Actually arpmany, the West has a history of supporting three 1-A conferences be it Pac-10/WAC/pcaa(BigWest), or Pac-10/MWC/WAC. Also, although the above games aren't very sexy, I'd put them up against a UL-Monroe vs. FAMU or MTSU vs. Arkansas St. as many times as not. ;D ;D

That being said, if the Pac-10 AND MWC expanded to 12 each, which I could see in the distant future only if ND joins the Big Ten, the WAC is doomed. Even if BSU, FSU, and Hawai'i go, the WAC would add Idaho and N. Texas and fight hard to keep La. Tech.

WAC: Idaho, Utah St, San Jose St, Nevada, UTEP, New Mexico St, UTEP, and N. Texas for the needed 8. Nine if they could convince La. Tech. to stay, or if C-USA looks elsewhere. I can't see them going to SunBelt, They really don't seem to want to with the Cajuns and especially the Indians. :)

Pounder wanton rumormongering is not conterproductive its stating an opinion. First you need to learn realignment than post when you evalute all possibilites. Second I don't care what you think either.

_________________
The Bear may be dead but he still hates Tennessee. Roll Damn Tide

Ok, I think it's prime time we defined what this thread about. It's not about rules, because this is clearly not a rules thread. What is this about is about MWC and WAC realignment. Second, since I'm the one of the vets here, let me just give this one guideline here: please, please do not state your opinion as a fact. I don't mind folk's opinions, just as long as they state it as such. Now, that being said, it is in my opinion that Montana and Montana State would be excellent WAC additions. I'm not sure about what type of effect they would have on the MWC, if any, but I do know that both programs would help out the WAC. Any opinions on my opinion? ;)

I agree The Griz and the Bobcats have good programs and fan support.

Agreed, more so for The Griz, but the Bobcats could give it a go too.

Anyone can think up possibilities. I could easily think up all this and more... but they're a dime a dozen. I want likelihoods and at least some sense of realism. I can respect that I may not get that here, but that doesn't have value to me or to anyone trying to figure out why things DO happen.

Since NCAA D-1 went to the bother of having standards and all, it's not unreasonable to say that there are facts among all these opinions. FACT: the NCAA has adopted standards involving 15,000 actual fans per game that, with some required additions, andbarring a sudden change in plans, begins being monitored next season. FACT: Idaho State has NEVER completely sold out 12,000-capacity Holt Arena for football, though they came really close this year against Montana. FACT: Montana State's facility has a capacity of 15,000 and maybe some change. DERIVATION OF OPINION FROM FACT: you can count the possibilities, but these facts don't really lend themselves to the concept that Idaho State and Montana State could THRIVE at 1-A, especially at Idaho State with their indoor facility and the lack of space to cram any more seats that they need to even begin to approach the new standards.

WAC: Idaho, Utah St, San Jose St, Nevada, UTEP, New Mexico St, UTEP, and N. Texas for the needed 8. Nine if they could convince La. Tech. to stay, or if C-USA looks elsewhere. I can't see them going to SunBelt, They really don't seem to want to with the Cajuns and especially the Indians. :)[/quote]

North Texas has no interest in being in a western conference where most teams are in the Mountain or Pacific Time Zone and travel expenses would go up dramatically. A CUSA invite would be great, otherwise stays in the Sun Belt.

Mean Green, would North Texas spring for an MWC invite?

MeanGreen, I would have to disagree. N. Texas should take a WAC invite if issued. Look at the Sunbelt line up for 05 and see how far you would have to travel. the difference would not be all that different and you would have added bowl games to compete for not to mention better teams to compete against, which in turn should help draw more fans to games.

It wouldn't be a huge upgrade overall, but an upgrade none the less.

pounder do you have those facts about Idaho St and Montana St. IMHO these 3 teams would make a great addition to the WAC if they have the numbers to support them. In fact the idahostatesman talk about all three of these team could move to 1-A when I find that article I will post it.

_________________
The Bear may be dead but he still hates Tennessee. Roll Damn Tide

pounder you are right about Idaho st the could not make it but Montana and Montana St could they have the facilities too. Montana St has the southeastern end to expand if need be. Its just an opinion of mine I like to see more teams move up to 1-A to bring in more compettion.

_________________
The Bear may be dead but he still hates Tennessee. Roll Damn Tide

Really a moot point DawgNDuckFan as there won't be a MWC invite. :)

North Texas was contacted by the WAC at about the time Utah State and NMSU received their invite. Supposedly to provide a bridge for Louisiana Tech if necessary. With potentially the nearest member being 600 miles west (UTEP & NMSU), North Texas is cool to a WAC alignment. The WAC should really stick to western schools as CTZ.

Right now there is no reason. If the WAC can hang on for a few years though, there may be reason. I'll get into this more in about 2 weeks.

I look at the WAC/Idaho situation on its own, and I am absolutely befuddled by the WAC not offering Idaho a bid. Talk all the trash you want about Idaho, they are Div1 and they are local. They have a nice TV market. They can probably hit the attendence numbers in the WAC. They would likely recruit better in the WAC. They could be moderately successful in the WAC. In other words, they are failing for the most part since they AREN'T in the WAC.

In addition, You look at the schools most frequently mentioned as the next wave of WAC expansion----Idaho St., Montana St., Montana----you think they don't see the WAC leaving Idaho out to dry? Those schools are all in LESSER TV markets.

I have to think the QWAC office realizes that this could be sending a bad message to schools thinking about the jump. So why aren't they doing it?

I suspect there is a fair amount of not wanting to kill the sunbelt. It was mentioned by someone on one of these threads that the fewer conferences out there, the smaller the voice of the non-BCS conferences.

I suspect this is the break that it slowing conference movement in the lower tiers.

I suspect that the MWC doesn't want to kill the WAC or the WAC to have to kill the sunbelt to survive. The MWC needs those voices to get the BCS expanded (They hope enough for them). Once they are in, I think they probably still won't want to cut up their share of the TV pie and expand, but all bets are off.

Right now, the WAC is the feeder conference for the MWC. I do not think the MWC wants to be the conference in the west taking unproven schools from Div 1AA. It is hard to sell yourself as an equal partner to the PAC 10 and Big 10 if you have a lot more in common with the MAC.

The MWC envisions itself becoming what the PAC 10 is to the Pacific time zone. Can't do that and also troll for Div 1-AA schools.

The MWC doesn't want to take chances. Supposing they go to 12 schools (in the process killing the WAC) and don't get a BCS invite...

They have in essence brought in lesser markets and cut their share of the TV pie immediately---for what? Supposing they cannot negotiate as sweet of a deal for the 12 team TV deal?

Their safest move is an expansion of 1 school with a great market (TCU) or a decent market nearby market with limited travel expenses (Boise). Whichever choice, the school has to be a legitimate football school as the issue that has dogged the WAC for years is that they are not competitive vs. other conferences in football.

If the WAC gets one school and the BCS is expanded, the WAC has a strong case without financially putting itself at risk.

In theory, all 3 conferences should survive---although automatic bids may be lost and the sunbelt and WAC will be hurting. The WAC for its part needs to think about conference partners. Killing the sunbelt kills a willing partner for a bowl. The reasons behind the WAC not immediately offering to Idaho may be twofold---if they offered Idaho the bid, the MWC might feel totally justified to bring in Boise St. In addition, without Idaho, the sunbelt is really scratching for teams today. Professional courtesy? An attempt to remain on good terms for the future with the sunbelt? A WAC #2 or #3 team vs. the sunbelt champion in the future?

I don't know which school the WAC takes if Boise or LTech is taken. I'd say the favorite is Idaho. The WAC should be looking to build their footprint in the pacific or in the midwest, not the SW. IMO there are more future candidates in those areas.