If you could add a school to the WAC who would it be? I'd also love to hear your reasoning as to why that school would work in the WAC.

Montana, Montana State, North Dakota State. Geography, good programs in all sports, pretty large fan bases, academically compatible with NMSU. Could easily move their FCS football programs to FBS.

Realistic possibility or wishful thinking?

Wishful thinking: New Mexico
1. Hopefully that would make NMSU stop looking around so much and stabilize the conference.
2. A second strong team in the WAC, but not so strong that beating them is out of the question for the rest of us.
3. Good geographic fit.

(Slightly more) Realistic possibility: Grab another LSC move up. Dallas Baptist has some prior WAC connections and getting to Dallas is easy for everyone.

If the WAC continues to add D2 schools, the next one I would like them to add is West Texas A&M. And, if the WAC is trying to start up FBS football using FCS move ups then... Sam Houston State, Stephen F. Austin, Montana, maybe North Dakota State. And, the team I wish NMSU was in the same conference with is UTEP.

West Texas A&M.
Perfect fit geographically.
Strong athletic programs.
FOOTBALL.
A&M money.
Tarleton Rival.

-OR-

Abilene Christian.
Perfect fit geographically.
Strong athletic programs.
FOOTBALL.
Deep pockets.
Tarleton Rival.

(05-09-2020 07:39 PM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  West Texas A&M.
Perfect fit geographically.
Strong athletic programs.
FOOTBALL.
A&M money.
Tarleton Rival.

-OR-

Abilene Christian.
Perfect fit geographically.
Strong athletic programs.
FOOTBALL.
Deep pockets.
Tarleton Rival.

Love this. No MWC teams will be in WAC ever.

(05-09-2020 05:11 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  If you could add a school to the WAC who would it be? I'd also love to hear your reasoning as to why that school would work in the WAC.

Denver. If we are talking about just Olympic sports, they would be the obvious pick. A western school, very good academically, a good market and gets the conference in Colorado, where the WAC headquarters are. They can be good in basketball and they are very good in men's soccer. The basketball program is going nowhere in the Dakota league. They were regular season co-champions in the WAC in 2013 (16-2) and they played in the NIT tournament, winning a first round game.

(05-09-2020 07:42 PM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  

(05-09-2020 07:39 PM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  West Texas A&M.
Perfect fit geographically.
Strong athletic programs.
FOOTBALL.
A&M money.
Tarleton Rival.

-OR-

Abilene Christian.
Perfect fit geographically.
Strong athletic programs.
FOOTBALL.
Deep pockets.
Tarleton Rival.

Love this. No MWC teams will be in WAC ever.

I'd take ACU and A&M Commerce.

NAU, as they'd be a natural geographic rival for GCU. Purely selfish reason, for sure

I’d take NAU also. Denver and Eastern Washington and bring back Idaho. These keep the WAC footprint, I would hate to see this turn into some kind of Texas league.

(05-10-2020 09:47 AM)Trod0 Wrote:  I’d take NAU also. Denver and Eastern Washington and bring back Idaho. These keep the WAC footprint, I would hate to see this turn into some kind of Texas league.

NAU, Denver, WT and ACU would be nice additions and make a solid core for FCS

Tarleton
Dixie
NAU
AcU
WT

(05-10-2020 10:17 AM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(05-10-2020 09:47 AM)Trod0 Wrote:  I’d take NAU also. Denver and Eastern Washington and bring back Idaho. These keep the WAC footprint, I would hate to see this turn into some kind of Texas league.

NAU, Denver, WT and ACU would be nice additions.

Proximity wise, staying within our current conference footprint, all four schools would be good additions. However, NAU doesn't add much to the WAC except a warm body when you take into account methods of travel to Flagstaff. There is no incentive for NAU to leave the Big Sky. There addition would move forward the premise of starting up FCS football in the WAC but falls well short of promoting the any idea of building a FBS conference for the future. NAU simply doesn't have the support to move up to FBS (averaging about 6.5K per game).

As for Denver, they left the WAC for academic reasons. They felt not all the current WAC schools represented Denver's academic values; feeling more comfortable with their peers in the Summit. They do not support football. So they would help NMSU goals at the FBS level or Dixie State and Tarleton State at the FCS level.

To be honest, I don't know a lot about Abilene Christian. If the are a well funded private school like Grand Canyon and California Baptist, I could see them as a plausible addition. But I don't see them leaving the Southland anytime soon. There is no incentive for them to leave one FCS conference for another. And they are not FBS ready.

I do like West Texas A&M because of their location within the WAC footprint and proximity to Amarillo; for travel. I feel they still have the reminisce of being D1 with their current facilities. As a D2 school, they out draw NAU in football attendance (at just over 7.6K). They is an infrastructure there which could easily move up to the FCS level and join Dixie State and Tarleton State. And, with (a lot of) time maybe even the FBS level.

The only reasons to join the WAC at this moment is to give D2 schools a landing spot to move up to FCS football and basketball into D1. Or, to start an FBS football conference for those FCS schools on the cusp on making that move. Unless a school is in one of those categories, I don't think schools are interested in the WAC. The old WAC model used to be to target non-football playing D2 schools in large metropolitan location for cheap travel, recruiting, and marketing. However, there are not enough D2 schools ready to make the move to D1... UC San Diego chose to join the Big West, Metropolitan State of Denver chose to stay at the D2 level, and California State Los Angeles performed a feasibility study to move to D1 but no results are currently available. Consequently, the WAC Commissioner changed the model by targeting football playing D2 schools with healthier budgets and are more D1 ready. But this has now put the WAC on a new path to target schools that have similar qualities to Dixie State and Tarleton State. Hence my interest in West Texas A&M.

(05-10-2020 11:17 AM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  

(05-10-2020 10:17 AM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(05-10-2020 09:47 AM)Trod0 Wrote:  I’d take NAU also. Denver and Eastern Washington and bring back Idaho. These keep the WAC footprint, I would hate to see this turn into some kind of Texas league.

NAU, Denver, WT and ACU would be nice additions.

Proximity wise, staying within our current conference footprint, all four schools would be good additions. However, NAU doesn't add much to the WAC except a warm body when you take into account methods of travel to Flagstaff. There is no incentive for NAU to leave the Big Sky. There addition would move forward the premise of starting up FCS football in the WAC but falls well short of promoting the any idea of building a FBS conference for the future. NAU simply doesn't have the support to move up to FBS (averaging about 6.5K per game).

As for Denver, they left the WAC for academic reasons. They felt not all the current WAC schools represented Denver's academic values; feeling more comfortable with their peers in the Summit. They do not support football. So they would help NMSU goals at the FBS level or Dixie State and Tarleton State at the FCS level.

To be honest, I don't know a lot about Abilene Christian. If the are a well funded private school like Grand Canyon and California Baptist, I could see them as a plausible addition. But I don't see them leaving the Southland anytime soon. There is no incentive for them to leave one FCS conference for another. And they are not FBS ready.

I do like West Texas A&M because of their location within the WAC footprint and proximity to Amarillo; for travel. I feel they still have the reminisce of being D1 with their current facilities. As a D2 school, they out draw NAU in football attendance (at just over 7.6K). They is an infrastructure there which could easily move up to the FCS level and join Dixie State and Tarleton State. And, with (a lot of) time maybe even the FBS level.

The only reasons to join the WAC at this moment is to give D2 schools a landing spot to move up to FCS football and basketball into D1. Or, to start an FBS football conference for those FCS schools on the cusp on making that move. Unless a school is in one of those categories, I don't think schools are interested in the WAC. The old WAC model used to be to target non-football playing D2 schools in large metropolitan location for cheap travel, recruiting, and marketing. However, there are not enough D2 schools ready to make the move to D1... UC San Diego chose to join the Big West, Metropolitan State of Denver chose to stay at the D2 level, and California State Los Angeles performed a feasibility study to move to D1 but no results are currently available. Consequently, the WAC Commissioner changed the model by targeting football playing D2 schools with healthier budgets and are more D1 ready. But this has now put the WAC on a new path to target schools that have similar qualities to Dixie State and Tarleton State. Hence my interest in West Texas A&M.

No truer words.

And I would also say the targeted D2 move-ups will be a selective few that have the potential of being fastracked to FBS, should the WAC choose to excercise that golden ticket.

On another note, what about Southern Utah coming over to the WAC?

West Texas A&M. My favorite among all the listed. We used to be with them in the Missouri Valley Conference. They have D1 basketball facilities. Never forget watching the great Maurice Cheeks playing for West Texas A&M (used to be West Texas State in those days).

(05-10-2020 11:53 AM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  

(05-10-2020 11:17 AM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  

(05-10-2020 10:17 AM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(05-10-2020 09:47 AM)Trod0 Wrote:  I’d take NAU also. Denver and Eastern Washington and bring back Idaho. These keep the WAC footprint, I would hate to see this turn into some kind of Texas league.

NAU, Denver, WT and ACU would be nice additions.

Proximity wise, staying within our current conference footprint, all four schools would be good additions. However, NAU doesn't add much to the WAC except a warm body when you take into account methods of travel to Flagstaff. There is no incentive for NAU to leave the Big Sky. There addition would move forward the premise of starting up FCS football in the WAC but falls well short of promoting the any idea of building a FBS conference for the future. NAU simply doesn't have the support to move up to FBS (averaging about 6.5K per game).

As for Denver, they left the WAC for academic reasons. They felt not all the current WAC schools represented Denver's academic values; feeling more comfortable with their peers in the Summit. They do not support football. So they would not help NMSU goals at the FBS level or Dixie State and Tarleton State at the FCS level.

To be honest, I don't know a lot about Abilene Christian. If they are a well funded private school like Grand Canyon and California Baptist, I could see them as a plausible addition. But I don't see them leaving the Southland anytime soon. There is no incentive for them to leave one FCS conference for another. And they are not FBS ready.

I do like West Texas A&M because of their location within the WAC footprint and proximity to Amarillo; for travel. I feel they still have the reminisce of being D1 with their current facilities. As a D2 school, they out draw NAU in football attendance (at just over 7.6K). There is an infrastructure there which could easily move up to the FCS level and join Dixie State and Tarleton State. And, with (a lot of) time maybe even the FBS level.

The only reasons to join the WAC at this moment is to give D2 schools a landing spot to move up to FCS football and basketball into D1. Or, to start an FBS football conference for those FCS schools on the cusp on making that move. Unless a school is in one of those categories, I don't think certain schools are interested in the WAC. The old WAC model used to be to target non-football playing D2 schools in large metropolitan locations for cheap travel, recruiting, and marketing. However, there are not enough D2 schools ready to make the move to D1... UC San Diego chose to join the Big West, Metropolitan State of Denver chose to stay at the D2 level, and California State Los Angeles performed a feasibility study to move to D1 but no results are currently available. Consequently, the WAC Commissioner changed the model by targeting football playing D2 schools with healthier budgets and are more D1 ready. But this has now put the WAC on a new path to target schools that have similar qualities to Dixie State and Tarleton State. Hence my interest in West Texas A&M.

No truer words.

And I would also say the targeted D2 move-ups will be a selective few that have the potential of being fastracked to FBS, should the WAC choose to excercise that golden ticket.

On another note, what about Southern Utah coming over to the WAC?

“The only reasons to join the WAC at this moment is to give D2 schools a landing spot to move up to FCS football and basketball into D1. Or, to start an FBS football conference for those FCS schools on the cusp on making that move.“

It’s both. I have been saying it since September.... FCS schools to join - SFA, SHSU, ACU, And a few more from SLC. Adding D2 WT (Possibly Commerce but not sure)and UTRGV adding Football.

Move to FBS I don’t see happening, but that would be the only draw for SLC schools.

(05-10-2020 12:45 PM)wisdomgymrat Wrote:  “The only reasons to join the WAC at this moment is to give D2 schools a landing spot to move up to FCS football and basketball into D1. Or, to start an FBS football conference for those FCS schools on the cusp on making that move.“

It’s both. I have been saying it since September.... FCS schools to join - SFA, SHSU, ACU, And a few more from SLC. Adding D2 WT (Possibly Commerce but not sure)and UTRGV adding Football.

Move to FBS I don’t see happening, but that would be the only draw for SLC schools.

Without the draw of moving up to the FBS level, there is no reason for any top tier schools to leave the Big Sky, Southland, or MVC football conference. Otherwise they are in a more regional FCS conference than the WAC could ever provide. SO, if the ultimate goal is to become an FBS conference, the WAC commissioner might stir the ears on Montana, Montana State, Idaho, North Dakota State, Sam Houston State, and Stephan F. Austin. But if the goal is simply to field an FCS conference, the only schools that would be interested would be D2 school move ups and lower tier FCS schools currently in the Big Sky and Southland, with natural rivals in the WAC, more in common with the WAC, and have a greater interest in improving their basketball stature (not many if at all).

On a side note, I wonder if UC San Diego will continue to participate in the Pioneer league with COVID19 impacting travel and the league being so spread out throughout the country? There might be an opportunity to add them to a WAC FCS conference as a football-only member in the future. They have the money to support 63 football scholarships. I'm just not sure they would be willing to do so.

(05-10-2020 12:45 PM)wisdomgymrat Wrote:  “The only reasons to join the WAC at this moment is to give D2 schools a landing spot to move up to FCS football and basketball into D1. Or, to start an FBS football conference for those FCS schools on the cusp on making that move.“

It’s both. I have been saying it since September.... FCS schools to join - SFA, SHSU, ACU, And a few more from SLC. Adding D2 WT (Possibly Commerce but not sure)and UTRGV adding Football.

Move to FBS I don’t see happening, but that would be the only draw for SLC schools.

I agree, but the Big Sky needs to either shed or add at least one football school. If they shed, who would it be? If this scenario plays out with the TX schools, Dixie will need a football partner out their way.

(05-10-2020 01:20 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  

(05-10-2020 12:45 PM)wisdomgymrat Wrote:  “The only reasons to join the WAC at this moment is to give D2 schools a landing spot to move up to FCS football and basketball into D1. Or, to start an FBS football conference for those FCS schools on the cusp on making that move.“

It’s both. I have been saying it since September.... FCS schools to join - SFA, SHSU, ACU, And a few more from SLC. Adding D2 WT (Possibly Commerce but not sure)and UTRGV adding Football.

Move to FBS I don’t see happening, but that would be the only draw for SLC schools.

Without the draw of moving up to the FBS level, there is no reason for any top tier schools to leave the Big Sky, Southland, or MVC football conference. Otherwise they are in a more regional FCS conference than the WAC could ever provide. SO, if the ultimate goal is to become an FBS conference, the WAC commissioner might stir the ears on Montana, Montana State, Idaho, North Dakota State, Sam Houston State, and Stephan F. Austin. But if the goal is simply to field an FCS conference, the only schools that would be interested would be D2 school move ups and lower tier FCS schools currently in the Big Sky and Southland, with natural rivals in the WAC, more in common with the WAC, and have a greater interest in improving their basketball stature (not many if at all).

On a side note, I wonder if UC San Diego will continue to participate in the Pioneer league with COVID19 impacting travel and the league being so spread out throughout the country? The might be an opportunity to add them to a WAC FCS conference as a football-only member in the future. They have the money to support 63 football scholarships. I'm just not sure they would be willing to do so.

It all boils down to this: is the WAC bringing back FCS or FBS football. I started a thread to learn more about it, because it's incredibly ambiguous at this point.

If they start FCS, I think the WAC will look alot like the current Lone Star Conference, full of D-2 move-ups that are FCS ready.

If the goal is FBS, we'll get the SFA. Sam, WTAMU, and Big Sky scenario.

A key factor here I think is UTRGV. They announce they"re starting up football, it will set alot of things in motion. Maybe we even see UTSA rear its ugly head to offset the A&M presence in the WAC.

NAU would give the conference a NCAA title contender every year in cross-country. I know it is a minor sport, but a National Championship in a sport is a National Championship. Flagstaff is a distance runners dream. High elevation not to far away from low elevation. Plus an athletic department that seems to support the cross country team.

PS, I am a college cross country coach.

The issue with NAU is although it is sort of close to Dixie St, the Grand Canyon (not the University) is in the way. If you did not know Arizona and Utah geography one could easily wonder why there is not an interstate from SLC to PHX. Well, there is a small ditch there. That being said the geography is not too hard to overcome.

I would love UTEP and UNM in the conference, but that is not likely to happen either. Although I do wish the three schools would work together like UTEP and NMSU have done recently with V-ball and schedule common opponents. First match at UNM, 2nd at NMSU, 3rd at UTEP or the other direction. It would be easier to get non-conference games that way. Three games for the price of one open-jaw plane ticket.

Texas Tech would be great, but they are not leaving the Big12.

Denver would be great to get back, but I would want them in a pair with UNC.

So if I had to only chose one, I think that it would be ... I could not just pick one. Sorry for the cop-out.