Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Yoda Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,120
Joined: May 2005
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Fresno State
Location: Poulsbo, WA
Post: #1
I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Remember the old Benson Plan? Basically, Benson tried to keep our old Texas (and environs) schools from bolting to CUSA by getting an ironclad commitment from the rest of the WAC to stay in the WAC. I think it was like a $5 mil exit fee or something. A couple of us, including Fresno I think, balked -- we wanted into the MWC and didn't want a $5 mil roadblock. So we voted it down and CUSA swiped our schools and we replaced them with Big West schools.

So what has changed since then? The WAC is going to BCS bowl games and winning the CWS while CUSA is sucking air. Their size of their television contract is about to tank and they are just waiting for the loss of at least Memphis -- their only really attractive television property. About all that CUSA has done for them is to keep travel costs down.

As for the WAC schools who voted down the Benson Plan, we still aren’t in the MWC and to my knowledge there is no reason to expect that we will ever get there. So maybe it’s time that we move on – commit to the WAC and mean it – and build it from there.

In other words, maybe it is time to take those Texas schools back.

If certain western WAC schools would make the kind of commitment that they refused to make years ago, then might some of these schools come back? Or might UNT finally say okay?

Here’s a WAC that I would like to see…

Western Division
Fresno State
San Jose State
Hawai'i
Boise State
Idaho
Nevada
Utah State

Eastern Division
New Mexico State
LA Tech
Houston
SMU
Tulsa
UTEP
USM

This expansion would create great stability in the WAC – a lack of stability being our #1 threat. And it would allow CUSA schools to retain their low travel costs while associating with a suddenly successful WAC instead of with a CUSA that will soon lose at least Memphis . And with 7 schools in each division, that gives you three home and three away within your own division (which six member divisions doesn’t do).

In order idea to for this work, all the members (including Fresno and Boise ) would have to commit to the conference for the long-term – which means foregoing the MWC. But more than that, this is a conference that could surpass the MWC – and the WAC we have now never will.

Further, we stabilize the WAC while robbing the MWC of virtually all their expansion candidates. So if BYU & UU move on, it is the MWC that is left unstable. Perhaps we take SDSU (western division) and New Mexico or better still, TCU (eastern division) at that point, leaving the MWC as dead as their fans so joyfully proclaim the WAC to be.

It wouldn’t be a bad thing to have a conference with one division centered in CA and the other centered in Texas . And it wouldn't be a bad thing to deny the MWC local recruiting access in both of CA and Texas.

I’m trying to figure out why this doesn’t work and I can’t think of anything…

We pause now for Tallgrass to post this on the CUSA board...

Yoda out…
07-19-2008 04:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Airport KC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,306
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 18
I Root For: Mid American
Location:
Post: #2
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
I don't think the WAC has any chance to win back those Texas schools who have gone to CUSA. CUSA has more bowls and TV money than the WAC.

What if the WAC could add UNT, Seattle, and Denver?

WAC Pacific
Hawaii
San Jose State
Fresno State
Nevada
Seattle
Idaho

WAC Central
Boise State
Denver
Utah State
New Mexico State
North Texas
La Tech

That would give the WAC 12 in basketball to help with travel and it would provide 10 in football to maintain round robin scheduling.
07-20-2008 05:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Yoda Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,120
Joined: May 2005
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Fresno State
Location: Poulsbo, WA
Post: #3
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Airport KC Wrote:I don't think the WAC has any chance to win back those Texas schools who have gone to CUSA. CUSA has more bowls and TV money than the WAC.

I have no idea whether or not the WAC could pull this off. But the bowls would follow and CUSA's next TV contract will be way smaller than the current one.

Yoda out...
07-20-2008 07:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
hawghiggs Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,792
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #4
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
north division : Boise st.,colorado st,Idaho,N.Dakota state,S.Dakota state,and wyoming in the south division : Fresno st.,Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico st., San jose state,and Utah state
07-20-2008 12:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Airport KC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,306
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 18
I Root For: Mid American
Location:
Post: #5
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Yoda Wrote:
Airport KC Wrote:I don't think the WAC has any chance to win back those Texas schools who have gone to CUSA. CUSA has more bowls and TV money than the WAC.

I have no idea whether or not the WAC could pull this off. But the bowls would follow and CUSA's next TV contract will be way smaller than the current one.

Yoda out...

The key to CUSA's value is Memphis. If they are still in the conference when the next contract is signed I suspect they will retain the TV value on the play of their basketball.

If Memphis leaves then CUSA is a disaster for everybody involved. The Liberty Bowl is gone as is the profitable conference basketball tourney played in Memphis.

The WAC I believe would be best just making an overature to UNT and calling it a day. UNT would give both La Tech and NMSU a rival. They are a big school with a lot of potential.

The WAC's TV deal may be better than CUSA's by the time the next contract rolls around but their are other factors like basketball money in CUSA and enterance fees to the WAC for Tulsa, SMU, Rice that I think will keep them from wanting a move back.
07-20-2008 02:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jediwarrior Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 18
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #6
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
If C-USA loses any member, they have several options for replacing them. If they lose one team, either La. Tech or UNT will be moving to C-USA. If they lose two teams, both La. Tech and UNT will be moving to C-USA.

Everybody knows that the BE is expanding. UNT will "not" move to the WAC and pay our entry fees "and" forfeit all WAC earnings for three years just to move to C-USA in year four. They're smarter than that.

...and as for the C-USA is doomed? Not even close.

With C-USA's TV deal, we have to remember that CBS Sports only has two D1-a conferences under contract. That's right -- Only two D1-a conferences...and they're C-USA and the MWC -- two mid-majors. I repeat: CBS Sports only has two D1-a conferences under contract, and they're both mid-majors.

CBS Sports is putting up a good "front". But behind the facade, there's very little there. ESPNU already has 3 BCS conferences under contract, along with the SBC, the MAC, and now the WAC. When it comes to content, ESPNU blows the doors off CBS Sports.

If CBS Sports loses C-USA, they'll only have the MWC left in D1-a. How long does CBS Sports survive with only one D1-a conference? Not long once the networks realize that CBS Sports is an empty shirt. So, CBS Sports will give C-USA a lotta cash to remain with them, no matter what. CBS Sports doesn't want to bring attention to what they really have.

So C-USA wont be hurting. CBS Sports will pay them in spades.
07-20-2008 03:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


BullsFanatic Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,650
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 26
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #7
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
I doubt that the WAC could bring back the schools they lost. They have a very travel friendly arrangement right now, and as mentioned before, better TV and bowls.

The WAC could still use expansion to create travel friendly divisions. There is the possibility of adding a few move-ups from the Big Sky (Sacramento State) or the Southland (Texas St, UTSA, Lamar). Then again, there is talk that the Southland as a whole may try to move to I-A. In that case, the WAC might be best going after some non-football members to balance things out for other sports.

Adding Southland Schools:
West
Hawaii
Fresno State
San Jose State
Idaho
Boise State
Nevada

East
Utah State
New Mexico State
Louisiana Tech
Texas State
UTSA
Lamar

Adding non-football members:
West
Hawaii
Fresno State
San Jose State
Idaho
Boise State
Seattle*

East
Nevada
Utah State
New Mexico State
Louisiana Tech
Denver*
Centenary*

Another option might be to go for a combination of the two: 1 football member, 2 non-FB members:

West
Hawaii
Fresno State
San Jose State
Nevada
Sacremento State*
Seattle*

East
Boise State
Idaho
Utah State
New Mexico State
Louisiana Tech
Denver*
07-20-2008 04:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Yoda Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,120
Joined: May 2005
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Fresno State
Location: Poulsbo, WA
Post: #8
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
BullsFanatic Wrote:I doubt that the WAC could bring back the schools they lost. They have a very travel friendly arrangement right now, and as mentioned before, better TV and bowls.

They may well not be able to. But as also pointed out already, if we did bring them back, their travel friendly arrantements would be maintained, the bowls would follow them and, whether or not they come back, their TV contract is about to shrink big time.

I would think that they would rather be associated with a conference that is sending teams to a BCS bowl than one that, per Sagarin, was behind even the Southern Conference -- whoever the heck they are.

Yoda out...
07-20-2008 07:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
templefootballfan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,615
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 162
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE Temple T
Post: #9
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Why didn't WAC go to 12 in 2001, when they added Boise & LousT. 2 of ArkSt, NMST & UtahSt would have worked.
07-21-2008 09:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Airport KC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,306
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 18
I Root For: Mid American
Location:
Post: #10
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
templefootballfan Wrote:Why didn't WAC go to 12 in 2001, when they added Boise & LousT. 2 of ArkSt, NMST & UtahSt would have worked.

UTEP has always had no interest in adding NMSU.

The WAC probably didn't want Ark State (its located near Memphis)

Utah State, I don't know the story there. All I can tell is there was no interest in going to 12.

Its probably saved the SBC in its early years that the WAC didn't want 12 teams.
07-22-2008 08:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jediwarrior Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 18
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #11
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Airport KC Wrote:
templefootballfan Wrote:Why didn't WAC go to 12 in 2001, when they added Boise & LousT. 2 of ArkSt, NMST & UtahSt would have worked.

UTEP has always had no interest in adding NMSU.

The WAC probably didn't want Ark State (its located near Memphis)

Utah State, I don't know the story there. All I can tell is there was no interest in going to 12.

Its probably saved the SBC in its early years that the WAC didn't want 12 teams.

I agree KC.

For some strange reason, everybody thinks the bigger the conference, the better the conference.

I keep hearing that if you go to 12 teams, you can have a Championship game. The WAC doesn't need that additional game. When WAC schools or any school travels to Hawaii, they automatically get that additional game.

A nine school conference is perfect.
07-22-2008 09:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


erdaaggie Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 403
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 6
I Root For: USU
Location:
Post: #12
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Airport KC Wrote:
templefootballfan Wrote:Why didn't WAC go to 12 in 2001, when they added Boise & LousT. 2 of ArkSt, NMST & UtahSt would have worked.

UTEP has always had no interest in adding NMSU.

The WAC probably didn't want Ark State (its located near Memphis)

Utah State, I don't know the story there. All I can tell is there was no interest in going to 12.

Its probably saved the SBC in its early years that the WAC didn't want 12 teams.

Actually the eastern schools in the SBC had no interest in moving to a predominantly Western Conference.

USU wanted to get into the WAC for several years, but didn't have any real shot until BYU/Utah left. Nevada was added first, then when TCU left to C-USA, the WAC added Boise State and had a choice between USU and La Tech. With Boise's departure, the Big West quit sponsoring football so USU, Idaho, NMSU, and North Texas had to find a home. Rumors have gone around that a former President of USU said some derogatory things regarding the league, so he turned off some people in the league. The Eastern Schools (Rice, Tulsa, and SMU) also wanted another eastern school so La Tech was added instead of USU.

USU went independent for football, which really hurt the team badly, Idaho and NMSU joined the SBC. After two years of independence, USU joined the SBC for football only, with the intention of bringing all sports in after 3 years. The WAC then had 3 teams leave (SMU, Rice, and Tulsa) and they invited USU and NMSU in to fill the spots. UTEP left several months later, when TCU joined the MWC. After that Idaho was invited to the league.
07-23-2008 12:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WAC_FAN Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 892
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 10
I Root For:
Location:

Baseball Genius
Post: #13
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Quote:Remember the old Benson Plan? Basically, Benson tried to keep our old Texas (and environs) schools from bolting to CUSA by getting an ironclad commitment from the rest of the WAC to stay in the WAC. I think it was like a $5 mil exit fee or something. A couple of us, including Fresno I think, balked -- we wanted into the MWC and didn't want a $5 mil roadblock. So we voted it down and CUSA swiped our schools and we replaced them with Big West schools.

So what has changed since then? The WAC is going to BCS bowl games and winning the CWS while CUSA is sucking air. Their size of their television contract is about to tank and they are just waiting for the loss of at least Memphis -- their only really attractive television property. About all that CUSA has done for them is to keep travel costs down.

I guess the question is--why do we want to expand now? Because of the success we've had for the past two years--I think it's safe to say we don't need them. Even with them, we still won't be an auto-BCS conference, instead we'd likely be sharing the revenue pie more ways--I don't see why the WAC would have any more reason to expand than the MWC does.

That said, if we did expand, I'd vote to go to a WAC-16. A West and a Southwest Division. That way if it didn't work out, we could always agree to part friendly ways as two conferences....
07-23-2008 04:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BoiseStateRules Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 541
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Boise State
Location: Boise, Idaho
Post: #14
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
This discussion is pretty pointless. A. There is no way the W.A.C. will EVER get the schools who left for Conference USA back. That simply isn't reality. B. There is no point, whatsoever, for the W.A.C. to expand anyway. Expanding only reduces the money that each school in the W.A.C. gets now.
07-23-2008 04:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
templefootballfan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,615
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 162
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE Temple T
Post: #15
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
When you expand, the idea is to raise revenue
07-23-2008 05:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bluesmoke Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 25
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #16
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
If boise and fesno left the wac

Does the WAC have enough appeal to draw ULL & UNT to the WAC?
07-24-2008 12:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


jediwarrior Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 18
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #17
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
bluesmoke Wrote:If boise and fesno left the wac

Does the WAC have enough appeal to draw ULL & UNT to the WAC?

Don't know what UNT is looking for.

They're definitely not interested in the WAC with Fresno and Boise in it.
07-25-2008 12:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
kingpotato Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 124
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Boise State
Location: Roady's Truck Stop
Post: #18
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Yoda Wrote:Remember the old Benson Plan? Basically, Benson tried to keep our old Texas (and environs) schools from bolting to CUSA by getting an ironclad commitment from the rest of the WAC to stay in the WAC. I think it was like a $5 mil exit fee or something. A couple of us, including Fresno I think, balked -- we wanted into the MWC and didn't want a $5 mil roadblock. So we voted it down and CUSA swiped our schools and we replaced them with Big West schools.

So what has changed since then? The WAC is going to BCS bowl games and winning the CWS while CUSA is sucking air. Their size of their television contract is about to tank and they are just waiting for the loss of at least Memphis -- their only really attractive television property. About all that CUSA has done for them is to keep travel costs down.

As for the WAC schools who voted down the Benson Plan, we still aren’t in the MWC and to my knowledge there is no reason to expect that we will ever get there. So maybe it’s time that we move on – commit to the WAC and mean it – and build it from there.

In other words, maybe it is time to take those Texas schools back.

If certain western WAC schools would make the kind of commitment that they refused to make years ago, then might some of these schools come back? Or might UNT finally say okay?

Here’s a WAC that I would like to see…

Western Division
Fresno State
San Jose State
Hawai'i
Boise State
Idaho
Nevada
Utah State

Eastern Division
New Mexico State
LA Tech
Houston
SMU
Tulsa
UTEP
USM

This expansion would create great stability in the WAC – a lack of stability being our #1 threat. And it would allow CUSA schools to retain their low travel costs while associating with a suddenly successful WAC instead of with a CUSA that will soon lose at least Memphis . And with 7 schools in each division, that gives you three home and three away within your own division (which six member divisions doesn’t do).

In order idea to for this work, all the members (including Fresno and Boise ) would have to commit to the conference for the long-term – which means foregoing the MWC. But more than that, this is a conference that could surpass the MWC – and the WAC we have now never will.

Further, we stabilize the WAC while robbing the MWC of virtually all their expansion candidates. So if BYU & UU move on, it is the MWC that is left unstable. Perhaps we take SDSU (western division) and New Mexico or better still, TCU (eastern division) at that point, leaving the MWC as dead as their fans so joyfully proclaim the WAC to be.

It wouldn’t be a bad thing to have a conference with one division centered in CA and the other centered in Texas . And it wouldn't be a bad thing to deny the MWC local recruiting access in both of CA and Texas.

I’m trying to figure out why this doesn’t work and I can’t think of anything…

We pause now for Tallgrass to post this on the CUSA board...

Yoda out…

I thought about this a bunch a year ago when there were rumors swirling around that Memphis was going to the BE and the eastern CUSA teams were going to leave and start another conference.

It would be awesome if some of the current WAC schools got absorbed by the Texas CUSA teams. That way they could keep the TV contract, keep the Memphis BB credits, and likely keep most of the Bowl games (Liberty would certainly go), but there would be enough to play local games for the east teams and the H-Bowl and Hawaii Bowl, as well as the NM Bowl would certainly come with the invites.

I'd love to see something like this:

West-
Boise State
Fresno State
Hawaii
UNR
SJSU
USU

East-
UTEP
Tulsa
SMU
Houston
NMSU
Rice

I'd actually love more to see TCU in there instead of NMSU, but I'm not sure they would go for that. La Tech would go where ever Tulane and USM ended up, NMSU would go SBC (if TCU joined) and Idaho goes to the Big Sky.

It would be a very good BB/FB conference with lots of bowl tie-ins, a good TV contract, good rivalries, and limited cross country traveling.
08-04-2008 11:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Native Georgian Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,519
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 1024
I Root For: TULANE+GA.STATE
Location: Decatur GA
Post: #19
RE:
The only member of C-USA who might leave for another west-based, non-Cartel conference is UTEP. I don't think that will happen, and all of the noise I have ever heard from UTEP-people is how they prefer the current C-USA to any other options out there right now. But still, I will admit that C-USA's present geographic configuration is tough for them. But the chance to play in a conference with 3 Texas-based opponents, including a football game every year in Houston (and every other year in Dallas) is quite pleasing to a lot of Miner fans.

I don't say this to stir the pot, but just being very blunt I think the next major move will be Boise and Fresno to the MWC. Also, I think there will come a day when the PAC-10 will be confronted with a choice: Invite BYU and Utah into their league, *Or* sit back and watch the MWC elevated into the Cartel. That would be a MWC that includes San Diego State and Fresno State, and possibly one other current WAC-member. When that day comes (7, 8 years down the road, if I had to guess) I really think the PAC-10 will bite the bullet and expand into Deseret. They won't necessarily like it but the money will control the decision.
08-05-2008 08:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ejmpalle Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 927
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Utah State
Location:
Post: #20
RE: I know! Let's do another expansion thread. WAC 14 anyone?
Why would the MWC invite 2 teams to their conference and make 11 teams? That doesn't make sense. Even 10 teams doesn't make any sense with the addition of Boise State or Fresno State, IMHO, when the MWC is so committed to TCU and vice versa. Why wouldn't the MWC give TCU a travel partner instead like SMU even if 10 teams made sense?
08-07-2008 03:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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.