(12-15-2016 04:23 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  We better be following them out the door to the Sun Belt if this is going down.

Without WSU...is the MVC even better than the Sun Belt in basketball....

http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_conf_Men.html

And that's with WSU in the conference.

----

Without WSU, the Belt is probably better in basketball (or equivalent), IS better in baseball, is better in football, is improving in all three, and provides Missouri State with closer rivals than the MVC or MVFC.

Great idea and great travel partner for Tulsa.

Essentially it's MBb's Navy- a one sport team that fills out the West division and adds national attention and brand.

(12-15-2016 04:58 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  and provides Missouri State with closer rivals than the MVC or MVFC.

I guess that would be Ark St?

MO St is ... kinda far from everywhere. Other than Arkansas (Fayetteville) and Mizzou.

(12-15-2016 04:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I don't think the AAC do not want a repeat of a Big East fiasco a few years ago. Why add schools without football?

1. Because football isn't the only revenue sport.
2. The politics of a league with a single outlier (non-football WSU in AAC) are very very different than the politics of a league with two different groups under one tent (C7 + BEFC 2005-12).

(12-15-2016 04:58 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 04:23 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  We better be following them out the door to the Sun Belt if this is going down.

Without WSU...is the MVC even better than the Sun Belt in basketball....

http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_conf_Men.html

And that's with WSU in the conference.

----

Without WSU, the Belt is probably better in basketball (or equivalent), IS better in baseball, is better in football, is improving in all three, and provides Missouri State with closer rivals than the MVC or MVFC.

Who do you want to balance it out? New Mexico State?

Would Northern Iowa, Illinois State and Youngstown State approach the MAC?

Would the Dakota schools approach the MWC?

Wichita State would be a home run add (as would VCU - but that's another topic).

It would really help balance out the bottom of the AAC, which - without due respect to those programs - really lower the perception and strength of the league. It's a great travel partner for Tulsa, and within distance of many of the western schools.

(12-15-2016 05:24 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 04:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I don't think the AAC do not want a repeat of a Big East fiasco a few years ago. Why add schools without football?

1. Because football isn't the only revenue sport.
2. The politics of a league with a single outlier (non-football WSU in AAC) are very very different than the politics of a league with two different groups under one tent (C7 + BEFC 2005-12).

That's right. ONE single outlier won't cause friction. But I'm still puzzled as to why the AAC is not into VCU. They fit better from a geography and all-sports aspect,

(12-15-2016 05:52 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Would Northern Iowa, Illinois State and Youngstown State approach the MAC?

Would the Dakota schools approach the MWC?

Illinois St has approached the MAC in the past, but there are no openings. No way does Youngstown get a return phone call from the MAC.
I
The MWC would approach CUSA Texas schools or.FCS Calif schools well before the Dakotas or Montana.

(12-15-2016 03:52 PM)Wedge Wrote:  If Wichita State leaves, who replaces them in the MVC?

Saint Louis — maybe, but might still think they are "too good" for the MVC

SLU wants to be in an East Coast conference for student recruitment purposes. It's not a matter of thinking they're too good for the MVC. They turned down the MVC when the gap with the A10 was much smaller.

(12-15-2016 05:57 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 05:24 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 04:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I don't think the AAC do not want a repeat of a Big East fiasco a few years ago. Why add schools without football?

1. Because football isn't the only revenue sport.
2. The politics of a league with a single outlier (non-football WSU in AAC) are very very different than the politics of a league with two different groups under one tent (C7 + BEFC 2005-12).

That's right. ONE single outlier won't cause friction. But I'm still puzzled as to why the AAC is not into VCU. They fit better from a geography and all-sports aspect,

I think it's more likely a lack of interest from VCU than from the AAC. Unlike WSU they aren't unhappy with their conference affiliation. WSU wants out of the MVC badly and would be a great addition to the AAC.

I would be okay with this provided that the AAC has the ability to require the Shockers to field FBS football and if Wichita St can't comply they can be voted out of the conference.

(12-15-2016 06:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I would be okay with this provided that the AAC has the ability to require the Shockers to field FBS football and if Wichita St can't comply they can be voted out of the conference.

The AAC won't take a newbie football team like CUSA or the Sun Belt.

My reading of the Wichita State president is that he still wants fb, but he'did be willing to go the WAC route for it. First FCS and then FBS. When Wichita St fb has progressed sufficiently, the AAC will take their FB.

This is my WAC fb lineup:

South
UTRGV
NMSU
Sam Houston St
Lamar
Wichita St
MO St (bb stays in the mVC)
UMKC (non fb)

North
Idaho
EWU
Montana
Montana St
Weber St
UND
Denver (non fb)

The rest of the WAC gets offers from the Big Sky and the Big Sky becomes a west coast conference (GCU, Bake, UVU, and Seattle to the BSC).

There is a reason that Chicago St wants to start fb to stay in the good graces of the WAC and a reason that UND's President has said a conference change may be imminent to help UND be the pre-eminent school in the upper plains.

(12-15-2016 06:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I would be okay with this provided that the AAC has the ability to require the Shockers to field FBS football and if Wichita St can't comply they can be voted out of the conference.

Why? We have absolutely no desire to add a newbie Wichita St football program to the AAC. That's the exact kind of move that has caused a lot of damage to CUSA. WSU's value lies in basketball. Im just fine if they never add football.

(12-15-2016 05:24 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 04:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I don't think the AAC do not want a repeat of a Big East fiasco a few years ago. Why add schools without football?

1. Because football isn't the only revenue sport.
2. The politics of a league with a single outlier (non-football WSU in AAC) are very very different than the politics of a league with two different groups under one tent (C7 + BEFC 2005-12).

I'll add a 3rd. Wichita has shown some interest in eventually (re)adding FBS football, which would negate the argument altogether.

That being said, this sounds like literally a men's basketball-only membership. I honestly can't imagine that's right that it's just an all sports mutually sponsored but football membership that's being discussed.

(12-15-2016 05:53 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Wichita State would be a home run add (as would VCU - but that's another topic).

No, no, no on VCU.

Wichita State is being considered because it helps balance the AAC West/East divisions for all sports with the additional benefit of bringing quality basketball and baseball.

VCU isn't leaving GWU, GMU and Richmond in the A10 for the AAC nor would the AAC be interested in adding another eastern member because it screws up the divisions. There is no motivation on either party to consider it.

Think travel costs.

Wichita State is in a travel situation that might actually be better for it if it could join the AAC.

VCU would have to greatly increase travel to join the AAC.

The next AAC TV deal may be nice BUT the non-FB schools will be getting a tiny slice of it and can't really benefit that way. Wichita could benefit in recruiting and travel with the AAC, VCU its going to hurt.

(12-15-2016 07:53 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 05:24 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 04:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I don't think the AAC do not want a repeat of a Big East fiasco a few years ago. Why add schools without football?

1. Because football isn't the only revenue sport.
2. The politics of a league with a single outlier (non-football WSU in AAC) are very very different than the politics of a league with two different groups under one tent (C7 + BEFC 2005-12).

I'll add a 3rd. Wichita has shown some interest in eventually (re)adding FBS football, which would negate the argument altogether.

That being said, this sounds like literally a men's basketball-only membership. I honestly can't imagine that's right that it's just an all sports mutually sponsored but football membership that's being discussed.

That's exactly what I was thinking when I read the article. No way they are just a basketball-only member, the MVC would not allow it. Wichita may have designs for football, so the AAC better think long and hard if that would be something they're willing to accept. VCU and St. Louis don't have any football ambition.

What other sport has divisions in the AAC besides football? I don't think this is geography related so much as it is about adding basketball strength.

Wichita's football ambition is just to get into a better conference. If they get into AAC without football, I don't think they will add unless the AAC makes them.

(12-15-2016 09:03 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Wichita's football ambition is just to get into a better conference. If they get into AAC without football, I don't think they will add unless the AAC makes them.

Football gets them on the radar in Texahoma much more than basketball does. Getting into student recruiting areas like the metroplex and Houston is a big motivation for the conference change. Football would magnify the impact.

The Koch Brothers want and need a more technical and bigger WSU for its corporate well being. Wichita St has financing already lined up for fb.

Wichita St'S President has said that he be willing to be a member of an FCS conference now, but wants FBS in the future. The MVFC won't give Wichita a slot if they are moving out. The WAC needs to be FCS first and FBS later, perfect for a Wichita St budding fb program. UTRGV is also on the same time line. Who else would give those two programs FBS slots?

I think the AAC should add Wichita St. with the caveat that their football (if they add it) will never play in the conference. The old BE was able to stop schools from moving up and the AAC can too.