UMKC to the WAC?

[JackJD]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

In the range of possible, plausible explanations for UMKC is: stupidity. Never underestimate stupidity.

[Prairiehaas]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

As everyone tries to find some real meaning to the move of UMKC, could it be possible that the WAC offered the Roos a bit of money to entice them? The WAC could lose enough members to threaten their auto qualifier to the NCAA basketball which would be the fatal blow to the conference as that stream of income would disappear. That fiscal problem might have as much peril to a conference for survival. The WAC had already welcomed teams like Texas Pan Am, Chicago St, and Grand Canyon. Offer UMKC a signing bonus with a few extra residuals over a few years and this move fits the "direction" the Roos want. Using the notion that the Ross are moving because they expect Creighton to leave the MVC in 2014 seems less rational. Equating the Roos with the potential Bluejays move makes less sense than jumping ship because the WAC is more attractive than an imploding Summit.

Makes more sense than any other potential explaination for what appears to be a bonehead move by UMKC. Best of luck Roos.

[rabidrabbit]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

If Summit wants to really thumb their nose to the Roos, should offer NMSU an invite. I'd take a team usually under 150 RPI for one consistently over 250. Make the Cowboys the Denver travel partner. Likewise, like should be offering UNC, UND, if NMSU drops to FCS football, add those 3 schools, and Summit could sponsor an FCS league with 7 members.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

IMO, the MVC is going to have to do something. There is a really good chance that something won't involve us. But if they try to stand pat with all the other conference shuffling, there is a decent chance their league could go the way of the WAC. Creighton might get poached. Who else? Hard to say, but most/all leagues are going to be looking to add someone in the coming years to attempt to avoid becoming the next WAC. The only way to ensure survival in the current environment is to be assertive, not passive. Heck, if the Summit could manage to stay stable through all this, schools like Drake could find themselves begging for admittance (despite their air of superiority now).

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

Do to my selfish nature I don't want to jump confrences due to having the the summit league in sioux falls. Losing that hurts sdsu. Until we up attendance and pay for coaches and consistancy I don't see jumping. As long as the tourney stays in sf sdsu has a legit chance of winning and making the dance instead of just being another team who occasionly make the dance.

It would be bittersweet to lose the conference tournament in our own backyard for MVC membership.

Take away Creighton and the MVC attendance figures are far less intimidating.

10,000
7000
6300
6100
5400
4900
4300
3900
3600


Right now, SDSU is at about 3500. That number would increase to 4500 rather easily with better competition and arena/seating improvements. 5000 might even be easily within reach. NDSU is in the same boat, although they would have a higher attendance ceiling being located in a bigger city.

[HoboJack]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

IMO UMKC simply realized that in the current Summit League, especially with adding Denver, that they did not have the recources & funding to become competitive in the near future. They are throwing in the towel.

On the other hand they see an opportunity to be at least respectable in the new WAC, which is essentially the equivalent of what the Mid-Continent conference was 10-20 years ago. UMKC likely saw this as a better fit than dropping back to DII.

The WAC still has an identifiable brand to those who havn't been paying attention to all the changes (allumni). By leaking the possibility of potential changes for other conference members - regardless of how likely they might be - they are simply trying to disguise this move as being proactive, rather than admitting defeat.

I'm glad SDSU's administration continues to have an eye on moving forward, rather than accepting the status quo as the only option.

[Hammersmith]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

As everyone tries to find some real meaning to the move of UMKC, could it be possible that the WAC offered the Roos a bit of money to entice them? The WAC could lose enough members to threaten their auto qualifier to the NCAA basketball which would be the fatal blow to the conference as that stream of income would disappear. That fiscal problem might have as much peril to a conference for survival. The WAC had already welcomed teams like Texas Pan Am, Chicago St, and Grand Canyon. Offer UMKC a signing bonus with a few extra residuals over a few years and this move fits the "direction" the Roos want. Using the notion that the Ross are moving because they expect Creighton to leave the MVC in 2014 seems less rational. Equating the Roos with the potential Bluejays move makes less sense than jumping ship because the WAC is more attractive than an imploding Summit.

Been wondering that myself. I've heard that the WAC has already had to use, or will have to use, the two year grace period to keep their autobid. Adding UMKC gets them out of that jam. A reward for that in the form of travel money doesn't sound far fetched. If true, it might stick a fork in the UNO to WAC rumors; UNO won't help the WAC for at least another couple years.

[OldHare]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

As everyone tries to find some real meaning to the move of UMKC, could it be possible that the WAC offered the Roos a bit of money to entice them? The WAC could lose enough members to threaten their auto qualifier to the NCAA basketball which would be the fatal blow to the conference as that stream of income would disappear. That fiscal problem might have as much peril to a conference for survival. The WAC had already welcomed teams like Texas Pan Am, Chicago St, and Grand Canyon. Offer UMKC a signing bonus with a few extra residuals over a few years and this move fits the "direction" the Roos want. Using the notion that the Ross are moving because they expect Creighton to leave the MVC in 2014 seems less rational. Equating the Roos with the potential Bluejays move makes less sense than jumping ship because the WAC is more attractive than an imploding Summit.

[LakeJack]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

News from the South

http://www.omaha.com/article/2013020...702089844/1707

[LakeJack]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

This one also plays a roll

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-bas...l-legal-battle

[LakeJack]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

Story from up north

http://www.grandforksherald.com/even...roup/homepage/

[goon]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

Do to my selfish nature I don't want to jump confrences due to having the the summit league in sioux falls. Losing that hurts sdsu. Until we up attendance and pay for coaches and consistancy I don't see jumping. As long as the tourney stays in sf sdsu has a legit chance of winning and making the dance instead of just being another team who occasionly make the dance.

[joeboo22]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

Here is the way I see it.

1. There is no guarantee that the MVC will expand, whether Creighton and Evansville leave or not
2. If they do expand its not a guarantee that NDSU and SDSU are the 2 they will chose to expand.

Could they expand? sure, its quite possible they do, could they add SDSU and NDSU? yes they are in the group of logical choices

[zooropa]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

So your argument is - your point of view is "obvious" and therefor everything else is irrelevant. Good enough. I bow to your superior intellect.

One of your arguments ('upside') has nothing to support it, and the others I consider irrelevant.

That's not the same as 'dismissing them out of hand', which implies that I didn't consider them. I did, and I, in my judgment, don't consider them persuasive. Your mileage may vary.

[FargoBison]

Re: UMKC to the WAC?

Andy Katz-

There is a definitely a push in one key corner of the seven to add Creighton because of the Bluejays passion for hoops, their facilities and following. I continue to hear conflicting opinions about whether or not distance matters in this new league. What isn't negotiable is the 7 want/need the schools to be all in for basketball. If that's the case then considering Gonzaga isn't out. This league has to be smart about its moves, and if Creighton is in the mix it would be a wise choice.

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebaske...z-3-point-shot