The Mountain West Conference has eight members, not nine. They are San Diego State, UNLV, Utah, Brigham Young, Wyoming, Colorado State, Air Force and New Mexico. Wyoming is sort of on the attendance bubble and the rumor is that they will take one more the first year of the shakeup in case Wyoming doesn't qualify. I think that while Wyoming will never have an average attendance of much more than 20,000, they can consistently average 17-18,000.

The MWC could take four teams; it depends on how they yield to the pressure on them from Hawaii, Fresno State, Boise State and Nevada.

I don't think that BYU will be a part of any realignment because it appears more and more doubtful that the Pac-10 will expand.

JFin, don't be so quick to count out the Big 12 taking on BYU. That is definitely forseeable even if the Pac 10 won't take BYU.

If that happened, UTEP would be the Westernmost team in the WAC other than San Jose State. I'm surprised that UTEP didn't get admitted into the MWC. Either the WAC could take four all-sports teams from the Sun Belt, or the Sun Belt could absorb the remaining WAC teams. If the latter happened, the sports other than football would have a huge number of teams. With Idaho and Utah State that makes 13 teams, which we had to have to get 8 all-sports football schools.

Frankly I think anyone can fudge the 15,000 average if they wanted to if they meet the other requirements to stay 1-A. I can't see Wyoming not qualifying.

I sure wish an overhaul like this which would make geographical sense takes place before the Sun Belt expands, if it is going to happen. Wright Waters has set Summer 2003 to have his 2005 lineup in place. I don't think changes of the magnitude you have mentioned will fit into Waters' timetable. I would think our attendance problems are too acute (4 under the 15K average) to wait too much longer for something to happen.

CaliforniaCajun,
On Sat 31, August '02 UTenn played Wyoming in Nashville. This counted as a Wyoming home game. Since the site was not in Wyoming, the stats must not have counted it toward WY attendance. If the had, the 56,000 there would have put WY way over the 15K they needed. I am sure that the schools will find a way to count these "neutral site" games toward their attendance. The 15K is probably there to keep the 1AA's from moving up. A division 1A might pay a 1AA to play them at home, but they would NOT play a 1AA on the road.

FBfan

From what I've read, Wright Waters said that he would have eight teams in place this July, with a ninth to come later. That is contingent on no other shifts being made. There are six all-sports teams in place, which means two will be added. It is rumored that one of those is an eastern WAC team. If that's so, the WAC would then be at nine teams. If the MWC takes more than one team or San Jose State doesn't qualify (a real possibility), then the remaining eastern WAC teams are not going to want to have huge travel expenses so would like a league closer to home. If say an SMU or Rice comes calling, would they be denied? I don't think so, thus WW's backup plan gets altered.

The main reason for as much regionalization as possible is travel costs. Louisiana-Monroe, a football-only member of the SBC (and likely to drop to 1-AA) spent a little more than one=half million dollars less in travel expenses than did nearby WAC member Louisiana Tech. And, as fuel costs rise, the travel expenses will continue to rise.

The next big rumor is that the Belt will take Idaho, then swap Idaho, Utah State and New Mexico State for the four easternmost WAC teams. That again would depend on the MWC only taking one AND San Jose State qualifying.

While there is no assurance that all six all-sports members of the SBC qualify, I believe that they all will. The two most at risk are Arkansas State and Middle Tennessee. MTSU has only averaged 15,000 twice in the last six years and Arkansas State none. However, for the first time in years ASU had a conpetitive which almost had a winning season. The just miss the magic number by a little more than a thousand. Middle fans seem to rally to the occasion but they must keep competitive teams for fan interest.

Perhaps this to ponder under realignment:

Pac 10 - north - WSU, Wash., Ore. St. Oreg., Utah, BYU:
south - ASU, Arz., UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford

WACC - north - San Jose St., Fresno St., Idaho, Boise St., Utah St, Montana (up from 1-AA); south - Nevada, UNLV, San Diego St., Hawaii, New Mex., New Mex. St.

Montain West - north - Wyoming, Air Force, Colorado St., N. Tex St., SMU, TCU; south - UTEP, Baylor, Rice, Houston, LA Tech, Tulane.

Big 12 - north - Colo., Nebraska, Missouri, KSU, Kansas, Okla St; south - LSU, Okla., Arkansas, Texas, Tex A&M, Tex. Tech.

MACC - south - Ark. St., Tulsa, LA-L, LA-Monroe, Troy St., GA Southern (up from 1-AA); north - Middle Tenn., N. Illinois, Ball St., Bowling Green, Miami-Ohio, Ohio Univ.

SEC - west - Miss St., Miss., Ala., Auburn, Tenn, FSU; east - Georgia, Fla., Miami, Ga Tech, So Car., Clemson.

ACC - south - Kentucky, NC, NC State, Duke, Va., Va Tech; north - WVU, Pitt, Note Dame, Syracuse, Boston College, Maryland.

Big Ten -west - Iowa St., Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern; east - Penn St., Ohio St., Mich St., Mich, Indiana, Purdue.

Big East - east - Rutgers, Army, Navy, Temple, Mass (up from 1-AA), UConn; - west - Buffalo, Akron, Kent, W. Mich., Central Mich., Eastern Mich.

Conference USA - north - Toledo, Louisville, Cincinatti, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, East Carolina; south - South Fla., Central Fla., UAB, Southern Miss., Marshall, Memphis.

Ten 12 team Conferences, geographically sound, yet diverse. Conference champions would represent ten of the 16 teams named for a play-off. The others chosen by polls. Never happen, but can dream on!

Not a bad situation for any teams really but it makes too much sense to work. I believe a major shift of so called mid majors is in line *I hate the word mid major because some of these schools should not be considered mid majors* I see a shapeup like this likely.

WAC- New Mexico State, Fresno State, Hawaii, Utah State, UTEP, Idaho, Boise State, Nevada and San Jose State if they survive.

MWC - Stays the same.

Here is where it gets really fun which is Texas and eastwards.

Sunbelt - Drops Utah State, Idaho and New Mexico State. Adds Rice Tulsa SMU La Tech to go along with Arkansas State, ULL, ULM, North Texas, Middle Tennessee State. Nice New 9 Team conference.

C-USA - Drops Cincy Louisville and Army to Big East. Temple UCF Marshall and Toledo to C-USA to go with TCU Houston Tulane Southern Miss ECU UAB South Florida Memphis.
Two Divisions - West - Houston TCU Tulane Southern Miss Memphis and UAB. East - Temple Toledo Marshall ECU South Florida and Central Florida. Football would now have to be the bread and butter as basketball has taken a two team hit or instead of Toledo or Marshall you could add Tulsa to help with basketball.

This is based upon the Big East Football and basketball schools splitting and the Big 12 and Big 10 standing pat. If either of those conferences add or loose a team then all bets are off. But I do believe we will see CUSA and MWC being thrown a bone in a 5th BCS bowl which will place their champions in different bowls against a BCS at large team. Kinda like the best of Mid Majors versus the best of whats left of the BCS thugs.

The problem that the Sun Belt schools have in realignment, frankly, is that none of them have ever done a thing in football. You can add up the bowls between them as big college teams and I doubt it would cover the fingers in one hand. Maybe New Mex State went to a bowl 20 years ago and UNT has been to the Sun Belt's bowl twice. And UL beat a few 2-9 Tulane teams and below par USM and Memphis teams - but that's not accomplishing anything. So, then you look for some outstanding feature - there aren't any - attendance isn't great, no basketball studs in the SBC, and no big markets (UNT's market is already covered), and none top ranked academically either. I'm not saying that they don't have good teams - they do - but nothing great. It's unfortunate, but they will be the choosees and not the choosers. And some will be chosen

Welcome to the forum, DogsNFighting Roosters!! (I know your team is SCarolina, but this board won't allow me to say Gamec*cks. It says "Gamethingys" instead. How lame ::) )
Anyway, I like your Sunbelt Conference idea quite a bit, and I had been mulling over the proposed alignment some myself. ASU seems to be a better MAC fit than a WAC fit, and LTU wants nothing to do w/ A-State anyway. I'd personally love to see Ga. Southern move up to I-A, but the GSU fans emphatically refuse to embrace the idea, preferring to be the big fish in a small pond than a small fish in the big pond. (i.e. they love winning I-AA national championships). Maybe they'll reconsider their stance on that should Troy State stay I-A for a long time. (it is possible, so long as TSU finds a conference home quickly!!) I'll comment on your other ideas in the dream thread. ;)

Hi Gamethingy, et al,
I am a Ga Southern Alum when they had no football team at the time, and asked, and they thought I was nuts!
Good point you made. I believe winning 1AA championships is indeed better than being an also-ran big timer. Why be in a situation to have to go to Lincoln or wherever to get creamed to finance your program? Anyway, the top 15 or so 1AA teams for the most part, can handle much of the bottom third of the 1A. Really, the LA-Layfayettes and Ball States do not have much of the sustained programs as much of 1A, and the new provisions really need to be stricter to streamline. The 117 and growing 1A football teams are too many, and the spectrum of quality is profound. I do applaud the unheralded teams when they do beat the big guys out of a desire for balance and suprise.

Cyc46,

You said that you do not like the term "mid-majors." I am not crazy about it myself, so I have been pushing the term "1B." The difference between a "mid-major" and a 1B is that mid-majors usually refers to any 1A team not in a BCS conference. 1B refers to any 1A team that cannot average top 60 status. Therefore Duke and Vandy are 1B's, while Louiseville and So. Miss could claim 1A.

Of course, you could go by attendance. In that case, the BCS schools almost always beat not BCS schools. IMHO, that is why the BCS conferences have the power. Fans equal money, and money equals power.

DogsNFighting Roosters,

The paragraph above could be the key to slowing or stopping growth in 1A. The 15K attendance requirement will be hard for some teams to meet. Raising it the 20-30K would basically leave only the BCS schools. So. Miss would make it if they could join the SEC, but the 2 Miss schools already in the SEC would NOT approve IMHO. So. Miss would be a good fit for the ACC, but travel cost would cut down the visiting team gate, and the Tobbacco RD crowd would not want any more FB schools IMHO.

If the NCAA raised the attendance requirement to 25K, I believe that the SBC would go out of business as 1A FB.

FBfan

Louisiana Ragin' Cajun football has not progressed for many years because the school president had a $100 million fund raising drive for academics, and wouldn't allow the athletic fund raising to compete with it. That goal has been achieved and now we're doing the same thing for athletics.

We went 1-A before we had the necessary funding to compete because in 1981 we met the qualifications and knew it would be harder to become 1-A at a later date.

Obviously Sun Belt football isn't anywhere near where it needs to be, but I think it's significant that in our second year we defeated the CUSA co-champion in a bowl game.

When Sun Belt budgets become more like $10-12 million rather than $5-6 million we will start looking more like CUSA.

Fledgling 1-A schools that have taken a similar course of action have paid a tremendous price, such as looking inept and losing their fan base.

I miss a rivalry we had with McNeese, who has continued to excel at the 1-AA level. Some of my friends invited me to one of their games last Fall and I had a wonderful time. McNeese fans tell me that they make money, but for a program of their stature they should make a whole lot more for playoff appearances and championship games. The NCAA could make an effort to make 1-AA more attractive from the standpoint of money. There is a reason why more than 20 schools have defected to 1-A in the last 20 years.

I consider "mid-majors" to be schools whose budgets are under the 1-A average, which I understand to be something like $18 million.

One thing that I think will trigger off realignment is the movement of schools whose budgets are much higher than the others in their conference (e.g. Louisville).

Sunbelt sends Utah State, Idaho, and New Mexico State to WAC; drops UL-M (will anyone even notice?) Adds Rice, Tulsa, SMU, La Tech to go along with Arkansas State, ULL, and North Texas, Middle Tennessee State. Nice New 8 Team conference. Florida International and/or Western Kentucky could go 1A.

This seems to be the Sun Belt that I've seen mentioned from many sources... I think this is what the Comish has in mind. I think this would be a great conference! I only hope my Toppers can be apart of it without football. If not, A-10 here we come hopefully.

Topper, I think that's what the commish has in mind if those schools will make up their minds. I had heard last Fall that the Eastern WAC schools were waffling and that Waters wasn't willing to wait beyond this Summer.

I don't believe that this would mean elimination of current members. The only schools I think will be in danger at some point in time are the ones who draw less than 1,500 a game for basketball.

The other scenario would be the WAC absorbing some of the SBC football schools if the WAC loses its Westernmost teams (e.g. Hawaii, San Jose State, Fresno State).

Economics will play a large part in what happens, particularly considering the fact that Rice, SMU, and Tulsa are private schools. The Sun Belt after the swap would probably make the most sense economically.