NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:09 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 356 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:47 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Tue May 06, 2003 5:30 pm
Posts: 178
Location: Greensboro, NC
gsohokiefan wrote:
hickory_cornhusker wrote:
The Middle Atlantic Conferences in Division III does something similar to that. I always thought it was a great way to maximize the amount of bids you could gain in the NCAA Tournament. They are the Middle Atlantic Conference in a sport such as football but are the Middle Atlantic Conference -Freedom Division and Middle Atlantic Conference-Commonwealth Division in a sport such as men's basketball with both divisions operating independent of one another and therefore obtaining an AQ for both. Their website is here:http://gomacsports.com/index.aspx

The only problem is Division III talked about prohibiting "Umbrella Conferences" in 2010. I never heard whatever came of that. It was also only Division III that was talking about it but I wonder if there that sentiment is shared in all of the NCAA.

If I remember correctly prohibition of "umbrella" conferences did pass but the Middle Atlantic Conference was grandfathered in.

Quote:
Proposal No. 2012-2 – NCAA Membership – Member Conference – Conditions,
Obligations Privileges and Automatic Qualification – Core Institution


Effective date: For the 2012-13 academic year

Source: Presidents Council (Management Council, Membership Committee and
Championships Committee)

Intent: To align the membership requirements for a conference with the automatic qualification
requirements for a conference by doing the following: (1) confirming that
member conferences must be composed of at least seven core Division III institutions; (2)
specifying that institutions may be a core member in only one multi-sport conference;
and (3) specifying that a member conference is entitles to a two-year grace period if it
fails to satisfy the membership requirements. Finally, any institution considered a core
institution in more than one multi-sport conference prior to Sept. 1, 2011, may continue
as a core institution in those conferences for purposes of satisfying the automatic
qualification and conference membership requirements.

Convention action: Adopted by roll-call vote, 422-35-1.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/pdfs/2012/division+iii+legislative+action+from+the+2012+ncaa+convention


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:33 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7291
Article out of Las Cruces(previously posted in another thread)with comments from Big Sky Commish and WAC Commish regarding "preliminary non-FB sports merger talks" between those two leagues.Unclear whether this idea will "get legs".Link at http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-sp ... feline-wac


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2012 9:46 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 580
Location: Columbus, OH
I wonder if any of the Big Sky's discussions have included the idea of creating two FCS football conferences in order to get two autobids to the FCS playoffs? This would most certainly mean that UC Davis and Cal Poly would have to be football affiliates of the WAC since the WAC only has 2 current football schools and need to counter-balance their 3 non-fb schools. Sacramento St would most certainly be a candidate for switching over in this case to keep them with their California brethren:

WAC
Seattle (no fb)
Idaho
Boise St (no fb)
Denver (no fb)
New Mexico St
Sacramento St

fb affiliates
UC Davis
Cal Poly

The WAC would need two more "volunteers" to switch over. The Montana schools might be candidates for the swap because they would want to be in the conference perceived to be the toughest in football and I if you throw them in with the FBS downgrades and the California schools the WAC would definitely be the superior conference.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2012 11:21 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7291
Article out of Boise(previously posted in another thread)with comments from Idaho President who says that Big Sky/WAC non-FB sports alliance talks have been restarted.Link at http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/08/1 ... ision.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 7:02 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 580
Location: Columbus, OH
Glad to hear the talks are back on. I wish the Big Sky and WAC schools could all get on the same page and get something worked out. With their combined 16 teams, 2 8-team conferences and 2 NCAA Men's basketball tournament bids just plain makes sense. Figure out which three teams are going to jump, get guarantees that no one is backing out (or at least negotiate terms for who and under what circumstances a school can opt out of this deal and go elsewhere [North Dakota, New Mexico St, Boise St, and Sacramento St probably all should get clauses]), let your back up schools (i.e. Utah Valley) know they are on deck if someone leaves, and lets do this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:54 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:51 am
Posts: 102
fighting muskie wrote:
Glad to hear the talks are back on. I wish the Big Sky and WAC schools could all get on the same page and get something worked out. With their combined 16 teams, 2 8-team conferences and 2 NCAA Men's basketball tournament bids just plain makes sense. Figure out which three teams are going to jump, get guarantees that no one is backing out (or at least negotiate terms for who and under what circumstances a school can opt out of this deal and go elsewhere [North Dakota, New Mexico St, Boise St, and Sacramento St probably all should get clauses]), let your back up schools (i.e. Utah Valley) know they are on deck if someone leaves, and lets do this.

Hear! Hear! Time for the western conferences to cooperate and survive until more D-II's can get into a position in that territory to climb the ladder.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:12 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7291
Article out of Boise(posted in another thread)with report that Idaho plans to play Indy FB with it's other sports in the Big Sky subject to State Board approval at tomorrow's(1 pm local) meeting.Link at http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/0 ... her_sports


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:08 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
freaked4collegefb wrote:
Article out of Boise(posted in another thread)with report that Idaho plans to play Indy FB with it's other sports in the Big Sky subject to State Board approval at tomorrow's(1 pm local) meeting.Link at http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/0 ... her_sports


So all they need to do now is slide Seattle into the BSC and put the Montanas, N Colorado, and N Dakota with NMSU and Denver then make a play for the other three Dakota schools and AFA if they go to the Big East. Should get them to 10 in each conference. If they're gonna do this do this right. Go big.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:47 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7291
Articles out of Boise and Las Cruces(previously posted in another thread)with comments from WAC Commish,Big Sky Commish and others regarding Idaho/Big Sky situation at http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/08/1 ... ndent.html
and at http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-sp ... -leave-wac


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:28 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7291
Article out of Boise(previously posted in another thread)reporting that SBOE has given Idaho permission to go FB Indy as well as negotiate possible Big Sky membership in non FB sports and FB.Link at http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/0 ... endent_joi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:51 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7291
Article out of Boise(previously posted on another thread) with comments from Idaho AD and others regarding yesterday's SBOE vote on negotiationg with the Big Sky.Link at http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/08/1 ... dence.html

Also,article out of Ogden with comments from Weber State AD regarding Idaho and the Big Sky at http://www.standard.net/stories/2012/08 ... ck-big-sky


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:36 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 672
Location: Louisville, KY
If the Big Sky takes in the remainder of the WAC, could sponsoring baseball be an option?

Seattle (from WAC)
NMSU (from WAC)
Northern Colorado (baseball from Great West)
Sacramento State (baseball from WAC)
Utah Valley (16th all sports member, from Great West)
North Dakota (baseball from Great West)
Cal-State Bakersfield (baseball only member)
UTPA (baseball only member)

Perhaps Southern Utah could restart their program now that they would have a viable home.

Big Sky Softball would also be in better shape with NMSU, Seattle, and UVU on board.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:25 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 580
Location: Columbus, OH
I know that it is believed on this message board that the Big Sky has forbidden Sacramento St from ever looking at the Big West with longing eyes without the risk of becoming homeless in football but with Boise St's recent move to the Big West that conference is on the prowl for a 12th. Furthermore it doesn't look like the WAC takeover is going to be feasible unless lesser programs like CSU-B and Utah Valley are brought into the fold and even then the two conferences are left vulnerable in the next conference alignment shift and no "spare" schools to use for replacements without going to DII. I think the Sky has to consider letting Sacramento St and North Dakota be football affiliates and take their other sports to the Big West and Summit respectively. This would open up room for the WAC schools to come in, thus shrinking the conference footprint while bringing in two highly respected private schools without jeopardizing the stability of Big Sky football. Plus letting them go could potentially allow them to unload potential future disgruntled members.

Big Sky North (all sports)
Seattle
Eastern Washington
Portland St
Idaho
Montana
Montana St

Big Sky South (all sports)
Idaho St
Weber St
Southern Utah
Northern Arizona
Northern Colorado
Denver
New Mexico St (if interested)

For football, Idaho St shifts to the North, along with fb affiliate ND. The 3 California fb affiliate schools play in the South.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:22 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2734
Location: Reedley, CA
fighting muskie wrote:
I know that it is believed on this message board that the Big Sky has forbidden Sacramento St from ever looking at the Big West with longing eyes without the risk of becoming homeless in football but with Boise St's recent move to the Big West that conference is on the prowl for a 12th. Furthermore it doesn't look like the WAC takeover is going to be feasible unless lesser programs like CSU-B and Utah Valley are brought into the fold and even then the two conferences are left vulnerable in the next conference alignment shift and no "spare" schools to use for replacements without going to DII. I think the Sky has to consider letting Sacramento St and North Dakota be football affiliates and take their other sports to the Big West and Summit respectively. This would open up room for the WAC schools to come in, thus shrinking the conference footprint while bringing in two highly respected private schools without jeopardizing the stability of Big Sky football. Plus letting them go could potentially allow them to unload potential future disgruntled members.

Big Sky North (all sports)
Seattle
Eastern Washington
Portland St
Idaho
Montana
Montana St

Big Sky South (all sports)
Idaho St
Weber St
Southern Utah
Northern Arizona
Northern Colorado
Denver
New Mexico St (if interested)

For football, Idaho St shifts to the North, along with fb affiliate ND. The 3 California fb affiliate schools play in the South.

You have 13, so they'd need Sac St. back. It's not the message board that says Sac St. couldn't move it was the other Big Sky Prez', Sure they could change their mind in order to get NMSU and keep things balanced but why get rid of your only all sports member in the state of CA, (where the best recruits are)? I'm sure the BW will want to wait to see if Fresno or UNLV is #14 for the BE and take either of them over Sac St. There might be a chance if AFA changes their mind that the BW would be willing to take them if they pay off the BW like BSU and Hawaii, not sure.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:26 am 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3802
Yeah, muskie, the Sac St. situation was pretty much written in stone. That said, FSA is right that it could always change. Fact is, when the Big Sky agreed to bring in UCD and Cal Poly for football-only and did so under the understanding that Sac St. would remain all sports...well, things have changed. Since then, South Dakota backed out of the Big Sky invite. Idaho is now in the mix and the Big Sky is even considering further expansion with WAC schools as a lifeline for them. Granted, it's viewed as a win for them: they could snag Denver and Seattle markets in the process, which make sense. So who knows, maybe there would be less of a need to keep Sac St. in the mix if you're replacing them with Idaho and Denver, possibly even Seattle and NMSU (all that said, still not anywhere near a lock that the Big Sky brings in anyone other than Idaho is Idaho formally accepts).

Also important to note, as FSA did, that with some bigger guys in the Big West now via SDSU, Hawaii and Boise St., it might be in the Big West's best interest to wait on the Big East for years if needed, for that extra pay-day via a MWC school joining. If you're the Big West, wouldnt' you rather wait on Fresno St., Air Force, Nevada, UNLV, New Mexico type of school rather than Sac St? Especially since there is at least some chance a MWC school joins the Big East and needs a home?

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 356 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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:  
 

 




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