(07-18-2017 07:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Exposure - same.

Don't be dishonest

(07-18-2017 07:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Benefits to locals - Montana wins.

Now you're making up your own criteria ... this is not applicable as the game wasn't in Moscow.

(07-18-2017 07:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Chance to host multiple? Montana

More made up, irrelevant criteria.

(07-18-2017 07:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Montana would need to add 45 scholarships

Factually false

(07-18-2017 07:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  All for what? A December night in Boise?

As you know, I've advocated that the Potato Bowl should not be allowed to continue being a bowl game ... so you got me there.

(07-18-2017 07:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Games in Fargo and Vermillion?

No need to be a twit ... you know that tin-foil hat stuff has nothing to do with me.

(07-18-2017 07:20 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  From Merriam-Webster.com

It just isn't internet discussion, if you don't have an argument over the definition of words. And now we even have competing dictionaries as the cherry on top.

Google says:

Quote:plau·si·ble
ˈplôzəb(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: plausible

(of an argument or statement) seeming reasonable or probable.
"a plausible explanation"

(07-18-2017 07:40 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Idaho was in a bad place - no conference wanted them, and travel to and from Moscow, plus crappy, small stadium would make scheduling almost impossible.

Amazing how all that crap takes care of itself when you WIN. Ask Boise, they won a whole bunch.

(07-18-2017 07:40 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  at which point the bigger guys push back and put new rules in place to chaff out the weaker schools.

This kind of wishful thinking only ever comes from FCS fans, pretending they're going to claw back G5 teams.

Not in your lifetime.

Idaho and E Michigan ... what do we think, over/under 16 wins combined? That a fair bet?