American Athletic Conference

[wusphlash]

I was under the impression from Dr. Bardo's previous public remarks that it was FBS football or nothing. In this letter it appears that he has not closed the door on the possibility of adding FCS football. Or did I misread that or misinterpret that?

I the first paragraph that he talks about football he mentions FCS and FBS. Two paragraphs down he mentions only FBS. To me, that indicates his preference.

[wusphlash]

Obviously Shockernet focuses mainly on athletics and therefore we look at who we want to see on the playing field. However, a key factor for Dr. Bardo is aligning WSU with similar institutions from an academic/research standpoint. The impacts of athletic realignment are fairly obvious. The academic realignment not so much, at least to me. Where lies the advantage of academic/research realignment?

[RoyalShock]

I the first paragraph that he talks about football he mentions FCS and FBS. Two paragraphs down he mentions only FBS. To me, that indicates his preference.

I agree with this. The thing is, you have to start at FCS and even if the goal is FBS, there is no guarantee it will get there. They don't give you a FBS entry coupon, redeemable in 2, 3, 5, or 10 years just because intentions are declared.

[1972Shocker]

I the first paragraph that he talks about football he mentions FCS and FBS. Two paragraphs down he mentions only FBS. To me, that indicates his preference.

I really wasn't questioning his preference. I was under the impression that playing at the FCS level would not even be a consideration other than during whatever transition period the program would have to serve. His comments to me seem to leave the option of playing football at the FCS level on the table.

There are two levels of football at which WSU might compete. The highest is the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) and the second is the Football Championship Subdivision (FCS). FBS football is much more costly than FCS. FCS has fewer scholarships (63 versus 85), and all other expenses are lower. The Missouri Valley Football Conference plays at the FCS level, while other surrounding conferences are FBS level.

Either level of football can help the university recruit students, provide on-campus experiences that promote the student's connections to the university community, and give alumni reasons to return to campus. Football at either level also gives the university weekend activities and events that create a sense of life on the campus during the critical early fall period when students are making decisions about where to go to college and at a time when freshmen make critical decisions regarding whether they are going to continue at the university.

A good FBS program can go further and have substantial impact on the community. Just look at the pride and excitement that has been generated by WSU basketball. FBS football can create a similar sense of place and provide quality activities so important to economic development. The costs associated with this level of play are substantial, but the benefits can be just as substantial for the whole Wichita community.

I agree that a good FBS program can create pride and excitement. The question is does a bad FBS program have the opposite effect? Can a good FCS program create any pride or excitement? A bad FCS program would definitely not be a good thing (i.e. see Missouri State).

[OregonShocker]

Obviously Shockernet focuses mainly on athletics and therefore we look at who we want to see on the playing field. However, a key factor for Dr. Bardo is aligning WSU with similar institutions from an academic/research standpoint. The impacts of athletic realignment are fairly obvious. The academic realignment not so much, at least to me. Where lies the advantage of academic/research realignment?

I believe the advantage still lies within his stated goal: increase enrollment, improve impact in Wichita/Ks, improve WSU status across the national academic spectrum. Athletics can definitely help achieve these goals, and partly (mostly?) does so via name recognition, but is still separate, budget-wise and other, from the University as a whole. He wants to grow MORE than athletically, and athletic growth helps feed other growth. It's better to be aligned with better schools academically; think of the stature of an "Ivy League" school compared to, say, Drake. Who wouldn't want to be lumped in with the Ivy League? But no one wants to be an athletics-only school; only athletes would be interested in attending.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

I really wasn't questioning his preference. I was under the impression that playing at the FCS level would not even be a consideration other than during whatever transition period the program would have to serve. His comments to me seem to leave the option of playing football at the FCS level on the table.



I agree that a good FBS program can create pride and excitement. The question is does a bad FBS program have the opposite effect? Can a good FCS program create any pride or excitement? A bad FCS program would definitely not be a good thing (i.e. see Missouri State).

It appears to me that he is merely describing and comparing the two levels of football in the first two paragraphs, then in the third presents a case on why FBS is a better option for us. He isn't necessarily saying either option is still on the table. I agree with @wusphlash:; he's tipping his hand ever so slightly at what his preference is.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

While he didn't admit it, I still feel the deal is done: conference change will happen soon. This letter helps solidify my feelings.

I get the same feeling. Part of me wonders if there's strong interest from a G5 conference with the condition that we add football, so we're working on a plan to move all current sports soon with football being added after its FCS trial period in the MVFC.

[Dave Stalwart]

He is really holding himself to the tagline on one of the WSU ad panels at Eisenhower National:

"We journey to destinations that do not yet exist."

Did we steal that from Picard?

[MoValley John]

That was Shatner. I never even liked Star Trek and I knew that.

[MoValley John]

Oh, and when Shatner said to boldly go where no one has gone before, he was referring to the green alien that he was boning.

[gdb620]

[QUOTE=Dave Stalwart;628476]Did we steal that from Picard?/QUOTE]

Kirk. Picard stole it from Kirk.

[gdb620]

Obviously Shockernet focuses mainly on athletics and therefore we look at who we want to see on the playing field. However, a key factor for Dr. Bardo is aligning WSU with similar institutions from an academic/research standpoint. The impacts of athletic realignment are fairly obvious. The academic realignment not so much, at least to me. Where lies the advantage of academic/research realignment?

I'm curious about this, too. Does conference alignment have some benefits in these areas, or is that just rationalization?

[MoValley John]

[QUOTE=gdb620;628484]

Did we steal that from Picard?/QUOTE]

Kirk. Picard stole it from Kirk.

Shatner.

[WstateU]

Did we steal that from Picard?

One of my all-time favorite shows...

[MoValley John]

I'm curious about this, too. Does conference alignment have some benefits in these areas, or is that just rationalization?

Some conferences do, some don't. The Big 10, ACC new Big East, Colonial and a few others have collaborative efforts outside of athletics, the MVC, Big 12 Summit and some others, don't. I think the SEC is only football, screw everything else including academics.