I've been struggling with this since Utah St has joined the WAC. Here's what it comes down to for Utah St. We've lobbied the WAC for almost 40 years and now in 2005 we're members of the WAC. But, now, Utah St fans and admins must ask themselves how committed teams like Boise St and Fresno St really are to the WAC. Quite frankly, if Boise St and Fresno St jump ship for another conference, I'd rather that Utah St drop all sponsored sports and let the Utah legislature lead them on their academic way. In other words, I really love this conference as it is, but if any major changes take place I'd rather it didn't exist at all and that sports at Utah St were dropped all together. Watching Utah St drop to D1AA would be too humiliating and wouldn't be worth my money and time.

So, I ask, how committed to the WAC are we? How serious are we about the success of this conference. The latest news about tv exposure has me very concerned about our future. Basketball was on track to be the leader in getting this conference some revenue and national exposure, but now I'm wondering whether we'll get any exposure. Secondly, I think the WAC has a legitimate shot at being the best conference without an autobid this year in football. Despite that, we simply aren't getting much time on national tv. Thus, I don't see hope in our revenues increasing, unless we can prove it on the court and field and build a larger name for ourselves. But how difficult is that without the national tv exposure? It seems like a very daunting task to me.

If we are really committed to being in the WAC and the success of the WAC, then we should stop drooling on the ground that the MWC walks on. I'm convinced, for example, that the pool of drool surrounding the MWC in Boise has gotten larger since Utah St has joined this conference. Curiously, Utah St has had just one year to meet any expectations before fans give up on the WAC's, what would seem to be, promising future. Thankfully, it seems that the pool of drool surrounding the MWC has gotten smaller in Fresno. None of us can afford to see the WAC lose a team at this point, IMO. The only team that we can afford to lose is La Tech and that is only when there is a viable candidate ready to be D1A in the future. That may take QUITE a while! I know Bow fans have talked about independence if the WAC fell apart. Trust me, that won't work in the long run for Hawaii. You'd see your programs lose even more competitiveness over time as a result.

So, again, I ask, "How committed are YOU? And how committed should ALL OF US be?"

ejmpalle Wrote:I've been struggling with this since Utah St has joined the WAC. Here's what it comes down to for Utah St. We've lobbied the WAC for almost 40 years and now in 2005 we're members of the WAC. But, now, Utah St fans and admins must ask themselves how committed teams like Boise St and Fresno St really are to the WAC. Quite frankly, if Boise St and Fresno St jump ship for another conference, I'd rather that Utah St drop all sponsored sports and let the Utah legislature lead them on their academic way. In other words, I really love this conference as it is, but if any major changes take place I'd rather it didn't exist at all and that sports at Utah St were dropped all together. Watching Utah St drop to D1AA would be too humiliating and wouldn't be worth my money and time.

So, I ask, how committed to the WAC are we? How serious are we about the success of this conference. The latest news about tv exposure has me very concerned about our future. Basketball was on track to be the leader in getting this conference some revenue and national exposure, but now I'm wondering whether we'll get any exposure. Secondly, I think the WAC has a legitimate shot at being the best conference without an autobid this year in football. Despite that, we simply aren't getting much time on national tv. Thus, I don't see hope in our revenues increasing, unless we can prove it on the court and field and build a larger name for ourselves. But how difficult is that without the national tv exposure? It seems like a very daunting task to me.

If we are really committed to being in the WAC and the success of the WAC, then we should stop drooling on the ground that the MWC walks on. I'm convinced, for example, that the pool of drool surrounding the MWC in Boise has gotten larger since Utah St has joined this conference. Curiously, Utah St has had just one year to meet any expectations before fans give up on the WAC's, what would seem to be, promising future. Thankfully, it seems that the pool of drool surrounding the MWC has gotten smaller in Fresno. None of us can afford to see the WAC lose a team at this point, IMO. The only team that we can afford to lose is La Tech and that is only when there is a viable candidate ready to be D1A in the future. That may take QUITE a while! I know Bow fans have talked about independence if the WAC fell apart. Trust me, that won't work in the long run for Hawaii. You'd see your programs lose even more competitiveness over time as a result.

So, again, I ask, "How committed are YOU? And how committed should ALL OF US be?"

I am just a lowly fan......I would like to be in a confercne with Idaho, Utah State, Nevada, Fresno and......Montana. I like the WAC and the WAC with Montana would be ideal FMPOV!!

But, I know that Fresno and Boise State would both be MWC bound if the offer ever came......

I believe all Spartans have a strong sense of loyalty to the league. The one factor that, I think, would supercede that loyalty would be a desire to have all three CSU schools (San Diego, San Jose, Fresno) in the same league.

broncobob Wrote:I am just a lowly fan......I would like to be in a confercne with Idaho, Utah State, Nevada, Fresno and......Montana. I like the WAC and the WAC with Montana would be ideal FMPOV!!

But, I know that Fresno and Boise State would both be MWC bound if the offer ever came......

Do you not believe that your voice on these boards can influence how other fans view our conference? Do you not believe that your voice and the voice of others at Boise St can affect how your administration at Boise St view this conference? We seem to have an exposure problem at this point in the WAC. Something needs to be done about it. I'm not sure what is being done or if there is a plan in place to resolve the matter.

I like the WAC. The only teams that I want to play in the MWC are Wyoming BYU and Utah, because I know a fair amount of people in their fan base. I would not want to give up playing Fresno, Hawaii, La Tech, USU, Nevada or idaho. I am starting to get attached to playing SJSU and expect the same will happen with NMSU, once we get some history. I would like to get some history with OSU, Oregon, UW and WSU. The only conference BSU should leave for is the PAC, IMHO. The WAC is fine by me.

ejmpalle Wrote:Do you not believe that your voice on these boards can influence how other fans view our conference? Do you not believe that your voice and the voice of others at Boise St can affect how your administration at Boise St view this conference? We seem to have an exposure problem at this point in the WAC. Something needs to be done about it. I'm not sure what is being done or if there is a plan in place to resolve the matter.

Nothing needs to be done about it. BSU or any other school's administration is not going to poll the fan base before making a decision to move. The other important fact is that there is no invite anywhere so this is all moot.

gaard Wrote:

ejmpalle Wrote:Do you not believe that your voice on these boards can influence how other fans view our conference? Do you not believe that your voice and the voice of others at Boise St can affect how your administration at Boise St view this conference? We seem to have an exposure problem at this point in the WAC. Something needs to be done about it. I'm not sure what is being done or if there is a plan in place to resolve the matter.

Nothing needs to be done about it. BSU or any other school's administration is not going to poll the fan base before making a decision to move. The other important fact is that there is no invite anywhere so this is all moot.

You're correct, the school President along with the current administration are the ones that control those type of conference decisions if indeed they ever become an option. In the meantime I'm happy to be in the WAC conference, it's about time we all quit worrying about things out of the normal fans control. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm so ready for football to get rolling again, and then here comes basketball right behind it!!
To the USU fans, based on your comments about the lack of football marketing to help improve attendance, posted in a previous thread, that would be my #1 priority concern. Maybe you need a new direction or plan from your USU public relations and marketing department. That is one battle USU fans may be able to fight and win.

gaard Wrote:Nothing needs to be done about it. BSU or any other school's administration is not going to poll the fan base before making a decision to move. The other important fact is that there is no invite anywhere so this is all moot.

I somewhat disagree with you. The ADs are going to do what they think will get them the most money. If 90% of the fans, or a significant $$ contributer, are against a certain action, then they'll think twice before taking that action.

gaard Wrote:I like the WAC I would not want to give up playing Fresno, Hawaii, La Tech, USU, Nevada or idaho. The WAC is fine by me.

Amen......Us Southern Aggies fell the same way...we love the WAC.

Being in the WAC is the greatest thing ever to happen to NMSU, as allowed us to raise more $$$, Upgrade both our FB & BB stadiums and pay our coaches more & recruit better FB & BB players.

Merge the WAC and MTN WEST together.

Take the next 2-3 years, and pick the winning teams from both conferences and merge them into one.

The rest fall out to the big west, D1AA or whatever.

I say this even being an SJSU fan.

Put up or shut up for all WAC schools (besides Boise and Fresno at this point).

Then we'd have a conference with some fire power.
All WAC teams (Even SJSU) NEED TO WIN NOW!

I'm sure all WAC schools are highly committed to the WAC - until a better financial deal comes along. In college sports it's mostly about the money. I'm sure long-term rivalries mean something - but only to an extent (ask BC, UTEP or Marshall).

Right now the WAC looks to be pretty stable - probably because the MWC also looks stable. But that won't last forever. The only way to protect one's self from potential defections is to upgrade one's program so as to be desireable in the next round of musical chairs. Hopefully all WAC schools can accomplish this - though that may be a little unrealistic.

As for going 1AA - I don't agree with the all or nothing approach. While I would hate for NMSU to go 1AA - I could live with a 1AA conference that still included close western rivals. Certainly better than no FB at all.

ejmpalle...You are working yourself up over nothing. It doesn't matter a lick if some posters want their school in the MWC. College presidents decide that sort of thing and they base their decisions on a wide variety of factors. College presidents like to be collegial and I am not sure many of them want to see a conference destoyed. I don't think the MWC will expand more than one, if that.

The WAC is what it is. It is comprised of several like minded schools with moderate to low athletic budgets. For the most part the member schools are not in big TV markets. ESPN is a business like any other. They look at supply and demand.

I prefer Nevada in the WAC because I am not all that keen on seeing a bloated athletic budget paid for by higher priced tickets and more expensive hot dogs.. I also love the long term rivalries.

The WAC is cool right now and the future looks bright..No need for hand wringing..

Yeah everybody needs to just chill. The first football games for everybody is just 2 weeks away.

1.)You can't blame Boise/Fresno etc. for being attractive. I have ZERO doubts that if the MWC sent invitations out to every single WAC school, USU would be the first ones in line to accept. You guys would kill to get in the same conference as BYU and Utah. (Or at least your Presidents would)

Quote:Merge the WAC and MTN WEST together.

Take the next 2-3 years, and pick the winning teams from both conferences and merge them into one.

We tried that--it was called the WAC-16. I'd say the MWC took 7/8 of the "hot" programs when they left. But as with any conference, teams rise to the top and bottom. The mid-MWC schools now became the bottom feeders. Fresno and Hawaii--who were once at the bottom now rose to the top and were joined by new powers Boise State. (Nevada is now starting to reach it's potential) Sure, the MWC can swoop up Fresno/Boise/Hawaii/Nevada now and dump UNLV/SDSU/Wyoming/New Mexico--but the same thing would happen. New teams will rise and fall in any given situation.

Frankly, from a Hawaii fan--this is the most stable the conference has ever been. And even if any school has a wandering eye--the conference can't afford to kick anyone out at this time.

So all of you are saying that we shouldn't have any loyalty, whatsoever? Our teams shouldn't have exit fees in place to give them incentive to stay?

If this is actually true, Utah St is in big trouble because BYU and Utah would never allow Utah St to be in the same conference with them. And if there is any truth to the fact that the MWC will expand and take a WAC team, it'll eventually happen that some WAC team is taken with Utah St left behind. I think of all teams in the WAC, Utah St stands to lose more from a confernence break-up than any other team.

ejmpalle Wrote:So all of you are saying that we shouldn't have any loyalty, whatsoever? Our teams shouldn't have exit fees in place to give them incentive to stay?

If this is actually true, Utah St is in big trouble because BYU and Utah would never allow Utah St to be in the same conference with them. And if there is any truth to the fact that the MWC will expand and take a WAC team, it'll eventually happen that some WAC team is taken with Utah St left behind. I think of all teams in the WAC, Utah St stands to lose more from a confernence break-up than any other team.

If a school President sees value in another conference, he may elect to leave with or without an exit fee. It doesn't mean that President is right or wrong, IMO they are doing what they think is best for the university and their future. Heck it doesn't have to be a WAC school, it could be an UTEP, TCU or a BCS school changing conferences, they will do what they think is best. Loyalty is great, but it becomes a business decision.

[Sorry, I double posted!!!!!

Forget the Mountain West; we've headed to the PAC 10!

http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/3peatTrojans/27551

Yoda out...

ejmpalle Wrote:I think of all teams in the WAC, Utah St stands to lose more from a confernence break-up than any other team.

I don't know dude...Tech isn't exactly a favorite of the Belt presidents or the commish. Can't go indy and CUSA doesn't have a spot. If the WAC fell apart, it'd be real rough on Tech as well.

Quote:So all of you are saying that we shouldn't have any loyalty, whatsoever? Our teams shouldn't have exit fees in place to give them incentive to stay?

I think we should have exit fees, especially because the new schools paid entrance fees. But at the end of the day, you can't force a school to stay if they don't want to.

The best thing we can do is all make our conference better so no one wants to leave. And it starts by each institution making a commitment to improve.