Need to probably put Denver and Seattle in the WAC column. By most accounts, they appear certain to be invited to help give the WAC a stronger core for most autobids.

(09-28-2010 05:35 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Need to probably put Denver and Seattle in the WAC column. By most accounts, they appear certain to be invited to help give the WAC a stronger core for most autobids.

it would be good for Denver and great for the Sun Belt.

Football brings in most of the money.

(09-28-2010 10:43 AM)AtlantaJag Wrote:  I wonder if the WAC will require Denver to add baseball to join. That's one of the sports in which they want to retain their automatic bid and Denver should, in my opinion, bring everything else possible to the table if they don't have football.

The WAC could always invite Utah Valley for baseball if Utah Valley doesn't join the Big Sky and the Great West conference goes under. I feel though if they get any of the Texas schools they should have no issues with baseball. Seattle could open up the possibility of playing in the Mariners' stadium should the WAC find a way to make it work (such as the ACC's plans to play their baseball tournament at Fenway Park in Boston).

You can't compare the rankings because all of those WAC schools' rankings are being brought UP by playing Fresno, Boise, and Nevada last year. Sagarin has a rolling ranking and last year's strength of schedule is still being factored in and will continue to be a factor. Strength of schedule alone can add 20 to 30 points onto any of these team's rankings. If you remove the three strongest schools, the schedule strength will go DRASTICALLY down and thus the rankings of those teams will go way down. NMSU, USU, Idaho, and SJSU have long suffered in Div I. La Tech has had some good years and some really bad ones. Hawaii was brough back to life by June Jones and left on a ventilator when he came to SMU.

From the rankings that you have used - we would be about even with the new WAC if you were to use THIS year's numbers. In the new WAC, those team rankings will be signifiantly lower because the three teams that are ranked in the top 80 will be leaving the conference. It is really like comparing apples to giraffes. The Belt will be ahead of the new WAC, without a doubt. But both conferences could be behind the MAC and even the Colonial (just being honest guys). We are just happy that we won't be the absolute shitiest anymore.

I like the new name as Big Wacked Out Land conference.

(09-28-2010 09:21 PM)stebo Wrote:  You can't compare the rankings because all of those WAC schools' rankings are being brought UP by playing Fresno, Boise, and Nevada last year. Sagarin has a rolling ranking and last year's strength of schedule is still being factored in and will continue to be a factor. Strength of schedule alone can add 20 to 30 points onto any of these team's rankings. If you remove the three strongest schools, the schedule strength will go DRASTICALLY down and thus the rankings of those teams will go way down. NMSU, USU, Idaho, and SJSU have long suffered in Div I. La Tech has had some good years and some really bad ones. Hawaii was brough back to life by June Jones and left on a ventilator when he came to SMU.
From the rankings that you have used - we would be about even with the new WAC if you were to use THIS year's numbers. In the new WAC, those team rankings will be signifiantly lower because the three teams that are ranked in the top 80 will be leaving the conference. It is really like comparing apples to giraffes. The Belt will be ahead of the new WAC, without a doubt. But both conferences could be behind the MAC and even the Colonial (just being honest guys). We are just happy that we won't be the absolute shitiest anymore.

So in other words, the WAC is on the way down and the Sun Belt is on the way up...me likey. Now if we can just get over that MAC hump we'll be the #3 non-AQ conference in a short 10 year period. Maybe we'll poach a WAC school or two once they are SBC material.

(09-29-2010 09:00 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(09-28-2010 09:21 PM)stebo Wrote:  You can't compare the rankings because all of those WAC schools' rankings are being brought UP by playing Fresno, Boise, and Nevada last year. Sagarin has a rolling ranking and last year's strength of schedule is still being factored in and will continue to be a factor. Strength of schedule alone can add 20 to 30 points onto any of these team's rankings. If you remove the three strongest schools, the schedule strength will go DRASTICALLY down and thus the rankings of those teams will go way down. NMSU, USU, Idaho, and SJSU have long suffered in Div I. La Tech has had some good years and some really bad ones. Hawaii was brough back to life by June Jones and left on a ventilator when he came to SMU.
From the rankings that you have used - we would be about even with the new WAC if you were to use THIS year's numbers. In the new WAC, those team rankings will be signifiantly lower because the three teams that are ranked in the top 80 will be leaving the conference. It is really like comparing apples to giraffes. The Belt will be ahead of the new WAC, without a doubt. But both conferences could be behind the MAC and even the Colonial (just being honest guys). We are just happy that we won't be the absolute shitiest anymore.

So in other words, the WAC is on the way down and the Sun Belt is on the way up...me likey. Now if we can just get over that MAC hump we'll be the #3 non-AQ conference in a short 10 year period. Maybe we'll poach a WAC school or two once they are SBC material.

I don't know about that, I'd rather we maintain our 'separation'

(09-21-2010 01:06 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Purportedly the WAC is talking to UTSA, Tex State, Lamar and maybe even Sam Houston along with Montana and maybe Montana State maybe Portland, SacSt, Cal-Davis, and Cal-Poly along with Denver and Seattle.

Right now the WAC is 5 Big West refugees plus Hawaii. Adding a Southland spin to the collection of former Big West and Big Sky schools might uh be interesting.

The WAC is desperate. Why not go after Morehead State too? Ivy Tech might be wanting to join as well. Also seems like I remember reading a few months ago that Hawaii was looking at going independent in football.

Why don't they make a push for Grambling? They would really help out Loser Tech.

(09-29-2010 02:30 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  Why don't they make a push for Grambling? They would really help out Loser Tech.

Has there ever been a HBCU in the FBS?

(09-29-2010 02:34 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(09-29-2010 02:30 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  Why don't they make a push for Grambling? They would really help out Loser Tech.

Has there ever been a HBCU in the FBS?

HBCU History With I-A Football


@ Tennessee State was actually the first HBCU to make a go of it as a I-A team in the early 1980s after many HBCUs had moved up to Division One, then opted to compete at the I-AA level.

The Tigers, who made their bones as an independent for many years, most notably during the reign of Hall of Fame coach “Big John” Merritt, becoming the scourge of Black College football with tons of future NFL talent, eventually moved to I-AA before joining the Ohio Valley Conference.

@ Alabama State was the next HBCU to seriously consider a leap to major college status, hiring former Temple head coach Ron Dickerson to head up their program in the 1990s. But financial concerns and waning support from the Hornets’ fan base ended that attempt.

@ North Carolina A&T, with Bill Hayes at the helm in the late 1990s, undertook an extensive study of prospects for moving on up, but despite a rock-solid action plan, the Aggies never moved forward.

@ Florida A&M, which explored possibilities in the 1980s when Bragg Stadium was expanded following their I-AA title win (1978) and their upset of Miami (1979), at the time saw Division I-AA as a stepping stone to major college status. But leadership changes put that idea on hold until the 1990s when consultants were called in, only to have the plans shelved for a second time.

In 2003, FAMU applied for Division I-A status in June of that year and played the next two seasons (2003, 2004) as a I-A independent, taking on a full-fledged I-A schedule in 2004. But financial concerns and lack of a conference affiliation forced university officials to pull the plug.

At this point, I imagine most HBCUs wouldn't have the alumni support as they'd likely have to leave behind one or two of their "Classics" if they were to make the jump.

(09-29-2010 03:26 PM)TU94 Wrote:  

(09-29-2010 02:34 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(09-29-2010 02:30 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  Why don't they make a push for Grambling? They would really help out Loser Tech.

Has there ever been a HBCU in the FBS?

HBCU History With I-A Football


@ Tennessee State was actually the first HBCU to make a go of it as a I-A team in the early 1980s after many HBCUs had moved up to Division One, then opted to compete at the I-AA level.

The Tigers, who made their bones as an independent for many years, most notably during the reign of Hall of Fame coach “Big John” Merritt, becoming the scourge of Black College football with tons of future NFL talent, eventually moved to I-AA before joining the Ohio Valley Conference.

@ Alabama State was the next HBCU to seriously consider a leap to major college status, hiring former Temple head coach Ron Dickerson to head up their program in the 1990s. But financial concerns and waning support from the Hornets’ fan base ended that attempt.

@ North Carolina A&T, with Bill Hayes at the helm in the late 1990s, undertook an extensive study of prospects for moving on up, but despite a rock-solid action plan, the Aggies never moved forward.

@ Florida A&M, which explored possibilities in the 1980s when Bragg Stadium was expanded following their I-AA title win (1978) and their upset of Miami (1979), at the time saw Division I-AA as a stepping stone to major college status. But leadership changes put that idea on hold until the 1990s when consultants were called in, only to have the plans shelved for a second time.

In 2003, FAMU applied for Division I-A status in June of that year and played the next two seasons (2003, 2004) as a I-A independent, taking on a full-fledged I-A schedule in 2004. But financial concerns and lack of a conference affiliation forced university officials to pull the plug.

memory and a quick look at cfbdatawarehouse.com, makes me question the accuracy of that article...according to cfbdatawarehouse.com, famu was a 1aa independent for one year (2004), NEVER 1A, and did play several 1a programs, but also had a significant number of 1aa programs on the schedule. Tennessee State was Div1 for one year and then 1A a few years (77-80) but even then there's no way the schedules for the nashville hbcu could be called 1A. Not sure what the schedule requirements were back then but the tigers schedule was like it is now, hbcus and other 1aas and an occasional lower level 1a program.

Forgive my ignorance but what is a HBCU?

(09-29-2010 05:02 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  Forgive my ignorance but what is a HBCU?

Here you go: http://hbcu.com/

(09-29-2010 05:02 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  Forgive my ignorance but what is a HBCU?

it stands for Historically Black Colleges and Universities. the SWAC is an HBCU Conference.