I offer my congratulations to they who play on the blue turf to the Mountain West Conference. I am sure that the Broncos not only find playing Utah, BYU and TCU more of a challenge than playing Fresno State, Hawaii and Nevada; they will also find UNLV, San Diego State and Wyoming more of a challenge than San Jose State, New Mexico and Utah State.
As "The Swagger" is one of the few Big Sky blogs in the Webosphere, it is becoming more clear how, or if this will effect the Big Sky Conference. Well, the Big Sky should be prepared for the best and the worst. The WAC is down to 8, and one of the reasons, again, is travel. What happens to the WAC will depend on how the PAC-16 and Mountain West realignments shake out.
Montana &?
If the PAC-10 adds, as expected, Texas, Texas A & M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, then the MWC could add the remaining 4 Big 12 programs and the WAC will suffer no more losses. The WAC, if I read the tea leaves correctly, will add Montana and a "team from California" and become a 10-school conference. The team from California is unknown at this point, but is likely to be Cal Poly. The Mustangs will have to add at least 5,000 seats to their stadium, but otherwise would be the best move the WAC could make. Cal Poly is the only division I football school on the Central Coast of California. The WAC could also add UT-San Antonio, who will call the Alamodome home. But the move will not provide access to the Alamo Bowl.
Other options for the WAC, that make sense, include San Diego University, Cal Davis, Sacramento State and Portland State. Weber State has an outside shot at WAC membership, but is really at least 5 years away from making that step. Montana State is a little closer, but also only an outside chance.
For the Big Sky, the aftershocks of this conference expansion will be felt in the Big Sky. At least one, and probably two schools will leave. The bigger problem is still economics. Northern Arizona is not out of the woods, yet. And there are rumblings of Idaho State dropping football as well.
The worst case scenario for the Big Sky is the loss of four or five schools to FBS promotion and the loss of two schools who decide that they can not longer afford football. The remaining programs in the Big Sky would likely join another conference.
Big Sky Schools and Attractiveness to FBS conferences:
1. Montana. Pros: good academics, supported by the community, modern facilities, nearby natural wonders, tradition. Cons: Travel--isolated, potential loss of fan interest if success of Boise State can not be duplicated.
2. Sacramento State. Pros: Major league community (NBA Kings), facilities and easy travel, tradition (baseball), competes in many sports most FCS schools do not. Cons: In the shadow of other programs in California.
3. Portland State. Pros: Major league community (NBA and MLS), recent facility upgrade. Cons: In the shadow of PAC-10 programs, lack of tradition.
4. Montana State. Pros: Community support, growing community, nearby natural wonders. Cons: Isolated, altitude, small community, weather.
5. Weber State. Pros: Major league community (NBA and MLS), good facilities, easy travel, strong academics, nearby natural wonders and tradition. Cons: community support is lacking, in the shadow of Mountain West programs.
6. Eastern Washington. Pros: growing community, good academic reputation. Cons: Isolated, outside of football, competes with another nearby DI school for fan support and local recruits.
7. Northern Colorado. Pros: growing community, academics, nearby natural wonders. Cons: Crowded community with several other division I colleges nearby. Recent DII promotee.
8. Northern Arizona. Pros: facilities, nearby natural wonders. Cons: smaller community, altitude, isolated.
9. Idaho State. Pros: nearby natural wonders. Cons: smaller community, isolated, aging facilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment