Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
Author Message
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,932
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 818
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #1
A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
The main factor to the WAC 16's failure was those darn quadrants. I think if they had taken Nevada instead of Tulsa they could have made rotating quadrants that worked:

Quad 1: Hawaii, SJSU, SDSU, Fresno St
Quad 2: Nevada, UNLV, Utah, BYU
Quad 3: WYO, Colo St, AFA, UNM
Quad 4: UTEP, SMU, TCU, Rice

Guarantee Utah and BYU a game with a Quad 3 school in years they aren't in the same division.

Fallout:

Tulsa plays football as an independent or affiliate of C-USA

SBC football forms with LA Tech, Ark St, ULL, MTSU, UNT, NMSU, and affiliates Utah St, Idaho, Boise St (& maybe Tulsa)

2005 becomes tricky. C-USA losing 3 FB members to the Big East still sends them looking for replacements. I also think the WAC 16 would be vulnerable:

C-USA East: Marshall, ECU, UCF, UAB, USM, Memphis
C-USA West: Tulsa, Tulane, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU

The WAC goes after SBC schools in the West.
09-24-2018 08:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


chargeradio Offline
Vamos Morados
*

Posts: 7,492
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 128
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #2
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-24-2018 08:41 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The main factor to the WAC 16's failure was those darn quadrants. I think if they had taken Nevada instead of Tulsa they could have made rotating quadrants that worked:

Quad 1: Hawaii, SJSU, SDSU, Fresno St
Quad 2: Nevada, UNLV, Utah, BYU
Quad 3: WYO, Colo St, AFA, UNM
Quad 4: UTEP, SMU, TCU, Rice

Guarantee Utah and BYU a game with a Quad 3 school in years they aren't in the same division.

Fallout:

Tulsa plays football as an independent or affiliate of C-USA

SBC football forms with LA Tech, Ark St, ULL, MTSU, UNT, NMSU, and affiliates Utah St, Idaho, Boise St (& maybe Tulsa)

2005 becomes tricky. C-USA losing 3 FB members to the Big East still sends them looking for replacements. I also think the WAC 16 would be vulnerable:

C-USA East: Marshall, ECU, UCF, UAB, USM, Memphis
C-USA West: Tulsa, Tulane, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU

The WAC goes after SBC schools in the West.
The Big West played football until 2000, so they may have wound up with Tulsa. I still think the Big West gives up the ghost by 2001 and the Sun Belt takes over.

If C-USA winds up as above in 2005, I could see the WAC inviting Boise State for number 14. Boise State winds up in the Pacific Division with Nevada, UNLV, and Quad 1. The Mountain West (sans UNLV and San Diego State, but adding UTEP) winds up in the Mountain Division.

I think by the time the 2012-14 realignment event happens, UTEP joins C-USA and the WAC adds Utah State to get back to 12, and you have today’s Mountain West under the WAC banner. C-USA fills the other seven vacancies with North Texas, Louisiana Tech, Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky, Florida Atlantic, Florida International, and Charlotte.

The Sun Belt adds UTSA, Texas State, Georgia State, Georgia Southern, App State, and the new football program at South Alabama. Troy, Louisiana, Louisiana Tech, Arkansas State, New Mexico State, and football-only Idaho continue on. Idaho is eventually dropped in favor of Coastal Carolina, and joins the Big Sky. Old Dominion and James Madison decline the Sun Belt.

Louisiana-Monroe and UMass toil on as football Independents. Seattle becomes Hawaii’s non-football placeholder in the WAC. Denver, ULM, UT-Arlington, and UALR join the Summit. UTRGV joins the Southland. Grand Canyon and Cal Baptist remain in Division II. Utah Valley eventually finds the Big Sky and agrees to add football. IUPUI and Fort Wayne join the Atlantic Sun, only to have North Alabama replace IUPUI.
09-24-2018 09:47 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MissouriStateBears Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,625
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Missouri State
Location:
Post: #3
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
Nevada has just moved up from I-AA when the WAC expanded to 16.
09-24-2018 09:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Big Frog II Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,021
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 116
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #4
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
If the WAC had just taken TCU and UNLV like they were originally going to, it might still be around.
(This post was last modified: 09-24-2018 10:09 PM by Big Frog II.)
09-24-2018 10:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,903
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 994
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #5
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-24-2018 09:48 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Nevada has just moved up from I-AA when the WAC expanded to 16.

Nevada had already won the Big West. They moved I-A same year as AState.
09-24-2018 10:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sactowndog Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,107
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Fresno State Texas A&M
Location:
Post: #6
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-24-2018 08:41 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The main factor to the WAC 16's failure was those darn quadrants. I think if they had taken Nevada instead of Tulsa they could have made rotating quadrants that worked:

Quad 1: Hawaii, SJSU, SDSU, Fresno St
Quad 2: Nevada, UNLV, Utah, BYU
Quad 3: WYO, Colo St, AFA, UNM
Quad 4: UTEP, SMU, TCU, Rice

Guarantee Utah and BYU a game with a Quad 3 school in years they aren't in the same division.

Fallout:

Tulsa plays football as an independent or affiliate of C-USA

SBC football forms with LA Tech, Ark St, ULL, MTSU, UNT, NMSU, and affiliates Utah St, Idaho, Boise St (& maybe Tulsa)

2005 becomes tricky. C-USA losing 3 FB members to the Big East still sends them looking for replacements. I also think the WAC 16 would be vulnerable:

C-USA East: Marshall, ECU, UCF, UAB, USM, Memphis
C-USA West: Tulsa, Tulane, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU

The WAC goes after SBC schools in the West.

The fundamental problem is the WAC expanded without any vision of how the conference would be structured. It was a fatal error.
09-29-2018 10:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,840
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3315
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #7
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-24-2018 08:41 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The main factor to the WAC 16's failure was those darn quadrants. I think if they had taken Nevada instead of Tulsa they could have made rotating quadrants that worked:

Quad 1: Hawaii, SJSU, SDSU, Fresno St
Quad 2: Nevada, UNLV, Utah, BYU
Quad 3: WYO, Colo St, AFA, UNM
Quad 4: UTEP, SMU, TCU, Rice

Guarantee Utah and BYU a game with a Quad 3 school in years they aren't in the same division.

Fallout:

Tulsa plays football as an independent or affiliate of C-USA

SBC football forms with LA Tech, Ark St, ULL, MTSU, UNT, NMSU, and affiliates Utah St, Idaho, Boise St (& maybe Tulsa)

2005 becomes tricky. C-USA losing 3 FB members to the Big East still sends them looking for replacements. I also think the WAC 16 would be vulnerable:

C-USA East: Marshall, ECU, UCF, UAB, USM, Memphis
C-USA West: Tulsa, Tulane, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU

The WAC goes after SBC schools in the West.

Possibly North Texas/Tulane/La Tech/ULL instead of San Jose St. Then you can split NW/SE with Hawaii, SDSU, Fresno, BYU, Utah, Wyoming, CSU and Air Force in the NW. UNLV, UNM, UTEP, Rice, Tulsa, SMU, TCU and UNT/Tulane/La Tech/ULL is in the SE.

Although the divisions were only one of the problems. The other was that they didn't consider that their contracts wouldn't pay any more for 16 than for 10.
09-29-2018 10:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,932
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 818
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #8
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-24-2018 10:08 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  If the WAC had just taken TCU and UNLV like they were originally going to, it might still be around.

It's my understanding that they were unwilling to do so without SMU and Rice.
09-29-2018 11:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Poster Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,084
Joined: Sep 2018
Reputation: 162
I Root For: Auburn
Location:
Post: #9
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
Other than the teams currently in the Mountain West playing under the WAC banner, I doubt much of anything would now be different if the WAC never went to 16.
09-29-2018 06:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,932
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 818
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #10
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-29-2018 06:33 PM)Poster Wrote:  Other than the teams currently in the Mountain West playing under the WAC banner, I doubt much of anything would now be different if the WAC never went to 16.

Things would be a little different. UTEP is probably in the WAC still, having never joined C-USA.

While where we are today would be very similar, everything along the way would be different. LA Tech stays in the Sunbelt for the founding of the football conference. NMSU, never being invited to the WAC, is still a full member of the Sunbelt.

Nevada, Boise St, Idaho, and Utah St are all Big West members from 1996 until 2010-2011 when things start moving around. In that interim they probably get at least 3 FCS schools to join them and the CA schools in the Big West have a strong input on who they are. I'm guessing the trio of Cal Poly/Sac St/UC Davis and maybe the Montanas join this league.
09-29-2018 07:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,918
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #11
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-29-2018 07:38 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(09-29-2018 06:33 PM)Poster Wrote:  Other than the teams currently in the Mountain West playing under the WAC banner, I doubt much of anything would now be different if the WAC never went to 16.

Things would be a little different. UTEP is probably in the WAC still, having never joined C-USA.

While where we are today would be very similar, everything along the way would be different. LA Tech stays in the Sunbelt for the founding of the football conference. NMSU, never being invited to the WAC, is still a full member of the Sunbelt.

Nevada, Boise St, Idaho, and Utah St are all Big West members from 1996 until 2010-2011 when things start moving around. In that interim they probably get at least 3 FCS schools to join them and the CA schools in the Big West have a strong input on who they are. I'm guessing the trio of Cal Poly/Sac St/UC Davis and maybe the Montanas join this league.

If the Big West is still interested in sponsoring football past 2000, NMSU wouldn't necessarily have left. Perhaps even North Texas might have stayed. You actually suggested this in the AH thread.
09-29-2018 08:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,932
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 818
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #12
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-29-2018 08:13 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(09-29-2018 07:38 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(09-29-2018 06:33 PM)Poster Wrote:  Other than the teams currently in the Mountain West playing under the WAC banner, I doubt much of anything would now be different if the WAC never went to 16.

Things would be a little different. UTEP is probably in the WAC still, having never joined C-USA.

While where we are today would be very similar, everything along the way would be different. LA Tech stays in the Sunbelt for the founding of the football conference. NMSU, never being invited to the WAC, is still a full member of the Sunbelt.

Nevada, Boise St, Idaho, and Utah St are all Big West members from 1996 until 2010-2011 when things start moving around. In that interim they probably get at least 3 FCS schools to join them and the CA schools in the Big West have a strong input on who they are. I'm guessing the trio of Cal Poly/Sac St/UC Davis and maybe the Montanas join this league.

If the Big West is still interested in sponsoring football past 2000, NMSU wouldn't necessarily have left. Perhaps even North Texas might have stayed. You actually suggested this in the AH thread.

I forgot about that old scenario. If your Big West group is NMSU, Nevada, Utah St, and newcomers Idaho, Boise St, and UNT in 1996 you might concievably have LA Tech, ULL, Ark St, and MTSU play for a few years in the Big West as affiliates in an East Division with UNT. I'll dub this arrangement, which might have persisted until 2005 as the Big Sun West Belt.
09-30-2018 08:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 16,664
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 1255
I Root For: Olde Ironclad
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #13
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-29-2018 11:10 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(09-24-2018 10:08 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  If the WAC had just taken TCU and UNLV like they were originally going to, it might still be around.

It's my understanding that they were unwilling to do so without SMU and Rice.

I can't find that mentioned in any articles; in fact, one mentioned TCU was a virtual lock while SMU and Rice had more "politicking" to do. From what I gather, the WAC's powers that be believed doubling-up on the Dallas market and adding the Houston market would increase their TV revenue and exposure.
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2018 09:16 AM by esayem.)
09-30-2018 09:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jdgaucho Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,285
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 115
I Root For: UCSB
Location: Big West Land
Post: #14
RE: A way the WAC 16 might have worked (for a while longer)
(09-30-2018 08:00 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(09-29-2018 08:13 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(09-29-2018 07:38 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(09-29-2018 06:33 PM)Poster Wrote:  Other than the teams currently in the Mountain West playing under the WAC banner, I doubt much of anything would now be different if the WAC never went to 16.

Things would be a little different. UTEP is probably in the WAC still, having never joined C-USA.

While where we are today would be very similar, everything along the way would be different. LA Tech stays in the Sunbelt for the founding of the football conference. NMSU, never being invited to the WAC, is still a full member of the Sunbelt.

Nevada, Boise St, Idaho, and Utah St are all Big West members from 1996 until 2010-2011 when things start moving around. In that interim they probably get at least 3 FCS schools to join them and the CA schools in the Big West have a strong input on who they are. I'm guessing the trio of Cal Poly/Sac St/UC Davis and maybe the Montanas join this league.

If the Big West is still interested in sponsoring football past 2000, NMSU wouldn't necessarily have left. Perhaps even North Texas might have stayed. You actually suggested this in the AH thread.

I forgot about that old scenario. If your Big West group is NMSU, Nevada, Utah St, and newcomers Idaho, Boise St, and UNT in 1996 you might concievably have LA Tech, ULL, Ark St, and MTSU play for a few years in the Big West as affiliates in an East Division with UNT. I'll dub this arrangement, which might have persisted until 2005 as the Big Sun West Belt.

In that case UC Riverside remains in D2 and Cal State Northridge is still in the Big Sky.
09-30-2018 12:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.