CSNbbs
What Will the WAC do Now - Printable Version

+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: WACbbs (/forum-376.html)
+--- Thread: What Will the WAC do Now (/thread-25675.html)

Pages: 1 2

- broncobob - 05-27-2004 12:02 PM

What Will the WAC do Now

- AdaVandal - 05-27-2004 12:46 PM

Football only would be a poor option. We are scheduled to join the belt in 05 for all sports. Playing everything but football in the belt is not an option according to belt conference rules I believe. Plus, If Idaho is to improve facilities to be a major player in the WAC. We need to not have to spend all that money in travel. Plus, if the WAC wants to survive long term they need to be cultivating full members, not simply holding the thing together until the next defection.

Look at it this way: You need at least 8 to make a conference.

1. LA. Tech's days are most likely numbered in the WAC.

2. SJSU could be in real trouble.

3. The MWC could come calling again.

If the WAC doesn't embrace Idaho now we might not be around in a few years when you really, really need us. If I were the WAC I would add UI right now in all sports and begin discussion with Montana and Montana State about the future.

Just my .02

- broncobob - 05-27-2004 12:50 PM

AdaVandal Wrote:Football only would be a poor option. We are scheduled to join the belt in 05 for all sports. Playing everything but football in the belt is not an option according to belt conference rules I believe. Plus, If Idaho is to improve facilities to be a major player in the WAC. We need to not have to spend all that money in travel. Plus, if the WAC wants to survive long term they need to be cultivating full members, not simply holding the thing together until the next defection.

Look at it this way: You need at least 8 to make a conference.

1. LA. Tech's days are most likely numbered in the WAC.

2. SJSU could be in real trouble.

3. The MWC could come calling again.

If the WAC doesn't embrace Idaho now we might not be around in a few years when you really, really need us. If I were the WAC I would add UI right now in all sports and begin discussion with Montana and Montana State about the future.

Just my .02
Good Points! I agree that Idaho for football only is not an option.

That leaves 2 options!

I know the Boise State AD is voting for Idaho to join the WAC in all sports.

- broncobob - 05-27-2004 12:53 PM

So far, 11 votes to add IDaho and No votes to stay at 8!!!!! As of Noon on May 27th.

- gaard - 05-27-2004 12:53 PM

AdaVandal Wrote:Football only would be a poor option. We are scheduled to join the belt in 05 for all sports. Playing everything but football in the belt is not an option according to belt conference rules I believe. Plus, If Idaho is to improve facilities to be a major player in the WAC. We need to not have to spend all that money in travel. Plus, if the WAC wants to survive long term they need to be cultivating full members, not simply holding the thing together until the next defection.

Look at it this way: You need at least 8 to make a conference.

1. LA. Tech's days are most likely numbered in the WAC.

2. SJSU could be in real trouble.

3. The MWC could come calling again.

If the WAC doesn't embrace Idaho now we might not be around in a few years when you really, really need us. If I were the WAC I would add UI right now in all sports and begin discussion with Montana and Montana State about the future.

Just my .02
1. I think La Tech will be with us until a CUSA invite is extended.

2. SJSU will most likely survive

3. The MWC will not be calling.

The only two options look to be staying at 8 or inviting Idaho for all sports.
I would guess the latter.

- USU78 - 05-27-2004 01:13 PM

No FB-only associations -- they don't work (see UNLV in the ancient WAC in the 70s).

BTW, USU is probably an Idaho ally as well.

Just goe to nine!

04-cheers

- TUfan - 05-27-2004 01:32 PM

Add Idaho (and Denver 03-wink ) and drop LaTech.

(Realize this is purely so that TU can take our bball money with us. If LaTech leaves later, then no one gets the money.)

- broncobob - 05-27-2004 01:58 PM

TUfan Wrote:Add Idaho (and Denver 03-wink ) and drop LaTech.

(Realize this is purely so that TU can take our bball money with us. If LaTech leaves later, then no one gets the money.)
The WAC will add Denver as soon as Denver adds a D1A football program...............
Looks like the WAC gets to keep the Tulsa share............

- Guest - 05-27-2004 02:00 PM

gaard Wrote:I think La Tech will be with us until a CUSA invite is extended.
But that's not guaranteed either. What happens if someone else gets invited to CUSA and not La Tech?

That is a very REAL possibility especially if the Big East expands again and Memphis and Central Florida are taken.

CUSA would naturally turn around and look for teams to replace those markets and their presence in those states where those teams are located.

Instantly, Middle Tennessee, Florida International, and Florida Atlantic could jump to the top of CUSA's "wish list".

But that's assuming that the Big East expands again, and that's not guaranteed either.

- gaard - 05-27-2004 03:24 PM

BlueRaiderPride Wrote:
gaard Wrote:I think La Tech will be with us until a CUSA invite is extended.
But that's not guaranteed either. What happens if someone else gets invited to CUSA and not La Tech?
You missed the point. La Tech is a WAC member and will be with us until they get an invitation to a better fitting conference. The new WAC is more than competitive with the new CUSA. We are already competitive with the MWC. We can find ourselves in a very strong position, if we quit looking for places to move to that don't exist and concentrate on our own conference. We are a match for the Big East in football and with our progress, basketball will follow shortly.

- TUfan - 05-27-2004 03:29 PM

broncobob Wrote:
TUfan Wrote:Add Idaho (and Denver 03-wink ) and drop LaTech.

(Realize this is purely so that TU can take our bball money with us. If LaTech leaves later, then no one gets the money.)
The WAC will add Denver as soon as Denver adds a D1A football program...............
Looks like the WAC gets to keep the Tulsa share............
OK. No Denver, but still say good-bye to LaTech for me, will ya? Thanks. 03-wink

- gaard - 05-27-2004 04:22 PM

TUfan Wrote:OK. No Denver, but still say good-bye to LaTech for me, will ya? Thanks. 03-wink
Why do you think La Tech is going anywhere?

- charles - 05-27-2004 05:31 PM

BlueRaiderPride Wrote:
gaard Wrote:I think La Tech will be with us until a CUSA invite is extended.
But that's not guaranteed either. What happens if someone else gets invited to CUSA and not La Tech?

That is a very REAL possibility especially if the Big East expands again and Memphis and Central Florida are taken.

CUSA would naturally turn around and look for teams to replace those markets and their presence in those states where those teams are located.

Instantly, Middle Tennessee, Florida International, and Florida Atlantic could jump to the top of CUSA's "wish list".

But that's assuming that the Big East expands again, and that's not guaranteed either.
If that happens then the voting block of UTEP, Tulsa, Rice, SMU, Houston, and Tulane hold the power and they ain't going to want MTSU, FIU, or FAU. The only Sun Belt school that has any chance at all at C-USA is UNT and that's if they keep winning. Louisiana Tech, NMSU, and UNT would be at the top of the list because of regional proximity and since those are the schools familiar to the group mentioned above. C-USA will raid the WAC first before raiding the Sun Belt since the WAC is still ahead in the pecking order and there's more prestige in raiding them than raiding the Sun Belt but we MIGHT make an exception and take UNT.

- TUfan - 05-27-2004 07:53 PM

gaard Wrote:
TUfan Wrote:OK. No Denver, but still say good-bye to LaTech for me, will ya? Thanks. 03-wink
Why do you think La Tech is going anywhere?
I don't. You missed the threads before this. If you had seen those, you'd understand.

- Aggieboy - 05-27-2004 09:21 PM

The MWC is solid because the core group have committed to each other. I agree with (gaard) we need to stay together, because the MWC is a very closed club. Joining them does not mean you’re in. Grow the WAC. With Idaho added we would be very competitive. Keep kicking the MWC and etc and the WAC will grow.


GO WAC!!!!!!

- Roughrider - 05-28-2004 09:16 AM

Cmon, we'll have to work to make the WAC work, I agree, but idaho adds zip for competitiveness and I sure don't want the Broncos to drop low enough to be competitive with that. You can't spin a perrenial sub-100 ranking.

Someday, maybe idaho will be competitive in the WAC, but it won't be anytime soon. Not in football. Fans of idaho have to stop spinning for them. They're coming, granted, but it's not a plus other than a ninth team for football scheduling.

- EMUHuron - 05-28-2004 11:25 AM

from what i've read - the wac-8 does not have enough teams fielding teams in "common" sports. apparently, a i-a conference must have a minimum number of sports that the majority of schools compete in, and play for a conference crown in, to remain i-a in fb. from what i hear, idaho does not solve all those short-comings for the wac.

it may be that the wac has to expand beyond just idaho to remain viable as a i-a fb conference.

would a denver (all but fb) invite solve that issue?

anyone have the number of wac 8/9 teams competeing in each sport handy?

- broncobob - 05-28-2004 12:25 PM

EMUHuron Wrote:from what i've read - the wac-8 does not have enough teams fielding teams in "common" sports. apparently, a i-a conference must have a minimum number of sports that the majority of schools compete in, and play for a conference crown in, to remain i-a in fb. from what i hear, idaho does not solve all those short-comings for the wac.

it may be that the wac has to expand beyond just idaho to remain viable as a i-a fb conference.

would a denver (all but fb) invite solve that issue?

anyone have the number of wac 8/9 teams competeing in each sport handy?
I think the WAC needs to field 3 mens team sports and 3 womens team sports with at least 6 members participating in each sports except football, which needs 8 teams. Team sports includings football, basketball, baseball/softball, soccer and volleyball, but not track, tennis or golf.

WACE is baseball poor with only six members remaining with baseball teams!

- WildBlue - 05-28-2004 01:35 PM

Here's a post stolen from USU78 on the Owlzone board. According to '78, the WAC has enough teams to maintain DI-A status. Women's golf won't be able to sponsor a championship unless someone else adds it. Without Idaho, Women's Swimming/Diving could also have problems, but even without those two, there are still enough Women's sports. And men's baseball would be a problem if LA Tech left or someone dropped a program. Sure wish USU could bring it back.

This post assumes Idaho is in, but even without them, there aren't any problems.

*****<<<Pirated Text>>>*****
here's what the WAC-sponsored sports situation looks like:

Women's Sports (10):

Basketball: All 9
Cross-Country: All 9
Golf: Boazy, Hawai'i, Idaho, Nevada, San Jose (5)*
Soccer: Boazy, Fresno, Hawai'i, Idaho, LaTech, Nevada, San Jose, USU (8)
Softball: Fresno, Hawai'i, LaTech, NewMags, Nevada, San Jose, USU (7)
Swimming/Diving: Fresno, Hawai'i, Idaho, NewMags, Nevada, San Jose (6)
Tennis: All 9
Track (I/O): All 9
Volleyball: All 9

Other sports: Gymnastics (Boazy, San Jose & USU), Skiing (Boazy & Nevada), Sailing (Hawai'i + Co-Ed), Water Polo (Hawai'i & San Jose), Bowling (LaTech), Equestrian (Fresno & NewMags), and Rifle (Nevada)

Men's Sports (8):

Baseball: Fresno, Hawai'i, LaTech, NewMags, Nevada, San Jose (6)
Basketball: All 9
Cross-Country: Boazy, Idaho, LaTech, NewMags, San Jose, USU (6)
Football: All 9
Golf: All 9
Tennis: Boazy, Fresno, Hawai'i, Idaho, NewMags, Nevada, USU (7)
Track (I/O): Boazy, Fresno, Idaho, LaTech, USU (5)*

Other sports: Soccer (Fresno, San Jose), Swimming/Diving (Hawai'i), Wrestling (Boazy, Fresno), Rifle (Nevada), Skiing (Nevada), Volleyball (Hawai'i)

*At risk of being non-WAC sport, since fewer than 6 participate.

- broncobob - 05-28-2004 02:01 PM

WildBlue Wrote:Here's a post stolen from USU78 on the Owlzone board. According to '78, the WAC has enough teams to maintain DI-A status. Women's golf won't be able to sponsor a championship unless someone else adds it. Without Idaho, Women's Swimming/Diving could also have problems, but even without those two, there are still enough Women's sports. And men's baseball would be a problem if LA Tech left or someone dropped a program. Sure wish USU could bring it back.

This post assumes Idaho is in, but even without them, there aren't any problems.

*****<<<Pirated Text>>>*****
here's what the WAC-sponsored sports situation looks like:

Women's Sports (10):

Basketball: All 9
Cross-Country: All 9
Golf: Boazy, Hawai'i, Idaho, Nevada, San Jose (5)*
Soccer: Boazy, Fresno, Hawai'i, Idaho, LaTech, Nevada, San Jose, USU (8)
Softball: Fresno, Hawai'i, LaTech, NewMags, Nevada, San Jose, USU (7)
Swimming/Diving: Fresno, Hawai'i, Idaho, NewMags, Nevada, San Jose (6)
Tennis: All 9
Track (I/O): All 9
Volleyball: All 9

Other sports: Gymnastics (Boazy, San Jose & USU), Skiing (Boazy & Nevada), Sailing (Hawai'i + Co-Ed), Water Polo (Hawai'i & San Jose), Bowling (LaTech), Equestrian (Fresno & NewMags), and Rifle (Nevada)

Men's Sports (8):

Baseball: Fresno, Hawai'i, LaTech, NewMags, Nevada, San Jose (6)
Basketball: All 9
Cross-Country: Boazy, Idaho, LaTech, NewMags, San Jose, USU (6)
Football: All 9
Golf: All 9
Tennis: Boazy, Fresno, Hawai'i, Idaho, NewMags, Nevada, USU (7)
Track (I/O): Boazy, Fresno, Idaho, LaTech, USU (5)*

Other sports: Soccer (Fresno, San Jose), Swimming/Diving (Hawai'i), Wrestling (Boazy, Fresno), Rifle (Nevada), Skiing (Nevada), Volleyball (Hawai'i)

*At risk of being non-WAC sport, since fewer than 6 participate.
Thanks USU78 via WildBlue! Good post! I would like to see Idaho, Boise State and Utah State all add Baseball, but probably won't happen due to Title 9 issues!