The MWC sponsoring men's soccer would cause more shake-ups in the west. The Pac-12 right now has just six members with SDSU as an affiliate. If they leave the Pac is down to five members and I doubt they would want Incarnate Word or Houston Baptist.

(05-10-2017 12:34 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(05-10-2017 10:44 AM)RunnerBall Wrote:  

(05-10-2017 09:13 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  NMSU is not looking to jump ship to another Olympic sport conference. We will be in the WAC until a conference that accepts FBS football opens a slot for us which in reality may never happen. At that point NMSU would probably just drop football and then decide on it's conference future.

NMSU WILL NOT DROP FOOTBALL!
............
......What? I was just saving some Aggie poster the work of posting it.

Currently mobile....away from the house or on "the throne."

So considerate of you Runner.

I know, huh. Where's my board points for that?

Currently mobile....away from the house or on "the throne."

(05-10-2017 01:38 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  The MWC sponsoring men's soccer would cause more shake-ups in the west. The Pac-12 right now has just six members with SDSU as an affiliate. If they leave the Pac is down to five members and I doubt they would want Incarnate Word or Houston Baptist.

I'm sure they convince schools to start a program if they make it worth their while.

The Pac-12 will target Sac State as a replacement, even pay them a bonus.

I think the MWC will bring HBU with them. My hunch is IUW winds up in the Summit, but they might stay in the WAC as their contract is one year different than the other 4 affiliates, or go to the MWC. There will be takers.

Of note: contracts for SJSU, Air Force, UNLV and HBU cycle every two years. 2017-18 (2017 season) and 2018-19 (2018 season) are the next two, and the contracts probably were extended back in March. So 2019-2020 (2019 season) is the first one they would likely exit. UIW contract completes after this coming fall 2017-18, so they can be can be cut loose first.

Missouri Valley wins by adding Valpo, but should resist expanding to 12 teams

Quote:Valpo to the Valley is a victory for school and league alike.

The university presidents in the Missouri Valley Conference have done right by their league in salvaging the MVC's stature as best as possible in the wake of losing their most important member, Wichita State. The MVC, in essentially a month's time, narrowed its search and identified the best and most realistic replacement .

The Valley has endured the most detrimental departures in the past half-decade of any non-power conference. It's lost its two most important programs -- Creighton's understandable lure to the Big East in 2013 was the first big hit. This time around, pegging Valpo provides a more prominent replacement than Loyola-Chicago getting the nod after losing Creighton (no offense to Loyola, but this is indisputably true). This was a critical move for the long-term viability of the Missouri Valley as a potential/occasional two-bid league in the years to come.

Here's the reality: The Valley has been malleable for much of its existence. The league has been around for 110 years and in that time had 34 different members, a surprising figure for sure. (Only the Southern Conference has gone through more turnover.) For all of its charm and sporadic March success, the Missouri Valley's persisting legacy should be its adaptability. Valparaiso makes for a nice marriage, a beneficial union for both league and school, and ushers in a tweaked, if not slightly (and undeniably) downgraded era for the MVC.

"I think we've made a decision that is the best for the Missouri Valley right now in terms of keeping us relevant and competitive and the strength of our league," league commissioner Doug Elgin told me.

Fittingly, Valparaiso has proven to be as flexible over the decades as its new host conference. The school went to Division I in men's basketball in the late 1970s, and since then has managed consistency through four stages: independence, then to the Mid-Continent (which would become the Summit League), followed by the Horizon League and now the MVC.

Full Article: http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketb...-12-teams/

Much ado about nothing. There are no plans to start MWC Men's soccer. The WAC is not kicking anyone out of the conference in any sport. The speculation is entertaining, but there is nothing to base it on. It is just speculation. The last conference that should consider kicking anyone out is the WAC.

The MVC has already said they will continue to look at expansion over the next year. That could involve a number of schools in a number of conferences. So every mid-major conference has to be aware that they could be next.

The Horizon is down to the minimum of six baseball schools. Since they already have a target on their back, they should consider adding a 10th school that plays baseball. If they added IPFW, that drops the Summit down to five baseball schools and six men's soccer teams. UMKC, because they don't play baseball, does not help either the Summit or Horizon. The Summit adding New York Tech? LOL!

(05-10-2017 03:32 PM)ThunderDan49 Wrote:  

(05-10-2017 01:38 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  The MWC sponsoring men's soccer would cause more shake-ups in the west. The Pac-12 right now has just six members with SDSU as an affiliate. If they leave the Pac is down to five members and I doubt they would want Incarnate Word or Houston Baptist.

I'm sure they convince schools to start a program if they make it worth their while.

Good luck. USC can easily afford to, they just don't want to. Same for Oregon and likely Arizona.

(05-10-2017 03:41 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The Pac-12 will target Sac State as a replacement, even pay them a bonus.

I think the MWC will bring HBU with them. My hunch is IUW winds up in the Summit, but they might stay in the WAC as their contract is one year different than the other 4 affiliates, or go to the MWC. There will be takers.

Of note: contracts for SJSU, Air Force, UNLV and HBU cycle every two years. 2017-18 (2017 season) and 2018-19 (2018 season) are the next two, and the contracts probably were extended back in March. So 2019-2020 (2019 season) is the first one they would likely exit. UIW contract completes after this coming fall 2017-18, so they can be can be cut loose first.

They wouldn't go after SAC St for soccer, WSU has mens club soccer they would more than likely just bump that up to a varsity sports and add a sport for women if they have to.

WSU has budget issues, much like Cal. Those two schools are the least likely to add any sports for the next several years.

An affiliate buys you four years. That is the route I expect the Pac-12 to go.

(04-07-2017 12:44 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  UCSD Athletic Director Earl Edwards: “We are still going to pursue moving to Division I with the hope that things will change in the relatively near future.”
comment from the article writer
A fact-finding report published before May’s student referendum said UCSD must receive a Big West invite by Sept. 15, 2018, or the student approval is null and void.

However as you know I inquired into the matter and discovered the language of the referendum only specifies D-I, although the campaign literature says "such as the Big West" (the hedge is in there, although I think the intent was BW or bust).

The WAC now has 18 months to convince UCSD to join. If for no other reason than, when the Big West decides to expand they will already be D-I. “I think UC San Diego is still going to be very attractive as a Division I school at some point in time in the future,” Big West commissioner Dennis Farrell said. “I’m not here to tell them what they should do in the future. There’s nothing negative about UC San Diego. I can only say glowing, positive things about them.”

That sort of says, go get through the D-I transition with somebody else and then come to us.

Ask the AD
Release: Thursday 10/12/2017
by UCSD

http://athletics.ucsd.edu/ViewArticle.db...=211672742

So basically no change. Stuck in D2 for a long while for UCSD.

Edit: Also he is talking the the wrong group. UC's probably have no issue bringing UCSD in, it's the CSU Presidents he should be talking to. Typical UC arrogance.

(11-20-2017 02:54 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  So basically no change. Stuck in D2 for a long while for UCSD.

Edit: Also he is talking the the wrong group. UC's probably have no issue bringing UCSD in, it's the CSU Presidents he should be talking to. Typical UC arrogance.

one can think about it as if ucsd does not get into the big west that the wac would be a plan b...the wac would take ucsd as is...ucsd can go d1 with the wac and try for the big west later...

Must be nice to have schools obsessed with joining your conference rather than leaving it. There is no way in hell UC San Diego wants to join the WAC. I wish they would but I doubt it will happen.

(11-20-2017 10:31 PM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  Must be nice to have schools obsessed with joining your conference rather than leaving it. There is no way in hell UC San Diego wants to join the WAC. I wish they would but I doubt it will happen.

WAC is better off adding Azuza Pac than UCSD

(11-20-2017 02:54 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  So basically no change. Stuck in D2 for a long while for UCSD.

Edit: Also he is talking the the wrong group. UC's probably have no issue bringing UCSD in, it's the CSU Presidents he should be talking to. Typical UC arrogance.

I have always thought the opposition primarily came from the UC ADs. For the CSU schools UCSD makes little difference for their recruiting. Either a student/athlete is UC material or if they don't qualify they are CSU material. Very few overlap. So they don't much care.

But for the UC schools UCSD is a serious competitor for the D-I level athletes that qualify for UC admission. The way they look at it, UCSD would be a 5th mouth at the trough, and four is already too many.

UCSD would find it much easier to get into the WAC, since they would not be competing with those schools for athletes.

Please stop this. UCSD don't want to be in the WAC at all. They never will.

It's not what they want now, but their path to D-I.

They want the Big West, but until they convince UC ADs that they wont be competing with them for student athletes, they will find the Big West blocked.

(11-21-2017 01:20 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  It's not what they want now, but their path to D-I.

They want the Big West, but until they convince UC ADs that they wont be competing with them for student athletes, they will find the Big West blocked.

It's not the ADs. They all said yes to UC San Diego. It's the presidents and chancellors who decide here.

UCSD's best chance to land a Big West invitation is to join the WAC first and have some success at the D-I level. Be patient and smart and do what it takes to make themselves an attractive target. Too bad their administration doesn't see it that way.

(11-20-2017 11:07 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(11-20-2017 02:54 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  So basically no change. Stuck in D2 for a long while for UCSD.

Edit: Also he is talking the the wrong group. UC's probably have no issue bringing UCSD in, it's the CSU Presidents he should be talking to. Typical UC arrogance.

I have always thought the opposition primarily came from the UC ADs. For the CSU schools UCSD makes little difference for their recruiting. Either a student/athlete is UC material or if they don't qualify they are CSU material. Very few overlap. So they don't much care.

But for the UC schools UCSD is a serious competitor for the D-I level athletes that qualify for UC admission. The way they look at it, UCSD would be a 5th mouth at the trough, and four is already too many.

UCSD would find it much easier to get into the WAC, since they would not be competing with those schools for athletes.

C'mon Stu, you know the UCSD-BW issue is all about politics, specifically the CSU's not giving up the membership count advantage to the UCs. Recruiting has nothing to do with this, neither does academics.

UCSD needs to bring a CSU that the BW will find palatable. BW has said no to Bako multiple times so they are out...and even if there is a palatable and willing CSU that wants to tag along, the BW powers that be have to be ok with splitting an already dwindling pie an additional 2 ways.

Add another twist to the mix and the BW no doubt still thinks they can land a whale like SDSU. So they no doubt will hold up their noses at the thought of adding an SJSU (good academics, would only happen if FB is dropped and MW boots them) or Sac State (poor hoops tradition) along with UCSD.