(05-28-2024 12:16 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(05-26-2024 12:11 AM)Pounder Wrote:  

(05-19-2024 05:29 PM)BlueDragon Wrote:  The WAC has NO LEADERSHIP!

The leadership is only as good as the membership. Full stop.

No leader would have been able to keep NMSU and SHSU in the WAC when an FBS conference called.

No leader would have been able to keep GCU and Seattle in the WAC when the WCC called.

Those four teams would be leaving regardless of any other internal or external leaders, etc.


UTRGV and SFA? SFA is now on an island, and the big basketball powers in the WAC (NMSU and GCU) are gone. Might as well cut costs in a lower travel league.

UTRGV - not sure their complete thought process - that is the only one were a leader may have made a difference.

SFA isn't on an island. UTA is less than a three-hour drive. Tarleton less than four. ACU less than six.

I think what did SFA in was the travel costs savings, as their students declined a student fee in a vote. If they make the move this summer, I don't know then, as the exit fee will take several years for the savings to even out.

I do know they were unhappy with the WAC for many reasons. However, some of those unhappy reasons were rectified at the departure of Seattle and more importantly GCU.

UTRGV makes the most sense to me as they move to a less competitive conference, giving them a better shot at the postseason and drastically reduces travel time and costs.

(05-28-2024 10:17 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  UTRGV makes the most sense to me as they move to a less competitive conference, giving them a better shot at the postseason and drastically reduces travel time and costs.

Read in one of these threads that Lamar saved $300K per year in travel by switching from WAC to SLC. On the other hand UTRGV will have to pay $2M just to exit the WAC. Seems like a long payoff time; longer than the average time a team spends in one conference these days.

I think for RGV the move was strictly for competitive reasons which is understanable. They are comparable to Corpus which is near or at the top of the Southland. SFA going there hurts RGV in basketball, but they would still be near the top program wise which they were never going to be at that level in the WAC. SFA is just being cry babies and taking their ball and going home because they can not win everything like they did in the Southland. It speaks volumes to the trajectory of the whole athletic program admitting they can not be competitive at the WAC level, just the Southland which should in reality be a D2 conference, not D1.

(05-29-2024 06:05 PM)edinburger Wrote:  

(05-28-2024 10:17 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  UTRGV makes the most sense to me as they move to a less competitive conference, giving them a better shot at the postseason and drastically reduces travel time and costs.

Read in one of these threads that Lamar saved $300K per year in travel by switching from WAC to SLC. On the other hand UTRGV will have to pay $2M just to exit the WAC. Seems like a long payoff time; longer than the average time a team spends in one conference these days.

Don't forget that Lamar's year was with divisional play in most sports. I suspect the cost savings might be more without the benefit of the division set up.

Here's a quick look at SFA's game expenses/travel expenses (mostly travel) compared to Lamar's crossing SLC and WAC years. SFA's expenses balloon in the later years. (Added UTRGV for non football comparison)

Year.......SFA................Lamar........UTRGV
2018 $1,983,296......$1,344,309........$2,292,504
2019 $2,197,186......$1,462,436........$2,921,343
2020 $1,962,535......$1,129,571........$2,102,711
2021 $1,986,911.......$928,400..........$1,601,829
2022 $3,610,813......$1,966,211........$2,488,669
2023 $3,420,195......$1,635,897........$2,799,737
Source: Knight-Newhouse College Athletics database drilling down to isolate "Game Expenses and Travel"

Looks like a lot of SFA's most recently revenue/expense reporting (OPE Equity in Athletics) is taken up by travel expenses.

SFA.......$24,962,955
Lamar....$21,287,614
UTRGV...$15,997,018

(05-29-2024 07:30 PM)Spolovilo4EVER Wrote:  I think for RGV the move was strictly for competitive reasons which is understanable. They are comparable to Corpus which is near or at the top of the Southland. SFA going there hurts RGV in basketball, but they would still be near the top program wise which they were never going to be at that level in the WAC. SFA is just being cry babies and taking their ball and going home because they can not win everything like they did in the Southland. It speaks volumes to the trajectory of the whole athletic program admitting they can not be competitive at the WAC level, just the Southland which should in reality be a D2 conference, not D1.

Could be UTRGV also looked at expense history without football vs projected expenses with football. It looks like UTRGV's travel expenses were already historically high as a non-football program. (See post #144 above.)

(05-29-2024 06:05 PM)edinburger Wrote:  

(05-28-2024 10:17 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  UTRGV makes the most sense to me as they move to a less competitive conference, giving them a better shot at the postseason and drastically reduces travel time and costs.

Read in one of these threads that Lamar saved $300K per year in travel by switching from WAC to SLC. On the other hand UTRGV will have to pay $2M just to exit the WAC. Seems like a long payoff time; longer than the average time a team spends in one conference these days.

It’s costlier for UTRGV because they are not near a major airport.

I do not think RGV is going to be saving a lot on travel expenses to the SLC. They are either going to have to take really long Bus trips or Fly to NO and then Bus the rest of the way. Their Location puts them at a big disadvantage for travel no matter what conference they are in/going to. Competitively they will be much better off in the SLC, but travel wise not so much. Think about it, Your on a the richest university system in the world, if you had a competitive sports program, would you move to vastly inferior conference just to save 100-200k a year?

(05-31-2024 03:50 AM)Spolovilo4EVER Wrote:  I do not think RGV is going to be saving a lot on travel expenses to the SLC. They are either going to have to take really long Bus trips or Fly to NO and then Bus the rest of the way. Their Location puts them at a big disadvantage for travel no matter what conference they are in/going to. Competitively they will be much better off in the SLC, but travel wise not so much. Think about it, Your on a the richest university system in the world, if you had a competitive sports program, would you move to vastly inferior conference just to save 100-200k a year?

Taken as a whole, the bolded words are correct in some instances and an exaggeration which the data does not support in other instances.

Below are comparisons. There are strengths and weaknesses in both conferences. The SLC is currently a conference of extremes with some high performing programs mixed with some currently weaker programs.

Football (WAC schools only compared to SLC) using Warren Nolans' ELO ranking out of 128 teams in 2023. Team listing to concentrate on WAC vs SLC. ASUN schools helped UAC ranking with 3 schools in top 50. The SLC had the highest performer.

Green represents program's year over year improvement. Red represents year over year drop.

Incarnate Word.....................11 (SLC) from 5 in 2022
Tarleton.................................32 (WAC) from 73 in 2022
Nicholls.................................44 (SLC) from 68 in 2022
Southern Utah.......................50 (WAC) from 80 in 2022
Abilene Christian...................64 (WAC) from 50 in 2022 Underline represents FCS midpoint
Lamar....................................71 (SLC) from 126 in 2022
Southeastern.........................75 (SLC) from 12 in 2022
Houston Christian..................79 (SLC) from 125 in 2022
Stephen F. Austin.................. 95 (WAC->SLC) from 30 in 2022
Utah Tech..............................101 (WAC) from 60 in 2022
Northwestern State...............113 (SLC) from 79 in 2022
Texas A&M-Commerce.........118 (SLC) (1st year)
McNeese...............................123 (SLC) from 87 in 20222

From here, green represents help with conference net. Red represents challenge to conference net.

The WAC definitely has the edge in basketball. A lot of that will disappear when SFA, GCU and Seattle leave.

Men's basketball The WAC had the highest performer, but that program is leaving.
WAC #14 (losing #50 GCU, #119, #175 SFA, and #331 UTRGV)
HIghest 3 - #50 GCU, #119 Seattle, #129 UTA

SLC #27(gaining #175 SFA and #331 UTRGV)
Highest 3 - #56 McNeese, #179 TAMU-CC, and #218 Lamar

Women's basketball The WAC had the highest performer, but that program is leaving.
WAC #21 (Losing #93 GCU, #147 SFA, #308 Seattle, and #312 UTRGV)
Highest 3 - #93 GCU, #120 CBU, and #147 SFA

SLC #25 (Gaining #147 SFA and #312 UTRGV)
Highest 3 - #126 Lamar, #167 TAMU-CC, and #177 Southeastern

The SLC currently has the edge in baseball. The SLC had the highest performers.
.
Baseball RPI
SLC #14 (Gaining 203 UTRGV and #297 SFA)
Highest 3 - #61 Nicholls, #65 Lamar, and #113 McNeese

WAC#21 (Losing #96 GCU, #203 UTRGV, #272 Seattle, and #297 SFA)
Highest 3 - #96 GCU, #129 CBU, and #151 Tarleton

The SLC currently has the edge in softball.

Softball RPI SLC has the highest performers
SLC #10 (Gaining #255 SFA)
Highest 3 - #41 McNeese, #53 Southeastern, and #76 Incarnate Word

WAC #17 (Losing #52 GCU, #160 Seattle, and #255 SFA)
Highest 3 - #52 GCU, #139 UVU, and #156 CBU

The WAC has the edge in Women's soccer. Again, the SLC had both the highest and lowest performers based on RPI rating.
Lamar..............................51 (SLC)
GCU.................................80 (WAC)
CBU...............................144 (WAC)
Utah Tech......................152 (WAC)
Seattle...........................165 (WAC)
McNeese.......................204 (SLC)
TAMU-Commerce..........218 (SLC)
Southeastern.................250 (SLC)
Abilene Christian...........255 (WAC)
Northwestern St............264 (SLC)
HCU..............................269 (SLC)
TAMU-CC......................277 (SLC)
Incarnate Word..............281 (SLC)
Southern Utah...............291 (WAC)
Tarleton.........................301 (WAC)
UTRGV.........................304 (WAC -> SLC)
Stephen F. Austin......... 308 (WAC -> SLC)
Nicholls..........................339 (SLC)

Women's Volleyball
Strong advantage WAC, but a lot of the strength is leaving.

Stephen F. Austin.........................39 (WAC -> SLC)
Grand Canyon..............................78 (WAC)
Southeastern.................................82 (SLC)
UTRGV.........................................113 (WAC -> SLC)
UTA..............................................132 (WAC)
TAMU-Corpus Christi...................157 (SLC)
Houston Christian........................162 (SLC)
UVU.............................................167 (WAC)
McNeese......................................211 (SLC)
Tarleton........................................215 (WAC)
Abilene Christian..........................216 (WAC)
CBU..............................................217 (WAC)
Northwestern St............................238 (SLC)
Utah Tech.....................................247 (WAC)
Incarnate Word.............................267 (SLC)
Seattle.........................................270 (WAC)
Southern Utah..............................293 (WAC)
TAMU-Commerce........................304 (SLC)
New Orleans................................316 (SLC)
Lamar...........................................329 (SLC)
Nicholls........................................331 (SLC)

On a side note, it's interesting that "Can't compete" former WAC member, Lamar, is in the highest 3 in many of the comparisons, even with the burden of being saddled with the drag of a "vastlly inferior" conference.

Thanks for the detailed analysis, LU.

Of course the first GCU Baseball squad to get a win in regionals is the one that backed their way into it after crapping the bed on their Day 1 of the WAC Tournament. Baseball is a funny sport that way. On to face West Virginia in the 1-0 game of the Tucson regional tomorrow, just like everyone had it drawn up.

If your trying to convince people that the SLC is a good conference you are wasting your time. Look how Lamar fared in the WAC and then see how they did when they went back to the SLC. They are upper echelon of the Southland but would still be at the very bottom of the WAC. Take TAMU-CC and UTRGV for a good comparison, they went 1-1 against each other and are about = on the court. UTRGV was LAST by a LONG WAY in the WAC and TAMUCC was 2nd in the SLC. The truth is the WAC is WAY better than the SLC and it is not even close. McNeese could win a few games in the WAC but most everyone else in the SLC would go winless against WAC Competition.

(06-03-2024 07:14 AM)Spolovilo4EVER Wrote:  If your trying to convince people that the SLC is a good conference you are wasting your time. Look how Lamar fared in the WAC and then see how they did when they went back to the SLC. They are upper echelon of the Southland but would still be at the very bottom of the WAC. Take TAMU-CC and UTRGV for a good comparison, they went 1-1 against each other and are about = on the court. UTRGV was LAST by a LONG WAY in the WAC and TAMUCC was 2nd in the SLC. The truth is the WAC is WAY better than the SLC and it is not even close. McNeese could win a few games in the WAC but most everyone else in the SLC would go winless against WAC Competition.

Right now, the WAC is light-years ahead in basketball. Some of that is GCU and Seattle. Some of that is also all the 300+ programs in the SLC. That's why I said, "The SLC is currently a conference of extremes with some high performing programs mixed with some currently weaker programs.", almost in the opening sentence of my post above.

Like some of the WAC teams I've been reading posts about, Lamar's team was injured and didn't play small ball well enough during its WAC year. It would have been nice to have a healthy team, but... That carried on into the next. Not an excuse, just adding the Cards to teams with injury challenges.

From Beaumont Enterprise, January 3, 2023. (Adblocker needs to be off to see article.)
Article link

Quote:Much like last year when Lamar was missing size at the forward position, the Cardinals will rely on smaller playmakers to create offense....

(That didn't work very well in 2022-23 just as it didn't in 2021-22.)

"All those (injured) guys are big guys, which is what makes it tough," Brooks said. "We've had to play small again after we tried to recruit away from that."

The end result was a WAC like performance in the SLC. Last year's (2022-23) team was 5-13 in conference play in the weak SLC; not much improvement of the pathetic 0-18 in WAC conference play the year before. This past season was a little better with 19-14 and 12-6 with a new court. Not where I would like the team, but progress. The following might be part of the reason.

I found this article a few weeks ago. It does a great job of explaining what is going on with the new AD and new university president at Lamar and the Marshall connection. I don't know if Mike Hamrick is still helping, but things are improving in all sports. It's a good story regardless of who you root for similar to some of the Tarleton stories I've read.

Link: Path to resiliency

This is some of the recent improvements (new scoreboards at football stadium and basketball arena as well as new sound systems at both). The old scoreboard was a good size (shown in the article above). The new one at the stadium is over twice as large.

Scoreboards and sound systems.

Link: Path to resiliency

This is some of the recent improvements (new scoreboards at football stadium and basketball arena as well as new sound systems at both). The old scoreboard was a good size (shown in the article above). The new one at the stadium is over twice as large.

Scoreboards and sound systems.
[/quote]

Nice to see the updates

(05-31-2024 08:38 PM)edinburger Wrote:  Thanks for the detailed analysis, LU.

Unfortuneately, what's not taken into account is that the rankings used will not be an apples to apples comparison in the new conference. Replacing ACU in men's basketball with Northwestern State will lower the teams ranking, all else equal. McNeese needed a huge non-conference schedule just to get a 12 seed. The SLC would get a play-in seed or a 15 at best if McNeese were upset. SFA at 175, would be 225-250 with all else equal in the SLC. That's just the nature or RPI/NET. Their conference is just terrible in non-conference. The only true advantage the SLC has is in baseball. UTRGV will make it a bit stronger. Softball is likely in the SLC's favor too. That's about it.

(06-05-2024 12:01 AM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(05-31-2024 08:38 PM)edinburger Wrote:  Thanks for the detailed analysis, LU.

Unfortuneately, what's not taken into account is that the rankings used will not be an apples to apples comparison in the new conference. Replacing ACU in men's basketball with Northwestern State will lower the teams ranking, all else equal. McNeese needed a huge non-conference schedule just to get a 12 seed. The SLC would get a play-in seed or a 15 at best if McNeese were upset. SFA at 175, would be 225-250 with all else equal in the SLC. That's just the nature or RPI/NET. Their conference is just terrible in non-conference. The only true advantage the SLC has is in baseball. UTRGV will make it a bit stronger. Softball is likely in the SLC's favor too. That's about it.

I thought the bolded part was understood. Also, team performance will not be static from year to year. I should have added the caveat. Thanks for the clarification.

I’ve learned that nothing on CSNBBS can be assumed to be understood.