Sounds like Wichita St to the AAC... Who gets an Invite?

[BirdsEyeView]

You are misleading. You didn't include the comment from AsianSensation to which I replied.

If the MVC and MVFC are ultimately the same, her comment expedited the departure of WSU. If she would have responded with a positive remarks on the inclusion of WSU football, who knows what could have happened 3-5-10 years from now. However, her negative remarks were the final nail in the coffin.
Are you better now as a conference?

Are you suggesting WSU would have said no to the AAC if Patty Viverito had been nicer to WSU about football?

I don't know that, but it is now pretty apparent what occurred by not trying to work with WSU.
We will never know now what might have been. The MVFC commissioner needs to reflect.

This is a RIDICULOUS assumption by Veritas...WOW!

Drakey - Football should be at least part of the consideration when picking a new school. In fact, all sports should be part of the consideration here, albeit at differing degrees of importance. To think otherwise, is ignorant.

[BCPanther]

I hope the people running this conference aren't really giving football ANY consideration in what they want to do. I'm guessing that they are not, and that it is just a few people on this board that think it matters.

It has to matter. This league is not viable long term if there aren't specifics on what half the league does with a major sport.

[Veritas]

If the MVC and MVFC are ultimately the same, her comment expedited the departure of WSU. If she would have responded with a positive remarks on the inclusion of WSU football, who knows what could have happened 3-5-10 years from now. However, her negative remarks were the final nail in the coffin.
Are you better now as a conference?[/quote]

Are you suggesting WSU would have said no to the AAC if Patty Viverito had been nicer to WSU about football?[/quote]

I don't know that, but it is now pretty apparent what occurred by not trying to work with WSU.
We will never know now what might have been. The MVFC commissioner needs to reflect.[/quote]


This is a RIDICULOUS assumption by Veritas...WOW!

Drakey - Football should be at least part of the consideration when picking a new school. In fact, all sports should be part of the consideration here, albeit at differing degrees of importance. To think otherwise, is ignorant.[/quote]

Sometimes facts can be ridiculous, but that doesn't change the truth.
The very fact she blew off WSU should get her canned.
She pretty much sums up everything that is wrong with the MoVal.
No strategy and little thinkers...

[BCPanther]

If the MVC and MVFC are ultimately the same, her comment expedited the departure of WSU. If she would have responded with a positive remarks on the inclusion of WSU football, who knows what could have happened 3-5-10 years from now. However, her negative remarks were the final nail in the coffin.
Are you better now as a conference?

Are you suggesting WSU would have said no to the AAC if Patty Viverito had been nicer to WSU about football?[/quote]

I don't know that, but it is now pretty apparent what occurred by not trying to work with WSU.
We will never know now what might have been. The MVFC commissioner needs to reflect.[/quote]


This is a RIDICULOUS assumption by Veritas...WOW!

Drakey - Football should be at least part of the consideration when picking a new school. In fact, all sports should be part of the consideration here, albeit at differing degrees of importance. To think otherwise, is ignorant.[/quote]

Sometimes facts can be ridiculous, but that doesn't change the truth.
The very fact she blew off WSU should get her canned.
She pretty much sums up everything that is wrong with the MoVal.
No strategy and little thinkers...[/quote]

Then you need to fire every university president. The league office can only do what the presidents will accept and vote for.

I dislike Patty greatly, but she was exactly right on WSU. There is no way they should have been allowed to use the Valley as a 2 year parking space on their way to FBS. They weren't going to bring back football to play FCS long term.

[Snaggletooth]

I dislike Patty greatly, but she was exactly right on WSU. There is no way they should have been allowed to use the Valley as a 2 year parking space on their way to FBS. They weren't going to bring back football to play FCS long term.

Regardless of whether WSU was going to be a long term or short term participant in FCS, I think it sent a very clear message that the MVC was not going to do anything that might help WSU elevate their athletic program if it meant they might be more desirable to a better conference.

I think that was pretty short sighted because if WSU had started football they probably would have been a lot more committed to the MVC as they worked to bring football back. And I doubt very much that WSU was going to have a conference calling them because of their football program in 2 year or in even 10 years.

[BCPanther]

I dislike Patty greatly, but she was exactly right on WSU. There is no way they should have been allowed to use the Valley as a 2 year parking space on their way to FBS. They weren't going to bring back football to play FCS long term.

Regardless of whether WSU was going to be a long term or short term participant in FCS, I think it sent a very clear message that the MVC was not going to do anything that might help WSU elevate their athletic program if it meant they might be more desirable to a better conference.

I think that was pretty short sighted because if WSU had started football they probably would have been a lot more committed to the MVC as they worked to bring football back. And I doubt very much that WSU was going to have a conference calling them because of their football program in 2 year or in even 10 years.

I disagree. The only reason that Wichita even would have entertained bringing football back is if the AAC would have made it a requirement for entry. Football made them even less likely to stay in the Valley, if that's possible.

There's a fine line between wanting to keep a very good program and whoring yourself out to the whims of that one program. Case in point, Iowa State's AD brokering the deal to let Texas have the Longhorn Network to make sure he didn't end up in the Mountain West and all the turmoil it's caused in that league.

[Snaggletooth]

I dislike Patty greatly, but she was exactly right on WSU. There is no way they should have been allowed to use the Valley as a 2 year parking space on their way to FBS. They weren't going to bring back football to play FCS long term.

Regardless of whether WSU was going to be a long term or short term participant in FCS, I think it sent a very clear message that the MVC was not going to do anything that might help WSU elevate their athletic program if it meant they might be more desirable to a better conference.

I think that was pretty short sighted because if WSU had started football they probably would have been a lot more committed to the MVC as they worked to bring football back. And I doubt very much that WSU was going to have a conference calling them because of their football program in 2 year or in even 10 years.

I disagree. The only reason that Wichita even would have entertained bringing football back is if the AAC would have made it a requirement for entry. Football made them even less likely to stay in the Valley, if that's possible.

There's a fine line between wanting to keep a very good program and whoring yourself out to the whims of that one program. Case in point, Iowa State's AD brokering the deal to let Texas have the Longhorn Network to make sure he didn't end up in the Mountain West and all the turmoil it's caused in that league.

WSU got into the AAC because they did not have football.

You are wrong about football also - it would have made WSU more likely to stay in the MVC, because it would have did what it has done to all the other schools in the MVC - drawn away the resources from the rest of the athletic program due to the cost of football and all the women sports it would have had to add.

[Play Angry]

It would have been smarter for Viverito to refuse to comment obviously.

The MVC was steadfast in not making moves to disproportionately benefit the western block (Wichita State and before they left, Creighton and Tulsa) for 3 decades despite those schools representing an outsized portion of fan support and Tournament credits. Instead, moves were made to concentrate the benefits with the balance of the schools to the westerners detriment (keeping Arch Madness in STL despite repeated lobbying to rotate with KC, adding Loyola, rotating the baseball tournament at host sites with a de-emphasis on attendance and bid size (hurting WSU and MSU), etc.).

The MVC committed to its current direction and geographic footprint a long time ago.

[BirdsEyeView]

Regardless, Veritas made an assumption (as if he was in the mind of the WSU brass) that after the comment was made that the conference basically isn't going to whore out the TOP FCS conference in the country for a rental football program, WSU was gone after that fact.

No. WSU was already looking for outs, this was an angle to find an out of the MVC by brokering football for 2 years and then leaving for FBS football (and thus a bigger basketball conference too)

When the MVFC turned that "rental" concept down....they went to plan B that worked out for them (at least for now) with the AAC only wanting a non-Football member to offset Navy's non-basketball program.

WSU lucked out with plan B after plan A was shut down by the conference...and rightfully so. If WSU would have hidden their true agenda (FBS football in a few years) from the MVFC, then I bet the conference would have accepted them for Football for what would have ended up being a short lease.


To act like the conference and the President's in the conference decision to reject WSU football were the REASON that WSU is now out of the conference is very short-sighted. WSU was looking for outs well before those comments were made.

[Play Angry]

While I agree that Viverito's comments weren't determinative or close to it (illustrative of a longer term pattern is perhaps a better description), I think it's a mischaracterization to label football at WSU as Plan A, and no football as Plan B. That implements the same behavior that you are criticizing Veritas for - pretending to know the machinations of the president of the university and what drove his decision-making. If we are going strictly off timelines, WSU was exploring its options well before the football feasibility study was announced - perhaps no football was Plan A, and there were no takers at that time, so football was explored as a belt and suspenders way to parachute out (but only if necessary given the tremendous financial cost) and it became a Plan B.1 (no football)/Plan B.2 (football if necessary) situation? None of us know for sure, but there really isn't any support to argue that WSU's first preference all along was to bring back football and that was only shut down when Ms. Viverito reacted to media inquiries (not requests by WSU).

I am happy with the way things played out, although I do think the MVC front office and the university presidents should have handled the past decade much, much differently. If the current trend holds, the strongest programs at the top will continue to seek escape hatches over the next decade because the current brand of management does very little to incentivize them to stay.