In theory, you could transfer Idaho's major professors and programs to Boise fairly easily.

U of Idaho on it's own is already academically on par with the lowest ranked "Big 6" schools and an institution that combined the best programs from U of I with BSU's best programs for U of Idaho - Boise would probably make for a school on par with the lowest ranked PAC schools like Oregon State and Arizona State and Utah and be acceptable for inclusion in that league.

Idaho would benefit tremendously from having the University of Idaho Broncos as full members of the PAC, something neither school will ever again achieve on it's own.

In practice, this will never, ever happen due to turf war/pride issues.

(05-25-2012 12:03 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  In theory, you could transfer Idaho's major professors and programs to Boise fairly easily.

U of Idaho on it's own is already academically on par with the lowest ranked "Big 6" schools and an institution that combined the best programs from U of I with BSU's best programs for U of Idaho - Boise would probably make for a school on par with the lowest ranked PAC schools like Oregon State and Arizona State and Utah and be acceptable for inclusion in that league.

Idaho would benefit tremendously from having the University of Idaho Broncos as full members of the PAC, something neither school will ever again achieve on it's own.

In practice, this will never, ever happen due to turf war/pride issues.

Let UofI have their pride and have Boise State drop their name but keep the Broncos as the mascot as you suggest. In fact keep the colors of BSU since it is so nationally recognizable.

I don't care how bad the feud is. Everyone there would have to realize what kind of a massive influx of dollars there would be if they could land in the PAC. That really doesn't say much about those people in charge, in my opinion. So narrow minded and locally focused. They have a gold mine to the West to tap into if they only just learn to work together.

(05-25-2012 10:02 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  

(05-25-2012 09:47 AM)NoDak Wrote:  NMST has to be marshalling its political resources on state government and UNM to get it in the MWC.

Somewhat surprised that Idaho government isn't pressuring Boise St to stay in the WAC, saving it as an Olympic conference.

You mean the MWC? The Idaho Government knows it has been playing favorites for far to long when it involves the Vandals. However I would not be shocked if they demanded we pay money to Idaho out of our paycheck. Would not surprise me at all.

No. I mean the WAC, which Boise St is scheduled to become a non-football member in again. Without Boise St in that conference, it might have a hard time surviving.

Does New Mexico State even have the Big Sky to go to? Aren't they a long way from any Big Sky members? A FCS conference even if they so chose?

As NMSU and UNM are similar institutions, one would think great pressure would be placed on UNM by the legislature. As in funding redistribution?
I think NMSU could make it as anindependent for a few years. Unfortunately they may have to. The NCAA could help by granting an extra game as an incentive to schedule home-home with both Idaho and NMSU. And if they want to pressure the MWC, they could take the extra game away from Hawaii until NMSU and Idaho find homes. Why does Hawaii need scheduling help anymore? They're in a conference, right? So give the extra game to NMSU and Idaho. Take it from Hawaii. Things would work out very quickly.

(05-25-2012 12:20 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(05-25-2012 10:02 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  

(05-25-2012 09:47 AM)NoDak Wrote:  NMST has to be marshalling its political resources on state government and UNM to get it in the MWC.

Somewhat surprised that Idaho government isn't pressuring Boise St to stay in the WAC, saving it as an Olympic conference.

You mean the MWC? The Idaho Government knows it has been playing favorites for far to long when it involves the Vandals. However I would not be shocked if they demanded we pay money to Idaho out of our paycheck. Would not surprise me at all.

No. I mean the WAC, which Boise St is scheduled to become a non-football member in again. Without Boise St in that conference, it might have a hard time surviving.

I think the WAC is dead. Boise State will be a Big East / Big West member. Even though it has been a little quite on the Big West invite as of late.

Okay, the plane fares to Rutgers from Boise are about $350 right now ... doable for many fans. But the team will have to travel, special rates, six times a year - generally at least a Friday night stay-over - six games. All I have to say is, the deal BEast gets with the media better pay the bills; And, be more lucrative that the offers from MWC. So, much for Boise. On the other hand, I really think that UofI is financially better off in the FCS than trying to struggle with the remains and will-comes of the WAC.

(05-25-2012 12:26 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  Does New Mexico State even have the Big Sky to go to? Aren't they a long way from any Big Sky members? A FCS conference even if they so chose?

As NMSU and UNM are similar institutions, one would think great pressure would be placed on UNM by the legislature. As in funding redistribution?
I think NMSU could make it as anindependent for a few years. Unfortunately they may have to. The NCAA could help by granting an extra game as an incentive to schedule home-home with both Idaho and NMSU. And if they want to pressure the MWC, they could take the extra game away from Hawaii until NMSU and Idaho find homes. Why does Hawaii need scheduling help anymore? They're in a conference, right? So give the extra game to NMSU and Idaho. Take it from Hawaii. Things would work out very quickly.

New Mexico tried really hard from what I understand to get the Aggies in the MWC. I am guessing the MWC is tired of fooling with Boise State after BSU said no to the last offer. As soon as Boise finds a home for the Olmpic sports and goes public with it NMSU will go the MWC.
I think the MWC knows its bread and butter is basketball and NMSU is a good addition.

I feel bad for Idaho and NMSt too - I hope they can figure out a way to stay FBS because I don't see any path to get back to FBS if they go to the Big Sky. Although at least the Big Sky is a good FCS conference. Their location/stadium situation make them marginal for remaining FBS though.

(05-25-2012 10:23 AM)JMU Duke Dog Wrote:  If both Idaho and New Mexico State end up moving down to FCS to join the Big Sky for football, then this will increase the Big Sky to have 15 football-playing members. Would they actually want to have that many? It would be easier for only Idaho to go to the Big Sky for north/south division-creating purposes. Also, why did the Big Sky add North Dakota? It seems so far from the other members.

Even before joining the Summit League and MVFC, NDSU's preference was for the Big Sky, but they and SDSU were publicly rejected multiple times by that league.

For UND, joining the Big Sky offered football a home - and the MVFC didn't want to go to 10 members at the time. UND wanted the Summit League football schools to start football, but they refused, and the rest of the MVFC didn't want us in.

UND, being so close to the Canadian border, has to fly most places anyway, even if belonged to the Summit League or MVFC. UND has a significant fleet of its own, and trains a large fraction of the US's airline pilots, air traffic controllers, and airport managers, so flying isn't something that UND shies away from.

Moreover, UND's outstate alumni are mainly in the West (except for Minneapolis), it's programs are western-oriented (energy, geology, resources, Indian programs, rural medicine, aviation). With the oil boom in western ND that is bringing in hundreds of thousands of people, UND needs to connect to the west and particularly the Montana schools. Commerce on the plains flows east and west: positioning UND in Minnesota and Montana are much more important than aligning itself with South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa.

(05-25-2012 12:30 PM)Dub591 Wrote:  Okay, the plane fares to Rutgers from Boise are about $350 right now ... doable for many fans. But the team will have to travel, special rates, six times a year - generally at least a Friday night stay-over - six games. All I have to say is, the deal BEast gets with the media better pay the bills; And, be more lucrative that the offers from MWC. So, much for Boise. On the other hand, I really think that UofI is financially better off in the FCS than trying to struggle with the remains and will-comes of the WAC.

Travel expenses get blown out of proportion as well.
I have a friend who was a member of The Pride of the Southland bad at Tennessee. We had a marketing class at Pellissippi before he transferred and I came up here. He did a paper on this and got some info. Keep in mind this was a decade ago.
For a band member a hotel room on the road was about $7 That is a room so 2 people per room in $3.50 a person.
Also every major university has an airline sponsor. And every airline has a hotel chain they have connections with by law. For instance if a plane is delayed the airline has to put you in a hotel for the night These hotels will accommodate universities at a low rate cost. Basically the plane travel ends up being the cost of the total hotel rooms , Fuel, and the rest is wrote off from the sponsorship.
Pro teams do this as well. I am not saying every university does this, but Tennessee and Boise State do. I also knows BYU does it, and Oregon State and Washington State does it because we all are sponsored by Alaskan Airlines.

Actually, if you guys haven't heard, multiple FCS programs have been contacted by the WAC east of the Rockies, so Idaho may live. New Mexico State and Appalachian State are supposedly #1 and #2 on the Sun Belt expansion list after they get Texas State and Georgia State on board.

(05-25-2012 09:49 AM)TommyC2 Wrote:  I have a question.

The funding for the University of Idaho and Boise State presumably comes from the same place, right? Correct me if I am wrong, but I think the State of Idaho ultimately pays the bills for both institutions.

How did one become so wildly successful in football while the other is about to be relegated?

I understand that the University of Texas and University of North Texas are both funded by the state of Texas and one has a much more successful athletic tradition. In that case, though, there are other factors. UT gets much more money from the state than does UNT. UT has a larger alumni base who gives to athletics. UT would be able to recruit the superior players etc.

In the case of Idaho and Boise State, though, I do not fully understand the discrepancy. Does one University get more money from the state? Does either Idaho or Boise State have a much more powerful alumni base from which to draw funds? Was it simply an institutional decision? In other words, did Boise State have a president and an AD who decided to funnel more of their state funding into football while the president of Idaho chose to fund other things? Obviously Boise State would be more likely to get football recruits now, but I feel like 10-15 years ago they would not have had a huge advantage. Is there an inherent recruiting advantage for Boise State?

I guess I am just wondering why the major difference?

yes, Idaho gets far more money (even for athletics) from the State than Boise State does. The difference is that Idaho has the world's worst location (middle of nowhere, 8 miles from WA State in the PAC) and thus no ticket sales, TV market or anything else that would be an advantage.

Recruits who come to U. Idaho to visit have to go right by WSU and see how much better its facilities and programs are in every way... that's not a good sales-pitch for an FBS school.

(05-25-2012 10:02 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  

(05-25-2012 09:47 AM)NoDak Wrote:  NMST has to be marshalling its political resources on state government and UNM to get it in the MWC.

Somewhat surprised that Idaho government isn't pressuring Boise St to stay in the WAC, saving it as an Olympic conference.

You mean the MWC? The Idaho Government knows it has been playing favorites for far to long when it involves the Vandals. However I would not be shocked if they demanded we pay money to Idaho out of our paycheck. Would not surprise me at all.

Nah.

They have little to no political power anymore... the Pro-BYU political faction in Eastern ID is 5 times their size already. Remember, they were going to impeach the Governor & fire the State Board of Ed over a one-word change to their Mission Statement, right?

What happened is NOTHING. They couldn't even get 10k fans/alums to sign an online petition about it.

(05-25-2012 12:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-25-2012 12:03 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  In theory, you could transfer Idaho's major professors and programs to Boise fairly easily.

U of Idaho on it's own is already academically on par with the lowest ranked "Big 6" schools and an institution that combined the best programs from U of I with BSU's best programs for U of Idaho - Boise would probably make for a school on par with the lowest ranked PAC schools like Oregon State and Arizona State and Utah and be acceptable for inclusion in that league.

Idaho would benefit tremendously from having the University of Idaho Broncos as full members of the PAC, something neither school will ever again achieve on it's own.

In practice, this will never, ever happen due to turf war/pride issues.

Let UofI have their pride and have Boise State drop their name but keep the Broncos as the mascot as you suggest. In fact keep the colors of BSU since it is so nationally recognizable.

I don't care how bad the feud is. Everyone there would have to realize what kind of a massive influx of dollars there would be if they could land in the PAC. That really doesn't say much about those people in charge, in my opinion. So narrow minded and locally focused. They have a gold mine to the West to tap into if they only just learn to work together.

Give it another 20 years and we'll discuss it again. UI academics aren't as stellar as they wish, and an analysts' report of the faculty called them "provincial, stagnant, aimless & eager to protect a bunch of directionless terminal Masters' programs." They were embarassed, and hid the report from Yardley, but haven't done anything to address the issues.

Idaho needs to quit screwing-around and pretending to be a PAC school... and pretending to be an FBS school and evolve into an artsy/geosciences-heavy beatnik school that offers something DIFFERENT for academics & college experience than Washington State, Washington, Montana, Boise State and other schools in the overall region. If they figure it out and do this, they'll be fine.

...if they keep pretending to be something they're not (they have more pride than brains up there,) they will keep sacrificing academics to subsidize an athletic program that only makes a decent school into a joke on the national scene.

To Wit:



(It took them FOUR games played in those butt-logo pants uniforms before they figured out it was a BAD IDEA and removed it? Sheesh.)

They need better leadership, some sense of focus, and NEW BLOOD in that faculty desperately. It's sad, but they are simply not positioned to EVER be what they think they are in their minds.

My Father is a U. Idaho Alumnus, and he's been so frustrated with watching them spin their wheels in the mud, trying to look like a major-college-sports school that he quit donating annually and told their development people never to call him again. Dad is not alone in that camp.

Ask a Wazzu (WA ST) alumn about them, you'll hear similar talk to what I've written above.

(05-25-2012 09:40 AM)Comet Wrote:  They did it to themselves unfortunately

Oh, OK. Do you have any idea how that must sound to someone from a public school in Moscow, Idaho with an endowment worth about 10% of SMU's?

My God, you Dallas people have arrogance down to a science.

(05-25-2012 06:39 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(05-25-2012 09:40 AM)Comet Wrote:  They did it to themselves unfortunately

Oh, OK. Do you have any idea how that must sound to someone from a public school in Moscow, Idaho with an endowment worth about 10% of SMU's?

My God, you Dallas people have arrogance down to a science.

I'm not here (or informed-enough on it) to judge NMSU, but Idaho should NEVER have reclassified to D1A (FBS) in 1996 in a lame effort to "keep up" with Boise. All the factors that have helped Boise State are negatives for their university... NMSU is a much more likely addition to any FBS conference than UI will be.

These things were pointed-out to Moscow, ID in 1995, when the state officials approved the move-up. They were U. of Idaho puppets at the time, and rubber-stamped the injection of "Slow-Acting Athletics Cancer" into U. Idaho by not thinking rationally.

All that's left for them is the long, slow death they will choose. Because pride is more important than thinking rationally. You know, something you're supposed to learn the opposite of when you're in college? Yeah, that.

In their FBS era, they have gone 66-122 for a winning% of .35, and have done so as members of the Big West, Sun Belt & WAC, inarguably the three weakest conferences in that timespan. In addition (and this is... BAD!) Idaho only has a winning record over 3 FBS schools:
Arkansas St: 4-3
Eastern Michigan: 1-0
New Mexico St: 10-5

Squeaking-out winning records over time and dominating only 1 FBS school in 17 seasons in the weakest leagues in CFB doesn't merit pity from anyone, if they end up reclassing-down to the FCS Big Sky Conference. They DID dominate NMSU (the only one they DID dominate over time,) so perhaps the schools belong on the same list of FBS 'undesireables?'

(05-25-2012 10:22 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

Quote:I understand that the University of Texas and University of North Texas are both funded by the state of Texas and one has a much more successful athletic tradition. In that case, though, there are other factors. UT gets much more money from the state than does UNT. UT has a larger alumni base who gives to athletics. UT would be able to recruit the superior players etc.

This is true, but one has nothing to do with the other. In the state of Texas, your athletics have to be self funded because you get no money from the state for athletics.

UT has better sports than UNT because of it's larger alumni base (and having a larger alumni base than anybody else for a long time) playing football longer, not being a commuter school, etc etc.

unt is not a part of the ut system..they are their own system and do their own funding with resources provided by the state..they havent been large for as long as ut-austin so have a smaller alumni base to draw from and are not the flagship university of a large state so they logically have fewer big doners supporting them.

(05-25-2012 06:58 PM)BadWillHunting Wrote:  

(05-25-2012 06:39 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(05-25-2012 09:40 AM)Comet Wrote:  They did it to themselves unfortunately

Oh, OK. Do you have any idea how that must sound to someone from a public school in Moscow, Idaho with an endowment worth about 10% of SMU's?

My God, you Dallas people have arrogance down to a science.

I'm not here (or informed-enough on it) to judge NMSU, but Idaho should NEVER have reclassified to D1A (FBS) in 1996 in a lame effort to "keep up" with Boise. All the factors that have helped Boise State are negatives for their university... NMSU is a much more likely addition to any FBS conference than UI will be.

These things were pointed-out to Moscow, ID in 1995, when the state officials approved the move-up. They were U. of Idaho puppets at the time, and rubber-stamped the injection of "Slow-Acting Athletics Cancer" into U. Idaho by not thinking rationally.

All that's left for them is the long, slow death they will choose. Because pride is more important than thinking rationally. You know, something you're supposed to learn the opposite of when you're in college? Yeah, that.

In their FBS era, they have gone 66-122 for a winning% of .35, and have done so as members of the Big West, Sun Belt & WAC, inarguably the three weakest conferences in that timespan. In addition (and this is... BAD!) Idaho only has a winning record over 3 FBS schools:
Arkansas St: 4-3
Eastern Michigan: 1-0
New Mexico St: 10-5

Squeaking-out winning records over time and dominating only 1 FBS school in 17 seasons in the weakest leagues in CFB doesn't merit pity from anyone, if they end up reclassing-down to the FCS Big Sky Conference. They DID dominate NMSU (the only one they DID dominate over time,) so perhaps the schools belong on the same list of FBS 'undesireables?'

Even though I agree for the most part with what you said, I have to ask if you have been to Moscow? The fact that they have accomplished what they did with what they have is pretty admirable.
They do not even have an actual basketball arena or gym because it is built in the middle of their football hanger. The black curtains are a nice touch.
They belong in the Big Sky. No doubt about it. But I do not hate them enough to say they were trying to keep up with Boise State. Nothing wrong with them trying to move up.

(05-25-2012 11:16 AM)TommyC2 Wrote:  

(05-25-2012 11:06 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Ok, I have a crazy question for you WTR. It is crazy because I realize the chances of it every actually happening are slim to none. What if Idaho finally realized the futility of this whole situation you guys got there and they just merged the two schools? How much better in academic ratings would that one school be? I think you can probably guess where I am going with this.

Welcome the newest member of the PAC 12 ...... The University of Idaho at Boise?

(05-26-2012 08:58 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  Even though I agree for the most part with what you said, I have to ask if you have been to Moscow? The fact that they have accomplished what they did with what they have is pretty admirable.
They do not even have an actual basketball arena or gym because it is built in the middle of their football hanger. The black curtains are a nice touch.
They belong in the Big Sky. No doubt about it. But I do not hate them enough to say they were trying to keep up with Boise State. Nothing wrong with them trying to move up.

Yes, I've had the displeasure of that road-trip numerous times. Whether you drive it or fly-n-drive it, the trip sucks, and there is nowhere decent to stay unless you drive all the way back to Spokane.

What you say about the facilities there is right on-the-mark.

The history of Idaho's move to reclassify from FCS is that a bunch of UI puppet-folks on the SBOE found-out in 1991 that Boise was considering a plan to reclass-up to FBS. Since UI had no such plans, and they worried they'd be left behind, they complained about the plans and fired then BSU President Keiser for his role in exploration of those plans.

So yeah, some of us don't appreciate a school that had no business moving-up, from a state w/ similar population to Vermont (which has how many FBS schools?) Pink-Slipping our president for a reasonable study on whether or not a move-up would be a good thing.

They fired him because they worried that U. Idaho would be "Forever Left Behind...." Well, they delayed our plans... and insisted that they move up at the same time... and have proceeded to stink up the subclass ever since. I'll argue that they moved-up, and got "Forever Left Behind" worse by what's happened than EVER would have been compared if they had stayed in the Big Sky, where they fit and belonged.