(09-09-2020 07:05 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote: (09-09-2020 05:31 AM)schmolik Wrote: They are still Chicago and beggars can't be choosers.
Do you think the conference itself is at odds with member schools about that? I suspect there is some internal strife within because the conference simply won’t make a decision and seems to have no plan, or the same basic plan of “just survive.”
Major transportation hub or no, I’m also sure members would love to lob off travel costs for a school so far east of the conference “core.”
There are reasons for inertia.
1. Do the barely-Division-I schools of the WAC *really* want to start the ball rolling on a movement to look closely at the academic, financial, etc status of Division I schools, and take action against those who don't meet standards? "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
2. Same point as #1, except from the POV of school administrators. Today, you're the provost of Eastern Bigflatstate State University, signing off on CSU's Division I death warrant. Tomorrow, it could be Western Bigflatstate U on the block, and you just lost your chances at the university presidency at WBFSU.
3. Travel costs. Sure Chicago is further away, but it's on a plane, so less hours than an 8 hour bus trip, or a 9 hour bus-and-plane-and-bus trip.
4. Nobody really really benefits from kicking Chicago State to the curb. If they leave on their own, no one will miss them. But who's going to put in the man hours to make it happen? Why?
EDIT: WAC may need Chicago State a little bit, at least for a while, because they're the seventh full Division I member, with UMKC and Cal-Bakersfield leaving
1. UT Rio Grande Valley
2. New Mexico State
3. Utah Valley
4. Grand Canyon
5. Seattle
6. Cal Baptist (soon, but not sure exactly when they count as a full Division I core member)
I'm sure that if anything happened with Chicago State, the NCAA would give the WAC a waiver, but that's part of the same culture of letting things slide for members of the club that keeps Chicago State in the WAC.