(07-20-2015 03:39 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 03:32 PM)billings Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 02:35 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 11:14 AM)billings Wrote:  Fullerton (Big Sky commish for everyone else)today at the big sky media days

SAID he is very happy some members did not chase FBS dreams and he wants to welcome Idaho back to FCS.

Now give it up. That is direct from the commish that the BIG sky is FCS and nobody is chasing FBS in that conference. Let your wild fantasy of a FBS big sky go since it will never happen

Tweets from a montana State reporter at the conference

Colter Nuanez ‏@Bobcat_Beat 1h1 hour ago
Fullerton confident with Big Sky's place among college conferences. Says he's glad some members didn't chase FBS dreams #BigSkyKickoff

Colter Nuanez ‏@Bobcat_Beat 1h1 hour ago
Fullerton said he would love to welcome Idaho back for football and he thinks that's what is best for the Vandals #BigSkyKickoff

Think it just hilarious that you use justified this forum on those tweets. Over anxious perhaps?

Fullerton was congratulating the Montanas for having patience and not jumping to the WAC when they were offered. The WAC would have been something like Montana, Mont St, Idaho, NMSU, LAMAR, Sam Houston, Jacksonville St, Liberty with Seattle and Denver as non football. All of them would have been up a creek.

Fullerton did not say Idaho was moving to FCS, as he would be justifiably fired.

Try again!,

Please. Again I am a montana State season Ticket holder and the AD laughed at the idea that montana state is interested in FBS in a press conference I was at. Literally laughed at how absurd it was to think they could afford it and be competitive.

I posted as you always try to use old fullerton statements in your twisted logic and now he flat out states they are not interested in FBS

Montana State's record last year would have gotten them a bowl bid. That would have been more money than the FCS playoffs.
Eastern Washington, Montana, Idaho State, Montana State, Northern Arizona, Cal-Poly, and Sacramento State were all bowl eligible. Big Sky Conference have a much better wining teams for Bowl games than MWC, AAC, MAC, Sun Belt and C-USA. That would have been a much bragging rights for them to be better than any of the G5 conferences with their top 7 schools better than the rest.

Montana State lost 37-10 to an Arkansas State squad that finished three games out of first in the Sun Belt.

(07-20-2015 11:14 AM)billings Wrote:  Fullerton (Big Sky commish for everyone else)today at the big sky media days

SAID he is very happy some members did not chase FBS dreams and he wants to welcome Idaho back to FCS.

Now give it up. That is direct from the commish that the BIG sky is FCS and nobody is chasing FBS in that conference. Let your wild fantasy of a FBS big sky go since it will never happen

Here is a better understanding of what Fullerton said....

Quote:Big Sky commissioner Doug Fullerton was careful not to mention any conferences by name, but his message was still clear: The Big Sky belongs with the non-power 5 conferences — all of them....

....But even with that, don't expect the Big Sky to be looking for FBS admittance soon.

"It begins to blur the lines ... ," Fullerton said. "It's a process and it's going to take a long time, but it's just where we belong. But I think to chase FBS prematurely would be a mistake.".....

...."I couldn't be more excited about the upside the Big Sky has over the next five years," Fullerton said. "I think you will see us expand into different territories, just as a brand."

How is this different from what Nodak has been saying? Change is coming and Fullerton wants to make sure that the Big Sky is making the right moves to position the Big Sky in the new landscape. If the Montana schools had left it would have been bad for the future of the Big Sky. They stayed and Idaho is back, with the exception of football.

(07-21-2015 07:17 AM)nokota Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 11:14 AM)billings Wrote:  Fullerton (Big Sky commish for everyone else)today at the big sky media days

SAID he is very happy some members did not chase FBS dreams and he wants to welcome Idaho back to FCS.

Now give it up. That is direct from the commish that the BIG sky is FCS and nobody is chasing FBS in that conference. Let your wild fantasy of a FBS big sky go since it will never happen

Here is a better understanding of what Fullerton said....

Quote:Big Sky commissioner Doug Fullerton was careful not to mention any conferences by name, but his message was still clear: The Big Sky belongs with the non-power 5 conferences — all of them....

....But even with that, don't expect the Big Sky to be looking for FBS admittance soon.

"It begins to blur the lines ... ," Fullerton said. "It's a process and it's going to take a long time, but it's just where we belong. But I think to chase FBS prematurely would be a mistake.".....

...."I couldn't be more excited about the upside the Big Sky has over the next five years," Fullerton said. "I think you will see us expand into different territories, just as a brand."

How is this different from what Nodak has been saying? Change is coming and Fullerton wants to make sure that the Big Sky is making the right moves to position the Big Sky in the new landscape. If the Montana schools had left it would have been bad for the future of the Big Sky. They stayed and Idaho is back, with the exception of football.

Nothing is going to change in FBS or FCS in the next five years, structurally. There might be some conference realignment, but that doesn't affect the post-season.

The CFP is on for another 11 years before CFP II goes into affect.


If it were allowed, the Big Sky could move up to FBS by upgrading their athletic departments accordingly.

But all that would do is make themselves into 85 scholarship versions of what they currently are. They would no longer be able to access the NCAA FCS tournament and they would have very limited bowl opportunities, on top of receiving zero money from the CFP over its life.

The current G5 have worked hard the last couple years to create new bowls, so they can have more bowl opportunities in the post season amongst themselves. They're not just going to fork over those slots to a FBS Big Sky.

(07-20-2015 04:09 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 03:59 PM)MJG Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 02:03 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 02:00 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 11:14 AM)billings Wrote:  Fullerton (Big Sky commish for everyone else)today at the big sky media days

SAID he is very happy some members did not chase FBS dreams and he wants to welcome Idaho back to FCS.

Now give it up. That is direct from the commish that the BIG sky is FCS and nobody is chasing FBS in that conference. Let your wild fantasy of a FBS big sky go since it will never happen

Tweets from a montana State reporter at the conference

Colter Nuanez ‏@Bobcat_Beat 1h1 hour ago
Fullerton confident with Big Sky's place among college conferences. Says he's glad some members didn't chase FBS dreams #BigSkyKickoff

Colter Nuanez ‏@Bobcat_Beat 1h1 hour ago
Fullerton said he would love to welcome Idaho back for football and he thinks that's what is best for the Vandals #BigSkyKickoff

"Please Idaho, please allow the Big Sky to drag you down to FCS! That would work out great for the Big Sky, while throwing away everything you've done in FBS and throwing away the investment you've made in that higher division!"

What investment has Idaho made since they moved to FBS? ZERO!

Idaho has spent thirty million in the last five years .
That is not counting the East end addition with all the usual FOC stuff.
Redone locker rooms big glassed in weight room over looking two outdoor spinturf lighted practice fields.Luxury seating 30X 50 video board new press box. 120 person team meeting room and position meeting rooms. A seating expansion is all that is left.

Basically everything U Mass has done without a seating expansion just like U Mass.

I figured someone would be able to explain it. I wasn't sure what exactly they had done, but I was sure they've spent some money on football (related) facilities in the last few years.

Idaho aspires upward, toward the Mountain West level of programs. Not downward, toward the Idaho State level of programs.

Idaho has spent 73 years at the top level and fans believe they were forced down.
So dropping down is not as easy as a school who moved up 18 years ago.
Idaho moved up to join the Big West and the conference dropped football.
They helped start SBC football along with NMSU one reason they might stay a while.
Both would prefer a Western conference but will fight to stay FBS.

This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hopes to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the reason the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep. Big sky commish hopes g5 schools drop hundreds of scholarships and sports so they can play better teams

Nodak think the big sky will move up to fbs level as a conference. Big sky commish says the g5 are better off at fcs level football spending levels. Yea no difference there

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep.

FCS fans who know they're basically stuck at the ceiling that their schools can achieve, in terms of growth, would love nothing more than the drag the G5 (and even a few of the lowest P5) down the FCS, keeping FCS the exact way it is (NCAA playoff field as the post-season).

It's been talked about and dreamed about among them for years.

(07-21-2015 11:24 AM)billings Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep. Big sky commish hopes g5 schools drop hundreds of scholarships and sports so they can play better teams

Nodak think the big sky will move up to fbs level as a conference. Big sky commish says the g5 are better off at fcs level football spending levels. Yea no difference there

The Big Sky is not hoping the G5 will drop scholarships and sports. Where in the world did you concoct that?

The Big Sky wants to expand. Why would it do that when it already has 14 affiliated teams? Answer: to divide into FCS and FBS divisions and later conferences.

The Big Sky should not move "prematurely to FBS". Right now it can't, so a move would only happen if the rule allowing access changes. But the NCAA is convening lawyers to head up a Summit of the future of DI subdivisions: how convenient.

Any Big Sky school that wants FBS has plans in place for a 15k seat stadium. Those that want to stay FCS can stay. Montana St can stay FCS if Billings insists they can't afford it. Surely President Cruzado will listen to his impassioned pleas.

(07-21-2015 11:26 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep.

FCS fans who know they're basically stuck at the ceiling that their schools can achieve, in terms of growth, would love nothing more than the drag the G5 (and even a few of the lowest P5) down the FCS, keeping FCS the exact way it is (NCAA playoff field as the post-season).

It's been talked about and dreamed about among them for years.

Yeah, that's why App St and GA Southern stayed in FCS. Their dream will soon be realized.

(07-21-2015 12:23 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:24 AM)billings Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep. Big sky commish hopes g5 schools drop hundreds of scholarships and sports so they can play better teams

Nodak think the big sky will move up to fbs level as a conference. Big sky commish says the g5 are better off at fcs level football spending levels. Yea no difference there

The Big Sky is not hoping the G5 will drop scholarships and sports. Where in the world did you concoct that?

The Big Sky wants to expand. Why would it do that when it already has 14 affiliated teams?
The Big Sky should not move "prematurely to FBS". Right now it Answer: to divide into FCS and FBS divisions and later conferences.
can't, so a move would only happen if the rule allowing access changes. But the NCAA is convening lawyers to head up a Summit of the future of DI subdivisions: how convenient.

Any Big Sky school that wants FBS has plans in place for a 15k seat stadium. Those that want to stay FCS can stay. Montana St can stay FCS if Billings insists they can't afford it. Surely President Cruzado will listen to his impassioned pleas.

Many of the Big Sky schools already have 15k plus stadiums that have no desire for FBS (Sac. St, Weber St, Portland St, UM, MSU, Cal Poly, UCD). MSU and UM expanded their stadium without any ambition to go FBS.

If there is any split that is going to happen it will be to have a WAC FCS conference taking the metro big sky schools (UCD, Cal Poly, PSU, Sac. St.)

(07-21-2015 12:23 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:24 AM)billings Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep. Big sky commish hopes g5 schools drop hundreds of scholarships and sports so they can play better teams

Nodak think the big sky will move up to fbs level as a conference. Big sky commish says the g5 are better off at fcs level football spending levels. Yea no difference there

The Big Sky is not hoping the G5 will drop scholarships and sports. Where in the world did you concoct that?

The Big Sky wants to expand. Why would it do that when it already has 14 affiliated teams? Answer: to divide into FCS and FBS divisions and later conferences.

The Big Sky should not move "prematurely to FBS". Right now it can't, so a move would only happen if the rule allowing access changes. But the NCAA is convening lawyers to head up a Summit of the future of DI subdivisions: how convenient.

Any Big Sky school that wants FBS has plans in place for a 15k seat stadium. Those that want to stay FCS can stay. Montana St can stay FCS if Billings insists they can't afford it. Surely President Cruzado will listen to his impassioned pleas.

She is the oner saying they can't afford FBS as it is structured today

(07-21-2015 01:06 PM)billings Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 12:23 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:24 AM)billings Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep. Big sky commish hopes g5 schools drop hundreds of scholarships and sports so they can play better teams

Nodak think the big sky will move up to fbs level as a conference. Big sky commish says the g5 are better off at fcs level football spending levels. Yea no difference there

The Big Sky is not hoping the G5 will drop scholarships and sports. Where in the world did you concoct that?

The Big Sky wants to expand. Why would it do that when it already has 14 affiliated teams? Answer: to divide into FCS and FBS divisions and later conferences.

The Big Sky should not move "prematurely to FBS". Right now it can't, so a move would only happen if the rule allowing access changes. But the NCAA is convening lawyers to head up a Summit of the future of DI subdivisions: how convenient.

Any Big Sky school that wants FBS has plans in place for a 15k seat stadium. Those that want to stay FCS can stay. Montana St can stay FCS if Billings insists they can't afford it. Surely President Cruzado will listen to his impassioned pleas.

She is the oner saying they can't afford FBS as it is structured today

Because Montana St would have to jump to the Sun Belt. But if had an alternative regional league, like the one she plays in now, she would change her tune.

(07-21-2015 12:23 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:24 AM)billings Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep. Big sky commish hopes g5 schools drop hundreds of scholarships and sports so they can play better teams

Nodak think the big sky will move up to fbs level as a conference. Big sky commish says the g5 are better off at fcs level football spending levels. Yea no difference there

The Big Sky is not hoping the G5 will drop scholarships and sports. Where in the world did you concoct that?

The Big Sky wants to expand. Why would it do that when it already has 14 affiliated teams? Answer: to divide into FCS and FBS divisions and later conferences.

The Big Sky should not move "prematurely to FBS". Right now it can't, so a move would only happen if the rule allowing access changes. But the NCAA is convening lawyers to head up a Summit of the future of DI subdivisions: how convenient.

Any Big Sky school that wants FBS has plans in place for a 15k seat stadium. Those that want to stay FCS can stay. Montana St can stay FCS if Billings insists they can't afford it. Surely President Cruzado will listen to his impassioned pleas.

Why is it convenient that the NCAA is trying to gear up for the most important lawsuits they've ever faced? (which are challenging the amateur model directly)

I don't see any reasonable scenario where part of the settlement is to split the FBS into P5 and G5 sub-divisions. How does that help student-athlete welfare? How does that help get student-athletes paychecks?

I'm sure you'll think of something.

(07-21-2015 12:29 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:26 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 09:38 AM)MJG Wrote:  This board is big on reading between the lines to figure out future moves.

I have to wonder about how FBS will change.

The biggest reason schools with no path talk of a future being FBS.
I understand it is just talk but you need a realistic option.

Idaho,Missouri St and U Mass have all spent considerable money upgrading everything except capacity.

SDSU and EWU went from plans for twenty two thousand to 18500.

EKU is tearing down their stadium which seat twenty two thousand.
They are seeking a Sun Belt invite the new stadium will be 18-20 thousand

Maybe capacity is becoming less important as the P5 will play less G5 road games.
Basically every P5 has received a fifteen million dollar raise recently.
So even a relatively poor P5 can buy more home games.
The typical P5 playing 4 conference and three out of four non conference at home.
That one road game is their P5 home and home game the conferences are encouraging.
The playoff money and widening T V money gap is new because of conference networks. So once the games already scheduled are done fewer will happen.

With ESPN tightening its belt G5 conferences will suffer.
Future T V deals will be less or even with the current ones while the P5 get smaller raises.

So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep.

FCS fans who know they're basically stuck at the ceiling that their schools can achieve, in terms of growth, would love nothing more than the drag the G5 (and even a few of the lowest P5) down the FCS, keeping FCS the exact way it is (NCAA playoff field as the post-season).

It's been talked about and dreamed about among them for years.

Yeah, that's why App St and GA Southern stayed in FCS. Their dream will soon be realized.

Hence why I explicitly said "FCS fans who know they're basically stuck at the ceiling that their schools can achieve, in terms of growth..."

Obvious App and GA So fans did not fall into that category and thus why they were never the ones saying those things.

(07-20-2015 04:07 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 03:57 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 03:51 PM)billings Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 03:46 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 02:36 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  They aren't going to do it. Their first priority is going to be building a separate basketball arena. They have lost their chance to really upgrade the Kibbie Dome or build a new stadium. They are in their last days of FBS, especially when they are not even close to filling up the stadium with actual people.

Hmm, you clearly have an agenda of seeing Idaho in FCS.

It should be obvious that no school is going to be forced out of FBS. Eastern Michigan proves that.

Fullerton's whole goal for the big sky is not to move up, they can't afford FBS football. What he wants i for everyone else to move down to their level. That is what he keeps talking about over and over the collapse of the g5 when the top 5 leave.

He trys to hold the sky together telling everyone the GBS is falling apart and wait for them to come to us. He hopes Idaho is first

And what else would you have him do? That scenario is more likely than 25-30 teams moving up en-masse to an unchanged FBS.

How about just be happy that the Big Sky is one of the most competitive FCS football conferences?? What's wrong with just doing that??

Why does he dream of dragging FBS teams down to FCS?

There is no way Boise State be going down to FCS. They are a money maker even for P5 schools to play. Even Nevada as well. Big Sky is mostly a FBS conference except for Weber, Northern Colorado, Southern Utah and Portland State. They are too big for FCS right now like several MVFC, Southland and a few schools on the east coast from Alabama on the way up to Delaware and Maryland.

(07-21-2015 12:09 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 03:39 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 03:32 PM)billings Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 02:35 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 11:14 AM)billings Wrote:  Fullerton (Big Sky commish for everyone else)today at the big sky media days

SAID he is very happy some members did not chase FBS dreams and he wants to welcome Idaho back to FCS.

Now give it up. That is direct from the commish that the BIG sky is FCS and nobody is chasing FBS in that conference. Let your wild fantasy of a FBS big sky go since it will never happen

Tweets from a montana State reporter at the conference

Colter Nuanez ‏@Bobcat_Beat 1h1 hour ago
Fullerton confident with Big Sky's place among college conferences. Says he's glad some members didn't chase FBS dreams #BigSkyKickoff

Colter Nuanez ‏@Bobcat_Beat 1h1 hour ago
Fullerton said he would love to welcome Idaho back for football and he thinks that's what is best for the Vandals #BigSkyKickoff

Think it just hilarious that you use justified this forum on those tweets. Over anxious perhaps?

Fullerton was congratulating the Montanas for having patience and not jumping to the WAC when they were offered. The WAC would have been something like Montana, Mont St, Idaho, NMSU, LAMAR, Sam Houston, Jacksonville St, Liberty with Seattle and Denver as non football. All of them would have been up a creek.

Fullerton did not say Idaho was moving to FCS, as he would be justifiably fired.

Try again!,

Please. Again I am a montana State season Ticket holder and the AD laughed at the idea that montana state is interested in FBS in a press conference I was at. Literally laughed at how absurd it was to think they could afford it and be competitive.

I posted as you always try to use old fullerton statements in your twisted logic and now he flat out states they are not interested in FBS

Montana State's record last year would have gotten them a bowl bid. That would have been more money than the FCS playoffs.
Eastern Washington, Montana, Idaho State, Montana State, Northern Arizona, Cal-Poly, and Sacramento State were all bowl eligible. Big Sky Conference have a much better wining teams for Bowl games than MWC, AAC, MAC, Sun Belt and C-USA. That would have been a much bragging rights for them to be better than any of the G5 conferences with their top 7 schools better than the rest.

Montana State lost 37-10 to an Arkansas State squad that finished three games out of first in the Sun Belt.

I was not talking about their lost to Arkansas State. I was talking about their overall record.

(07-21-2015 07:57 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 07:17 AM)nokota Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 11:14 AM)billings Wrote:  Fullerton (Big Sky commish for everyone else)today at the big sky media days

SAID he is very happy some members did not chase FBS dreams and he wants to welcome Idaho back to FCS.

Now give it up. That is direct from the commish that the BIG sky is FCS and nobody is chasing FBS in that conference. Let your wild fantasy of a FBS big sky go since it will never happen

Here is a better understanding of what Fullerton said....

Quote:Big Sky commissioner Doug Fullerton was careful not to mention any conferences by name, but his message was still clear: The Big Sky belongs with the non-power 5 conferences — all of them....

....But even with that, don't expect the Big Sky to be looking for FBS admittance soon.

"It begins to blur the lines ... ," Fullerton said. "It's a process and it's going to take a long time, but it's just where we belong. But I think to chase FBS prematurely would be a mistake.".....

...."I couldn't be more excited about the upside the Big Sky has over the next five years," Fullerton said. "I think you will see us expand into different territories, just as a brand."

How is this different from what Nodak has been saying? Change is coming and Fullerton wants to make sure that the Big Sky is making the right moves to position the Big Sky in the new landscape. If the Montana schools had left it would have been bad for the future of the Big Sky. They stayed and Idaho is back, with the exception of football.

Nothing is going to change in FBS or FCS in the next five years, structurally. There might be some conference realignment, but that doesn't affect the post-season.

The CFP is on for another 11 years before CFP II goes into affect.


If it were allowed, the Big Sky could move up to FBS by upgrading their athletic departments accordingly.

But all that would do is make themselves into 85 scholarship versions of what they currently are. They would no longer be able to access the NCAA FCS tournament and they would have very limited bowl opportunities, on top of receiving zero money from the CFP over its life.

The current G5 have worked hard the last couple years to create new bowls, so they can have more bowl opportunities in the post season amongst themselves. They're not just going to fork over those slots to a FBS Big Sky.

Could there be bowl games in the future be added by FCS schools when they move up?

Big Sky winner Vs MVFC winner? CAA Winner Vs Southern winner? Southland Winner vs an independent FCS school like Jacksonville State, Liberty or Delaware State?

What Portland State SHOULD be doing, is trying to join the Big West and sell them on restarting football at the FCS level - while leaving open the possibility of becoming an FBS conference once more . Would reduce travel costs significantly.

The hypothetical Big West FCS members goes something like this:

PSU (full member)
UC Davis (leave the Big Sky)
Cal Poly (leave the Big Sky)
USD (football-only; all other sports remain in the WCC)
Northern Arizona (fb-only; all other sports to the WAC)
Eastern Washington (fb-only; all other sports to the WAC)
Sacramento State (fb-only; all other sports except men's soccer to the WAC)


Yes it's far-fetched, but at least it's somewhat plausible and different than what has been thrown around here. Then if several of these schools still have the itch to move up to FBS at a later date, they can do it under a still geographically compact Big West banner. NMSU and Idaho (and perhaps a Fresno State) would be all ears.

Why not, right?

(07-21-2015 01:20 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 01:06 PM)billings Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 12:23 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:24 AM)billings Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  So if the G5 future is so horrible--why on earth would the Big Sky want to move up? Well, they really don't. They are hoping the G5 moves down. The Big Sky commish basically admits this. He says he hope to have NMS and Idaho join the Big Sky in FCS and says the Big Sky supported autonomy so strongly was because it served to weaken and push down the G5 (redrew the line was the term he used).

Yep. Big sky commish hopes g5 schools drop hundreds of scholarships and sports so they can play better teams

Nodak think the big sky will move up to fbs level as a conference. Big sky commish says the g5 are better off at fcs level football spending levels. Yea no difference there

The Big Sky is not hoping the G5 will drop scholarships and sports. Where in the world did you concoct that?

The Big Sky wants to expand. Why would it do that when it already has 14 affiliated teams? Answer: to divide into FCS and FBS divisions and later conferences.

The Big Sky should not move "prematurely to FBS". Right now it can't, so a move would only happen if the rule allowing access changes. But the NCAA is convening lawyers to head up a Summit of the future of DI subdivisions: how convenient.

Any Big Sky school that wants FBS has plans in place for a 15k seat stadium. Those that want to stay FCS can stay. Montana St can stay FCS if Billings insists they can't afford it. Surely President Cruzado will listen to his impassioned pleas.

She is the oner saying they can't afford FBS as it is structured today

Because Montana St would have to jump to the Sun Belt. But if had an alternative regional league, like the one she plays in now, she would change her tune.

If Eastern Washington, Montana, Montana State or North Dakota State goes unbeaten? They could get into the access bowl than any of the G5 schools. Since MWC and WAC had the most access bowl appearance than other G5 conferences. Big Sky and MVFC would be competing against MWC every year.