I may point out that Texas and Oklahoma is oil boom country with rich donors who could help schools move up. This is why I think schools from those states might make a move to a higher level. It seems there is a rush between Texas and Texas A&M in how many schools that they can get up at D1.

(12-02-2017 02:18 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(12-02-2017 12:10 PM)Columbia Blue Wrote:  Upgrading facilities doesn't always mean a university is looking to move to a higher level. Univ. of Central Oklahoma recently raised around $25 million to upgrade facilities on campus, but hasn't uttered a peep about trying to move-up. They seem quite content where they are. I believe West Texas A&M raised money for a new stadium because they were still playing in the dilapidated stadium they had been in when they were Division 1 in the 1970s.

Southern Indiana (who I've already mentioned on this thread) seems to be putting money into the programs/facilities with Division 1 as the desired end result. It probably pushed them a bit faster after watching enviously as former conference rival Northern Kentucky moved up and became successful at the Division 1 level. A bit of an extra driving force if you will.

the talks about Lone Star Conference and the Oklahoma schools have been coming up this year alone. Lone Star Conference is up to 19 teams. That is way too many unless schools like West Texas A&M, UTPB, Texas A&M-Commerce, Tarleton State and Kingsville moving to D1. GAC can't hold many more Oklahoma teams since they are at 12. They could get NE Oklahoma State, but that is about it. Southland have been after Central Oklahoma for a long time. I do think they could make the move to D1 because of where they are located. That would give Oklahoma 4 football schools and 5 D1 schools overall.

UTPB could be the hot girl that people will want. It is the hotbed of football recruits in that area.

Central Washington is in a fast growing region of Washington state that the leaders planned to go over 20,000 students enroll, and have a higher ceiling than just D2.

Colorado Mesa is in a large city metro. It seems that they are the only school at the lower levels in the state that are getting money to do upgrades. I think the problem with the other D2 colorado schools are already too close to Colorado, Colorado State and Northern Colorado. If the state wants another D1 state school, colorado Mesa is far enough away to not compete with the other three for students. Colorado Mesa could actually reached into Utah.

So far, the schools that I do see that might be D1 are the ones that are in the Lone Star, Azusa Pacific, Central Washington, Dixie State, Colorado Mesa and Central Oklahoma. It seems these schools do have sugar daddies who could give them money to make the move. I could throw in Montana State-Billings who also have a sugar daddy as well.

There is about 100 posts already explaining why everything stated here is wrong, he doesn't learn. Delusional.

(11-30-2017 10:17 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  Sorry bud. All I can say is from a source in the WAC office that they inquired. This was some time back. I remember reading it on another message board about a year ago as well and then heard it from friend in WAC office who no longer works there so that's why I'm posting it now.

I am a Tarleton fan. For those that don't know, we are a D2 school an hour from Fort Worth, TX. Our Men's Basketball team has been ranked #1 numerous times in the last 15 years, made the NCAA tourney nearly every year, multiple Sweet Sixteen and 2 Final Four appearances (just havent won the big one).

Tarleton has been considering moving up for more than a decade.

2005- Tries to join Southland, but Corpus and Central Ark are chosen because of facilities and funding
2007- Tarleton announces master plan with D1 as stated goal and facility renovations
2009- Students increase athletic fee to finance enhancements
2012- Southland loses 3 schools (TXST,UTSA,UTA) to WAC and starts looking for replacements. Southland adds Incarnate Word to keep San Antonio market, Abilene Christian because of money and athletic success, and three other members for markets (Houston Baptist, New Orleans, Oral Bob). The holes this caused left all remaining Lone Star Conference teams floundering and accelerated the need to move up if possible
2013- Tarleton students increase athletic fee again to $22 per credit hour to again enhance facilities.
2015- Tarleton's Enrollment is over 10,000 and Mens Basketball reaches the Final Four. At that point, big dollar donors start coming back into the fold and the D1 question is pushed by more members of the community.

Fees are in place and enrollment is now above 12,000. Facility enhancements are happening all over campus and especially around athletics. Tennis courts redone. Rec fields for intramural soccer have been made NCAA soccer ready. A $24m Football stadium project is underway and President talks about new swim/dive complex.

For the past couple of years, our President and Athletic Director have hinted about D1 possibilities. Earlier this fall, they created an internal D1 committee to start getting ducks in a row because they felt like an invite could come as soon as December 2017.

Just my 2 cents- Tarleton wasn't ready when ACU moved up. They learned from being left behind and started pushing full force to get things in place when the next offer would come. SLC wasnt ready to expand while ACU and UIW were in their 5 year transition window. That has come to a close and they are now full D1 members. At this point, the SLC can explore taking on another transition team.

Southland would be the ideal fit because it is a regional D1 conference that sponsors football. However, with the Runners departure and the President's talk a potential December invite, I wondered if the WAC was involved.

The hard part is football. With $24m committed and stadium expansion underway, I don't see us dropping the sport. That means for the WAC to make sense, we've got to find a place to park the pigskin.

Goof grief, a typical 120 unit 4 year degree would carry $2,620 in athletic fees for D-II. This is an obscenely high amount for a public school at that level.

(12-03-2017 09:30 PM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:17 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  Sorry bud. All I can say is from a source in the WAC office that they inquired. This was some time back. I remember reading it on another message board about a year ago as well and then heard it from friend in WAC office who no longer works there so that's why I'm posting it now.

I am a Tarleton fan. For those that don't know, we are a D2 school an hour from Fort Worth, TX. Our Men's Basketball team has been ranked #1 numerous times in the last 15 years, made the NCAA tourney nearly every year, multiple Sweet Sixteen and 2 Final Four appearances (just havent won the big one).

Tarleton has been considering moving up for more than a decade.

2005- Tries to join Southland, but Corpus and Central Ark are chosen because of facilities and funding
2007- Tarleton announces master plan with D1 as stated goal and facility renovations
2009- Students increase athletic fee to finance enhancements
2012- Southland loses 3 schools (TXST,UTSA,UTA) to WAC and starts looking for replacements. Southland adds Incarnate Word to keep San Antonio market, Abilene Christian because of money and athletic success, and three other members for markets (Houston Baptist, New Orleans, Oral Bob). The holes this caused left all remaining Lone Star Conference teams floundering and accelerated the need to move up if possible
2013- Tarleton students increase athletic fee again to $22 per credit hour to again enhance facilities.
2015- Tarleton's Enrollment is over 10,000 and Mens Basketball reaches the Final Four. At that point, big dollar donors start coming back into the fold and the D1 question is pushed by more members of the community.

Fees are in place and enrollment is now above 12,000. Facility enhancements are happening all over campus and especially around athletics. Tennis courts redone. Rec fields for intramural soccer have been made NCAA soccer ready. A $24m Football stadium project is underway and President talks about new swim/dive complex.

For the past couple of years, our President and Athletic Director have hinted about D1 possibilities. Earlier this fall, they created an internal D1 committee to start getting ducks in a row because they felt like an invite could come as soon as December 2017.

Just my 2 cents- Tarleton wasn't ready when ACU moved up. They learned from being left behind and started pushing full force to get things in place when the next offer would come. SLC wasnt ready to expand while ACU and UIW were in their 5 year transition window. That has come to a close and they are now full D1 members. At this point, the SLC can explore taking on another transition team.

Southland would be the ideal fit because it is a regional D1 conference that sponsors football. However, with the Runners departure and the President's talk a potential December invite, I wondered if the WAC was involved.

The hard part is football. With $24m committed and stadium expansion underway, I don't see us dropping the sport. That means for the WAC to make sense, we've got to find a place to park the pigskin.

Thanks Chris, great info.

While a restored FBS WAC would be exciting I just don't see it happening. But this additional information about Tarleton State, on top of what Columbia Blue said in the OP, has me thinking that FCS could be a possibility. A WAC FCS league with Azusa Pacific, Dixie State (which is expanding its football stadium to seat 10,000 and targeting 15,000), Tarleton State and possibly UTRGV as full football-playing WAC members and UC Davis, Cal Poly and Sac State as affiliate members (allowing Sac State to put its non-football sports in the Big West) could be a win-win for the member schools and the conference.

The issue with this admittedly rosy scenario is that Tarleton would obviously prefer to be in the Southland and with that conference currently having an unbalanced 13/11 membership Tarleton could very well land an invitation. And even if it didn't, Tarleton leaving for the Southland would always be a risk. That would discourage the Big Sky Cali schools from signing on.

The SLC is interested in Tarleton. The Associate Commissioner hinted at it in tweets. For some reason he felt the need to comment that Tarleton plays football so would not work in the WAC. If they were not talking to them, then why tweet?

(12-04-2017 01:43 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The SLC is interested in Tarleton. The Associate Commissioner hinted at it in tweets. For some reason he felt the need to comment that Tarleton plays football so would not work in the WAC. If they were not talking to them, then why tweet?

If Tarleton is headed to the Southland, that means that UTRGV chance might be closing, if there ever was one.

I don't think it's going to happen but if the WAC restored FBS football that would be amazing. It certainly would piss off all the other G5 conferences, especially the MWC!

(12-04-2017 10:20 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  I don't think it's going to happen but if the WAC restored FBS football that would be amazing. It certainly would piss off all the other G5 conferences, especially the MWC!

I don't know if there is enough interested FCS move ups to form an FBS football conference in the WAC. The only way I could see the WAC form an FBS level conference is for Hurd to pull an under the table coup with the a select number of western SBC and C-USA teams; to play under a WAC banner. My pipedream would be New Mexico State plus UTEP, Rice, North Texas, UTSA, and Louisiana Tech from C-USA. And, Texas State, Arkansas State, and Louisiana from the SBC.

However, with the improbability of an FBS conference forming in the WAC, it would behoove Hurd to look at the possibility of forming an eight team FCS level conference; in order to expand the number of potential D2 programs with the interest to move up to the WAC. Otherwise, there are very few D2 programs left which fit the current WAC non-football profile.

(12-04-2017 11:31 AM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 10:20 AM)dancingNMSUaggie Wrote:  I don't think it's going to happen but if the WAC restored FBS football that would be amazing. It certainly would piss off all the other G5 conferences, especially the MWC!

I don't know if there is enough interested FCS move ups to form an FBS football conference in the WAC. The only way I could see the WAC form an FBS level conference is for Hurd to pull an under the table coup with the a select number of western SBC and C-USA teams; to play under a WAC banner. My pipedream would be New Mexico State plus UTEP, Rice, North Texas, UTSA, and Louisiana Tech from C-USA. And, Texas State, Arkansas State, and Louisiana from the SBC.

However, with the improbability of an FBS conference forming in the WAC, it would behoove Hurd to look at the possibility of forming an eight team FCS level conference; in order to expand the number of potential D2 programs with the interest to move up to the WAC. Otherwise, there are very few D2 programs left which fit the current WAC non-football profile.

I'd welcome that conference and I know a few of my Bobcat brothers would as well.

(12-03-2017 09:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Goof grief, a typical 120 unit 4 year degree would carry $2,620 in athletic fees for D-II. This is an obscenely high amount for a public school at that level.

I agree. Texas State and UTSA didn't look at a $20/credit hour fee until they were considering FBS.

Tarleton has $22 max 286
TAMU Commerce has a $32 Student Service fee that covers athletics
Sam Houston - 16 SSF
Lamar - 10.58 athletic fee
UNT 10 athletic fee
UT Arlington - 8.5
UTEP 13.5 SSF

Based on looking at these numbers, it appears that Tarleton understood where they were and where the administration wants to be.

(12-04-2017 12:47 PM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(12-03-2017 09:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Goof grief, a typical 120 unit 4 year degree would carry $2,620 in athletic fees for D-II. This is an obscenely high amount for a public school at that level.

I agree. Texas State and UTSA didn't look at a $20/credit hour fee until they were considering FBS.

Tarleton has $22 max 286
TAMU Commerce has a $32 Student Service fee that covers athletics
Sam Houston - 16 SSF
Lamar - 10.58 athletic fee
UNT 10 athletic fee
UT Arlington - 8.5
UTEP 13.5 SSF

Based on looking at these numbers, it appears that Tarleton understood where they were and where the administration wants to be.

Do Students vote on fees like they do in California, or are they imposed by the administration?

Ok, so I know often, certain schools are mentioned as candidates, but alas they have DII football would be a deal breaker for moving up and into an Olympic WAC.
Their's GOTTA' be cases though where ditching football (probably D2) would be a plus....right? However, I do understand fiscal sense and booster opinion dont always equate (or RARELY equate, for that matter )

Still, anyone have any examples/theories (out West, western Midwest at least) of schools that would likely be better off biting the bullet and ending FB for the DI Olympic-only WAC?

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

RunnerBall,

Nebraska Omaha.

Tarleton is investing in Football, not dropping it.

(12-04-2017 01:43 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  RunnerBall,

Nebraska Omaha.

Tarleton is investing in Football, not dropping it.

......a nice travel partner for UMKC.

I know the UNO idea was floated years ago on the old Scout boards.

A baseball school too....a plus!

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

(12-04-2017 08:08 AM)RobtheAggie Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 01:43 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The SLC is interested in Tarleton. The Associate Commissioner hinted at it in tweets. For some reason he felt the need to comment that Tarleton plays football so would not work in the WAC. If they were not talking to them, then why tweet?

If Tarleton is headed to the Southland, that means that UTRGV chance might be closing, if there ever was one.

Good. I really don't want us to go to the southland.

(12-04-2017 03:43 PM)Vaqueronation Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 08:08 AM)RobtheAggie Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 01:43 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The SLC is interested in Tarleton. The Associate Commissioner hinted at it in tweets. For some reason he felt the need to comment that Tarleton plays football so would not work in the WAC. If they were not talking to them, then why tweet?

If Tarleton is headed to the Southland, that means that UTRGV chance might be closing, if there ever was one.

Good. I really don't want us to go to the southland.

Moving forward, I do think Hurd needs to find a travel partner closer to UTRGV. So, WAC teams don't have the long flight between UTRGV and NMSU. Although, I'm not sure there is a prospective D2 move up in Texas that doesn't play football. TAMCC would be an ideal travel partner but I don't see them leaving a more compact SLC for the WAC.

UMKC plays Omaha every year except this year. One of us is moving.

(12-04-2017 01:21 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 12:47 PM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(12-03-2017 09:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Goof grief, a typical 120 unit 4 year degree would carry $2,620 in athletic fees for D-II. This is an obscenely high amount for a public school at that level.

I agree. Texas State and UTSA didn't look at a $20/credit hour fee until they were considering FBS.

Tarleton has $22 max 286
TAMU Commerce has a $32 Student Service fee that covers athletics
Sam Houston - 16 SSF
Lamar - 10.58 athletic fee
UNT 10 athletic fee
UT Arlington - 8.5
UTEP 13.5 SSF

Based on looking at these numbers, it appears that Tarleton understood where they were and where the administration wants to be.

Do Students vote on fees like they do in California, or are they imposed by the administration?

Students have to vote on it. Based on what I read online, it was overwhelmingly approved (75/25) by a small percentage of the campus 15%.

Well they vote for it, then it's all good in my book. (I only object to institutional transfers and imposed fees without representation; students fees are a legitimate way to fund athletics, when democratically decided upon.) 15% turn out is what it is. Those who don;t vote cede their decision powers to those who do -- that is how American representative government works; you cannot compel people to vote, as a non-vote is a political statement you are allowed to make (just that people tend to ignore the message or pretend its not a statement).

This makes Texas more of a Western State and less of an Eastern one in such practice.