(03-04-2016 01:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 12:48 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  That's an overly bleak assessment, and 2013 is not the best guide given that we didn't have a chance to start putting it together until the very last minute.

A 2018 indy schedule would probably have a mix of H&Hs with schools like NMSU, UMass, Coastal Carolina & UAB. So that's 2 home games and 2 away. Add that to the home game already scheduled with Wyoming and an FCS school and we're already up to 4 home games. We'd just need one more H&H from someone in the Sun Belt, MAC or MWC and we hit our minimum 5. Not really that difficult. Add in the road games already scheduled with NIU, Fresno & Florida, and we just need another money game to balance the books plus either another money game or another G5 H&H. Not the world's greatest schedule but not really all that different from what we're playing in the Sun Belt.

Shampoo, rinse, repeat for 2019.

It can work in the short term, though there has to be a good reason to think the long term outlook is bright. If Idaho is trying to sell this to Idaho boosters who are asking why they should write big checks, the AD and prez are going to have to have very good answers to questions like, "What's the end game? If we fund this FBS indy path starting today, tell us where the program will be in 10 years?"

The honest answer would be "we have no idea, but the other choice is FCS." That answer works for most Idaho boosters. Roughly 90% of the people who actually give money to the program want nothing to do with FCS football and don't care at all about Big Sky.

The whole "regional rivalries" argument people throw out here to argue that we should play football in the Big Sky is BS. We're playing basketball in the Big Sky right now and have a pretty solid team this year, and attendance is as low as it's ever been. Nobody cares about any school in that conference other than Montana.

So if choice A is walking into a dim tunnel and choice B is giving up, the vast majority of boosters would pick choice A.

Can't these same boosters be held responsible for the condition the football program is in now?

(03-04-2016 02:12 PM)NoQuestion Wrote:  Can't these same boosters be held responsible for the condition the football program is in now?

I blame our administrations over the past 2 decades and the people who don't support the program a lot more than I blame the people who volunteer their time and money to make it better.

I used to pull for Boise but that is before they stopped playing any games in Moscow.

Idaho played Boise H&H four years after they transitioned from a junior college to a four year school.
Idaho had a twelve game winning streak against Boise.
Shortly before Boise had a similar streak we didn't stop playing them at the end of it.

The perception of Boise is little team that can .
The reality is they outspend everyone in their conference.
They place athletics above academics and screwed their conference with the TV deal.
People want to complain about the importance of athletics at an Alabama or OSU but at least their also big time schools.
Boise is as close to being a true football factory as any school.

(03-04-2016 01:18 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 01:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 12:48 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  That's an overly bleak assessment, and 2013 is not the best guide given that we didn't have a chance to start putting it together until the very last minute.

A 2018 indy schedule would probably have a mix of H&Hs with schools like NMSU, UMass, Coastal Carolina & UAB. So that's 2 home games and 2 away. Add that to the home game already scheduled with Wyoming and an FCS school and we're already up to 4 home games. We'd just need one more H&H from someone in the Sun Belt, MAC or MWC and we hit our minimum 5. Not really that difficult. Add in the road games already scheduled with NIU, Fresno & Florida, and we just need another money game to balance the books plus either another money game or another G5 H&H. Not the world's greatest schedule but not really all that different from what we're playing in the Sun Belt.

Shampoo, rinse, repeat for 2019.

It can work in the short term, though there has to be a good reason to think the long term outlook is bright. If Idaho is trying to sell this to Idaho boosters who are asking why they should write big checks, the AD and prez are going to have to have very good answers to questions like, "What's the end game? If we fund this FBS indy path starting today, tell us where the program will be in 10 years?"

The honest answer would be "we have no idea, but the other choice is FCS." That answer works for most Idaho boosters. Roughly 90% of the people who actually give money to the program want nothing to do with FCS football and don't care at all about Big Sky.

The whole "regional rivalries" argument people throw out here to argue that we should play football in the Big Sky is BS. We're playing basketball in the Big Sky right now and have a pretty solid team this year, and attendance is as low as it's ever been. Nobody cares about any school in that conference other than Montana.

So if choice A is walking into a dim tunnel and choice B is giving up, the vast majority of boosters would pick choice A.

Much of the Idaho fan base that complains about playing FCS schools in the Big Sky seems to be ignorant of the Sun Belt, which has almost all its teams as recent FCS upgrades. They complain about that there'should no team except Montana who they have history with but not a word that the in entire Sun Belt there is not a single rivalry game. Realize that is traumatic to be kicked out, but it was never a match to begin with.

How much is will it cost Idaho to get out of their FBS contracts until 2022? There is another plan out there that hasn't been revealed yet.

(03-04-2016 10:33 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 10:18 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  Idaho would have no problem being independent.

Idaho State
Eastern Washington
@BYU (2-1)
New Mexico State
@ New Mexico State
UMass (1-1)
@Army (1-1)
Boise State (1-1)
@MWC (1-1)
@Washington State
@SEC
@PAC-12

Just play Boise State every year, two FCS schools (Idaho State, Eastern Washington, Montana,etc) play two games home and away against New Mexico State. Play other independents in BYU, Army, and UMass, sign a 1-1 with some MWC schools, and play three guarantee games against P5 schools for a million or so each and that $3 million would put them in a good place. Plus try to get an ESPN contract for like $50,000 a year for their football home games. Mostly ESPN3 but probably would get a few ESPNews or U games when they play BYU or Boise State at home.

You need 5 home games, only 1 can be FCS.

Army isn't hard up for games, so H&H with Army is not a lock.

Boise STate hasn't played Idaho since Boise left the WAC. Home-and-home with Boise is not happening.

Idaho FBS is a low-budget, low-attendance program in the middle of nowhere, no drawing power outside Idaho and precious little in Idaho, no history of success and no future prospects of success; whose highest realistic aspiration is to cling tenously to FBS status.

Idaho had 5 home games in 2013, two with schools in or just completing FCS-FBS transition (ODU and Texas State); one with Temple, who had their own brush with FBS mortality; and one with Fresno STate, who may have been doing an old WAC-mate a favor.

Idaho can play the Black Knights if they agree to a 2-1 deal. Two trips to West Point, one trip to Moscow (the less interesting American version).

(03-04-2016 10:42 PM)NoDak Wrote:  How much is will it cost Idaho to get out of their FBS contracts until 2022?

Less than you're probably thinking.

Google brings up the BYU-Missouri game, when the Mizzou players went on strike and cancelling the game was a real possibility. Mizzou would have been on the hook for $1M, for cancelling the game during the season. Link

Google also turns up an $800,000 cancellation fee for the Georgia State @ Wisconsin game in 2016. Link

Idaho has 16 games scheduled from 2018-22. There is a home-and-home with Wyoming and a double-home-and-home with San Jose State. Those 6 games unwind very easily: You don't come and we don't go. Similarly, Idaho can just tell Nevada that they don't have to make the return trip in 2021 or 22.

That leaves 9 road games with 8 schools. So a maximum penalty of $9M over 4 years. But I don't think it will be that much, because Idaho's AD isn't a complete meathead (I assume), and so the possibility of Idaho being forced to drop is probably considered in the contracts.

Three years notice is plenty to go out and find a replacement game. So if it comes to lawsuits, schools will have a hard time proving that Idaho dropping to FCS is hurting them financially. (Especially since Idaho has an argument that they didn't want to, but the mean ol' Sun Belt kicked them out and FBS independence isn't viable for them.)

Quote:There is another plan out there that hasn't been revealed yet.

(03-04-2016 10:42 PM)NoDak Wrote:  There is another plan out there that hasn't been revealed yet.

Ok, reveal it.

(03-04-2016 11:37 PM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(03-04-2016 10:42 PM)NoDak Wrote:  There is another plan out there that hasn't been revealed yet.

Ok, reveal it.

Already have on this board, but it sends certain posters into near seizures, so for medical reasons I'll abstain.

(03-04-2016 10:42 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Much of the Idaho fan base that complains about playing FCS schools in the Big Sky seems to be ignorant of the Sun Belt, which has almost all its teams as recent FCS upgrades. They complain about that there'should no team except Montana who they have history with but not a word that the in entire Sun Belt there is not a single rivalry game. Realize that is traumatic to be kicked out, but it was never a match to begin with.

How much is will it cost Idaho to get out of their FBS contracts until 2022? There is another plan out there that hasn't been revealed yet.

I know exactly what the Sun Belt is. I like the teams in the Sun Belt, but I'm not particularly attached to that conference except as a means to help us keep playing FBS football. If the Big Sky played FBS football, then fine. If we're FCS, then we'll never see the schools we actually want to play at home again. And politically within the state, Idaho in FCS is a disaster.

Don't blame us. We added you in the 90s to keep our FBS ticket. Who knew it would go away after just five years? And yes, I know you were blocked from joining the Big West without Boise in the 70s.

The good thing about Idaho going independent is they can play two FCS teams a year mostly Idaho State and a Montana, Montana State, or Eastern Washington. Even though those are FCS games they would be sellouts for Kibbie Dome plus having four or five games a year against P5 teams will make the boosters happy especially when they are on National TV like FS1/2, ESPN2/U, SECNetwork, Or Big Ten Network. Then schedule games with MWC/Sun Belt/C-USA to feel up the schedule. The MWC games will be good turn outs as well.

When it comes to Boise State playing Idaho that game should be played at the end of the year as a rivalry game. That is a lot of money to lose each year for the state to not have that game going on. It would also give Boise a sell out that it normally wouldn't get at the end of the year. I know in NC the ACC schools love playing ECU just because of the amount of money it brings in for the region and the home team gets a sellout.

The downside of immediately dropping would be losing many fans for not trying.
The program would be in turmoil and dropping football a better alternative.
The Upside easier for the AD he doesn't have to schedule all those games.

Upside for trying independence for a while .
Maybe realignment or rules changes work for us for once.
The outrage is less because we gave it a go and it didn't work.
U Mass and UAB just had their best recruiting classes ever so who knows.

We could turn our disadvantages into pluses.
Rent Martin for one name opponent a year BYU,Utah and Oregon ST type programs.
Play Montana H&H for a decent draw (the only BSC draw ) no conference to complain.
Work with other independents and try to get a scheduling agreement going forward.

Moccia said on an interview on 610 this morning that he has contacted the 4 independent football schools over the last month. Mainly to get there take on being independent in football. Also regarding scheduling Moccia said that he has talked to a scheduling guru for football. Lastly they will start focusing on football after basketball season.

Work with the NMSU AD Moccia he seems to know what he is doing.

(03-05-2016 08:53 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  The good thing about Idaho going independent is they can play two FCS teams a year mostly Idaho State and a Montana, Montana State, or Eastern Washington. Even though those are FCS games they would be sellouts for Kibbie Dome plus having four or five games a year against P5 teams will make the boosters happy especially when they are on National TV like FS1/2, ESPN2/U, SECNetwork, Or Big Ten Network. Then schedule games with MWC/Sun Belt/C-USA to feel up the schedule. The MWC games will be good turn outs as well.

When it comes to Boise State playing Idaho that game should be played at the end of the year as a rivalry game. That is a lot of money to lose each year for the state to not have that game going on. It would also give Boise a sell out that it normally wouldn't get at the end of the year. I know in NC the ACC schools love playing ECU just because of the amount of money it brings in for the region and the home team gets a sellout.

Montana in Moscow boosts attendance. The other 3 Big Sky schools you mentioned? Not so much. We played EWU at home in 2012 and it was our lowest-attended game of the year. Again, the Idaho fans who buy tickets don't care about the Big Sky.

BSU-Idaho is a guaranteed sellout both in Moscow and Boise and it's good for the whole state. Most everyone in Idaho recognizes that except, unfortunately, the BSU president, who is trying to elevate his 3rd-tier school above U of Idaho through athletic domination. We won't get that game until he retires.