jlog3000

19 minutes ago, GriffinM6 said:

Should've called it the WAC-SUN.

That would been something at least, Like how the MVFC is, separately from the MVC, but also includes Summit schools for one sport (being football).

Anyone has yet seen this?

https://asunsports.org/sports/fball/2022-23/releases/20230417066y7o

What a way to name a single-sport only conference with "athletic" on it. How would that make sense, knowing that it will only be a football-sponsoring league with no other sports being added for men and/or women alike? It would be logical if it's called the "United Football Conference".

P.S.: Good job WAC & A-Sun. *facepalms*

13 minutes ago, Burmy said:

I think Montana being one of these states is the key reason why the Griz never moved up to FBS in their program's juggernaut days (because no conference was willing to also take Montana State).

Same could possibly be said for both Dakota states with the 4 major public Dakota schools (despite some of them having recent success, with NDSU football as a prime example), or even Idaho, hence the UofI had to downgrade back to the FCS.

But back to Montana, at one point, the schools from that state (as well as Idaho) played with the schools in the Pacific Northwest (mostly who are now in the Pac-12), and competed at one time within the same conference. Times had changed since the 1960s

5 minutes ago, Burmy said:

St. Cloud State dropped football in 2019...I wonder what it would take for them to revive it?

Perhaps Minnesota State would work as the other school to move up? 

Darn, I almost forgot about that in regards with St. Cloud State; which reminded me of Omaha, who unfortunately had to give up the sport they got success in its history in order to move upto D-I from D-II. But at least Minnesota-Duluth from the D-II NSIC would fit the SL footprint if given the chance for an invitation to join, as that conference is leaning a bit Upper Midwest in a geographic footprint standpoint, despite having exclaves (or enclaves, depending on how it's being taken) with Western Illinois, Oral Roberts and Denver.

Minnesota State would also be a solid choice, as they compete in the NSIC as well; plus their hockey team is in the CCHA, also they sponsor football. And speaking of other similar schools that fit similarly, maybe Bemidji State too.

But if that were the case (although it might be unlikely), maybe the Summit could also absorb the CCHA, which has St. Thomas (a current full member of the Summit) as a few other MAC schools like Bowling Green to join with Western Michigan and Miami-Ohio, and the remaining four schools who play in the D-II GLIAC for other sports (which all would make hockey affiliates under the SL banner), that way it might form a super-conference in D-I hockey.

If that would be the plan indeed, then good luck to 'both sides' for 'only that sport', despite the fact that I'm personally not a fan of single sport-only conferences (S.S.O.C.'s) and all for mainstream clout. Hence also the OVC/Big South "partnership".

On a sidenote, there are rumors or sources that the Summit League might absorb the NCHC to sponsor ice hockey as a conference sport, as that S.S.O.C. has 3 schools who are SL full members (Denver, Nebraska-Omaha... I mean Omaha, and North Dakota).

Although that is all and dandy, assuming that it will be expected to happen at some point, but it would make sense if the Summit would add 2 more full members that could benefit football and hockey (those being Minnesota-Duluth and St. Cloud State, as both are in D-II for other sports that could possible to move upto D-I for their entire programs while remaining in D-I for hockey).

If it was only done a bit sooner than later by the time UTA had gotten the invite to re-join back to the WAC, then the conference would had been a bit more than alright to sponsor FCS football due to having over 6 or 7 full members that would sponsor the sport (even after UTRGV would have its program debut its season), although it would too little too late. However, it might work for the "partnership" of the WAC/A-Sun group (or MVFC 2.0).

Only time can tell. Realistically both Central Washington and Western Oregon would remain in D-II. However, they have the chance to move upto D-I, if both schools could get funds to invest on their athletic facilities. As they are the only two schools in the D-II ranks within the Pacific Northwest that sponsor the sport of football (as they play in the GNAC for other sports), while the other peer schools from that same conference have dropped the sport over time.

Well I'll be damned. I mean, I bet no one expected that to happen, and they got an invitation to re-join the American Midwest Conference a few months ago after spending 2 seasons (including this school year) in the Independent ranks (i.e.: Continental or AII) when they re-joined the NAIA from the NCAA D-III ranks.

But in general, that's another school who will either discontinue its athletics program or close entirely altogether in the past few weeks, regardless of college sports level; like how St. Francis (NY) just somehow announced to remove its athletics program, leaving another blow to the D-I NEC.

9 minutes ago, Cujo said:

 

They're getting in regardless of next weekend. 

 

1) The Aztecs consistently good.

 

2) The Pac-12 will be in dire need of a SoCal school.

Unfortunately, there aren't any other SoCal schools within D-I (let alone within the FBS). The other viable option for the Pac-12 to get is Fresno State, although that school is in CenCel (Central California), like close to Stanford and UCal.

So that means St. Francis (NY) pulled a Lincoln Christian (a former NAIA/NCCAA school), meaning that they just dropped/discontinued its entire athletics program, but is keeping the school alive; which would mean that St. Francis would still remain active (hence the campus moving and expansion). Recently Trinity International (an NAIA school) did it similarly too.

42 minutes ago, Seadragon76 said:

 

Yes it is and man, does it hurt for the NEC. To think, less then 24 hours ago, Fairleigh Dickinson was the toast of the college basketball world despite losing to Florida Atlantic.

 

What this does is put the league down to eight members for the foreseeable future... which is not a bad thing, mind you. In Basketball, you get an 8 team league. Football still has their 8 teams (7 full members and Duquesne). 

True, and good point. As long as the minimum amount of schools for a conference to promote and compete is 8 in order to maintain the automatic bids for their sponsored sports, it seems that way.

And if that is official, will the NEC rebound back with new expansion members or wait til their new callups to become full D-I members for that (i.e.: Stonehill, who just joined during this school year), or even in a worse case scenario (which is having upto 8 members and staying that way forever without expanding at all, shades of the MEAC in that route)?

Talk about a shocker that was unexpected. Saint Francis (N.Y.) is a D-I school right? And if so, that would be another blow for the NEC.

1 minute ago, heavybass said:

Mountain West to go after the Bison and the Jackrabbits?

That might be possible. And after that, the next to be in line would be either the USD Coyotes & the UND Fighting Hawks; or the Montana Grizzlies & the Montana St. Bobcats?

5 hours ago, WestCoastBias said:

 

I'm with @jlog3000 here. I was always of the belief that basketball was the sport that determined the conference where the rest of your sports played and that football was able to do it's own thing basically. Unless your basketball conference didn't sponsor one of your sports then all your sports played there. That could be more like a hand shake agreement than an actual rule though idk.

 

Whatever the case, Gonzaga would be added for all sports to the Big 12. The WCC definitely wouldn't let their biggest money maker leave while the rest of Gonzaga's sports stayed with them. From The Athletic: "Indications are that Gonzaga would want any move to be an all-sports deal, not just for basketball."

 

At least someone got my point to an extent. I thank you @WestCoastBias for that.

Plus with the Notre Dame example on one of my prior posts, it was due to the reference of basketball, but in their 2nd stint at the MCC/Horizon (before moving almost all of its sports to the Big East in the 1995-96 school year), almost every sport the program sponsored was part of that except for men's basketball and football. The only thing I wanted to clarify was that football was still independent at that time (like how they are today), hence I didn't include it.

The context in question was about basketball, which is a main priority for revenue and a key factor as a minimum requirement, with football being a close second (unless that school doesn't sponsor that sport). Also at least it's not like the NAIA and lower organizations, where institutions are full members whose sports that are possible for the school to sponsor in an athletic conference have neither football or basketball or both, or even.

Heck, a rare few exceptions exist in the NCAA, with those that have no basketball but have other Olympic sports, for instance: Massachusetts Maritime (also sponsors football); or a women's-only college like Simmons (Mass.) who has no basketball (whose final season was in the 2018-19 season).

18 minutes ago, sportsfan7 said:

This is basically right with a few exceptions. VMI and The Citadel don't sponsor women's basketball (although they do sponsor other women's sports), Morehead State and Presbyterian play football in the non-scholarship Pioneer despite the OVC and Big South (respectively) sponsoring football, and despite the Patriot League sponsoring football Army plays as an FBS independent and Navy in the American. But yes, if a school plays basketball in a conference then it traditionally hosts as many of its teams there as it can.

True, but don't you guys think that it's irrelevant to have a school to compete in basketball (either men's alone or women's alone or both alike) for one conference as an affiliate, while having the rest of the other sports in its primary home conference?

It's like almost with the case of Notre Dame's 2nd stint in the MCC (now the Horizon League) as a full member plus women's basketball, while it's men's basketball team was a D-I Independent (proverbially speaking that being on another conference).

20 minutes ago, McCall said:

Yes. They’re not big enough any other sport to leave the more regional WCC.

Then basically should they selfishly and entitlely get their way, it would mean that Gonzaga will be the first school to be an associate or affiliate member for only that sport. Because in a normal, common sensical world, it's unheard of for an institution to have basketball only on one conference while remaining as a "full non-football member" on its primary home conference for other sports. Bottom line.

And to my understanding, for a member institution to join an athletic conference as its primary home, it must have both men's and women's basketball as its main priority (plus football if that conference also sponsors it), along with a few less revenue Olympic sports for each gender.

4 minutes ago, McCall said:

Gonzaga’s only being looked at for basketball.

But for basketball only? Not counting its other Olympic sports?

25 minutes ago, McCall said:

Here's how I can see it happening, eventually, in the end:

1. Four Corner Schools (Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah) to the Big 12

2. Oregon, Washington, Stanford to the Big Ten

3. Oregon State, Washington State to the Mountain West. OR...

4. They stay in the Pac-12 (with California, who I could see ending up in the Big 12) and add San Diego State, Fresno State, UNLV, Nevada and maybe Boise State (and potentially others to reach 10-12 teams)  to form a new, non-P5 conference of the P5-Pac-12 leftovers and top schools from the Mountain West (which adds North Dakota State and South Dakota State.) If any of these schools become appealing for P5 expansion, they'd eventually end up in the Big 12.

Those are good predictions. And a bit off-topic, although I know it's speculation at this moment, but do you see Gonzaga join the Big XII as an all-sports member (except football)? Also would other Dakota schools (North Dakota and South Dakota) or both Montana schools to follow suit to join alongside North Dakota State and South Dakota State?

This is a bit off-topic from the major college sports conferences; but I heard from some links or sources that there might be serious talk between mid-major powerhouse school Gonzaga and the Big XII. So I was wondering, should the Zaggin' Bulldogs get an official invitation to join that conference, would it be ideal for the Big XII to get another non-football school similar to Gonzaga's caliber (regardless of whether or not their current men's basketball head coach eventually leaving)? Because in my opinion, having an odd number of member schools just seems not the ideal move.

And if Gonzaga does 'move up the ladder', will the WCC plan to find its replacement (and if so, which school(s) would fit there to replace them (including BYU) in any standpoint)? If it's for major city market purposes, would it be Seattle or Denver?

Love those sample custom field concepts. Keep up the good work @pitt6pack Also on a sidenote, do you have that same field template, but with the "natural grass" look and/or the "old school artificial turf" look (which was used during the 70s and 80s that had one shade of green representing it and it was before high definition quality began, etc.?

Any idea on which font is closest? Here's a pic, with the reference. Hint wordmarks: "ARIZONA" "CARDINALS"

5 hours ago, LAWeaver said:

Since the announcement that the Arena Football League is planning a comeback, I had the thought of "what if they didn't fail?"

 

Here is my 28-team, no-rhyme-or-reason Arena Football wish list, including teams that currently play in the IFL and NAL.

 

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Northern Division

Albany Firebirds

Cleveland Gladiators

Columbus Destroyers

Detroit Drive

Massachusetts Pirates (considered relocating to Boston, but we'll keep them in Worcester for now)

New York Dragons (now in Brooklyn)

Philadelphia Soul

 

Southern Division

Carolina Cobras (Charlotte)

Georgia Force (Atlanta)

Jacksonville Sharks

Nashville Kats

New Orleans VooDoo

Orlando Predators

Tampa Bay Storm

 

WESTERN CONFERENCE

Central Division

Chicago Rush

Dallas Desperados

Grand Rapids Rampage

Green Bay Blizzard

Iowa Barnstormers

Quad City/St. Louis Steamwheelers (Feel like the team would've moved to a larger market, i.e. St. Louis, once the Rams skipped town and the league continued to grow)

Tulsa Oilers (Almost went OKC but Tulsa felt like it fit the smaller-market vibe of the AFL a bit better)

 

Pacific Division

Arizona Rattlers

Colorado Crush

Las Vegas NightHawks

Los Angeles Avengers

San Jose SaberCats

Spokane Shock

Utah Blaze

This alignment looks epic. But imagine if the ARENA would add 4 more teams, then they would do like in the NFL (each conference has 4 pods of 4 teams each, but keeps the divisions for some standpoint purposes (meaning each having 2 of 8 teams)). Those teams should be the Pittsburgh Power in the East Conf. North Division; the Washington Valor or the Baltimore Brigade in the East Conf. South Division; the Kansas City Brigade/Command or the Austin Wranglers in the West Conf. Midwest Division; and the Portland Steel in the West Conf. Pacific Division. Therefore, the following divisions would go as follows:

1) Eastern Conference

1.1.) Northern Division

1.1.1.) Northeast Section

* Albany
* Massachusetts
* New York
* Philadelphia

1.1.2.) Mideast Section

* Cleveland
* Columbus
* Detroit
* Pittsburgh

1.2.) Southern Division

1.2.1.) Mid-South Section

* Carolina
* Georgia
* Nashville
* Washington D.C. or Baltimore

1.2.2.) Southeast Section

* Jacksonville
* New Orleans
* Orlando
* Tampa Bay

2.) Western Conference

2.1.) Midwest Division

2.1.1.) Great Lakes Section

* Chicago
* Grand Rapdis
* Green Bay
* Quad Cities

2.1.2.) Plains Section

* Dallas
* Iowa
* Kansas City or Austin
* Tulsa

2.2.) Pacific Division

2.2.1.) Northwest Section

* Colorado
* Portland
* Spokane
* Utah

2.2.2.) Southwest Section

* Arizona
* Las Vegas
* Los Angeles
* San Jose

Your thoughts guys?

38 minutes ago, JQK said:

Super Bowl LVII "Modern Traditional"
Using the field design system and color scheming from the "golden era" of Super Bowl field design

Looks pretty basic but epic. Love it. Imagine if both endzones were black (for a little night mode version), and while keeping the current text colors but have the colors of those endzones as the trim line (i.e.: Chiefs with yellow trim on red, and Eagles with silver trim on green).

54 minutes ago, Wackyriderfan14 said:

Would probably need to do a Rose Bowl style grass border too so that there's contrast between the sideline and endzone

Good point. And speaking of such, like the 2013-14 final BCS title game between Florida State and Auburn (for example)?

3 hours ago, JQK said:

Endzone should be the contrasting team color from the helmet.
Chiefs should be yellow, Eagles should be silver

Agreed. However, if it was me, the Eagles endzone should be black with green text plus silver trim; while the Chiefs should be yellow with red text plus white trim. Although I won't mind if the Eagles silver endzone would have a white trim around its green text.