Wac Officially Contacts Utsa And Texas St

[KoldBeer]

The San Antonio paper said UTSA and Texas St have officially met with the WAC. Both will be giving formal presentations to the WAC soon. If the WAC can survive, I'm guessing at least one of those schools gets an invite. The article says the WAC has talked to 6 to 8 schools (with some in the FBS division).

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/utsa_texas_state_officially_on_wac_radar_103016944.html

Parts of story...

Western Athletic Conference commissioner Karl Benson said UTSA athletic officials will likely be asked to reprise an informal presentation they gave Wednesday in Denver for the league's membership committee in the next two weeks, potentially advancing the school's quest to reach the Football Bowl Subdivision.

Benson met with UTSA athletic director Lynn Hickey, head football coach Larry Coker and department deputies Brad Parrott and Jim Sarra for about three hours Wednesday morning to hear the school's case for membership in the WAC.

Benson said Texas State athletic director Larry Teis and school president Denise Trauth made a similar presentation about six weeks ago in Denver and would likely be asked to meet again with WAC members on the same day as UTSA. He said he didn't think the two schools, rival members of the Southland Conference, would either hurt or help the other's cause.

Louisiana Tech athletic director Bruce Van De Velde said the addition of UTSA would “really help” his school.

“We love it because they're in the Central Time Zone, and we recruit to Texas,” he said. “I think it would be a nice fit for them. We'll see what happens.”

[Green Mean]

Let the barrage of conference realignment talk begin.

[pollock]

Meh.

[PlummMeanGreen]

Likely not to happen, but.......wouldn't it be the ultimate kick in the butt for UNT if that conference with their 2 proposed Texas additions (still) produced a BCS Bowl Buster team? And we would still be standing firm, faithful, loyal & prudent with the SBC?

GMG!

Question: Didn't TSU (SM) officials say 2 weeks ago that the WAC would not work well with their future plans to be in the FBS? If not--what will?

GMG!!

Edited September 16, 2010 by PlummMeanGreen

[MDH]

Awaits post by chrisattsu

[GoMeanGreen1999]

I don't really understand these WAC threads...virtually no one here wants to go the WAC.

[yyz28]

I don't really understand these WAC threads...virtually no one here wants to go the WAC.

That's not accurate at all... last poll I saw was about 40%-60% against... hardly "nobody at all".

I'm sorry, but if we don't get a CUSA invite somewhere in the near future and other schools now who don't have FBS teams today manage to get into the WAC, we've been left behind.

WAC isn't my first choice, but it is better than where we are now.

[untbowler]

The WAC is Sun Belt West, no more no less. Take out Boise St and the rest of the teams are not much better than the Sun Belt Teams, now take out Nevada and Fresno and Sun Belt is actually better. Let them take Tx State and UTSA, it only makes the Sun Belt look stronger.

[jtm0097]

Let them be in the WAC, they will lose there too.

[DeepGreen]

I don't get it. Without Fresno, Nevada, and Boise, the WAC is practically toast as for as respectability goes. Adding TSU-San Marcus and UTSA won't change that.

This the power of that WAC patch that strong?

[yyz28]

The second best thing to happen behind a CUSA bid for us is an eventual admission by both the SBC and the WAC that they need each other and a joining of forces into a divisional conference.

[Green Mean]

What would be funny is if/when UTSA and TSU get into the WAC, it will be their foot in the door for FBS football. I really wouldn't be surprised if the SBC stole UTSA and TSU from the WAC after 3 or 4 years since they would be a better addition to the SBC.

[H-towngreen]

Isn't there a hold on any teams moving up to D-1 for a while?

[Cerebus]

Isn't there a hold on any teams moving up to D-1 for a while?

The moratorium expires next year.

[Baby Arm!]

I don't really understand these WAC threads...virtually no one here wants to go the WAC.

I don't want the WAC, but if you add two Texas schools to La Tech? It becomes more a more interesting option. However first choice would be CUSA

[rcade]

WAC isn't my first choice, but it is better than where we are now.

The only thing the WAC has going for it is a historic name. The current teams are no better than the Sun Belt.

[GrayEagle]

The moratorium expires next year.

June 30 to be exact.

Whether they'll have much respect or not will depend on whether they can retain Hawaii.

[aztecskin]

The WAC means nothing to me. Neither does the SBC. What matters is winning and winning against schools that people care about.

Lots of you cry about how we could have been Boise or whatever. Yeah, we could have, if we continued our unbeaten run in the SunBelt, gave BCS schools a scare now and then and were in the NO bowl every year.

Sure it helps if you have politicians pulling strings for you in Austin. Sure it helps if you are ideally located in a major market with a crapload of big money donors. That doesn't always get you a sweet spot. Ask TCU, SMU, and Rice. Baylor lucked out twice. If they don't start pulling a Texas Tech and upset UT and OU every once in a while they might not get lucky a third time.

I'm not bashing conference realignment talk -- it can be interesting. I am knocking the weird, misplaced feeling of entitlement that we have. 'North Texas deserves to be in the Big 12 because we are North Texas' is poor reasoning.

So maybe we tone down the 'What are we going to do when we win the lottery?' talk and maybe embrace regional rivals like Guadalupe River State - Home of the drunken tubers and ootsah -- the fightin' commuters.

I agree that there is no difference between the scrubby WACK schools and the scrubby SBC guys. There will be no difference between them and TxSt and UTSA either, except they are closer and easier to get up for -- which is more entertaining, financially beneficial, and potentially ego-boosting.

[rcade]

I agree that there is no difference between the scrubby WACK schools and the scrubby SBC guys. There will be no difference between them and TxSt and UTSA either, except they are closer and easier to get up for -- which is more entertaining, financially beneficial, and potentially ego-boosting.

I'd love to see us in a conference with UTSA and Teas State. Just not at the price of being in another Big West. They should join the Belt.

[GangGreen]

So the WAC will be:

Hawaii

Idaho

La. Tech

Utah St.

New Mexico St.

San Jose St.

Texas St.

UTSA

Throw out Hawaii, Idaho, and SJSU. Add UNT, Ulala, ULM and Ark St. If this is the case, I'm all for it.

UNT

Ulala

ULM

Ark. St.

La. Tech

Utah St.

New Mexico St.

Texas St.

UTSA

[Coach Andy Mac]

Having San Antonio and San Marcos as destinations would be good for us.

[untjim1995]

The WAC means nothing to me. Neither does the SBC. What matters is winning and winning against schools that people care about.

Lots of you cry about how we could have been Boise or whatever. Yeah, we could have, if we continued our unbeaten run in the SunBelt, gave BCS schools a scare now and then and were in the NO bowl every year.

Sure it helps if you have politicians pulling strings for you in Austin. Sure it helps if you are ideally located in a major market with a crapload of big money donors. That doesn't always get you a sweet spot. Ask TCU, SMU, and Rice. Baylor lucked out twice. If they don't start pulling a Texas Tech and upset UT and OU every once in a while they might not get lucky a third time.

I'm not bashing conference realignment talk -- it can be interesting. I am knocking the weird, misplaced feeling of entitlement that we have. 'North Texas deserves to be in the Big 12 because we are North Texas' is poor reasoning.

So maybe we tone down the 'What are we going to do when we win the lottery?' talk and maybe embrace regional rivals like Guadalupe River State - Home of the drunken tubers and ootsah -- the fightin' commuters.

I agree that there is no difference between the scrubby WACK schools and the scrubby SBC guys. There will be no difference between them and TxSt and UTSA either, except they are closer and easier to get up for -- which is more entertaining, financially beneficial, and potentially ego-boosting.

great post--those two startups down to the south COULD turn in to great in-state rivals within the confines of the SBC. I think folks here get scared of giving those schools an advantage, but they forget that we have been blackballed that way for decades here in the state. It just seems ironic that we look down at Texas State, yet we complain incessantly about SMU and others looking down on us. Imagine, just for a moment, how cool it would be to have rivals in the state of Texas. We would get a trip to one of the best areas to visit in the state every year. I can assure that recruits' families in this state would be more thrilled to see their sons play Texas State than South Alabama, just as they would enjoy going to San Antonio for a game instead of Miami. If we cannot get into CUSA or MWC, then the SBC is just going to be our home for a long time to come. It would help our league to get some more Texas exposure. And, I will say this about those two upstarts. If they both do go the WAC and have success over the course of the next five years, someone in one of those coveted conferences that we would love to be in, will give them a call about joining. It all depends on attendance and support, but those untapped markets are going to be real attractive to somebody one day. I just think the SBC could do worse than to invite them in once they become FBS programs.

[forevereagle]

Isn't the reason that the SBC is perceived as the bottom of the barrel because it is the perceived destination for FCS schools that move up? If this happens, then what does that mean for the WAC, doesn't that move them to the bottom?

[Chrisattsu]

Awaits post by chrisattsu

I'm here, work keeps me from posting during the day.

The meeting is great, but it is nothing really new. We've known that the WAC was going to need to reload, and reload fast, if they want to survive as a conference. If the WAC can survive the departure of these teams then Bobcatfans are going to be lucky as we are one of the few teams in their 'footprint' that is ready to go. The other schools normally mentioned along Texas State include Cal Poly, UC-Davis, Sac State, Portland State, Montana, and UTSA. Poly and Davis just signed on as football-only members of the Big Sky and it does not appear that they will be leaving any time soon. Montana has the fanbase and success in FCS to warrant a move, but they are not likely at this time. Sac is already an affiliate member of the WAC for some sports, maybe they will pair up with Portland and bolster the west. However, like someone already mentioned, FCS teams can't make a move until June 30 because of the Moratorium.

Even if it wasn't for the Moratorium, all of the teams listed with the exception of UTSA is playing football right now. I would think that there is some discussion that if an invite was coming, hold off, see how the candidates do in the FCS playoffs, and then invite after the season is done. Once we accept a WAC bid, we forfeit any chances at a conference championship (or Automatic Playoff bid).

I started coming on this board and the SBC board when our "Drive" was taking off because I hoped that we might join UNT in the SBC. I liked the idea of moving up to FBS, and still having an instate rival. It currently looks like the SBC is not interested in taking us and the WAC may be our only opportunity. Even if we don't end up in the same conference, I hope we still play regularly.

[aztecskin]

untjim, that's a great point about the SBC looking ahead.

The other thing to remember is that the SBC is us--it isn't a separate body outside of our sphere of influence. NT has some sway to maybe make a play for those schools.

Again, the potential rivalry will not only benefit our three schools but the conference as a whole because of the buzz.

The regional championship brings more prestige than champion of the ragtag fbs teams. It's why I don't think any big 12 fan got up for Iowa St victories or why Neb felt more compatibility in Big Televen country.

If we made a commitment to be SWC-lite I think it could work. It's like 3A champ I suppose. I dont mind competing to be the best Other Texas college football team. We'd still have the awesome basketball team leading the cause for national respectability.