Like many Americans, I got completely caught up in the Olympic games this summer. It had me longing to see the games come back to the states and disappointed that Chicago lost its bid to host the 2016 games to Rio. However, this got me thinking: What if Columbus, Ohio could host a games? How sweet would it be if my hometown could have a games of their own?! Fellow blogger Brock Hutchison and I got to thinking and we concluded that it wouldn't be that unrealistic:
Columbus is a rapidly growing city that's forward thinking and very cosmopolitan. Something like 70% of the US population are within a day's drive of the city so we can expect a huge turn out from fans of the host nation. We don't necessarily have the public transit system in place but Columbus's freeway system is very efficient--what if we just created a massive bus system to handle the traffic? After the games some of the extra buses could just be sold off. We can also probably figure out where to house all the extra tourists but we will cross the road when we get there.
As for venues and the Olympic Village I think I have an answer for that. Ohio Stadium, home of my near and dear the Ohio State University Buckeyes football program would make a perfect venue. At it's current capacity it seats 102,329 spectators which would be way bigger than London's Olympic Stadium.The old girl was built in 1922 however and she is showing her age. She could however use a major facelift and modernization to get her ready for the games. This update would be well worth the investment as the Buckeyes would be able to benefit from the upgrades long after the Olympic flame is extinguished.
For the indoor events Columbus has Value City Arena, Nationwide Arena, Saint John Arena, and the Columbus Convention Center all as potential venues. The Jesse Owens Track and Field Facility right by the Horseshoe could also be used for the games. Even if the Columbus bid cannot get baseball and softball returned to the Olympic games Huntington Park, the 10,100 seat home of the Columbus Clippers Triple-A baseball team, down in the Arena District could also be called upon to host some events, maybe beach volleyball. Crew Stadium, which holds 20,145, would be another ideal Olympic venue and could easily be expanded to seat more. The nearby Celeste Center at the Ohio State Fairgrounds could also be renovated/replaced to serve as yet another venue for some of the lesser events.
Typically, Olympic soccer utilizes large stadiums in nearby cities. Columbus has so many nearby venues that could be host--Browns Stadium in Cleveland, Paul Brown Stadium in Cincinnati, and Heinz Field in Pittsburgh would all be great. If the indoor stadiums in Indianapolis and Detroit (Lucas Oil and Ford Fields respectively) were big enough to accommodate the field they would be great too. Smaller venues that currently host American football at a collegiate level exist all over the state at University of Cincinnati, Miami University, Ohio University, Kent State University, University Of Akron, Youngstown State University, Bowling Green State University, and University of Toledo. If additional indoor arenas are needed there are a multitude of those within a short drive of Columbus--Unversity of Dayton, University of Cincinnati, and Xavier University all have basketball venues that would work and they are all relatively close. Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland would also be great. The games could really become an Ohio affair.
Sure we would have to build a new Aquatics Center because Columbus doesn't have anything that could handle Olympic swimming and water polo but with so many other stadia already in place this doesn't seem too bad. This venue would be a great legacy for the games and would allow Columbus to host future world class swimming events. For the canoeing and 10K swim the Hoover Reservoir would be a great place to have it. I Have no idea how much space is needed for the sailing events but just north of Ohio is one of the world's largest bodies of fresh water--I think we could host it there either somewhere near Cleveland or perhaps Put-in-Bay.
Building an Olympic Village to accommodate all of the athletes is a prerequisite for hosting the games. Why not partner with the Ohio State University and have the Olympic Village there near the campus and all the university's facilities being used for the games and have the university assume control of the Olympic Village after the games so that they can be used as dormitories in much the same way that Georgia State University, then a commuter school, did with the Olympic Village in Atlanta in 1996. In the process, much the slummy areas around campus could be revitalized by replacing run down houses with the new Olympic Village.
If Columbus got the 2020, or a future Summer Olympic Games, it would be huge for Ohioans and Americans in general. It would launch the city onto a global stage and for two weeks all the world's eyes would be on us. But how could Columbus convince the International Olympic Committee to pick us? We're not a huge metropolis by any means, nor do we have a storied history. The IOC loves a warm fuzzy story, particularly one with a progressive, open-minded flavor, and I think Columbus has one that we can use to steer the games our way. I think we make this games all about Ohio State alumnus Jesse Owens, who in 1936 at the Berlin Games defied Hitler and his theories of Aryan supremacy when he won 4 gold medals in track and field. If we make the games about celebrating diversity and combating racism and prejudice I think we can land these games.
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Thursday, August 9, 2012
CAA expansion has arrived!
The Stony Brook Seawolves and Albany Great Danes are coming the CAA in 2013---but they are only bringing their football teams. Their other sports will stay in the America East Conference. This is good news for CAA football. It gives this league 10 members for football and they will be able to play either an 8 or 9 game conference schedule. It also means that their are still 3 spots open in the CAA for non-football schools. The CAA is also reportedly in talks with Rhode Island about staying around for football instead of following through on their plans to depart for the NEC.
Let's break this down:
The desire to keep Rhode Island, an 11th program, surely means they have a 12th in mind. My money is on a cooperation with the America East and the CAA to bring Central Connecticut St--a lone state school in the private school NEC--to the America East for all-sports and to the CAA for football.
This would give a depleted AmEast a much needed 9th member and, should the CAA keep the Rhode Island Rams football program, a northern division of 4 New England schools and the 2 New York schools and a southern division that includes the Midatlantic and Virginia schools.
Another possibility is that one of the three all-sports members that the CAA has their eyes on has a football program they would need to bring with them and that is football member #12. I think this possibility is doubtful because most every school they would be going after would rather be moving to the SoCon and the SoCon will surely have some openings coming open should Charleston and Davidson (and possibly UNC-Greensboro as well) defect to the CAA.
The Ripples:
The NEC takes a huge hit but not a deathblow. The loss of Albany, Rhode Island, and Central Connecticut State leaves them with just 7 football schools. Picking up Marist would be a good option for them.
The Big South is in even bigger trouble--Stony Brook drops them to 6 football members and I see the SoCon taking another 2 maybe even 3. Their only hope, as I've said before, is to get the non-scholarship and emerging programs in the South to join them in a non-scholarship/low scholarship league.
Let's break this down:
The desire to keep Rhode Island, an 11th program, surely means they have a 12th in mind. My money is on a cooperation with the America East and the CAA to bring Central Connecticut St--a lone state school in the private school NEC--to the America East for all-sports and to the CAA for football.
This would give a depleted AmEast a much needed 9th member and, should the CAA keep the Rhode Island Rams football program, a northern division of 4 New England schools and the 2 New York schools and a southern division that includes the Midatlantic and Virginia schools.
Another possibility is that one of the three all-sports members that the CAA has their eyes on has a football program they would need to bring with them and that is football member #12. I think this possibility is doubtful because most every school they would be going after would rather be moving to the SoCon and the SoCon will surely have some openings coming open should Charleston and Davidson (and possibly UNC-Greensboro as well) defect to the CAA.
The Ripples:
The NEC takes a huge hit but not a deathblow. The loss of Albany, Rhode Island, and Central Connecticut State leaves them with just 7 football schools. Picking up Marist would be a good option for them.
The Big South is in even bigger trouble--Stony Brook drops them to 6 football members and I see the SoCon taking another 2 maybe even 3. Their only hope, as I've said before, is to get the non-scholarship and emerging programs in the South to join them in a non-scholarship/low scholarship league.
Saturday, August 4, 2012
Is CAA expansion finally coming? What ripples will it create?
The latest internet rumor is that Stony Brook and Albany are both on the verge of making football only moves to the Colonial Athletic Association. This would give the CAA 4 full members who play football and 6 football affiliates:
Maine*
New Hampshire*
Albany*
Stony Brook*
Villanova*
Delaware
Towson
James Madison
Richmond*
William and Mary
What this expansion doesn't tell us is who they are going to take to fill the league's three all-sports membership vacancies. My best guess is that it will be Davidson, College of Charleston, and a third school somewhere in the south that wont be sponsoring CAA football. It also probably means that Hofstra wont allow Stony Brook to be an all-sports member.
If we follow the logical cascade that follows I imagine that the SoCon will raid the Big South of its best football schools--Coastal Carolina and Liberty, and/or grab Jacksonville St. from the OVC.
These leaves the Big South's football ranks fairly depleted with likely Gardner-Webb, Charleston Southern, Presbyterian, and VMI around. In my opinion the best move for these schools is to create a non-scholarship/low scholarship southern football only league and persuade programs like Davidson, Campbell, Stetson, Mercer, Jacksonville, and Kennesaw St to join them. It would make for a 10 team league that has fairly nice geography and while the Pioneer Football League will likely not be thrilled about the southern defections they could arrange a nice post-season "bowl" between the champions of the two leagues similar to what they did with the NEC prior to the NEC getting an autobid to the FCS playoffs.
Maine*
New Hampshire*
Albany*
Stony Brook*
Villanova*
Delaware
Towson
James Madison
Richmond*
William and Mary
What this expansion doesn't tell us is who they are going to take to fill the league's three all-sports membership vacancies. My best guess is that it will be Davidson, College of Charleston, and a third school somewhere in the south that wont be sponsoring CAA football. It also probably means that Hofstra wont allow Stony Brook to be an all-sports member.
If we follow the logical cascade that follows I imagine that the SoCon will raid the Big South of its best football schools--Coastal Carolina and Liberty, and/or grab Jacksonville St. from the OVC.
These leaves the Big South's football ranks fairly depleted with likely Gardner-Webb, Charleston Southern, Presbyterian, and VMI around. In my opinion the best move for these schools is to create a non-scholarship/low scholarship southern football only league and persuade programs like Davidson, Campbell, Stetson, Mercer, Jacksonville, and Kennesaw St to join them. It would make for a 10 team league that has fairly nice geography and while the Pioneer Football League will likely not be thrilled about the southern defections they could arrange a nice post-season "bowl" between the champions of the two leagues similar to what they did with the NEC prior to the NEC getting an autobid to the FCS playoffs.
BYU and football scheduling
As I explained in a previous post, BYU is going to face some real scheduling challenges in the coming years as an independent. I've been a proponent of the Cougars becoming a football only member of the Big East at least until a more attractive all sports invitation from the Big 12 avails itself. However, if independence is truly that critical to the Cougars I think they should enter into some long-term scheduling deals with the western members of the Big East to fill up their schedule in late October and throughout November. Playing Boise St, San Diego St, Houston, and Southern Methodist on an annual basis (or at least getting 3 of those 4 each year) would be a great move for all of the parties involved. I think it elevates the stature of all those schools and helps to cement BYU's position as the Notre Dame of the West in that they would have annual match ups against established rivals. Perhaps this arrangement to could be parlayed into getting access to Big East bowl tie ins which, with the lure of of BYU, would hopefully include a high profile game such as the Fiesta Bowl or at least a high mid-level bowl like the Las Vegas Bowl (which these days fancies itself as the Maaco Bowl Las Vegas).
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Realigning the Big Ten in the Wake of the Sandusky Scandal
Penn St football will never be the same again after the sanctions that Mark Emmert and the NCAA forced upon them. (Personally I think they had no business penalizing the program and should be focusing their efforts on preventing violations not reacting to them with their sanctimonious penalties.) This leaves the Big Ten Conference in a pickle because for the next 2 seasons only four members of the 6-team Leaders Division are eligible for postseason play--the Leader's two strongest brands and two out its three strongest teams cannot win the division. This leaves a terrible imbalance between the two divisions and will likely mean that we will see a Leaders Division "Champion" make the title game over a much more deserving 2nd place team from the Legends Division due to the sanctions in place. last year in the Pac-12 a 6-6 UCLA "won" the South Division with a 5-4 conference record because USC was ineligible to carry the South's flag at the title game. That UCLA was crushed by Oregon while a far superior Stanford team sat at home. The same could happen in Big Ten Country the next 2 seasons. I have two suggestions for the Big Ten:
A) Immediately enact a new rule stating that if one or more members of a division are facing postseason bans then the second place team of the opposite division will go to the Big Ten title game if they have a better conference record than the team that would ordinarily represent the division in the title game. This could mean that they would be replacing a team who won the division by default because, like in UCLA's case, the actual winner was ineligible OR as the result of sanctions weakening one or more elite teams that division was utterly noncompetitive compared to the other.
B) Scrap Leaders and Legends and go to geographic--East/West divisions. Leaders and Legends was built on the premise that the 4 biggest money makers/brand names--Penn St, Ohio St, Michigan, and Nebraska--would be split up evenly and that each division would also get one of the two up-and-coming programs--Wisconsin and Michigan St. It was a good idea at the time but with the Penn St program in shambles for the next decade and Ohio St facing issues over their own because of Terrell Pryor's tattoos this paradigm no longer works. Put Penn St, Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St, Indiana, and Purdue in an East Division and Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska in the West. Let Indiana and Illinois keep a preserved crossover rivalry and the same with Purdue and Northwestern. All the trophies are thus protected. Ohio St, Michigan, and Michigan St hallmark the East while the trio of Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Iowa provide the backbone of the West. When Penn St recovers the conference can reconsider going back to the old divisions but for the time being Leaders and Legends just don't work.
A) Immediately enact a new rule stating that if one or more members of a division are facing postseason bans then the second place team of the opposite division will go to the Big Ten title game if they have a better conference record than the team that would ordinarily represent the division in the title game. This could mean that they would be replacing a team who won the division by default because, like in UCLA's case, the actual winner was ineligible OR as the result of sanctions weakening one or more elite teams that division was utterly noncompetitive compared to the other.
B) Scrap Leaders and Legends and go to geographic--East/West divisions. Leaders and Legends was built on the premise that the 4 biggest money makers/brand names--Penn St, Ohio St, Michigan, and Nebraska--would be split up evenly and that each division would also get one of the two up-and-coming programs--Wisconsin and Michigan St. It was a good idea at the time but with the Penn St program in shambles for the next decade and Ohio St facing issues over their own because of Terrell Pryor's tattoos this paradigm no longer works. Put Penn St, Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St, Indiana, and Purdue in an East Division and Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska in the West. Let Indiana and Illinois keep a preserved crossover rivalry and the same with Purdue and Northwestern. All the trophies are thus protected. Ohio St, Michigan, and Michigan St hallmark the East while the trio of Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Iowa provide the backbone of the West. When Penn St recovers the conference can reconsider going back to the old divisions but for the time being Leaders and Legends just don't work.
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Examining the One-and-Done Rule: The University Perspective
This is the first part of a two-part article examining college basketball's one-and-done rule requiring players to either play a year of college basketball or sit out until they are 19 before entering the NBA draft. As the resident expert on collegiate sports on this blog I will be looking at it from the perspective of college basketball.
The one-and-done rule is infuriating to the college basketball fan. The most gifted and talented players in the sport will play one season before packing their bags, declaring for the draft, and collecting a big paycheck in the process. The one-and-done rule undermines the principle of the college athletes being students first and athletes second. Programs like John Calipari's Kentucky Wildcats exploit this rule to create a revolving carousel of talented players who regularly make deep NCAA Tournament runs while the bench players go to class, study hard, and graduate to keep the program from facing probation and other sanctions for not meeting the NCAA's requirements for APR (Academic Progress Rating).
While many players have played a season of college basketball before transitioning to the NBA and have had successful careers many others have gone pro early only to find themselves unprepared for the next level. I believe that the front offices of NBA franchises would benefit from having more than one season of play (30 some games) to evaluate players who they will be making multi-million dollar investments in.
I also have concerns about young players coming out early having the maturity to handle the money that comes being a professional athlete. A large share of the players in the NBA came from relatively modest or below poverty-line homes and suddenly they have huge piles of money handed to them with no idea how to manage it wisely. Staying in college a year or two longer would give them the opportunity to mature. On a side note I think that the NBA should implement a program in which players under the age of 21 have a portion of their salaries go into a trust that they cannot access until after their rookie contracts expire in order to ensure that these young athletes have a nest egg and do not go broke. Perhaps set it up in such a way that players a rewarded for leaving that money in that trust longer by having the league match whatever interest that money accrues.
I think that when high schoolers sign letters of intent to play college basketball they should be required to stay at least two years. After the end of their sophomore year they can then declare for the draft if they so choose but they should be required to repay the university they played for the cost of the tuition, room, board, and books by the end of their first NBA season. Players who leave after their junior year would be free to forego their senior seasons and go to the NBA early and would not be obligated to reimburse their university.
The one-and-done rule is infuriating to the college basketball fan. The most gifted and talented players in the sport will play one season before packing their bags, declaring for the draft, and collecting a big paycheck in the process. The one-and-done rule undermines the principle of the college athletes being students first and athletes second. Programs like John Calipari's Kentucky Wildcats exploit this rule to create a revolving carousel of talented players who regularly make deep NCAA Tournament runs while the bench players go to class, study hard, and graduate to keep the program from facing probation and other sanctions for not meeting the NCAA's requirements for APR (Academic Progress Rating).
While many players have played a season of college basketball before transitioning to the NBA and have had successful careers many others have gone pro early only to find themselves unprepared for the next level. I believe that the front offices of NBA franchises would benefit from having more than one season of play (30 some games) to evaluate players who they will be making multi-million dollar investments in.
I also have concerns about young players coming out early having the maturity to handle the money that comes being a professional athlete. A large share of the players in the NBA came from relatively modest or below poverty-line homes and suddenly they have huge piles of money handed to them with no idea how to manage it wisely. Staying in college a year or two longer would give them the opportunity to mature. On a side note I think that the NBA should implement a program in which players under the age of 21 have a portion of their salaries go into a trust that they cannot access until after their rookie contracts expire in order to ensure that these young athletes have a nest egg and do not go broke. Perhaps set it up in such a way that players a rewarded for leaving that money in that trust longer by having the league match whatever interest that money accrues.
I think that when high schoolers sign letters of intent to play college basketball they should be required to stay at least two years. After the end of their sophomore year they can then declare for the draft if they so choose but they should be required to repay the university they played for the cost of the tuition, room, board, and books by the end of their first NBA season. Players who leave after their junior year would be free to forego their senior seasons and go to the NBA early and would not be obligated to reimburse their university.
Friday, July 20, 2012
The Big Sky---WAC Merger
I love the idea of the floundering WAC working in tandem with the more stable Big Sky Conference. However their are two ways to approach this collaboration: a full merger in which the Big Sky absorbs the 5 WAC members or an ingenious bait and switch move in which some of the Big Sky members voluntarily move their Olympic sports to the weaker WAC and the two leagues operate independently but the "WAC" schools participate in the Big Sky for FCS football.
The Merger
The merger would work like this:
You take the 11 all-sports members of the Big Sky:
Eastern Washington*
Portland St*
Idaho St*
Montana*
Montana St*
Weber St*
S Utah*
N Arizona*
N Colorado*
North Dakota*
Sacramento St*
...and throw in the 5 newcomers:
Idaho*
Boise St
Seattle
Denver
New Mexico St*
...then create two 8 team divisions based on geography--probably a north/south alignment or some 4-Four team Pods model. For football they would have 15 members playing (all the asterisked teams plus associate members UC Davis and Cal Poly)
The Bait and Switch
The bait and switch is A) financially more lucrative, B) far more complicated and unstable, and C) borderline in violation of NCAA regulations prohibiting "umbrella" conferences. What complicates this move is how do you decide who goes where? Is it a purely geographic move? Or is it more a matter of deciding which schools want to be associated with which other schools? This gets complicated as schools will have conflicting interests and could lead to infighting among the leagues. Who is going to stop a school from deciding they would rather be in the other conference and unbalancing the fragile balance between the two league?.
The Flight Risks
Regardless of how this all shakes out, their are certain schools in this conglomeration are clear flight risks, albeit the departure of certain schools could be beneficial: New Mexico St (or maybe Montana) could potentially be asked to join the MWC to replace a member departing for Big East football--the loss of NMSU would shrink the footprint; the loss of Montana would deprive the league of its strongest football school. North Dakota, on the other hand, could depart for the Summit/MVFC) and the Big Sky confederation would be just fine--they are really more of a Midwestern school anyway and they are better off with the other Dakota schools and Nebraska-Omaha. Sacramento St moving its Olympic sports to the Big West is another potential shake up that might be helpful in slimming down the size of the league if they go with the full merger model. The Hornets are simply a better fit in a league with other CSU and UC schools.
The Spare Parts
The Big Sky Conference box set comes with some extra pieces--namely Cal St Bakersfield and Utah Valley, that could be thrown into the mix to fill the void of a member who backs out or simply used as a filler to get to an even number.
My Personal Preference
I'd like to see a merger but one that leaves out Sacramento St (for Olympic Sports only--they can get into the Big West easy enough and would probably be happier there) and all of North Dakota's sports (left to find an invitation to the Summit). This would create a 14 member league for Olympic sports that spans 8 states and creating a Pacific Northwest Division and a "Four Corners" Division. It also means 14 for football with the 3 California schools (Sacramento St, UC Davis, and Cal Poly) replacing Boise St, Denver, and Seattle in two slightly realigned divisions.
Looking Back at the Bait and Switch
Provided that both Idaho and New Mexico St are both serious about playing FCS football (I'm not convinced that NMSU is as they are waiting for an 11th hour MWC invite should a MWC school go to the Big East/Big West), there is a way to align both the Big Sky and WAC as FCS football conferences and thus this confederation would not only get two automatic berths the NCAA Men's basketball tournament but the FCS Playoffs as well. These conferences would be non-geographic and would be more about grouping the historically stronger schools together in one group and the weaker ones in the other:
UC Davis and Cal Poly become WAC football affiliates (in order to balance the fact that the WAC has 3 non-football schools)
Sacramento St goes to the WAC so they can play football with their instate rivals
Montana and Montana St both go the WAC
This creates a WAC that looks like this: While the Big Sky looks like this:
Seattle (no fb) Eastern Washington
Idaho Portland St
Boise St (no fb) Idaho St
Montana Weber St
Montana St Southern Utah
Denver (no fb) Northern Arizona
New Mexico St Northern Colorado
Sacramento St North Dakota
***UC Davis
***Cal Poly
You then create some sort of scheduling alliance between the two conferences and maybe a revenue sharing plan too in order to compensate the poorer Big Sky schools for facilitating the whole set up. You also have to work something out with the Olympic sports where if one 8-member conference doesn't have enough members in a sport the other conference will allow the members who do play that sport play in their league.
The Merger
The merger would work like this:
You take the 11 all-sports members of the Big Sky:
Eastern Washington*
Portland St*
Idaho St*
Montana*
Montana St*
Weber St*
S Utah*
N Arizona*
N Colorado*
North Dakota*
Sacramento St*
...and throw in the 5 newcomers:
Idaho*
Boise St
Seattle
Denver
New Mexico St*
...then create two 8 team divisions based on geography--probably a north/south alignment or some 4-Four team Pods model. For football they would have 15 members playing (all the asterisked teams plus associate members UC Davis and Cal Poly)
The Bait and Switch
The bait and switch is A) financially more lucrative, B) far more complicated and unstable, and C) borderline in violation of NCAA regulations prohibiting "umbrella" conferences. What complicates this move is how do you decide who goes where? Is it a purely geographic move? Or is it more a matter of deciding which schools want to be associated with which other schools? This gets complicated as schools will have conflicting interests and could lead to infighting among the leagues. Who is going to stop a school from deciding they would rather be in the other conference and unbalancing the fragile balance between the two league?.
The Flight Risks
Regardless of how this all shakes out, their are certain schools in this conglomeration are clear flight risks, albeit the departure of certain schools could be beneficial: New Mexico St (or maybe Montana) could potentially be asked to join the MWC to replace a member departing for Big East football--the loss of NMSU would shrink the footprint; the loss of Montana would deprive the league of its strongest football school. North Dakota, on the other hand, could depart for the Summit/MVFC) and the Big Sky confederation would be just fine--they are really more of a Midwestern school anyway and they are better off with the other Dakota schools and Nebraska-Omaha. Sacramento St moving its Olympic sports to the Big West is another potential shake up that might be helpful in slimming down the size of the league if they go with the full merger model. The Hornets are simply a better fit in a league with other CSU and UC schools.
The Spare Parts
The Big Sky Conference box set comes with some extra pieces--namely Cal St Bakersfield and Utah Valley, that could be thrown into the mix to fill the void of a member who backs out or simply used as a filler to get to an even number.
My Personal Preference
I'd like to see a merger but one that leaves out Sacramento St (for Olympic Sports only--they can get into the Big West easy enough and would probably be happier there) and all of North Dakota's sports (left to find an invitation to the Summit). This would create a 14 member league for Olympic sports that spans 8 states and creating a Pacific Northwest Division and a "Four Corners" Division. It also means 14 for football with the 3 California schools (Sacramento St, UC Davis, and Cal Poly) replacing Boise St, Denver, and Seattle in two slightly realigned divisions.
Looking Back at the Bait and Switch
Provided that both Idaho and New Mexico St are both serious about playing FCS football (I'm not convinced that NMSU is as they are waiting for an 11th hour MWC invite should a MWC school go to the Big East/Big West), there is a way to align both the Big Sky and WAC as FCS football conferences and thus this confederation would not only get two automatic berths the NCAA Men's basketball tournament but the FCS Playoffs as well. These conferences would be non-geographic and would be more about grouping the historically stronger schools together in one group and the weaker ones in the other:
UC Davis and Cal Poly become WAC football affiliates (in order to balance the fact that the WAC has 3 non-football schools)
Sacramento St goes to the WAC so they can play football with their instate rivals
Montana and Montana St both go the WAC
This creates a WAC that looks like this: While the Big Sky looks like this:
Seattle (no fb) Eastern Washington
Idaho Portland St
Boise St (no fb) Idaho St
Montana Weber St
Montana St Southern Utah
Denver (no fb) Northern Arizona
New Mexico St Northern Colorado
Sacramento St North Dakota
***UC Davis
***Cal Poly
You then create some sort of scheduling alliance between the two conferences and maybe a revenue sharing plan too in order to compensate the poorer Big Sky schools for facilitating the whole set up. You also have to work something out with the Olympic sports where if one 8-member conference doesn't have enough members in a sport the other conference will allow the members who do play that sport play in their league.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)