runningbomb
Active member
Espn article:
http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=5276064
http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=5276064
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts, upgrade to remove ads and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your BigSkyFans.com experience today!
It's official: Boise St to the MWC
- Thread starter runningbomb
- Start date
runningbomb
Active member
10 minutes later and now it's official.
OldHornet
Active member
As much as I want this move to happen, I really have a hard time believing Sac will be chosen. At best I put us third or even fourth in the list of possible candidates.
1. Montana - they have facilities, fans and tradition. Not the easiest place to get to, but based on the WAC's history I don't think that's an obstacle that precludes admission.
2. Texas St - they are already pursuing a move to FBS. They also have better facilities (and are upgrading as well). Also gains a foothold into Texas HS for recruiting. Could also add UT-San Antonio as a partner - Larry Coker is their new FB Coach so I'm sure he wasn't hired expecting to stay as a smalll FCS player.
3. Portland St - They are much closer from a facilities perspective. The staduim is being renovated to be a soccer stadium so the configuration will be much better. The old Rose Garden is close and I'm sure it's affordable. There isn't another WAC team in Oregon so it does open that market. Fan support is no better than Sac but I believe the other items out weigh those.
4. Sac - Facilities are severly lacking. Yes the FB stadium has seats, but face it there isn't a press box or decent bathrooms. No Arena!
5. Other options that could be ahead of Sac - Montana St (paired with Montana), Weber State (great fit for Utah St.)
I would love being in the WAC, but the question is why would the WAC love to have us? I welcome a realistic answer to that question.
1. Montana - they have facilities, fans and tradition. Not the easiest place to get to, but based on the WAC's history I don't think that's an obstacle that precludes admission.
2. Texas St - they are already pursuing a move to FBS. They also have better facilities (and are upgrading as well). Also gains a foothold into Texas HS for recruiting. Could also add UT-San Antonio as a partner - Larry Coker is their new FB Coach so I'm sure he wasn't hired expecting to stay as a smalll FCS player.
3. Portland St - They are much closer from a facilities perspective. The staduim is being renovated to be a soccer stadium so the configuration will be much better. The old Rose Garden is close and I'm sure it's affordable. There isn't another WAC team in Oregon so it does open that market. Fan support is no better than Sac but I believe the other items out weigh those.
4. Sac - Facilities are severly lacking. Yes the FB stadium has seats, but face it there isn't a press box or decent bathrooms. No Arena!
5. Other options that could be ahead of Sac - Montana St (paired with Montana), Weber State (great fit for Utah St.)
I would love being in the WAC, but the question is why would the WAC love to have us? I welcome a realistic answer to that question.
UM needs to add 2 sports (and facilities) to meet the NCAA minimum for FBS. Apparently UM is also having budget problems. I agree about the travel, however in these economic times, I have to think the member schools would like to save on travel costs and keep it to a minimum. UM has a very small TV market for the WAC to tap into.OldHornet said:
Many posters have TX St as the front runner. I have to assume they are right. UTSA has yet to play a down of football but if they are as committed to going FBS as everyone is saying, they could be a possibility.
I have PSU pegged to be in the same position as Sac State: metropolitan area with a sizable TV market, and facility problems being the biggest hurdle.
See above. And yes Hornet Stadium needs work, but additional support structure (bathrooms & concessions) wouldn't be hard to implement.
I can see Montana peddling its two marquee universities to the WAC as a move up deal, the question is whether they want both of them. I don't know why they would. Not sure about WSU's football facilities but I have seen photos and they are not top of the line. I have no idea if they even want to move up. Given that they will be directly competing with USU, Utah, and BYU for attention and the SLC TV market, WSU looks to be a tough sell.
The WAC would love to have Sac State due to its considerable TV market ($$$), close proximity to current WAC members ($$$ in the form of higher attendance and reduced travel costs), and the talent rich area to be opened up for recruitment by WAC schools. There are more, but these are the reasons that stand out most to me.
OldHornet
Active member
I'm not sure I agree with this thinking. The Sac TV market belongs to the PAC 10, and I don't think that's going to change after all the expansion - regardless of the league Sac is in. Travel costs are a consideration but I have to believe that Fresno and Nevada are spending as much energy to leave the WAC as Sac is to get in. If they leave only SJSU will benefit from a decrease in travel - so Sac's travel costs would probably remain the same. As for recruiting market, WAC teams already take a significant number of prospects from the Sacramento market. Sac entering the WAC might make it more competitive for those teams rather than opening a newer market.
Again let me state I would LOVE for Sac St to move to the WAC - it would be huge for us. I just think everyone else see's the opportunity as well. But I will keep the faith!
I don't disagree with your points as they all tell part of the story. With respect to recruiting, having the WAC teams play in Sacramento every other year will allow the recruit to see their courting team in action, something I would think most coaches would want. Plus a trip to Sac would allow the coaches to get some recruiting done while they are here to play the Hornets.OldHornet said:
Yes the Pac-10 has a large interest in the Sac TV market, but realize the a home Sac State game would probably be scheduled such that it isn't going head to head against a regional Pac-10 game.
I also agree that if Fresno and Reno leave the WAC, a ton of advantages are thrown out the window with respect to Sac State being in the WAC.
Kadeezy
Active member
So, if we were to actually move up, wouldn't the Causeway have to be suspended until UCD moved up? I can't think of any FBS schools who have an FCS main rival. Seems to me to be a risky proposition for an FBS team to drop down for an emotionally charged game like that... Kind of a lose/lose for us...
aggiemba said:
Keep smoking that crack pipe Farmer John...
Screw the Causeway if we get in the WAC. I can guarantee UCFE isn't thinking about what moving up for them would do to Causeway.
SloStang said:
Not forgetting, just no talk about it. Your board hasn't even brought the subject up. Plus your president is a lame duck, probably nothing will happen until a replacement is brought in and then you'd have to hope has the same sports mindset.
Only longterm issue for SLO is its location; limited market and travel options. This expansion will be based solely on $$$ and potential for more $$$. Tradition & rivalries are secondary.
superhornet
Active member
There's a good possibility that Montana's WAC candidacy may be held up in internal politics with Bozo a la Boise/Idaho. The WAC doesn't want to see another Idaho, and that's what they're likely to get with Bozo, which already has a coaching fiasco in the recent past. That alone would give a Sac candidacy a higher priority than Montana.
Cow Poly? Harder to get to, but some pretty good facilities. The basketball arena would likely have to be replaced, but so does Sac's. Could be a wash. If the Manure Pile isn't taken, Cow Poly would make a pretty good travel partner for Sac, which could be an argument for calling up both. MP's 10K NEW stadium would likely argue against THEM. I'd put a CP candidacy LIGHT YEARS ahead of UCFE.
That said, I'm still against a Sac move-up. I'm merely comparing the value of various candidacies as I see them.
Cow Poly? Harder to get to, but some pretty good facilities. The basketball arena would likely have to be replaced, but so does Sac's. Could be a wash. If the Manure Pile isn't taken, Cow Poly would make a pretty good travel partner for Sac, which could be an argument for calling up both. MP's 10K NEW stadium would likely argue against THEM. I'd put a CP candidacy LIGHT YEARS ahead of UCFE.
That said, I'm still against a Sac move-up. I'm merely comparing the value of various candidacies as I see them.
