Should teams like Utah State and Temple get demoted to I-AA?

[Lumberjacks76]

They rarely field competitive teams and many I-AA teams could easily defeat either school in football.

Paul

[appmaj]

Is going to FCS football a demotion?

[Touchdown Yosef]

First off I kind of resent the "demoted" term but I see where you are going. I don't think you could really do this unless the conferences kicked them out and the school decided that was the path for them. Should you move UT Chattanooga to Division II? Should Richmond get "promoted". Interesting thought but the NCAA is just set up so different and there are so much politics it would be near impossible to do.

[Lumberjacks76]

I didn't mean it in a bad way. I just couldn't figure out what word to place there.

Paul

[nwFL Griz]

I think that kind of decision is best left to the particular school. What is best for them, not what we think based on their past accomplishments.

Unless of course they are not meeting minimum requirements to maintain FBS status. (Of which there are a few teams not meeting attendance requirements)

[89Hen]

I don't think it's a good idea for the NCAA to do that. It may actually be the right choice for certain schools, but they are too proud to do it. For some, on field performance has little to do with it. They get bowl money from the conference, they get alumni to donate, they are a part of the conference for other sports, etc... So for those, they are fine to stay mired in losing seasons in I-A.

[appmaj]

First off I kind of resent the "demoted" term but I see where you are going. I don't think you could really do this unless the conferences kicked them out and the school decided that was the path for them. Should you move UT Chattanooga to Division II? Should Richmond get "promoted". Interesting thought but the NCAA is just set up so different and there are so much politics it would be near impossible to do.

xwhistlex


A system of promotion and relegation exists in most worldwide PRO sports...

[Hoyadestroya85]

I say move Villanova up and move temple down :P (spare me UD fans.. it pays to dream)

[Lumberjacks76]

There are several borderline programs that have ceased football operations. Three that come to mind right away are Pacific, Long Beach State and Lamar.

Paul

[TexasTerror]

There are several borderline programs that have ceased football operations. Three that come to mind right away are Pacific, Long Beach State and Lamar.

Lamar has a football team and will begin SLC play in 2011... xthumbsupx

[FullertonTitanTexan44]

I don't think it's a good idea for the NCAA to do that. It may actually be the right choice for certain schools, but they are too proud to do it. For some, on field performance has little to do with it. They get bowl money from the conference, they get alumni to donate, they are a part of the conference for other sports, etc... So for those, they are fine to stay mired in losing seasons in I-A.

I totally agree.

Utah State actually was 30-5 in Basketball and went to the big dance.
Temple was 4th in their conference and went to the big dance as well.

So just b/c they aren't powerhouses in fb doesn't mean they don't do much in other sports..

[crunifan]

I say move UNI into Iowa State's position in the Big 12. We can't do any worse, can we?

[chrisattsu]

I say move UNI into Iowa State's position in the Big 12. We can't do any worse, can we?

Plus Ames is a *****hole, I would welcome a trip to Cedar Falls anyday.

[Jackman]

Utah State and Temple should play at whatever level they want to play at, so long as they're complying with all regulations.

[Ivytalk]

I say move Villanova up and move temple down :P (spare me UD fans.. it pays to dream)

I agree totally, Hoya... move Villanova and all 12 of its rabid fans up to FBS immediately!

[Lumberjacks76]

Did Lamar re-instate their football program recently?

Paul

[nwFL Griz]

Did Lamar re-instate their football program recently?

Paul

Yup....click here! (http://www.lamarcardinals.com/sports/m-footbl/lama-m-footbl-body.html)

[Lumberjacks76]

That's good to hear! I always liked Lamar and was disappointed when they dropped football in 1989.

Paul

[Silenoz]

I totally agree.

Utah State actually was 30-5 in Basketball and went to the big dance.
Temple was 4th in their conference and went to the big dance as well.

So just b/c they aren't powerhouses in fb doesn't mean they don't do much in other sports..
They could still move down to I-AA and remain in the A-10 and WAC in basketball (assuming this for Utah State). I mean Temple is already in multiple conferences

[crunifan]

Plus Ames is a *****hole, I would welcome a trip to Cedar Falls anyday.

Ames is absolutely worthless. Cedar Falls is much better. We are no Iowa City, but we are far better than Ames.

[Grizalltheway]

I agree totally, Hoya... move Villanova and all 12 of its rabid fans up to FBS immediately!

Now don't be taking cheap shots at Villanova while one of their twelve fans is banned! :p

[Mike Johnson]

They could still move down to I-AA and remain in the A-10 and WAC in basketball (assuming this for Utah State). I mean Temple is already in multiple conferences

Utah State would not be allowed to remain in the WAC for the other sports if they reclassify I-FCS. That is a WAC requirement.

I am not sure why Utah State was selected for this thread, when they have defeated both New Mexico State and Idaho 3 of the last four years (the WAC years for all three schools). Those two schools joined the WAC with Utah State and have struggled even worse.

Actually, in the past, I have thought about Utah State reclassifying to I-FCS and probably joining the Great West in football (which would make it interesting, with Southern Utah--the former USU branch campus--in that conference). At the time, I was thinking USU would try to get back into the Big West for basketball and other sports. Perhaps they would just be Great West for all and develop a rivalry with UVU.

There seems to be a renewed commitment at Utah State. The new football coach could make a difference. New football facilities were completed this past year. And the students just voted to increase student fees substantially--it should mean an extra $3 million a year for the athletics department. Money doesn't buy wins, but when a program has been on a shoe string, extra money can be used in a variety of ways that could help.

One last thing. I am not convinced that a school struggling at one level, dropping to the level below, would necessarily create the conditions to improve. Indeed, scholarships would drop, the school's reputation would sink even lower, and if it didn't perform immediately, it would probably just continue the same malaise at the lower level. A USU team with 85 scholarships would be better than a USU team with 65 scholarships.

[KleinTx05]

Utah States main problem is their lack of support ... they barely make the required minimum attendence average every year... Even with fudge'n the numbers. They have been having debates about dropping football all together. Too bad because i've watch games in Romney Stadium ... its a nice stadium with a heck of a hilltop view. Could have a nicer lockeroom, if they haven't already designed on. The 30k+ stadium could have a very nice atmosphere under the night lites if they could ever sellout!!!

[Mike Johnson]

Utah States main problem is their lack of support ... they barely make the required minimum attendence average every year... Even with fudge'n the numbers. They have been having debates about dropping football all together. Too bad because i've watch games in Romney Stadium ... its a nice stadium with a heck of a hilltop view. Could have a nicer lockeroom, if they haven't already designed on. The 30k+ stadium could have a very nice atmosphere under the night lites if they could ever sellout!!!

When did you play in Romney Stadium? I ask, because of the new facility that opened last fall that has improved locker rooms, weight room, offices, etc. It was a 25 million dollar investment.

I agree about the view. I was last there a few years ago to watch my Utes crush the Aggies. More than half of the 20,000 fans in the stadium were Utah fans. And I was frustrated that even with all of the Utah fans, the stadium didn't sell out.

[BobcatTXST04]

I understand what you are saying about borderline FBS / FCS teams, but honestly, some of these conferences are barely able to get enough schools in them as it is (the WAC has to pull from all over the western half of the US) and honestly, I don't think it would really provide any real benefit or detriment to those teams.

It's true that there is little difference between a middle-of-the-pack team from the SBC, WAC, or MAC and most of the better teams in FCS. Even some of the teams in C-USA would not be able to win in a good FCS conference. But would there be any real reason to 'demote' these teams? Not really. Sure some FCS teams such as TXST and GSU have talked about moving up to FBS and maybe by 'demoting' some of these teams it would free up spots. But really, when looking at conferences like the SBC as a possible conference to join in FBS, is there really a reason to move up?

[Mike Johnson]

Sure some FCS teams such as TXST and GSU have talked about moving up to FBS and maybe by 'demoting' some of these teams it would free up spots. But really, when looking at conferences like the SBC as a possible conference to join in FBS, is there really a reason to move up?

You could be a travel partner for North Texas in the Sun Belt. Of course, would you rather have a chance at a national championship in an NCAA sponsored tournament? or a shot at the New Orleans Bowl? I am not sure the opportunities in I-FBS offer that much. Most of the recent move ups to I-A/I-FBS have been Sun Belt teams just aligning their football programs to the conference. And I understand South Alabama is adding football and will probably do the same thing.

[FullertonTitanTexan44]

I remember reading an article about USU and Idaho being warned by the NCAA for their attendance.. Both being former Big West teams, it's going to take awhile for them to get their fan base up.

At the same time, the big west shut their doors to them. BW wants to keep an all-california conference now. So USU and Idaho would have to go to the Big Sky or be FCS independent. I think the NCAA see the dilima in this and hasnt pressed anymore.

[UNHWildCats]

I remember reading an article about USU and Idaho being warned by the NCAA for their attendance.. Both being former Big West teams, it's going to take awhile for them to get their fan base up.

At the same time, the big west shut their doors to them. BW wants to keep an all-california conference now. So USU and Idaho would have to go to the Big Sky or be FCS independent. I think the NCAA see the dilima in this and hasnt pressed anymore.

Why would that be their only options? What about the Great West? They can keep their current conference affiliation for everything but football and just move their football to the Great West.

[FullertonTitanTexan44]

Why would that be their only options? What about the Great West? They can keep their current conference affiliation for everything but football and just move their football to the Great West.

Because the WAC wouldn't let them keep their conference affilation. Basically, if USU can't do football they can't do the WAC. The WAC only takes 'associate' members for sports that the West coast doesn't have alot of programs in.. Like Gymnastics.

[OSBF]

Utah State and Temple should play at whatever level they want to play at, so long as they're complying with all regulations.


BINGO!!!!!!!!!! We have a winner!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really bugs me that the NCAA selectively enforces their own rule book. If you don't have a big enough stadium, if you don't have the required attendance, if you don't have the necessary cash flow, get your arse "back" to FCS. The NCAA has rules, guidelines, and parameters in place that an institution must meet in order to play football at the FBS level. If you can't meet them, you don't play FBS.
It's like the guy with a 5 inch wand that wants to be an adult film star, wishin' just don't make it so my friends.

[Lumberjacks76]

I don't think that Utah State has met their attendance requirements in football. They have shortages just like Temple and Duke. Such schools as those need to meet their attendance requirements of the NCAA in order to remain FBS.

Paul

[OSBF]

I don't think that Utah State has met their attendance requirements in football. They have shortages just like Temple and Duke. Such schools as those need to meet their attendance requirements of the NCAA in order to remain FBS.

Paul


I agree with you completely, but show me one institution that the NCAA has forced to move "down" because of a failure to meet any of the requirements for FBS. It has never happened, I doubt that it ever will.

How many of those Louisanna or Florida schools that have made the move "up" in the last few years actually deserve to be there? A bunch of 'em all jumped about the same time, and IMHO, we have several schools playing FBS football that shouldn't be and/or don't deserve to be there.

[813Jag]

I agree with you completely, but show me one institution that the NCAA has forced to move "down" because of a failure to meet any of the requirements for FBS. It has never happened, I doubt that it ever will.

How many of those Louisanna or Florida schools that have made the move "up" in the last few years actually deserve to be there? A bunch of 'em all jumped about the same time, and IMHO, we have several schools playing FBS football that shouldn't be and/or don't deserve to be there.
The only team from Louisiana the moved up was UL-Monroe. UL-Lafayette, Tulane, and Louisiana Tech were already there. Not saying any of those teams are good, but if they haven't moved by now they won't be moving. Out of the 3 teams from Florida that moved up in the last 10 years only FIU has had no success.

[DFW HOYA]

I agree with you completely, but show me one institution that the NCAA has forced to move "down" because of a failure to meet any of the requirements for FBS. It has never happened, I doubt that it ever will.


That's how Division I-AA was created.

[Lumberjacks76]

South Florida, I think, started I-A and Florida Atlantic was I-AA for a few years before jumping to I-A.

Paul

[813Jag]

South Florida, I think, started I-A and Florida Atlantic was I-AA for a few years before jumping to I-A.

Paul
USF was I-AA first, then moved up (Independent, C-USA, then Big East). FAU and FIU were I-AA for a short while.

[Lumberjacks76]

Florida International was in the Sun Belt conference, right?

Paul

[813Jag]

Florida International was in the Sun Belt conference, right?

Paul
FIU and FAU are Sun Belt.

[Lumberjacks76]

The Sun Belt conference is somewhat weak. I haven't seen too many Sun Belt teams winning their bowl game. I believe it is the New Orleans Bowl that the winner of the conference qualifies for.

Paul

[813Jag]

The Sun Belt conference is somewhat weak. I haven't seen too many Sun Belt teams winning their bowl game. I believe it is the New Orleans Bowl that the winner of the conference qualifies for.

Paul
FAU won the New Orleans Bowl in 2007 and the Motor City Bowl last year. But the league is 3-5 in the New Orleans Bowl.

[Lumberjacks76]

FAU has made great progress since whipping NAU in the 2003 playoffs. I think they'll be able to steal some solid recruits from the other florida schools.

Paul

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Utah State would not be allowed to remain in the WAC for the other sports if they reclassify I-FCS. That is a WAC requirement


And therein lies the problem. USU probably likes its WAC affiliation for basketball and that rules the day.

From a larger perspective, though, the biggest problem is that no school wants to be seen as if they're "de-emphasizing" the sport. Let's say Temple reclassifies to FCS. Their program would instantly be branded as being "on death's door" because they can't spend enough money to be competitive. It would be seen as "we can't compete with Ball State, so maybe we can compete with Bucknell" - and that would have some grain of truth to it, but it would be blown fundamentally out of proportion.

Even in FCS, precious few teams have "reclassified" from 63 scholarships to non-scholarships or Patriot League-style "equivalencies" simply because they were seen as downgrades. When going from FBS to FCS, rightly or wrongly it would be seen in that light, too. Ironically, it would be more feasible for these schools to drop football entirely and then try to re-start it later.

In an ideal world where there is no loss of face to transfer from FBS to FCS, there'd be lots of teams that would be ideal candidates - start with Army, Navy, the entire MAC and Sun Belt, and certain teams like USU in the Big West and WAC. But in reality, there's no way these schools would reclassify voluntarily. The NCAA would have to force them to do it.

[Mike Johnson]

That's how Division I-AA was created.

No, it isn't. The split occurred in 1978 over the issue of whether or not the NCAA should sponsor a national tournament, with about half of Division I schools wanting a tournament and half wanting to protect the bowls. Nobody was forced into either subdivision.

[Mike Johnson]

South Florida, I think, started I-A and Florida Atlantic was I-AA for a few years before jumping to I-A.

Paul

South Florida started football (I-AA) in 1997 and moved to I-A in 2001.
Florida Atlantic started football (I-AA) in 2001 and moved to I-A in 2005.
Florida International started football (I-AA) in 2002 and moved to I-A in 2005.

Central Florida started football (III) in 1979, moved to II in 1982, to I-AA in 1990, and I-A in 1997.

[blukeys]

No, it isn't. The split occurred in 1978 over the issue of whether or not the NCAA should sponsor a national tournament, with about half of Division I schools wanting a tournament and half wanting to protect the bowls. Nobody was forced into either subdivision.

I don't know where you were in 1978 but the creation of the I-AA subdivision had nothing to do with whether or not the NCAA should sponsor a national tournament for Division I football or as it was called before 1973, University Division Football. The NCAA in fact had been sponsoring National tournaments since 1973 in Division 2 and 3.

Division I-AA was created with the concept of having Division I level football and athletics at a cost contained basis. So to keep the costs contained I-AA teams were allowed up to 63 scholarships and were exempt from other Division I requirements such as attendance. (Which has not been enforced for years)

The NCAA's idea was to create a level of competition which included the best of what was then called D-2 with the lower level of what was then D1

As a concession to those teams who the NCAA wanted to move from D1 to DIAA the NCAA offered the concession of a National Champion tournament just as they were already doing for D-2 And D-3. This was also an incentive for perennial D-2 powers to move up. (think Delaware and Youngstown State)

Your argument that no one was forced into I-AA ignores the basic fact that 2 whole conferneces were reclssified from DI into D-IAA. These were the Yankee and Southern Conferences. All of these teams were considered University Division football teams prior to 1978, Many alumni of both of these conferences were upset by the move and are still not happy with the subsequent loss of prestige.

[jcf5445]

I don't know where you were in 1978 but the creation of the I-AA subdivision had nothing to do with whether or not the NCAA should sponsor a national tournament for Division I football or as it was called before 1973, University Division Football. The NCAA in fact had been sponsoring National tournaments since 1973 in Division 2 and 3.

Division I-AA was created with the concept of having Division I level football and athletics at a cost contained basis. So to keep the costs contained I-AA teams were allowed up to 63 scholarships and were exempt from other Division I requirements such as attendance. (Which has not been enforced for years)

The NCAA's idea was to create a level of competition which included the best of what was then called D-2 with the lower level of what was then D1

As a concession to those teams who the NCAA wanted to move from D1 to DIAA the NCAA offered the concession of a National Champion tournament just as they were already doing for D-2 And D-3. This was also an incentive for perennial D-2 powers to move up. (think Delaware and Youngstown State)

Your argument that no one was forced into I-AA ignores the basic fact that 2 whole conferneces were reclssified from DI into D-IAA. These were the Yankee and Southern Conferences. All of these teams were considered University Division football teams prior to 1978, Many alumni of both of these conferences were upset by the move and are still not happy with the subsequent loss of prestige.

That's not entirely accurate. The Yankee Conference was DII and moved up to DI-AA when the DI split occurred, as did the Ohio Valley and Big Sky. The MEAC would follow suit a couple of years later, as would the Mid-Continent Conference, which was the unofficial precursor to the Gateway.

You are correct that some conferences were in effect forced into DI-AA. Those were the Ivy, MAC, Southern, and Southland. However, these conferences were not forced into DI-AA until 1982, which was the deadline for meeting DI-A requirements. The MAC petitioned the NCAA and was restored to DI-A in 1983. The SWAC voluntarily moved to DI-AA in 1978 after becoming a DI member in 1977.

In addition to the conferences, a number of independent football schools were forced into DI-AA in 1982. These include Colgate, Holy Cross, North Texas, Richmond, and William&Mary. Northwestern State and Tennessee State were a couple of schools that voluntarily moved from DI-A to DI-AA prior to 1982.

Several DII schools also moved up independently in the early years of DI-AA, including Bucknell, Florida A&M, Lafayette, Lehigh, Nevada, Northeastern, Portland State (would return to DII a few years later), Southeastern Louisiana, Davidson (would later drop to DIII), Delaware, James Madison, Nicholls State, and Alabama State.

Anyhow, to get back on topic, I don't think any current school should be forced into any particular division. The FBS requirements aren't nearly as strict as some on this board seem to think. They removed the minimum stadium capacity requirement several years ago, and they only have to meet the 15,000 minimum attendance requirement once every 4 years. Each school should be allowed to play in the subdivision that it wants to be a part of, as long as it meets or comes very close to meeting the relatively weak requirements of FBS.

[Hoyadestroya85]

I agree totally, Hoya... move Villanova and all 12 of its rabid fans up to FBS immediately!

We have a solid base of "rabid fans" we just can't attract the casual fan because we play against schools that are in no way similar to us, we banned tailgating (the big one) and we have a smaller alumni base. I guarantee you that a Villanova football game against Rutgers if we were I-AA would attract 30,000 plus

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Anyhow, to get back on topic, I don't think any current school should be forced into any particular division. The FBS requirements aren't nearly as strict as some on this board seem to think. They removed the minimum stadium capacity requirement several years ago, and they only have to meet the 15,000 minimum attendance requirement once every 4 years. Each school should be allowed to play in the subdivision that it wants to be a part of, as long as it meets or comes very close to meeting the relatively weak requirements of FBS.

You say those requirements are "weak", but they're actually quite significant.

For example, your stadium would have to at a bare minimum have to accommodate the FBS minimum in theory (15,000) - a 8,000 seat stadium like Fordham would mean they would have to engage in a costly rental of (say) the new Yankee Stadium in order to do so. The NCAA would never allow a school with a stadium capacity of 8,000 to move to FBS - and would enforce some sort of standard if someone were to try.

And that's not including the extra scholarship costs from 63 to 85 - a huge chunk of change - and the end of scholarship splitting, another huge expense. Some state schools would face massive outlays of cash to upgrade facilities, academic services, and face several years of red before they even dream of making money on the proposition - expenses which many state school systems, particularly in this economy, would be unable to lay out even if they were willing (which many probably would not).

The fundamental question is: does the NCAA let schools sow the seeds of their own destruction? If you think schools like Texas State should be allowed to allow their school to fail by sponsoring FBS football, then you're for freedom of movement between FBS and FCS. If you think the NCAA has to act as some sort of traffic cop to keep the interests more realistic, you're for some standards with teeth. But the only thing for sure is - and nearly every move has borne this out - is that once you move from FCS to FBS, or D-II to FCS, or non-scholarship to scholarship FCS, it's extremely unlikely you'll go back to any stricter cost-containment.

[Mike Johnson]

I don't know where you were in 1978 but the creation of the I-AA subdivision had nothing to do with whether or not the NCAA should sponsor a national tournament for Division I football or as it was called before 1973, University Division Football. The NCAA in fact had been sponsoring National tournaments since 1973 in Division 2 and 3.

Division I-AA was created with the concept of having Division I level football and athletics at a cost contained basis. So to keep the costs contained I-AA teams were allowed up to 63 scholarships and were exempt from other Division I requirements such as attendance. (Which has not been enforced for years)

The NCAA's idea was to create a level of competition which included the best of what was then called D-2 with the lower level of what was then D1

As a concession to those teams who the NCAA wanted to move from D1 to DIAA the NCAA offered the concession of a National Champion tournament just as they were already doing for D-2 And D-3. This was also an incentive for perennial D-2 powers to move up. (think Delaware and Youngstown State)

Your argument that no one was forced into I-AA ignores the basic fact that 2 whole conferneces were reclssified from DI into D-IAA. These were the Yankee and Southern Conferences. All of these teams were considered University Division football teams prior to 1978, Many alumni of both of these conferences were upset by the move and are still not happy with the subsequent loss of prestige.

You are right in that I did not mention all the issues in 1978. The point I wanted to make was that nobody was forceably reclassified in 1978 from I-A to I-AA, as I-A was not the logical successor of Division I football (from 1972 when the University and College Divisions were reorganized into Divisions I, II, and III).

I would submit that the desire to have a Division I national tournament was more than simply a concession, but had been a demand by many of the schools.

You mentioned the Southern and Yankee conferences as conferences that prior to 1972 were in the University Division. I don't think that is very relevant to 1978, as some institutions and conferences in the University Division ended up in Division III. So, what. But, it does raise an important point. Between 1972 and 1978, the Southern conference experienced a great deal of turnover, with East Carolina, Richmond, and William & Mary leaving in 1976 and Tennessee-Chattanooga and Western Carolina joining that year. East Tennessee State joining in 1978 brought the conference up to 7 teams. As the conference did not meet the 8-team standard, it would not have been allowed to classify as a I-A conference under the new standards. As such, the conference had only one option in the split, classify as a I-AA conference. This does contradict the idea that all teams were free to choose. Of course, they were free to choose only the options they could qualify for.

I would suggest that I-AA/I-FCS is the default subdivision in Division I. All Division I institutions have a right to play football in this subdivision, if they abide by the rules of the subdivision. To play football in I-FBS (or I-A before that), institutions need to meet standards for an institution beyond those for Division I, need approvals, and need transition years. I-FBS is thus the subdivision of Division I that only some Division I teams could meet. Conferences need to meet a higher standard to be in I-FBS. Note, conferences and schools went from playing football in Division I to becoming part of the I-A or I-AA subdivisions. All conferences were forced to choose. Those who could not meet the standards of I-A, had only one option, I-AA. I was wrong in implying otherwise.

[jimbo65]

Well it wasn't the Rose Bowl, but as you will see below, Utah St. did get to a bowl. Sorry to say, from an age perspective, I attended the game.

The Gotham Bowl was a post-season college football bowl game that was played in New York City, United States, in 1961 and 1962.[1] The game was initially created as a fund raising attempt for the March of Dimes. The 1961 game was played in the New York Polo Grounds while the 1962 game was played in Yankee Stadium.

The games were not successful either financially or in attendance--both games lost money both years as few fans were willing to sit through the cold December New York weather. Plus, as it was essentially a charity game, it had little financial capital on which it could survive.

The last game in 1962 was particularly tormented with poor luck and bad planning. The game had been scheduled, but only one participant had been invited--the Miami (FL) Hurricanes. With only eleven days to go before the game was to be played, the Gotham Bowl invited Nebraska, which had just finished an 8-2 season. However, before the 1962 game could be played, the Nebraska Cornhuskers' team plane refused to leave the Lincoln airport until the bowl's check for expenditures cleared. In addition, the 1962 New York City newspaper strike ensured that the 1962 game would receive virtually no coverage in the media capital of the world. As a result of the failures, the bowl game was not renewed for 1963.


[edit] Game results
Date Winning Team Losing Team Location
1960 Oregon State was invited to play, but no opponent was found.[2]
December 9, 1961 Baylor 24 Utah State 9 New York, New York
December 15, 1962 Nebraska 36 Miami (FL) 34 The Bronx, New York

[KleinTx05]

When did you play in Romney Stadium? I ask, because of the new facility that opened last fall that has improved locker rooms, weight room, offices, etc. It was a 25 million dollar investment.

I agree about the view. I was last there a few years ago to watch my Utes crush the Aggies. More than half of the 20,000 fans in the stadium were Utah fans. And I was frustrated that even with all of the Utah fans, the stadium didn't sell out.

Exactly ... i think the new facilities was put into effect and completed the season after our family transfered to TxSt ... im thinking maybe '05-'06 was our 1st & last yr there. I also feel ya on the attendence ... whoever we played brought more fans no matter how far they traveled. Boise State brought their entire stadium ... the only way u could tell we was the home team was because of the logo on the field lol