Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Chicago State AD talks potential move
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
PojoaquePosse Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 804
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 20
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-11-2020 06:09 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:46 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:22 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 02:33 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 01:02 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  1) Due to only having so many jump to D1 at a time it doesn't cause an issue like The Southland had for 1.
2) Who in the WAC is a flight risk if everything in leagues around the WAC stay pretty steady/stable in number?
3) Headaches is having a school not in compliance with the WAC, school itself has no business being D1 as it sits right now, Chicago States brand not only makes the them look bad but it has hampered schools to join the WAC b/c of how many problems they have. I'd say that is headache quality.

Please produce your source that shows that having Chicago State “has hampered schools to join the WAC”.

Btw, every school is a flight risk. All want out of the WAC.

Not a fair question. No school that turns down a WAC offer is going to state on the record that Chicago State's membership in the conference had an impact on their decision. But anyone who follows conference realignment knows that key considerations for most schools evaluating a move include the geographic proximity and institutional compatibility of other schools in the destination conference. When it comes to WAC recruitment of new members in the western U.S., Chicago State is an impediment with respect to both of these factors.

UMKC, Cal Baptist, Dixie State, and Tarleton State all joined after Chicago State was added. Who has turned down a WAC offer?

Two that were reported publicly in 2018 are Colorado Mesa and Metropolitan State University-Denver. Also I have no doubt that the WAC took a run at UC San Diego after the Tritons were rejected by the Big West in 2017, but the Tritons elected to hold out for the Big West.

Read UC San Diego’s proposal on a move to D1. The vote was solely based on a move to the Big West. They did not consider any other conferences. It was Big West or bust.

Several schools have turned down the WAC. Maybe it was because of Chicago State. Maybe it wasn’t. But don’t speculate and try to play it off as facts. It’s just your opinion.

I stand by my statements. Unless the WAC is at 10-12 schools, we NEED Chicago State.
09-12-2020 12:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,771
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 153
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #22
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-11-2020 06:46 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 06:09 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:46 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:22 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 02:33 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  Please produce your source that shows that having Chicago State “has hampered schools to join the WAC”.

Btw, every school is a flight risk. All want out of the WAC.

Not a fair question. No school that turns down a WAC offer is going to state on the record that Chicago State's membership in the conference had an impact on their decision. But anyone who follows conference realignment knows that key considerations for most schools evaluating a move include the geographic proximity and institutional compatibility of other schools in the destination conference. When it comes to WAC recruitment of new members in the western U.S., Chicago State is an impediment with respect to both of these factors.

UMKC, Cal Baptist, Dixie State, and Tarleton State all joined after Chicago State was added. Who has turned down a WAC offer?

Two that were reported publicly in 2018 are Colorado Mesa and Metropolitan State University-Denver. Also I have no doubt that the WAC took a run at UC San Diego after the Tritons were rejected by the Big West in 2017, but the Tritons elected to hold out for the Big West.

Do you believe that Chicago St was the sole reason Metro and Mesa “reportedly” did not go D1/WAC? Do you think UCSD turned down the WAC because of Chicago St?

Of course not, and neither does anyone else. That’s not the point and I’m pretty sure you understand that. The decision any school makes to join or not join the WAC is based on multiple factors. Having to send teams all the way to Chicago to compete is just one. Having a conference mate that can barely hold onto its accreditation is just one.

In my view the issue with Chicago State is not that its membership in the WAC prevents other schools from joining. The issue is that when western candidate schools are weighing all of the reasons to join or not join, Chicago State’s membership is likely to be perceived as a negative rather than a positive. That makes Chicago State’s membership an impediment to WAC expansion within its core geographic footprint.

In the past the WAC has tolerated this impediment for obvious reasons. But the conference is no longer teetering on the edge of oblivion, in part due to its success in helping top western D2 programs transition to D1 and in part because other western conferences have no motivation to further expand and finally because some of its members have done a great job of making the WAC respectable nationally in men’s basketball.

Chicago State’s membership in the WAC has always been a marriage of convenience. It has lasted until now because the mutual benefits of the arrangement have outweighed the disadvantages. The relationship has been symbiotic rather than parasitic. I think both parties are coming to a realization that is no longer true.
(This post was last modified: 09-12-2020 11:40 AM by HawaiiMongoose.)
09-12-2020 11:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,771
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 153
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #23
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-12-2020 12:02 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 06:09 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:46 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:22 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 02:33 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  Please produce your source that shows that having Chicago State “has hampered schools to join the WAC”.

Btw, every school is a flight risk. All want out of the WAC.

Not a fair question. No school that turns down a WAC offer is going to state on the record that Chicago State's membership in the conference had an impact on their decision. But anyone who follows conference realignment knows that key considerations for most schools evaluating a move include the geographic proximity and institutional compatibility of other schools in the destination conference. When it comes to WAC recruitment of new members in the western U.S., Chicago State is an impediment with respect to both of these factors.

UMKC, Cal Baptist, Dixie State, and Tarleton State all joined after Chicago State was added. Who has turned down a WAC offer?

Two that were reported publicly in 2018 are Colorado Mesa and Metropolitan State University-Denver. Also I have no doubt that the WAC took a run at UC San Diego after the Tritons were rejected by the Big West in 2017, but the Tritons elected to hold out for the Big West.

Read UC San Diego’s proposal on a move to D1. The vote was solely based on a move to the Big West. They did not consider any other conferences. It was Big West or bust.

Several schools have turned down the WAC. Maybe it was because of Chicago State. Maybe it wasn’t. But don’t speculate and try to play it off as facts. It’s just your opinion.

I stand by my statements. Unless the WAC is at 10-12 schools, we NEED Chicago State.

Colorado Mesa and Metro State turning down the WAC are facts. UCSD being unwilling to entertain WAC membership is a fact. But I completely grant that Chicago State’s WAC membership being an impediment to the conference’s expansion in the west — not the sole impediment, but one of the factors in the calculation that matters — is just my opinion. Just as I’m sure you would grant that your assertion the WAC still needs Chicago State is just your opinion.
09-12-2020 11:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DoubleRSU Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,289
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation: 50
I Root For: SU, WAC, NAU
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
Metro and Mesa “turning down the WAC” are not facts. They decided not to go D1. Two entirely different things.
09-12-2020 11:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,005
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #25
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
Chicago State still serves as a buffer from the WAC hitting the minimum number of members. Once the WAC locates/adds a 10th western member, Chicago State no longer serves that usefulness in the conference. Chicago State's is literally an island in the WAC; hampered by travel cost it is basically in survival mode. They need a mid-western alliance in order to regain their D1 footing and eventually prosper. I just don't know if the school's financial issues has weakened the Athletic dept. so much that no Midwest conference would want to take the gamble of bringing them onboard; just to continue to be a bottom feeder.
09-12-2020 12:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hilldog Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 131
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-11-2020 06:09 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:46 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:22 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 02:33 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 01:02 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  1) Due to only having so many jump to D1 at a time it doesn't cause an issue like The Southland had for 1.
2) Who in the WAC is a flight risk if everything in leagues around the WAC stay pretty steady/stable in number?
3) Headaches is having a school not in compliance with the WAC, school itself has no business being D1 as it sits right now, Chicago States brand not only makes the them look bad but it has hampered schools to join the WAC b/c of how many problems they have. I'd say that is headache quality.

Please produce your source that shows that having Chicago State “has hampered schools to join the WAC”.

Btw, every school is a flight risk. All want out of the WAC.

Not a fair question. No school that turns down a WAC offer is going to state on the record that Chicago State's membership in the conference had an impact on their decision. But anyone who follows conference realignment knows that key considerations for most schools evaluating a move include the geographic proximity and institutional compatibility of other schools in the destination conference. When it comes to WAC recruitment of new members in the western U.S., Chicago State is an impediment with respect to both of these factors.

UMKC, Cal Baptist, Dixie State, and Tarleton State all joined after Chicago State was added. Who has turned down a WAC offer?

Two that were reported publicly in 2018 are Colorado Mesa and Metropolitan State University-Denver. Also I have no doubt that the WAC took a run at UC San Diego after the Tritons were rejected by the Big West in 2017, but the Tritons elected to hold out for the Big West.

UCSD and the Big West invitation in 2017 was more like the chicken or the egg. There was no doubt the Big West wanted UCSD. But, UCSD students still hadn't voted to move to D1 and without the students' money, UCSD wasn't moving to D1. The BW wasn't going to invite a school hoping their students was going to vote to move to D1. If UCSD student had voted to move to D1 before 2017, UCSD would have been in the Big West already. The WAC did talk to UCSD to gauge interest, but UCSD was very clear if they were going to D1, it would be the Big West.
09-12-2020 12:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,005
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #27
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-12-2020 12:45 PM)Hilldog Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 06:09 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:46 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:22 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 02:33 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  Please produce your source that shows that having Chicago State “has hampered schools to join the WAC”.

Btw, every school is a flight risk. All want out of the WAC.

Not a fair question. No school that turns down a WAC offer is going to state on the record that Chicago State's membership in the conference had an impact on their decision. But anyone who follows conference realignment knows that key considerations for most schools evaluating a move include the geographic proximity and institutional compatibility of other schools in the destination conference. When it comes to WAC recruitment of new members in the western U.S., Chicago State is an impediment with respect to both of these factors.

UMKC, Cal Baptist, Dixie State, and Tarleton State all joined after Chicago State was added. Who has turned down a WAC offer?

Two that were reported publicly in 2018 are Colorado Mesa and Metropolitan State University-Denver. Also I have no doubt that the WAC took a run at UC San Diego after the Tritons were rejected by the Big West in 2017, but the Tritons elected to hold out for the Big West.

UCSD and the Big West invitation in 2017 was more like the chicken or the egg. There was no doubt the Big West wanted UCSD. But, UCSD students still hadn't voted to move to D1 and without the students' money, UCSD wasn't moving to D1. The BW wasn't going to invite a school hoping their students was going to vote to move to D1. If UCSD student had voted to move to D1 before 2017, UCSD would have been in the Big West already. The WAC did talk to UCSD to gauge interest, but UCSD was very clear if they were going to D1, it would be the Big West.

Another issue was the UC/CSU balance of power in the BWC. The BWC could not simply add UC San Diego without confirming a CSU counterpart to add in tandem. Once the BWC knew Cal State Bakersfield was interested in membership and there was not too much objection from the conference membership, the Commissioner moved forward with the dual invite. As a condition both needed to accept the invite simultaneously. Individually neither could get in the BWC.
09-12-2020 01:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hilldog Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 131
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-12-2020 01:16 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 12:45 PM)Hilldog Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 06:09 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:46 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:22 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  Not a fair question. No school that turns down a WAC offer is going to state on the record that Chicago State's membership in the conference had an impact on their decision. But anyone who follows conference realignment knows that key considerations for most schools evaluating a move include the geographic proximity and institutional compatibility of other schools in the destination conference. When it comes to WAC recruitment of new members in the western U.S., Chicago State is an impediment with respect to both of these factors.

UMKC, Cal Baptist, Dixie State, and Tarleton State all joined after Chicago State was added. Who has turned down a WAC offer?

Two that were reported publicly in 2018 are Colorado Mesa and Metropolitan State University-Denver. Also I have no doubt that the WAC took a run at UC San Diego after the Tritons were rejected by the Big West in 2017, but the Tritons elected to hold out for the Big West.

UCSD and the Big West invitation in 2017 was more like the chicken or the egg. There was no doubt the Big West wanted UCSD. But, UCSD students still hadn't voted to move to D1 and without the students' money, UCSD wasn't moving to D1. The BW wasn't going to invite a school hoping their students was going to vote to move to D1. If UCSD student had voted to move to D1 before 2017, UCSD would have been in the Big West already. The WAC did talk to UCSD to gauge interest, but UCSD was very clear if they were going to D1, it would be the Big West.

Another issue was the UC/CSU balance of power in the BWC. The BWC could not simply add UC San Diego without confirming a CSU counterpart to add in tandem. Once the BWC knew Cal State Bakersfield was interested in membership and there was not too much objection from the conference membership, the Commissioner moved forward with the dual invite. As a condition both needed to accept the invite simultaneously. Individually neither could get in the BWC.

That's BS! The Big West has known about Bakersfield's interest ever since Bakersfield went D1. The Big West had 3 CSU's since the first wave of conference expansion in 96- Fullerton, Long Beach & Cal Poly-who moved up. There were only 2 UC's Irvine and Santa Barbara. Around 2001 Northridge and Riverside came in, making it 4 CSU's to 3 UC's. When Davis came in, it wasn't about balancing the number of UC's to CSU's, it was the fact that Davis would be a good addition to the conference.

And if for some reason Bakersfield didn't accept, the Big West has always wanted to get into the San Diego market. They would have only added UCSD. It wasn't a package deal.
09-12-2020 03:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,784
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 418
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #29
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
Bakersfield got into the Big West because the CSU’s forced it as a condition of voting in UC San Diego. UC/CSU balance is the reason Bakersfield got in. If it wasn’t about balance, CSUB would’ve been taken in earlier or UC-San Diego would’ve been voted in without them.
09-12-2020 03:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,005
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #30
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-12-2020 03:08 PM)Hilldog Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 01:16 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 12:45 PM)Hilldog Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 06:09 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 03:46 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  UMKC, Cal Baptist, Dixie State, and Tarleton State all joined after Chicago State was added. Who has turned down a WAC offer?

Two that were reported publicly in 2018 are Colorado Mesa and Metropolitan State University-Denver. Also I have no doubt that the WAC took a run at UC San Diego after the Tritons were rejected by the Big West in 2017, but the Tritons elected to hold out for the Big West.

UCSD and the Big West invitation in 2017 was more like the chicken or the egg. There was no doubt the Big West wanted UCSD. But, UCSD students still hadn't voted to move to D1 and without the students' money, UCSD wasn't moving to D1. The BW wasn't going to invite a school hoping their students was going to vote to move to D1. If UCSD student had voted to move to D1 before 2017, UCSD would have been in the Big West already. The WAC did talk to UCSD to gauge interest, but UCSD was very clear if they were going to D1, it would be the Big West.

Another issue was the UC/CSU balance of power in the BWC. The BWC could not simply add UC San Diego without confirming a CSU counterpart to add in tandem. Once the BWC knew Cal State Bakersfield was interested in membership and there was not too much objection from the conference membership, the Commissioner moved forward with the dual invite. As a condition both needed to accept the invite simultaneously. Individually neither could get in the BWC.

That's BS! The Big West has known about Bakersfield's interest ever since Bakersfield went D1. The Big West had 3 CSU's since the first wave of conference expansion in 96- Fullerton, Long Beach & Cal Poly-who moved up. There were only 2 UC's Irvine and Santa Barbara. Around 2001 Northridge and Riverside came in, making it 4 CSU's to 3 UC's. When Davis came in, it wasn't about balancing the number of UC's to CSU's, it was the fact that Davis would be a good addition to the conference.

And if for some reason Bakersfield didn't accept, the Big West has always wanted to get into the San Diego market. They would have only added UCSD. It wasn't a package deal.

Read the link below...

Moving Forward with Division I

From the article...

"When looking at the composition of the conference, it is evenly balanced between UC and CSU schools, with four of each as well as a ninth school in the University of Hawai’i at Manoa. Seven of the chancellors or presidents in the conference needed to approve the move in order for UCSD to be admitted. Numerous sources have indicated that the UC Chancellors voted “yes” while the Cal State Presidents voted “no.” There is reliable speculation that the Cal State schools opposed UCSD’s membership as part of an ongoing effort to gain conference membership for Cal State Bakersfield. Thus, UCSD has seen its NCAA Division I ambitions stalled, not for lack of merit or conference fit, but as part of a political agenda.

As for you assertion about the BWC prior to 2000, the Big West voting block was much different then. Back then, there were a number of schools from outside California which had some say in the direction the Big West would take. It wasn't until these schools left (looking for FBS football homes) that the California bus league schools took over full control of the Big West.
09-12-2020 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,907
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-12-2020 05:21 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 03:08 PM)Hilldog Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 01:16 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 12:45 PM)Hilldog Wrote:  
(09-11-2020 06:09 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  Two that were reported publicly in 2018 are Colorado Mesa and Metropolitan State University-Denver. Also I have no doubt that the WAC took a run at UC San Diego after the Tritons were rejected by the Big West in 2017, but the Tritons elected to hold out for the Big West.

UCSD and the Big West invitation in 2017 was more like the chicken or the egg. There was no doubt the Big West wanted UCSD. But, UCSD students still hadn't voted to move to D1 and without the students' money, UCSD wasn't moving to D1. The BW wasn't going to invite a school hoping their students was going to vote to move to D1. If UCSD student had voted to move to D1 before 2017, UCSD would have been in the Big West already. The WAC did talk to UCSD to gauge interest, but UCSD was very clear if they were going to D1, it would be the Big West.

Another issue was the UC/CSU balance of power in the BWC. The BWC could not simply add UC San Diego without confirming a CSU counterpart to add in tandem. Once the BWC knew Cal State Bakersfield was interested in membership and there was not too much objection from the conference membership, the Commissioner moved forward with the dual invite. As a condition both needed to accept the invite simultaneously. Individually neither could get in the BWC.

That's BS! The Big West has known about Bakersfield's interest ever since Bakersfield went D1. The Big West had 3 CSU's since the first wave of conference expansion in 96- Fullerton, Long Beach & Cal Poly-who moved up. There were only 2 UC's Irvine and Santa Barbara. Around 2001 Northridge and Riverside came in, making it 4 CSU's to 3 UC's. When Davis came in, it wasn't about balancing the number of UC's to CSU's, it was the fact that Davis would be a good addition to the conference.

And if for some reason Bakersfield didn't accept, the Big West has always wanted to get into the San Diego market. They would have only added UCSD. It wasn't a package deal.

Read the link below...

Moving Forward with Division I

From the article...

"When looking at the composition of the conference, it is evenly balanced between UC and CSU schools, with four of each as well as a ninth school in the University of Hawai’i at Manoa. Seven of the chancellors or presidents in the conference needed to approve the move in order for UCSD to be admitted. Numerous sources have indicated that the UC Chancellors voted “yes” while the Cal State Presidents voted “no.” There is reliable speculation that the Cal State schools opposed UCSD’s membership as part of an ongoing effort to gain conference membership for Cal State Bakersfield. Thus, UCSD has seen its NCAA Division I ambitions stalled, not for lack of merit or conference fit, but as part of a political agenda.

As for you assertion about the BWC prior to 2000, the Big West voting block was much different then. Back then, there were a number of schools from outside California which had some say in the direction the Big West would take. It wasn't until these schools left (looking for FBS football homes) that the California bus league schools took over full control of the Big West.

Right! After 1996 it was about balancing the CA (non-fb) faction with the non-CA (fb) faction. In 2001 there was no more fb, and by 2005 there were no non-CA schools. Priorities and loyalties switched to a system based divide, thus the need to balance UC/Cal St factions.
09-12-2020 10:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,005
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #32
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-12-2020 03:49 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Bakersfield got into the Big West because the CSU’s forced it as a condition of voting in UC San Diego. UC/CSU balance is the reason Bakersfield got in. If it wasn’t about balance, CSUB would’ve been taken in earlier or UC-San Diego would’ve been voted in without them.

Correct. UC San Diego and Cal State Bakersfield were a package deal to appease both the UC and CSU schools. So, much so that Cal State Bakersfield had to wait to enter the Big West until UC San Diego was ready to make the move to D1. Cal State Bakersfield was on UC San Diego's timeline for the move to D1. Subsequently, Cal State Bakersfield had to play two more seasons in the WAC until they could make the jump to the Big West. So, again Cal State Bakersfield could not get into the Big West without having a UC counterpart and vice versa for UC San Diego. It is just my opinion but I think the Big West will remain at 11 members for the foreseeable future. They have five UC schools, five CSU schools and Hawaii. All schools play each other twice in a round-robin (20 conference games and 8 to 11 non-conference per schedule). If there is ever a 12th member, it would need to be a school that does not disrupt the balance of power between the ten California school; much like Hawaii.

So, UC San Diego never turned down the WAC. The WAC simply let it be known if they did not get an invite to the Big West, the WAC would be willing to give UC San Diego a D1 home; similar to the situation with Tarleton State and the Southland Conference.

With regards to Metro State and Colorado Mesa, the WAC sent out feelers to check if either school was interested in moving up to D1. At this time neither school felt comfortable with the financial demands needed to make the D1 move. A feasibility study was conducted and they concluded their infrastructures were still lacking. Cal State Los Angeles was also conducting a D1 feasibility study, but their conclusions haven't been made public.
(This post was last modified: 09-13-2020 05:16 AM by NMSUPistolPete.)
09-13-2020 05:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PojoaquePosse Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 804
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 20
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-13-2020 05:13 AM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 03:49 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Bakersfield got into the Big West because the CSU’s forced it as a condition of voting in UC San Diego. UC/CSU balance is the reason Bakersfield got in. If it wasn’t about balance, CSUB would’ve been taken in earlier or UC-San Diego would’ve been voted in without them.

Correct. UC San Diego and Cal State Bakersfield were a package deal to appease both the UC and CSU schools. So, much so that Cal State Bakersfield had to wait to enter the Big West until UC San Diego was ready to make the move to D1. Cal State Bakersfield was on UC San Diego's timeline for the move to D1. Subsequently, Cal State Bakersfield had to play two more seasons in the WAC until they could make the jump to the Big West. So, again Cal State Bakersfield could not get into the Big West without having a UC counterpart and vice versa for UC San Diego. It is just my opinion but I think the Big West will remain at 11 members for the foreseeable future. They have five UC schools, five CSU schools and Hawaii. All schools play each other twice in a round-robin (20 conference games and 8 to 11 non-conference per schedule). If there is ever a 12th member, it would need to be a school that does not disrupt the balance of power between the ten California school; much like Hawaii.

So, UC San Diego never turned down the WAC. The WAC simply let it be known if they did not get an invite to the Big West, the WAC would be willing to give UC San Diego a D1 home; similar to the situation with Tarleton State and the Southland Conference.

With regards to Metro State and Colorado Mesa, the WAC sent out feelers to check if either school was interested in moving up to D1. At this time neither school felt comfortable with the financial demands needed to make the D1 move. A feasibility study was conducted and they concluded their infrastructures were still lacking. Cal State Los Angeles was also conducting a D1 feasibility study, but their conclusions haven't been made public.

Good stuff, Pistol. Thanks for all the clarity.
09-14-2020 04:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
otis campbell Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 56
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Valpo, Miami O
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
And back to the original post....the AD must have known the Trustees had no clue what was going on with the athletic department. Anyone with any knowledge who have laughed him out of the room. There is a 0% chance either conference would be interested in CSU. Beyond the fact that both have 12 schools, each could come up with 5-10 better replacements. To be honest if they were short and looking they wouldn’t consider CSU. You know, I know it, the AD knows it, only the BOT is too clueless to know.
09-14-2020 08:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hilldog Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 131
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #35
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-13-2020 05:13 AM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 03:49 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Bakersfield got into the Big West because the CSU’s forced it as a condition of voting in UC San Diego. UC/CSU balance is the reason Bakersfield got in. If it wasn’t about balance, CSUB would’ve been taken in earlier or UC-San Diego would’ve been voted in without them.

Correct. UC San Diego and Cal State Bakersfield were a package deal to appease both the UC and CSU schools. So, much so that Cal State Bakersfield had to wait to enter the Big West until UC San Diego was ready to make the move to D1. Cal State Bakersfield was on UC San Diego's timeline for the move to D1. Subsequently, Cal State Bakersfield had to play two more seasons in the WAC until they could make the jump to the Big West. So, again Cal State Bakersfield could not get into the Big West without having a UC counterpart and vice versa for UC San Diego. It is just my opinion but I think the Big West will remain at 11 members for the foreseeable future. They have five UC schools, five CSU schools and Hawaii. All schools play each other twice in a round-robin (20 conference games and 8 to 11 non-conference per schedule). If there is ever a 12th member, it would need to be a school that does not disrupt the balance of power between the ten California school; much like Hawaii.

So, UC San Diego never turned down the WAC. The WAC simply let it be known if they did not get an invite to the Big West, the WAC would be willing to give UC San Diego a D1 home; similar to the situation with Tarleton State and the Southland Conference.

With regards to Metro State and Colorado Mesa, the WAC sent out feelers to check if either school was interested in moving up to D1. At this time neither school felt comfortable with the financial demands needed to make the D1 move. A feasibility study was conducted and they concluded their infrastructures were still lacking. Cal State Los Angeles was also conducting a D1 feasibility study, but their conclusions haven't been made public.

Is there a link that Cal St. LA conducted a D1 study?
09-16-2020 05:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AZcats Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,124
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 85
I Root For: stAte, af, zona
Location: Pike's Peak
Post: #36
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-16-2020 05:57 PM)Hilldog Wrote:  
(09-13-2020 05:13 AM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 03:49 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Bakersfield got into the Big West because the CSU’s forced it as a condition of voting in UC San Diego. UC/CSU balance is the reason Bakersfield got in. If it wasn’t about balance, CSUB would’ve been taken in earlier or UC-San Diego would’ve been voted in without them.

Correct. UC San Diego and Cal State Bakersfield were a package deal to appease both the UC and CSU schools. So, much so that Cal State Bakersfield had to wait to enter the Big West until UC San Diego was ready to make the move to D1. Cal State Bakersfield was on UC San Diego's timeline for the move to D1. Subsequently, Cal State Bakersfield had to play two more seasons in the WAC until they could make the jump to the Big West. So, again Cal State Bakersfield could not get into the Big West without having a UC counterpart and vice versa for UC San Diego. It is just my opinion but I think the Big West will remain at 11 members for the foreseeable future. They have five UC schools, five CSU schools and Hawaii. All schools play each other twice in a round-robin (20 conference games and 8 to 11 non-conference per schedule). If there is ever a 12th member, it would need to be a school that does not disrupt the balance of power between the ten California school; much like Hawaii.

So, UC San Diego never turned down the WAC. The WAC simply let it be known if they did not get an invite to the Big West, the WAC would be willing to give UC San Diego a D1 home; similar to the situation with Tarleton State and the Southland Conference.

With regards to Metro State and Colorado Mesa, the WAC sent out feelers to check if either school was interested in moving up to D1. At this time neither school felt comfortable with the financial demands needed to make the D1 move. A feasibility study was conducted and they concluded their infrastructures were still lacking. Cal State Los Angeles was also conducting a D1 feasibility study, but their conclusions haven't been made public.

Is there a link that Cal St. LA conducted a D1 study?

Doubtful. But if there is one, the first item on the report would be "must add at least 1 men's sport before applying to D1". Cal State Los Angeles has only 5 men's sports (Baseball, Basketball, Cross Country, Soccer, Track & Field Outdoor).
09-16-2020 08:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
joshadam84 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 365
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Chicago State
Location: Indiana
Post: #37
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-16-2020 05:57 PM)Hilldog Wrote:  
(09-13-2020 05:13 AM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(09-12-2020 03:49 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Bakersfield got into the Big West because the CSU’s forced it as a condition of voting in UC San Diego. UC/CSU balance is the reason Bakersfield got in. If it wasn’t about balance, CSUB would’ve been taken in earlier or UC-San Diego would’ve been voted in without them.

Correct. UC San Diego and Cal State Bakersfield were a package deal to appease both the UC and CSU schools. So, much so that Cal State Bakersfield had to wait to enter the Big West until UC San Diego was ready to make the move to D1. Cal State Bakersfield was on UC San Diego's timeline for the move to D1. Subsequently, Cal State Bakersfield had to play two more seasons in the WAC until they could make the jump to the Big West. So, again Cal State Bakersfield could not get into the Big West without having a UC counterpart and vice versa for UC San Diego. It is just my opinion but I think the Big West will remain at 11 members for the foreseeable future. They have five UC schools, five CSU schools and Hawaii. All schools play each other twice in a round-robin (20 conference games and 8 to 11 non-conference per schedule). If there is ever a 12th member, it would need to be a school that does not disrupt the balance of power between the ten California school; much like Hawaii.

So, UC San Diego never turned down the WAC. The WAC simply let it be known if they did not get an invite to the Big West, the WAC would be willing to give UC San Diego a D1 home; similar to the situation with Tarleton State and the Southland Conference.

With regards to Metro State and Colorado Mesa, the WAC sent out feelers to check if either school was interested in moving up to D1. At this time neither school felt comfortable with the financial demands needed to make the D1 move. A feasibility study was conducted and they concluded their infrastructures were still lacking. Cal State Los Angeles was also conducting a D1 feasibility study, but their conclusions haven't been made public.

Is there a link that Cal St. LA conducted a D1 study?

It primarily became known when Dixie State’s feasibility study was released. Page 41:Feasibility Study
09-17-2020 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,005
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #38
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
Thank you for finding it. I knew I had seen the info embedded in another program's feasibility. I just could not remember where I read it.
09-17-2020 01:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DoubleRSU Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,289
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation: 50
I Root For: SU, WAC, NAU
Location:
Post: #39
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
Chicago St is keeping members out of the WAC/making schools stay in D2 has been debunked. Foolish, unfounded statements by some posters on here
09-18-2020 09:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
joshadam84 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 365
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Chicago State
Location: Indiana
Post: #40
RE: Chicago State AD talks potential move
(09-17-2020 01:23 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  Thank you for finding it. I knew I had seen the info embedded in another program's feasibility. I just could not remember where I read it.

No problem at all, Pistol Pete. Glad to help.
09-18-2020 08:44 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.