Why was Houston not included in the original WAC? Did Houston not want in? I can't imagine the WAC would want the other SWC teams but not Houston. They took SMU and TCU from the Dallas area so why not two from the Houston area? Is Tulsa a better school than Houston?

(06-02-2021 10:43 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Why was Houston not included in the original WAC? Did Houston not want in? I can't imagine the WAC would want the other SWC teams but not Houston. They took SMU and TCU from the Dallas area so why not two from the Houston area? Is Tulsa a better school than Houston?

Houston wanted to be with the Eastern Independents forming CUSA

(06-02-2021 10:34 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(06-02-2021 10:16 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2021 07:38 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(05-30-2021 07:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  If the WAC had just gone to 12 to get the championship game, they would have been OK

Hawaii, Fresno, SJSU, SDSU, UNLV, BYU
UTEP, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado St, Air Force, Wyoming

Guarantee the Utah game evey year and the gap between the other mountain schools isn't unbearable like it is in the WAC 16.

Breakaway happens in any scenario BYU/UU/CSU/AFA/WYO aren’t all playing annually.

Frankly, I suspect the league would have been fine had it stuck with a traditional 2-division format rather than the ill-fated 4-team pods. With two 8-team divisions, the Airport 5 could have had their annual games against one another by simply placing them all in the same division. The 4-team pod structure meant that the 5 team group would not be able to count on annual games as one would always be left out of the group. I always thought the 16-team WAC was a much better football league than the basketball centric CUSA Houston chose to throw in with in the aftermath of the SWC implosion. While it was not a P5---it was much closer than CUSA.

I agree, it's just really tough to keep those 5 together in the 16 team format when most of your additions are central and TX schools.

Maybe if they skipped SJSU and had newcomer UNLV in an east division with UTEP, New Mexico, Rice, SMU, TCU, Tulsa and a 16th school (NMSU, Utah St., or North Texas)

(06-02-2021 12:07 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-02-2021 10:34 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(06-02-2021 10:16 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2021 07:38 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(05-30-2021 07:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  If the WAC had just gone to 12 to get the championship game, they would have been OK

Hawaii, Fresno, SJSU, SDSU, UNLV, BYU
UTEP, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado St, Air Force, Wyoming

Guarantee the Utah game evey year and the gap between the other mountain schools isn't unbearable like it is in the WAC 16.

Breakaway happens in any scenario BYU/UU/CSU/AFA/WYO aren’t all playing annually.

Frankly, I suspect the league would have been fine had it stuck with a traditional 2-division format rather than the ill-fated 4-team pods. With two 8-team divisions, the Airport 5 could have had their annual games against one another by simply placing them all in the same division. The 4-team pod structure meant that the 5 team group would not be able to count on annual games as one would always be left out of the group. I always thought the 16-team WAC was a much better football league than the basketball centric CUSA Houston chose to throw in with in the aftermath of the SWC implosion. While it was not a P5---it was much closer than CUSA.

I agree, it's just really tough to keep those 5 together in the 16 team format when most of your additions are central and TX schools.

Maybe if they skipped SJSU and had newcomer UNLV in an east division with UTEP, New Mexico, Rice, SMU, TCU, Tulsa and a 16th school (NMSU, Utah St., or North Texas)

They would have had to be ok with abandoning geographic divisions to preserve the "Airport 5"

I don't think anyone was ready for that in 96.

The WAC really should have stayed at 10 in 1996, or at the very least, only gone to 12. That decision ultimately doomed the league.

I read an article once, and now I can’t find it, that said expansion passed with a simple majority vote and there was one abstention. (So 5-4?) I think Hawaii, Fresno St, Colorado St, UTEP, and San Diego St were the yes schools.

(06-02-2021 01:47 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The WAC really should have stayed at 10 in 1996, or at the very least, only gone to 12. That decision ultimately doomed the league.

I read an article once, and now I can’t find it, that said expansion passed with a simple majority vote and there was one abstention. (So 5-4?) I think Hawaii, Fresno St, Colorado St, UTEP, and San Diego St were the yes schools.

If preserving the airport 5 was that important they should have gone to 14 and taken UNLV, Nevada, SJSU, and Boise State.

That would have given them enough for a CCG and preserved the MT and PT divisons

Of course there is no chance Nevada and Boise would have been added in 96.

So what they really should have done is put BYU in the Western Divison with the PT schools stopping at 12 with SJSU and UNLV, amd preserving the Utah/BYU game. If/When BYU gets tired of that after a couple of years, then you add two more PT schools so BYU can be bumped to the MT divison. Given a couple of years, Boise and Nevada would have been more ready and acceptable to a BYU looking to get back in the MT division.

Going to CT schools and splitting the core MT schools killed the WAC

(06-02-2021 03:51 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(06-02-2021 01:47 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The WAC really should have stayed at 10 in 1996, or at the very least, only gone to 12. That decision ultimately doomed the league.

I read an article once, and now I can’t find it, that said expansion passed with a simple majority vote and there was one abstention. (So 5-4?) I think Hawaii, Fresno St, Colorado St, UTEP, and San Diego St were the yes schools.

If preserving the airport 5 was that important they should have gone to 14 and taken UNLV, Nevada, SJSU, and Boise State.

That would have given them enough for a CCG and preserved the MT and PT divisons

Of course there is no chance Nevada and Boise would have been added in 96.

So what they really should have done is put BYU in the Western Divison with the PT schools stopping at 12 with SJSU and UNLV, amd preserving the Utah/BYU game. If/When BYU gets tired of that after a couple of years, then you add two more PT schools so BYU can be bumped to the MT divison. Given a couple of years, Boise and Nevada would have been more ready and acceptable to a BYU looking to get back in the MT division.

Going to CT schools and splitting the core MT schools killed the WAC

Boise St was still in DI-AA and Nevada had only made the move in 1992. I don’t think the WAC was strongly considering either of them.

Expansion for the WAC in 1996 was a mistake—they should have stayed put or only added 2 schools.

I can understand the temptation to reach into Texas and gain a presence in those big DFW and Houston markets. I get that there was concern that if they didn’t take the 3 SWC schools they’d try to rebuild and that UTEP and UNM would be strong candidates to join them but had that happened, they still had 8 members and there were plenty of expansion options still in the Big West—San Jose St, UNLV, Nevada, etc.