The Case For The Wac

greenpie · June 23, 2010

The Choice UNT Faces: Be a Leader Or a Follower For The Rest Of Its Days

By Tobi Writes

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/410366-the-choice-unt-faces-be-a-leader-or-a-follower-for-the-rest-of-its-days

Pictured: Boise State Player standing next to some stupid trophy that probably came as part of a deal with a fat BCS Bowl check for his school. - Not pictured, any Sun Belt school.

UNT fans seem OK with passing over overtures from the Western Athletic Conference again for the security of the Sun Belt Conference's warm teat.

It seems horrifically poor logic as the Sun Belt is the worst FBS conference out there.

I have to ask, will UNT fans feel the same if UTSA or Texas State gets tabbed as the 9th team by a possibly desperate WAC?

You want an even worse thought, what if UNT blows off the WAC, Texas State or even UTSA gets in, and then they become an SMU sized roadblock of any future UNT WAC admission?

If Texas State were to get in, it could make a lot of sense to block UNT and UTSA. San Marcos (in the shadow of Austin) is potentially a very tough recruiting position with UTSA in the same conference. Being in a higher level conference than UNT should allow Texas State to suppliment their recruiting with DFW talent at UNT's expense.

If UTSA gets in Larry Coker and Co. may decide they profit more being the only Texas school in the conference in terms of media and recruiting. It may give them a better shot to try to be the next Fresno to block other Texas schools. They also would move ahead of UNT in terms of DFW and Texas recruiting in that scenario.

There is a fair bit of logic for both schools to try to go it alone and to block any other Texas schools joining. They have the budgets to handle the travel. WAC schools don't want to lose any control of their conference and certainly won't want 2 trips to Texas in anything less than a 12 team conference, so they would likely go along.

Hawaii and Fresno State are still potential BCS busters. Fresno just needs to learn to play defense again. Hawaii could be on the cusp of bouncing back...or not. Still, there is nothing like that in the Sun Belt. No future BCS checks will be coming down the way.

There is a very real chance that if UNT passes this opportunity up now, it not only may not be offered again, but could also blow up in UNT's face.

Who's to say UNT can get into CUSA? There is talk of potentially Houston to the Big 12. It is unclear how much of a risk a loss like that or any other CUSA school to a BCS conference might be. If that occurs, why would an eastern leaning CUSA not add old CUSA staple Charlotte over UNT? They have friends and rivalries. It is already potentially 6-5 for them over UNT in that scenario and that would be before SMU starts campaigning.

Will SMU continue to block UNT in hopes of a MWC implosion and a TCU recovery?

Do I really need to ask that question?

UNT could get permanently blocked by SMU in C-USA and Texas State or UTSA in the WAC. UNT could be trapped in the Sun Belt forever.

The Sun Belt is STILL the worst FBS conference in America.

The argument of UNT fans against a western movement is that without Boise, the WAC just another Big West, and UNT had an awful time playing those schools. Players flying west sucked. No one cared about games against the western schools at UNT (with the lone exception of New Mexico State games) and vice versa.

Even if the media in Texas considers the Sun Belt a joke, the media coverage is better than what UNT had in the Big West.

Their logic is the Sun Belt is better than the Big West.

I would argue that the Big West didn't have two programs the level of Hawaii and Fresno State - and probably didn't have three at the level of Idaho, La Tech, and Nevada - therefore the WAC is MUCH better than the Big West and today's Sun Belt.

Consider for a second what occurs if the Sun Belt loses Troy and/or MTSU? What then?

The reality of the Sun Belt is that they are 2 realignment losses from being right back where they were 5 years ago. The Sun Belt is 2 bad days away from being the same old crappy Sun Belt reloading with the ULMs of the world.

A gigantic footprint with nothing to show for it; The worst FBS conference in America without question.

Heck, if the MAC suddenly gets interested in Western Kentucky, WKU and MTSU could go north! That reported interest by both schools has been out there for years.

You won't see that in the WAC. The odds of Fresno moving up are slim, and the odds of Hawaii moving up are near non-existent.

The WAC "is what it is" and will continue to be that. It is very counterintuitive, but there is a great deal of stability the WAC can offer UNT and that UNT can offer the WAC.

UNT has the leverage to negotiate a great deal from the WAC.

I totally get the "travel sucks in the west" argument, but the WAC is a little fragile right now. They have little in terms of TV markets and have the potential of losing regionally isolated La Tech and possibly San Jose State and New Mexico State to high travel costs and poor turnouts.

As the only realistic current FBS team out there the WAC could land (without a MWC collapse) and a school with a large alumni base residing in a huge nationally relevant market, UNT probably has a lot of leverage to push for a better ending position than just team nine in a nine team WAC.

UNT needs to be grabbing UTSA and Texas State as allies. Without UNT's influence they are in the same boat UNT is and will likely be fighting each other (and UNT) for slot nine in a nine team WAC.

UTSA and Texas State students have voted to max out their athletic fees at $20 per sememster hour - double what UNT's students voted to do. Now eventually UNT's athletic budget will surpass both schools' again, but for now UNT is looking at the very real potential that either of those schools has the financial means to pass UNT in competitiveness and national esteem in a superior conference.

Texas State has an enrollment of 30,816; UTSA has an enrollment of 28,955. I don't know what students were paying at each school before in athletic fees, but mutliplying those numbers out gives potentially a $17-18 Million increase in their athletic budgets. This will put both schools on the high end of WAC athletic budgets, far ahead of Sun Belt budgets.

With UNT's insistance, negotiations, and coordination, all 3 schools can probably get into the WAC, maximizing UNT's and the central Texas duo's values and making Texas State and UTSA solid allies. Potentially the three Texas giants could opt as a group to storm CUSA on better terms in 10 years or less, putting their shared alumni bases in signifigant markets -fueled by enrollments of almost 100K - to good use.

Or they could forget about that and maybe potentially steal a UTEP or even a Houston down the road - collecting large alumni bases for Big TV payouts. (I call it the long term "Screw SMU" plan.)

Regardless UNT would lead the way... not follow.

UNT's best bet is to use the leverage it has with the WAC (and over UTSA and Texas State) in the pursuit of a split division WAC as the cost of our inclusion.

ULL wants to be with UNT in a higher level conference than ULM.

Arkansas State has a history with La Tech, ULL, UNT and even with the other former Big west schools. They may or may not come along. The Sun Belt could be a lot less ideal for them if WKU and MTSU aren't in it, which is always a looming possibility.

UNT is the key player who could probably get this type of proposal done. They have the best leverage and the long term relationships with the other schools.

There is no higher profile move than being a "conference maker". This would put UNT as being perceived at the non-AQ level of delivering the kind of siezmic change that UT threatened to deliver 2 weeks ago with the Pac-10 flirtation.

If you want to put UNT on the map, this would do it.

UNT could sell the WAC on the idea that they could miss getting the kind of bump that conference needs by adding only 1 team in Texas if they chose the wrong team.

If the WAC adds the wrong Texas school, they could see a landslide erosion with La Tech defecting and NMSU financially imploding. Then they are REALLY screwed as they would not have any western candidates and would have taken a huge presitge loss.

They have a lot to lose. UNT has a lot to lose.

When you have these conditions it is easy to see a "win-win" scenario arising.

Rather than waiting for CUSA Godot, it makes a lot more sense to take an immediate WAC bump and use our superior leverage to manufacture a stable division centered around UNT. Take the best we know we can get, and make it work for UNT.

What would that look like?

After a few weeks of consideration, I think at 12/14 would be the right strategy for UNT and the western WAC schools.

Add the 3 amigos (ULL, UNT, & Arky state – 3 of the 5 schools that tried starting their own conference year ago with La Tech and Lamar) and the two upgrading Southland giants (Texas State and UTSA) with their soon to be huge athletic budgets (for the non-BCS level).

Sacramento State would be the smart play to admit as a non-football member for now in the west. Due to their FBS sized stadium, proximity to Sac State, Fresno State, and Reno they are the western FCS school most likely to be able to move up to the FBS level successfully and quickly. Sac State offers a nice nationally significant TV designated market area and futher builds the alliance between the WAC and the California State system.

Getting Sac State in for all sports would cut San Jose's budget and help the neighboring SJSU Spartans a bit with attendance. The western WAC (today's WAC)cannot afford to lose San Jose State in TV terms as the conference has very few markets of note.

Lamar can be left to the Southland or Sun Belt for now. They offer good insurance in the future.

I think La Tech might get a CUSA invite at some point and at that point UTSA will take their slot for 12 for football, but for now UTSA and Sac State would be non-football members.

Football

WAC Pacific Division

Sac State (Great West for football as they start an FBS transition)

Fresno State

Hawaii

San Jose State

Nevada

Idaho

Utah State

WAC Southwest Division

New Mexico State

North Texas

Texas-San Antonio (GW for football as they complete their FBS startup transition)

Texas State

ULL

Arky State

Louisiana Tech

That gives UNT ideal in division travel and maybe 2 games OOD with western travel in each sport. Regardless of two trips going "the wrong way", that is MUCH better for UNT than the Sun Belt today in terms of travel costs and Texas media exposure.

Additionally, UNT could smartly insist that its schedule has Hawaii on it each year as a "rivalry game". I have long thought that would give UNT a state-wide recruiting edge to be able to offer recruits 2 trips to Hawaii in their careers. Right there UNT would have a permanent edge over UTSA and Texas State in recruiting and esteem. Plus (while I am not sure if in conference includes this) teams that play Hawaii are allowed to play 13 games in a regular season instead of 12.

If UNT pushes for it, it gives the WAC the public relations angle to add upgrading schools like UTSA & Texas State and say "Well...UNT twisted our arm". They can also mask the fact that the central Texas duo both are upgrading behind the fact both will have athletic budgets at the top of the WAC and they are also being joined by 3 long time FBS members.

It makes it a lot more of a saleable point in terms of arguing that even though they added upgrading FCS and IAAA schools, they are still better than the MAC and more importantly that they aren't on the same level as the Sun Belt now.

Remember if the Sun Belt loses UNT, ULL, and Arky, they will need to add FCS upgrades too - protecting the WAC's "lead".

It is "Win-win" all around.

Frankly schools in both conferences would benefit from the measure in the long term even if it would be a minor hit in the short term.

The WAC Southwest Division schools would all have nice travel and good rivals. The WAC Pacific Division would have the ability to quickly game the attendance numbers to get Sac State moved up to FBS - potentially helping stabilize a key at risk school like San Jose State.

(Sac State is two hours from Reno and San Jose State and 3 hours from Fresno, so if those 3 WAC schools and Hawaii did schedule home and home games with Sac State with the idea of gaming the NCAA system and pushing Sac State up in short order, they could get it done. Those 4 WAC schools could fill that 21K stadium twice a year. Assuming 6 home games with 9,935 in the other 4 games - and it should be more in the GW as Sac State is totally isolated in the Big Sky - that would give Sac State an average attendance of 13,623 per game. That isn’t hitting the multi-year 15,000 or so that is technically officially needed, but it isn’t far off and if they hit something north of there, would probably be enough to satisfy the NCAA.)

This deal takes the WAC out of the danger zone in the short term.

In the long term, both divisions could decide to break away into seperate conferences at a future date to give berth to extra shared bowl games if they chose.

The Sun Belt would lose some schools, but they are considered the worst FBS conference out there, so they have no stature to lose. They would likely add Georgia Southern and Jacksonville State (and maybe FAMU or Lamar) ramping up rivalries and potentially dramatically improving the footprint in terms of travel costs.

Time to Think Big

UNT has a lot of leverage over schools like UTSA and Texas State that they likely won't have in 10 years time when the next wave of realignment may hit.

If a school has this kind of potential realignment leverage ---and I think UNT does --- I think it will always be a mistake not to use it.

It is time for UNT fans to think big. Our school needs us to push it to become a leader and not a follower at the FBS level.

greenpie · June 23, 2010

Sold! Lets get WACky!

Mean Green 93-98 · June 23, 2010

Interesting thoughts. But where did UNT get all this "leverage" to effectively create their own division?

As the only realistic current FBS team out there the WAC could land (without a MWC collapse) and a school with a large alumni base residing in a huge nationally relevant market, UNT probably has a lot of leverage to push for a better ending position than just team nine in a nine team WAC.

I'm not convinced. The WAC may well come calling again, but I don't think they give a 2-10, Tier 4 school that much more leverage than the established schools in their conference.

chrisfisher · June 23, 2010

Everyone around here seems hell bent on CUSA. Aside from the potential travel expenses, I think the WAC represents a nice upgrade for UNT. Seems like every year lately one of the WAC teams (and not just Boise) are kicking BCS arse. And I like the scenario painted with a bunch of Texas and Louisiana schools in one division. I think folks would travel from San Antonio and San Marcus and us to them for football games. Could start some nice new good ole' Texas rivalry games. I'm sure RV is looking at all conference realignment possibilities.

LongJim · June 23, 2010

There's nothing wrong with the scenario the author poses. Many who are against joining the WAC are against it in it's CURRENT Big West redux configuration. If you add regional rivals/Texas schools, and put them in the same division, that is a totally different animal, and of course it is probably a better situation than the SBC.

VideoEagle · June 23, 2010

It's the Bleacher Report, the only source with less credibility than the Weekly World News.

LongJim · June 23, 2010

It's the Bleacher Report, the only source with less credibility than the Weekly World News.

shrek "Oh, aye." /shrek

Daddy Dumpsalot · June 23, 2010

Please leave U-lala and U-lamo in the belt...where they belong.

Rudy · June 24, 2010

Everyone around here seems hell bent on CUSA. Aside from the potential travel expenses, I think the WAC represents a nice upgrade for UNT. Seems like every year lately one of the WAC teams (and not just Boise) are kicking BCS arse. And I like the scenario painted with a bunch of Texas and Louisiana schools in one division. I think folks would travel from San Antonio and San Marcus and us to them for football games. Could start some nice new good ole' Texas rivalry games. I'm sure RV is looking at all conference realignment possibilities.

Which teams are kicking BcS arse?

LoveMG · June 24, 2010

Which teams are kicking BcS arse?

fresno, hawaii

Monkeypox · June 24, 2010

fresno, hawaii

The 6-7 Hawaii. I guess that win over Washington State was a bigger BCS arse-whooping than I thought. Haven't been a player without June.

What was Fresno, 8-5? Beat Illinois n got their business handled by Wyoming. Again, haven't done much in the last few years.

I'd certainly have trouble making a case that these guys were kicking butt.

As long as we're re-making the WAC in dream scenarios, at least play like you've got a pair:

WAC East:

Texas

A&M

TCU

SMU (personally think we should reject them from our megaconference, but if you don't talk about SMU at least a couple of times a day, some people will shrivel up and die)

Arkansas

North Texas

Louisiana Tech

LSU (just for good measure)

People are like, you know, just rejecting the WAC in its current formation, but I'm sure if the WAC made a division with these teams, North Texas fans would probably be cool with it.

UNTLifer · June 24, 2010

I totally get the "travel sucks in the west" argument, but the WAC is a little fragile right now. They have little in terms of TV markets and have the potential of losing regionally isolated La Tech and possibly San Jose State and New Mexico State to high travel costs and poor turnouts.

Sounds like a conference on the up swing.

MeanGreenTexan · June 24, 2010

Once again, if we want to be grouped in with the big boys, we have to have the same mentality. IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO MONEY!

If moving to the WAC brings in more PROFIT than staying in the SBC, then you have to highly consider moving to that conference. This has to be considered at it's current state as well as future state.

If staying in the Belt brings in more money than moving to the WAC, we should stay right where we are.

I assume that weighing these pro's & con's is what this consultant we brought on is going to do.

buff64 · June 24, 2010

Greenpie had a nice post, well thought out. I think one whould have to rank the MAC as a very low rated conference if not the worst . Look at their attendance the past few years .

VideoEagle · June 24, 2010

Once again, if we want to be grouped in with the big boys, we have to have the same mentality. IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO MONEY!

If moving to the WAC brings in more PROFIT than staying in the SBC, then you have to highly consider moving to that conference. This has to be considered at it's current state as well as future state.

If staying in the Belt brings in more money than moving to the WAC, we should stay right where we are.

I assume that weighing these pro's & con's is what this consultant we brought on is going to do.

There you go making sense again. Don't you know it's all about the "prestige" of being in a conference that is seriously also considering Sacramento State.

hickoryhouse · June 24, 2010

I have to say that the thought of these two FCS schools south of us with such large budgets and athletics fees is a bit scary in the future. The author makes a good point, if we could get the WAC to take a few more teams in our region I love the WAC idea. If we can't I still think that the WAC is a better idea for us than staying in the Belt. Especially when Troy gets asked out by a bigger conference or when MuTS gets a better offer, both of which are going to happen. It is time for us to be proactive, perhaps the WAC is that proactive step that we need to take.... It beats waiting for a CUSA invite that might never happen.

Edited June 24, 2010 by hickoryhouse

PlummMeanGreen · June 24, 2010

We of UNT don't need to be left in a MUT-less or Troy-less SBC. There are no sacred cows in the NCAA anymore, folks. TAMU was ready to leave their siamese twin brother UT and not even look back to a century of tradition as they did it. UNT needs to take on the same attitude albeit I know the situation or stakes are much different for us.

The WAC with an eastern division of UNT, LaTech, UL (Laf.) and Ark. State is an interesting scenario and gets even more interesting when more on this forum start realizing that the Belt & its full membership are hardly in a circle singing kum-bah-yah as some think. Cold and calculating as many thought DeLoss Dodds of UT was in the most recent re-alignment, it might not hurt us at UNT if we took on "dammit', we are going to take care of us" attitude, too; especially if there is even a remote chance we can go up the NCAA food chain. What if UNT were in the WAC and it was us who made the rest of their league forget Boise State; that is, it was UNT that became a perennial Top 25 ranked football program that crashed the BCS bowl party? Wasn't that long ago when Boise State had a hard time beating the Mean Green and at least 2 times were unable to do so. Addendum: Being rewarded as a Bottom 25 team that represents a league as its champion is not what many would call progress. That (alone) should be impetus for UNT to better itself as far as what collegiate neighborhood we ultimately want to be in; that is, when as a Top 25 conference champion you are reward (dramatically) monetarily and moreso, rewarded with the kind of perception we all crave for our alma mater.

If anyone has the answers to all this--will you let the rest of us know? }:>)

Edited June 24, 2010 by PlummMeanGreen

foutsrouts · June 24, 2010

Time to roll the dice and go WACky. Staying in the SBC is like spending decades in an entry level position. We need a stint in a more respected conference if we are going to have the credibility to associate with better regional schools down the road. Time to move up. Even if we somehow dominate the SBC even more than we did at the beginning of the century, people are still going to look at us as a joke because of the company we keep. Not that we qualify as a beautiful babe at this point, but it's kind of like a beautiful babe who hangs out with a bunch of slobs. She just doesn't seem quite so desirable. We can always come back to our entry level position if The WAC implodes down the road.

Mean Green 93-98 · June 24, 2010

Many of you keep making the argument for the WAC if they add ____________, _____________, and _____________ (insert names of various regional teams). If the WAC were to take more regional teams, and particularly if they created a New Mexico/Texas/Louisiana/Arkansas/Oklahoma? division, it would be much more enticing for UNT. But that is a huge leap to assume the WAC will want to add those teams when they had no interest in it last time they offered us.

VideoEagle · June 24, 2010

Many of you keep making the argument for the WAC if they add ____________, _____________, and _____________ (insert names of various regional teams). If the WAC were to take more regional teams, and particularly if they created a New Mexico/Texas/Louisiana/Arkansas/Oklahoma? division, it would be much more enticing for UNT. But that is a huge leap to assume the WAC will want to add those teams when they had no interest in it last time they offered us.

Back in 2004, I believe Fresno, Hawaii, Boise and Nevada all threatened to leave the Wac IF it took a group of NT, Arky State, the Louisiana's, etc. ONE of the group was all they would accept. That was how they ended up with what was their last choice at the time, Idaho. While some NT fans want an Eastern WAC, the current WAC schools most definitely do NOT want one. They will not throw La Tech out, but they still hope La Tech finds a home elsewhere.

PlummMeanGreen · June 24, 2010

Many of you keep making the argument for the WAC if they add ____________, _____________, and _____________ (insert names of various regional teams). If the WAC were to take more regional teams, and particularly if they created a New Mexico/Texas/Louisiana/Arkansas/Oklahoma? division, it would be much more enticing for UNT. But that is a huge leap to assume the WAC will want to add those teams when they had no interest in it last time they offered us.

Totally 100% agree, Mean Green 93-98...but FWIW....isn't this how conference re-alignment talk gets started in the firs place around league conference tables? Didn't at some point the Big 10 Commish had to say to his constituency': "What if we added Nebraska to our league, fellow members?"

Yet it's like GrayEagle posted a few days ago and I liberally paraphrase: "Not much else to do till 2-a-days but talk conference possibilities plus...its sorta' fun."

GMG!

UNTLifer · June 24, 2010

With Troy's academic status, or lack thereof, where would they go? Seriously, it takes more than a successful football program to be enticing to another conference.

Side Show Joe · June 24, 2010

Glad to hear others making good arguments for moving to the WAC. We can't be scared of a Big West conference from 15 years ago. Things change, and if we don't, we will be left behind.

Shof · June 24, 2010

With Troy's academic status, or lack thereof, where would they go? Seriously, it takes more than a successful football program to be enticing to another conference.

Glad to see someone else recalled this little publicized fact. No way CUSA (for ex:) wants Troy. Athletics are fine, but the academic side will factor in negatively.

KRAM1 · June 24, 2010

Could the season hurry up and get here PLEASE. The off-season is way too long as indicated by this never-ending conference this or that stuff. Folks, sit back, relax...believe it or not, you (nor I) have anything to say or do about it. Let the folks that make their living messing with this stuff handle it. They will do what they believe is in the very best interests of UNT and its programs, and we can then watch UNT beat whichever team from whichever conference UNT is playing that day. And, it will do wonders for you blood pressure.

:lol: