Agree; the WAC still has the FBS ticket and forming a super FCS regional conference accomplishes little. There is no motivation for the Dakotas to make lateral moves. While it might make a bit more attactive nest to attract Idaho, a more attractive nest for the Vandals is anything FBS.griz4life said:You would be better off trying to form that conference under the tattered banner of the WAC with the intention of positioning football for the alleged "second tier" of FBS. Were you to do it that way, the conference might have a voice in deciding how many scholarships would be required in second tier FBS football. You might be able to set the minimum at say 75 scholarships -- 12 more than FCS, which would make the jump much easier for schools like Montana, both because of football related costs and because of matching women's scholarships required under Title IX.
Either way, you would have a seat at the table when it comes to issues like scholarship limits, potential playoffs, etc. No FCS conference seems to have a seat at the table currently.
That said. Montana lacks the leadership to make any such plans at the moment. These are big, bold decisions that Montana might not be up to until Engstrom either retires or is fired. MSU on the other hand, I can see pulling this off.
I would stop short of giving MSU that much credit. They have an impressive Pres., but a dolt for an AD. And there remains the MT BOR, which will always have its head in the sand and continue to spread its support across six institutions.