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

Yesterday the Long Beach Press Telegram ran a front page story stating that the question of whether to bring back football (and agree to an $89 fee per student to do so) will appear on a CSULB student ballot, voting to be held March 21-24, with results announced March 25; this shares the ballot with voting for Associated Students Representatives. The results will be shared, but the decision rests with the Univ. President, and that announcement would come before the end of the semester. Three students put in the work to get the football question put on the ballot.The AD was quoted as saying it was"very...unrealistic", unlikely to happen, even with a ballot victory. It is true huge obstacles, such as no stadium and the need for Title Nine funding parity for women's sports would have to be overcome, along with additional funding and fan support; the rest of the article tracked the arc and demise of the program...Yet, there it is, at least it's on the ballot at "The Beach"!

goroute wrote:Yesterday the Long Beach Press Telegram ran a front page story stating that the question of whether to bring back football ...!

Knew I saw this somewhere. Thanks for posting it. I've been bringing it up elsewhere and kept wracking my brain as to where I read it. Turns out it was your post. I hope they pull off the miracle and bring it back. They could be that 14th team to balance the Big Sky!

bojeta wrote:

goroute wrote:Yesterday the Long Beach Press Telegram ran a front page story stating that the question of whether to bring back football ...!

Knew I saw this somewhere. Thanks for posting it. I've been bringing it up elsewhere and kept wracking my brain as to where I read it. Turns out it was your post. I hope they pull off the miracle and bring it back. They could be that 14th team to balance the Big Sky!

Sure, why not extend the geography even farther....

kemajic wrote:

bojeta wrote:

Knew I saw this somewhere. Thanks for posting it. I've been bringing it up elsewhere and kept wracking my brain as to where I read it. Turns out it was your post. I hope they pull off the miracle and bring it back. They could be that 14th team to balance the Big Sky!

Sure, why not extend the geography even farther....

You have been in California for some time now so you would not be expanding the geography any further grumpy.

Seems to me adding a new Ca. School would lock the Montana Schools into yet another series of trips to the west coast. Those are games they could fill with schools a lot closer and save a ton of money.

Having a team in Los Angles area would be great for a school like Montana that recruits in southern California.

SloStang wrote:Having a team in Los Angles area would be great for a school like EWU that recruits in southern California.

FIFY

Screamin_Eagle174 wrote:

SloStang wrote:Having a team in Los Angles area would be great for a school like EWU that recruits in southern California.

FIFY

I was addressing JBB's post about Montana having another trip to the coast, but yes it would also be good for EWU, ISU, WSU, NAU, PSU, MSU and any other BSC school that recruits in California.

SloStang wrote:Having a team in Los Angles area would be great for a school like Montana that recruits in southern California.

Any benefits the other members realized when Northridge was in the BSC were not measureable.

SloStang wrote:

kemajic wrote: Sure, why not extend the geography even farther....

You have been in California for some time now so you would not be expanding the geography any further grumpy.

Long Beach is even farther from the epicenter of the BSC than the other CA schools. But since you think the world revolves around CA, you probably haven't noticed.

Every team I mentioned above recruits in California. Having a team in southern California certainly does not hurt their recruiting efforts.

While I wouldn't mind adding another Cali school to round out the conference at 14, I don't really think adding one in the LA area is that big of a deal - a little more exposure to a large market.

kemajic wrote:

SloStang wrote: You have been in California for some time now so you would not be expanding the geography any further grumpy.

Long Beach is even farther from the epicenter of the BSC than the other CA schools. But since you think the world revolves around CA, you probably haven't noticed.

My guess is that the Athletic Director's, Coaches etc. involved in this have A LITTLE MORE INFO than the rest of us and have concluded that the expansion was beneficial in all respects, financially and otherwise. For starters, the obvious ability to fill a schedule followed by the end to "the need schedule DII programs" which requires large payouts, no necessary cross country trips, etc. On top of that, recruiting benefits, larger attendance numbers and on and on. Anyone can be Captain Negative, but let's try looking at the many positive aspects of this. Great rivalries, great games, more FCS post season appearances for western schools!!

kemajic wrote:

bojeta wrote:

Knew I saw this somewhere. Thanks for posting it. I've been bringing it up elsewhere and kept wracking my brain as to where I read it. Turns out it was your post. I hope they pull off the miracle and bring it back. They could be that 14th team to balance the Big Sky!

Sure, why not extend the geography even farther....

I think the addition of UND was more of problem, geography wise, than adding another CA school would be. There's already Sac St, UCD, & CP. Having another CA wouldn't be too much of a stretch.

Thundering Herd wrote:

kemajic wrote: Sure, why not extend the geography even farther....

I think the addition of UND was more of problem, geography wise, than adding another CA school would be. There's already Sac St, UCD, & CP. Having another CA wouldn't be too much of a stretch.

LB is about 450 miles south of Sac. It would be increasing the geography of the conference...however nothing would stretch it more than the UND addition.

SDHornet wrote:

Thundering Herd wrote:
I think the addition of UND was more of problem, geography wise, than adding another CA school would be. There's already Sac St, UCD, & CP. Having another CA wouldn't be too much of a stretch.

LB is about 450 miles south of Sac. It would be increasing the geography of the conference...however nothing would stretch it more than the UND addition.

I guess LB is further south than I thought. But still nothing compared to the expansion of ND. I think it would've been different if all 4 dakota schools were in the BSC. Having just one doesn't make logistical sense.

Thundering Herd wrote:

SDHornet wrote: LB is about 450 miles south of Sac. It would be increasing the geography of the conference...however nothing would stretch it more than the UND addition.

I guess LB is further south than I thought. But still nothing compared to the expansion of ND. I think it would've been different if all 4 dakota schools were in the BSC. Having just one doesn't make logistical sense.

None whatsoever.

Funny thing is, if the Big Sky had adopted a slightly difference stance than the one they had several years ago when all of this came up, all 4 Dakota schools could be members right now.

The geography would have still be problematic for the majority of the current conference members, IMO, but at least having all four would have mitigated that some. As much as I like that we're adding a state flagship, the geography still doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

EWURanger wrote:Funny thing is, if the Big Sky had adopted a slightly difference stance than the one they had several years ago when all of this came up, all 4 Dakota schools could be members right now.

The geography would have still be problematic for the majority of the current conference members, IMO, but at least having all four would have mitigated that some. As much as I like that we're adding a state flagship, the geography still doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

bennypole wrote:I'll be interested to see where the Long Beach State proposal goes. I think it will fail miserably. Of the two, UCSB has a much better shot. The central coast, has its own identity separate from LA that most of it's students buy into. People have school spirit and will support athletic programs. All the Cal States and UCs in the LA area will never be able to compete with UCLA and USC.

I'll spare you the trouble....no public university in CA is starting a football program. The end.

SDHornet wrote:I'll spare you the trouble....no public university in CA is starting a football program. The end.

I am sure you are right, but in last few months I have seen articles about 5 UC or CSU schools considering adding football. Perhaps this might be the time. They could stay in the Big West for most sports and become football only in the WAC. Perhaps not, this is California we are talking about.

Mike Johnson wrote:

SDHornet wrote:I'll spare you the trouble....no public university in CA is starting a football program. The end.

I am sure you are right, but in last few months I have seen articles about 5 UC or CSU schools considering adding football. Perhaps this might be the time. They could stay in the Big West for most sports and become football only in the WAC. Perhaps not, this is California we are talking about.

I think the first one to jump on it is going to find themselves in a good position to do one of the following (in this order of likelihood):
1. Join the expanded Big Sky Conference as the 14th member
2. Join the Pioneer League as a non-scholarship FCS team
3. Join the desperate WAC
4. They all bring back football at the same time and reform the Big West/PCAA (ya, right..)

Personally think the Big Sky would be the best move.

It'd be cool to get another Cali school as a 14th member for football. Have a hard time seeing any of them doing it, though.

I heard a while back that Utah Valley State was considering adding football. They'd fit within the Big Sky footprint. Only thing is, could Utah really support another Division I football program....they've already got Utah, USU, BYU, Weber, Southern Utah....

EWURanger wrote:It'd be cool to get another Cali school as a 14th member for football. Have a hard time seeing any of them doing it, though.

I heard a while back that Utah Valley State was considering adding football. They'd fit within the Big Sky footprint. Only thing is, could Utah really support another Division I football program....they've already got Utah, USU, BYU, Weber, Southern Utah....

Thats an interesting question, I think it could its already supporting 6 D-1 hoops programs, and I think the state would have a easier time supporting UVU if they were FCS (Big Sky) and not FBS (WAC).

Supporting 4 FBS teams might be too much for the State, but 3 fbs and 3 FCS might be easier. But then again i'm no expert.

JBB wrote:Seems to me adding a new Ca. School would lock the Montana Schools into yet another series of trips to the west coast. Those are games they could fill with schools a lot closer and save a ton of money.

LA is closer (and easier to get to) than Fargo.