+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: College Sports and Conference Realignment (/forum-637.html)
+---- Thread: Selling out the WAC (/thread-846767.html)
Selling out the WAC - Fighting Muskie - 03-26-2018 06:17 PM
At what point should the WAC stop shopping for new members and start shopping for a conference interested in taking over the shell of the WAC and inheriting their autobid and tournament credits?
Cal St Bakersfield is already gone. Seattle might be too soon. Chicago St was never a core member--just an associate for all sports.
That just leaves Utah Valley, GCU, NMSU, UTRGV, and UMKC. I'm not counting Cal Baptist because at the moment they are still D2.
At that point maybe you try to get the Southland or C-USA West to take over, offer the survivors a temporary home.
RE: Selling out the WAC - NoDak - 03-26-2018 06:31 PM
Although circumstances look bleak for the WAC, it is far too valuable an NCAA-bid earning conference to go under. Think some schools are just waiting for the Gonzaga decision to take place.
RE: Selling out the WAC - AuzGrams - 03-26-2018 06:52 PM
Eh. I'd like to see the WAC stay alive. It wasn't any worse at all in terms of basketball compared to the Big West.
RE: Selling out the WAC - IWokeUpLikeThis - 03-26-2018 07:29 PM
How about the Summit?
UND/NDSU
USD/SDSU
UNO/UMKC
ORU/UTRGV
DU/UVU
GCU/NMSU
Fort Wayne to Horizon, WIU to OVC.
That’s a good league.
RE: Selling out the WAC - johnbragg - 03-26-2018 07:36 PM
(03-26-2018 06:31 PM)NoDak Wrote: Although circumstances look bleak for the WAC, i[b]t is far too valuable an NCAA-bid earning conference to go under.[/b] Think some schools are just waiting for the Gonzaga decision to take place.
Yes, the entire value of the WAC is that it has an existing autobid. Which is , to reference former Illinois Governor Blagojevich, a ------- valuable thing.
So if you're a group of CUSA schools pondering a split, you want to keep a line of communication open with the WAC.
You'd think you of all people, herald of the FBS Summit, would understand the value of taking over an existing conference shell rather than spending 8 years in no-autobid purgatory.
RE: Selling out the WAC - NoDak - 03-26-2018 09:55 PM
(03-26-2018 07:36 PM)johnbragg Wrote:(03-26-2018 06:31 PM)NoDak Wrote: Although circumstances look bleak for the WAC, i[b]t is far too valuable an NCAA-bid earning conference to go under.[/b] Think some schools are just waiting for the Gonzaga decision to take place.
Yes, the entire value of the WAC is that it has an existing autobid. Which is , to reference former Illinois Governor Blagojevich, a ------- valuable thing.
So if you're a group of CUSA schools pondering a split, you want to keep a line of communication open with the WAC.
You'd think you of all people, herald of the FBS Summit, would understand the value of taking over an existing conference shell rather than spending 8 years in no-autobid purgatory.
NMSU would be a definite yes.
GCU would say yes.
Seattle, UTRGV and UVU would need a new home.
UMKC could get a MBB only pass.
A school like Mo St could be interested.
A deal could be made.
RE: Selling out the WAC - Wedge - 03-26-2018 10:23 PM
Virginia Tech fans might remember -- how much was paid to VT and VCU when they were excluded from the GMC/Metro "merger"? That was more than 20 years ago, so double or triple that amount, and that would have to be the opening offer to each orphaned WAC school to get them to sell the shell of their conference. They'll probably hold out for a lot more.
Of course one problem is that many of the schools who would want to "buy" the WAC shell have athletic departments that are already run on a shoestring and can barely find two nickels to rub together, so where are they going to get a few million dollars for each WAC orphan?
RE: Selling out the WAC - NoDak - 03-26-2018 10:36 PM
(03-26-2018 10:23 PM)Wedge Wrote: Virginia Tech fans might remember -- how much was paid to VT and VCU when they were excluded from the GMC/Metro "merger"? That was more than 20 years ago, so double or triple that amount, and that would have to be the opening offer to each orphaned WAC school to get them to sell the shell of their conference. They'll probably hold out for a lot more.
Of course one problem is that many of the schools who would want to "buy" the WAC shell have athletic departments that are already run on a shoestring and can barely find two nickels to rub together, so where are they going to get a few million dollars for each WAC orphan?
Seattle may get a natural WCC bid.
The Big Sky actually needs a school for Olympic sports.
The Southland may have a need for UTRGV w fb.
It doesn't need to be complicated.
RE: Selling out the WAC - arkstfan - 03-26-2018 10:48 PM
(03-26-2018 10:23 PM)Wedge Wrote: Virginia Tech fans might remember -- how much was paid to VT and VCU when they were excluded from the GMC/Metro "merger"? That was more than 20 years ago, so double or triple that amount, and that would have to be the opening offer to each orphaned WAC school to get them to sell the shell of their conference. They'll probably hold out for a lot more.
Of course one problem is that many of the schools who would want to "buy" the WAC shell have athletic departments that are already run on a shoestring and can barely find two nickels to rub together, so where are they going to get a few million dollars for each WAC orphan?
WAC has what six units?
That is roughly $1.8 million in revenue before the costs of operating the conference. Split among six equity members that is $300,000 per year.
In the real world it's probably worth $4 million or so given that the operating costs will eat most of that revenue or around $667,000 per school. But this isn't the real world it is college athletics and the value of autobids and stable scheduling is worth much more.
RE: Selling out the WAC - chargeradio - 03-26-2018 10:53 PM
The Southland is your best candidate. Take UTRGV, New Mexico State, and UMKC plus the eleven Southland members, and you have the core for two conferences. One of them might even be able to lure Oral Roberts out of the Summit.
Conference 1:
UMKC, Central Arkansas, Northwestern State, Nicholls State, Southeastern Louisiana, McNeese State, New Orleans, Lamar
Conference 2:
New Mexico State, UTRGV, Texas A&M Corpus Christi, Houston Baptist, Incarnate Word, Sam Houston State, Stephen F. Austin, Abilene Christian
RE: Selling out the WAC - arkstfan - 03-26-2018 11:22 PM
I don't think the WAC has much value as a shell for someone else's realignment. CUSA sans WKU meets 8 years in 2020 and with WKU in 2021. Sun Belt meets in 2020 and with Coastal Carolina meets in 2023. Unless something catastrophic were to happen with AAC or MWC most any shuffle involving the southern teams is probably going to include 7 teams from one league or the other.
The highest and best use of the WAC, especially if Seattle is able to depart is to go ahead and terminate Chicago State's associate membership and merge with an existing conference to get the earned units.
RE: Selling out the WAC - templefootballfan - 03-26-2018 11:41 PM
one step at time
Stephen F Austin replaces Cal-Bakerfield
right now, WAC is 14th rpi, splits money 8 ways
RE: Selling out the WAC - johnbragg - 03-26-2018 11:59 PM
(03-26-2018 11:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote: I don't think the WAC has much value as a shell for someone else's realignment. CUSA sans WKU meets 8 years in 2020 and with WKU in 2021. Sun Belt meets in 2020 and with Coastal Carolina meets in 2023. Unless something catastrophic were to happen with AAC or MWC most any shuffle involving the southern teams is probably going to include 7 teams from one league or the other.
It sounds like you're thinking of the old continuity rules. That doesn't matter anymore.
RE: Selling out the WAC - NoDak - 03-27-2018 12:17 AM
(03-26-2018 10:53 PM)chargeradio Wrote: The Southland is your best candidate. Take UTRGV, New Mexico State, and UMKC plus the eleven Southland members, and you have the core for two conferences. One of them might even be able to lure Oral Roberts out of the Summit.
Conference 1:
UMKC, Central Arkansas, Northwestern State, Nicholls State, Southeastern Louisiana, McNeese State, New Orleans, Lamar
Conference 2:
New Mexico State, UTRGV, Texas A&M Corpus Christi, Houston Baptist, Incarnate Word, Sam Houston State, Stephen F. Austin, Abilene Christian
NMSU would insist on an FBS conference, so it needs eight schools that would qualify. Swap Lamar with Corpus Christi. Houston Baptist doesn’t have the capability for FBS either. Most of the rest would need mega donors.
A split CUSA is NMSU’s dream conference.
NMSU
UTEP
North Texas
UTSA
Rice
La Tech
S Miss
UAB
The following are Olympic only schools until they find other spots.
UTGV
UMKC
GCU
Could see Mo St moving over pronto.
The eastern CUSA would be:
FIU
FAU
Charlotte
ODU
Marshall
WKU
MTSU
Add JMU, Delaware and Stony Brook and one has a footprint of nearly the ACC.
The complicated issue is how CUSA would handle their FBS payments and exit fees.
Selling out the WAC - Jjoey52 - 03-27-2018 12:41 AM
(03-26-2018 10:36 PM)NoDak Wrote:(03-26-2018 10:23 PM)Wedge Wrote: Virginia Tech fans might remember -- how much was paid to VT and VCU when they were excluded from the GMC/Metro "merger"? That was more than 20 years ago, so double or triple that amount, and that would have to be the opening offer to each orphaned WAC school to get them to sell the shell of their conference. They'll probably hold out for a lot more.
Of course one problem is that many of the schools who would want to "buy" the WAC shell have athletic departments that are already run on a shoestring and can barely find two nickels to rub together, so where are they going to get a few million dollars for each WAC orphan?
Seattle may get a natural WCC bid.
The Big Sky actually needs a school for Olympic sports.
The Southland may have a need for UTRGV w fb.
It doesn't need to be complicated.
Big Sky would not take UVU if that is your thinking, SUU and Weber would block. The one they would take is NMSU, but I doubt they would be interested.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
RE: Selling out the WAC - jacksfan29 - 03-27-2018 10:03 AM
(03-26-2018 11:41 PM)templefootballfan Wrote: one step at time
Stephen F Austin replaces Cal-Bakerfield
right now, WAC is 14th rpi, splits money 8 ways
Where does SFA park their FB program?
RE: Selling out the WAC - dbackjon - 03-27-2018 10:27 AM
(03-27-2018 12:41 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:(03-26-2018 10:36 PM)NoDak Wrote:(03-26-2018 10:23 PM)Wedge Wrote: Virginia Tech fans might remember -- how much was paid to VT and VCU when they were excluded from the GMC/Metro "merger"? That was more than 20 years ago, so double or triple that amount, and that would have to be the opening offer to each orphaned WAC school to get them to sell the shell of their conference. They'll probably hold out for a lot more.
Of course one problem is that many of the schools who would want to "buy" the WAC shell have athletic departments that are already run on a shoestring and can barely find two nickels to rub together, so where are they going to get a few million dollars for each WAC orphan?
Seattle may get a natural WCC bid.
The Big Sky actually needs a school for Olympic sports.
The Southland may have a need for UTRGV w fb.
It doesn't need to be complicated.
Big Sky would not take UVU if that is your thinking, SUU and Weber would block. The one they would take is NMSU, but I doubt they would be interested.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Yup. Of the current WAC members, if there was an interest in going to 12 (and in reality, no hurry on that front) it would be:
NMSU - far and away if a) NMSU drops to FCS or ends football. Chances not likely
Seattle - would pair with Portland State for non-football travel sports. Since Seattle wants WCC, and would always be a flight risk, not likely
GCU/UVU/UTRGV/Cal Baptist/UMKC - none really add to the Big Sky at this point, just another mouth to feed, not institutional fits.
RE: Selling out the WAC - desertscholar974 - 03-27-2018 10:56 AM
(03-26-2018 10:53 PM)chargeradio Wrote: The Southland is your best candidate. Take UTRGV, New Mexico State, and UMKC plus the eleven Southland members, and you have the core for two conferences. One of them might even be able to lure Oral Roberts out of the Summit.
Conference 1:
UMKC, Central Arkansas, Northwestern State, Nicholls State, Southeastern Louisiana, McNeese State, New Orleans, Lamar
Conference 2:
New Mexico State, UTRGV, Texas A&M Corpus Christi, Houston Baptist, Incarnate Word, Sam Houston State, Stephen F. Austin, Abilene Christian
The circuits have been overloaded in both the Lone Star Conference & Southland Conference. Something needs to give way.
RE: Selling out the WAC - arkstfan - 03-27-2018 11:01 AM
(03-26-2018 11:59 PM)johnbragg Wrote:Yes they do. Covered in another thread.(03-26-2018 11:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote: I don't think the WAC has much value as a shell for someone else's realignment. CUSA sans WKU meets 8 years in 2020 and with WKU in 2021. Sun Belt meets in 2020 and with Coastal Carolina meets in 2023. Unless something catastrophic were to happen with AAC or MWC most any shuffle involving the southern teams is probably going to include 7 teams from one league or the other.
It sounds like you're thinking of the old continuity rules. That doesn't matter anymore.
The only change to the continuity rule is an existing conference doesn't have to meet continuity as long as they keep their numbers up.
RE: Selling out the WAC - johnbragg - 03-27-2018 12:27 PM
(03-27-2018 11:01 AM)arkstfan Wrote:(03-26-2018 11:59 PM)johnbragg Wrote:Yes they do. Covered in another thread.(03-26-2018 11:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote: I don't think the WAC has much value as a shell for someone else's realignment. CUSA sans WKU meets 8 years in 2020 and with WKU in 2021. Sun Belt meets in 2020 and with Coastal Carolina meets in 2023. Unless something catastrophic were to happen with AAC or MWC most any shuffle involving the southern teams is probably going to include 7 teams from one league or the other.
It sounds like you're thinking of the old continuity rules. That doesn't matter anymore.
The only change to the continuity rule is an existing conference doesn't have to meet continuity as long as they keep their numbers up.
That's not what the rulebook says. I was the one who wrote the thread.
https://csnbbs.com/thread-768543.html
As far as the rulebook is concerned, continuity is a thing that conferences have, not a thing that schools have with each other. By the rulebook, if the original 10 Big Ten schools walked out today on Penn State, Rutgers, Nebraska and Maryland, they're no different than the Great West was.
(Of course it would be treated differently. I'm telling you what the PDF says.)