UT Arlington to join the WAC

Big Blue's House is intended for general sports talk, sharing ideas, announcements, etc.
User avatar
shoichikun808
Posts: 94
Joined: December 10th, 2010, 11:56 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by shoichikun808 » July 10th, 2011, 8:47 pm

according to Justin on BobcatReport(the other Admin that works with Jack who's job was to find out about MSU and Montana future) he has heard from some sources that the Montana's are planning on joining the WAC after this coming football season.

Justin's 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."



http://bobcatreport.com/forum/viewtopic ... &start=120

how would this setup be in your opinion
Image


Image

User avatar
Aglicious
Site Admin
Posts: 5743
Joined: January 14th, 2004, 12:00 am
Location: Vega$
Has thanked: 354 times
Been thanked: 806 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by Aglicious » July 10th, 2011, 9:54 pm

shoichikun808 wrote: how would this setup be in your opinion
Honestly, adding Montana and Montana St. is not much of a long term remedy for the situation the Aggies find themselves in. Montana may prove to be competitive in FB in the short term but over the long haul the limited resources and market that either Montana school brings is not going to make the conference one that I feel USU belongs in all of a sudden. It may keep the WAC alive and keep Benson employed but the only solution for a successful USU future is to get the hell out of this conference ASAP.

Of course the writing is on the wall for the next year or two, but we need to make sure we are positioning ourselves to make the move beyond that point. We also need to make sure we are not quiet about our intentions. You know what makes me the sickest of all? Watching these largely no-name schools be invited to a conference that we fought to be in for over 40 years. Most of them did little to nothing to be invited, they simply find themselves in a fortunate situation where the conference is super desperate and is looking for anything that closely resembles an athletic department, is located in a large metro-area, or plays football west of the Mississippi. :bangwall:



User avatar
DIOaggie
Posts: 27
Joined: November 30th, 2010, 3:50 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by DIOaggie » July 10th, 2011, 10:06 pm

Adding the Montana's greatly stabilizes the WAC. Plus UM has been a top-100 basketball team recently and finished just outside the top-100 last year. Ultimately, I want USU to get in the MWC. But we've got to prove it on the football field the next couple of years. Until then, USU needs to make the best of the WAC.



User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7384
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 322 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by GeoAg » July 10th, 2011, 10:12 pm

Aglicious wrote:
shoichikun808 wrote: how would this setup be in your opinion
Honestly, adding Montana and Montana St. is not much of a long term remedy for the situation the Aggies find themselves in. Montana may prove to be competitive in FB in the short term but over the long haul the limited resources and market that either Montana school brings is not going to make the conference one that I feel USU belongs in all of a sudden. It may keep the WAC alive and keep Benson employed but the only solution for a successful USU future is to get the hell out of this conference ASAP.

Of course the writing is on the wall for the next year or two, but we need to make sure we are positioning ourselves to make the move beyond that point. We also need to make sure we are not quiet about our intentions. You know what makes me the sickest of all? Watching these largely no-name schools be invited to a conference that we fought to be in for over 40 years. Most of them did little to nothing to be invited, they simply find themselves in a fortunate situation where the conference is super desperate and is looking for anything that closely resembles an athletic department, is located in a large metro-area, or plays football west of the Mississippi. :bangwall:
I think a divisional setup with MT and Montana State would be about the best of all possible outcomes for the current situation. I think the goal would still be to get to the MWC of course, as it would be for every football playing team in this new WAC western division. I disagree on being quiet about our intentions. Boise continually ran the WAC down and in so doing discounted their own success. The best way to get to the MWC is build the strength of our conference as a whole and kick all their tails on the field and the court. We have a great opportunity to step up and own this conference in football (as I am sure every other team of the WAC 5 is saying) and if we capitalize, the MWC will come calling within 5 years.

If we don't have the on field success to warrant an invite, at least the conference will have a home for football with a alignment that makes sense with some schools who care about their teams (Montana and Montana State specifically).


"I don't think you become resilient right in the middle of the season when adversity hits. You learn how to face adversity in the offseason in football. That's when we win games around Utah State." -Coach Matt Wells #ArmsAround

dogie
Posts: 3121
Joined: November 4th, 2010, 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 146 times

I am at peace with the situation

Post by dogie » July 10th, 2011, 10:14 pm

shoichikun808 wrote:according to Justin on BobcatReport(the other Admin that works with Jack who's job was to find out about MSU and Montana future) he has heard from some sources that the Montana's are planning on joining the WAC after this coming football season.

Justin's 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."



http://bobcatreport.com/forum/viewtopic ... &start=120

how would this setup be in your opinion
Image
If Montana and Montana State join the WAC, it would be OK. I have long been interested in being in a conference with Montana and Montana State. In fact, for me, the ideal scenario would be for Montana to join USU as the 11th and 12th MWC schools.

If USU dominates the new WAC, I expect that they'll be invited to the MWC within five years. If they don't, then maybe it was foolish to think that USU belonged in the MWC, anyway. I do, however, think that USU will start winning (frequently) beginning this year or next and that the new WAC will give USU the ability to develop a winning tradition while being reasonably stable.

Without Montana and Montana State, I don't feel this way. With them, we have a group of football playing schools that Aggie fans know about and can develop an interest in. SJSU, Idaho, NMSU, Montana, MSU, and even La. Tech. The two Texas football newcomers will be fine as well. USU has a long (but interrrupted) history with both Montana and Montana State.

It would be my strong preference to have not picked up the three non-football schools. Nine football-playing schools would have been fine and, if the WAC could get to that point, they would have the stability to pick up three more - most likely UC-Davis, Lamar and ULL. But, maybe the only way to attract the eighth and ninth football schools was to immediately give them two six-team divisions.



User avatar
treesap32
Moderator
Posts: 15119
Joined: July 28th, 2005, 1:00 am
Location: Washington D.C.
Has thanked: 314 times
Been thanked: 722 times
Contact:

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by treesap32 » July 10th, 2011, 10:31 pm

I will say this: The Montana Schools are superstars compared to what we've been adding.



dogie
Posts: 3121
Joined: November 4th, 2010, 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 146 times

@shoichikun808

Post by dogie » July 10th, 2011, 10:33 pm

shoichikun808 wrote:how would this setup be in your opinion
Image
Can you summarize what was in the image that you linked to BobcatReport? I assume that it was the projected divisional membership of the new WAC. Those of us who aren't registered with BobcatReport can't see the image.



User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7384
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 322 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by GeoAg » July 10th, 2011, 11:18 pm

The image was a map of a potential 9/12 WAC setup

West:
SJSU
Seattle
Idaho
USU
Montana
Montana State

East:
Denver
NMSU
UTA
UTSA
Texas State
La Tech

Big improvement in travel costs. Makes it a survivable conference for football.


"I don't think you become resilient right in the middle of the season when adversity hits. You learn how to face adversity in the offseason in football. That's when we win games around Utah State." -Coach Matt Wells #ArmsAround

MidnightTralnAggie
Posts: 12
Joined: January 11th, 2011, 4:36 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by MidnightTralnAggie » July 10th, 2011, 11:38 pm

GeoAg wrote:The image was a map of a potential 9/12 WAC setup

West:
SJSU
Seattle
Idaho
USU
Montana
Montana State

East:
Denver
NMSU
UTA
UTSA
Texas State
La Tech

Big improvement in travel costs. Makes it a survivable conference for football.


Aggie Fanatics had a similar take earlier today on the new WAC. http://www.usuaggiefanatics.blogspot.com/


I think it's about the best situation the WAC would be able to realistically come up with. The WAC may pull a miracle and survive a near death blow by becoming a solid conference.

I know that UTSA and Montana would be able to compete in football. Seattle would be competitive in basketball. The markets are good. Progress on the field/court in a conference like the WAC could draw new fans in these huge markets.



Steve509
Posts: 996
Joined: November 25th, 2010, 1:41 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by Steve509 » July 11th, 2011, 12:33 am

i agree that the two montana schools are about the best the WAC can hope for. the good news is there isn't a single school in the 'new WAC' that USU shouldn't beat just about every time. the possibility of the Aggies being able to separate themselves from the rest of the WAC is very real and very doable. i see no reason why the Aggies cannot become the best FB team in the west that isn't in the Pac-12 or MW.

it has to start next season.



Imakeitrain
Posts: 7939
Joined: March 11th, 2011, 9:12 pm
Has thanked: 199 times
Been thanked: 475 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by Imakeitrain » July 11th, 2011, 12:53 am

wowwww.... we've really hit rock bottom...next thing you know Benson will invite Hogwarts, or the South Harmon Institute of Technology... or we could invite the Women's teams from the MWC or PAC-12... (and I'm not 100% sure they'd finish last)... yeah... things are really looking up...


“If at first you don’t succeed, do not try skydiving”

User avatar
ratofallaggies
Posts: 3451
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:29 pm
Location: Kaysville, Utah
Has thanked: 105 times
Been thanked: 261 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by ratofallaggies » July 11th, 2011, 5:27 am

What would you suggest that they do??? just lay over and die? I'm pretty sure almost all options have been explored here!



coolag
Posts: 1453
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 10:10 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 155 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by coolag » July 11th, 2011, 9:05 am

Adding the Montana schools is what needs to happen to keep the WAC alive. It is the best scenario that can happen at this time. Get it done Benson!



88USUAggie
Posts: 124
Joined: November 19th, 2010, 7:55 am
Location: Mesa AZ
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by 88USUAggie » July 11th, 2011, 11:57 am

I'll believe the UM/MSU thing when I see it...I have good friends who are UM alums and they have said repeatedly that there is no interest in moving up. They like being a big fish in a small pond...unless it makes financial sense to them, it won't happen. I do know that UM/MSU is a bundled deal...they have to be in the same athletic conference....not sure it's a 'law' but know that the state legislature has some hand in it and will not approve a split of UM/MSU.



DevilsAGvocate
Posts: 45
Joined: January 9th, 2011, 11:47 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by DevilsAGvocate » July 11th, 2011, 2:02 pm

All these division splits are cute and all. But with an 8/12 model, they are not going to be splitting into divisions. The only thing division splits are good for is football. They are not going to split into divisions for basketball.



User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7384
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 322 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by GeoAg » July 11th, 2011, 2:08 pm

DevilsAGvocate wrote:All these division splits are cute and all. But with an 8/12 model, they are not going to be splitting into divisions. The only thing division splits are good for is football. They are not going to split into divisions for basketball.
Not true. Division splits are good for football and a lifesaver for lower revenue sports. For basketball you would have 22 conference games with trips to La Tech, SA, Arlington, San Marcos, Denver and Las Cruces. The same would apply in other sports. With a 12 team setup with 2 divisions, you play each team in your division home and home and the teams in the other division once a year on a rotating basis. This cuts the number of trips back to Texas and Louisiana in half. This really adds up when you talk about teams that don't bring in money like soccer, softball, volleyball, etc., let alone basketball.


"I don't think you become resilient right in the middle of the season when adversity hits. You learn how to face adversity in the offseason in football. That's when we win games around Utah State." -Coach Matt Wells #ArmsAround

alum93
Posts: 30
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 12:51 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by alum93 » July 11th, 2011, 3:33 pm

GeoAg wrote:
DevilsAGvocate wrote:All these division splits are cute and all. But with an 8/12 model, they are not going to be splitting into divisions. The only thing division splits are good for is football. They are not going to split into divisions for basketball.
Not true. Division splits are good for football and a lifesaver for lower revenue sports. For basketball you would have 22 conference games with trips to La Tech, SA, Arlington, San Marcos, Denver and Las Cruces. The same would apply in other sports. With a 12 team setup with 2 divisions, you play each team in your division home and home and the teams in the other division once a year on a rotating basis. This cuts the number of trips back to Texas and Louisiana in half. This really adds up when you talk about teams that don't bring in money like soccer, softball, volleyball, etc., let alone basketball.

Exactly. The splits are to save money across the board in athletics. It is a huge deal for mid-majors struggling to balance athletic budgets in normal economies, much less the brutal last 3 years. I am guessing this has been a major topic of conversation behind closed doors. I think the conference is shaping up nicely for an east/west (north/south?) split with the next round of announcements. I also think it will be in better shape for a loss of a school in the far west or far east should that happen in the next couple years.



Donman
Posts: 2700
Joined: November 4th, 2010, 9:49 am
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 88 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by Donman » July 11th, 2011, 3:37 pm

I can't see east/west splits saving money. I can see north/south splits. We would have a league with Seattle, Denver, San Jose, Idaho (and possibily the future additions).



User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7384
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 322 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by GeoAg » July 11th, 2011, 3:54 pm

Donman wrote:I can't see east/west splits saving money. I can see north/south splits. We would have a league with Seattle, Denver, San Jose, Idaho (and possibily the future additions).
I don't follow you here. The way it looks like the conference is going from a geographic standpoint you come up with pretty much the same division whether you go east/west or north/south. What you call the divisions is just semantics.


"I don't think you become resilient right in the middle of the season when adversity hits. You learn how to face adversity in the offseason in football. That's when we win games around Utah State." -Coach Matt Wells #ArmsAround

dogie
Posts: 3121
Joined: November 4th, 2010, 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: UT Arlington to join the WAC

Post by dogie » July 11th, 2011, 10:33 pm

GeoAg wrote:
DevilsAGvocate wrote:All these division splits are cute and all. But with an 8/12 model, they are not going to be splitting into divisions. The only thing division splits are good for is football. They are not going to split into divisions for basketball.
Not true. Division splits are good for football and a lifesaver for lower revenue sports. For basketball you would have 22 conference games with trips to La Tech, SA, Arlington, San Marcos, Denver and Las Cruces. The same would apply in other sports. With a 12 team setup with 2 divisions, you play each team in your division home and home and the teams in the other division once a year on a rotating basis. This cuts the number of trips back to Texas and Louisiana in half. This really adds up when you talk about teams that don't bring in money like soccer, softball, volleyball, etc., let alone basketball.
Plus, it will be a 9/12 model, with only Seattle, Denver and UT-Arlington not playing football. Nine is a good number for football, as would be 12.

The Big West (just before it gave up the football ghost) was a 6/12 conference, with USU in the east division with Nevada, Boise State, Idaho, NMSU, UNT. The west division was Pacific, Irvine, Fullerton, LBSU, UCSB and Cal-Poly. I think that lasted about three years (1996-1999) and then Nevada left for the WAC. The Big West tried to hang on by bringing in Arkansas State for football (for the second time), but that lasted only about one more year. The Aggies played in the Humanitarian Bowl as part fo this conference.

For a few years leading up to 1996 (and the expansion of the WAC to 16 and Pacific dropping football), the Big West football conference consisted of Pacific, UNLV, Nevada, USU, SJSU, and four associate members - Louisiana Tech., Southwestern Louisiana, Arkansas State and Northern Illinios. That was just about the ugliest conference USU has belonged to. The Las Vegas Bowl came during these years. As Pacific was dropping football and the WAC was taking SJSU and UNLV, there was some talk of adding Montana and Montana State, which of course didn't happen.

By the way, how many remember the order in which the WAC cherry-picked the Big West and then the Sun Belt? It was Louisiana Tech, then Nevada, followed by Boise State, USU/NMSU and Idaho. It's interesting that Louisiana Tech was the first one taken. Of course, the WAC had SMU, Tulsa, Rice and UTEP back then.



Locked Previous topicNext topic