Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I don't get why Lamar and SHSU were passed over for UTA. I think Lamar will get the invite next year and probably CS Bakersfield will get the last spot

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/07/08 ... o-wac.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another one
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/utsa/2011/ ... -approval/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looking like the SLC will need to target some D-II LSC schools and settle for HBU and UTPA if 1 or no LSC schools want to move up.

Also got this from TT on csi board

Jack from BobcatReport is now indicating the school's ambition is to have football by 2016.

Jack states, "I just heard football in 2016. Massive stadium renovation before then with natural gas revenues from on campus drilling. 24K with suites. Chasing Cowboys and will buy a bubble for practice."

UTPA and HBU need to get on the phone with the SLC today. The Great West Conference is dying a slow death and the Southland could use some new members.

Hey FS Alum. whose helmet is that in your avatar???

Meh.

UTA is horrible in all sports, haha

Keeper wrote:Hey FS Alum. whose helmet is that in your avatar???

My fantasy football helmet "Bruisers" also in my avatar. I made it. I used the old Cologne Centurions logo.

Man, the WAC has really turned into one craptastic conference.

Everyone on the WAC board thinks that this move proves that after the FCS season is over that Montana and Montana St. will join the WAC, that way they stay eligible for the playoffs this year. Some others think it might not be those 2 but will be 2 Sky schools. I don't know how they've come to that. I still don't get why you'd leave Lamar out, who has fb for UTA who doesn't. 10/12 works better than 9/12 especially if you want to add a couple more fb teams in a few years to get 12/14 and a title game.

Lamar is in Beaumont. UTA is in the heart of the Metroplex. In Benson's eyes this would be a no brainer since the Mavs supposedly are starting up a football program as part of the invitation. UTA has a stadium that needs an upgrade similar to what Lamar did this past year. But they would have time to get it done before football returned in a bout 5 years as some suggest.

Sly Fox wrote:Lamar is in Beaumont. UTA is in the heart of the Metroplex. In Benson's eyes this would be a no brainer since the Mavs supposedly are starting up a football program as part of the invitation. UTA has a stadium that needs an upgrade similar to what Lamar did this past year. But they would have time to get it done before football returned in a bout 5 years as some suggest.

You're putting a lot of risk in maybe. WAC said that the invite was NOT contingent on them starting fb, so they do not have to. They may be in a big market but so is SJSU, neither bring any of that market. Hell most of the UTA students are UT fans, they don't live close enough to Austin to go to UT so UTA is convenient.

Fresno St. Alum wrote:Everyone on the WAC board thinks that this move proves that after the FCS season is over that Montana and Montana St. will join the WAC, that way they stay eligible for the playoffs this year. Some others think it might not be those 2 but will be 2 Sky schools. I don't know how they've come to that. I still don't get why you'd leave Lamar out, who has fb for UTA who doesn't. 10/12 works better than 9/12 especially if you want to add a couple more fb teams in a few years to get 12/14 and a title game.

For the love of God, let that not be true.

I don't really care for the move but it make sense for the WACs desired 9/12 structure. They sit at 7/10 right now. Lamar is still a backup option if western schools don't come through. SHSU is in no shape to be added for football. At least UTA is building a great basketball arena. I really don't see them adding football. No support and would need a new stadium. I used to run track at their current one and it is quite dated.

I know the Montana fans don't want the move but would welcome them with open arms. Largely a group of very classy fans.

Grizalltheway wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:Everyone on the WAC board thinks that this move proves that after the FCS season is over that Montana and Montana St. will join the WAC, that way they stay eligible for the playoffs this year. Some others think it might not be those 2 but will be 2 Sky schools. I don't know how they've come to that. I still don't get why you'd leave Lamar out, who has fb for UTA who doesn't. 10/12 works better than 9/12 especially if you want to add a couple more fb teams in a few years to get 12/14 and a title game.

For the love of God, let that not be true.

Maybe me and a Hawaii fan or 2 are the only ones that think that they WON'T get a Big Sky school. If there was a Sky school my guess would be PSU, no real logic behind it other than the Montana schools said they don't want to move and it would be too expensive along with all of the CA schools having to cut 23% of its costs. That would leave PSU. Still I think it will end up being Lamar and CSUB.

I am wondering how realistic it is for ANY Big Sky school to be convinced to join a conference that is becoming more Texas-centric by the day. They might as well rename it something else...........too bad (S)WAC is already taken.

EWURanger wrote:I am wondering how realistic it is for ANY Big Sky school to be convinced to join a conference that is becoming more Texas-centric by the day. They might as well rename it something else...........too bad (S)WAC is already taken.

The UTA addition will allow for their Olympic sports to be split into divisions and thus save on travel costs one 2 more schools are added. Their next two additions have to be football schools. Now depending on which schools are added will truly define if the WAC has abandoned all hope of staying a western conference.

BTW FSA, doesn't this addition cost you a bet on the WAC board?

SDHornet wrote:

EWURanger wrote:I am wondering how realistic it is for ANY Big Sky school to be convinced to join a conference that is becoming more Texas-centric by the day. They might as well rename it something else...........too bad (S)WAC is already taken.

The UTA addition will allow for their Olympic sports to be split into divisions and thus save on travel costs one 2 more schools are added. Their next two additions have to be football schools. Now depending on which schools are added will truly define if the WAC has abandoned all hope of staying a western conference.

BTW FSA, doesn't this addition cost you a bet on the WAC board?

I bet the guy that It wouldn't be a CA or MT Big Sky school or UNT and/or ULL. I said it would be Lamar. And no matter what they'd need another Texas school for the South Div.

So right state wrong school for me. SJSU guy still wrong on everything. If you noticed I left out Oregon, just in case PSU changes their mind. Remember the WAC defies logic in every way. The name for starters. They say they need fb schools then add 3 w/o fb.

He didn't take my bet anyway.

Fresno St. Alum wrote:I bet the guy that It wouldn't be a CA or MT Big Sky school or UNT and/or ULL. I said it would be Lamar. And no matter what they'd need another Texas school for the South Div.

So right state wrong school for me. SJSU guy still wrong on everything. If you noticed I left out Oregon, just in case PSU changes their mind. Remember the WAC defies logic in every way. The name for starters. They say they need fb schools then add 3 w/o fb.

He didn't take my bet anyway.

Yeah I was just ribbing you. Your bet did shut them up though. It was a ballsy post and thoroughly enjoyed it.

I think the UTA add shows that the WAC are looking at schools who are located in large DMA’s as a way to lead to possible TV revenue somewhere in the future. The addition also shows they aren’t too concerned with AD budgets as UTA’s is barely at the $10M mark. Questionable move, but when you are as desperate as the WAC, nothing can be that surprising.

SDHornet wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:I bet the guy that It wouldn't be a CA or MT Big Sky school or UNT and/or ULL. I said it would be Lamar. And no matter what they'd need another Texas school for the South Div.

So right state wrong school for me. SJSU guy still wrong on everything. If you noticed I left out Oregon, just in case PSU changes their mind. Remember the WAC defies logic in every way. The name for starters. They say they need fb schools then add 3 w/o fb.

He didn't take my bet anyway.

Yeah I was just ribbing you. Your bet did shut them up though. It was a ballsy post and thoroughly enjoyed it.

I think the UTA add shows that the WAC are looking at schools who are located in large DMA’s as a way to lead to possible TV revenue somewhere in the future. The addition also shows they aren’t too concerned with AD budgets as UTA’s is barely at the $10M mark. Questionable move, but when you are as desperate as the WAC, nothing can be that surprising.

Well even if he did take it and I did lose it would have been fine because the WAC would be done expanding w/ 12 and Fresno would be off to the MWC. Really no reason to post there w/ expansion being done and my team being gone.

I don't always know what will happen but I know what can't happen. Like UNT and ULL leaving the SBC for the new WAC. The SBC would need to be raided for them to think about it. Just like no App St. to CUSA from SoCon. No Boise St. to the Pac 12. No kicking out DePaul and Marquette from the BE.

Here's quotes from the bobcat report that the wac fans swear by
Montana people are you really gonna save the WAC's ass?

Quote:I just got more confirmation that the Montana schools have been working behind the scenes on a jump to the WAC and FBS. The existing WAC schools are aware of these talks and expect a deal to get done.

We would not see any announcement from either school until after this football season. Any announcement would cause both schools to lose post season eligibility. That could be why the lid is being kept so tight on this issue.

My money is on an announcement after this season.

Quote:Using what we have learned from the UT Board of Regents meetings, the next one for Montana and MSU is on August 2nd. It's a "planning session". I will keep an eye on it and I am sure Justin will.

Fresno St. Alum wrote:I don't get why Lamar and SHSU were passed over for UTA. I think Lamar will get the invite next year and probably CS Bakersfield will get the last spot

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/07/08 ... o-wac.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The way things have been playing out, it would appear that the end game is in sight for the WAC..."end game" being their preferred membership for the time being (with only small changes such as La Tech or Utah St leaving in the cards).

It's clear UVU is on the outs. 2 shots, two swings and misses (Seattle and UTA). Two spots left for football right now, seemingly, and it appears that the Montana & Montana St. combo are working to take those final spots.

Luckily though, it's 7/10 right now for the conference. So if Montana and Montana St. join, it would be 9/12.

And IFFFFF UTA adds football in 2016, it would be 10/12.

So in theory, based on the membership issues the WAC has dealt with over the past year, it wouldn't be a shock to see Lamar and SHSU join for a 12/14 WAC alignment. But for now, it appears Montana and MSU have the pole position with Lamar and SHSU being passed over in the near future.


Gotta say, while it might not be the Pac-12, it would still be an impressive feat if the WAC were able to lose so many schools, go through an overhaul, and be able to find some stability in the process.

I really like the idea of 12/14 because you can pull a divisional alignment that works for almost everyone:
East:
LA Tech
Lamar
SHSU
UTA
UTSA
Texas St.
NMSU

West:
Denver
Utah St.
Montana St.
Montana
Idaho
Seattle
SJSU

If UTA is NOT going to add Football, what is the point?

The WAC isn't going to make them more money. Travel is going to be much more expensive. WAC basketball (I should say USU and NMSU basketball) are better than Southland basketball, but the rest of the WAC is no better than the Southland.

So without football, this is a stupid move by UTA.

If UTA doesn't add football their costs only go up for travel but they will probably draw better for their new basketball arena so thats a win.

At this point I would put my money on Montana and Montana St joining because a divisional split will make it cheaper then it was 6 months ago.

Who the hell is UTA? Seriously? They are about as obscure as Lamar. The WAC is sort of becoming like the old Big West and their contingent of schools with names starting with multiple letters like UC and CSU.

Why would Montana or Montana State join that? Better yet, why would a bigger makret school like Sac State or Portland State aspire to join a dead conference?

LDopaPDX wrote:Who the hell is UTA? Seriously? They are about as obscure as Lamar. The WAC is sort of becoming like the old Big West and their contingent of schools with names starting with multiple letters like UC and CSU.

Why would Montana or Montana State join that? Better yet, why would a bigger makret school like Sac State or Portland State aspire to join a dead conference?

Because the FCS is a money losing affair and the non-AQ FBS isn't.

horrible decision, terrible add. UTA? the WAC is getting worse every day. poor, poor, san jose state. They should bounce to the Big West, and keep their football team in the WAC until they get better.