Forger Wac And Cusa

SilverEagle · January 16, 2007

Ok, as requested here are my thoughts.
It'll never happen. Even if you could convince all of the schools to set aside egos, grudges etc. where would the money come from? Is there a TV network that would partner with this new "Southwest Conference" when it doesn't include any of the big name Texas or Oklahoma schools? Which bowl tie-ins could we bring with us?
I think we are best off hoping for CUSA or building the belt. Even a combination of WAC and Sun Belt schools would be difficult with the travel costs involved. San Jose CA, Moscow ID, Hawaii, Fresno CA? I know that the trips to Florida are tough but this would be a nightmare if you added these other destinations...especially when you consider that you are now picking up trips to New Mexico and Logan UT again.

So, have you given up on the idea of a pony? :rolleyes:

This is from my wife re: your "pony" response. :clapping:

emmitt01 · January 16, 2007

So, have you given up on the idea of a pony?
This is from my wife re: your "pony" response.

Yes.

the real grad88 · January 17, 2007

This is my last post on the topic I started. For the life of me, I can not understand how programs rate each other, which determines who they want to be aligned with. Is there really any major difference in any of the programs in the WAC, CUSA or Belt? Why wouldn't the so called mid-tier schools want to align themselves according to geography? Why does Marshall want to be with SMU over Troy and Middle Tennessee? Why does SMU want to be with Marshall more than North Texas? None of it makes any logical sense. Regional conferences are much better for developing rivalries and keeping costs at a minimum. Are schools really that afraid of each other? It's down-right illogical, and I think ultimately costly to all involved. It makes no logical sense for North Texas to be in the same conference as Florida school...no sense at all.

As the arms race continues in college athletics, and coaches and facilities costs and travel continue to grow exponentially, I have to think at some point the above conferences are going to get together and work out a more rational approach. The arrangment ought to be: If you can't take a bus to the game against your opponent, it's too far.

UNTBill · January 17, 2007

This is my last post on the topic I started. For the life of me, I can not understand how programs rate each other, which determines who they want to be aligned with. Is there really any major difference in any of the programs in the WAC, CUSA or Belt? Why wouldn't the so called mid-tier schools want to align themselves according to geography? Why does Marshall want to be with SMU over Troy and Middle Tennessee? Why does SMU want to be with Marshall more than North Texas? None of it makes any logical sense. Regional conferences are much better for developing rivalries and keeping costs at a minimum. Are schools really that afraid of each other? It's down-right illogical, and I think ultimately costly to all involved. It makes no logical sense for North Texas to be in the same conference as Florida school...no sense at all.
As the arms race continues in college athletics, and coaches and facilities costs and travel continue to grow exponentially, I have to think at some point the above conferences are going to get together and work out a more rational approach. The arrangment ought to be: If you can't take a bus to the game against your opponent, it's too far.

Great post!!! It seems, as though, logic always takes a back seat to money.

Green Mean · January 17, 2007

Neither of them do anything to help the PAC10, and Utah schools are very...odd. There's a reason why they haven't been added so far. If the PAC10 were to expand, it would be to take Colorado/Colorado State, Texas/Texas A&M, or Texas/Colorado.

To think the PAC 10 would pursue any school from Texas is absolutely rediculous. Even getting Colorado is pretty much unlikely. The teams they would tangle with is BYU, Utah, Nevada, or perhaps even Boise State. Utah has an excellent fb program and is a basketball powerhouse. Nevada is a notch below a powerhouse in basketball and has a very capable program in football. BSU and BYU are extreme longshots but it wouldnt surprise me if they did go to the pac 10. Again if they added they dont expect to add a powerhouse in football because THEY ALREADY HAVE ONE!! Its call the University of Southern California and they arent going to change that. Tho football is a big money sport, so is basketball especially in the pac 10. You didnt mention Baylor in your post Colorado but whoever mentioned Baylor as making a change ITS NOT HAPPENING....THATS JUST THAT SIMPLE. Baylor wont leave cuz they are in an ELITE conference and they are benefited by being surrounded by powerhouses and many schools in their regional level. Plus Baylor is like the Vandy of the SEC...they are upper major....have some nice teams but arent that elite kind like UT, OU, LSU, UF etc etc etc.

emmitt01 · January 17, 2007

This is my last post on the topic I started. For the life of me, I can not understand how programs rate each other, which determines who they want to be aligned with. Is there really any major difference in any of the programs in the WAC, CUSA or Belt? Why wouldn't the so called mid-tier schools want to align themselves according to geography? Why does Marshall want to be with SMU over Troy and Middle Tennessee? Why does SMU want to be with Marshall more than North Texas? None of it makes any logical sense. Regional conferences are much better for developing rivalries and keeping costs at a minimum. Are schools really that afraid of each other? It's down-right illogical, and I think ultimately costly to all involved. It makes no logical sense for North Texas to be in the same conference as Florida school...no sense at all.
As the arms race continues in college athletics, and coaches and facilities costs and travel continue to grow exponentially, I have to think at some point the above conferences are going to get together and work out a more rational approach. The arrangment ought to be: If you can't take a bus to the game against your opponent, it's too far.

Let me help you understand. If you are SMU you don't want any part of North Texas. North Texas is a large public school, with a myriad of possible majors, just a short drive from DFW. What do you tell a recruit in any sport who is considering SMU and NT? You can't use the "stay close to home" angle. NEVER underestimate the allure of staying close to family and friends. You can't use the "they don't offer what you want to study" angle unless you're talking to a Law student. And, since they stopped being allowed to pay players, you can't use the "we're a powerhouse and they're not" angle.

Edited January 17, 2007 by emmitt01

ColoradoEagle · January 17, 2007

Colorado and the PAC10 have been mentioned in the same breath since the Big 12 formed. Either Colorado being interested, or the other way around. The PAC10 has also been interested in the longhorns not just due to their athletics, but also their academics. All of this is well known. As far as I know, UT-Austin has never shown any interest in heading west, but I don't keep up with it too much. Their minds might change down the road if the Big 12 South ever gets as bad as the North.

Edited January 17, 2007 by ColoradoEagle

Green Mean · January 17, 2007

Colorado and the PAC10 have been mentioned in the same breath since the Big 12 formed. Either Colorado being interested, or the other way around. The PAC10 has also been interested in the longhorns not just due to their athletics, but also their academics. All of this is well known. As far as I know, UT-Austin has never shown any interest in heading west, but I don't keep up with it too much. Their minds might change down the road if the Big 12 South ever gets as bad as the North.

Thats quite interesting cuz i've never heard that kind of re alignment. My belief is if the PAC 10 were too add then i think they would make a big change to where they would add multiple schools to from and east/west division. Right now the big 12 north is struggling but these things run in cycles. Nebraska is Nebraska and they will surely get back to championship level soon....KSU and CU have had some down years but I fully expect them to get back to what they used to be a few years back. If you're Texas then I for sure wouldnt consider pac 10 unless there was major overhaul to form east/west divisions or something like that. Look for Arkansas to do something in the future because when moving to the SEC they did lose their luster in recruiting in Texas a little. I think having TX, OU, Arkansas and etc in the same conference would be great and would be kind of like a reborn rivalry of the old SWC powerhouses.