(07-28-2016 06:42 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 05:46 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  if the B12 expansion somehow trickles down to a MW or C-USA spot opening up for New Mexico State, then the WAC is finally toast. I think the remaining members will be actively and publicly searching for new homes.

But - the best chances for that happening is for Boise and/or CSU to be invited to the Big 12 and neither one looks like they are receiving such an invite.

One other possible effect is if BYU goes all sports to the Big 12. What does the WCC do? Stick at 9, or try to get back to 10? Seattle is a perfect fit, institution wise, other than Gonzaga is blocking them.

Perfect fits don't always mean guaranteed admission. Seattle isn't receiving an invite because the WCC doesn't want to risk drawing Gonzaga's ire. It will either try to add Denver or stay at 9. The WCC could invite Grand Canyon as a replacement for BYU if it can overlook GCU's "academics." Meanwhile, Cal Baptist won't be eligible for moving up to D1 for a few years.

(07-28-2016 04:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 04:17 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 04:06 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 03:56 PM)NoDak Wrote:  If NMSU gets an MWC or CUSA offer, that throws a wrench in plans. Wichita St and Mo St aren't getting offers from those conferences. The plan is dependent on the WAC, not Big Sky which is again talking expansion.

Funny that now NAU is being proposed for the MWC by dbackjon. Maybe for x-country, as they don't have facilities or money or fan support for anything else.

What is funny is that you have no ability to distinguish tongue-in-cheek from reality.

On the MWC expansion thread, some people responded to your suggestion. Obviously, your post wasn't blatantly tongue in cheek, but on this thread it is?

Can't help it if people don't recognize obvious sarcasm.

So, you pushing your deadline back again?

Whenever Wichita St gets an official FBS only offer from the WAC, then it will start.

If the WAC loses only New Mexico State, then the WAC will have 7 active Division I members by the time the move is complete, the bare minimum under Division I rules as Grand Canyon will have completed its transition. The WAC could actually be in a better position to invite someone from Division II, as it could invite a school closer to Seattle (Western Washington), Bakersfield (?), Utah Valley (Dixie State), UMKC (Central Missouri), or UTRGV (?). The new member may not consolidate the footprint, but may make a better travel partner for someone than New Mexico State, who really isn't that close to anyone in the WAC.

The catch is that it will likely be a non-football school since there really isn't a place for a new member to park a FCS program.

If the WAC takes any losses, it probably is go time for the Big Sky to reorganize itself into two conferences. Idaho proceeds with the downgrade, and the WAC becomes a FCS conference. UC Davis becomes a Big Sky affiliate, Cal Poly a WAC affiliate.

BSC Football - EWU, PSU, Idaho, ISU, Montana, MSU, UC Davis*
WAC Football - Sacramento State, NAU, SUU, Weber State, UNC, UND, Cal Poly*

Bye weeks during conference play are coordinated for rivals separated from each other to be able to still play each other out of conference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(07-28-2016 05:10 PM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 04:06 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 03:56 PM)NoDak Wrote:  If NMSU gets an MWC or CUSA offer, that throws a wrench in plans. Wichita St and Mo St aren't getting offers from those conferences. The plan is dependent on the WAC, not Big Sky which is again talking expansion.

Funny that now NAU is being proposed for the MWC by dbackjon. Maybe for x-country, as they don't have facilities or money or fan support for anything else.

What is funny is that you have no ability to distinguish tongue-in-cheek from reality.

The Big Sky is talking expansion? Link please. Tomorrow begins the 3 day countdown to the master plan being put into place. Have we seen any press conferences scheduled yet or do they need to hold off since CUSA are now part of your master plan.

At times I think you and David St are either twins or the same person posting as two.

David St loves NDSU and SDSU, so he's more likely to be related to you.

So expansion doesn't mean expansion in your world? Crazy the things that they teach at XDSUs.

A commish talks expansion publicly, and she is not talking about her waistline or pocketbook.

Best places for the WAC teams to go:

NM ST -> CUSA or MWC, with UTEP
Seattle -> WCC (to replace BYU)
UMKC -> Summit (much better geography)
Chicago St -> drop athletics
Grand Canyon -> Don't care ... I hope no conference takes "Liberty Western"
UTRGV -> Southland (starts FCS football)
Utah Valley -> Big Sky
CSU-B -> Big West


*EDIT - thanks jd

No home for Cal State Bakersfield?

(07-28-2016 07:36 PM)NoDak Wrote:  A commish talks expansion publicly, and she is not talking about her waistline or pocketbook.

I don't get why it is so hard for you to understand that she is talking about Idaho.

(07-28-2016 09:39 PM)NoQuestion Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 07:36 PM)NoDak Wrote:  A commish talks expansion publicly, and she is not talking about her waistline or pocketbook.

I don't get why it is so hard for you to understand that she is talking about Idaho.

Did the Big Ten talk expansion after they added Maryland and Rutgers? No. They talked divisions.

A commish never talks expansion when they already have that team. They talk divisions. This board knows that, but NDSU, SDSU, and Idaho posters are speaking a different language because they want to badly disprove what I have said.

The XDSU's posters passionately hate the idea of Big Sky expansion and the Idaho posters disbelieve it.

When Wichita St goes to a different FBS conference than the WAC, that will prove me wrong. There are no obvious expansion candidate for the Big Sky in the west. The only ones that are possible are in the Central Time Zone. Commish Williams expansion comments were not followed up in the least because most of the Big Sky reporters are clueless.

Right now Egriz is talking about the MWC taking them. They have to be FBS first.

The BSC does not expand until 2018. So all the talk at the Big Sky Kickoff was about the expansion in 2018. Nowhere does the commish talk about expanding past Idaho. Prove me wrong with a quote and a link.

The Griz have been talking about the MWC for years because that is the only legitimate FBS conference that a team in the West could move up to. That will not change anytime soon.

(07-28-2016 10:26 PM)NoQuestion Wrote:  The BSC does not expand until 2018. So all the talk at the Big Sky Kickoff was about the expansion in 2018. Nowhere does the commish talk about expanding past Idaho. Prove me wrong with a quote and a link.

The Griz have been talking about the MWC for years because that is the only legitimate FBS conference that a team in the West could move up to. That will not change anytime soon.

Show me one example of where divisional alignment was hailed as expansion.

The illiteracy of the XDSU fans is spreading at an alarming rate.

Montana won't even get a mention from the MWC.

(07-28-2016 08:57 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Best places for the WAC teams to go:

NM ST -> CUSA or MWC, with UTEP
Seattle -> WCC (to replace BYU)
UMKC -> Summit (much better geography)
Chicago St -> drop athletics
Grand Canyon -> Don't care ... I hope no conference takes "Liberty Western"
UTRGV -> Southland (starts FCS football)
Utah Valley -> Big Sky
CSU-B -> Big West


*EDIT - thanks jd

We don't want Cal State Bakersfield. If the WAC loses its auto bid they will be homeless or in the Big Sky

(07-28-2016 05:46 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  if the B12 expansion somehow trickles down to a MW or C-USA spot opening up for New Mexico State, then the WAC is finally toast. I think the remaining members will be actively and publicly searching for new homes.

But - the best chances for that happening is for Boise and/or CSU to be invited to the Big 12 and neither one looks like they are receiving such an invite.

If the Big 12 expands, then NMSU's best chance is if the trickle-down results in CUSA losing either 1 or 3 schools to the AAC. If CUSA loses 0 or 2 members, they'll do nothing. If CUSA loses an odd number of members, they'll add 1 to make themselves even again for football and basketball.

(07-28-2016 07:35 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If the WAC loses only New Mexico State, then the WAC will have 7 active Division I members by the time the move is complete, the bare minimum under Division I rules as Grand Canyon will have completed its transition. The WAC could actually be in a better position to invite someone from Division II, as it could invite a school closer to Seattle (Western Washington), Bakersfield (?), Utah Valley (Dixie State), UMKC (Central Missouri), or UTRGV (?). The new member may not consolidate the footprint, but may make a better travel partner for someone than New Mexico State, who really isn't that close to anyone in the WAC.

The catch is that it will likely be a non-football school since there really isn't a place for a new member to park a FCS program.

If the WAC takes any losses, it probably is go time for the Big Sky to reorganize itself into two conferences. Idaho proceeds with the downgrade, and the WAC becomes a FCS conference. UC Davis becomes a Big Sky affiliate, Cal Poly a WAC affiliate.

BSC Football - EWU, PSU, Idaho, ISU, Montana, MSU, UC Davis*
WAC Football - Sacramento State, NAU, SUU, Weber State, UNC, UND, Cal Poly*

Bye weeks during conference play are coordinated for rivals separated from each other to be able to still play each other out of conference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seattle/Western Washington/Central Washington (doing work on their facilities)
Bakersfield State/East Bay State/Cal-San Diego/Azusa Pacific/Sonoma State/Cal. State-L.A.
Utah Valley/Dixie State/Colorado Mesa/Western State/Fort Lewis/Colorado Mines
UMKC/Central Missouri/Missouri Southern/Missouri Western/Lindenwood/NW Missouri State
UTRGV/Texas-Permian Basin/Texas A&M-Commerce/Tarleton State/West Texas A&M/Angelo State/Midwestern State/Lamar/Sam Houston State/Texas A&M-Kingsville
Grand Canyon U./Arizona Christian?

I know not all of them could be FBS ready, but they could still be part of Big Sky football. Cal-San Diego, Azusa Pacific, East Bay State, Cal. State- LA, Tarleton State, Texas A&M-Commerce, Midwestern State, Lamar, West Texas A&M all could use a pro stadium or they have the stadium or a stadium close enough to be FBS.

(07-28-2016 11:25 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 07:35 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If the WAC loses only New Mexico State, then the WAC will have 7 active Division I members by the time the move is complete, the bare minimum under Division I rules as Grand Canyon will have completed its transition. The WAC could actually be in a better position to invite someone from Division II, as it could invite a school closer to Seattle (Western Washington), Bakersfield (?), Utah Valley (Dixie State), UMKC (Central Missouri), or UTRGV (?). The new member may not consolidate the footprint, but may make a better travel partner for someone than New Mexico State, who really isn't that close to anyone in the WAC.

The catch is that it will likely be a non-football school since there really isn't a place for a new member to park a FCS program.

If the WAC takes any losses, it probably is go time for the Big Sky to reorganize itself into two conferences. Idaho proceeds with the downgrade, and the WAC becomes a FCS conference. UC Davis becomes a Big Sky affiliate, Cal Poly a WAC affiliate.

BSC Football - EWU, PSU, Idaho, ISU, Montana, MSU, UC Davis*
WAC Football - Sacramento State, NAU, SUU, Weber State, UNC, UND, Cal Poly*

Bye weeks during conference play are coordinated for rivals separated from each other to be able to still play each other out of conference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seattle/Western Washington/Central Washington (doing work on their facilities)
Bakersfield State/East Bay State/Cal-San Diego/Azusa Pacific/Sonoma State/Cal. State-L.A.
Utah Valley/Dixie State/Colorado Mesa/Western State/Fort Lewis/Colorado Mines
UMKC/Central Missouri/Missouri Southern/Missouri Western/Lindenwood/NW Missouri State
UTRGV/Texas-Permian Basin/Texas A&M-Commerce/Tarleton State/West Texas A&M/Angelo State/Midwestern State/Lamar/Sam Houston State/Texas A&M-Kingsville
Grand Canyon U./Arizona Christian?

I know not all of them could be FBS ready, but they could still be part of Big Sky football. Cal-San Diego, Azusa Pacific, East Bay State, Cal. State- LA, Tarleton State, Texas A&M-Commerce, Midwestern State, Lamar, West Texas A&M all could use a pro stadium or they have the stadium or a stadium close enough to be FBS.

Because when I think of Division 1 football prospects, I think of a 781-student NAIA school.

(07-29-2016 12:01 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:25 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 07:35 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If the WAC loses only New Mexico State, then the WAC will have 7 active Division I members by the time the move is complete, the bare minimum under Division I rules as Grand Canyon will have completed its transition. The WAC could actually be in a better position to invite someone from Division II, as it could invite a school closer to Seattle (Western Washington), Bakersfield (?), Utah Valley (Dixie State), UMKC (Central Missouri), or UTRGV (?). The new member may not consolidate the footprint, but may make a better travel partner for someone than New Mexico State, who really isn't that close to anyone in the WAC.

The catch is that it will likely be a non-football school since there really isn't a place for a new member to park a FCS program.

If the WAC takes any losses, it probably is go time for the Big Sky to reorganize itself into two conferences. Idaho proceeds with the downgrade, and the WAC becomes a FCS conference. UC Davis becomes a Big Sky affiliate, Cal Poly a WAC affiliate.

BSC Football - EWU, PSU, Idaho, ISU, Montana, MSU, UC Davis*
WAC Football - Sacramento State, NAU, SUU, Weber State, UNC, UND, Cal Poly*

Bye weeks during conference play are coordinated for rivals separated from each other to be able to still play each other out of conference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seattle/Western Washington/Central Washington (doing work on their facilities)
Bakersfield State/East Bay State/Cal-San Diego/Azusa Pacific/Sonoma State/Cal. State-L.A.
Utah Valley/Dixie State/Colorado Mesa/Western State/Fort Lewis/Colorado Mines
UMKC/Central Missouri/Missouri Southern/Missouri Western/Lindenwood/NW Missouri State
UTRGV/Texas-Permian Basin/Texas A&M-Commerce/Tarleton State/West Texas A&M/Angelo State/Midwestern State/Lamar/Sam Houston State/Texas A&M-Kingsville
Grand Canyon U./Arizona Christian?

I know not all of them could be FBS ready, but they could still be part of Big Sky football. Cal-San Diego, Azusa Pacific, East Bay State, Cal. State- LA, Tarleton State, Texas A&M-Commerce, Midwestern State, Lamar, West Texas A&M all could use a pro stadium or they have the stadium or a stadium close enough to be FBS.

Because when I think of Division 1 football prospects, I think of a 781-student NAIA school.

That is why I put a question mark by them. They are growing, but it would be awhile. If Arizona Western go from JC to a 4 year university, they could be in that spot.

If the AAC takes U Mass Southern Miss and Rice.
Expansion is over.
Also NMSU and Army would be the only true independent programs.

(07-28-2016 03:37 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 03:37 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  DavidSt is on pins and needles

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

As is NoDak!

Paging FloridaJag

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

jd,

I was just saying from the school's point of view. The Big West is the automatic preferred destination for any California DI-AAA school.

(07-28-2016 09:52 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Did the Big Ten talk expansion after they added Maryland and Rutgers? No. They talked divisions.

A commish never talks expansion when they already have that team. They talk divisions. This board knows that, but NDSU, SDSU, and Idaho posters are speaking a different language because they want to badly disprove what I have said.

The XDSU's posters passionately hate the idea of Big Sky expansion and the Idaho posters disbelieve it.

When Wichita St goes to a different FBS conference than the WAC, that will prove me wrong. There are no obvious expansion candidate for the Big Sky in the west. The only ones that are possible are in the Central Time Zone. Commish Williams expansion comments were not followed up in the least because most of the Big Sky reporters are clueless.

Right now Egriz is talking about the MWC taking them. They have to be FBS first.

For the record, I believe the Big Sky might very well add a couple more schools and then break into two conferences. It's actually what Idaho leadership seems to want. I just don't believe such a move necessarily leads to a new FBS conference. It would increase the odds of an FBS WAC ever happening from about 1% to about 3%, IMO.

I'm for it. I just don't believe very many, if any, schools are thinking that way.

(07-28-2016 07:36 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 05:10 PM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 04:06 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 03:56 PM)NoDak Wrote:  If NMSU gets an MWC or CUSA offer, that throws a wrench in plans. Wichita St and Mo St aren't getting offers from those conferences. The plan is dependent on the WAC, not Big Sky which is again talking expansion.

Funny that now NAU is being proposed for the MWC by dbackjon. Maybe for x-country, as they don't have facilities or money or fan support for anything else.

What is funny is that you have no ability to distinguish tongue-in-cheek from reality.

The Big Sky is talking expansion? Link please. Tomorrow begins the 3 day countdown to the master plan being put into place. Have we seen any press conferences scheduled yet or do they need to hold off since CUSA are now part of your master plan.

At times I think you and David St are either twins or the same person posting as two.

David St loves NDSU and SDSU, so he's more likely to be related to you.

So expansion doesn't mean expansion in your world? Crazy the things that they teach at XDSUs.

A commish talks expansion publicly, and she is not talking about her waistline or pocketbook.

Everyone knows the game you play. She mentioned the word expansion in discussing the addition of Idaho. She later used it when talking about her predecessor who thought bigger was always better. She pointedly stated that there is NO push among member schools to expand beyond Idaho. If she has discussed expansion in any other way please post the link.

It is now July 29. Any pressers announced?