The new WAC and their current standings. At least their records will improve with the changes.

Hawaii 5-1 7-3
Louisiana Tech 2-3 3-6
Idaho 1-3 4-5
Utah State 1-4 3-6
New Mexico State 1-4 2-7
San Jose State 0-4 1-8
Texas State 1-4 4-5
UTSA

That lineup would have the #11 ranked Sagarin numbers using current ratings.

In case you didn't know, the SBC is at #17

Even if you gave UTSA a 0 rating, it would just give the "new" WAC about the same numbers as the current SBC.

The defection of Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada to the Mountain West and the upcoming announcement of the addition Texas State and UT-San Antonio (and Denver for basketball) really changes the complextion of college athletics in the Southwest. Is it me or are these changes going to pole vault the Sun Belt Conference over the whacked-out WAC in strength and quality? It seems the Sun Belt has already overtaken the MAC.

Screw the Sagarins. I wouldn't wipe my *&% with them.

(11-11-2010 01:37 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  The new WAC and their current standings. At least their records will improve with the changes.

Hawaii 5-1 7-3
Louisiana Tech 2-3 3-6
Idaho 1-3 4-5
Utah State 1-4 3-6
New Mexico State 1-4 2-7
San Jose State 0-4 1-8
Texas State 1-4 4-5
UTSA

How long will Hawai'i put up with this?

Montana doesn't even want this

There is some talk of Hawai'i going independent in football. Very interesting scenarios in play. And the changes keep on keeping on.

(11-11-2010 02:28 PM)SidJag Wrote:  The defection of Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada to the Mountain West and the upcoming announcement of the addition Texas State and UT-San Antonio (and Denver for basketball) really changes the complextion of college athletics in the Southwest. Is it me or are these changes going to pole vault the Sun Belt Conference over the whacked-out WAC in strength and quality? It seems the Sun Belt has already overtaken the MAC.

Is there a reason why people on this board keep playing the ignorance card and stating that the Sun Belt has overtaken the MAC? Especially those that support a team whose biggest win in history is over a DIII school or whatever comparable patsy USA has scheduled to build momentum for its program. The MAC will probably land 5 - 6 bowls games this year and has two teams (NIU and Temple) knocking on the door of the top 25 with both registering wins over teams from BCS conferences. The Sun Belt has no marquis wins and its top team is knocking on the door of the top 100. Like I have said before, I have nothing against the Belt but making uneducated statements ate totally unnecessary. Do your homework before you post. The MAC is just as likely to benefit as much or even more from the demise of the WAC as the Belt. If anything, both conferences will move up the chain. Oh, and the MAC also has a better TV package...

SBC light ?

LaTech, Utah State, Idaho, NMSU, Denver, plus a couple of 1-aa's

(11-11-2010 02:26 PM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  That lineup would have the #11 ranked Sagarin numbers using current ratings.

In case you didn't know, the SBC is at #17

Even if you gave UTSA a 0 rating, it would just give the "new" WAC about the same numbers as the current SBC.

I think the actual ranking would be quite a bit lower as you have to factor in that most, if not all remaining WAC teams will no longer have the benefit of playing (win or lose) Boise, Fresno, and Nevada during the season. Strength of schedule could take a huge hit.

(11-11-2010 02:57 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(11-11-2010 02:28 PM)SidJag Wrote:  The defection of Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada to the Mountain West and the upcoming announcement of the addition Texas State and UT-San Antonio (and Denver for basketball) really changes the complextion of college athletics in the Southwest. Is it me or are these changes going to pole vault the Sun Belt Conference over the whacked-out WAC in strength and quality? It seems the Sun Belt has already overtaken the MAC.

Is there a reason why people on this board keep playing the ignorance card and stating that the Sun Belt has overtaken the MAC? Especially those that support a team whose biggest win in history is over a DIII school or whatever comparable patsy USA has scheduled to build momentum for its program. The MAC will probably land 5 - 6 bowls games this year and has two teams (NIU and Temple) knocking on the door of the top 25 with both registering wins over teams from BCS conferences. The Sun Belt has no marquis wins and its top team is knocking on the door of the top 100. Like I have said before, I have nothing against the Belt but making uneducated statements ate totally unnecessary. Do your homework before you post. The MAC is just as likely to benefit as much or even more from the demise of the WAC as the Belt. If anything, both conferences will move up the chain. Oh, and the MAC also has a better TV package...

1st...you get your facts straight. USA is not a part of the SBC in football, but they soon will be. If they want to talk up their program, they can...it is the SBC board and they are members in all other sports. 2nd, we can speculate and toss ideas back and forth because it's a message board. Everything posted isn't gonna be Britannica worthy...

Now, so far as the MAC is concerned, you've been around forever and your progression has been molasses, to be kind. You rotate champs every year and the top is the bottom and the bottom is the top. No consistency. The SBC has far more upside and recruiting promise than the MAC. More home-and-home series will bring those facts to fruition...

(11-11-2010 02:57 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(11-11-2010 02:28 PM)SidJag Wrote:  The defection of Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada to the Mountain West and the upcoming announcement of the addition Texas State and UT-San Antonio (and Denver for basketball) really changes the complextion of college athletics in the Southwest. Is it me or are these changes going to pole vault the Sun Belt Conference over the whacked-out WAC in strength and quality? It seems the Sun Belt has already overtaken the MAC.

The MAC will probably land 5 - 6 bowls games this year and has two teams (NIU and Temple) knocking on the door of the top 25 with both registering wins over teams from BCS conferences. The Sun Belt has no marquis wins and its top team is knocking on the door of the top 100. Like I have said before, I have nothing against the Belt but making uneducated statements ate totally unnecessary. If anything, both conferences will move up the chain. Oh, and the MAC also has a better TV package...

If the MAC lands 6 bowl games this year I'll do a jig in Times Square with Madonna wearing a pair of speedos and brogans. If that happens there will be several p-oed upper crust conference teams. I'm sure that you people have a better TV package than the Belt does. That is not exactly something I'd brag about too much as it exposes the weakness of some of your teams and p!$$-pour attendances that are shown in the stands. Does last night's game come to mind?

So here we are again...The WAC 6 is on the precipice looking over into the abyss and all we need to do is give them a little push.

Scenario: If/when Hawai'i goes indy, we take La Tech, NMSU and S. Alabama and just like that we are at 12 members ready for a Champ game (am I ).

In the proces WE eliminate competition from UTSA, TSU, USU, Idaho and SJSU. We do all non-AQ's a favor by reducing the future mouths to feed and recruiting battles.

But.....we don't want La Tech....

(11-11-2010 03:18 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  But.....we don't want La Tech....

Oh yeah.

(11-11-2010 03:18 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  But.....we don't want La Tech....

Yeah! Get outta here tech!

Neck-aration ?

(11-11-2010 02:26 PM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  That lineup would have the #11 ranked Sagarin numbers using current ratings.

In case you didn't know, the SBC is at #17

Even if you gave UTSA a 0 rating, it would just give the "new" WAC about the same numbers as the current SBC.

How are those bowl agreements holding up for the WAC? You can keep the Sagarin ratings and, I will look at bowl agreements and television contracts. Let's come back and visit this subject in two years. BTW, Montana stated today, they are not going to the WAC.

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2010/11...t-montana/

OUCH they gotta luv this:odie:

CBS Sportsline - WAC invites teams you've never heard of
http://college-football-blog.blogs.cbssp...8/25611243

(11-11-2010 02:57 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(11-11-2010 02:28 PM)SidJag Wrote:  The defection of Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada to the Mountain West and the upcoming announcement of the addition Texas State and UT-San Antonio (and Denver for basketball) really changes the complextion of college athletics in the Southwest. Is it me or are these changes going to pole vault the Sun Belt Conference over the whacked-out WAC in strength and quality? It seems the Sun Belt has already overtaken the MAC.

Is there a reason why people on this board keep playing the ignorance card and stating that the Sun Belt has overtaken the MAC? Especially those that support a team whose biggest win in history is over a DIII school or whatever comparable patsy USA has scheduled to build momentum for its program. The MAC will probably land 5 - 6 bowls games this year and has two teams (NIU and Temple) knocking on the door of the top 25 with both registering wins over teams from BCS conferences. The Sun Belt has no marquis wins and its top team is knocking on the door of the top 100. Like I have said before, I have nothing against the Belt but making uneducated statements ate totally unnecessary. Do your homework before you post. The MAC is just as likely to benefit as much or even more from the demise of the WAC as the Belt. If anything, both conferences will move up the chain. Oh, and the MAC also has a better TV package...

Using the correct 'marquee' would help your arrogance to be more effective. The other poster says it 'seems' the Sun Belt has overtaken the MAC. You can give a counter argument why this might not be true, but your writing style wouldn't lead many to take it constructively.