Big Sky announces Montanas not going to WAC

[weberwildcat]

http://bigskyconf.com/news/2010/11/1/GE ... 05326.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The Big Sky does not anticipate losing any of its current nine core members."

This is great news for the current members.

[EWURanger]

http://bigskyconf.com/news/2010/11/1/GE ... 05326.aspx

"The Big Sky does not anticipate losing any of its current nine core members."

This is great news for the current members.

Well, not in the next year or so, anyway. I still think there's a strong possibility that UM will try to bolt at some point. I like that the conference is being pro-active. Been saying all along that UND and USD aren't that great as far as geography goes, but adding two flagship universities is a good move, IMO.

[webfan]

I'll still bet Montana's gone in 3-4 years.

[cats2506]

“The moves we’ve made aren’t about protection,’’ Fullerton said. “If the talk out there is true that playing at the FBS level of football is unsustainable for many schools, then FCS will play an even bigger role in the future. The Big Sky presidents want the Big Sky to be the first major player coming from the FCS ranks.

“We have to change a lot of mindsets,’’ Fullerton added. “Every time someone from our division has sustained success, the national media believes that school has to move up to the FBS level, and that’s not the case.”

or the WAC comes to us

[nwFL Griz]

Kind of a stretch between "doesn't anticipate losing..." and "announces Montana not going to WAC", isn't it?

I'm sure the WAC didn't anticipate losing Fresno or Nevada, either. Right up until both announced they were leaving.

I would wait to hear from UM before declaring that they are not leaving.

[catbob]

Kind of a stretch between "doesn't anticipate losing..." and "announces Montana not going to WAC", isn't it?

I'm sure the WAC didn't anticipate losing Fresno or Nevada, either. Right up until both announced they were leaving.

I would wait to hear from UM before declaring that they are not leaving.

I was going to post the same thing.

[bpcats]

When Montana can find a way to double its athletic budget including coaches salary then they will move up. WAC is in a precarious position right now anyways. Might not be around by time Montana is ready to move up.

[SouthDakotaGrizzly]

When Montana can find a way to double its athletic budget including coaches salary then they will move up. WAC is in a precarious position right now anyways. Might not be around by time Montana is ready to move up.

It's all part of Montana's plan....wait for the WAC to fold and then make the jump straight to the Mountain West or Pac-10/12.

[EWURanger]

I don't think the WAC will be around, personally. When the BCS conferences are done forming these "super-leagues", it will virtually shut all of the non-BCS conferences out of the major bowl bids, and along with it, all the major money to be made from said bowls. I think Fullerton might be on track when he says that FBS is going to be more and more un-sustainable in the coming years. That said, there needs to be some changes made in FCS to make it less attractive for schools to want to move up.

[webfan]

How ya going to make it "less attractive" to go FBS? Do you think the minor bowls are gonna fold?

[EWURanger]

How ya going to make it "less attractive" to go FBS? Do you think the minor bowls are gonna fold?

No, I don't.....not necessarily. But what I am saying is that the BCS conferences are positioning themselves to keep the non-BCS conferences out of any BCS bowl bids. So, being in a non-BCS FBS conference is going to be less attractive for FCS programs that are looking to move up, because there's no money in those crappy bowl games.

[nwFL Griz]

How ya going to make it "less attractive" to go FBS? Do you think the minor bowls are gonna fold?

No, I don't.....not necessarily. But what I am saying is that the BCS conferences are positioning themselves to keep the non-BCS conferences out of any BCS bowl bids. So, being in a non-BCS FBS conference is going to be less attractive for FCS programs that are looking to move up, because there's no money in those crappy bowl games.

I think the only way it becomes less attractive is if the BCS conferences stop sharing any of the revenue from the BCS model.

Minor bowl/tv contracts/BCS revenue is still better than FCS...money wise. Until that changes, it will be more attractive to those that are able to do it.

[Big McLargehuge]

Kind of a stretch between "doesn't anticipate losing..." and "announces Montana not going to WAC", isn't it?

I'm sure the WAC didn't anticipate losing Fresno or Nevada, either. Right up until both announced they were leaving.

I would wait to hear from UM before declaring that they are not leaving.

Yeah, I was going to say the same thing.


At this point I doubt Montana jumps...but the commissioner saying he 'doesn't expect' isn't the same thing as 'they're not'.