Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Some of the Scout boards have been giving old Cal Poly a bit of grief about moving to the Big Sky. Saying essentially that they had to go to the BSC because they were "rejected" by the WAC. Personally I dont buy that at all. As I have said on those boards. It is really not about who the WAC should take it is really about who is willing to come....Given the football landscape in the west right now, does it really make any sense to be spending millions of dollars to join a less stable and equal football strength conference???....yes I said equal!!!

Consider this (per Sagarin national FBS/FCS mixed ranking)

Top 6 western FCS teams as of today

North Dakota St. 83
Cal Poly 84
Montana 117
Weber 124
Northern Arizona 126
Eastern Washington 129

Avg Ranking 110

Note: 5 of the 6 teams above will all be Big Sky in 2012....


WAC 6

Hawaii 68
Idaho 88
Utah St. 91
San Jose St. 107
La Tech 110
New Mexico St. 177

Avg Ranking 107

If you throw out any of the teams most likely to leave the WAC (Hawaii, La Tech maybe USU) you start to see that in fact the furure Big Sky may be stronger.

Now dont misunderstand...I am a fan of WAC football and I want to see a healthy WAC conference. I hope they are able to pick up a few teams and continue as they have in the past but honestly it is pretty touch an go right now. The WAC folks on Scout asking which team will "step up a level" are delusional...step up? More like step in and save their @ZZZ.

Why would North Dakota State be in the Big Sky in 2012?

Mvemjsunpx wrote:Why would North Dakota State be in the Big Sky in 2012?

they wouldnt...I hate when I do that....those dakotas always screw me up..i'll edit

This is something JMU fans have been arguing for some time now. Some people want to jump to be "playing at a higher level" while others are perfectly content at the FCS level. Using things like Sagarin's shows just how off those people are - the CAA is consistently ranked above the MAC and Sun Belt, the two conferences we'd most likely go to.

The biggest reason for fans of FCS wanting to jump to any FBS conference, no matter how bad, is that they suffer from little brother complex. You know, big BCS brother is constantly denigrating our brand of football, saying we can't compete, we suck, that we'll never have our names up in lights, etc. These people need a IA conference to belong to for validation and to prove that they in fact don't suck.

I don't need that shit - I know the CAA is better than those bottom dwellers, I know the Big Sky is on par with the WAC. We get an equal or greater level of competition where we're at now, with far fewer scholarships. The only lacking is the "IA" label, which to be honest, doesn't matter for crap if it's not BCS - who thinks Temple is a good team outside us and the MAC?

Sure there are fans who want the "glory" of playing FBS. And there are ADs and Presidents who hanker after the big media play of the FBS. But it comes at a huge cost. Yes, we're playing even with the lower tier of the FBS. But more importantly, we're solvent.