The more I read the WAC board and follow their current situation, the more firmly I believe that not only is the Sun Belt infinitely more stable currently, but the future of the conference appears to be much stronger and more stable as well even if we were to have to replace a few schools.

The WAC fans point to the WAC's past of always being able to rebound from realignment and come back strongly, which is true, when you look at their past and the number of times that they've suffered multiple departures, it really is amazing the conference has lasted as long as it has and been as strong as it has at times. That said, they've almost always had existing FBS candidates to refill with and usually ones that have been FBS for quite some time and they've almost always had at least a few long time members holding the conference together to welcome the newcomers. If you just look at their last round in 2005 when they lost UTEP, Rice, SMU and Tulsa to C-USA they still had Hawaii(25+ years as a member) Fresno State(14 year member) San Jose State(10 year member) Nevada(6 year member) La Tech(5 year member) and Boise State(5 year member) and they were able to add Utah State(FBS since the split in the 70's) New Mexico State(FBS since the split in the 70's) and Idaho(FBS for close to ten years). On top of that, looking back over their history, I don't believe they've ever added a FCS member or startup program directly. The earliest I can find them having added a former FCS program is Boise State who they added in their sixth year at the FBS level.

Now in 2012 they will have San Jose State(16 year member) La Tech(11 year member) Utah State, Idaho, and New Mexico State(all 7 year members). They will be adding a FCS program, a startup and a non football program in Texas State, UTSA and Denver. Now when you look at the their board, the schools that are being bandied about are all FCS programs(with the exception of the few who continue to mention several Sun Belt programs) a few more recent or confirmed startups(like Lamar) and a slew of schools who may or may not have any real intention of adding football like Utah Valley University and Texas-Arlington. All that said, it's pretty much assumed that the last add before this year's deadline will be Lamar. So in a few years the WAC will be made up of exactly two members who's been around for more than a decade, three schools who have been decent WAC members with a few good teams between them(USU MBB, La Tech WBB etc.) and then probably three teams brand new to FBS, two of them nearly brand new to playing football and then their best all around program being non-football member Denver. That IMO is weaker than the Sun Belt was in 2001. Furthermore if you look into their future, should they suffer any more defections, unless Montana changes their mind and/or California finds some money, their options are even more dire.

Conversely, if you look at the Sun Belt and our footprint, there is a wealth of strong FCS programs that have little support from any of us to be added now, but were the Sun Belt to suffer any defections, the options are infinitely better than those afforded to the WAC. When we talk about FCS programs, we generally argue over which program is best and of course, we don't need to add anyone and on top of all that, if the WAC continues to suffer in a few years if we find ourselves needing to add I don't think it would be out of the question that we could take any or all of La Tech, Texas State, UTSA and New Mexico State. The WAC on the other hand, when they argue over FCS programs it seems they argue which one sucks least and they are in a position that they need to add at least one and should add a few more to achieve some semblance of stability and there is no chance of them adding Sun Belt programs currently. I freely admit that if the WAC is somehow able to rise from the ashes again, a move to the WAC might finally make sense for UNT and perhaps they bring ULL and ASU with them, but I have my doubts that the WAC ever fully rebounds from this and even if they do, UNT may still be perfectly happy in the Sun Belt even with the geographic shift of the WAC.

Back in 1986, the Southland wanted to SW Texas State (now Texas State), Stephen F. Austin, Sam Houston State, and NW Louisiana. Despite objection, the three Texas schools got in. Arkansas State, Lamar and Louisiana Tech left and formed the American South, with us gone NW Louisiana got in as well.

As the American South made efforts to add football, Lamar elected to drop football rather than remain a I-AA independent or go I-A. After the ASC-Sun Belt merger, Lamar gave up hope of being competitive and returned to the Southland to try to revive their program and then added I-AA football back.

Now a school that La.Tech fought against joining is one of the saviors of the WAC. They are joined by UTSA program that hasn't played a game yet and a Denver program that was the remote out-post of the Sun Belt. The WAC today is a crippled version of the Big West experiment that didn't work well for them (NMSU, USU, San Jose State) plus an FCS that moved up when they left the Big West (Idaho), plus former SBC Denver, and previously mentioned Texas schools. They are looking at previously mentioned Lamar and Division I newcomers Seattle and Utah Valley State. There is some talk of Texas-Arlington who got booted from the SLC for not having football until the league got short of members and invited them back.

I know La.Tech has been opposed to a return to the Sun Belt but if you are comparison shopping between the WAC and Sun Belt it gets to be a pretty easy choice. There may be internal politics reasons that prevent it but saying no has other risks.

The Sun Belt is going to 11 schools with Denver's departure. I hear that there is a strong push to keep the divisions and that probably means adding a school. If it isn't Tech who does the Belt look to? I think the list is pretty short. Texas State who is in the process of going FBS, the "let's bet on the future" pick UTSA, Georgia State, Appalachian State, and Jacksonville State.

JSU is probably a good bit from ready and like GSU and AppSt don't plug well into our divisional format. My sense is that UTSA is a long-shot pick while Texas State seems closest to ready. A WAC without Texas State isn't looking to find one FBS to move up to get to eight, its now searching for two.

If there really is serious consideration of expansion (I don't know if that is the case) then I don't believe there is enough resistance internally or among boosters that would cause the leadership at La.Tech to risk the fate of the program if in fact Texas State is being considered. I know NMSU's name was bandied around some months ago but I cannot believe the AD's want to replace an expensive trip to Denver with an equally expensive trip to Las Cruces for anything other than football only so I don't think they are in the mix.

I'd say WAC stability is seriously threatened by what MWC might do down the line, what CUSA might do, and even by what the Sun Belt might do. The Sun Belt has numbers to survive a significant raid and would have a good opportunity to replace members by dipping into the WAC as well as the FCS ranks. The WAC has already found that a number of FCS schools in their region are not interested or simply cannot afford the cost.

(03-09-2011 02:36 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The Sun Belt is going to 11 schools with Denver's departure. I hear that there is a strong push to keep the divisions and that probably means adding a school. If it isn't Tech who does the Belt look to? I think the list is pretty short. Texas State who is in the process of going FBS, the "let's bet on the future" pick UTSA, Georgia State, Appalachian State, and Jacksonville State.

In order to get back to 12 we'd have to add by this summer, wouldn't we? Are there any non-football playing candidates that would avoid going to 11 in football? Lastly do you think Missouri State could be a viable and/or interested party?

I still wonder if the F_U's would move out or would want to be dropped by most Sun Belt members?

Its quite a trip for most of the confrence to come down and the same in reverse for us to travel to games. I seriously doubt you will ever see much of travelling fan base from either FAU or FIU. The distances are just to great. There is not one easy drive to game for the Florida teams in the confrence.

I know that our markets and pressence in a recruiting hotbed for football are what makes programs happy to have us but I dont imagine that many would be unhappy if some shakeup happened and the F_U's went elsewhere.

Am I wrong?

I was kinda hoping we'd stay at 11 and goto a 20 game full round robin basketball schedule. Oh well.

(03-09-2011 02:56 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  Am I wrong?

Yes. Quite.

(03-09-2011 02:56 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  I still wonder if the F_U's would move out or would want to be dropped by most Sun Belt members?

Its quite a trip for most of the confrence to come down and the same in reverse for us to travel to games. I seriously doubt you will ever see much of travelling fan base from either FAU or FIU. The distances are just to great. There is not one easy drive to game for the Florida teams in the confrence.

I know that our markets and pressence in a recruiting hotbed for football are what makes programs happy to have us but I dont imagine that many would be unhappy if some shakeup happened and the F_U's went elsewhere.

Am I wrong?

The honest answer would be yes. Right now we are all in the survival mode together in this conference. But down the road, I'm sure it's just as fare to say FAU and FIU would much rather compete within a more regional conference in the Eastern Time zone. FAU and FIU are in great markets to visit, but they are not any more cost effective for us to travel to then NMST.

The other side of the debate of course is the TV markets in those areas. Obviously is not close, but has having a SBC presence in Miami helped secure better TV contracts for the conference? I don't know, haven't seen numbers that can make a convincing argument either way.

(03-09-2011 02:56 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  I still wonder if the F_U's would move out or would want to be dropped by most Sun Belt members?

Its quite a trip for most of the confrence to come down and the same in reverse for us to travel to games. I seriously doubt you will ever see much of travelling fan base from either FAU or FIU. The distances are just to great. There is not one easy drive to game for the Florida teams in the confrence.

I know that our markets and pressence in a recruiting hotbed for football are what makes programs happy to have us but I dont imagine that many would be unhappy if some shakeup happened and the F_U's went elsewhere.

Am I wrong?

Yes. FAU and FIU are valuable to the Sun Belt. Besides, look at how far out Miami is for the rest of the ACC! It works for them, and FAU and FIU work for us.



Also, if FAU and FIU fans want media outlets (such as ESPN.com) to stop referring FAU and FIU as the F_U's, then why do people keep it going here? That's like a Louisiana-Lafayette fan NOT referring to their team as Louisiana. That's crazy! Just thinking aloud.

I actually dont mind the F_U moniker. It works and the two programs have an almost identical timeline since 2000.

I know we add value to the confrence for the reasons I stated. We have large student bases as well and are in a growing area. Hell, FAU had well over 20K applications this year, with over 1100 for the 96 spots for our new medical program.

I just know from an athletics standpoint its a long way for teams/fans to travel to and vice versa. I am seriously jealous of the rivalrys that WKU vs MTSU have since they are only a few hours drive from each other. FAU and FIU will never travel well to Sun Belt games (other then each other) because of the distance, closest is probalby MTSU and I would imagine thats about 10 hours away.

(03-09-2011 03:29 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  I just know from an athletics standpoint its a long way for teams/fans to travel to and vice versa. I am seriously jealous of the rivalrys that WKU vs MTSU have since they are only a few hours drive from each other. FAU and FIU will never travel well to Sun Belt games (other then each other) because of the distance, closest is probalby MTSU and I would imagine thats about 10 hours away.

The Sun Belt could certainly stand to have a few more rivalries like MT/WKU. It's by far the most played rivalry in football in the conference 2010 being the 60th meeting(14 more than ULL/ULM) and that's with two pretty substantial breaks in the series, the two teams did not meet between 1941 and 1952 and again from 1991 to 2007.

And FYI at just under 100 miles apart, we're less than "a few hours apart".

To get this back on track, I do agree, the WAC seems very unstable and they are doing what the 'Belt had to do back in 05 to survive. They will move to the bottom of the barrell after 2012 if things stay the same.

IF for some reason LATech were back would having 3 schools in one state be over kill for football?

(03-09-2011 03:21 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(03-09-2011 02:56 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  I still wonder if the F_U's would move out or would want to be dropped by most Sun Belt members?

Its quite a trip for most of the confrence to come down and the same in reverse for us to travel to games. I seriously doubt you will ever see much of travelling fan base from either FAU or FIU. The distances are just to great. There is not one easy drive to game for the Florida teams in the confrence.

I know that our markets and pressence in a recruiting hotbed for football are what makes programs happy to have us but I dont imagine that many would be unhappy if some shakeup happened and the F_U's went elsewhere.

Am I wrong?

Yes. FAU and FIU are valuable to the Sun Belt. Besides, look at how far out Miami is for the rest of the ACC! It works for them, and FAU and FIU work for us.



Also, if FAU and FIU fans want media outlets (such as ESPN.com) to stop referring FAU and FIU as the F_U's, then why do people keep it going here? That's like a Louisiana-Lafayette fan NOT referring to their team as Louisiana. That's crazy! Just thinking aloud.

Why even bring Louisiana into the discussion? I certainly don't use F_U, not even making fun of either. But the same question could be asked of you, why complain or think out loud about the F_U moniker, when you have gone out of your way to use Louisiana-Lafayette? Sounds a bit hypocritical to me.

(03-09-2011 03:41 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(03-09-2011 03:29 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  I just know from an athletics standpoint its a long way for teams/fans to travel to and vice versa. I am seriously jealous of the rivalrys that WKU vs MTSU have since they are only a few hours drive from each other. FAU and FIU will never travel well to Sun Belt games (other then each other) because of the distance, closest is probalby MTSU and I would imagine thats about 10 hours away.

The Sun Belt could certainly stand to have a few more rivalries like MT/WKU. It's by far the most played rivalry in football in the conference 2010 being the 60th meeting(14 more than ULL/ULM) and that's with two pretty substantial breaks in the series, the two teams did not meet between 1941 and 1952 and again from 1991 to 2007.

And FYI at just under 100 miles apart, we're less than "a few hours apart".

How far away are the following from MTSU?

ASU
TROY
USA
Cajuns
ULM
UNT

(03-09-2011 03:43 PM)CajunT Wrote:  

(03-09-2011 03:21 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(03-09-2011 02:56 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  I still wonder if the F_U's would move out or would want to be dropped by most Sun Belt members?

Its quite a trip for most of the confrence to come down and the same in reverse for us to travel to games. I seriously doubt you will ever see much of travelling fan base from either FAU or FIU. The distances are just to great. There is not one easy drive to game for the Florida teams in the confrence.

I know that our markets and pressence in a recruiting hotbed for football are what makes programs happy to have us but I dont imagine that many would be unhappy if some shakeup happened and the F_U's went elsewhere.

Am I wrong?

Yes. FAU and FIU are valuable to the Sun Belt. Besides, look at how far out Miami is for the rest of the ACC! It works for them, and FAU and FIU work for us.



Also, if FAU and FIU fans want media outlets (such as ESPN.com) to stop referring FAU and FIU as the F_U's, then why do people keep it going here? That's like a Louisiana-Lafayette fan NOT referring to their team as Louisiana. That's crazy! Just thinking aloud.

Why even bring Louisiana into the discussion? I certainly don't use F_U, not even making fun of either. But the same question could be asked of you, why complain or think out loud about the F_U moniker, when you have gone out of your way to use Louisiana-Lafayette? Sounds a bit hypocritical to me.

I brought Louisiana into the discussion because Cajun fans don't like to be called ULL or whatever and I was making a comparison since some FIU and FAU fans complain about ESPN calling them the F_U's (like in the Bottom Ten thing specifically). I am not complaining about the F_U, asking a genuine question. And I call your school Louisiana-Lafayette because it is what I have always called your school and is your legal name.

Warning: This thread is about to get hijacked! Go F I U!

P.S. I don't really care much about the whole F_U thing. It will be a thing of the past once we are not bottom dwellers. I.E. this past year, FIU was off after the first 4 weeks. Go F I U!

(03-09-2011 03:49 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  And I call your school Louisiana-Lafayette because it is what I have always called your school and is your legal name.

But is it really their name legally.....?

Please Lord, lets not do the "Name" thing in this thread.

Id REALLY like to keep it focused on the discussion of the 'Bets stability and possible confrence issues.

I think we have enough threads about name issues for our brethren in LA.

(03-09-2011 03:53 PM)FIU Panther Fan Wrote:  Warning: This thread is about to get hijacked! Go F I U!

P.S. I don't really care much about the whole F_U thing. It will be a thing of the past once we are not bottom dwellers. I.E. this past year, FIU was off after the first 4 weeks. Go F I U!

Im curious if you agree with me in regards to our schools and the distances involved hindering rivalrys and causeing logistic issues for other confrence mates?

FAU has travelled prety good to FIU and also to USF and UCF when weve played them. The other schools are just not an easy trip to make.

(03-09-2011 02:36 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Back in 1986, the Southland wanted to SW Texas State (now Texas State), Stephen F. Austin, Sam Houston State, and NW Louisiana. Despite objection, the three Texas schools got in. Arkansas State, Lamar and Louisiana Tech left and formed the American South, with us gone NW Louisiana got in as well.

As the American South made efforts to add football, Lamar elected to drop football rather than remain a I-AA independent or go I-A. After the ASC-Sun Belt merger, Lamar gave up hope of being competitive and returned to the Southland to try to revive their program and then added I-AA football back.

Now a school that La.Tech fought against joining is one of the saviors of the WAC. They are joined by UTSA program that hasn't played a game yet and a Denver program that was the remote out-post of the Sun Belt. The WAC today is a crippled version of the Big West experiment that didn't work well for them (NMSU, USU, San Jose State) plus an FCS that moved up when they left the Big West (Idaho), plus former SBC Denver, and previously mentioned Texas schools. They are looking at previously mentioned Lamar and Division I newcomers Seattle and Utah Valley State. There is some talk of Texas-Arlington who got booted from the SLC for not having football until the league got short of members and invited them back.

I know La.Tech has been opposed to a return to the Sun Belt but if you are comparison shopping between the WAC and Sun Belt it gets to be a pretty easy choice. There may be internal politics reasons that prevent it but saying no has other risks.

The Sun Belt is going to 11 schools with Denver's departure. I hear that there is a strong push to keep the divisions and that probably means adding a school. If it isn't Tech who does the Belt look to? I think the list is pretty short. Texas State who is in the process of going FBS, the "let's bet on the future" pick UTSA, Georgia State, Appalachian State, and Jacksonville State.

JSU is probably a good bit from ready and like GSU and AppSt don't plug well into our divisional format. My sense is that UTSA is a long-shot pick while Texas State seems closest to ready. A WAC without Texas State isn't looking to find one FBS to move up to get to eight, its now searching for two.

If there really is serious consideration of expansion (I don't know if that is the case) then I don't believe there is enough resistance internally or among boosters that would cause the leadership at La.Tech to risk the fate of the program if in fact Texas State is being considered. I know NMSU's name was bandied around some months ago but I cannot believe the AD's want to replace an expensive trip to Denver with an equally expensive trip to Las Cruces for anything other than football only so I don't think they are in the mix.

I'd say WAC stability is seriously threatened by what MWC might do down the line, what CUSA might do, and even by what the Sun Belt might do. The Sun Belt has numbers to survive a significant raid and would have a good opportunity to replace members by dipping into the WAC as well as the FCS ranks. The WAC has already found that a number of FCS schools in their region are not interested or simply cannot afford the cost.

If the SBC expands again, would a 12/13 mode work better than a 11/12? I think it would. You guys could have a conf. championship and you've had 13 before for other sports.

Charlotte is an interesting one. Would they be willing to become a full member of the SBC? If so you could add them and have 10/12 until their fb is ready to be #11 for fb. From there you could add a 13th full/12th fb. Really their only other option is hope the MAC goes to 16 and adds UNCC and say JMU for fb only. I figure UMass will be #14 for MAC fb, announcing by the end of the month.

SBC's list of candidates, in order?
1.Charlotte
2.UTSA
3.La.Tech
4.Texas St.
5.App St.
6.Georgia St.
7.Jacksonville St.
8.Lamar
Here's the WAC's
1.Lamar
2.Seattle
3.CS Bakersfield
4.Utah Valley

umm, advantage SBC

(03-09-2011 03:49 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(03-09-2011 03:43 PM)CajunT Wrote:  

(03-09-2011 03:21 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(03-09-2011 02:56 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  I still wonder if the F_U's would move out or would want to be dropped by most Sun Belt members?

Its quite a trip for most of the confrence to come down and the same in reverse for us to travel to games. I seriously doubt you will ever see much of travelling fan base from either FAU or FIU. The distances are just to great. There is not one easy drive to game for the Florida teams in the confrence.

I know that our markets and pressence in a recruiting hotbed for football are what makes programs happy to have us but I dont imagine that many would be unhappy if some shakeup happened and the F_U's went elsewhere.

Am I wrong?

Yes. FAU and FIU are valuable to the Sun Belt. Besides, look at how far out Miami is for the rest of the ACC! It works for them, and FAU and FIU work for us.



Also, if FAU and FIU fans want media outlets (such as ESPN.com) to stop referring FAU and FIU as the F_U's, then why do people keep it going here? That's like a Louisiana-Lafayette fan NOT referring to their team as Louisiana. That's crazy! Just thinking aloud.

Why even bring Louisiana into the discussion? I certainly don't use F_U, not even making fun of either. But the same question could be asked of you, why complain or think out loud about the F_U moniker, when you have gone out of your way to use Louisiana-Lafayette? Sounds a bit hypocritical to me.

I brought Louisiana into the discussion because Cajun fans don't like to be called ULL or whatever and I was making a comparison since some FIU and FAU fans complain about ESPN calling them the F_U's (like in the Bottom Ten thing specifically). I am not complaining about the F_U, asking a genuine question. And I call your school Louisiana-Lafayette because it is what I have always called your school and is your legal name.

I call BS on that sir, but thanks for the interest in "Louisiana's Ragin' Cajuns" once again.