La Tech, I forgot they were still around.

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
['08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS]

Article out of Grand Forks(previously posted in another thread)with comments from Big Sky Commish(scroll down) who says that the Big Sky Presidents are not interested in adding any schools other than Idaho.Not sure where that leaves Denver,Seattle or NMSU.Link at http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/a ... p/homepage

Ouch.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Not too surprising.... If the Big Sky were to go to 16 or whatever, the NCAA BB money gets split that many more ways (since they are regarded as a 1-bid league).

So when they look at expansion, many presidents are probably thinking - let's bring in a school that has a FB team, and get to an even number, and STOP.
Idaho is geographically desirable, and has a FB team (albeit an FBS one...). If they are unable to schedule a season's-worth of games, the FCS is inevitable for them.

That leaves 3 refugees in the WAC, and the concept of merging them with the Great West seems that much more likely. Why have two 1/2 conferences ?

It's too bad the Big Sky cannot politely ask North Dakota to go to the Summit League. New Mexico St > North Dakota

The 3 other Dakota schools would really have to push the envelop to get the Fighting Sioux into the MVFC though--its probably the only thing impeding a Dakota reunion.

North Dakota was hoping to join the Summit League.

Two issues stood in the way - the Summit dragged their feet on inviting them over the "Fighting Sioux" nickname (which now appears headed into retirement), and
North Dakota needed a home for their FB team (and was hoping to be invited to the MVFC where they could play SDU, SDSU, NDSU every year).
South Dakota was hastily invited to the MVFC #10 slot, North Dakota was never invited, so North Dakota accepted the Big Sky invitation.


BUT ANOTHER SCOOP FROM THE GEM STATE !!!!

Idaho / Big Sky negotiations are apparently proceding toward Idaho joining Big Sky in fall 2014 (for all but football), according to Doug Fullerton:

http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/0 ... ber_201415

If UNI ends up fb only in the MAC, UND could go the Summit/MVFC route. NMSU and Idaho could be in the Sky and eventually fb joins the sky too.

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
['08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS]

There is so much unrest in the Big (Middle) East I almost forgot about all the trouble in the WAC. It's good to see that Idaho is making progress with coming to terms with their future as a Big Sky school. Unfortunately, it puts New Mexico St in a precarious situation. The Big Sky says it will stop with expansion after Idaho--meaning 12 all-sports members and 2 fb affiliates, and NMSU would be left out in the cold. We all know the Aggies are banking on someone leaving the MWC for BEfb/BWC and then they would get a call up. Air Force is adamant they are staying and, coupled with the recent turmoil in the BE, it looks like the possibility of a MWC call up is very unlikely. This would leave NMSU completely out in the cold. Perhaps is NMSU agreed to downgrade their football as a condition for membership the Big Sky would reconsider. I suppose if a Summit League/MVFC invite manifested itself for the Fighting Sioux, the Big Sky might also rethink their stance on NMSU.

Good point, Muskie.
In the last round of conference musical chairs, NMSU is the one standing. At least Idaho has a clear option, though they wanted something better.

The MWC may not go for NMSU even if someone leaves; maybe though, if they just need a school to round out numbers. C-USA would not be interested; and it is well known nearby UTEP does not want to be in the same conference with NMSU. The MAC is in another region, travel would be costly, and the MAC may be more interested in "eastern/southeastern" or "contiguous midwest" upgrades if they add.

The Sunbelt was a prior experience, but even that conference is getting "picky" in terms of whom to add.

The WAC losing it's purpose, at least for fb, may have been inevitable. It's a shame though, that those conferences (basically the MWC) that extracted from the WAC or otherwise played some role in its demise, would not do something to help out the one or two or so left behind. Even if the MWC does not add them, they could at least help them out with significant partial scheduling, including giving NMSU (or another impacted as such) some home games, until they find another home conference and/or find a new direction.

Let me see if i got the situation down. After the dust clears, this will be what's left out west in July 2013:

WAC
New Mexico State
Seattle
Denver
Idaho (probably gone in 2014)

Great West
NJIT
Chicago State
Utah Valley
Texas-Pan Am

Div. 1 Independent
CSU-Bakersfield (already an affiliate with both WAC and GWC)

I have to wonder why WAC hasn't gone for a merger with the GWC and invited CSU-B and the other GWC affiliates, unless the WAC has resigned themselves to just die off. In that case, I would assume that GWC would be more than happy to pick up any (or all) of the 4 WAC schools and any affiliates.

Could mean a number of things.

1) We know Idaho is working out their situation, looking at the Big Sky with indy for football
2) NMSU is set for indy football, but in holding pattern for it's other sports.
3) Could mean Denver and Seattle are working hard trying to get into the WCC. Since the WCC has even more leverage, both schools could give up even more (larger entrance fee, etc) to join.
4) Gotta think Denver has also had some contact with Summit. Who knows, maybe Seattle has too.

In other words, since the remaining schools are all seeking other options, it makes it more difficult to make any moves as a conference. Granted, it's not like the GWC would have anything to lose. Worse case scenario, all 4 WAC schools leave and the GWC can drop the GWC label and just become the WAC.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Article in yesterday's USA Today mentioned that the new BCS selection committee would consist of a representative from ND and the other 11 FBS members. Why would the WAC deserve a seat at that table?

Well, supposedly the WAC is still technically a conference with some kind of charter, as depleted as it may be.

What's still evident and not suprising, one school, Notre Dame, is treated at minimum, as a major conference unto itself. No other independents have a seat at the table.

ND seat should be with the acc.

Back when the conf. commisioners all met regarding the future of the BCS, there were 11 FBS conferences (including WAC) + Notre Dame.

The journalists reporting today may be referring to documents generated before the recent developments with Notre Dame and the WAC.

If the WAC is no longer sponsoring football, at some pooint they will cease to be invited to meetings.

I have trouble with Notre Dame having representation while other independents (Army, BYU, Idaho, NMSU) lack the same level of represetation.