BSC Football Schedule?

WSU Football talk & news.
Post Reply
User avatar
oldrunner
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4441
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:35 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Idaho
Location: Rocky Mountains

Why in the world is the BSC dragging it's feet in setting the spring schedule? Are they waiting for SUU to bolt so they can not schedule them in? Are they waiting for the California schools to commit to actually playing? The silence coming from the league is deafening. Just tell us all what you might be waiting for. Say something. :wall:
Things are good, but they are sure to get better! :nod:
User avatar
oldrunner
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4441
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:35 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Idaho
Location: Rocky Mountains

If SUU is truly leaving the BSC, but wants to play a BSC schedule this spring, then I think they should be scheduled 8 road games. Seems fair to everyone else that they are abandoning.
Things are good, but they are sure to get better! :nod:
User avatar
SWeberCat02
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4184
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:52 am
I am a fan of: Weber State

Sac St has announced that they will not participate in a spring season.
User avatar
oldrunner
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4441
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:35 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Idaho
Location: Rocky Mountains

SWeberCat02 wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:41 pm
Sac St has announced that they will not participate in a spring season.
They must think there will be some sort of advantage for them in the fall. I don't see it.
Things are good, but they are sure to get better! :nod:
sacstateman
Big Sky 1st Team
Posts: 459
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 11:04 am
I am a fan of: Sacramento State
Big Sky school I dislike most: UC Davis

oldrunner wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:27 am
SWeberCat02 wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:41 pm
Sac St has announced that they will not participate in a spring season.
They must think there will be some sort of advantage for them in the fall. I don't see it.

Not really an advantage but our coach doesn't want to play 20 or more games in a 12 month period.....in a regular season, you have 8 months for your body to recuperate and then train for another 4 month long season....with a spring schedule, realistically, you are looking at only 1 to 2 months off max....Now that the NCAA is granting another year of eligibility, there is no reason to play a spring sched....I think he is right but not for the reasons that you seem to believe.....
User avatar
oldrunner
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4441
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:35 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Idaho
Location: Rocky Mountains

sacstateman wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 9:30 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:27 am
SWeberCat02 wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:41 pm
Sac St has announced that they will not participate in a spring season.
They must think there will be some sort of advantage for them in the fall. I don't see it.

Not really an advantage but our coach doesn't want to play 20 or more games in a 12 month period.....in a regular season, you have 8 months for your body to recuperate and then train for another 4 month long season....with a spring schedule, realistically, you are looking at only 1 to 2 months off max....Now that the NCAA is granting another year of eligibility, there is no reason to play a spring sched....I think he is right but not for the reasons that you seem to believe.....
What you are saying is that coach thinks his guys will be more healthy having not played in the spring and thus have an advantage over those who do play in the spring. It could work that way or it could be an advantage for all of a teams depth players to get a lot of experience. The age old argument between experience and execution vs health and fitness will be put to the test. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out. I'm just hoping that there will be some sort of handle on our plague by that time. If not, nobody will be playing. :coffee:
Things are good, but they are sure to get better! :nod:
sacstateman
Big Sky 1st Team
Posts: 459
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 11:04 am
I am a fan of: Sacramento State
Big Sky school I dislike most: UC Davis

oldrunner wrote:
Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:51 pm
sacstateman wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 9:30 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:27 am
SWeberCat02 wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:41 pm
Sac St has announced that they will not participate in a spring season.
They must think there will be some sort of advantage for them in the fall. I don't see it.

Not really an advantage but our coach doesn't want to play 20 or more games in a 12 month period.....in a regular season, you have 8 months for your body to recuperate and then train for another 4 month long season....with a spring schedule, realistically, you are looking at only 1 to 2 months off max....Now that the NCAA is granting another year of eligibility, there is no reason to play a spring sched....I think he is right but not for the reasons that you seem to believe.....
What you are saying is that coach thinks his guys will be more healthy having not played in the spring and thus have an advantage over those who do play in the spring. It could work that way or it could be an advantage for all of a teams depth players to get a lot of experience. The age old argument between experience and execution vs health and fitness will be put to the test. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out. I'm just hoping that there will be some sort of handle on our plague by that time. If not, nobody will be playing. :coffee:

That is not what I said or meant.....Perhaps, our coach is actually looking out for the welfare of our players, not just using them like meat.....Your coach could do the same thing if he wanted to keep kids from suffering from stress injuries from over used bodies....
User avatar
oldrunner
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4441
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:35 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Idaho
Location: Rocky Mountains

sacstateman wrote:
Tue Oct 20, 2020 9:27 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:51 pm
sacstateman wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 9:30 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:27 am
SWeberCat02 wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:41 pm
Sac St has announced that they will not participate in a spring season.
They must think there will be some sort of advantage for them in the fall. I don't see it.

Not really an advantage but our coach doesn't want to play 20 or more games in a 12 month period.....in a regular season, you have 8 months for your body to recuperate and then train for another 4 month long season....with a spring schedule, realistically, you are looking at only 1 to 2 months off max....Now that the NCAA is granting another year of eligibility, there is no reason to play a spring sched....I think he is right but not for the reasons that you seem to believe.....
What you are saying is that coach thinks his guys will be more healthy having not played in the spring and thus have an advantage over those who do play in the spring. It could work that way or it could be an advantage for all of a teams depth players to get a lot of experience. The age old argument between experience and execution vs health and fitness will be put to the test. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out. I'm just hoping that there will be some sort of handle on our plague by that time. If not, nobody will be playing. :coffee:

That is not what I said or meant.....Perhaps, our coach is actually looking out for the welfare of our players, not just using them like meat.....Your coach could do the same thing if he wanted to keep kids from suffering from stress injuries from over used bodies....
That's BS. If your coach is only interested in the welfare of young people, then why would he let them play football at all, much less coach them to do such a harmful thing?
Things are good, but they are sure to get better! :nod:
sacstateman
Big Sky 1st Team
Posts: 459
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 11:04 am
I am a fan of: Sacramento State
Big Sky school I dislike most: UC Davis

oldrunner wrote:
Wed Oct 21, 2020 10:12 am
sacstateman wrote:
Tue Oct 20, 2020 9:27 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:51 pm
sacstateman wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 9:30 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:27 am
SWeberCat02 wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:41 pm
Sac St has announced that they will not participate in a spring season.
They must think there will be some sort of advantage for them in the fall. I don't see it.

Not really an advantage but our coach doesn't want to play 20 or more games in a 12 month period.....in a regular season, you have 8 months for your body to recuperate and then train for another 4 month long season....with a spring schedule, realistically, you are looking at only 1 to 2 months off max....Now that the NCAA is granting another year of eligibility, there is no reason to play a spring sched....I think he is right but not for the reasons that you seem to believe.....
What you are saying is that coach thinks his guys will be more healthy having not played in the spring and thus have an advantage over those who do play in the spring. It could work that way or it could be an advantage for all of a teams depth players to get a lot of experience. The age old argument between experience and execution vs health and fitness will be put to the test. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out. I'm just hoping that there will be some sort of handle on our plague by that time. If not, nobody will be playing. :coffee:

That is not what I said or meant.....Perhaps, our coach is actually looking out for the welfare of our players, not just using them like meat.....Your coach could do the same thing if he wanted to keep kids from suffering from stress injuries from over used bodies....
That's BS. If your coach is only interested in the welfare of young people, then why would he let them play football at all, much less coach them to do such a harmful thing?
I've thought this for many years but you have now confirmed it for me.....You are an idiot oldrunner.....nothing more need to be said......Now I know why you quit posting on the basketball board....because your ego was bruised by knowledgeable fans who weren't buying your BS anymore.....So long moron...
pawildcat
Big Sky Honorable Mention
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:07 am
I am a fan of: Southern Utah University

sacstateman wrote:
Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:21 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Wed Oct 21, 2020 10:12 am
sacstateman wrote:
Tue Oct 20, 2020 9:27 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:51 pm
sacstateman wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 9:30 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:27 am
SWeberCat02 wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:41 pm
Sac St has announced that they will not participate in a spring season.
They must think there will be some sort of advantage for them in the fall. I don't see it.

Not really an advantage but our coach doesn't want to play 20 or more games in a 12 month period.....in a regular season, you have 8 months for your body to recuperate and then train for another 4 month long season....with a spring schedule, realistically, you are looking at only 1 to 2 months off max....Now that the NCAA is granting another year of eligibility, there is no reason to play a spring sched....I think he is right but not for the reasons that you seem to believe.....
What you are saying is that coach thinks his guys will be more healthy having not played in the spring and thus have an advantage over those who do play in the spring. It could work that way or it could be an advantage for all of a teams depth players to get a lot of experience. The age old argument between experience and execution vs health and fitness will be put to the test. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out. I'm just hoping that there will be some sort of handle on our plague by that time. If not, nobody will be playing. :coffee:

That is not what I said or meant.....Perhaps, our coach is actually looking out for the welfare of our players, not just using them like meat.....Your coach could do the same thing if he wanted to keep kids from suffering from stress injuries from over used bodies....
That's BS. If your coach is only interested in the welfare of young people, then why would he let them play football at all, much less coach them to do such a harmful thing?
I've thought this for many years but you have now confirmed it for me.....You are an idiot oldrunner.....nothing more need to be said......Now I know why you quit posting on the basketball board....because your ego was bruised by knowledgeable fans who weren't buying your BS anymore.....So long moron...
Wow...I know that you have been around the block several times, sacstateman, but I would have hoped you would have kept your eyes open at least one of those times. This is an incredibly naive view you have on your athletic department. Take it from a Penn State fan, you should never take what your favorite athletic department says at face value...

Unless you are actually in the behind the scene meetings discussing this, which I am certain you aren't, you have no idea what the real reason is that your school is not playing football. Sure, there is a concern for the players safety, but I would venture to say that is a small concern.

I'm certain; however, it has nothing to do with money. I mean, it would be crazy to think that one of the top priorities of every college athletics departments, if not the top priority, is money! Certainly that couldn't be the case at Sac St! I mean, so what if Sac St has the highest althetic dept budget in the big sky at just over $31,000,000. And so what that Sac St has to subsidize almost 90% of its athletic dept budget. And what does it matter if no one is coming to the games as evident by the paltry $241,562 in ticket sales last year for all sports! And certainly canceling the football season has nothing to do with other CA state schools, that also subsidize around 90% of their athletic dept budget, currently having discussions about cutting their entire athletic department (UC Riverside).

Yes, student athlete safety is important. But let's be honest, if money was to be made, you can bet Sac St would be playing. Football is expensive and you are not getting a money game this year. I would venture to guess that if Sac St played football this year, it would lose so much money that it would jeopardize the entire athletic department. It sure sounds a lot better, though, if you say you are canceling it for the safety of the student athlete.

I understand that Sac St has more sports than other Big Sky schools, but it is a little crazy to me that their budget is so high. Yes, you have some decent olympic sports teams, but none of them are special (unlike NAU, the second highest athletic budget in the Big Sky, who has won multiple XC NCs over the last several years). While all Big Sky schools are going to have to adapt to the peri- and post-COVID era, yours might have to the most.
User avatar
SWeberCat02
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4184
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:52 am
I am a fan of: Weber State

Will be a six game conference-only schedule with a target starting date of Feb 27. Bye weeks after three games and the week before playoffs start. Bye weeks will give the ability to make up postponed games if necessary. Six games for most teams seems like a good number considering another full season will start in the fall.
sacstateman
Big Sky 1st Team
Posts: 459
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 11:04 am
I am a fan of: Sacramento State
Big Sky school I dislike most: UC Davis

pawildcat wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:39 am
sacstateman wrote:
Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:21 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Wed Oct 21, 2020 10:12 am
sacstateman wrote:
Tue Oct 20, 2020 9:27 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:51 pm
sacstateman wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 9:30 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:27 am
SWeberCat02 wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:41 pm
Sac St has announced that they will not participate in a spring season.
They must think there will be some sort of advantage for them in the fall. I don't see it.

Not really an advantage but our coach doesn't want to play 20 or more games in a 12 month period.....in a regular season, you have 8 months for your body to recuperate and then train for another 4 month long season....with a spring schedule, realistically, you are looking at only 1 to 2 months off max....Now that the NCAA is granting another year of eligibility, there is no reason to play a spring sched....I think he is right but not for the reasons that you seem to believe.....
What you are saying is that coach thinks his guys will be more healthy having not played in the spring and thus have an advantage over those who do play in the spring. It could work that way or it could be an advantage for all of a teams depth players to get a lot of experience. The age old argument between experience and execution vs health and fitness will be put to the test. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out. I'm just hoping that there will be some sort of handle on our plague by that time. If not, nobody will be playing. :coffee:

That is not what I said or meant.....Perhaps, our coach is actually looking out for the welfare of our players, not just using them like meat.....Your coach could do the same thing if he wanted to keep kids from suffering from stress injuries from over used bodies....
That's BS. If your coach is only interested in the welfare of young people, then why would he let them play football at all, much less coach them to do such a harmful thing?
I've thought this for many years but you have now confirmed it for me.....You are an idiot oldrunner.....nothing more need to be said......Now I know why you quit posting on the basketball board....because your ego was bruised by knowledgeable fans who weren't buying your BS anymore.....So long moron...
Wow...I know that you have been around the block several times, sacstateman, but I would have hoped you would have kept your eyes open at least one of those times. This is an incredibly naive view you have on your athletic department. Take it from a Penn State fan, you should never take what your favorite athletic department says at face value...

Unless you are actually in the behind the scene meetings discussing this, which I am certain you aren't, you have no idea what the real reason is that your school is not playing football. Sure, there is a concern for the players safety, but I would venture to say that is a small concern.

I'm certain; however, it has nothing to do with money. I mean, it would be crazy to think that one of the top priorities of every college athletics departments, if not the top priority, is money! Certainly that couldn't be the case at Sac St! I mean, so what if Sac St has the highest althetic dept budget in the big sky at just over $31,000,000. And so what that Sac St has to subsidize almost 90% of its athletic dept budget. And what does it matter if no one is coming to the games as evident by the paltry $241,562 in ticket sales last year for all sports! And certainly canceling the football season has nothing to do with other CA state schools, that also subsidize around 90% of their athletic dept budget, currently having discussions about cutting their entire athletic department (UC Riverside).

Yes, student athlete safety is important. But let's be honest, if money was to be made, you can bet Sac St would be playing. Football is expensive and you are not getting a money game this year. I would venture to guess that if Sac St played football this year, it would lose so much money that it would jeopardize the entire athletic department. It sure sounds a lot better, though, if you say you are canceling it for the safety of the student athlete.

I understand that Sac St has more sports than other Big Sky schools, but it is a little crazy to me that their budget is so high. Yes, you have some decent olympic sports teams, but none of them are special (unlike NAU, the second highest athletic budget in the Big Sky, who has won multiple XC NCs over the last several years). While all Big Sky schools are going to have to adapt to the peri- and post-COVID era, yours might have to the most.
Using your logic, with $241K as the total ticket sales for the year vs $30+ million budget for sports, WHY DO WE PLAY ANY SPORT? Money is NEVER made on sports in the BSC.....Even Weber loses money on sports.....Every school in the BSC loses money on sports.....Money is a factor but not the end all factor.....Quite frankly, since I'm not writing the checks, I don't care if they lose money....Sports are good for the overall college experience for students and alumni alike.....And oldrunner is still a moron!
pawildcat
Big Sky Honorable Mention
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:07 am
I am a fan of: Southern Utah University

sacstateman wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:56 am
]

Using your logic, with $241K as the total ticket sales for the year vs $30+ million budget for sports, WHY DO WE PLAY ANY SPORT? Money is NEVER made on sports in the BSC.....Even Weber loses money on sports.....Every school in the BSC loses money on sports.....Money is a factor but not the end all factor.....Quite frankly, since I'm not writing the checks, I don't care if they lose money....Sports are good for the overall college experience for students and alumni alike.....And oldrunner is still a moron!
"WHY DO WE PLAY ANY SPORT?"

If UC Riverside is any indication, this is exactly what sac st is asking itself right now while covering it up behind the facade of player safety.

While you try to state it as fact, it is in no way a foregone conclusion that sports are good for the overall college experience. There are many, many students and alumni that would disagree with you for a multitude of reasons. Those dissents gain power when the use of subsidies get reexamined in times of financial strife like we are currently experiencing.

While all bsc schools are in a precarious situation, sac st may be in the most tenuous position of them all. Sac st for instance, has double the athletic budget of Weber while using a substantially higher percentage of subsidies to cover that budget (87% for sac vs 64% for Weber). Additionally, Sac St sports are underperforming compared to the amount of money being spent on them and there would appear to be a definite apathy towards your athletic program (as evident by the hornets pathetic ticket sales).

So you can do your own math, but an athletic department, with a bloated budget requiring a percentage of subsidies that are almost the highest in the country, that is not successfully engaging the students or alumni sure seems like a terrible formula for success right now.

But let's keep saying that player safety is the reason why sac st is not playing football in the spring (wink, wink)...

Frankly, I don't get the Weber posters on this board. They are happy to cannibalize oldrunner, who is one of their own, because he is an eternal optimist who is occasionally delusional. But they won't call you out for being a pompous ass. I get that I am a pompous ass also, but at least I'm not trolling your fan board.
sacstateman
Big Sky 1st Team
Posts: 459
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 11:04 am
I am a fan of: Sacramento State
Big Sky school I dislike most: UC Davis

This "troll" has 5 times the number of posts on your board than you do....Nice try youngster....
pawildcat
Big Sky Honorable Mention
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:07 am
I am a fan of: Southern Utah University

sacstateman wrote:
Sat Oct 24, 2020 1:49 pm
This "troll" has 5 times the number of posts on your board than you do....Nice try youngster....
So...you think because you post a lot that you aren't trolling this board? Ok, Boomer... :roll:

Perhaps you wouldn't post so much if you had an actual life. Have you tried pickleball? I hear the elderly love it.

Farewell, sacstateman. Your posts are the equivalent of a Skip Bayless hot take...complete garbage. You are not worth anymore of my time.

To the Weber State posters, I apologize for side tracking this conversation. I think that a 6 game spring season will be really fun and i am looking forward to seeing the schedule. I'm afraid, though, that we will still be in the throes of COVID-19. It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Go Wildcats!
User avatar
oldrunner
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4441
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:35 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Idaho
Location: Rocky Mountains

pawildcat wrote:
Sat Oct 24, 2020 8:04 pm
sacstateman wrote:
Sat Oct 24, 2020 1:49 pm
This "troll" has 5 times the number of posts on your board than you do....Nice try youngster....
So...you think because you post a lot that you aren't trolling this board? Ok, Boomer... :roll:

Perhaps you wouldn't post so much if you had an actual life. Have you tried pickleball? I hear the elderly love it.

Farewell, sacstateman. Your posts are the equivalent of a Skip Bayless hot take...complete garbage. You are not worth anymore of my time.

To the Weber State posters, I apologize for side tracking this conversation. I think that a 6 game spring season will be really fun and i am looking forward to seeing the schedule. I'm afraid, though, that we will still be in the throes of COVID-19. It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Go Wildcats!
Check your PM's.
Things are good, but they are sure to get better! :nod:
The Dan
Big Sky 1st Team
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2015 12:56 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Southern Utah

CAA announced their schedules. It’s about time for the Big Sky to do so...
User avatar
oldrunner
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4441
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:35 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Idaho
Location: Rocky Mountains

The Dan wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:33 am
CAA announced their schedules. It’s about time for the Big Sky to do so...
They are, obviously, waiting for something or someone. If I had to guess, there may be a school or two who have not committed yet or a school or two who have not even committed to being in the BSC yet. I would think that those things need to be in place for a schedule to be put together. I'm not sure if Oregon or Washington are even allowing gatherings large enough for a football team to have a full practice. :coffee:
Things are good, but they are sure to get better! :nod:
User avatar
WILDCAT
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4080
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:56 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Idaho

oldrunner wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 3:11 pm
The Dan wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:33 am
CAA announced their schedules. It’s about time for the Big Sky to do so...
They are, obviously, waiting for something or someone. If I had to guess, there may be a school or two who have not committed yet or a school or two who have not even committed to being in the BSC yet. I would think that those things need to be in place for a schedule to be put together. I'm not sure if Oregon or Washington are even allowing gatherings large enough for a football team to have a full practice. :coffee:
My money is on Montana. If they dont play then the whole conf wont
:rockon: I STAND AND SUPPORT:rockon:
User avatar
oldrunner
9 Time Big Sky Champ
Posts: 4441
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:35 pm
I am a fan of: Weber State
Big Sky school I dislike most: Idaho
Location: Rocky Mountains

WILDCAT wrote:
Sat Oct 31, 2020 6:12 pm
oldrunner wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 3:11 pm
The Dan wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:33 am
CAA announced their schedules. It’s about time for the Big Sky to do so...
They are, obviously, waiting for something or someone. If I had to guess, there may be a school or two who have not committed yet or a school or two who have not even committed to being in the BSC yet. I would think that those things need to be in place for a schedule to be put together. I'm not sure if Oregon or Washington are even allowing gatherings large enough for a football team to have a full practice. :coffee:
My money is on Montana. If they dont play then the whole conf wont
There are some fans in Montana who are thinking that way as well. Although, I can't believe that coach Bobby would go for opting out. Even if both of the Montanas opted out, the rest of the league could still play. If 5 or 6 teams dropped out, it would get a bit dicey.
Things are good, but they are sure to get better! :nod:
Post Reply

Cal Poly
Eastern Washington
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
North Dakota
Northern Arizona
Northern Colorado
Portland State
Sacramento State
Southern Utah
UC Davis
Weber State