Should UM move up if they can?

[SuperHornet]

OK. I see you're going with Big Cat's old "Superior California" bit. Had you used that terminology, I'd agree with you. Unfortunately, many of the smaller communities like Lodi (San Joaquin County) and Modesto (Stanislaus County) would object to that on principle alone. We want our own identity.

BTW, Liveable, Loveable Lodi is closer to 35-45 miles from Sac. On CA-99, anyway. (Of course, I measure that in terms of average time to get there....)

[Green Laser]

OK. I see you're going with Big Cat's old "Superior California" bit. Had you used that terminology, I'd agree with you. Unfortunately, many of the smaller communities like Lodi (San Joaquin County) and Modesto (Stanislaus County) would object to that on principle alone. We want our own identity.

BTW, Liveable, Loveable Lodi is closer to 35-45 miles from Sac. On CA-99, anyway. (Of course, I measure that in terms of average time to get there....)

Think more of it as Sacramento sphere of influence, what are the local tv stations the small communities that you mentioned watching? I would consider the "Superior California" mentioned as inland Northern California from the Southern Sacramento Valley to the Oregon line. At least thats the way it's been traditionally used. That should be our prime recruiting area too bad Volek was not as effective as Sperbeck is recruiting that area, we would have been in a far better position now! Players from Superior California are our bread an butter, players from the Bay Area and Southern California are the icing on the cake. I will however give "Big Cat" credit for Ricky Ray!

[EWURanger]

Thanks for making my point!

1. If a team/ market can draw nearly 10,000 for a losing team it shows potential for better attendance once the team improves or play more attractive visiting teams. On the other had if we had a winning record and made the playoffs several times and still drew just over 5,000 thats not a good sign. If you where 5-6 what would you have drawn 2,000?

I understand the point you are trying to make, but there's more to it than that. We have, over the years always had around 6-7k come out to games at Eastern, whether it's an 8-3 year, or 6-5 year. If attendance were purely a function of winning, ours would obviously be a lot better. An increased fan base, however big, will only come about by generating more interest in the program...I.E. better game day experience, facility improvements, more home play-off games.

2. I understand that you are trying to improve the facilites, we all are. No doubt the red carpet is unusal enough to peak some interest. Do you really expect it to build continuing interest in your program once everyone comes out and takes a look?

Of course not. I don't know why people think we are somehow "banking" on this new red turf to carry us to the promised land of the FCS world. It's simply something cool that won't hurt, and will actually probably help out some. Whether you think it's a novelty or not, it doesn't really matter. It helps to give the Stadium an identity and the University some publicity, and will undoubtedly help out in the recruiting department because kids will like it. Gimicky? Of course it is, but if it helps out in some small ways while at the same time giving the team a much better surface to play on, then mission accomplished. But as I have said before, other improvements are in the works, all of which will help out in the long run. We also have a pretty decent team, if you hadn't noticed.

3. No doubt the Sacramento area is very talent rich and EWU along with many other programs have benefited. Fresno State and Nevada both have over 20 players each from the immediate Sacramento Area on their rosters and Boise State has recuited very well from the area not only for players but coaches. In EWU's case Coach Wulff is from the Sacramento area and has a lot of contacts, his nephew, Matt Nichols, Twain Jones no doubt could have helped any program. With Wulff gone I doubt that you will get as many quality area players as in the past. I look for Portland State to be more successful from Coach Burton's contacts, another Sacramento guy. Coach Sperbeck has made it a priority to recruit locally and has done very well keeping some good players home. If and when we ever move up it would be easier from him to increase the quality of the roster with 20 more scholarships to work with then schools that need to pull players from elsewhere. Speaking of keeping local players home it seems that Montana more or less cleaned your clock in the Spokane area. Isn't that your main recruiting area? Good luck this season!

Again, you can believe what you want, but Baldwin recruited a couple of pretty darn good players this past recruiting season from the Bay Area.

"A pair of players from California, including running back Mario Brown from Berkeley, Calif. (Bishop O'Dowd HS), are also speedsters. Brown rushed for 1,200 yards and 14 touchdowns as a senior, and 1,928 yards (9.2 per carry) and 23 touchdowns as a junior. The other is wide receiver Andre Willliams from El Cerrito (Calif.) HS, who rushed for 711 yards and had another 575 yards receiving with 13 total touchdowns in 2009."

Also, while I'm sure we recruit heavily in the Spokane area, it's an area of half a million folks, so a lot of other schools do as well. We have traditionally recruited all over the state, though - not just in our backyard. We particularly recruit a lot of kids from the west side of the state. Montana may have nabbed more Spokane kids this past year, but EWU was in a unique position in that they had a very small recruiting class and were able to be a lot more selective than most years. That could have played a part. That said, the break-down from last year's recruiting class was still:

Washington - 11
California - 3
Idaho - 1

[Herky]

If your attendance numbers are grossly mis-represented as you said due to students attending for free, then Sac States must be as well. All Sac State students attend everything on campus for free. Weak argument there.

As far as attendance, no one in Sac gives a sh!t about Montucky, MSU, Eastern etc because they literally have no regional significance in California, no one knows who they are. If Sac State wants better attendance they're going to have to start playing other California universities as well as teams that people around here can relate to, teams they've heard of.

Trust me, I would like nothing more than to be able to go to more away games, but the schools are just too far apart.

Every kid except for one on Sac States roster is from CA. You guys got our left-overs.

I understand the regional aspects in regards to Sac wanting to join the WAC. With other California schools in there, it would make a lot of sense from a rivalry/attendance aspect......so I can certainly understand that. I guess my point is that trying to hint that the Sac fan base's apparent lack of interest in who they play in the BSC somehow translates to a historically poor showing on the football field is a shoddy argument, at best.

The bottom line, in my opinion, is that there are a number of reasons for why Sac, PSU, or whoever may or may not join the WAC. If it makes sense for your school to do so, and you have the means and the desire, I say go for it. Maybe Sac could pull it off, but realistically I think it would be extremely challenging. I personally don't see it happening any time soon for any of the afore mentioned schools, for a multitude of reasons. Maybe it could make sense for PSU to try to make a move, but at the same time, no one in Oregon cares about the WAC and to a certain extent they would still be playing second fiddle to UO and OSU even with a WAC invite - not much difference there.

But getting back onto topic..........Everyone tries to use Boise State as a model for moving up, but some seem to forget that there were no other 1-A schools in the state of Idaho at the time they moved, so really no one to compete with for fans, etc........unlike California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona who have at least 2 Pac-10 schools each. Add to that the massive amount of corporate sponsorship, state dollars, and booster support BSU received during their move up, and there really is no comparison between them then, and any of the western FCS schools that are thinking about moving up now. Simply put, I don't think there will ever be another Boise State now, or any time in the future. I think any of the western FCS schools that made a jump now would more likely be following the Idaho scenario. They just posted their most successful season last year, after something like 15 years in FBS. A once-proud program that was a laughing stock for the latter part of the 90's and all of the 00's. I just don't see why anyone would want to go down that road.

Good post, I agree with everything for the most part

[AZGrizFan]

The calamities of the BSC and FCS vs. the milk & honey of the FBS where we will never have a shot at the BCS (which is the pipe dream that you move uppers cling to) is not to me the fairy tale that it is to you guys wanting to play the same style of mediocrity for many years to come just that it will cost more and give us less.

What move up have you seen that makes you think this is such a fantastic idea? Is Boise St. your only horse to hitch too?

I hear ya. You'd rather play in a mediocre BSC than a mediocre WAC conference. You'd rather watch Central Washington and Fort Lewis and Western State than Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado State, Utah State, AFA, etc., etc.

Well, given the numbnuts who are running UM, you'll probably get your wish.

Don't come cryin' to me when the BSC collapses in on itself.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

The calamities of the BSC and FCS vs. the milk & honey of the FBS where we will never have a shot at the BCS (which is the pipe dream that you move uppers cling to) is not to me the fairy tale that it is to you guys wanting to play the same style of mediocrity for many years to come just that it will cost more and give us less.

What move up have you seen that makes you think this is such a fantastic idea? Is Boise St. your only horse to hitch too?

I hear ya. You'd rather play in a mediocre BSC than a mediocre WAC conference. You'd rather watch Central Washington and Fort Lewis and Western State than Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado State, Utah State, AFA, etc., etc.

Well, given the numbnuts who are running UM, you'll probably get your wish.

Don't come cryin' to me when the BSC collapses in on itself.

AZ, why do you keep chipping away at your integrity by taking the D2 OOC's and comparing them to the conference slate or the better teams that we could POSSIBLY play in the west? Why aren't you comparing the good to the good, and the bad to the bad? I have to assume it's because your argument is looking very weak and the emotional part of the argument is winning out to try and salvage something.

Why don't you make up your mock dream schedule for the WAC, & the OOC, pick the 3 or 4 best teams that you are guessing we will be able to have for home games vs. the actual schedules historically that we've played and then compare that.

I mean right now where we're at and with the limited resources we have we get to play some great teams IF we are good enough to make it to the playoffs. Every team in the playoffs is supposedly a top 16 team in the nation.

If we are good enough in the WAC then how many opportunities will we have to play those kinds of teams at the FBS level? How many of those kinds of teams will WE EVER see come to Missoula?

You keep pulling up a shiny spot every here and again like we'll have teams like Colorado State....really? I'm sure we would have that once in a while but how often are we gonna have that?

I really don't know so I'm asking...how often do teams like Wyoming, Idaho, or Utah State get real quality teams to come in and play them? I know Wyoming had Texas I think come in over the last couple years but what did they have to give up to have that happen? I'm sure that wasn't a home and home deal cuz nobody would consider Wyoming and Texas as being on equal footing and I don't know how anyone could think that we are gonna fare even that well.

You are advocating the WAC, you realize that right?

[Herky]

BYU has reached out to the WCC and is expected to join sometime within the next week or so, BYU is looking for a home for its 18 Olympic sports so it can go independent in football.

Utah State has entered "second round" talks with the MWC this morning, could join the MWC this week.

Hawaii is reported to have contacted the Big West for a home for its Olympic sports so its football program can go independent.

Reports are that LA Tech has contacted C-USA and is expected to leave the WAC (sketchy source, however, not far fetched).

Karl Benson is quoted as saying that the remaining six schools are not being subjected to the $5 million to leave the conference as Fresno State has said they're not going to pay and Nevada never actually signed the agreement.

The WACs future is uncertain and the conference may not be sustainable after next week when realignment is expected to be done.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... elopments/

There is no mention, anywhere, of SJSU and Idaho. SJSU can't afford to go indy and I highly doubt Idaho can. So, if all of the above actually happens, what happens to the WAC and the remaining two programs?

[grizzaholic]

The calamities of the BSC and FCS vs. the milk & honey of the FBS where we will never have a shot at the BCS (which is the pipe dream that you move uppers cling to) is not to me the fairy tale that it is to you guys wanting to play the same style of mediocrity for many years to come just that it will cost more and give us less.

What move up have you seen that makes you think this is such a fantastic idea? Is Boise St. your only horse to hitch too?

I hear ya. You'd rather play in a mediocre BSC than a mediocre WAC conference. You'd rather watch Central Washington and Fort Lewis and Western State than Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado State, Utah State, AFA, etc., etc.

Well, given the numbnuts who are running UM, you'll probably get your wish.

Don't come cryin' to me when the BSC collapses in on itself.

I don't think Idaho is mediocre in any way, shape, or form. They have really turned the corner and will be putting up W's all year this year. You have lost in this argument and are grasping at straws.

[AZGrizFan]

I hear ya. You'd rather play in a mediocre BSC than a mediocre WAC conference. You'd rather watch Central Washington and Fort Lewis and Western State than Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado State, Utah State, AFA, etc., etc.

Well, given the numbnuts who are running UM, you'll probably get your wish.

Don't come cryin' to me when the BSC collapses in on itself.

I don't think Idaho is mediocre in any way, shape, or form. They have really turned the corner and will be putting up W's all year this year. You have lost in this argument and are grasping at straws.

Thank you. You agree with me, then?

[Silenoz]

I hear ya. You'd rather play in a mediocre BSC than a mediocre WAC conference. You'd rather watch Central Washington and Fort Lewis and Western State than Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado State, Utah State, AFA, etc., etc.

Well, given the numbnuts who are running UM, you'll probably get your wish.

Don't come cryin' to me when the BSC collapses in on itself.

I don't think Idaho is mediocre in any way, shape, or form. They have really turned the corner and will be putting up W's all year this year. You have lost in this argument and are grasping at straws.

Averaged 2.25 wins a year this decade until last year, when they went 8-5 in the WAC with their best win being over two 7-6 MAC teams (only wins over teams with winning records at that). I'm gonna wait awhile before calling Idaho anything other than one of the worst programs in FBS

[AZGrizFan]

I don't think Idaho is mediocre in any way, shape, or form. They have really turned the corner and will be putting up W's all year this year. You have lost in this argument and are grasping at straws.

Averaged 2.25 wins a year this decade until last year, when they went 8-5 in the WAC with their best win being over two 7-6 MAC teams (only wins over teams with winning records at that). I'm gonna wait awhile before calling Idaho anything other than one of the worst programs in FBS

Grizza's logic about Idaho is the same logic Ursus is using about Idaho State and PSU...."Don't call ISU bad! They were good once! Hell, they won the national title once! Yeah, they've only won 3 games in 4 years....but they ain't THAT bad..."

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

I don't think Idaho is mediocre in any way, shape, or form. They have really turned the corner and will be putting up W's all year this year. You have lost in this argument and are grasping at straws.

Averaged 2.25 wins a year this decade until last year, when they went 8-5 in the WAC with their best win being over two 7-6 MAC teams (only wins over teams with winning records at that). I'm gonna wait awhile before calling Idaho anything other than one of the worst programs in FBS

I hope they are on the rise because I did hate seeing them be a laughing stock. Grizza delivers things like this with a very dry sense of humor so he I think he may have been playing the "false advocate" on that one due to the way he ended his post.

I would have to agree with your wait and see thing on ID because that is a long stretch of deep mediocrity there and even with the scholarship generosity that FBS afforded them they couldn't keep up with us.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Averaged 2.25 wins a year this decade until last year, when they went 8-5 in the WAC with their best win being over two 7-6 MAC teams (only wins over teams with winning records at that). I'm gonna wait awhile before calling Idaho anything other than one of the worst programs in FBS

Grizza's logic about Idaho is the same logic Ursus is using about Idaho State and PSU...."Don't call ISU bad! They were good once! Hell, they won the national title once! Yeah, they've only won 3 games in 4 years....but they ain't THAT bad..."

That wasn't my position at all AZ. I said that PSU was a good rival and was running on some hard times but that ISU has been very bad. Why do you keep this shit up? You argue like a fucking woman when you get the shit kicked out of you with your own words. You have got to stop embarrassing yourself dude.

I think Grizza was making fun of you so that last post of yours backfires even further.

Not to mention that YOU are putting Idaho up as one of the "Steps up" in competition in one post and then in this post you are equating them to ISU.

Again AZ, I have to scratch my head on your disoriented style of logic and argument here and as you WTF?

My god man, please give it up. You are not looking the part of man with all faculties intact here.

[AZGrizFan]

Grizza's logic about Idaho is the same logic Ursus is using about Idaho State and PSU...."Don't call ISU bad! They were good once! Hell, they won the national title once! Yeah, they've only won 3 games in 4 years....but they ain't THAT bad..."

That wasn't my position at all AZ. I said that PSU was a good rival and was running on some hard times but that ISU has been very bad. Why do you keep this shit up? You argue like a fucking woman when you get the shit kicked out of you with your own words. You have got to stop embarrassing yourself dude.

I think Grizza was making fun of you so that last post of yours backfires even further.

Not to mention that YOU are putting Idaho up as one of the "Steps up" in competition in one post and then in this post you are equating them to ISU.

Again AZ, I have to scratch my head on your disoriented style of logic and argument here and as you WTF?

My god man, please give it up. You are not looking the part of man with all faculties intact here.

Dude. I'm sorry. I just can't carry on with this charade any longer.

I'm NOT a move-up proponent. Seriously.

But watching you (and to a much lesser extent, Grizza) kneejerk react to every wild-ass post I made on this topic has been like crack to a coke addict.

I was gonna stop long ago, but everytime I changed my argument and put out new bait, you kept swallowing it and coming back with more and more and more vitriol. I gotta give you that...you're an emotional SOB.

Seriously, here's what I think/hope happens:

BSC could lose 1-2 schools. If they do, they pick up a couple replacements and we move on, carrying the torch as the flagbearer for FCS.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

That wasn't my position at all AZ. I said that PSU was a good rival and was running on some hard times but that ISU has been very bad. Why do you keep this shit up? You argue like a fucking woman when you get the shit kicked out of you with your own words. You have got to stop embarrassing yourself dude.

I think Grizza was making fun of you so that last post of yours backfires even further.

Not to mention that YOU are putting Idaho up as one of the "Steps up" in competition in one post and then in this post you are equating them to ISU.

Again AZ, I have to scratch my head on your disoriented style of logic and argument here and as you WTF?

My god man, please give it up. You are not looking the part of man with all faculties intact here.

Dude. I'm sorry. I just can't carry on with this charade any longer.

I'm NOT a move-up proponent. Seriously.

But watching you (and to a much lesser extent, Grizza) kneejerk react to every wild-ass post I made on this topic has been like crack to a coke addict.

I was gonna stop long ago, but everytime I changed my argument and put out new bait, you kept swallowing it and coming back with more and more and more vitriol. I gotta give you that...you're an emotional SOB.

Seriously, here's what I think/hope happens:

BSC could lose 1-2 schools. If they do, they pick up a couple replacements and we move on, carrying the torch as the flagbearer for FCS.

AZ, have I not been on the boards for years and in many arguments with you. We have often taken opposing sides of things we believe and go after each other with much intensity.

I know you are not a staunch move upper but that is the side of the argument you chose to take so I expect you to make a decent argument. You can't really think I am angry about swatting those homers out of the park even if you were having fun grooving me a few pitches.

The truth is that you did a pretty good job mimicking what some unreasonable move uppers come up with. You did forget to use the Microsoft donating millions argument that had me in hysterics a month ago though. Microsoft wants us to move up and will be donating Millions to us because someone that works there has a summer home on the lake...that one is a classic that you should have worked in somewhere.

As I say, I trust you when you say you didn't really believe the shit you were saying cuz you've never said it before but you can't really think I was pissed about it can you? I was eagerly waiting to see what you had next though.

I've never been in an argument that I didn't think was good fun so thanks for that.

[AZGrizFan]

Dude. I'm sorry. I just can't carry on with this charade any longer.

I'm NOT a move-up proponent. Seriously.

But watching you (and to a much lesser extent, Grizza) kneejerk react to every wild-ass post I made on this topic has been like crack to a coke addict.

I was gonna stop long ago, but everytime I changed my argument and put out new bait, you kept swallowing it and coming back with more and more and more vitriol. I gotta give you that...you're an emotional SOB.

Seriously, here's what I think/hope happens:

BSC could lose 1-2 schools. If they do, they pick up a couple replacements and we move on, carrying the torch as the flagbearer for FCS.

AZ, have I not been on the boards for years and in many arguments with you. We have often taken opposing sides of things we believe and go after each other with much intensity.

I know you are not a staunch move upper but that is the side of the argument you chose to take so I expect you to make a decent argument. You can't really think I am angry about swatting those homers out of the park even if you were having fun grooving me a few pitches.

The truth is that you did a pretty good job mimicking what some unreasonable move uppers come up with. You did forget to use the Microsoft donating millions argument that had me in hysterics a month ago though. Microsoft wants us to move up and will be donating Millions to us because someone that works there has a summer home on the lake...that one is a classic that you should have worked in somewhere.
As I say, I trust you when you say you didn't really believe the shit you were saying cuz you've never said it before but you can't really think I was pissed about it can you? I was eagerly waiting to see what you had next though.

I've never been in an argument that I didn't think was good fun so thanks for that.

Awww...DAMMIT. I KNEW I forgot something.

[kemajic]

I think any of the western FCS schools that made a jump now would more likely be following the Idaho scenario. They just posted their most successful season last year, after something like 15 years in FBS. A once-proud program that was a laughing stock for the latter part of the 90's and all of the 00's.

That "laughing stock" won the Big West Conf. championship in '98 in their third year of FBS, so your homework is imperfect. Comparing SacSt's readiness for FBS to Idaho's shows how much a prize the SacSt FB program would be for any FBS conf. Idaho was very successful at the FBS level, winning 8 BSC championships. SacSt has been a BSC doormat with a 33-75 record in 14 years. The state that the WAC finds itself in should lead it to finding the most credible programs it can gather. It cannot afford to add programs that decrease its competitiveness further.

[EWURanger]

I think any of the western FCS schools that made a jump now would more likely be following the Idaho scenario. They just posted their most successful season last year, after something like 15 years in FBS. A once-proud program that was a laughing stock for the latter part of the 90's and all of the 00's.

That "laughing stock" won the Big West Conf. championship in '98 in their third year of FBS, so your homework is imperfect. Comparing SacSt's readiness for FBS to Idaho's shows how much a prize the SacSt FB program would be for any FBS conf. Idaho was very successful at the FBS level, winning 8 BSC championships. SacSt has been a BSC doormat with a 33-75 record in 14 years. The state that the WAC finds itself in should lead it to finding the most credible programs it can gather. It cannot afford to add programs that decrease its competitiveness further.

I forgot about their Big West Championship. But come on, football in the Big West Conference in 1998 was probably only marginally better than the Big Sky. But you're right, Idaho was a *very* succesful 1-AA program during their long tenure in the BSC. I was arguing how much of a joke many have considered them to be since joining FBS. All the more reason why they probably should never have left the Big Sky in the first place. Their position was far different than BSU's. I was using the Idaho analogy more to illustrate how even a successful FCS program can struggle at the FBS level without the proper resources and systems in place to compete. I'm not sure what makes anyone think any of the other western FCS teams would fair any better in that regard. Montana might be a different story.....but. Do PSU, Sac, Davis, etc. really have considerably more resources, fan/booster support, state funding now than Idaho did back then? Are their facilities better than Idaho's.......understand they are all making improvements which could eventually find them with better facilities than Idaho, but those could still be a few years down the road before completion. Will an off-campus facility in Portland draw fans to watch Utah State, La Tech, etc? Maybe, maybe not. Sac, and to a less extent PSU, have been somewhat marginal in the BSC. People can blast me if they want, but I just don't see how anyone could think that they would be anything but marginal playing in the WAC.....at least for the unforeseeable future. Both programs, however, could get better and even be challengers in the BSC if they continued down the right path.

In regards to the health of the WAC, I'm not sure if I would bank on its longevity at this point.

With Boise State, Nevada, and Fresno gone, it's basically lost most of its credibility as a football conference. It's also down to 6 members.

It's rumored that Hawaii may go independent for football and the Big West for other sports. It makes sense for them to do so, because being independent for football allows them to schedule big pay-day away games against all the Pac-10 schools within relative proximity of their location.

La Tech must be pondering their WAC status. It might make more sense for them to join the Sun Belt, who already has 2 LA schools in it. Or maybe they would consider C-USA, I am not sure. But if they are going to try to stay in the WAC, they should probably hope that a couple of the Texas FCS school get invites. Because if it's PSU or Sac, the travel costs associated with such a conference just don't make that much sense for them.

Utah State is in the process of trying to leverage themselves as a 12th MWC member. The most recent rumors have BYU staying in the MWC, so this increases USU's chances of getting an invite. But if BYU jets, I have a hard time seeing USU getting a MWC invite.

Could New Mexico state get a MWC invite with their in-state rival already there? Perhaps they might also consider C-USA or the Sun Belt...........hard to see what they might do if the WAC folds.

But what are San Jose State, Idaho, and Utah State going to do if just one, or a combination of the above happens?

Then again, maybe the WAC won't fold. Perhaps they invite Rice, Tulane, Tulsa or UTEP to join? Would either of those four schools leave the relative stability of C-USA for the uncertainty that is the WAC? Not to mention the additional travel expenditures that would come along with it?

It's going to be interesting. But in my opinion, the notion that that the WAC is going to somehow swallow up the BSC is not looking very likely at this point.

[dbackjon]

Both UTEP and New Mexico have consistantly lobbied/voted against any conference association with NMSU.

Teams aren't gonna leave the C-USA for the WAC.

[EWURanger]

Both UTEP and New Mexico have consistantly lobbied/voted against any conference association with NMSU.

Teams aren't gonna leave the C-USA for the WAC.

I tend to agree with you. Which again begs the question: If Hawaii goes the indie route, or Utah State becomes the 12 MWC member (assuming BYU stays there)........what happens to Idaho, San Jose State, NMSU, etc? Doesn't look good.

The WAC better hope they find a couple schools *really* quickly. In my mind, I think it's more likely they go after a couple of schools that are already full FBS members (wherever they may be) than go after two or more current FCS programs, for a couple of reasons.

1.)The WAC doesn't want to dilute their conference any more than it already has been.
2.) How many FCS programs in the BSC or GWFC want to shell out millions to join a conference whose prestige has taken a massive hit, and whose future is pretty darn uncertain......

[Herky]

Both UTEP and New Mexico have consistantly lobbied/voted against any conference association with NMSU.

Teams aren't gonna leave the C-USA for the WAC.

I tend to agree with you. Which again begs the question: If Hawaii goes the indie route, or Utah State becomes the 12 MWC member (assuming BYU stays there)........what happens to Idaho, San Jose State, NMSU, etc? Doesn't look good.

The WAC better hope they find a couple schools *really* quickly. In my mind, I think it's more likely they go after a couple of schools that are already full FBS members (wherever they may be) than go after two or more current FCS programs, for a couple of reasons.

1.)The WAC doesn't want to dilute their conference any more than it already has been.
2.) How many FCS programs in the BSC or GWFC want to shell out millions to join a conference whose prestige has taken a massive hit, and whose future is pretty darn uncertain......

BYU will be announcing that they will be staying in the MWC as early as today. The Salt Lake Tribune (or whatever it's called) is reporting.

[EWURanger]

I tend to agree with you. Which again begs the question: If Hawaii goes the indie route, or Utah State becomes the 12 MWC member (assuming BYU stays there)........what happens to Idaho, San Jose State, NMSU, etc? Doesn't look good.

The WAC better hope they find a couple schools *really* quickly. In my mind, I think it's more likely they go after a couple of schools that are already full FBS members (wherever they may be) than go after two or more current FCS programs, for a couple of reasons.

1.)The WAC doesn't want to dilute their conference any more than it already has been.
2.) How many FCS programs in the BSC or GWFC want to shell out millions to join a conference whose prestige has taken a massive hit, and whose future is pretty darn uncertain......

BYU will be announcing that they will be staying in the MWC as early as today. The Salt Lake Tribune (or whatever it's called) is reporting.

I've heard this as well, which would put the MWC at 11 teams for football. They are going to be looking for a 12th member, and chances are, they will again look to raid what's left of the WAC. Adding Utah State would give BYU a travel partner and an in-state, in-conference (however abysmal) rival. Or perhaps they take some other WAC team. If that happens, the WAC is down to 5. If Hawaii goes indie, they're down to 4, and effectively done as a conference.

So does this still seem like a good scenario for Montana, Sac, PSU, Davis, Poly, etc?

[AZGrizFan]

BYU will be announcing that they will be staying in the MWC as early as today. The Salt Lake Tribune (or whatever it's called) is reporting.

I've heard this as well, which would put the MWC at 11 teams for football. They are going to be looking for a 12th member, and chances are, they will again look to raid what's left of the WAC. Adding Utah State would give BYU a travel partner and an in-state, in-conference (however abysmal) rival. Or perhaps they take some other WAC team. If that happens, the WAC is down to 5. If Hawaii goes indie, they're down to 4, and effectively done as a conference.

So does this still seem like a good scenario for Montana, Sac, PSU, Davis, Poly, etc?

At that point, Idaho, SJSU, New Mexico State and La Tech would need to BEG the MWC to to take them back and become a 16-team super conference again. There isn't enough fresh meat in the Western US to formulate another FBS conference if the WAC and Pac 10 both insist on being 12-team conferences.

[Herky]

BYU will be announcing that they will be staying in the MWC as early as today. The Salt Lake Tribune (or whatever it's called) is reporting.

I've heard this as well, which would put the MWC at 11 teams for football. They are going to be looking for a 12th member, and chances are, they will again look to raid what's left of the WAC. Adding Utah State would give BYU a travel partner and an in-state, in-conference (however abysmal) rival. Or perhaps they take some other WAC team. If that happens, the WAC is down to 5. If Hawaii goes indie, they're down to 4, and effectively done as a conference.

So does this still seem like a good scenario for Montana, Sac, PSU, Davis, Poly, etc?

USU will get the invite from the MWC, that gives the MWC a championship game. USU and the MWC met yesterday to discuss USU joining the conference. I wouldnt be surprised if the announcement came as early as tomorrow.

No one is leaving C-USA to go to the WAC and UNT has told the WAC no twice before. It looks as though the two obvious options for the WAC at this point is to either work out a deal to include the remaining teams in the MWC, or invite four (4) FCS teams to join.

If teams are invited from the FCS, I don't know who it would be, we all have our own opinions as to who would be a good fit, however, it's all speculation as up to six or seven programs have been mentioned. I can see benefits to the WAC from all programs mentioned, they all bring something different to the table. Montucky brings competition; Sac, Davis, and PSU bring markets; TXSU and UTSA bring markets; and Cal Poly brings? Other than being based in CA and having a decent program, they don't offer much else.

Some programs may even be ruled out for certain reasons. Montucky has no media market to speak of, doesnt have the required minimum sponsored sports, and has a tag-along little brother in MSU. Sac doesnt have the greatest football history and can be a little wishy washy with fan support if they don't do well, same with Davis. Plus, Sac and Davis share a market, so there may only be a need/want to invite one of them, however, by inviting both they've got the market for sure. PSU, I don't know enough about them but I do know they don't have a stadium on campus. UTSA doesnt even have a team yet and they're support is up in the air. TXSU, like PSU, I don't know enough about them.

[Herky]

According to the attached article, as soon as BYU announces they are staying in the MWC, USU will join the MWC.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/sports/501 ... u.html.csp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;