• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Fullerton Article on Big Sky

Doug Fullerton is one part snake oil salesman/one part parish priest. He makes no judgement as to ones worthiness welcoming anybody who shows up at the door with a meal and a warm bed - but get uppity and talk about leaving he'll tell you you're going to hell.

Father Doug presides over something more akin to the Poverello Center than a bonafide D1 athletic conference... :coffee:
 
I would really love to hear Fullerton or any other FCS commissioner's plans to bring more revenue to the FCS. That is the key. Teams play up to get paydays to keep their programs alive and most are not Montana or Montana State getting 20,000 per game to help pay the bills and that is all it does, help pay. Mr. Fullerton show me a plan by FCS commissioners to present to ESPN, Root, etc to get more games on and get better payouts for FCS conferences and then you have better argument.
 
Fullerton inked a deal with Root, giving more exposure to the Big Sky than it ever has nationally, and yet that still isn't good enough.

The only way you people will be happy is if we start getting MWC money. Guess what, it ain't gonna happen.

READ: When you guys talk about him being good for the Big Sky, you are really talking about being good for UM.
 
...fullerton iz doing adequate...
...he will alwayz be suspect...
...in the eye of the griz...

... 8-) ...
 
CatzWillRise said:
Fullerton inked a deal with Root, giving more exposure to the Big Sky than it ever has nationally, and yet that still isn't good enough.

The only way you people will be happy is if we start getting MWC money. Guess what, it ain't gonna happen.

READ: When you guys talk about him being good for the Big Sky, you are really talking about being good for UM.
Check the Root viewer ratings for BSC games and the payoff (pennies) before you make claims about what a good deal that was. Bringing in UNC for Altitude was another of his "acomplishments;" how's that report card? What did he deliver with his great initiative to bring in major population centers with PSU, SacSt and UNC? When major population centers don't care about FCS football. NDSU/SDSU didn't fit his initiative, but now UND does? A real commissioner would be doing more and would not move to a stupid 13 team conference with a footprint spanning half the US when the objective of FCS football is to keep spending small. The BSC championship used to be earned and meant something; no more. With the new footprint, fan road attendance in this conf. is going down, not up.

Fullerton is only about keeping his job, such as it is. A survivalist, not a leader.
 
CatzWillRise said:
Fullerton inked a deal with Root, giving more exposure to the Big Sky than it ever has nationally, and yet that still isn't good enough.

The only way you people will be happy is if we start getting MWC money. Guess what, it ain't gonna happen.

READ: When you guys talk about him being good for the Big Sky, you are really talking about being good for UM.[/quote]


Well UM brings in the $$$$ for the Big Sky first of all; via: attendance, merchandise, tv/radio, etc. Our' one home game is probably equivalent to all of Northern Colorado's entire home attendance. We have kept our product on the field very high over the years, making our' other league members play at higher levels (Cats, EWU.) We have basically recruited teams like Cal Poly, North Dakota, SUU to join! So ya, we want what's what best for UM!
 
kemajic said:
OrgonGriz said:
I am sure UM is not getting a 650k payout from Wyoming.
Correct. The number is $400 M, twice what they paid Weber.

Holy shyt Kemajic, you're going to set off wyogriz again with the "M". Please use a "K"!

YITB
 
Bjorn Bjornstein said:
kemajic said:
OrgonGriz said:
I am sure UM is not getting a 650k payout from Wyoming.
Correct. The number is $400 M, twice what they paid Weber.

Holy shyt Kemajic, you're going to set off wyogriz again with the "M". Please use a "K"!

YITB
We have been around and around on this technicality. M is used in banking (and other finance) to mean thousand(s) because M is the first letter of the Latin word mille which means thousand AND was used by the Romans to mean 1000 as in MMXIII representing 2013. MM or thousand-thousands means millions in the accounting world. k is used in engineering and other measurements - (and by most people referring to thousands of dollars).
 
CatzWillRise said:
Fullerton inked a deal with Root, giving more exposure to the Big Sky than it ever has nationally, and yet that still isn't good enough. The only way you people will be happy is if we start getting MWC money. Guess what, it ain't gonna happen.

READ: When you guys talk about him being good for the Big Sky, you are really talking about being good for UM.

The first lesson in TV 101 is that reach isn't the same thing as a rating....if the BSC by some strange chance were on the ESPN flagship with its astronomical reach the actual number of homes tuned in would still be equivalent to a grain or two in your catz's sand box... ;)
 
Silvertip said:
CatzWillRise said:
Fullerton inked a deal with Root, giving more exposure to the Big Sky than it ever has nationally, and yet that still isn't good enough. The only way you people will be happy is if we start getting MWC money. Guess what, it ain't gonna happen.

READ: When you guys talk about him being good for the Big Sky, you are really talking about being good for UM.

The first lesson in TV 101 is that reach isn't the same thing as a rating....if the BSC by some strange chance were on the ESPN flagship with its astronomical reach the actual number of homes tuned in would still be equivalent to a grain or two in your catz's sand box... ;)

I live out in Washington now, and most times when I wear MSU gear around, people comment how they saw us on Root. Hell when I first took the job I have now in WA, a guy said he just watched us destroy Portland last weekend, he said it was embarasing (for them). He is an OSU grad with no ties at all to FCS.

The other day I had a guy ask me if the logo on my shirt was the new or the old one, because he saw something about it on the Mariners pre-game.

Reaching even 50,000 people out of state is better than 0. And yes even the Altitude deal was better than nothing. Root is head and shoulders above Altitude in production values and professionalism.

MSU recruits have been found saying they caught us on Root. I am guessing that goes for every BSC school (that was fortunate to be on Root last year).

Just look at the steps TV coverage has taken in the last 10 years for the conference, specifically the Montana schools. We went from having some games covered, to the amazing Omega network with their 3 commercials, but at least they broadcast nearly every game! Then Max Media, KPAX. Then Altitude picked up a game or two every year for a while and broadcast us on a larger network than Max Media and KPAX combined. Now we got on Root, which is even much larger than Altitude. BigSkyTV is in there as well, while not perfect, let any fan watch from anywhere with a wifi connection. And it became free.

Name any other FCS conference with better viewing options than the Big Sky? We are on a pretty major network (Root), and all home games that aren't on Root are on BSTV for free.

We aren't ever going to have a Big Sky Network, with large revenue shares. We have to work our way up, and eventually we will hit our ceiling, because it's just FCS afterall and there are only so many people willing to watch that.

I guess my major question is, how would you guys make the BSC more profitable? NDSU and SDSU, yes I agree about that being a major miss. Those are big players in their markets. And we have taken some schools that weren't traditionally strong in many aspects. But we have a healthy number right now and frankly there aren't a lot of FCS options out west.
 
CatzWillRise said:
Silvertip said:
CatzWillRise said:
Fullerton inked a deal with Root, giving more exposure to the Big Sky than it ever has nationally, and yet that still isn't good enough. The only way you people will be happy is if we start getting MWC money. Guess what, it ain't gonna happen.

READ: When you guys talk about him being good for the Big Sky, you are really talking about being good for UM.

The first lesson in TV 101 is that reach isn't the same thing as a rating....if the BSC by some strange chance were on the ESPN flagship with its astronomical reach the actual number of homes tuned in would still be equivalent to a grain or two in your catz's sand box... ;)

I live out in Washington now, and most times when I wear MSU gear around, people comment how they saw us on Root. Hell when I first took the job I have now in WA, a guy said he just watched us destroy Portland last weekend, he said it was embarasing (for them). He is an OSU grad with no ties at all to FCS.

The other day I had a guy ask me if the logo on my shirt was the new or the old one, because he saw something about it on the Mariners pre-game.

Reaching even 50,000 people out of state is better than 0. And yes even the Altitude deal was better than nothing. Root is head and shoulders above Altitude in production values and professionalism.

MSU recruits have been found saying they caught us on Root. I am guessing that goes for every BSC school (that was fortunate to be on Root last year).

Just look at the steps TV coverage has taken in the last 10 years for the conference, specifically the Montana schools. We went from having some games covered, to the amazing Omega network with their 3 commercials, but at least they broadcast nearly every game! Then Max Media, KPAX. Then Altitude picked up a game or two every year for a while and broadcast us on a larger network than Max Media and KPAX combined. Now we got on Root, which is even much larger than Altitude. BigSkyTV is in there as well, while not perfect, let any fan watch from anywhere with a wifi connection. And it became free.

Name any other FCS conference with better viewing options than the Big Sky? We are on a pretty major network (Root), and all home games that aren't on Root are on BSTV for free.

We aren't ever going to have a Big Sky Network, with large revenue shares. We have to work our way up, and eventually we will hit our ceiling, because it's just FCS afterall and there are only so many people willing to watch that.

I guess my major question is, how would you guys make the BSC more profitable? NDSU and SDSU, yes I agree about that being a major miss. Those are big players in their markets. And we have taken some schools that weren't traditionally strong in many aspects. But we have a healthy number right now and frankly there aren't a lot of FCS options out west.

Great insight, I have to admit that when we played App State and it was ESPN 3 and it quit working midway I lost it. I love watching the games and it's nice to be able to catch some of the other teams play to see what we're up against.

As far as the conference is concerned, I would actually like to see it shrink a little bit. This not playing all the teams is bullshit. I feel like our schedule is harder than the cats but that's just my opinion. I'm sure in other years it's the other way around. It would be really nice with the 12 game season to have 11 teams in the conference so everyone plays everyone. That leaves 2 non conference games so teams can grab that payout game or bring in a great team from off yonder to play...Sam Houston App State McNeese... I would love to round in the NDSU and SDSU schools as well. Maybe something along the lines of:
Montana
Montana State
NDSU
SDSU
EWU
Weber
ND
SD
NAU
PSU
SUU

Yes, I left out the California schools and some "others" but that leaves us with a smaller travel schedule and a little bit more regionalized. The arguement for the California schools can be made for recruiting, but I think that all of the California schools will at some point or another try for FBS. This would give us 10 conference games and what would truly be a real conference champion...at least more so than now.
 
Agreed that we have too many teams now for an ideal size, but I'd rather have too many than too few. And yes it gives some teams and easier road to the playoffs perhaps, but the committee looks at strength of schedule (see NAU last year).
 
dupuyer griz said:
As far as the conference is concerned, I would actually like to see it shrink a little bit. This not playing all the teams is bullshit. I feel like our schedule is harder than the cats but that's just my opinion. I'm sure in other years it's the other way around. It would be really nice with the 12 game season to have 11 teams in the conference so everyone plays everyone. That leaves 2 non conference games so teams can grab that payout game or bring in a great team from off yonder to play...Sam Houston App State McNeese... I would love to round in the NDSU and SDSU schools as well. Maybe something along the lines of:
Montana
Montana State
NDSU
SDSU
EWU
Weber
ND
SD
NAU
PSU
SUU

Yes, I left out the California schools and some "others" but that leaves us with a smaller travel schedule and a little bit more regionalized. The arguement for the California schools can be made for recruiting, but I think that all of the California schools will at some point or another try for FBS. This would give us 10 conference games and what would truly be a real conference champion...at least more so than now.
Recognize we only have a 12 game regular season about every 4 years; otherwise it's 11. The biggest proponent for holding to an 8 game regular season has been UM, since we make a lot more money on the OOC games; it enables more home games.
 
With his smoke and mirrors comments Fullerton suggests that the Big Sky Conference is at the same level as the Pac 12 and Mountain West in the western region. Sorry, Mr. Fullerton, sell your line elsewhere.
 
Spanky said:
With his smoke and mirrors comments Fullerton suggests that the Big Sky Conference is at the same level as the Pac 12 and Mountain West in the western region. Sorry, Mr. Fullerton, sell your line elsewhere.

Here's the funny think about these Foolerton articles. He is always the only source cited in the article. It's been like that for 15 years, during which he's suggested a pending merger of lower tier FBS and upper FCS, offered his two bits on the state of Idaho football, and even suggested that merging the Southland and Big Sky Conferences might be necessary.
None of these sportswriters ever call on a lower tier FBS AD to back up Doug Less's claims. No one drags Rob Spear into the story or Commissioner Sankey back when he was Southland Commissioner and Foolerton was chattering about a four time zone conference.
It's always just Foolerton blowing hot gas. Some fans eat it up. Some don't. What I'd like to know is what other conference commissioners think about Doug's diatribes. The fact that Big Sky presidents never acknowledge what he's saying leads me to assume they're not too attentive to Big Sky athletics.
 
griz4life said:
The fact that Big Sky presidents never acknowledge what he's saying leads me to assume they're not too attentive to Big Sky athletics.
He's their tool; no more.
 
The Amish Guy isn't attentive to anything except banking his pay check and planning his next vacation.
 
Back
Top