• 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!

WAC Revival?

360Eag

Active member
I saw this article posted today on Twitter.

http://missoulian.com/sports/college/montana/haslam-montana-has-not-had-discussions-about-joining-revived-wac/article_d4fc00b1-f787-5785-824f-c9d1cb90b6be.html

If the Western Athletic Conference is planning an FBS comeback, Montana has had no part in the discussion, UM athletic director Kent Haslam said.

Emails between Idaho athletic director Rob Spear and WAC commissioner Jeff Hurd showed discussion of a possible revival of the Football Bowl Subdivision league that would include not only Idaho, but Montana and Montana State. The documents were obtained and published last week by the Lewiston Tribune through a public records request.

Haslam acknowledge trading emails with Spear recently, just as he has with other ADs around the Big Sky Conference. A change in division or conference affiliation was not among the topics, though.

"Never have had a serious conversation about moving up a division or anything like that," Haslam told the Missoulian this week. "... We are happy in the Big Sky Conference. Right now this is where we're focused."

The Missoulian has filed a similar public records request of Haslam's emails through the Freedom of Information Act.

Idaho, which left the Big Sky in 1996 for the brighter lights of the FBS, has since been rebuffed by the Sun Belt Conference. The Vandals' affiliation with the mostly southeastern-based conference expires after the 2017 season and Idaho announced in April its intention to return to the Football Championship Subdivision and the Big Sky in 2018. The school's other sports rejoined the Big Sky in 2014.

After a processing period that lasted from May to August, the Tribune obtained 645 email communications sent and received by both Spear and Idaho president Chuck Staben. Included was one from Hurd at the WAC indicating a possible future football conference.

“Rob: Have you had an opportunity to speak with your President regarding football and whether or not he believes the idea of other Big Sky institutions moving to the FBS level could have any legs?” Hurd wrote. “Although (former Big Sky commissioner) Doug Fullerton had interest, one of my concerns is that the new Commissioner might consider it too much of a risk to have on his/her plate right shortly after being hired.”

Fullerton retired this past summer with Andrea Williams taking over as Big Sky Commissioner.

Spear, wary that the Freedom of Information Act could be used to make such emails public -- exactly as it has -- responded accordingly:

“Jeff, do you have time for a call? I don’t want to respond via email…FOIA.”

In another email, Spear specifically targeted the Grizzlies and Bobcats as potential allies in the WAC's return.

"The WAC has traction and I look forward to influencing the Big Sky from within," Spear wrote. "I know I can convince Montana and Montana State to jump…we need to lock arms with them."

Dates of the emails were not included in the Tribune's reporting.

***

Montana's flirtation with the FBS goes back many years. The Grizzlies turned down an informal invitation to the WAC in 2010, then watched the conference disband its football membership just two years later after the 2012 season.

The Griz had sat by as former Big Sky programs Boise State, Nevada and Idaho left in the mid-90s -- to varying degrees of FBS success. A slew of fellow FCS powers have jumped in the past few years as well, a list that includes UM's former national rivals like Georgia Southern and Appalachian State.

Montana stuck around for reasons both financial and competitive. The Griz were hesitant to abandon their rivalry with the Bobcats, as well.

"I think it's only natural to be drawn to schools that look similar to you," Haslam said. "From the Montana standpoint, you've also got to step back and think: Where do we fit? What do our fans like? It's important for us to be competing for championships."

Geography has been a prime issue for many schools in the West contemplating such a move. Whereas App State, based in North Carolina, had a natural landing spot in the Sun Belt, teams like Montana and North Dakota State have far fewer options.

Especially once you rule out Power Five conferences like the Big Ten and Pac-12.

"You've got to have a conference that your fans relate to, that they can connect with," Haslam said. "There's two other (FBS) conferences out West playing football. The Pac-12 isn't coming to knock and the Mountain West hasn't either."

But that doesn't mean it will be that way forever. Asked if a return of the WAC -- which would need eight football members to resurrect itself as an FBS league -- would change his thinking, Haslam deferred, saying he wouldn't try guessing the future.

But he did dangle one carrot; Montana needs to be ready for whatever that future may hold.

"The sands of college athletics shift so rapidly that you do have to be prepared," he said. "The way you prepare is you improve your infrastructure facilities, you strengthen your fan base and you compete at the highest level you can. You control the things that you can control.

"I don't want to pretend that we're not trying to be prepared, but you've also got to be realistic."

I know there was some talk back in the Spring about this revival, but then the talk went dead. Now it seems to be starting up again. I know there's been talks of the Power 5 becoming their own league and the Group of 5 doing their own thing. Do you think any other Big Sky teams would jump into a revived WAC?
 
Portland State and Sac State have long rumored to have an interest in moving to FBS mostly because they're in larger metro areas, not because they have seen any regular success on the football field.
 
FormerEag said:
Glad EWU isn't a part of that discussion. Big Sky > Low tier Toilet Bowl Subdivision.

I disagree 100%. If the top half of the Big Sky leaves we need to be ready to go with them. I love FCS and hope it doesn't happen, but I don't want to be left behind with our rivals leaving us.

It's still just rehashed talk at this point however.
 
Sounds like wishful thinking by Spear and the WAC. But I agree that we need to be ready just in case.
 
Yes, if we lost the two MT. Idaho, PSU and one of the Cali schools, there isn't much left. Do we even have facilities that would meet NCAA standards to play football in FBS? PSU doesn't have either, CP maybe UCD not.
We might be out even if the desire was there and the revival of the WAC even happened.
 
I agree with MLEagle that if the top half of the Big Sky went, we would be best off going with them.

However, we are not even close to being ready to go to FBS. We don't even have a plan for facility upgrades that will bring us close. If the top half were to leave within five years, we still wouldn't be ready. Eastern Washington of Big Sky would end up being the SHSU of Southland. Just beating up on weak opponents year in and year out. Not very exciting for a fan base to say the least.
 
After we won our national championship , many Central Washington fans were left wondering "How did we miss out? Why didn't we take the jump like Eastern?" I don't want to be like Central... on the outside looking in as our peers elevate their program.
 
I would love to see eastern make the jump to FBS regardless if other big sky schools did or didn't. Obviously, we would need a partner or a group to go with us to make it feasible, but I would love to see that happen. The national championship at this level is fantastic, but it would be nice to see a step up in competition, even if we are then in the bowl system. It would be a huge step up for university, and could do wonders for the school.

Unfortunately, we are not in a position to make this move, we need a bigger stadium and we need to be able to bring in more revenue, both of which we are really struggling with right now. I think there will be another movement which will cause the lower FBS schools and the top FCS schools to merge, we need to be ready to be in that group for sure
 
marceagfan5 said:
I would love to see eastern make the jump to FBS regardless if other big sky schools did or didn't. Obviously, we would need a partner or a group to go with us to make it feasible, but I would love to see that happen. The national championship at this level is fantastic, but it would be nice to see a step up in competition, even if we are then in the bowl system. It would be a huge step up for university, and could do wonders for the school.

Unfortunately, we are not in a position to make this move, we need a bigger stadium and we need to be able to bring in more revenue, both of which we are really struggling with right now. I think there will be another movement which will cause the lower FBS schools and the top FCS schools to merge, we need to be ready to be in that group for sure

I guess my thought is, if you're talking about moving up and playing the same teams, plus/minus a few, why not stay FCS and have a shot at more National Championships? I'm sorry, but to me, moving up for a shot at some toilet bowl has never been appealing. I really believe there is no difference on a National scale between low level FBS and FCS.
 
ewueagle2010 said:
marceagfan5 said:
I would love to see eastern make the jump to FBS regardless if other big sky schools did or didn't. Obviously, we would need a partner or a group to go with us to make it feasible, but I would love to see that happen. The national championship at this level is fantastic, but it would be nice to see a step up in competition, even if we are then in the bowl system. It would be a huge step up for university, and could do wonders for the school.

Unfortunately, we are not in a position to make this move, we need a bigger stadium and we need to be able to bring in more revenue, both of which we are really struggling with right now. I think there will be another movement which will cause the lower FBS schools and the top FCS schools to merge, we need to be ready to be in that group for sure

I guess my thought is, if you're talking about moving up and playing the same teams, plus/minus a few, why not stay FCS and have a shot at more National Championships? I'm sorry, but to me, moving up for a shot at some toilet bowl has never been appealing. I really believe there is no difference on a National scale between low level FBS and FCS.


I'm with you 100%. I don't see anything appetizing about the FBS realm below the BCS conferences. The only thing that might change my mind is a complete restructuring of the non-BCS FBS schools. Hoping to get to a bowl game to play another low-level FBS team seems like an exercise in stupidity; who cares about the R&H Carriers Weedeater Bowl? Now, if the non-BCS conferences decided to go the playoff route so that there can be legitimate exposure and a definitive championship at the end of the season, then it may look far better.

Let's face it, our facilities are garbage and our admin doesn't seem to have any plan to change them. If Idaho, Montana, and Montana State wanted to leave- and it's debatable if they're ready either-- who do they leave with? New Mexico State? Sac State and Portland State don't have anywhere near the budget or the fan support to make FBS any more than a pipe dream. Those two schools are actually worse off than us, even though they have much better facilities.
 
I hope when you all mention "facilities", what you are really talking about it just the football stadium. Our weight room, Reese Court, etc. are good facilities.
 
Seattle Eagle said:
I hope when you all mention "facilities", what you are really talking about it just the football stadium. Our weight room, Reese Court, etc. are good facilities.[/quote

I was thinking the same.
 
pure speculation at this point. my guess is that these emails are several months old from around the time that Idaho announced their move back to the Big Sky. But I agree with everyone else, anything can happen, and if the Montana schools bolt I don't want to be left in the dust because of our stadium situation.
 
Seattle Eagle said:
I hope when you all mention "facilities", what you are really talking about it just the football stadium. Our weight room, Reese Court, etc. are good facilities.


Yes, that's true. However, the football stadium is typically the crown jewel of athletics facilities for a D1 school. And ours is in desperate need of a makeover.
 
I don't know if Idaho is officially admitted yet, but shouldn't this give the Big Sky some pause about letting them in? This email quite clearly outlines that they want to destroy the conference from within. I see no benefit to adding a team who's admin thinks this way.
 
LDopaPDX said:
I don't know if Idaho is officially admitted yet, but shouldn't this give the Big Sky some pause about letting them in? This email quite clearly outlines that they want to destroy the conference from within. I see no benefit to adding a team who's admin thinks this way.

That's a very good point that I hadn't thought about, do we want a new member of the Big Sky that wants to tear the conference apart?
 
MLEagle said:
LDopaPDX said:
I don't know if Idaho is officially admitted yet, but shouldn't this give the Big Sky some pause about letting them in? This email quite clearly outlines that they want to destroy the conference from within. I see no benefit to adding a team who's admin thinks this way.

That's a very good point that I hadn't thought about, do we want a new member of the Big Sky that wants to tear the conference apart?

Personally, I think it was a lame attempt to appease donor types from both schools who have aspirations of going FBS.

Furthermore, you need more than 3 teams to make an FBS conference, and one of those three (Idaho) has proven for more than 20 years that they can't compete at that level.
 
LDopaPDX said:
Seattle Eagle said:
I hope when you all mention "facilities", what you are really talking about it just the football stadium. Our weight room, Reese Court, etc. are good facilities.


Yes, that's true. However, the football stadium is typically the crown jewel of athletics facilities for a D1 school. And ours is in desperate need of a makeover.

No argument on that front. It is the thorn in the side of an otherwise remarkable program.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top