SMUstang
Banned
Posts: 3,513
Joined: Jan 2004
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: Horseshoe Bay, Texas
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-14-2021 06:41 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote: (04-14-2021 06:18 PM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:43 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:46 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: IMHO the WAC needs to pass on UIW. Doesn’t matter how much money they have, they just don’t draw any fan interest despite playing in San Antonio’s huge urban market. WTAMU on the outskirts of Amarillo has more than double UIW’s football attendance and triple UIW’s basketball attendance playing a D2 schedule.
Agreed. I take the hard look at UIW as WTAM not interested in the WAC at this time. Not really understanding the need of the WAC to add another FB immediately. WAC needs to take the time to find the best fit.
The WAC does have some time. But the number of candidates within the footprint are few (you can count them on one hand). So why should the WAC wait if their objective is to get to FBS status by 2030?
Because if they really think they can go FBS then they need to take the right school and UIW doesnt look like theyre capable of FBS. Of course people like to throw the word potential out there for a lot of schools, but to me if a school hasnt capitalized on their potential by now then its not gonna happen. I could potentially win the lotto right?
Not if you don’t buy a ticket.
|
|
04-14-2021 06:55 PM |
|
SDHornet
Special Teams
Posts: 984
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-14-2021 06:18 PM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:43 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:46 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: IMHO the WAC needs to pass on UIW. Doesn’t matter how much money they have, they just don’t draw any fan interest despite playing in San Antonio’s huge urban market. WTAMU on the outskirts of Amarillo has more than double UIW’s football attendance and triple UIW’s basketball attendance playing a D2 schedule.
Agreed. I take the hard look at UIW as WTAM not interested in the WAC at this time. Not really understanding the need of the WAC to add another FB immediately. WAC needs to take the time to find the best fit.
The WAC does have some time. But the number of candidates within the footprint are few (you can count them on one hand). So why should the WAC wait if their objective is to get to FBS status by 2030?
FBS? LOL.
No this add is to shore up the eastern side of the conference. Whoever is the realistic best fit should be targeted. WTAM seems to be the consensus. If WTAM is not interested, is there urgency to find another body? I don't see why there is, especially with 2 FB members still transitioning.
|
|
04-14-2021 11:28 PM |
|
SMUstang
Banned
Posts: 3,513
Joined: Jan 2004
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: Horseshoe Bay, Texas
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-14-2021 11:28 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-14-2021 06:18 PM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:43 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:46 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: IMHO the WAC needs to pass on UIW. Doesn’t matter how much money they have, they just don’t draw any fan interest despite playing in San Antonio’s huge urban market. WTAMU on the outskirts of Amarillo has more than double UIW’s football attendance and triple UIW’s basketball attendance playing a D2 schedule.
Agreed. I take the hard look at UIW as WTAM not interested in the WAC at this time. Not really understanding the need of the WAC to add another FB immediately. WAC needs to take the time to find the best fit.
The WAC does have some time. But the number of candidates within the footprint are few (you can count them on one hand). So why should the WAC wait if their objective is to get to FBS status by 2030?
FBS? LOL.
No this add is to shore up the eastern side of the conference. Whoever is the realistic best fit should be targeted. WTAM seems to be the consensus. If WTAM is not interested, is there urgency to find another body? I don't see why there is, especially with 2 FB members still transitioning.
Who says WTA&M is not interested? From what I’ve seen, they just don’t want to be the ones who kill the Lone Star Conference. Which is admirable.
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2021 08:18 AM by SMUstang.)
|
|
04-15-2021 08:15 AM |
|
SDHornet
Special Teams
Posts: 984
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-15-2021 08:15 AM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-14-2021 11:28 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-14-2021 06:18 PM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:43 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:46 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: IMHO the WAC needs to pass on UIW. Doesn’t matter how much money they have, they just don’t draw any fan interest despite playing in San Antonio’s huge urban market. WTAMU on the outskirts of Amarillo has more than double UIW’s football attendance and triple UIW’s basketball attendance playing a D2 schedule.
Agreed. I take the hard look at UIW as WTAM not interested in the WAC at this time. Not really understanding the need of the WAC to add another FB immediately. WAC needs to take the time to find the best fit.
The WAC does have some time. But the number of candidates within the footprint are few (you can count them on one hand). So why should the WAC wait if their objective is to get to FBS status by 2030?
FBS? LOL.
No this add is to shore up the eastern side of the conference. Whoever is the realistic best fit should be targeted. WTAM seems to be the consensus. If WTAM is not interested, is there urgency to find another body? I don't see why there is, especially with 2 FB members still transitioning.
Who says WTA&M is not interested? From what I’ve seen, they just don’t want to be the ones who kill the Lone Star Conference. Which is admirable.
The WAC's actions are indicating they are not interested, of course it could be a ploy to force WTAM (or another desired D2 addition) hand. WTAM worrying about what happens to the LSC after they leave is a waste of energy on their part. You either want D1 or you don't.
|
|
04-15-2021 10:44 AM |
|
SMUstang
Banned
Posts: 3,513
Joined: Jan 2004
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: Horseshoe Bay, Texas
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-15-2021 10:44 AM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-15-2021 08:15 AM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-14-2021 11:28 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-14-2021 06:18 PM)SMUstang Wrote: [quote='SDHornet' pid='17383453' dateline='1618436598']
Agreed. I take the hard look at UIW as WTAM not interested in the WAC at this time. Not really understanding the need of the WAC to add another FB immediately. WAC needs to take the time to find the best fit.
The WAC does have some time. But the number of candidates within the footprint are few (you can count them on one hand). So why should the WAC wait if their objective is to get to FBS status by 2030?
FBS? LOL.
No this add is to shore up the eastern side of the conference. Whoever is the realistic best fit should be targeted. WTAM seems to be the consensus. If WTAM is not interested, is there urgency to find another body? I don't see why there is, especially with 2 FB members still transitioning.
Who says WTA&M is not interested? From what I’ve seen, they just don’t want to be the ones who kill the Lone Star Conference. Which is admirable.
The WAC's actions are indicating they are not interested, of course it could be a ploy to force WTAM (or another desired D2 addition) hand. WTAM worrying about what happens to the LSC after they leave is a waste of energy on their part. You either want D1 or you don't.
[/quote
It would be very costly to go from D2 to D1. If I were a college president, I would make sure that that is the best choice for my school. Football isn't the only sport sponsored, in fact there are 16 others to be considered. Besides rivalries, and travel, and what the student population want, and what the alumni think.
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2021 04:03 PM by SMUstang.)
|
|
04-15-2021 11:19 AM |
|
makinbacon
Water Engineer
Posts: 11
Joined: Feb 2021
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Florida
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-14-2021 04:46 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: IMHO the WAC needs to pass on UIW. Doesn’t matter how much money they have, they just don’t draw any fan interest despite playing in San Antonio’s huge urban market. WTAMU on the outskirts of Amarillo has more than double UIW’s football attendance and triple UIW’s basketball attendance playing a D2 schedule.
Is there a possibility should the WAC rejoin the FBS ranks that Idaho returns?
|
|
04-20-2021 12:16 AM |
|
chrisattsu
Mom's Favorite
Posts: 2,027
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 74
I Root For: Tarleton / TXST
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-15-2021 11:19 AM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-15-2021 10:44 AM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-15-2021 08:15 AM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-14-2021 11:28 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (04-14-2021 06:18 PM)SMUstang Wrote: [quote='SDHornet' pid='17383453' dateline='1618436598']
Agreed. I take the hard look at UIW as WTAM not interested in the WAC at this time. Not really understanding the need of the WAC to add another FB immediately. WAC needs to take the time to find the best fit.
The WAC does have some time. But the number of candidates within the footprint are few (you can count them on one hand). So why should the WAC wait if their objective is to get to FBS status by 2030?
FBS? LOL.
No this add is to shore up the eastern side of the conference. Whoever is the realistic best fit should be targeted. WTAM seems to be the consensus. If WTAM is not interested, is there urgency to find another body? I don't see why there is, especially with 2 FB members still transitioning.
Who says WTA&M is not interested? From what I’ve seen, they just don’t want to be the ones who kill the Lone Star Conference. Which is admirable.
The WAC's actions are indicating they are not interested, of course it could be a ploy to force WTAM (or another desired D2 addition) hand. WTAM worrying about what happens to the LSC after they leave is a waste of energy on their part. You either want D1 or you don't.
[/quote
It would be very costly to go from D2 to D1. If I were a college president, I would make sure that that is the best choice for my school. Football isn't the only sport sponsored, in fact there are 16 others to be considered. Besides rivalries, and travel, and what the student population want, and what the alumni think.
Agreed. Their football, basketball and volleyball all have all made deep NCAA d2 runs in the past 20 Years. Their leadership acknowledged that they can't do that in D1.
As for rivalries, Tarleton and ACU are already in the WAC. Both those teams are rivals for the Buffaloes.
Some alumni remember their D1 days in the MVC and welcome those days again. Bonus thay they were in the Border conference with NMSU like 200 years ago
|
|
04-20-2021 07:12 AM |
|
SMUstang
Banned
Posts: 3,513
Joined: Jan 2004
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: Horseshoe Bay, Texas
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-20-2021 07:12 AM)chrisattsu Wrote: (04-15-2021 11:19 AM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-15-2021 10:44 AM)SDHornet Wrote: j
(04-15-2021 08:15 AM)SMUstang Wrote: (04-14-2021 11:28 PM)SDHornet Wrote: The WAC does have some time. But the number of candidates within the footprint are few (you can count them on one hand). So why should the WAC wait if their objective is to get to FBS status by 2030?
FBS? LOL.
No this add is to shore up the eastern side of the conference. Whoever is the realistic best fit should be targeted. WTAM seems to be the consensus. If WTAM is not interested, is there urgency to find another body? I don't see why there is, especially with 2 FB members still transitioning.
Who says WTA&M is not interested? From what I’ve seen, they just don’t want to be the ones who kill the Lone Star Conference. Which is admirable.
The WAC's actions are indicating they are not interested, of course it could be a ploy to force WTAM (or another desired D2 addition) hand. WTAM worrying about what happens to the LSC after they leave is a waste of energy on their part. You either want D1 or you don't.
[/quote
It would be very costly to go from D2 to D1. If I were a college president, I would make sure that that is the best choice for my school. Football isn't the only sport sponsored, in fact there are 16 others to be considered. Besides rivalries, and travel, and what the student population want, and what the alumni think.
Agreed. Their football, basketball and volleyball all have all made deep NCAA d2 runs in the past 20 Years. Their leadership acknowledged that they can't do that in D1.
As for rivalries, Tarleton and ACU are already in the WAC. Both those teams are rivals for the Buffaloes.
Some alumni remember their D1 days in the MVC and welcome those days again. Bonus thay they were in the Border conference with NMSU like 200 years ago
I think that WTAMU would fit in well in the WAC. But the cost and uncertainty might be against them. They may be better off to stay in the Lone Star Conference.
|
|
04-20-2021 08:26 AM |
|
TexasTerror
1st String
Posts: 2,476
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 89
I Root For: SHSU
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-20-2021 08:26 AM)SMUstang Wrote: I think that WTAMU would fit in well in the WAC. But the cost and uncertainty might be against them. They may be better off to stay in the Lone Star Conference.
WTAMU will move, if you asked me.
I cannot see a way in which the Lone Star Conference stands pat and none of the schools (Commerce, Kingsville, WTAMU or Angelo State) move to Division I.
This could be the last opportunity some of these schools get for at least a decade if not more to move to Division I and this is a generational decision.
Ultimately, if none of the LSC schools make a move - it will not hurt the WAC as much as it will hurt the Southland. The Southland was already playing with limited options and they desperately need Division II schools from the LSC to join them.
|
|
04-20-2021 09:04 AM |
|
Bobcat2013
All American
Posts: 4,202
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 179
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-20-2021 09:04 AM)TexasTerror Wrote: (04-20-2021 08:26 AM)SMUstang Wrote: I think that WTAMU would fit in well in the WAC. But the cost and uncertainty might be against them. They may be better off to stay in the Lone Star Conference.
WTAMU will move, if you asked me.
I cannot see a way in which the Lone Star Conference stands pat and none of the schools (Commerce, Kingsville, WTAMU or Angelo State) move to Division I.
This could be the last opportunity some of these schools get for at least a decade if not more to move to Division I and this is a generational decision.
Ultimately, if none of the LSC schools make a move - it will not hurt the WAC as much as it will hurt the Southland. The Southland was already playing with limited options and they desperately need Division II schools from the LSC to join them.
The only thing that makes me think that the LSC schools stay put is that besides WTAMU none of the others mentioned resemble a D1 school and there's nothing wrong with that.
But then again I would've said the same thing about Tarleton two years ago and look at them now.
|
|
04-20-2021 09:22 AM |
|
wisdomgymrat
Special Teams
Posts: 554
Joined: Nov 2019
Reputation: 20
I Root For: Tarleton State
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
As far as facilities and D1 preparedness goes... Angelo and WT are the best out of the LSC with Commerce in a close 3rd. Kingsville is dying a slow death before they merge with A&M Corpus Christi.
|
|
04-20-2021 10:03 AM |
|
PojoaquePosse
Blowhard
Posts: 2,414
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 147
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2021 03:26 PM by PojoaquePosse.)
|
|
04-20-2021 03:25 PM |
|
Itinerant Texan
Shot Caller
Posts: 1,967
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation: 28
I Root For: On Ye Tarleton!
Location: USA
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-20-2021 03:25 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote: Ask the AD from 4/19/21. Moccia talks extensively about the WAC visiting a current TX institution, FBS, adding a 14th member and contraction to 12. Starts at the 13:30 mark.
https://art19.com/shows/nm-state-athleti...4ca7507f5a
Much obliged.
|
|
04-20-2021 03:29 PM |
|
SMUstang
Banned
Posts: 3,513
Joined: Jan 2004
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: Horseshoe Bay, Texas
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
I have a difficult time ever seeing Tarleton State or Dixie State as FBS teams on par with the Sunbelt, C-USA, or the MAC. It looks to me like the WAC is destined to be FCS forever, with one FBS independent. Not very attractive unless you are a D2 looking to move up.
|
|
04-21-2021 08:56 AM |
|
Lopes87
1st String
Posts: 1,569
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 38
I Root For: GCU
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-21-2021 08:56 AM)SMUstang Wrote: I have a difficult time ever seeing Tarleton State or Dixie State as FBS teams on par with the Sunbelt, C-USA, or the MAC. It looks to me like the WAC is destined to be FCS forever, with one FBS independent. Not very attractive unless you are a D2 looking to move up.
I mean that's one way to look at it but a current hybrid of the MAC and Sun Belt is obtainable imo.
WAC will have TX along with NMSU and Utah is a sports hungry state.
NMSU - NM
SUU - UT
DSU - UT
ACU - TX
SFA - TX
LU - TX
SHST - TX
TSU -TX
|
|
04-21-2021 10:14 AM |
|
HawaiiMongoose
All American
Posts: 4,717
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 446
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-20-2021 12:16 AM)makinbacon Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:46 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: IMHO the WAC needs to pass on UIW. Doesn’t matter how much money they have, they just don’t draw any fan interest despite playing in San Antonio’s huge urban market. WTAMU on the outskirts of Amarillo has more than double UIW’s football attendance and triple UIW’s basketball attendance playing a D2 schedule.
Is there a possibility should the WAC rejoin the FBS ranks that Idaho returns?
In my opinion, no. Idaho’s FBS days are over and the WAC’s days of traveling to Moscow for non-football conference games (there would be little benefit for the WAC in having Idaho as a football-only member) are over.
|
|
04-21-2021 10:26 AM |
|
Bobcat2013
All American
Posts: 4,202
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 179
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-21-2021 10:26 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: (04-20-2021 12:16 AM)makinbacon Wrote: (04-14-2021 04:46 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: IMHO the WAC needs to pass on UIW. Doesn’t matter how much money they have, they just don’t draw any fan interest despite playing in San Antonio’s huge urban market. WTAMU on the outskirts of Amarillo has more than double UIW’s football attendance and triple UIW’s basketball attendance playing a D2 schedule.
Is there a possibility should the WAC rejoin the FBS ranks that Idaho returns?
In my opinion, no. Idaho’s FBS days are over and the WAC’s days of traveling to Moscow for non-football conference games (there would be little benefit for the WAC in having Idaho as a football-only member) are over.
Agreed, if they had FBS aspirations then they never would have dropped down. They had a great last year in FBS but they've fallen so much since then that it would be hard for them to jump back up. Based on the comments of the Idaho fan that used to frequent the Sun Belt board their fans are deflated and donations and attendance have fallen despite playing "regional rivals". He made comments a long those lines a while back but I doubt that has changed.
|
|
04-21-2021 10:32 AM |
|
Bobcat2013
All American
Posts: 4,202
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 179
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-21-2021 10:14 AM)Lopes87 Wrote: (04-21-2021 08:56 AM)SMUstang Wrote: I have a difficult time ever seeing Tarleton State or Dixie State as FBS teams on par with the Sunbelt, C-USA, or the MAC. It looks to me like the WAC is destined to be FCS forever, with one FBS independent. Not very attractive unless you are a D2 looking to move up.
I mean that's one way to look at it but a current hybrid of the MAC and Sun Belt is obtainable imo.
WAC will have TX along with NMSU and Utah is a sports hungry state.
NMSU - NM
SUU - UT
DSU - UT
ACU - TX
SFA - TX
LU - TX
SHST - TX
TSU -TX
What do you mean by hybrid of MAC and Sun Belt?
|
|
04-21-2021 10:33 AM |
|
Lopes87
1st String
Posts: 1,569
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 38
I Root For: GCU
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-21-2021 10:33 AM)Bobcat2013 Wrote: (04-21-2021 10:14 AM)Lopes87 Wrote: (04-21-2021 08:56 AM)SMUstang Wrote: I have a difficult time ever seeing Tarleton State or Dixie State as FBS teams on par with the Sunbelt, C-USA, or the MAC. It looks to me like the WAC is destined to be FCS forever, with one FBS independent. Not very attractive unless you are a D2 looking to move up.
I mean that's one way to look at it but a current hybrid of the MAC and Sun Belt is obtainable imo.
WAC will have TX along with NMSU and Utah is a sports hungry state.
NMSU - NM
SUU - UT
DSU - UT
ACU - TX
SFA - TX
LU - TX
SHST - TX
TSU -TX
What do you mean by hybrid of MAC and Sun Belt?
I mean it's pretty regional, school sizes and facilities for football are similar to the MAC while being in the SW where its growing population wise and having good support for their sports similar to the SB. The WAC base will continue to grow. I don't think we can look and treat the WAC going forward like they are a struggling league with schools far flung with the likes of Chicago St and a bunch of new to D1's just trying to get their feet wet with no football.
|
|
04-21-2021 10:46 AM |
|
Bobcat2013
All American
Posts: 4,202
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 179
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
|
RE: WAC Expansion/FCS - for real (Official Discussion Thread)
(04-21-2021 10:46 AM)Lopes87 Wrote: (04-21-2021 10:33 AM)Bobcat2013 Wrote: (04-21-2021 10:14 AM)Lopes87 Wrote: (04-21-2021 08:56 AM)SMUstang Wrote: I have a difficult time ever seeing Tarleton State or Dixie State as FBS teams on par with the Sunbelt, C-USA, or the MAC. It looks to me like the WAC is destined to be FCS forever, with one FBS independent. Not very attractive unless you are a D2 looking to move up.
I mean that's one way to look at it but a current hybrid of the MAC and Sun Belt is obtainable imo.
WAC will have TX along with NMSU and Utah is a sports hungry state.
NMSU - NM
SUU - UT
DSU - UT
ACU - TX
SFA - TX
LU - TX
SHST - TX
TSU -TX
What do you mean by hybrid of MAC and Sun Belt?
I mean it's pretty regional, school sizes and facilities for football are similar to the MAC while being in the SW where its growing population wise and having good support for their sports similar to the SB. The WAC base will continue to grow. I don't think we can look and treat the WAC going forward like they are a struggling league with schools far flung with the likes of Chicago St and a bunch of new to D1's just trying to get their feet wet with no football.
Oh ok, when I first read hybrid I thought you were implying that the WAC would try and successfully poach MAC and Sun Belt schools lol, but I see what you mean now.
I think the MAC has a few advantages that allow them to succeed that the WAC cant create or will take a long time to create such as close proximity for most schools, TV deal(arguable whether this helps or hurts them), history together ( those schools have been together for a LONG time), stability (none of them are flight risks), and established fan bases.
Maybe the WAC will end up more on the Sun Belt end of the spectrum?
|
|
04-21-2021 11:02 AM |
|