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

So was just browsing around looking to see if SUU will schedule themselves out of the playoffs again (which we nearly have done once again this season) when I stumbled across an article talking about Idaho going FBS Independent which can be found here:
http://www.fbschedules.com/2012/10/idah ... dependent/

It looks like the Vandals are going to try and continue to get wailed on in FBS competition instead of joining the Big Sky, does that mean Fullerton may be looking at adding another team to even out at 14? I am also curious about the state of North Dakota, are they working on a new mascot? And since they (for the time being anyway) have resolved their name issues does that mean they may be going to the MVC to join their rival the Yotes? Just curious as to what the future holds as I am definitely not a fan of the current game layout for the Big Sky.

From what I understand, UND is committed to being a football big boy in the Big Sky Conference.

Idaho is in the Big Sky now for all sports not named football, which I think was terrible for Fullerton to allow. The Big Sky shouldn't be a fallback plan for Idaho, after they thought they were too good for it 16 years ago. I say let 'em rot in limbo. Keep in mind, they were opposed to expansion in the 80s and early 90s, which meant they opposed BOTH Eastern and Sac State, as well as Portland State.

Will they ultimately join the Big Sky in football? I'd say it's 50/50. Their goal is to hope like hell some other conference opens up admission in the next couple of years. They'll make money playing whipping boy on the road, but will wind up giving it all back to get the 4 home games required by NCAA rule. Why would anyone with any options play Idaho on the road?

Common sense indicates the Big Sky is the right choice for their football program, but their AD and staff see potential pay cuts by leaving FBS and thus are opposed to it. Therefore, they'll be stuck with a 0, 1, or 2 win football program unless somebody invites them into the fold. The MWC won't do it, I guess that leaves them to lobby the Sun Belt.

Holy crap... as of right now with the schedule "nearing completion," they have 5 confirmed home games over the next 2 years.

Kick UND to the MVFC, and bring in Idaho. Shrinks our footprint considerably and makes WAY too much sense.

AZGrizFan wrote:Kick UND to the MVFC, and bring in Idaho. Shrinks our footprint considerably and makes WAY too much sense.

We still would be stuck with 13 teams then and stuck in the current situation, I just am not a fan of the Big Sky game thats not a conference game system, with 12 teams we could easily split into two conferences (Big Sky North and South) and just play half of the other conference each season. Gives us 8 Big Sky games every year which leaves room for a D2 or FBS opponents.

SUUTbird wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Kick UND to the MVFC, and bring in Idaho. Shrinks our footprint considerably and makes WAY too much sense.

We still would be stuck with 13 teams then and stuck in the current situation, I just am not a fan of the Big Sky game thats not a conference game system, with 12 teams we could easily split into two conferences (Big Sky North and South) and just play half of the other conference each season. Gives us 8 Big Sky games every year which leaves room for a D2 or FBS opponents.

Agreed wholeheartedly. We're about to see the limitations of that in the very first year with Cal Poly potentially running the table and never having had to play EWU, UM or MSU. BTW, we'll always have 8 BSC games...just a function of how they're dole'd out.

To get to 12 I wouldn't mind seeing UNC go back to D-II. They become the biggest outlier once UND is gone anyways...

LDopaPDX wrote:Holy crap... as of right now with the schedule "nearing completion," they have 5 confirmed home games over the next 2 years.

You have to have four FBS games at home per season to stay in the division.

There's actually rumors Idaho and NMSU will play four times a season (2x H/H) to meet the requirements; they're already scheduled to play each other twice a season for the next two years (in-season H/H). Each is struggling to find that 4th home game though and playing each other four times would solve the issue.

∞∞∞ wrote:

LDopaPDX wrote:Holy crap... as of right now with the schedule "nearing completion," they have 5 confirmed home games over the next 2 years.

You have to have four FBS games at home per season to stay in the division.

There's actually rumors Idaho and NMSU will play four times a season (2x H/H) to meet the requirements; they're already scheduled to play each other twice a season for the next two years (in-season H/H). Each is struggling to find that 4th home game though and playing each other four times would solve the issue.

I could maybe see New Mexico State getting into the CUSA eventually since some of the out west schools (Houston and SMU) bolted for the Big East. If the Aggies joined they would be a good fit and add more teams out west along with UTSA, UTEP, Rice and Tulsa.

Back to the Big Sky has anyone even heard anything regarding North Dakota? Ever since the NCAA shot down their latest mascot issue (not allowed to get a new one until 2015) I havent heard anything about their intentions.

SUUTbird wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote: You have to have four FBS games at home per season to stay in the division.

There's actually rumors Idaho and NMSU will play four times a season (2x H/H) to meet the requirements; they're already scheduled to play each other twice a season for the next two years (in-season H/H). Each is struggling to find that 4th home game though and playing each other four times would solve the issue.

I could maybe see New Mexico State getting into the CUSA eventually since some of the out west schools (Houston and SMU) bolted for the Big East. If the Aggies joined they would be a good fit and add more teams out west along with UTSA, UTEP, Rice and Tulsa.

Back to the Big Sky has anyone even heard anything regarding North Dakota? Ever since the NCAA shot down their latest mascot issue havent heard anything about their intentions.

I believe they're going this year without a mascot.

AZGrizFan wrote:Kick UND to the MVFC, and bring in Idaho. Shrinks our footprint considerably and makes WAY too much sense.

Precisely why Fullerton won't go for it.

SUUTbird wrote:So was just browsing around looking to see if SUU will schedule themselves out of the playoffs again (which we nearly have done once again this season) when I stumbled across an article talking about Idaho going FBS Independent which can be found here:
http://www.fbschedules.com/2012/10/idah ... dependent/

It looks like the Vandals are going to try and continue to get wailed on in FBS competition instead of joining the Big Sky, does that mean Fullerton may be looking at adding another team to even out at 14? I am also curious about the state of North Dakota, are they working on a new mascot? And since they (for the time being anyway) have resolved their name issues does that mean they may be going to the MVC to join their rival the Yotes? Just curious as to what the future holds as I am definitely not a fan of the current game layout for the Big Sky.

Idaho will always have an open invitation to come back to the Big Sky, right up until they do it. They couldn't get into the WAC without the help of Boise State, so maybe they are thinking Boise will help them again. They have always seen themselves as on a par with Boise, going back to the days when both were in the Big Sky (talk about delusions of grandeur).

What I see is UND eventually moving to the Mo Valley, and the Big Sky bringing in Central Washington, Western Oregon, Humboldt State and Dixie State, bringing the total teams to a more manageable 16.

How is 16 "more manageable?"

Of those, I can see CWU moving up. I'm not so sure about the others. WOU is barely over .500 with a crazy schedule that's VERY similar to what we've been proposing for Idaho and NMSU. Humboldt's doing OK THIS year, but they've historically been bad (similar schedule since they're in the same league). Dixie is BELOW .500 with the same record. At least WOU tried to do something about it by playing traditional D-II power Grand Valley.

Better choices would be CWU and Mesa State.

All that said, even if you don't like my picks, do we REALLY need another group of Lumberjacks in the Big Sky?

JALMOND wrote:

SUUTbird wrote:So was just browsing around looking to see if SUU will schedule themselves out of the playoffs again (which we nearly have done once again this season) when I stumbled across an article talking about Idaho going FBS Independent which can be found here:
http://www.fbschedules.com/2012/10/idah ... dependent/

It looks like the Vandals are going to try and continue to get wailed on in FBS competition instead of joining the Big Sky, does that mean Fullerton may be looking at adding another team to even out at 14? I am also curious about the state of North Dakota, are they working on a new mascot? And since they (for the time being anyway) have resolved their name issues does that mean they may be going to the MVC to join their rival the Yotes? Just curious as to what the future holds as I am definitely not a fan of the current game layout for the Big Sky.

Idaho will always have an open invitation to come back to the Big Sky, right up until they do it. They couldn't get into the WAC without the help of Boise State, so maybe they are thinking Boise will help them again. They have always seen themselves as on a par with Boise, going back to the days when both were in the Big Sky (talk about delusions of grandeur).

What I see is UND eventually moving to the Mo Valley, and the Big Sky bringing in Central Washington, Western Oregon, Humboldt State and Dixie State, bringing the total teams to a more manageable 16.

I'd rather see that split into two conferences then. I'd love to have Montana in a conference with MSU, EWU, PSU, ISU, WSU, CWU, Western Oregon.

AZGrizFan wrote:

JALMOND wrote:
Idaho will always have an open invitation to come back to the Big Sky, right up until they do it. They couldn't get into the WAC without the help of Boise State, so maybe they are thinking Boise will help them again. They have always seen themselves as on a par with Boise, going back to the days when both were in the Big Sky (talk about delusions of grandeur).

What I see is UND eventually moving to the Mo Valley, and the Big Sky bringing in Central Washington, Western Oregon, Humboldt State and Dixie State, bringing the total teams to a more manageable 16.

I'd rather see that split into two conferences then. I'd love to have Montana in a conference with MSU, EWU, PSU, ISU, WSU, CWU, Western Oregon.

why do all the teams have to be in the same conference? There is no money in the FCS for a conference championship game. Why not let Poly, Sac, UC Davis, NAU, San Diego, SUU and one to two others be in one conference and the other can be what AZ said. Makes more sense and would curb costs for all schools.

putter wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
I'd rather see that split into two conferences then. I'd love to have Montana in a conference with MSU, EWU, PSU, ISU, WSU, CWU, Western Oregon.

why do all the teams have to be in the same conference? There is no money in the FCS for a conference championship game. Why not let Poly, Sac, UC Davis, NAU, San Diego, SUU and one to two others be in one conference and the other can be what AZ said. Makes more sense and would curb costs for all schools.

Precisely. Of course, for recruiting purposes that doesn't work...

JALMOND wrote: What I see is UND eventually moving to the Mo Valley, and the Big Sky bringing in Central Washington, Western Oregon, Humboldt State and Dixie State, bringing the total teams to a more manageable 16.

Uh, no. No chance on CWU, they are nowhere close to being DI ready. Humboldt State, maybe...Dixie State? No thanks.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

EWURanger wrote:

JALMOND wrote: What I see is UND eventually moving to the Mo Valley, and the Big Sky bringing in Central Washington, Western Oregon, Humboldt State and Dixie State, bringing the total teams to a more manageable 16.

Uh, no. No chance on CWU, they are nowhere close to being DI ready. Humboldt State, maybe...Dixie State? No thanks.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True but of course the same could be said for Eastern in the early 80's.

AZGrizFan wrote:

SUUTbird wrote:
We still would be stuck with 13 teams then and stuck in the current situation, I just am not a fan of the Big Sky game thats not a conference game system, with 12 teams we could easily split into two conferences (Big Sky North and South) and just play half of the other conference each season. Gives us 8 Big Sky games every year which leaves room for a D2 or FBS opponents.

Agreed wholeheartedly. We're about to see the limitations of that in the very first year with Cal Poly potentially running the table and never having had to play EWU, UM or MSU. BTW, we'll always have 8 BSC games...just a function of how they're dole'd out.

To get to 12 I wouldn't mind seeing UNC go back to D-II. They become the biggest outlier once UND is gone anyways...

Why would we? Mens and women's hoops, and volleyball have been pretty successful in D1

BigSkyBears wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Agreed wholeheartedly. We're about to see the limitations of that in the very first year with Cal Poly potentially running the table and never having had to play EWU, UM or MSU. BTW, we'll always have 8 BSC games...just a function of how they're dole'd out.

To get to 12 I wouldn't mind seeing UNC go back to D-II. They become the biggest outlier once UND is gone anyways...

Why would we? Mens and women's hoops, and volleyball have been pretty successful in D1

Because those don't make any money. And your football team sucks. And you're a geophgraphic outlier. And Greeley is a shithole.

Any other questions?

AZGrizFan wrote:

SUUTbird wrote:
We still would be stuck with 13 teams then and stuck in the current situation, I just am not a fan of the Big Sky game thats not a conference game system, with 12 teams we could easily split into two conferences (Big Sky North and South) and just play half of the other conference each season. Gives us 8 Big Sky games every year which leaves room for a D2 or FBS opponents.

Agreed wholeheartedly. We're about to see the limitations of that in the very first year with Cal Poly potentially running the table and never having had to play EWU, UM or MSU. BTW, we'll always have 8 BSC games...just a function of how they're dole'd out.

To get to 12 I wouldn't mind seeing UNC go back to D-II. They become the biggest outlier once UND is gone anyways...

The Big Sky made the conference schedule, not Cal Poly. The 3 games Cal Poly could schedule are San Diego, Wyoming and Eastern Washingon. Of your BIG 3 Cal Poly will not play UM and MSU (we play EWU in a OOC game). One could argue that Cal Poly's schedule is tougher this year not having a 3-4 (1-3) Montana on it and MSU and UM's are easier not having to face 6-0 (4-0) Cal Poly. I am just saying......

SloStang wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Agreed wholeheartedly. We're about to see the limitations of that in the very first year with Cal Poly potentially running the table and never having had to play EWU, UM or MSU. BTW, we'll always have 8 BSC games...just a function of how they're dole'd out.

To get to 12 I wouldn't mind seeing UNC go back to D-II. They become the biggest outlier once UND is gone anyways...

The Big Sky made the conference schedule, not Cal Poly. The 3 games Cal Poly could schedule are San Diego, Wyoming and Eastern Washingon. Of your BIG 3 Cal Poly will not play UM and MSU (we play EWU in a OOC game). One could argue that Cal Poly's schedule is tougher this year not having a 3-4 (1-3) Montana on it and MSU and UM's are easier not having to face 6-0 (4-0) Cal Poly. I am just saying......

a) I've not stated Cal Poly had the luxury of making their own schedule
b) yes you're correct about the "tougher schedule" thingy...but remember: this year is an anomaly.
c) EWU is an OOC game. Case closed.
d) Congrats on the conference title first year in. You know your mustangs (and your tailgate) are close to my heart!

AZGrizFan wrote:

SloStang wrote: The Big Sky made the conference schedule, not Cal Poly. The 3 games Cal Poly could schedule are San Diego, Wyoming and Eastern Washingon. Of your BIG 3 Cal Poly will not play UM and MSU (we play EWU in a OOC game). One could argue that Cal Poly's schedule is tougher this year not having a 3-4 (1-3) Montana on it and MSU and UM's are easier not having to face 6-0 (4-0) Cal Poly. I am just saying......

a) I've not stated Cal Poly had the luxury of making their own schedule
b) yes you're correct about the "tougher schedule" thingy...but remember: this year is an anomaly.
c) EWU is an OOC game. Case closed.
d) Congrats on the conference title first year in. You know your mustangs (and your tailgate) are close to my heart!

Just having fun with you, see the wink at the end.

SloStang wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
a) I've not stated Cal Poly had the luxury of making their own schedule
b) yes you're correct about the "tougher schedule" thingy...but remember: this year is an anomaly.
c) EWU is an OOC game. Case closed.
d) Congrats on the conference title first year in. You know your mustangs (and your tailgate) are close to my heart!

Just having fun with you, see the wink at the end.

Oh. Is that what that means? I thought you were hittin' on me....

AZGrizFan wrote:

SloStang wrote: Just having fun with you, see the wink at the end.

Oh. Is that what that means? I thought you were hittin' on me....

I've met you. Not even my dog that tries to hump everyone's leg would hit on you.

kalm wrote:

EWURanger wrote:
Uh, no. No chance on CWU, they are nowhere close to being DI ready. Humboldt State, maybe...Dixie State? No thanks.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True but of course the same could be said for Eastern in the early 80's.

Reese Court, etc. back in the 80's was still miles better than anything CWU has now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk