NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Sun Dec 21, 2014 11:58 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1487 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85 ... 100  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:13 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1753
Do they need 2 x 8 = 16 to get two (2) NCAA tourney auto-bids ?

Assuming Boise St. to the Big West (with CSU-B coming along; although I wouldn't bet the farm on that...)

Big Sky is now at 11/13.
To get to 16, they'd need Idaho, NMSU, Denver, Seattle, and UVU.

I would think Denver, Seattle, and UVU would consider the stability of the Big Sky a huge improvement over the mess that is the WAC right now.
They would thank their lucky stars for an invitation.

I also should think that NMSU and Idaho (the Big Sky would want them both in order to get to 16 for all sports) should both appreaciate the offer of
all but FB membership, and letting them continue as FBS independents (hoping for an eventual MWC FB affiliate offer), but having the option to drop back to FCS inthe Big Sky.
If those 2 schools continue to hold out for some better deal at this point, they would have to be considered utterly delusional.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:29 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 783
Location: Columbus, OH
I completely agree with tute. Take the deal on the table right now while its there and be thankful they are willing to wait 2 yrs for your football programs. Should a MWC shakeup cause that conference to come after New Mexico St (Idaho getting a phone call is doubtful), call the deal off. The Big Sky could simply make Utah Valley wait 2 yrs for full membership in case they are A) not needed, B) someone backs out and the Big Sky/WAC can't achieve the 8/8 alignment so they settle on one 14-member league instead.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:30 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:07 pm
Posts: 77
Nonsense. This is no time to panic. The WAC could still survive as a non-football conference, using CSUB and the remnants of the Great West. And if they cannot survive, there are other options. As I mentioned previously, Seattle, Denver, and NMSU could go to the Summit League, and it's possible the MVC would be interested as well (NMSU is a former member). Also, if the Big Sky is interested in Idaho now, they will still be interested next year and the year after - there is no urgency.

Unless I am mistaken, only Idaho has been invited to join the Big Sky so far - and that was an all-sports invitation. The Big Sky does not accept non-football schools, so Seattle, Denver, and UVU stay out. Fullerton's plan is not to bring them into the Big Sky, but to keep them in the WAC, with him in charge of both conferences. He is not offering them invitations or a life line, but rather dictating terms of their surrender.

"Don't give up the ship" has been part of our American heritage since the time of John Paul Jones. If they cannot save the WAC, they should sink (dissolve) it.

If Fullerton really wanted to help the WAC, he would stop recruiting Idaho, and even encourage a few Big Sky schools to join the WAC. Of course that won't happen - because Fullerton isn't really interested in helping the WAC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:47 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1753
Man, you have it in for the Big Sky !

The BSC didn't destroy the WAC, I'll lay that at the feet of the MWC and Big East.
The WAC had become an FBS "starter confence" and those that could ascend higher all made the move.

Are all of Fullerton's motivations altruistic ? - doubtful !
Is the BSC in position to dictate terms as the issue invitations ? - Yes, but isn't that always the case ?

I believe you are correct that only Idaho has been in discussions that one might refer to as "invitation negotiations".
The articles seem to indicate that idaho would be welcomed for all sports (not necessarily including football) initially,
and then maybe there is a deadline (2 years out ?) whereby if Idaho has not joined an FBS confernece,
they would be expected to drop to FCS and play in the Big Sky.

I do think Idaho is the most-wanted WAC school, but it may also be the lynch-pin for the grander plan of
having 2 8-school conferneces under the BSC umbrella (unless that is all just a big red herring).
There is not a lot of margin for error, with regard to the numbers.
Boise State sounds like they are DEFINITELY in BW/BEFB mode, so the Big Sky needs to reel in 5 of:
Idaho, NMSU, Denver, Seattle, UVU, CSU-B.
If this scenario is indeed the grand plan, the BSC must know which schools they ultimately want to bring on board.
And if Idaho is still hedging, then that holds up the grand plan.

Why would schools such as Seattle, Denver, and UVU NOT regard the Big Sky as a nice fit ?
BSC offers:
1) D-1 athletics,
2) nice regional geography and rivals about as local as you can get out west,
3) stability.

What are the other options ?
If you merge the WAC and GW right now, you have:
Seattle, Denver, Idaho, NMSU, UVU, UTPA, Chicago St. and NJIT. Let's say CSU-B is availbale too (they have given GW mebership some consideration).
OBVIOUSLY, NJIT is looking for an east coast home, and does NOT regard this as a long-term solution.
Chicago State is only part of this mess due to some improprieties in their athletic management, which led them to be asked to leave the Summit (Mid-Con at that time).
Pretty sure UTPA is part of the Great West due to similar mis-adventure.

THAT'S IT !!! Pretty hard to put this all together and create something (WITH A MINIMUM OF 8 SCHOOLS) that you can call stable.
The Big Sky looks pretty darn good by comparison.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:44 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1574
Not every conference needs to be saved. Maybe the WAC is not the one most deserving of expiration. But that's how the dominos fell. The old Southwest Conference which was the premier tie-in of the once mighty Cotton Bowl fell. One departure and the ripple effect happens. The Metro fell. The B12 came close to desolving last year or two, or at least being changed radically.

Some may be amazed how some conferences could ever survive...the Big East comes readily to mind. Some thought the SunBelt was doomed from the get-go; and they trend better and better, with decent stability considering they were considered the bottom rung of the FBS. And they have options!

I can't see the Big Sky as any cause of the demise of the WAC. For fb, BSC of the FCS, raiding a FBS conference is not very logical. Conditions are given for entrance. And options are limited. A weak school in terms of desirability is much compromised in terms of being able to dictate with negotiations.

The west simply does not have the available schools to feed every existing conference as others take and grow. Conference casualties happen, and certain schools can suffer because of it, having really done nothing wrong other than being less attractive by others.


Last edited by sec03 on Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 1:34 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:50 pm
Posts: 268
Dennis wrote:
If Fullerton really wanted to help the WAC, he would stop recruiting Idaho, and even encourage a few Big Sky schools to join the WAC. Of course that won't happen - because Fullerton isn't really interested in helping the WAC.



That is EASILY the stupidest thing I have read on this board, ever.


Why in the HELL would any conference commissioner ever encourage a few of it's members to leave to help save another conference?

By your idiotic logic, the ACC should have encourage MD, VA and Wake Forest to go to the Big East to help them.

And the SEC should have told Arkansas and LSU to go to the Big 12.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 2:43 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
dbackjon wrote:
Dennis wrote:
If Fullerton really wanted to help the WAC, he would stop recruiting Idaho, and even encourage a few Big Sky schools to join the WAC. Of course that won't happen - because Fullerton isn't really interested in helping the WAC.



That is EASILY the stupidest thing I have read on this board, ever.


Why in the HELL would any conference commissioner ever encourage a few of it's members to leave to help save another conference?

By your idiotic logic, the ACC should have encourage MD, VA and Wake Forest to go to the Big East to help them.

And the SEC should have told Arkansas and LSU to go to the Big 12.

Is Dennis SH from the FCS board :?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:21 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:07 pm
Posts: 77
tute79 wrote:
Man, you have it in for the Big Sky !

The BSC didn't destroy the WAC, I'll lay that at the feet of the MWC and Big East.
The WAC had become an FBS "starter confence" and those that could ascend higher all made the move.

Are all of Fullerton's motivations altruistic ? - doubtful !
Is the BSC in position to dictate terms as the issue invitations ? - Yes, but isn't that always the case ?

I believe you are correct that only Idaho has been in discussions that one might refer to as "invitation negotiations".
The articles seem to indicate that idaho would be welcomed for all sports (not necessarily including football) initially,
and then maybe there is a deadline (2 years out ?) whereby if Idaho has not joined an FBS confernece,
they would be expected to drop to FCS and play in the Big Sky.

I do think Idaho is the most-wanted WAC school, but it may also be the lynch-pin for the grander plan of
having 2 8-school conferneces under the BSC umbrella (unless that is all just a big red herring).
There is not a lot of margin for error, with regard to the numbers.
Boise State sounds like they are DEFINITELY in BW/BEFB mode, so the Big Sky needs to reel in 5 of:
Idaho, NMSU, Denver, Seattle, UVU, CSU-B.
If this scenario is indeed the grand plan, the BSC must know which schools they ultimately want to bring on board.
And if Idaho is still hedging, then that holds up the grand plan.

Why would schools such as Seattle, Denver, and UVU NOT regard the Big Sky as a nice fit ?
BSC offers:
1) D-1 athletics,
2) nice regional geography and rivals about as local as you can get out west,
3) stability.

What are the other options ?
If you merge the WAC and GW right now, you have:
Seattle, Denver, Idaho, NMSU, UVU, UTPA, Chicago St. and NJIT. Let's say CSU-B is availbale too (they have given GW mebership some consideration).
OBVIOUSLY, NJIT is looking for an east coast home, and does NOT regard this as a long-term solution.
Chicago State is only part of this mess due to some improprieties in their athletic management, which led them to be asked to leave the Summit (Mid-Con at that time).
Pretty sure UTPA is part of the Great West due to similar mis-adventure.

THAT'S IT !!! Pretty hard to put this all together and create something (WITH A MINIMUM OF 8 SCHOOLS) that you can call stable.
The Big Sky looks pretty darn good by comparison.


tute,

I think they only need 7 schools, so IF they can convince Idaho to stay, they need only add UVU, UTPA, and CSUB. (Fresno St. Alum also mentioned GCU as a possibility in a post last week, so keep that in mind.) I agree that NJIT will probably get accepted into an eastern conference, and Chicago St. is not reliable, but I spent some time last weekend looking at UTPA and they appear to be getting their act together. With Idaho, the WAC should be a viable conference - at least for a couple years.

I do not have it in for the Big Sky. I do have a major problem with Fullerton trying to take over another conference, which I consider WAY over the line. I understand his obligation to defend and strengthen his conference, but I think what he is attempting is far beyond what is appropriate for a conference commissioner.

I also have a problem with the way Idaho appears to be handling this. They should avoid doing anything that undermines the WAC's negotiating position.

Boise St. certainly deserves some criticism too, but that's "beating a dead horse."


Last edited by Dennis on Thu Aug 23, 2012 6:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:25 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:07 pm
Posts: 77
dbackjon wrote:
Dennis wrote:
If Fullerton really wanted to help the WAC, he would stop recruiting Idaho, and even encourage a few Big Sky schools to join the WAC. Of course that won't happen - because Fullerton isn't really interested in helping the WAC.



That is EASILY the stupidest thing I have read on this board, ever.


Why in the HELL would any conference commissioner ever encourage a few of it's members to leave to help save another conference?

By your idiotic logic, the ACC should have encourage MD, VA and Wake Forest to go to the Big East to help them.

And the SEC should have told Arkansas and LSU to go to the Big 12.


Really? I suggest you read more carefully.

As for encouraging Big Sky members to move to the WAC, that is exactly what will happen if Fullerton gains control of the WAC. It's pretty much what this is all about.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:32 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 783
Location: Columbus, OH
Texas St has 3 openings in their schedule for 2013 and 2014. I wonder if they would consider Home-and-Homes against Idaho and New Mexico St to help them fill their schedules? They'd be returning the favor for giving them an FBS conference and at the same time it would give the Bobcats some OOC games they'd actually stand a chance at winning.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 5:55 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
Dennis wrote:
dbackjon wrote:
Dennis wrote:
If Fullerton really wanted to help the WAC, he would stop recruiting Idaho, and even encourage a few Big Sky schools to join the WAC. Of course that won't happen - because Fullerton isn't really interested in helping the WAC.



That is EASILY the stupidest thing I have read on this board, ever.


Why in the HELL would any conference commissioner ever encourage a few of it's members to leave to help save another conference?

By your idiotic logic, the ACC should have encourage MD, VA and Wake Forest to go to the Big East to help them.

And the SEC should have told Arkansas and LSU to go to the Big 12.


Really? I suggest you read more carefully.

As for encouraging Big Sky members to move to the WAC, that is exactly what will happen if Fullerton gains control of the WAC. It's pretty much what this is all about.


There are too many factors to make the WAC/BSC thing work. We all saw it fail w/ MWC and CUSA already. Merger, nope. play as 2 conf and move UTEP and UTSA to the MWC side split money, have 2 bids and a bowl game, nope.

No one wants to move from the BSC side to the WAC side and play w/ UVU, CSUB. They can just add Idaho and be done if they want. Too many rivalries that don't want to be split. S.Utah and N.Dakota are the only ones w/o rivalries, I doubt they want to leave the conf they just joined for lesser schools minus Denver and NMSU basketball.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:21 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:50 pm
Posts: 268
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
Dennis wrote:
dbackjon wrote:
Dennis wrote:
If Fullerton really wanted to help the WAC, he would stop recruiting Idaho, and even encourage a few Big Sky schools to join the WAC. Of course that won't happen - because Fullerton isn't really interested in helping the WAC.



That is EASILY the stupidest thing I have read on this board, ever.


Why in the HELL would any conference commissioner ever encourage a few of it's members to leave to help save another conference?

By your idiotic logic, the ACC should have encourage MD, VA and Wake Forest to go to the Big East to help them.

And the SEC should have told Arkansas and LSU to go to the Big 12.


Really? I suggest you read more carefully.

As for encouraging Big Sky members to move to the WAC, that is exactly what will happen if Fullerton gains control of the WAC. It's pretty much what this is all about.


There are too many factors to make the WAC/BSC thing work. We all saw it fail w/ MWC and CUSA already. Merger, nope. play as 2 conf and move UTEP and UTSA to the MWC side split money, have 2 bids and a bowl game, nope.

No one wants to move from the BSC side to the WAC side and play w/ UVU, CSUB. They can just add Idaho and be done if they want. Too many rivalries that don't want to be split. S.Utah and N.Dakota are the only ones w/o rivalries, I doubt they want to leave the conf they just joined for lesser schools minus Denver and NMSU basketball.



Yup - and SUU was brought in because it gives NAU a rival, finally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:18 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1753
Dennis -

I'm not sure the WAC can be saved. Maybe they can scrape together 7, but they'd be rather far-flung...
The WAC seems to be just sitting there without a rudder. Benson skee-daddled out of town for the Sun-Belt, and went to work creating a nice regional conference.
Hurd was brought into the WAC and appears to be acting as a care-taker, rather than a conference builder.
Right now as it stands (assuming Boise St. gone) the WAC is at 4. If there is a desire on the part of the 4 schools to save the WAC,
shouldn't they be inviting UVU and CSU-B right now ? Bring them in. No entrance fee, no exit fee.
The GW lacks critical mass. Would it be better to be part of a larger group (Seattle, Denver, Idaho, NMSU, UVU, CSUB make 6 !)
What is the delay ?
I think the delay is that Idaho and others are pondering their escape from the WAC, except no escape route has presneted itself (yet) that is fully to their liking.

To the credit of the Big Sky, when they absorbed the Great West Football League, they did it in a thoughtful way, and invited everyone.
They didn't try to cherry-pick it, and it was a WIN-WIN for everybody. The Big Sky got their numbers up.
The GWFL was stuck at 5 members with no candidates in sight for #6, and all 5 wound up with astable FB home (4 in Big Sky, and one in MVFC).

Don't get me started on Boise St. either. They come across as greedy slime-balls.
They spent the better part of a decade clamoring for MWC membership, and then left at the drop of a hat to help create this God-awful Big East mess.
Kustra is very self-serving and manipulative.
Perhaps those are traits of upwardly mobile managers, but the time he sent all sorts of congratulations and roses to the MWC office (for something or other about 3 years ago),
it ws so "over-the-top", I thought I would puke. The other schools in the WAC should have booted them out right then and there
(since they had "1.999999 feet out the door" at that moment anyway).

Do you think Big Sky (Fullerton) wants only Idaho, and has ZERO interest in Seattle, Denver, NMSU ? I honestly don't know.

But it's not in his job description to save the WAC. Just looking at the situtation from afar, it appears the WAC is on life support and doing nothing to save itself.
So there may not be a WAC to save. If the Big Sky does only want Idaho, then the other guys can presumably merge with great West or invite portions thereof...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:42 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1574
The MWC may have expectations that within a few years Boise State may come running back to them. This even further diminishes the possibility that the MWC would embrace Idaho. Also doubt the MWC would be interested in NMSU, particularly with UNM as a MWC staple.

As to WAC Commish Hurd, I expect he has made a lot of phone calls to any school that could be considered a reasonable prospect. He's probably gotten multiple, flat "NOs'", and others saying "only if this school and/or that school also joins, etc.". If Hurd has little to nothing to offer enticements, he would have to be a miracle worker to save the WAC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:57 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
sec03 wrote:
The MWC may have expectations that within a few years Boise State may come running back to them. This even further diminishes the possibility that the MWC would embrace Idaho. Also doubt the MWC would be interested in NMSU, particularly with UNM as a MWC staple.

As to WAC Commish Hurd, I expect he has made a lot of phone calls to any school that could be considered a reasonable prospect. He's probably gotten multiple, flat "NOs'", and others saying "only if this school and/or that school also joins, etc.". If Hurd has little to nothing to offer enticements, he would have to be a miracle worker to save the WAC.

I think he got 5 yes' and a maybe. UVU, CSUB, UTPA, Chicago St., GCU. Maybe NJIT waiting to see the dominoes from CAA seeing if NEC or AEC gives them a home.

WAC should be concerned w/ Denver going to the Summit. I'm not sure if Fullerton really wants 2 more WAC members or if he's bsing.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1487 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85 ... 100  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 

cron




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group