• Hi Guest,

    We've updated the site to combine all the forums that were part of the Big Sky Fans Network into one location. This will make it easier to navigate and participate in all the discussions for each school without having to have multiple accounts, etc. We are still working out some tweaks but please let us know if you notice anything.

    With the migration, in some circumstances, your username could have been merged with one of your other usernames from the other forums. If this is the case, you can request to change your username in your account details page of your profile.
  • Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
  • Guest, do want an ad free experience on BigSkyFans.com among other benefits? Upgrade your account today!

    Simply click your profile name > account upgrades > BigSky Club > choose between the year long subscription (two free months) or month to month

    Thanks for the continued support. Cheers!

Story on Idaho Football...

Why don't you just go ahead and post the letter. None of us can log in because we don't have accounts with this unheard of site. Contrary to what you think the whole Big Sky doesn't revolve around what Idaho wants most of the league members to do.
 
Sioux:

Apparently you are reading something into these contracts that others aren't including the media member I contacted from Boise and one member of the ISU athletic department that I spoke with tonight at the Chukars game. (It was ISU night there...)

The clause stating that Idaho is bound to the Sun Belt for only four years apparently is standard protection today in middle range conferences that could change a lot as college football evolves and as I was told, given the costs of buying out to leave a conference (as Rutgers and Maryland just found out) this is also protection for individual schools so that they have an out without breaking the bank for them. Seems like a win / win situation to me.

I was very intrigued by your comments at first but now especially with your last comment about "dropping out of the Big Sky and bittersweet", you sound upset that people here aren't falling all over themselves to congratulate you on your "find."

I ask again with respect, link me that story in the Spokane or Boise newspaper that you claim you read it in. Give me some solid evidence from a mainstream media source (I'm not picky...radio / TV / newspaper...not a fan web site) that the Big Sky wants to:

1. expand
2. move up to the FBS division
3. AD's and president's are talking "all about FBS." (your words...)

Not just quoting some general comments from Fullerton that might not mean what you think they do and can actually mean something completely different.

Lastly, forgive my skepticism but without information as to who you are and what you do, it's hard to take your story in a meaningful manner. For example if you provided some proof that you work in a school athletic department, are in the media, work for a university...that could change the dynamic but for all I know you are simply a North Dakota fan trying to post a theory based on your interpretation of circumstantial evidence.

I don't mean this as an attack on you but I've found from experience that a story this big, with the potential impact it has would be very hard to keep under wraps especially if that's "all Big Sky AD's and presidents are talking about." (again your direct quote) SOMEONE would have talked, it's human nature... some media member would have broken this story by now.

At this point it seems you seem to be the only one advancing these comments and I'm not ready to take that at face value without more hard evidence.

Sorry about that.

PBP
 
I asked Jon Kasper, Big Sky assistant commissioner, whether Idaho’s agreement to join the Big Sky in all sports but football REQUIRES Idaho to join the Big Sky in football within a given timeframe. Here is Jon's response:

"I just read the document. There is nothing that requires them to come back for football. It states that we 'anticipate them' returning. We had to spell out the financial situations if that were to occur in the letter.

Nothing about the Big Sky becoming FBS.

Again, nothing that states they must return by x date or they are out or anything like that, just that 'we antcipate them' returning to the Big Sky for football and nothing more."
 
Brad:

Thanks for following up.

So to summarize what we've got is:

*The Big Sky themselves saying there is nothing in the contract requiring Idaho to return in a certain time frame.
*My contact in the Boise media stating the same thing after he read the contracts.
*Nothing anyplace about the Big Sky moving up to the FBS division.
*Nothing anyplace about ISU (and others) having to drop football or leave the conference.

At this point that's pretty convincing stuff that the comments posted by Sioux are his views of things without concrete substance.

I'll take that position myself unless something of a solid nature appears by him or anyone else along these lines.

Like I've said for a few years, Idaho is crazy to try to make it in the FBS division and will eventually return to the Big Sky because logically that is the place they fit geographically, from a rivalry standpoint and because they have a chance to actually win some games. I understand why financially and to appease their vocal minority fan base they are trying to survive in the larger division but they can't and also this gives them an out to tell that vocal minority, "hey we tried it your way. We couldn't make it...now we are going to try our way and go back to where we belong..."

PBP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top