A Question for Our Weber Brethern

[Skippy]

It is looking more and more like Montana is seriously exploring leaving the Big Sky and heading to the FBS. (Probably to the WAC). It does not appear to me that the Big Sky League Office or the other members of the conference are doing any public planning on what will happen to the league if Montana and/or Montana State both jump ship.

Idaho State and Weber would be the last two remaining "originals" in the conference if both Montana schools make the leap. What is the vision of Weber fans of what would happen to the league if one or both of the Montanas leave?

Here are some links to stories that you may find interesting on this topic:

http://www.missoulian.com/sports/college/montana/article_1cfec962-c6b2-11de-b343-001cc4c03286.html

http://isubengalblog.blogspot.com/

(see No. 2 on third post down on the above blog)

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2009/dec/16/griz-pause-to-consider-their-future/

 

[WILDCAT]

These are 2 scenarios I could see happening if the Montana teams left;
1. The first scenario would be that the Big Sky and the Great West would merge, and become a 12 team conf, or a 10 team conf depending on whether or not North and South Dakota leave. If they dont, then the Big Sky will be split into 2 divisions. Most Likely East and West.

East
Idaho State
North Dakota
Northern Colorado
South Dakota
Southern Utah
Weber State

West
Cal Poly
Eastern Washington
Portland State
Northern Arizona
Sacramento State
UC Davis

If North and South Dakota leave, then the Big Sky would become just a 10 team conf and there wont be divisions, which is what I would prefer.

2. The second scenario is that the Great West and Big Sky would not merge, but Div 2 teams would move up to join the 2 conferences, teams like Central Washington, Utah Valley (if they get a football team)
Cal State Fullerton (if they bring football back) and others.

Personaly, I dont care what Montana does, if they move up, good ridance to them, move up and become a doormat for all I care, Montana State on the other hand is a team and school that I have alot of respect for, and I would hate to see them leave. Personaly I like the FCS better, and would rather have Weber stay in the FCS where Championships are won, not given.

Bengal Visitor, Weber and Idaho State would be the last remaining Big Sky founders, if thats the way it gonna be, so be it. We will be true Big Sky Members.

 

[ajwildcat]

These are 2 scenarios I could see happening if the Montana teams left;
1. The first scenario would be that the Big Sky and the Great West would merge, and become a 12 team conf, or a 10 team conf depending on whether or not North and South Dakota leave. If they dont, then the Big Sky will be split into 2 divisions. Most Likely East and West.

East West
Idaho State Cal Poly
North Dakota Eastern Washington
Northern Colorado Portland State
South Dakota Northern Arizona
Southern Utah Sacramento State
Weber State UC Davis

If North and South Dakota leave, then the Big Sky would become just a 10 team conf and there wont be divisions, which is what I would prefer.

2. The second scenario is that the Great West and Big Sky would not merge, but Div 2 teams would move up to join the 2 conferences, teams like Central Washington, Utah Valley (if they get a football team)
Cal State Fullerton (if they bring football back) and others.

Personaly, I dont care what Montana does, if they move up, good ridance to them, move up and become a doormat for all I care, Montana State on the other hand is a team and school that I have alot of respect for, and I would hate to see them leave. Personaly I like the FCS better, and would rather have Weber stay in the FCS where Championships are won, not given.

Bengal Visitor, Weber and Idaho State would be the last remaining Big Sky founders, if thats the way it gonna be, so be it. We will be true Big Sky Members.

I would like to see the Big Sky bring in the Great West teams, I really don't think Montana State could possibly move up to D1 in football. Then again, utah state really belongs in the big Sky as well.

 

[Skippy]

I like the merger and two divisions scenario. It will be an interesting 18 months leading up to the end of the moratorium of teams moving up in August, 2011.

 

[WILDCAT]

These are 2 scenarios I could see happening if the Montana teams left;
1. The first scenario would be that the Big Sky and the Great West would merge, and become a 12 team conf, or a 10 team conf depending on whether or not North and South Dakota leave. If they dont, then the Big Sky will be split into 2 divisions. Most Likely East and West.

East West
Idaho State Cal Poly
North Dakota Eastern Washington
Northern Colorado Portland State
South Dakota Northern Arizona
Southern Utah Sacramento State
Weber State UC Davis

If North and South Dakota leave, then the Big Sky would become just a 10 team conf and there wont be divisions, which is what I would prefer.

2. The second scenario is that the Great West and Big Sky would not merge, but Div 2 teams would move up to join the 2 conferences, teams like Central Washington, Utah Valley (if they get a football team)
Cal State Fullerton (if they bring football back) and others.

Personaly, I dont care what Montana does, if they move up, good ridance to them, move up and become a doormat for all I care, Montana State on the other hand is a team and school that I have alot of respect for, and I would hate to see them leave. Personaly I like the FCS better, and would rather have Weber stay in the FCS where Championships are won, not given.

Bengal Visitor, Weber and Idaho State would be the last remaining Big Sky founders, if thats the way it gonna be, so be it. We will be true Big Sky Members.

I would like to see the Big Sky bring in the Great West teams, I really don't think Montana State could possibly move up to D1 in football. Then again, utah state really belongs in the big Sky as well.

The reason I think MSU would go is because of the same thing that happened earlier in the Big Sky, Boise left for the WAC, then Idaho left even though they shouldnt have, If Montana goes I honestly think MSU would go to.

 

[weberwildcat]

A few of my assumptions.

If UM goes, MSU goes too and UM won't go alone. It would be like Utah going to another conf not with BYU.

I also wonder if we would lose our autobid to the playoffs if the Montanas left. But since they are adding more maybe that would save us. Also, if SUU and Central Wash are the top candidates thats not a good sign for the Big Sky.

getting some great west teams woudl be cool but they say Cal Poly is a top candidate right now for the WAC. Cal Poly, UC Davis, Montana r the top rumored candidates from what ive heard.

 

[weberwildcat]

With the addition of Northern Colorado (July 1, 2006), the Big Sky is now a nine-team format.

In 1963 the Big Sky Conference was established by six charter members (Idaho, Idaho State, Gonzaga, Montana, Montana State, and Weber State).

The ?Sky was later expanded in 1970 by adding Boise State and Northern Arizona. Gonzaga left in 1979 and was replaced by Nevada, which gave the league eight members. The conference grew to nine schools in 1987 with the addition of Eastern Washington.

In 1992 Nevada departed, and in 1996 Boise State and Idaho left and at the same time the conference added Portland State, Sacramento State and Cal State Northridge. For the next 5 years the Big Sky would maintain nine teams before Cal State Northridge left in 2001.

 

[weberwildcat]

if htey both left anyone could win in football which would be cool. i guess this yr we'd have gone 6-0.

basketball wont change if anything it woudl be easier for us to win titles.

 

[weberwildcat]

No Big West teams wil come to the Big Sky. Big West are all in cali close to each other. this makes travel much cheaper. no flights necessary. big west is also good at baseball, just another reason to not come to the sky.

 

[n.ogdencat]

Montana isn't going anywhere...State especially.

 

[Skippy]

"montana isn't going anywhere...state especially.""

On what do you base that statement? Montana (not state) is very seriously considering moving. Check out John Blanchette's column in the Spokesman Review. Montana's AD, Jim O'Day, is quoted as saying that Grizzly fans are passionate about where they are now -- but he doesn't know if they'll stay passionate. He also talks about how Idaho is now much better situated financially than Montana is.

So if Montana does leave, where does that put MSU? Would they will be willing to be left behind in an obviously wounded Big Sky, playing FCS football, which is a money-losing proposition? I can't say for sure that MSU would look to move at that point, but you can't convince me they wouldn't consider it.

As to the Big West, you are right, that's a basketball-only bus league. But the Great West, those are the last vestiges of the western, football-playing independents. The Big Sky should have taken Cal Poly back in the late 1980s, when they first asked to get into the league. Unfortunately, I would expect Cal Poly to be waiting for a WAC invite now -- the money would be much better there.

 

[weberwildcat]

Montana isn't going anywhere...State especially.

montana could go at anytime and is a shoe in. now whether or not they do go is up to them. i'd be more surprised if they left than stayed. but it would be their choice not the WACs.

 

[Wildcat 4Ever]

Montana isn't going anywhere...State especially.

montana could go at anytime and is a shoe in. now whether or not they do go is up to them. i'd be more surprised if they left than stayed. but it would be their choice not the WACs.

interesting to say the least

 

[native]

A few of my assumptions.

If UM goes, MSU goes too and UM won't go alone. It would be like Utah going to another conf not with BYU.

I also wonder if we would lose our autobid to the playoffs if the Montanas left. But since they are adding more maybe that would save us. Also, if SUU and Central Wash are the top candidates thats not a good sign for the Big Sky.

getting some great west teams woudl be cool but they say Cal Poly is a top candidate right now for the WAC. Cal Poly, UC Davis, Montana r the top rumored candidates from what ive heard.

I think the minimum number of conference teams necessary to be eligible for an auto-bid is six, so no problem there.

 

[wsucatfan]

If, if, and a big if UM left and even MSU left, do we really want to stay in a sinking ship, even if we are the captain? One thing I remember from one of Coach Mac's 1st interviews as a Wildcat was he wanted the program to be at a level that we could move up to FBS if we wanted. I thought that was a pretty lofty goal, I don't know if we are quite there yet but I think we would have held our own in the WAC the past two years. Would USU let us in, doubtful. There would have to be a trickle down effect, Utah and the Y leaving the mtn west, two WAC teams jump for the mtn and then teams from the sky move up to the WAC. Too many if's, wishes, and hopeful dreaming for now.

 

[Old Skool Cat]

I can tell you one thing - MSU ain't movin' up! Everyone around the program realizes that would be a death blow to Bobcat football. It would be the equivalent of Boise and Idaho when they moved up together. Granted, the Vandals had a decent season this year, but look at how long it took them. That would be MSU if we moved up. We all realize in Bobcat Nation that it takes everything we have now to compete at the FCS level. I really think the only team in the BSC positioned to make the move in terms of money, facilities, and support is UM.

There has been a lot of speculation on both the Bobcat and griz boards about this. Many people think that one school cannot move up without the other based on what the state's Board of Regents may have put in place. However, I personally can't recall any thing our Regents have stated about this topic, and I assume that a move up by UM without MSU would be allowed. What would that do to our conference, and in particular, Cat/Griz? Well, it terms of our rivalry, it wouldn't kill it, but it would be diminished significantly. Keep in mind that in the history of the two schools, we have played at different levels from one another in the past, so there is precedence. We probably would still play each other every year, but the games in Bozeman would be few and far between; probably one game in Bozeman to every three in Missoula. And the game would be played near the beginning of the season rather than at the end. However, the outcome would still be the same - the Cats on the short end of the stick.

As for the conference, it would survive. Someone else would just fill the role that UM has played all these years. I remember when Boise, Idaho and Nevada used to rule the roost. People wondered what would happen when they left. I think that loss was more significant than if we were to lose UM, just because we lost three teams that all use to be perennial conference contenders. Losing UM would be big, however, they have pretty much been the conference the past 15-20 years. Without UM, some of the other BSC teams might actually get to taste a little success.

While I personally do not want to see them move up, I think it is their time. And if you look at how their program has situated itself the past several years, I think anyone would be foolish to not think they are seriously considering a move up. I think the rest of us have to very seriously consider a BSC conference without UM. I just hope the presidents of all our institutions as well as the BSC Commissioner can be as forward thinking, and have a few names of schools that could come in and compete.

 

[WILDCAT]

If Montana wants to move to the WAC and become Boise State's doormat or move to the Mtn West and become Utah BYU and TCU's doormat in football fine by be.

Montana's basketball wouldnt survive in the WAC or Mtn West either. Well maybe the womens team would.

Montana might have a great football team now in the FCS, but when they move up what will happen to the UM fans when UM continuously loses in the WAC/Mtn West?

Personaly I like being in the Big SKy, I like playing Idaho State and MSU and NAU and all the other BSC schools (even Montana) especially now since the conference is getting so much stronger, especially in basketball.

 

[hdqweber]

For scheduling purposes, what the WAC really needs is a non-football playing 10th team. If I were them, I'd grab Gonzaga if they can, or Seattle for TV market purposes. In my dream world, Weber plays football in the Sky and everything else in the WAC. It would give USU fans a collective stroke. But the BSC would never allow the move. I don't know why the Commissioner is so stubborn about that rule, because it would be nice for scheduling if we had Denver as a 10th non foot ball member.

 

[Bengal!]

The WAC commish has said in the past they'd consider a non-football playing member, but he'd want the team to be an established member whose basketball teams draw at least 5,000. The only one who really fits that right now is Gonzaga, and I just don't see them leaving the WCC. Seattle wants into the WCC in the worst way, and I think it will happen once its transitional period to D-I is over (give or take a year or two). Denver has made it know they'd like into the WCC as well (since the Sun Belt is pushing them out by 2012, I believe), but geography may say otherwise. Personally, I'd love to see the Big Sky pursue a school like Denver (and the lone wolf scheduling in basketball would be over).

Before I'd look to make the move up to FBS (be it Montana, Portland State, or anybody else), I'd wait to see what happens in the latest round of Conference Carousel. If the Pac-10 and Big-10 both go to 12 teams, the MWC could see the loss of BYU, Utah, and/or TCU by the domino effect. If that happens, I think it's far more likely that the remaining MWC teams would invite BSU, Nevada, and Fresno State into the conference (as opposed to the WAC teams absorbing the MWC teams). A WAC conference with Idaho, USU, NMSU, SJSU, and maybe Hawaii has little national TV appeal, thus ESPN revenue would decrease (I think Louisiana Tech would be a likely candidate for Conference USA should it find the need to replace members). You could also pretty much rule out a BCS bowl in the forseeable future (and the revenue which comes with it).