According to this reporter/blogger, Denver has made contact with the WAC.

This could work out really well for them (and us.)

Not if we kill the WAC. If they lose another member, the WAC doesn't have an auto bid, and Denver has no place to go.

(08-20-2010 07:49 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Not if we kill the WAC. If they lose another member, the WAC doesn't have an auto bid, and Denver has no place to go.

So I read your blog post, which are you more inclined to do? Expand or let WAC live?

I'm waffling but seeing Andy Staples write about the WAC being the worst league, backing up my devil's advocate argument... I'm leaning anti-expansion.

Even if they added 3 new schools, how long with the $$$ hold up without Boise, Nevada and Fresno? They'll be broke before next season...

I think the ESPN contract is written so that they can immediately lower the WAC payout, with the loss of the WAC's premier teams -- Boise, Nevada, and Fresno. Hawaii has a good run every now and then, but they are not a premier team.

(08-20-2010 08:04 AM)ManzanoWolf Wrote:  I think the ESPN contract is written so that they can immediately lower the WAC payout, with the loss of the WAC's premier teams -- Boise, Nevada, and Fresno. Hawaii has a good run every now and then, but they are not a premier team.

They are now the premier program in the WAC and they aren't going to play every home game at 3 pm local time on a weeknight to be on the 8pm ESPN telecast.

(08-20-2010 07:53 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  I'm waffling but seeing Andy Staples write about the WAC being the worst league, backing up my devil's advocate argument... I'm leaning anti-expansion.

But, you mention it was a tactical error by C-USA not to finish us off.... would it be a tactical error not to finish off the WAC, in the long run?

The WAC is a royal mess. No matter what we think, it will live or die on its own merits. And having 6 members, spead out from the middle of the Pacific to the Mississippi River with a stop in southern Cananda aint much of a recipe for success.

They've got a lot of work to do and being so far flung does not bode well for them.

(08-20-2010 08:10 AM)galojah Wrote:  

(08-20-2010 07:53 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  I'm waffling but seeing Andy Staples write about the WAC being the worst league, backing up my devil's advocate argument... I'm leaning anti-expansion.

But, you mention it was a tactical error by C-USA not to finish us off.... would it be a tactical error not to finish off the WAC, in the long run?

Maybe. If they add Sacramento State, and help Cal-Davis and Cal-Poly buy enough portable bleachers to move to FBS, our risk is low.

I am sure that Peg Bradley Doppes (Denver's AD) was on speed dial to WAC commish Karl Benson as soon as the recent WAC upheaval became known, and probably before it happened.

Back in June, Denver was "under consideration" by the WAC for 2012, probably on the assumption that La. Tech would leave by then, but now those goalposts have moved up.

If I am the WAC, taking on a now-established, well-funded and top-notch D-I non-football program right in the middle of their footprint makes some sense as hedge against further erosion.

But Denver may also not want to jump too quickly here. The WAC is now on much shakier ground, and other schools could leave, making it worse.

Also if BYU decides to go to the WCC with their other non-football sports, Denver would make a very logical travel partner addition to the WCC, since they are only a 40 minute flight from Utah. Denver fits the WCC profile in terms of size and private status, and it's where Denver wanted to be before the WCC turned them down for distance reasons in 1999. Denver is further along and also better resourced and has better academics than Seattle or Pacific, the two other schools under WCC consideration.

What should Denver do?

I always keep coming back to if/when Denver leaves, what does that do for UALR-- the lone non-football school. If Denver leave and we do not expand from WAC, we are at 10 football schools 11 total. 10 all around would be awesome and would allow for round-robin basketball.

Going to 12 if we pick up two from WAC leaves us at 13 overall. Really an awkward number. But I am leaning toward 12 just for the safety in numbers. 10 doesn't give us much margin for being robbed.

(08-20-2010 07:53 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  I'm waffling but seeing Andy Staples write about the WAC being the worst league, backing up my devil's advocate argument... I'm leaning anti-expansion.

If another girl uglier than you walks into the dancehall, that doesn't mean the boys will suddenly not think you're still ugly too.




We still need to add programs which will enable "enhancement" of the league for decades to come.

I live three hours from Ruston or thereabouts and adding Tech would do nothing for our reputation here that merely not being listed as the worst conference in pre-season mags wouldn't do.