WAC General Realignment Thread

Fresno St. Alum · **Posted:** Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:52 pm

Dennis wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

Dennis wrote:

I think discussion of the demise of the WAC as a football conference is premature, because there are way too many schools with an interest in seeing it survive - specifically, just about every team west of the Mississippi River with aspirations of moving from FCS to FBS in the next 10 or 15 years. They should all be submitting their membership applications to the WAC about now, even if they will not be truly ready for FBS football by 2013, because move up is by invitation only, and one fewer FBS conference means the remaining 10 are almost full (especially after move ups in the East), so there may not be many invitations for western teams to move up for a very long time. They cannot afford to let the WAC collapse.

Even if the WAC is left with only Idaho, New Mexico State, and Texas State as football members, they should be able to add schools such as Montana, Montana State, North Dakota State (football only perhaps), Sam Houston State, and Lamar. Other candidates might include Sacramento State, Portland State, SF Austin, McNeese State, South Dakota State, Northern Iowa, and Missouri State.

Lamar is the only one that would consider moving to the current wac. I doubt they would now w/ the losses of USU, UTSA, La Tech, and probably Texas St., SJSU on the horizon. If La Tech and UTSA don't get into the Alliance then SBC will take them. If 1 goes to the Alliance then Texas St. will go to the SBC.

If they stay separate then you are looking at the CUSA going back to 12(UAB prez pointed that out today) FIU, UNT, La Tech, UTSA look like they'd get the nod. Maybe Charlotte over UTSA if MWC convinces them to join the MWC along w/ SJSU, USU. AFA or Fresno will be in the BE by 2015.

W/ Alliance
BE adds AFA(14/18)
Alliance adds UNT, FIU, USU, UTSA, SJSU(20/19)
SBC adds La Tech, Texas St., Charlotte, UTA(12/14) Benson said wants a 2nd bball school
WAC adds AFA, UVU, CSUB, UTPA (2/9)

No Alliance
BE adds AFA(14/18)
CUSA adds UNT, FIU, UTSA, La Tech(12)
MWC adds SJSU, USU, Texas St.(10/9)
SBC adds Charlotte, App St., Old Dominion, UTA(12/14)
WAC adds AFA, UVU, CSUB, UTPA (2/9)

You missed my point entirely. Either that or you have knowledge that - other than Lamar - none of the FCS schools I mentioned will have any interest in moving up to FBS in the next 10-15 years. If so, please share, because I find that very hard to believe.

Montana, Montana St., Portland St., Sac St. all told the WAC NO last year. Since then the WAC is on shakier ground where only 2 or 3 FBS teams will be left. Sure those schools might want to move up in 10 to 15 years. The WAC will not be a football conf in 2014 when their waiver expires. They'll be down to 2 or 3 fb members by 2013. The WAC board has accepted it, yet you don't? I didn't miss your point, you didn't get mine or you are a troll. Explain to me why you think any school w/ fb would be willing to join a conf. where 4-5 of the 7 fb members are candidates to join the MWC/CUSA and SBC? So Montana and Montana St. are itching to join NMSU and Idaho to be a 4 team fb WAC? Big Sky is a far better and safer place to be.

Just because you make a random list of FCS schools doesn't mean they want to move up.

Here are the schools that have done a FBS study or will when they get things in order(stadium/money) Have done a study, App St., Georgia So., Jacksonville St., Illinois St. SHSU(told they needed major stadium upgrades) Want to do a study, Lamar, ODU, James Madison, Liberty. No CA school can even afford to move up right now even if they were interested. So the # is 1 school west of the Miss., 2 if you include the school that needs to fix things before thinking about a move.

SJSUFan2010 · **Joined:** Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm **Posts:** 467

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

Dennis wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

Dennis wrote:

I think discussion of the demise of the WAC as a football conference is premature, because there are way too many schools with an interest in seeing it survive - specifically, just about every team west of the Mississippi River with aspirations of moving from FCS to FBS in the next 10 or 15 years. They should all be submitting their membership applications to the WAC about now, even if they will not be truly ready for FBS football by 2013, because move up is by invitation only, and one fewer FBS conference means the remaining 10 are almost full (especially after move ups in the East), so there may not be many invitations for western teams to move up for a very long time. They cannot afford to let the WAC collapse.

Even if the WAC is left with only Idaho, New Mexico State, and Texas State as football members, they should be able to add schools such as Montana, Montana State, North Dakota State (football only perhaps), Sam Houston State, and Lamar. Other candidates might include Sacramento State, Portland State, SF Austin, McNeese State, South Dakota State, Northern Iowa, and Missouri State.

Lamar is the only one that would consider moving to the current wac. I doubt they would now w/ the losses of USU, UTSA, La Tech, and probably Texas St., SJSU on the horizon. If La Tech and UTSA don't get into the Alliance then SBC will take them. If 1 goes to the Alliance then Texas St. will go to the SBC.

If they stay separate then you are looking at the CUSA going back to 12(UAB prez pointed that out today) FIU, UNT, La Tech, UTSA look like they'd get the nod. Maybe Charlotte over UTSA if MWC convinces them to join the MWC along w/ SJSU, USU. AFA or Fresno will be in the BE by 2015.

W/ Alliance
BE adds AFA(14/18)
Alliance adds UNT, FIU, USU, UTSA, SJSU(20/19)
SBC adds La Tech, Texas St., Charlotte, UTA(12/14) Benson said wants a 2nd bball school
WAC adds AFA, UVU, CSUB, UTPA (2/9)

No Alliance
BE adds AFA(14/18)
CUSA adds UNT, FIU, UTSA, La Tech(12)
MWC adds SJSU, USU, Texas St.(10/9)
SBC adds Charlotte, App St., Old Dominion, UTA(12/14)
WAC adds AFA, UVU, CSUB, UTPA (2/9)

You missed my point entirely. Either that or you have knowledge that - other than Lamar - none of the FCS schools I mentioned will have any interest in moving up to FBS in the next 10-15 years. If so, please share, because I find that very hard to believe.

Montana, Montana St., Portland St., Sac St. all told the WAC NO last year. Since then the WAC is on shakier ground where only 2 or 3 FBS teams will be left. Sure those schools might want to move up in 10 to 15 years. The WAC will not be a football conf in 2014 when their waiver expires. They'll be down to 2 or 3 fb members by 2013. The WAC board has accepted it, yet you don't? I didn't miss your point, you didn't get mine or you are a troll. Explain to me why you think any school w/ fb would be willing to join a conf. where 4-5 of the 7 fb members are candidates to join the MWC/CUSA and SBC? So Montana and Montana St. are itching to join NMSU and Idaho to be a 4 team fb WAC? Big Sky is a far better and safer place to be.

Just because you make a random list of FCS schools doesn't mean they want to move up.

Here are the schools that have done a FBS study or will when they get things in order(stadium/money) Have done a study, App St., Georgia So., Jacksonville St., Illinois St. SHSU(told they needed major stadium upgrades) Want to do a study, Lamar, ODU, James Madison, Liberty. No CA school can even afford to move up right now even if they were interested. So the # is 1 school west of the Miss., 2 if you include the school that needs to fix things before thinking about a move.

As much as it pains me to agree with FSA, he's right. And worse news yet for the WAC is even the 9 he mentions might not be there/available. Bakersfield wouldn't gain a whole lot by joining the WAC since there are so many California schools they are able to schedule. Texas Pan Am has had talks with the Southland so they might not be available. Trickle down from A-10 expansion could mean Denver may end up in the Summit. Chicago State would probably end up in the Summit too. Texas State is probably a strong candidate when N. Texas leaves the Sun Belt.

Things could get so bad they have to look at D-II...

I personally think Boise should tell the Big West to pick between Fresno, UNLV, and UNR and get that school into the Big East. In return, the Big West takes that school and Boise. Otherwise, Boise is in trouble

Fresno St. Alum · **Posted:** Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:24 am

SJSUFan2010 wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

Dennis wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

Dennis wrote:

I think discussion of the demise of the WAC as a football conference is premature, because there are way too many schools with an interest in seeing it survive - specifically, just about every team west of the Mississippi River with aspirations of moving from FCS to FBS in the next 10 or 15 years. They should all be submitting their membership applications to the WAC about now, even if they will not be truly ready for FBS football by 2013, because move up is by invitation only, and one fewer FBS conference means the remaining 10 are almost full (especially after move ups in the East), so there may not be many invitations for western teams to move up for a very long time. They cannot afford to let the WAC collapse.

Even if the WAC is left with only Idaho, New Mexico State, and Texas State as football members, they should be able to add schools such as Montana, Montana State, North Dakota State (football only perhaps), Sam Houston State, and Lamar. Other candidates might include Sacramento State, Portland State, SF Austin, McNeese State, South Dakota State, Northern Iowa, and Missouri State.

Lamar is the only one that would consider moving to the current wac. I doubt they would now w/ the losses of USU, UTSA, La Tech, and probably Texas St., SJSU on the horizon. If La Tech and UTSA don't get into the Alliance then SBC will take them. If 1 goes to the Alliance then Texas St. will go to the SBC.

If they stay separate then you are looking at the CUSA going back to 12(UAB prez pointed that out today) FIU, UNT, La Tech, UTSA look like they'd get the nod. Maybe Charlotte over UTSA if MWC convinces them to join the MWC along w/ SJSU, USU. AFA or Fresno will be in the BE by 2015.

W/ Alliance
BE adds AFA(14/18)
Alliance adds UNT, FIU, USU, UTSA, SJSU(20/19)
SBC adds La Tech, Texas St., Charlotte, UTA(12/14) Benson said wants a 2nd bball school
WAC adds AFA, UVU, CSUB, UTPA (2/9)

No Alliance
BE adds AFA(14/18)
CUSA adds UNT, FIU, UTSA, La Tech(12)
MWC adds SJSU, USU, Texas St.(10/9)
SBC adds Charlotte, App St., Old Dominion, UTA(12/14)
WAC adds AFA, UVU, CSUB, UTPA (2/9)

You missed my point entirely. Either that or you have knowledge that - other than Lamar - none of the FCS schools I mentioned will have any interest in moving up to FBS in the next 10-15 years. If so, please share, because I find that very hard to believe.

Montana, Montana St., Portland St., Sac St. all told the WAC NO last year. Since then the WAC is on shakier ground where only 2 or 3 FBS teams will be left. Sure those schools might want to move up in 10 to 15 years. The WAC will not be a football conf in 2014 when their waiver expires. They'll be down to 2 or 3 fb members by 2013. The WAC board has accepted it, yet you don't? I didn't miss your point, you didn't get mine or you are a troll. Explain to me why you think any school w/ fb would be willing to join a conf. where 4-5 of the 7 fb members are candidates to join the MWC/CUSA and SBC? So Montana and Montana St. are itching to join NMSU and Idaho to be a 4 team fb WAC? Big Sky is a far better and safer place to be.

Just because you make a random list of FCS schools doesn't mean they want to move up.

Here are the schools that have done a FBS study or will when they get things in order(stadium/money) Have done a study, App St., Georgia So., Jacksonville St., Illinois St. SHSU(told they needed major stadium upgrades) Want to do a study, Lamar, ODU, James Madison, Liberty. No CA school can even afford to move up right now even if they were interested. So the # is 1 school west of the Miss., 2 if you include the school that needs to fix things before thinking about a move.

As much as it pains me to agree with FSA, he's right. And worse news yet for the WAC is even the 9 he mentions might not be there/available. Bakersfield wouldn't gain a whole lot by joining the WAC since there are so many California schools they are able to schedule. Texas Pan Am has had talks with the Southland so they might not be available. Trickle down from A-10 expansion could mean Denver may end up in the Summit. Chicago State would probably end up in the Summit too. Texas State is probably a strong candidate when N. Texas leaves the Sun Belt.

Things could get so bad they have to look at D-II...

I personally think Boise should tell the Big West to pick between Fresno, UNLV, and UNR and get that school into the Big East. In return, the Big West takes that school and Boise. Otherwise, Boise is in trouble

If it does get that bad, then MWC should use that to bring in the Tx schools like UTEP, UTSA if the alliance becomes a stab in the back takeover(like JP and you are suggesting). Tell the CUSA schools, hey, the WAC won't be around, so it's only a matter of time before SDSU and BSU have to come back, while Houston, UCF, SMU, Memphis are never coming back. Join us and we will rule the FBS as the 7th best conf

Right now the only D-II school in the west that wants to move up is Grand Canyon. UIW and ACU are SLC or bust since they have fb and would like to be FCS.

freaked4collegefb · **Joined:** Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm **Posts:** 7045

Article out of San Antonio discussing the continued attempts by UTSA to "escape" from the WAC at http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/arti ... 496314.php

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3752

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

SJSUFan2010 wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

Dennis wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

Dennis wrote:

I think discussion of the demise of the WAC as a football conference is premature, because there are way too many schools with an interest in seeing it survive - specifically, just about every team west of the Mississippi River with aspirations of moving from FCS to FBS in the next 10 or 15 years. They should all be submitting their membership applications to the WAC about now, even if they will not be truly ready for FBS football by 2013, because move up is by invitation only, and one fewer FBS conference means the remaining 10 are almost full (especially after move ups in the East), so there may not be many invitations for western teams to move up for a very long time. They cannot afford to let the WAC collapse.

Even if the WAC is left with only Idaho, New Mexico State, and Texas State as football members, they should be able to add schools such as Montana, Montana State, North Dakota State (football only perhaps), Sam Houston State, and Lamar. Other candidates might include Sacramento State, Portland State, SF Austin, McNeese State, South Dakota State, Northern Iowa, and Missouri State.

Lamar is the only one that would consider moving to the current wac. I doubt they would now w/ the losses of USU, UTSA, La Tech, and probably Texas St., SJSU on the horizon. If La Tech and UTSA don't get into the Alliance then SBC will take them. If 1 goes to the Alliance then Texas St. will go to the SBC.

If they stay separate then you are looking at the CUSA going back to 12(UAB prez pointed that out today) FIU, UNT, La Tech, UTSA look like they'd get the nod. Maybe Charlotte over UTSA if MWC convinces them to join the MWC along w/ SJSU, USU. AFA or Fresno will be in the BE by 2015.

W/ Alliance
BE adds AFA(14/18)
Alliance adds UNT, FIU, USU, UTSA, SJSU(20/19)
SBC adds La Tech, Texas St., Charlotte, UTA(12/14) Benson said wants a 2nd bball school
WAC adds AFA, UVU, CSUB, UTPA (2/9)

No Alliance
BE adds AFA(14/18)
CUSA adds UNT, FIU, UTSA, La Tech(12)
MWC adds SJSU, USU, Texas St.(10/9)
SBC adds Charlotte, App St., Old Dominion, UTA(12/14)
WAC adds AFA, UVU, CSUB, UTPA (2/9)

You missed my point entirely. Either that or you have knowledge that - other than Lamar - none of the FCS schools I mentioned will have any interest in moving up to FBS in the next 10-15 years. If so, please share, because I find that very hard to believe.

Montana, Montana St., Portland St., Sac St. all told the WAC NO last year. Since then the WAC is on shakier ground where only 2 or 3 FBS teams will be left. Sure those schools might want to move up in 10 to 15 years. The WAC will not be a football conf in 2014 when their waiver expires. They'll be down to 2 or 3 fb members by 2013. The WAC board has accepted it, yet you don't? I didn't miss your point, you didn't get mine or you are a troll. Explain to me why you think any school w/ fb would be willing to join a conf. where 4-5 of the 7 fb members are candidates to join the MWC/CUSA and SBC? So Montana and Montana St. are itching to join NMSU and Idaho to be a 4 team fb WAC? Big Sky is a far better and safer place to be.

Just because you make a random list of FCS schools doesn't mean they want to move up.

Here are the schools that have done a FBS study or will when they get things in order(stadium/money) Have done a study, App St., Georgia So., Jacksonville St., Illinois St. SHSU(told they needed major stadium upgrades) Want to do a study, Lamar, ODU, James Madison, Liberty. No CA school can even afford to move up right now even if they were interested. So the # is 1 school west of the Miss., 2 if you include the school that needs to fix things before thinking about a move.

As much as it pains me to agree with FSA, he's right. And worse news yet for the WAC is even the 9 he mentions might not be there/available. Bakersfield wouldn't gain a whole lot by joining the WAC since there are so many California schools they are able to schedule. Texas Pan Am has had talks with the Southland so they might not be available. Trickle down from A-10 expansion could mean Denver may end up in the Summit. Chicago State would probably end up in the Summit too. Texas State is probably a strong candidate when N. Texas leaves the Sun Belt.

Things could get so bad they have to look at D-II...

I personally think Boise should tell the Big West to pick between Fresno, UNLV, and UNR and get that school into the Big East. In return, the Big West takes that school and Boise. Otherwise, Boise is in trouble

If it does get that bad, then MWC should use that to bring in the Tx schools like UTEP, UTSA if the alliance becomes a stab in the back takeover(like JP and you are suggesting). Tell the CUSA schools, hey, the WAC won't be around, so it's only a matter of time before SDSU and BSU have to come back, while Houston, UCF, SMU, Memphis are never coming back. Join us and we will rule the FBS as the 7th best conf

Right now the only D-II school in the west that wants to move up is Grand Canyon. UIW and ACU are SLC or bust since they have fb and would like to be FCS.

Agreed that no matter what, I think the MWC is safe as safe can be. Same for CUSA.

CUSA has all the SB, eastern FCS upgrades, WAC schools in LA/TX and perhaps even the MAC.
MWC has all the WAC.

So even if the MWC lost 2 schools, dropping to 5/6, they would always have Utah St., SJSU, NMSU and Idaho who would join right away, even if in CUSA at the time. Then you'd have 9/10 with no problems. At that point, if we're talking a MWC invite, it's not a stretch to think that with the stability in place (no place left for MWC schools to go) that some of the FCS schools (Montana, Montana St.) might even take a look at upgrading.

86mets · **Joined:** Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:22 pm **Posts:** 58

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

86mets wrote:

When you only play once a week and visit schools every other year, what does it matter about having travel partners? Marinatto's assertion of western travel partners is where hardheaded idiocy rules the day. For high-level football, read BCS, travel expenses are not an issue--not when you are making $XXm off of TV contracts alone. Can't handle traveling cross country, don't play with the big boys. If the concern is over students missing class time due to too many cross-country flights, then why did they join in the first place knowing there may never be another western team added? BS!
As far as Northeast fans and college ball, well I am one amongst many and before all this desperation, I really enjoyed the BE for all sports. I don't even have a problem w/ the addition of so many mediocre teams and football-onlies, I have a problem w/ the landslide of Pitt and Syracuse bolting for whatever reasons they like to justify. The BE conference shuffling is a joke, an absolute joke. A farce and mockery of college athletics that we have SDSU in both the BE and the BW. I have no problem w/ Fresno, come one come all, because at this point it doesn't matter. The BE may exist, but it's irrelevant. And as you guys have all forecasted on here, B-ball and its untenable structure is due to collapse. Sad really. Used to love the BE tournament in the 80s. Some great and exciting basketball and a highlight of the sports calendar. Hard to get excited about SMU vs. USF or Houston vs. Boise, just not the same.

Your rant doesn't change the fact that Marinetto wants another western fb only. Fresno and AFA aren't that far behind the new Big East. We play and have beat those big east teams, minus BSU who owns us. We beat Cincy and Rutgers the last few years. If all goes according to plan, AFA will be #14 in the West along w/ Navy in the west. Temple moves back to the East. Yes I also prefer that AFA, Fresno, BSU, SDSU all just stay in the MWC together, and wish that there was a rule that you can't be fb only. BE isn't "Big Boys" anymore, proof is in all the departures and having to add SDSU, BSU, Temple(who was removed as fb only a few years ago. It's the Big 5 conf. the little 1. 2 wish they were something, the 2 never gonna be anything, 1 DOA.

I forgot BE basketball back in the day was right up their w/ Pro sports in the BE. 16 team tourney kinda killed it in my mind.

Yea, a little bit of a rant as it's all starting to get frustrating from a fan perspective--something that is being much overlooked in this charade. The BE is still the big boys so long as they have that BCS autobid...or else all these teams wouldn't be clamoring to gain entry. I agree the 16-team BE ruined the specialness and set in motion the chaos that exists today with the conference. This has in turn impacted the CUSA, the MWC, the Belt and the WAC. I just don't see how any of this is sustainable long term for the BE, alliance or WAC for the varying reasons we've outlined here on this board ad nauseum. The money is currently there as a whole, ie, TV deals, but if you whittle away at traditional and regional rivalries, the average fan will lose interest. Now guys like us will always watch our teams and sports in general, but I'm not sure if we constitiute a majority or a niche. The unsustainable part of college athletics is that it is increasingly looking like a bubble with more and more billions being pumped into it through the auspice of advertising dollars, while getting further and further away from its core mission of intercollegiate athletics. The genie is out of the bottle and the major conferences--SEC, Big 10, Pac 12, ACC, even Big 12, will be fine for the foreseeable future. The middle to lower terrain of FBS is heading into dangerous waters. Personally, I find Fresno vs SDSU or Rutgers vs. Temple more compelling specifically because of their regional nature. Marinatto is pissing in the wind, so let him invite Hawaii for anybody cares...his conference will never last anyway.

To clarify, I generally like realignment as it shakes things up and most conference moves are not extreme in their geography. The Big East's moves, led by Marinatto's incompetence, are what is making a mockery of this whole process through far-flung acts of desperation.

Fresno St. Alum · **Posted:** Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:36 pm

86mets wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

86mets wrote:

When you only play once a week and visit schools every other year, what does it matter about having travel partners? Marinatto's assertion of western travel partners is where hardheaded idiocy rules the day. For high-level football, read BCS, travel expenses are not an issue--not when you are making $XXm off of TV contracts alone. Can't handle traveling cross country, don't play with the big boys. If the concern is over students missing class time due to too many cross-country flights, then why did they join in the first place knowing there may never be another western team added? BS!
As far as Northeast fans and college ball, well I am one amongst many and before all this desperation, I really enjoyed the BE for all sports. I don't even have a problem w/ the addition of so many mediocre teams and football-onlies, I have a problem w/ the landslide of Pitt and Syracuse bolting for whatever reasons they like to justify. The BE conference shuffling is a joke, an absolute joke. A farce and mockery of college athletics that we have SDSU in both the BE and the BW. I have no problem w/ Fresno, come one come all, because at this point it doesn't matter. The BE may exist, but it's irrelevant. And as you guys have all forecasted on here, B-ball and its untenable structure is due to collapse. Sad really. Used to love the BE tournament in the 80s. Some great and exciting basketball and a highlight of the sports calendar. Hard to get excited about SMU vs. USF or Houston vs. Boise, just not the same.

Your rant doesn't change the fact that Marinetto wants another western fb only. Fresno and AFA aren't that far behind the new Big East. We play and have beat those big east teams, minus BSU who owns us. We beat Cincy and Rutgers the last few years. If all goes according to plan, AFA will be #14 in the West along w/ Navy in the west. Temple moves back to the East. Yes I also prefer that AFA, Fresno, BSU, SDSU all just stay in the MWC together, and wish that there was a rule that you can't be fb only. BE isn't "Big Boys" anymore, proof is in all the departures and having to add SDSU, BSU, Temple(who was removed as fb only a few years ago. It's the Big 5 conf. the little 1. 2 wish they were something, the 2 never gonna be anything, 1 DOA.

I forgot BE basketball back in the day was right up their w/ Pro sports in the BE. 16 team tourney kinda killed it in my mind.

Yea, a little bit of a rant as it's all starting to get frustrating from a fan perspective--something that is being much overlooked in this charade. The BE is still the big boys so long as they have that BCS autobid...or else all these teams wouldn't be clamoring to gain entry. I agree the 16-team BE ruined the specialness and set in motion the chaos that exists today with the conference. This has in turn impacted the CUSA, the MWC, the Belt and the WAC. I just don't see how any of this is sustainable long term for the BE, alliance or WAC for the varying reasons we've outlined here on this board ad nauseum. The money is currently there as a whole, ie, TV deals, but if you whittle away at traditional and regional rivalries, the average fan will lose interest. Now guys like us will always watch our teams and sports in general, but I'm not sure if we constitiute a majority or a niche. The unsustainable part of college athletics is that it is increasingly looking like a bubble with more and more billions being pumped into it through the auspice of advertising dollars, while getting further and further away from its core mission of intercollegiate athletics. The genie is out of the bottle and the major conferences--SEC, Big 10, Pac 12, ACC, even Big 12, will be fine for the foreseeable future. The middle to lower terrain of FBS is heading into dangerous waters. Personally, I find Fresno vs SDSU or Rutgers vs. Temple more compelling specifically because of their regional nature. Marinatto is pissing in the wind, so let him invite Hawaii for anybody cares...his conference will never last anyway.

To clarify, I generally like realignment as it shakes things up and most conference moves are not extreme in their geography. The Big East's moves, led by Marinatto's incompetence, are what is making a mockery of this whole process through far-flung acts of desperation.

Is it possible for me to agree 200% w/ you in that? It should be!

freaked4collegefb · **Joined:** Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm **Posts:** 7045

CSNBBS MB thread (previously posted in another thread)discussing CBSSports report of C-USA and MWC expansion at the expense of the WAC and others at http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=567388

The Bishin Cutter · **Joined:** Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am **Posts:** 538

I had a feeling the "new WAC" wouldn't ever see a down. While it looks like it will, whether it sees a second birthday is now completely up in the air.

I have a feeling that when this is all over, MWC absorbs what it can of the WAC and takes the name for legacy's sake.

freaked4collegefb · **Joined:** Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm **Posts:** 7045

Article out of Idaho discussing precarious WAC FB situation at http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/0 ... conference

freaked4collegefb · **Joined:** Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm **Posts:** 7045

Jon Wilner blog article discussing how last of WAC FB "rats" are apparently getting ready to jump off the SS WAC at http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespo ... invitation

westwolf · **Posted:** Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:00 am

Well, Quinn, it looks like you'll be retiring this thread soon. Idaho would seem to be faced with a battle with NM State for the 12th MWC spot. Fallback is dropping down to the Big Sky again.

The Bishin Cutter · **Joined:** Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am **Posts:** 538

I don't think there's a card the WAC can play at this point. Recruit the bejeezus out of Montana and Montana State, and maybe Idaho State, and probably MU and MSU get poached by the MWC for very good reasons. If Denver spent the kind of money it could to field a football team as competitive as its hockey and skiing, you could see a lot big conferences instantly looking at them.

tute79 · **Joined:** Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm **Posts:** 1490

The Great West is now at 4 teams perhaps (?). Not sure if UTPA is off to the SLC or not....

Once the MWC, CUSA, and Sun-Belt have picked over the WAC, the WAC will be a similar clump of junk.
I see some sort of a merger.
And the product will not be one strong conference, it wil be a glorified scheduling alliance of schools that despearately want to be somewhere else.

At that point, the WAC will need to move out of this "Other FBS Conferences" down to "Other Division 1 Conferences".

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3752

Lots of WAC scenarios up at http://collegesportsinfo.com/2012/04/29 ... pport-2-0/

WAC General Realignment Thread

Who is online