Wac Expansion

pollock · November 11, 2010

Denver needed a new home. Good luck to Texas State. After UTSA has a season of actual Division 1 football played, then I might care.

Made a little edit, now I agree.

EagleGreen · November 11, 2010

Hey, what in the world has happened to our Texans' down in Stephenville this year?

Rick

New coach blows I suppose.

EagleGreen · November 11, 2010

Tarleton's new coach blows.

Cary Fowler was a "really good defensive coordinator", a "nice guy", that "deserved his shot at the top". He really "rallied the troops" and subsequently got the head coaching job. Kinda like folks around here want Canales. But, Fowler certainly didn't get the job done this year, taking last years 10-3 team to a 3-10 season. We gotta be careful what we ask for.

EagleGreen

--

Tarleton Texan

Texas A&M Aggie

UNT Mean Green Eagle

UNTDude · November 11, 2010

More reason for UNT to get it's act together. I mean, the WAC isn't much better than the SBC, but I'd hate to be left behind by any of these colleges.

To your point, from the ESPN blog.... http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/32442/wac-adds-ut-san-antonio-texas-state

"It appears as if it is going to be a long road back for the WAC now that it is losing Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada, its three best teams. The WAC has already gotten roundly criticized for the perception that it is a weak league with Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada in it. Now that it is adding two football members that are not even on the FBS level right now, the WAC may move behind the Sun Belt in terms of conference perception. "

Ouch...

Chrisattsu · November 12, 2010

Cary Fowler was a "really good defensive coordinator", a "nice guy", that "deserved his shot at the top". He really "rallied the troops" and subsequently got the head coaching job. Kinda like folks around here want Canales. But, Fowler certainly didn't get the job done this year, taking last years 10-3 team to a 3-10 season. We gotta be careful what we ask for.

EagleGreen
--
Tarleton Texan
Texas A&M Aggie
UNT Mean Green Eagle

EagleGreen / Rick -

The 10-3 to 3-7 (we will win Saturday) is because of a coaching change and injury. Coach Mac followed Tuberville to the Southplains. Rather than doing a real search, we promoted Cary Fowler (DC) to the HC position.

On paper, Fowler looked like the good hire. He had nearly a decade as a DC in the Lone Star Conference, the players rallied around him last season, and he seemed to be a solid recruiter. So what happened? We lost our starting QB to personal reasons (this was to be his senior season), replaced him with a D1 transfer who was injured during the first game of the season, and had a piece-milled OL line that never found their groove. As a result, the offense suffered. The Defense sustained quite a few injuries and Fowler brought in a new DC>. On top of that, it is Fowler's first experience as a HC.

I have been following the Tarleton Texans for a decade now, and this is the first losing season that I have seen. Basketball cannot get here fast enough.

People want

Chrisattsu · November 12, 2010

Ask WKU.

No doubt, it is going to be a tough road for the Bobcats. WKU has taken their lumps in stride, but at least they have afforded the Mean Green with some wins along the way (maybe you guys should schedule us).

Texas State will play as an FCS independent next season, and join the WAC in 2012. Hopefully we will be able to sell recruits on this, and make it competitive. As I said on the Sunbelt Board, joining the WAC is about improving all of our sports not just football. The WAC, even in its depleted state, has better national recognition than the Southland. It has a better overall RPI in every sport, which will allow for at large bids if we lose out on the autobid.

Initially, I am looking at the Diamond Sports, Women's soccer, and maybe Volleyball to be successful from the start. Football will have a ways to go, and our basketball team will not be in the running given what NMSU, Denver, and USU bring to the table.

Chrisattsu · November 12, 2010

My only question is why havent Tx St and UTSA looked into joining the Sun Belt? Travel cost alone would make it a better affiliation. It is not like the WAC is a superconference with mega-media locations.

Texas State has been looking at moving up since 2000. We backed off in the early part of the decade and then committed ourself to the moving up in 2007. Since that time we have pushed to make ourselves the best possible candidate when the Moritorium was lifted. From the onset, I have advocated that we would join the Sun Belt or the WAC. Our facilities (and the renderings for new facilities) are on par with ones within SBC. They are like-minded institutions (accredited by SACS). Several of them were initially founded as Normal Schools and have since gone on to develop a broader scope.

We were in both conference's footprint, and it just came down to who would want us. I have no doubts that our administration contacted SBC on our intentions, and we made it no secret that we were looking to move up. As you mentioned, its makes sense geographically, rivalries could easily be formed with you, ULL, and ASU. However, Waters stressed this summer during realignment that the SBC was good with their current lineup and did not want UTSA or TXST. In the meantime, the WAC needed members and so we head west.

TennesseeBoyintheRockies · November 12, 2010

To your point, from the ESPN blog.... http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/32442/wac-adds-ut-san-antonio-texas-state

"It appears as if it is going to be a long road back for the WAC now that it is losing Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada, its three best teams. The WAC has already gotten roundly criticized for the perception that it is a weak league with Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada in it. Now that it is adding two football members that are not even on the FBS level right now, the WAC may move behind the Sun Belt in terms of conference perception. "

Ouch...

The WAC is in more trouble than Karl Benson wants people to believe. If you saw the announcement by Montana to remain in the Big Sky, the reasons Montana president, Royce Engstrom, gave for not joining the WAC eludes to the fact that Montana saw the WAC to be incredibly unattractive (like an ugly girlfriend) and gave reasons for not getting into the relationship without hurting the WAC's feelings.

Engstrom said there were three reasons Montana stayed in the Big Sky:

1. It wanted to retain it's rivalry with Montana State every year. The WAC was willing to bend over backwards to assure Montana had that right. This is not a good reason not to join the WAC.

2. It wanted to compete against schools with similar academic missions. Montana's academic standards are no better or worse than many other WAC schools. Montana is a public school like many other WAC members. The academic missions are virtually the same. This is not a good reason not to join the WAC.

3. It wanted to retain the integrity and prestige the program had demonstrated. Montana would've dominated the WAC from Day 1, and everyone knows it. No one would've doubted Montana's integrity or prestige as a good athletics program especially in football. The only issue that could be seen is that people might question Montana's integrity for joining a conference that is far worse in perception than any other conference in the Football Bowl Subdivision. This would support the belief that beginning in 2012, the WAC truly will be THE worst conference in Division 1 FBS. It would also support the belief that the future of the WAC is the most uncertain of any conference in Division 1 FBS.

Boise, Fresno, and Nevada leaving the WAC was the first clue that the WAC was reaching a monumental low. BYU's consequential decision to not join the WAC after this took place was the second clue. The third clue was when the WAC decided to add Texas State and UTSA for football. This showed that beggar's can't be choosers and the desperation of the WAC became apparent. The fourth clue came literally within hours after the announcement of UTSA and Texas State's acceptance to the WAC when the New Mexico Bowl announced that they were dropping the WAC as an affiliate in order to pick up the 7th-place PAC-12 team to face a Mountain West affiliate. The fifth clue came today when Montana rejected the WAC invitation to remain in the Big Sky under the reasons cited by Montana.

This is not the end. Within the next year or so, Hawaii is going to announce their decision to leave the WAC. Hawaii was already seriously contemplating leaving the WAC. With the loss of Boise, Fresno, and Nevada, Hawaii's already previous senior membership looks even more daunting when the next in line is San Jose State followed by Louisiana Tech. These recent developments are only going to hasten their decision to get out. The WAC as we know it is no longer the conference Hawaii joined in 1979--not even close. Also, as we all may have presumed, once Hawaii leaves, the WAC also will lose the Hawaii Bowl.

I have to hand your AD credit, friends of North Texas. He may not have seen this level of destruction coming when UNT turned down the WAC a few years back when Utah State and New Mexico State joined, but he has to be feeling a degree of confidence seeing that UNT could be in the middle of this mess today rather than enjoying stability and better perception in the Sun Belt.

Edited November 12, 2010 by TennesseeBoyintheRockies

stebo · November 12, 2010

No doubt, it is going to be a tough road for the Bobcats. WKU has taken their lumps in stride, but at least they have afforded the Mean Green with some wins along the way (maybe you guys should schedule us).

Texas State will play as an FCS independent next season, and join the WAC in 2012. Hopefully we will be able to sell recruits on this, and make it competitive. As I said on the Sunbelt Board, joining the WAC is about improving all of our sports not just football. The WAC, even in its depleted state, has better national recognition than the Southland. It has a better overall RPI in every sport, which will allow for at large bids if we lose out on the autobid.

Initially, I am looking at the Diamond Sports, Women's soccer, and maybe Volleyball to be successful from the start. Football will have a ways to go, and our basketball team will not be in the running given what NMSU, Denver, and USU bring to the table.

Chris, how is that possible? The transition period is 2 years. You have to play a minimum of 5 Div I FBS teams at home during both of those transition years. After those 2 transition years, you would be able to petition the NCAA for inclusion as an FBS team. So the earliest that I could see Texas State or UTSA being a member (football playing, bowl eligble) member of the WACK would be 2013 or 2014. You can get around a lot of the rules now - basically if you want to be FBS and are willing to spend the money to fund it - you will be FBS, but there is still a protocol for moving up. You have to declare, you have to have 5 Div I FBS home games each year for two years, and you have to meet the 15K attendance requirement. A lot can be faked (i.e. the attendance requirement) but you can't add extra years. You will also need a total of 10 Div I FBS teams (5 each year) that will come TO San Marcos to play. The WAC will have limited membership in 2011 with 8 teams total... (your first transition year) and VERY limited membership in 2012 - 6 teams - your second transition year. It is really too late to schedule OOC teams for those games, most schools have filled up their schedules. I just don't see how you are going to hit the requirements. UTSA has already scheduled some teams but I would be a little bit leary about some of those big time schools honoring their return trips.

I think that the WAC leftovers can make it happen - but you are going to need just about every member to travel to both San Marcos and San Antonio over the span of 2012 and 2013. That would make you eligble to apply for FBS membership in 2014.

Chrisattsu · November 12, 2010

Chris, how is that possible? The transition period is 2 years. You have to play a minimum of 5 Div I FBS teams at home during both of those transition years. After those 2 transition years, you would be able to petition the NCAA for inclusion as an FBS team. So the earliest that I could see Texas State or UTSA being a member (football playing, bowl eligble) member of the WACK would be 2013 or 2014. You can get around a lot of the rules now - basically if you want to be FBS and are willing to spend the money to fund it - you will be FBS, but there is still a protocol for moving up. You have to declare, you have to have 5 Div I FBS home games each year for two years, and you have to meet the 15K attendance requirement. A lot can be faked (i.e. the attendance requirement) but you can't add extra years. You will also need a total of 10 Div I FBS teams (5 each year) that will come TO San Marcos to play. The WAC will have limited membership in 2011 with 8 teams total... (your first transition year) and VERY limited membership in 2012 - 6 teams - your second transition year. It is really too late to schedule OOC teams for those games, most schools have filled up their schedules. I just don't see how you are going to hit the requirements. UTSA has already scheduled some teams but I would be a little bit leary about some of those big time schools honoring their return trips.

I think that the WAC leftovers can make it happen - but you are going to need just about every member to travel to both San Marcos and San Antonio over the span of 2012 and 2013. That would make you eligble to apply for FBS membership in 2014.

Stebo,

I am just going off of what I heard at the press conference today. Benson and the sunshine pumpers may be wrong, but this was the situation

2011- Play FCS football with extra scholarships. This disqualifies us from the playoffs, and ramps us up for the FBS.

2012- First year in the WAC (not bowl eligible). Play a full WAC schedule and I guess fill the rest of the schedule with open dates.

2013- Second season against WAC teams (bowl eligible).

stebo · November 12, 2010

Stebo,
I am just going off of what I heard at the press conference today. Benson and the sunshine pumpers may be wrong, but this was the situation
2011- Play FCS football with extra scholarships. This disqualifies us from the playoffs, and ramps us up for the FBS.
2012- First year in the WAC (not bowl eligible). Play a full WAC schedule and I guess fill the rest of the schedule with open dates.
2013- Second season against WAC teams (bowl eligible).

Not possible according to NCAA rules unless the WAC is really going to help with scheduling... You would be transitional for 2 years at a minimum. We have brought FAU and FIU into FBS and are working on USA, the transition is 2 years, during those 2 years you must play 5 FBS schools at home each year and average 15K in attendance. You are correct that the first year you would not be eligible for the playoffs and would have extra ships... and if you could get 5 FBS home games, that "could" be year 1; I just don't see how that is possible. Is the WAC going to supply those next year? If so - more power to you. I suppose they could send Fresno and Nevada to both San Marcos and San Antonio next year. Year 2 (2012) would be the tricky one - basically you would have to play 5 out of the 6 leftovers at home (both of you) to move up. Heck, maybe they will do that for you guys - they are in survival mode. I just don't see how it is possible.