(07-15-2014 12:39 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  The equation:

SBC - Idaho - NMSU + Missouri Sate + UTA football = Better SBC

No North Florida or Kennesaw State? I'm disappointed in you FJ!

(07-15-2014 12:42 PM)runamuck Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:18 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:14 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  I think Fullerton is expecting the big five's demands for autonomy (SEC, B1G, ACC, BIG XII, and PAC-12) to unravel the FBS's present setup. And, force the lower level FBS institutions to bow out for lack of funding. Consequently. putting conferences like C-USA, the MAC and the SBC on the same level as the Big Sky.

Being on a level playing field with the Sun Belt, the Big Sky commissioner believes he can coax Idaho and possibly NMSU away from the SBC. I think that is what he is alluding to with his statement.

Pretty much.

Lots of delusions in Big Sky Country

not too likely that any schools in the mwc would consider sac state or uc-davis their peers.

Sac. St...perhaps but UC-Davis is an AAU school, the MW schools would love to see them as peers.

(07-15-2014 12:42 PM)runamuck Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:18 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:14 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  I think Fullerton is expecting the big five's demands for autonomy (SEC, B1G, ACC, BIG XII, and PAC-12) to unravel the FBS's present setup. And, force the lower level FBS institutions to bow out for lack of funding. Consequently. putting conferences like C-USA, the MAC and the SBC on the same level as the Big Sky.

Being on a level playing field with the Sun Belt, the Big Sky commissioner believes he can coax Idaho and possibly NMSU away from the SBC. I think that is what he is alluding to with his statement.

Pretty much.

Lots of delusions in Big Sky Country

not too likely that any schools in the mwc would consider sac state or uc-davis their peers.

As would be the case with uta if they added back football; at least at first.

(07-15-2014 12:52 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:39 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  The equation:

SBC - Idaho - NMSU + Missouri Sate + UTA football = Better SBC

No North Florida or Kennesaw State? I'm disappointed in you FJ!

They are not ready.....yet!

(07-14-2014 10:10 PM)rknj8993 Wrote:  According to Craig Haley, a writer for Sports Network, the commissioner of the Big Sky Conference, Doug Fullerton, stated that either Idaho or NMSU were being looked at as the 14th member of the Big Sky Conference.

https://twitter.com/CraigHaley/status/48...7602506752

I know that Idaho is expected to leave the Sun Belt Conference soon-ish, but should the Big Sky take both, what should the Sun Belt do?

http://csnbbs.com/thread-694992.html
Our realignment board had a good thread on this yesterday.
Sounds like Fullerton is way out there and has been for years.

(07-15-2014 12:14 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  I think Fullerton is expecting the big five's demands for autonomy (SEC, B1G, ACC, BIG XII, and PAC-12) to unravel the FBS's present setup. And, force the lower level FBS institutions to bow out for lack of funding. Consequently. putting conferences like C-USA, the MAC and the SBC on the same level as the Big Sky.

Being on a level playing field with the Sun Belt, the Big Sky commissioner believes he can coax Idaho and possibly NMSU away from the SBC. I think that is what he is alluding to with his statement.

Even with P5 autonomy being in a G5 conference is still light years better than FCS.

(07-15-2014 11:45 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Big Sky fans also have a rumor circulating that the Sun Belt will take them all in and then
once they transition they would break away to still be the Big Sky, but as FBS. There are
variations on it but that is the most often mentioned. Some are rock solid sure about it,
to the point of being dismissive if someone calls them out on it.

The premise is pure genius. The Sun Belt would willingly temporarily dilute the playoff money we would get in order to let them leave and create their own league, thus diluting the playoff money for ALL of G5 on a permanent basis.

Sad part? I could actually see Benson buying into this notion.

(07-15-2014 01:22 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:52 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:39 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  The equation:

SBC - Idaho - NMSU + Missouri Sate + UTA football = Better SBC

No North Florida or Kennesaw State? I'm disappointed in you FJ!

They are not ready.....yet!

They are closer than UTA. It would take UTA something like 6 or 7 years to start football and get it FBS ready and eligible.

(07-16-2014 12:54 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 01:22 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:52 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:39 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  The equation:

SBC - Idaho - NMSU + Missouri Sate + UTA football = Better SBC

No North Florida or Kennesaw State? I'm disappointed in you FJ!

They are not ready.....yet!

They are closer than UTA. It would take UTA something like 6 or 7 years to start football and get it FBS ready and eligible.

I agree. The math is more like Idaho leaves, we add MSU. Then four years from now NMSU leaves and we add UTA Football.

Quick question, what is this Idaho 4 year deal I keep hearing about. Was Idaho given a 4 year membership in Sunbelt. Can it be extended. What was the purpose of this. Thanks.

(07-16-2014 02:39 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Quick question, what is this Idaho 4 year deal I keep hearing about. Was Idaho given a 4 year membership in Sunbelt. Can it be extended. What was the purpose of this. Thanks.

The Sun Belt has a two or four year agreement with Idaho to be in the Sun Belt. It is renewable I take it if both parties desire to do so.

(07-16-2014 12:54 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 01:22 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:52 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-15-2014 12:39 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  The equation:

SBC - Idaho - NMSU + Missouri Sate + UTA football = Better SBC

No North Florida or Kennesaw State? I'm disappointed in you FJ!

They are not ready.....yet!

They are closer than UTA. It would take UTA something like 6 or 7 years to start football and get it FBS ready and eligible.

depends on how motivated the leadership gets..took utsa only a cpl. years and they were starting from scratch..uta already has on campus stadium, weight room, office space, very good marching band, etc.

(07-16-2014 02:39 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Quick question, what is this Idaho 4 year deal I keep hearing about. Was Idaho given a 4 year membership in Sunbelt. Can it be extended. What was the purpose of this. Thanks.

In Idaho's agreement in joining the SBC, Idaho is only guaranteed 4 years of membership. But after the first two years the SBC can decided whether to extend the agreement by 2 years or not. If its not extended then Idaho has 2 years to find another conference or go independent. So every 2 years it is voted on whether to keep Idaho. What the exact purpose of this is I am not sure.

(07-16-2014 02:43 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(07-16-2014 02:39 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Quick question, what is this Idaho 4 year deal I keep hearing about. Was Idaho given a 4 year membership in Sunbelt. Can it be extended. What was the purpose of this. Thanks.

The Sun Belt has a two or four year agreement with Idaho to be in the Sun Belt. It is renewable I take it if both parties desire to do so.

That's not correct. Idaho's agreement with the Sun Belt is from July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2018. After two years (sometime in 2016) the Sun Belt will decide whether or not to extend that deal two more years to June 30, 2020.

http://www.thevandalnation.com/idaho-foo...on-june-1/

From the talks last Spring, it seemed pretty clear that it would take 9 out of 11 votes for a team to be invited. So thinking the last paragraph in the above link is not correct.

Quote:Idaho will also have a full vote on Sun Belt Conference football issues. The Sun Belt is current shopping for a 12th member, Sun Belt commissioner Karl Benson has said it’s preferred that member will be in all sports.

(07-16-2014 03:00 PM)GoVandals1893 Wrote:  

(07-16-2014 02:43 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(07-16-2014 02:39 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Quick question, what is this Idaho 4 year deal I keep hearing about. Was Idaho given a 4 year membership in Sunbelt. Can it be extended. What was the purpose of this. Thanks.

The Sun Belt has a two or four year agreement with Idaho to be in the Sun Belt. It is renewable I take it if both parties desire to do so.

That's not correct. Idaho's agreement with the Sun Belt is from July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2018. After two years (sometime in 2016) the Sun Belt will decide whether or not to extend that deal two more years to June 30, 2020.

http://www.thevandalnation.com/idaho-foo...on-june-1/

Oh picky picky, was just saying that it is an agreement that involves 4 or 2 years increments.
Here is a discussion on your own site:
http://www.thevandalnation.com/idaho-foo...on-june-1/
If you go back and read the original letter agreement believe there was an original two year review possible. Doesn't matter since they evidently have agreed to review it now later. After the 2015-16 season, Idaho’s second in the league, the Sun Belt Conference board of governors will meet to decide whether to extend Idaho’s football-only agreement beyond 2017-18.