Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,187
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 219
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #1
Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
Dixie State As Expansion Candidate

It mentioned a split north and south, but could the south be WAC as a football conference? It could leave, if granted, a 12th game as a championship game between Big Sky North verses WAC South as a true champ. It seems that D2 schools from Texas and the west coast with football is not happy right now.

I suspect Western Oregon, Central Washington and Azusa Pacific could be in the mix and if Simon Fraser could get a waiver to play in D1 for football and hockey? What would the north/south split be like? This is the first official article where coaches, ads and the Big Sky commish talking about realignment issues out west. This could effect the WAC as we know it as well. Might see Chicago State leave, and UTRGV adding football. Seattle, C. Washington and Eastern Washington playing against each other might benefit all three.

As it is, we can speculate D1 with the GNAC, RMAC and Lone Star schools that play football which could actually make the WAC stable. Yes, we can use CSU-Pueblo and Colorado Mesa to see what the north and south would look like. Big Sky commish said he wants to add more schools, but adding more would hurt unless you can actually keep the north rivalry games intact.

Tarleton State's AD mentioned several D2 schools want to make the jump to D1 out west. I do wonder the article from Colorado Mesa actually saying they want to move up? We are now hearing schools in D2 out there making some noise. CSU-Pueblo and Colorado Mesa would bring the top 2 RMAC schools in football to FCS.
11-02-2019 08:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DoubleRSU Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,297
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation: 50
I Root For: SU, WAC, NAU
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
Zzzzzz
11-02-2019 10:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,034
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 236
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #3
Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
I would guess Weber and SUU would fight this.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
11-02-2019 10:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,187
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 219
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
Not sure they would mind Dixie State. WAC could host the southern schools. Big Sky hosts the north. WAC could wind up getting more D2 football schools to join. With changes in the NCAAs, and bills being passed for pay to play for all levels? Big Sky schools have to think ahead. Both Big Sky and the WAC could join forces. You could tighten the football for travel purposes.
11-02-2019 11:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,007
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #5
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
I doubt the Big Sky would want to add Dixie State. The Big Sky is already too large for FCS football. And, adding another mouth to feed (to a one bid basketball conference) makes no sense. If anything, the Big Sky flagship schools would like to shed the dead weight and shrink the conference down to 10 members; which seems to be the optimal size for a logistically compact lower division conference. The only reason for a mid major conference to grow beyond 10 members is if travel costs for non-revenue sports are too high and it benefits the conference to create two regionally grouped 6-8 member divisions to reduce travel cost.
11-02-2019 12:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,771
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 153
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #6
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
Well, the conference commissioner is pretty clear that he thinks bigger is better, and I suspect his opinion carries more weight with the Big Sky member school presidents than the football coaches’ opinions do.

In my view this article pretty much puts to rest the rumor that the Big Sky is working with the WAC to spin off some of the Big Sky football programs into a new WAC-sponsored FCS league. The Big Sky has historically viewed the WAC as a threat to its vision of being the only western D-I football alternative to the Pac-12 and MWC and it looks like that hasn’t changed.
11-02-2019 01:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


SoCalBobcat78 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,096
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 83
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-02-2019 01:21 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  Well, the conference commissioner is pretty clear that he thinks bigger is better, and I suspect his opinion carries more weight with the Big Sky member school presidents than the football coaches’ opinions do.

In my view this article pretty much puts to rest the rumor that the Big Sky is working with the WAC to spin off some of the Big Sky football programs into a new WAC-sponsored FCS league. The Big Sky has historically viewed the WAC as a threat to its vision of being the only western D-I football alternative to the Pac-12 and MWC and it looks like that hasn’t changed.

Not necessarily. The WAC may or may not be working with the Big Sky on a split. If I was the Big Sky commissioner, I would want a bigger football conference. I would want to expand my footprint. Getting into Texas would be huge. So Tarleton State and Dixie State for football only, would make sense. The BSC makes about $100,000 per school from their TV Contracts in football. If they can expand their footprint, it could help increase TV revenue and it certainly would help in recruiting in Texas.

A bigger conference would likely mean divisions. Since the playoffs make a conference championship difficult, the question would be, would the NCAA give an auto bid to the playoffs for a Big Sky North & Big Sky South Champion? Probably not. That would mean working with the WAC to create a new conference or the WAC just steps up and does it on their own.

As far as I am concerned, the WAC is an Olympic sports league. The Big Sky is a football conference that also plays basketball. Tarleton State and Dixie State are going to be Olympic sports schools in the WAC and eventually football schools in an expanded Big Sky or in a WAC FCS football conference. The WAC FCS league could be managed by the Big Sky or managed by the WAC.

But what does not work is a larger Big Sky Conference with one division. It is obvious that the coaches don't like it and eventually the Presidents won't either. The school presidents will ultimately make the decision on any expansion.
11-02-2019 02:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Country_Wisdom_359 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 348
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 10
I Root For: Lopes, Govs, Raiders
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
If we’re talking other western FCS schools potentially flipping to the WAC... I’d love to see NAU. It’s be an awesome instate rival for GCU, at least in basketball.
11-02-2019 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jdgaucho Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,351
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 62
I Root For: UCSB
Location: Big West Land
Post: #9
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
Portland State, folks...
11-02-2019 09:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,187
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 219
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-02-2019 01:21 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  Well, the conference commissioner is pretty clear that he thinks bigger is better, and I suspect his opinion carries more weight with the Big Sky member school presidents than the football coaches’ opinions do.

In my view this article pretty much puts to rest the rumor that the Big Sky is working with the WAC to spin off some of the Big Sky football programs into a new WAC-sponsored FCS league. The Big Sky has historically viewed the WAC as a threat to its vision of being the only western D-I football alternative to the Pac-12 and MWC and it looks like that hasn’t changed.


Lets not forget if the WAC could still grab D2 schools with football in the Big Sky's footprint. 4 GNAC, 2 RMAC and 3 Lone Star in west Texas. To keep the WAC from grabbing them? Big Sky have to invite 11 schools to be a big conference. It sounds like the northern schools could actually break away. They did not want Southern Utah in the conference to begin with. Hard to get to travel. Dixie State is not too hard to get there.

That is why splitting north and south would be helpful, plus WAC could play a part as well to house Olympics sports. Second, you need another FCS conference out west. Some schools could still escape to FBS, but you would have schools already playing D1 to raid from.
11-03-2019 06:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,572
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 271
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-02-2019 01:21 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  Well, the conference commissioner is pretty clear that he thinks bigger is better, and I suspect his opinion carries more weight with the Big Sky member school presidents than the football coaches’ opinions do.

In my view this article pretty much puts to rest the rumor that the Big Sky is working with the WAC to spin off some of the Big Sky football programs into a new WAC-sponsored FCS league. The Big Sky has historically viewed the WAC as a threat to its vision of being the only western D-I football alternative to the Pac-12 and MWC and it looks like that hasn’t changed.

The OLD conference commissioner.

No Big Sky school would WANT to be spun off (and the only ones that are slightly advocating for this to happen are the ones that wouldn't be spun off).

Big Sky is a multi-bid league in football, so really no need to split the conference for football.

And yes, the Big Sky teams are so upset over the possibility of WAC Football they rushed out to schedule Dixie (and now Tarleton as well).
11-04-2019 01:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Pounder Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
I read this a bit differently. Just a bit. This does involve the ability to read between the lines.

First: where? Bozeman. So, basically, columnist talks to the Montana State AD, the AD vents, and after a considerable amount of massaging, it ends up here.

Here's the problem: Montana State wants to be seen as a big deal... but do you think they can afford to send their Olympic sports teams all over the west? Heck no.

Are they in favor of the WAC taking away southern Big Sky schools? Probably.

As that won't happen by itself, would they be in favor of the northern schools breaking away? Probably. It does depend on the schools involved.

What's the core for Montana State? Montana, Idaho, Idaho State... and Weber State. Hey, Weber usually holds up the standard that barely exists for basketball in the Big Sky; they're the only school in the Big Sky that draws more than 3,000 fans per game (they usually double that 3K). Add Eastern Washington and Portland...

...wait a minute.

I don't know about Montana State necessarily. I know Montana recruits Seattle and Denver rather well. The crowd in Sacramento seeing Montana was kind of large. Would they value recruiting in Portland over Sacramento? Would they value Northern Colorado over either? Huge questions there.

Now... would they want Seattle U to join for basketball? I bet they do. Would Seattle make that move? I'll let you guys answer that, and I'm guessing both your answer & SU's answer will converge nicely.

This is where someone will scream about their dream FBS conference. That's not happening BECAUSE that conference will need TV more than all the others, but networks will ask them to pay for TV time instead of the networks doing it. END OF SUBJECT.

So if you can process this:

Eastern Washington
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
Portland State (we'll call it close enough to Seattle to matter)
Sacramento State
Weber State

Now maybe you add Northern Colorado to that. Maybe you don't. If not, Sac is the shameless outlier... after the BSC tries to lure UC Davis away to derisive laughter.

That doesn't mean the Big Sky won't want to manage a larger FOOTBALL conference. That can be done separately from where the southern schools find their conference for their other sports. Thing is, outside that flight to Sacramento, basically you have a conference serviced generally by one airline and, theoretically, is less expensive to manage without giving up too many "schools that matter."
(This post was last modified: 11-04-2019 03:53 PM by Pounder.)
11-04-2019 03:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 93
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-04-2019 03:49 PM)Pounder Wrote:  I read this a bit differently. Just a bit. This does involve the ability to read between the lines.

First: where? Bozeman. So, basically, columnist talks to the Montana State AD, the AD vents, and after a considerable amount of massaging, it ends up here.

Here's the problem: Montana State wants to be seen as a big deal... but do you think they can afford to send their Olympic sports teams all over the west? Heck no.

Are they in favor of the WAC taking away southern Big Sky schools? Probably.

As that won't happen by itself, would they be in favor of the northern schools breaking away? Probably. It does depend on the schools involved.

What's the core for Montana State? Montana, Idaho, Idaho State... and Weber State. Hey, Weber usually holds up the standard that barely exists for basketball in the Big Sky; they're the only school in the Big Sky that draws more than 3,000 fans per game (they usually double that 3K). Add Eastern Washington and Portland...

...wait a minute.

I don't know about Montana State necessarily. I know Montana recruits Seattle and Denver rather well. The crowd in Sacramento seeing Montana was kind of large. Would they value recruiting in Portland over Sacramento? Would they value Northern Colorado over either? Huge questions there.

Now... would they want Seattle U to join for basketball? I bet they do. Would Seattle make that move? I'll let you guys answer that, and I'm guessing both your answer & SU's answer will converge nicely.

This is where someone will scream about their dream FBS conference. That's not happening BECAUSE that conference will need TV more than all the others, but networks will ask them to pay for TV time instead of the networks doing it. END OF SUBJECT.

So if you can process this:

Eastern Washington
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
Portland State (we'll call it close enough to Seattle to matter)
Sacramento State
Weber State

Now maybe you add Northern Colorado to that. Maybe you don't. If not, Sac is the shameless outlier... after the BSC tries to lure UC Davis away to derisive laughter.

That doesn't mean the Big Sky won't want to manage a larger FOOTBALL conference. That can be done separately from where the southern schools find their conference for their other sports. Thing is, outside that flight to Sacramento, basically you have a conference serviced generally by one airline and, theoretically, is less expensive to manage without giving up too many "schools that matter."

That’s effectively what I said two years ago, but have been trashed since. David St has said my projections were just trash, but now he is spouting them too.

ESPN even said Montana wanted in the FBS WAC.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/ne...id=5792840

Montana St then didn’t have a 15k seat stadium, but went in debt to expand. Both Montanas have elevated their FBS facilities since, for practice, training, and academics. Weber St has too. EWU is trying, but the progress is slow.

Idaho St doesn’t have money nor does Portland St for facilities. Sac St will go with Davis and Cal Poly to a new FBS WAC. California was really financially impacted by the 2009 recession so its schools were really reeling. But not now.

The new Summit will stretch from St Paul to Spokane and south to Denver and Ogden. NDSU, SDSU, UND, and USD aren’t living in the 1930’s anymore and they now have money. Omaha, Denver and St Thomas will be non-football members. The Montanas have wanted in a league with the Dakotas since the 1970’s, as all the states there have similar fan bases which actually care.

The Big Sky doesn’t offer the Montanas much of anything with the commuter schools.
11-04-2019 06:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,034
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 236
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #14
Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-04-2019 06:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 03:49 PM)Pounder Wrote:  I read this a bit differently. Just a bit. This does involve the ability to read between the lines.

First: where? Bozeman. So, basically, columnist talks to the Montana State AD, the AD vents, and after a considerable amount of massaging, it ends up here.

Here's the problem: Montana State wants to be seen as a big deal... but do you think they can afford to send their Olympic sports teams all over the west? Heck no.

Are they in favor of the WAC taking away southern Big Sky schools? Probably.

As that won't happen by itself, would they be in favor of the northern schools breaking away? Probably. It does depend on the schools involved.

What's the core for Montana State? Montana, Idaho, Idaho State... and Weber State. Hey, Weber usually holds up the standard that barely exists for basketball in the Big Sky; they're the only school in the Big Sky that draws more than 3,000 fans per game (they usually double that 3K). Add Eastern Washington and Portland...

...wait a minute.

I don't know about Montana State necessarily. I know Montana recruits Seattle and Denver rather well. The crowd in Sacramento seeing Montana was kind of large. Would they value recruiting in Portland over Sacramento? Would they value Northern Colorado over either? Huge questions there.

Now... would they want Seattle U to join for basketball? I bet they do. Would Seattle make that move? I'll let you guys answer that, and I'm guessing both your answer & SU's answer will converge nicely.

This is where someone will scream about their dream FBS conference. That's not happening BECAUSE that conference will need TV more than all the others, but networks will ask them to pay for TV time instead of the networks doing it. END OF SUBJECT.

So if you can process this:

Eastern Washington
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
Portland State (we'll call it close enough to Seattle to matter)
Sacramento State
Weber State

Now maybe you add Northern Colorado to that. Maybe you don't. If not, Sac is the shameless outlier... after the BSC tries to lure UC Davis away to derisive laughter.

That doesn't mean the Big Sky won't want to manage a larger FOOTBALL conference. That can be done separately from where the southern schools find their conference for their other sports. Thing is, outside that flight to Sacramento, basically you have a conference serviced generally by one airline and, theoretically, is less expensive to manage without giving up too many "schools that matter."

That’s effectively what I said two years ago, but have been trashed since. David St has said my projections were just trash, but now he is spouting them too.

ESPN even said Montana wanted in the FBS WAC.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/ne...id=5792840

Montana St then didn’t have a 15k seat stadium, but went in debt to expand. Both Montanas have elevated their FBS facilities since, for practice, training, and academics. Weber St has too. EWU is trying, but the progress is slow.

Idaho St doesn’t have money nor does Portland St for facilities. Sac St will go with Davis and Cal Poly to a new FBS WAC. California was really financially impacted by the 2009 recession so its schools were really reeling. But not now.

The new Summit will stretch from St Paul to Spokane and south to Denver and Ogden. NDSU, SDSU, UND, and USD aren’t living in the 1930’s anymore and they now have money. Omaha, Denver and St Thomas will be non-football members. The Montanas have wanted in a league with the Dakotas since the 1970’s, as all the states there have similar fan bases which actually care.

The Big Sky doesn’t offer the Montanas much of anything with the commuter schools.


NoDak, I am glad to see you, even though the Great North will never happen. You are right about ISU, but the Montanas seem very happy in FCS.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
11-04-2019 10:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 93
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-04-2019 10:21 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 06:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 03:49 PM)Pounder Wrote:  I read this a bit differently. Just a bit. This does involve the ability to read between the lines.

First: where? Bozeman. So, basically, columnist talks to the Montana State AD, the AD vents, and after a considerable amount of massaging, it ends up here.

Here's the problem: Montana State wants to be seen as a big deal... but do you think they can afford to send their Olympic sports teams all over the west? Heck no.

Are they in favor of the WAC taking away southern Big Sky schools? Probably.

As that won't happen by itself, would they be in favor of the northern schools breaking away? Probably. It does depend on the schools involved.

What's the core for Montana State? Montana, Idaho, Idaho State... and Weber State. Hey, Weber usually holds up the standard that barely exists for basketball in the Big Sky; they're the only school in the Big Sky that draws more than 3,000 fans per game (they usually double that 3K). Add Eastern Washington and Portland...

...wait a minute.

I don't know about Montana State necessarily. I know Montana recruits Seattle and Denver rather well. The crowd in Sacramento seeing Montana was kind of large. Would they value recruiting in Portland over Sacramento? Would they value Northern Colorado over either? Huge questions there.

Now... would they want Seattle U to join for basketball? I bet they do. Would Seattle make that move? I'll let you guys answer that, and I'm guessing both your answer & SU's answer will converge nicely.

This is where someone will scream about their dream FBS conference. That's not happening BECAUSE that conference will need TV more than all the others, but networks will ask them to pay for TV time instead of the networks doing it. END OF SUBJECT.

So if you can process this:

Eastern Washington
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
Portland State (we'll call it close enough to Seattle to matter)
Sacramento State
Weber State

Now maybe you add Northern Colorado to that. Maybe you don't. If not, Sac is the shameless outlier... after the BSC tries to lure UC Davis away to derisive laughter.

That doesn't mean the Big Sky won't want to manage a larger FOOTBALL conference. That can be done separately from where the southern schools find their conference for their other sports. Thing is, outside that flight to Sacramento, basically you have a conference serviced generally by one airline and, theoretically, is less expensive to manage without giving up too many "schools that matter."

That’s effectively what I said two years ago, but have been trashed since. David St has said my projections were just trash, but now he is spouting them too.

ESPN even said Montana wanted in the FBS WAC.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/ne...id=5792840

Montana St then didn’t have a 15k seat stadium, but went in debt to expand. Both Montanas have elevated their FBS facilities since, for practice, training, and academics. Weber St has too. EWU is trying, but the progress is slow.

Idaho St doesn’t have money nor does Portland St for facilities. Sac St will go with Davis and Cal Poly to a new FBS WAC. California was really financially impacted by the 2009 recession so its schools were really reeling. But not now.

The new Summit will stretch from St Paul to Spokane and south to Denver and Ogden. NDSU, SDSU, UND, and USD aren’t living in the 1930’s anymore and they now have money. Omaha, Denver and St Thomas will be non-football members. The Montanas have wanted in a league with the Dakotas since the 1970’s, as all the states there have similar fan bases which actually care.

The Big Sky doesn’t offer the Montanas much of anything with the commuter schools.


NoDak, I am glad to see you, even though the Great North will never happen. You are right about ISU, but the Montanas seem very happy in FCS.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
So, you dont believe Montana asked for WAC FBS membership, even though that was stated right in front of your eyes by ESPN?

The last eight years the Montanas have been lining up regional FBS conference mates even though they publicly deny any interest. The Dakotas would be happy to oblige, as well as Weber St, EWU and Idaho. The depleted Summit would be happy with all those schools, as IUPUI and PFW, have left and soon W Illinois will too.


Good luck with your new conference mates: UVU, Dixie St, CWU and Seattle. Sincerely hope you can win mbb now without Weber and Montana.

You are a very decent poster, but so naive.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2019 12:01 AM by NoDak.)
11-04-2019 11:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,007
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 47
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #16
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-04-2019 11:58 PM)NoDak Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 10:21 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 06:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 03:49 PM)Pounder Wrote:  I read this a bit differently. Just a bit. This does involve the ability to read between the lines.

First: where? Bozeman. So, basically, columnist talks to the Montana State AD, the AD vents, and after a considerable amount of massaging, it ends up here.

Here's the problem: Montana State wants to be seen as a big deal... but do you think they can afford to send their Olympic sports teams all over the west? Heck no.

Are they in favor of the WAC taking away southern Big Sky schools? Probably.

As that won't happen by itself, would they be in favor of the northern schools breaking away? Probably. It does depend on the schools involved.

What's the core for Montana State? Montana, Idaho, Idaho State... and Weber State. Hey, Weber usually holds up the standard that barely exists for basketball in the Big Sky; they're the only school in the Big Sky that draws more than 3,000 fans per game (they usually double that 3K). Add Eastern Washington and Portland...

...wait a minute.

I don't know about Montana State necessarily. I know Montana recruits Seattle and Denver rather well. The crowd in Sacramento seeing Montana was kind of large. Would they value recruiting in Portland over Sacramento? Would they value Northern Colorado over either? Huge questions there.

Now... would they want Seattle U to join for basketball? I bet they do. Would Seattle make that move? I'll let you guys answer that, and I'm guessing both your answer & SU's answer will converge nicely.

This is where someone will scream about their dream FBS conference. That's not happening BECAUSE that conference will need TV more than all the others, but networks will ask them to pay for TV time instead of the networks doing it. END OF SUBJECT.

So if you can process this:

Eastern Washington
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
Portland State (we'll call it close enough to Seattle to matter)
Sacramento State
Weber State

Now maybe you add Northern Colorado to that. Maybe you don't. If not, Sac is the shameless outlier... after the BSC tries to lure UC Davis away to derisive laughter.

That doesn't mean the Big Sky won't want to manage a larger FOOTBALL conference. That can be done separately from where the southern schools find their conference for their other sports. Thing is, outside that flight to Sacramento, basically you have a conference serviced generally by one airline and, theoretically, is less expensive to manage without giving up too many "schools that matter."

That’s effectively what I said two years ago, but have been trashed since. David St has said my projections were just trash, but now he is spouting them too.

ESPN even said Montana wanted in the FBS WAC.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/ne...id=5792840

Montana St then didn’t have a 15k seat stadium, but went in debt to expand. Both Montanas have elevated their FBS facilities since, for practice, training, and academics. Weber St has too. EWU is trying, but the progress is slow.

Idaho St doesn’t have money nor does Portland St for facilities. Sac St will go with Davis and Cal Poly to a new FBS WAC. California was really financially impacted by the 2009 recession so its schools were really reeling. But not now.

The new Summit will stretch from St Paul to Spokane and south to Denver and Ogden. NDSU, SDSU, UND, and USD aren’t living in the 1930’s anymore and they now have money. Omaha, Denver and St Thomas will be non-football members. The Montanas have wanted in a league with the Dakotas since the 1970’s, as all the states there have similar fan bases which actually care.

The Big Sky doesn’t offer the Montanas much of anything with the commuter schools.


NoDak, I am glad to see you, even though the Great North will never happen. You are right about ISU, but the Montanas seem very happy in FCS.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
So, you dont believe Montana asked for WAC FBS membership, even though that was stated right in front of your eyes by ESPN?

The last eight years the Montanas have been lining up regional FBS conference mates even though they publicly deny any interest. The Dakotas would be happy to oblige, as well as Weber St, EWU and Idaho. The depleted Summit would be happy with all those schools, as IUPUI and PFW, have left and soon W Illinois will too.


Good luck with your new conference mates: UVU, Dixie St, CWU and Seattle. Sincerely hope you can win mbb now without Weber and Montana.

You are a very decent poster, but so naive.

Montana showed some interest in the WAC when Boise State was still in the conference. Once Boise State left the conference for the MWC and WAC football was decimated by further school defections, Montana lost its interest in the WAC. Furthermore, the State of Montana didn't seem to want to allow Montana to move to any conference without Montana State tagging along as well. And, at the time, Montana State was not financially ready for the FBS. With the greater separation between the Power 5 and the rest of the FBS schools, I'm not sure the Montana schools want to make the jump to the FBS anytime soon; rather seeming willing to wait for conferences like the AAC, MWC, CUSA, and the SBC to be left behind to form an intermediate FBS division which the Big Sky as a whole could join.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2019 06:41 AM by NMSUPistolPete.)
11-05-2019 06:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 93
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-05-2019 06:40 AM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 11:58 PM)NoDak Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 10:21 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 06:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 03:49 PM)Pounder Wrote:  I read this a bit differently. Just a bit. This does involve the ability to read between the lines.

First: where? Bozeman. So, basically, columnist talks to the Montana State AD, the AD vents, and after a considerable amount of massaging, it ends up here.

Here's the problem: Montana State wants to be seen as a big deal... but do you think they can afford to send their Olympic sports teams all over the west? Heck no.

Are they in favor of the WAC taking away southern Big Sky schools? Probably.

As that won't happen by itself, would they be in favor of the northern schools breaking away? Probably. It does depend on the schools involved.

What's the core for Montana State? Montana, Idaho, Idaho State... and Weber State. Hey, Weber usually holds up the standard that barely exists for basketball in the Big Sky; they're the only school in the Big Sky that draws more than 3,000 fans per game (they usually double that 3K). Add Eastern Washington and Portland...

...wait a minute.

I don't know about Montana State necessarily. I know Montana recruits Seattle and Denver rather well. The crowd in Sacramento seeing Montana was kind of large. Would they value recruiting in Portland over Sacramento? Would they value Northern Colorado over either? Huge questions there.

Now... would they want Seattle U to join for basketball? I bet they do. Would Seattle make that move? I'll let you guys answer that, and I'm guessing both your answer & SU's answer will converge nicely.

This is where someone will scream about their dream FBS conference. That's not happening BECAUSE that conference will need TV more than all the others, but networks will ask them to pay for TV time instead of the networks doing it. END OF SUBJECT.

So if you can process this:

Eastern Washington
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
Portland State (we'll call it close enough to Seattle to matter)
Sacramento State
Weber State

Now maybe you add Northern Colorado to that. Maybe you don't. If not, Sac is the shameless outlier... after the BSC tries to lure UC Davis away to derisive laughter.

That doesn't mean the Big Sky won't want to manage a larger FOOTBALL conference. That can be done separately from where the southern schools find their conference for their other sports. Thing is, outside that flight to Sacramento, basically you have a conference serviced generally by one airline and, theoretically, is less expensive to manage without giving up too many "schools that matter."

That’s effectively what I said two years ago, but have been trashed since. David St has said my projections were just trash, but now he is spouting them too.

ESPN even said Montana wanted in the FBS WAC.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/ne...id=5792840

Montana St then didn’t have a 15k seat stadium, but went in debt to expand. Both Montanas have elevated their FBS facilities since, for practice, training, and academics. Weber St has too. EWU is trying, but the progress is slow.

Idaho St doesn’t have money nor does Portland St for facilities. Sac St will go with Davis and Cal Poly to a new FBS WAC. California was really financially impacted by the 2009 recession so its schools were really reeling. But not now.

The new Summit will stretch from St Paul to Spokane and south to Denver and Ogden. NDSU, SDSU, UND, and USD aren’t living in the 1930’s anymore and they now have money. Omaha, Denver and St Thomas will be non-football members. The Montanas have wanted in a league with the Dakotas since the 1970’s, as all the states there have similar fan bases which actually care.

The Big Sky doesn’t offer the Montanas much of anything with the commuter schools.


NoDak, I am glad to see you, even though the Great North will never happen. You are right about ISU, but the Montanas seem very happy in FCS.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
So, you dont believe Montana asked for WAC FBS membership, even though that was stated right in front of your eyes by ESPN?

The last eight years the Montanas have been lining up regional FBS conference mates even though they publicly deny any interest. The Dakotas would be happy to oblige, as well as Weber St, EWU and Idaho. The depleted Summit would be happy with all those schools, as IUPUI and PFW, have left and soon W Illinois will too.


Good luck with your new conference mates: UVU, Dixie St, CWU and Seattle. Sincerely hope you can win mbb now without Weber and Montana.

You are a very decent poster, but so naive.

Montana showed some interest in the WAC when Boise State was still in the conference. Once Boise State left the conference for the MWC and WAC football was decimated by further school defections, Montana lost its interest in the WAC. Furthermore, the State of Montana didn't seem to want to allow Montana to move to any conference without Montana State tagging along as well. And, at the time, Montana State was not financially ready for the FBS. With the greater separation between the Power 5 and the rest of the FBS schools, I'm not sure the Montana schools want to make the jump to the FBS anytime soon; rather seeming willing to wait for conferences like the AAC, MWC, CUSA, and the SBC to be left behind to form an intermediate FBS division which the Big Sky as a whole could join.
Montana State has expanded its stadium and updated its football practice, workout and study areas for FBS at considerable cost but that’s conveniently ignored. So Montana St, Montana,Weber St, and Idaho are all ready to move up and EWU has plans to upgrade its stadium now.

They need to start transitioning soon as they will miss out again on the CFP, which is a big part of the FBS revenue side. If they miss it again, they will have to wait 10 more years. Boise St and Nevada have just too great a revenue gap for any of those Big Sky school to attempt following them.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2019 11:29 AM by NoDak.)
11-05-2019 11:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pounder Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-04-2019 06:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  That’s effectively what I said two years ago, but have been trashed since. David St has said my projections were just trash, but now he is spouting them too.

ESPN even said Montana wanted in the FBS WAC.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/ne...id=5792840

Montana St then didn’t have a 15k seat stadium, but went in debt to expand. Both Montanas have elevated their FBS facilities since, for practice, training, and academics. Weber St has too. EWU is trying, but the progress is slow.

Idaho St doesn’t have money nor does Portland St for facilities. Sac St will go with Davis and Cal Poly to a new FBS WAC. California was really financially impacted by the 2009 recession so its schools were really reeling. But not now.

The new Summit will stretch from St Paul to Spokane and south to Denver and Ogden. NDSU, SDSU, UND, and USD aren’t living in the 1930’s anymore and they now have money. Omaha, Denver and St Thomas will be non-football members. The Montanas have wanted in a league with the Dakotas since the 1970’s, as all the states there have similar fan bases which actually care.

The Big Sky doesn’t offer the Montanas much of anything with the commuter schools.


You missed my point. I will restate it.

Quote:That's not happening BECAUSE that conference will need TV more than all the others, but networks will ask them to pay for TV time instead of the networks doing it. END OF SUBJECT.

This will not be an FBS conference unless the NCAA becomes worthless. It doesn't matter how many of these schools are ready. It matters only if this region finds a way to increase its population fivefold in short order, because otherwise, there's simply not enough TV sets. This all because television runs sports.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2019 02:00 PM by Pounder.)
11-05-2019 01:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoDak Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 93
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-05-2019 01:58 PM)Pounder Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 06:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  That’s effectively what I said two years ago, but have been trashed since. David St has said my projections were just trash, but now he is spouting them too.

ESPN even said Montana wanted in the FBS WAC.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/ne...id=5792840

Montana St then didn’t have a 15k seat stadium, but went in debt to expand. Both Montanas have elevated their FBS facilities since, for practice, training, and academics. Weber St has too. EWU is trying, but the progress is slow.

Idaho St doesn’t have money nor does Portland St for facilities. Sac St will go with Davis and Cal Poly to a new FBS WAC. California was really financially impacted by the 2009 recession so its schools were really reeling. But not now.

The new Summit will stretch from St Paul to Spokane and south to Denver and Ogden. NDSU, SDSU, UND, and USD aren’t living in the 1930’s anymore and they now have money. Omaha, Denver and St Thomas will be non-football members. The Montanas have wanted in a league with the Dakotas since the 1970’s, as all the states there have similar fan bases which actually care.

The Big Sky doesn’t offer the Montanas much of anything with the commuter schools.


You missed my point. I will restate it.

Quote:That's not happening BECAUSE that conference will need TV more than all the others, but networks will ask them to pay for TV time instead of the networks doing it. END OF SUBJECT.

This will not be an FBS conference unless the NCAA becomes worthless. It doesn't matter how many of these schools are ready. It matters only if this region finds a way to increase its population fivefold in short order, because otherwise, there's simply not enough TV sets. This all because television runs sports.

The new conference will have much greater TV's watching rate than the PAC12. More like the Big12 or greater. The Dakotas have its own sports netwo:rk and the west has Root Tv.. The Sun Belt went for years without. any conference. TV contract.
11-05-2019 02:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,034
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 236
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #20
Dixie State Already Being Mentioned A Possible Big Sky Conference Candidate
(11-05-2019 11:25 AM)NoDak Wrote:  
(11-05-2019 06:40 AM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 11:58 PM)NoDak Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 10:21 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(11-04-2019 06:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  That’s effectively what I said two years ago, but have been trashed since. David St has said my projections were just trash, but now he is spouting them too.

ESPN even said Montana wanted in the FBS WAC.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/ne...id=5792840

Montana St then didn’t have a 15k seat stadium, but went in debt to expand. Both Montanas have elevated their FBS facilities since, for practice, training, and academics. Weber St has too. EWU is trying, but the progress is slow.

Idaho St doesn’t have money nor does Portland St for facilities. Sac St will go with Davis and Cal Poly to a new FBS WAC. California was really financially impacted by the 2009 recession so its schools were really reeling. But not now.

The new Summit will stretch from St Paul to Spokane and south to Denver and Ogden. NDSU, SDSU, UND, and USD aren’t living in the 1930’s anymore and they now have money. Omaha, Denver and St Thomas will be non-football members. The Montanas have wanted in a league with the Dakotas since the 1970’s, as all the states there have similar fan bases which actually care.

The Big Sky doesn’t offer the Montanas much of anything with the commuter schools.


NoDak, I am glad to see you, even though the Great North will never happen. You are right about ISU, but the Montanas seem very happy in FCS.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
So, you dont believe Montana asked for WAC FBS membership, even though that was stated right in front of your eyes by ESPN?

The last eight years the Montanas have been lining up regional FBS conference mates even though they publicly deny any interest. The Dakotas would be happy to oblige, as well as Weber St, EWU and Idaho. The depleted Summit would be happy with all those schools, as IUPUI and PFW, have left and soon W Illinois will too.


Good luck with your new conference mates: UVU, Dixie St, CWU and Seattle. Sincerely hope you can win mbb now without Weber and Montana.

You are a very decent poster, but so naive.

Montana showed some interest in the WAC when Boise State was still in the conference. Once Boise State left the conference for the MWC and WAC football was decimated by further school defections, Montana lost its interest in the WAC. Furthermore, the State of Montana didn't seem to want to allow Montana to move to any conference without Montana State tagging along as well. And, at the time, Montana State was not financially ready for the FBS. With the greater separation between the Power 5 and the rest of the FBS schools, I'm not sure the Montana schools want to make the jump to the FBS anytime soon; rather seeming willing to wait for conferences like the AAC, MWC, CUSA, and the SBC to be left behind to form an intermediate FBS division which the Big Sky as a whole could join.
Montana State has expanded its stadium and updated its football practice, workout and study areas for FBS at considerable cost but that’s conveniently ignored. So Montana St, Montana,Weber St, and Idaho are all ready to move up and EWU has plans to upgrade its stadium now.

They need to start transitioning soon as they will miss out again on the CFP, which is a big part of the FBS revenue side. If they miss it again, they will have to wait 10 more years. Boise St and Nevada have just too great a revenue gap for any of those Big Sky school to attempt following them.


EWU and UI do not have stadiums for FBS, UI also just returned to FCS with their tail between their legs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
11-05-2019 06:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2020 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, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.