(12-10-2010 09:33 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Cal Poly ? Shouldn't that be Cal Tech ?

No because they are 2 different schools one is the Division 3, private uber-prestigious California Institute of Technology and the other the Division 1 FCS, public California Polytechnic State University. A friend of mine graduated from Cal Tech this past Spring and she's incredibly brilliant and would make sure I knew the difference.

Yup, Cal Tech is as fine an academic institution as there is in the world. It's full name is the California Insitute of Technology. They are the Beavers and I believe they played in the Rose Bowl early on. They have produced 30 Nobel laureates.

Cal Poly usually referrs to California State Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo. They are the Mustangs. SLO is much like Miami U for the Cincinnatians on the board in that no matter where you are you can't get there from here, have a beautiful campus, and seems to have a strong academic reputation for a place nobody knows anything about. They have produced several distinguished alumni including Weird Al, John Madden, and both Laci and Scott Peterson.

Cal Poly may also refer to California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. We are the Broncos and I believe we won the last DII Mens Basketball Tourney. Jim Zorn and I are the most distinguished alum produced by the university.

The University of Cal-Berkley is the designated land grant school for California but I think Berkley put all the agriculture programs at UC-Davis. But, in reality, Caly Poly SLO, among other academic programs, is probably the agriculture school that most Californians look to for majoring in agriculture. Probably in academic terms, the school most likly resembling Cal Poly SLO is a school like Va Tech, the land grant school for Virginia but not thought of as an ag school like, for example, Iowa State. In terms of attitude, Cal Poly SLO most closely resembles Texas A&M. They are passionate and gung ho for their school. If they get them, this is a great pickup for WAC, great positive news in an otherwise disheartening situation. Gorgeous campus not located too far from the beach.

I think Cal Poly would need major upgrades in facilities before they could make the move the WAC. For one thing, their stadium seats less than 12k. They also just made a move to the Big Sky, which would seem to indicate they aren't interested in making the leap to the WAC any time soon.

The schools that make the most sense for the WAC's immediate needs are: Lamar, Portland State and Sacramento State, plus Seattle for non-football. That would get them to 10 for football, 12 overall.

Lamar, Portland State and Sacramento State all need upgrades, but they have stadiums large enough for FBS football, are in perfect locations for the league, and have all publicly at least hinted/suggested that they'd be interested in a move to FBS if the timing is right. Lamar has made it clear that they ultimately want to be FBS, and considering two of their conference mates in Tx State and UTSA are making the move, it would seem to make a great deal of sense for Lamar. Sac State is already an affiliate member of the WAC in at least one sport.

Montana and Montana State have already said no, and I doubt the further weakening of the WAC will help - but if the Big Sky is weakened by the potential departure of Sac State and Portland State? And would the fact that they don't have to travel to Hawaii help in their considerations? Who knows.

The other wildcard is UC-Davis; they would be a GREAT catch for the WAC but just like Cal Poly they don't appear to be in any hurry to make the jump.

The State of California isn't exactly overflowing with cash for unnecessary projects like football stadium improvements and additional scholarships. It's in deep financial trouble, like the rest of the nation. If these schools want to upgrade, it's going to be up to the alumni to raise the funds...

(12-11-2010 11:33 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(12-10-2010 09:41 PM)WVUeer Wrote:  

(12-10-2010 09:28 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Also...the MWC has some late night games they can sell to networks.

Thi makes perfect sense...although ironic as the MWC split from the WAC and is now inviting many of the jilted teams back.

The MWC has arguably the better football teams in the conference right now but they don't have the TV deal or the big cities to land that TV deal like CUSA has. That's where CUSA comes into the picture......markets like Dallas, Houston, Orlando etc.

Yep -- this is why I suggested on a separate thread that a MWC merger with C-USA West makes perfect sense. Get whatever value you can by including the Houston and Dallas TV markets.

Personally I just think that at some point another BCS game will emerge. To much pressure to do so. Obviously I think it would be the "Cotton Bowl" and it would be held in Dallas at the new Cowboys stadium. Its no secret that Jerry Jones wants it. Jerry usually gets what he wants so I think its a real possibility. CUSA is a Texas based organization (correct me if I'm wrong) so it only makes sense.

You take the two best non-AQ conferences, put then together in a way to determine a champion that would get the bid to the new BCS bowl. My guess is that CUSA works with Mountain West and its TV network (since its already up and running) to expand in CUSA markets.

A TV network spanning from coast to coast from California to West Virginia. I would assume that that Mountain West name would go away and simply be called "Conference USA".

Personally I think it has big potential.

(12-13-2010 11:14 AM)WVUeer Wrote:  

(12-11-2010 11:33 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(12-10-2010 09:41 PM)WVUeer Wrote:  

(12-10-2010 09:28 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Also...the MWC has some late night games they can sell to networks.

Thi makes perfect sense...although ironic as the MWC split from the WAC and is now inviting many of the jilted teams back.

The MWC has arguably the better football teams in the conference right now but they don't have the TV deal or the big cities to land that TV deal like CUSA has. That's where CUSA comes into the picture......markets like Dallas, Houston, Orlando etc.

Yep -- this is why I suggested on a separate thread that a MWC merger with C-USA West makes perfect sense. Get whatever value you can by including the Houston and Dallas TV markets.

Personally I just think that at some point another BCS game will emerge. To much pressure to do so. Obviously I think it would be the "Cotton Bowl" and it would be held in Dallas at the new Cowboys stadium. Its no secret that Jerry Jones wants it. Jerry usually gets what he wants so I think its a real possibility. CUSA is a Texas based organization (correct me if I'm wrong) so it only makes sense.

You take the two best non-AQ conferences, put then together in a way to determine a champion that would get the bid to the new BCS bowl. My guess is that CUSA works with Mountain West and its TV network (since its already up and running) to expand in CUSA markets.

A TV network spanning from coast to coast from California to West Virginia. I would assume that that Mountain West name would go away and simply be called "Conference USA".

Personally I think it has big potential.

Just speculation on my part but I would think that if the BCS powers that be agreed to a BCS bid for this combined conference, they would want the 2 combining to be as big as possible to account for a bigger chunk of the non-AQ's.

I also think if this merger or affiliation happened that the 3 (AFA, Wyo, CSU) remaining schools from the infamous gang of 5 that formed the MWC would need to agree to having tracking bracelets attached to their athletic directors and presidents. The first time they all congregated at an airport, a swat team would be dispatched immediately.

(12-13-2010 09:32 AM)wvucrazed Wrote:  The schools that make the most sense for the WAC's immediate needs are: Lamar, Portland State and Sacramento State, plus Seattle for non-football. That would get them to 10 for football, 12 overall.

The WAC's most immediate issue is the loss of their NCAA basketball tournament autobid. After Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii leave the WAC will only have 5 schools that have been together at least 5 years (you have to have 6 together for 5 years to keep the autobid).

Oddly enough, the easiest way for the WAC to keep its hoops autobid is to add four more Southland Conference schools at the same time as UTSA and Texas State; then those six former Southland schools would give them the continuity needed.

(12-13-2010 02:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-13-2010 09:32 AM)wvucrazed Wrote:  The schools that make the most sense for the WAC's immediate needs are: Lamar, Portland State and Sacramento State, plus Seattle for non-football. That would get them to 10 for football, 12 overall.

The WAC's most immediate issue is the loss of their NCAA basketball tournament autobid. After Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii leave the WAC will only have 5 schools that have been together at least 5 years (you have to have 6 together for 5 years to keep the autobid).

Oddly enough, the easiest way for the WAC to keep its hoops autobid is to add four more Southland Conference schools at the same time as UTSA and Texas State; then those six former Southland schools would give them the continuity needed.

They would only lose the autobid for 3 years, I believe. And they are likely to get an at-large anyway... I don't think they would make important membership decisions that could impact the league for decades based on losing the auto-bid for such a short period of time.

That said, there could be some merit to the idea of bringing in a couple non-FB members of the Southland conference - Corpus Christi, for instance, or Arlington. That could make life easier if you're looking at divisions from a travel and a rivalry standpoint.

(12-13-2010 02:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-13-2010 09:32 AM)wvucrazed Wrote:  The schools that make the most sense for the WAC's immediate needs are: Lamar, Portland State and Sacramento State, plus Seattle for non-football. That would get them to 10 for football, 12 overall.

The WAC's most immediate issue is the loss of their NCAA basketball tournament autobid. After Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii leave the WAC will only have 5 schools that have been together at least 5 years (you have to have 6 together for 5 years to keep the autobid).

Oddly enough, the easiest way for the WAC to keep its hoops autobid is to add four more Southland Conference schools at the same time as UTSA and Texas State; then those six former Southland schools would give them the continuity needed.

Or they could ask for a waiver of the rule and due to circumstances the ncaa might grant it. I feel the rule is meant to prevent conferences from forming easily and really isn't meant to remove a bid from a league as much as it is meant to encourage stability.

(12-13-2010 03:03 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  

(12-13-2010 02:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-13-2010 09:32 AM)wvucrazed Wrote:  The schools that make the most sense for the WAC's immediate needs are: Lamar, Portland State and Sacramento State, plus Seattle for non-football. That would get them to 10 for football, 12 overall.

The WAC's most immediate issue is the loss of their NCAA basketball tournament autobid. After Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii leave the WAC will only have 5 schools that have been together at least 5 years (you have to have 6 together for 5 years to keep the autobid).

Oddly enough, the easiest way for the WAC to keep its hoops autobid is to add four more Southland Conference schools at the same time as UTSA and Texas State; then those six former Southland schools would give them the continuity needed.

Or they could ask for a waiver of the rule and due to circumstances the ncaa might grant it. I feel the rule is meant to prevent conferences from forming easily and really isn't meant to remove a bid from a league as much as it is meant to encourage stability.

I agree that it's very possible a waiver could be granted. The MWC initially didn't get a waiver, but part of that was because that was a group that split off from another league. The WAC's situation is different where it's a league that has lost members. The main purpose of the waiver rule is to discourage members from leaving to form new leagues as opposed to punishing those left behind in weakened leagues.

What will happen to my local team San Jose State Spartans? They are screwed.

(12-13-2010 09:07 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  The University of Cal-Berkley is the designated land grant school for California but I think Berkley put all the agriculture programs at UC-Davis. But, in reality, Caly Poly SLO, among other academic programs, is probably the agriculture school that most Californians look to for majoring in agriculture. Probably in academic terms, the school most likly resembling Cal Poly SLO is a school like Va Tech, the land grant school for Virginia but not thought of as an ag school like, for example, Iowa State. In terms of attitude, Cal Poly SLO most closely resembles Texas A&M. They are passionate and gung ho for their school. If they get them, this is a great pickup for WAC, great positive news in an otherwise disheartening situation. Gorgeous campus not located too far from the beach.

Nice try... Ag engineering for SLO maybe. Davis also does alot of AG but they are very research focused. One of the primary ag schools in California is Fresno State.

(12-13-2010 03:06 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2010 03:03 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  

(12-13-2010 02:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-13-2010 09:32 AM)wvucrazed Wrote:  The schools that make the most sense for the WAC's immediate needs are: Lamar, Portland State and Sacramento State, plus Seattle for non-football. That would get them to 10 for football, 12 overall.

The WAC's most immediate issue is the loss of their NCAA basketball tournament autobid. After Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii leave the WAC will only have 5 schools that have been together at least 5 years (you have to have 6 together for 5 years to keep the autobid).

Oddly enough, the easiest way for the WAC to keep its hoops autobid is to add four more Southland Conference schools at the same time as UTSA and Texas State; then those six former Southland schools would give them the continuity needed.

Or they could ask for a waiver of the rule and due to circumstances the ncaa might grant it. I feel the rule is meant to prevent conferences from forming easily and really isn't meant to remove a bid from a league as much as it is meant to encourage stability.

I agree that it's very possible a waiver could be granted. The MWC initially didn't get a waiver, but part of that was because that was a group that split off from another league. The WAC's situation is different where it's a league that has lost members. The main purpose of the waiver rule is to discourage members from leaving to form new leagues as opposed to punishing those left behind in weakened leagues.

I think you'll see it as well if they are up to at least 7 members and working their way back towards the requirements for an auto-bid. I just see the waiver being given since they were raided.

(12-13-2010 03:12 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  What will happen to my local team San Jose State Spartans? They are screwed.

Personally I think it will all work out fine in then for all of those schools. Just a hunch.

(12-10-2010 10:33 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(12-10-2010 09:33 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(12-10-2010 04:28 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  there is a rumor that Cal Poly, now in the BW may move up and join the WAC if they can raise funding for stadium enhancement.

Cal Poly ? Shouldn't that be Cal Tech ?

Commonly referred to as Cal Poly out west. Cal Tech does sound better though.

There already is a Cal Tech, they play D-III. California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo is the official name of Cal Poly-SLO. There's also a Cal Poly-Pomona in D-II.

edit: I didn't see the new guy's post, but yeah what he said.