-
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!
WAC chatter
- Thread starter the Rat
- Start date
Im not worried about it at this point. Nothing is really going to happen until the WAC lawsuit against Fresno and Reno gets resolved.
Green Laser
Active member
The more that I hear about the "New WAC" the less interested I am. First UTSA does not even have a football team yet. USTA and Texas State would be a good pick in if LA Tech were to stay along with New Mexico State. The WAC would become a Southwest focused league. I can't see Hawaii staying and I don't think that the Montanas or Portland would be interested.
Talk about a collection of distant. unconnected and uninteresting teams! Our travel expenses would probably double and for what?
We don't know what if any discussions may have taken place between Sac State and the WAC. I have noticed several indications that Sac State may not have ruled out a move to the WAC yet. First when Fullerton announced adding Poly and davis to the BSC he said it would allow the BSC to "maintain" the BSC's presence in California which seemed to indicate that he thought Sac State might be leaving. Second there has been no effort to move our other sports to the Big West which would be a far better fit for our other sports than the Big Sky. The third thing that I found odd is that there are no Big Sky Conference logos on our new turf, I thought that was pretty standard on all the conference's fields. Time will tell, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out!
Talk about a collection of distant. unconnected and uninteresting teams! Our travel expenses would probably double and for what?
We don't know what if any discussions may have taken place between Sac State and the WAC. I have noticed several indications that Sac State may not have ruled out a move to the WAC yet. First when Fullerton announced adding Poly and davis to the BSC he said it would allow the BSC to "maintain" the BSC's presence in California which seemed to indicate that he thought Sac State might be leaving. Second there has been no effort to move our other sports to the Big West which would be a far better fit for our other sports than the Big Sky. The third thing that I found odd is that there are no Big Sky Conference logos on our new turf, I thought that was pretty standard on all the conference's fields. Time will tell, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out!
I disagree. The only way to make this move in the current climate is on the down low. If someone was to bang a drum about Sac State making a move, there would be faculty and other staunchly opposed people clamoring about the move which wouldn't bode well for a Sac State invite. They would complain about how their programs or whatever would potentially see less money.the Rat said:
The operative word is "someone." To make this kind of move with the financial resources needed for such a transition, you need a clamoring of boosters, alumni, and the community excited and willing to support such an endeavor with the commitment to improve facilities. You would have to sell the WAC that it would be in their best interests to invite Sac State. You will always have a grumpy and resistive minority. You don't fear them, you ignore them. The silence from the administration and the lack of visible interest is very telling. I think the addition of UC Davis and Cal Poly to the Big Sky may have further sealed off any chances to pursue promotion. Abandoning regional rivalries to play with the "big boys" in the Central Time Zone holds little appeal and made the argument much harder. You want to spend millions of extra dollars to compete in an unstable conference with teams in Texas and Louisiana? Thanks, but no thanks.
the Rat said:
Actually, I think the WAC already knows of us because of our associate membership with two sports. Since we are part of the league in that sense, we probably don't have to do an all-out sales pitch, unlike TxSt and UTSA.
SJHornet
Active member
The Big Sky did a good job of making the WAC seem a lot less attractive by adding Poly and UCFE. Still, our AD and Prez have remained tight lipped on the whole issue. There wasn’t even a big deal made by the program when the two schools were added. You would think we would have made the loudest applause when we received two regional partners. I don’t know that we are actually going make the move, or should make the move at this point, but I’m sure everyone involved on Sac State’s end is taking their time looking at the matter really closely. If UTSA does get an invite that makes 7. WAC still needs 8. LA Tech and Hawaii are still raising a stink about wanting to be somewhere else. That makes a potential 9 and 10.
I think now the question becomes do we want to go now that we have a better football situation and potential opportunities in the Big West or inviting Poly and UCFE to become full members of the Sky down the road. The FCS is getting stronger, but the FBS still offers great opportunities. UTSA has been very vocal about wanting out of FCS for a while now. I think they have started to burn bridges in their current conference which may make the WAC their savior causing them to be a little more vocal. I know Gonzo wants our athletic department to grow and become more notable to help make Sac State a destination campus and FBS sports may help do that.
We keep waiting...
I think now the question becomes do we want to go now that we have a better football situation and potential opportunities in the Big West or inviting Poly and UCFE to become full members of the Sky down the road. The FCS is getting stronger, but the FBS still offers great opportunities. UTSA has been very vocal about wanting out of FCS for a while now. I think they have started to burn bridges in their current conference which may make the WAC their savior causing them to be a little more vocal. I know Gonzo wants our athletic department to grow and become more notable to help make Sac State a destination campus and FBS sports may help do that.
We keep waiting...
I'd be shocked if Sac State received a WAC invite. To be successful there needs to be complete community involvement in support, fundraising, awareness/goals, etc. None of this has been publicly discussed by the Sac State administration.
UCFE and Poly couldn't pull it off with their deep pockets, methinks the public perception will be if those two schools can't do it, Sac State can't do it either, or has no business doing it.
Still not sure why we aren't clamoring for a Big West membership though. That would bring immediate economic relief.
UCFE and Poly couldn't pull it off with their deep pockets, methinks the public perception will be if those two schools can't do it, Sac State can't do it either, or has no business doing it.
Still not sure why we aren't clamoring for a Big West membership though. That would bring immediate economic relief.
Green Cookie Monster said:
Perhaps the Sky has told us we either have to be full members or none at all. Why would they let us out into only being an associate member? We made a commitment a long time ago to be full members of this conference. If we leave for another conference, it will be for the WAC.
the Rat said:
To me that's the only reason since this announcement that school hasn't announced a press conf. saying we are Big West bound (and really, since all but two of those schools have no football, do we really have anything in common these days with them?).
The question is did the BSC add CP and “the farm extension” to keep Sac State or to keep a Big Sky presence in CA. I think it is the latter; the schools in the BSC depend on CA recruits to keep their team competitive. Just take a look at UM’s roster, 24 are from CA and only 31 from MT. The fact is the BSC was worried about losing their CA connection/pipeline so they broke their long standing line of inviting full members only and allowed CP and “the farm extension” in as football only members. And why is having in-state conference rivals such a big deal all of a sudden? Last time I checked, Sac State has never had an in-state conference rival while in the BSC (BTW we will have one with SJSU in the WAC). Sure it would be a nice change, but imo it doesn’t make or break the decision to go to the WAC. If the BSC really wanted to have a positive impact to persuade Sac State to stay in the BSC for good, they would have forced either CP or “the farm extension” to be a full member so we would have a travel partner for hoops.
I think Sac State makes the move if the WAC can be stabilized; and UTSA and TX State getting an invite would help stabilize it (it lessens the likelihood of LA Tech leaving as well as possibly adds incentive for North Texas to join the WAC). The addition of UM would solidify the WAC. Right now the only thing we know with respect to conference alignment is that anything can happen.
I think Sac State makes the move if the WAC can be stabilized; and UTSA and TX State getting an invite would help stabilize it (it lessens the likelihood of LA Tech leaving as well as possibly adds incentive for North Texas to join the WAC). The addition of UM would solidify the WAC. Right now the only thing we know with respect to conference alignment is that anything can happen.
By adding the Tx schools the WAC is becoming more SW oriented (LA Tech, NMSU, TXSU, UTSA) which makes any benefit for Idaho, Hawaii and SJSU less, through in Sac State and UM and it is very polarized. USU is in the no-man's land.
WAC West:
Sac State
SJSU
Idaho
Hawaii
UM
WAC East:
La Tech
NMSU
TXSU
UTSA
USU
I'd still be shocked silly.
WAC West:
Sac State
SJSU
Idaho
Hawaii
UM
WAC East:
La Tech
NMSU
TXSU
UTSA
USU
I'd still be shocked silly.
1) Yes, Sac State has almost everything in common with the other California schools in the Big West. Plus, the competition would be a step up in soccer, volleyball, basketball, and baseball. And, of course, a move to the BW would reduce travel expenses.
2) The regional rivalries have long been important, to at least me. I didn't like the aversion to not schedule Cal Poly. The creation of the Causeway Cup with Davis has added greatly to the rivalry. Having the two schools join the Big Sky in football was a great move though I hate throwing Davis a lifeline.
3) I am open to moving football to FCS. But, can we deal with reality? Facilities are lacking, specifically arena. Arco and Memorial are not acceptable. Attendance is lacking. I am hearing more "buzz" about the Mountain Lions than Sac State football. People telling me they bought season tickets. Ask them about Sac State football, and they get a blank look. Losing Fresno and Nevada was a huge setback for any reason to join the WAC. Pinning hope on scheduling them out of conference at home is not a sound strategy. Until a number of big time donors step up and SHOW ME THE MONEY, I am not buying that it is a good idea.
2) The regional rivalries have long been important, to at least me. I didn't like the aversion to not schedule Cal Poly. The creation of the Causeway Cup with Davis has added greatly to the rivalry. Having the two schools join the Big Sky in football was a great move though I hate throwing Davis a lifeline.
3) I am open to moving football to FCS. But, can we deal with reality? Facilities are lacking, specifically arena. Arco and Memorial are not acceptable. Attendance is lacking. I am hearing more "buzz" about the Mountain Lions than Sac State football. People telling me they bought season tickets. Ask them about Sac State football, and they get a blank look. Losing Fresno and Nevada was a huge setback for any reason to join the WAC. Pinning hope on scheduling them out of conference at home is not a sound strategy. Until a number of big time donors step up and SHOW ME THE MONEY, I am not buying that it is a good idea.
superhornet
Active member
GCM: Given Karl Benson's public statements, I would NOT be surprised if Sac got an invite. We're already WAC members in good (if associate) standing.
What WOULD surprise me would be if we accepted the invite. The increased travel costs (particularly if HI doesn't revert to the Big West) might outweigh the fiduciary benefits (read: bowl and NCAA Tournament revenue distributions) of the move.
My reasoning is that it seems that Benson's primary duty is to keep the western footprint of the WAC. By trying for Sac/Davis/Montana/etc., he would show the existing WAC stakeholders that he tried and failed in that regard, thereby justifying the south-and-eastward expansion for Texas State and UTSA.
What WOULD surprise me would be if we accepted the invite. The increased travel costs (particularly if HI doesn't revert to the Big West) might outweigh the fiduciary benefits (read: bowl and NCAA Tournament revenue distributions) of the move.
My reasoning is that it seems that Benson's primary duty is to keep the western footprint of the WAC. By trying for Sac/Davis/Montana/etc., he would show the existing WAC stakeholders that he tried and failed in that regard, thereby justifying the south-and-eastward expansion for Texas State and UTSA.
Green Laser
Active member
SDHornet said:
SD,
FYI a little history: We did join the Big Sky with Cal State Northridge in 1996, the first two California teams in the BSC.
The BSC came out and said that the additions would open up the California media market (northern and southern) and help with recruiting. As I recall some of the other BSC fans at the time didn't really want us in because they thought we would have a unfair recruiting advantage. Northridge folded their football team about 2002 and went home to the Big West for the other sports. I suspect that when Northridge realized the Big West was a better fit and only football was requiring them to be in the Big Sky they killed football to help the rest of their sports.
SDHornet said:
They played in a 6500 seat cookie cutter CSU football stadium and did very well for themselves. Really broke the excuse of facilities and coaching turnover equate to losing.
