I'll believe it when I see it. That CollegeSportsInfo site is another speculative non stop conference realignment theory site and if you read it most of their scenarios they had never have and never will happen. The Slummit is mad at UMKC, period. UMKC has nothing to offer the Slummit. UMKC has horrible teams. The WAC needs to keep focusing on the west and try to convince Big Sky teams and/or some Missouri Valley Football Conference teams to become FBS and then bring all their programs to the WAC, or convince some more Cal Baptist NON PROFIT type schools to come over. Any more for profit schools and the WAC will turn more into a laughingstock. The romance the media has with GCU will soon end. Trust me, behind closed doors the university educational system thinks GCU is a joke and although they talk well of GCU because of NBA Majerle and Colangelo clout, no one wants them either in their conference. That being said, I believe in the rivalry between NMSU and GCU. Geography wise its awesome and GCUs obsession with beating NMSU is entertaining. GCUs athletics are legit in all sports and the guys that post here that are GCU fans are civil, have knowledge, and are reasonable. Too bad the real reason for the façade of their athletics program and an on campus students which they are promoting is just to advertise it's online for profit product. Back to UMKC. Both UMKC and Chicago State, unless the Slummit becomes desperate, will be in the WAC for a long long time. I'm hoping our football program is legit and is invited by either Conf USA or the MWC. Until then, I like the WAC, especially since it is getting better and more legit. Just need more teams.
Serious question, why would a conference want UMKC? They don't draw and don't win. Being in a major market does nothing for TV contracts/numbers for small conferences. What does UMKC offer a conference that is supposedly "better" than the WAC?
(10-27-2017 11:50 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote: [ -> ]I'll believe it when I see it. That CollegeSportsInfo site is another speculative non stop conference realignment theory site and if you read it most of their scenarios they had never have and never will happen. The Slummit is mad at UMKC, period. UMKC has nothing to offer the Slummit. UMKC has horrible teams. The WAC needs to keep focusing on the west and try to convince Big Sky teams and/or some Missouri Valley Football Conference teams to become FBS and then bring all their programs to the WAC, or convince some more Cal Baptist NON PROFIT type schools to come over. Any more for profit schools and the WAC will turn more into a laughingstock. The romance the media has with GCU will soon end. Trust me, behind closed doors the university educational system thinks GCU is a joke and although they talk well of GCU because of NBA Majerle and Colangelo clout, no one wants them either in their conference. That being said, I believe in the rivalry between NMSU and GCU. Geography wise its awesome and GCUs obsession with beating NMSU is entertaining. GCUs athletics are legit in all sports and the guys that post here that are GCU fans are civil, have knowledge, and are reasonable. Too bad the real reason for the façade of their athletics program and an on campus students which they are promoting is just to advertise it's online for profit product. Back to UMKC. Both UMKC and Chicago State, unless the Slummit becomes desperate, will be in the WAC for a long long time. I'm hoping our football program is legit and is invited by either Conf USA or the MWC. Until then, I like the WAC, especially since it is getting better and more legit. Just need more teams.
Not sure how a rant against GCU's for-profit status happened on this UMKC joining the Summit post, but it was entertaining.
(10-27-2017 01:47 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote: [ -> ]Serious question, why would a conference want UMKC? They don't draw and don't win. Being in a major market does nothing for TV contracts/numbers for small conferences. What does UMKC offer a conference that is supposedly "better" than the WAC?
(10-27-2017 11:50 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote: [ -> ]I'll believe it when I see it. That CollegeSportsInfo site is another speculative non stop conference realignment theory site and if you read it most of their scenarios they had never have and never will happen. The Slummit is mad at UMKC, period. UMKC has nothing to offer the Slummit. UMKC has horrible teams. The WAC needs to keep focusing on the west and try to convince Big Sky teams and/or some Missouri Valley Football Conference teams to become FBS and then bring all their programs to the WAC, or convince some more Cal Baptist NON PROFIT type schools to come over. Any more for profit schools and the WAC will turn more into a laughingstock. The romance the media has with GCU will soon end. Trust me, behind closed doors the university educational system thinks GCU is a joke and although they talk well of GCU because of NBA Majerle and Colangelo clout, no one wants them either in their conference. That being said, I believe in the rivalry between NMSU and GCU. Geography wise its awesome and GCUs obsession with beating NMSU is entertaining. GCUs athletics are legit in all sports and the guys that post here that are GCU fans are civil, have knowledge, and are reasonable. Too bad the real reason for the façade of their athletics program and an on campus students which they are promoting is just to advertise it's online for profit product. Back to UMKC. Both UMKC and Chicago State, unless the Slummit becomes desperate, will be in the WAC for a long long time. I'm hoping our football program is legit and is invited by either Conf USA or the MWC. Until then, I like the WAC, especially since it is getting better and more legit. Just need more teams.
Not sure how a rant against GCU's for-profit status happened on this UMKC joining the Summit post, but it was entertaining.
Dancing, you are losing it. Not sure why you went off on GCU regarding UMKC leaving the WAC. Crazy in the club...
(10-27-2017 03:57 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote: [ -> ]Not GCU and CSUB went to the NIT Final 4. Again, just interested on what UMKC offers, not what the other 7 schools do or don't
(10-27-2017 03:57 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote: [ -> ]Not GCU and CSUB went to the NIT Final 4. Again, just interested on what UMKC offers, not what the other 7 schools do or don't
I beg to differ. I think that sentiment is true for majors, who if expected to go dancing and don't are let down. But for mids like CSUB (many/most WAC schools?) They can get their name out there in a positive way. Going deeper sure helped. CSUB (and the WAC to an extent) got some pretty good press out of that run. Also, locally season ticket sales spiked. Barnes also reported a rise in interest from potential recruits. So, its not like it was without benefit, as you imply.
Quick question. How would return back to Summit affect recruiting? Would UMKC be working with a significantly different market for recruits, or does WAC membership open other doors to them from different regions?
I meant in respect to other conferences. Sure a deep run and I was rooting for CSUB is good for the program itself, but generates no revenue to other conference members like a tournament win
As far as recruiting we are mostly KC, St Louis, Oklahoma, and Chicago. The only player we have had from California went back there and became 2nd team MWC this year.
Either way the only "source" for UMKC going back to the Summit is one tweet from a 850 follower college realignment twitter account with no sources. Not believing it right now.
The article is dated 9/14, but it's actually earlier since it mentions that Luppino will present his report to the faculty Senate on 9/9. Below is a description of the task force objectives. (It's about costs savings)
Quote:The CIE Athletics Task Force addresses three primary questions. The first is whether UMKC should continue to have Intercollegiate Athletics and what level of subsidy for the department should come from general revenues.
The second is whether UMKC should drop to a lower division or continue as a NCAA Division I. If we should drop, then what is the best fit and why? And lastly, if the school decides to remain in Division I, should switching conferences be considered?
For a timing note, the next Board of Trustees meeting is November 14th.
The three things it would do for the Summit.
1) make them feel better after losing IUPUI
2) fills a geographic hole for ORU (Tulsa), Denver, and Omaha
3) moves summit to 10 members for better scheduling (even numbers)
10 for MBB, WBB, WVB, WS, MT, 8 for SB, still 6 for BB
Doesn't mean it will happen. But this does make sense. Don't know if it will save the $500K UMKC is hoping to save - they are targeting a 20% reduction in travel costs (CBU joining doesn't help).
******* late comment *******
Were UMKC to leave the WAC, the biggest impact would be tennis, where the league would fall to 5 schools, this might impact individual qualifying (not sure). Scheduling I assume could be double round robin to get 8 matches. The only independent is Binghamton's women (men are in the MAC). Time to get to work on APU.
The article is dated 9/14, but it's actually earlier since it mentions that Luppino will present his report to the faculty Senate on 9/9. Below is a description of the task force objectives. (It's about costs savings)
Quote:The CIE Athletics Task Force addresses three primary questions. The first is whether UMKC should continue to have Intercollegiate Athletics and what level of subsidy for the department should come from general revenues.
The second is whether UMKC should drop to a lower division or continue as a NCAA Division I. If we should drop, then what is the best fit and why? And lastly, if the school decides to remain in Division I, should switching conferences be considered?
For a timing note, the next Board of Trustees meeting is November 14th.
The three things it would do for the Summit.
1) make them feel better after losing UIPUI
2) fills a geographic hole for ORU (Tulsa), Denver, and Omaha
3) moves summit to 10 members for better scheduling (even numbers)
10 for MBB, WBB, WVB, WS, MT, 8 for SB, still 6 for BB
Doesn't mean it will happen. But this does make sense. Don't know if it will save the $500K UMKC is hoping to save.
******* late comment *******
Were UMKC to leave the WAC, the biggest impact would be tennis, where the league would fall to 5 schools, this might impact individual qualifying (not sure). Scheduling I assume could be double round robin to get 8 matches. The only independent is Binghamton's women (men are in the MAC). Time to get to work on APU.
