Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Idaho's Consultant Report
Author Message
LatahCounty Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,242
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #1
Idaho's Consultant Report
Idaho hired Collegiate Consulting to do research on its conference affiliation, and the report just became public. I'm pasting the most interesting 2 pages here and I'd be curious what all you intelligent folks make of it. If I'm reading this correctly the WAC still seems to believe it has some kind of grandfathered FBS status.

Full report can be found here: http://www.uidaho.edu/president/communic...al_general

CONFERENCE NOTES
Western Athletic Conference
Collegiate Consulting has had multiple discussions with the WAC regarding its grandfathered status as a FBS conference, despite not offering football as a sport for two-plus years. Marlon Edge, the WAC’s compliance officer, confirmed with the NCAA that the WAC does meet the criteria.
NCAA Bylaw 20.02.6
Football Bowl Subdivision Conference - A conference classified as a Football Bowl Subdivision conference shall be comprised of at least eight full Football Bowl Subdivision members that satisfy all bowl subdivision requirements
NCAA Bylaw 20.4.2.1.1
Eligibility for Reclassification - Before a Football Championship Subdivision institution may apply for reclassification to the Football Bowl Subdivision, the institution must receive a bona fide invitation for membership from a Football Bowl Subdivision conference or a conference that previously met the definition of a Football Bowl Subdivision conference.
If the WAC were to reinstate football, it would need eight football-playing members. There could be an opportunity with Idaho and New Mexico State. The University of Texas at Rio Grande Valley has recently released an RFP to conduct a football feasibility study. If these three institutions were to have an interest in WAC football, the conference would need to bring in five additional institutions.
Collegiate Consulting has spoken with various institutions to discuss interest in the FBS and WAC; the synopsis of information is detailed:
 North Dakota State and South Dakota State have stated publicly they do not have an interest in moving to FBS. However, it appears from discussions with each school there is not an interest in the WAC, should it reinstate football or go with a combined WAC/Big Sky option. As a side note, there has been strong speculation that both institutions could be invited to join the Missouri Valley Conference as a full member, not just the MVFC.
 If the WAC were to pursue Big Sky institutions, independent of the scenario discussed below, it seems reasonable that Montana and Montana State would make a collaborative decision.
Big Sky Conference
There have been “off-line” discussions with Big Sky officials as well as several Big Sky presidents and athletic directors. Doug Fullerton, the soon-to-be-retired commissioner of the Big Sky, has stated that he would like to see Idaho join as a full member, including football, by the time of his retirement on June 30, 2016. It was also discussed if pressure would be placed on Idaho to drop to FCS or risk losing its current membership in the Big Sky. Discussions with various stakeholders have stated that “the conference, presidents and ADs are O.K. with the current situation; however, everyone has stated that it could change with the new commissioner. There are schools in the Big Sky Conference that would prefer Idaho (and New Mexico State) not join the league for football as they fear it will create an “arms race” at this level.
Big Sky Conference/Western Athletic Conference
Three years ago, Big Sky Commissioner Doug Fullerton and WAC Commissioner Jeff Hurd visited about the possibility of combining the two conferences, and having part of the league participate in FBS and the remainder in FCS for football. The idea did gain some interest, but was ultimately shot down. However, there could be an opportunity to rekindle these discussions. Here is a possible scenario should it gain traction:
Football
 FBS – Idaho, New Mexico State, Montana, Montana State, North Dakota, South Dakota, Cal Poly and Northern Arizona (8 teams).
 FCS – Eastern Washington, Idaho State, Portland State, UC-Davis, Sacramento State, Southern Utah and Northern Colorado (7 teams). If they can meet the academic criteria and budget criteria, and have an interest in “moving up” to FBS, they certainly would be considered.
Basketball
 North Division – Montana, Montana State, North Dakota, South Dakota, Eastern Washington, Portland State, Idaho State, Seattle University and Idaho (9 teams).
 South Division – Sacramento State, Southern Utah, New Mexico State, Northern Colorado, Weber State, Utah Valley, Grand Canyon State, UTRGV and CSU-Bakersfield (9 teams).
With this, most rivalries would be maintained – and some enhanced. Scheduling would be much easier, and schools would be much more similar. There would be a lot of parity in all leagues. Academic criteria under the Carnegie rating service would also be a consideration. There would also be possibilities for more revenue streams for higher-level FCS product in terms of television, ticket pricing, NCAA/conference monies and corporate dollars. Plus, with more regional competition, there could be money savings in travel, etc.
05-03-2016 07:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


LatahCounty Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,242
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
There's also a full SWOT analysis for WAC membership. Paging NoDak, the conspiracy is alive and well.
05-03-2016 07:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,009
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 657
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
Good info in that report.


Interesting that NAU was part of the FBS group (regardless of NoDak's claims)
Also interesting that NAU was left out of the Basketball grouping
05-03-2016 07:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LatahCounty Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,242
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
(05-03-2016 07:14 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Good info in that report.


Interesting that NAU was part of the FBS group (regardless of NoDak's claims)
Also interesting that NAU was left out of the Basketball grouping

I'm for it. Go tell your school to help make it happen. You can play in our basketball league all you want as far as I'm concerned.
05-03-2016 07:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LatahCounty Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,242
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
The other fun part of the report is that all the comments they received from the Idaho people they interviewed were adamantly pro-FBS. Staben really did make this call all alone.
05-03-2016 07:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
Everything I saw indicated they had two years to restart football with 8 members. The P5 wouldn't allow them back.
05-03-2016 07:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


LatahCounty Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,242
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
(05-03-2016 07:28 PM)bullet Wrote:  Everything I saw indicated they had two years to restart football with 8 members. The P5 wouldn't allow them back.

That's been the common wisdom around here, but apparently the WAC's compliance officer says the NCAA told him that's not the case. They apparently think they can call up all the FCS schools they want.
05-03-2016 07:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
solohawks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,782
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 810
I Root For: UNCW
Location: Wilmington, NC
Post: #8
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
Would be very interesting to see if they could pull it off
05-03-2016 08:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoQuestion Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 157
Joined: Apr 2014
Reputation: 2
I Root For: MSU
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
Couple things. They talked about it 3 years ago and it was shot down. The guy that was pushing it is retiring.
05-03-2016 08:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MJG Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,278
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 30
I Root For: U I , UMich, SC
Location: Myrtle Beach
Post: #10
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
So the WAC can be the gate keeper of FBS like the Sun Belt.
The interesting part is no time table is mentioned.
So
NDSU can add suites and 1200 seats after finishing their arena.
UND can expand Memorial now that their arena and IPF are done.
Idaho can do the cheap expansion to 20500 after their arena is done.
You get the idea
05-03-2016 08:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #11
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
So the Big West is eligible then if the WAC is.
Still the problem is not enough teams are interested in FBS. They don't have the funds to compete at that level and neither does Idaho. Staben made the right choice for Idaho financially and competitively.

But still the Wac and Big West are not able to bring back FBS football. The waiver period has expired which is what the rule actually implies as grandfather in.
(This post was last modified: 05-03-2016 09:16 PM by MWC Tex.)
05-03-2016 08:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


LatahCounty Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,242
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
(05-03-2016 08:57 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  So the Big West is eligible then if the WAC is.
Still the problem is not enough teams are interested in FBS. They don't have the funds to compete at that level and neither does Idaho. Staben made the right choice for Idaho financially and competitively.

The Big West was never an FBS conference. They dropped football before the FBS/FCS designations. Same deal with the MVC.
05-03-2016 09:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sultan of Euphonistan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,999
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation: 80
I Root For: Baritones
Location: The Euphonistan Tree
Post: #13
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
(05-03-2016 09:07 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 09:00 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 08:57 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  So the Big West is eligible then if the WAC is.
Still the problem is not enough teams are interested in FBS. They don't have the funds to compete at that level and neither does Idaho. Staben made the right choice for Idaho financially and competitively.

The Big West was never an FBS conference. They dropped football before the FBS/FCS designations. Same deal with the MVC.

Yes the big west was a FBS conference. They were D1a which is the same name as fbs.

In most ways they are effectively the same thing but are not technically the same thing depending on what exact details we are talking about.
05-03-2016 09:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #14
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
(05-03-2016 09:09 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 09:07 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 09:00 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 08:57 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  So the Big West is eligible then if the WAC is.
Still the problem is not enough teams are interested in FBS. They don't have the funds to compete at that level and neither does Idaho. Staben made the right choice for Idaho financially and competitively.

The Big West was never an FBS conference. They dropped football before the FBS/FCS designations. Same deal with the MVC.

Yes the big west was a FBS conference. They were D1a which is the same name as fbs.

In most ways they are effectively the same thing but are not technically the same thing depending on what exact details we are talking about.

They are the same, that rule would apply. However, both the Big West and the WAC cannot become FBS conferences again. The clause only applies if a FBS conference lost football but would be able get back the number of teams within 2 years. After that, its gone for good.
05-03-2016 09:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LatahCounty Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,242
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
(05-03-2016 09:23 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 09:09 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 09:07 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 09:00 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 08:57 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  So the Big West is eligible then if the WAC is.
Still the problem is not enough teams are interested in FBS. They don't have the funds to compete at that level and neither does Idaho. Staben made the right choice for Idaho financially and competitively.

The Big West was never an FBS conference. They dropped football before the FBS/FCS designations. Same deal with the MVC.

Yes the big west was a FBS conference. They were D1a which is the same name as fbs.

In most ways they are effectively the same thing but are not technically the same thing depending on what exact details we are talking about.

They are the same, that rule would apply. However, both the Big West and the WAC cannot become FBS conferences again. The clause only applies if a FBS conference lost football but would be able get back the number of teams within 2 years. After that, its gone for good.

People here keep saying that, but apparently the WAC compliance guy says the NCAA has told him that's not the case. So what's the evidence the other way?
05-03-2016 09:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
(05-03-2016 09:27 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  People here keep saying that, but apparently the WAC compliance guy says the NCAA has told him that's not the case. So what's the evidence the other way?

The actual text of the rules. But, I guess I take the WAC compliance officer's word over the black-letter text of the rules. This is the NCAA, rules only matter when it's convenient.
05-03-2016 09:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


jdgaucho Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,271
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 108
I Root For: UCSB
Location: Big West Land
Post: #17
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
(05-03-2016 09:00 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 08:57 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  So the Big West is eligible then if the WAC is.
Still the problem is not enough teams are interested in FBS. They don't have the funds to compete at that level and neither does Idaho. Staben made the right choice for Idaho financially and competitively.

The Big West was never an FBS conference. They dropped football before the FBS/FCS designations. Same deal with the MVC.

The Big West sponsored football during the BCS era. That should be good enough for the FBS/FCS distinction.
05-03-2016 10:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
The P5/G5 would probably block the return of the WAC if it tried to return to the top level.

The governance model in FBS was completely revamped along the new P5/G5 lines, a major stumbling block IMO.
05-03-2016 10:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
Here are the conferences that could get the FBS nod.

SWC -Rice Houston and SMU still owns the rights to the name. The others waived their rights to it.

MVC

WAC

Southland -many of the schools were 1A

Southern

Both MVC and Southern are actually a parent conferences to three P5 conferences. ACC, Big 12 and SEC.

As it is, there are enough teams that wants FBS that the WAC can invite.

Liberty
Jacksonville State
Northern Iowa
Wichita State
UTRGV
Youngstown State
Alabama State
North Alabama
Stony Brook
James Madison
Eastern Kentucky
Plus the Dakota schools coud join the WAC for all sports.

Idaho, New Mexico State, UTRGV, Grand Canyon, Utah Valley could be 5 with three of them wants to add football.
I suspect Azusa Pacific would want to go D1 since they seem to have money, and doing work on their facilities, but with the Big Sky full, they don;t have a place for football. They have to be in D2 for 8 years before they can join D1. There is no such rules to go to FBS. To become a D1 program? You have to be in D2 for 8 years.
05-03-2016 11:03 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LatahCounty Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,242
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Idaho's Consultant Report
(05-03-2016 09:46 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(05-03-2016 09:27 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  People here keep saying that, but apparently the WAC compliance guy says the NCAA has told him that's not the case. So what's the evidence the other way?

The actual text of the rules. But, I guess I take the WAC compliance officer's word over the black-letter text of the rules. This is the NCAA, rules only matter when it's convenient.

Here's the piece of the rulebook from the report:

NCAA Bylaw 20.4.2.1.1
Eligibility for Reclassification - Before a Football Championship Subdivision institution may apply for reclassification to the Football Bowl Subdivision, the institution must receive a bona fide invitation for membership from a Football Bowl Subdivision conference or a conference that previously met the definition of a Football Bowl Subdivision conference.

The WAC was a Football Bowl Subdivision conference (the Big West was not, if you're interpreting this literally).

Is there another rule that nullifies this?
05-03-2016 11:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.