It's not a rumor. It's direct sources that you don't have. Every indication is UMKC is gone. Chicago State loses their travel partner, they're gone as well. You've been wrong on just about everything related to the WAC.

(11-27-2017 01:26 AM)Clarity Wrote:  It's not a rumor. It's direct sources that you don't have. Every indication is UMKC is gone. Chicago State loses their travel partner, they're gone as well. You've been wrong on just about everything related to the WAC.

What are these sources that I don't have? Do you have your own sources? Every indication? Specifically, what indications?

When did Chicago State become tied to UMKC's alleged departure?

(11-27-2017 01:26 AM)Clarity Wrote:  It's not a rumor. It's direct sources that you don't have. Every indication is UMKC is gone. Chicago State loses their travel partner, they're gone as well. You've been wrong on just about everything related to the WAC.

I don’t doubt that a Grand Canyon source told you that, but I am very skeptical that Grand Canyon was ever really close to getting invited to the horizon.

Wannabe sports writers crap. Again, no schools are going anywhere. If NMSU goes to a bowl and can sustain a competitive football program they will be the primary candidates to leave the WAC. NMSU is also a top tier in academics which also helps. GCU will never be in the WCC as long as Gonzaga is in that conference. GCU is a pariah of college athletics. Also, once Dan Majerle leaves (and he will), that schools college basketball program will lose it's appeal.GCUs "success" is smoke and mirrors scheduling tons of crappy schools at home with a few exceptions, almost free tickets to get in, and a celebrity coach who is going to realize even with eligibility to Tourney the real good recruits are still not going to go there.

(11-27-2017 01:01 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  I like GCU in the WAC. That being said NO conference is going to invite a for profit education enterprise with it's horrible academic rating into a conference. As it presently stands no one wants any of the present Wac teams at this time.

I'm curious about this "horrible academic rating" you speak of, and often reference. GCU just completed a full institutional review by the Higher Lerning Commission for their regional accreditation. As a result of the comprehensive review of all academic areas, GCU's accreditation was reupped, and the university was awarded the maximum time between HLC site visits. Is the knock on GCU academics tied to the whole teaching vs. research institutions? I don't get it.

If you look online at academic rating GCU doesn't even make the cut they are so down the line. Also, read about the % of people who don't finish degrees at GCU. On top of that GCU has had and still has people sueing them in a class action lawsuit for predatory recruiting practices. Your president and other top officials have some baggage too and are more business people rather than educators. I have no doubt lots of people that have a GCU education go on to have successful career. I'm just telling you why conferences are weary of adding GCU. That's why Denver left the WAC btw. They didn't want to be associated with GCU type institution.

(11-27-2017 11:11 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  Wannabe sports writers crap. Again, no schools are going anywhere. If NMSU goes to a bowl and can sustain a competitive football program they will be the primary candidates to leave the WAC. NMSU is also a top tier in academics which also helps. GCU will never be in the WCC as long as Gonzaga is in that conference. GCU is a pariah of college athletics. Also, once Dan Majerle leaves (and he will), that schools college basketball program will lose it's appeal.GCUs "success" is smoke and mirrors scheduling tons of crappy schools at home with a few exceptions, almost free tickets to get in, and a celebrity coach who is going to realize even with eligibility to Tourney the real good recruits are still not going to go there.

I think GCU has the potential to be a dominant mid-major; because its resources. However, I see flaws in the way Majerle wants to go about building a program. Majerle seems to value good three point shooting from his players over their ability to get into your face defensively. I know statistically, GCU appears to be a good defensive team but the eye test doesn't match the numbers. GCU still hasn't learn how to win ugly with mostly a grinding defense. I just don't see guys like Benson, Blumbergs leading a defensive effort. Vernon hasn't learned how to defend without fouling. And, although Braun is tough as nails, with all his knee surgeries, he has lost a little of his lateral quickness. Majerle's blueprint for a future GCU player should be Oscar Frayer. He is tough on both sides of the ball.

This is why, at the moment, I feel Cal State Bakersfield, Utah Valley, and possibly Seattle represent a greater challenge for NMSU and winning another WAC tourney championship.

As far as GCU joining the WCC in the future... it won't happen as long as Gonzaga is the kingpin. GCU's for-profit school model negates any possibility. And, the Zags have already earn national recognition with the current WCC setup. Adding GCU gains the WCC nothing. Seattle U. is in the same boat.

(11-27-2017 12:40 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  

(11-27-2017 11:11 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  Wannabe sports writers crap. Again, no schools are going anywhere. If NMSU goes to a bowl and can sustain a competitive football program they will be the primary candidates to leave the WAC. NMSU is also a top tier in academics which also helps. GCU will never be in the WCC as long as Gonzaga is in that conference. GCU is a pariah of college athletics. Also, once Dan Majerle leaves (and he will), that schools college basketball program will lose it's appeal.GCUs "success" is smoke and mirrors scheduling tons of crappy schools at home with a few exceptions, almost free tickets to get in, and a celebrity coach who is going to realize even with eligibility to Tourney the real good recruits are still not going to go there.

I think GCU has the potential to be a dominant mid-major; because its resources. However, I see flaws in the way Majerle wants to go about building a program. Majerle seems to value good three point shooting from his players over their ability to get into your face defensively. I know statistically, GCU appears to be a good defensive team but the eye test doesn't match the numbers. GCU still hasn't learn how to win ugly with mostly a grinding defense. I just don't see guys like Benson, Blumbergs leading a defensive effort. Vernon hasn't learned how to defend without fouling. And, although Braun is tough as nails, with all his knee surgeries, he has lost a little of his lateral quickness. Majerle's blueprint for a future GCU player should be Oscar Frayer. He is tough on both sides of the ball.

This is why, at the moment, I feel Cal State Bakersfield, Utah Valley, and possibly Seattle represent a greater challenge for NMSU and winning another WAC tourney championship.

As far as GCU joining the WCC in the future... it won't happen as long as Gonzaga is the kingpin. GCU's for-profit school model negates any possibility. And, the Zags have already earn national recognition with the current WCC setup. Adding GCU gains the WCC nothing. Seattle U. is in the same boat.

UC San Diego makes it official: It's joining Div. I, Big West
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spor...story.html

(11-27-2017 01:01 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  I like GCU in the WAC. That being said NO conference is going to invite a for profit education enterprise with it's horrible academic rating into a conference. As it presently stands no one wants any of the present Wac teams at this time.

GCU does make for a convenient bus ride in the BW. They also have the sports mix the BW likes. And lots of cash. Ya never know

Gaucho, I think you remember the old Big West, back when Tark's UNLV, SJSU, Fresno, NMSU, UOP and USU were members. I get you are an advocate of the Big West thinking big.

But the new Big West is super ultra mega California focused. The CSUB, UCSD adds were to keep the CSU schools happy and keep it in California. UCSD's referendum was all about playing California schools. That is who the students want to compete against, its 95% of the students in the California public Universities. You are very much in the minority about wanting to reach beyond the state. But think small, now even smaller, and now even smaller still like the Big West does. Phoenix is a commuter hop away, not a bus ride, and they are not a California public school.

My money is on Sac State within a decade.

Phoenix is closer to San Diego than Davis is.

GCU and NMSU probably have to work together to sell themselves as a travel pair to a conference like the MVC or tHL if they want out. Otherwise they are probably stuck.

NMSU could do what Idaho did and join the Big Sky. But that would probably mean the end of FBS football

(11-27-2017 07:21 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  GCU and NMSU probably have to work together to sell themselves as a travel pair to a conference like the MVC or tHL if they want out. Otherwise they are probably stuck.

NMSU could do what Idaho did and join the Big Sky. But that would probably mean the end of FBS football

I wonder since the Big West didn't mind Boise St cash that they turned a blind eye to their academics. Same could be said for GCU if they brought cash with them.

(11-27-2017 07:42 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-27-2017 07:21 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  GCU and NMSU probably have to work together to sell themselves as a travel pair to a conference like the MVC or tHL if they want out. Otherwise they are probably stuck.

NMSU could do what Idaho did and join the Big Sky. But that would probably mean the end of FBS football

I wonder since the Big West didn't mind Boise St cash that they turned a blind eye to their academics. Same could be said for GCU if they brought cash with them.

Bingo. GCU is a shorter bus ride for the SoCal schools than Davis is. Still keeps the conference compact.

(11-27-2017 07:42 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-27-2017 07:21 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  GCU and NMSU probably have to work together to sell themselves as a travel pair to a conference like the MVC or tHL if they want out. Otherwise they are probably stuck.

NMSU could do what Idaho did and join the Big Sky. But that would probably mean the end of FBS football

I wonder since the Big West didn't mind Boise St cash that they turned a blind eye to their academics. Same could be said for GCU if they brought cash with them.

For enough cash, they might. And Liberty showed some school leaders are insane enough to throw $millions around. Of course the Big West did make $1.5m from SDSU and $1m from Boise State for never joining.

But I think it is harder with another UC. Boise State at least had Kustra who is well respected among his peers. Also Grand Canyon is not San Diego State or Boise State on the national picture. A harder sell, more cash.

And GCU's aim is to step up, not simply survive. So I think they have to be looking toward tHL and MVC.

Well so much for me saying Bako was a low flight risk. Wasn't thinking UCSD would out weight the BW's negative views on Bako.

(11-27-2017 07:12 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  My money is on Sac State within a decade.

Doubt it. As just witnessed, BW only expands in UC/CSU pairs. BW is probably done unless FB members bolt when all the chairs are realigned in the P4 TV deal/realignment fallout next decade...and in that case Sac won't be looking BW, we'll be looking to be with whatever grouping SJSU/UNR type of schools land.

(11-27-2017 10:32 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  Well so much for me saying Bako was a low flight risk. Wasn't thinking UCSD would out weight the BW's negative views on Bako.

Thats the thing i dont really get. With CSUB's perceived negatives, academics, etc plus UCSD transition/RPI, may seem stalemate have been preferred? The BWC wasn't out anything for UCSD rejection.

Politics alone responsible? I can't see how BOTH system's schools couldnt have lived with that. Was the face-saving THAT strong for members of each system?!

But, even then, if one candidate so bad and the other so weak, why the drive to add? I really dont think it was the "weaken the WAC" motive.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

(11-28-2017 12:14 AM)RunnerBall Wrote:  

(11-27-2017 10:32 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  Well so much for me saying Bako was a low flight risk. Wasn't thinking UCSD would out weight the BW's negative views on Bako.

Thats the thing i dont really get. With CSUB's perceived negatives, academics, etc plus UCSD transition/RPI, may seem stalemate have been preferred? The BWC wasn't out anything for UCSD rejection.
Politics alone responsuble? But even then, if one candidate so bad and the other so weak, why the drive to add? I really dont think it was the "weaken the WAC" motive.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

My guess is UC chancellors looking out for one of its most prestigious campus' so they convinced everyone to bite the bullet on Bako. Literally nothing changed since UCSD's initial rejection, but Bako got tremendously better since their last rejection. Very odd indeed.

Men's basketball is king and that's what CSUB brings. They would've won the Big West the last two years and would walk it this year. An NCAA tournament and the NIT Final 4 are serious achievements for a team that only started competing in the WAC in 2013. They also bring a good baseball and volleyball team.

(11-28-2017 12:21 AM)Clarity Wrote:  Men's basketball is king and that's what CSUB brings. They would've won the Big West the last two years and would walk it this year. An NCAA tournament and the NIT Final 4 are serious achievements for a team that only started competing in the WAC in 2013. They also bring a good baseball and volleyball team.

I'm very curious to see how/if this would have panned out if CSUB was NOT very good the last few years. Recent success makes it more justifiable.

A plus, I'll admit, is basenall will benefit from BW membership. WVB will have to kick it up a notch or two in comparison to BW competition.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app