Division 1 College Conference Realignment

[Burmy]

Well, it's official:

Denver, Texas State and UTSA all accept WAC invites. All three are set to join in 2012

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...

[Seadragon76]

Well, it's official:

Denver, Texas State and UTSA all accept WAC invites. All three are set to join in 2012

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.

[dfwabel]

Texas State had the plan to move up and expand their North End Zone a decade ago when Jim Wacker was still alive and was a part of their 2006 Master Plan. The project got approval in September for RFPs. Texas State will have their student athletic fee cap out in 2015. Students voted to increase their fees from 2008-2015 to assist with a move to FBS football. Student fees will account for 50% of their budget (that's outrageously high).

As far as Sac State, the California budget issues will continue to hamper their efforts as enrollment will stagnate or even lower. On Wednesday the CSU System voted to increase fees (aka tuition) again. The tuition increase would be implemented in two steps. The first bump would be a 5 percent mid-academic year increase ? or $105 per semester for undergraduate students ? that would take effect Jan. 1 for the winter/spring terms. Tuition would rise to $2,220 from $2,115 for the spring semester for full-time undergraduate students.

The second bump would be a 10 percent annual hike of $444 for undergrads. Undergraduate tuition would rise to $4,884 from $4,440 per year, starting in fall 2011.

In a nutshell, it is 3x more expensive to attend a CSU school than it was in 2000.

[Still MIGHTY]

Texas State had the plan to move up and expand their North End Zone a decade ago when Jim Wacker was still alive and was a part of their 2006 Master Plan. The project got approval in September for RFPs. Texas State will have their student athletic fee cap out in 2015. Students voted to increase their fees from 2008-2015 to assist with a move to FBS football. Student fees will account for 50% of their budget (that's outrageously high).

As far as Sac State, the California budget issues will continue to hamper their efforts as enrollment will stagnate or even lower. On Wednesday the CSU System voted to increase fees (aka tuition) again. The tuition increase would be implemented in two steps. The first bump would be a 5 percent mid-academic year increase ? or $105 per semester for undergraduate students ? that would take effect Jan. 1 for the winter/spring terms. Tuition would rise to $2,220 from $2,115 for the spring semester for full-time undergraduate students.

The second bump would be a 10 percent annual hike of $444 for undergrads. Undergraduate tuition would rise to $4,884 from $4,440 per year, starting in fall 2011.

In a nutshell, it is 3x more expensive to attend a CSU school than it was in 2000.

Exactly the reasons I went to Arizona State. The UCs are even worse. In-State UC tuition is more than Out-of-State ASU tuition. Absolutely ridiculous. Love my home state, but the financial and political situations are just cluster s.

[dfwabel]

Texas State had the plan to move up and expand their North End Zone a decade ago when Jim Wacker was still alive and was a part of their 2006 Master Plan. The project got approval in September for RFPs. Texas State will have their student athletic fee cap out in 2015. Students voted to increase their fees from 2008-2015 to assist with a move to FBS football. Student fees will account for 50% of their budget (that's outrageously high).

As far as Sac State, the California budget issues will continue to hamper their efforts as enrollment will stagnate or even lower. On Wednesday the CSU System voted to increase fees (aka tuition) again. The tuition increase would be implemented in two steps. The first bump would be a 5 percent mid-academic year increase ? or $105 per semester for undergraduate students ? that would take effect Jan. 1 for the winter/spring terms. Tuition would rise to $2,220 from $2,115 for the spring semester for full-time undergraduate students.

The second bump would be a 10 percent annual hike of $444 for undergrads. Undergraduate tuition would rise to $4,884 from $4,440 per year, starting in fall 2011.

In a nutshell, it is 3x more expensive to attend a CSU school than it was in 2000.

Exactly the reasons I went to Arizona State. The UCs are even worse. In-State UC tuition is more than Out-of-State ASU tuition. Absolutely ridiculous. Love my home state, but the financial and political situations are just cluster s.

When I was in grad school a decade ago, a fellow Grad Asst was a girl who went to ASU and flunked out because he partied too much. She then attended an instate school for her.

As for ASU, they are apparently the largest enrollment in the USA by a UCF is 2, ASU is #1. That number has to include part timers.

Regardless, out of state tuition costs are what athletic departments have to absorb, thus making scholarship costs higher.

[Cujo]

Hawaii currently in talks to join the Mountain West Conference.

[dfwabel]

Hawaii currently in talks to join the Mountain West Conference.

The WAC will soon be below the Sun belt. If/when Hawai'i leaves, the school with the largest athletic budget will be SJSU.

Hawai'i would only join the MWC for football, all other sports would be a part of the Big West.

[illwauk]

The fact that so many schools are joining different conferences for football than they are for every other part only confirms a thought I've had for awhile... each sport should have its own governing body instead of just one large umbrella organization like the NCAA. It would help avoid situations like South Florida sending its non-revenue teams all the way to Chicago and Milwaukee just so their football team can have a shot at the BCS title.

[Lights Out]

Hawaii currently in talks to join the Mountain West Conference.

So how long before Karl Benson's next tantrum?

[dfwabel]

The fact that so many schools are joining different conferences for football than they are for every other part only confirms a thought I've had for awhile... each sport should have its own governing body instead of just one large umbrella organization like the NCAA. It would help avoid situations like South Florida sending its non-revenue teams all the way to Chicago and Milwaukee just so their football team can have a shot at the BCS title.

Well there is the rumor that the MWC knows that TCU is going to bolt to the Big East for football only, then send the other teams back to the WAC.

[dfwabel]

Hawaii currently in talks to join the Mountain West Conference.

So how long before Karl Benson's next tantrum?

It already occurred.

The WAC may have an issue in terms of revenue from the NCAA Basketball Tournaments.

If Hawai'i leaves, the conference would just have five continuing members, the NCAA?s term for schools that have been in the same conference for two years (San Jose State, Idaho, Utah State, New Mexico State and Louisiana Tech).

And if the WAC doesn?t have at least six continuing members, it would lose its automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament ? and the multi-million annual payout that goes with it.

With only seven football-playing schools (the five plus Texas State and UTSA), the WAC would also be in danger of losing its status as a FBS member.

[ESTONES6]

I still think the Big Ten should go after Syracuse over Rutgers to take hold of the New York market. Although the football is just slightly better with Rutgers, the addition of Syracuse's basketball program would legitimize the Big Ten as a true, 2 sport conference... the 2 biggest money-making sports in NCAA.

[Cujo]

Hawaii currently in talks to join the Mountain West Conference.

The WAC will soon be below the Sun belt. If/when Hawai'i leaves, the school with the largest athletic budget will be SJSU.

This means New Mexico State football has a realistic shot at winning a whopping four games in a single season now!

[dfwabel]

I still think the Big Ten should go after Syracuse over Rutgers to take hold of the New York market. Although the football is just slightly better with Rutgers, the addition of Syracuse's basketball program would legitimize the Big Ten as a true, 2 sport conference... the 2 biggest money-making sports in NCAA.

There is not a true national conference, but the Big Ten is trying to be that in terms of TV audiences. That is why they may name their divisions as "Stars" and "Stripes" as opposed to regional names or even on former football coaches (Hayes and Schembechler) as those names will draw ire from many, like Penn State.

[rams80]

I still think the Big Ten should go after Syracuse over Rutgers to take hold of the New York market. Although the football is just slightly better with Rutgers, the addition of Syracuse's basketball program would legitimize the Big Ten as a true, 2 sport conference... the 2 biggest money-making sports in NCAA.

There is not a true national conference, but the Big Ten is trying to be that in terms of TV audiences. That is why they may name their divisions as "Stars" and "Stripes" as opposed to regional names or even on former football coaches (Hayes and Schembechler) as those names will draw ire from many, like Penn State.

LOL WUT.

[dfwabel]

WAC talks about the future if Hawaii leaves in 2012

The WAC is in discussions with North Texas about potential membership.

Benson?s hope is that Texas State and UTSA joining the conference ?might make the WAC more attractive to North Texas today than previously.?

The WAC is also interested in providing a home for TCU?s sports if the Horned Frogs join the Big East as a football-only member.

The WAC approached UC Davis a few weeks ago, but the Aggies weren?t interested in making the jump to major college football.

Seattle remains on the radar as a possible non-football member.

(If Hawaii leaves) the WAC leaves with seven football-playing schools starting in 2012, but only five continuing members.

The conference would not lose its membership in the BCS or the ability play in bowl games.

It would, however, lose its classification as a Football Bowl Subdivision conference.

At the same time, it wouldn?t be FCS, either ? it would be ?unclassified? according to Benson.

But ? and here?s where it gets confusing ? while the WAC itself wouldn?t be FBS, the schools in the WAC would be ? meaning they would count as FBS opponents for scheduling purposes.

[rams80]

When North Texas tells you to get bent, your Conference should just shut down.

[ESTONES6]

I still think the Big Ten should go after Syracuse over Rutgers to take hold of the New York market. Although the football is just slightly better with Rutgers, the addition of Syracuse's basketball program would legitimize the Big Ten as a true, 2 sport conference... the 2 biggest money-making sports in NCAA.

There is not a true national conference, but the Big Ten is trying to be that in terms of TV audiences. That is why they may name their divisions as "Stars" and "Stripes" as opposed to regional names or even on former football coaches (Hayes and Schembechler) as those names will draw ire from many, like Penn State.

Anyway... The Big 10 is rather transparent when it comes to determining what teams they are extending invitations to. Nebraska was a perfect fit because they had a extensive fan base, solid market, and competitive football. But when it comes to Maryland, Rutgers, and Georgia Tech... its not hard to see that the Big 10's first priority is money as they are seeking the teams with the Baltimore+Washington DC, New York, and Atlanta markets.

I find it a bit discouraging because I think Missouri, Syracuse, and West Virginia would add decent markets, but also make the footprint bigger, provide better football competition, as well as provide a lot better basketball competition. The Big 10 would be a legitimate 2 sport conference.

[rams80]

I still think the Big Ten should go after Syracuse over Rutgers to take hold of the New York market. Although the football is just slightly better with Rutgers, the addition of Syracuse's basketball program would legitimize the Big Ten as a true, 2 sport conference... the 2 biggest money-making sports in NCAA.

There is not a true national conference, but the Big Ten is trying to be that in terms of TV audiences. That is why they may name their divisions as "Stars" and "Stripes" as opposed to regional names or even on former football coaches (Hayes and Schembechler) as those names will draw ire from many, like Penn State.

Anyway... The Big 10 is rather transparent when it comes to determining what teams they are extending invitations to. Nebraska was a perfect fit because they had a extensive fan base, solid market, and competitive football. But when it comes to Maryland, Rutgers, and Georgia Tech... its not hard to see that the Big 10's first priority is money as they are seeking the teams with the Baltimore+Washington DC, New York, and Atlanta markets.

I find it a bit discouraging because I think Missouri, Syracuse, and West Virginia would add decent markets, but also make the footprint bigger, provide better football competition, as well as provide a lot better basketball competition. The Big 10 would be a legitimate 2 sport conference.

I'm pretty sure the Big Ten is quite the legitimate basketball and football power already.

[pcgd]

Yeah I don't know how's not a legit football and basketball conference. They aren't the best in the country every year by any means but they are always in the discussion of best conference in each sport or at least one of the top ones for sure...