WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Get the skinny on Hornet Football and the FCS
User avatar
Kadeezy
Posts: 2431
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:00 am

WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by Kadeezy » Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:27 pm

With the move of Dixie State to DI (led by HC Paul Peterson!), there is much speculation that the Western Athletic Conference (WAC) is aiming to return as a FCS Football Conference. Lots of message boards are chirping on about this, but I wouldn't mind to see this make-up:

New Mexico State
NAU
Dixie State
Southern Utah
Cal Poly
San Diego
UC Davis
Sac State

Alternate: Portland State

8 teams allows for flexibility in non-conf (likely with Big Sky schools, or a money game or two). And you get a true champion each year (no 13 team nonsense...)

Thoughts?
Image

Green Laser
Posts: 895
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 5:16 pm

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by Green Laser » Fri Jan 11, 2019 5:27 pm

Kadeezy wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:27 pm
With the move of Dixie State to DI (led by HC Paul Peterson!), there is much speculation that the Western Athletic Conference (WAC) is aiming to return as a FCS Football Conference. Lots of message boards are chirping on about this, but I wouldn't mind to see this make-up:

New Mexico State
NAU
Dixie State
Southern Utah
Cal Poly
San Diego
UC Davis
Sac State

Alternate: Portland State

8 teams allows for flexibility in non-conf (likely with Big Sky schools, or a money game or two). And you get a true champion each year (no 13 team nonsense...)

Thoughts?
That it a pretty interesting football lineup but I don't think NMSU would go FCS. They are currently a FBS independent since they were kicked out of the Sun Belt. Unlike Idaho, which was in the same position they choose to stay FBS. Maybe their struggles as a FBS independent and the fact that their other teams are in the WAC might change their minds. San Diego is non scholarship and I don't know if they would want to change that, they seem pretty comfortable where they are.
If anything like this was to happen I hope that we could put the other sports in the Big West. I'm sure we would not be welcome in the BSC without football and don't think there are any travel, name recognition values etc. in having everything in the WAC.

HornetHope
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:41 pm

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by HornetHope » Fri Jan 11, 2019 9:35 pm

Kadeezy wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:27 pm
With the move of Dixie State to DI (led by HC Paul Peterson!), there is much speculation that the Western Athletic Conference (WAC) is aiming to return as a FCS Football Conference. Lots of message boards are chirping on about this, but I wouldn't mind to see this make-up:

New Mexico State
NAU
Dixie State
Southern Utah
Cal Poly
San Diego
UC Davis
Sac State

Alternate: Portland State

8 teams allows for flexibility in non-conf (likely with Big Sky schools, or a money game or two). And you get a true champion each year (no 13 team nonsense...)

Thoughts?
We are 6 years out so not going to get wound up in wild speculation, but would say that the President and AD have a plan and they are clearly executing on it.
It's not whether you get knocked down, it's whether you get up.
Vince Lombardi

User avatar
SDHornet
Moderator
Posts: 5000
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 11:49 am

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by SDHornet » Fri Jan 11, 2019 9:59 pm

Dixie State is a good add for the WAC as the move replaces the vacancy created by Bako’s pending departure.

WAC isn't starting football, that is Siouxfan type of conspiracy nonsense talk. WAC FCS FB means NMSU will have to find a new home. They have no intention of dropping FBS status like Idalol...and quite frankly they shouldn't considering they have rivalries with UNM and UTEP.

Dixie State will go FCS Indy and have no problem putting together schedules. They are 120 miles from Vegas so getting home and homes with willing partners in the BSC, Southland, and MVFC shouldn't be an issue. Add in a D2/NAIA home game and FBS money games and their schedule will be set year in and year out. If anything they become a target as a BSC FB only program to balance out the conference scheduling as they are in SUU’s backyard and easy travel to NAU, WSU, UNC, and the CA schools.

Before Bako left the WAC I actually thought the WAC would have been a good home for us. Granted that assumed FB would stay in the BSC, but the WAC has had better bball (from an RPI standpoint) than both the BSC and BW the last 3 years and their additions of private Universities with money to spend on athletics will only push the WAC to new heights (WAC soccer got 2 NCAA bids last season). The travel would actually be better considering the WAC's presence in large metro areas predominately on the West Coast vs the podunk locations in the BSC. Add in a bus trip rivalry with Bako and it probably could have worked out quite well…but without an in-state rival the move now would be no different than the situation we are in with the BSC.

Pass on the BW. That should only be the end game if we completely give up on FB and athletics as a whole. With the willingness Nelsen has shown to invest in athletics, it’s safe to say the BW isn’t even on the radar.
"I never drink anything stronger than gin before breakfast." W.C. Fields

User avatar
SDHornet
Moderator
Posts: 5000
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 11:49 am

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by SDHornet » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:02 pm

HornetHope wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 9:35 pm

We are 6 years out so not going to get wound up in wild speculation, but would say that the President and AD have a plan and they are clearly executing on it.
I agree. I think there will be another realignment circus when the P4 finish consolidating its power during the next round of TV deal negotiations which expire in the mid 2020's. There is no telling how things shake out, but the way things are trending we'll be in a good position to take advantage of whatever opportunities arise.
"I never drink anything stronger than gin before breakfast." W.C. Fields

GreenArmySwarm
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:39 am

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by GreenArmySwarm » Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:22 am

Well, first thing first, I’m happy for Coach Peterson because he was the engineer for some of our “funner” (relative here) football this past decade. Now, he gets a chance to coach at the D1 level so good for him.

Now regarding the WAC/Dixie State/BSC.

WAC: I don’t think they have their sights on FB, I think it’s more of a “we need to find a comparable replacement for “Bako” and they found it in Dixie State. A smaller public school in the West Coast and in a state where there’s a WAC presence already (Utah Valley). That’s was literally it. No conspiracy here of WAC “trying to add fb back”. At least Idt but I’m just a fan so I don’t really know the ins and outs of the WAC commish thought process. So, as for as Olympic sports standpoint, this was a good match for the WAC.

Dixie State: Obviously, you’re always trying to go to the highest level that’s willing to accept you and D1 was what DSU had in mind. The only downfall I see for Dixie State is that there’s already 6 D1 Olympic sports and 5 D1 football school in Utah. I don’t know how they’re going to “out recruit” anyone in the state of Utah nevertheless the West Coast. With that said, they won’t have trouble scheduling like previously mentioned on this board because they’ll be the only Independent (I don’t think for long) FCS school in the West Coast. Every FCS school West of the Mississippi will try to schedule them as a non-conference to get another D1 school under the schedule. ESPECIALLY the BSC schools because, well, people are probably sick of scheduling each other as “non-conference games”. They already have a natural rivalry with SUU and Weber. According to an article I read, the last time SUU and DSU played, they drew over 10 thousand fans. Pretty darn impressive at the FCS level. They already have a 2-1 series set up worth SUU and have something similar in the works with Montana State and Weber. With recruiting aside, pretty solid job by Dixie State for making this jump happen.

BSC: For the record, I don’t want this to happen, but I think BSC eventually extend an invite to Dixie as a full member (after 2022 when they’re eligible for D1 postseason). The fact that the conference HQ is in Utah, and Dixie State will be the only public FCS school West of Colorado that’s not part of the BSC, this is going to happen. I think they’ll eventually split the conference into two division something along the lines of the PAC12. And once the invite is extended, they’ll be jumping up and down in celebration. Let’s just hope SAC can get a few non-conferencen games scheduled with Dixie before this happens.

Super Hornet
Admin
Posts: 2392
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:48 pm

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by Super Hornet » Sat Jan 12, 2019 3:26 pm

Meh. I like the Big Sky...with the exception of SUU. The point of schedule flexibility, though, IS a valid one. Maybe find some schools to replace NAU, Sac, and Davis in that lineup, keeping BBQ in the Sky, as well. Perhaps ship off SUU and UNC to the WAC....

SoCalSacHornetFan
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:52 am

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by SoCalSacHornetFan » Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:59 am

The timing for any realignment that might have opportunities for California teams in my opinion would be w the Mountain West.

The Mountain West Conference TV (2019/2020) deal is up for renegotiation soon and Sac State / UCDavis / Cal Poly might be on the radar for Football?

Why these teams? Supports travel budgets San Diego State, Fresno State & San Jose State having inexpensive travel costs.

Also adds deeper penetration into the CA TV Market that could be developed w Home / Away games that could deliver larger attendance rivalry games in State.


User avatar
Green Cookie Monster
Moderator
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:08 am
Location: 867-5309

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by Green Cookie Monster » Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:23 am

1. NMSU will never join a FCS conference.
2. Dixie State/Cal Baptist in the same conference as 30,000+ student Cali schools? Wont happen.
3. BSC might add Dixie to hedge against Cali schools leaving, but that is another reason for them to leave.
4. SJSU is not sustainable, they will need relief and eat crow. They dont add anything to MWC, so their payout from that group has got to be pittance.
5. FSU & SDSU are gone, never gonna have 40,000 seat Bulldog stadium in same conference as 998 seat Hornet gym.
6. Hawaii is wild card, join and have all sports on far west coast. WAC has to be FBS though.
7. Great hire by Orr and Nelson and subsequently Taylor to his staff.
Image

Hornet Fever
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:38 pm

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by Hornet Fever » Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:47 am

BSC is a very serviceable conference I know traveling can be a challenge at times but its a way better conference than WAC. The WAC answer to losing Bakersfield is picking up Dixie State...WOW what a pick up. To me the WAC is on life-support. But if there is an opportunity to jump to the Mountain West Conference by all means we should try to do that. I’m sure Orr and Nelson has a plan in place over the next 5 years but one of those plans needs to be an upgrade to our facilities before we can even be considered. I can’t help but think being that we have put all this time and money into upgrading our coaching staff for football that it’s only a matter time we start seeing some upgrades around the campus.

HornetHope
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:41 pm

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by HornetHope » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:14 pm

Hornet Fever wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:47 am
BSC is a very serviceable conference I know traveling can be a challenge at times but its a way better conference than WAC. The WAC answer to losing Bakersfield is picking up Dixie State...WOW what a pick up. To me the WAC is on life-support. But if there is an opportunity to jump to the Mountain West Conference by all means we should try to do that. I’m sure Orr and Nelson has a plan in place over the next 5 years but one of those plans needs to be an upgrade to our facilities before we can even be considered. I can’t help but think being that we have put all this time and money into upgrading our coaching staff for football that it’s only a matter time we start seeing some upgrades around the campus.
I figured the next 2 sports to hit reset button will be MBB and WBB, concurrently done with a new arena upgrade announcement and prolly a few WCC level coaches so that all upgrades done at once.
It's not whether you get knocked down, it's whether you get up.
Vince Lombardi

User avatar
SDHornet
Moderator
Posts: 5000
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 11:49 am

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by SDHornet » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:04 pm

Hornet Fever wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:47 am
BSC is a very serviceable conference I know traveling can be a challenge at times but its a way better conference than WAC. The WAC answer to losing Bakersfield is picking up Dixie State...WOW what a pick up. To me the WAC is on life-support. But if there is an opportunity to jump to the Mountain West Conference by all means we should try to do that. I’m sure Orr and Nelson has a plan in place over the next 5 years but one of those plans needs to be an upgrade to our facilities before we can even be considered. I can’t help but think being that we have put all this time and money into upgrading our coaching staff for football that it’s only a matter time we start seeing some upgrades around the campus.
WAC is not on life support. They have re-branded themselves as the primary destination for D2 move-ups west of the Mississippi, and that isn't a bad thing. Also pretty much all of the members have nobody that wants them.
"I never drink anything stronger than gin before breakfast." W.C. Fields

SoCalSacHornetFan
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:52 am

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by SoCalSacHornetFan » Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:55 pm

Green Cookie Monster wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:23 am
1. NMSU will never join a FCS conference.
2. Dixie State/Cal Baptist in the same conference as 30,000+ student Cali schools? Wont happen.
3. BSC might add Dixie to hedge against Cali schools leaving, but that is another reason for them to leave.
4. SJSU is not sustainable, they will need relief and eat crow. They dont add anything to MWC, so their payout from that group has got to be pittance.
5. FSU & SDSU are gone, never gonna have 40,000 seat Bulldog stadium in same conference as 998 seat Hornet gym.
6. Hawaii is wild card, join and have all sports on far west coast. WAC has to be FBS though.
7. Great hire by Orr and Nelson and subsequently Taylor to his staff.

Hornet Stadium seats about 20,000? Plenty of room to add seating once the stadium begins to sell out.

If you’re referring to Basketball facilities if the economics justify it I’m sure the Hornets could play where the Sac Kings (nba) play, while a new on campus arena gets built. Plenty of options should the finances be in play.

User avatar
Green Cookie Monster
Moderator
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:08 am
Location: 867-5309

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by Green Cookie Monster » Mon Jan 21, 2019 1:04 pm

SoCalSacHornetFan wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:55 pm
Green Cookie Monster wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:23 am
1. NMSU will never join a FCS conference.
2. Dixie State/Cal Baptist in the same conference as 30,000+ student Cali schools? Wont happen.
3. BSC might add Dixie to hedge against Cali schools leaving, but that is another reason for them to leave.
4. SJSU is not sustainable, they will need relief and eat crow. They dont add anything to MWC, so their payout from that group has got to be pittance.
5. FSU & SDSU are gone, never gonna have 40,000 seat Bulldog stadium in same conference as 998 seat Hornet gym.
6. Hawaii is wild card, join and have all sports on far west coast. WAC has to be FBS though.
7. Great hire by Orr and Nelson and subsequently Taylor to his staff.

Hornet Stadium seats about 20,000? Plenty of room to add seating once the stadium begins to sell out.
Hornet stadium has room for 21,000, wouldnt call it a seat, more of a 18" wide section of cold, hard, aluminum. Held up by aluminum scaffolding and cinched together with garden netting, hardly a stadium comparable to Bulldog or really any FBS or top-mid FCS level stadium. Its more the amenities, atmosphere, fan experience and comfort, the perception factor is a show stopper in itself.

How does Hornet Stadium pass earthquake code?
Image

User avatar
Green Cookie Monster
Moderator
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:08 am
Location: 867-5309

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by Green Cookie Monster » Mon Jan 21, 2019 1:06 pm

SoCalSacHornetFan wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:55 pm
Green Cookie Monster wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:23 am
1. NMSU will never join a FCS conference.
2. Dixie State/Cal Baptist in the same conference as 30,000+ student Cali schools? Wont happen.
3. BSC might add Dixie to hedge against Cali schools leaving, but that is another reason for them to leave.
4. SJSU is not sustainable, they will need relief and eat crow. They dont add anything to MWC, so their payout from that group has got to be pittance.
5. FSU & SDSU are gone, never gonna have 40,000 seat Bulldog stadium in same conference as 998 seat Hornet gym.
6. Hawaii is wild card, join and have all sports on far west coast. WAC has to be FBS though.
7. Great hire by Orr and Nelson and subsequently Taylor to his staff.

Hornet Stadium seats about 20,000? Plenty of room to add seating once the stadium begins to sell out.
Hornet stadium has room for 21,000, wouldnt call it a seat, more of a 18" wide section of cold, hard, aluminum. Held up by aluminum scaffolding and cinched together with garden netting, hardly a stadium comparable to Bulldog or really any FBS or top-mid FCS level stadium. Its more the amenities, atmosphere, fan experience and comfort, the perception factor is a show stopper in itself.
Image

josephpoint
Posts: 996
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:03 pm

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by josephpoint » Mon Jan 21, 2019 5:57 pm

Always about facilities at Sac State.

No news in years about a new basketball arena.

Football stadium is huge but would be best to have concrete and box seating and move the track to another part of the campus so the football experience is so much better than it currently is. Love our track teams but we need a football stadium without a track around it.

Super Hornet
Admin
Posts: 2392
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:48 pm

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by Super Hornet » Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:38 pm

I highly disagree with you, JP. Of course, that's why this is a FAN board. We all have our own opinions, and our reasons for having them. For me, track is VERY important, not just an afterthought, and I actually want football players on the track team. For the skill position players, sprints keep them in shape, hurdles develop rhythm, and the jumps work on agility. For linemen, the throws develop strength. There's a well-known HS football coach in OH who has won 14 state titles over 30-something years and attributes every one of them to the fact that his football players all do track. The football stadium is the athletic "face" of the campus; if a sport is to be found there, it's important. Track should NOT be on the backburner like wrestling....

BuckeyeHornetFan
Posts: 249
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 9:26 pm

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by BuckeyeHornetFan » Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:02 am

Super Hornet wrote:
Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:38 pm
I highly disagree with you, JP. Of course, that's why this is a FAN board. We all have our own opinions, and our reasons for having them. For me, track is VERY important, not just an afterthought, and I actually want football players on the track team. For the skill position players, sprints keep them in shape, hurdles develop rhythm, and the jumps work on agility. For linemen, the throws develop strength. There's a well-known HS football coach in OH who has won 14 state titles over 30-something years and attributes every one of them to the fact that his football players all do track. The football stadium is the athletic "face" of the campus; if a sport is to be found there, it's important. Track should NOT be on the backburner like wrestling....
I agree with you that track is important. But I also agree with JP that it would be nice if the track was located someplace else other than around the football field. High schools do that for cost and space reasons. But you don’t see it done at marquee college football venues. I get that Sac State isn’t marquee. But you also don’t see it done at fellow Big Sky programs such as Montana and UC Davis. It’s a poor experience. And believe it or not, plays a factor in recruiting.

I realize that space is limited around the Sac State campus. But there are alternatives where the track could have been layed down with new stands erected. Hopefully that’ll happen someday if/when the football program ever reaches new heights and funds become available.

User avatar
iSac
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 11:52 am

Re: WAC Positioning to Bring Back Football at FCS Level?

Post by iSac » Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:57 pm

Fully agreed that finding another home for the track should be a part of any stadium upgrades. It's great for the Sacramento community to have U.S. Olympic Trials and NCAA D1 Outdoor Track and Field Championships; but the track does not align with creating the best football game day experience. Aside from events like these, and although I want them to succeed, little attention is given to the Hornet track and field teams compared to a marquee sport like football. Right now, track wins out over football when comparing their impact on overall facilities vs ROI to the university and fans.
Image

Post Reply