Idaho Vandals Back To Big Sky

[weberwildcat1]

http://www.wildcats.bigskyfans.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2283" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since you guys are in Idaho what do you think of this thread? Could/would this really happen with them? What would it mean for the Bengals pros/cons? Does it matter?

 

[Red Hill]

I would love to see them back in the Big Sky. I think most of their fans would like to see it too. Utah State fans need to step down from their high horse and realize that the Sky would be better for them too. Good luck filling the Kibbie Dome or Romney Stadium for Texas Arlington San Antonio A&I Southwest Laredo.

 

[biobengal]

No, not possible. IMO, we would see Idaho drop football before returning to the BSC. Moving down would require admitting the move to FBS was a mistake.... Idaho has too much pride for to happen.

 

[Moscow_Bengal]

I'm currently a student at Idaho. I would really like to see UI return to the Big Sky, and among some students this is a popular idea, especially since the Vandals are unlikely to play BSU in the future.

But, as much as I'd like to see UI back in the Sky (not because I'm a Vandals van as much as I think it'd be great for ISU) I just don't think it's going to happen. UI too often does not operate by logic, but, as has been mentioned, pride. I don't know if the WAC will eventually fall apart, but even if it does, I doubt Idaho would return to playing 1-AA football.

Hopefully I'm wrong, because I'd love to see the Bengals beat up on the Vandals.

PS - Years and years ago, the legislature passed a resolution to ensure the Bengals and the Vandals would play every year, alternating campuses each game. Even if UI will never return to playing 1-AA, I think setting up a yearly game between ISU/UI would be of great benefit for both schools.

 

[blackfootbengal]

The problem with playing Idaho was they did not want to pay for the game. Idaho is not a great Div. I program but they still have 85 scholorships compared to 63 for ISU. Idaho wanted to always play on their home field and only pay a break even payout. Why would we play them when they have all the advantage and we don't make any money from the game. It just does not make sense, you play Div. I games for a paycheck. Additionally, playing the in state Div. I programs can and does hurt you in recruiting in state. You would be amazed at the number of people who do not understand the advantage Div. I programs have from those extra scholorships when you play money games. The reason beating a Div I program is an upset is because it is not supposed to happen, even to bottom dwellers like Idaho and Utah State. And face it, right now we are a bottom dweller in Div. IAA and have little to no chance of beating a Div. I program so we need to collect our money and use it to make our program better.

 

[spudbowl]

The UI has always seen their selves at THE university in the state of Idaho. The reality is that they are located in a small town in an isolated part of the state at a time where education is no longer generally about fraternities, family ties and tradition and is much more about convenience and location and programs. This has resulted in the growth of Boise State (roughly 19,00 students) into the largest school in the state with Idaho (about 12,000 students) the smallest school in the state (in terms of enrollment). Despite this, Idaho as a land grant school gets all types of money that BSU and ISU does not get for academics.
Idaho cannot play FBS football, we all knew that 15 years ago. While they might have a winning year from time to time, they are a FCS team. The departure of BSU and Reno from the WAC leaves them in a conference that will generate no money.
They would be better in the Big Sky but they would never do it. They again believe that they are THE university in the state and they have to therefore play in the biggest division possible, sad.

 

[Moscow_Bengal]

Blackfoot -- I agree that playing UI at UI every year is not a good deal for ISU. But, if UI agreed to alternating campuses, I think it'd be great, payout or not -- even with the scholarship disadvantage. Now, I know that such a scenario is unlikely, but I still like to dream about such a deal being struck.

Either way, I think it's important to note per this discussion, that other than the big games like BSU, ISU has a much better atmosphere at the Holt and, even with its lack of updates, it's a much better facility than the Kibbie.

 

[sofork]

The vandals should be in the Big Sky. They are a small college team which has little upside in the FBS--just look at their record the last 10+ years. They are not competitive with the decent non-BCS teams, and are a far cry from the caliber of Boise State (who they hate). However, they are so stuborn that they will stay in the FBS until the WAC dissolves or becomes even more meaningless, which will happen once Fresno, Reno and Hawaii leave. La Tech will leave too once they can get into CUSA or maybe even the Sun Belt.

 

[boisebengal]

I think the folks at Idaho are really looking towards Montana and MSU to join the WAC in a couple years after Nevada, Fresno and Hawaii all leave, to help save their league. But the AD's at those schools have already stated that they're both content to stay in the Big Sky. I think that Montana likes being a big fish in a small pond. It's obvious that the WAC's in serious trouble and is falling apart at the seams. And the remaining WAC teams will certainly have difficult times coming up with the revenues needed to support their 1-A football programs, as their ESPN contract, if they have one at all, is expected to be about $100,000 per year in a couple of years. And attendance should decrease significantly when they add those directional Texas schools, since Idaho usually has better attendance figures against their traditional rival teams, like WSU, BSU, and Montana -- which they won't be playing for the foreseeable future. Montana will only play Idaho on a home and home basis, which they can't do being a 1-AA team. And it really doesn't do WSU and BSU any good to schedule Idaho. Right now Idaho's confused as to who their rivals are. And I think that all of the remaining WAC teams will have a more difficult time in trying to recruit better players, since players don't want to play for teams in a conference that's falling apart. Coach Kramer has already told me that ISU kids could play up in Moscow.

Last year Idaho only had an average of 12,730 fans for all the games, and this includes a high of 16,450 for perhaps their final home game ever against BSU, and a low of 8011 who witnessed the SJSU game. Northern Idaho really doesn't have the population base to support big-time football -- not when Pac-12 member WSU plays football 8 miles away. I think that Idaho will probably just drop their program in a few years once the WAC disbands, and then after a few years they'll come to their senses and go back into the Big Sky where they belong. We'll forgive and forget their transgressions and huge mistakes.

Like someone already stated, of all the major colleges in the state, Idaho has the least amount of students enrolled, and for many, many years they were always the major college in the state. Here's the breakdown as far as enrollment figures for Idaho colleges:

BSU 20,000 students
ISU 15,500 students
BYU - Idaho (Ricks) 14,900 students
Idaho 12,000 students (10,000 of those in Moscow)

U of I = DYING COLLEGE

 

[svvandal]

:tothehand:

Coach Kramer has already told me that ISU kids could play up in Moscow.

:rofl:

Which kids? Corey White was behind 4 guys at Idaho, and he was your leading rusher last year. AJ is a great player, but we have many great players at that speed/height/weight/ability. Keep in mind that Idaho has 17 players on Phil Steele's preseason all-WAC team, more than Nevada, Fresno, or Hawaii. Not to mention a 1st-round draft pick in 2010 and 3 drafted players in 2011. Virtually all of Idaho's incoming freshman would earn substantial playing time as freshman at ISU - they will redshirt at Idaho. I'm not sure you are grasping the difference in ability and depth between the two teams - if the two opened the 2011 season, the spread would probably be at least 35 points in Idaho's favor.

I'll let the other statements go, with the only comment being that if you think that quantity=quality, please bow down to University of Phoenix. UI has a 56% graduation rate and our grads earn an ROI that is competitive with most BCS schools. I don't mean to denigrate ISU because I know several ISU grads and they are doing just fine, but please stop with the anti-UI tirades and hyperbole. It's inaccurate, old, and easily rebuffed.

http://www.payscale.com/education/average-cost-for-college-ROI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[spazdog1]

:tothehand:

Coach Kramer has already told me that ISU kids could play up in Moscow.

:rofl:

Which kids? Corey White was behind 4 guys at Idaho, and he was your leading rusher last year. AJ is a great player, but we have many great players at that speed/height/weight/ability. Keep in mind that Idaho has 17 players on Phil Steele's preseason all-WAC team, more than Nevada, Fresno, or Hawaii. Not to mention a 1st-round draft pick in 2010 and 3 drafted players in 2011. Virtually all of Idaho's incoming freshman would earn substantial playing time as freshman at ISU - they will redshirt at Idaho. I'm not sure you are grasping the difference in ability and depth between the two teams - if the two opened the 2011 season, the spread would probably be at least 35 points in Idaho's favor.

I'll let the other statements go, with the only comment being that if you think that quantity=quality, please bow down to University of Phoenix. UI has a 56% graduation rate and our grads earn an ROI that is competitive with most BCS schools. I don't mean to denigrate ISU because I know several ISU grads and they are doing just fine, but please stop with the anti-UI tirades and hyperbole. It's inaccurate, old, and easily rebuffed.

http://www.payscale.com/education/average-cost-for-college-ROI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Come on svvanal, you can do better than that. Corey White was healthy and had an O-Line last year. In 2009, Idaho had an O-Line. Yes, with a one year wonder Wooldridge (sp?) and a veteran O-line including their first round draft pick, 2009 brought the Vandals their first winning season in how many years? Can't say much about the Vandal O-line in 2010. The Vandal ground last year was a shadow of their 2009 team. Don't even get me started about the Vandal defense and special teams. I still contend that the best defensive player for the Vandals in 2009 was Wooldridge. He picked up the tough yards and moved the sticks which left their pitful defense on the sidelines. His ball control took pressure of Enderle and the Vandals won games against lower echelon FBS teams. I admit, if the Vandals defeated any FBS team with a winning record during the regular season, I'd be surprised. Scholarships, yes the Vandals have more, although they were still penalized for APR last year. However, anyone would rationalize that with the superior number of scholarships, there would be more depth, but not necessarily better players.

What's funny, you are banking on the projections of Steele's preseason all WAC (watered down WAC team, I might add). This past year was the WAC's best year in regards to the quality of players in the league. The quality drops off significantly this year - losing BSU as league members and players like Kap out of Nevada. Yawn... Who's pulling the trigger this year for the Vandals? Reader? He did so well in 2009. Last year Enderle had no O-line so he ran for his life, made poor decisions and even though he was drafted into the NFL, he had a losing season AGAIN. In 2009 with Enderle out, please tell everyone how many games the Vandals won with Reader as a starter. He was a deer in the headlights even with Wooldridge in the backfield and a veteran O-Line. Yet you come over here and tell us that they would win easily by 35? Finally, you are speculating about how the incoming freshmen in Moscow could have significant playing time at ISU. I could win the lottery, too.

Don't come over here and spout off about inaccurate, old and easily rebuffed info regarding the mighty Vandals on the Bengal board. In fact, I believe you've been rebuffed.

 

[boisebengal]

Honestly, Coach Kramer did tell me that, and he would tell anybody else the same thing if they asked him. And he's someone I respect and I'm sure he can evaluate talent much better than myself and most people I know. In context, what we were talking about, was the fact that I asked him why ISU did so well in signing many Idaho kids and Idaho didn't sign any. And I just added that perhaps the reason why is because Idaho was looking to other states to try to get a better-caliber athlete, since they'd probably need better talent that they wouldn't be able to find in this state, in order to compete in the WAC. And he just said that our guys could play in Moscow.

 

[biobengal]

Weird…..

A thread started by a Wildcat fan, egged on by a Bronco fan and debated by a Vandal fan. IMO, Idaho is not going back to FCS. Why should they? Every program should be able to establish their place in the NCAA. Further, the idea that Idaho is wasting taxpayer money is absurd… Boise State, Idaho State and Idaho all waste taxpayer money educating roughly the same small number of student athletes.

What should happen instead, Idaho State should work on getting its own house in order to make the move to FBS when Montana and Montana State make the move. I don’t relish a BSC without the Montana schools and a bunch of Directional U’s without much shared history.

 

[mighty_bengals]

Bio, when I look at your posts you appear to be very pro-Idaho, and I think you may have gone to school there. Which there's nothing wrong with that because I've got some good friends that went there and they have good academics there.

First of all, don't bet on Montana and MSU moving up to FBS, because their AD's are adamantly opposed to this. And Montana's AD said they'd have to spend at least $5 million per year every year to make the move. They've already spent quite a bit of money for a feasibility study to see if it's worth it to move up, and they found out it's not. What's the point in joining a league that's disintegrating? As for teams like Sac or PSU possibly moving up, forget it! No, Montana and MSU are content to stay in the Big Sky. As for the WAC, La. Tech and NMSU both definitely want out of the WAC, La. Tech wants in C-USA and NMSU wants in the Sun Belt. And USU could go into the MWC, but maybe not. I don't think that SJSU will go anywhere.

If the WAC does fall apart, which seems like a good possibility, then Idaho would have no choice but to compete as a 1-A indy, and this would be suicide for a school like Idaho. They couldn't pay any money to bring teams to Moscow! People here are only saying that if they did want to continue to field a FB team in the future, then they may have to look at the Big Sky and FCS. But if they're too prideful to ever go back down, then they may have to do without a program in the future. But hey, but whatever happens they've done all they can do to compete at the highest level because this is what they wanted.

 

[WILDCAT]

If the Vandals fans would rather drop football than drop to the FCS and keep football because they dont want to hurt thier "pride", then they arent even worth being affiliated with.

Goodbye and good riddance.

 

[SLCBengal]

Tony Barnhart of CBSSports.com wrote an interesting piece about two weeks ago. He speculated that the "big six" conferences and major independents could be ready to split from the rest of the FBS conferences, leaving conferences such as the WAC, MWC, and Sun Belt to join conferences such as the Big Sky, CAA, and Missouri Valley to create its own new division...

What the Big Ten said last week got everybody's attention," said (Appalachian State AD) Cobb, a former football player at N.C. State. "What it really showed is that the gap in college football is not between Division I-A and I-AA. It's between the BCS schools and everybody else Division I-A."

"I like to look at the math. And when you look at the math, we are a lot closer to East Carolina [a member of Division I-A Conference USA] than East Carolina is to the ACC," said Cobb.

Read more: CBSSports.com: Divide Might be Coming...

I'm not a mind reader, but I think what biobengal is saying is that ISU needs to put itself into the position of being able to choose its own destiny and not worry about anybody else's...

 

[svvandal]

"Don't come over here and spout off about inaccurate, old and easily rebuffed info regarding the mighty Vandals on the Bengal board. In fact, I believe you've been rebuffed."

Beautiful diatribe, but get a grip. Name the ISU players that would be on the two-deep at Idaho.

 

[spazdog1]

svvandal... AJ for one. As for the rest, who's to say? Not you or me but maybe Kramer or Akey. But that's not the point of my earlier response to your non-sense. You come over to the Bengal boards and spout off about how much better the Vandals are. Like I posted originally, with more scholarships, everyone but the homer of homers would agree that the Vandals have more depth. But you spout off a bunch of jibberish about the mighty Vandals and their players as if they were top 25 material. Again, here's a dose of reality... with all of the draft picks, pre-season all WAC team members, in the past several years, the Vandals have beaten nobody. Not last year, the year before that which was their best year in 10 or so? Who knows about 2011. But based on Reader's and the O-Line's previous experience, (I won't EVEN go into the defense or their special teams) I'm not betting on them. Thus, your arrogant assertion that Vandals would defeat the Bengals by 35 is pure speculation - more Vandal sanctity as described in previous posts to this thread.

Just in case you missed the topic of the thread, I believe it is in reference to where the Vandals go from here. The Vandals, whether you will admit it or not, are in no man's land. The Vandal home football attendence is nothing spectacular (Spears needs to take up ticket counting 101). The fan support as a FBS affiliate is lip service. The future of the WAC is tenuous. Vandal pride and stubbornness is the basis for their still being a FBS affiliate. The premise here is would there be a shread of common sense in Moscow that would bring them back to the Big Sky where they can compete.

 

[Vandals_n_Bengals]

Idaho will never return to the Big Sky as a full member. If the WAC folds (which is doubtful), the Vandals may return to the BSC for Olympic Sports, but stay independent or join the Sunbelt (again), the MAC, or maybe the MWC for football. If anything, the BCS will have the Montana schools leave for the WAC for the 2013-14 season.

 

[Vandals_n_Bengals]

Why would the Vandals drop football? Really? Their tradition of playing football goes back farther than ISU does as existing! To call U of I a failing school is ridiculous and ignorant. U of I has a graduation rate that is greater than Boise Junior College and ISU's combined. The amount of research dollars U of I brings into the State of Idaho is three times greater than the amount brought in by all other colleges and universities in the State. As an alumnus of both schools, I think both ISU and U of I are great schools, but you clearly do not know what you are talking about when you tear down U of I. U of I and ISU cooperate on a deep level, and if anything, the two schools operate as brother institutions similar to how Utah State and University of Utah do. If you think that enrollment size should determine at what level a schools should play football at, then you would force schools like TCU and Baylor to play at the Division II level! Yeah, BJC has 19,000 students, but of those, only about 14,000 are full time, taking 12-credits or more, per semester. While still trailing behind U of I in terms of academic prestige, ISU is leaps and bounds ahead of BJC.

I agree that the Vandals and the Bengals should play each other more often. I do not think that U of I should or will return to the Big Sky for football. Yeah, Idaho has not had as much success as BJC in football since moving up in 1996, but then again the priority of the schools is very different. BJC focused on gaining fame through their athletics, primarily football, at the cost to their academic prestige. Idaho has focused more on improving it's academic reputation, and this combined with poor decisions regarding coaches. The fiasco of the Tom Cable years comes to mind. Tom Cable single handedly destroyed U of I's ability to compete. Without his tenure at U of I, the Vandals would probably be much better off football wise then they are now.