(05-08-2020 11:02 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  UTRGV to restart their football program? They did had the sport when they were a JC.

Dixie State planned to build a 15,000 seat stadium.

Lamar, Midwestern State and West Texas A&M could be some others.

Midwestern has needed to move up from the Lone Star Conference for years. But, they still need to build a stadium. Playing games in WFISD's high school stadium isn't going to get them into the Southland or a new FCS WAC.

(05-08-2020 10:26 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  How would the WAC be able to restart FBS football?

The bylaw on transitioning to FBS says you need an invite from an FBS or formerly FBS conference. Which the WAC is.

Now, this is college football, where what the rules say on paper is a lot less important than what powerful interests want to happen. So if the WAC got anywhere near issuing an "FBS invite" to a UTRGV or a North Dakota State or a Missouri State, you might see that bylaw get scrapped very quickly.

But apparently, the WAC powers-that-be actually discuss that possibility.

"But don't you need 8 all-sports schools to qualify as an FBS conference"
Yes.

"How do you reconcile that with the WAC handing out FBS invites"
I dunno.

(05-08-2020 02:02 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 01:10 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  What was interesting in the conversation was Mochia saying UTRGV had hired Oliver Luck and Mack Brown to investigate football. This is probably what the announcement on the 11th will be about. Perhaps they are FBS focused, or maybe FCS with the SLC in mind. New Orleans place is shaky since they had a study on football, an announcement they would be exploring it, and no football. UTRGV and Tarleton could perhaps replace UNO down the road.

Moccia misspoke. Mack Brown was involved in the UTRGV football feasibility study which started in 2016 and I think ended in 2018. Brown was hired at UNC as the head coach in November of 2018. As far as I know, UTRGV never made a decision on football. So, for UTRGV to decide to go with football now, considering the environment we are in today and the likely budgets cuts, makes no sense. They may decide to go with football at some point down the road, especially with a growing enrollment that is expected to reach 40,000 in the next decade, but not at this point in time.

That makes sense. Your recognition of this error makes me think almost the entire conversation is BS.

The WAC is having a scheduled talk on Football, but it has everything to do with supporting Dixie State and Tarleton State programs and nothing to do with New Mexico State's FBS needs. Mochia may have deliberately hinted at meat for his home audience.

(05-08-2020 11:18 AM)Hammersmith Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 10:26 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  How would the WAC be able to restart FBS football?

It was an extreme hypothetical he was raising(after being asked directly about it). He mentioned UMass, UConn and Liberty. If they got the four of them(inc. NMSU) and maybe a few other move ups, they probably think there's a chance.

But if you listen to his tone of voice, it does not sound likely at all. At one point, he says. "It's not impossible," and he puts a little bit of emphasis on the 'im'. Like you do when you say something's not impossible, but very, very improbable.

This. The AD is trying to sell hope to NMSU supporters, hope that they won't have to cobble together indy football schedules forever.

(05-08-2020 02:22 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 10:26 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  How would the WAC be able to restart FBS football?

The bylaw on transitioning to FBS says you need an invite from an FBS or formerly FBS conference. Which the WAC is.

Now, this is college football, where what the rules say on paper is a lot less important than what powerful interests want to happen. So if the WAC got anywhere near issuing an "FBS invite" to a UTRGV or a North Dakota State or a Missouri State, you might see that bylaw get scrapped very quickly.

But apparently, the WAC powers-that-be actually discuss that possibility.

"But don't you need 8 all-sports schools to qualify as an FBS conference"
Yes.

"How do you reconcile that with the WAC handing out FBS invites"
I dunno.

Ah, well now this makes the whole thing a LOT more interesting. If that is indeed the case, then you could essentially have a western-centered "best of FCS" move up to FBS WAC:

NMSU
NDSU
UND
SDSU
Montana
Montana St
UNI
NAU
Sacramento St
Missouri St
JMU
Liberty

Feel free to substitute some other teams in for some of these^

(05-08-2020 03:03 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Ah, well now this makes the whole thing a LOT more interesting. If that is indeed the case, then you could essentially have a western-centered "best of FCS" move up to FBS WAC:

NMSU
NDSU
UND
SDSU
Montana
Montana St
UNI
NAU
Sacramento St
Missouri St
JMU
Liberty

Feel free to substitute some other teams in for some of these^

Thing is, those are insane distances to deal with. Just an example: NDSU to Sac St(which is nowhere near the largest distance among the schools you listed) is the same distance as Orlando to Quebec. It's one thing for a P5 conference to have a spread like that with their bankrolls, but quite another for upper tier FCS schools to do the same.

edit: Have no idea why I thought you had PSU on your list. Fixed.

(05-08-2020 01:44 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 01:35 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 01:22 PM)esayem Wrote:  The only way this could have happened, and it would have been a long shot:

Before they added Dixie St. and Tarletan St., two programs with no business being D1, they should have reached out to BYU again. BYU plus seven of the top MWC schools to form a new version of the MWC without the football fat. Football revenue would not be shared with the non-football members. Sure, NMSU is included, but their basketball makes it worth it. Then simply vote out Chicago St.

Hypothetically you’d have:

Air Force
Colorado St.
Wyoming
BYU
Boise
San Diego St.
UNLV
New Mexico
NMSU
*Cal Baptist
*Grand Canyon
*Seattle
*UTRGV
*Utah Valley

*non-football

Why in the heck would any of the MWC want this? It would serve no purpose for them and be a downgrade. If they really wanted any of them to be conference mates, they could just invite them.

This is DavidSt level

Thanks for the complement!

The purpose was to create a football conference that would be more appealing than the current MWC due to a greater payout with BYU and less mouths to feed. Make sense?

Nope Not more appealing.

MWC also values basketball. They aren't going to dump Utah State for Utah Valley.

MWC values a presence in Northern California. Your conference has none.

New Mexico State is worse than Utah State in basketball and football.

This is a non-starter

I enjoy having a third FBS conference in the West. But, my initial reaction is that right now is absolutely the wrong time to even think about teams moving up from the FCS ranks to the FBS level.

On further thought, and summoning my inter-David State, perhaps some Big Sky and Missouri Valley schools see an opportunity to make TV money if they are a legitimate FBS program....and they're able to work together to make the upwards jump and get enough to make workable football and Olympic sports alignment....

Here's the best I can do:

WAC FBS FOOTBALL
*New Mexico State
Idaho
Montana
Montana State
North Dakota State
South Dakota State
UC Davis
Sacramento State

WAC OLYMPICS
*New Mexico State
*Grand Canyon
*Utah Valley
*Seattle
*Cal Baptist
*UT Rio Grande Valley
*Chicago State
*Dixie State
*Tarleton State
Idaho
Montana
Montana State
North Dakota State
South Dakota State
UC Davis
Sacramento State

Every school, except Chicago State, would have at least 3 other schools in the same state or an adjacent state.

I think the WAC could continue football as FBS but the only way to do that would be to shape the conference like this

NDSU
UND
SDSU
USD
Montana
Montana state
Idaho
NMSU
UTEP (not needed but would help)

Okay, I'll play.

Here's a 15-member future WAC with three 5-school divisions:

NORTH
Seattle
Eastern Washington
Idaho
Montana
Montana State

WEST
Sac State
Cal Baptist
Utah Valley
Dixie State
Grand Canyon

SOUTH
New Mexico St
West Texas A&M
Midwestern State
Tarleton State
UTRGV

For basketball each school would play an 18-game schedule consisting of home-and-homes with the other four teams in its division and single games (half home and half away) with the ten teams in the other divisions. That would help control travel expenses.

The target FBS lineup would be (2019 football attendance in parentheses):
Montana (23K)
New Mexico State (18K)
Montana State (17K)
Sac State (11K)
Tarleton State (9K)
Midwestern State (8K)
West Texas A&M (8K)
Eastern Washington (8K)
Idaho (7K)

Since only three of the above currently meet the FBS 15K attendance requirement, the rest would need to invest heavily in facilities and marketing to put more fans in the seats. This would happen over a three to five year transition period. In the meantime the NCAA would categorize the schools as football independents rather than members of an FBS conference.

Although Dixie State plays football the team drew only 4K per game in 2019 and should probably target playing at the FCS rather than FBS level. With five Big Sky members moving to the WAC it's likely that the Big Sky would accept Dixie State as a football affiliate.

UTRGV could become the 10th FBS football member if it chose to jump directly into FBS like UTSA did when it launched the sport.

(05-08-2020 03:22 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 01:44 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 01:35 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 01:22 PM)esayem Wrote:  The only way this could have happened, and it would have been a long shot:

Before they added Dixie St. and Tarletan St., two programs with no business being D1, they should have reached out to BYU again. BYU plus seven of the top MWC schools to form a new version of the MWC without the football fat. Football revenue would not be shared with the non-football members. Sure, NMSU is included, but their basketball makes it worth it. Then simply vote out Chicago St.

Hypothetically you’d have:

Air Force
Colorado St.
Wyoming
BYU
Boise
San Diego St.
UNLV
New Mexico
NMSU
*Cal Baptist
*Grand Canyon
*Seattle
*UTRGV
*Utah Valley

*non-football

Why in the heck would any of the MWC want this? It would serve no purpose for them and be a downgrade. If they really wanted any of them to be conference mates, they could just invite them.

This is DavidSt level

Thanks for the complement!

The purpose was to create a football conference that would be more appealing than the current MWC due to a greater payout with BYU and less mouths to feed. Make sense?

Nope Not more appealing.

MWC also values basketball. They aren't going to dump Utah State for Utah Valley.

MWC values a presence in Northern California. Your conference has none.

New Mexico State is worse than Utah State in basketball and football.

This is a non-starter

Utah State plays football. Any configuration featuring BYU and Utah State in a football conference is a non-starter. So there is a greater chance of my David St conference happening than BYU joining the current MWC.

MWC values a presence in Northern CA? Is that why SJSU was the last admitted member just to get to 12 after all other options were exhausted?

This is merely an alternative to BYU forming a brand new conference with the best MWC properties. It’s happened once before, so it certainly could happen again. With this idea, an NCAA waiver isn’t required to get an auto-bid.

Experiment:
East:
Tennessee State 68,798 seat stadium
Liberty
UMass.
JMU
Jacksonville State
Delaware
N.C.A&T
Youngstown State
E. Kentucky
Murray State
N. Alabama
Chattanooga
Stony Brook any 6 to 8 of these schools could be football affiliates.

West:
New Mexico State
Dixie State
Montana
Texas Southern
Sacramento State
S. Dakota State
Montana State
N. Dakota State
Missouri State
Weber State
Idaho
Lamar
N. Iowa
N. Arizona
S. Illinois
SFAU
Sam Houston State
West Texas A&M
UTPB
Kingsville
Midwestern State
Commerce


The D2 schools could be easily upgraded cheaper than several FCS schools.

Azusa Pacific
Central Oklahoma
Missouri Western
Lindenwood
Wayne State, Mich.
Indianapolis

These 6 schools can easily access a large stadium.

You could then reformed the Great West with:
California Baptist
Southern Utah
Azusa Pacific
Western Washington
Colorado Mesa with football as affiliate of the Big Sky
Grand Canyon
Utah Valley
CSU-L.A.
Sonoma State
San Francisco State


WAC pays Horizon League to take Chicago State.

Big Sky gets Western Oregon, Central Washington, CSU-Pueblo and some others.

WAC then could split down the road to create:

New East Coast Conference:
Tennessee State
JMU
Liberty
Delaware
UMass.
Jacksonville State
N.C.A&T
Chattanooga
E. Kentucky
N. Alabama
Stony Brook
Towson

New Northern Conference:
South Dakota State
North Dakota State
Missouri State
Murray State
Northern Iowa
Southern Illinois
Illinois State
Indiana State
Western Illinois
Wayne State, Mich.
Lindenwood
Youngstown State

WAC:
New Mexico State
Montana
Sacramento State
Weber State
Idaho
Lamar
N. Arizona
SFAU
Sam Houston State
Dixie State
Texas Southern
Montana State
UTRGV adding football
West Texas A&M

Central Oklahoma could join the WAC in the future if the WAC gets picked apart.

(05-08-2020 03:44 PM)Cajuns1252 Wrote:  I think the WAC could continue football as FBS but the only way to do that would be to shape the conference like this

NDSU
UND
SDSU
USD
Montana
Montana state
Idaho
NMSU
UTEP (not needed but would help)

Sort of what I was shooting for in my above post. UTEP being nearby rival and travel partner for NMSU makes perfect sense. Keeping each Dakota twin together and Montana twin together helps too. Idaho should be right there with that group yes. That is what... 9? Could probably come up with 1 more to get to 10 or 3 more to get to 12. I swear I think Missouri St is a sleeping giant but they have been a doormat forever and I'm not sure they are finding their program the way it needs to be to have success.

(05-08-2020 03:44 PM)Cajuns1252 Wrote:  I think the WAC could continue football as FBS but the only way to do that would be to shape the conference like this

NDSU
UND
SDSU
USD
Montana
Montana state
Idaho
NMSU
UTEP (not needed but would help)

Pretty sure that the Montanas find NMSU and UTEP unexceptable. Weber St is allowable.

There arent many FCS's that turn on NMSU as FBS schools. Have to go to Cali or East Texas.

I came her for news on what NMSU's AD said in a podcast...


...and left with 50 new realignment pipe dreams...

(05-08-2020 12:26 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 11:22 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Sounds a lot like they would discuss having the minimum 8 football members for more of a scheduling agreement disguised as a conference

I could see a scheduling agreement, yes (sort of already doing that with those FBS independents now). But joining a conference to make this happen... eh... I dunno. If any current or future WAC members have FBS aspirations this may be an option, but wouldn't they need to get 6-8 members that are FBS now to kick-start the whole thing?

The rule is that a current or former FBS conference can invite up an FCS football school who wants to transition.

What they need to do to get started is to be able to organize four FBS home games (assuming availability of an FCS game exemption qualifier). Then when there are a total of eight, restart the FBS competition.

To bring schools through one at a time, all you'd need would be for NMSU, Liberty, UConn and UMass to schedule to travel to them in the second year of their transition while they put together an independent schedule for their first year in FBS ... when first transitioning school plays the return on those four ... while the original four play away at the second transitioning school.

And any FBS home game they can organize in their transition year loosens that up.

An eight school conference would have a seven game schedule, so you could have one buy game, three home and away series and an FCS qualifier for a six home game schedule every year, or two buy games, two home and away series and an FCS buy game for alternating 6/5. One presumes for budgetary reasons most would opt for the latter.

I guess something like this could work

NMSU
Liberty
Tarleton St
Dixie St
Lamar
UTRGV
NDSU
SDSU

(05-08-2020 03:36 PM)YNot Wrote:  I enjoy having a third FBS conference in the West. But, my initial reaction is that right now is absolutely the wrong time to even think about teams moving up from the FCS ranks to the FBS level.

On further thought, and summoning my inter-David State, perhaps some Big Sky and Missouri Valley schools see an opportunity to make TV money if they are a legitimate FBS program....and they're able to work together to make the upwards jump and get enough to make workable football and Olympic sports alignment....

Here's the best I can do:

WAC FBS FOOTBALL
*New Mexico State
Idaho
Montana
Montana State
North Dakota State
South Dakota State
UC Davis
Sacramento State

WAC OLYMPICS
*New Mexico State
*Grand Canyon
*Utah Valley
*Seattle
*Cal Baptist
*UT Rio Grande Valley
*Chicago State
*Dixie State
*Tarleton State
Idaho
Montana
Montana State
North Dakota State
South Dakota State
UC Davis
Sacramento State

Every school, except Chicago State, would have at least 3 other schools in the same state or an adjacent state.

Bolded is incorrect. Seattle has just Idaho, and Tarleton State and UTRGV have just each other and NMSU.

As an NMSU grad, this interests me quite a bit, but all of the discussion makes me laugh.

Would I love NMSU to be in a stable conference with football, yes. Do I think that the WAC has done a really nice job with what they have been given, yes I do. I think that there is some good that has come out of such a wide group of schools.

In a sense, it is like watching the Poseidon Adventure or one of those movies that throws people from different backgrounds with different strengths together. Each brings something to the table that permits people to survive. Are there stronger members, yes, but all are needed for survival.

The way I could see this happening is one of three ways.
1. A certain number of FCS schools from the Big Sky/Southland decide that now is the time to move up to FBS.
2. The NCAA has a sizemic shift and allows schools to place Football in conferences that do not house all the other sports. This has been banded about quite a bit of late on this messageboard.
3 Another way that I can not forsee.

I doubt it, but it is fun to speculate about. Everyone has an answer, but it seems like none of us have "the answer" that is economically viable, pandemic possible, and travel friendly.

(05-08-2020 01:44 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 01:35 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(05-08-2020 01:22 PM)esayem Wrote:  The only way this could have happened, and it would have been a long shot:

Before they added Dixie St. and Tarletan St., two programs with no business being D1, they should have reached out to BYU again. BYU plus seven of the top MWC schools to form a new version of the MWC without the football fat. Football revenue would not be shared with the non-football members. Sure, NMSU is included, but their basketball makes it worth it. Then simply vote out Chicago St.

Hypothetically you’d have:

Air Force
Colorado St.
Wyoming
BYU
Boise
San Diego St.
UNLV
New Mexico
NMSU
*Cal Baptist
*Grand Canyon
*Seattle
*UTRGV
*Utah Valley

*non-football

Why in the heck would any of the MWC want this? It would serve no purpose for them and be a downgrade. If they really wanted any of them to be conference mates, they could just invite them.

This is DavidSt level

Thanks for the complement!

The purpose was to create a football conference that would be more appealing than the current MWC due to a greater payout with BYU and less mouths to feed. Make sense?

More appealing by pissing off the TV folks, adding more putrid "schools", and splitting less money more ways?