(04-08-2017 01:50 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(04-08-2017 11:10 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  If the student approved referendum language isn't specific to Big West then the UCSD admin doesn't need to sell anything to anybody. They just need to have the balls to make the move and swallow their pride in being with unlike institutions in the WAC.

The other question is will the WAC be ok with UCSD using it as a launching pad into the BW, because the WAC has to assume they are gone as soon as the transition period into D1 is over.

Technically they don't need to sell, the language said "dependent upon an invitation from a D1 conference such as the Big West." And yes the WAC already made a courtesy call long before this Big West decision.

But I think they owe it to the student body to sell the concept of the WAC, because the campaign literature was so laser focused on the Big West. It could look like a bait and switch. You want to keep the student body on your side. So you need to sell things like our schedules will include many Big West schools - which would be true.

There is no doubt the entire athletic department and even the athletes would be fine with the WAC, because of the increased prestige (and pay for the coaches and staff) in being D1. But the general student body which voted for the referendum needs to at least be ambivalent and not openly opposed to the WAC. That is the sell job they need to make.

Maybe Hurd will promise them they can host the basketball tourney each year. Wait, UMKC already......

Currently mobile....but not necessarily upwardly.

(04-07-2017 11:43 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 11:25 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 11:01 PM)Columbia Blue Wrote:  I'm just not seeing what exactly UCSD offers the WAC. Basically if invited they will come in with a D2 roster, and drag down the WAC's RPI while in transition. Not everybody can compete right out of D2 like GCU. As soon as they get acclimated to Division 1, and the kinks are worked out, they will jump to the Big West.

So in essence, the WAC is acting as kind of a triple AAA affiliate for a conference which is only marginally stronger than them (if at all).

UCSD is not joining the WAC. They have this laser focus on the Big West. They were not interested in the WAC seven years ago when they were rejected by the Big West. UCSD said at the time that they were not interested in any other D1 conference. They have not changed. They are still focused on the Big West.

It would take many years for UCSD to really be of any help to a conference. They are a terrific academic add and in a market that the WAC would love to be in, but adding a second D2 move up with CBU is not a good idea. Better to focus on D1 schools that might be willing to leave their conferences.

And which DI schools are those? There are plenty of DI's, but name one that would go to the WAC.

Sacramento State for the following reasons:

1. The WAC is also a better basketball conference. Better RPI, more upside. The Big Sky just lost one of their best coaches to a WAC school. That tells you all you need to know.

2. The WAC is a better Olympic sports conference. The Big Sky is a football conference that also plays basketball. They don't offer baseball or men's soccer. Sac State plays baseball in the WAC and men's soccer in the Big West. They could easily move their Olympic sports programs to the WAC.

3. Sacramento State needs to change the direction of their basketball program. They need a conference change (WAC or Big West), they need to build the Events Center to give the basketball program a decent venue to play in and recruit to. They need to spend more money on their basketball program. They are the only school in the Big Sky to have never made the NCAA tournament.

4. Leaving the Big Sky Conference will leave the BSC at an even 10 Olympic schools, a better number for basketball than 11 schools. They can keep their football program in the Big Sky similar to what UC Davis and Cal Poly currently are doing.

5. The markets and the travel are just better in the WAC for Sac State. Playing in a conference with two other California schools, direct flights to Seattle, Phoenix, Chicago and Salt Lake City.

Bottom line for Sac State is that this does not hurt the Big Sky and the only reason to be in the Big Sky is football.

(04-08-2017 02:05 PM)RunnerBall Wrote:  

(04-08-2017 01:50 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(04-08-2017 11:10 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  If the student approved referendum language isn't specific to Big West then the UCSD admin doesn't need to sell anything to anybody. They just need to have the balls to make the move and swallow their pride in being with unlike institutions in the WAC.

The other question is will the WAC be ok with UCSD using it as a launching pad into the BW, because the WAC has to assume they are gone as soon as the transition period into D1 is over.

Technically they don't need to sell, the language said "dependent upon an invitation from a D1 conference such as the Big West." And yes the WAC already made a courtesy call long before this Big West decision.

But I think they owe it to the student body to sell the concept of the WAC, because the campaign literature was so laser focused on the Big West. It could look like a bait and switch. You want to keep the student body on your side. So you need to sell things like our schedules will include many Big West schools - which would be true.

There is no doubt the entire athletic department and even the athletes would be fine with the WAC, because of the increased prestige (and pay for the coaches and staff) in being D1. But the general student body which voted for the referendum needs to at least be ambivalent and not openly opposed to the WAC. That is the sell job they need to make.

Maybe Hurd will promise them they can host the basketball tourney each year. Wait, UMKC already......

Currently mobile....but not necessarily upwardly.

I'd be all about a March tournament in San Diego!

(04-08-2017 02:41 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 11:43 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 11:25 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 11:01 PM)Columbia Blue Wrote:  I'm just not seeing what exactly UCSD offers the WAC. Basically if invited they will come in with a D2 roster, and drag down the WAC's RPI while in transition. Not everybody can compete right out of D2 like GCU. As soon as they get acclimated to Division 1, and the kinks are worked out, they will jump to the Big West.

So in essence, the WAC is acting as kind of a triple AAA affiliate for a conference which is only marginally stronger than them (if at all).

UCSD is not joining the WAC. They have this laser focus on the Big West. They were not interested in the WAC seven years ago when they were rejected by the Big West. UCSD said at the time that they were not interested in any other D1 conference. They have not changed. They are still focused on the Big West.

It would take many years for UCSD to really be of any help to a conference. They are a terrific academic add and in a market that the WAC would love to be in, but adding a second D2 move up with CBU is not a good idea. Better to focus on D1 schools that might be willing to leave their conferences.

And which DI schools are those? There are plenty of DI's, but name one that would go to the WAC.

Sacramento State for the following reasons:

1. The WAC is also a better basketball conference. Better RPI, more upside. The Big Sky just lost one of their best coaches to a WAC school. That tells you all you need to know.

2. The WAC is a better Olympic sports conference. The Big Sky is a football conference that also plays basketball. They don't offer baseball or men's soccer. Sac State plays baseball in the WAC and men's soccer in the Big West. They could easily move their Olympic sports programs to the WAC.

3. Sacramento State needs to change the direction of their basketball program. They need a conference change (WAC or Big West), they need to build the Events Center to give the basketball program a decent venue to play in and recruit to. They need to spend more money on their basketball program. They are the only school in the Big Sky to have never made the NCAA tournament.

4. Leaving the Big Sky Conference will leave the BSC at an even 10 Olympic schools, a better number for basketball than 11 schools. They can keep their football program in the Big Sky similar to what UC Davis and Cal Poly currently are doing.

5. The markets and the travel are just better in the WAC for Sac State. Playing in a conference with two other California schools, direct flights to Seattle, Phoenix, Chicago and Salt Lake City.

Bottom line for Sac State is that this does not hurt the Big Sky and the only reason to be in the Big Sky is football.

I will concede Sac St may be interested, but there is an issue with football and Sac St still plays in a Jr High gym, which doesn't even meet lowly Big Sky basketball standards.

(04-08-2017 03:13 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-08-2017 02:41 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 11:43 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 11:25 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 11:01 PM)Columbia Blue Wrote:  I'm just not seeing what exactly UCSD offers the WAC. Basically if invited they will come in with a D2 roster, and drag down the WAC's RPI while in transition. Not everybody can compete right out of D2 like GCU. As soon as they get acclimated to Division 1, and the kinks are worked out, they will jump to the Big West.

So in essence, the WAC is acting as kind of a triple AAA affiliate for a conference which is only marginally stronger than them (if at all).

UCSD is not joining the WAC. They have this laser focus on the Big West. They were not interested in the WAC seven years ago when they were rejected by the Big West. UCSD said at the time that they were not interested in any other D1 conference. They have not changed. They are still focused on the Big West.

It would take many years for UCSD to really be of any help to a conference. They are a terrific academic add and in a market that the WAC would love to be in, but adding a second D2 move up with CBU is not a good idea. Better to focus on D1 schools that might be willing to leave their conferences.

And which DI schools are those? There are plenty of DI's, but name one that would go to the WAC.

Sacramento State for the following reasons:

1. The WAC is also a better basketball conference. Better RPI, more upside. The Big Sky just lost one of their best coaches to a WAC school. That tells you all you need to know.

2. The WAC is a better Olympic sports conference. The Big Sky is a football conference that also plays basketball. They don't offer baseball or men's soccer. Sac State plays baseball in the WAC and men's soccer in the Big West. They could easily move their Olympic sports programs to the WAC.

3. Sacramento State needs to change the direction of their basketball program. They need a conference change (WAC or Big West), they need to build the Events Center to give the basketball program a decent venue to play in and recruit to. They need to spend more money on their basketball program. They are the only school in the Big Sky to have never made the NCAA tournament.

4. Leaving the Big Sky Conference will leave the BSC at an even 10 Olympic schools, a better number for basketball than 11 schools. They can keep their football program in the Big Sky similar to what UC Davis and Cal Poly currently are doing.

5. The markets and the travel are just better in the WAC for Sac State. Playing in a conference with two other California schools, direct flights to Seattle, Phoenix, Chicago and Salt Lake City.

Bottom line for Sac State is that this does not hurt the Big Sky and the only reason to be in the Big Sky is football.

I will concede Sac St may be interested, but there is an issue with football and Sac St still plays in a Jr High gym, which doesn't even meet lowly Big Sky basketball standards.

Yeah but it's on par with a lot of BW venues.

Katz has our hoops program at its ceiling and there is no need to expect more until an events center is built. No need to invest more or make any conference moves until facilities are addressed...

...that said I would take the WAC or even the bus league BW over the BSC in a heartbeat...in that order...

It's on par with Fullerton and UCR. That's pretty much it. The Hornet's nest vs Davis, Hawaii, Long Beach, UCSB?

Please.

(04-08-2017 05:42 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  It's on par with Fullerton and UCR. That's pretty much it. The Hornet's nest vs Davis, Hawaii, Long Beach, UCSB?

Please.

Sorry JD, but UCSB’s venue doesn’t belong on that list. It’s like CP, Fullerton, Rivertucky and may as well add Bako and Seattle to the list in that it’s just a larger version of Hornet Gym. UCSB has a great tradition but it’s venue is nothing special other than having ripped the named from a Mel Gibson flick.

Point being Hornet Gym would not be a sticking point for BW membership, it would fit right in with the BW bus league mantra.

(04-09-2017 12:54 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(04-08-2017 05:42 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  It's on par with Fullerton and UCR. That's pretty much it. The Hornet's nest vs Davis, Hawaii, Long Beach, UCSB?

Please.

Sorry JD, but UCSB’s venue doesn’t belong on that list. It’s like CP, Fullerton, Rivertucky and may as well add Bako and Seattle to the list in that it’s just a larger version of Hornet Gym. UCSB has a great tradition but it’s venue is nothing special other than having ripped the named from a Mel Gibson flick.

Point being Hornet Gym would not be a sticking point for BW membership, it would fit right in with the BW bus league mantra.

Hornet Gym might not be the sticking point, but that RPI definitely is. If the BW has rejected Bakersfield and UCSD multiple times within the last decade, Sac State would get the same treatment.

BTW, you left out Irvine and Northridge.

(04-09-2017 01:43 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(04-09-2017 12:54 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(04-08-2017 05:42 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  It's on par with Fullerton and UCR. That's pretty much it. The Hornet's nest vs Davis, Hawaii, Long Beach, UCSB?

Please.

Sorry JD, but UCSB’s venue doesn’t belong on that list. It’s like CP, Fullerton, Rivertucky and may as well add Bako and Seattle to the list in that it’s just a larger version of Hornet Gym. UCSB has a great tradition but it’s venue is nothing special other than having ripped the named from a Mel Gibson flick.

Point being Hornet Gym would not be a sticking point for BW membership, it would fit right in with the BW bus league mantra.

Hornet Gym might not be the sticking point, but that RPI definitely is. If the BW has rejected Bakersfield and UCSD multiple times within the last decade, Sac State would get the same treatment.

BTW, you left out Irvine and Northridge.

Not really. The rejection was also a clear indicator that the CSU's will not allow themselves to get outnumbered by the UC's in the BW. So if UCSD ever becomes a "must have", the BW membership will have to pinch their nose and accept one of Sac State or Bako...or SJSU (albeit less nose pinching) if they are in play later down the road.

Sorry about leaving off Irvine and the Matadump. My bad.

Bottom line regarding Sac State - until we find a place to land football, we aren't going anywhere. Big Sky will not "give" us a deal like Poly or the school down the road. We'd be happy to pack our bags and take our program elsewhere, but it ain't happening until we get the okay to do so.

(04-11-2017 11:12 AM)SJHornet Wrote:  Bottom line regarding Sac State - until we find a place to land football, we aren't going anywhere. Big Sky will not "give" us a deal like Poly or the school down the road. We'd be happy to pack our bags and take our program elsewhere, but it ain't happening until we get the okay to do so.

I think another financial catastrophe (and there will be one) might force our hand. A move to either WAC or BW would save us a significant clip on travel and lost time.

(04-13-2017 09:06 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(04-11-2017 11:12 AM)SJHornet Wrote:  Bottom line regarding Sac State - until we find a place to land football, we aren't going anywhere. Big Sky will not "give" us a deal like Poly or the school down the road. We'd be happy to pack our bags and take our program elsewhere, but it ain't happening until we get the okay to do so.

I think another financial catastrophe (and there will be one) might force our hand. A move to either WAC or BW would save us a significant clip on travel and lost time.

The WAC would bite. The BW not so much. Not when the only thing it gets in return is another RPI anchor. Basketball still matters, folks

I do see a possibility of Sac State joining the BW. But it would have to do something it has shown no stomach for - sponsor football again. Even then you'd still need at least one more full member and two affiliates, all of whom would be outside California.

Okay Hornets, assuming the Cal State - UC balance is maintained and the BW is okay with starting up football, who's getting the call for #12? Portland State? Northern Arizona? EWU? Weber State??

I sometimes wonder if Sac would have the ability (or cajones) to stage a revolt of sorts, and put together a "breakaway league". Even if they just get to the planning stages as a way force the Big Sky's hand, and allow them a deal like Poly and Davis received. When those two were admitted, the conference forbade Sac from receiving a similar deal, siting the importance of recruitment for Olympic sports. If Sac could get the WAC or Big West on board with the idea of fielding a new league, it could back the Sky off, giving Sac the freedom to take oly sports to a better regional conference. Personally, I'm ready to begin a new chalter away from the Montana Conference.

I know the Big West fan base look down on the RPI, but if we get our new event center, we will attract better talent, and our other sports have been strong in recent years. I personally see the Hornets going to the WAC. Even though the footprint is huge, those two California schools make it easier, and there are large markets to help grow the brand. Plus, Sac have been affiTe members for years now, and the relationship is probably strong. I think we'd jump at a chance to go BW, but as I've said time and time again, there seems to be bad blood on both sides.

JD, as for your question, it would be NAU or Portland St.

I don't even see the big deal about RPI in the Big West. It was a really bad conference the past few years save the Hawaii team that beat Cal. They have Riverside who is constantly one of the worst teams in the country. I personally see Sac State jumping to the WAC the first chance they get.

Poor conference RPI was cited by SDSU fans and local media as a reason to back out. Hasn't helped the MW out lately though. Hawaii media also said RPI could be important with regards to UCSD.

In 2015-2016 the BW was 16th in conference RPI with four top 100 teams. The year before, 15th with three top 100 teams. This year was an aberration. Hawaii won't stay down long. UCSB has a new coach, we shouldn't stay down long.

The WAC is still looking more promising especially at the top of the league with NMSU, GCU and Bakersfield. Might take a few years for the BW RPI to rebound.

We'll see.

How important is RPI for conferences that are one bid leagues? Unless a school is ranked in the top 25 nearly all season long, the Big West, WAC, and other mid majors are only sending one team to the tourney.

Does CS-Chico, CSLA, or San Francisco State have any desire to go D1? Any of them seem like good options for the WAC with a possible addition of UCSD.

(04-14-2017 11:01 PM)SJHornet Wrote:  How important is RPI for conferences that are one bid leagues? Unless a school is ranked in the top 25 nearly all season long, the Big West, WAC, and other mid majors are only sending one team to the tourney.

Becuase it's not. RPI is an easy out to use. SDSU used it on the BW, but the real reason was they didn't want their program prestige to take a hit by playing in glorified HS gyms. Not even Fisher could have landed top recruits with them knowing the type of digs they would be playing in.

The better reason for the BW to not expand is so they don't have to split their pie between 2 more mouths. More money is always a legit reason to stay put, and a believable one too.

And stop with the talk about the BW adding a pair of programs that require air travel. That's just total nonsense.

I like the WAC over the BW because it gives us regional exposure while the BW is just a CA also ran league. If athletics is truly viewed as an avenue to expand the brand, then being in a CA only league does nothing to benefit that concept. I like to look at Bako and their recent increase in athletic success and exposure. They wouldn't be anywhere near what they have become had they been accepted into the CA bus league. The WAC offers exposure (albeit minimal, but better than nothing) in major markets across the west coast...and it will increase when CBU comes on board.