Sun Belt gives the boot to Idaho, NMSU

[JJB]

Just saw where the Sun Belt won't extend UI or NMSU as conference members after 2017. No surprise there. UI has said they'll look at independence or the Big Sky. NMSU also has said they'll look at FCS.

 

[otis campbell]

AJ Mazzolini, sports reporter for the Missoulian stated that CalPoly and IDAHO STATE are football only members of the BSC.

 

[PBP]

Just saw where the Sun Belt won't extend UI or NMSU as conference members after 2017. No surprise there. UI has said they'll look at independence or the Big Sky. NMSU also has said they'll look at FCS.

The Big Sky frankly has been expecting this. New UI president said he'd personally prefer going back to the Big Sky as opposed to being an independent.

Don't know a thing about New Mexico State but if they were to also join the Big Sky they'd HAVE to split into divisions.

PBP

 

[biobengal]

Be careful what you wish for.

There is much talk that the BSC may splinter with ISU remaining with the leftovers. Oh joy. It appears that the Big Sky Conference may be in collusion with certain members.

http://www.thespectrum.com/story/sports/2016/03/01/big-sky-could-idaho-footballs-future-after-leaving-sun-belt/81167778/

 

[Skippy]

I can't read your link, bio, but I share your concerns. If there is ever a movement by the upper echelon of the Big Sky to create a Western FBS conference, Idaho State will likely be left behind. I hope it never comes to that, but I can envision the Montana's, EWU, Idaho and NM State creating their own FBS league. Because of facilities and budget restrictions, it would be very difficult for ISU to ever make the FBS leap.

 

[BengalBannMan]

I feel they would ALL be terrible at the FBS level. We know that New Mexico and Idaho already have been. An entire conference of losers is what they would all look like. I don't feel Montana and EWU would be willing to look like fools.

 

[JJB]

This is the story from biobengal's link, skippy.

http://www.thespectrum.com/story/sports/2016/03/01/big-sky-could-idaho-footballs-future-after-leaving-sun-belt/81167778/

Ryan Miller, [email protected]

The dominoes are starting to fall for the Big Sky Conference to add another football member — if not two.

The Sun Belt announced on Tuesday that it will not be renewing the contracts of Idaho or New Mexico State. Both schools will play their final season as Sun Belt members in 2017.

Idaho, which is a member of the Big Sky in all sports but football, has had a long standing offer from the conference to join its gridiron fraternity, too.

“There’s always a spot for them,” Big Sky deputy commissioner Ron Loghry told The Spectrum and Daily News in January.

Loghry even hinted that is why the league is at an odd number of teams (13), saving a place for the Vandals.

The league reiterated that stance on Tuesday, with a league spokesman saying, “There has been a public standing offer for Idaho to rejoin the Big Sky in football, and that offer remains.”

And Idaho will be mulling over that offer. The university stated in a press release it will either accept the Big Sky’s invitation for the 2018 season or try to stick in the FBS as an independent.

If the Vandals join, it would put the conference at 14 football playing members — a pretty large number for one automatic qualifying spot. And that’s why the league would consider splitting the league into two conferences for football, if Idaho did join.

“The talk, honestly, is having another football conference,” Loghry said. “Everybody in the Big Sky for all sports, then having an — ala the Missouri Valley or Ohio Valley — a football only conference. So develop something like that for half the teams, and the other half would carry the Big Sky name still. Then you build a schedule among those two conferences.

“To go to divisions is an option, but you are still sharing one AQ,” he continued. “Where if you go into two separate conferences, then you could get an AQ for each one. Seven teams fight for an AQ and seven more fight for another one and you get two or three more in.”

How the conference would split is still unknown. While there have been theories floated around about a possible FBS/FCS split, more likely, the conference would be divided based off geography.

While Idaho is the more natural fit, with it being an original member and with all the non-football sports already in, New Mexico State to join the conference is a possibility, as well.

Big Sky commissioner Doug Fullerton said last summer that he believes both Idaho and New Mexico State would benefit by dropping down and joining the Big Sky.

 

[Skippy]

I feel they would ALL be terrible at the FBS level. We know that New Mexico and Idaho already have been. An entire conference of losers is what they would all look like. I don't feel Montana and EWU would be willing to look like fools.

I respectfully disagree, Bannman. I believe the two Montana schools are biding their time, waiting for the Mountain West to expand, perhaps if Boise State gets invited to the Big 12. If that doesn't happen over a period of years, however, I can see the top tier BSC schools joining with Idaho and New Mexico to form their own FBS league. Here's why: the FCS is a shrinking brand of football. It's best programs keep moving up. Several FBS leagues are forbidding their members from playing FCS schools. A school like Idaho gets paid double what a school like ISU gets for body bag games, simply because it is an FBS school.

Here's another issue that could lead the Top BSC schools to leave: the conference is really bifurcated between the haves and have-nots when it comes to performance, facilities, tradition and support. In football, the two Montana's and Eastern have largely separated themselves from the rest of the conference. In basketball, Montana and Weber have risen to the top. There is likely going to be more friction between the haves and the have-nots as governing decisions are made by the presidents. Do you think Montana and Weber are really excited about giving up the chance to host the Big Sky basketball tournament every year so all 12 schools can play before a large empty arena in Reno? Sure their public statements are supportive, but you know they have to be thinking about how to form alliances with other schools that have similar commitments to excellence.

I don't anticipate a revolt tomorrow or next year, but I can see a splintering coming over time. There is simply too much disparity within the conference over institutional profiles and approaches to athletics. The wise athletic administrators are anticipating changes in the landscape and developing Plan Bs in case the more dramatic scenarios come to pass.

 

[BengalBannMan]

Skippy,
I totally understand what you're saying, and in some ways agree. My point is that when teams like ISU, Weber State, etc, play teams like Boise State, Stanford, etc, they don't compete. When ISU, Weber, etc., play teams like Montana, EWU, etc., they compete, if not beat them. Teams that are not handily beating other FCS teams consistently, should not move up. Just an opinion.
I realize there is the desperity between athletic spending and budget with the Montanas vs ISU, SUU, etc. And there are two different levels within the BSC. But ready go for the FBS? Not in my opinion. (But I guess you have to start the climb at some point)

 

[BengalBannMan]

...oh, and that arena in Reno, it won't be empty, I'll be there! Lol. (Not meaning anything by that, just excited to go support our Bengals surprise team. And the sleeper team, Lady Bengals!)

 

[Spudhead]

Hasn't the 'Sky been the only conference which hosted a tournament at the site of the regular season champion? I get that Weber and Montana liked hosting it, but it's not like they're going to find any other conference which would let them host it in the future.

I always worried if the conference got too big, like 14 or more, that we'd see a breakaway group. Just like the old MWC breakaway from the old WAC. At least it's probably good to know in advance that two conferences will form, so that nobody is left scrambling to find a home. People forget that geography plays a role, too, and some Big Sky schools may want to be FBS, but their geography AND population is going to prevent them from going anywhere except with other Big Sky schools. So you have a shitty FBS conference, the western version of the Sun Belt. I don't know, it may happen, but I see lots of cons.

 

[boisebengal]

I sure am getting a kick out of what the Vandal fans have to say about all of this on their board. The pain and anguish they're going through right now is just priceless! http://www.scout.com/college/idaho/forums/3864-sbc-bsc-realignment

 

[Skippy]

Hasn't the 'Sky been the only conference which hosted a tournament at the site of the regular season champion? I get that Weber and Montana liked hosting it, but it's not like they're going to find any other conference which would let them host it in the future.

I always worried if the conference got too big, like 14 or more, that we'd see a breakaway group. Just like the old MWC breakaway from the old WAC. At least it's probably good to know in advance that two conferences will form, so that nobody is left scrambling to find a home. People forget that geography plays a role, too, and some Big Sky schools may want to be FBS, but their geography AND population is going to prevent them from going anywhere except with other Big Sky schools. So you have a shitty FBS conference, the western version of the Sun Belt. I don't know, it may happen, but I see lots of cons.

There are always lots of potential cons in every opportunity but my dear departed friend Jim Fox taught me there are two kinds of people in this world: those who see obstacles around every opportunity and those who see beyond those obstacles to a better result. Jim was the later. He looked at the small crowds the 1-AA championship was drawing in Tacoma and said, "Hey, if Pocatello guaranteed the NCAA a sellout, why couldn't we host that game?" And we did.

Dubby Holt was the same kind of guy. He looked at how football crowds dropped off in Pocatello in October and November and said, "Hey if we build a domed stadium we can play night games and we don't have to compete with hunting, shopping and kids sports on Saturday afternoons." A lot of people thought Dubby was crazy, but he got it done.

And then there was Boise State's Gene Bleymaier, who looked at Boise State's potential when it was still just another 1-AA school and said, "Hey with some infrastructure investment and some commitment, Boise State can compete nationally." And they did. (Not to mention that stroke of genius in installing blue turf, which has become BSU's signature nationally)

I don't know if the Montanas, Idaho or Weber State has any of these kinds of visionary leaders but all it takes is one person with the vision and drive to say, "Hey we could make a pretty good football conference with traditional powers like the Montanas, EWU, maybe North Dakota State.... And once we form that league, we don't have to beat USC to be successful -- we just have to beat the other teams in our league."

Ps--in reading the Idaho board, I saw a post about the NCAA rules that make it virtually impossible to create a new FBS conference out of nothing. So short of getting these rules changed, the vision of a new FBS western conference would be very difficult to achieve.

 

[spartan]

curious why many are looking forward to idaho rejoining the big sky in football...?

historically they beat us about 70% of the time....

 

[PBP]

curious why many are looking forward to idaho rejoining the big sky in football...?

historically they beat us about 70% of the time....

Don't know how many are necessarily "looking forward to it." But on many, many levels it makes sense for everyone including ISU to get a game against an in state rival. It also makes the conference better in my opinion and if what Brad posted is true about NCAA rules regarding starting new conferences pretty much eliminates the fear of a break away part of the Big Sky.

PBP

 

[boisebengal]

They've got a tough decision ahead, because they've got to decide as to whether they're going to join the Big Sky for football, drop it altogether, or compete as a 1-A independent. If they decide to join the Big Sky, then they'd have to let the league offices know by May 4 if they're going to be part of the league for the 2018 season. If they don't then we may not hold a spot for them anymore.

 

[PBP]

Here's another issue to consider when thinking about New Mexico State. Their athletic budget for a year is usually around 25 million dollars.

ISU's for example is usually around 12 million.

Letting the Aggies in would give them a huge advantage over the vast majority of the schools in the Big Sky as far as money is concerned.

PBP

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

Here's another issue to consider when thinking about New Mexico State. Their athletic budget for a year is usually around 25 million dollars.

ISU's for example is usually around 12 million.

Letting the Aggies in would give them a huge advantage over the vast majority of the schools in the Big Sky as far as money is concerned.

PBP

Keep in mind, Sac State's budget is 21 million with 21 sports (though Beach Volleyball is now the spring sport for indoor Volleyball). We spread out a lot of money ourselves, but with good to great weather, we can afford to do so. Once we get our new arena built, our location, media market (No. 19 in the nation) and with a stadium that can easily be expanded/renovated with a FBS move in mind will probably come to fruition.

I like ISU, but your dome, just like UI's, is your shackle.

 

[boisebengal]

Sac's not going FBS anytime soon. When you averaged about 8800 fans last year, no way. Despite how many people live in the Sacramento area, the vast majority of the people there couldn't care less about Sac State -- it's pretty obvious.

 

[PBP]

I think Boise is probably correct. Sacramento is a "pro" town with the Kings and the close proximity of the 49'ers, Raiders, Giants, A's, Warriors, Sharks et al. Plus Stanford and Cal aren't that far away either.

Just hard to see how they (and Portland State) can ever make the jump and be successful. You never say never but I can't see how it could be done.

PBP