(08-19-2020 11:47 AM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  

(08-19-2020 11:21 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 08:01 PM)Todor Wrote:  the WAC is dynamic and the schools in the WAC are dynamic. Nothing is happening with BSC schools or within the conference. The Southland is geographically stuck and monetarily stuck. No reason for anyone with aspirations to look at either.

If you all want to talk about aspirations and potential for WAC teams, I will accept that as an answer. How long do the Presidents and ADs hold out for those two things though? When budgets are looked at and scrutinized years later, sending the volleyball team to Seattle and Los Angeles won’t look too good, when you could send them to Huntsville and Beaumont, TX instead. I think you Tarleton and RGV fans that are saying you’re better off in the WAC than the Southland are fooling yourselves.

If the SLC was expanding by 2 teams, UTRGV and Tarleton would be the first two schools to put their names in for consideration.

Nah. But you're entitled to your opinion.
A healthy, stable FCS playin' WAC behooves both the Southland and the Big Sky. An FCS conference in the Southwest bridges the geographic gap between the two conferences. Opens up a ton of scheduling options for the WAC, too. Tarleton brass, and most importantly, the Texas A&M Chancellor, prefers the WAC. They've made no bones about it.

Ok but an FCS WAC doesnt exist. How long are yall going to wait before giving up on a football WAC? Even if the WAC were to get FCS football theres no way theyd be percieved as a better conference than the SL or BS.