Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
New School maybe
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
joshadam84 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 276
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Chicago State
Location: Indiana
Post: #61
RE: New School maybe
11-01-2018 07:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,481
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 127
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #62
RE: New School maybe
(11-01-2018 03:34 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 12:14 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 02:04 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  Texas is a great option but wouldn't the WAC be wary of a Texas school voting block if they add 5 to 6 of them?

I once had a boss who would say “That’s the kind of problem we like to have.”

Karl Benson?

Karl Benson’s problem was not being able to recruit or hold onto Texas schools when he needed them to save WAC football. He couldn’t land North Texas, and couldn’t convince Texas State, UTSA and UTA to stick around.
11-01-2018 11:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CrimsonPhantom Offline
A WAC Sheriff!
*

Posts: 5,524
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 302
I Root For: NM State
Location:
Post: #63
RE: New School maybe
(11-01-2018 11:39 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 03:34 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 12:14 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 02:04 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  Texas is a great option but wouldn't the WAC be wary of a Texas school voting block if they add 5 to 6 of them?

I once had a boss who would say “That’s the kind of problem we like to have.”

Karl Benson?

Karl Benson’s problem was not being able to recruit or hold onto Texas schools when he needed them to save WAC football. He couldn’t land North Texas, and couldn’t convince Texas State, UTSA and UTA to stick around.

UTA doesn't have football, so it wouldn't have mattered if they had stayed.
11-02-2018 11:44 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,039
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 8
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #64
RE: New School maybe
(11-01-2018 11:39 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 03:34 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 12:14 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 02:04 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  Texas is a great option but wouldn't the WAC be wary of a Texas school voting block if they add 5 to 6 of them?

I once had a boss who would say “That’s the kind of problem we like to have.”

Karl Benson?

Karl Benson’s problem was not being able to recruit or hold onto Texas schools when he needed them to save WAC football. He couldn’t land North Texas, and couldn’t convince Texas State, UTSA and UTA to stick around.

Actually, Karl Benson was the person who invited Texas State and UT Arlington to the Sun Belt. He jumped ship from the WAC to the SBC and essentially gave WAC FBS football its final death blow... Slimy Mr. Peanut!

May 4, 2012...

"Texas State is a great addition to the Sun Belt Conference as the Bobcat athletic program is destined for success in the Football Bowl Subdivision," Sun Belt commissioner Karl Benson said during a teleconference Wednesday afternoon."

"The addition of Texas State and Georgia State is part of the plan the Sun Belt has to bring in quality universities, not only to get bigger but to get better," Benson said. "We believe that these two universities have made the Sun Belt better for the future."

May 24, 2012...

"We are honored to join the Sun Belt Conference," UT Arlington president James D. Spaniolo said. "This move will help us continue to advance the interests of our university. Along with the opening of the College Park Center just a few short months ago, this move to the Sun Belt is another clear sign of the growth of not only our athletic department but of our entire university."

"This is another milestone day for UT Arlington athletics," UTA director of athletics Jim Baker said. "I want to thank commissioner Karl Benson for the invitation to compete in the Sun Belt Conference. This move to the Sun Belt will allow us to continue to showcase our athletics program on a national level and create further awareness for our university."

"The addition of UT Arlington is tremendous for the Sun Belt Conference as the league will now move forward with 12 member institutions with two six team divisions," Sun Belt Commissioner Karl Benson said. "UTA will help continue the rise of the Sun Belt Conference as a national contender in intercollegiate athletics."
(This post was last modified: 11-03-2018 03:07 AM by NMSUPistolPete.)
11-02-2018 06:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,015
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 112
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #65
RE: New School maybe
Actually on May 6th San Jose State and and May 4th Utah State accepted invitations to join the Mountain West. The two schools worked together for over a year to pull it off. IIRC the MWC wanted each school to have it's pwn press day, hence the two day difference.

Everyone knew this was coming. The Texas schools got to work on their options. UTSA joined CUSA in April as well. They got Board of Regents approval to accept an invitation on April 5th, news broke on April 28th, and they made it official. New reports already were mentioning the pending announcements of USU and SJSU to the MWC. LTU also joined CUSA officially on May 4th, 2012, and North Texas moved from the SBC to CUSA.

Everyone moved at once. It really was inevitable when the BYU project failed, the MWC preemptively inviting Fresno State and Nevada, then Hawaii (not sure I remember the exact order). At that point SJSU and USU started working with each other for MWC invites and Karl Benson planned his exit to the Sun Belt. Everyone else started looking out for #1 except NMSU (led at the time by the disastrous Barbara Couture) and Idaho.

When even your Commissioner bails out for another conference, you know things are bad
(This post was last modified: 11-02-2018 07:32 PM by Stugray2.)
11-02-2018 07:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,015
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 112
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #66
RE: New School maybe
To the subject at hand. It will be interesting to see if the WAC can get either Metro State or Dixie State (requires and FCS Football plan), and possibly Tarleton State (also requires a football plan).

I would think Football could work if they could convince UCD and Cal Poly to join with Dixie State, Tarleton State and a new RGV program. But it requires yet one more school APU, to move up.

That is a lot of if's. But they are all plausible. RGV starting football is problematic, APU getting the finances and desire to go D1 is far from certain. Luring UCD and Cal Poly as affiliates is not a sure thing (although many in the Big Sky want to expand by subtraction to just play each other).

Should it come together, you'd have a conference with APU, CBU, GCU, UVU, RGV, SU, MSU and TSU. UMKC may be stuck, and NMSU seems stuck as well. If they had that 10, I suspect they'd finally pull the trigger on booting Chicago State who have not been in compliance with WAC requirements ever (they simply don't have the money to ever get in compliance).

Anyway, way ahead of myself. Just interesting that they are working on so many D2 schools as possible move ups. Hurd is working hard get the league stable. Metro seems to be a stand alone. They basically need Dixie, Tarleton and Azusa Pacific to all join together to get FCS off the ground. I don't see that as likely. It's hard enough to get one school to move up, let alone three at once.
11-02-2018 08:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,481
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 127
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #67
RE: New School maybe
(11-02-2018 06:46 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 11:39 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 03:34 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 12:14 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(11-01-2018 02:04 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  Texas is a great option but wouldn't the WAC be wary of a Texas school voting block if they add 5 to 6 of them?

I once had a boss who would say “That’s the kind of problem we like to have.”

Karl Benson?

Karl Benson’s problem was not being able to recruit or hold onto Texas schools when he needed them to save WAC football. He couldn’t land North Texas, and couldn’t convince Texas State, UTSA and UTA to stick around.

May 4, 2012...

Actually, Karl Benson was the person who invited Texas State and UT Arlington to the Sun Belt. He jumped ship from the WAC to the SBC and essentially gave WAC FBS football its final death blow... Slimy Mr. Peanut!

"Texas State is a great addition to the Sun Belt Conference as the Bobcat athletic program is destined for success in the Football Bowl Subdivision," Sun Belt commissioner Karl Benson said during a teleconference Wednesday afternoon."

"The addition of Texas State and Georgia State is part of the plan the Sun Belt has to bring in quality universities, not only to get bigger but to get better," Benson said. "We believe that these two universities have made the Sun Belt better for the future."

May 24, 2012...

"We are honored to join the Sun Belt Conference," UT Arlington president James D. Spaniolo said. "This move will help us continue to advance the interests of our university. Along with the opening of the College Park Center just a few short months ago, this move to the Sun Belt is another clear sign of the growth of not only our athletic department but of our entire university."

"This is another milestone day for UT Arlington athletics," UTA director of athletics Jim Baker said. "I want to thank commissioner Karl Benson for the invitation to compete in the Sun Belt Conference. This move to the Sun Belt will allow us to continue to showcase our athletics program on a national level and create further awareness for our university."

"The addition of UT Arlington is tremendous for the Sun Belt Conference as the league will now move forward with 12 member institutions with two six team divisions," Sun Belt Commissioner Karl Benson said. "UTA will help continue the rise of the Sun Belt Conference as a national contender in intercollegiate athletics."

My bad, I didn't realize Karl was already gone to the Sun Belt when Texas State and UTA jumped. Thanks for setting the record straight!
11-03-2018 02:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,265
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 33
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #68
RE: New School maybe
Good discussion. Texas State accepted an invite to the WAC on November 11, 2010, along with UTSA, Denver and Seattle. When Utah State and San Jose State left, it was over for us. Benson got us into the Sun Belt. Louisiana Tech left for CUSA and UTSA had their choice of CUSA, Sun Belt and the Mountain West. They chose CUSA. That all happened before the 2012 football season. As Stu correctly pointed out, everyone knew the departures were coming.

Metro State, if they can find the money, would be a very good fit and they could join in 2020-2021 to replace CSUB. The Denver market is another top twenty TV Market and the WAC headquarters are in Denver. Metro State replacing CSUB is easier on travel for schools like UMKC.

As for WAC FCS football, there are a lot of obstacles to that, but it is a remote possibility. I think a WAC football conference would need to get to nine and include the following:

1. California D1 schools - UC Davis, Cal Poly, San Diego. These schools could join without effecting their Olympic school affiliations. For San Diego, playing western schools will significantly decrease travel and should generate fan interest.

2. D2 schools - Tarleton State, Dixie State and Azusa Pacific. APU is a long shot. I don't know if they have the desire or the money, but they would be a great addition. All three schools would join as all-sports additions.

3. Big Sky & Southland defections - If Cal Poly and UC Davis left, the Big Sky could still lose one all-sport school to the WAC and they would be at an even ten. The Southland could also lose one school for football and be at an even ten. So, Northern Arizona from the Big Sky and Abilene Christian from the Southland. ACU would join the WAC for football only with their old rival, Tarleton State. Abilene is less than 100 miles from Stephenville.

4. UTRGV & UTA - Both of these schools have discussed starting a football program. I am not sure if either has the money or support for
a football team. The DFW market is not in need of more football. I am not convinced that the Valley will really support football. UTA would join for football only.

I think WAC football is a long shot, bit it is worth the shot.
11-03-2018 03:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,332
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 94
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #69
RE: New School maybe
Why aren’t the WAC posters, for consistency sake, getting all upset over the WAC becoming an FCS League? It would take at least seven years to even get an autobid and there isn’t any pot of money at the end of the line and you would not be protected from defections for at least five years ( an autobid would take two more). But this same group claimed I was insane for posting the Cal Poly, Sac St, UCDavis, UTRGV, NMSU and three other Souland schools wanted to be FBS in the WAC and qualify for at least a $10 million CFP pot annually after 2025 is now totally happy with seeking FCS status by 2027 with no money incentive.

In return for taking other conferences schools, the WAC will recruit FCS schools to replace them as a gentleman’s agreement. The WAC is the only conference that can extend FBS bids. UCDavis etc would be insane if they waived that bye-bye. Liberty moved up on its own, but it would take a veritable fortune to do it, and Liberty has that cash.

The Big Sky and Southland can’t recruit now without fans knowing something is up and rebelling as both leagues are bloated now. So the WAC will do their dirty work and no one would be wiser. Tarleton St leadership would be insane for a WAC FCS League just as Dixie St leadership would be for a WAC FCS League. And why is Metro St even in the running as it doesn’t help an FCS WAC? Metro St will provide a Olympic travel partner for No Colo in the new cheaper Big Sky.

Why wasn’t the WAC adding schools years ago if they wanted insurance against Chicago St, UMKC and NMSU leaving? The WAC was just plainly incompetent or these movement have been planned for years as UCDavis et al could not be FBS in time for the CFP payout in 2012. The Big West added UCSD and Bakersfield because they were informed by Davis and Poly of their impending departure. Again, a gentlemen’s agreement to not leave hurt feeling behind but preplanning instead. Something big is about to occur but the posters here are just clueless.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2018 10:21 AM by NoDak.)
11-04-2018 11:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lopes87 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 527
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 6
I Root For: GCU
Location:
Post: #70
RE: New School maybe
Why should any current WAC school with no football care?
11-05-2018 12:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,039
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 8
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #71
RE: New School maybe
After Cal State Bakersfield leaves the conference, the WAC will be left with seven non-football schools and one school with football in the FBS. I doubt the WAC will grow beyond 12 full members since there is no point in growing any larger for a one (NCAA) bid basketball conference. So, if FCS football in the WAC is meant to be, Commissioner Hurd would need to add four FCS football play schools with the open slots. If the WAC is seriously looking at adding non-football playing schools Metro State of Denver and Cal State Los Angeles, which fits the WAC's current blueprint for easy travel, then I'm not sure how Hurd can start a WAC affiliated FCS conference? The addition of both those schools would put the WAC at 10 schools who don't play FCS football.

In order for FCS football in the WAC to be realistic, two things would need to happen in unison. Both Chicago State and UM Kansas City would need to leave the conference at the same time the WAC adds Dixie State and Tarleton State. Then Hurd would need to target four more FCS schools to be full members so not to exceeding 12 total members. At that point, any additional FCS members would need to be football only schools like possibly adding Cal Poly, UC Davis and San Diego; to bring the WAC FCS membership up to 9 schools. That would put the WAC at a 12 basketball/9 football conference. The problem? Are there four FCS schools available as full members after adding Dixie State and Tarleton State? Do Chicago State and UMKC have any plans of leaving the WAC anytime soon? There are a lot of moving parts (with schools yet to be named) just to make FCS football happen in the WAC.

The simple answer is to add any combinations of Metro State, Dixie State, Tarleton State, and Cal State Los Angeles to fill in the WAC without "intending" to creating a WAC football conference. If both Dixie State and Tarleton State join, they will figure out individually how to house their football programs; either go independent or stick football in a different conference. Maybe over time "if" the eastern WAC schools decide to leave (opening up new slots), the WAC can add other football playing schools. And, maybe UTRGV will add football. At some point, those football playing schools can possibly form a non-affiliated football conference much like MVC football.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2018 06:48 AM by NMSUPistolPete.)
11-05-2018 06:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RobtheAggie Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 262
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 7
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #72
RE: New School maybe
The one question I have is with all of the talk, what is the timeline for all the DII move-ups to occur. Is one a season too much, is it every two seasons that one can move up? I can not remember. I know that the Southland had an issue when UIW and Abilene Christian both moved up at the same time.
11-05-2018 07:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,332
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 94
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #73
RE: New School maybe
The Southland brought in two DII schools the same year but didnt limit their schedule to single round robin. The ASUN did it too but successfully as they were smart enough to limit the DII moveups schedules. New DI schools are looked at by the NCAA as still DII only the first year. The ASUN brought in two DII schools for two years running (Kennesaw St, USC-Upstate, FGCU, UNF) and didn’t have problems as they followed the NCAA rules. The Southland seemingly just refused to look up the NCAA rules for moveups while the ASUN did.

As a DI can play up to 3 DII'S a year, taking in three a year is theoretically possible with a single round robin by the moveups. More than three is also possible with very weird scheduling ( the moveups playing mostly among themselves the first year).
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2018 10:08 AM by NoDak.)
11-05-2018 09:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
edinburger Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 137
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 0
I Root For: UTRGV
Location:
Post: #74
RE: New School maybe
(11-05-2018 07:40 AM)RobtheAggie Wrote:  The one question I have is with all of the talk, what is the timeline for all the DII move-ups to occur. Is one a season too much, is it every two seasons that one can move up? I can not remember. I know that the Southland had an issue when UIW and Abilene Christian both moved up at the same time.

Is there a rule? Thought as long as 7 were full D-I that was all that mattered.
11-05-2018 09:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,332
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 94
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #75
RE: New School maybe
(11-05-2018 12:30 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  Why should any current WAC school with no football care?

If one cares about the future of the conference one should care. If GCU is leaving that’s another story.
11-05-2018 10:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,332
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 94
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #76
RE: New School maybe
Six FCS are possible in just a few years, but an autobid would take at least seven years.

UC-Davis - join as an affiliate
Cal Poly -join as an affiliate
Dixie St
UTRGV -chose FCS
Tarleton St
UVU or another moveup

But why would UC-Davis and Cal Poly choose a weaker schedule (harder to get an at large) and no chance at an autobid for seven years?

UC-Davis just hired Dan Hawkins, who guided Boise St to FBS, and is having its best season ever in FCS. Hawkins would quit and move elsewhere if this was the condition.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2018 10:26 AM by NoDak.)
11-05-2018 10:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,332
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 94
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #77
RE: New School maybe
Expect Azusa Pacific to be called up for FCS and Cal St-LA called up to be their travel partner.

CWU called up to be EWU’s travel partner.

The future Big Sky

Portland St - Seattle
EWU - CWU
Idaho St - UVU
No Colo - Metro St
SUU - Dixie St
Azusa Pac - Cal St LA
NAUp
11-05-2018 10:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,039
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 8
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #78
RE: New School maybe
(11-05-2018 07:40 AM)RobtheAggie Wrote:  The one question I have is with all of the talk, what is the timeline for all the DII move-ups to occur. Is one a season too much, is it every two seasons that one can move up? I can not remember. I know that the Southland had an issue when UIW and Abilene Christian both moved up at the same time.

With regards to basketball scheduling, a Division 1 school can only play four games against Division 2 opponents in a single season. And, a transitioning Division 2 school is only considered as a Division 1 school after its second year in the transition process and only if it meets all D1 scheduling requirements.

https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/search/bylawView?id=1

20.9.8 Basketball Scheduling.

20.9.8.1 Four-Game Limit. An institution may schedule and play not more than four basketball games, including any contest (e.g., scrimmage, exhibition), in an academic year against institutions that are not members of Division I. (Revised: 3/1/12)

20.9.8.2 One-Third of Contests in Home Arena. An active or reclassifying member must play at least one-third of its regular-season basketball contests in the arena regularly used for the institution's home games. (Revised: 1/11/94 effective 9/2/94, 3/10/04, 1/15/11 effective 8/1/11)

20.9.8.2.1 Multiple Home Arenas. In meeting the home-arena requirement, an institution may use more than one arena, provided each arena is located within a 30-mile radius of the institution's main campus and each arena is used annually by the institution for at least two home basketball contests.

20.9.8.3 One-Third of Women's Contests Away From Home or at a Neutral Site. An active member or a reclassifying member must play at least one-third of its regular-season women's basketball contests away from home or at a neutral site. A reclassifying member is required to apply scheduling criteria beginning with year two of the reclassifying process. (Adopted: 1/15/11 effective 8/1/11)

20.9.8.4 Counting Contests.

20.9.8.4.1 Membership Classification of Opponents. In determining whether an institution meets the scheduling criteria, each opponent shall be counted as it was classified on August 1 of the academic year involved.

20.9.8.4.1.1 Reclassifying Opponents. A reclassifying institution shall be counted as a Division I opponent in the year the reclassifying institution must comply with Division I scheduling requirements (year two of the reclassifying process). (Adopted: 4/15/97, Revised: 4/24/03 effective 8/1/03)

20.9.8.4.1.2 Waiver. The Strategic Vision and Planning Committee, by a two-thirds majority of its members present and voting, may grant a waiver of the provisions of Bylaw 20.9.8.4.1 in cases of reclassification of an opponent when there is an enforceable game contract, executed in writing, or in the case of similar contractual problems. (Revised: 11/1/07 effective 8/1/08, 8/7/14, 10/4/17)
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2018 10:49 AM by NMSUPistolPete.)
11-05-2018 10:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PojoaquePosse Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 285
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 4
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #79
RE: New School maybe
(11-01-2018 06:55 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  Tarleton, Dixie, and Metro are the only ones that have come up. Let’s not get too ahead of ourselves.

This is the only sane post in this thread. These are the only schools we know about and could very well constitute the entirety of the "schools that were asked by the WAC to look into moving to D1".

I know there was a brief mention of the WAC and FCS somewhere, but I think that is secondary. The WAC needs schools to stay afloat and is probably throwing out every carrot possible (FCS) to try and get teams to join.
11-05-2018 11:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jdgaucho Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,837
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 36
I Root For: UCSB
Location: Big West Land
Post: #80
RE: New School maybe
(11-04-2018 11:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Why aren’t the WAC posters, for consistency sake, getting all upset over the WAC becoming an FCS League? It would take at least seven years to even get an autobid and there isn’t any pot of money at the end of the line and you would not be protected from defections for at least five years ( an autobid would take two more). But this same group claimed I was insane for posting the Cal Poly, Sac St, UCDavis, UTRGV, NMSU and three other Souland schools wanted to be FBS in the WAC and qualify for at least a $10 million CFP pot annually after 2025 is now totally happy with seeking FCS status by 2027 with no money incentive.

In return for taking other conferences schools, the WAC will recruit FCS schools to replace them as a gentleman’s agreement. The WAC is the only conference that can extend FBS bids. UCDavis etc would be insane if they waived that bye-bye. Liberty moved up on its own, but it would take a veritable fortune to do it, and Liberty has that cash.

The Big Sky and Southland can’t recruit now without fans knowing something is up and rebelling as both leagues are bloated now. So the WAC will do their dirty work and no one would be wiser. Tarleton St leadership would be insane for a WAC FCS League just as Dixie St leadership would be for a WAC FCS League. And why is Metro St even in the running as it doesn’t help an FCS WAC? Metro St will provide a Olympic travel partner for No Colo in the new cheaper Big Sky.

Why wasn’t the WAC adding schools years ago if they wanted insurance against Chicago St, UMKC and NMSU leaving? The WAC was just plainly incompetent or these movement have been planned for years as UCDavis et al could not be FBS in time for the CFP payout in 2012. The Big West added UCSD and Bakersfield because they were informed by Davis and Poly of their impending departure. Again, a gentlemen’s agreement to not leave hurt feeling behind but preplanning instead. Something big is about to occur but the posters here are just clueless.

Remember the travel ban The California State governnent issued in 2017 towards other states they deem to have discriminatory laws towards LGBT? It says no state money to be used to travel to those states. What a coincidence, that within a mere six months of the travel ban being enacted Bakersfield finds the BW door open after 14 years of having it slammed in their face.

If the state government does not want Cal State Bakersfield to play conference games in Texas or other states on the banned list - SDSU was forced to use private funds to pay for their flight to Wichita for their NCAA Tourney game as well as their last bowl game - there's no way they will just issue a blank check to UC Davis and Cal Poly playing conference games in Texas.

Until athletics is exempted from this ban, Cal Poly and UC Davis won't be part of an FBS WAC that has any members in Texas.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-gov...08374.html


AB 1887 reads that, along with other state agencies, “the Board of Regents of the University of California … shall not … Approve a request for state-funded or state-sponsored travel to a state that, after June 26, 2015, has enacted a law that voids or repeals, or has the effect of voiding or repealing, existing state or local protections against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/02/09/new-c...in-states/
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2018 11:23 AM by jdgaucho.)
11-05-2018 11:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 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, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.