I'm just curious as to how WAC fans feel about FCS football and considering D2 schools with FB for membership

FBS would be great, FCS no. No one gives a crap about FCS.

FBS or no football. FCS is a waste.

Where's the "WAC is never sponsoring FB again" option?

(01-18-2019 11:10 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  Where's the "WAC is never sponsoring FB again" option?

Its not there because it is an option per the NCAA rules. I guess the WAC would be smart to start FCS football. It would solidify the existence of the conference and give it the flexibility to have more D2 move ups that also have football. I wish the WAC started FBS football again and those FCS programs like the Montanas, Dakota schools and a few Texas schools would be perfect for FBS football conference but it won't happen. Been discussed to death.

If it helps attract members that want to be here, I’m all for it

FBS football is going to be next to impossible to start up. You'd need to recruit a bunch of Big Sky schools and they all seem happy with FCS. Bringing up D2s is more probable and some of those candidates need somewhere to put football.

Recruit 2 more teams and you can cut Chicago St loose and still have 10 members.

Recruit 4 more teams and you have a safety net should NMSU, UMKC or UTRGV depart.

There is plenty of room for 2 FCS conferences in the West.

I would like to see it happen.

No FCS, even more no on FBS.

The cost and the Title IX requirements would suck the life out of the sports we already have.

Only CBU, Dixie, Chicago State and Utah Valley are core WAC members going forward. Everyone else is ready to bolt when the time comes and has a realistic possibility at their conference of choice. When that offer would come could be over a decade away or within a week. A lot can and will change, but members not mentioned above would leave instantly for the invite they are not delusional in waiting for.

The WAC isn't stable. It's way better than it was but can't stop inviting members. FCS football will help it stabalize

(01-25-2019 12:41 AM)SeattleVandals Wrote:  Only CBU, Dixie, Chicago State and Utah Valley are core WAC members going forward. Everyone else is ready to bolt when the time comes and has a realistic possibility at their conference of choice. When that offer would come could be over a decade away or within a week. A lot can and will change, but members not mentioned above would leave instantly for the invite they are not delusional in waiting for.

The WAC isn't stable. It's way better than it was but can't stop inviting members. FCS football will help it stabalize

The question is, where are the other schools going? UTRGV is not being sought out by the Southland. They don't need more members. The WCC is not interested in expansion, so GCU and Seattle are not going there. UMKC had their divorce from the Summit in 2013 and there is no reason to remarry. UMKC brings nothing to the Summit and the Summit does nothing for UMKC. As long as NMSU is independent in football, the WAC is a good place to be.

As for WAC football, it may happen, but not to save the WAC. If it is going to happen, it would be similar to the Missouri Valley Football Conference (MVFC), which is separate from the MVC. So you could have a WAFC. The Big Sky would have to be on board with the idea and the WAFC would need an auto bid from the NCAA to the FCS playoffs. A second auto bid to the FCS playoffs for western schools would not be a bad thing. Kind of a long shot, but you never know.

(01-19-2019 05:39 PM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  

(01-18-2019 11:10 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  Where's the "WAC is never sponsoring FB again" option?

Its not there because it is an option per the NCAA rules. I guess the WAC would be smart to start FCS football. It would solidify the existence of the conference and give it the flexibility to have more D2 move ups that also have football. I wish the WAC started FBS football again and those FCS programs like the Montanas, Dakota schools and a few Texas schools would be perfect for FBS football conference but it won't happen. Been discussed to death.

I know in theory it "could" happen, my comment was more geared towards it "won't" happen.

(01-28-2019 11:19 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(01-25-2019 12:41 AM)SeattleVandals Wrote:  Only CBU, Dixie, Chicago State and Utah Valley are core WAC members going forward. Everyone else is ready to bolt when the time comes and has a realistic possibility at their conference of choice. When that offer would come could be over a decade away or within a week. A lot can and will change, but members not mentioned above would leave instantly for the invite they are not delusional in waiting for.

The WAC isn't stable. It's way better than it was but can't stop inviting members. FCS football will help it stabalize

The question is, where are the other schools going? UTRGV is not being sought out by the Southland. They don't need more members. The WCC is not interested in expansion, so GCU and Seattle are not going there. UMKC had their divorce from the Summit in 2013 and there is no reason to remarry. UMKC brings nothing to the Summit and the Summit does nothing for UMKC. As long as NMSU is independent in football, the WAC is a good place to be.

As for WAC football, it may happen, but not to save the WAC. If it is going to happen, it would be similar to the Missouri Valley Football Conference (MVFC), which is separate from the MVC. So you could have a WAFC. The Big Sky would have to be on board with the idea and the WAFC would need an auto bid from the NCAA to the FCS playoffs. A second auto bid to the FCS playoffs for western schools would not be a bad thing. Kind of a long shot, but you never know.

Yup, completely agree. I think the WAC is fairly stable based on your first paragraph. At least stable relative to a few years back. If I were a fan of a WAC school I would not be worried about the WAC dissolving any time soon. And more time will only help the WAC getting more D2 move ups.

Regarding the WAFC, it would have no issue getting a bid but it necessarily might not be an auto bid (per NCAA rules) initially. Any potential/hypothetical WAFC members would have a schedule full of BSC opponents, so 7+ D1 wins would more than likely get them an at large bid. Of course once the WAFC got auto bid status then it's all moot anyways. The BSC typically gets 3 bids (got 4 in 2018), so those bids would just be distributed between the BSC and the WAFC. Point being that I just don't see the WAFC not initially having an auto bid as a deal breaker for potential members. Plus, since the NCAA picks up the tab on travel they would probably like having another western FCS conference for 1st round scheduling purposes.

(01-29-2019 08:36 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 11:19 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(01-25-2019 12:41 AM)SeattleVandals Wrote:  Only CBU, Dixie, Chicago State and Utah Valley are core WAC members going forward. Everyone else is ready to bolt when the time comes and has a realistic possibility at their conference of choice. When that offer would come could be over a decade away or within a week. A lot can and will change, but members not mentioned above would leave instantly for the invite they are not delusional in waiting for.

The WAC isn't stable. It's way better than it was but can't stop inviting members. FCS football will help it stabalize

The question is, where are the other schools going? UTRGV is not being sought out by the Southland. They don't need more members. The WCC is not interested in expansion, so GCU and Seattle are not going there. UMKC had their divorce from the Summit in 2013 and there is no reason to remarry. UMKC brings nothing to the Summit and the Summit does nothing for UMKC. As long as NMSU is independent in football, the WAC is a good place to be.

As for WAC football, it may happen, but not to save the WAC. If it is going to happen, it would be similar to the Missouri Valley Football Conference (MVFC), which is separate from the MVC. So you could have a WAFC. The Big Sky would have to be on board with the idea and the WAFC would need an auto bid from the NCAA to the FCS playoffs. A second auto bid to the FCS playoffs for western schools would not be a bad thing. Kind of a long shot, but you never know.

Yup, completely agree. I think the WAC is fairly stable based on your first paragraph. At least stable relative to a few years back. If I were a fan of a WAC school I would not be worried about the WAC dissolving any time soon. And more time will only help the WAC getting more D2 move ups.

Regarding the WAFC, it would have no issue getting a bid but it necessarily might not be an auto bid (per NCAA rules) initially. Any potential/hypothetical WAFC members would have a schedule full of BSC opponents, so 7+ D1 wins would more than likely get them an at large bid. Of course once the WAFC got auto bid status then it's all moot anyways. The BSC typically gets 3 bids (got 4 in 2018), so those bids would just be distributed between the BSC and the WAFC. Point being that I just don't see the WAFC not initially having an auto bid as a deal breaker for potential members. Plus, since the NCAA picks up the tab on travel they would probably like having another western FCS conference for 1st round scheduling purposes.

If SUU and UNC don't put up a fight and they are given to the WAC, I wonder if the NCAA would give them a waiver period for an at large bid if they can be at 4 or 5 members initially. If Augustana can get in for football and Tarleton State finally accepts their invite, they'd be ready right there

(01-28-2019 11:19 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(01-25-2019 12:41 AM)SeattleVandals Wrote:  Only CBU, Dixie, Chicago State and Utah Valley are core WAC members going forward. Everyone else is ready to bolt when the time comes and has a realistic possibility at their conference of choice. When that offer would come could be over a decade away or within a week. A lot can and will change, but members not mentioned above would leave instantly for the invite they are not delusional in waiting for.

The WAC isn't stable. It's way better than it was but can't stop inviting members. FCS football will help it stabalize

The question is, where are the other schools going? UTRGV is not being sought out by the Southland. They don't need more members. The WCC is not interested in expansion, so GCU and Seattle are not going there. UMKC had their divorce from the Summit in 2013 and there is no reason to remarry. UMKC brings nothing to the Summit and the Summit does nothing for UMKC. As long as NMSU is independent in football, the WAC is a good place to be.

Yes, nothing is coming anytime soon for most of these schools, I'm just saying there is a realistic end point for them down the line Unlike Dixie, UVU, and Cal Baptist who appear to be in the WAC for decades to come. Though GCU might be as well. WCC would need to lose a significant amount of members at once before I think they'd agree to add the first non-Catholic school in league history since the Cal State days at the start of existence (besides BYU, obvious exception). GCU isn't close to WCC academic standards, let alone the recent for profit stuff I'm not knowledgeable enough to break down but get almost no conference wants a part of. It would depend on how many exceptions they're willing to give in everything non-athletics. If they were willing, I think GCU would be invited already just for the sake of making the WCC as strong as possible in basketball.

BYU is mormon school University of the Pacific is methodist Pepperdine is Church of Christ so the WCC has already set the precedent for inviting not Catholic schools into the WCC. BYU entered 2011 Pacific 2013 and Pepperdine 1955. Do I think GCU gets an invite soon? I don't but these 3 schools have paved a way for GCU to make an argument to get an invite.

(01-29-2019 03:18 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  BYU is mormon school University of the Pacific is methodist Pepperdine is Church of Christ so the WCC has already set the precedent for inviting not Catholic schools into the WCC. BYU entered 2011 Pacific 2013 and Pepperdine 1955. Do I think GCU gets an invite soon? I don't but these 3 schools have paved a way for GCU to make an argument to get an invite.

I don't know why everyone keeps thinking the WCC is looking to add or that GCU and Seattle fit the profile (not saying you are proposing this). Seattle definitely does more so than GCU. GCU is still very much tainted as a for profit school. Heck, Denver left the WAC due to their dislike of GCU's for profit status at the time.

The WCC just made huge concessions to keep Gonzaga. Now they are supposed to add more schools and take more bites out of the apple? I don't see it. I can find absolutely no reason why the WCC would want/need to add any schools.

(01-29-2019 03:30 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 03:18 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  BYU is mormon school University of the Pacific is methodist Pepperdine is Church of Christ so the WCC has already set the precedent for inviting not Catholic schools into the WCC. BYU entered 2011 Pacific 2013 and Pepperdine 1955. Do I think GCU gets an invite soon? I don't but these 3 schools have paved a way for GCU to make an argument to get an invite.

I don't know why everyone keeps thinking the WCC is looking to add or that GCU and Seattle fit the profile (not saying you are proposing this). Seattle definitely does more so than GCU. GCU is still very much tainted as a for profit school. Heck, Denver left the WAC due to their dislike of GCU's for profit status at the time.

The WCC just made huge concessions to keep Gonzaga. Now they are supposed to add more schools and take more bites out of the apple? I don't see it. I can find absolutely no reason why the WCC would want/need to add any schools.

First, GCU is not going to the WCC even if they got an invite. Period. GCU is very committed to the WAC.
Second, what do these posts have to do with WAC FCS football possibilities?
Third, why so much discussion about a "tainted" former for-profit institution? Hmm...

(01-29-2019 03:18 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  BYU is mormon school University of the Pacific is methodist Pepperdine is Church of Christ so the WCC has already set the precedent for inviting not Catholic schools into the WCC. BYU entered 2011 Pacific 2013 and Pepperdine 1955. Do I think GCU gets an invite soon? I don't but these 3 schools have paved a way for GCU to make an argument to get an invite.

You are correct I was under the impression they all related back to Catholic in some way.

Still, you're talking about a comparable situation to Pac 12 full of top 100 and elite Universities not inviting Boise State despite the athletic success. GCU can play off keeping out of the main school rankings but no school that scores highly would do that, it's to avoid the truth.

GCU would be in by now if they were a serious candidate. They'd raise the leagues profile immediately in statistical rankings. But the WCC is almost all majority top 100 insititutions, and I don't think anyone is lower than 130-something last I saw in the WCC (I remember seeing SU around #105 on that list).

I agree the WCC should add GCU for athletics, but they also would only be doing it to please Gonzaga basketball. They don't NEED GCU, so the amount of exceptions theyd have to make is a tough sell. While SU is the opposite, not brining anything but a mid-tier at best program to the WCC but fitting all other check boxes.

If it ever happens we will see. But I think in the WCCs current set up, they'd have expanded for the sake of better basketball already with GCU if they would make exceptions.

That also depends if the only possible flight risk, BYU, even gets replaced

(01-29-2019 04:31 PM)ProfScott Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 03:30 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  

(01-29-2019 03:18 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  BYU is mormon school University of the Pacific is methodist Pepperdine is Church of Christ so the WCC has already set the precedent for inviting not Catholic schools into the WCC. BYU entered 2011 Pacific 2013 and Pepperdine 1955. Do I think GCU gets an invite soon? I don't but these 3 schools have paved a way for GCU to make an argument to get an invite.

I don't know why everyone keeps thinking the WCC is looking to add or that GCU and Seattle fit the profile (not saying you are proposing this). Seattle definitely does more so than GCU. GCU is still very much tainted as a for profit school. Heck, Denver left the WAC due to their dislike of GCU's for profit status at the time.

The WCC just made huge concessions to keep Gonzaga. Now they are supposed to add more schools and take more bites out of the apple? I don't see it. I can find absolutely no reason why the WCC would want/need to add any schools.

First, GCU is not going to the WCC even if they got an invite. Period. GCU is very committed to the WAC.
Second, what do these posts have to do with WAC FCS football possibilities?
Third, why so much discussion about a "tainted" former for-profit institution? Hmm...

I was commenting on the ridiculous notion that 1) the WCC was even remotely looking to expand and 2) Seattle and GCU were prime candidates for expansion. These notions are mentioned in this thread, no?

No conference in the country would have taken GCU because of their for profit status. For whatever reason, it was a dark cloud that no one wanted to touch. Do you not believe this to be true? The WAC was and continues to be willing to take any warm body to keep the conference alive.

I'm not trying to bash GCU or poke you in the eye. I was trying to state what I considered to be facts. I like having GCU in the WAC and am glad they continue to improve. But man, you are starting to really make me dislike your school.