I'm not wholly convinced Rice would want to be in the MWC. It's a step up but not much of one with lots of increased travel, numerous extra time zones and academic lightweights abound. Rice would only leave for the AAC, ACC, B1G, Pac-12 and Big 12.

(05-15-2017 11:57 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 10:52 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  I have lived in California for 38 years now. I am one of the large number of Great Lakes white folks in Silicon Valley. At this point I have to confess I am more a Bear than Buckeye.

I can tell you all the CSUs would vote in favor. While Fresno fans might be against, the administration thinks much more along the same lines as San Jose and San Diego. UC schools recruit different players than a Cal State, due to their admission policies, they are not really much competition - the UCSD problem of getting past the BW UC ADs is not an obstacle here. They are an easy travel partner for SJSU and raise the stature academically of the MWC. The academic boost will definitely encourage the four flagships to also vote for them.

I agree, Boise State, which is not from any part of California that I am aware of, may well have a different opinion. But then again the competition for that replacement spot of losing Colorado State is most likely Rice, another academic jewel. Boise would not be thrilled from a competition stand point with them either. (That is another school with a potential Pac-12 path).

Again we are talking close to a decade out, and under new management for UC Davis. Management that is very likely not going to materialize in time to take advantage of the opportunity. So this is probably something which would never get put to the test. Personally I'd love to have a UC in the MWC, as that would heat up the California rivalries.

I think your nuts and if you went to the MWC board, I doubt you would find a single fan that agrees with you. The MWC might invite Rice and would certainly invite any number of Texas CUSA schools before inviting Davis. The fact your a Silicon Valley Cal fan just speaks to how little you know the Valley. My guess is the most you know about the valley is the traffic on 80 driving to Reno.

But since your a Cal fan I will make you a sig bet. We will create a poll on the MWC board about losing CSU and with whom do we replace them with: Choices will be
Rice
UTEP
UTSA
Texas State
Montana
Sacramento State
North Texas
UC Davis.

If UC Davis is in the top 4 you win. If not I win and your sig will read:
Cal: 5th best in everything in California.

Deal?

The WAC's top choices while Boise, Fresno and San Jose was still there went like this.

Montana
Sacramento State
Cal.-Davis
Cal-Poly
Montana State
UTEP

They did not want to get anymore Texas schools like Rice and them because they got burned by them before when they left the WAC. Why would the WAC 2.0 block want to vote Rice in ahead of any other schools when Rice abandoned them to leave for C-USA? Boise, Hawaii, UNR, Fresno, San Jose all will vote hell no on Rice. There could still be hard feelings towards Rice to allow them to come back and rejoin those 5.
UTSA and Texas State would also have an issue on getting the votes from the remaining WAC members like Hawaii, Fresno and San Jose when they left after one or two seasons in the WAC with those schools. It was like a one night stand with those five schools. But, was there any rift between UTEP and the rest of the MWC schools that have not left before the WAC members joined?

(05-16-2017 12:40 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  I'm not wholly convinced Rice would want to be in the MWC. It's a step up but not much of one with lots of increased travel, numerous extra time zones and academic lightweights abound. Rice would only leave for the AAC, ACC, B1G, Pac-12 and Big 12.

All depends on the TV deal differences. I'm not sure the MWC would want Rice over UTSA either.

I don't think UTSA wants the MWC either for the same reasons. Didn't they decline an invite to the MWC? UTSA's dream scenario., and I do mean dream, is to go to the AAC then up to the Big 12 or SEC. But most realistically AAC of the non-contract conferences.

Two schools were in very serious talks about joining the MWC, UTEP and Rice. There is a general lack of confidence in CUSA and the pathetic media package. The MWC likes both schools, but the money is not there in the current contract (no escalator clause) nor from the playoff distributions. So it has been tabled for the moment.

Make no mistake, Rice and UTEP want out of CUSA

(05-16-2017 10:45 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Two schools were in very serious talks about joining the MWC, UTEP and Rice. There is a general lack of confidence in CUSA and the pathetic media package. The MWC likes both schools, but the money is not their in the current contract (no escalator clause) nor from the playoff distributions. So it has been tabled for the moment.

Make no mistake, Rice and UTEP want out of CUSA

And Air Force wants games in Texas, UTEP fits with the Front Range schools (geography and history), and Rice has excellent academics in a great market for recruiting.

Also, to move Boise St. to the WEST division realigns them annually with their former WAC mates and the California market.

This move should happen in preparation for the contract renewal (after 2019 season?). So, perhaps an announcement as soon as next year?

(05-16-2017 12:40 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  I'm not wholly convinced Rice would want to be in the MWC. It's a step up but not much of one with lots of increased travel, numerous extra time zones and academic lightweights abound. Rice would only leave for the AAC, ACC, B1G, Pac-12 and Big 12.

Then why did they apply for the MW?

That must have been recent, I must have missed it. There's no room at the in for them. Rice ought to invest, they have almost everything in place to be attractive to every major conference, including the SEC.

(05-16-2017 11:37 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  That must have been recent, I must have missed it. There's no room at the in for them. Rice ought to invest, they have almost everything in place to be attractive to every major conference, including the SEC.

Getting into Texas is a high priority for the MWC. Adding UC Davis is way down to never on the list.

That may be so but I still don't see why they'd be interested. They left the WAC for a reason and it was mostly about time zones and travel, with the extra bonus of their semi-elite conference they joined being partitioned. Yeah, C-USA isn't exactly what they joined 12 years ago but it still has regional rivals and except for Boise, who isn't exactly fielding top 15 teams anymore, the MWC is only slightly better than C-USA. This isn't like the AAC coming calling or the best of each conference forming some kind of combo. I don't get why they're interested.

(05-13-2017 08:29 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Sac St has never won the Big Sky and rarely won in DII. Of the ten coaches, only one has a winning record and just barely. They started fb in the 1950's and it's rather amazing it survived when most of the other Cal States dropped fb.

UC Davis hasn't done anything either since they moved to FCS 15 years ago. Cal Poly has been good but not outstanding in the more than 20 years of FCS.

Sac ST still doesn't have plans to move out of its Jr High gym, so facilities are not at all DI level. It only has 1600 housing units on campus, so the commuter school tag is well deserved. The alumni don't seem to demand excellence in athletics, so it doesn't have a groundswell for winning to happen.

Incorrect. This effort started two years ago to raise the seed money to conduct the study to hone in the desired size of the venue. The seed money goal was hit within a year. Since this kicked off, there has been leadership changes at both the Presidential and AD level that are encouraging.

There are 4 major construction projects currently underway, or that will break ground this summer. Why does that matter? Because the current President highlighted some of these projects (including a new events center) as key capital improvement projects he wants to get done....i.e. this is how he wants to make his mark on campus.

So a President that wants (and is) getting facilities built that is also a strong supporter of athletics, plus the recent hire of a AD with D1 experience (Mark Orr, formerly of St. Mary's) are definitely steps in the right direction. IMO we break ground on the events center within the next 5 years.

(05-14-2017 08:11 AM)NoDak Wrote:  When/if the Sacramento Republic get their new MLS stadium, the Hornets should look into FBS and playing there. It might be a race then between Sac St and UC Davis to establish themselves in FBS.

I would like to see some Hornet games in the new Republic stadium when it gets built, similarly to how Hornet hoops uses Golden 1 Arena for a game here and there. However I don't think FBS is in the cards for any FCS out west unless there are realignment changes that are utter craziness.

(05-16-2017 01:29 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  That may be so but I still don't see why they'd be interested. They left the WAC for a reason and it was mostly about time zones and travel, with the extra bonus of their semi-elite conference they joined being partitioned.

They joined the WAC during the collapse of the SWC, along with SMU and TCU. They signed up to join BYU, Utah, Air Force, UNLV, and the Front Range schools, but ended up with Hawaii, UTEP, SMU, TCU, Tulsa, San Jose State and Fresno State. Then TCU bailed, and the WAC started taking in Big West refugees.

Scoreboard: They signed up once (WAC) to play UNM, CSU, AFA, Wyo, SDSU, UNLV, Hawaii, Fresno, San Jose; bailed once (CUSA) on Boise State, HAwaii, Fresno State, SJSU and Nevada.

Quote:Yeah, C-USA isn't exactly what they joined 12 years ago but it still has regional rivals and except for Boise, who isn't exactly fielding top 15 teams anymore, the MWC is only slightly better than C-USA. This isn't like the AAC coming calling or the best of each conference forming some kind of combo. I don't get why they're interested.

Mountain West has Air Force and a lot of state flagships-and-landgrants, while CUSA has a lot of "low-class" directional schools.

Sac State still has the urban CSU commuter school problem, where it's the 3rd or 4th choice every kid there,mostly because they can drive from home to class. It's not a big time college sports environment.

UC Davis is true residential campus and has 20x the endowment. If they ever get leadership with vision they will be a monster. The gap between UC Davis and Sac St is potentially as great as between UCLA and Cal State Fullerton.

I think Sac St is doing very well as a CSU. But the "CSU" is a big limiting factor.

Again, John Bragg, C-USA has regional rivals, mostly in the same time zone or just ahead.

(05-20-2017 08:43 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Sac State still has the urban CSU commuter school problem, where it's the 3rd or 4th choice every kid there,mostly because they can drive from home to class. It's not a big time college sports environment.

UC Davis is true residential campus and has 20x the endowment. If they ever get leadership with vision they will be a monster. The gap between UC Davis and Sac St is potentially as great as between UCLA and Cal State Fullerton.

I think Sac St is doing very well as a CSU. But the "CSU" is a big limiting factor.

Not really sure why being in an urban environment is a problem if you are trying to draw more crowds to athletic events in this hypothetical FBS scenario. Having more students living on-campus is nice, but you need the "t-shirt" fans to come to games for the revenue. In the sporting world, Sac is a Bay Area suburb for everything except the Kings…loads of bandwagon fans for whatever BA team is winning. I don’t think a bottom tier G5 team breaks into that scene unless there are years upon years of winning and bringing name programs to town.

I’m not following how a big endowment helps athletics get butts in the seats. Fill me in on this.

Bottom line is absolute mayhem would result in davis going FBS, and at that point Sac State and even Cal Poly is probably in the mix as well.

(05-20-2017 10:02 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Again, John Bragg, C-USA has regional rivals, mostly in the same time zone or just ahead.

"Rivals"? They've been playing UTEP, USM, UAB for 10 years, North Texas, UTSA, Louisiana Tech for about 5 minutes.

My point is that they have teams that are easy or relatively easy road trips or plane trips in C-USA. The closest MWC team is New Mexico, farther than the majority of C-USA schools.

The problem with the three California Big Sky schools for football is that they really don't have close rivals. Big Sky is a big travel burden that I do see a split down the road in the future with the southern schools breaking away from the northern schools.

Sacramento State
UC-Davis
Cal. Poly
Northern Arizona
Southern Utah

They could join up with?
Humboldt State
Azusa Pacific
Dixie State

Grand Canyon and Utah Valley if they add football.

Western New Mexico and maybe a Colorado State-Pueblo could be a good southern Southwest conference.

Big Sky could take in the other GNAC north schools to replace the three California schools for all sports. I do think that Big Sky's requirements is that you have to have football. That leaves out the non-football schools of the WAC.

(05-21-2017 07:51 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  The problem with the three California Big Sky schools for football is that they really don't have close rivals. Big Sky is a big travel burden that I do see a split down the road in the future with the southern schools breaking away from the northern schools.

Sacramento State
UC-Davis
Cal. Poly
Northern Arizona
Southern Utah

They could join up with?
Humboldt State
Azusa Pacific
Dixie State

Grand Canyon and Utah Valley if they add football.

Western New Mexico and maybe a Colorado State-Pueblo could be a good southern Southwest conference.

Big Sky could take in the other GNAC north schools to replace the three California schools for all sports. I do think that Big Sky's requirements is that you have to have football. That leaves out the non-football schools of the WAC.

These fantasies have become too ridiculously idiotic, it's not worth the effort.