The University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople sounds like a winner to me 8-)!

Maybe the PAC 10 could go "truly Pacific" to reach 12. Hawaii would be a cinch! The other, nudge The University of Alaska at Fairbanks (or Anchorage).

But the PAC 10 takes in twos: UNLV and Nevada-Reno: geographically superb; academically and athletically? well......... ::)

Never mind java's obvious blast (I can say I've passed through Mayville, anyway), my left leg is a centimeter longer because of the other two of the last three posts.

Heck, the Pac-10 will probably go pro once the California legislature passes legislation providing pay or stipends for student athletes. Barring that, they'll probably leave the BCS, who then goes to a playoff, meaning they'll be as out of touch as, well, always.

If the BCS comes away from its meeting and tells Notre Dame that their exception is being removed, they will immediately join either the Big 10 or Big East. Big 10 would align perfectly with academics (faculty are behind it), current games played (Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, etc.), and regional affiliation. Notre Dame then wouldn't have to worry about going 6-6 and waiting to hear from a bowl or 7-5 and not sure. There would be automatic bowls and berths to the BCS. Also, they would probably work something out with the Big10 commish to keep their TV contract.

They would move to the BigEast if they wanted to pull a Florida State move, ala their move to BigEast in 1993. They became dominant, winning 12 of 13 years and going to BCS game even if they were 7-5 (which IMO is wrong, wrong, wrong, but what can you do?). If they were in the Big East, they would have good tv access, basketball would be great, and it does make sense.

If Notre Dame goes to Big10 and they become 12 (name change please :) the Pac10 may or may not move to add. I think the Pac10 would have a benefit by moving to 12 to solidify the champion and setup leagues. The title game would be a good money-maker as well. Overall, the Pac10 won't move unless the Big10 does. If they do add teams, then it'll get interesting. The WAC would have to move quickly to avoid being completely taken by other leagues (MWC, Pac-10, CUSA).

The Big Ten invites Missouri, The Big XII replaces them with Colorado State. The Pac Ten adds Utah and BYU. The MWC replaces their three losses with Boise State, Fresno State, Utah State, New Mexico State, UTEP, Idaho, and Nevada.

Missouri may very well leave for the Big-X and if they do look for Baylor to also leave (get the boot). CSU may not be the team to get an invite though, Houston, Rice and Tulsa would probably get looks, but could very well get blocks from there big brothers.

BYU will never get a PAC invite and as a result Utah will not go.

If The WAC goes 4-0 and the MWC 0-3, then I look for the WAC to stabilize. Many people get on Karl Benson, but he has done a remarkable job holding the WAC together. UTEP bringing in Price already gives Miners and to a much lesser degree WAC more credibility than they had.

Here is to TCU jumping to the MWC, Boise staying in the WAC and La. Tech going to C-USA.

New WAC:
Fresno St.
Hawaii
Boise St.
Nevada
UTEP
San Jose (Attendance, could be Idahos chance)
N. Aggies
S. Aggies
N. Texas (Maybe they would jump)
N. Arizona (Leave me alone, I like the Lumber Jacks)

Big Ten invites Missouri
Pac 10 invites Colorado and CSU
Big XII invites TCU and Houston to southern division and moves OU and OSU to the northern division
MWC invites Nevada, Boise, Utah State, NMSU, and Fresno.

How should I reply to this? Tu madre.

Do a little homework on the Cajuns before you pronounce their move to 1-AA. When is the last time you've visited a Sun Belt message board, looked at SBC football records or attendance?

For now, I'll work under the assumption that you committed the all-too-common mistake that people make: you confused ULM with UL.

UL = Cajuns
ULM = Indians

UL = Largest school in the UL System
ULM = Third, behind LA Tech

UL = Never been 1-AA
ULM = Moved up to 1-A in 1990s

UL:
CWS in 2001.
Women's CWS, 2003.
Three consecutive 20 win basketball seasons (with multiple wins over C-USA teams). Currently working on #4.
You know Jake Delhomme (Panthers QB)? Cajun.
Brian Mitchell (All-time Kick Return yardage leader)? Cajun.
Brandon Stokely (Colts WR)? Cajun.
Charles Tillman (Chicago Safety, NFL All-Rookie Team)? Cajun.

Football has taken a down turn since back-to-back Big West Co-Championships in the early 90s. Our administration finally wisened up and hired a decent coach (Former VTech Assistant Ricky Bustle). We had a top 50 recruiting class last year and will again this year. Look at the last three years and you will see an upward trend out of our eight-year football coma.

Have been a casual Cajun fan since they beat A&M in 1996, and I do believe that UL is on the upswing, but that loss to ULM has got to eat at you. Two years in a row, too. Please don't let that happen again.

ULM is a sorry excuse for a football team and rightfully should not only drop from 1-A, but should drop football altogether, even WITH Weatherbie at HC.

2003: 1-11
2002: 3-9
2001: 2-9
2000: 1-10 (only win over 1-AA Nicholls State)
TOT: 7-39
No 1-A wins outside the Sun Belt.

That's the worst record in college football this side of Buffalo.

UNT won't go. ULa/UNT/ASU all would have if they had been given an invite right after NMSU & USU took off. This is the Big West II and none of the SBC schools that went there before want to go back.

As far as the SBC getting eight teams ...

North Texas
Arkansas State
Middle Tennessee
Louisiana
Troy State (fb 2004, all-sports 2005)
ULM (all sports invite likely coming, 2005 entry likely)
Florida International (fb 2005, other sports already in)
Florida Atlantic (fb 2005, all-sports 2006)

FIU & FAU both have an almost-complete SBC schedule next year, including home games. ULM pulled off the Arkansas deal. WKU is not even close to upgrading.

It will be tight, but the SBC will pull it off.

When you say "Louisiana" don't you mean Louisiana-Lafayette (or La Laf as many say)? Isn't that the former SW La?

You know the answer to that question...I love it when mid-majors are referred to by colloquial monikers that no one else understands like "The Belt" and "The Valley," did I miss any or is the the SLC "The Land?"

Nothing agains the Southland...I just conjured up images of TX/LA commentators speaking of "the best players in 'The Land'"

A) From what I understand of the articles shared on this board, the WAC would have significant problems if La. Tech or another school left. Particularly in terms of maintaining the minimum number of members all playing a minimum number of sports under the WAC umbrella. The articles mention such needs in the area of baseball and some other women's sport, and even suggested (I believe) simply adding Idaho wouldn't solve the problem.

B) If the MWC can't find value in having 12 members and a championship game, I suspect the WAC would find it even less worthwhile. While their top teams and general market areas are equal, the MWC has, from what I understand, the better TV contracts and bowl packages. Since North Texas has an athletic budget noatably less than TCU's, they seem unlikely to start regular trips to Hawaii, IMO. This may change depending on who CUSA invites. Should La Tech remain (stuck?) in the WAC, then the cost/benefits of and for a UNT look better. Good enough to move...?

C) CUSA had already begun renegotiating their TV deals before TCU left, and I suspect they'll complete those negotiations with a clear idea of any advantages in expanding to 12 members, and what that new member must bring to the table. I suspect they'll wait till midsummer before any announcements are made. Barring any newcomers 1-A, I suspect they'll favor one of 3 options:
- La Tech, if only for established programs and some cost savings.
- Temple for football only. Owls prefer to stay in A-10, but may shop football around in hopes of staying afloat until possible BE split.
- One of FIU or FAU. Florida market, buffer against possible move of UCF in the future, not too harsh on travel.

D) The next move may actually come from the BCS (concepts for revisions) or the NCAA (implementing the new 1-A standards). Clarification of one or both of these issues will go a long way towards helping the MAC, SBC and others plan their next membership moves.

GunnerFan,
Good post. I have believed for some time that the next major series of moves will be triggered by the 2005 rule changes. If they are strictly enforced, the landscape could change drastically.

For example: What if the WAC or SBC lost 2 teams. I could see a merger . If the enforcement appears to be strict, they might merge as a safety measure before they lose any teams.

The MAC has enough teams to be safe. The MWC adding TCU has given them insurance against WY dropping to 1AA, as well as having 4 home games if everyone can stay.

If someone can tell us exactly what teams will be 1A in 2008, someone else on this board can probably guess the alignments. Until then: it is fun to guess.

FBfan