Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
NMSUPistolPete Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,023
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #21
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-26-2020 04:23 PM)Todor Wrote:  
(08-26-2020 04:03 PM)gleadley Wrote:  
(08-26-2020 04:01 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  Liberty
UMass
UConn
NMSU

I think you could give BYU and UTEP a Boise State like setup to join.

DSU
TSU

there is 8 right there.

I have cured the WAC FBS issue. lol

Why hasn't anyone thought of GCU starting football? 05-stirthepot05-stirthepot05-stirthepot

They have, but everyone know how tight money is around there.

Yeah, they would need to buy another city block so they can build their 50K seat football stadium.
08-26-2020 05:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Todor Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 430
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Nmsu
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-26-2020 11:29 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(08-26-2020 10:49 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  UMass, UConn, and Liberty haven’t had any issues putting together an independent schedule, why would they want to be tied up with conference games with Dixie and Tarleton? Which network is going to sign this conference to a TV deal?

Ummm...this thread was started with the possibility that BYU would have problems scheduling as an Indy and that Hawaii and Tulsa could be kicked out of their conferences.

Back to your take. There are many benefits to being in a conference. And if Liberty were not having issues with a schedule, why are they scheduling NMSU twice a season? UMass is also starting to appear on NMSU's schedules. Other than Army, ND and BYU, I think it is difficult scheduling as an Indy.

BYU--They're a decent program and they have had success getting games--so far. But a front loaded schedule with empty gaps mixed in with irrelevant FCS teams when it gets to that for BYU is not fun or fan friendly. Stick a couple of indys in a conference home and BYU is going to be looking at a bunch of FCS buy games just to finish a season out.

Hawaii- these type of stop gap measures seldom work long term. Is there evidence to the contrary? Assuming it doesn't last forever, exactly which FBS conference is a great option for Hawaii? Perhaps there are there more football only affiliate arrangements stretching over 3,000 miles that have worked out long term that I'm not a are of. The MW would NEVER turn a full time 12th member to help a football onky deal with Hawaii. UH is in because the MW needed them at the moment. When they don't need them any more, they are kicked into rip tide I'm afraid.

Tulsa, oh Tulsa. Former WAC member, former Conference USA member, former Missouri Valley member.... But now they have stability in a conference full of other conference jumpers? At least half of whom would jump ship at the drop of a hat. And have a history of doing so. Not only that, but they are the odd duck of the conference with barely 3K students while UCF, USF, Temple, and Houston range from 40-65k. Small school, smaller tv market, running $20 million dollar budget deficits... If all the good, big programs like Houston,UCF, USF, Memphis and Cincy end up getting snapped up in the next realignment, will Tulsa be happy with just Tulane and East Carolina and SMU? Or might they be looking? They haven't been in 4 different conferences in the last 25 years for no reason.And I have no reason to think the AAC won't change drastically in the near future. The only reason I didn't throw SMU and Rice in along with them is that they are richer and in bigger markets. But all three, and probably Tulane as well, seem to feel they belong in the big time a little more than they do in reality. And time will catch up with them all if they don't perform better.

If you think I threw out names and with no forethought or some kind of magical, wishful thinking, you'd be sorely mistaken sir. Conference instability is real. Any New Mexico State fan knows that. I'm not talking about any existing FBS teams aspiring to be in the WAC, I'm talking schools that may have little choice at some point. And from the talk at the top, something is indeed happening. And I doubt it is all FCS move ups, particularly from some of the newest D1 schools--not because of anything about them in particular, but because of the time and planning needed to institute such changes. The Dakota schools could pull it off quickly on the other hand

Sorry for the extra long "column," as well as past and future ones lol.
(This post was last modified: 08-27-2020 01:36 AM by Todor.)
08-27-2020 01:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PojoaquePosse Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 812
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 20
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
Check out our weekly Ask the AD podcast from yesterday. MM talks about FBS football. Starts around the 8:55 mark. He says in order for the WAC to start an FBS conference, they need 8 (not 6) teams and each team has to be a full member of the conference, not an affiliate. So that rules out teams like UMASS and Liberty. He does mention Tarleton by name and says we need 6 more schools. Strange that he does not mention Dixie State.

https://nmstatesports.com/sports/2020/8/...casts.aspx
08-27-2020 09:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PojoaquePosse Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 812
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 20
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-27-2020 01:19 AM)Todor Wrote:  
(08-26-2020 11:29 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(08-26-2020 10:49 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  UMass, UConn, and Liberty haven’t had any issues putting together an independent schedule, why would they want to be tied up with conference games with Dixie and Tarleton? Which network is going to sign this conference to a TV deal?

Ummm...this thread was started with the possibility that BYU would have problems scheduling as an Indy and that Hawaii and Tulsa could be kicked out of their conferences.

Back to your take. There are many benefits to being in a conference. And if Liberty were not having issues with a schedule, why are they scheduling NMSU twice a season? UMass is also starting to appear on NMSU's schedules. Other than Army, ND and BYU, I think it is difficult scheduling as an Indy.

BYU--They're a decent program and they have had success getting games--so far. But a front loaded schedule with empty gaps mixed in with irrelevant FCS teams when it gets to that for BYU is not fun or fan friendly. Stick a couple of indys in a conference home and BYU is going to be looking at a bunch of FCS buy games just to finish a season out.

Hawaii- these type of stop gap measures seldom work long term. Is there evidence to the contrary? Assuming it doesn't last forever, exactly which FBS conference is a great option for Hawaii? Perhaps there are there more football only affiliate arrangements stretching over 3,000 miles that have worked out long term that I'm not a are of. The MW would NEVER turn a full time 12th member to help a football onky deal with Hawaii. UH is in because the MW needed them at the moment. When they don't need them any more, they are kicked into rip tide I'm afraid.

Tulsa, oh Tulsa. Former WAC member, former Conference USA member, former Missouri Valley member.... But now they have stability in a conference full of other conference jumpers? At least half of whom would jump ship at the drop of a hat. And have a history of doing so. Not only that, but they are the odd duck of the conference with barely 3K students while UCF, USF, Temple, and Houston range from 40-65k. Small school, smaller tv market, running $20 million dollar budget deficits... If all the good, big programs like Houston,UCF, USF, Memphis and Cincy end up getting snapped up in the next realignment, will Tulsa be happy with just Tulane and East Carolina and SMU? Or might they be looking? They haven't been in 4 different conferences in the last 25 years for no reason.And I have no reason to think the AAC won't change drastically in the near future. The only reason I didn't throw SMU and Rice in along with them is that they are richer and in bigger markets. But all three, and probably Tulane as well, seem to feel they belong in the big time a little more than they do in reality. And time will catch up with them all if they don't perform better.

If you think I threw out names and with no forethought or some kind of magical, wishful thinking, you'd be sorely mistaken sir. Conference instability is real. Any New Mexico State fan knows that. I'm not talking about any existing FBS teams aspiring to be in the WAC, I'm talking schools that may have little choice at some point. And from the talk at the top, something is indeed happening. And I doubt it is all FCS move ups, particularly from some of the newest D1 schools--not because of anything about them in particular, but because of the time and planning needed to institute such changes. The Dakota schools could pull it off quickly on the other hand

Sorry for the extra long "column," as well as past and future ones lol.

Never mind. I don't know why I get caught up in this realignment nonsense...
(This post was last modified: 08-27-2020 09:53 AM by PojoaquePosse.)
08-27-2020 09:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Trod0 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 329
Joined: Mar 2016
Reputation: 16
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-27-2020 09:28 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(08-27-2020 01:19 AM)Todor Wrote:  
(08-26-2020 11:29 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(08-26-2020 10:49 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  UMass, UConn, and Liberty haven’t had any issues putting together an independent schedule, why would they want to be tied up with conference games with Dixie and Tarleton? Which network is going to sign this conference to a TV deal?

Ummm...this thread was started with the possibility that BYU would have problems scheduling as an Indy and that Hawaii and Tulsa could be kicked out of their conferences.

Back to your take. There are many benefits to being in a conference. And if Liberty were not having issues with a schedule, why are they scheduling NMSU twice a season? UMass is also starting to appear on NMSU's schedules. Other than Army, ND and BYU, I think it is difficult scheduling as an Indy.

BYU--They're a decent program and they have had success getting games--so far. But a front loaded schedule with empty gaps mixed in with irrelevant FCS teams when it gets to that for BYU is not fun or fan friendly. Stick a couple of indys in a conference home and BYU is going to be looking at a bunch of FCS buy games just to finish a season out.

Hawaii- these type of stop gap measures seldom work long term. Is there evidence to the contrary? Assuming it doesn't last forever, exactly which FBS conference is a great option for Hawaii? Perhaps there are there more football only affiliate arrangements stretching over 3,000 miles that have worked out long term that I'm not a are of. The MW would NEVER turn a full time 12th member to help a football onky deal with Hawaii. UH is in because the MW needed them at the moment. When they don't need them any more, they are kicked into rip tide I'm afraid.

Tulsa, oh Tulsa. Former WAC member, former Conference USA member, former Missouri Valley member.... But now they have stability in a conference full of other conference jumpers? At least half of whom would jump ship at the drop of a hat. And have a history of doing so. Not only that, but they are the odd duck of the conference with barely 3K students while UCF, USF, Temple, and Houston range from 40-65k. Small school, smaller tv market, running $20 million dollar budget deficits... If all the good, big programs like Houston,UCF, USF, Memphis and Cincy end up getting snapped up in the next realignment, will Tulsa be happy with just Tulane and East Carolina and SMU? Or might they be looking? They haven't been in 4 different conferences in the last 25 years for no reason.And I have no reason to think the AAC won't change drastically in the near future. The only reason I didn't throw SMU and Rice in along with them is that they are richer and in bigger markets. But all three, and probably Tulane as well, seem to feel they belong in the big time a little more than they do in reality. And time will catch up with them all if they don't perform better.

If you think I threw out names and with no forethought or some kind of magical, wishful thinking, you'd be sorely mistaken sir. Conference instability is real. Any New Mexico State fan knows that. I'm not talking about any existing FBS teams aspiring to be in the WAC, I'm talking schools that may have little choice at some point. And from the talk at the top, something is indeed happening. And I doubt it is all FCS move ups, particularly from some of the newest D1 schools--not because of anything about them in particular, but because of the time and planning needed to institute such changes. The Dakota schools could pull it off quickly on the other hand

Sorry for the extra long "column," as well as past and future ones lol.

Never mind. I don't know why I get caught up in this realignment nonsense...

Lol you keep getting sucked back into it, how dirty do you feel now? Lol I been getting sucked into it also in that other thread. I blame Mario for dangling that carrot and me wanting it.
08-27-2020 10:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NotANewbie Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 407
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Tennesse, NMSU
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-27-2020 09:10 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  Check out our weekly Ask the AD podcast from yesterday. MM talks about FBS football. Starts around the 8:55 mark. He says in order for the WAC to start an FBS conference, they need 8 (not 6) teams and each team has to be a full member of the conference, not an affiliate. So that rules out teams like UMASS and Liberty. He does mention Tarleton by name and says we need 6 more schools. Strange that he does not mention Dixie State.

https://nmstatesports.com/sports/2020/8/...casts.aspx

Maybe Dixie State was brought in as a trading piece. Dixie State may be traded for some Big Sky team that wants to move to FBS. Schools like Weber State, NAU one of the Dakotas come to mind.
08-27-2020 12:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bobcat2013 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,243
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 74
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-27-2020 12:27 PM)NotANewbie Wrote:  
(08-27-2020 09:10 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  Check out our weekly Ask the AD podcast from yesterday. MM talks about FBS football. Starts around the 8:55 mark. He says in order for the WAC to start an FBS conference, they need 8 (not 6) teams and each team has to be a full member of the conference, not an affiliate. So that rules out teams like UMASS and Liberty. He does mention Tarleton by name and says we need 6 more schools. Strange that he does not mention Dixie State.

https://nmstatesports.com/sports/2020/8/...casts.aspx

Maybe Dixie State was brought in as a trading piece. Dixie State may be traded for some Big Sky team that wants to move to FBS. Schools like Weber State, NAU one of the Dakotas come to mind.

None of the dakotas are in the big sky.
08-27-2020 12:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Vulpes88 Online
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 238
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 6
I Root For: Tarleton
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-27-2020 10:05 AM)Trod0 Wrote:  
(08-27-2020 09:28 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(08-27-2020 01:19 AM)Todor Wrote:  
(08-26-2020 11:29 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(08-26-2020 10:49 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  UMass, UConn, and Liberty haven’t had any issues putting together an independent schedule, why would they want to be tied up with conference games with Dixie and Tarleton? Which network is going to sign this conference to a TV deal?

Ummm...this thread was started with the possibility that BYU would have problems scheduling as an Indy and that Hawaii and Tulsa could be kicked out of their conferences.

Back to your take. There are many benefits to being in a conference. And if Liberty were not having issues with a schedule, why are they scheduling NMSU twice a season? UMass is also starting to appear on NMSU's schedules. Other than Army, ND and BYU, I think it is difficult scheduling as an Indy.

BYU--They're a decent program and they have had success getting games--so far. But a front loaded schedule with empty gaps mixed in with irrelevant FCS teams when it gets to that for BYU is not fun or fan friendly. Stick a couple of indys in a conference home and BYU is going to be looking at a bunch of FCS buy games just to finish a season out.

Hawaii- these type of stop gap measures seldom work long term. Is there evidence to the contrary? Assuming it doesn't last forever, exactly which FBS conference is a great option for Hawaii? Perhaps there are there more football only affiliate arrangements stretching over 3,000 miles that have worked out long term that I'm not a are of. The MW would NEVER turn a full time 12th member to help a football onky deal with Hawaii. UH is in because the MW needed them at the moment. When they don't need them any more, they are kicked into rip tide I'm afraid.

Tulsa, oh Tulsa. Former WAC member, former Conference USA member, former Missouri Valley member.... But now they have stability in a conference full of other conference jumpers? At least half of whom would jump ship at the drop of a hat. And have a history of doing so. Not only that, but they are the odd duck of the conference with barely 3K students while UCF, USF, Temple, and Houston range from 40-65k. Small school, smaller tv market, running $20 million dollar budget deficits... If all the good, big programs like Houston,UCF, USF, Memphis and Cincy end up getting snapped up in the next realignment, will Tulsa be happy with just Tulane and East Carolina and SMU? Or might they be looking? They haven't been in 4 different conferences in the last 25 years for no reason.And I have no reason to think the AAC won't change drastically in the near future. The only reason I didn't throw SMU and Rice in along with them is that they are richer and in bigger markets. But all three, and probably Tulane as well, seem to feel they belong in the big time a little more than they do in reality. And time will catch up with them all if they don't perform better.

If you think I threw out names and with no forethought or some kind of magical, wishful thinking, you'd be sorely mistaken sir. Conference instability is real. Any New Mexico State fan knows that. I'm not talking about any existing FBS teams aspiring to be in the WAC, I'm talking schools that may have little choice at some point. And from the talk at the top, something is indeed happening. And I doubt it is all FCS move ups, particularly from some of the newest D1 schools--not because of anything about them in particular, but because of the time and planning needed to institute such changes. The Dakota schools could pull it off quickly on the other hand

Sorry for the extra long "column," as well as past and future ones lol.

Never mind. I don't know why I get caught up in this realignment nonsense...

Lol you keep getting sucked back into it, how dirty do you feel now? Lol I been getting sucked into it also in that other thread. I blame Mario for dangling that carrot and me wanting it.

He's Michael Corleone. He wants out but people just keep bringing him back in.
08-27-2020 01:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,943
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
The problem with any sort of WAC FBS scheme is that for it to work you’d need to bring in a lot of new schools in but where are the non-FBS schools currently in the conference going to move out?

Chicago St is the only school that can be easily kicked out. Where is everyone else going?

There’s also the issue of no one jumping out saying they want to move up—no one in the Southland; no one in the Big Sky.
08-27-2020 01:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NotANewbie Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 407
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Tennesse, NMSU
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-27-2020 01:36 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The problem . . . is . . . also the issue of no one jumping out saying they want to move up—no one in the Southland; no one in the Big Sky.

Sometimes, silence masks a consideration of a surprise action. Not saying that is what is happening, but it is possible, although the chances are slim.
08-27-2020 01:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bobcat2013 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,243
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 74
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-27-2020 01:36 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The problem with any sort of WAC FBS scheme is that for it to work you’d need to bring in a lot of new schools in but where are the non-FBS schools currently in the conference going to move out?

Chicago St is the only school that can be easily kicked out. Where is everyone else going?

There’s also the issue of no one jumping out saying they want to move up—no one in the Southland; no one in the Big Sky.

To be fair to those who believe this will happen, no target schools are going to say anything until its a done deal. Otherwise they jeopardize their current membership.

Good point about the non football schools though.
08-27-2020 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,775
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 153
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #32
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
I think the chances of the WAC pulling off a return to FBS football are somewhere between slim and none.

Having said that, I see a single potential path to making it happen: a WAC expansion to 14 members accomplished by parting ways with Chicago State and adding six new schools that have FCS football programs with the potential to advance to FBS.

FCS schools would have to be targeted because I don't consider any member of any current FBS conference to be a realistic prospect to join the WAC. No school in a conference that's a party to the CFP contract would leave to join a conference that's not.

Looking at FCS programs with the potential to move up, the obvious challenge is that there aren't six in close geographic proximity to NMSU and Tarleton State. Instead the WAC would have to build southwest and northwest divisions and draw new members from each region. In the southwest division I could see the football additions being two move-ups from the Southland, and in the northwest four move-ups from the Big Sky.

While Dixie State would be a ninth football member, bringing their facilities and attendance up to the FBS level would be a long-term effort so I assume they would play FCS football in the Big Sky, which would be looking to rebuild if four members jumped to the WAC.

I think the best move-up prospects from the Southland are Lamar and Stephen F. Austin. Lamar enrolls 15K and SFA enrolls 13K. Both schools are in the upper tier of the Southland with respect to football stadium capacity (16K and 14K respectively) and average home football game attendance (8K and 7K respectively), and both have drawn single game crowds well in excess of 15K at times in their histories. Both are within a 2-hour drive of Houston's airport and each other which makes them ideal travel partners. Lamar has expressed interest in joining the WAC in the past, and SFA has an outstanding basketball program that would benefit from the higher level of competition in the WAC.

An alternative potential candidate is Abilene Christian, which is close enough to Tarleton State to be a good travel partner, draws comparably in football (8K) and has a nice new stadium. However ACU's enrollment is a relatively small 5K and the stadium seats only 12K.

In the northwest the obvious move-up prospects are Montana, Montana State and Idaho, all of which have 10K-plus enrollments. Montana and Montana State are among the leaders in FCS attendance (23K and 17K respectively) and were discussed many times on this board as WAC candidates when the conference still sponsored football. Obviously Idaho has played at the FBS level before, and is upgrading facilities with a new basketball arena. I think a fourth logical prospect is Eastern Washington, due to its football competitiveness (2010 FCS national championship and 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016 and 2018 Big Sky titles), 13K enrollment, decent level of fan support (8K home football attendance), proximity to Idaho as a travel partner, and potential to tap Spokane as a market. The challenge for EWU would be finding the money to expand its undersized 12K football stadium.

An alternative potential candidate is Sacramento State, which has a larger enrollment (31K), bigger stadium (21K) and better football attendance (11K) than EWU. The Sacramento metro market is also attractive. The downsides to Sac State are that the school wouldn't fit as well geographically, and until 2019 the football team had never won or shared a Big Sky title since joining the conference in 1996.

With the above divisions a future FBS WAC would consist of:

SOUTHWEST DIVISION

CBU
GCU
NMSU
Tarleton State
SFA
Lamar
UTRGV

NORTHWEST DIVISION

Seattle
EWU
Idaho
Montana
Montana State
UVU
Dixie State
08-27-2020 10:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Todor Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 430
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Nmsu
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
Dixie being traded for a BSC team that may want to move is an excellent possibility.

It is true that these deals seem to be all worked out behind the scenes before anything is known, and then boom, its just announced.

It would be funny if something does happen sometime, that it was scenario no one thought of.
08-27-2020 11:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LUSportsFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 407
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Lamar Cardinals
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-27-2020 01:36 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The problem with any sort of WAC FBS scheme is that for it to work you’d need to bring in a lot of new schools in but where are the non-FBS schools currently in the conference going to move out?

Chicago St is the only school that can be easily kicked out. Where is everyone else going?

There’s also the issue of no one jumping out saying they want to move up—no one in the Southland; no one in the Big Sky.

I haven't seen anything about Southland Conference universities in recent years except for a hint from UIW in 2017, but here are some by current members. Most are around the time of the last big round of moves. Personally, I don't see any reason for a public statement now so I'm not surprised at the lack of any. On the other hand, I see very few reasons for long term goals to change.

Sam Houston State - Link - Sam Houston State Exploring FBS Opportunities
This article first appeared in 2010 and was revised in 2014.

Quote:About a month ago, before all the crazy expansion stuff went down, Sam Houston State came up with a survey for alumni, students, fans and facility and staff to serve as a tool to help determine the feasibility of strengthening the entire athletic department and the possibility of moving up to the Football Bowl Subdivision.

This doesn’t mean that the Bearkats are planning on making the move anytime soon, but the athletic department would like to get a feel of what it might need to do to position Sam Houston State for the jump if indeed it comes to that down the road.

Incarnate Word - Link - UIW This 2017 article is primarily about the number of sports UIW sponsors, but there are hints of FBS aspirations.

Quote:UIW’s robust athletic lineup includes such so-called “marginal” or “nonspectator” sports as synchronized swimming and men’s and women’s fencing, which are sure to come under scrutiny as the school considers an athletic future that someday could include a move to the upper echelon of college football, the Division I-Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS).

Lamar - Link - Lamar five year goal

Quote:Tubbs and university president Jimmy Simmons believe Lamar could soon find a way into the Bowl Subdivision. Such a move would bring Lamar larger payouts

for so-called guarantee games and give the university a slice of the lucrative bowl pie.

"Yes, we plan to do that, in a five-year program we would like be in the FBS, which is the Bowl Subdivision," Tubbs said. "That's where we aspire to be. As things are moving around, we want to position ourselves to have the possibility of upgrading our football program."

Details of a move have not been ironed out. Tubbs said no deal is in place with a particular conference, but "we've been looking at this for quite some time," Tubbs said.

Link - Lamar to WAC? This 2011 article is about a possible move to the WAC.

Quote:Jimmy Simmons waits.

And until he receives contact from the Western Athletic Conference or any other conference interested in helping Lamar University move up in the world of college football, he's glad to be a member of the Southland Conference.

"They have not contacted me," Simmons said Wednesday in response to a report that the WAC is considering Lamar as a replacement for the University of Hawaii, which will leave the conference for the Mountain West Conference in time for the 2012 football season.

"We had mentioned before that we'd be open to anything that would give us the ability to change direction and move up," Simmons added. "At this point, until they make a definitive offer, there's nothing to discuss."

Stephen F. Austin -
I had heard Stephen F. Austin studied moving up about the same time as Sam Houston, but I haven't been able to find any articles about any studies. SFA has continued improving athletic facilities, and is currently building a $26M basketball performance facility.

Twitter Link - SFA Basketball Performance Center rendition video
(This post was last modified: 08-28-2020 05:05 PM by LUSportsFan.)
08-28-2020 04:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Todor Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 430
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Nmsu
Location:
Post: #35
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
There are several good possibilities in there, LUSportsfan. Even though I'm not as optimistic about being all newly arrived teams from FCS, Abilene and Incarnate Word, and West Texas would all be nice additions and geographically favorable in most respects. But anywhere in Texas is still pretty good for the WAC with existing members already there.

If football can be done without expanding the footprint much, that is ideal.

While we all know that WAC football is being worked on, without knowing if it will be strictly an FCS deal, strictly an FBS deal, FCS moving to FBS, or some kind of mixed system, the possibilities remain virtually wide open.
(This post was last modified: 08-30-2020 10:10 AM by Todor.)
08-30-2020 10:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LUSportsFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 407
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Lamar Cardinals
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-25-2020 09:19 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  If the WAC were to restart FBS football, I think the new founding members would be from the Southland, and maybe Summit and Big Sky. If the WAC were to actually develop a stable FBS conference then maybe the WAC could court Texas schools from the Sun Belt and CUSA. But the WAC would need at least four FBS committed schools from the FCS level first plus NMSU and Tarleton State to get things started.

Agree

If I am reading this correctly, as long as the WAC's "golden ticket to FBS" is still valid, it does look like the WAC could reinstate football sponsorship at an FBS level with either no additional or a minimum of current FBS members. At the start, the key would be for enough fully qualified FCS members transitioning to FBS to start the process at the same time. That way, the 60% requirement of FBS home game opponents could be met within the conference competition.
Below is an excerpt from the NCAA's "Frequently Asked Questions" for "Football Bowl Subdivision - Membership Requirements".

Link - NCAA FBS Membership Requirements Q&A

Quote:Q. For purposes of satisfying the FBS scheduling requirements, is it permissible for an
institution to count an opponent that is in the process of reclassifying its football program
to FBS?
A. In determining whether an institution meets the FBS institution scheduling criteria, each
opponent shall be counted as it was classified on September 1 of the academic year
involved; however, it is permissible to count an institution reclassifying its program to the
FBS as a FBS opponent during the year in which the reclassifying institution must comply
with Football Bowl Subdivision scheduling requirements (i.e., year two of the
reclassification process). [Bylaws 20.9.9.2.2 and 20.9.9.2.2.1]

Another requirement deals with grant-in-aid. Just using a "back of the envelope" look, that doesn't appear to be much of an issue. The requirement is either a minimum of 200 grant-in-aid equivalents or a minimum of $4,000,000 in athletically related grants in aid. Using the OPE Equity in Athletics database, here are the athletically related student aid amounts for some current Division I universities mentioned as possibilities. A sampling of Division II universities fell well below $4,000,000, but that is understood. The numbers will increase as Division I scholarship numbers are met.

Link - OPE Equity in Athletics database

Abilene Christian - $8,627,844
Incarnate Word - $10,268,094

Eastern Washington - $4,281,300
Lamar - $6,353,378
Montana - $5,296,775
Montana State - $5,100,246
Northern Arizona - $5,573,307
Sam Houston State - $4,770,982
Stephen F. Austin - $4,295,100
Weber State - $4,402,018
(This post was last modified: 08-30-2020 03:02 PM by LUSportsFan.)
08-30-2020 02:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Todor Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 430
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Nmsu
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
I see ACU total athletic expenses is over $18,000,000 and UIW is a little over $20,000,000.

For comparison, NMSU is listed just over $27 million and UTEP is at $33.

Non scholly Pioneer League football school San Diego spends $25 million, also for comparison.
(This post was last modified: 08-30-2020 07:36 PM by Todor.)
08-30-2020 07:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,943
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
Theoretically, you could grab 4 Big Sky schools, 4 Southland schools and have a nice conference at the FBS level with the idea of eventually moving to a two division format as a goal.

The existing membership isn’t going to go for any plan that renders them as outliers. I think a hybrid FCS/non-fb model is the future of the WAC.
08-31-2020 01:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Todor Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 430
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Nmsu
Location:
Post: #39
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
I think most of the existing membership will go along with what is presented to them as the future of the conference because many of them have aspirations outside of the current conference set up. And most of them are appreciative of the fact that the conference took them in when they needed a home.
(This post was last modified: 08-31-2020 04:29 PM by Todor.)
08-31-2020 04:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NotANewbie Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 407
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Tennesse, NMSU
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Potential existing D1 members to join the WAC
(08-31-2020 04:27 PM)Todor Wrote:  I think most of the existing membership will go along with what is presented to them as the future of the conference because many of them have aspirations outside of the current conference set up. And most of them are appreciative of the fact that the conference took them in when they needed a home.

I tend to agree with you but would add one qualifier. They will go along with whatever keeps the conference alive and healthy, as long as it does not damage their interests while they are in the conference. Although most may aspire to another conference, they don't know how long that will take, or even if it will happen within the next decade or two. So they have a commitment to keep the WAC viable.
08-31-2020 04:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2020 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, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.