(05-02-2022 09:46 AM)MemTGRS Wrote:  And you might really worry if you are Southern Utah. They were in the Summit League when they were all over the map with Centenary, Troy, and Central Connecticut State ---- then finally achieved their hope of the Big Sky. Would they then be rejected in a return request, too?

Southern Utah wasn't in the Mid-Con at the same time as Troy and CCSU. They were in at the same time as Buffalo and Youngstown State. I've never understood why they wanted to leave the Big Sky. It sounds like the conference you want to be in if you're a football-playing directional school in the Rocky Mountains.

(05-02-2022 02:47 PM)zibby Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 09:46 AM)MemTGRS Wrote:  And you might really worry if you are Southern Utah. They were in the Summit League when they were all over the map with Centenary, Troy, and Central Connecticut State ---- then finally achieved their hope of the Big Sky. Would they then be rejected in a return request, too?

Southern Utah wasn't in the Mid-Con at the same time as Troy and CCSU. They were in at the same time as Buffalo and Youngstown State. I've never understood why they wanted to leave the Big Sky. It sounds like the conference you want to be in if you're a football-playing directional school in the Rocky Mountains.

I have never figured that out, either.

(05-02-2022 10:43 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  The WAC should take a page out of the old MWC playbook and respond to the Southland’s attempt to flip back UIW by opening discussions with Houston Baptist and TAMU-Commerce. Those discussions don’t necessarily have to lead to invitations but they’ll at least send a message that the WAC doesn’t intend to lie back and be picked apart.

Commerce would have zero interest in the WAC due to the travel. I'm sure those talks already happened with the WAC prior to joining the Southland.

(05-02-2022 12:12 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If UIW does flip flop is there anyone in the D2 Lonestar likely to jump in and take that slot?

There's no one in the LSC interested at the moment. Maybe after a couple of years from now after the travel to the ridiculous new schools they just added in Oregon, Washington, Canada, etc. But as of now, no.

(05-02-2022 11:59 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 10:43 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  The WAC should take a page out of the old MWC playbook and respond to the Southland’s attempt to flip back UIW by opening discussions with Houston Baptist and TAMU-Commerce. Those discussions don’t necessarily have to lead to invitations but they’ll at least send a message that the WAC doesn’t intend to lie back and be picked apart.

Houston Baptist, that will show em! LMAO

If the WAC is willing to take the Southland schools that the Texas 4 intentionally left behind, that would only encourage them to leave the WAC for would what would be an improved Southland.

Quote:Officials at WAC, Southland and ASUN institutions, as well as conference offices, confirmed to me that low-level conversations have been had about additional ways the three leagues can work together. One idea that had been discussed would be to find ways to facilitate allowing any of their interested members to pursue FBS membership immediately, while maintaining membership in their current conferences for the rest of their sports. Those institutions would then enter into a scheduling agreement, seek to secure bowl invites, etc.

WAC FBS is still an option for the 3 conferences.

SFAU
Tarleton State
ACU
UTRGV

All could be the core FBS while Southern Utah and Dixie State be affiliates in Southland until they can grow their stadiums.

Lamar and McNeese State to WAC FBS as affiliates.

UCA, North Alabama, Kennesaw State, EKU and Austin Peay State as affiliates for football would make them 11 WAC FBS members.

This is out of Matt's article. If the three conferences work together to achieved this goal. I think this might pry some D2 schools who are not interested now to move up to D1 to join the Southland like West Texas A&M and Central Oklahoma. It would leave a path open for them in the future to join FBS.

(05-02-2022 02:11 PM)TallTexan Wrote:  For my money, the smart WAC move right now is to let UIW walk(idiotic add in the first place), and reach out to ASUN for a longer term commitment. 3-5 years for the UT/OU dust to settle would be good for both leagues.

I could see this arrangement working.

[quote='DavidSt' pid='18219566' dateline='1651537265']

Quote: I think this might pry some D2 schools who are not interested now to move up to D1 to join the Southland like West Texas A&M and Central Oklahoma. It would leave a path open for them in the future to join FBS.

There is zero chance WT is moving up anytime soon for any reason. Especially to go FBS.

(05-03-2022 08:30 AM)Lionfan Wrote:  [quote='DavidSt' pid='18219566' dateline='1651537265']

Quote: I think this might pry some D2 schools who are not interested now to move up to D1 to join the Southland like West Texas A&M and Central Oklahoma. It would leave a path open for them in the future to join FBS.

There is zero chance WT is moving up anytime soon for any reason. Especially to go FBS.

David is hell bent on WTAMU going to D1. He read an article 15 years ago about the possibility. Until WTAMU shuts down athletics, he will still talk about their D1 “potential” every chance he gets.

(05-03-2022 09:13 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(05-03-2022 08:30 AM)Lionfan Wrote:  [quote='DavidSt' pid='18219566' dateline='1651537265']

Quote: I think this might pry some D2 schools who are not interested now to move up to D1 to join the Southland like West Texas A&M and Central Oklahoma. It would leave a path open for them in the future to join FBS.

There is zero chance WT is moving up anytime soon for any reason. Especially to go FBS.

David is hell bent on WTAMU going to D1. He read an article 15 years ago about the possibility. Until WTAMU shuts down athletics, he will still talk about their D1 “potential” every chance he gets.

Give him a little credit. He will keep talking about it even if WTAMU shuts down athletics.

In theory they'd be a great D1 school. But there's no desire at all to move up. Maybe later on, but not now. They've been playing behind ACU, Commerce and Tarleton for years. This is their chance to be good now that they've all moved up. They want some football success more than they want to move up.

I'd be interested in hearing more about what happened between Augustana and the WAC. Matt Zimmer (of the Argus Leader) said he thought there was some fire to the smoke. Wonder if the WAC would backfill with them if UIW stays in the Southland.

(05-03-2022 11:09 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  I'd be interested in hearing more about what happened between Augustana and the WAC. Matt Zimmer (of the Argus Leader) said he thought there was some fire to the smoke. Wonder if the WAC would backfill with them if UIW stays in the Southland.

Why would they add them? They just tightened up their geography a bit when CSU and UMKC left, why add them now?

(05-03-2022 11:19 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(05-03-2022 11:09 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  I'd be interested in hearing more about what happened between Augustana and the WAC. Matt Zimmer (of the Argus Leader) said he thought there was some fire to the smoke. Wonder if the WAC would backfill with them if UIW stays in the Southland.

Why would they add them? They just tightened up their geography a bit when CSU and UMKC left, why add them now?

Because they're a warm body that plays football. Of course, this motivation could be moot because of changes to the NCAA rules or if the WAC-ASUN Challenge becomes permanent.

(05-02-2022 10:27 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 10:24 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  UTRGV is 100% committed to the WAC right now. If their leadership changes, well, maybe they revisit it, but they are where their school leaders want them to be right now.

But wouldn't that be because the WAC brought them Texas neighbor's? If those Texas neighbors move back to the old neighborhood wouldn't UTRGV wanna hop on board?

If EVERYBODY went back to the Southland? Okay, sure, that might change things. But that isn't what is likely to happen. I've had multiple ADs in this group flat out tell me "hell no" when I ask if they'd recommend leaving for the Southland. UTGRV's leadership, right now, is really pro-WAC.

(05-02-2022 04:28 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 11:59 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 10:43 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  The WAC should take a page out of the old MWC playbook and respond to the Southland’s attempt to flip back UIW by opening discussions with Houston Baptist and TAMU-Commerce. Those discussions don’t necessarily have to lead to invitations but they’ll at least send a message that the WAC doesn’t intend to lie back and be picked apart.

Houston Baptist, that will show em! LMAO

If the WAC is willing to take the Southland schools that the Texas 4 intentionally left behind, that would only encourage them to leave the WAC for would what would be an improved Southland.

Fair point. It’s a fine line to walk. But to be clear, I’m only suggesting discussions, not invitations. The discussions wouldn’t move beyond exploratory unless UIW actually decided to leave, at which point the question for the WAC would become whether the conference would be better off standing pat with the remaining 11 schools or trying to backfill with one of the Southland’s other Texas members. Would a straight trade of UIW for, say, TAMU-Commerce really make the conference worse off? Especially if it preserves the WAC’s ability to use divisional scheduling to control travel costs? I could be wrong but I don’t think the answer is a slam dunk either way.

(05-03-2022 02:25 PM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 10:27 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 10:24 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  UTRGV is 100% committed to the WAC right now. If their leadership changes, well, maybe they revisit it, but they are where their school leaders want them to be right now.

But wouldn't that be because the WAC brought them Texas neighbor's? If those Texas neighbors move back to the old neighborhood wouldn't UTRGV wanna hop on board?

If EVERYBODY went back to the Southland? Okay, sure, that might change things. But that isn't what is likely to happen. I've had multiple ADs in this group flat out tell me "hell no" when I ask if they'd recommend leaving for the Southland. UTGRV's leadership, right now, is really pro-WAC.

And UTRGV will always be pro-WAC because it was the only conference that took a quality chance at them after being shunned on three different occasions by Southland. Why would a new Southland want a resurgent UTRGV all of a sudden? $$$ no, travel partner for AM-CC nope, Football in 2025 LOL Nope. Being better positioned overall in improvements YES.

(05-03-2022 05:06 PM)WACfan86 Wrote:  

(05-03-2022 02:25 PM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 10:27 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 10:24 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  UTRGV is 100% committed to the WAC right now. If their leadership changes, well, maybe they revisit it, but they are where their school leaders want them to be right now.

But wouldn't that be because the WAC brought them Texas neighbor's? If those Texas neighbors move back to the old neighborhood wouldn't UTRGV wanna hop on board?

If EVERYBODY went back to the Southland? Okay, sure, that might change things. But that isn't what is likely to happen. I've had multiple ADs in this group flat out tell me "hell no" when I ask if they'd recommend leaving for the Southland. UTGRV's leadership, right now, is really pro-WAC.

And UTRGV will always be pro-WAC because it was the only conference that took a quality chance at them after being shunned on three different occasions by Southland. Why would a new Southland want a resurgent UTRGV all of a sudden? $$$ no, travel partner for AM-CC nope, Football in 2025 LOL Nope. Being better positioned overall in improvements YES.

Brand new conference commish is headed in a very different direction than prior leadership. I've got no idea if that changes anything UTRGV related, but I think it's safe to say anything that happened prior to new leadership in the Southland office doesnt necessarily still hold true today.

(05-04-2022 10:27 AM)Lionfan Wrote:  Brand new conference commish is headed in a very different direction than prior leadership. I've got no idea if that changes anything UTRGV related, but I think it's safe to say anything that happened prior to new leadership in the Southland office doesnt necessarily still hold true today.

I think the schools that left the Southland or are in the 'Southland footprint' yet in the WAC will tell you that there are still some concerns about the leadership.

Look at what's going on with league championship events - all the 'biggies' are in Lake Charles for the time being? Are the established (and successful) Division I programs that are not in the SLC going to be interested in making such an adjustment?

(05-03-2022 02:25 PM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 10:27 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(05-02-2022 10:24 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  UTRGV is 100% committed to the WAC right now. If their leadership changes, well, maybe they revisit it, but they are where their school leaders want them to be right now.

But wouldn't that be because the WAC brought them Texas neighbor's? If those Texas neighbors move back to the old neighborhood wouldn't UTRGV wanna hop on board?

If EVERYBODY went back to the Southland? Okay, sure, that might change things. But that isn't what is likely to happen. I've had multiple ADs in this group flat out tell me "hell no" when I ask if they'd recommend leaving for the Southland. UTGRV's leadership, right now, is really pro-WAC.

I'm glad to hear this. Have heard similar.

WAC might be a larger geographic league, and lost a little shine bc of UT/OU ripples, but it's still miles ahead of the Southland when it comes to meeting teams like SFA, ACU, & Tarleton's goals.