An FCS Without the Montana Schools

[TexasTerror]

More and more indications are coming out from BobcatReport.com regarding the Montana schools and their intentions to join the WAC...

BobcatReport.com has broken most of the stories related to the WAC in the last several months, including the move to accept UT-Arlington.

The Montana and Montana State fan base have always been an important part of not only this board, but the FCS community in general.

It'd be a pretty tough pill to swallow to see them go. Schools like Montana and Montana State are not ones you ever saw leaving FCS, but the time looks like it is upon us. Let's hope that the subdivision creates some new schools to join the McNeeses, Georgia Southerns and Appalachian States that have been the standard bearer for FCS.

The latest from the BobcatReport.com..


I just got more confirmation that the Montana schools have been working behind the scenes on a jump to the WAC and FBS. The existing WAC schools are aware of these talks and expect a deal to get done.

We would not see any announcement from either school until after this football season. Any announcement would cause both schools to lose post season eligibility. That could be why the lid is being kept so tight on this issue.

My money is on an announcement after this season.

http://bobcatreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=19967#p19967

[Grizzaholic]

They had better ****ing stay in the FCS.

[The Eagle's Cliff]

They had better ****ing stay in the FCS.

You don't think Montana and State would be good additions to the WAC? I've always thought the WAC or Mountain West would be a good fit for them to renew the rivalries with Boise St and Nevada.

[TexasTerror]

You don't think Montana and State would be good additions to the WAC? I've always thought the WAC or Mountain West would be a good fit for them to renew the rivalries with Boise St and Nevada.

The WAC will not have Boise State or Nevada nowadays though with the changes...

[Grizzaholic]

You don't think Montana and State would be good additions to the WAC? I've always thought the WAC or Mountain West would be a good fit for them to renew the rivalries with Boise St and Nevada.

No. I think the Montana schools moving up to the FBS would do nothing but cause problems. It has nothing to do with how I think they would fare football wise, it has to do with increased need for money, more sports, more everything. Montana already fleeces the football team for every dollar available and doesn't put anything back into it.

[darell1976]

I think the Mountain West would be the only reason to move up. The WAC just looks like another FCS Conference....with only a bowl game to look forward to.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

You don't think Montana and State would be good additions to the WAC? I've always thought the WAC or Mountain West would be a good fit for them to renew the rivalries with Boise St and Nevada.

There is NOTHING the FBS offers that I can see as a benefit. If you have a desire to be in a good FBS conference with old rivals and that means something to regionally then I get it from certain fans perspectives. Giving up the opportunity to play for the FCS Title just to be a ****ty FBS team doesn't mean a damn thing to me though.

I can not believe that just moving to FBS is a step up in a school's game as far this is concerned.

I'll tell ya this much...if it happens then I'll still watch em' on TV and may even do it at the tailgates and go have some fun but I will most definitely NOT be planning my life around Grizzly home games any onger as I have been doing for the last 25 yrs. My season tickets will available for someone that wants and supports the move to FBS and they can start to pitch in and pay the load that Griz Football is gonaa be asked to carry.

If we thought they were crying poor before then I guarantee you we ain't seen nothing yet.

I just don't care about being part of FBS unless you at least have the opportunity to be in a playoff by winning your conference like FCS does.

I wish em' well but I'm a casual fan once this happens and I'll hang around and party but my *** ain't gonna be taking an expensive seat. You know, voting with your dollars and all that.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I think the Mountain West would be the only reason to move up. The WAC just looks like another FCS Conference....with only a bowl game to look forward to.

All but four bowl games have zero meaning to me personally so I can't think of one that a WAC team would go to that we be anything more than a regular season type excitement level.

Bowl games are a silly little beauty pageant but at least you have to be pretty good to go to one of the BCS bowls so you can at least say "we were at least good enough to make it here even though we don't know if we were the best this year".

[Grizzaholic]

There is NOTHING the FBS offers that I can see as a benefit. If you have a desire to be in a good FBS conference with old rivals and that means something to regionally then I get it from certain fans perspectives. Giving up the opportunity to play for the FCS Title just to be a ****ty FBS team doesn't mean a damn thing to me though.

I can not believe that just moving to FBS is a step up in a school's game as far this is concerned.

I'll tell ya this much...if it happens then I'll still watch em' on TV and may even do it at the tailgates and go have some fun but I will most definitely NOT be planning my life around Grizzly home games any onger as I have been doing for the last 25 yrs. My season tickets will available for someone that wants and supports the move to FBS and they can start to pitch in and pay the load that Griz Football is gonaa be asked to carry.

If we thought they were crying poor before then I guarantee you we ain't seen nothing yet.

I just don't care about being part of FBS unless you at least have the opportunity to be in a playoff by winning your conference like FCS does.

I wish em' well but I'm a casual fan once this happens and I'll hang around and party but my *** ain't gonna be taking an expensive seat. You know, voting with your dollars and all that.

And what about all of the friends we won't see anymore because they won't be coming to town..and we won't be going to visit.

EWU/CP/ISU/PSU/ the EC(b) teams and the always welcome Southland..... Lots of folks that I look forward to seeing each year that I will more than likely miss out on...unless I go to their games somewheres.

[Tim James]

The Dakota schools will do a nice job replacing them.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

And what about all of the friends we won't see anymore because they won't be coming to town..and we won't be going to visit.

EWU/CP/ISU/PSU/ the EC(b) teams and the always welcome Southland..... Lots of folks that I look forward to seeing each year that I will more than likely miss out on...unless I go to their games somewheres.

Well it is what it is and I'm sure that is of little concern to the Athletic Dpt. (which it should be) but other friends would be made anyway.

Interesting you mention EWU though because I was just thinking about this move and the fact that it could be a real boon for EWU Football because as far as I can see there is at best a maybe 40% of Griz fans that want a move to FBS. I'm not saying 60% of Griz fans would say "**** it" but there will be a number of them that really want to see playoff footall and where do you think they are gonna go?

There is also a pretty large # of Griz Alumni in the Spokane area that make the trip to Missoula and may just decide that they can watch it on TV as well and hit the EWU game.

If it happens it may turn out that EWU benefits greatly from this cuz they will be the FCS team that gains my loyalty.

[Rob Iola]

At what point do we stop having a distinction between the FCS and the FBS? If the BCS conferences maintain their monopoly on the bowl championship bowls (or whatever you want to call them), then at some point you would think that the NCAA would morph the lesser bowls together with playoffs for non-BCS schools, at which point you don't need an FCS anymore (or more accurately, you wouldn't need an FBS anymore). And if you remove the D1 basketball/football requirement, then the smaller FCS schools could opt to go to DII and remain competitive.

[Grizzaholic]

At what point do we stop having a distinction between the FCS and the FBS?



POST EDIT:


Sorry..didn't want to derail this thread.

[Grizzaholic]

Well it is what it is and I'm sure that is of little concern to the Athletic Dpt. (which it should be) but other friends would be made anyway.

Interesting you mention EWU though because I was just thinking about this move and the fact that it could be a real boon for EWU Football because as far as I can see there is at best a maybe 40% of Griz fans that want a move to FBS. I'm not saying 60% of Griz fans would say "**** it" but there will be a number of them that really want to see playoff footall and where do you think they are gonna go?

There is also a pretty large # of Griz Alumni in the Spokane area that make the trip to Missoula and may just decide that they can watch it on TV as well and hit the EWU game.

If it happens it may turn out that EWU benefits greatly from this cuz they will be the FCS team that gains my loyalty.

Didn't think of that. Good call on EWU though.

[polsongrizz]

They had better ****ing stay in the FCS.

AGREED

[polsongrizz]

Well it is what it is and I'm sure that is of little concern to the Athletic Dpt. (which it should be) but other friends would be made anyway.

Interesting you mention EWU though because I was just thinking about this move and the fact that it could be a real boon for EWU Football because as far as I can see there is at best a maybe 40% of Griz fans that want a move to FBS. I'm not saying 60% of Griz fans would say "**** it" but there will be a number of them that really want to see playoff footall and where do you think they are gonna go?

There is also a pretty large # of Griz Alumni in the Spokane area that make the trip to Missoula and may just decide that they can watch it on TV as well and hit the EWU game.

If it happens it may turn out that EWU benefits greatly from this cuz they will be the FCS team that gains my loyalty.

Went to all three playoff games in Cheney last year. How many would I go to if we move up, not sure? But I do know I WILL NOT BE GOING TO MANY FBS GAMES if we move up. BTW I haven't missed a home game since "94".

[ursus arctos horribilis]

At what point do we stop having a distinction between the FCS and the FBS? If the BCS conferences maintain their monopoly on the bowl championship bowls (or whatever you want to call them), then at some point you would think that the NCAA would morph the lesser bowls together with playoffs for non-BCS schools, at which point you don't need an FCS anymore (or more accurately, you wouldn't need an FBS anymore). And if you remove the D1 basketball/football requirement, then the smaller FCS schools could opt to go to DII and remain competitive.

Fully agree and we were talking about what the BCS was doing last summer on champsub and I said then that the FBS teams were gonna be SOL when they get done so so any dreams of being Boise State for move up teams could be put to rest.

There is very little difference right now between the majority of FBS schools and the top 1/2 of FCS. Leave the BCS schools out of it and take 22 second stringers from Montana or any other team and put them on UNI, Delaware, Montana State, or any team from the top 1/2 of most FCS Conferences and let them play any team from the top 1/2 of your average non BCS conference and I'll put my money on the bloated scholly FCS team almost every time.

FBS is not what can be considered a step up and for the money it costs the diminishing returns is just silly talk.

Now if FBS were to have a playoff then I'm almost completely fine with going there but I still don't see how it's money well spent.

[DG Cowboy]

Say it ain't so, Joe. Didn't think delusions of grandeur was a problem with the Griz and Cats.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Went to all three playoff games in Cheney last year. How many would I go to if we move up, not sure? But I do know I WILL NOT BE GOING TO MANY FBS GAMES if we move up. BTW I haven't missed a home game since "94".

That's what I'm sayin' too man. I live my life around football season, it's special because of what we've done, where we are, and the fact that I've been doing it for a very long time because I really enjoy that we can find out on th field what we are or were last season. I have seen every game the Grizzlies have ever played in that stadium. I've been to very many road games. I've paid whatever I was asked all along because even though it seemed a little high in comparison I didn't care...I loved the product and the experience so it was money well spent.

So now the idea is to move a total piece of **** conference with almost zero natural rivals other than the one that will be coming with us and giving up the possibility of the playoff experience and seeing the Griz play some great teams in our house because we can say some hollow **** like "We son the 2016 Humanitarian Bowl", "We are at the top level of NCAA football by being FBS even though we know that we are not because BCS is above us and we aren't gonna be there".

As I say, I'll still go the party but I ain't gonna be too eager to pop down $50/ticket to watch what are termed "highest level" teams just because these teams are called FBS.

I'll go watch a playoff game in Cheney long before I ever pay the freight on some bull**** Humanitarian Bowl type of thing.

[rocket]

To be quite honest about this bobcat report is rarely right about anything unless they rip it of espn. Montana is not going to the WAC.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Say it ain't so, Joe. Didn't think delusions of grandeur was a problem with the Griz and Cats.

It never has been. There is always a fraction of the fan base that has that but I must be out of touch or the AD's of UM & MSU are because I just don't see very many people EVER talking about the move up as something they are wanting or looking forward to. I know that the Missoula community has a great attachment to FCS and the playoff experience but one thing I've seen happen before around here is that the Athletic Dept. can get a little full of itself and in the process of a money grab **** it's fan base and ruin a good thing they have going.

Montana Basketball was riding a pretty healthy wave back in the 80's & very early 90's and then Bill Moos took away something vital to the experience by moving the students out of their rightful place and making those seats GSA because they thought it was gonna make them some money.

Grizzly basketball has struggled for nearly 20 yrs. to get back to anywhere near what it was back in 1992 and it has never made it back even with some successful teams.

One thing that people seem to fall victim to is the thinking that things will remain as they are even when you take something vital to the experience away and you take that carrot of the playoffs away and replace it with some ****ty bowl possibility and I think the delusions of granduer leaving the UM Athletic Dpt. in a very poor position and the guys that made the decision will be no where to be found if this doesn't pan out.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

To be quite honest about this bobcat report is rarely right about anything unless they rip it of espn. Montana is not going to the WAC.

Only one post and you have helped me Rocket. I was beginning to really spin myself into a bad place there.xlolx

Thank you sir and I've never hoped so vigorously for a one post guy to be dead on with his prognostication in my life.xthumbsupx

BTW, glad you are here and hope you enjoy the board.

[Keeper]

Haven't we been down this road already? Didn't UM nix the idea for good a few months back? Would the WAC have added who they have so far if they had a possible move from the Montanas? Is travel to Texas State, UTSA La Tech and NMSU really that much better than Cal-Arizona? The answer lies in whatever TV revenues the WAC office can come up with, other than that what is there to talk about? xconfusedx

[dgtw]

An FBS league made up of fattened up FCS schools doesn't seem like a recipe for success.

[Grizzaholic]

This should have been the second post in the thread.

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c315/thehinge/NotAgain.jpg

[DFW HOYA]

BobcatReport.com has broken most of the stories related to the WAC in the last several months, including the move to accept UT-Arlington.

UTA, the school that dropped football after building a brand new stadium? The UTA where basketball games are held on a theater stage?

The WAC must be officially out of hope.

http://startelegram.typepad.com/honkin_mad/images/2008/03/20/uta.jpg

[rocket]

Only one post and you have helped me Rocket. I was beginning to really spin myself into a bad place there.xlolx

Thank you sir and I've never hoped so vigorously for a one post guy to be dead on with his prognostication in my life.xthumbsupx

BTW, glad you are here and hope you enjoy the board.

Thanks I've been lurking for a while (like reading the board) and this thread finally got me to sign up. TT's posts are always 1 of two things 1) naming a team to the WAC or SLC and then giving a weird source for it (i think he's giving about 20 to the WAC and 15 teams so far).2) bashing other school's athletic budgets (i.e. every Louisiana school or UNA). he's been right once out of 20 with the WAC (seattle) even though that was all over every board and fairly obvious and i do not believe that big budgets directly equal success (look at a lot of the Texas schools performances even with huge budgets they have, its not like they're dominating the FCS) its how you spend that budget.

Anyways like this board and i don't believe that montana will leave it just makes no sense in any sport (football, basketball or the rest). I'd rather the FCS and FBS get combined with a playoff so every team can prosper instead of just 20 teams but that's a whole other issue.

[Grizzaholic]

Thanks I've been lurking for a while (like reading the board) and this thread finally got me to sign up. TT's posts are always 1 of two things 1) naming a team to the WAC or SLC and then giving a weird source for it (i think he's giving about 20 to the WAC and 15 teams so far).2) bashing other school's athletic budgets (i.e. every Louisiana school or UNA). he's been right once out of 20 with the WAC (seattle) even though that was all over every board and fairly obvious and i do not believe that big budgets directly equal success (look at a lot of the Texas schools performances even with huge budgets they have, its not like they're dominating the FCS) its how you spend that budget.

Anyways like this board and i don't believe that montana will leave it just makes no sense in any sport (football, basketball or the rest). I'd rather the FCS and FBS get combined with a playoff so every team can prosper instead of just 20 teams but that's a whole other issue.


Good logical post....you sure you are in the right place?

[rocket]

I've seen a reasonable amount of good and great posts here, and even some of the bad ones like the original one still add to the discussion since it set off three pages of reasoning and arguments for and against, so i think i'm in the right place haha.

[CrazyCat]

Reps to the new guy.

[Grizzaholic]

Reps to the new guy.

Cat fan is correct.

[citdog]

This should have been the second post in the thread.

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c315/thehinge/NotAgain.jpg


Chipper Jones after a visit to Hooters?

[Grizzaholic]

Chipper Jones after a visit to Hooters?

Check your PM"s.

[green and gold]

The Dakota schools will do a nice job replacing them.
You mean just the one.

[citdog]

Well if the Griz do leave there will be no more need for FCS fans to ALWAYS have these two necessities on hand in case of a playoff run.



http://just-thinkin.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/huge-hearing-aids.jpg





http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2007/jun/southpole11lg.jpg

[Grizzaholic]

Cit...that first one sure looks like a hearing device....not ear plugs. Just sayin'.

[citdog]

Cit...that first one sure looks like a hearing device....not ear plugs. Just sayin'.


for use AFTER you freeze your taint at the game.

[Grizzaholic]

for use AFTER you freeze your taint at the game.

Luckily you will only have to wear 2 down parkas, double sets of socks in your Pack boots, lots of layers under those parkas, snow pants, full face guard (most people get the ones used on Everest), and some 220 db-30 db ear protection. That list should get you started and anything you don't have you can pick up at the Griz Bookstore.

[citdog]

Luckily you will only have to wear 2 down parkas, double sets of socks in your Pack boots, lots of layers under those parkas, snow pants, full face guard (most people get the ones used on Everest), and some 220 db-30 db ear protection. That list should get you started and anything you don't have you can pick up at the Griz Bookstore.

What is this snow?

[The Eagle's Cliff]

What is this snow?

Snow n. Frozen precipitation occurring once or twice a decade without accumulating on the ground for more than a few hours.

[superman7515]

Thanks I've been lurking for a while (like reading the board) and this thread finally got me to sign up. TT's posts are always 1 of two things 1) naming a team to the WAC or SLC and then giving a weird source for it (i think he's giving about 20 to the WAC and 15 teams so far).2) bashing other school's athletic budgets (i.e. every Louisiana school or UNA). he's been right once out of 20 with the WAC (seattle) even though that was all over every board and fairly obvious and i do not believe that big budgets directly equal success (look at a lot of the Texas schools performances even with huge budgets they have, its not like they're dominating the FCS) its how you spend that budget.

Anyways like this board and i don't believe that montana will leave it just makes no sense in any sport (football, basketball or the rest). I'd rather the FCS and FBS get combined with a playoff so every team can prosper instead of just 20 teams but that's a whole other issue.

You forgot the third thing... TT's glowing reviews of all things SWAC.

[darell1976]

You mean just the one.

Yep the only one going to the Big Sky Conference!!!xnodx

[TexasTerror]

To be quite honest about this bobcat report is rarely right about anything unless they rip it of espn. Montana is not going to the WAC.

The BobcatReport has broken numerous stories in the last few months and been credited accordingly by legitimate sources of media, including newspapers from three of the four time zones within the continental United States. While I am not one to credit much of what any Bobcat will do - I will pat those guys on the back. It is incredible what kind of sources that they have.


Thanks I've been lurking for a while (like reading the board) and this thread finally got me to sign up. TT's posts are always 1 of two things 1) naming a team to the WAC or SLC and then giving a weird source for it (i think he's giving about 20 to the WAC and 15 teams so far).2) bashing other school's athletic budgets (i.e. every Louisiana school or UNA). he's been right once out of 20 with the WAC (seattle) even though that was all over every board and fairly obvious and i do not believe that big budgets directly equal success (look at a lot of the Texas schools performances even with huge budgets they have, its not like they're dominating the FCS) its how you spend that budget.

Budgets do equate to success.

As one SLC athletic director told me, line up the budgets against the Commish Cup standings within the league. It all adds up. Nicholls has the lowest budget and is repeatedly at the bottom. The Texas schools have the top budgets and are repeatedly occupying most, if not all of the top spots. While the Texas schools are not dominating FCS, they are dominating the SLC as far as consistent performances across all sports go and that is measured by the Commish Cup.

Even in the Sun Belt - ULM has the worst budget and they are the worst team annually. UL-Lafayette is down towards the bottom too with the schools with the deepest pockets at the top. Wonder why?

I only follow the 'regional leagues' - so that's what I am basing it off of at the Div I level. I would include the SWAC, but there are way too many variables there for many obvious reasons.

[3rd Coast Tiger]

Thanks I've been lurking for a while (like reading the board) and this thread finally got me to sign up. TT's posts are always 1 of two things 1) naming a team to the WAC or SLC and then giving a weird source for it (i think he's giving about 20 to the WAC and 15 teams so far).2) bashing other school's athletic budgets (i.e. every Louisiana school or UNA). he's been right once out of 20 with the WAC (seattle) even though that was all over every board and fairly obvious and i do not believe that big budgets directly equal success (look at a lot of the Texas schools performances even with huge budgets they have, its not like they're dominating the FCS) its how you spend that budget.

My hero!

[3rd Coast Tiger]

You forgot the third thing... TT's glowing reviews of all things SWAC.

xrotatehx

[aust42]

I find it hard to imagine why the Montana schools would join a dying conference. Every decent school has fled the WAC. Saragin will most likely have four 1AA conferences ranked higher than the WAC next year. The Sun Belch will no longer be the laughing stock of 1A. The Montana schools have already turned the WAC down, what would make them change their minds at this point?

[cpalum]

I find it hard to imagine why the Montana schools would join a dying conference. Every decent school has fled the WAC. Saragin will most likely have four 1AA conferences ranked higher than the WAC next year. The Sun Belch will no longer be the laughing stock of 1A. The Montana schools have already turned the WAC down, what would make them change their minds at this point?

Exactly!...Anybody care to take a crack at that one? Why the hell would the WAC be more appealing to Montana now? The addition of UTA?!?!?!

[ncbears]

I find it hard to imagine why the Montana schools would join a dying conference. Every decent school has fled the WAC. Saragin will most likely have four 1AA conferences ranked higher than the WAC next year. The Sun Belch will no longer be the laughing stock of 1A. The Montana schools have already turned the WAC down, what would make them change their minds at this point?

That's what I was thinking too.

[Silenoz]

Exactly!...Anybody care to take a crack at that one? Why the hell would the WAC be more appealing to Montana now? The addition of UTA?!?!?!

It would probably make more sense the other way around; UTA is being added because the WAC schools think they have the Montanas incoming

[CrazyCat]

The only reason would be money. There must be some financial benefit for both schools or they wouldn't move. Plain and simple.

Is there a playoff system in the works for non-BCS schools that is based on the teams participating actually making money instead of giving it to the NCAA ? A new WAC TV contract? As an aside. There are strong rumors that Burlington Northern Santa Fe is going to be sponsoring the Cat/Griz game and the money for both schools is significant and far higher than what their entire season tv contracts are currently.

[DG Cowboy]

The SLC is D-1 in all but football, so this becomes a football status issue. If you want the "status" and want new more "glamourous"playmates, then pay for it and go. Since McNeese has won more SLC campionships than all of the other current members COMBINED, I think we feel good about where we are. I do. I like being able to attend all of the conference games because they are not too far away. I like arguing for fun with guys from UCA, Nicholls, SFA, SLU, and especially Northwestern. It's family. I don't care to go to Las Cruces, Moscow (do I need a Visa?), or San Jose. Hell, I can't afford to anyway, and I don't want to start paying more so the teams can fly there. The Griz points to consider are well-made and I agree with them. I believe we will come through this upheaval with a viable conference and move on with life. I'm just ready for it all to be done.

[bandit]

Bobcat Report does have good sources; they've been right on the money.

Yes, the Montana AD did turn down the WAC. But that could have to do with timing as much as anything else. The Montana AD also sent out a very grim e-mail about the financial realities of staying in FCS - folks who point out that Montana turned down the WAC once seem to forget this e-mail.

Time will tell, but I for one would not be so quick to disregard what you hear on Bobcat Report, because they have shown several times to have legit sources in the WAC.

[Silenoz]

The only reason would be money. There must be some financial benefit for both schools or they wouldn't move. Plain and simple.

Is there a playoff system in the works for non-BCS schools that is based on the teams participating actually making money instead of giving it to the NCAA ? A new WAC TV contract? As an aside. There are strong rumors that Burlington Northern Santa Fe is going to be sponsoring the Cat/Griz game and the money for both schools is significant and far higher than what their entire season tv contracts are currently.
Interesting

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Bobcat Report does have good sources; they've been right on the money.

Yes, the Montana AD did turn down the WAC. But that could have to do with timing as much as anything else. The Montana AD also sent out a very grim e-mail about the financial realities of staying in FCS - folks who point out that Montana turned down the WAC once seem to forget this e-mail.

Time will tell, but I for one would not be so quick to disregard what you hear on Bobcat Report, because they have shown several times to have legit sources in the WAC.

Here's the thing about that email and Montana in the way they count what is and is not football revenue. Revenue that can be shoveled into any other budget even if it is specifically from or due to football is put in other areas so as to make the balance sheet look less stable than it actually is.

That's fine, I don't care that they use this to tell the fans they aren't doing well and need more money UNLESS this ploy is used as a reason that we need to go and spend a lot more money to go FBS.

The erroneous thinking here to me is that may be under the impression that calling this sham FBS may make people want to pony up for the move and it will make some people happy but I know it will make a lot of people unhappy as well so I don't know that the money from the fans is gonna be some great windfall because they put a new coat of paint and moved into a rickety piece of **** house.

The fact that this is being put forth as a combination of both teams is the only thing that has me giving this any credence since Montana State is now making real strides in the facilities.

If there were to be a change in FBS to give a playoff and some of the current FCS were to move to that if it were to happen then why in the hell would you leave the BSC which would do that as a whole when it became available and stay with the teams that we currently have real rivalries and history with to go to a WAC that we do not?

[Silenoz]

I figure the forces against the BCS monopoly have been building every year. Something has to eventually give. Even if it's only a +1 to start, the money and attention generated will wake those idiots up

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I figure the forces against the BCS monopoly have been building every year. Something has to eventually give. Even if it's only a +1 to start, the money and attention generated will wake those idiots up

Not saying that's not possible but it seems really unlikely to me that it would ever be a system to give teams lfrom outside of the DCS conferences any sort of a chance to compete for it.

The public outcry sure doesn't seem to be to give the winner of the SBC, & WAC teams a chance it seems to be to take the top 8 in the rankings and do something with them as far as a playoff.

I think we all know how unlikely it would be that any teams outside of the BCS will be in that group no matter how well they play in a given year.

There may be a playoff some day but it will be between the BCS teams.

[dgtw]

If the Mountain West came calling, would you be in favor of that?

[dbackjon]

If the Mountain West came calling, would you be in favor of that?


Won't speak for the Montana fans, but for NAU, yes. Mountain West actually is a step up from the Big Sky. There are interesting regional teams in the MWC. More money in the MWC.

[TheBisonator]

Not saying that's not possible but it seems really unlikely to me that it would ever be a system to give teams lfrom outside of the DCS conferences any sort of a chance to compete for it.

The public outcry sure doesn't seem to be to give the winner of the SBC, & WAC teams a chance it seems to be to take the top 8 in the rankings and do something with them as far as a playoff.

I think we all know how unlikely it would be that any teams outside of the BCS will be in that group no matter how well they play in a given year.

There may be a playoff some day but it will be between the BCS teams.

IF there is ever an 8-team playoff, that is, the top 8 BCS standings schools seeded 1-8, I like the chances of a MAC, WAC or SBC school getting in, PROVIDED (I SAID "PROVIDED," DAMMIT!):

1) That team goes undefeated
2) That team schedules strongly for OOC games

Ball State was undefeated in Week 12 a few years ago with a weak schedule and there was talk of putting them in a BCS bowl game. That is, until they pissed it down their legs the last two games of the season (last reg. season game and MAC championship)

[Screamin_Eagle174]

Well it is what it is and I'm sure that is of little concern to the Athletic Dpt. (which it should be) but other friends would be made anyway.

Interesting you mention EWU though because I was just thinking about this move and the fact that it could be a real boon for EWU Football because as far as I can see there is at best a maybe 40% of Griz fans that want a move to FBS. I'm not saying 60% of Griz fans would say "**** it" but there will be a number of them that really want to see playoff footall and where do you think they are gonna go?

There is also a pretty large # of Griz Alumni in the Spokane area that make the trip to Missoula and may just decide that they can watch it on TV as well and hit the EWU game.

If it happens it may turn out that EWU benefits greatly from this cuz they will be the FCS team that gains my loyalty.


Went to all three playoff games in Cheney last year. How many would I go to if we move up, not sure? But I do know I WILL NOT BE GOING TO MANY FBS GAMES if we move up. BTW I haven't missed a home game since "94".

xbowx

And we would greatly appreciate that support, because sadly, it's much needed. At the same time though, I would hate to see the Montana schools move up and those games ended.

[dgtw]

If the NCAA is going to sponsor a championship for I-A football, the only fair way to do it is to give the eleven conference champs an automatic bid and then have five wild cards for a 16 team bracket. I wouldn't even mind a 24 team field, but every team has to have a chance to make the playoffs.

[rocket]

I can see the NCAA adding a playoff soon. Right now they're losing power over their schools , and if we know anything it's that the NCAA loves power, a playoff would be an easy way to get that back and take away some power from the high powered BCS schools (and people who run those bowls see the fiesta bowl scandal) and still make as much money (and probably more) then they would before.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Won't speak for the Montana fans, but for NAU, yes. Mountain West actually is a step up from the Big Sky. There are interesting regional teams in the MWC. More money in the MWC.

Jon nails it. I wouldn't necessarily be thrilled but I could see the merits of a move like this because of what the overall benefit to UM would be and the fact that this would not just be a move because the term "FBS" is in front of the conference. That is a lot closer to real top level D1 football that I could be excited about and a conference that would have a chance to place a team in a playoff scenario if that were to ever come about.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

IF there is ever an 8-team playoff, that is, the top 8 BCS standings schools seeded 1-8, I like the chances of a MAC, WAC or SBC school getting in, PROVIDED (I SAID "PROVIDED," DAMMIT!):

1) That team goes undefeated
2) That team schedules strongly for OOC games

Ball State was undefeated in Week 12 a few years ago with a weak schedule and there was talk of putting them in a BCS bowl game. That is, until they pissed it down their legs the last two games of the season (last reg. season game and MAC championship)

I get your premise. I just don't see that Ball St. would have been in there even if they hadn't lost the final game. There is always "talk" of some bubble teams with a great record but that is there because it helps fill sports talk radio airtime and get people calling in on both sides.

The fact that there is chatter about it doesn't mean a thing when the teams are selected. There is always a financial reason to choose an 8-3 BCS team over a Ball State and that is one rule that is gonna remain in place, even though it is not a rule.

[TexasTerror]

Bobcat Report does have good sources; they've been right on the money.

Yes, the Montana AD did turn down the WAC. But that could have to do with timing as much as anything else. The Montana AD also sent out a very grim e-mail about the financial realities of staying in FCS - folks who point out that Montana turned down the WAC once seem to forget this e-mail.

Time will tell, but I for one would not be so quick to disregard what you hear on Bobcat Report, because they have shown several times to have legit sources in the WAC.

Thanks Bandit... worth noting that Jack of BobcatReport will be on a Hawaii ESPN station. The folks out in Hawaii maintain a very keen interest into what happens in the WAC for whatever reasons, despite the exit door being within reach!

[OB55]

Unless the Mountain West Conference degrades to the point that the WAC is currently in, I would doubt they would ever consider a new member coming up from FCS. Probably going to have to sweat it out in a low tier FBS conference and prove out as a winner in FBS first, and that could take some time.

If this were in fact to happen, it could only happen with broad support for the move by fans, alumni, and administrators at UM, and that certainly does not exist.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Unless the Mountain West Conference degrades to the point that the WAC is currently in, I would doubt they would ever consider a new member coming up from FCS. Probably going to have to sweat it out in a low tier FBS conference and prove out as a winner in FBS first, and that could take some time.

If this were in fact to happen, it could only happen with broad support for the move by fans, alumni, and administrators at UM, and that certainly does not exist.

it's what you'd hope would happen and so forth but I've been taken a little aback at some of the statements that have been made over the past couple of years to try and steer the fans in the direction some in the AD would seem to be looking for. I don't know that they are but the illogical statement a couple years ago that went something like "UM may not be able to afford out of state tuition for athletes and may need to either look at FBS or a move to D2" was when I started thinking to myself...this is pure bull**** and they are trying to give two scenarios. One is unacceptable and the other is a little more acceptable to the Griz fan base.

That is a Carney trick.

As I said now that this rumor has MSU attached to it then the possibility may be that if the MSU & UM AD's are both working toward this then it takes out some of the Board of Regents blockade that has existed and made these rumors totthless in the past.

You just never know what people are working on behind closed doors. If it were actually a case where the community were to have input on it then I'd feel pretty confident that it wouldn't fly especially if they will need to pass some costs on to the students.

Oh, and I know the MWC is not an option and that UM would spend a minimum of 20 yrs. in the WAC just to be considered by the MWC so I ain't too worried about that coming about but I am worried that some people might think that a vrief stay in the WAC is a possibility then move. That won't happen.

[OB55]

it's what you'd hope would happen and so forth but I've been taken a little aback at some of the statements that have been made over the past couple of years to try and steer the fans in the direction some in the AD would seem to be looking for. I don't know that they are but the illogical statement a couple years ago that went something like "UM may not be able to afford out of state tuition for athletes and may need to either look at FBS or a move to D2" was when I started thinking to myself...this is pure bull**** and they are trying to give two scenarios. One is unacceptable and the other is a little more acceptable to the Griz fan base.

That is a Carney trick.

As I said now that this rumor has MSU attached to it then the possibility may be that if the MSU & UM AD's are both working toward this then it takes out some of the Board of Regents blockade that has existed and made these rumors totthless in the past.

You just never know what people are working on behind closed doors. If it were actually a case where the community were to have input on it then I'd feel pretty confident that it wouldn't fly especially if they will need to pass some costs on to the students.

Oh, and I know the MWC is not an option and that UM would spend a minimum of 20 yrs. in the WAC just to be considered by the MWC so I ain't too worried about that coming about but I am worried that some people might think that a vrief stay in the WAC is a possibility then move. That won't happen.

The WAC likely will be long gone in 20 years from the looks of things right now.

[Silenoz]

The decision will be (is) out of our hands, or at least mine. As far as whether or not I think it will happen, it certainly does seem like a lot of things are coming together to make it seem like it very well could. Facilities upgrades are needed for years and years and all of sudden are being put together. New sport for Title IX is suddenly announced and shot through ASUM. MSU expansions rumors are dead for years, before suddenly spring to life under a new president. Lamar football can't get the votes for a WAC invite from the Western schools, yet all of a sudden there is a change of heart and unanimous decision to add nearby Olympic sports UTA. We already know O'Day wants the move, and its a pretty good bet he's been working on Engstrom. Assuming we could move up without MSU, there is no way they let us leave them behind and become the de facto flagship university

Anyways thats my half-baked 2 cents

[txstatebobcat]

The current thinking is that the WAC will form a round robin schedule for football and form west and East divisions for all the other sports.. Should the Montana Schools Join the WAC then the West division would be:

Montana
Montana State
Utah State
Idaho
San Jose State
Seattle

East Division would be:

Texas State
UTSA
New Mexico State
La Tech
UT-Arlington
Denver

As far as FBS goes I personally think of it in two ways.

One: that, with the current rule of "by conference invitation only". there are a limited number of openings to go FBS. The WAC has two or three openings right now and that's about it. The other FBS conferences are in what they call "enhancement mode" which essentially means "no FCS allowed".

Two: There is such a thing as a "stepping stone" conference. Personally while I'm exited to play UTSA, LaTech and New Mexico State the other conference mates really don't do a thing for me and I'm sure they feel the same about us. Most bobcats would agree with me that a conference consisting of mainly Texas FBS schools (Houston, SMU, UTEP, UNT, Rice, etc.) would be our ideal situation. The day may never come where a new SWC will be reborn, but if it does the only way that TxSt has a chance of joining this conference is if we are also FBS. As any UMass fan, I'm sure they feel that the MAC is a means to an end and not the end itself.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

The current thinking is that the WAC will form a round robin schedule for football and form west and East divisions for all the other sports.. Should the Montana Schools Join the WAC then the West division would be:

Montana
Montana State
Utah State
Idaho
San Jose State
Seattle

East Division would be:

Texas State
UTSA
New Mexico State
La Tech
UT-Arlington
Denver

As far as FBS goes I personally think of it in two ways.

One: that, with the current rule of "by conference invitation only". there are a limited number of openings to go FBS. The WAC has two or three openings right now and that's about it. The other FBS conferences are in what they call "enhancement mode" which essentially means "no FCS allowed".

Two: There is such a thing as a "stepping stone" conference. Personally while I'm exited to play UTSA, LaTech and New Mexico State the other conference mates really don't do a thing for me and I'm sure they feel the same about us. Most bobcats would agree with me that a conference consisting of mainly Texas FBS schools (Houston, SMU, UTEP, UNT, Rice, etc.) would be our ideal situation. The day may never come where a new SWC will be reborn, but if it does the only way that TxSt has a chance of joining this conference is if we are also FBS. As any UMass fan, I'm sure they feel that the MAC is a means to an end and not the end itself.

That is EXACTLY why this is such a dumb thing for the "west WAC" part of this equation. There is not one team in there that is not looking to leap at the first chance.

The WAC is a **** situation and anybody that is or will be there are only there out of pure necessity and will be leaving at the first chance they get. Only problem is that only a few at most will get the chance to jump and the rest will be eating **** sandwiches once that happens.

The thing about the stepping stone theory is that it does exist but 8 or 9 times out of 10 you will be stuck on that "stepping stone" and not going anywhere.

TXST, UTA, and some of the others had really nowhere to go but up but MSU and UM have a real chance at backsliding below where they currently are. Montana & MSU are already above the level where we are now than most of those teams in the WAC will be if all goes well for them. From that perspective I can see the benefits for those teams, I can not for UM & MSU however.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

The decision will be (is) out of our hands, or at least mine. As far as whether or not I think it will happen, it certainly does seem like a lot of things are coming together to make it seem like it very well could. Facilities upgrades are needed for years and years and all of sudden are being put together. New sport for Title IX is suddenly announced and shot through ASUM. MSU expansions rumors are dead for years, before suddenly spring to life under a new president. Lamar football can't get the votes for a WAC invite from the Western schools, yet all of a sudden there is a change of heart and unanimous decision to add nearby Olympic sports UTA. We already know O'Day wants the move, and its a pretty good bet he's been working on Engstrom. Assuming we could move up without MSU, there is no way they let us leave them behind and become the de facto flagship university

Anyways thats my half-baked 2 cents

All of that is why this worries me that we could be looking at a mojor clusterfokk in the future.

[Green26]

Montana has been in the process of figuring out how to upgrade facilities for years, and has considered various combinations of projects and designs over the years. What is different now is that the new president Engstrom has said he would have the university match funds raised from donors. Thus, there is incentive for the athletic dept to raise funds for facilities now. The athletic director O'Day is pushing for stadium lights in order to try to get real television and tv money for future high-interst games like App St. Adding softball has been discussed for some time, as a way of addressing Title IX issues. Addressing existing Title IX issues has nothing to do with preparing to move up. I doubt that O'Day has discussed the move-up subject with Engstrom since last fall, when the decision not to move up was announced.

[WestCoastAggie]

I can see the NCAA adding a playoff soon. Right now they're losing power over their schools , and if we know anything it's that the NCAA loves power, a playoff would be an easy way to get that back and take away some power from the high powered BCS schools (and people who run those bowls see the fiesta bowl scandal) and still make as much money (and probably more) then they would before.

The NCAA will never have control until the Supreme Court repeals their 1984 decision between the NCAA and Oklahoma, representing the now defunct CFA.

Without power to control the Post-Season TV rights of the schools and conferences that represent them, the Bowl system isn't going away, anytime soon.

[txstatebobcat]

That is EXACTLY why this is such a dumb thing for the "west WAC" part of this equation. There is not one team in there that is not looking to leap at the first chance.

The WAC is a **** situation and anybody that is or will be there are only there out of pure necessity and will be leaving at the first chance they get. Only problem is that only a few at most will get the chance to jump and the rest will be eating **** sandwiches once that happens.

The thing about the stepping stone theory is that it does exist but 8 or 9 times out of 10 you will be stuck on that "stepping stone" and not going anywhere.

TXST, UTA, and some of the others had really nowhere to go but up but MSU and UM have a real chance at backsliding below where they currently are. Montana & MSU are already above the level where we are now than most of those teams in the WAC will be if all goes well for them. From that perspective I can see the benefits for those teams, I can not for UM & MSU however.


I wonder what you call what Montana did last year, from my end that was backsliding and you didn't even have to leave the BSC. Is it a temporary thing? probably, but it is backsliding nonetheless.

As far as the stepping stone thing. You couldn't be more wrong. In actuality, if you look at history, the vast majority of schools currently in FBS have improved their lot in life and yes this includes most the the current WAC, Sunbelt and MAC schools. Take the current WAC schools for example: Idaho, USU and NMSU were all in the Sunbelt less than ten years ago, before that they were in the now defunct Big West Conference and were stuck in Independent purgatory even before that.
As far as TxSt is concerned most bobcat fans are ecstatic about our first FBS schedule and consider it a huge improvement over our regular FCS schedule. In 2012 we will host Texas Tech, Nevada, LaTech, New Mexico St, Idaho and SFA and have road trips to UofHouston, UTSA, Navy, New Mexico, San Jose State and Utah State. Being a Montana Fan you might not be to impressed, but let me assure you that this is almost a perfect schedule for a bobcat fan's perspective.

[WestCoastAggie]

I wonder what you call what Montana did last year, from my end that was backsliding and you didn't even have to leave the BSC. Is it a temporary thing? probably, but it is backsliding nonetheless.

As far as the stepping stone thing. You couldn't be more wrong. In actuality, if you look at history, the vast majority of schools currently in FBS have improved their lot in life and yes this includes most the the current WAC, Sunbelt and MAC schools. Take the current WAC schools for example: Idaho, USU and NMSU were all in the Sunbelt less than ten years ago, before that they were in the now defunct Big West Conference and were stuck in Independent purgatory even before that.
As far as TxSt is concerned most bobcat fans are ecstatic about our first FBS schedule and consider it a huge improvement over our regular FCS schedule. In 2012 we will host Texas Tech, Nevada, LaTech, New Mexico St, Idaho and SFA and have road trips to UofHouston, UTSA, Navy, New Mexico, San Jose State and Utah State. Being a Montana Fan you might not be to impressed, but let me assure you that this is almost a perfect schedule for a bobcat fan's perspective.

What may work for Texas State, may not work for Montana.

Sidenote: A positive thing about this for the Griz could be that they now have the ability to establish a Home and Home with Boise State.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

What may work for Texas State, may not work for Montana.

Sidenote: A positive thing about this for the Griz could be that they now have the ability to establish a Home and Home with Boise State.

I'm glad you see my point. It does not have a single thing to do with how the season went. Last season even as a low point was still better than most TX St seasons and that's not taking a swipe at TX St. even if it appears that way.

I'm talking about where the program is with fans, excitement, and facilities that were built on the hope of being a great team in this division and the fact that the BSC will be the equal of the WAC anyway as far as competition goes if not better than the WAC.

If you think the SBC, & the Big West were stepping stones to get to the WAC then I am just not on the page with ya.

This is not about what is good for TX schools. It's about what is good for Montana & MSU. The two teams are fairly tied together and would need to go anywhere as a package probably. TX St & the other schools in that area may have a shot at other conferences if they thought that was a good choice.

Exactly which conference do you think UM & MSU would be waiting on the WAC stepping stone for txstbobcat?

The perspective for TX St. is different than it is at Montana. That may look like a big step up to you guys and you are quite happy with it but from my point of view..."no thanks".

[citdog]

I wonder what you call what Montana did last year, from my end that was backsliding and you didn't even have to leave the BSC. Is it a temporary thing? probably, but it is backsliding nonetheless.

As far as the stepping stone thing. You couldn't be more wrong. In actuality, if you look at history, the vast majority of schools currently in FBS have improved their lot in life and yes this includes most the the current WAC, Sunbelt and MAC schools. Take the current WAC schools for example: Idaho, USU and NMSU were all in the Sunbelt less than ten years ago, before that they were in the now defunct Big West Conference and were stuck in Independent purgatory even before that.
As far as TxSt is concerned most bobcat fans are ecstatic about our first FBS schedule and consider it a huge improvement over our regular FCS schedule. In 2012 we will host Texas Tech, Nevada, LaTech, New Mexico St, Idaho and SFA and have road trips to UofHouston, UTSA, Navy, New Mexico, San Jose State and Utah State. Being a Montana Fan you might not be to impressed, but let me assure you that this is almost a perfect schedule for a bobcat fan's perspective.


isn't there an fbs board you can join and spare we inferiors? please take texasterror with you

[rocket]

I wonder what you call what Montana did last year, from my end that was backsliding and you didn't even have to leave the BSC. Is it a temporary thing? probably, but it is backsliding nonetheless.

As far as the stepping stone thing. You couldn't be more wrong. In actuality, if you look at history, the vast majority of schools currently in FBS have improved their lot in life and yes this includes most the the current WAC, Sunbelt and MAC schools. Take the current WAC schools for example: Idaho, USU and NMSU were all in the Sunbelt less than ten years ago, before that they were in the now defunct Big West Conference and were stuck in Independent purgatory even before that.
As far as TxSt is concerned most bobcat fans are ecstatic about our first FBS schedule and consider it a huge improvement over our regular FCS schedule. In 2012 we will host Texas Tech, Nevada, LaTech, New Mexico St, Idaho and SFA and have road trips to UofHouston, UTSA, Navy, New Mexico, San Jose State and Utah State. Being a Montana Fan you might not be to impressed, but let me assure you that this is almost a perfect schedule for a bobcat fan's perspective.


Hosting Tech is a big deal and getting navy and Houston road games (if you get a home game from it, if not you could have done that in the FCS) are also pretty good games. But the thing is in the long run it wont matter what division your in (d2, FCS, FBS) if you can't get wins this is probably actually more important in the FBS as a couple bad seasons at the that level can ruin your program for years (look at Washington State). there's no guarantee that any school moving up will get those wins (Texas state sure as hell didn't at this level). Montana already gets the fans, has enough money from come at least come close to breaking even, has a decent enough amount of exposure from their athletic program (even more so if they can beat UTENN this year) and have been successful in other sports (i doubt anyone is going to beat Utah state any time soon so Montana might not have the chance to go back to the tourny like they did 2 years ago) why would they gamble and take the chance of becoming irrelevant (look at pretty much every team in the sun belt) instead of being a great football school with a chance to play a couple of home games and play for a national championship each year?

[txstatebobcat]

I'm glad you see my point. It does not have a single thing to do with how the season went. Last season even as a low point was still better than most TX St seasons and that's not taking a swipe at TX St. even if it appears that way.

I'm talking about where the program is with fans, excitement, and facilities that were built on the hope of being a great team in this division and the fact that the BSC will be the equal of the WAC anyway as far as competition goes if not better than the WAC.

If you think the SBC, & the Big West were stepping stones to get to the WAC then I am just not on the page with ya.

This is not about what is good for TX schools. It's about what is good for Montana & MSU. The two teams are fairly tied together and would need to go anywhere as a package probably. TX St & the other schools in that area may have a shot at other conferences if they thought that was a good choice.

Exactly which conference do you think UM & MSU would be waiting on the WAC stepping stone for txstbobcat?

The perspective for TX St. is different than it is at Montana. That may look like a big step up to you guys and you are quite happy with it but from my point of view..."no thanks".

I'm perfectly fine with that. As I stated in my original post, it is my opinion as to why any school with FBS aspirations should pull the trigger. If a school doesn't have any FBS aspirations then it becomes a moot point.

[txstatebobcat]

isn't there an fbs board you can join and spare we inferiors? please take texasterror with you

No problem I'll be joining kissmyfbsa**.com soon.

[txstatebobcat]

Hosting Tech is a big deal and getting navy and Houston road games (if you get a home game from it, if not you could have done that in the FCS) are also pretty good games. But the thing is in the long run it wont matter what division your in (d2, FCS, FBS) if you can't get wins this is probably actually more important in the FBS as a couple bad seasons at the that level can ruin your program for years (look at Washington State). there's no guarantee that any school moving up will get those wins (Texas state sure as hell didn't at this level). Montana already gets the fans, has enough money from come at least come close to breaking even, has a decent enough amount of exposure from their athletic program (even more so if they can beat UTENN this year) and have been successful in other sports (i doubt anyone is going to beat Utah state any time soon so Montana might not have the chance to go back to the tourny like they did 2 years ago) why would they gamble and take the chance of becoming irrelevant (look at pretty much every team in the sun belt) instead of being a great football school with a chance to play a couple of home games and play for a national championship each year?

Navy will come to San Marcos in a few years. Unfortunately the Houston game was from a contract signed back in 2009 that we couldn't get out of. Texas State's story is one of zero commitment from the administration up until about 7-8 years ago. It is no accident that we've had more winning seasons in that time than in the previous 25 years. Also if Montana wants to stay FCS then that's perfectly fine. I enjoyed Texas State's time in FCS and didn't see the need for us to move. Now that the move has come I can only do two things either quit being a bobcat fan or enjoy this new adventure and the opportunities that come with it and I'm finding out that there is a pretty good upside to it.

[rocket]

Navy will come to San Marcos in a few years. Unfortunately the Houston game was from a contract signed back in 2009 that we couldn't get out of. Texas State's story is one of zero commitment from the administration up until about 7-8 years ago. It is no accident that we've had more winning seasons in that time than in the previous 25 years. Also if Montana wants to stay FCS then that's perfectly fine. I enjoyed Texas State's time in FCS and didn't see the need for us to move. Now that the move has come I can only do two things either quit being a bobcat fan or enjoy this new adventure and the opportunities that come with it and I'm finding out that there is a pretty good upside to it.

good post enjoy the games with Navy and Tech they should be fun for your university.

[citdog]

No problem I'll be joining kissmyfbsa**.com soon.


and the WHOLE DIVISION will say "good riddance to bad rubbish"

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Personally I liked TX St. and the people I met when they were in Missoula. I liked all of their posters to a man & woman and I am sad to see them go but the majority of their fans wanted to move, their students wanted to move and I can respect that and wish them luck.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I friggin love TBitR. More importantly I hope he's spot on. The points made on the issue are solid and a move would be so illogical to me that I fear it could happen.

[TheRevSFA]

Why leave the status quo when it's working? I mean.."Yay we can play Idaho! Uh oh..San Jose State is coming to town..."

Let's be honest, the WAC will be ranked behind the CAA and SoCon in terms of football.

[nwFL Griz]

I understand all of the angst against moving to the FBS, and I even agree with most of it. However, like it or not, there is a small amount of prestige associated with being an FBS team as opposed to an FCS team. A kind of d*** measuring thing that university big wigs like to use. Whatever happens, I will always be a Griz fan and will support them (financially) when I can.

[dakota fairways]

for North Dakota, this would be like being invited to the prom by the quarterback and the homecoming king, then having them leave to go to the prom at the school across town before we even get there.
Hope TBitR is right.

[cpalum]

Ahhh, yes! The Bobcat Report! Where sports journalism fails to meet reality or objectivism. Just so people are fully aware of this, but Montana was approached by the WAC after Tulsa, SMU, Rice, and UTEP left the WAC for Conference USA in the expansion that led to the Big East adding Cincy and Louisville from CUSA. Mind you, Boise State, Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii were still members of the WAC. Any credibility the WAC had was found in those four schools. Not even then did Montana agree to move to the FBS division. Now with those four schools gone, some guys down in San Marcos, TX are trying to say that the pride of Montana is interested in joining the watered-down WAC without its credible members? Are you kidding me? There's no incentive for Montana to join this new WAC. Also, as we know in the West that for the way which Montana does travel, so goes Montana State.

There's only three scenarios that would potentially put Montana in the Football Bowl Subdivision:

1) Invitation to a Power $ix AQ conference
2) Invitation to the Mountain West (and this one isn't necessarily a given)
3) Complete relocation of the Big Sky to the FBS division

That's it. Under no other remote circumstance would the state of Montana see its Top 2 football-playing schools move to the Football Bowl Subdivision. Sometimes I wonder if the guys that write for the BleacherReport are the same ones that write for the Bobcat Report. Terrible journalism. As for the Bobcat Report having "inside info" on UT-Arlington and others, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every once in a while.

I think there is a real chance given what is happening in the WAC that #3 may very well happen. In that case, I could see SJSU, Idaho and maybe even USU join the Big Sky.

[TheBisonator]

Why leave the status quo when it's working? I mean.."Yay we can play Idaho! Uh oh..San Jose State is coming to town..."

Let's be honest, the WAC will be ranked behind the CAA and SoCon in terms of football.

Probably ranked behind the MVFC as well.

[aust42]

I think there is a real chance given what is happening in the WAC that #3 may very well happen. In that case, I could see SJSU, Idaho and maybe even USU join the Big Sky.

There is no entire FCS conference that is going to move up to FBS status, period.

[cpalum]

There is no entire FCS conference that is going to move up to FBS status, period.

Why not? If the WAC is no longer a viable option for FCS/FBS transitions then why would the NCAA block that kind of a move? They have stated that they want the WAC to remain viable for this specific reason. If the WAC becomes a southwest conference the Big Sky could step in and add homeless FBS programs and provide an opportunity for it sown membership to elevate their level of play. I am not saying that it will happen but it could happen. Doug Fullerton has hinted to this possibility several times in the past few months, even suggesting a Idaho and USU invite.

[Tod]

Probably ranked behind the MVFC as well.

I'm not saying that I approve, but I seriously doubt that a WAC that includes both Montana and Montana State would be interior to any FCS conference.

[citdog]

I'm not saying that I approve, but I seriously doubt that a WAC that includes both Montana and Montana State would be interior to any FCS conference.


me either

[Sader87]

Or inferior for that matter....

[Keeper]

(ditto)

[TheRevSFA]

I think he meant if Montana and Montana State don't jump....because the top team in the WAC will be Louisiana Tech or Idaho....So yes..that version of the WAC without the Montana schools would be inferior to CAA and SoCon...and probably par to MVFC...

[aust42]

Why not? If the WAC is no longer a viable option for FCS/FBS transitions then why would the NCAA block that kind of a move? They have stated that they want the WAC to remain viable for this specific reason. If the WAC becomes a southwest conference the Big Sky could step in and add homeless FBS programs and provide an opportunity for it sown membership to elevate their level of play. I am not saying that it will happen but it could happen. Doug Fullerton has hinted to this possibility several times in the past few months, even suggesting a Idaho and USU invite.

For one it's unprecedented, I don't think an entire conference has ever moved up? I doubt every school in the Big Sky would be able to upgrade their facilities due to the financial costs it would take to do so. Would all the Big Sky teams meet all the other other requirements? Title IX, Grant in aid, sponsoring 16 varsity sports, etc. Besides Montana, would any other Big Sky school be able to meet the $15k attendance requirement? (I know this has not been enforced). And lastly, as I google up info: Football Championship Subdivision members who wish to join the Football Bowl Subdivision should have a bona fide offer of membership from an FBS conference to be considered for FBS membership. FCS members suggested this change as a way of being consistent – the Council is also recommending that new Division I members have a bona fide offer of membership from a Division I conference before beginning the reclassification process.

[cpalum]

For one it's unprecedented, I don't think an entire conference has ever moved up? I doubt every school in the Big Sky would be able to upgrade their facilities due to the financial costs it would take to do so. Would all the Big Sky teams meet all the other other requirements? Title IX, Grant in aid, sponsoring 16 varsity sports, etc. Besides Montana, would any other Big Sky school be able to meet the $15k attendance requirement? (I know this has not been enforced). And lastly, as I google up info: Football Championship Subdivision members who wish to join the Football Bowl Subdivision should have a bona fide offer of membership from an FBS conference to be considered for FBS membership. FCS members suggested this change as a way of being consistent – the Council is also recommending that new Division I members have a bona fide offer of membership from a Division I conference before beginning the reclassification process.

The concept would be a split conference with a division of FBS and a division of FCS. It might look like this:

FBS Divsion

Montana
Montana St
Utah State
Weber State
Portland State
Idaho
Sacramento State
San Jose Sate

FCS Division

Southern Utah
Idaho Sate
UND
Eastern Washington
NAU
UNC
Cal Poly
UC Davis


This would give the schools that would like to ultimately move up the luxury of doing so over time. FCS members would be automatically considered for FBS/Big Sky if facilities and scholarships were available. Meanwhile Olympic sports would play as typical. The divisions would only be relative to football. Further the FCS division could still play the FBS division in the same way that current FCS plays FBS.

[superman7515]

The concept would be a split conference with a division of FBS and a division of FCS. It might look like this:

FBS Divsion

Montana
Montana St
Utah State
Weber State
Portland State
Idaho
Sacramento State
San Jose Sate

FCS Division

Southern Utah
Idaho Sate
UND
Eastern Washington
NAU
UNC
Cal Poly
UC Davis


This would give the schools that would like to ultimately move up the luxury of doing so over time. FCS members would be automatically considered for FBS/Big Sky if facilities and scholarships were available. Meanwhile Olympic sports would play as typical. The divisions would only be relative to football. Further the FCS division could still play the FBS division in the same way that current FCS plays FBS.

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[cpalum]

yep.....crazy idea but crazier s$% has been happening.

[dbackjon]

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

What a ****ing tool you are.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

What a ****ing tool you are.

You did get the comedic reference didn't ya dback?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bImBBTaPDY&feature=related



Just tom complete the exchange.

[bluehenbillk]

Forgive me for not following Montana very closely but didn't they just have a FBS flirtation and said no? What's the appeal to the WAC? That conference seems barely alive...

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Forgive me for not following Montana very closely but didn't they just have a FBS flirtation and said no? What's the appeal to the WAC? That conference seems barely alive...

Yes, you'd have to catch up on this dicussion though cuz those are the same question mulled over again on this thread.

[dbackjon]

You did get the comedic reference didn't ya dback?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

I did - and insulted back :)

[superman7515]

Touche

[superman7515]

Wait a second, that was touche - An acknowledgement of a hit. Not tushy. Not touch me. I've been warned about you.

[cpalum]

Im so crazy that Doug Fullerton must have read my mind.....xcoffeex

http://standard.net/topics/sports/2011/07/14/big-sky-conference-dreams-big

It's reapportionment. Times change, schools' fortunes change. Some schools grow, some schools don't. So we redraw the line and we take the Big Sky Conference and we merge it with those (FBS schools) in the bottom quartile. I tell you what, it would be better for all of us."

[aust42]

Im so crazy that Doug Fullerton must have read my mind.....xcoffeex

http://standard.net/topics/sports/2011/07/14/big-sky-conference-dreams-big

It's reapportionment. Times change, schools' fortunes change. Some schools grow, some schools don't. So we redraw the line and we take the Big Sky Conference and we merge it with those (FBS schools) in the bottom quartile. I tell you what, it would be better for all of us."

After reading this article it pretty much wraps up this whole topic. Montana & Montana State are staying in the Big Sky. He is talking hypothetically in the quote you pasted.

[TheRevSFA]

If I were Idaho I'd go to the Big Sky. Idaho can't compete at FBS level...and the regional rivalries would be great...

[aust42]

If I were Idaho I'd go to the Big Sky. Idaho can't compete at FBS level...and the regional rivalries would be great...

Idaho should have never left the Big Sky. They were a consistent 1AA playoff team with great rivalries in the Big Sky and have been nothing short of horrendous since moving "up" to 1A.

[TheRevSFA]

Idaho should have never left the Big Sky. They were a consistent 1AA playoff team with great rivalries in the Big Sky and have been nothing short of horrendous since moving "up" to 1A.

Exactly...they should just say "our bad..it was a test and we failed" and go back.

[cpalum]

After reading this article it pretty much wraps up this whole topic. Montana & Montana State are staying in the Big Sky. He is talking hypothetically in the quote you pasted.

of course it is hypothetical.....the point is albeit far fetched, it is not such a crazy idea as was suggested above.

[dbackjon]

Wait a second, that was touche - An acknowledgement of a hit. Not tushy. Not touch me. I've been warned about you.


Been warned? To set the record clear, it was Ursus, after 6 beers, that hit on me.


And I am not EVEN going to mention Cleets and OB55 in the hotel room.

[Grizzaholic]

Been warned? To set the record clear, it was Ursus, after 6 beers, that hit on me.


And I am not EVEN going to mention Cleets and OB55 in the hotel room.


People...this is why when/if you meet up with Dback and he says pick up a six pack on your way....only get 5...that 6th one is just one too many.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Been warned? To set the record clear, it was Ursus, after 6 beers, that hit on me.


And I am not EVEN going to mention Cleets and OB55 in the hotel room.

If I called you a liar, I'd be a liar.