bengalcub
Active member
What happens to the University of Idaho now?
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/sports/54013176-77/state-utah-conference-west.html.csp
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/sports/54013176-77/state-utah-conference-west.html.csp
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts, upgrade to remove ads and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your BigSkyFans.com experience today!
Ding Dong the WAC is dead.
- Thread starter bengalcub
- Start date
spudbowl
Active member
The Big Sky is in pretty good shape. Here is a possible new WAC without football as floated at
http://wasatchswagger.blogspot.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
New non-football WAC?
Boise State (Football in Big East)
CS Bakersfield (No Football)
Denver (No Football)
Idaho (Football in Sun Belt)
New Mexico State (Football in Sun Belt)
Seattle (No Football)
UT Arlington (No Football)
Utah Valley (No Football)
That is a pretty mediocre and non-exciting basketball conference with lots of travel and only UI and BSU with historical rivalries. UI and BSU would be better to come back to the Big Sky for travel and historical rivalry purposes (BSU for everything but football, Idaho for everything). Apparently the Big West and West Coast Conference have both turned down BSU for non-football participation.
http://wasatchswagger.blogspot.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
New non-football WAC?
Boise State (Football in Big East)
CS Bakersfield (No Football)
Denver (No Football)
Idaho (Football in Sun Belt)
New Mexico State (Football in Sun Belt)
Seattle (No Football)
UT Arlington (No Football)
Utah Valley (No Football)
That is a pretty mediocre and non-exciting basketball conference with lots of travel and only UI and BSU with historical rivalries. UI and BSU would be better to come back to the Big Sky for travel and historical rivalry purposes (BSU for everything but football, Idaho for everything). Apparently the Big West and West Coast Conference have both turned down BSU for non-football participation.
SLCBengal
Active member
Scratch UT-Arlington from the list -- Brett McMurphy of CBS Sports is reporting UTA is heading to the Sun Belt...
Read more: Texas State, UT-Arlington to Sun Belt in 2013
That would leave 7 schools (assuming Bakersfield and UVU join) -- would that qualify for an auto-bid to the NCAA's?
Read more: Texas State, UT-Arlington to Sun Belt in 2013
That would leave 7 schools (assuming Bakersfield and UVU join) -- would that qualify for an auto-bid to the NCAA's?
SLCBengal
Active member
Despite the decimation of the WAC, Idaho still wants to maintain FBS status...
Read more: Spokesman Review: Idaho AD: Retaining FBS Status a Priority
Read more: Spokesman Review: Idaho AD: Retaining FBS Status a Priority
SLCBengal said:
Despite my view that Idaho would be better served in the Big Sky, the most reasonable course of action right now should be to hold tight for a couple of years. The carnage of the conference shuffle may not be over. In fact, it's not unlikely that changes could come to the Big East which will impact membership in the MWC, freeing a spot for Idaho.
Scheduling has already been a nightmare in Moscow. I understand them wanting to wait, because there is still movement happening between the conferences. I just don't think they can hang on for more than one season.
I doubt the Sun Belt wants them. Benson, maybe. The actual schools in that league, doubtful. It's just too far to travel, especially when they have an adequate number of schools within their own geographic area. They also have Louisiana Monroe, who is considered the weak link of that conference. ULM has not had a winning record since joining FBS in the early to mid 90's, and they still operate on an athletic budget of around $8.5 million! That would be a mid-tier budget in the Big Sky! I don't think the Sun Belt wants to take on two schools which are on the brink. Too much risk.
I think Idaho would have its hands full trying to schedule ONE season as an independent. Like I said, it's been a nightmare for them as it is. To be an FBS program, you need to play 5 FBS opponents at home each year. I believe you can include an FCS team among those 5 as long as it offers at least 90% of available scholarships, and you can count one game at a neutral site as a home game. Idaho has had 4 home conference games, and they have scheduled 2 non-conference home games. If they go indy, where do they get the extra games? Scheduling mid to late season will be next to impossible for home games. The other quandry is the guarantee amount Idaho pays. They pay $150,000 per team, at least this season to EWU and Wyoming. How much did ISU receive to go the same distance and play Wazzu? $400K to $500K? ISU received around $500K for the BYU game. And these were low amounts compared to Georgia, Oklahoma, and the others. Kramer won't play Idaho up there if they are FBS, because they don't pay enough. Idaho can increase the guarantee amount, but where are they getting the money from? They won't receive any TV money as an independent, so some other area of the department will have to work with less unless they load up on more bodybag games. The record will be bad, but even so, there still wouldn't be a bowl game to play for as an indy, so recruiting will take a hit.
Wish 'em luck, but I don't think they can wait a couple of years.
I doubt the Sun Belt wants them. Benson, maybe. The actual schools in that league, doubtful. It's just too far to travel, especially when they have an adequate number of schools within their own geographic area. They also have Louisiana Monroe, who is considered the weak link of that conference. ULM has not had a winning record since joining FBS in the early to mid 90's, and they still operate on an athletic budget of around $8.5 million! That would be a mid-tier budget in the Big Sky! I don't think the Sun Belt wants to take on two schools which are on the brink. Too much risk.
I think Idaho would have its hands full trying to schedule ONE season as an independent. Like I said, it's been a nightmare for them as it is. To be an FBS program, you need to play 5 FBS opponents at home each year. I believe you can include an FCS team among those 5 as long as it offers at least 90% of available scholarships, and you can count one game at a neutral site as a home game. Idaho has had 4 home conference games, and they have scheduled 2 non-conference home games. If they go indy, where do they get the extra games? Scheduling mid to late season will be next to impossible for home games. The other quandry is the guarantee amount Idaho pays. They pay $150,000 per team, at least this season to EWU and Wyoming. How much did ISU receive to go the same distance and play Wazzu? $400K to $500K? ISU received around $500K for the BYU game. And these were low amounts compared to Georgia, Oklahoma, and the others. Kramer won't play Idaho up there if they are FBS, because they don't pay enough. Idaho can increase the guarantee amount, but where are they getting the money from? They won't receive any TV money as an independent, so some other area of the department will have to work with less unless they load up on more bodybag games. The record will be bad, but even so, there still wouldn't be a bowl game to play for as an indy, so recruiting will take a hit.
Wish 'em luck, but I don't think they can wait a couple of years.
On the Idaho Scout message board several mock schedules were floated, many of these schedules included mid-season games with Idaho State. However, I'm not sure ISU or any Big Sky team will accommodate Idaho, receive paltry payouts, all while helping Idaho remain FBS. IMO, this might be counter to the interests of ISU and other Big Sky programs.
SLCBengal
Active member
The Sun Belt won't be an option for Idaho's football program...
Read more: Idaho Statesman: Sun Belt Rules Out Taking Idaho as Member
Read more: Idaho Statesman: Sun Belt Rules Out Taking Idaho as Member
