Three Part Series on Griz Attempt to Move to 'Div I'

[TexasTerror]

Part I: Moving up in the world? Montana looking at possible jump to Division I in near future

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/sports/local_montana/article_68549afe-3e0d-11df-881a-001cc4c002e0.html

Moving up in the world? Part II: Which footsteps to follow
http://www.dailyinterlake.com/sports/local_montana/article_5373f65c-3edf-11df-a622-001cc4c002e0.html

Moving up in the world? Part III: A Griz-sized gamble
http://www.dailyinterlake.com/sports/local_montana/article_adf70e3a-3f9c-11df-8db1-001cc4c03286.html

And for those who want to give the writer crap for saying that Montana is not in Division I - "Reporter Dillon Tabish can be reached at 758-4463 or by e-mail at [email protected]."


The football program, which has become one of the most successful in the Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) formerly known as I-AA, would be the most directly affected by a possible jump. The other 13 sports at Montana already compete in Division I.


The football program at Montana is the only non-Division I team and plays in the Football Championship Subdivision (FCS), formerly called I-AA.

[Franks Tanks]

Part I: Moving up in the world? Montana looking at possible jump to Division I in near future

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/sports/local_montana/article_68549afe-3e0d-11df-881a-001cc4c002e0.html

Moving up in the world? Part II: Which footsteps to follow
http://www.dailyinterlake.com/sports/local_montana/article_5373f65c-3edf-11df-a622-001cc4c002e0.html

Moving up in the world? Part III: A Griz-sized gamble
http://www.dailyinterlake.com/sports/local_montana/article_adf70e3a-3f9c-11df-8db1-001cc4c03286.html

And for those who want to give the writer crap for saying that Montana is not in Division I - "Reporter Dillon Tabish can be reached at 758-4463 or by e-mail at [email protected]."

That second quote makes so little sense its astonishing. To compete in D-I a school kinda has to be D-I.

[TexasTerror]

That second quote makes so little sense its astonishing. To compete in D-I a school kinda has to be D-I.

There's a reason this guy does not write for the Missoulian and hopefully, never will...

Sent an e-mail, will share response, if I get one... xnonono2x

[Bogus Megapardus]

There's only one "Division I" football championship competition, and that's where Montana plays now. The writer quotes UM Athletic Director Jim O'Day at length who certainly would have explained this. The guy simply chose not to listen.

[Saint3333]

Sorry guys but this this guy represents 90% of people's perception of FCS football.

Are they right no, but this view is shared with the majority of non-FCS fans. We've all had those conversations at work:

FBS or casual sports fans - "Which team do you pull for"

FCS fan - "Where I went to school, App State"

FBS - "That's nice, which Div. 1 school do you pull for"

FCS fan - "ASU is Div. 1"

FBS - "Yeah but which real Div. 1 (or big) school do you pull for"

FCS - "App State"

FBS - "Some BS..." and then the conversation changes to another topic.

[CopperCat]

Lol, what a tool. My wife is from Kalispell and I remember on several occasions ready the interlake and thinking that the sports section was more like reading the sunday funnies. The guy is probably from somewhere other than Montana, otherwise he wouldn't be suffering from a severe intercranial inversion. The whole series is a joke, I give no credence to it whatsoever.

[Bogus Megapardus]

Sorry guys but this this guy represents 90% of people's perception of FCS football.

Or, perhaps, "What team are you pulling for?"

"Butler, of course."

"I mean in football."

"Butler."

"I didn't know Butler played football."

[MplsBison]

Techincally, he is wrong. Montana football is already DI.

But is he really wrong? You all know exactly what he meant. FCS is not the top level of college football.

[NoCoDanny]

They should go, I'd like to see them in the WAC.

[Bogus Megapardus]

But is he really wrong?

Yes, he is really wrong. To be accurate, he should have written that he believes Montana should play for a bowl invitation rather than for a tournament championship, and that it should play in a conference the writer believes to consist of more widely-recognized colleges (such as the ones his editors tells him to cover more broadly).

Montana need only post a winning record to be eligible for a bowl. It must do much more that that to play in the Division I Championship game. An invite to the Xanax Bowl or the Brawndo Bowl (or whatever) is small potatoes by comparison.

The problem is one of perception and its roots can be traced to ill-conceived "journalism" like this.

[Syntax Error]

Sorry guys but this this guy represents 90% of people's perception of FCS football...


Techincally, he is wrong. Montana football is already DI.
But is he really wrong? You all know exactly what he meant. FCS is not the top level of college football.

The FCS plays for the NCAA Division I Football Championship. What part do you not understand? Idiots are just that and there is no reason to let their delirium pass as anything but spew. Anything else is just spouted by FBS lovers to discredit the highest level of NCAA championship football. xreadxxreadx

[DFW HOYA]

Montana need only post a winning record to be eligible for a bowl. It must do much more that that to play in the Division I Championship game. An invite to the Xanax Bowl or the Brawndo Bowl (or whatever) is small potatoes by comparison.

A game in the Roady's Humanitarian Bowl or the R&L Carriers New Orleans Bowl still means a lot more to a lot of schools and their fans than to say "Hey, but we made it to the quarterfinals of the NCAA Division I Football Championship Series...you ask, what is that? Well, we played before 6,391 in the opening round at Eastern Illinois, and then...wait, wait!"

[MplsBison]

Yes, he is really wrong. To be accurate, he should have written that he believes Montana should play for a bowl invitation rather than for a tournament championship, and that it should play in a conference the writer believes to consist of more widely-recognized colleges (such as the ones his editors tells him to cover more broadly).

Montana need only post a winning record to be eligible for a bowl. It must do much more that that to play in the Division I Championship game. An invite to the Xanax Bowl or the Brawndo Bowl (or whatever) is small potatoes by comparison.

The problem is one of perception and its roots can be traced to ill-conceived "journalism" like this.

I wouldn't dream of coming to AGS, the central board of FCS football, and getting a reaction anything different.


Your personal bias aside, FBS is the top level of college football whether we like it or not.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

A game in the Roady's Humanitarian Bowl or the R&L Carriers New Orleans Bowl still means a lot more to a lot of schools and their fans than to say "Hey, but we made it to the quarterfinals of the NCAA Division I Football Championship Series...you ask, what is that? Well, we played before 6,391 in the opening round at Eastern Illinois, and then...wait, wait!"

And this explains why most FBS schools - and if not all, nearly all of the non-BCS schools' - athletic departments are hemorrhaging money.

[crunifan]

They should go, I'd like to see them in the WAC.

I agree. Idaho needs another cellar dweller to keep it company.

[DFW HOYA]

Why are athletic departments hemorrhaging money? Two reasons: travel and staff.

Take a random school...Richmond. Here is where their spring (non-revenue) teams are going just this week:

Men's Tennis: Durham, N.C.
Men's Golf: Charlotte, N.C.
Women's Golf: Morganton, N.C.
Women's Tennis: Greenville, N.C.
Baseball: Amherst, Mass.
Women's Tennis: Williamsburg, Va.
Men's Tennis: Annapolis, Md.
Track: Charlottesville, Va.
Men's Tennis: Baltimore, Md.
Women's Lacrosse: Philadelphia, Pa.

OK, so that's not Big Sky-like travel, but that's still a lot of charter bus trips (i.e., the Spiders aren't hitching a ride at the Greyhound station) and per diems that teams must account for across various sports.

Second? Staff. Let's take Delaware. There are over 140 names listed in its staff directory, which means you've probably got somewhere from 90-100 full time positions (that's salary and benefits) to account for in the athletic budget. A generation ago a school could get by with a full time football coach that coached baseball in the spring, a couple for basketball, maybe a part time track coach, a retired coach as A.D... no more.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Why are athletic departments hemorrhaging money? Two reasons: travel and staff.

Take a random school...Richmond. Here is where their spring (non-revenue) teams are going just this week:

Men's Tennis: Durham, N.C.
Men's Golf: Charlotte, N.C.
Women's Golf: Morganton, N.C.
Women's Tennis: Greenville, N.C.
Baseball: Amherst, Mass.
Women's Tennis: Williamsburg, Va.
Men's Tennis: Annapolis, Md.
Track: Charlottesville, Va.
Men's Tennis: Baltimore, Md.
Women's Lacrosse: Philadelphia, Pa.

OK, so that's not Big Sky-like travel, but that's still a lot of charter bus trips (i.e., the Spiders aren't hitching a ride at the Greyhound station) and per diems that teams must account for across various sports.

Second? Staff. Let's take Delaware. There are over 140 names listed in its staff directory, which means you've probably got somewhere from 90-100 full time positions (that's salary and benefits) to account for in the athletic budget. A generation ago a school could get by with a full time football coach that coached baseball in the spring, a couple for basketball, maybe a part time track coach, a retired coach as A.D... no more.

This is all true, but carrying 85 scholarship football athletes - no partials here - is the biggest component of costs for FBS. It's hard enough at cheaper state schools, let alone smaller, expensive private schools.

If you're in, say, the Big 10, you get a nice TV contract to pay for all that. Same if you're Notre Dame, or even Army and Navy. But the non-BCS schools? No way.

[Saint3333]

The FCS plays for the NCAA Division I Football Championship. What part do you not understand? Idiots are just that and there is no reason to let their delirium pass as anything but spew. Anything else is just spouted by FBS lovers to discredit the highest level of NCAA championship football. xreadxxreadx

I don't think it is the posters of this board that don't understand, but unfortunately the followers of FCS football make up less than 10% of football fans as a whole. Trying to explain what you just stated to the majority of FBS fans, I have learned to be a waste of time. They will look at you like you aren't speaking english. That perception is not going to change, might as well ---->xbangx.

[DFW HOYA]

I don't think it is the posters of this board that don't understand, but unfortunately the followers of FCS football make up less than 10% of football fans as a whole. Trying to explain what you just stated to the majority of FBS fans, I have learned to be a waste of time. They will look at you like you aren't speaking english. That perception is not going to change, might as well ---->xbangx.

And try telling it to incoming students who wonder why you're playing Wagner and Sacred Heart in football instead of the Big East...

[MplsBison]

Why are athletic departments hemorrhaging money? Two reasons: travel and staff.

Take a random school...Richmond. Here is where their spring (non-revenue) teams are going just this week:

Men's Tennis: Durham, N.C.
Men's Golf: Charlotte, N.C.
Women's Golf: Morganton, N.C.
Women's Tennis: Greenville, N.C.
Baseball: Amherst, Mass.
Women's Tennis: Williamsburg, Va.
Men's Tennis: Annapolis, Md.
Track: Charlottesville, Va.
Men's Tennis: Baltimore, Md.
Women's Lacrosse: Philadelphia, Pa.

OK, so that's not Big Sky-like travel, but that's still a lot of charter bus trips (i.e., the Spiders aren't hitching a ride at the Greyhound station) and per diems that teams must account for across various sports.

Second? Staff. Let's take Delaware. There are over 140 names listed in its staff directory, which means you've probably got somewhere from 90-100 full time positions (that's salary and benefits) to account for in the athletic budget. A generation ago a school could get by with a full time football coach that coached baseball in the spring, a couple for basketball, maybe a part time track coach, a retired coach as A.D... no more.

I don't think schools should have to offer so many sports, just as long as they meet title IX.

If a school wants to just offer Men's and Women's bball and nothing else, then they should be allowed to do that.

Then being in DI would based on average attendance, say you have to avg 6k a game to be DI in bball or something like that.

[Bogus Megapardus]

I wouldn't dream of coming to AGS, the central board of FCS football, and getting a reaction anything different.

Your personal bias aside, FBS is the top level of college football whether we like it or not.

I maintain that I am correct; that the author could - and should - simply point out that he would like to see Montana play for a bowl invitation rather than a in a championship tournament. That's it. It's very simple. I don't dispute that the BCS and the greater portion of FBS is a higher level of competition.

I think the writer of the article knew what he was writing was inaccurate and misleading but he simply did not want to accurately explain the difference in the context of that piece.

[Syntax Error]

"With the landscape in the NCAA about to change drastically in the near future, the University of Montana Athletic Department is looking at the viability of moving to a Division I bowl conference in less than two years instead of playing for an NCAA championship."

That wasn't too rough was it?

[GATA]

This is just ridiculous. If you're going to call yourself a journalist...do some research.

It takes about 2 minutes to look this crap up. We all know that FCS football is not the top division of football, but it's not Div. II either...

Saying that Montana is going to move "up" to Division I is just stupid...it implies that they're in Div. II. Nobody would have a problem with this guy saying that he wants to see Montana play "big boy" football or move into the "big leagues," but that's not what he said.

If you're going to bother to write the story then get your facts straight...it's really that simple.

[Syntax Error]

This is just ridiculous. If you're going to call yourself a journalist...do some research.

Exactly. What this guy fails to see is that the FBS is not the only "big boy" college football, D-I. FCS has produced some of the biggest NFL stars ever and many all-DI record holders. As CSN looked at last year in the top 30 lists, an all-FCS team since '78 would stand up well against any FBS team. The BCS buys the media so this is what we get. That is why AGS and CSN exist, because mainstream media is out of the loop. xbangx xbangx xbangx xbangx

[ThompsonThe]

So you are saying that maintaining FCS is to the advantage of the AGS and CSN for their very being?

[Willie]

They should go, I'd like to see them in the WAC.

I'd like to see it too...but it's not happening.

[MplsBison]

I maintain that I am correct; that the author could - and should - simply point out that he would like to see Montana play for a bowl invitation rather than a in a championship tournament. That's it. It's very simple. I don't dispute that the BCS and the greater portion of FBS is a higher level of competition.

I think the writer of the article knew what he was writing was inaccurate and misleading but he simply did not want to accurately explain the difference in the context of that piece.

Even more simply, he could just say he'd like to see Montana move up to FBS from FCS.

[MplsBison]

This is just ridiculous. If you're going to call yourself a journalist...do some research.

It takes about 2 minutes to look this crap up. We all know that FCS football is not the top division of football, but it's not Div. II either...

Saying that Montana is going to move "up" to Division I is just stupid...it implies that they're in Div. II. Nobody would have a problem with this guy saying that he wants to see Montana play "big boy" football or move into the "big leagues," but that's not what he said.

If you're going to bother to write the story then get your facts straight...it's really that simple.

Then again, he probably knows the audience he is writing for -- it's not AGS.

Most people (incorrectly) assume the top level in college sports is just called DI, with the next level down DII and so on. Therefore, most people (incorrectly) assume FBS is DI and FCS is DII, etc.

[laxVik]

Nearly 4 pages of whining over what's D1. Come on...

[Lehigh Football Nation]

On the other end of the spectrum, the University of Wyoming recently completed an internal study to see if it should drop down to the FCS level, according to O’Day.

“That’s one thing we probably learned from Idaho is that they probably didn’t have the infrastructure in place,” O’Day said. “Now they’re getting there but it’s been 10 years down the road to get to that point where they can then be competitive. Boise had the infrastructure in place when they left.”

Here's a little nugget of information that probably deserves its own thread...

[JMUDuke2002]

Here's a little nugget of information that probably deserves its own thread...

You're right! There are a lot of little nuggets in this article. The quote you highlighted, plus the one about JMU and its internal study on FBS, which I've never heard before. Interesting.

Well, one way or another, it appears as though major shake-ups are coming to college football at least on the FBS and FCS levels.

[DFW HOYA]

Well, one way or another, it appears as though major shake-ups are coming to college football at least on the FBS and FCS levels.

For some of the I-A conferences, perhaps, but it's not like the I-AA schools are getting thrown to the winds, e.g., Georgetown and Bucknell are not going to the Ohio Valley Conference...

[Ronbo]

Respect will never happen. After 15 years of following an FCS team this is clear. But this thread sure shows that FCS fans have a tremendous amount of insecurity and "package" envy. xviolinx I wouldn't mind the Griz going WAC but I'll believe it when I see it.

[JMUDuke2002]

For some of the I-A conferences, perhaps, but it's not like the I-AA schools are getting thrown to the winds, e.g., Georgetown and Bucknell are not going to the Ohio Valley Conference...

Perhaps, although I'll have to disagree. While Georgetown may be happy languishing in mediocrity, other schools will be jockeying for position. If Montana moves up, we now have an opening in the Big Sky. There will also be the issue of MSU. Plus, we all know more is going to happen with the CAA. You also have the continuing issue of the Patriot League scholarships, Big South expansion and playoff expansion. Not to be out done with the constant chatter involving what will JMU, GSU, Georgia State, Appy, Liberty, Delaware, UMass and a whole host of other schools do. Changes are coming my friend, maybe not for the Hoyas, but for fans of a lot of other programs.

[MplsBison]

Respect will never happen. After 15 years of following an FCS team this is clear. But this thread sure shows that FCS fans have a tremendous amount of insecurity and "package" envy. xviolinx I wouldn't mind the Griz going WAC but I'll believe it when I see it.

I agree, FCS will never get respect from the national media, even if our best teams should rightful be seen by the nation as belonging on the same field with the top 25 bowl schools.


I hope NDSU can move up to FBS within 15 years and follow Montana. It will depend on how well we do in FCS and how big our season ticket base can grow.

[DFW HOYA]

Perhaps, although I'll have to disagree. While Georgetown may be happy languishing in mediocrity, other schools will be jockeying for position.

No one is happy languishing in mediocrity (although I've never thought 0-11 as being particularly "mediocre"), but Georgetown isn't going to get calls from other conferences looking to realign. With five other conferences already having a presence in the Washington market (ACC, A-10, CAA, MEAC, Patriot), other conferences just aren't interested in adding a "too big for basketball, too small for football" program to their table, $28 million budget notwithstanding.

Georgetown helped build Big East basketball and that where it will stay. Football, of course, is another story. Some PL folks like the Hoyas (and a win every year), some not as much. If six PL schools go to 63 and Georgetown stays where it is, there will be friction.

[MplsBison]

No one is happy languishing in mediocrity (although I've never thought 0-11 as being particularly "mediocre"), but Georgetown isn't going to get calls from other conferences looking to realign. With five other conferences already having a presence in the Washington market (ACC, A-10, CAA, MEAC, Patriot), other conferences just aren't interested in adding a "too big for basketball, too small for football" program to their table, $28 million budget notwithstanding.

Georgetown helped build Big East basketball and that where it will stay. Football, of course, is another story. Some PL folks like the Hoyas (and a win every year), some not as much. If six PL schools go to 63 and Georgetown stays where it is, there will be friction.

Drop some sports.

Men's and women's sailing?! For cripe's sake...

[DFW HOYA]

Drop some sports.
Men's and women's sailing?! For cripe's sake...

You picked a bad example: Sailing won the 2008 national title.

Dropping sports won't put Georgetown in a better conference and only antagonizes donors and alumni. A broad-based athletics program remains the best answer.

[Bogus Megapardus]

Drop some sports.

Men's and women's sailing?! For cripe's sake...

Sailing it a perfectly legitimate sport. Besides, sports such as sailing typically are funded almost entirely by specific donations. There are no sailing scholarships.

On the other hand, I'm still waiting for varsity Chess-Boxing and Auto Racing to be sanctioned by the NCAA. As to the later, all vehicles must be designed and built on campus by students. I happen to think Georgia Tech and Virginia Tech would excel here. Army and Navy would clean up in Chess-Boxing, so it's a good PL sport.

[Franks Tanks]

Sailing it a perfectly legitimate sport. Besides, sports such as sailing typically are funded almost entirely by specific donations. There are no sailing scholarships.

On the other hand, I'm still waiting for varsity Chess-Boxing and Auto Racing to be sanctioned by the NCAA. As to the later, all vehicles must be designed and built on campus by students. I happen to think Georgia Tech and Virginia Tech would excel here. Army and Navy would clean up in Chess-Boxing, so it's a good PL sport.

Beer Pong (real beer pong with paddles) would be a great sport for the PL as well!

[CollegeSportsInfo]

Techincally, he is wrong. Montana football is already DI.

But is he really wrong? You all know exactly what he meant. FCS is not the top level of college football.

Yeah, so true. Just goes back to all the semantics. At least with the I-A and I-AA there was an easy to recognize nomenclature for all level of fans, both casual and hardcore.

But really, we're fans of a level of football that is not the top level. Just like in basketball, fans of a D2 school know that there is a division higher then them. At the same time, those D2 fans realize that in basketball, their program is probably stronger than some current D1 schools.

I just think that for as tough as the I-A and I-AA situation was, the FBS and FCS system has just been a nightmare. Virtually ever writer STILL needs to use a qualifying sentence to explain just what the heck "FCS" is. By then, readers have lost interest. :(

[CollegeSportsInfo]

They should go, I'd like to see them in the WAC.

Montana and the Big Sky are a great fit. But as a fan, I'd like to see Montana make the move. I think they'd be a great fit in the WAC as well. While Boise St. will likely be in the MWC sooner than later, I'd like to see Montana come in day 1 and dominate Utah St. and Idaho. The rest of the rivalries to build wouldn't be the same as in the Big Sky in regards to convenience, but they're not too far flung:

EWU --> Boise St.
Montana St. --> Idaho
Sac St --> San Jose St
Portland St --> Nevada
Weber St. --> Utah St.
No. Arizona --> New Mexico St.
No Colorado --> Fresno St.
Idaho St --> Hawaii
New game: LA Tech (boo)


Whatever they chose, I'll still be a fan of all that Montana has done. I'll still keep tracking their scores on saturdays. And if they upgrade, I'll be hoping they make some noise and can pull of seasons like BSU and Utah have recently.

[Syntax Error]

So you are saying that maintaining FCS is to the advantage of the AGS and CSN for their very being?What is the advantage? Both are non-profits that exist for the fans.


... this thread sure shows that FCS fans have a tremendous amount of insecurity and "package" envy...

Yes, some FCS fans envy the FBS here. We know who they are. xrolleyesx

[Jackman]

And for those who want to give the writer crap for saying that Montana is not in Division I - "Reporter Dillon Tabish can be reached at 758-4463 or by e-mail at [email protected]."

Okay, but how about contacting these two ADs (or were they misquoted)?

"There's a lot of uncertainty out there - an expanded playoff system, a championship moved back a couple weeks," [Montana Athletic Director Jim] O'Day said. "What happens if the Appalachian States and the James Madisons and the Delawares and a lot of those teams move to Division 1 status? ... That playoff system cannot continue to lose the money it's losing right now."

"I look at Montana and the success they've had, they're a dominant program and they've done exceptionally well," Idaho Athletic Director and Butte native Rob Spear said. "It's a tough balance between revenue and staying competitive. At one side you want to stay competitive for your fanbase and your boosters and you're community. Being Division I will give you more revenue opportunities, but at what cost?"

[ThompsonThe]

Since everyone thinks all of FCS is Division 2....I think we should all go Division 1, or all of us get out of the NCAA and start our own league. Maybe come up with some new great rules to entertain the fans and get TV contracts.

[CollegeSportsInfo]

Since everyone thinks all of FCS is Division 2....I think we should all go Division 1, or all of us get out of the NCAA and start our own league. Maybe come up with some new great rules to entertain the fans and get TV contracts.

Remember back before the name change to FCS, the idea on the table was exactly for that: to merge I-A and I-AA. Instead, the NCAA opted to just change the names. Brilliant.

I'm with you that I think it would be fine if there were a merge.

As a UMass fan, I'd have no problem if there were say even 10 BCS bowl games (20 teams) and then the other schools participate in a NIT type of playoff. I'd like to see CAA champ Umass in along with ACC 5th team BC (who was left out of the 20 BCS spots) in a tournament, and Montana playing schools like Nevada, BYU, etc. Then there would be a Division 1 with less confusion: If you're numbers are good enough, maybe a team like one of recent App St. powers or a montana can slip into the Top 20 and the BCS.

[danefan]

What is the advantage? Both are non-profits that exist for the fans.



xnonox

While they may not make a profit, they certainly are not "non-profit" organizations.

Non-profit is a description of an organization used interchangeably by most with the terms charities or foundations.

None of those terms apply to the businesses that are CSN and AGS.

Sorry OT, but definitely something that needed clarification.

[MplsBison]

You picked a bad example: Sailing won the 2008 national title.

Dropping sports won't put Georgetown in a better conference and only antagonizes donors and alumni. A broad-based athletics program remains the best answer.

All it does is prevent legitimate sports from being fully funded.

[Redbird Ray]

I would kind of like to see Montana in the WAC because they could step right in and compete. A Montana/Boise State matchup would be fun to watch year in and year out.

That said, I thought Montana's atmosphere last season for the playoff game against App State was incredible, and I'm not sure a regular season FBS game will ever have that same intensity. Montana's fans really did the whole FCS subculture proud that day, along with the two teams high quality performance on the field. It's just a shame how quickly that game, and it's top-notch atmosphere, was swept under the rug on ESPN highlights by some meaningless NBA game or some other crap.

I do think with some more facility upgrades FCS could evolve into something that mainstream media could appreciate more. If every playoff game had the look and feel of the Montana/App game from last season, where teams packed 20-25K seat stadiums with loud, energetic fanbases, then FCS could definitely sell its product to Versus or some other B list sports network.

A long wishlist I know, but if teams with new or expanded stadiums could consistently field playoff caliber teams (Montana, JMU, App State, Liberty, Texas State, NDSU, YSU, others I'm forgetting), that would be critical to making FCS more appealing to a general audience.

Either way, Montana is too good not to win at whatever level their admins deem best for the school.

[Jackman]

All it does is prevent legitimate sports from being fully funded.

You have to sponsor a minimum of 14 sports in Division I, and Sailing on average is one of the least expensive sports the NCAA allows. Sailing also doesn't require any land, which costs a premium at Gtown. It's the right sport for them. Probably not a great fit for North Dakota State though...

[MplsBison]

You have to sponsor a minimum of 14 sports in Division I, and Sailing on average is one of the least expensive sports the NCAA allows. Sailing also doesn't require any land, which costs a premium at Gtown. It's the right sport for them. Probably not a great fit for North Dakota State though...

I for one don't think any school should have to sponsor any minimum number of sports, so long as they meet title IX.

I think the minimum requirements for being DI in a sport should be tied to funding of the sport.


Simply having the sport just to have it should not be good enough to be DI.

[DFW HOYA]

I for one don't think any school should have to sponsor any minimum number of sports, so long as they meet title IX.

I think the minimum requirements for being DI in a sport should be tied to funding of the sport. Simply having the sport just to have it should not be good enough to be DI.

Your logic gets fuzzy here. If Centenary spend its entire athletics budget on fully funding one sport - football - and averaged 870 people a game (or the size of the student body), that would still be Division I-A eligible, but that the rest of its sports wouldn't be allowed in Division I?

What if a school simply decreed that all football schoalrships were $1 a year--would $85 be "full funding"? Of course not. That's where the devil is in the details.

[MplsBison]

Your logic gets fuzzy here. If Centenary spend its entire athletics budget on fully funding one sport - football - and averaged 870 people a game (or the size of the student body), that would still be Division I-A eligible, but that the rest of its sports wouldn't be allowed in Division I?

What if a school simply decreed that all football schoalrships were $1 a year--would $85 be "full funding"? Of course not. That's where the devil is in the details.

Equivalencies are calculated per the NCAA standard, not the school.

$85 in scholarship funding to 85 players with tuition probably in the $30-40k range each would not be close to full funding and thus would not meet the DI requirement for funding.


I would be fine with throwing in a minimum average attendance or tickets sold requirement as well, but if a school wants to make the financial commitment to fully funding a program to the DI level, why should it matter how many fans come to the games? If Centenary wants to commit to a $4 million budget for football (and corresponding $4 million for women's opportunities), there should be no reason to deny them full DI status in football just because they average less than 1k per game.

My point is, if they commit to that $8 million yearly budget, I see no reason why Centenary shouldn't be allowed just to have DI football and then say DI women's bball, vball and softball (or whatever). There is no reason they should have to have 10 other sports to be DI.

[Ronbo]

From a post at CS.com by Ursus A. Horribilis


I'm not on board with a move up but I have a friend that is in the system that says it is pretty much already decided and they are now laying out these doomsday scenarios to move the fan base in the direction that is a necessary step. That is why when they come out with the bull**** about not recruiting out of state due to money problems I started to have the feeling that the process is starting. They may not be outright lying on the two alternatives but they are trying to paint the move up as the only option.


The latest fan poll at eGriz has:

41 votes to move up
14 votes to stay put
3 votes unsure

[Saint3333]

What else does Montana have left to prove at the FCS level? Makes sense to me.

[MplsBison]

What else does Montana have left to prove at the FCS level? Makes sense to me.

Same for App, obviously.

[laxVik]

From a post at CS.com by Ursus A. Horribilis




The latest fan poll at eGriz has:

41 votes to move up
14 votes to stay put
3 votes unsure
58 people? That's nearly half the population of Missoula. Booha. ;)

[CrunchGriz]

58 people? That's nearly half the population of Missoula. Booha. ;)

...and just about double the attendance at the PSU Vikings home football opener. ;)

[bandit]

if Montana did decide to move up, would Montana State follow as well?

[Ronbo]

From a post at CS.com by Ursus A. Horribilis




The latest fan poll at eGriz has:

41 votes to move up
14 votes to stay put
3 votes unsure

Update

55
18
4

[MplsBison]

if Montana did decide to move up, would Montana State follow as well?

Could they?

I mean no offense to the Montana State program, but it's not at the level of Montana when you consider average attendance, season ticket holders and revenue generation (business perspective only).

[Ronbo]

58 people? That's nearly half the population of Missoula. Booha. ;)

It's a very slow time of the year on the football boards. As with any poll it can be said to reflect the feelings of the people within 2-3% margin of error.

HaHa! We are not large but we have very low crime, no gangs, light traffic, and almost zero pollution. Our unemployment is still around 6%, what's Oregon 12.5%? Who's laughing now? I watched a Portland segment on Gangland recently, made me afraid to even come there. Last time in Portland I went to a WalMart to pick up a few things and 80% of the people weren't speaking english. You seem to be getting overrun with illegals.

[CrazyCat]

Could they?

I mean no offense to the Montana State program, but it's not at the level of Montana when you consider average attendance, season ticket holders and revenue generation (business perspective only).

All that revenue and they are the ones with budget problems.

[MplsBison]

All that revenue and they are the ones with budget problems.

I realize it's difficult for you, but NDSU isn't really any better stacked up to Montana. Few in the FCS can match them on a business perspective.

[Ronbo]

It's a very slow time of the year on the football boards. As with any poll it can be said to reflect the feelings of the people within 2-3% margin of error.

HaHa! We are not large but we have very low crime, no gangs, light traffic, and almost zero pollution. Our unemployment is still around 6%, what's Oregon 12.5%? Who's laughing now? I watched a Portland segment on Gangland recently, made me afraid to even come there. Last time in Portland I went to a WalMart to pick up a few things and 80% of the people weren't speaking english. You seem to be getting overrun with illegals.

Oh and I totally forgot to mention that while I was checking out at that WalMart a gang of 4-5 shoplifters ran out the door being chased by several WalMart employees. This was followed up a couple minutes later by 3-4 squad cars screaching to a halt with lights blazing in front of the store.

Just another boring night in Portland.xlolx

[CrazyCat]

I realize it's difficult for you, but NDSU isn't really any better stacked up to Montana. Few in the FCS can match them on a business perspective.

It's not difficult at all. Their business model is flawed.


School A has a 15 million dollar budget and runs a profit, things are tight but they manage. School B has a 15 million dollar budget and usually runs a profit but costs of covering the budget are increasing. Both schools receive 2 million a year to their budgets. hmmm

[laxVik]

It's a very slow time of the year on the football boards. As with any poll it can be said to reflect the feelings of the people within 2-3% margin of error.

HaHa! We are not large but we have very low crime, no gangs, light traffic, and almost zero pollution. Our unemployment is still around 6%, what's Oregon 12.5%? Who's laughing now? I watched a Portland segment on Gangland recently, made me afraid to even come there. Last time in Portland I went to a WalMart to pick up a few things and 80% of the people weren't speaking english. You seem to be getting overrun with illegals.Hey I live in Albuquerque now. PDX as a city has been on my ignore list for awhile now.

[MplsBison]

It's not difficult at all. Their business model is flawed.


School A has a 15 million dollar budget and runs a profit, things are tight but they manage. School B has a 15 million dollar budget and usually runs a profit but costs of covering the budget are increasing. Both schools receive 2 million a year to their budgets. hmmm

I checked the OPE equity in athletics database and I was very surprised.

For 2008 Montana State actually reported larger revenue from football than Montana (~$5.6 million vs ~4.7 million).


That seems preposterous given that Montana averages almost 10k more fans per game than MSU. I wonder if MSU is reporting false numbers?

[Silenoz]

No, our school is just dumb. And my season tickets to MSU (yeah) cost as much as my Griz homecoming ticket alone xmadx

[CrazyCat]

I checked the OPE equity in athletics database and I was very surprised.

For 2008 Montana State actually reported larger revenue from football than Montana (~$5.6 million vs ~4.7 million).


That seems preposterous given that Montana averages almost 10k more fans per game than MSU. I wonder if MSU is reporting false numbers?

That's it their lying.xoopsx


UM has alot of entities sucking on the teet of Grizzly football. One example is that UM actually has to pay for the use of Dahlberg arena to the tune of around $750,000/yr. plus maintenance. The cost of the fieldhouse to MSU is $0 plus maintenance.

[Jackman]

That seems preposterous given that Montana averages almost 10k more fans per game than MSU. I wonder if MSU is reporting false numbers?

Reporting standards, particularly with respect to revenue as opposed to expenses, are extremely inconsistent. The most likely explanation is that they are reporting different things as "football revenue".

[Silenoz]

That's it their lying.xoopsx


UM has alot of entities sucking on the teet of Grizzly football. One example is that UM actually has to pay for the use of Dahlberg arena to the tune of around $750,000/yr. plus maintenance. The cost of the fieldhouse to MSU is $0 plus maintenance.

More specifically, the AD has to pay the University for it. The football team gets "screwed in similar ways. You'd think you'd treat your Golden Goose with the utmost care, yet here we are with talk about cutting out-of-state football scholarships. Probably a scare tactic, but still... brilliant thinking.

[Dignan]

HaHa! We are not large but we have very low crime, no gangs, light traffic, and almost zero pollution.

And no Unabombers since '96! xlolx

I kid, really, I do. I've never been to Montana, sounds like a really beautiful place.

[Ronbo]

And no Unabombers since '96! xlolx

I kid, really, I do. I've never been to Montana, sounds like a really beautiful place.

That guy was a left wing loonie from Berkeley, Ca. Thankyou very much.xnodxxlolx

Wasn't it just 2002 you had the Beltway sniper guys that killed a bunch of unsuspecting civilians?

[griz5700]

Lol, what a tool. My wife is from Kalispell and I remember on several occasions ready the interlake and thinking that the sports section was more like reading the sunday funnies. The guy is probably from somewhere other than Montana, otherwise he wouldn't be suffering from a severe intercranial inversion. The whole series is a joke, I give no credence to it whatsoever.

Actually Dillon is a Montana kid, born and raised in Missoula. We were roommates in Duniway freshman year (class of 07) and he is one of my best friends. So obviously I'd like bitch slap you right now. It's about time someone reported on this, the Missoulian should be embrassed the Interlake beat them to it.

[Dignan]

That guy was a left wing loonie from Berkeley, Ca. Thankyou very much.xnodxxlolx

Wasn't it just 2002 you had the Beltway sniper guys that killed a bunch of unsuspecting civilians?

Yep, in fact I moved to Northern VA from Charlotte about a week before that whole thing started. The timing was so close that I think that my new co-workers began to suspect me. xcoolx "Hey, someone just got shot in Falls Church... and he did take kind of a long lunch break today."

I believe that those lunatics weren't from there either. I think they made a cross-country trip for their peculiar version of an urban hunting expedition.

[TokyoGriz]

Montana will be moving up soon. Id guess 3-4 years. The only real question is were.

The univeristy has been building on their football program and gearing up for this for 20 years. There are hurdles and many things to be done yet. But with the Big sky falling apart, the moratorium lifted, and the shake up in the WAC it will happen.

The school will sell the idea as a way of generating MORE money in difficult times. Which it would be. There is the initial investment, but the univeristy will convince the board of regents and state that it will lead to greater economic stablity for missoula, and western montana.

They are commisioning studies on the economic affects of the university even now in preperation to make their argument.

[Green26]

Montana will be moving up soon. Id guess 3-4 years. The only real question is were.

The univeristy has been building on their football program and gearing up for this for 20 years. There are hurdles and many things to be done yet. But with the Big sky falling apart, the moratorium lifted, and the shake up in the WAC it will happen.

The school will sell the idea as a way of generating MORE money in difficult times. Which it would be. There is the initial investment, but the univeristy will convince the board of regents and state that it will lead to greater economic stablity for missoula, and western montana.

They are commisioning studies on the economic affects of the university even now in preperation to make their argument.


For anyone who cares about the facts, almost nothing in the above post is true.

[txstatebobcat]

Originally Posted by bandit
if Montana did decide to move up, would Montana State follow as well?

Could they?

I mean no offense to the Montana State program, but it's not at the level of Montana when you consider average attendance, season ticket holders and revenue generation (business perspective only).

I think on a technical level they could. Last I saw MSU was at or near the 15,000+ average attendance. I don't know how many sports they have, but if needed they could add more. That's the easy part.

The hard part would be getting a conference invite and the chances of the WAC inviting two Montana Schools are, in my opinion, pretty slim. The population small to begin and the Griz don't need assistance in delivering that market. The only way I could see it happening would be if the WAC loses more than two members and other schools (Sacramento St, UC-Davis, TxSt, UTSA and any Sunbelt School) , for whatever reason, say no to joining the WAC. At this point WAC will be desperate and add any school just to survive.

Who knows it could happen if the PAC-10 expands with Utah and BYU and the Big-10 takes 3 or more teams.

[Grizzaholic]

I spent most of last night talking with a couple folks about this possible move up thing. I am still in favor of staying in the FCS but I am getting worn down a little on the move up being not that bad of a thing. I just wish that if the Griz do end up making the jump, that MSU comes along.

[Green26]

These are quotes from Montana AD Jim O'Day from an April 15 newspaper article:

"If the athletic department can work through its budgetary woes, option three [staying in Big Sky] would be pristine," O’Day said.

“Right now, we’re very comfortable with where we’re at,” he said.

“The Big Sky Conference is good for us right now. There would have to be something very special that came up,” O’Day said. “The way I look at it right now, it would be very, very hard to move anywhere.”

[Grizzaholic]

Hummmm..

[TokyoGriz]

hey green26 you are obviously against moving up. But try to actually take quotes in context, and provide links.


http://www.montanakaimin.com/index.php/articles/article/changes_ahead/1099


In a meeting with the Kaimin a month ago, athletic director Jim O’Day outlined the budgetary crisis the athletic department was facing. He said budget cuts and rising fixed costs have put the program in a tight spot and gave three possible solutions:
—The aforementioned move up, which would give the Griz more revenue in the form of television contracts and league payment.
—The end-of-the-world option of a move down to Division II that would cut the amount of money to Montana’s teams, though the lower division would compensate with lower-quality opponents.
—The third option of staying in the Big Sky and potentially cutting the more expensive out-of-state scholarships, limiting the ability for the Grizzlies to compete.


This is the article your referencing. Note your quote is option 3, and ya the griz are comfy were there are atm. Guess what, everyone knows that. But guess what else? There might be some huge changes on the way that will make staying in the big sky NOT an option.

everything at this time, both leaving the conference and staying are speculation atm. But changes are going to happen.

What is not speculation is griz fans are NOT going to be ok with doing DOWN a division and nor are the vast vast majority going to be happy with us going from bein a competitive school to a bottom feeder of FCS! I am from montana and want us to have loads of montana kids on the team, but if going up will reduce some of these then thats the way the cookie crumbles. The thought of us reducing scholarships to save money instead of investing in the future is idiotic.

If options 1 or 3 are taken the athletic department will take a even larger hit financially I can gaurantee it. That hit will come from reduced fan base and attendance of sporting events. There would be a REVOLT in GrizNation!



That leaves one real option, to invest in the future and move up.

[Green26]

Montana will be moving up soon. Id guess 3-4 years. The only real question is were.

The univeristy has been building on their football program and gearing up for this for 20 years. There are hurdles and many things to be done yet. But with the Big sky falling apart, the moratorium lifted, and the shake up in the WAC it will happen.

The school will sell the idea as a way of generating MORE money in difficult times. Which it would be. There is the initial investment, but the univeristy will convince the board of regents and state that it will lead to greater economic stablity for missoula, and western montana.

They are commisioning studies on the economic affects of the university even now in preperation to make their argument.

1. "Montana will be moving up soon." That may be your opinion, but UM isn't even planning to move up at this time.

2. "The univeristy has been building on their football program and gearing up for this for 20 years." This is not accurate.

3. The recent feasibility studies of other schools, as well as the ncaa's own study, say that making more money is not a valid reason to move up.

4. "They are commisioning studies on the economic affects of the university even now in preperation to make their argument." While I don't know for sure, I'm pretty sure that UM is not currently having a feasibility study done.

5. O'Day's own most recent statements appear to say that UM is fine where it is.

[TokyoGriz]

1. "Montana will be moving up soon." That may be your opinion, but UM isn't even planning to move up at this time.

2. "The univeristy has been building on their football program and gearing up for this for 20 years." This is not accurate.

3. The recent feasibility studies of other schools, as well as the ncaa's own study, say that making more money is not a valid reason to move up.

4. "They are commisioning studies on the economic affects of the university even now in preperation to make their argument." While I don't know for sure, I'm pretty sure that UM is not currently having a feasibility study done.

5. O'Day's own most recent statements appear to say that UM is fine where it is.

1- Oday has moving up as option number one in his action list of 3. So how are they not "Considering" moving up? They are according to him.

Yes it is my opinion they will move up soon. However your statement saying Um isnt even planning a move is no less conjecture unless you yourself are personally involved in this process, if so do tell. If your not involved in the decision process then you have no more idea of what is really going on behind the scenes than I do and your statement holds no more water than mine.

2 - UM has been building up our football program for 20 years in quality, advertising and market reach, and has heavily invested in infastructure and expansion. Theres more needed in lights, locker and weight area, and an indoor field. But we are closer than almost all our peers in terms of being ready for a move up both in fan base, infastructure and marketing.

3 - Please provide links and evidence of this statement you make here. Also if you bother to read the Kaiman article MONEY is the MAIN REASON anything is going to happen in our athletic program in the near future, be that option 1 or 2 or 3. SO how is money NOT the main reason for anything to happen?

4 - http://www.bber.umt.edu/pubs/econ/universityreport.pdf
This was done I think last year. Its not really a part of the move up agenda, but if anyone would argue how investing in infastructure for UM would help MONTANA ecenomically in the future this would be a possible source to build from. So yes UM does want to prove to the state legislature that investin in it will be worth it for the whole state in the long run. This analysis is on the univeristy as whole, not just the football program. However the football program is probably the most effective marketing tool our university has to the general public.

5 - You only are reading a small part of the article then saying AHA thats it! The entire future of the Big Sky and FCS is in murky at best. According to odays statements UM is faced with 3 options.

Just because Oday says he is comfy at option 3 doesnt mean thats the option the univeristy will take. "IF" there is a offer to move to the WAC, or even a newly formed conference in FBS with a larger revenue stream, THEN we will see what will really happen.

IMO oday is being nice saying "oh ya its nice here in the big sky" because right now theres not a real tangible offer on the table to move. But its in everyones mind isnt it? Hes playing it cool for now doesnt mean the move isnt going to happen. Its very possible if and when an offer is made you will see a "sudden" change in his apparent public attitude.

[Green26]

1- Oday has moving up as option number one in his action list of 3. So how are they not "Considering" moving up? They are according to him.

Yes it is my opinion they will move up soon. However your statement saying Um isnt even planning a move is no less conjecture unless you yourself are personally involved in this process, if so do tell. If your not involved in the decision process then you have no more idea of what is really going on behind the scenes than I do and your statement holds no more water than mine.

2 - UM has been building up our football program for 20 years in quality, advertising and market reach, and has heavily invested in infastructure and expansion. Theres more needed in lights, locker and weight area, and an indoor field. But we are closer than almost all our peers in terms of being ready for a move up both in fan base, infastructure and marketing.

3 - Please provide links and evidence of this statement you make here. Also if you bother to read the Kaiman article MONEY is the MAIN REASON anything is going to happen in our athletic program in the near future, be that option 1 or 2 or 3. SO how is money NOT the main reason for anything to happen?

4 - http://www.bber.umt.edu/pubs/econ/universityreport.pdf
This was done I think last year. Its not really a part of the move up agenda, but if anyone would argue how investing in infastructure for UM would help MONTANA ecenomically in the future this would be a possible source to build from. So yes UM does want to prove to the state legislature that investin in it will be worth it for the whole state in the long run. This analysis is on the univeristy as whole, not just the football program. However the football program is probably the most effective marketing tool our university has to the general public.

5 - You only are reading a small part of the article then saying AHA thats it! The entire future of the Big Sky and FCS is in murky at best. According to odays statements UM is faced with 3 options.

Just because Oday says he is comfy at option 3 doesnt mean thats the option the univeristy will take. "IF" there is a offer to move to the WAC, or even a newly formed conference in FBS with a larger revenue stream, THEN we will see what will really happen.

IMO oday is being nice saying "oh ya its nice here in the big sky" because right now theres not a real tangible offer on the table to move. But its in everyones mind isnt it? Hes playing it cool for now doesnt mean the move isnt going to happen. Its very possible if and when an offer is made you will see a "sudden" change in his apparent public attitude.

Feel free to think what you want, Tokyo, but I am specifically in the know on the subject--and that's why I know that most of what you said initially was wrong.

[TokyoGriz]

Feel free to think what you want, Tokyo, but I am specifically in the know on the subject--and that's why I know that most of what you said initially was wrong.

Your statement has no validity without any indication of who you are and how you know what your know.

[Green26]

Your statement has no validity without any indication of who you are and how you know what your know.

I'm fine with that, Tokyo (because I'm not going to provide more information), but your statements have even less validity because you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

[TokyoGriz]

I'm fine with that, Tokyo (because I'm not going to provide more information), but your statements have even less validity because you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Actually I posted my opinion and speculated on some things while providing some links and possble data that might make my theory plausible. As of right now, EVERYTHING that will happen in the next 3-5 years in FCS and FBS is speculation to be honest.

You sir are basicly are posing anonamous on a chat room saying "I know what I know and thats gods truth." and act like its the end all of everything.

If your were the AD of montana, or someone "In the Know" I seriously doubt you would be posting anonamously on this board. To be honest from reading Odays statements even they dont "Know" what will really happen in the next few years. Unlike you who "Is in the Know" of everything.

Sorry but unless you can do more than just say you know everything, ie provide any sort of data, valid information confirming your statements, or prove you are actually INVOVLED in the decision process that is or will be at work at the Univeristy of Montana in regards to this issue then you sir are a bag of hot air.

[Squealofthepig]

Ultimately, this looks like O'Day is just weighing options. That seems to be a prudent move.

The Big Sky is its own problem for Montana. On one hand, it's been very good to them, and they've dominated for... jeez, since Marshall was I-AA. That's a long time to be dominant in any conference. On the other hand, one can plausibly argue they've been dominant because the Big Sky is a soft conference. Montana is consistently very good, and while most years there's a MSU or Weber or PSU to keep the Griz honest, top to bottom, there is not a consistent depth to the conference like you'll find in the CAA, Southern, etc.

Outside of MSU, this doesn't seem to be something that will change any time soon. All universities are having to look at their bottom lines, and it does not look like there will be a sudden surge in competitiveness top to bottom. So the Griz may be looking at, best case, continually entering the playoffs as a bit of an unknown. Yes, there will be years where they'll answer their detractors, but there will be others where the lack of competitiveness and exposure to consistent, quality teams can lead to an early exit.

So, what would you do as an AD? I think just about anyone should say O'Day has a very lucky problem to have - I think most ADs would be thrilled to have to worry about something like Griz football, which consistently has huge home crowds and travels very well both in conference and in the playoffs (was nice seeing myself in the stands on the ESPNU rebroadcast of this year's loss to 'Nova). But, what can ensure Montana's success 5, 10 years down the road? Would a move to FBS make sense if you also thought the Big Sky would continue to deterioriate? Could Griz football become more of a regional, pnw team? I think those questions are legitimate ones to contemplate, and while I have my own thoughts on this, I think the AD would frankly be foolish not to at least weigh the options.

[CopperCat]

Ultimately, this looks like O'Day is just weighing options. That seems to be a prudent move.

The Big Sky is its own problem for Montana. On one hand, it's been very good to them, and they've dominated for... jeez, since Marshall was I-AA. That's a long time to be dominant in any conference. On the other hand, one can plausibly argue they've been dominant because the Big Sky is a soft conference. Montana is consistently very good, and while most years there's a MSU or Weber or PSU to keep the Griz honest, top to bottom, there is not a consistent depth to the conference like you'll find in the CAA, Southern, etc.

Outside of MSU, this doesn't seem to be something that will change any time soon. All universities are having to look at their bottom lines, and it does not look like there will be a sudden surge in competitiveness top to bottom. So the Griz may be looking at, best case, continually entering the playoffs as a bit of an unknown. Yes, there will be years where they'll answer their detractors, but there will be others where the lack of competitiveness and exposure to consistent, quality teams can lead to an early exit.

So, what would you do as an AD? I think just about anyone should say O'Day has a very lucky problem to have - I think most ADs would be thrilled to have to worry about something like Griz football, which consistently has huge home crowds and travels very well both in conference and in the playoffs (was nice seeing myself in the stands on the ESPNU rebroadcast of this year's loss to 'Nova). But, what can ensure Montana's success 5, 10 years down the road? Would a move to FBS make sense if you also thought the Big Sky would continue to deterioriate? Could Griz football become more of a regional, pnw team? I think those questions are legitimate ones to contemplate, and while I have my own thoughts on this, I think the AD would frankly be foolish not to at least weigh the options.

The AD is "weighing his options" already. That's why we're talking about this.

You mention being competetive twice above. IF UM moves up, I really doubt they will be competetive in the first two to three years, and possibly much further down the road. Moreover, the Big Sky IS getting better and NOT deteriorating like you might be suggesting. EWU, MSU, Weber, and UM have all been pretty **** good in the last three to four years. The Big Sky got three teams in this year and MSU almost made it in as well, so we are getting props from people outside of the conference. If UM wants to move up, maybe they should stop and take a look at how good they have it right now. Best stadium in the FCS, one of the best teams in the FCS, THEY MAKE $$$ EVERY SINGLE HOME GAME THEY PLAY, always getting home playoff games etc. I really think UM has a case of spoiled child syndrome in addition to its money woes, but the money problems are primary in this instance. If UM isn't making enough money to keep it's football team in the FCS, something is seriously W R O N G. Somebody somewhere has seen the numbers and could probably tell us for sure what is going on, but my gut instinct is that the griz are getting screwed somewhere.

[AGS OWNER]

Nearly 4 pages of whining over what's D1. Come on...

Yep!xnodx

[Mr. C]

Actually I posted my opinion and speculated on some things while providing some links and possble data that might make my theory plausible. As of right now, EVERYTHING that will happen in the next 3-5 years in FCS and FBS is speculation to be honest.

You sir are basicly are posing anonamous on a chat room saying "I know what I know and thats gods truth." and act like its the end all of everything.

If your were the AD of montana, or someone "In the Know" I seriously doubt you would be posting anonamously on this board. To be honest from reading Odays statements even they dont "Know" what will really happen in the next few years. Unlike you who "Is in the Know" of everything.

Sorry but unless you can do more than just say you know everything, ie provide any sort of data, valid information confirming your statements, or prove you are actually INVOVLED in the decision process that is or will be at work at the Univeristy of Montana in regards to this issue then you sir are a bag of hot air.

Just an FYI. You might indeed want to listen to Green 26 on subjects concerning Montana. He is closer to things than you might think, even if he doesn't reveal his indentity. He has been on the mark about a lot of other stuff in the past regarding Montana.

[TokyoGriz]

Just an FYI. You might indeed want to listen to Green 26 on subjects concerning Montana. He is closer to things than you might think, even if he doesn't reveal his indentity. He has been on the mark about a lot of other stuff in the past regarding Montana.

Hes "in the know" he even said so, so of course its true!

Oday just listed 3 options he (the university) are considering in the article for no real reason cause Green26 knows the real truth, that is hes not considering option 1 that is moving up at all. That leaves option 2 moving down to division II level, and option 3 cutting most (all?) out of state scholarships. This article states that the U of M is considering ALL 3 of these options, as hard as option 2 or 3 would be.


http://www.montanakaimin.com/index.php/articles/article/changes_ahead/1099


Green is a bag of hot air because he is speaking for another person, even though what he is saying contradicts what that person is saying themselves in the media.

On top of that he provides no means of how, why, or who he got said information from.

[Grizo406]

Just an FYI. You might indeed want to listen to Green 26 on subjects concerning Montana. He is closer to things than you might think, even if he doesn't reveal his indentity. He has been on the mark about a lot of other stuff in the past regarding Montana.

You're ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, Mr. C!

[Squealofthepig]

The AD is "weighing his options" already. That's why we're talking about this.

You mention being competetive twice above. IF UM moves up, I really doubt they will be competetive in the first two to three years, and possibly much further down the road. Moreover, the Big Sky IS getting better and NOT deteriorating like you might be suggesting. EWU, MSU, Weber, and UM have all been pretty **** good in the last three to four years. The Big Sky got three teams in this year and MSU almost made it in as well, so we are getting props from people outside of the conference.

Good points - should have said more competitive top to bottom. Agree the top programs are all solid, and think that's great (and hope it continues!) My worry, though, is the bottom teams, who don't make money on their football programs, and whose AD's might have to make the bottom-line decision to cut their football programs. That's drastic, and it's certainly not on the table currently, but it's a possibility.

Also agree the Griz would not be competitive in FBS for several years if they moved up; if they moved up, they still have some geographic issue to contend with in terms of scheduling, and any teams that would be on the Griz's schedule would know about Griz football and not regard them lightly.

[CopperCat]

Good points - should have said more competitive top to bottom. Agree the top programs are all solid, and think that's great (and hope it continues!) My worry, though, is the bottom teams, who don't make money on their football programs, and whose AD's might have to make the bottom-line decision to cut their football programs. That's drastic, and it's certainly not on the table currently, but it's a possibility.

Also agree the Griz would not be competitive in FBS for several years if they moved up; if they moved up, they still have some geographic issue to contend with in terms of scheduling, and any teams that would be on the Griz's schedule would know about Griz football and not regard them lightly.

Another thing that should be said about the griz is that they are making plenty of money right now on their football program. I'm not so sure that would be the case if they moved up, as their overall competetiveness wouldn't be as high as it is now in the BSC. If revenue dropped after the move, then the move would have been a bust right there. Obviously I don't know the whole story about TV contracts and whatnot (I would certainly hope that somebody OTHER than KPAX would cover the griz) so they might make a bit more off the TV end of the deal but the potential damage to the fanbase has to be something that the higher-ups should be thinking about.

If the bottom dwellers of the BSC aren't doing very well, then Fullerton needs to find ways to improve the conference. We already had our shot at the XDSU's, so the next opportunity that comes along might be the one we have to take. It makes sense to me to take on UND and USD, both are solid squads are really aren't that far from most BSC schools when you compare how far everyone has to travel to get to places like Sacramento and Flagstaff. And if anyone wants to argue that UND and USD are too far away and in remote locations, I say nay. Flagstaff is plenty far away and even MORE remote, and we've had NAU in the conference since 1970. Can't get into that mess of an aiport (be it from snowstorms or it's too hot and airplanes can't land there due to high density altitude) so the flight is into Phoenix followed by the three hour busride to Flagstaff. Not saying we need to boot NAU, just providing the argument.

[Green26]

Just an FYI. You might indeed want to listen to Green 26 on subjects concerning Montana. He is closer to things than you might think, even if he doesn't reveal his indentity. He has been on the mark about a lot of other stuff in the past regarding Montana.

Thanks Mr. C and Grizo. What are you doing these days, Mr. C? I almost introduced myself to you in Chattanooga in the Marriott, but you were pretty busy at the time. My son and I were talking to Terrell Hudgins by the couch to the left of the front desk, as you were walking in with or meeting Armanti Edwards and others. Hudgins joined your group, and introductions were taking place, so I opted not to interrupt. I think it was Thurs., and you were probably getting to go with them to the Payton/Buchanan award dinner. I turned out to be right on Mariani and Schillinger, didn't I--and so were you.