(12-09-2015 03:52 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 12:50 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Honestly, if Wichita St goes anywhere it would probably be to the AAC. Natural rival with Tulsa, peer-level basketball programs (Cincy, Memphis, Tulsa, SMU, UConn, Temple). I wonder if the Sun Belt would accept Wichita St as a football only. Sun Belt and MAC basketball would be below Wichita St, and likely below the MVC as a whole.

What's in it for the Belt if we took WSU as a football only? They'd only stay if they sucked. No point in taking them. We already have 12. We already have 2 spares hanging out there with UMass and EKU.

Basketball scheduling considerations?

And what else is in it for the Sun Belt. The above did not help UMASS get a football only invite.

(12-09-2015 03:57 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:52 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 12:50 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Honestly, if Wichita St goes anywhere it would probably be to the AAC. Natural rival with Tulsa, peer-level basketball programs (Cincy, Memphis, Tulsa, SMU, UConn, Temple). I wonder if the Sun Belt would accept Wichita St as a football only. Sun Belt and MAC basketball would be below Wichita St, and likely below the MVC as a whole.

What's in it for the Belt if we took WSU as a football only? They'd only stay if they sucked. No point in taking them. We already have 12. We already have 2 spares hanging out there with UMass and EKU.

Basketball scheduling considerations?

And what else is in it for the Sun Belt. The above did not help UMASS get a football only invite.

Only thing there- Wichita is light years better at basketball than UMass is.

(12-09-2015 04:05 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  The very last year that Wichita State had a football team (1986), they went 3-8-0. Their last two victories were @Tulane (21-20 on Oct. 4th) and home vs. Central Florida (9-6 on Oct. 11th)

See, we already have history with the Shockers. ;-)

I think there is a reason why Wichita State approached MWC first is because MWC does not have any private schools. There is something going on in the MVC that makes it look like they are unstable right now. Look who MVC brought in to replace Creighton? A schools that is very sorry in basketball. North Dakota State would have been better for the MVC. The school that got invited does not have football. There was a reason why the MVFC was in talks with the WAC about a football merger only at the FBS level. It sounds like the football schools are not happy with the none-football schools.

(12-09-2015 03:58 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:57 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:52 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 12:50 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Honestly, if Wichita St goes anywhere it would probably be to the AAC. Natural rival with Tulsa, peer-level basketball programs (Cincy, Memphis, Tulsa, SMU, UConn, Temple). I wonder if the Sun Belt would accept Wichita St as a football only. Sun Belt and MAC basketball would be below Wichita St, and likely below the MVC as a whole.

What's in it for the Belt if we took WSU as a football only? They'd only stay if they sucked. No point in taking them. We already have 12. We already have 2 spares hanging out there with UMass and EKU.

Basketball scheduling considerations?

And what else is in it for the Sun Belt. The above did not help UMASS get a football only invite.

Only thing there- Wichita is light years better at basketball than UMass is.

Precisely. The appeal is that Sun Belt teams are very unlikely to get a Top 25-level program to visit their arena. And even if Wichita takes a step back in the coming years, they'll almost always be the biggest OOC game on a Sun Belt team's home schedule.

(12-09-2015 03:58 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:57 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:52 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 12:50 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Honestly, if Wichita St goes anywhere it would probably be to the AAC. Natural rival with Tulsa, peer-level basketball programs (Cincy, Memphis, Tulsa, SMU, UConn, Temple). I wonder if the Sun Belt would accept Wichita St as a football only. Sun Belt and MAC basketball would be below Wichita St, and likely below the MVC as a whole.

What's in it for the Belt if we took WSU as a football only? They'd only stay if they sucked. No point in taking them. We already have 12. We already have 2 spares hanging out there with UMass and EKU.

Basketball scheduling considerations?

And what else is in it for the Sun Belt. The above did not help UMASS get a football only invite.

Only thing there- Wichita is light years better at basketball than UMass is.

OK they are better in basketball than UMass, but still what would it do on the positive side for the Sun Belt Conference. There are 32 Div 1 basketball conferences so what if the Sun Belt moves up the conference list 2 places with a scheaduling agreement.....Still will only be a one bid league. Football only there is nothing in it for the Sun Belt......that is why it will not happen.

(12-09-2015 04:33 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:58 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:57 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:52 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  What's in it for the Belt if we took WSU as a football only? They'd only stay if they sucked. No point in taking them. We already have 12. We already have 2 spares hanging out there with UMass and EKU.

Basketball scheduling considerations?

And what else is in it for the Sun Belt. The above did not help UMASS get a football only invite.

Only thing there- Wichita is light years better at basketball than UMass is.

OK they are better in basketball than UMass, but still what would it do on the positive side for the Sun Belt Conference. There are 32 Div 1 basketball conferences so what if the Sun Belt moves up the conference list 2 places with a scheaduling agreement.....Still will only be a one bid league. Football only there is nothing in it for the Sun Belt......that is why it will not happen.

I would think the advantage is you get to dump Idaho.

(12-09-2015 04:33 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:58 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:57 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:52 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  What's in it for the Belt if we took WSU as a football only? They'd only stay if they sucked. No point in taking them. We already have 12. We already have 2 spares hanging out there with UMass and EKU.

Basketball scheduling considerations?

And what else is in it for the Sun Belt. The above did not help UMASS get a football only invite.

Only thing there- Wichita is light years better at basketball than UMass is.

OK they are better in basketball than UMass, but still what would it do on the positive side for the Sun Belt Conference. There are 32 Div 1 basketball conferences so what if the Sun Belt moves up the conference list 2 places with a scheaduling agreement.....Still will only be a one bid league. Football only there is nothing in it for the Sun Belt......that is why it will not happen.

Depending on the length of the relationship, it could give every school in the conference an attendance boost when Wichita visits (presuming 2 home/2 road games per season). For the best teams, like UT-Arlington and Georgia State, it could help make an at-large resume, depending on the rest of the conference schedule. If Wichita is in the top 25 at game time, that's an enhanced chance at more-prominent TV exposure.

And, as attackcoog points out, no more Idaho.

(12-09-2015 01:12 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 12:56 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I would hope they'd feel around the MWC and aim toward it. Avoid the muck and mire of eastern politics. The MAC's more like what they know geographically, but it wouldn't do anything for their basketball. Most natural fit, though.

Is MWC still sweet on Tulsa? The two of them would be a good pair. Sorry, UTEP.

Before we go nuts, though, studies don't guarantee execution. Basketball will suffer financially for football, too, barring a Tom Jurich-like leader to help both along without issue. And these kind of things tend to alienate the wrong sort, trying to fish for hypothetical folks who may or may not really exist.

As long as CUSA has Texas schools UTEP will stay with them. Tulsa? Don't think the MW is interested in a very small school and don't believe Tulsa wants to leave the AAC.
I would hope that if WSU says football is a go, then the MW will add then as a full member and then help them transition into FBS like the Sunbelt did with Ga St.
Just wonder if #14 would be BYU or NMSU or perhaps WSU replacing say an Air Force that decide to be in the same conference as Navy and Army.

How is Tulsa, SMU, Houston, Memphis any farther away than CSU, AFA, Wyoming, and UNM?

(12-09-2015 04:14 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I think there is a reason why Wichita State approached MWC first is because MWC does not have any private schools. There is something going on in the MVC that makes it look like they are unstable right now. Look who MVC brought in to replace Creighton? A schools that is very sorry in basketball. North Dakota State would have been better for the MVC. The school that got invited does not have football. There was a reason why the MVFC was in talks with the WAC about a football merger only at the FBS level. It sounds like the football schools are not happy with the none-football schools.

Wichita State is a Public Research Institution, not a private university.

(12-09-2015 06:32 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 04:14 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I think there is a reason why Wichita State approached MWC first is because MWC does not have any private schools. There is something going on in the MVC that makes it look like they are unstable right now. Look who MVC brought in to replace Creighton? A schools that is very sorry in basketball. North Dakota State would have been better for the MVC. The school that got invited does not have football. There was a reason why the MVFC was in talks with the WAC about a football merger only at the FBS level. It sounds like the football schools are not happy with the none-football schools.

Wichita State is a Public Research Institution, not a private university.

That is why they want to get away from the privates. I am reading it that the privates in the MVC is causing headaches for the football members.

(12-09-2015 03:52 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 12:50 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Honestly, if Wichita St goes anywhere it would probably be to the AAC. Natural rival with Tulsa, peer-level basketball programs (Cincy, Memphis, Tulsa, SMU, UConn, Temple). I wonder if the Sun Belt would accept Wichita St as a football only. Sun Belt and MAC basketball would be below Wichita St, and likely below the MVC as a whole.

What's in it for the Belt if we took WSU as a football only? They'd only stay if they sucked. No point in taking them. We already have 12. We already have 2 spares hanging out there with UMass and EKU.

Basketball scheduling considerations?

Wichita State isn't going to schedule 12 games with Sun Belt teams. Throwing 2 or 3 games in OOC really isn't going to move the needle IMHO.

And why does anyone think that WSU football will be any better than Idaho or NMSU?

Besides, we're not some dumping ground for teams no one else wants. Heck, the fifth place team in the Belt beat the MWC champion at their place.

If WSU wishes to apply for membership to the Sun Belt Conference, we will certainly evaluate their application. But unless they're willing to bring everything to the Belt, I see no point in taking them.

(12-09-2015 07:00 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:52 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 12:50 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Honestly, if Wichita St goes anywhere it would probably be to the AAC. Natural rival with Tulsa, peer-level basketball programs (Cincy, Memphis, Tulsa, SMU, UConn, Temple). I wonder if the Sun Belt would accept Wichita St as a football only. Sun Belt and MAC basketball would be below Wichita St, and likely below the MVC as a whole.

What's in it for the Belt if we took WSU as a football only? They'd only stay if they sucked. No point in taking them. We already have 12. We already have 2 spares hanging out there with UMass and EKU.

Basketball scheduling considerations?

Wichita State isn't going to schedule 12 games with Sun Belt teams. Throwing 2 or 3 games in OOC really isn't going to move the needle IMHO.

And why does anyone think that WSU football will be any better than Idaho or NMSU?

Besides, we're not some dumping ground for teams no one else wants. Heck, the fifth place team in the Belt beat the MWC champion at their place.

If WSU wishes to apply for membership to the Sun Belt Conference, we will certainly evaluate their application. But unless they're willing to bring everything to the Belt, I see no point in taking them.

It might not be better (though it would be really hard to be worse). Regardless of its quality, it would most certainly be closer to the other SB members than Idaho. Maybe they get the same renewable deal as Idaho. That would give the SB an opportunity to see how well the new Wichita program is supported financially--as well as its level of fan support.

(12-09-2015 07:00 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:52 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 03:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 12:50 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Honestly, if Wichita St goes anywhere it would probably be to the AAC. Natural rival with Tulsa, peer-level basketball programs (Cincy, Memphis, Tulsa, SMU, UConn, Temple). I wonder if the Sun Belt would accept Wichita St as a football only. Sun Belt and MAC basketball would be below Wichita St, and likely below the MVC as a whole.

What's in it for the Belt if we took WSU as a football only? They'd only stay if they sucked. No point in taking them. We already have 12. We already have 2 spares hanging out there with UMass and EKU.

Basketball scheduling considerations?

Wichita State isn't going to schedule 12 games with Sun Belt teams. Throwing 2 or 3 games in OOC really isn't going to move the needle IMHO.

And why does anyone think that WSU football will be any better than Idaho or NMSU?

Besides, we're not some dumping ground for teams no one else wants. Heck, the fifth place team in the Belt beat the MWC champion at their place.

If WSU wishes to apply for membership to the Sun Belt Conference, we will certainly evaluate their application. But unless they're willing to bring everything to the Belt, I see no point in taking them.

Game, Set, Match.

(12-09-2015 04:14 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I think there is a reason why Wichita State approached MWC first is because MWC does not have any private schools. There is something going on in the MVC that makes it look like they are unstable right now. Look who MVC brought in to replace Creighton? A schools that is very sorry in basketball. North Dakota State would have been better for the MVC. The school that got invited does not have football. There was a reason why the MVFC was in talks with the WAC about a football merger only at the FBS level. It sounds like the football schools are not happy with the none-football schools.

Sure Wichita State can approach the MWC but the MWC would need a second school to move to pair with Wichita and I don't think Missouri State would satisfy the MWC.

CUSA sounds to me the way to go for WSU. They've been willing to take starter football programs in the past that play good football. Charlotte and Old Dominion come to mind. They could even package the addition with Missouri State if they like to build up the West division. The SBC I think would also be a buyer in the WSU market but its less preferred then getting into CUSA.

If there is some realignment down the road down the road and a school like Tulsa or SMU becomes available to the MWC that is when you make a move to go after Wichita State but not before that.

The MAC wouldn't take them in for FB-only, not after bringing in UCF/Temple/UMass and having to put up with a lot of bad football for them to leave us

I don't know why everyone is touting Missouri State as a viable partner with Wichita State, their football program was mediocre before this year and now abysmal under their new coach. MSU's only win this year was against a DII school, in their other 11 games they gave up no less than 38, scored no more than 28, and they only scored seven points their last four games. In theory they would be a nice add though, I know that their basketball team is well supported and Springfield is actually larger than most people realize.

(12-09-2015 07:27 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(12-09-2015 04:14 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I think there is a reason why Wichita State approached MWC first is because MWC does not have any private schools. There is something going on in the MVC that makes it look like they are unstable right now. Look who MVC brought in to replace Creighton? A schools that is very sorry in basketball. North Dakota State would have been better for the MVC. The school that got invited does not have football. There was a reason why the MVFC was in talks with the WAC about a football merger only at the FBS level. It sounds like the football schools are not happy with the none-football schools.

Sure Wichita State can approach the MWC but the MWC would need a second school to move to pair with Wichita and I don't think Missouri State would satisfy the MWC.

CUSA sounds to me the way to go for WSU. They've been willing to take starter football programs in the past that play good football. Charlotte and Old Dominion come to mind. They could even package the addition with Missouri State if they like to build up the West division. The SBC I think would also be a buyer in the WSU market but its less preferred then getting into CUSA.

If there is some realignment down the road down the road and a school like Tulsa or SMU becomes available to the MWC that is when you make a move to go after Wichita State but not before that.

Wichita St and Gonzaga have been speculated as a 12th MWC ball school. With Hawaii as a football only, there is a need for a 12th bball team. Whether the .WC wants a 13th fb school can be debated, but a 13th fb school is not out of the question.

(12-09-2015 07:29 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  The MAC wouldn't take them in for FB-only, not after bringing in UCF/Temple/UMass and having to put up with a lot of bad football for them to leave us

I don't know why everyone is touting Missouri State as a viable partner with Wichita State, their program was mediocre before this year and now atrocious under their new coach. MSU's only win this year was against a DII school, in their other 11 games they gave up no less than 38, scored no more than 28, and they only scored seven points their last four games. In theory they would be a nice add though.

If Wichita St leaves the MVC, MO St will seek other pastures and get serious about football. MO St needs Texas partners more than Illinois ones if Wichita St is gone.

(12-09-2015 04:14 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Look who MVC brought in to replace Creighton? A schools that is very sorry in basketball.

Loyola beat Creighton in basketball a few days ago. Loyola has a ton of potential in the MVC.

The MVC is already a hybrid conference that would be ripe for a split. Either Way, I'd like to see Missouri State/Wichita State move up to FBS together.

They could take 6-7 schools to jump to FBS as a group and add a 3rd division to the MAC. 21 team super conference.

MVC division
Missouri State
Wichita State
Illinois State
Indiana State
Northern Iowa
Southern Illinois
North Dakota State

Central division
Ball State
Central Michigan
Eastern Michigan
Northern Illinois
Toledo
Western Michigan
Bowling Green

East division
Akron
Buffalo
Kent State
Miami
Ohio University
U. Massachusetts
James Madison