(05-17-2016 09:56 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  I guess I was wrong to use the word cockamamie, after all.

No, there isn't a word available that properly imparts the correct level of ridiculousness and implausibility onto what NoDak is pretending to know and "explain" to us all.

That's strange. When I was advocating UND to the Big Sky, you and other bizon fans said the same and worse. The Slummit was the only option was a cat call chorus I heard and that only morons believed UND to the Big Sky was possible.

How did that work out again?

You know full well that's comparing apples to watermelons.

No one is stopping this circus. Carry on

(05-17-2016 09:51 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(05-17-2016 09:41 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  I challenge anyone to read this: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/201...race-essay

And tell me Chuck Staben is a guy whose heart is in FBS football.

At the press conference announcing the Big Sky, Staben basically came out and said Idaho cannot compete in FBS. He'd have to be dragged back kicking and screaming.

Maybe the top of the Big Sky breaks off and goes FBS and if that happens Idaho will come along, but it won't be because Chuck Staben helped make it happen.

"All these qualities will be nurtured in the Big Sky conference" says it all.

If the Big Sky wants to go FBS, Staben will follow. But in truth, Staben wanted the Big Sky to go FBS all along, as that would be more appropriate competition.

There is no reason to disparage your own school and proclaim to the world your inability to compete in FBS football if you're planning to play FBS football.

(05-17-2016 09:56 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  I guess I was wrong to use the word cockamamie, after all.

No, there isn't a word available that properly imparts the correct level of ridiculousness and implausibility onto what NoDak is pretending to know and "explain" to us all.

I tried to take your tactful path or Latah's amazingly patient approach when I gently attempted to explain the notion of confirmation bias to NoDak but then I realized what grand theater NoDak is providing. He is not a mere troll but rather a testimony to the indomitable nature inherent in the human spirit. He refuses to conform despite intense pressure from the masses and overwhelming evidence that is contrary to his colorful fantasies. His imagination quickly creates a new scenario to explain every bit of the vast evidence against his thesis that "good golly UND will be FBS" even if it has to occur solely through the strength of his nearly omnipotent will. How long can he keep it up? What will be the tipping point? Its fascinating. I used to think pit bulls were tenacious but there is now a new standard. Cervantes would be proud.

And it's done. SBOE has approved the move to the Big Sky.

(05-17-2016 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Wednesday is when the Vandals get approval to put football in the Big Sky from the Idaho Board of Education. The meeting is ironically enough in Bronco Stadium in one of their suites, so Boise St boosters will be gloating for a week. Idaho State backers on the board will also be happy, as they will see Idaho moving down a notch to be like them.

But I still think this is an Idaho ruse. The Big Sky will announce that it is interested in FBS in a week or two, before Fullerton leaves. Idaho will have no choice but to team up with the other research schools in the Big Sky, stay in FBS, and move back to the WAC. Idaho knows Idaho State can't move up, so Idaho St'S victory will be short lived and Idaho St backers will not blame Idaho for convincing the Big Sky schools to go FBS. BOISE St backers endorsed Idaho's move to the Big Sky, so they can't blame Idaho either. The Big Sky and Fullerton will be the villain of anti-Idaho forces in the state, and Staben will be popular among them all.

Idaho will say it will need more donations before it will commit further to FBS.

All in all, it will be a brilliant move by Idaho and will not create more enemies by Boise St and Idaho St backers.

Looks like step one is accomplished. Idaho Statesman article on SBOE approval So you say step two will be the BSC announcing an FBS strategy for some of its schools (with the WAC's assistance) in one or two weeks. Gotta love it when a plan comes together.

(05-18-2016 09:54 AM)Bronco85 Wrote:  

(05-17-2016 09:56 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  I guess I was wrong to use the word cockamamie, after all.

No, there isn't a word available that properly imparts the correct level of ridiculousness and implausibility onto what NoDak is pretending to know and "explain" to us all.

I tried to take your tactful path or Latah's amazingly patient approach when I gently attempted to explain the notion of confirmation bias to NoDak but then I realized what grand theater NoDak is providing. He is not a mere troll but rather a testimony to the indomitable nature inherent in the human spirit. He refuses to conform despite intense pressure from the masses and overwhelming evidence that is contrary to his colorful fantasies. His imagination quickly creates a new scenario to explain every bit of the vast evidence against his thesis that "good golly UND will be FBS" even if it has to occur solely through the strength of his nearly omnipotent will. How long can he keep it up? What will be the tipping point? Its fascinating. I used to think pit bulls were tenacious but there is now a new standard. Cervantes would be proud.

You fail to understand how University Presidents see themselves as the focus of a grand theatre and expressing their views that won't harm the school politically but incentivize the correct alumni to give. Boise State President Kuistra is one of the few that doesn't play that game because he doesn't mind downtrodding the U of Idaho. It serves his purposes.

Forgot about Idaho State when rationalizing Staben before, so his moves are purposely not to aggravate the Bengal faction. Wait for a couple weeks. Staben's true desires will be revealed.

(05-18-2016 09:54 AM)Bronco85 Wrote:  

(05-17-2016 09:56 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  I guess I was wrong to use the word cockamamie, after all.

No, there isn't a word available that properly imparts the correct level of ridiculousness and implausibility onto what NoDak is pretending to know and "explain" to us all.

I tried to take your tactful path or Latah's amazingly patient approach when I gently attempted to explain the notion of confirmation bias to NoDak but then I realized what grand theater NoDak is providing. He is not a mere troll but rather a testimony to the indomitable nature inherent in the human spirit. He refuses to conform despite intense pressure from the masses and overwhelming evidence that is contrary to his colorful fantasies. His imagination quickly creates a new scenario to explain every bit of the vast evidence against his thesis that "good golly UND will be FBS" even if it has to occur solely through the strength of his nearly omnipotent will. How long can he keep it up? What will be the tipping point? Its fascinating. I used to think pit bulls were tenacious but there is now a new standard. Cervantes would be proud.

Good post, said user is really fitting the motto:
People believe what they want to believe.
Cheers!

Bronco's well executed "link" notwithstanding (post #406), here is the actual Statesman article: http://www.idahostatesman.com/sports/col...15202.html


You'll note the perfectly apt photo: University of Idaho President Chuck Staben as "McDowell", reaching over to crush the nuts of Idaho football with his bare hands.

The reasoning given to the board, as paraphrased (or perhaps directly quoted), is pure horse s___t.

Idaho won't save much by playing full-scholarship FCS football in the Big Sky. Travel will still cost a lot. Scholarships will still cost a lot. Recruiting will still cost a lot. They're probably already paying the head coach/coaching staff about the same as the top Big Sky schools pay. And so the meager savings will be eaten up by the lower revenue of FCS. So all that for ... not being any more competitive in the Big Sky and getting much less exposure to boot.

Such a joke.

(05-19-2016 08:27 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  The reasoning given to the board, as paraphrased (or perhaps directly quoted), is pure horse s___t.

Idaho won't save much by playing full-scholarship FCS football in the Big Sky. Travel will still cost a lot. Scholarships will still cost a lot. Recruiting will still cost a lot. They're probably already paying the head coach/coaching staff about the same as the top Big Sky schools pay. And so the meager savings will be eaten up by the lower revenue of FCS.

Except that U of Idaho wasn't getting any FBS revenue to speak of. No CFP check. No bowl payout, no TV contract. Minimal attendance revenue.

ODE gives U of Idaho's football expenses and revenues both around $6M. Eastern Washington's number is about $4.5M.

So yeah, Idaho is probably looking at saving $1.5M per year. They may be able to save a few nickels by axing women's volleyball or soccer?

Looking at the Vandals' website, I only see 15 sports, (counting track and field twice--indoor and outdoor.) That's under the 16 sport FBS minimum. I wonder if an FBS independent Idaho would have been under pressure to add another sport to actually meet FBS requirements.

Even despite your argument - which was a good one, by the way - you are forgetting one crucial component of FBS revenue: payday games are 2x-3x the revenue.

Idaho can expect to get probably $300k - 400k as an FCS team. On the other hand, I know some lower end FBS schools get well over $1M from big time P5 programs!


Nonetheless, I admit that I did underestimate the Idaho football budget. $6M is significantly more than most FCS programs. But again ... not by that much. Not an overwhelming amount.

Even if they do save $1.5M .... so what?????

How does that compare to the operating budget of the University of Idaho??? Peanuts. Damn peanuts. The changes in perception and exposure alone easily trump that.

I think you overstate the "prestige" and "exposure" of having losing seasons every year and losing by 70 to Florida.

If the only way you can finance your program is to become the football version of the Washington Generals, then you are probably not in the right division.



And JohnBragg - Idaho has 16 sports currently.

(05-19-2016 08:23 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Bronco's well executed "link" notwithstanding (post #406), here is the actual Statesman article: http://www.idahostatesman.com/sports/col...15202.html


You'll note the perfectly apt photo: University of Idaho President Chuck Staben as "McDowell", reaching over to crush the nuts of Idaho football with his bare hands.

To blame UIs predicament on BSU is not only untrue, it is ironic. In any case, I am on record as supporting UI playing in any division they desire. Sorry about the link, thanks for fixing it. Your perfection is duly noted.

dback, you know full well what I mean. And I think you know I'm correct too.

Casual college football fan in Ohio: "Idaho? Uh ... yeah, I'm prety sure they play Division I football [sic]"

Casual college football fan in Ohio: "Northern Arizona?? I don't think there is such a college."

(05-19-2016 10:08 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  dback, you know full well what I mean. And I think you know I'm correct too.

Casual college football fan in Ohio: "Idaho? Uh ... yeah, I'm prety sure they play Division I football [sic]"

Casual college football fan in Ohio: "Northern Arizona?? I don't think there is such a college."

That, and $4 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

(05-19-2016 09:32 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 08:27 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  The reasoning given to the board, as paraphrased (or perhaps directly quoted), is pure horse s___t.

Idaho won't save much by playing full-scholarship FCS football in the Big Sky. Travel will still cost a lot. Scholarships will still cost a lot. Recruiting will still cost a lot. They're probably already paying the head coach/coaching staff about the same as the top Big Sky schools pay. And so the meager savings will be eaten up by the lower revenue of FCS.

Except that U of Idaho wasn't getting any FBS revenue to speak of. No CFP check. No bowl payout, no TV contract. Minimal attendance revenue.

ODE gives U of Idaho's football expenses and revenues both around $6M. Eastern Washington's number is about $4.5M.

So yeah, Idaho is probably looking at saving $1.5M per year. They may be able to save a few nickels by axing women's volleyball or soccer?

Looking at the Vandals' website, I only see 15 sports, (counting track and field twice--indoor and outdoor.) That's under the 16 sport FBS minimum. I wonder if an FBS independent Idaho would have been under pressure to add another sport to actually meet FBS requirements.

Idaho has the full 16 sports currently. You're incorrect about the revenue part, Idaho as an Independent would get a payout from the CFP (I believe around $100K) and the money guarantees are up to $1.2M to $1.5M, so if you play 2 of those a year that's $2.7M to $3M right there. Something that I also haven't seen mentioned is a reduction in our sponsorship from Learfield Sports. NMSU says that their sponsorship would decrease $450K from Learfield if they moved to FCS so I would guess ours is a similar amount. The Idaho president has said that no further sports will be axed and no coaches will be getting paycuts so I really don't know where the cost savings are going to come from other than the 20 less scholarships and slightly less travel.

Look Staben ... err ... dback. There's nothing logically invalid about taking the viewpoint that if something doesn't output hard cash then it must therefore be worthless. It's just completely wrong.

The true reality of bottom half FBS vs FCS is this:

Nice things are nice to have. Nicer things are nicer to have than nice things. Nicer things cost more than nice things, which cost more than having nothing. If you want nice things, then buck up and pay for them. If you want nicer things, buck up and pay more than for nice things.

At the end of the day, a Ford and a Cadillac both get you there. People have their own opinions on the merits of both. But people also know which one costs more, and is therefore nicer.

(05-19-2016 10:08 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  dback, you know full well what I mean. And I think you know I'm correct too.

Casual college football fan in Ohio: "Idaho? Uh ... yeah, I'm prety sure they play Division I football [sic]"

Casual college football fan in Ohio: "Northern Arizona?? I don't think there is such a college."

Casual college football fan in Ohio would be hard pressed to say for sure which of "U of Idaho" and "Idaho State" is the one that's FBS. Which is the more direct comparison, not a directional school.

I'm sorry about my error when I looked at the Idaho Vandals athletics website, I missed women's Swimming and Diving. I'm not "wrong" about the revenues--those are the numbers on the ODE site. If there's some reason that FCS U of Idaho would have a different financial profile than FCS Eastern Washington, I'm open to that. IF you have some zany scheme for how Idaho could make more money playing body-bag games than they could as a Sun Belt member, you're welcome to it but the people sitting in the informed decision makers' chairs said "Nah."

Beyond the financials, FBS independent scheduling has become very, very difficult. Notre Dame and Army can hack it. Navy, freakin Navy, was concerned about whether they could continue to do so, which was a big reason they joined the AAC. UMass has managed. NMSU is going to try. But the reality is that it's hard to get non-conference opponents at all after Oct 1 and it's hard to get anyone to come play at Moscow, Idaho at any time.

(05-19-2016 11:42 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 10:08 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  dback, you know full well what I mean. And I think you know I'm correct too.

Casual college football fan in Ohio: "Idaho? Uh ... yeah, I'm prety sure they play Division I football [sic]"

Casual college football fan in Ohio: "Northern Arizona?? I don't think there is such a college."

Casual college football fan in Ohio would be hard pressed to say for sure which of "U of Idaho" and "Idaho State" is the one that's FBS. Which is the more direct comparison, not a directional school.

I'm sorry about my error when I looked at the Idaho Vandals athletics website, I missed women's Swimming and Diving. I'm not "wrong" about the revenues--those are the numbers on the ODE site. If there's some reason that FCS U of Idaho would have a different financial profile than FCS Eastern Washington, I'm open to that. IF you have some zany scheme for how Idaho could make more money playing body-bag games than they could as a Sun Belt member, you're welcome to it but the people sitting in the informed decision makers' chairs said "Nah."

Beyond the financials, FBS independent scheduling has become very, very difficult. Notre Dame and Army can hack it. Navy, freakin Navy, was concerned about whether they could continue to do so, which was a big reason they joined the AAC. UMass has managed. NMSU is going to try. But the reality is that it's hard to get non-conference opponents at all after Oct 1 and it's hard to get anyone to come play at Moscow, Idaho at any time.

You said that Idaho was getting "no FBS revenue" to speak of which is incorrect. And yes, different schools use different accounting methods so you can't really say that Idaho's financials and EWU's are comparable. Independent scheduling would obviously been a challenge but we put together one with a year's notice last time. With 2 years this time and more independent programs out there to work with it definitely would have been doable.