Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Todor Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,637
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 914
I Root For: New Mexico State
Location:
Post: #61
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
I don't have the faintest idea how facilities and event management or scheduling works, but obviously some events are scheduled years in advance, others with a much shorter lead time.

I suspect since an arena that size couldn't make nearly as much on a single Redhawks gane as, say, a huge concert that's in town for 1 or 2 nights, and since Seattle U does have other options, that its not realistic to block off too many dates all at once.

There are always primary tenants such as professional sports, secondary tenants like Seattle basketball, in addition to all of the one off events like a giant convention or something. I'm already thinking that would be a nice little weekend trip for myself when the Aggies visit. I'm kind of a arena/gym/stadium junkie and hate missing a chance to see some where new.
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2021 08:59 PM by Todor.)
01-17-2021 08:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TexasTerror Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,476
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 89
I Root For: SHSU
Location:
Post: #62
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
Including a few that were not mentioned...

Winners...

Division II schools in Texas / Oklahoma / Arkansas region interested in moving up from Division II to Division I. Between the WAC and Southland, there's conceivably a few invitations to be had in the next 12-24 months and safe to say at this point, it could be 2-to-3 schools.

Houston Baptist. Their spot in Division I and the Southland Conference is more secure today than it ever was before. Plus, as KatFans tweeted out - they are likely under no stress to improve their facilities anytime soon.

Losers...

Texas A&M - Corpus Christi. They are in a bad place, particularly if UTRGV adds football and if there's not a merger that places with Texas A&M-Kingsville rising to the Division I level. Corpus will fall quickly and be surpassed by these two schools on either side of them. The TAMUK situation could really hurt them and there's still the prospect in the next decade or so of Texas A&M-San Antonio rapidly rising through the ranks.

Frisco, Texas. The Southland is changing rapidly and what's this mean for the league office? The FCS football championship game? The leadership? There could be significant changes in the next few years that could see the Southland offices, leadership and the national championship game (as well as the other championships in the DFW area that the Southland was slated to do there) leave town.
01-19-2021 03:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,006
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 655
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #63
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-19-2021 03:01 PM)TexasTerror Wrote:  Including a few that were not mentioned...

Winners...

Division II schools in Texas / Oklahoma / Arkansas region interested in moving up from Division II to Division I. Between the WAC and Southland, there's conceivably a few invitations to be had in the next 12-24 months and safe to say at this point, it could be 2-to-3 schools.

Houston Baptist. Their spot in Division I and the Southland Conference is more secure today than it ever was before. Plus, as KatFans tweeted out - they are likely under no stress to improve their facilities anytime soon.

Losers...

Texas A&M - Corpus Christi. They are in a bad place, particularly if UTRGV adds football and if there's not a merger that places with Texas A&M-Kingsville rising to the Division I level. Corpus will fall quickly and be surpassed by these two schools on either side of them. The TAMUK situation could really hurt them and there's still the prospect in the next decade or so of Texas A&M-San Antonio rapidly rising through the ranks.

Frisco, Texas. The Southland is changing rapidly and what's this mean for the league office? The FCS football championship game? The leadership? There could be significant changes in the next few years that could see the Southland offices, leadership and the national championship game (as well as the other championships in the DFW area that the Southland was slated to do there) leave town.


Southland/WAC changes will have zero impact on the site of the FCS championship game.
01-19-2021 07:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AZcats Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,826
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 137
I Root For: stAte, af, zona
Location: Pike's Peak
Post: #64
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-19-2021 03:01 PM)TexasTerror Wrote:  Including a few that were not mentioned...

Winners...

Division II schools in Texas / Oklahoma / Arkansas region interested in moving up from Division II to Division I. Between the WAC and Southland, there's conceivably a few invitations to be had in the next 12-24 months and safe to say at this point, it could be 2-to-3 schools.
...

No Arkansas school is interested.

Since the Southland and WAC will be wanting football-playing schools, all but 2 of the Oklahoma schools with football will have to add sports to move. Of the two with enough sports, one is about to discontinue 7 sports and the other recently dropped a sport; both are small private OKC area schools. If there is any interest from Oklahoma schools, it is next to zero. The state is also still facing budget issues.

Why would the Texas schools want to join the Southland and put themselves in the same position they just saw their peers get out of? Midwestern State would have to add sports to move including baseball if it is required by the conference. The SLC is going to have a hard time finding new members. They might not be in a hurry to add anyway with the remaining members soon to be getting a larger share of NCAAT money. Texas schools may be assessing their opportunities in the Southland and the WAC but that is not the same as having an interest.
01-19-2021 08:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PojoaquePosse Offline
Blowhard
*

Posts: 2,414
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 147
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #65
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-19-2021 03:01 PM)TexasTerror Wrote:  Including a few that were not mentioned...

Winners...

Division II schools in Texas / Oklahoma / Arkansas region interested in moving up from Division II to Division I. Between the WAC and Southland, there's conceivably a few invitations to be had in the next 12-24 months and safe to say at this point, it could be 2-to-3 schools.

Houston Baptist. Their spot in Division I and the Southland Conference is more secure today than it ever was before. Plus, as KatFans tweeted out - they are likely under no stress to improve their facilities anytime soon.

Losers...

Texas A&M - Corpus Christi. They are in a bad place, particularly if UTRGV adds football and if there's not a merger that places with Texas A&M-Kingsville rising to the Division I level. Corpus will fall quickly and be surpassed by these two schools on either side of them. The TAMUK situation could really hurt them and there's still the prospect in the next decade or so of Texas A&M-San Antonio rapidly rising through the ranks.

Frisco, Texas. The Southland is changing rapidly and what's this mean for the league office? The FCS football championship game? The leadership? There could be significant changes in the next few years that could see the Southland offices, leadership and the national championship game (as well as the other championships in the DFW area that the Southland was slated to do there) leave town.

The WAC offices are in Denver, CO. There hasn't been any Colorado schools in the WAC in many years. Why do the SLC offices need to move? This makes no sense.
01-20-2021 10:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TexasTerror Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,476
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 89
I Root For: SHSU
Location:
Post: #66
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-19-2021 07:03 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Southland/WAC changes will have zero impact on the site of the FCS championship game.

So if the Southland Conference office leaves Frisco, Texas in addition to a leadership change at the top of the league... both which could very well happen... you do not foresee a change? Who takes over administration and being the "champion" of the game?

(01-20-2021 10:17 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  The WAC offices are in Denver, CO. There hasn't been any Colorado schools in the WAC in many years. Why do the SLC offices need to move? This makes no sense.

There has been ample chatter and perhaps its just from the Lake Charles media that there will be wholesale changes with the league - league name, league office location, league leadership, etc. are all on the table. These changes are a "bolt to the system" and the power of the league for the first time ever doesn't lean towards Texas
01-20-2021 10:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,006
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 655
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #67
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-20-2021 10:49 AM)TexasTerror Wrote:  
(01-19-2021 07:03 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Southland/WAC changes will have zero impact on the site of the FCS championship game.

So if the Southland Conference office leaves Frisco, Texas in addition to a leadership change at the top of the league... both which could very well happen... you do not foresee a change? Who takes over administration and being the "champion" of the game?

(01-20-2021 10:17 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  The WAC offices are in Denver, CO. There hasn't been any Colorado schools in the WAC in many years. Why do the SLC offices need to move? This makes no sense.

There has been ample chatter and perhaps its just from the Lake Charles media that there will be wholesale changes with the league - league name, league office location, league leadership, etc. are all on the table. These changes are a "bolt to the system" and the power of the league for the first time ever doesn't lean towards Texas

Frisco is the champion - they want the game.
01-20-2021 11:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TexasTerror Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,476
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 89
I Root For: SHSU
Location:
Post: #68
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-20-2021 11:04 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  Frisco is the champion - they want the game.

I would be curious if others disagree with you.

In my mind, Tom Burnett had been the champion of the game, the champion of FCS football in Texas and has been the biggest cheerleader for the city of Frisco in general in the world of college athletics.
01-20-2021 11:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TarletonStateTexan Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 28
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Tarleton State
Location: Lone Star State
Post: #69
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-17-2021 03:12 PM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  
(01-17-2021 02:12 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(01-17-2021 01:09 PM)Todor Wrote:  For reference, the average home attendance in D1 is about 4,600. Also for comparison, GCU and NMSU would be 5th and 6th in the Mountain West in attendance for the last year I saw totals.

3516 for the old WAC
2332 for SUU in BSC
1993 SLC schools
1869 Dixie-Tarleton in D2

A real east west divide.
3510 West
1760 East

The places I see potential for attendance increases- Possibly at Seattle when/if they play in Climate Pledge. Every program has games against certain teams that draw much higher than average attendance. With Seattle's small capacity, they don't have the opportunity to capitalize on those chances. Other promo nights with giveaways, free parking, t shirts etc also boost those nights a little but Seattle can't really try to draw big crowds as it stands. Even a few nights in Climate Pledge should help a lot.

I think Dixie, SUU and UVU are going to have a significant percent increases, particularly UVU. I think lots of Salt Lake kids would make a weekend at home trip for an away game, and lots of them are from SLC. And Dixie and SUU should have a significant boost in games against one another. Having 3 programs in state is going to raise all of their profiles locally and I expect big increases quickly.

The main reason for the increase will be the fact that Utahans LOVE basketball. Beyond the Y and the U, Weber pretty much always leads the BSC in attendance. Well over double the 2nd place BSC attendance school recently. A few years ago Weber State had the 12th highest attendance average among schools in the western United States. They also finished with a higher attendance average than seven Pac-12 schools, seven Mountain West schools and nine West Coast schools. I expect our Utah 3 to increase ever single year for the foreseeable future. Dixie was near the top of D2 attendance every year. Basketball is just a Utah thing so we're lucky to have them.

CBU should continue to grow their followers. They're still young and continued winning will boost them. NMSU is so far off their record crowd of over 14,800. That was the same year we beat national champion UNLV in a Big West classic. We've got a ways to go in attendance.

Actually NMSU highest attendance game was played against UNM (14,845) in the 1990-91 season; the year after NMSU upset eventual National Champions UNLV in the 1989-90 season. That 1990 game against UNLV didn't even make the Top 25 attendance mark in NMSU history. After the UNM game in December 1990, the Las Cruces Fire Marshall stepped in and would not allow NMSU to ever sell that many standing room only tickets ever again. So, NMSU will never break its top attendance mark unless the school expands the arena or builds a new one. When originally built the PAC had a capacity of 13,222. But the increase in number of fire exit doors reduced the capacity to 13,071. And, after the 2005 renovation of the Pan Am Center, the arena was downsized from 13,071 to 12,515 losing over 500 seats in capacity. Plus the concourse which had full view of the court (good for stand room tickets sale) has been relocated under the upper level stands removing the sight lines to the court. So, with the current configuration of the PAC, Aggie basketball will be hard pressed to crack the NMSU's Top 25 attendance threshold ever again.

Rank / Date / Opponent / Result / Attendance
1. 12/15/90... New Mexico... W... 72-64... 14,845
2. 11/29/90... UTEP... W... 70-55... 13,787
3. 1/23/86... UNLV... L... 88-79... 13,709
4. 12/3/83... UTEP... L... 60-59... 13,691
5. 2/1/79... Indiana State... L... 91-89... 13,684
6 12/2/78... UTEP... L... 54-52... 13,319
7. 1/24/70... UTEP... W... 90-77... 13,227
8. 1/29/69... New Mexico... L... 86-66... 13,222
9. 2/22/90... San Jose State... W... 101-70... 13,182
10. 12/10/86... UTEP... L... 61-58... 13,159
11. 2/21/83... Wichita State... L... 72-70... 13,127
12. 2/28/70... Utah State... W... 104-92... 13,111
13. 12/1/94... UTEP... W... 89-83... 13,085
14. 1/25/92... UNLV... L... 74-67... 13,071
15. 12/3/93... UTEP... W... 72-64... 13,071
16. 12/20/93... New Mexico... W... 63-62... 13,071
17. 12/16/69... New Mexico... W... 91-73... 13,058
18. 12/2/89... New Mexico... W... 60-55... 13,040
19. 12/27/84... UTEP... W... 66-63... 13,027
20. 12/9/94... New Mexico... W... 74-65... 13,012
21. 12/3/77... New Mexico... L... 94-87... 13,011
22. 2/25/91... UNLV... L... 86-74... 13,007
23. 3/1/93... UNLV... W... 90-88... 13,007
24. 2/21/87... UNLV... L... 80-69... 13,002
25. 2/10/18... Grand Canyon... W... 74-70... 12,989

Just some NMSU history.

This is why I hope Tarleton doesn't overdo it when they build the new arena. 5,000 to 7,500 capacity will do just fine. Less and less attendance with the advent of streaming interwebs. Max decibel level will never be achieved in a half-empty arena. That CBU arena is nice and right-sized.

I highly doubt Texan Basketball's (potential) attendance figures are the driving factor behind the proposed arena's size and seating capability. The arena will be multipurpose, from what I understand, and used for freshman convocation, commencement and other large campus gatherings. If past incoming freshmen classes are any indicator—all have been record-breaking enrollments in recent years—it's obvious to everyone that Tarleton has outgrown Wisdom Gym and is the reason the university has had to hold as many as five or six separate graduation ceremonies over a weekend, and also limit the number of tickets graduates receive for their guests to attend. But, yes. I agree. I hope it's not too big and will seem "half-full" on game days.
01-20-2021 03:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Zonadub Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 2
Joined: Jan 2021
Reputation: 0
I Root For: NoDak
Location:
Post: #70
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
Very doubtful that the Big Sky would add Seattle. The Big Sky is a football focused conference and has no non-football members.
01-20-2021 06:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lopes87 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,569
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 38
I Root For: GCU
Location:
Post: #71
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-20-2021 06:04 PM)Zonadub Wrote:  Very doubtful that the Big Sky would add Seattle. The Big Sky is a football focused conference and has no non-football members.

Big Sky doesn't offer baseball or men's soccer, so that would damper SU for wanting the Big Sky.
01-20-2021 06:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,789
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #72
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-20-2021 06:29 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  
(01-20-2021 06:04 PM)Zonadub Wrote:  Very doubtful that the Big Sky would add Seattle. The Big Sky is a football focused conference and has no non-football members.

Big Sky doesn't offer baseball or men's soccer, so that would damper SU for wanting the Big Sky.

The WAC would probably let them keep those sports in the WAC.
01-20-2021 06:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pounder Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 230
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #73
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-17-2021 07:30 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  
(01-17-2021 05:52 PM)Todor Wrote:  
(01-17-2021 05:34 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  Seattle U doesn't have an agreement to use CPA to this point. If anything they could be using Showare Center (Kent) or Xfinity Arena (Everett) as options. The Oak View Group has made statements that they'd prefer to use the CPA for pro sports (NHL.WNBA,NBA), NCAA Tournament games, or concerts/conferences. All I'm saying is if I'm a Seattle U fan I'm not going to count my chickens before they hatch. Redhawk Center might be a more permanent home a while longer.

I'm sure they'll get a deal worked out. They probably just don't want to commit to booking a whole season of college basketball, but I'm sure they'd rather have it used than have it empty. Its almost a quarter of a billion over their original cost projections, so they may want to at least try and make some money out of it.

They’ll more than likely have a few games there, unless they’re going to load it up with concerts and other arena shows. They will want some dates and so will SU, but why commit to anything right now? This thing isn’t over yet.

Everything I’ve read notes that OVG is really in it for the concerts. They won’t make it look like NHL takes a back seat, including the probability that the NHL schedules early enough that it’s not usually a problem.

That doesn’t mean they won’t fit in SU a handful of times, but continuity becomes an issue. Long term, the school needs an on-campus upgrade.
01-21-2021 06:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalVANDAL Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 580
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 21
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #74
RE: Winners and losers of 1/14/21 WAC Expansion
(01-16-2021 05:31 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(01-16-2021 04:44 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  
(01-15-2021 04:54 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  
(01-15-2021 04:38 PM)Todor Wrote:  
(01-15-2021 03:16 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  Probably too early to assess long term winners and losers, but I think most mid-major conferences west of the Mississippi COULD be losers (including the WAC). In the meantime, the WAC looks like the winner and the SLC looks like the loser, but there are so many possible repercussions. E.g. I wouldn’t be surprised if ORU goes back to the SLC now that they could be top dog and milk the basketball bid. Would push the Summit to target UNC or the Montana schools, which could cause the Big Sky to push for expansion etc. etc. etc. And there’s been an excessive amount of chatter about the Texas 4 moving on. Impossible to predict. Real losers are fans of stability. Winners are realignmentologists (or are they losers?).

Equally impossible to predict are the futures of all of the other conferences...wrong forum for excessive chatter about non WAC topics. Those issues are already being discussed in the general, non WAC specific main forum.

I’m discouraging speculation about such topics, because it’s pointless, and I didn’t intend to hijack this thread for speculation. OP mentioned the WAC as the “winner” and the SLC as the “loser.” My point (perhaps poorly made) was that the initial fallout from the realignment hasn’t even settled, so it’s premature to say this. I’m happy that NMSU appears to have a more stable home, but I don’t think we’re out of the woods yet.

Can you tell me how a conference who has been struggling for stability and had to add Chicago State 8 years ago, is not a winner for adding 5 current FCS teams to their new football league?

Can you also tell me how a conference who just lost 4 of their best football teams and is left with only 6 football schools is not a loser? Not to mention the 4 teams left to join 2 D2 move ups and not Utah and SMU. I would like to know your thoughts on those questions.

The WAC is a major winner. Same as the Atlantic Sun if the OVC defects rumor comes to fruition. The Southland and OVC are looking more like the bottom of the barrel.

Southern Utah leaving the Big Sky is a benefit to the Big Sky and the WAC.
Southern Utah is a big winner also with this move.
For the short term an easier football schedule at least.
Two in state conference members and fairly close trips to a couple more.
They have a really nice basketball arena those closer future rivals will help build that sport.
01-22-2021 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2024 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, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.