
11. Portland State
12. Sacramento State
13. Cal Poly (football only)
14. UC Davis (football only)
Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app
North Dakota is leaving next year, and Football is leaving in 2020. So that is 13 football.
Nobody would voluntarily leave the Big Sky. That is the problem the WAC faces. I do think a shake up is coming, but could be years down the road, even a decade.
But when it comes I expect Montana, Montana State, Idaho State, Idaho, Eastern Washington, Weber State to break off taking Northern Arizona and maybe Portland State with them. Basically jettisoning Sac State and the remaining Great West schools. Sac State would simply roll into the Big West, But southern Utah and Northern Colorado would be stranded. The WAC is I guess where they would go. You'd have five stranded football schools, basically the old Great West except no North Dakota.
(Note, this could also work with the WAC schools joining the Big Sky and in the process jettison Chicago State: so you'd have Seattle, UVU, SUU, NoCo, CBU, GCU, NMSU and UTRGV)
But this is some years down the road. Were Asuza Pacific to join the WAC and put Football in the Big Sky, then the split would be easier as you'd have 6 WAC/Big West Football schools.
But this is all nice perfect world stuff and it never works that way. Instead I see GCU and NMSU bailing, APU staying D-II, and Chicago State folding by 2020. That would strand SU, UVU, CBU, and UTRGV.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - SDHornet - 12-06-2017 12:56 AM
Another negative about Bako leaving...we now get delusional multi-conference NoDak style realignment nonsense. The BSC, BW, and WAC will not collude (figure I'd use that word since it's the cool political thing to say these days) in some multi move, orchestrated realignment for the sake of keeping the WAC alive. The WAC is on it's own; always has been, always will be. And Stu is right, no one in their right mind is leaving the stable BSC/BW for the WAC so stop with that nonsense.
With UND gone the BSC will be at 11 Oly, which is what it was at before Idaho came back...so basically nothing the conference hasn't already seen. The BSC is likely waiting out NMSU to see if they need an FCS home if that is the path the choose (doubtful that happens IMO).
A FB only FCS conference makes sense but it ain't gonna happen, especially if the concept is dependent on a couple of BSC members to move Oly to WAC.
WAC needs to target a D2 move up soon that ideally can start transitioning midway through the CBU transition. I still think APU is their best bet/hope as they can park FB in the "non-schollie" Pioneer and regain its rivalry with CBU. Bako shouldn't be a deal breaker for APU if they truely have their sights on D1.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - jdgaucho - 12-06-2017 01:43 AM
Thank you SDHornet. Bakersfield's move simplifies things for the most part. It means Sac State isn't leaving for the BW or WAC, nor should they, because the current arrangement works pretty well for all parties. No need to open Pandora's Box.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - SDHornet - 12-06-2017 01:53 AM
(12-06-2017 01:43 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: Thank you SDHornet. Bakersfield's move simplifies things for the most part. It means Sac State isn't leaving for the BW or WAC, nor should they, because the current arrangement works pretty well for all parties. No need to open Pandora's Box.
BSC membership (due to its higher operating expenses) allows us to be better positioned for any potential realignment moves that may open up due to the pending P4 consolidation.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - SoCalBobcat78 - 12-06-2017 09:40 AM
(12-06-2017 01:53 AM)SDHornet Wrote:(12-06-2017 01:43 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: Thank you SDHornet. Bakersfield's move simplifies things for the most part. It means Sac State isn't leaving for the BW or WAC, nor should they, because the current arrangement works pretty well for all parties. No need to open Pandora's Box.
BSC membership (due to its higher operating expenses) allows us to be better positioned for any potential realignment moves that may open up due to the pending P4 consolidation.
What is the pending P4 consolidation?
RE: The WAC's Next Move - chrisattsu - 12-06-2017 11:19 AM
(12-06-2017 09:40 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:(12-06-2017 01:53 AM)SDHornet Wrote:(12-06-2017 01:43 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: Thank you SDHornet. Bakersfield's move simplifies things for the most part. It means Sac State isn't leaving for the BW or WAC, nor should they, because the current arrangement works pretty well for all parties. No need to open Pandora's Box.
BSC membership (due to its higher operating expenses) allows us to be better positioned for any potential realignment moves that may open up due to the pending P4 consolidation.
What is the pending P4 consolidation?
Speculation. From what I have read on the realignment board, there is a thought that the P5 (B1G, SEC, ACC, PAC, XII) should be reorged to 4x16 teams. Each of the 4 conference champs would receive an autobid to CFP. Conference championship games become a play in game
While it predates the latest controversy, this would ensure that none of the "big boys" are left out of the Championship hunt and prevent another Bama over conference champ Ohio State. Apparently, they are offended by being left out. Nevermind, that they are doing this very thing to the G5 teams.
Current conferences-
ACC - 15 members
B1G - 14 members
PAC - 12 members
SEC - 14 members
XII - 10 members
One theory that I have seen is that basically the XII is picked a part by the other conferences. How depends on who you ask and which teams each conference is willing to absorb.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - dancingNMSUaggie - 12-06-2017 01:59 PM
Read article today Conference USA teams might be wanting to break away and form more regional conference. Their attendance for the CUSA championship game was listed as 14000 and it looked more like 5000. MWC championship game where Boise State played at Boise State's home stadium was 24000. NMSU's last game vs South Alabama 26000+. Just saying....
RE: The WAC's Next Move - NMSUPistolPete - 12-06-2017 02:43 PM
(12-06-2017 01:59 PM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote: Read article today Conference USA teams might be wanting to break away and form more regional conference. Their attendance for the CUSA championship game was listed as 14000 and it looked more like 5000. MWC championship game where Boise State played at Boise State's home stadium was 24000. NMSU's last game vs South Alabama 26000+. Just saying....
It is plausible. I feel for C-USA is too big (14 schools), too spread out (West Texas to West Virginia) and too costly to compete in for non-revenue sports (travel costs). And, although Mr. Peanut has had the foresight to downsize the footprint of his conference after this season, the reality is the Sun Belt still remains a subordinate to C-USA. Out of self preservation, I think it's plausible that C-USA could force a conference reorganization with the Sun Belt to form two more regionally sound conferences under the current two banners. I just hope NMSU can get in on the deal "if" it happens. Two factors that might work against NMSU are the UTEP administration, and Mr. Peanut (Benson) if he takes the leadership of the western schools in any realignment.
RE: The WAC's Next Move - RobtheAggie - 12-06-2017 02:45 PM
Conference USA is essentially two conferences now.
East:
UAB
FAU
FIU
Marshall
MTSU
UNC-C
ODU
WKU
La Tech
UNT
Rice
USM
UTEP
UTSA
Seems like if this were ever to break into a more regional conference, there could be a move for NMSU/TSU if UTEP could ever get overruled.