Seadragon76

What's not to say that the Yankees actually have a bad year, or the Red Sox or the Rays? I understand the problem, but I'm not going to blow this idea up because of someone being worried about the power in the East.

Time for my take on some realignment. MLB With the line between the leagues being blurred farther and farther every day, the time has come to take out the old and once timeless names for something that makes sense. Let me introduce to you Seadragon's MLB Realignment... Eastern Conference Northeast Division Boston Red Sox New York Mets New York Yankees Philadelphia Phillies Toronto Blue Jays Atlantic Division Baltimore Orioles Cincinnati Reds Cleveland Indians Pittsburgh Pirates Washington Nationals Southeast Division Atlanta Braves Houston Astros Miami Marlins Tampa Bay Rays Texas Rangers Western Conference Midwest Division Chicago Cubs Chicago White Sox Detroit Tigers Milwaukee Brewers St. Louis Cardinals Mountain Division Arizona Diamondbacks Colorado Rockies Minnesota Twins Kansas City Royals San Diego Padres Pacific Division Anaheim Angels Los Angeles Dodgers Oakland Athletics San Francisco Giants Seattle Mariners Schedule Format: -55 games against divisional foes (5 3-game series [3 at Team A, 2 at Team B], 1 2-game series [at Team B]) -60 games against the two remaining divisions (4 3-game series [2 at Team A, 2 at Team B]) -45 games against the other conference (1 3-game series)

OK, someone explain to me why the WAC, which needs a football school to stay under FBS standards (which states that you need 8 football playing schools to remain in the FBS or else you won't count.. in an odd way), wants Texas-Arlington, who doesn't have football and won't have it for the time being. I have an idea: Stop trying to poach the Southland Conference of it's members and aim for someone else. If you have to, add Cal State Bakersfield and hope that either them, Denver or Seattle wants to start football up (which is basically a no-chance-in-hell plan). Or you can always ask Houston Baptist. They want to play football and they need a new home after the Great West implodes.

Yep. Denver and Seattle are the Non-football members while Texas State-San Marcos and UTSA are joining the WAC with football in tow. And rams80 makes a very good point: The goal of some of these programs that have started football programs as of late, like Lamar, is to reach the FBS level. The WAC would provide a decent home for the football program and it would help satisfy Louisiana Tech from being so far out from everyone else.

I want to say that at least a handful of those schools have already turned the WAC down. I know that Montana and Cal Poly have said no already to the WAC. Sacramento State just doesn't have the resources availible at the moment for a jump to FBS and there's no chance in hell Montana State goes anywhere without Montana. This leaves Sam Houston State and Lamar, both schools having ambitions to move up to FBS level play, as the most likely options for the WAC. But, what does that do to the Southland should these two schools jump ship?

Oh yeah... Nebraska-Omaha plans to join the Summit League, but will drop football and wrestling

The one rumor I like is the OVC adding North Alabama. For those who don't know, North Alabama's current D-II home (Gulf South Conference) has been ripped apart when the six Arkansas schools left to join the three Oklahoma schools from the Lone Star Conference to create a new conference, which is now known as the Great American Conference. This leaves five schools for football at the moment. The GSC is looking for new members, and one of the options is the University of New Orleans. The school has recently decided to change their plans and go to D-II instead of D-III and possibly add football in the near future. UNA has a choice here: Either jump ship and move to D-I or wait it out and hope that the GSC can be revived in the near future.

But, if I remember correctly McCall... Didn't Utah State shoot down the MWC invite because they were loyal to the WAC's cause? I wonder if that still plays a role in this little drama.

I personally think that the WAC will be OK. Idaho isn't going anywhere, especially to the Mountain West with Boise State in there. Let's face it, the Bronco fanbase isn't all that fond of the Vandal fanbase to begin with. So, Idaho stays put. This also means that San Jose State and Utah State also stays put. Louisiana Tech and New Mexico State also stay put as to help the struggling WAC survive in what seems to be hard times for the conference. Oh, and let's not forget about Texas State, UTSA and Denver joining the WAC in 2012. 8 schools with 7 for football may not be the best scenario for the WAC, but this is the only option that works right now. It's possible that the WAC may look into Seattle U. and Cal State Bakersfield as non-football members (In the Hawaii move to the Big West, someone had to be denied entry and that was CSU-Bakersfield) to reach an even 10 schools.

Not. Going. To. Happen. Here's why: 1. Big Sky Stability - The Big Sky just added North Dakota and Southern Utah for 2012, giving it 11 full time members plus Cal Poly and UC-Davis as football only members in 2013 (That's an assumed date, BTW). This makes the Big Sky the largest FCS football conference and a leading force in the western half of the nation at the FCS level. 2. Distance Issues - Say that EWU does join the WAC? You're talking about having all of their teams play in Louisiana, Texas and New Mexico instead of what the Big Sky offers, which is shorter trips to Montana, Idaho, and Oregon (And, yes, there are some longer road trips there, but not to the extent of what the WAC would have). 3. Upgrading - I highly doubt that Eastern Washington would have the money needed to make an upgrade.

Both cases aren't likely. Butler's case is location. Indianapolis, while being in the footprint of the MVC, is pretty much the heart of the Horizon's footprint. I don't think that Butler would leave it's home (and trips to major metro areas in the Midwest like Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, Milwaukee and Chicago) for one that is larger in scope. The Sun Belt is probably happy as hell to get rid of Denver. They were the oddball in the Sun Belt, so seeing Denver join the WAC in 2012 makes the Sun Belt happy. Adding anyone right now is probably not on the radar unless they can find a way to convince UALR to get a football program going (or not. 11 members with 10 playing football is just as good).

While that does make sense, I have to think the big reason for this move is so the MAC can have a small piece of the Boston TV market. With 14 football schools in the MAC, UMass would be great in the Eastern Division along with Buffalo and Temple, both being regional foes, and the Ohio schools. This would mean the Western most Ohio school would be in the Western Division to make it an even two 7 team divisions. If anything, the CAA is starting to look awful shaky here. Hofstra and Northeastern drop their programs, Rhode Island is leaving for the NEC in 2013, Villanova and UMass are looking at FBS upgrades. With the additions of Old Dominion and Georgia State, the CAA is heading from a large 12 team beast of an FCS conference to one that, by 2013, may only have 9 members in the conference and just about half are associate members. Things aren't looking good for the CAA down the road.

What rams said about Hawaii makes a lot of sense. CS-Bakersfield has been waiting for an invite to the Big West ever since they completed the move to Division I athletics. UC San Diego seems like the oddball here. Are they even ready for a possible jump to D-I?

I'm curious about this. How is the Big East Basketball Tourney going to work out, now? Top 3 teams get byes to the semifinals, other 14 teams play 13 round-robin games each to decide the #4 seed in the semis? Bonus points to anyone who can name all 17 Big East teams. I'm convinced at least 5 of those teams are just in the conference for the sake of having a large conference. All 17 teams, you say? UConn Cincinnati DePaul Georgetown Louisville Marquette Notre Dame Pittsburgh Providence Rutgers St. John's (New York) Seton Hall South Florida Syracuse Texas Christian (2012-2013) Villanova West Virginia

As an FYI, you forgot Buffalo in the MAC but otherwise it looks right. Not to mention the additions of Texas State-San Marcos and Texas-San Antonio to the WAC (Provided there is a WAC left after the MWC raids it to oblivion).

Here's my review: Denver: Good move. They stuck out like a sore thumb in the Sun Belt, so it's good that they found a conference more in their geographic footprint. Now if only the Pioneers could bring back football (they're one of the few schools which don't have it right now that could certainly afford it). Texas State: It's because of the name, isn't it? The football program is a perennial FCS contender, but Bobcat Stadium will need some major expansion if they want to make it work. UTSA: Also a good move. San Antonio is a blossoming sports market, plus the Roadrunners are bringing in football and playing in the Alamodome (which has been trying to get a solid tenant for two decades now). Quite a catch here. (the I-35 rivalry with Texas State will certainly be a highlight). They're looking for one more to fill in the puzzle, and from what I hear, Portland State isn't being considered. Here are my potential suggestions: Sacramento State: Solid stadium & fanbase, plus the Hornets would help the WAC regain the Central Valley market they'll lose when Fresno State bolts for the MWC. Idaho State: If for no other reason than to respark the Vandal-Bengal rivalry (Idaho will need an in-state rival once Boise State goes MWC too). North Texas: Now that they'll have San Antonio on lock again, I think they should get their piece of the pie which is the DFW Metroplex. The Mean Green has a sparkling new football stadium, and their basketball team is the class of the Sun Belt. Time to upgrade! At this point, I think that's pretty much it... What I bolded: That is what Texas State is going to do. They have plans to expand their stadium to 30,000 seats by 2012 so they can get a running start in the WAC. As for UTSA, though... It might be a little tricky because the WAC may hold off UTSA's football entry until 2013. As for your choices for the WAC to add... Sacramento State: A good choice since they are a affiliate member of the WAC in baseball. But, the whole state of California is in a massive money pinch so that may be a hinder to those plans. Idaho State: Right... This must of been your 'Out of Left Field' option, right? North Texas: The WAC already has the San Antonio and Austin markets with their addition of UTSA and Texas State. No need to get into the congested Dallas market. Another option I will throw in: Seattle U. The Redhawks were considered by the WAC for expansion and might still be. The overall plan is to have 9 football playing schools and 10 overall. That's where Montana came in. Now that the Grizzlies have said no to the WAC and the FBS, this is the chance that Seattle University has been waiting for because they know that their former home (West Coast Conference) won't be calling anytime soon.

Well, it's official: Denver, Texas State and UTSA all accept WAC invites. All three are set to join in 2012

I would think the Sun Belt would be more then happy to see the WAC take Denver off of their hands. The Pioneers are pretty far off the main footprint of the Sun Belt and the conference has dropped two of the three non-football members (New Orleans left for Division III). With UALR as the only non-football member left, I'd say the Sun Belt is pretty happy right now. As for the WAC: Good for those three, but there is got to be someone that is going to be unhappy and that might be Seattle U. and possibly Montana. There have been a ton of rumors that have Montana joining the WAC (Which would explain why the Big Sky added North Dakota and Southern Utah: As insurance in case Montana left), but the big issue is that should Montana join, would there be enough money to get the team into FBS standards... Oh, and that little thing about playing Montana State every year.

Not gonna happen -- not as long as Hawkins is still at CU. Dude currently has a career record of 1938. I hope that assclown never sees the Pac-12! I don't care who's coaching at Colorado... Hell, it can be Ralphie for all I care for, I just want to see those hicks from Wazzu get an asswhipping.

Nice way to indoctrine Utah to the Pac-12. Oh, and if there are any Colorado fans out there: Go ahead and whip Waz-Spew as badly as possible. There's a reason they are the bottom feeders in the Pac-12.

The choice of the higher seed hosting the conference title game can work (Look at C-USA, who uses this model), but a Big 6 BCS conference using this model strikes me as odd. You're leaving a lot of money on the table if someone else could host the game.

Montana would be a GREAT addition to the WAC, as would a school like North Dakota State to give them a natural travel partner. True, but there's no way Montana goes without Montana State. If the Griz goes, then the Bobcats will follow. As for Denver and Seattle: Both teams are looking for a home (In the case of the Redhawks, they're actually looking for a conference to call home) that is closer. Denver is the oddball western post of the Sun Belt right now. Moving to the WAC would be better for them and the WAC gets back into the Denver market that it would like to have. For Seattle, they just need a home. The WCC (Which they are a former member) have already said no to the Redhawks (Seattle wants to be in the WCC because the members are similar to Seattle itself). Being in the WAC would give the Redhawks some decent regional rivals (Outside of OoC games with Washington, Washington State, Portland, etc) and a place to call home. Also to note: Adding Denver and Seattle gives the WAC 10 teams overall with 8 for football with Texas State and UT-San Antonio. At this point, beggars can't be choosers.

I know the Big East is desperate for attention in Football, but I suggest you guys should just stick with trying to bring Villanova up, OK?

As for those who are possibly fearing the end of the Michigan-Ohio State rivalry... ...You can get off that ledge now. As part of the division alignment announcement comes the 2011-2012 Big Ten Schedule. It works like this: -5 Division Games -1 Protected Rivalry Game (Matchups are as follows: Michigan-Ohio State, Nebraska-Penn State, Minnesota-Wisconsin, Michigan State-Indiana, Iowa-Purdue and Northwestern-Illinois) -2 Crossover Games Also of note: Michigan-Ohio State will be played on the final day of the regular season in both years, like it has been for many years.

Why not at this point? Ohio State-Michigan is already one of the greatest rivalries out there. Why not give it a primetime slot and let the world watch Michigan... stink it up again against Jim Tressel and the Bucks.