Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What was the Southland thinking?!
Author Message
Fighting Muskie Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,303
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 199
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #1
What was the Southland thinking?!
I'm trying to rationalize why the Southland added Incarnate Word, Houston Baptist, Abilene Christian, Oral Roberts, and New Orleans when they did.

At that point they had 9 schools and 8 played football. They could have stayed pat or added just 1 additional member to stabilize but instead they are way overexpanded.

Think about where they could be if they'd let the WAC assume the risk of adding those programs. The WAC would be stable and the football programs among them could be Southland affiliates.
01-22-2018 07:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


dbackjon Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,669
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 285
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #2
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
Part of it was when Louisiana was suffering mightily under Jindal - budget cuts were making it possible that one or more Louisiana schools would close or drop sports to stay alive. Houston Baptist is centrally located in the footprint. UIW kept them in San Antonio after UTSA and Texas State left for the WAC.

ACU has traditionally been a strong program.
01-22-2018 07:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,834
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 378
I Root For: Houston, PVAMU
Location: Houston
Post: #3
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
I'm against diluting a brand just to add numbers. That said, while they may have gone slightly overboard, all of those teams make total sense as Southland programs. The Southland is barely D-I as it is.
(This post was last modified: 01-22-2018 09:08 PM by _C2_.)
01-22-2018 08:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Jersey Retired
Jersey Retired

Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 105
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #4
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
The Southland is leary of Lamar, Sam Houston St, and Stephen F Austin leaving for FBS. It had to protect the football side if that happened.
01-22-2018 08:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chargeradio Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,398
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 82
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #5
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 07:16 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm trying to rationalize why the Southland added Incarnate Word, Houston Baptist, Abilene Christian, Oral Roberts, and New Orleans when they did.

At that point they had 9 schools and 8 played football. They could have stayed pat or added just 1 additional member to stabilize but instead they are way overexpanded.

Think about where they could be if they'd let the WAC assume the risk of adding those programs. The WAC would be stable and the football programs among them could be Southland affiliates.
There might be an opportunity for a do-over, but finding homes for Seattle, Utah Valley, Grand Canyon, and now Cal Baptist might be difficult:

WAC - NMSU, ACU, UTRGV, TAMUCC, UIW, HBU, SHSU
SLC - Lamar, SFA, UCA, UNO, McNeese State, Nicholas State, Northwestern State, SELA

If UT Arlington and/or Little Rock could be lured to the Southland, this would allow the WAC to square up at eight members.
01-22-2018 08:25 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,303
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 199
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #6
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  The Southland is leary of Lamar, Sam Houston St, and Stephen F Austin leaving for FBS. It had to protect the football side if that happened.

I get the flight risk associated with those 3 at a time where alignments were shifting about as often as the tides but they could have just as easily picked them as replacements to those 3 rather than filler.

Looking back I'm really shocked that when the WAC essentially did an open casting call for anyone West of the Mississippi interested in FBS football UTSA and Texas St was all they could muster. It would have probably taken at least 5 more to ultimately save WAC football.
01-22-2018 08:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 3,182
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 171
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #7
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 08:25 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 07:16 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm trying to rationalize why the Southland added Incarnate Word, Houston Baptist, Abilene Christian, Oral Roberts, and New Orleans when they did.

At that point they had 9 schools and 8 played football. They could have stayed pat or added just 1 additional member to stabilize but instead they are way overexpanded.

Think about where they could be if they'd let the WAC assume the risk of adding those programs. The WAC would be stable and the football programs among them could be Southland affiliates.
There might be an opportunity for a do-over, but finding homes for Seattle, Utah Valley, Grand Canyon, and now Cal Baptist might be difficult:

WAC - NMSU, ACU, UTRGV, TAMUCC, UIW, HBU, SHSU
SLC - Lamar, SFA, UCA, UNO, McNeese State, Nicholas State, Northwestern State, SELA

If UT Arlington and/or Little Rock could be lured to the Southland, this would allow the WAC to square up at eight members.

Do UTA and UALR get a share of the CFP payout as part of the SBC? If so (and even if not), I don't see how the Southland could "lure" them away.
01-22-2018 08:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,303
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 199
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #8
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 08:25 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 07:16 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm trying to rationalize why the Southland added Incarnate Word, Houston Baptist, Abilene Christian, Oral Roberts, and New Orleans when they did.

At that point they had 9 schools and 8 played football. They could have stayed pat or added just 1 additional member to stabilize but instead they are way overexpanded.

Think about where they could be if they'd let the WAC assume the risk of adding those programs. The WAC would be stable and the football programs among them could be Southland affiliates.
There might be an opportunity for a do-over, but finding homes for Seattle, Utah Valley, Grand Canyon, and now Cal Baptist might be difficult:

WAC - NMSU, ACU, UTRGV, TAMUCC, UIW, HBU, SHSU
SLC - Lamar, SFA, UCA, UNO, McNeese State, Nicholas State, Northwestern State, SELA

If UT Arlington and/or Little Rock could be lured to the Southland, this would allow the WAC to square up at eight members.

There are a bunch of ways you could stock the WAC--

Push all the non-football schools in the South Central region to the WAC:
+ A&M CC, UTA, UALR, New Orleans

Add the 2010s SLC adds:
+ IWU, ACU, HBU, New Orleans

You don't necessarily have to find homes for Seattle, UVU, Cal Bapt, and GCU--just shift to a divisional model where one group is Texas centric and the other has more of a western feel.
01-22-2018 08:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,303
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 199
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #9
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 08:30 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:25 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 07:16 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm trying to rationalize why the Southland added Incarnate Word, Houston Baptist, Abilene Christian, Oral Roberts, and New Orleans when they did.

At that point they had 9 schools and 8 played football. They could have stayed pat or added just 1 additional member to stabilize but instead they are way overexpanded.

Think about where they could be if they'd let the WAC assume the risk of adding those programs. The WAC would be stable and the football programs among them could be Southland affiliates.
There might be an opportunity for a do-over, but finding homes for Seattle, Utah Valley, Grand Canyon, and now Cal Baptist might be difficult:

WAC - NMSU, ACU, UTRGV, TAMUCC, UIW, HBU, SHSU
SLC - Lamar, SFA, UCA, UNO, McNeese State, Nicholas State, Northwestern State, SELA

If UT Arlington and/or Little Rock could be lured to the Southland, this would allow the WAC to square up at eight members.

Do UTA and UALR get a share of the CFP payout as part of the SBC? If so (and even if not), I don't see how the Southland could "lure" them away.

I don't think either get any football related money
01-22-2018 08:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chargeradio Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,398
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 82
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #10
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 08:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Looking back I'm really shocked that when the WAC essentially did an open casting call for anyone West of the Mississippi interested in FBS football UTSA and Texas St was all they could muster. It would have probably taken at least 5 more to ultimately save WAC football.
What really did the WAC in was the requirement for 12 teams to have a championship game. Had the Mountain West held at 10, this looks like a very different group to rebuild from:

Utah State
Idaho
San Jose State
New Mexico State

That’s to say nothing of Texas State and UTSA staying put in the WAC thanks to C-USA adding UTSA and WKU.
01-22-2018 08:35 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,303
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 199
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #11
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 08:35 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Looking back I'm really shocked that when the WAC essentially did an open casting call for anyone West of the Mississippi interested in FBS football UTSA and Texas St was all they could muster. It would have probably taken at least 5 more to ultimately save WAC football.
What really did the WAC in was the requirement for 12 teams to have a championship game. Had the Mountain West held at 10, this looks like a very different group to rebuild from:

Utah State
Idaho
San Jose State
New Mexico State

That’s to say nothing of Texas State and UTSA staying put in the WAC thanks to C-USA adding UTSA and WKU.

Great point. If the "Big 12" rule been in place my guess is that C-USA would have about 10 members which means probably 4 schools currently in C-USA or SBC would not be in either league. Coastal Carolina is a given. It also probably means App St and Georgia Southern stay in FCS too.

If the American had the option to play a conference title with 10 schools Tulsa and either ECU or Tulane also find them back in C-USA.

UTSA probably still ends up moving out of the WAC but maybe they hang onto Texas St and non-FB UTA.
01-22-2018 08:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,299
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 446
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #12
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  The Southland is leary of Lamar, Sam Houston St, and Stephen F Austin leaving for FBS. It had to protect the football side if that happened.

Exactly one of those teams has any chance of viability as a FBS team. And they're not interested.
01-22-2018 08:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chargeradio Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,398
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 82
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #13
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 08:46 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:35 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Looking back I'm really shocked that when the WAC essentially did an open casting call for anyone West of the Mississippi interested in FBS football UTSA and Texas St was all they could muster. It would have probably taken at least 5 more to ultimately save WAC football.
What really did the WAC in was the requirement for 12 teams to have a championship game. Had the Mountain West held at 10, this looks like a very different group to rebuild from:

Utah State
Idaho
San Jose State
New Mexico State

That’s to say nothing of Texas State and UTSA staying put in the WAC thanks to C-USA adding UTSA and WKU.

Great point. If the "Big 12" rule been in place my guess is that C-USA would have about 10 members which means probably 4 schools currently in C-USA or SBC would not be in either league. Coastal Carolina is a given. It also probably means App St and Georgia Southern stay in FCS too.

If the American had the option to play a conference title with 10 schools Tulsa and either ECU or Tulane also find them back in C-USA.

UTSA probably still ends up moving out of the WAC but maybe they hang onto Texas St and non-FB UTA.
If you go by the last moves announced:

American: -Tulsa, -East Carolina (originally announced as football only to the hen-Big East)
CUSA: +Tulsa, +East Carolina, -WKU, -MTSU, -FAU, -Charlotte, -ODU, -UTSA
SBC: +WKU, +MTSU, +FAU, -CCU, -Georgia Southern, -App State

MWC: -SJSU, -USU
WAC: +NMSU, +Idaho, +SJSU, +USU, +UTSA

Interesting that Texas State was added by the Sun Belt before Georgia Southern and App State, but that move probably doesn’t happen with FAU, WKU, and MTSU in the Belt (not to mention incoming Georgia State). In the worst case the WAC forms an Eastern Division with Charlotte, Old Dominion, and two of Georgia Southern/App State/Texas State.
01-22-2018 09:27 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 34,689
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1802
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #14
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  The Southland is leary of Lamar, Sam Houston St, and Stephen F Austin leaving for FBS. It had to protect the football side if that happened.

I just don’t see any of those having the support base necessary for FBS.
01-22-2018 09:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Jersey Retired
Jersey Retired

Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 105
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #15
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 09:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  The Southland is leary of Lamar, Sam Houston St, and Stephen F Austin leaving for FBS. It had to protect the football side if that happened.

I just don’t see any of those having the support base necessary for FBS.

Didn't see much support from FIU, FAU, Ga St, Tx St, and Coastal either but they all took the FBS plunge.
01-22-2018 10:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 3,182
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 171
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #16
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 09:27 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:46 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:35 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Looking back I'm really shocked that when the WAC essentially did an open casting call for anyone West of the Mississippi interested in FBS football UTSA and Texas St was all they could muster. It would have probably taken at least 5 more to ultimately save WAC football.
What really did the WAC in was the requirement for 12 teams to have a championship game. Had the Mountain West held at 10, this looks like a very different group to rebuild from:

Utah State
Idaho
San Jose State
New Mexico State

That’s to say nothing of Texas State and UTSA staying put in the WAC thanks to C-USA adding UTSA and WKU.

Great point. If the "Big 12" rule been in place my guess is that C-USA would have about 10 members which means probably 4 schools currently in C-USA or SBC would not be in either league. Coastal Carolina is a given. It also probably means App St and Georgia Southern stay in FCS too.

If the American had the option to play a conference title with 10 schools Tulsa and either ECU or Tulane also find them back in C-USA.

UTSA probably still ends up moving out of the WAC but maybe they hang onto Texas St and non-FB UTA.
If you go by the last moves announced:

American: -Tulsa, -East Carolina (originally announced as football only to the hen-Big East)
CUSA: +Tulsa, +East Carolina, -WKU, -MTSU, -FAU, -Charlotte, -ODU, -UTSA
SBC: +WKU, +MTSU, +FAU, -CCU, -Georgia Southern, -App State

MWC: -SJSU, -USU
WAC: +NMSU, +Idaho, +SJSU, +USU, +UTSA

Interesting that Texas State was added by the Sun Belt before Georgia Southern and App State, but that move probably doesn’t happen with FAU, WKU, and MTSU in the Belt (not to mention incoming Georgia State). In the worst case the WAC forms an Eastern Division with Charlotte, Old Dominion, and two of Georgia Southern/App State/Texas State.

Here's my take on an earlier CCG deregulation, slightly modified from another thread:

Suppose that a more forward-thinking Big 12 had been able to convince the NCAA to drop the 12-school minimum for a conference championship in late 2011, by which point the conference had settled on 10 schools. I imagine that one major consequence of this is that the non-power conferences wouldn't have been so keen on reaching 12. While the P5 would likely have proceeded with expansion as in our timeline, I would guess that 8 or 10 football schools would probably be the target for rest of the conferences. This means that the WAC could possibly have survived as a football conference, although only barely. A potential G6 alignment by 2018:

American: Cincinnati, Houston, Memphis, Navy (FB only), SMU, Temple, Tulane, UCF, UConn, USF

C-USA: Charlotte, ECU, FIU, Marshall, North Texas, Rice, Southern Miss, Tulsa, UAB, UTEP

MWC: Air Force, Boise, CSU, Fresno, Hawaii (FB only), Nevada, New Mexico, SDSU, UNLV, Wyoming

Sun Belt: Arkansas State, FAU, MTSU, South Alabama, Troy, ULL, ULM, WKU (+ non-FB UALR)

WAC: Idaho, La Tech, NMSU, SJSU, Texas State, Utah State, UTSA, [another FB school] (+ non-FB Denver, Seattle, UTA)

The MAC is the same as in our timeline.

Basically, the old Big East/American declines to invite ECU and Tulsa. So those two stick with C-USA, who in turn isn't as inclined to overexpand and so only takes FIU and North Texas from the Sun Belt and Charlotte from the A-10. The Sun Belt restocks to the 8-school football minimum when USA adds the sport. The MWC doesn't pick off SJSU or USU from the WAC. This leaves the WAC with just 7 football schools after adding Texas State and UTSA, so perhaps they'd add another FCS team to make eight. The MAC's 12 full members had all been in the conference since before the turn of the century. UMass had already been set as of April 2011 to join as a football affiliate, but they part ways with the MAC in just a few years as in our timeline. ODU, App State, GA Southern, GSU, and CCU remain in the FCS without an FBS conference invite.
01-22-2018 10:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,834
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 378
I Root For: Houston, PVAMU
Location: Houston
Post: #17
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
I wish more conferences wouldn't overexpand. It dilutes quality and finances, which in turn dilutes quality, which in turn dilutes finances...and the cycle doesn't end until someone leaves.
(This post was last modified: 01-23-2018 09:12 AM by _C2_.)
01-22-2018 10:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CarlSmithCenter Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 279
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 27
I Root For: Ball So Hard U
Location:
Post: #18
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 10:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 09:27 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:46 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:35 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Looking back I'm really shocked that when the WAC essentially did an open casting call for anyone West of the Mississippi interested in FBS football UTSA and Texas St was all they could muster. It would have probably taken at least 5 more to ultimately save WAC football.
What really did the WAC in was the requirement for 12 teams to have a championship game. Had the Mountain West held at 10, this looks like a very different group to rebuild from:

Utah State
Idaho
San Jose State
New Mexico State

That’s to say nothing of Texas State and UTSA staying put in the WAC thanks to C-USA adding UTSA and WKU.

Great point. If the "Big 12" rule been in place my guess is that C-USA would have about 10 members which means probably 4 schools currently in C-USA or SBC would not be in either league. Coastal Carolina is a given. It also probably means App St and Georgia Southern stay in FCS too.

If the American had the option to play a conference title with 10 schools Tulsa and either ECU or Tulane also find them back in C-USA.

UTSA probably still ends up moving out of the WAC but maybe they hang onto Texas St and non-FB UTA.
If you go by the last moves announced:

American: -Tulsa, -East Carolina (originally announced as football only to the hen-Big East)
CUSA: +Tulsa, +East Carolina, -WKU, -MTSU, -FAU, -Charlotte, -ODU, -UTSA
SBC: +WKU, +MTSU, +FAU, -CCU, -Georgia Southern, -App State

MWC: -SJSU, -USU
WAC: +NMSU, +Idaho, +SJSU, +USU, +UTSA

Interesting that Texas State was added by the Sun Belt before Georgia Southern and App State, but that move probably doesn’t happen with FAU, WKU, and MTSU in the Belt (not to mention incoming Georgia State). In the worst case the WAC forms an Eastern Division with Charlotte, Old Dominion, and two of Georgia Southern/App State/Texas State.

Here's my take on an earlier CCG deregulation, slightly modified from another thread:

Suppose that a more forward-thinking Big 12 had been able to convince the NCAA to drop the 12-school minimum for a conference championship in late 2011, by which point the conference had settled on 10 schools. I imagine that one major consequence of this is that the non-power conferences wouldn't have been so keen on reaching 12. While the P5 would likely have proceeded with expansion as in our timeline, I would guess that 8 or 10 football schools would probably be the target for rest of the conferences. This means that the WAC could possibly have survived as a football conference, although only barely. A potential G6 alignment by 2018:

American: Cincinnati, Houston, Memphis, Navy (FB only), SMU, Temple, Tulane, UCF, UConn, USF

C-USA: Charlotte, ECU, FIU, Marshall, North Texas, Rice, Southern Miss, Tulsa, UAB, UTEP

MWC: Air Force, Boise, CSU, Fresno, Hawaii (FB only), Nevada, New Mexico, SDSU, UNLV, Wyoming

Sun Belt: Arkansas State, FAU, MTSU, South Alabama, Troy, ULL, ULM, WKU (+ non-FB UALR)

WAC: Idaho, La Tech, NMSU, SJSU, Texas State, Utah State, UTSA, [another FB school] (+ non-FB Denver, Seattle, UTA)

The MAC is the same as in our timeline.

Basically, the old Big East/American declines to invite ECU and Tulsa. So those two stick with C-USA, who in turn isn't as inclined to overexpand and so only takes FIU and North Texas from the Sun Belt and Charlotte from the A-10. The Sun Belt restocks to the 8-school football minimum when USA adds the sport. The MWC doesn't pick off SJSU or USU from the WAC. This leaves the WAC with just 7 football schools after adding Texas State and UTSA, so perhaps they'd add another FCS team to make eight. The MAC's 12 full members had all been in the conference since before the turn of the century. UMass had already been set as of April 2011 to join as a football affiliate, but they part ways with the MAC in just a few years as in our timeline. ODU, App State, GA Southern, GSU, and CCU remain in the FCS without an FBS conference invite.

American: Cincinnati, Houston, Memphis, Navy (FB only), SMU, Temple, Tulane, UCF, UConn, USF

C-USA: Charlotte, ECU, FIU, FAU, Marshall, Rice, Southern Miss, Tulsa, UAB, UNT

MWC: Air Force, Boise, CSU, Fresno, UTEP, Nevada, New Mexico, SDSU, UNLV, Wyoming

Sun Belt: Arkansas State, App State, Ga So, ODU, MTSU, South Alabama, Troy, ULL, ULM, WKU (+ non-FB UALR)

WAC: Hawaii, Idaho, La Tech, NMSU, SJSU, Texas State, Utah State, UTSA (+ non-FB Denver, Seattle, UTA).

Hawaii doesn’t have to leave the WAC and can still put its Olympic sports in the Big West if it wants. When UAB drops football CUSA adds ODU to remain at 10 football teams. Sun Belt adds Ga State or Coastal to replace ODU. If UAB revives football and is allowed to stay in CUSA, CUSA takes UMass all sports and goes to 12. If UAB is booted from CUSA for dropping football initially they join Sun Belt and when they revive football whichever of Ga State or Coastal that didn’t initially get in is added and they go to 12.
01-22-2018 10:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 34,689
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1802
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #19
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
Honestly—the Southland is a pretty congenial conference. There is no money to speak of being split—so extra teams don’t really make a difference. In fact, more teams within the footprint just make travel easier for the teams and fans. There is no huge downside to having extra teams in FCS.
(This post was last modified: 01-22-2018 11:06 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-22-2018 11:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 3,182
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 171
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #20
RE: What was the Southland thinking?!
(01-22-2018 10:46 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 10:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 09:27 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:46 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(01-22-2018 08:35 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  What really did the WAC in was the requirement for 12 teams to have a championship game. Had the Mountain West held at 10, this looks like a very different group to rebuild from:

Utah State
Idaho
San Jose State
New Mexico State

That’s to say nothing of Texas State and UTSA staying put in the WAC thanks to C-USA adding UTSA and WKU.

Great point. If the "Big 12" rule been in place my guess is that C-USA would have about 10 members which means probably 4 schools currently in C-USA or SBC would not be in either league. Coastal Carolina is a given. It also probably means App St and Georgia Southern stay in FCS too.

If the American had the option to play a conference title with 10 schools Tulsa and either ECU or Tulane also find them back in C-USA.

UTSA probably still ends up moving out of the WAC but maybe they hang onto Texas St and non-FB UTA.
If you go by the last moves announced:

American: -Tulsa, -East Carolina (originally announced as football only to the hen-Big East)
CUSA: +Tulsa, +East Carolina, -WKU, -MTSU, -FAU, -Charlotte, -ODU, -UTSA
SBC: +WKU, +MTSU, +FAU, -CCU, -Georgia Southern, -App State

MWC: -SJSU, -USU
WAC: +NMSU, +Idaho, +SJSU, +USU, +UTSA

Interesting that Texas State was added by the Sun Belt before Georgia Southern and App State, but that move probably doesn’t happen with FAU, WKU, and MTSU in the Belt (not to mention incoming Georgia State). In the worst case the WAC forms an Eastern Division with Charlotte, Old Dominion, and two of Georgia Southern/App State/Texas State.

Here's my take on an earlier CCG deregulation, slightly modified from another thread:

Suppose that a more forward-thinking Big 12 had been able to convince the NCAA to drop the 12-school minimum for a conference championship in late 2011, by which point the conference had settled on 10 schools. I imagine that one major consequence of this is that the non-power conferences wouldn't have been so keen on reaching 12. While the P5 would likely have proceeded with expansion as in our timeline, I would guess that 8 or 10 football schools would probably be the target for rest of the conferences. This means that the WAC could possibly have survived as a football conference, although only barely. A potential G6 alignment by 2018:

American: Cincinnati, Houston, Memphis, Navy (FB only), SMU, Temple, Tulane, UCF, UConn, USF

C-USA: Charlotte, ECU, FIU, Marshall, North Texas, Rice, Southern Miss, Tulsa, UAB, UTEP

MWC: Air Force, Boise, CSU, Fresno, Hawaii (FB only), Nevada, New Mexico, SDSU, UNLV, Wyoming

Sun Belt: Arkansas State, FAU, MTSU, South Alabama, Troy, ULL, ULM, WKU (+ non-FB UALR)

WAC: Idaho, La Tech, NMSU, SJSU, Texas State, Utah State, UTSA, [another FB school] (+ non-FB Denver, Seattle, UTA)

The MAC is the same as in our timeline.

Basically, the old Big East/American declines to invite ECU and Tulsa. So those two stick with C-USA, who in turn isn't as inclined to overexpand and so only takes FIU and North Texas from the Sun Belt and Charlotte from the A-10. The Sun Belt restocks to the 8-school football minimum when USA adds the sport. The MWC doesn't pick off SJSU or USU from the WAC. This leaves the WAC with just 7 football schools after adding Texas State and UTSA, so perhaps they'd add another FCS team to make eight. The MAC's 12 full members had all been in the conference since before the turn of the century. UMass had already been set as of April 2011 to join as a football affiliate, but they part ways with the MAC in just a few years as in our timeline. ODU, App State, GA Southern, GSU, and CCU remain in the FCS without an FBS conference invite.

American: Cincinnati, Houston, Memphis, Navy (FB only), SMU, Temple, Tulane, UCF, UConn, USF

C-USA: Charlotte, ECU, FIU, FAU, Marshall, Rice, Southern Miss, Tulsa, UAB, UNT

MWC: Air Force, Boise, CSU, Fresno, UTEP, Nevada, New Mexico, SDSU, UNLV, Wyoming

Sun Belt: Arkansas State, App State, Ga So, ODU, MTSU, South Alabama, Troy, ULL, ULM, WKU (+ non-FB UALR)

WAC: Hawaii, Idaho, La Tech, NMSU, SJSU, Texas State, Utah State, UTSA (+ non-FB Denver, Seattle, UTA).

Hawaii doesn’t have to leave the WAC and can still put its Olympic sports in the Big West if it wants. When UAB drops football CUSA adds ODU to remain at 10 football teams. Sun Belt adds Ga State or Coastal to replace ODU. If UAB revives football and is allowed to stay in CUSA, CUSA takes UMass all sports and goes to 12. If UAB is booted from CUSA for dropping football initially they join Sun Belt and when they revive football whichever of Ga State or Coastal that didn’t initially get in is added and they go to 12.

Wouldn't Hawaii want to leave the WAC anyway? And the MWC must have preferred them as a FB affiliate over having UTEP as a full member.

I doubt ODU would have made the jump to FBS without a CUSA invite.

And CUSA didn't dump UAB for dropping football in reality, so why would they do so here?

In any case, CUSA isn't taking UMass as a full member. Even as FB affiliate, it seems more trouble than it's worth.

And finally, Georgia State received a SBC invite well before either Georgia Southern or App State did.
01-23-2018 09:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.