Conference Realignment - where will we be in 5 yrs?

[CaseyGarrisonforPrez]

Disagree John on K-State. Within the last ten years they won the Big XII (2003) and had an amazing run in football from the early 90s until 2003. Now Snyder is back recreating that magic. If the Big XII somehow survives, he will have them competing for titles in another year or two. The man is just a winner. But I give you that K-State was bad before he got there, arguably fighting with Northwestern as the worst current BCS program until he got to the Little Apple.

K-State has an amazing history in basketball. One of the top 20-25 best programs of all time. Look at what they won in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. Asbury and Wooldridge sank them. But they are back now, in the Elite Eight just two years ago. While they may not have a NC in a sport like handball or bowling (or baseball which is roughly on par with those two if you look at collegiate interest) they have solid history.

If they were in the Valley, they'd be the best all around program and dominate pretty quickly in most everything. It is hubris to think that UNI or Wichita or Creighton could match. Missouri State is kind of similar to K-State but even I would be hard pressed to think we could match them.

[MoValley John]

Disagree John on K-State. Within the last ten years they won the Big XII (2003) and had an amazing run in football from the early 90s until 2003. Now Snyder is back recreating that magic. If the Big XII somehow survives, he will have them competing for titles in another year or two. The man is just a winner. But I give you that K-State was bad before he got there, arguably fighting with Northwestern as the worst current BCS program until he got to the Little Apple.

K-State has an amazing history in basketball. One of the top 20-25 best programs of all time. Look at what they won in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. Asbury and Wooldridge sank them. But they are back now, in the Elite Eight just two years ago. While they may not have a NC in a sport like handball or bowling (or baseball which is roughly on par with those two if you look at collegiate interest) they have solid history.

If they were in the Valley, they'd be the best all around program and dominate pretty quickly in most everything. It is hubris to think that UNI or Wichita or Creighton could match. Missouri State is kind of similar to K-State but even I would be hard pressed to think we could match them.

Are you arguing with me for the sake of arguing, or did you not read what I wrote. Kansas State has ZERO national titles in anything. That is a fact. Zero as in none, nada, nothing. Kansas State hasn't even invented a competition in which they have won a national championship. They haven't done it in the NCAA at any level, nor have they done it at the NAIA level. See, I'm not even limiting it to the NCAA, I even included Wichita State's bowling titles in my example, I think that is sanctioned by the ABC, not the NCAA. Missouri State has these handball titles, also not NCAA sanctioned competition. Kansas State has none of them, either, zero, zero, zero, and nobody from Kansas State disputes that.

As for your retort, I never said, nor did I imply that Kansas State hasn't won a conference championship or two, they have, but their only sustained success was with Snyder, and while his climb to the top was dramatic, once he got their, they only stayed up a few years. If you look back to the last few years of Snyder before Ron Prince took over, Kansas State gravitated right back to mediocrity.

So please, show me where I am wrong in my budget analysis of Kansas State, their national significance, prestige and lack of national titles. Kansas State is a Valley level program that was lucky enough to land in the Big 8 and exploit the monies of the Big XII. Other than that, they are nothing.

[MoValley John]

On September 19, 2009, Kansas State became the third FBS teams to lose 600 games in its history after a loss to UCLA at the Rose Bowl. K-State joined Northwestern and Indiana.

[MoValley John]

Also, Wichita State can boast past basketball success as you did for K-State. And Wichita is a more appealing place to live. Manhattan sucks. When your town sucks like Manhattan, you will struggle too be consistently good. Why would a great athlete want to go to Manhattan, when they could play in Iowa City, Lawrence, Wichita or even Tulsa?

I can understand K-State fans jumping to defend them, but anyone outside of the program that takes a hard, honest look at Kansas State, would have a hard time differentiating them from any Valley school.

[CaseyGarrisonforPrez]

Disagree John on K-State. Within the last ten years they won the Big XII (2003) and had an amazing run in football from the early 90s until 2003. Now Snyder is back recreating that magic. If the Big XII somehow survives, he will have them competing for titles in another year or two. The man is just a winner. But I give you that K-State was bad before he got there, arguably fighting with Northwestern as the worst current BCS program until he got to the Little Apple.

K-State has an amazing history in basketball. One of the top 20-25 best programs of all time. Look at what they won in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. Asbury and Wooldridge sank them. But they are back now, in the Elite Eight just two years ago. While they may not have a NC in a sport like handball or bowling (or baseball which is roughly on par with those two if you look at collegiate interest) they have solid history.

If they were in the Valley, they'd be the best all around program and dominate pretty quickly in most everything. It is hubris to think that UNI or Wichita or Creighton could match. Missouri State is kind of similar to K-State but even I would be hard pressed to think we could match them.

Are you arguing with me for the sake of arguing, or did you not read what I wrote. Kansas State has ZERO national titles in anything. That is a fact. Zero as in none, nada, nothing. Kansas State hasn't even invented a competition in which they have won a national championship. They haven't done it in the NCAA at any level, nor have they done it at the NAIA level. See, I'm not even limiting it to the NCAA, I even included Wichita State's bowling titles in my example, I think that is sanctioned by the ABC, not the NCAA. Missouri State has these handball titles, also not NCAA sanctioned competition. Kansas State has none of them, either, zero, zero, zero, and nobody from Kansas State disputes that.

As for your retort, I never said, nor did I imply that Kansas State hasn't won a conference championship or two, they have, but their only sustained success was with Snyder, and while his climb to the top was dramatic, once he got their, they only stayed up a few years. If you look back to the last few years of Snyder before Ron Prince took over, Kansas State gravitated right back to mediocrity.

So please, show me where I am wrong in my budget analysis of Kansas State, their national significance, prestige and lack of national titles. Kansas State is a Valley level program that was lucky enough to land in the Big 8 and exploit the monies of the Big XII. Other than that, they are nothing.

I could care less about the national titles. The only sports that matter nationally are football, basketball (men's and women's), and men's soccer. No one here has any of those either.

The budget analysis is not something I care to engage in. If you gave Kansas Wesleyan Ohio State's budget they'd be pretty amazing and if you gave Florida the athletic budget of Haskell Indian Nation's athletic budget, they'd be awful. Not sure what that argument proves in the context of ISU or KSU.

The fact is that K-State is pretty prestigious in all the major sports. And academically it has improved under Dr. Wefald as well.

[panther-state]

I could care less about the national titles. The only sports that matter nationally are football, basketball (men's and women's), and men's soccer. No one here has any of those either.

The budget analysis is not something I care to engage in. If you gave Kansas Wesleyan Ohio State's budget they'd be pretty amazing and if you gave Florida the athletic budget of Haskell Indian Nation's athletic budget, they'd be awful. Not sure what that argument proves in the context of ISU or KSU.

The fact is that K-State is pretty prestigious in all the major sports. And academically it has improved under Dr. Wefald as well.

That's pretty subjective, Casey. I would doubt that many people if any care about college men's soccer, and I know that women's basketball is only slightly more popular. I'd say besides football and mens basketball, college baseball and MAYBE track & field or wrestling would be next (but living in Iowa probably causes me to put too much stock into wrestling). I'd say the first 3 are the only one's that really matter to a majority of college sports fans. Also K-State is irrelevant in almost all sports. They are mediocre at best

[MoValley John]

Okay, I don't even know how to respond... I'm really trying to take you at face value, but when you make statements like this, "The only sports that matter nationally are football, basketball (men's and women's), and men's soccer." what am I supposed to do? I can't even begin to take you seriously. I will give you women's basketball, but only because it is politically correct. That said, you throw in men's soccer??? Men's soccer is lower on the rung than women's volleyball. Men's soccer is lower on the rung than baseball. Soccer is a niche sport. And men's soccer is not all that widely played, it is a victim of Title IX. There are far more women's soccer programs, yet you include men's soccer as important nationally? If that is the case, you just made a case for Creighton being big time!

And you do this all to defend K-State??? And you don't want to discuss NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. And you don't care about budgets? Let me make this simple for you, conference championships make you relevant in your region, and only during the time you are winning them. National championships make you relevant, nationally, and they are, using your word, significant, nationally. Nobody remembers who won the Pac-10 conference in football back in 2010. However, we remember USC vying for national titles.

As for your statement on budgets, let me give you a little insight, money is driving the bus right now, Kansas State doesn't have it. And Kansas State doesn't have, once again to use your word, significance nationally to generate funds for a conference. They take, they don't give. They detract, they don't add. Without the money that is provided by the Big XII, K-State's budget shrinks dramatically. Then you factor in lower ticket prices for events in a mid major, fewer seat licensing opportunities, less money from advertising and suddenly, K-State is no better than Indiana State or Missouri State.

So keep arguing for the sake of arguing, but if anyone takes a critical and objective look at the finances and potential at either Kansas State or Iowa State, they would find schools that, other than conference affiliation, K- State and Iowa State look much like many Valley programs.

[RoyalShock]

I think K-State will resemble whatever conference they end up it, be it MWC, CUSA or MVC (a long-shot, IMO). What was the KSU vs. E. Kentucky score? Does that give any indication as to what level of football KSU is playing?

Back in the mid-80s (an era that Casey says is relevant), WSU and KSU had roughly the same enrollment and very similar football and basketball teams. It wasn't until after WSU dropped football and KSU hired Snyder (1989) did KSU begin to separate itself from WSU in enrollment.

[CaseyGarrisonforPrez]

I think K-State will resemble whatever conference they end up it, be it MWC, CUSA or MVC (a long-shot, IMO). What was the KSU vs. E. Kentucky score? Does that give any indication as to what level of football KSU is playing?

Back in the mid-80s (an era that Casey says is relevant), WSU and KSU had roughly the same enrollment and very similar football and basketball teams. It wasn't until after WSU dropped football and KSU hired Snyder (1989) did KSU begin to separate itself from WSU in enrollment.

K-State beat EKU 10-7 in a matchup of pretty good teams. EKU is a tought team. K-State also beat Texas soundly last year and has beaten them 3 times in a row I believe. They also have beaten Kansas a lot lately too.

I think we are getting sidetracked here though. All I am saying is that it is hubris to think that Iowa State and Kansas State are "what they are" because of what conference they are a member of. They have amazing facilities and would be a step ahead of most schools if they were invited into our home.

[uniftw]

I think K-State will resemble whatever conference they end up it, be it MWC, CUSA or MVC (a long-shot, IMO). What was the KSU vs. E. Kentucky score? Does that give any indication as to what level of football KSU is playing?

Back in the mid-80s (an era that Casey says is relevant), WSU and KSU had roughly the same enrollment and very similar football and basketball teams. It wasn't until after WSU dropped football and KSU hired Snyder (1989) did KSU begin to separate itself from WSU in enrollment.

K-State beat EKU 10-7 in a matchup of pretty good teams. EKU is a tought team. K-State also beat Texas soundly last year and has beaten them 3 times in a row I believe. They also have beaten Kansas a lot lately too.

I think we are getting sidetracked here though. All I am saying is that it is hubris to think that Iowa State and Kansas State are "what they are" because of what conference they are a member of. They have amazing facilities and would be a step ahead of most schools if they were invited into our home.

It's not hubris to think that.

The fact is is that ISU and KSU only have the money for those facilities because of their conference....and they are pretty low on the "nice" standard within the B12. Give UNI the football money from that B12 that ISU gets and UNI would have much nicer things as well.

Taking away the conference money (none of which KSU or ISU really brings into the conference) they are nothing more than a mid-major in basketball or football.