I realize that Boise is awesome right now. What happens when they aren't awesome in 10-15 years? They are not the state flagship. They are not in a good recruiting area or market. I see adding Boise as being very short-sighted.

I feel the same way about the academies. However, if the academies start to suck, they will excuse themselves and go indy making room for a Memphis or ECU. Boise will not excuse itself.

(10-14-2011 08:40 AM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  I realize that Boise is awesome right now. What happens when they aren't awesome in 10-15 years? They are not the state flagship. They are not in a good recruiting area or market. I see adding Boise as being very short-sighted.

I feel the same way about the academies. However, if the academies start to suck, they will excuse themselves and go indy making room for a Memphis or ECU. Boise will not excuse itself.

I'm guessing you haven followed Boise very closely. The answer is that in 10-15 years, Boise won't suck.

Trust me when I say a team on top, and ESPN darling for TV (hmmm .... that sounds familiar) is one ncaa probation & scholly reduction, 1 bad coaching hire, and 1 bad AD hire away from becoming mediocre. It happened to us, it can happen to Boise.

Granted Boise rose in the time when undefeated seasons got you the BCS game and not a MCB appearance against BYU, but the OP is right that it can all go up in a sh*tstorm in a hurry.

We're slowly making our way back with major facilities on their way, BBall back into the National spotlight/talk, and (hopefully) a rising FB program again here soon.

The answer is simple, If Boise helps BE survive as an AQ short term you deal with the long term then. Seems to me the BE has been known to vote out FB only members before. Boise has set itself in a unique spot, I am not sure they are a flash in the pan.

ECU, Memphis & company are more likely to suck over the next 10-15 years than Boise State.

Who cares if they end up sucking? We'll all hopefully be in bigger better super conferences by then...

If there is no Big East in 10-15 years without Boise... then what do you have to lose?

(10-14-2011 08:40 AM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  I realize that Boise is awesome right now. What happens when they aren't awesome in 10-15 years? They are not the state flagship. They are not in a good recruiting area or market. I see adding Boise as being very short-sighted.

I feel the same way about the academies. However, if the academies start to suck, they will excuse themselves and go indy making room for a Memphis or ECU. Boise will not excuse itself.

1. Big East Football may not be around in 5 years much less 10-15, so I wouldn't worry about it.

2. Boise is being invited for football only, not full membership. That's not necessarily a permanent thing. It's an associated membership that can be terminated.

3. Boise recruits heavily from California. Thin about it. A still growing state of 38 million people with only 4 BCS schools in it. Boise has recruited heavily in CA & will continue to do so, creating some confidence that they can be good for a long time. Even if Idaho was a good recruiting area, how many players are going to sign with an East Coast or Ohio Vally school 2500 miles away simply because they come in to play football once every other year? If that does the trick, East Coast schools can simply tell CA recruits that the family can take the short flight up & over to Boise to catch a game the kid plays.

What happens to the ACC when they add Miami and the U starts sucking?

Nothing.

(10-14-2011 08:40 AM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  I realize that Boise is awesome right now. What happens when they aren't awesome in 10-15 years? They are not the state flagship. They are not in a good recruiting area or market. I see adding Boise as being very short-sighted.

I feel the same way about the academies. However, if the academies start to suck, they will excuse themselves and go indy making room for a Memphis or ECU. Boise will not excuse itself.

The truth is the BE doesn't care about the long term, because every single FB member wants to leave. The only thing they care about is keeping the league viable enough untill they can find something better. Boise is only valuable to the league if they are an elite program. If they become average or worse they are a huge boat anchor. Anyone who says it can't happen is just being silly. Much stronger and much greater programs have gone on bad runs. It's very likely they could take a step back next year losing Moore, and then if they came in the BE and had to play legit opponents week after week breaking in a new QB and traveling across the country for all their road games I could easily see them losing 3 or 4 games next year. They are worthless if they do that.

(10-14-2011 08:52 AM)Chappy Wrote:  What happens to the ACC when they add Miami and the U starts sucking?

What do you mean "starts"?

(10-14-2011 08:49 AM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  ECU, Memphis & company are more likely to suck over the next 10-15 years than Boise State.

Maybe maybe not. 15 years ago would you have predicted that Boise State would have the best record of anyone in the 2000's? Marshall was close to their level at one point, and then one bad coaching hire and they are irrelevant. Sure if Petterson is there for that long they will probably be great, but he could leave at any moment and they make one bad hire and they are worthless. The entire point of adding them isn't long term viability, it's just keeping an AQ bid short term till everyone else can get off the sinking ship.

Conference USA has dealt with a similar issue.

Marshall was a mini-Boise State from 1997-2002, averaging 11 wins a year.

Then they lost their coach.

Since Marshall started play in C-USA in 2005, they've made exactly one bowl game. Now C-USA is stuck with a team in the middle of nowhere that brings nothing to the league.

Could the same thing happen again with Boise and the Big East? Sure could.

One huge difference here is that Boise helps keep the BCS AutoBid. Another huge difference is that Boise will be football-only and not no mans land for your Olympic sports.

Boise has sustained a level of excellence through multiple football coaches. Their administration is committed to maintaining it. You can't say that about ECU or Memphis, lip service from ADs not withstanding.

(10-14-2011 09:04 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  Conference USA has dealt with a similar issue.

Marshall was a mini-Boise State from 1997-2002, averaging 11 wins a year.

Then they lost their coach.

Since Marshall started play in C-USA in 2005, they've made exactly one bowl game. Now C-USA is stuck with a team in the middle of nowhere that brings nothing to the league.

Could the same thing happen again with Boise and the Big East? Sure could.

One huge difference here is that Boise helps keep the BCS AutoBid. Another huge difference is that Boise will be football-only and not no mans land for your Olympic sports.

Back when Marshall was in its hay day, so was Boise. They still are. That's the difference.

(10-14-2011 08:49 AM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  ECU, Memphis & company are more likely to suck over the next 10-15 years than Boise State.

Yes...If BSU gets AQ they will jump to another level. I will say though the same thing would happen to ECU. The difference is BSU is going to continue to be good without the AQ status. ECU is going to suffer without it.

(10-14-2011 09:07 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  Back when Marshall was in its hay day, so was Boise. They still are. That's the difference.

True. Boise's been awesome for 13 years now. Marshall was only awesome for 6. So that's 7 more years of awesome.

(10-14-2011 09:08 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(10-14-2011 08:49 AM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  ECU, Memphis & company are more likely to suck over the next 10-15 years than Boise State.

Yes...If BSU gets AQ they will jump to another level. I will say though the same thing would happen to ECU. The difference is BSU is going to continue to be good without the AQ status. ECU is going to suffer without it.

What other level? Did Louisville jump to another level? They will be good as long as they have an elite head coach. They could get in the BE, he leaves, they make a bad hire and become a dumpster fire like Louisville was for a few years. It's always funny to see people assuming today's reality is what the future will look like.

(10-14-2011 09:05 AM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  Boise has sustained a level of excellence through multiple football coaches. Their administration is committed to maintaining it. You can't say that about ECU or Memphis, lip service from ADs not withstanding.

BSU has a unique situation. They have set themselves up a pretty good dynasty for years to come...even if they remain non-AQ. If Peterson leaves?(and I don't know why he would) that could make a difference..but..I expect BSU could hire a very good replacement. I see BSU just reloading...year after year. That blue field hypnotizes recruits..

Boise is no different than any other program. They could continue this amazing run for another 15 years. Or, like many programs, they could have a couple of recruiting classes not pan out, have a coach leave, and everything hit the skids for a few years before they get back up.

But that's not something unique to Boise. It could happen to every single NCAA program. And it has. Even programs like Nebraska, Texas, Florida State, Miami, Notre Dame, etc. have had "down" years- sometimes many in a row. If those type programs can have it happen to them, then it can happen to anyone. And how teams like Boise responds to it will determine their fate.

(10-14-2011 09:05 AM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  Boise has sustained a level of excellence through multiple football coaches. Their administration is committed to maintaining it. You can't say that about ECU or Memphis, lip service from ADs not withstanding.

You can be committed to maintaining it, but all it takes is one bad coaching hire and you lose all momentum. You think ECU isn't committed to maintaining and reaching that level? We are spending money on football like it's on fire, but you have to hire the right guy to coach your football team. We may not have this time, but do you really think it was from a lack of commitment? Coaching hires are a complete crapshoot. Boise has hired 3 straight great coaches for them, but all the commitment and want to can't guarantee every coach they hire from here on out is going to be that level of great.