(05-10-2016 08:53 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 08:05 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 07:54 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 07:56 AM)MechaKnight Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 04:59 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  MWC requires its members to play football.

They would not allow BYU to be independent in football and park their other sports in the MWC. Why would they make an exception for Wichita State?

Now if Wichita St adds football, then that's a different scenario altogether.

But Wichita is only desirable for their basketball program, their football would be dead weight. You don't let BYU do that because you actually want their FB program.

If I'm the MWC I would strongly consider adding Gonzaga and Wichita as non-football members.

I can't believe a UCF fan would say this. Didn't UCF and USF start their programs in the 1990'? This is like the pot calling the kettle black. Wichita state could easily do the same thing.

Ucf has been playing football since the 70's in a cow pasture.

OK even so ucf is new to d 1 football. There is no reason to think Wichita state would be any different. My question with them would be "are you making the necessary commitment to be competitive." add them to the league in all sports except football. After five years at the FCS level add their football program.

I like Wichita State. They should of been added years ago. If they can get resources from Koch brothers then they might be good enough addition in 10 years for football. Basketball they should have been added years ago.

(05-10-2016 09:13 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 08:53 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 08:05 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 07:54 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 07:56 AM)MechaKnight Wrote:  But Wichita is only desirable for their basketball program, their football would be dead weight. You don't let BYU do that because you actually want their FB program.

If I'm the MWC I would strongly consider adding Gonzaga and Wichita as non-football members.

I can't believe a UCF fan would say this. Didn't UCF and USF start their programs in the 1990'? This is like the pot calling the kettle black. Wichita state could easily do the same thing.

Ucf has been playing football since the 70's in a cow pasture.

OK even so ucf is new to d 1 football. There is no reason to think Wichita state would be any different. My question with them would be "are you making the necessary commitment to be competitive." add them to the league in all sports except football. After five years at the FCS level add their football program.

I like Wichita State. They should of been added years ago. If they can get resources from Koch brothers then they might be good enough addition in 10 years for football. Basketball they should have been added years ago.

I agree but they could probably do it in five. UTSA did it in two

(05-10-2016 09:28 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:13 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 08:53 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 08:05 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 07:54 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  I can't believe a UCF fan would say this. Didn't UCF and USF start their programs in the 1990'? This is like the pot calling the kettle black. Wichita state could easily do the same thing.

Ucf has been playing football since the 70's in a cow pasture.

OK even so ucf is new to d 1 football. There is no reason to think Wichita state would be any different. My question with them would be "are you making the necessary commitment to be competitive." add them to the league in all sports except football. After five years at the FCS level add their football program.

I like Wichita State. They should of been added years ago. If they can get resources from Koch brothers then they might be good enough addition in 10 years for football. Basketball they should have been added years ago.

I agree but they could probably do it in five. UTSA did it in two

We want them further along than UTSA. FCS 2 years, indy 3 years and see where they stand on attendance, support, and competitiveness.

(05-10-2016 09:59 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:28 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:13 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 08:53 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 08:05 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  Ucf has been playing football since the 70's in a cow pasture.

OK even so ucf is new to d 1 football. There is no reason to think Wichita state would be any different. My question with them would be "are you making the necessary commitment to be competitive." add them to the league in all sports except football. After five years at the FCS level add their football program.

I like Wichita State. They should of been added years ago. If they can get resources from Koch brothers then they might be good enough addition in 10 years for football. Basketball they should have been added years ago.

I agree but they could probably do it in five. UTSA did it in two

We want them further along than UTSA. FCS 2 years, indy 3 years and see where they stand on attendance, support, and competitiveness.

agree

(05-10-2016 10:00 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:59 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:28 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 09:13 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(05-10-2016 08:53 AM)TopCoog2016 Wrote:  OK even so ucf is new to d 1 football. There is no reason to think Wichita state would be any different. My question with them would be "are you making the necessary commitment to be competitive." add them to the league in all sports except football. After five years at the FCS level add their football program.

I like Wichita State. They should of been added years ago. If they can get resources from Koch brothers then they might be good enough addition in 10 years for football. Basketball they should have been added years ago.

I agree but they could probably do it in five. UTSA did it in two

We want them further along than UTSA. FCS 2 years, indy 3 years and see where they stand on attendance, support, and competitiveness.

agree

If we do decide to bring back football, it will be done right. We're not going to half ass it just to have it. That said, basketball will still be number one and we won't do anything to hurt that, but football will be funded and we won't be happy just to have a team. Now how long it takes to get to respectability is anyone's guess. We have a number of wealthy donors not named Charles Koch, even if he is the biggest and most recognizable name. And if he's on board, others will definitely follow.

Wichita football was dropped before due to lack of interest so who knows if a second time will change their taste among their fans who may heavily favor basketball and not so much football.

This definitely plays a big role when conferences decide who is a good candidate for them and IMO, Wichita doesn't look sexy right now.

(05-10-2016 12:25 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Wichita football was dropped before due to lack of interest so who knows if a second time will change their taste among their fans who may heavily favor basketball and not so much football.

This definitely plays a big role when conferences decide who is a good candidate for them and IMO, Wichita doesn't look sexy right now.

That's partially true. But 30 years ago football wasn't near as big as it is now. We also had an AD and Prez back then that didn't see athletics as a priority and all sports outside of baseball, which was essentially run by the coach and the AD had little to do with anything. That's not the case now. We have a fan base that seems to be very excited about football and a President that has it as a high priority.

Just because we are a basketball first school doesn't mean that football will be nothing more than an afterthought. The state of KS is a basketball centric state to begin with. But football has grown in popularity and I believe it would be supported. Time will tell and I hope we get that chance to prove it.

I do completely understand those who are hesitant. But there are a lot of Shocker fans who have been paying attention and attending games up north or even in Oklahoma because Wichita doesn't have it. Most of those would latch onto Shocker Football pretty quickly. I know I've talked to a number of people that only follow KSU/KU/OU/OSU because we currently don't offer the sport. They are all excited about where many of us believe things are headed.

I expect us to be an FCS Independent if/when we start back up. I'm not sure how complicated scheduling would be but I do believe some of our football playing MVC members might be open to games. Especially the couple of schools that have been looking at their options a little less publically than we have as they may believe our exit could help theirs should we have to go somewhere other than the AAC/MWC.

(05-10-2016 12:25 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Wichita football was dropped before due to lack of interest so who knows if a second time will change their taste among their fans who may heavily favor basketball and not so much football.

This definitely plays a big role when conferences decide who is a good candidate for them and IMO, Wichita doesn't look sexy right now.

A plane crash on the level of Marshall certainly didn't help.