Is the FCS the new division 2?

[kemajic]

Nope. Montana beat the crap out of Boise State in 1995. Wasn't even close. The Griz didn't ascend because Boise departed.

Yes, DD and the '95 NC team beat Boise on their way out of the conference. One very gratifying win at home. Prior to that we were 8-16 vs. BSU. We were 4-10 against Nevada. Their departures certainly elevated Montana's positioning in the BSC.

 

[hm.grwn.grizfan]

As to the old move up argument, winning programs bring in students. Losing athletic programs often cost schools enrollment, and darn sure costs them fans.

Montana's enrollment grew to record levels in conjunction with the Grizzlies success in the 1990's and 2000's. That wasn't a coincidence. Then weak leadership at UM, and the administration's anti-athletics push, resulted in teams with the worst results in ages. Again, no coincidence Montana student enrollment directly dropped during that period. At the same time Wadeed over at msu was promoting the hell out of their athletics programs (along with everything else). They saw their enrollment grow as they enjoyed some of their best athletic results ever. In both cases it was not simply athletic results driving numbers up or down yet there is a direct correlation. Kids want to go where it's fun, exciting and teams are winning.

There will still be Grizzly fans if we habitually turned out 3-8 or 6-5 seasons. However, those fans would be in a half-filled WA Griz stadium. Winning fills those seats. Doubt me? Count the fans in the stands next time you see San Jose State, New Mexico State, Utah State, Nevada, or any of our "would be peers" on TV. The exposed concrete out numbers the fans by at least 3 to 1.

You might be ashamed UM is only FCS, I don't care. It does not bother me. I prefer watching our guys having a shot at a championship on a level playing field. At FBS it isn't a level field and there is no reason to believe it won't get even more lop sided. You move up folks have a little patience. After they slice FBS into the "haves" and "have nots" we can move up and join the have nots in the new Division 2.

Patient? Be patient? It’s been over 20 flipping years of watching our peers move on. And you doubt that we would be successful at the next level? I don’t. I’m also a Wyoming fan and watched Craig Bohl build something special at Wyoming during his years there, producing some of the most exciting Wyoming teams I can remember. That’s in Laramie……laramie. To be fair, the new coaching staff isn’t as good, but I digress. My point is that with the right staff I have no doubt that UM would be successful. And to avoid moving up out of fear of failure is timid and weak, and supposedly the pride and tradition of the Montana grizzlies wasn’t supposed to be entrusted to the timid and weak…. Or was that just hype and bluster

 

[mthoopsfan]

Montana talked to WAC sometime in 2009, and decided not to join.

"Following 2009, the Western Athletic Conference (WAC) experienced a severe and continuous loss of members, which ultimately led to the suspension of its top-tier Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) football competition and a major realignment.

• Massive departures: Between 2011 and 2013, the WAC lost nearly all of its members, many of whom joined the Mountain West Conference or Conference USA.
• Loss of key football members: High-profile defections included Boise State, Fresno State, and Nevada in 2011–2012, followed by Hawaii, San Jose State, and Utah State.
• Elimination of football: After the 2012 season, with just two football-playing members left, the WAC announced it would cease sponsoring FBS football. It transitioned into a non-football conference, focusing on basketball and other sports."
• 
  
• "Boise State announced it was leaving the WAC on June 11, 2010, to join the Mountain West Conference, effective July 1, 2011.
  
  • Announcement Date: June 11, 2010.
  • New Conference: Mountain West Conference.
  • Effective Date: July 1, 2011."

"During the week of June 7, 2010, amid rumors surrounding Boise State's future in the WAC, the conference held a meeting of its athletic directors and university presidents in Las Vegas to discuss contingency options. The conference fully expected to lose Boise State, and according to WAC commissioner Karl Benson, there was no bitterness toward BSU by the rest of the current membership. Benson also added that the WAC was considering expanding itself, with the conference eyeing up to six current members of the second-tier Football Championship Subdivision.

Boise State left the WAC for the Mountain West at the end of the 2010–2011 season. On August 18, 2010, Nevada (Reno) and Fresno State were both extended invitations to join the Mountain West Conference, and subsequently accepted."

 

[hm.grwn.grizfan]

Montana talked to WAC sometime in 2009, and decided not to join.

"Following 2009, the Western Athletic Conference (WAC) experienced a severe and continuous loss of members, which ultimately led to the suspension of its top-tier Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) football competition and a major realignment.

• Massive departures: Between 2011 and 2013, the WAC lost nearly all of its members, many of whom joined the Mountain West Conference or Conference USA.
• Loss of key football members: High-profile defections included Boise State, Fresno State, and Nevada in 2011–2012, followed by Hawaii, San Jose State, and Utah State.
• Elimination of football: After the 2012 season, with just two football-playing members left, the WAC announced it would cease sponsoring FBS football. It transitioned into a non-football conference, focusing on basketball and other sports."
• 
  
• "Boise State announced it was leaving the WAC on June 11, 2010, to join the Mountain West Conference, effective July 1, 2011.
  • Announcement Date: June 11, 2010.
  • New Conference: Mountain West Conference.
  • Effective Date: July 1, 2011."

"During the week of June 7, 2010, amid rumors surrounding Boise State's future in the WAC, the conference held a meeting of its athletic directors and university presidents in Las Vegas to discuss contingency options. The conference fully expected to lose Boise State, and according to WAC commissioner Karl Benson, there was no bitterness toward BSU by the rest of the current membership. Benson also added that the WAC was considering expanding itself, with the conference eyeing up to six current members of the second-tier Football Championship Subdivision.

Boise State left the WAC for the Mountain West at the end of the 2010–2011 season. On August 18, 2010, Nevada (Reno) and Fresno State were both extended invitations to join the Mountain West Conference, and subsequently accepted."

Sooooooo, like boise state, Nevada, and Fresno state, Montana very likely would have been in the MWC

 

[mthoopsfan]

Sooooooo, like boise state, Nevada, and Fresno state, Montana very likely would have been in the MWC

Not true for multiple reasons. Those teams were thinking of moving on before UM would have even committed to come to WAC. And MW wouldn't have wanted UM then. Had UM gone to WAC, UM would have been screwed when it folded. I have that on good authority. And MSU didn't want to leave the Big Sky.

 

[get'em_griz]

We once competed against Marshall. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

We once competed against App State. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

We once competed against James Madison. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

We once competed against Sam Houston. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

We once competed against Delaware. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

---

If we moved up to the FBS, we aren't competing with Oregon, Texas, Alabama, Auburn, etc.

We'll be competing against former FCS programs that we previously competed against, as well as the rest of the G5 that are no better than the top 25% of the FCS. And no, we wouldn't have many losing seasons. Not with our facilities, support, and program strength. Most G5 programs would kill to have what we have.

 

[DoubleNicks]

That was the most dominant team I have ever seen. There was just no stopping Randy, he did whatever he wanted and Pennington could get the ball to him all over the place. I was too young to be prepared for what we faced in that game, it was soul crushing for Young Elrod.

Interestingly, I was flying back from Salt Lake to Missoula almost 20 years ago and the guy next to me saw my Griz gear and asked about the game. Turns out, he was a student at Marshall that year. We reminisced, and he said he had a few classes. Said Pennington would voluntarily read his own poetry in front of the class for extra credit in English. He said he never saw Moss once, lol.

Again, the '96 Marshall QB was Eric Kresser. After the game, we were in a restaurant with family-style seating, occupied by 99% Marshall gear-wearing customers. Late in the dinner, a nice lady across the table from us told us something she said she shouldn't. Marshall had postponed issuing grades until the following week as Randy had not attended a class the whole term.

Sorry, off topic but if true, should Marshall have to vacate the '96 title? What gets me is the similarities with our vacated 2012(?) season where we supposedly played with ineligible players and the apparent double-standard/different ruling.

Or at least, that has been my understanding to the reasoning for the vacation punishment. That some players took free benefits (hotdogs from some tailgates or something) which made them ineligible. However, this wasn't discovered and ruled on until after the season so the team didn't know they were ineligible at the time and played them. Then after the season when the NCAA deemed the players had broken the rules thus making them ineligible, they went back and retroactively deemed the school had acted improperly by playing said "ineligible" players (even though the university didn't have that knowledge at the time).

Of course, I think the punishment was self-imposed (or at least, proposed by the school) which might be part of the reason for the double-standard. But anyways...

Or am I wrong on the reasoning for the vacated season?

 

[mthoopsfan]

We once competed against Marshall. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

We once competed against App State. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

We once competed against James Madison. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

We once competed against Sam Houston. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

We once competed against Delaware. Competed. Now they're FBS and people say we can't compete.

---

If we moved up to the FBS, we aren't competing with Oregon, Texas, Alabama, Auburn, etc.

We'll be competing against former FCS programs that we previously competed against, as well as the rest of the G5 that are no better than the top 25% of the FCS. And no, we wouldn't have many losing seasons. Not with our facilities, support, and program strength. Most G5 programs would kill to have what we have.

We probably wouldn’t play those teams. Who has said we couldn’t compete against Sam Houston or DE? I have never seen anyone say that. Who has said we would have losing seasons in FBS? How do facilities, support and program strength compare to say Utah State. I don’t know.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Would be nice to see those teams play in Missoula. We certainly could compete with many of them. Yet it is questionable if we could consistently win as an FBS program. Though I'll be there next year to watch us take down Oregon State.

I'll always be a fan, you and many others will too. Though attendance in Missoula will drop significantly if we did not produce a winning program. Don't doubt me. That is a fact. Remember I'm bonkers and potentially unpredictable.

While it’s questionable what would happen to attendance if UM played better teams instead of CWU and Holy Cross, I think the speculation that it would go down makes a huge assumption that we would necessarily lose a lot more games. The potential fault here is that assumption seems to look at our current teams/talent level. I think it would be useful to factor in that we’d almost certainly be quite a bit better after stocking the shelves with FBS talent using significantly more scholarships.

 

[flowtowngriz]

WHen a team opted in for the new players getting paid there is no scholarship min. You now have roster size limits, 105. The big sky conf. imposed a limit for scholarships but the mvc did not impose a limit.

 

[Stop_HammerTime69]

I'd kind of argue that shows the opposite, no offense.

"In this study it shows that schools moving from FCS to FBS saw, on average, a 6–12% increase in applications within 2–3 years post-transition. Enrollment rose 3–5% during the same period. The bump in enrollment did taper off after about five years, however, unless athletic success sustained the increased visibility garner from the move up and subsequent exposure."

And there is the catch. "Unless athletic success sustained the increased visibility garnered from moving up." Would there truly be sustained athletic success? That is the debate.

I also used Marshall, which did see a slight bump in the couple of years after moving up, but now have less students. You're right that there are widely varied examples. My point was that Schmidt's hyper focus on App State to make his argument isn't a very fair example, and excludes examples that support the opposite position.

I’ve always heard from other sources that your game plan for running an athletic department in a FCS-to-FBS move-up cannot be “win and figure it out later.” You have to have a way to pay for things and keep fan engagement high the whole way through, particularly during really bad years. Most of the time this is aimed at teams like Kennesaw State, Sam Houston State, or Sacramento State, who don’t have the infrastructure and culture to really support being FBS without winning.

Now, I kind of think the Griz and Cats have the infrastructure and culture to keep that engagement in a move-up, particularly with a captive market here in the state, but the Griz financial state may be more fragile than we think too. That Gogala article a couple weeks ago with the interview with Haslam about how the Griz are making less from television now than we were in 2017 keeps rolling around in my head.