BigRed98 Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 It must be pretty bad as TxSt-SM has talked to multiple conferences already. When asked if TXST-SM is shopping around: @WACJack - @robertwood They've talked to MWC, CUSA, and the Belt from what I was told. Wow. Starting to feel a little left behind now...
jdcurran235 Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 I wonder if we might be in a position of power versus the WAC soon. We might be able to say that you have to take McNeese, SHSU, and LU or we will not go. What could be left from what I am hearing today is: TxSt - and no one wants them Idaho St. - no one wants them SJSU - only USU gets the invite UTSA - behind la tech and NMSU on CUSA list and then the wac just picks up one western member or UTA begins a football program. LU might end up being the key to the conferences survival. Thoughts?
jdcurran235 Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 This would really give us a lot of power in a basically new FBS conference. I gotta admit that I kinda like the idea. This would also force the conference to stay regional.
BigRedTrack Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 ESPN will decide what happens. They still got 35 bowl games to fill & if they don't watch it they will have 2 schools from the same conference playing each other - again. I don't think that's what they want.
jdcurran235 Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 I don't think ESPN is going to care that much about the WAC
Guest Crawfish Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 I wonder if we might be in a position of power versus the WAC soon. We might be able to say that you have to take McNeese, SHSU, and LU or we will not go. What could be left from what I am hearing today is: TxSt - and no one wants them Idaho St. - no one wants them SJSU - only USU gets the invite UTSA - behind la tech and NMSU on CUSA list and then the wac just picks up one western member or UTA begins a football program. LU might end up being the key to the conferences survival. Thoughts? In the scenario you describe, the present WAC would not longer exist (because of rules defining a conference), thereby losing all automatic post season bids and (what little) Bowl tie ins they have left. Another fact; Mcneese has no desire and does not have the resources available to go to the FBS level. This is a very fluid situation, but I don't think the WAC will survive as a football conference.
jdcurran235 Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 the rules are a lot more flexible now so it is almost impossible for the WAC to go away. They could go down to two teams and still survive. And you are right about McNeese but if we approached them with a regional FBS conference they might consider. But they are not the only fish in the sea. I am just saying we might be able to drive the look of the conference.
jdcurran235 Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Continuity of membership is the rule that changed and will keep the conference alive.
LUSportsFan Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 I wonder if we might be in a position of power versus the WAC soon. We might be able to say that you have to take McNeese, SHSU, and LU or we will not go. What could be left from what I am hearing today is: TxSt - and no one wants them Idaho St. - no one wants them SJSU - only USU gets the invite UTSA - behind la tech and NMSU on CUSA list and then the wac just picks up one western member or UTA begins a football program. LU might end up being the key to the conferences survival. Thoughts? In the scenario you describe, the present WAC would not longer exist (because of rules defining a conference), thereby losing all automatic post season bids and (what little) Bowl tie ins they have left. Another fact; Mcneese has no desire and does not have the resources available to go to the FBS level. This is a very fluid situation, but I don't think the WAC will survive as a football conference. Unless everyone in the WAC cuts and runs, I think it could still stay viable due to the NCAA revisions last January. With UTA, Seattle, and Denver the WAC has 3 of the 7 programs required (not including current member). Four more out of the WAC 5 plus the Texas Twins would need to stay or more basketball participants would need to be invited. Link: http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/2011-01-19/new-rules-protect-wac-auto-bids The situation is a lot more tenuous in the current environment. That was one of my main frustrations this summer when the WAC failed to backfill any football members. I thought and still think that they should have gone at least for the minimum and ideally for some "pad" members even if it meant more FCS move ups. The WAC may have gambled and lost, but I hope not.
jdcurran235 Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 I do agree with the last part, but I don't think it is over for the WAC yet.
coachacola Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 From Jack at bobcatreport on twitter: Hearing Boise/AFA to Big East. NMSU/USU/SJSU - 2 of 3 to backfill. UTEP could go to MWC. LA Tech, NMSU, UNT on CUSA list. UTSA/TXST? No. WAC could lose up to 3 football schools. IMHO the best thing for Lamar is if only SJSU leaves, because if La Tech and/or NMSU leave and UTSA & TXST get invited to the Sun Belt, then Lamar would have no place to go.
jdcurran235 Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 From Jack at bobcatreport on twitter: Hearing Boise/AFA to Big East. NMSU/USU/SJSU - 2 of 3 to backfill. UTEP could go to MWC. LA Tech, NMSU, UNT on CUSA list. UTSA/TXST? No. WAC could lose up to 3 football schools. IMHO the best thing for Lamar is if only SJSU leaves, because if La Tech and/or NMSU leave and UTSA & TXST get invited to the Sun Belt, then Lamar would have no place to go. I don't think that TxSt and UTSA get invited to the sunbelt. I think that no one will want Idaho and NMSU. So, you will have a core to build from including UTA and Denver. The conference can probably only get schools in the Southwest region so the conference becomes more regionalised. The NCAA and ESPN want this conference to survive so they can fill bowl games. I think La Tech., USU, and SJSU are gone for sure. Everyone else will be stuck in the WAC. No one wants a transitional even though UTSA is pulling huge attendance numbers. And Idaho / NMSU do not bring anything to a conference. The conference has to survive for these teams to keep playing FBS football.
Guest Crawfish Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 UTSA is an attractive school of last resort for the Sunbelt and C-USA because of their attendance and location. I personally believe that La. Tech will not get the C-USA invite over UNT. The original name of C-USA was the "Metro Conference" and their philosophy has been to seek out large market schools. Ruston definitely is not a very large town and LSU owns the Shreveport market. If they do not get the invite, they will be (very unhappy) members of the SBC. They will not stay in the WAC. NMSU could and should be invited back to the Belt, at least for football. This would balance out UALR, the only non-football member of the belt left. I agree that USU and San Jose State are will finally get their MWC invites. The Belt could conceivably lose three of the following schools; FIU, FAU, WKU, UMT and UNT. I think at least one of those replacements will be Appalachian State to appease the Eastern schools, and La. Tech or UTSA on the west side. If the SBC gets to 11 or 12, I think they will get at least one more Bowl bid at the expense of the WAC or C-USA. They Belt has had 3 Bowl eligible teams most years. Maybe I am totally off track, but I still see no way the WAC survives as a football conference. Where does LU fit into all of this? I am not sure, but I do not believe there is any future to the WAC.
jdcurran235 Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 You still have idaho and txst even with all the defections. Also you have Denver and UTA in the conference. The autobid is the question. Continuity of membership will allow it to survive as a football conference cause they can get 5 more FCS move ups. But they cannot get those move ups if they lose the autobid for basketball.
jdcurran235 Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 Here is what I think is left in the WAC after all said and done. Denver (basketball) UTA (basketball) Idaho TxSt UTSA NMSU That gives you six teams and four for football. To get back to six for football (which is all that is required by the continuity of membership) you just need two more teams. Those two might be LU and SHSU. For football: Idaho TxSt UTSA NMSU LU SHSU The conference would want at least two more to get to eight right away: Dakota's or eastern schools. West coast schools are a no because of money. Montana's just dont want to go. Dakota's are studying going FBS and would like to move up. App St would like to move up. Maybe we can convince some other SLC schools to join with us. The WAC gambled by not adding us and other back in May. This gamble might make in hard to survive but not impossible in my opinion. I don't think every team in the WAC has a home to go to so there only chance is to fight for the WAC to survive. TxSt and UTSA have made it clear they do not want to be back in FCS play. I personally would like the WAC to survive so we can have an FBS home. I also think it is in the best interest of the teams in the WAC as well with the exception of USU and SJSU. They are both a forgone conclusion at this point. CUSA is inviting UNT or La Tech. if UNT is gone La Tech is invited to SBC and probably goes. But there is still a core of schools left.
coachacola Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 As far as football goes, my hope is that La Tech, NMSU, Texas State and UTSA stay in the WAC. I don't think Idaho is going anywhere, while Utah State and SJSU are more than likely headed to the MWC. Since Lamar's preference is the Sun Belt, which may get raided by CUSA, maybe Lamar can rejoin the Sun Belt as a package deal with UTSA and Texas State to replace UNT and FIU (or whoever leaves). Comparing budgets, both UALR and ULM have sub $10 million budgets so they need to go the SLC. La Tech can take ULM's spot, and the Sun Belt can add one more eastern school and have a 12 team conference. I would like to see something like this for the Sun Belt: East FAU MTSU WKU USA TROY GSU (GA St or GA Southern)/Appy State West ASU ULL LTU LU TXST UTSA This is also a long shot. I'm guessing Lamar stays in the SLC for a while longer.
Guest Crawfish Posted November 7, 2011 Posted November 7, 2011 I agree about ULM, I think the $2000 scholarship stipend could be the nail in the coffin for ULM football. The other schools in Louisiana will pay this but I don't see how Monroe can. If they do, it will be using more state money, which will attract more negative attention to their athletic programs. They will not be able to recruit FBS players without this. UALR stays in the Belt as long as they choose to, because they were a long tenured member before football was added. The have also been a good member of the belt. The WAC is doomed as a football conference, too many obstacles to overcome.
TexGator Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 East Florida Atlantic Florida International Middle Tennessee State Westerny Kentucky South Alabama Troy Georgia State (since App State and GA Southern haven't expressed FBS ambitions) West Arkansas State Louisiana- Lafayette Louisiana Tech Lamar Texas State Texas- San Antonio I like this set-up. But, what would they call this conference? It seems like an amalgamation between the Sun Belt, WAC, and some move-ups. More importantly, what're the chances of creating a new conference that looks like this?
TBonesLU Posted November 15, 2011 Posted November 15, 2011 East Florida Atlantic Florida International Middle Tennessee State Westerny Kentucky South Alabama Troy Georgia State (since App State and GA Southern haven't expressed FBS ambitions) West Arkansas State Louisiana- Lafayette Louisiana Tech Lamar Texas State Texas- San Antonio I like this set-up. But, what would they call this conference? It seems like an amalgamation between the Sun Belt, WAC, and some move-ups. More importantly, what're the chances of creating a new conference that looks like this? "The South Belt"...I really like that look. For two reasons...the west division is stacked, and (2) no UT-A! :laugh:
coachacola Posted November 16, 2011 Posted November 16, 2011 The Scout WAC board is talking about how if the MWC/CUSA alliance takes place after they lose some members, they'll just take the remaining 5 WAC footballs schools (La Tech, Idaho, SJSU, UTSA, TXST). If that happens then that would really hurt Lamar's chances of moving up.
jdcurran235 Posted November 16, 2011 Posted November 16, 2011 I saw that but I don't think it will happen.
Guest Crawfish Posted November 16, 2011 Posted November 16, 2011 The Scout WAC board is talking about how if the MWC/CUSA alliance takes place after they lose some members, they'll just take the remaining 5 WAC footballs schools (La Tech, Idaho, SJSU, UTSA, TXST). If that happens then that would really hurt Lamar's chances of moving up. That is wishful thinking on their part; this will not happen. "App State and GA Southern haven't expressed FBS ambitions" App state recently announced their intention to pursue FBS status. Not sure about GA Southern. IMHO, the belt would welcome App State, but not sure about GA State. This would probably be dependent on whether they lose one or both FIU and FAU to C-USA. The belt will try and attract current FBS members first; except in the case of App State.
TexGator Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 Looks like HBU is joining the Southland.... http://www.chron.com/sports/college/article/Houston-Baptist-to-join-Southland-Conference-2277082.php I don't think this changes Lamar's intention to move up to FBS football... but it does stabilize the Southland in other sports.
jdcurran235 Posted November 24, 2011 Posted November 24, 2011 http://www.witn.com/home/headlines/Conference_USA_Mountain_West_To_Complete_134289338.html This is good news for us I think. If this is true the WAC will still be around and I would expect an invite sometime next year. I think La Tech is probably gone no matter what. If that happens we are then next logical choice for a football add.
Guest bigred360 Posted November 24, 2011 Posted November 24, 2011 You guys know more about conference realignment than I do but is the WAC really going to be a good football conference if even La Tech leaves? I'm not overly impressed with the rest of the conference members. Just my two cents.
.png.88e0b900f1aa353dc4be09303a3550aa.png)
Recommended Posts