• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Seattle U or Utah Valley State?

Grizbeer

Well-known member
It seems clear the conference needs to add another team to get to an even number of teams for travel partners. Utah Valley State and Seattle U are the obvious choices, although Seattle U could still go to the WAC. Seattle U offers the big market Fullerton craves, Utah Valley would help to keep travel costs lower.

Of course the best solution would be for Sac State to go to the Big West and add both teams. Then there is easy, compact travel partners, but of course no trips to California for the non-football teams.

Thoughts?
 
Grizbeer said:
It seems clear the conference needs to add another team to get to an even number of teams for travel partners. Utah Valley State and Seattle U are the obvious choices, although Seattle U could still go to the WAC. Seattle U offers the big market Fullerton craves, Utah Valley would help to keep travel costs lower.

Of course the best solution would be for Sac State to go to the Big West and add both teams. Then there is easy, compact travel partners, but of course no trips to California for the non-football teams.

Thoughts?[/quote
no thoughts, only really get excited for out of conference and the kitties. ready for a beat down of Nevada and a good showing against UCLA.
 
I'd love to see Seattle U in the Big Sky. It was one of the many reasons I was hoping we'd end up in the WAC. It sounded like Seattle U was headed to the WAC too.

I kind of doubt they'd join the Big Sky though. They seem to be a better fit for the WAC or the WCC... I wouldn't be surprised to see them still move to the WAC and eventually the WCC. They were at one time a very good basketball team... They are trying to rebuild that (just moved back up to Div1 recently).
 
They have been trying to get into the WCC but so far have been turned away at the door. They are still growing into their DI programs. They really want to get into a good viable conference as they feel it will enhance their stature and recruitment of students. I do know for a fact that they have a excellent freshmen women's soccer class taking shape. They have made a commitment to move up and the powers to be are all pulling on the same end of the rope.
 
Sounds like Seattle U will get a invite to the WAC in a couple months - or possibly join the Great West?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/seattleuniversity/2013406149_seattleuwac12.html

The Western Athletic Conference passed on Seattle University when it announced the addition of three schools to its lineup Thursday.

But WAC commissioner Karl Benson said Seattle U. "is high on our list" as a possibility to be added later, and that decisions could be made in the next four months.

The chances of Seattle U. being asked to join the WAC increased Thursday when Montana declined an invitation, deciding instead to remain in the Big Sky Conference and play football at the FCS level.

"We're waiting and we still feel really good about being part of the conversation," said Seattle U. athletic director Bill Hogan.

The WAC added the University of Denver, Texas-San Antonio and Texas State (located in San Marcos) beginning in 2012, again giving it nine schools after Nevada, Fresno State and Boise State all soon depart.

Denver is joining as a non-football member, a status Seattle U. could also fill.

Benson acknowledged the WAC chose Denver instead of Seattle U. at this point due to the fact it has a more established Division I program, having been a member of the Sun Belt Conference since 1999.

Benson categorized Seattle U. as being "10 years later" than Denver in its plan to become a full-fledged Division I athletic program — Seattle U. is in its second year of making the move to D-I.

He also said "we were expecting" Montana to join the WAC, possibly Thursday. Instead, UM announced earlier in the day it would stay put, in part citing a desire to keep its traditional rivalries and remain to compete "with institutions with missions more similar" to Montana.

There had been speculation that if Montana turned down the WAC, the conference would turn to Seattle U. to give it an even 10 members for basketball.

Benson said "a 10-team league for other sports is important."

With Montana out of the picture, Benson said the WAC "will turn our attention to the next phase and whether that is 30, 60, 90, 120 days, we will now kind of look at our options. As we explore all our options, they (the Seattle U. Redhawks) will continue to be high on our radar screen."

advertising

However, Benson said while a decision could come soon, there is no timetable. He said the conference wanted to quickly add a few schools to solidify its football lineup to help in recruiting for all members, but that there is not the similar urgency anymore.

Hogan, who made a presentation to the WAC in September, said Seattle U. also has had conversations with the Great West Conference. But he said the WAC remains the best opportunity for Seattle U.

The three new WAC schools will join six holdovers — Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana Tech, New Mexico State, San Jose State and Utah State.

The West Coast Conference, meanwhile, has shown no interest in adding Seattle U.

For now, Seattle U. remains an independent for men's basketball, its highest-profile sport. It is not eligible to play in the NCAA tournament until the 2012-13 season.
 
Grizbeer said:
It seems clear the conference needs to add another team to get to an even number of teams for travel partners. Utah Valley State and Seattle U are the obvious choices, although Seattle U could still go to the WAC. Seattle U offers the big market Fullerton craves, Utah Valley would help to keep travel costs lower.

Of course the best solution would be for Sac State to go to the Big West and add both teams. Then there is easy, compact travel partners, but of course no trips to California for the non-football teams.

Thoughts?
I would think Seattle would be a great fit for the WCC..mostly private and religious oriented schools that emphasize bball....not a good fit for the Big Sky...Utah Valley has potential for growth and the development of good rivalries with Weber, and SUU...that might help their programs, plus, Utah seems to support the universities more generously than most states....so, if forced to choose, I would think Utah Valley has more plus than minus (over the long haul).
 
GrizLA said:
Grizbeer said:
It seems clear the conference needs to add another team to get to an even number of teams for travel partners. Utah Valley State and Seattle U are the obvious choices, although Seattle U could still go to the WAC. Seattle U offers the big market Fullerton craves, Utah Valley would help to keep travel costs lower.

Of course the best solution would be for Sac State to go to the Big West and add both teams. Then there is easy, compact travel partners, but of course no trips to California for the non-football teams.

Thoughts?
I would think Seattle would be a great fit for the WCC..mostly private and religious oriented schools that emphasize bball....not a good fit for the Big Sky...Utah Valley has potential for growth and the development of good rivalries with Weber, and SUU...that might help their programs, plus, Utah seems to support the universities more generously than most states....so, if forced to choose, I would think Utah Valley has more plus than minus (over the long haul).
I agree completely that SU is a better fit for the WCC. Unfortunately for them, Gonzaga looks at Seattle as its code market, and doesn't want to share it, so they have completely blocked any chance Seattle U has to get into that conference.

I think UVSU has turned into a decent program. Unfortunately they are the number 5 or 6 D-I program in Utah. Not sure how long Utah can continue to support 6 D-I teams?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top