Movin' On Up
In hopes of surviving as a football conference, the WAC is scouring the countryside, looking for teams to add.
Most believe North Texas, of the Sun Belt Conference, is the WAC’s first choice, but it has rebuffed previous overtures. But a Fort Worth Star-Telegram writer, Saturday, said UNT is “a logical candidate for WAC expansion.”
Other possibilities that have been discussed are Montana (it has enjoyed being a big fish in a small pond), Sacramento State, Cal Poly and UC-Davis.
Truth is, it’s going to be hard for the WAC to continue as a football conference. Asked this week if the WAC remains a viable entity, commissioner Karl Benson said, “I would hope that’s the case.”
Not exactly a vote of confidence.
To remain a football conference, it needs to have eight teams.
Problem is, the WAC has pretty much run out of teams to recruit. All the aforementioned teams have potential, but trading up in conferences takes money — and virtually no school has cash to burn. Moving up increases revenue, but sometimes it isn’t worth the cost. In the past, that’s a conclusion Montana is said to have reached.
Even Utah — a two-time BCS bowl winner — will be tested financially as it gets its facilities and minor sports teams up to Pac-10 standards (football and basketball are OK, but some other sports lag far behind). Chris Hill, Utah’s A.D., has made it no secret he’s on a major donor campaign.
Imagine what it would take to get, say, Sacramento State or another small school up to WAC standards in various sports. Meanwhile, the money isn’t that great, otherwise Boise State, Nevada and Fresno State wouldn’t be moving on to the MWC (where the money isn’t that great, either.)
Moving up reminds me of the famous Patrick Ewing quote: “We make a lot but we spend a lot.”
Then there’s the overall concern over the WAC’s viability.
Convincing smaller teams to come won’t be as easy in these times as it seems.