Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Thread Closed 
WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Lopes87 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,569
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 38
I Root For: GCU
Location:
Post: #1981
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 05:14 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 05:03 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:37 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 03:59 PM)Todor Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 03:43 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  If the G5 looses any CFP money because of a new conference, they will do everything in their power to exclude the WAC.

One of the biggest hang ups in the potential plan for FBS is a total lack of clarity regarding essentially all the important details. We know the WAC has an FBS charter, but precisely what the means isn't as clear, simply because we are(I believe) the only conference to try to use that pass to get back in the door.

And guess as we might, without a clue what the financials will look like, who knows if its even possible.

So far as I know there's no such thing as a WAC "FBS charter". Rather there is a single clause in the NCAA rules that requires a school that wants to move up to FBS to either obtain membership in a current FBS conference or to obtain membership in a conference that was previously FBS. The only thing the WAC has that all other non-FBS conferences don't have is that it fits the definition of a conference that was previously considered FBS. Therefore an FCS school that joins the WAC can move up to FBS without seeking an exemption from the above requirement (as Liberty successfully did).

There's another, separate NCAA rule that describes how a D1 conference can become an FBS conference. The requirements include having at least eight full members that are FBS and sponsoring enough men's and women's sports to meet defined minimums. That rule applies equally to the WAC and all other non-FBS conferences. So regardless of whether FCS schools in the WAC take advantage of the first rule described above to move up to FBS, the WAC cannot apply to the NCAA to restore its previous status as an FBS conference until it has at least eight full members that are FBS or are transitioning to FBS.


So then based on my calculations once UTRGV launches their football program in 2023 or 2024, by the time of negotiations that would put the WAC at 8 football playing members right?

SHSU
SFA
TSU
Lamar
Dixie
SUU
NMSU
UTRGV

With the possibilities of Weber State, UNA, UNC and WT. So the WAC should fit both criteria, former FBS member and 8 football playing institutions. Of course there’s the other criteria of budget and attendance increases.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Plus we are looking to add a 9th school. We should be good to go. Call up BCS LLC and ask for our monies.

























yup
01-22-2021 05:15 PM
Find all posts by this user
Lopes87 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,569
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 38
I Root For: GCU
Location:
Post: #1982
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
100 pages. Boom!
01-22-2021 05:16 PM
Find all posts by this user
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,718
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 446
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #1983
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 05:03 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:37 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 03:59 PM)Todor Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 03:43 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  If the G5 looses any CFP money because of a new conference, they will do everything in their power to exclude the WAC.

One of the biggest hang ups in the potential plan for FBS is a total lack of clarity regarding essentially all the important details. We know the WAC has an FBS charter, but precisely what the means isn't as clear, simply because we are(I believe) the only conference to try to use that pass to get back in the door.

And guess as we might, without a clue what the financials will look like, who knows if its even possible.

So far as I know there's no such thing as a WAC "FBS charter". Rather there is a single clause in the NCAA rules that requires a school that wants to move up to FBS to either obtain membership in a current FBS conference or to obtain membership in a conference that was previously FBS. The only thing the WAC has that all other non-FBS conferences don't have is that it fits the definition of a conference that was previously considered FBS. Therefore an FCS school that joins the WAC can move up to FBS without seeking an exemption from the above requirement (as Liberty successfully did).

There's another, separate NCAA rule that describes how a D1 conference can become an FBS conference. The requirements include having at least eight full members that are FBS and sponsoring enough men's and women's sports to meet defined minimums. That rule applies equally to the WAC and all other non-FBS conferences. So regardless of whether FCS schools in the WAC take advantage of the first rule described above to move up to FBS, the WAC cannot apply to the NCAA to restore its previous status as an FBS conference until it has at least eight full members that are FBS or are transitioning to FBS.


So then based on my calculations once UTRGV launches their football program in 2023 or 2024, by the time of negotiations that would put the WAC at 8 football playing members right?

SHSU
SFA
TSU
Lamar
Dixie
SUU
NMSU
UTRGV

With the possibilities of Weber State, UNA, UNC and WT. So the WAC should fit both criteria, former FBS member and 8 football playing institutions. Of course there’s the other criteria of budget and attendance increases.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Even if money and attendance were not concerns and all of the WAC FCS members were willing to take advantage of the NCAA rules clause I cited above to begin the FBS transition process, there are also scheduling requirements that a school must meet to complete the transition. I don't remember the precise details but a school in transition must schedule a certain minimum number of games against FBS opponents each season. Games played by transitioning WAC members against other transitioning WAC members wouldn't count. So that's another big hurdle that would have to be overcome for the WAC to regain FBS conference status.
(This post was last modified: 01-22-2021 05:22 PM by HawaiiMongoose.)
01-22-2021 05:19 PM
Find all posts by this user
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,718
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 446
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #1984
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 05:15 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 05:14 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 05:03 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:37 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 03:59 PM)Todor Wrote:  One of the biggest hang ups in the potential plan for FBS is a total lack of clarity regarding essentially all the important details. We know the WAC has an FBS charter, but precisely what the means isn't as clear, simply because we are(I believe) the only conference to try to use that pass to get back in the door.

And guess as we might, without a clue what the financials will look like, who knows if its even possible.

So far as I know there's no such thing as a WAC "FBS charter". Rather there is a single clause in the NCAA rules that requires a school that wants to move up to FBS to either obtain membership in a current FBS conference or to obtain membership in a conference that was previously FBS. The only thing the WAC has that all other non-FBS conferences don't have is that it fits the definition of a conference that was previously considered FBS. Therefore an FCS school that joins the WAC can move up to FBS without seeking an exemption from the above requirement (as Liberty successfully did).

There's another, separate NCAA rule that describes how a D1 conference can become an FBS conference. The requirements include having at least eight full members that are FBS and sponsoring enough men's and women's sports to meet defined minimums. That rule applies equally to the WAC and all other non-FBS conferences. So regardless of whether FCS schools in the WAC take advantage of the first rule described above to move up to FBS, the WAC cannot apply to the NCAA to restore its previous status as an FBS conference until it has at least eight full members that are FBS or are transitioning to FBS.


So then based on my calculations once UTRGV launches their football program in 2023 or 2024, by the time of negotiations that would put the WAC at 8 football playing members right?

SHSU
SFA
TSU
Lamar
Dixie
SUU
NMSU
UTRGV

With the possibilities of Weber State, UNA, UNC and WT. So the WAC should fit both criteria, former FBS member and 8 football playing institutions. Of course there’s the other criteria of budget and attendance increases.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Plus we are looking to add a 9th school. We should be good to go. Call up BCS LLC and ask for our monies.

























yup

LOL! No prize for that!
01-22-2021 05:20 PM
Find all posts by this user
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,718
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 446
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #1985
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 05:16 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  100 pages. Boom!

04-cheers
01-22-2021 05:22 PM
Find all posts by this user
Bobcat2013 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,202
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 179
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
Post: #1986
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 05:01 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  Part of WAC FBS has to include CFP payouts. If not, then why would all these schools do this but not get a cut? Are you telling me when new D1 conferences started up the NCAA said “you can play in the tourney but you can’t get money because you were not a part of the original negotiations”? I could be wrong, I think NMSU does get a small cut of the money today. Just my 2 cents.

Interesting that you bring up the NCAA tourney, I do believe there is a rule stating that a new conference cant get an autobid for like 7 years or something which is why we dont see many new conferences form. Not sure how the AAC thing worked out.

But yes NMSU gets a small slice of CFP pie. All the FBS indepents and FCS conferences each get like 325k or something from the CFP. So at least yall have that going for you.
01-22-2021 05:22 PM
Find all posts by this user
OscarWildeCat Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,084
Joined: Nov 2020
Reputation: 45
I Root For: ACU & UGA
Location:
Post: #1987
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 05:22 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 05:16 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  100 pages. Boom!

04-cheers

Definitely worth celebrating
01-22-2021 05:47 PM
Find all posts by this user
Itinerant Texan Offline
Shot Caller
*

Posts: 1,967
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation: 28
I Root For: On Ye Tarleton!
Location: USA
Post: #1988
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 04:43 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 01:46 PM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:11 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 11:43 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  I don’t think Seattle is leaving. I don’t think the new schools are leaving. I think the WAC is going FBS. I think NMSU would be perfectly content to stay in the new WAC with FBS. I think the new WAC has the potential for multiple NCAA bids and will increase the seed if we only get one bid. I think I am sorry I started making jokes about TX. All of the TX posters are great except one. But every fan base has one (if you guys think Todor is something, wait till you get a load of “Coach” Frank Allison).

So your fan base has two?

Three. They like to hate on anyone that doesn't buy into their overinflated sense of self. They just don't understand it's hard for Texas schools, big or small, to be subservient to anything "New Mexico". We are, after all, the Great State of Texas! Just ask Pojo. It goes like this... one minute, they have no peer institutions in the WAC, and we're all a bunch of chumps. Then the next minute, they're happy to be here (have nowhere else to go). It's quite comical, and I like to poke fun at it.

You know when you’ve become “that guy”? When posters from your own school say things like “he doesn’t speak for all of us” or “don’t lump me in with him”. You have a lot of good info and insights. Too bad they get muddled in the trash talk, great state of TX talk and the “Tarleton is gonna surprise some people this year” talk. When Lopes was saying people in the PNM despise TX, it’s because of people that take things too far, such as being a caricature or stereotype of a Texan from the great state of Texas.

Lol we all know, especially Tarleton posters, that I'm completely content being "that guy". People in the PNW despise Texas? I guess haters gonna hate.
01-22-2021 05:52 PM
Find all posts by this user
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,718
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 446
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #1989
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 05:22 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 05:01 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  Part of WAC FBS has to include CFP payouts. If not, then why would all these schools do this but not get a cut? Are you telling me when new D1 conferences started up the NCAA said “you can play in the tourney but you can’t get money because you were not a part of the original negotiations”? I could be wrong, I think NMSU does get a small cut of the money today. Just my 2 cents.

Interesting that you bring up the NCAA tourney, I do believe there is a rule stating that a new conference cant get an autobid for like 7 years or something which is why we dont see many new conferences form. Not sure how the AAC thing worked out.

But yes NMSU gets a small slice of CFP pie. All the FBS indepents and FCS conferences each get like 325k or something from the CFP. So at least yall have that going for you.

It's an 8-year wait for autobids for any new D1 conference under current NCAA rules.

The AAC got an exemption, I believe because at the time the 8-year rule had just been instituted. I don't think it would be easy for a new conference to land a similar exemption today, mainly because a new conference autobid would reduce the pool of at-large bids available to existing conferences.
(This post was last modified: 01-22-2021 06:19 PM by HawaiiMongoose.)
01-22-2021 06:17 PM
Find all posts by this user
Vulpes88 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 477
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 21
I Root For: Tarleton
Location:
Post: #1990
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 06:17 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 05:22 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 05:01 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  Part of WAC FBS has to include CFP payouts. If not, then why would all these schools do this but not get a cut? Are you telling me when new D1 conferences started up the NCAA said “you can play in the tourney but you can’t get money because you were not a part of the original negotiations”? I could be wrong, I think NMSU does get a small cut of the money today. Just my 2 cents.

Interesting that you bring up the NCAA tourney, I do believe there is a rule stating that a new conference cant get an autobid for like 7 years or something which is why we dont see many new conferences form. Not sure how the AAC thing worked out.

But yes NMSU gets a small slice of CFP pie. All the FBS indepents and FCS conferences each get like 325k or something from the CFP. So at least yall have that going for you.

It's an 8-year wait for autobids for any new D1 conference under current NCAA rules.

The AAC got an exemption, I believe because at the time the 8-year rule had just been instituted. I don't think it would be easy for a new conference to land a similar exemption today, mainly because a new conference autobid would reduce the pool of at-large bids available to existing conferences.

Wouldn't it still be one for G5?
01-22-2021 06:26 PM
Find all posts by this user
Vulpes88 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 477
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 21
I Root For: Tarleton
Location:
Post: #1991
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 04:43 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 01:46 PM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:11 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 11:43 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  I don’t think Seattle is leaving. I don’t think the new schools are leaving. I think the WAC is going FBS. I think NMSU would be perfectly content to stay in the new WAC with FBS. I think the new WAC has the potential for multiple NCAA bids and will increase the seed if we only get one bid. I think I am sorry I started making jokes about TX. All of the TX posters are great except one. But every fan base has one (if you guys think Todor is something, wait till you get a load of “Coach” Frank Allison).

So your fan base has two?

Three. They like to hate on anyone that doesn't buy into their overinflated sense of self. They just don't understand it's hard for Texas schools, big or small, to be subservient to anything "New Mexico". We are, after all, the Great State of Texas! Just ask Pojo. It goes like this... one minute, they have no peer institutions in the WAC, and we're all a bunch of chumps. Then the next minute, they're happy to be here (have nowhere else to go). It's quite comical, and I like to poke fun at it.

You know when you’ve become “that guy”? When posters from your own school say things like “he doesn’t speak for all of us” or “don’t lump me in with him”. You have a lot of good info and insights. Too bad they get muddled in the trash talk, great state of TX talk and the “Tarleton is gonna surprise some people this year” talk. When Lopes was saying people in the PNM despise TX, it’s because of people that take things too far, such as being a caricature or stereotype of a Texan from the great state of Texas.

IT relishes being "that guy". Kinda sad, you'd think he'd have something else to hang his hat on. Some better feather for his cap.
01-22-2021 06:28 PM
Find all posts by this user
coogkat14 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 77
Joined: Sep 2017
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Houston/SHSU
Location:
Post: #1992
WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
Well I guess it would depend on whether the NCAA and CFP presidents view the WAC as a “new conference” since they previously were a FBS conference. In the AACs case they started a new conference since the catholic schools kept the “Big East” brand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
01-22-2021 07:02 PM
Find all posts by this user
OscarWildeCat Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,084
Joined: Nov 2020
Reputation: 45
I Root For: ACU & UGA
Location:
Post: #1993
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 04:54 PM)Todor Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:45 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:12 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:07 PM)TexanFan Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 11:52 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  Because they always have an ear out for the siren song that is the MWC and/or CUSA. Everything about the new WAC is perfect for NMSU with one exception (my humble opinion): none of the WAC schools are institutional peers of NMSU.

Yet.

I hope in ten years or so this opinion will change because some if not most of the the WAC schools will have massively improved their academic standings. But I would agree with your opinion today.

The concept of "peer universities" is about more than academics - some big components are mission, demographics, geography, and funding. NMSU has a list of peer institutions, and they are all either land grant universities that are west of the Mississippi or large universities that are close to NMSU (UNM, UTEP, Texas Tech). There would have to be some structural changes for NMSU to view any of the Texas 4 as a peer, I think. The Big Sky is more institutionally similar to NMSU than the WAC is.

I didn’t consider the peer institution comment a slight.
ACU wouldn’t consider NMSU or any of the Texas WAC schools peer institutions either for the reasons you identify. Our mission, history , & funding differs in distinctive ways. Our list of peer institutions includes both universities most like us and a few institutions that share our mission that we aspire to become more like.

Our peers are all religiously affiliated private universities or close by private schools. Land grant universities and regional state schools serve different purposes.

Harding being peer number one most likely. No more similar school in many ways. Possibly Wayland and Lubbock in some ways, Oklahoma Baptist and Christian, but more likely Oral Roberts. HBU and IWU would have been the closets peers in the SLC.

Lipscomb is perhaps the school most like us. Our theology aligns more closely to Pepperdine than Harding. Schools outside of our religious tradition but related in many ways include Samford, Calvin and Azusa Pacific. California Baptist, Seattle and Grand Canyon will be our closest peers in the new WAC in the sense that we are all private and religiously affiliated.
01-22-2021 07:09 PM
Find all posts by this user
Lopes87 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,569
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 38
I Root For: GCU
Location:
Post: #1994
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 07:09 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:54 PM)Todor Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:45 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:12 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:07 PM)TexanFan Wrote:  Yet.

I hope in ten years or so this opinion will change because some if not most of the the WAC schools will have massively improved their academic standings. But I would agree with your opinion today.

The concept of "peer universities" is about more than academics - some big components are mission, demographics, geography, and funding. NMSU has a list of peer institutions, and they are all either land grant universities that are west of the Mississippi or large universities that are close to NMSU (UNM, UTEP, Texas Tech). There would have to be some structural changes for NMSU to view any of the Texas 4 as a peer, I think. The Big Sky is more institutionally similar to NMSU than the WAC is.

I didn’t consider the peer institution comment a slight.
ACU wouldn’t consider NMSU or any of the Texas WAC schools peer institutions either for the reasons you identify. Our mission, history , & funding differs in distinctive ways. Our list of peer institutions includes both universities most like us and a few institutions that share our mission that we aspire to become more like.

Our peers are all religiously affiliated private universities or close by private schools. Land grant universities and regional state schools serve different purposes.

Harding being peer number one most likely. No more similar school in many ways. Possibly Wayland and Lubbock in some ways, Oklahoma Baptist and Christian, but more likely Oral Roberts. HBU and IWU would have been the closets peers in the SLC.

Lipscomb is perhaps the school most like us. Our theology aligns more closely to Pepperdine than Harding. Schools outside of our religious tradition but related in many ways include Samford, Calvin and Azusa Pacific. California Baptist, Seattle and Grand Canyon will be our closest peers in the new WAC in the sense that we are all private and religiously affiliated.

Seattle U has been trying hard to minimize their Jesuit background unless it helps them in anyway. I'd say ACU peer schools in the WAC are GCU and CBU.
01-22-2021 07:21 PM
Find all posts by this user
Lopes87 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,569
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 38
I Root For: GCU
Location:
Post: #1995
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 05:52 PM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:43 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 01:46 PM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:11 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 11:43 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  I don’t think Seattle is leaving. I don’t think the new schools are leaving. I think the WAC is going FBS. I think NMSU would be perfectly content to stay in the new WAC with FBS. I think the new WAC has the potential for multiple NCAA bids and will increase the seed if we only get one bid. I think I am sorry I started making jokes about TX. All of the TX posters are great except one. But every fan base has one (if you guys think Todor is something, wait till you get a load of “Coach” Frank Allison).

So your fan base has two?

Three. They like to hate on anyone that doesn't buy into their overinflated sense of self. They just don't understand it's hard for Texas schools, big or small, to be subservient to anything "New Mexico". We are, after all, the Great State of Texas! Just ask Pojo. It goes like this... one minute, they have no peer institutions in the WAC, and we're all a bunch of chumps. Then the next minute, they're happy to be here (have nowhere else to go). It's quite comical, and I like to poke fun at it.

You know when you’ve become “that guy”? When posters from your own school say things like “he doesn’t speak for all of us” or “don’t lump me in with him”. You have a lot of good info and insights. Too bad they get muddled in the trash talk, great state of TX talk and the “Tarleton is gonna surprise some people this year” talk. When Lopes was saying people in the PNM despise TX, it’s because of people that take things too far, such as being a caricature or stereotype of a Texan from the great state of Texas.

Lol we all know, especially Tarleton posters, that I'm completely content being "that guy". People in the PNW despise Texas? I guess haters gonna hate.

People in the Great PNW don't despise TX, PNW culture isn't one that gets impressed by the delta bravo act and they quickly move on b/c life is to short to deal with it.
01-22-2021 07:25 PM
Find all posts by this user
coogkat14 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 77
Joined: Sep 2017
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Houston/SHSU
Location:
Post: #1996
WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 07:09 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:54 PM)Todor Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:45 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 04:12 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:07 PM)TexanFan Wrote:  Yet.

I hope in ten years or so this opinion will change because some if not most of the the WAC schools will have massively improved their academic standings. But I would agree with your opinion today.

The concept of "peer universities" is about more than academics - some big components are mission, demographics, geography, and funding. NMSU has a list of peer institutions, and they are all either land grant universities that are west of the Mississippi or large universities that are close to NMSU (UNM, UTEP, Texas Tech). There would have to be some structural changes for NMSU to view any of the Texas 4 as a peer, I think. The Big Sky is more institutionally similar to NMSU than the WAC is.

I didn’t consider the peer institution comment a slight.
ACU wouldn’t consider NMSU or any of the Texas WAC schools peer institutions either for the reasons you identify. Our mission, history , & funding differs in distinctive ways. Our list of peer institutions includes both universities most like us and a few institutions that share our mission that we aspire to become more like.

Our peers are all religiously affiliated private universities or close by private schools. Land grant universities and regional state schools serve different purposes.

Harding being peer number one most likely. No more similar school in many ways. Possibly Wayland and Lubbock in some ways, Oklahoma Baptist and Christian, but more likely Oral Roberts. HBU and IWU would have been the closets peers in the SLC.

Lipscomb is perhaps the school most like us. Our theology aligns more closely to Pepperdine than Harding. Schools outside of our religious tradition but related in many ways include Samford, Calvin and Azusa Pacific. California Baptist, Seattle and Grand Canyon will be our closest peers in the new WAC in the sense that we are all private and religiously affiliated.


Seeing you guys post about your universities peer institutions had me interested in who Sam Houston State views as it’s peer institutions. So after some diving I found a report from 2016 and they had listed, East Tennessee State, Georgia Southern, Illinois State, Middle Tennessee and UNC Greensboro as their out of state peer institutions. Apparently these are institutions that match us in size, prestige and demographics. I guess we don’t have to look to hard to see who we view as our instate peers. Haha[Image: f44e9c011464ba5517d47724493cf6ad.png]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
01-22-2021 07:37 PM
Find all posts by this user
chrisattsu Offline
Mom's Favorite
*

Posts: 2,027
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 74
I Root For: Tarleton / TXST
Location:
Post: #1997
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 02:00 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:19 PM)Vulpes88 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:15 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 11:43 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  I don’t think Seattle is leaving. I don’t think the new schools are leaving. I think the WAC is going FBS. I think NMSU would be perfectly content to stay in the new WAC with FBS. I think the new WAC has the potential for multiple NCAA bids and will increase the seed if we only get one bid. I think I am sorry I started making jokes about TX. All of the TX posters are great except one. But every fan base has one (if you guys think Todor is something, wait till you get a load of “Coach” Frank Allison).


All good Pojoaque! Like I said! I’m happy to be here! I love Seattle! Gives me a chance to get out there and catch a Sounders game! Happy to be in the WAC! I think this conference is great and has a bright future! Happy to be along for the ride! Go WAC! Eat’em Up Kats!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would've thought Dynamo.


I do have a lot of love for the Dynamo! Especially being from the Houston area, but I currently live in New Braunfels so I’m actually an Austin FC fan (New Expansion team). The new stadium they built in the Domain area of Austin in beautiful!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#listo for the #verde right now.

Being in NB, there was an Austin Anthem chapter in town. However, the since created Oak Army
01-22-2021 07:44 PM
Find all posts by this user
Vulpes88 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 477
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 21
I Root For: Tarleton
Location:
Post: #1998
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 02:00 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:19 PM)Vulpes88 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:15 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 11:43 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  I don’t think Seattle is leaving. I don’t think the new schools are leaving. I think the WAC is going FBS. I think NMSU would be perfectly content to stay in the new WAC with FBS. I think the new WAC has the potential for multiple NCAA bids and will increase the seed if we only get one bid. I think I am sorry I started making jokes about TX. All of the TX posters are great except one. But every fan base has one (if you guys think Todor is something, wait till you get a load of “Coach” Frank Allison).


All good Pojoaque! Like I said! I’m happy to be here! I love Seattle! Gives me a chance to get out there and catch a Sounders game! Happy to be in the WAC! I think this conference is great and has a bright future! Happy to be along for the ride! Go WAC! Eat’em Up Kats!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would've thought Dynamo.


I do have a lot of love for the Dynamo! Especially being from the Houston area, but I currently live in New Braunfels so I’m actually an Austin FC fan (New Expansion team). The new stadium they built in the Domain area of Austin in beautiful!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


FC Dallas fan for MLS, hopefully the new Austin team has success.
01-22-2021 07:55 PM
Find all posts by this user
coogkat14 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 77
Joined: Sep 2017
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Houston/SHSU
Location:
Post: #1999
WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 07:44 PM)chrisattsu Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 02:00 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:19 PM)Vulpes88 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:15 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 11:43 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  I don’t think Seattle is leaving. I don’t think the new schools are leaving. I think the WAC is going FBS. I think NMSU would be perfectly content to stay in the new WAC with FBS. I think the new WAC has the potential for multiple NCAA bids and will increase the seed if we only get one bid. I think I am sorry I started making jokes about TX. All of the TX posters are great except one. But every fan base has one (if you guys think Todor is something, wait till you get a load of “Coach” Frank Allison).


All good Pojoaque! Like I said! I’m happy to be here! I love Seattle! Gives me a chance to get out there and catch a Sounders game! Happy to be in the WAC! I think this conference is great and has a bright future! Happy to be along for the ride! Go WAC! Eat’em Up Kats!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would've thought Dynamo.


I do have a lot of love for the Dynamo! Especially being from the Houston area, but I currently live in New Braunfels so I’m actually an Austin FC fan (New Expansion team). The new stadium they built in the Domain area of Austin in beautiful!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#listo for the #verde right now.

Being in NB, there was an Austin Anthem chapter in town. However, the since created Oak Army


#listos!! Man! I’m hella ready for the #verde!! We got some really quality signings! So can’t wait to see them take to the pitch! I’ve been thinking of getting involved with the anthem! But I teach and coach in SA so time availability is limited! But can’t wait to catch some of the games!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
01-22-2021 08:38 PM
Find all posts by this user
coogkat14 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 77
Joined: Sep 2017
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Houston/SHSU
Location:
Post: #2000
WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(01-22-2021 07:55 PM)Vulpes88 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 02:00 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:19 PM)Vulpes88 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 12:15 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  
(01-22-2021 11:43 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  I don’t think Seattle is leaving. I don’t think the new schools are leaving. I think the WAC is going FBS. I think NMSU would be perfectly content to stay in the new WAC with FBS. I think the new WAC has the potential for multiple NCAA bids and will increase the seed if we only get one bid. I think I am sorry I started making jokes about TX. All of the TX posters are great except one. But every fan base has one (if you guys think Todor is something, wait till you get a load of “Coach” Frank Allison).


All good Pojoaque! Like I said! I’m happy to be here! I love Seattle! Gives me a chance to get out there and catch a Sounders game! Happy to be in the WAC! I think this conference is great and has a bright future! Happy to be along for the ride! Go WAC! Eat’em Up Kats!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would've thought Dynamo.


I do have a lot of love for the Dynamo! Especially being from the Houston area, but I currently live in New Braunfels so I’m actually an Austin FC fan (New Expansion team). The new stadium they built in the Domain area of Austin in beautiful!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


FC Dallas fan for MLS, hopefully the new Austin team has success.


Yesss!! I hope all the Texas MLS clubs do well! You guys have a crazy good academy up there in DFW. So the potential is here in Texas for our clubs to thrive! We just have to find a way to get to tap into that liga mx vein to activate that interest!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
01-22-2021 08:41 PM
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.