Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
Author Message
SDHornet Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 323
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
Everyone seems to forget that the WAC/BW are soccer/hoops/baseball conferences. Just saying "hey PSU go to the WAC" because it looks good on a map just isn't going to happen because they don't sponsor any of those sports. All of the BSC schools sponsor the FCS minimum number of sports on the men's side. This comes at the expense of soccer and baseball (UNC being an exception).

Sac State is the only school with the ability to pick up and leave on a moments notice as we sponsor all of those sports. Any others would need to add new sports which would likely come at the expense of its football program.
06-18-2017 12:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,333
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 123
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #42
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 12:58 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  Everyone seems to forget that the WAC/BW are soccer/hoops/baseball conferences. Just saying "hey PSU go to the WAC" because it looks good on a map just isn't going to happen because they don't sponsor any of those sports. All of the BSC schools sponsor the FCS minimum number of sports on the men's side. This comes at the expense of soccer and baseball (UNC being an exception).

Sac State is the only school with the ability to pick up and leave on a moments notice as we sponsor all of those sports. Any others would need to add new sports which would likely come at the expense of its football program.

That is a very good point.
However, I still can see PSU in the Wac without soccer since there are more than enough schools for soccer.
06-18-2017 02:07 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: #43
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
If the Big Sky splits football into two conferences it's possible.
The Commissioner has talked about two football conferences makes sense . You get two auto bids two teams claim a championship. Travel would be slightly less better for rivalries.
WACFC and BSFC seperate from the BSC but ran out of the same office.



Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app
06-18-2017 02:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SDHornet Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 323
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 02:12 PM)MJG Wrote:  If the Big Sky splits football into two conferences it's possible.
The Commissioner has talked about two football conferences makes sense . You get two auto bids two teams claim a championship. Travel would be slightly less better for rivalries.
WACFC and BSFC seperate from the BSC but ran out of the same office.



Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Yeah I am in favor of an FCS FB only conference being formed...ain't gonna happen though.
06-18-2017 02:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,460
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 48
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
Would the Big Sky welcome additional WAC football programs into their 2 FCS conference scheme?

If Azusa Pacific for instance came up would they put them with the other Cali schools, N Arizona, and S Utah? What if an existing WAC school like GCU wanted to.
06-18-2017 03:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,953
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 142
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
Central Washington have been doing some upgrading on their facilities lately.
Dixie State and Colorado Mesa all also have done some upgrading recently as well.
06-18-2017 03:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,287
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 94
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 03:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Would the Big Sky welcome additional WAC football programs into their 2 FCS conference scheme?

If Azusa Pacific for instance came up would they put them with the other Cali schools, N Arizona, and S Utah? What if an existing WAC school like GCU wanted to.

Dixie St's admin have made known some DI interest from a conference, with their football stadium getting an upgrade. Dixie St has more potential in fast growing St George than S Utah in Cedar City. Since Dixie St was formerly a JC with good facilities, it takes time to move up the ladder.
(This post was last modified: 06-18-2017 03:37 PM by NoDak.)
06-18-2017 03:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chargeradio Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,052
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 82
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #48
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 03:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Would the Big Sky welcome additional WAC football programs into their 2 FCS conference scheme?

If Azusa Pacific for instance came up would they put them with the other Cali schools, N Arizona, and S Utah? What if an existing WAC school like GCU wanted to.
The Big Sky and WAC could have pulled the trigger had North Dakota stayed, as there would have been 12 full members playing FCS football, and 2 affiliates:

Big Sky - Montana, Montana State, Idaho, Idaho State, North Dakota, Northern Colorado (non-football members: UMKC, UTRGV, NMSU)
WAC - Eastern Washington, Portland State, Sacramento State, Northern Arizona, Southern Utah, Weber State (non-football: Seattle, CSU Bakersfield, Grand Canyon, Utah Valley)

You could basically flip a coin for where to assign UC Davis and Cal Poly, and even have it setup to rotate every two years so the Big Sky gets two trips to California every four years.

Since there would only be six conference games, there could be an agreement setup to where each of the full members get two non-conference games versus the other side of the Big Sky/WAC alignment. If there were three interlock games, there could actually be permanent rivalries, with schools rotating through the other opponents once every three years.
06-18-2017 05:22 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,953
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 142
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #49
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 05:22 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(06-18-2017 03:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Would the Big Sky welcome additional WAC football programs into their 2 FCS conference scheme?

If Azusa Pacific for instance came up would they put them with the other Cali schools, N Arizona, and S Utah? What if an existing WAC school like GCU wanted to.
The Big Sky and WAC could have pulled the trigger had North Dakota stayed, as there would have been 12 full members playing FCS football, and 2 affiliates:

Big Sky - Montana, Montana State, Idaho, Idaho State, North Dakota, Northern Colorado (non-football members: UMKC, UTRGV, NMSU)
WAC - Eastern Washington, Portland State, Sacramento State, Northern Arizona, Southern Utah, Weber State (non-football: Seattle, CSU Bakersfield, Grand Canyon, Utah Valley)

You could basically flip a coin for where to assign UC Davis and Cal Poly, and even have it setup to rotate every two years so the Big Sky gets two trips to California every four years.

Since there would only be six conference games, there could be an agreement setup to where each of the full members get two non-conference games versus the other side of the Big Sky/WAC alignment. If there were three interlock games, there could actually be permanent rivalries, with schools rotating through the other opponents once every three years.


I do not think the Montanas are interested in the Texas schools. Plus, they are not interested with schools that do not have football.

Eastern Washington/Central Washington
Portland State/Western Oregon
Idaho/Idaho State
Montana/Montana State
Southern Utah/Dixie State
Northern Arizona/Grand Canyon (adding football)
Weber State/Utah Valley (adding football)
Northern Colorado/Colorado Mesa (travel partners)
Sacramento State/Humboldt State
Cal-Davis/Cal. Poly
Cal.-San Diego(adding football)/Azusa Pacific
UTRGV (adding football)/West Texas A&M

Big Sky Conference:
Eastern Washington
Central Washington
Portland State
Western Oregon
Weber State
Utah Valley
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
Northern Colorado
Colorado Mesa
Simon Fraser
Seattle might be an acceptance to be number 14.

WAC:
Cal.-Davis
Cal. Poly
Sacramento State
Azusa Pacific
Humboldt State
Cal.-San Diego
Cal. Baptist
Cal. State-Bakersfield
Southern Utah
Dixie State
Northern Arizona
Grand Canyon
New Mexico State
West Texas A&M
UTRGV

Bye bye Chicago State and UMKC.
06-18-2017 06:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SDHornet Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 323
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
^^^Makes total sense. Expand to a ridiculous number of conference members so an already tiny bit of revenue is sliced and diced even further. This right here is the end game. 01-wingedeagle
06-18-2017 07:07 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: #51
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
I could see staying at eleven/ thirteen.
Splitting up football was mentioned by the commissioner.
Losing UNC and staying at ten makes sense and seems like a possible outcome.
Losing PSU and Sac St could be possible and might help those schools.

Then their is David st adding six or eight undesirable mouths to feed.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app
06-18-2017 07:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,953
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 142
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 07:07 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  ^^^Makes total sense. Expand to a ridiculous number of conference members so an already tiny bit of revenue is sliced and diced even further. This right here is the end game. 01-wingedeagle

Why? Maybe in the future schools like Sacramento State and Cal-San Diego move into the Big West, and maybe an Azusa Pacific to make it even in that conference.
How many of these schools could get a called up to FBS in the future if the MWC gets raided? This would make both Big Sky and WAC safe from being ripped apart in the future.
06-18-2017 07:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SDHornet Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 323
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
Post: #53
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
Who is Cal-San Diego?

And APU to the BW? 03-lmfao
06-18-2017 07:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billings Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,248
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation: 39
I Root For: Wyo / Mont St.
Location: Billings, Montana
Post: #54
Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
big sky members want to go to 10 not 12. in fact some would prefer 8 members. And no montana schools are not interested in a midwestern league with the dakotas

give the big sky UM, MSU, idaho, ISU, Weber, EWU, PSU and somebody else and they are pretty happy frankly
(This post was last modified: 06-18-2017 08:23 PM by billings.)
06-18-2017 08:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,287
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 94
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 08:18 PM)billings Wrote:  big sky members want to go to 10 not 12. in fact some would prefer 8 members. And no montana schools are not interested in a midwestern league with the dakotas

give the big sky UM, MSU, idaho, ISU, Weber, EWU, PSU and somebody else and they are pretty happy frankly

There is growing support on egriz to get out of the Big Sky. Teams there do not have any following except the Montanas. The contract with Root Sports practically only shows Montana teams, as their the only ones left that have viewers.

The Montanas are kings of the snow hill in an elementary playground, but the Montanas are full fledged college students bullying grammar school kids. Imagine the scene.
06-18-2017 08:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoQuestion Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 149
Joined: Apr 2014
Reputation: 2
I Root For: MSU
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
Egriz. That's funny.
06-18-2017 09:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Cave_Johnson Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 123
Joined: Jul 2016
Reputation: 3
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #57
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 08:31 PM)NoDak Wrote:  
(06-18-2017 08:18 PM)billings Wrote:  big sky members want to go to 10 not 12. in fact some would prefer 8 members. And no montana schools are not interested in a midwestern league with the dakotas

give the big sky UM, MSU, idaho, ISU, Weber, EWU, PSU and somebody else and they are pretty happy frankly

There is growing support on egriz to get out of the Big Sky. Teams there do not have any following except the Montanas. The contract with Root Sports practically only shows Montana teams, as their the only ones left that have viewers.

The Montanas are kings of the snow hill in an elementary playground, but the Montanas are full fledged college students bullying grammar school kids. Imagine the scene.

Quick reminder that last season Montana and Montana State finished 8th and 10th respectively in football and 5th and 6th respectively in basketball. Right now it's actually EWU and UND that are on top of everybody else.
06-18-2017 09:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SDHornet Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 323
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 09:00 PM)NoQuestion Wrote:  Egriz. That's funny.

No kidding.

BTW those egrizzers also think leaving the BSC means going to the MWC. 01-wingedeagle03-lmfao
06-18-2017 09:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoQuestion Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 149
Joined: Apr 2014
Reputation: 2
I Root For: MSU
Location:
Post: #59
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 09:35 PM)Cave_Johnson Wrote:  Quick reminder that last season Montana and Montana State finished 8th and 10th respectively in football and 5th and 6th respectively in basketball. Right now it's actually EWU and UND that are on top of everybody else.



BIG SKY OVERALL ATHLETIC POINTS PER SPORT (MEN'S & WOMEN'S)*
1. Northern Arizona - 8.71
2. Sacramento State - 6.63
3. Weber State - 6.33
4. Eastern Washington - 6.07
5. Montana State - 5.96
6. Montana - 5.22
7. North Dakota - 5.14
8. Northern Colorado - 4.56
9. Southern Utah - 4.31
10. Idaho State - 4.20
11. Portland State - 3.95
06-18-2017 09:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,287
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 94
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Who should the Big Sky try to get for twelve.
(06-18-2017 09:47 PM)NoQuestion Wrote:  
(06-18-2017 09:35 PM)Cave_Johnson Wrote:  Quick reminder that last season Montana and Montana State finished 8th and 10th respectively in football and 5th and 6th respectively in basketball. Right now it's actually EWU and UND that are on top of everybody else.



BIG SKY OVERALL ATHLETIC POINTS PER SPORT (MEN'S & WOMEN'S)*
1. Northern Arizona - 8.71
2. Sacramento State - 6.63
3. Weber State - 6.33
4. Eastern Washington - 6.07
5. Montana State - 5.96
6. Montana - 5.22
7. North Dakota - 5.14
8. Northern Colorado - 4.56
9. Southern Utah - 4.31
10. Idaho State - 4.20
11. Portland State - 3.95

UND swept the four major revenue sports for the first time in Big Sky history, but still doesn't shine in those major revenue sports of m &W Cross Country, m&W indoor and outdoor track and Field, m&W tennis and women's golf like NAU and Sac St do. Most of the Big Sky sports no one cares about, NAU and Sac St excell at.
(This post was last modified: 06-18-2017 10:23 PM by NoDak.)
06-18-2017 10:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2018 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, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.