Division 1 College Conference Realignment

[illwauk]

And now the Idaho Vandals are reported to be talking to the Mountain West:

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/sportslink/2011/jan/20/vandals-pursuing-mwc-membership/

Also mentions San Jose State and Utah State...I think this image is safe to post now (since every suggestion I made for the WAC to pick up, you've quickly refuted):

I'm pretty sure the WAC will find a way to stay alive as a non-football conference like the Big West has. It's sad to see a conference with such history go out the way it has, but I can't feel bad for 'em. They did themselves in with the over-expansion that caused the creation of the Mountain West in the first place.

[McCall]

And now the Idaho Vandals are reported to be talking to the Mountain West:

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/sportslink/2011/jan/20/vandals-pursuing-mwc-membership/

Also mentions San Jose State and Utah State...I think this image is safe to post now (since every suggestion I made for the WAC to pick up, you've quickly refuted):

I'm pretty sure the WAC will find a way to stay alive as a non-football conference like the Big West has. It's sad to see a conference with such history go out the way it has, but I can't feel bad for 'em. They did themselves in with the over-expansion that caused the creation of the Mountain West in the first place.

In all the conference realignments I've been working on, I always end up with the entire WAC into the Mountain West. The 2 conferences should just merge back together and form a 14-team league. Let Louisiana Tech head to Conference USA and bam. I know Denver is supposed to be headed to teh WAC in everything but football, but Hawaii is only goint to the MWC in football, so it balances out.

How it would look:

San Jose State

Fresno State

San Diego State

Nevada

UNLV

Boise State

Idaho

Wyoming

Utah State

Air Force

Colorado State

New Mexico

New Mexico State

Hawaii (Football only)

Denver (Non-Football)

[rams80]

The problem with the "MWC eats the WAC" scenario is that I don't think the MWC wants to revisit the old 16 team WAC days. Or anything that lands within the ballpark of that. Too many hard feelings, too many stepped on toes, too unwieldy overall.

EDIT-Also the number of "yes votes" you need to get in could be an issue. If their expansion procedure has a liberum veto, Boise State's going to move to scuttle any expansion to Moscow in a heartbeat.

[dfwabel]

And now the Idaho Vandals are reported to be talking to the Mountain West:

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/sportslink/2011/jan/20/vandals-pursuing-mwc-membership/

Also mentions San Jose State and Utah State...I think this image is safe to post now (since every suggestion I made for the WAC to pick up, you've quickly refuted):

How long before we see the Big Sky make the "conference jump" to FBS?

I could see SJSU for the major market anchor and they have the largest athletic budget left in the WAC and for a population base for recruiting, but Idaho? I wonder if a member of the Idaho legislature got their hands into this.

To go FBS, the Big Sky would have to (at minimum):

*-add 20 scholarships per school. That's about $1 million, depending on tuition/fees.

*-bump up the salaries for coaches to baseline for the FBS level and recruiting budget(another $500K-1 million)

*-some schools would have to add seating to get to the 15,000 minimum.

[McCall]

The problem with the "MWC eats the WAC" scenario is that I don't think the MWC wants to revisit the old 16 team WAC days. Or anything that lands within the ballpark of that. Too many hard feelings, too many stepped on toes, too unwieldy overall.

EDIT-Also the number of "yes votes" you need to get in could be an issue. If their expansion procedure has a liberum veto, Boise State's going to move to scuttle any expansion to Moscow in a heartbeat.

The thing is, if Idaho, San Jose State and Utah State all do indeed jump to the MWC, that would only leave Louisiana Tech and New Mexico State in the WAC. If you assume Idaho does not go, which they would be the 13th MWC member, then that still only leaves 3 schools, with La Tech having a penalty-free opt out at anytime if they want to join Conference USA, which right now is at 12 members. But who knows if Memphis and maybe even Houston jump to the Big 12 or even the possibility of the Big East. Either the remaining schools will have to go independent in football or try to get in the MWC cuz the only other conference in the west is the Pac and they're obviously not getting in there. In football, at least, I could see the WAC and MWC merging, while maintaining seperate conferences in non-football sports.

[Burmy]

With all this expansion, pretty soon the Mountain West will be big enough to have a championship game.

That said: which sites in the area would make good ones for that game? (Personally, my money's on the Alamodome if the MWC/WAC football merger does indeed take place)

[Seadragon76]

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.

[dfwabel]

With all this expansion, pretty soon the Mountain West will be big enough to have a championship game.

That said: which sites in the area would make good ones for that game? (Personally, my money's on the Alamodome if the MWC/WAC football merger does indeed take place)

It would be in Las Vegas if the game date does not coincide with the NFR (National Finals Rodeo) which is generally the first week in December. Jerry Jones wants the event, so who knows if they are going to stay at the Thomas and Mack Center after 2014.

The Alamodome as a site just illustrated how spread out the conference is. They could not sell 60% of Invesco Field or Qualcomm.

EDIT: Last week, the NCAA changed a by-law regarding membership

Proposal 2010-100 was adopted Thursday by the NCAA’s Legislative Council, which will allow the WAC to remain an FBS/Division I league as it is currently composed. Provided, of course, it doesn’t continue to hemorrhage members, which likely will remain a concern for the foreseeable future.

(But for now) the league can at least breath a little bit easier after the continuity clause that required conferences to maintain a core membership of six schools for at least five years was abolished. In its place, conferences must have “seven active Division I members” – all of which sponsor men’s basketball, and six that sponsor at least five other sports, including football.

[Red Wolf]

I can't see the Mountain West bothering with Idaho, regardless of whether Boise wants them or not. Why would they want them? They don't bring a history of success or a major market or anything. They have a dome, but it's tiny as can be.

I also don't see why they'd ever want New Mexico State or San Jose State or even Utah State.

I also don't see Louisiana Tech getting into C-USA. Every team except for Marshall added by C-USA in the last realignment was from a pretty major market (UTEP, Rice, SMU, Tulsa, UCF). Ruston, Louisiana is not a major market. And there also isn't the excuse of on-field success for La Tech. So unless C-USA teams start moving around (realignment's about football, so I don't see Memphis going anywhere) La Tech has nowhere to go other than maybe the Sun Belt, and even if there is movement by C-USA, I don't think they necessarily want to pick up La Tech.

[McCall]

I can't see the Mountain West bothering with Idaho, regardless of whether Boise wants them or not. Why would they want them? They don't bring a history of success or a major market or anything. They have a dome, but it's tiny as can be.

I also don't see why they'd ever want New Mexico State or San Jose State or even Utah State.

I also don't see Louisiana Tech getting into C-USA. Every team except for Marshall added by C-USA in the last realignment was from a pretty major market (UTEP, Rice, SMU, Tulsa, UCF). Ruston, Louisiana is not a major market. And there also isn't the excuse of on-field success for La Tech. So unless C-USA teams start moving around (realignment's about football, so I don't see Memphis going anywhere) La Tech has nowhere to go other than maybe the Sun Belt, and even if there is movement by C-USA, I don't think they necessarily want to pick up La Tech.

Yeah, but if they end up losing some teams, with Memphis and maybe Houston being the most likely, then they'd probably look at adding to maintain 12 teams. Louisiana Tech may not be a major market, but there's really not much else.

And Seadragon, just because Idaho doesn't go to the MWC wouldn't mean San Jose State or Utah State wouldn't either. The MWC offered a spot to Utah State before, but that's befor BYU left. Now they're saying there's a possibility Utah State would except an invitation. It's definately a bump up. And if they bring in SJSU as well, that would give them the magic 12 number for a championship game. I think Idaho and New Mexico State only get in in the case that the WAC dissolves (as a football conference at least) and they don't want to go Independent. Then the MWC may take them simply as a pity, I don't know. But the WAC is definately in trouble as far as football goes. If they bring in those Texas schools from FCS, then that would probably just make it more likely SJSU and Utah State, more FBS schools, would want to get into a better conference. So I see either the WAC football conf dying out/unofficially merging into MWC or becoming one of the lower FBS conferences with the MAC and Sun Belt.

[Seadragon76]

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.

[McCall]

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.

No, I believe it had something to do with BYU being in the MWC or something. But that was before BYU left to go Independent.

[dfwabel]

I can't see the Mountain West bothering with Idaho, regardless of whether Boise wants them or not. Why would they want them? They don't bring a history of success or a major market or anything. They have a dome, but it's tiny as can be.

I also don't see why they'd ever want New Mexico State or San Jose State or even Utah State.

I also don't see Louisiana Tech getting into C-USA. Every team except for Marshall added by C-USA in the last realignment was from a pretty major market (UTEP, Rice, SMU, Tulsa, UCF). Ruston, Louisiana is not a major market. And there also isn't the excuse of on-field success for La Tech. So unless C-USA teams start moving around (realignment's about football, so I don't see Memphis going anywhere) La Tech has nowhere to go other than maybe the Sun Belt, and even if there is movement by C-USA, I don't think they necessarily want to pick up La Tech.

Yeah, but if they end up losing some teams, with Memphis and maybe Houston being the most likely, then they'd probably look at adding to maintain 12 teams. Louisiana Tech may not be a major market, but there's really not much else.

And Seadragon, just because Idaho doesn't go to the MWC wouldn't mean San Jose State or Utah State wouldn't either. The MWC offered a spot to Utah State before, but that's befor BYU left. Now they're saying there's a possibility Utah State would except an invitation. It's definately a bump up. And if they bring in SJSU as well, that would give them the magic 12 number for a championship game. I think Idaho and New Mexico State only get in in the case that the WAC dissolves (as a football conference at least) and they don't want to go Independent. Then the MWC may take them simply as a pity, I don't know. But the WAC is definately in trouble as far as football goes. If they bring in those Texas schools from FCS, then that would probably just make it more likely SJSU and Utah State, more FBS schools, would want to get into a better conference. So I see either the WAC football conf dying out/unofficially merging into MWC or becoming one of the lower FBS conferences with the MAC and Sun Belt.

SJ Mercury News writer John Wilner wrote about the intentions of the WAC this past Wednesday in addressing the SJSU to the MWC rumor.

The WAC is looking seriously at a membership structure of nine schools for football and 12 for all other sports, which would allow it to split into two divisions.

Montana, Montana State, Cal Davis, Cal Poly, Seattle, Lamar, North Texas and Sam Houston State have been named in media reports as possible expansion targets.

I can say with near-certainty that Poly and Davis aren?t happening ? both schools are headed to the Big Sky.

Those targeted FCS schools would have the same football-related expense issues for football, but travel could be reduced if they had 12 teams for other sports.

[ESTONES6]

Shoot, if it was all about the almighty cable dollar and locking down markets, Missouri IS a better get than Nebraska. But they didn't go for any of that, and to me that indicates one thing-the visions of Big Ten Manifest Destiny are confined solely to the fevered dreams of a few Midwestern bloggers. Now if the Big East or Big XII were to fly apart, then yes, opportunistic acquisitions of programs may follow. But until that point, the Big Ten is sticking with 12.

I heartily disagree. If your point is that Missouri generates more money than Nebraska, then you have not seen this article from Forbes that outlines the Most (Financially) Valuable Teams in the NCAA. Nebraska is #4, while Mizzou doesn't even make the list.

The report looks at the four following criteria, ranked in order of importance:

1. Money generated by football that goes to academic purposes.

2. Athletic Department profit.

3. Conference dividends (which includes television money).

4. Spending by local communities (buying team merchandise, etc).

According to the report, Nebraska's program is responsible for generating $93 million annually. Currently, Nebraska's population is 1.8 million, which further points to the fact that Nebraska has a national audience. If only the 1.8 million people within the state were solely responsible for $93 million in revenue, every single man, woman, and child would have to spend $50 on Cornhusker-related purchases. While $50/head doesn't seem like a large number, especially on an annual basis, consider that if this logic were applied to the State of Missouri, the Tigers would be making over $300 million per year, or nearly 3 times what Texas (#1 in this report) makes.

Jim Delaney wasn't just looking at states with a high population count, he was looking for national brands that will appeal to a wide audience. And before I get villified as a Husker Homer, I'm from Missouri. My family all lives there. And it's more of a pro-state anyway. Royals and Cardinals. Rams and Chiefs. And even on the college level, people are split between the Tigers and Jayhawks.

Those reasons, amongst others, are why Missouri didn't get the nod.

Now, that being said, from a purely selfish reason I would love to see Mizzou in the next wave of BigTen expansion. I've always enjoy playing them on the field.

And you completely missed the point. The premise of ESTONE's argument is that Big Ten expansion is predicated on increasing revenues through subscription fees to the BTN, not other revenue sources. Missouri brings Kansas City and St. Louis to the table. Nebraska brings Omaha. You can do the math.

For the most part... it is. Nebraska was just a perfect storm... legendary program with a huge following. How else could explain them seeking Georgia Tech, Maryland, and Rutgers? I mean, don't be so naive. The Big 10 is and has been using the Big 10 Network as leverage throughout the entire process.

Not only that, The Big 10 receives something like 70% of the revenue generated From the B10 Network from states that contain a school in the conference. On the other hand, states that do NOT have a college in the conference, the Big 10 only receives about 30% of the profit.

[rams80]

Shoot, if it was all about the almighty cable dollar and locking down markets, Missouri IS a better get than Nebraska. But they didn't go for any of that, and to me that indicates one thing-the visions of Big Ten Manifest Destiny are confined solely to the fevered dreams of a few Midwestern bloggers. Now if the Big East or Big XII were to fly apart, then yes, opportunistic acquisitions of programs may follow. But until that point, the Big Ten is sticking with 12.

I heartily disagree. If your point is that Missouri generates more money than Nebraska, then you have not seen this article from Forbes that outlines the Most (Financially) Valuable Teams in the NCAA. Nebraska is #4, while Mizzou doesn't even make the list.

The report looks at the four following criteria, ranked in order of importance:

1. Money generated by football that goes to academic purposes.

2. Athletic Department profit.

3. Conference dividends (which includes television money).

4. Spending by local communities (buying team merchandise, etc).

According to the report, Nebraska's program is responsible for generating $93 million annually. Currently, Nebraska's population is 1.8 million, which further points to the fact that Nebraska has a national audience. If only the 1.8 million people within the state were solely responsible for $93 million in revenue, every single man, woman, and child would have to spend $50 on Cornhusker-related purchases. While $50/head doesn't seem like a large number, especially on an annual basis, consider that if this logic were applied to the State of Missouri, the Tigers would be making over $300 million per year, or nearly 3 times what Texas (#1 in this report) makes.

Jim Delaney wasn't just looking at states with a high population count, he was looking for national brands that will appeal to a wide audience. And before I get villified as a Husker Homer, I'm from Missouri. My family all lives there. And it's more of a pro-state anyway. Royals and Cardinals. Rams and Chiefs. And even on the college level, people are split between the Tigers and Jayhawks.

Those reasons, amongst others, are why Missouri didn't get the nod.

Now, that being said, from a purely selfish reason I would love to see Mizzou in the next wave of BigTen expansion. I've always enjoy playing them on the field.

And you completely missed the point. The premise of ESTONE's argument is that Big Ten expansion is predicated on increasing revenues through subscription fees to the BTN, not other revenue sources. Missouri brings Kansas City and St. Louis to the table. Nebraska brings Omaha. You can do the math.

For the most part... it is. Nebraska was just a perfect storm... legendary program with a huge following. How else could explain them seeking Georgia Tech, Maryland, and Rutgers? I mean, don't be so naive. The Big 10 is and has been using the Big 10 Network as leverage throughout the entire process.

Not only that, The Big 10 receives something like 70% of the revenue generated From the B10 Network from states that contain a school in the conference. On the other hand, states that do NOT have a college in the conference, the Big 10 only receives about 30% of the profit.

Can you cite for me professional journal articles (not the comments section of Frank the Tank's blog) where Georgia Tech was stated to be a legitimate option. (Maryland too for that matter.)

[ESTONES6]

Delany was quoted as saying "think outside the box... Maryland, Georgia Tech, Texas, Vanderbilt." Those are the outside the box options, obviously. Additionally, Georgia Tech has been invited to join the AAU... which is officially an unofficial rule to join the Big 10.

Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez:

"I'm not sure about continued expansion, but it would not surprise me. Our commissioner (Jim Delany) thinks outside the box and is always thinking how to be progressive and proactive. We will continue to study expansion throughout this year. It would not surprise me if we continue to expand. We've always talked about and had research done that we haven't taken full advantage of Penn State being in the east and we need someone else in the league from the east to maximize Penn State. It wouldn't surprise me if we went that way."

[rams80]

Delany was quoted as saying "think outside the box... Maryland, Georgia Tech, Texas, Vanderbilt." Those are the outside the box options, obviously. Additionally, Georgia Tech has been invited to join the AAU... which is officially an unofficial rule to join the Big 10.

Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez:

"I'm not sure about continued expansion, but it would not surprise me. Our commissioner (Jim Delany) thinks outside the box and is always thinking how to be progressive and proactive. We will continue to study expansion throughout this year. It would not surprise me if we continue to expand. We've always talked about and had research done that we haven't taken full advantage of Penn State being in the east and we need someone else in the league from the east to maximize Penn State. It wouldn't surprise me if we went that way."

Can you provide a link to and context for that quote?

EDIT I found these articles. Both represent 2nd or 3rd party speculation about possible expansion targets based on rumor and hearsay.

/FWIW the thought of prising Nebraska from the Big XII and its literally ancient rivalries would probably fall under "outside the box".

[dfwabel]

The original story and that quote came from the July 28 Detroit Free Press. To get that archived story in full, you have to pay for it.

[dfwabel]

MWC will not add more teams. It will remain at ten teams for the 2012 season, when TCU leaves and Fresno St. and Nevada are added.

From the story:

The Mountain West Conference has decided against expansion. The league has opted to not add San Jose State and Utah State, and Hawaii will not be added as a full member.

The decision was announced at the conclusion of the MWC?s annual January meetings.

?The Board feels strongly the membership configuration already established going forward creates outstanding prospects for future success,? the conference wrote in a released statement. ?In addition, we are continuing with our strategic initiatives related to our television partnerships and the MWC?s efforts to effect change in the BCS structure. The Board is excited about what is undoubtedly a bright future for the Conference.?

[Red Wolf]

Rumor I heard recently.

Big East adds:

-Houston

-UCF

-Villanova

C-USA adds:

-Louisiana Tech

-Temple

Just a rumor for now, but there it is.