Montana will be offered by WAC

[grizzaholic]

Did Ursus just agree with something I said? Mark it on your calendars folks....

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Did Ursus just agree with something I said? Mark it on your calendars folks....

You were bound get something right Grizza.

See ya tomorrow probably.

[grizzaholic]

Did Ursus just agree with something I said? Mark it on your calendars folks....

You were bound get something right Grizza.

See ya tomorrow probably.

Took me 10,000 plus posts to get ONE thing right. Thanks for the vote of confidence Ursus. Wouldn't have happened if it weren't for you.

[JALMOND]

The original twitter post has been updated to say the invite will be extended sometime this year. By then the WAC will probably have extended an offer to every Big Sky school. Even Idaho State.

Another take on this, I have. We have been approached by the WAC as well as having asked the WAC to look at us when they are ready for expansion. From what I've heard, Sac State has been, too. This was back when Boise, Nevada and Fresno did not have any aspirations to leave the WAC. My point is this...if we have looked at the WAC and stayed in the Big Sky, if Sac State has looked at the WAC and stayed in the Big Sky, and if both Cal Poly and UC-Davis shunned the WAC and joined the Big Sky, currently what is there in the WAC that makes Montana want to leave the Big Sky and join what I see as a dying conference? And what is left in the WAC once Boise, Fresno and Nevada leave?

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

The original twitter post has been updated to say the invite will be extended sometime this year. By then the WAC will probably have extended an offer to every Big Sky school. Even Idaho State.

Another take on this, I have. We have been approached by the WAC as well as having asked the WAC to look at us when they are ready for expansion. From what I've heard, Sac State has been, too. This was back when Boise, Nevada and Fresno did not have any aspirations to leave the WAC. My point is this...if we have looked at the WAC and stayed in the Big Sky, if Sac State has looked at the WAC and stayed in the Big Sky, and if both Cal Poly and UC-Davis shunned the WAC and joined the Big Sky, currently what is there in the WAC that makes Montana want to leave the Big Sky and join what I see as a dying conference? And what is left in the WAC once Boise, Fresno and Nevada leave?

There is nothing left in the WAC with those teams gone except shame.

[Fresno St. Alum]

wow the Montana guys and other Big Sky fans must really be worried about Montana "moving up" (sideways), 6 pages of this already.

WAC
Hawaii (that's a good name to associate with, nice vacation spot, if they stay)
Idaho (former rival, finally playing well in the FBS)
Utah St. (finally turning it around, playing competitive, nice regional foe, good basketball)
San Jose St. (well it's like playing Sac St. except Sac is harder)
New Mexico St. (I think they're better than Idaho St., maybe, good basketball)
Louisiana Tech (It's like playing a ooc game since they're so far away)
UTSA (Hi I'm new here)
Texas St. (will remind Montana of playing in the FCS)
Sac St. (like playing Sac St. except we replace the letter C with a B and BSC with WAC)
Montana ( why did we agree to this)

[Keeper]

forgive me if I've missed some posts, but.....

can anyone give me one compelling reason the WAC should stay in business??

[kalm]

Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but where does the money come from in moving up and is it enough to off-set increased travel, recruiting, marketing, and scholarship expenses? Is it the bowl money, larger single game contracts, and conference TV contracts? I would think that if Idaho can continue to exist that Montana should have no problem, but with the economy hurting donations and state budgets it seems like there might be more economic challenges.

I personally hope you stay as I enjoy my trips to Missoula.

[AZGrizFan]

Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but where does the money come from in moving up and is it enough to off-set increased travel, recruiting, marketing, and scholarship expenses? Is it the bowl money, larger single game contracts, and conference TV contracts? I would think that if Idaho can continue to exist that Montana should have no problem, but with the economy hurting donations and state budgets it seems like there might be more economic challenges.

I personally hope you stay as I enjoy my trips to Missoula.

Sure, if that's your barometer.

[dbackjon]

Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but where does the money come from in moving up and is it enough to off-set increased travel, recruiting, marketing, and scholarship expenses? Is it the bowl money, larger single game contracts, and conference TV contracts? I would think that if Idaho can continue to exist that Montana should have no problem, but with the economy hurting donations and state budgets it seems like there might be more economic challenges.

I personally hope you stay as I enjoy my trips to Missoula.

Sure, if that's your barometer.

Yup.

As someone that was accepted to Idaho and NAU, I supported the Vandals (when they weren't playing NAU). Idaho had very good programs. Since the ill-advised jump to keep up with Boise, it is been painful watching them struggle.

Montana has a great program/tradition. I would hate to see them move up with the minimum resources needed to make the jump. I keep seeing posts on how Montana only needs $5 million a year to get to the lower end of WAC spending. Screw that. If Montana moves up, I want to see the committment to be an upper half team - which will take $10 million or so a year.

[SDHornet]

The lack of playoff appearances may have something to do with the pro-WAC feeling in Portland and Sacramento, but it may have something else, something that the Griz and other Big Sky schools do not have. Not speaking for Sac State, but just from PSU's perspective, a move to the WAC would benefit in Portland. As I stated before, the Pac-10 has been extremely lax in giving the WAC a home and home. If the WAC had a presence in Portland, it may become attractive to have Oregon and/or Oregon State play a "road" game in Portland, thus scheduling a home and home with the Vikings. Five or six home games plus a game in Portland may be quite attractive for the Ducks and Beavers, as well as Sacramento would for Stanford and Cal.

I must preface this, though, with the fact that there is currently no talk on any of the PSU fan sites, nor on Oregon Live about any WAC expansion or moveup from PSU. This talk of PSU to the WAC is also something I have been strongly opposed to in the past.

J hit the nail on the head with this one. IMO if the Hornets want to be relevant and have any appeal to the casual fan, a move must be made. It’s not necessarily trying to become like a Pac-12 program, more like giving casual fans a reason to give a damn about Hornet football ( and Hornet athletics in general). Sure the WAC doesn’t have the regional draws with Fresno and Nevada gone, but being in a conference that has some (albeit flailing) recognition could potentially get Hornet athletics some local press and hopefully higher attendance. To me the decision is more long term and is about keeping a football program alive. Just one look at recent attendance figures sheds some light on how much the local populace cares/knows about BSC football is.

[frinq]

I agree with SD - PSU like Sac State would gain a little more media attention and probably an increase in attendence and interest by the casual fans. Not sure about Jalmond's "home and home" idea. OSU/UO would probably fill the PGE stadium, but that's only 20,000. OSU might come, but I doubt UO, the way it stands now.

But this is all beside the point. Does PSU have the money to make the transition? I think not.

[SDHornet]

I agree with SD - PSU like Sac State would gain a little more media attention and probably an increase in attendence and interest by the casual fans. Not sure about Jalmond's "home and home" idea. OSU/UO would probably fill the PGE stadium, but that's only 20,000. OSU might come, but I doubt UO, the way it stands now.

But this is all beside the point. Does PSU have the money to make the transition? I think not.

I think that is the issue facing any school considering the move up.

[JALMOND]

I agree with SD - PSU like Sac State would gain a little more media attention and probably an increase in attendence and interest by the casual fans. Not sure about Jalmond's "home and home" idea. OSU/UO would probably fill the PGE stadium, but that's only 20,000. OSU might come, but I doubt UO, the way it stands now.

But this is all beside the point. Does PSU have the money to make the transition? I think not.

That has been my point for years whenever this argument comes up about us going to the WAC. We are in a great situation now (that has become even better since Boise, Nevada and Fresno are leaving the WAC). We would have to come up with more funds to rent Memorial Coliseum for basketball and added travel costs in a conference that stretched from Hawaii to Louisiana (and now losing their marquee football member-Boise and their marquee basketball member-Nevada).

Our best bet has always been to stay in the Big Sky for as long as they will have us.