Seattle U

So my youngest brother bucked the family trend and went to Seattle U so my parents get the school magazine, and the most recent one is a feature story on SU making the switch to D-1... Apparently they will be eligible this year for women's soccer as an at large team. Interesting since they generally do field a pretty solid team and I think are a few years removed from a D-II title... More interestingly is that since their on campus gym is extremely sub-standard for basketball they will be starting to play their games at Key Arena this year and playing a mix of D-I and D-II teams until they can get full D-I status. So basically they are 2-3 years from full eligibility but next year are able to qualify for the NIT and CBS, however not the Big Dance...

The article again says that the WCC would pretty much be the perfect fit for the Red Hawks, and I can't say I disagree... Makes you wonder if once they achieve that status if the WCC will finally let them play in the league they belong...

There have been many discussions of this topic, and I agree 100% that SU belongs in the WCC. Once they are ready.

Logistically, it would make sense to add another school at the same time to keep an even number of teams; a 9-team conference poses some scheduling challenges. Should the WCC wait for a 10th team before accepting SU? Probably not, but I would hope the wheels would be in motion.

Adding the Seattle market directly to the conference would be huge, as well.

I think an I-5 rivalry (like Blazers/Sonics, Timbers/Sounders, Ducks/Dawgs) would be great for both UP and SU and could generate attention in both cities... I look forward to road trips north!

Here is the article DTR is referring to: Seattle U. Magazine

That would be the article....

Not only the I-5 rivalry, but also the I-90 rivalry with the OTHER team up north... Not to mention all of the fans for that OTHER team in the Seattle area. It would be great to introduce that into the area. That said it adds another team picking from the Puget Sound talent pool, more "friendly" competition. Not to mention it would give my other UP alum brother a chance to razz the Seattle U neophyte a few more times a year...

Plus for all you soccer fans, would add another solid program into the region. AKA another team to qualify for the NCAAs and incidentally help us bring playoff soccer to Merlo

Seattle U makes a lot of sense for the WCC. Expanding into the third or fourth largest market on the West Coast would be big, and the difficulties of scheduling for ALL WCC sports (not just basketball) could really be aided by adding a few more conference games. Plus there is Seattle U's history with the WCC and the fact that it's a private Catholic school on the west coast... everything seems to fit.

The big question is whether or not U. of the Pacific in Stockton is 1) still interested in joining the WCC and 2) is still being looked at as a viable 10th member. The answer to question two should be pretty obvious (of course they would be) but question one I'm not so sure.

DaTruRochin wrote:So my youngest brother bucked the family trend and went to Seattle U so my parents get the school magazine, and the most recent one is a feature story on SU making the switch to D-1... Apparently they will be eligible this year for women's soccer as an at large team.

Not so. from the article

Soccer is an exception, however. Under a provision that allows the university to fast-track the reclassification of two sports, SU's men's and women's soccer will be considered full members of the NCAA and eligible for tournament play during the 2010–11 season.

(emphasis mine)

As to whether they will become WCC members, I think if they upgrade facilities and have competetive programs in the WCC sports, they are a lock. Pacific? only when Seattle comes in, and it might be Nevada instead.

OK, so I didn't check my sources... You got me there... I knew it was sooner than later, but was too lazy...

Don't think Nevada would leave its conference because of football.

Pacific is the "natural" fit - private, the odd-man out in the Big West (the only non-state school), history in the WCC, plays all the WCC sports, etc etc. I think they should be a no-brainer if they are indeed still interested in joining our conference. The problem is that they have been strung along for so long now that they may be a bit jaded about the whole thing. I hope not... I would love to see the WCC expand into the Sacramento area and add another major metro area into the mix. I mean really... if Seattle U and Pacific were added, the WCC would have all the major metro areas of the West Coast: Seattle, Portland, Bay Area, LA, San Diego, and Sacramento. Spokane? Well, it's not as big as the others, but it's probably up there as well.

The positives for expansion seem to be huge from my point of view, and the conference will have plenty of money over the next several years with three teams having made the tournament last year and likely at least two this year as well. I know the argument about making the slice of the pie smaller, but it just makes so much sense for scheduling stuff and helping legitmize the conference... not many conferences have only 8 members, that's for sure, and I'm sure opening up to the Seattle and Sacramento markets would make broadcasting WCC games on TV that much more appealing. I really hope they can make it happen.

The fit for both schools really is as close to perfect as you can get. Seattle has decent facilities for most sports, but their basketball gym is definitely sub-standard. That said, until they can get that situation fixed; the ability to use Key Arena definitely solves the arena problem until they can get one built closer to campus.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out in the near future...

Are we Pilots willing to let S.U. in the WCC before they apologize for that stealing Elgin Baylor episode?

up7587 wrote:Are we Pilots willing to let S.U. in the WCC before they apologize for that stealing Elgin Baylor episode?

The way I heard it, we turned Elgin down because of his grades.

I do believe that would fall under the category of "whoops!!"

WHOA!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is a tidbit of UP history I do not know.

Please ellaborate.

It's one of the big legends of UP sports. I'm surprised you never heard it. I don't know if I have the story exactly right, but Baylor applied to UP. Apparently his grades weren't quite up to snuff. The athletic department (I can't remember who the coach was) went to Bishop Waldschmidt to see if we could get him in anyhow, and they were turned down. The rest is history.

Some of the Really old guys still rail about it once in a while.

Wow, I didnt know that either.

That is one of those things that makes you wonder "what if"...? How would history have been different for the hoops program? And the school in general?!

Would we be where Seattle U is right now - trying to move up to D1 and struggling to join a conference??

I'd like to say yes. Just to make me feel better. (but 2 national championship B-Ball banners would be pretty sweet hanging in Chiles....)

Can we chalk this up with failing to hire Adelman back in the 80s as one of the greatest mistakes in our basketball program's disturbingly long history of them?

Rob's Jacket wrote:Can we chalk this up with failing to hire Adelman back in the 80s as one of the greatest mistakes in our basketball program's disturbingly long history of them?

What what WHAT? Didn't know this one either. Looks like we may have hired the wrong former Blazer. And it seems all the Blazers fired him for was winning two conference championships and losing to the Bad Boys and Jordan's Bulls in our Finals appearances.

The rumor I've always heard is that Adelman was our first choice to replace Jack Avina, but that we wouldn't pay him as much money as he was making as an assistant with the Blazers. Since we wouldn't up the offer, Adelman turned down the job, and we got Larry Steele.

And we all know how that turned out . . .

Ah the folly of being blinded by the Blazer mystique ! Larry Steele was totally unqualified for the job. He had no prior coaching experience. I believe that the schools administration was deceived into thinking that the pr alone would help to bring greater attention to the program. Then, after his disastrous first 3 years he was given a contract extension. That was pure folly!

Agreed! Coach Avina had some very good years, but the Chiles Center was not getting filled up like the administration desired. Combine that with the fact that to get good teams, Jack had to take some chances on a few players, and they may have burned him with off-court antics (I only heard rumors; I'm not in a position to know all the facts.) So the administration decided to try to fill the Chiles Center by getting a big-name Blazer for coach and hoping for the best. The downward spiral ensued that we are still struggling to escape today.

I don't know how Greg Anthony's transfer to UNLV played into all this; would he have stayed if Coach Avina had been retained, or did he decide first? (And was he asking for "extra" benefits that Tark would offer that we wouldn't?) I just know he was about the best player I ever saw in a Pilot uniform for that one year.

Adelman was up for the UP job a least 3 times, and we didn't seriously consider him any of those. I think it was a good move. He would have stayed until he got the first big time offer in the pros or college.

UP would have just ben a place to hang his hat for a while.

I don't know, Geez . . . I think I'd have rather had Adelman's hat hung on us for a couple of years as opposed to the "stability" brought to us by Steele.

I tend to agree with RJ. Yes, Adelman probably would have moved on... but he certainly would have left the program in much better shape than Steele did. He could have been a spark to the program to get it/keep it rolling...

While a clean, honest program is the most important, you have to think that just about ANY coach other than Steele would have been an improvement...