Big Sky Conference Splitting?

[BleedingBLue]

I think it bad business to have a charter member leave the conference and/or separate Weber from Southern Utah. I like the super conference as it is. Especially with the improving TV coverage. Would be cool to see Idaho return.

Can you imagine the muddled mess of a 15 team super conference if NMSU joins as well? The top of the conference is already jumbled with 13 teams. The fact that SUU won the conference title outright this year was a miracle. If the FCS was allowed conference championships games with 2 divisions then this scenario would be great. But they don't. And there could be 7 or 8 teams in the conference deserving of a playoff spot and there is no way that many would ever get in. We could also keep Weber and NAU and I'll bet San Diego would be more than willing to join the new Great West still giving them 7 teams and the Big Sky 9. UNC could go into that conference too and we could keep ISU. Many scenarios are possible.

I don't see any chance that San Diego will ever join the Big Sky, or Great West, or whatever a new conference might be called. Being a non-scholarship program, it would be very difficult for them to ever compete with scholarship programs.

They are the only team in the FCS that doesn't offer athletic scholarships. So every team in the Pioneer, where they currently are a member, utilizes scholarships. It would save them hundreds of thousands every year on travel alone to be in a western conference.

[John K]

I think it bad business to have a charter member leave the conference and/or separate Weber from Southern Utah. I like the super conference as it is. Especially with the improving TV coverage. Would be cool to see Idaho return.

Can you imagine the muddled mess of a 15 team super conference if NMSU joins as well? The top of the conference is already jumbled with 13 teams. The fact that SUU won the conference title outright this year was a miracle. If the FCS was allowed conference championships games with 2 divisions then this scenario would be great. But they don't. And there could be 7 or 8 teams in the conference deserving of a playoff spot and there is no way that many would ever get in. We could also keep Weber and NAU and I'll bet San Diego would be more than willing to join the new Great West still giving them 7 teams and the Big Sky 9. UNC could go into that conference too and we could keep ISU. Many scenarios are possible.

I don't see any chance that San Diego will ever join the Big Sky, or Great West, or whatever a new conference might be called. Being a non-scholarship program, it would be very difficult for them to ever compete with scholarship programs.

They are the only team in the FCS that doesn't offer athletic scholarships. So every team in the Pioneer, where they currently are a member, utilizes scholarships. It would save them hundreds of thousands every year on travel alone to be in a western conference.

Are you sure about that? Is that something new? I know that the PFL used to be non-scholarship, as well as the Ivy League of course.

Edit: I just did a little research, and from what I could find, I believe the PFL is still non-scholarship, and as already noted, the Ivy League is also non-scholarship.

[BleedingBLue]

I think it bad business to have a charter member leave the conference and/or separate Weber from Southern Utah. I like the super conference as it is. Especially with the improving TV coverage. Would be cool to see Idaho return.

Can you imagine the muddled mess of a 15 team super conference if NMSU joins as well? The top of the conference is already jumbled with 13 teams. The fact that SUU won the conference title outright this year was a miracle. If the FCS was allowed conference championships games with 2 divisions then this scenario would be great. But they don't. And there could be 7 or 8 teams in the conference deserving of a playoff spot and there is no way that many would ever get in. We could also keep Weber and NAU and I'll bet San Diego would be more than willing to join the new Great West still giving them 7 teams and the Big Sky 9. UNC could go into that conference too and we could keep ISU. Many scenarios are possible.

I don't see any chance that San Diego will ever join the Big Sky, or Great West, or whatever a new conference might be called. Being a non-scholarship program, it would be very difficult for them to ever compete with scholarship programs.

They are the only team in the FCS that doesn't offer athletic scholarships. So every team in the Pioneer, where they currently are a member, utilizes scholarships. It would save them hundreds of thousands every year on travel alone to be in a western conference.

Are you sure about that? Is that something new? I know that the PFL used to be non-scholarship, as well as the Ivy League of course.

Edit: I just did a little research, and from what I could find, I believe the PFL is still non-scholarship, and as already noted, the Ivy League is also non-scholarship.

You are correct, I was mistaken. Most of the Pioneer teams are big basketball schools so football is secondary. I wish MSU could afford to make multiple trips east every year like San Diego!

[FTG06']

The big sky and FCS football are both better if the conference does NOT split. Two divisions would be fine, but recreating the great west doesn't do much good IMO. Idaho is certainly welcome to join the fold, but the BSC is in good shape without them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[allcat]

I say we treat it like soccer. Put the best 7 in one conference with 1 or 2 worst moving to the other conference and the 1 or 2 best moving to the Big Sky. Whatever tv money they get the top conference splits 2/3 and the bottom conference splitting 1/3.

[BleedingBLue]

I say we treat it like soccer. Put the best 7 in one conference with 1 or 2 worst moving to the other conference and the 1 or 2 best moving to the Big Sky. Whatever tv money they get the top conference splits 2/3 and the bottom conference splitting 1/3.

The only problem here is that a conference with 7 teams is not looked at favorable for at large bids when the playoffs come. The Big Sky would need at least 8.

[John K]

I say we treat it like soccer. Put the best 7 in one conference with 1 or 2 worst moving to the other conference and the 1 or 2 best moving to the Big Sky. Whatever tv money they get the top conference splits 2/3 and the bottom conference splitting 1/3.

The only problem here is that a conference with 7 teams is not looked at favorable for at large bids when the playoffs come. The Big Sky would need at least 8.

With 24 teams making the playoff field now, I think if a team is deserving, they will get selected, even if they play in a 7 team conference. I agree that it would be ideal to have at least 8 teams in each conference, but there just aren't any other scholarship FCS programs in the west to add, other than than UI and NMSU. Even if one of them would have only 7 teams, I definitely think it would be better to split into two conferences, versus one large super conference, in terms of getting the maximum number of playoff bids.

[John K]

On a side note, don't you think it's probably just a matter of time, before UND applies to join the MVFC, and the Summit League for all other sports? It just seems to make sense for all four Dakota schools to be in the same conference. Didn't UND's dispute over their nickname play at least a partial role in them being excluded from those conferences, at the time they decided to join the BSC? Since that's now been resolved, I'd bet that they'll eventually try to make that move.

[St George]

My opinion is that it is time to reconfigure the FCS, The big south has 6 teams, independents 1, patriot 7, sw athletic split in two with 5 teams each.

[BelgradeBobcat]

On a side note, don't you think it's probably just a matter of time, before UND applies to join the MVFC, and the Summit League for all other sports? It just seems to make sense for all four Dakota schools to be in the same conference. Didn't UND's dispute over their nickname play at least a partial role in them being excluded from those conferences, at the time they decided to join the BSC? Since that's now been resolved, I'd bet that they'll eventually try to make that move.

That's a really good question. There's a long discussion about this on UND's board: http://forum.siouxsports.com/topic/2079 ... on/?page=1
I think right now, the MVFC doesn't want any more members and they don't want to be even more Dakota-centric.

If Idaho does come back to the Big Sky in football, I think we will see Idaho, Montana, Montana State, and North Dakota hitching their wagons together. At an institutional level I think those four like being in each other's company.

[Rich K]

On a side note, don't you think it's probably just a matter of time, before UND applies to join the MVFC, and the Summit League for all other sports? It just seems to make sense for all four Dakota schools to be in the same conference. Didn't UND's dispute over their nickname play at least a partial role in them being excluded from those conferences, at the time they decided to join the BSC? Since that's now been resolved, I'd bet that they'll eventually try to make that move.

That's a really good question. There's a long discussion about this on UND's board: http://forum.siouxsports.com/topic/2079 ... on/?page=1
I think right now, the MVFC doesn't want any more members and they don't want to be even more Dakota-centric.

If Idaho does come back to the Big Sky in football, I think we will see Idaho, Montana, Montana State, and North Dakota hitching their wagons together. At an institutional level I think those four like being in each other's company.

I think it rather funny that so many of the posters indicate that if they do make the move to the Big Sky that they will no longer support Vandal football. Maybe if more people had supported vandal football they wouldn't be in the current mess. Maybe we should call them UIU in the same manner as UNCU. haha.

[BleedingBLue]

On a side note, don't you think it's probably just a matter of time, before UND applies to join the MVFC, and the Summit League for all other sports? It just seems to make sense for all four Dakota schools to be in the same conference. Didn't UND's dispute over their nickname play at least a partial role in them being excluded from those conferences, at the time they decided to join the BSC? Since that's now been resolved, I'd bet that they'll eventually try to make that move.

That's a really good question. There's a long discussion about this on UND's board: http://forum.siouxsports.com/topic/2079 ... on/?page=1
I think right now, the MVFC doesn't want any more members and they don't want to be even more Dakota-centric.

If Idaho does come back to the Big Sky in football, I think we will see Idaho, Montana, Montana State, and North Dakota hitching their wagons together. At an institutional level I think those four like being in each other's company.

I think it rather funny that so many of the posters indicate that if they do make the move to the Big Sky that they will no longer support Vandal football. Maybe if more people had supported vandal football they wouldn't be in the current mess. Maybe we should call them UIU in the same manner as UNCU. haha.

Great point on the MVFC. I think 10 teams is where they want to stay.

[BleedingBLue]

My opinion is that it is time to reconfigure the FCS, The big south has 6 teams, independents 1, patriot 7, sw athletic split in two with 5 teams each.

Reconfigure how? The SWAC basically plays by there own rules since they play a conference title game and the champion plays in a bowl game against the MEAC. Neither team participates in the FCS playoffs. The SWAC isn't allowed to because of the conference championship game and the MEAC voted as a conference to have the winner play the bowl game. If other teams in the MEAC are extended at large berths they can accept however. I'm not sure where reconfiguration is possible if teams want to play in the playoffs.

[WSUWILDCAT]

I think it bad business to have a charter member leave the conference and/or separate Weber from Southern Utah. I like the super conference as it is. Especially with the improving TV coverage. Would be cool to see Idaho return.

I would rather Weber be separated from SUU, than Idaho State, Montana State and Montana. NAU and SUU are bigger rivals than SUU and Weber, plus Weber and SUU can still schedule each other.

I had posted on the championship forum my version of the two conferences if the Big Sky should split, I realize that my selection and segregation might not be popular, but geographically I believe its the best and it splits the power in half.

My two conferences

The Big Sky Conference
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
North Dakota
Northern Colorado
Weber State

The Pacific Coast Conference
Cal Poly
Eastern Washington
Northern Arizona
Portland State
Sacramento State
Southern Utah
UC Davis

[blueandgoldblitz]

I think it bad business to have a charter member leave the conference and/or separate Weber from Southern Utah. I like the super conference as it is. Especially with the improving TV coverage. Would be cool to see Idaho return.

I would rather Weber be separated from SUU, than Idaho State, Montana State and Montana. NAU and SUU are bigger rivals than SUU and Weber, plus Weber and SUU can still schedule each other.

I had posted on the championship forum my version of the two conferences if the Big Sky should split, I realize that my selection and segregation might not be popular, but geographically I believe its the best and it splits the power in half.

My two conferences

The Big Sky Conference
Idaho
Idaho State
Montana
Montana State
North Dakota
Northern Colorado
Weber State

The Pacific Coast Conference
Cal Poly
Eastern Washington
Northern Arizona
Portland State
Sacramento State
Southern Utah
UC Davis

I could get behind that kind of list. I would prefer to have Eastern Washington in the same conference as MSU and UM but I understand why you did what you did

[lutecat]

No way we give up ewu. Lose n. Colorado if that's the case.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[John K]

No way we give up ewu. Lose n. Colorado if that's the case.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

It's going to be really difficult to split up the schools in a way that will make everyone happy, and that will meet all the various criteria that could/should govern which teams are grouped together. And of course it's very possible that NMSU could also be included. How exactly would the two leagues be linked? If each conference had 7 teams (assuming no NMSU), would all teams be required to play 2-3 games against teams in the other league? Would a rotation be built into the inter-conference schedule for all teams in both conferences, or would teams be allowed to schedule whomever they wanted for non-conference games, but strongly encouraged to schedule as many games as possible against teams from their "sister" league? It's a really intriguing concept, but there would be lots of complicated details that would have to be resolved, in order for it to happen. Plus, I'm still not convinced that Idaho will accept the invitation to join the BSC. I'd say it's no more than 50-50 at this point, that they'll actually make the move back to the BSC/FCS, at least as D-I is currently constituted.

[Montanabob]

You must be from Missoula cause you're smoking some damn good weed. Idaho is coming back with that you want it or not the decision was made a couple years ago and they decided to even come back into this conference they just had to appease her boosters you know now they're boosters know better

[GRIZ1STCATS2ND]

You must be from Missoula cause you're smoking some damn good weed. Idaho is coming back with that you want it or not the decision was made a couple years ago and they decided to even come back into this conference they just had to appease her boosters you know now they're boosters know better

This. What most of the fans want to do is very different than what needs to be done. They're stubborn. They'll get over it in time after competing here for a couple years. If they are too good for the BSC they should run the board......right? Not gonna happen.

[John K]

You must be from Missoula cause you're smoking some damn good weed. Idaho is coming back with that you want it or not the decision was made a couple years ago and they decided to even come back into this conference they just had to appease her boosters you know now they're boosters know better

I most certainly am not from Missoula, and I haven't been smoking any bad weed even, let alone any good stuff. I just think there's so much resistance to this move from their boosters and fans, that they may try to ride it out in FBS somehow (going independent would seem to be their only option), or maybe even just drop the program, at least until the seemingly inevitable reorganization of all of D-I football eventually happens. If you've ever read any of my previous posts on this issue, you would know how I feel about it. They had no business moving up to I-A/FBS in the first place, back in 1996. Every year that goes by, it becomes more and more obvious that they don't belong at that level, and the sooner they admit that to themselves, the better. But when you read their board, many of the comments are almost militant in their tone, in expressing their opposition concerning a potential move to the BSC/FCS. It seems like their administration has resigned themselves to it, but it's going to be a very tough sell to convince their boosters and fans that it's the right thing to do for their program.