(12-04-2015 05:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-04-2015 04:08 PM)geef Wrote:  

(12-04-2015 02:22 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(12-04-2015 02:14 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Split the Colorado schools off from the NCHC and have them join with Vegas and the Arizona schools, in a new conference.

Denver, CC, UND, and Omaha want to be part of a PAC12 hockey conference, IMHO. All have direct flights to Phoenix and Vegas.

This illustrates and interesting and ongoing dilemma for DU. I went to grad school and worked there for 7 years, and came to know a number of folks in the athletic department. They want more than anything to be part of a west coast conference in all-sports. The WCC makes the most sense in terms of geography and similar institutions. The school is unlikely to get a bid, however, unless there's a travel partner that makes sense. I just don't see that happening. Conference affiliation is always going to be a bit odd for the university. The Summit League is a better cultural fit than the Sun Belt, but I know it isn't a long term preference.

DU's revenue-generating sports, lacrosse and hockey, are east (and midwest) dominated, however, and they'll likely always be played in a different conference than DU is affiliated with for the majority of its sports. I'd argue that in hockey a number of alumni would be disappointed to see DU go to a west coast-heavy conference, although the recent changes would make the transition easier. DU has already lost its rivalries with Wisconsin, Minnesota and St. Cloud. I suppose a move to a west coast conference would only mean losing UND as a rival. Ultimately, a move might be more palatable if enough PAC-12 schools add hockey and lacrosse. That way, there be three sports - hockey, men's and women's lacrosse - played in a PAC-12 conference, and new rivalries would come.

Putting aside hockey, I've always felt that DU would fit extremely well in the WCC (and frankly, I've been surprised that the WCC doesn't seem showing interest in DU since it's a well-funded school in a top market with excellent academics). The best thing for DU long-term might be for Seattle (the other on-paper institutional fit that would mesh with the WCC) to become a viable option (as it has only been back in Division I sports for about 5 years) in order to provide an even-numbered WCC expansion in two markets that one would think that the league would want to be in.

Agreed. Just prior to DU's one-year stint in the WAC, the school offered the WCC a relatively large chunk of money in an effort to gain admission. They were apparently turned down. The inclusion of BYU - a school in a noncontiguous state that wasn't Catholic or Catholic Lite - made me think that DU was a viable option. You're right about Seattle. They're hanging out in the conference of misfit toys and - since moving back to Division 1 - would love nothing more than to be in the WCC as well.

Could some of the RMAC schools start hockey as well? I know they sponsor La Crosse, and they could be a good new conference move up to D1 as a whole to FCS? The schools like Denver and western schools that sponsors La Crosse for Men and Women's could move there as an affiliate. Their football be in FCS, and have a hockey conference at D1. The schools there might start up both men and women ice hockey. It would give Air Force more competition.

(12-04-2015 07:40 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Could some of the RMAC schools start hockey as well? I know they sponsor La Crosse, and they could be a good new conference move up to D1 as a whole to FCS? The schools like Denver and western schools that sponsors La Crosse for Men and Women's could move there as an affiliate. Their football be in FCS, and have a hockey conference at D1. The schools there might start up both men and women ice hockey. It would give Air Force more competition.

There are only like 30 high schools that sponsor hockey in Colorado. Many more sponsor lacrosse, plus lax is much more inexpensive and actually increases enrollment. Lax college players come from all over, so would expect D2 RMAC schools to emphasize lax over hockey. The NCHC won't take another Colorado school unless it was Colorado or Colo St. Black Hills St in SD is an exception, because there are different motives in the Dakotas, as they are building a rink on campus, and lax hasn't impacted SD yet. Black Hills St can join the WCHA if it moves on varsity hockey.

(12-04-2015 07:40 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Could some of the RMAC schools start hockey as well?

No. Most of these schools don't have access to a rink. Nor, do they have the funds to build a rink and start a program. Only two schools of the 16 have men's teams in all the sports offered by the RMAC. Four of the schools don't even have football programs. On the women's side only 3 schools play all of the offered sports. Adding tennis, swimming, golf, soccer, lacrosse etc. would be their goals long before adding hockey

Quote:I know they sponsor La Crosse, and they could be a good new conference move up to D1 as a whole to FCS?

No. Only four of the 16 schools in the RMAC and one affiliate school play men's lacrosse. Women's lacrosse is played by six schools and three affiliates. That is hardly a basis to move the conference to D1. None of the schools really has the money to move to FCS. Plus, they learned a lesson from Northern Colorado's spectacular failure in moving to D1 and FCS.

Quote:The schools like Denver and western schools that sponsors La Crosse for Men and Women's could move there as an affiliate. Their football be in FCS, and have a hockey conference at D1. The schools there might start up both men and women ice hockey. It would give Air Force more competition.

The Pioneers captured their first Lacrosse championship in 2015 against Maryland 10-5. They are the first division 1 men's team west of the Appalachians to win an NCAA Lacrosse championship. Why would they possibly want their lacrosse program to be an affiliate of the RMAC? Air Force seems to happy with where their hockey team is. Even if several of the RMAC schools could start hockey program, why would Air Force wish to join a handful of upstart programs in a new conference

(12-03-2015 09:39 PM)CameramanJ Wrote:  People would pay price of admission just to get the AC + the cold wafting off the ice. Good move UNLV

Or they could just walk into a casino...

Besides, at the time of the year hockey is going on, the heat isn't really an issue

(12-04-2015 05:44 PM)geef Wrote:  

(12-04-2015 05:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-04-2015 04:08 PM)geef Wrote:  

(12-04-2015 02:22 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(12-04-2015 02:14 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Split the Colorado schools off from the NCHC and have them join with Vegas and the Arizona schools, in a new conference.

Denver, CC, UND, and Omaha want to be part of a PAC12 hockey conference, IMHO. All have direct flights to Phoenix and Vegas.

This illustrates and interesting and ongoing dilemma for DU. I went to grad school and worked there for 7 years, and came to know a number of folks in the athletic department. They want more than anything to be part of a west coast conference in all-sports. The WCC makes the most sense in terms of geography and similar institutions. The school is unlikely to get a bid, however, unless there's a travel partner that makes sense. I just don't see that happening. Conference affiliation is always going to be a bit odd for the university. The Summit League is a better cultural fit than the Sun Belt, but I know it isn't a long term preference.

DU's revenue-generating sports, lacrosse and hockey, are east (and midwest) dominated, however, and they'll likely always be played in a different conference than DU is affiliated with for the majority of its sports. I'd argue that in hockey a number of alumni would be disappointed to see DU go to a west coast-heavy conference, although the recent changes would make the transition easier. DU has already lost its rivalries with Wisconsin, Minnesota and St. Cloud. I suppose a move to a west coast conference would only mean losing UND as a rival. Ultimately, a move might be more palatable if enough PAC-12 schools add hockey and lacrosse. That way, there be three sports - hockey, men's and women's lacrosse - played in a PAC-12 conference, and new rivalries would come.

Putting aside hockey, I've always felt that DU would fit extremely well in the WCC (and frankly, I've been surprised that the WCC doesn't seem showing interest in DU since it's a well-funded school in a top market with excellent academics). The best thing for DU long-term might be for Seattle (the other on-paper institutional fit that would mesh with the WCC) to become a viable option (as it has only been back in Division I sports for about 5 years) in order to provide an even-numbered WCC expansion in two markets that one would think that the league would want to be in.

Agreed. Just prior to DU's one-year stint in the WAC, the school offered the WCC a relatively large chunk of money in an effort to gain admission. They were apparently turned down. The inclusion of BYU - a school in a noncontiguous state that wasn't Catholic or Catholic Lite - made me think that DU was a viable option. You're right about Seattle. They're hanging out in the conference of misfit toys and - since moving back to Division 1 - would love nothing more than to be in the WCC as well.

I'd be curious to know the official or unofficial reason that DU and Seattle are both rejected by the WCC.

I'm assuming politics and avoiding competition must be part of it.

Seattle's problem is Gonzaga. Gonzaga doesn't want the competition for Seattle-Tacoma viewers.

Both Seattle and Denver have not exactly torn up the hardwood recently, so the RPI-conscientious WCC will pass on them for now.

(12-05-2015 06:11 PM)sportsrankings Wrote:  

(12-03-2015 07:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Oregon is far along in their decision process and USC is considering it, waiting for Ariz St to prove college hockey out west. A PAC12 hockey league could be closer than most realize.

I have a source at USC and that is simply not true.

Perhaps your source is plausibly denying it, as Arizona St sources said it was true before too.

Mayorsmanor.com first reported it, followed by other outlets.

(12-05-2015 03:02 AM)lew240z Wrote:  

(12-04-2015 07:40 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Could some of the RMAC schools start hockey as well?

No. Most of these schools don't have access to a rink. Nor, do they have the funds to build a rink and start a program. Only two schools of the 16 have men's teams in all the sports offered by the RMAC. Four of the schools don't even have football programs. On the women's side only 3 schools play all of the offered sports. Adding tennis, swimming, golf, soccer, lacrosse etc. would be their goals long before adding hockey

Quote:I know they sponsor La Crosse, and they could be a good new conference move up to D1 as a whole to FCS?

No. Only four of the 16 schools in the RMAC and one affiliate school play men's lacrosse. Women's lacrosse is played by six schools and three affiliates. That is hardly a basis to move the conference to D1. None of the schools really has the money to move to FCS. Plus, they learned a lesson from Northern Colorado's spectacular failure in moving to D1 and FCS.

Quote:The schools like Denver and western schools that sponsors La Crosse for Men and Women's could move there as an affiliate. Their football be in FCS, and have a hockey conference at D1. The schools there might start up both men and women ice hockey. It would give Air Force more competition.

The Pioneers captured their first Lacrosse championship in 2015 against Maryland 10-5. They are the first division 1 men's team west of the Appalachians to win an NCAA Lacrosse championship. Why would they possibly want their lacrosse program to be an affiliate of the RMAC? Air Force seems to happy with where their hockey team is. Even if several of the RMAC schools could start hockey program, why would Air Force wish to join a handful of upstart programs in a new conference

RMAC Women's LAX
Regis
Fort Lewis
Colorado Mesa
Colorado State-Pueblo
Adams State

Colorado-Colorado Springs is adding LAX in a few years.

Lindenwood and Rockhurst would be leaving since their conference would be starting LAX as a sponsor sport.

RMAC Men's LAX
Adams State
Colorado Mesa
Colorado State-Pueblo
Westminster Utah

Rockhurst and Lindeonwood would leave.

Fort Lewis could turn their men's club program into a varsity team.

There are several RMAC schools that are looking into adding LAX.

The question is could Colorado-Colorado Springs, Regis, Metro State, Northern Colorado and Colorado Mines be able to add hockey since they have close access to rinks? Colorado-Colorado Springs and Air Force could play cross town rivalry games.

Metro State does have a club football team.

Carroll, Montana is supposed to be moving to D2 as well soon.

I forgot that Montana State-Billings are getting donations together to restart their football program.

I am a MSCD... OK, MSUD now...alumni. It is written INTO THEIR CHARTER that Metro can NEVER sponsor varsity football. (Seriously. They were chartered in 1965 and the Colorado State legislature mandated that they never sponsor varsity FB because of the amount of money FB consumes.)

(12-05-2015 08:56 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I am a MSCD... OK, MSUD now...alumni. It is written INTO THEIR CHARTER that Metro can NEVER sponsor varsity football. (Seriously. They were chartered in 1965 and the Colorado State legislature mandated that they never sponsor varsity FB because of the amount of money FB consumes.)

I read somewhere Florida mandated that none of the public universities should add football because it competes against the 3 top dogs, but then UCF, USF, FAU, FIU and now West Florida started football up. I think that is what the AD from Polk State in Florida said.

Now, with Metro State in the RMAC? The travel for football is far less than if they join the WAC or Big Sky. Westminster Utah AD said they might do a study down the road to start up football. Be very interested in seeing RMAC back as a major D1 conference since Colorado and Colorado State were members.

The chances of the RMAC becoming a D1 conference, let alone a major D1 conference, are about the same as DU, CU, Wyoming, BYU, and Utah rejoining the RMAC.

BTW, the only reason CSU-P restarted its football program is because two alumni donated $7 million specifically to restart the program.

(12-05-2015 04:25 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  Seattle's problem is Gonzaga. Gonzaga doesn't want the competition for Seattle-Tacoma viewers.

Both Seattle and Denver have not exactly torn up the hardwood recently, so the RPI-conscientious WCC will pass on them for now.

I figured that was the case for Seattle.

But would've thought WCC would want Denver audience. But yeah, Denver isn't a power basketball program and WCC's only sport is men's bball.

Denver also has a problem in that BYU will always be a threat to leave since the Cougars play FBS football - unless if they join a conference for football only, the WCC can't really build around them. If BYU left entirely, then the WCC could actually expand to 12 with Seattle, Denver, and Grand Canyon, and have all of the non-FBS Division I private schools west of Texas.

(12-06-2015 11:46 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  Denver also has a problem in that BYU will always be a threat to leave since the Cougars play FBS football - unless if they join a conference for football only, the WCC can't really build around them. If BYU left entirely, then the WCC could actually expand to 12 with Seattle, Denver, and Grand Canyon, and have all of the non-FBS Division I private schools west of Texas.

If BYU left, only Denver would get in. GCU won't because of their for profit status and Seattle seems to be blocked by the Zags.

If the Zags go elsewhere, Seattle would get in the next day.

(12-06-2015 03:09 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 11:46 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  Denver also has a problem in that BYU will always be a threat to leave since the Cougars play FBS football - unless if they join a conference for football only, the WCC can't really build around them. If BYU left entirely, then the WCC could actually expand to 12 with Seattle, Denver, and Grand Canyon, and have all of the non-FBS Division I private schools west of Texas.

If BYU left, only Denver would get in. GCU won't because of their for profit status and Seattle seems to be blocked by the Zags.

If the Zags go elsewhere, Seattle would get in the next day.

If BYU decides to rejoin the MWC? They would want MWC to bring in Gonzaga. But, Gonzaga have to restart their football program to even be considered to get an invite.


As to the RMAC? I think with their history as being a major conference that was considered a D1 back in the old days? I think they might be welcome back to D1 because they produced top programs in D1 today including Colorado, Colorado and Air Force. They would be the low FCS level, and the lower end of the D1 ladder.

(12-05-2015 08:56 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I am a MSCD... OK, MSUD now...alumni. It is written INTO THEIR CHARTER that Metro can NEVER sponsor varsity football. (Seriously. They were chartered in 1965 and the Colorado State legislature mandated that they never sponsor varsity FB because of the amount of money FB consumes.)

A Metro AND UC alum? I'm not sure that I'd ever heard that combination. I also didn't know about Metro never being able to sponsor football. If I remember correctly, DU gave up football sometime in the 1960s - there used to be a 30,000 seat stadium on campus. On the MSUD thing, I was working at DU when Metro tried to rename themselves Denver State, but DU blocked it. Complete garbage on DU's part, and it caused Metro to choose a name that doesn't quite work.

On the WCC, someone commented on why DU hasn't gotten in. I'm not close enough to the athletics department to know whether it's politics at play (like with Gonzaga and Seattle). I believe that it's merely a matter of geography not working.

(12-06-2015 03:09 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 11:46 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  Denver also has a problem in that BYU will always be a threat to leave since the Cougars play FBS football - unless if they join a conference for football only, the WCC can't really build around them. If BYU left entirely, then the WCC could actually expand to 12 with Seattle, Denver, and Grand Canyon, and have all of the non-FBS Division I private schools west of Texas.

If BYU left, only Denver would get in. GCU won't because of their for profit status and Seattle seems to be blocked by the Zags.

If the Zags go elsewhere, Seattle would get in the next day.

Plus, the WCC is religious (founded) schools. GCU doesn't fit.


I don't see BYU getting into any P5 conference. Even the XII, if it were expanding. They can't get into the PAC and that's their only real opportunity, geographically.

(12-06-2015 08:06 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  As to the RMAC? I think with their history as being a major conference that was considered a D1 back in the old days? I think they might be welcome back to D1 because they produced top programs in D1 today including Colorado, Colorado and Air Force. They would be the low FCS level, and the lower end of the D1 ladder.

The RMAC stopped being a major conference in 1932 when CU, CSU, CU, Utah, BYU and Wyoming left to start a new conference. The RMAC will never be a D! conference. Air Force was never in the RMAC.

(12-07-2015 09:54 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 03:09 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 11:46 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  Denver also has a problem in that BYU will always be a threat to leave since the Cougars play FBS football - unless if they join a conference for football only, the WCC can't really build around them. If BYU left entirely, then the WCC could actually expand to 12 with Seattle, Denver, and Grand Canyon, and have all of the non-FBS Division I private schools west of Texas.

If BYU left, only Denver would get in. GCU won't because of their for profit status and Seattle seems to be blocked by the Zags.

If the Zags go elsewhere, Seattle would get in the next day.

Plus, the WCC is religious (founded) schools. GCU doesn't fit.

DU doesn't fit in the WCC, either. DU is a secular school.