PlayerRep said:
Yes, UM doesn't make much from the conference in the Big Sky, but it also doesn't have the huge additional expenses of being FBS. FCS in general, and UM in particular, are much better known nationally, and respected by many, than what you say. In my view, winning and participating in championships attracts more good attention and more students, than just being in FBS as an also-ran. If UM were to move up without adequate funding, this would decrease the chance of success. If UM was very successful relatively quickly, attendance would decline fairly rapidly, in my view. Losing to BYU or Air Force doesn't excite me. Playing Utah St, etc. also doesn't excite me. I'd much rather play App St, other top FCS programs, compete for the conference championship, and participate in the playoffs. The playoffs are the best part of FCS, and the road to getting to the playoffs and earning higher seeds for home games, is very exciting.
This whole exercise is pretty silly right now, because UM isn't going anywhere. But for the sake of argument, wouldn't you entire statement also apply to moving down to D-II, or better yet, NAIA and the frontier conference? For example:
UM would receive less money from the conference (due to NCAA basketball tournament revenues) if we dropped down to NAIA, but costs would be significantly lower - fewer scholarships, more scholarships filled from in-state due to the lower competition level, especially for non-revenue sports, and travel would be significantly reduced.
A few teams, like Montana and now North Dakota State, are nationally know due to their success in the playoffs. Carroll College had a picture on the cover of Sports Illustrated after winning their national title. D-II Grand Valley State and Valdost are probably better know nationally than 90% of teh FCS programs. Orgon Griz is correct that the National perception of FCS is that it is D-II. It is infuriating, but it is what it is, anyone that doesn't explicitly follow FCS football thinks of it as less than D-I. I think it would be hard to argue that in general the National perception FCS is above NAIA or D-II, especially when you consider one of the auto-bid conferences to the FCS playoffs offer no scholarships, so is essentially D-III.
As a State research University, Montana would be expected to be immediately successful at the lower level of competition, and win multiple National Championships. This should generate higher attendance for Montana.
frankly losing Southern Utah, Northern Arizona and North Dakota doesn't excite me. Playing Sac State and Northern Colorado doesn't excite me. I would rather face and compete with top ranked NAIA program like Carroll College and St. Francis.
Montana's basketball programs could actually compete and win national championships, boosting attendance and revenues for the athletic budget.
I am not suggesting Montana should move down, although UM has moved down several times in their history, and attempted to reduce football scholarships several more times, the latest being 1993 when Dennison pushed through a resolution in the Big Sky to reduce football scholarships by 18. This was the last straw for the Idaho BOE, and it allowed BSU and Idaho to leave the conference rather than try to compete at the DII level of scholarships. However the good arguments you make for staying FCS also apply to dropping to D-II or NAIA, and I am sure this will not escape Pat Williams attention.
