Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Cowboy

The WAC 16 would’ve been in Autonomy

Recommended Posts

Looking at this line up of schools, it seems crazy now that the WAC 16 didn’t stay the course.

Thats a good league.

9 of the WAC 16 are current MWC members... plus 1 B12 (TCU), 1 P12 (UTAH), 2 AAC (SMU & Tulsa), etc.

In the place of those schools now is Utah State, Boise State, etc

AFF7935E-50A4-4A97-9535-6B03F0A88AC2.jpeg

3mxsBs3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an aside, I think the new WAC really pulled off a decent league for the future.

A hybrid model would’ve been the best for the teams that remained as the MWC, if we could have pull

 

ed the ZAGS and a couple others, while keeping FB numbers at 9.

The Texas-centric WAC learned from the current MWC and really cobbled together a cohesive group. They are taking advantage of the MWC staying out of Texas to make up ground with the MWC.

3mxsBs3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a different universe where the WAC-16 DID stay the course (with the exception of TCU leaving for Big-12 in 2011, Utah leaving for Pac-12 in 2011 and BYU jumping to indy) my question is what happens to USU/Nevada/New Mexico State/BSU? They don't really have a logical place to go without the WAC-16 falling apart. Does BSU become the North Dakota State of the fcs? or do they just never fully develop?

Does the Big West stay more relevant in basketball (all 4 of those schools were in the Big West at the time of the WAC-16)? Does the Big West keep a fcs football. Would those fcs school just try to jump up the fbs as a new conference. Utah State, Boise State, Nevada, New Mexico State, Idaho, North Texas, Arkansas State all are currently in fbs (or in the case of Idaho were) anyways. They just would have needed to find one more member to try to create a fbs conference. Maybe UC Davis (they joined fcs in 1996) or another Texas school. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer is those schools you mentioned likely remain with the Big West until at least 2005.  When the quartet of Boise, Cal Poly, North Texas and Idaho joined in 1996 it was the Sick Man of the West.  but still an FBS conference with the Las Vegas Bowl in 1996 and then Humanitarian Bowl.

 

In this alternate universe of the WAC-16 alive and well, you change several things beyond the Boise/USU/NNSU/Nevada dynamic.   

 

- Cal Poly likely moves up to FBS eventually (2005?), in the Big West. 

- Cal State Northridge, who originally replaced Boise in the Big Sky and then the Big West, at least remains in the Big Sky and holds onto football. 

- UC Davis, Cal State Bakersfield, UC Riverside and Grand Canyon all remain in Division 2. Because with the WAC-16 and (somehow) FBS Big West in existence there is no room or no need for any of them.  Maybe Davis gets the call, but not until the late 2000s at least.

- Seattle never joins the WAC.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The WAC had the same chance of getting a place at the big table that the MWC did.

 

 

None

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Mexico State? Huh? NMSU was never in the WAC.

CSUN? A friend of mine was on their staff when the school shut down football and he would say this. The Cal-NOW settlement destroyed any chance of CSUN continuing to play even in the Big West much less the Big Sky. SLO isn't a good comparison because it's sufficiently geographically separate from any other college program that it has no local competition. L.A. traffic notwithstanding, CSUN is only half an hour from USC and 20 minutes from UCLA.

As to the nineties WAC, you have to be old like me to be able to remember it. My recollection is the problem in expanding beyond 10 was agreeing to take in the SWC leftovers not named Houston plus SJSU and Tusla, which was then independent. Adding Fresno and UNLV made sense since the Rebels were at the top of the college hoops world and Fresno State had been dominating the Big West and theoretically brought the old California Bowl when the WAC was desperate for more bowl game opportunities. (I can't recall why Hawaii was also offered.)

Here's a good synopsis of how YBU, which was then the class of the WAC, thought of the expansion to 16: 

https://www.deseret.com/1994/9/8/19129567/bigger-not-necessarily-better-with-future-mediocre-additions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, 818SUDSFan said:

New Mexico State? Huh? NMSU was never in the WAC.

CSUN? A friend of mine was on their staff when the school shut down football and he would say this. The Cal-NOW settlement destroyed any chance of CSUN continuing to play even in the Big West much less the Big Sky. SLO isn't a good comparison because it's sufficiently geographically separate from any other college program that it has no local competition. L.A. traffic notwithstanding, CSUN is only half an hour from USC and 20 minutes from UCLA.

As to the nineties WAC, you have to be old like me to be able to remember it. My recollection is the problem in expanding beyond 10 was agreeing to take in the SWC leftovers not named Houston plus SJSU and Tusla, which was then independent. Adding Fresno and UNLV made sense since the Rebels were at the top of the college hoops world and Fresno State had been dominating the Big West and theoretically brought the old California Bowl when the WAC was desperate for more bowl game opportunities. (I can't recall why Hawaii was also offered.)

Here's a good synopsis of how YBU, which was then the class of the WAC, thought of the expansion to 16: 

https://www.deseret.com/1994/9/8/19129567/bigger-not-necessarily-better-with-future-mediocre-additions

Fresno came on in like 1992. That add made sense. Hawaii was around since like 1980 or something. Those adds made sense and conference leadership should have stayed at 10, with a possible expansion to 12 down the road a piece. The rest of it was just fluff that didn't add anything, really, in hindsight. Plus it would have maintained 2 non-PAC conferences out west IMO. The West would be a lot better off had that happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, 818SUDSFan said:

New Mexico State? Huh? NMSU was never in the WAC.

CSUN? A friend of mine was on their staff when the school shut down football and he would say this. The Cal-NOW settlement destroyed any chance of CSUN continuing to play even in the Big West much less the Big Sky. SLO isn't a good comparison because it's sufficiently geographically separate from any other college program that it has no local competition. L.A. traffic notwithstanding, CSUN is only half an hour from USC and 20 minutes from UCLA.

As to the nineties WAC, you have to be old like me to be able to remember it. My recollection is the problem in expanding beyond 10 was agreeing to take in the SWC leftovers not named Houston plus SJSU and Tusla, which was then independent. Adding Fresno and UNLV made sense since the Rebels were at the top of the college hoops world and Fresno State had been dominating the Big West and theoretically brought the old California Bowl when the WAC was desperate for more bowl game opportunities. (I can't recall why Hawaii was also offered.)

Here's a good synopsis of how YBU, which was then the class of the WAC, thought of the expansion to 16: 

https://www.deseret.com/1994/9/8/19129567/bigger-not-necessarily-better-with-future-mediocre-additions

NMSU joined the WAC the same time Idaho and Utah State joined from the Sun Belt/Indy to replace the members that left to CUSA (Rice, Tulsa, UTEP, etc) in 2005

Hawaii joined for football in 1979 after the completion of Aloha Stadium and a jump to full time D1 athletics. This was after Arizona and Arizona St left to the PAC. A large 50k stadium that brought in huge attendance back then (over 40k-50k easily every game). The Olympic sports later joined in the 90’s from the Big West as it brought the athletics under one conference and the WAC probably was deemed a ‘better’ one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there was no money. it never could have stuck together

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ShoichiKUN808 said:

NMSU joined the WAC the same time Idaho and Utah State joined from the Sun Belt/Indy to replace the members that left to CUSA (Rice, Tulsa, UTEP, etc) in 2005

Hawaii joined for football in 1979 after the completion of Aloha Stadium and a jump to full time D1 athletics. This was after Arizona and Arizona St left to the PAC. A large 50k stadium that brought in huge attendance back then (over 40k-50k easily every game). The Olympic sports later joined in the 90’s from the Big West as it brought the athletics under one conference and the WAC probably was deemed a ‘better’ one

Thanks for the info on your school. I knew you guys joined the WAC the same year as SDSU as replacements for the Zona schools but I wasn't aware Aloha Stadium was brand new at the time.

As to the highlighted portion, that just shows how much attention I paid to the WAC in its final form. NMSU and Idaho? What a terrible decision that was by the WAC. Given what's available, for the MWC to add two more schools if Boise should leave rather than just one or none would be equally dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Joe from WY said:

The WAC 10 would have been a power conference if it had stuck together.

WAC-16, not so much.

I’m not so sure about that.  I’m guessing this is the lineup you’re referring to?

AFA, BYU, CSU, FSU, Hawaii, New Mexico, SDSU, Utah, UTEP, Wyoming

I really don’t think that lineup would’ve been allowed to sit at the power conference table - no truly marquee blue-blood program, inconsistent play across the conference, small TV geographies and interest, lack of fan support, etc. relative to power conferences. Agree on no chance for the WAC-16 abomination.

 

v0icAvfW.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, NorCalCoug said:

I’m not so sure about that.  I’m guessing this is the lineup you’re referring to?

AFA, BYU, CSU, FSU, Hawaii, New Mexico, SDSU, Utah, UTEP, Wyoming

I really don’t think that lineup would’ve been allowed to sit at the power conference table - no truly marquee blue-blood program, inconsistent play across the conference, small TV geographies and interest, lack of fan support, etc. relative to power conferences. Agree on no chance for the WAC-16 abomination.

You're forgetting just how good your school was in the eighties and nineties in both football and basketball. Utah was still pretty meh but would become really good and under Lubick, CSU had one of the best non-power conference football programs in the country. You are correct, of course, about the small TV geographies which is something which plagues the MWC to this day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, 818SUDSFan said:

You're forgetting just how good your school was in the eighties and nineties in both football and basketball. Utah was still pretty meh but would become really good and under Lubick, CSU had one of the best non-power conference football programs in the country. You are correct, of course, about the small TV geographies which is something which plagues the MWC to this day.

BYU wasn’t good enough or carried enough cachet alone to carry the WAC into power conference status.  They had already seen a pretty significant decline in the 90’s....  and being excluded from even consideration for a BCS bowl in 1996 is evidence that they weren’t readily accepted as a power conference type program - at least perception-wise.

v0icAvfW.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, happycamper said:

there was no money. it never could have stuck together

The conference just had to hang in there for another couple of years until the next TV contract.

I think we'd likely be in a similar spot anyway.  TCU/Utah still get picked off.  Even if the WAC had gotten an auto-bid, it would have lost it again.

Boise and Nevada get back filled in.  Maybe there's a chance we could have poached Houston/Cincinatti when the Big East imploded.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

23 hours ago, 818SUDSFan said:

New Mexico State? Huh? NMSU was never in the WAC.

CSUN? A friend of mine was on their staff when the school shut down football and he would say this. The Cal-NOW settlement destroyed any chance of CSUN continuing to play even in the Big West much less the Big Sky. SLO isn't a good comparison because it's sufficiently geographically separate from any other college program that it has no local competition. L.A. traffic notwithstanding, CSUN is only half an hour from USC and 20 minutes from UCLA.

As to the nineties WAC, you have to be old like me to be able to remember it. My recollection is the problem in expanding beyond 10 was agreeing to take in the SWC leftovers not named Houston plus SJSU and Tusla, which was then independent. Adding Fresno and UNLV made sense since the Rebels were at the top of the college hoops world and Fresno State had been dominating the Big West and theoretically brought the old California Bowl when the WAC was desperate for more bowl game opportunities. (I can't recall why Hawaii was also offered.)

Here's a good synopsis of how YBU, which was then the class of the WAC, thought of the expansion to 16: 

https://www.deseret.com/1994/9/8/19129567/bigger-not-necessarily-better-with-future-mediocre-additions

 

Cal-NOW settlement happened in 1993.  CSUN held onto football until 2001 :shrug:.  In the WAC-16 scenario they don't join the Big West because Nevada, Boise and NMSU are still there.  Meaning CSUN has to hold onto football and Big Sky membership - or they stay in Division 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jdgaucho said:

Cal-NOW settlement happened in 1993.  CSUN held onto football until 2001 :shrug:.  In the WAC-16 scenario they don't join the Big West because Nevada, Boise and NMSU are still there.  Meaning CSUN has to hold onto football and Big Sky membership - or they stay in Division 2.

Note that shutting the program down was long anticipated yet it had been in existence for 40+ years.

I acknowledge I misspoke when I said my friend was still at CSUN when the program was shut down as he moved on before 2001.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, 818SUDSFan said:

Note that shutting the program down was long anticipated yet it had been in existence for 40+ years.

I acknowledge I misspoke when I said my friend was still at CSUN when the program was shut down as he moved on before 2001.

 

Duly noted for both statements.  But it certainly helped CSUN that the Big West dropped football one year earlier.  Because again, if the WAC-16 lasts they have nowhere to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...