• 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!

Pam State applying to go FBS Independent

Question. What drags down non-thriving or struggling FCS schools? Lack of football revenue or the many other non-revenue sports? I suppose both to some extent. Is another financial answer for a non-thriving FCS, to get rid of the non-revenue sports that have significant cost? I'm not suggesting that I like that idea. Just wondering. I don't even know the UM non-revenue sport costs, let along such costs for other FCS schools.
 
Part of the reason your (and other FCS members) FBS aspirations aren't really a thing is because you don't sponsor the FBS minimum in sports/scholarships. Of course with all the House settlement and governance discussions going on those might be changed as well.
 
kemajic said:
Huh? The BSC had nine full time members for years and that enabled a balanced schedule. 8 conf games for all and play every member. Ideal.
Click to expand...
Ya except in Basketball that equates to only 16 conference games which means you'd have to schedule 15 non-conference games whereas right now its 18 conference and 13 non-conference which is much easier. Trying to schedule non-conference games has become so incredibly tough that the more conference games you are able to play, the better.
 
SDHornet said:
Lots of folks seem to be looking at this pending move through the lens of the past. Lots of things up in the air with the pending House Settlement next week (Dr. Wood indicated that Sac State is opting in) and the new governance model being discussed/negotiated by the power brokers (SEC & B1G) of the college football. College football as we have known it has been changing quite dramatically over the past few years and that trend will probably continue until all the lawsuits, settlements, and possible Federal legislation on the various issues are eventually sorted out. In the meantime, Dr. Wood has positioned Sac State well to take advantage of the current environment.

For us Hornet fans that keep a close eye on things, the notable difference this time around with the stadium/FBS push was the fact that Dr. Wood raised student fees to increase athletic operating budgets and athletic facility improvements that go into effect this fall. Dr. Wood also ran a concurrent PR blitz to generate interest/hype/notability of this current stadium/FBS push. Past efforts were more seemingly hopeful something would just come along and fall in our lap, or that local media would care. Notable difference in approach by Dr. Wood by going out and making noise and being proactive in getting tangible results. Hate on his approach all you want but anyone that lives life knows the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

That said, I agree with the poster that stated this is a high risk - high reward move. The high risk is leaving a stable conference home for football with the known variables for FBS Indy status with a lot of unknown variables.

Monetarily, I'm not overly concerned with our situation. California wastes billions on illegals and other awful policies like a high speed rail to no where, so I couldn't care less on a few million a year being squandered on the only D1 football program in the state capital. The students were always going to fund the significant portion of this push and the new fees will bolster that aspect.

My understanding is that the NIL pledges being touted were contingent on a PAC invite, however I image a significant portion of those pledges remaining with our move to FBS. I think the biggest factor in whether or not those NIL pledges materialize is more dependent on the economy holding up rather than PAC vs MW vs Indy.

Being in the 20th largest media market will go a long way in allowing this move to FBS to be a success. Immediately upon reclassifying as FBS, our media value will see an significant increase so the questions is how much of that potential will be realized sooner rather than later. Given the move away from large TV deals for the non-power conferences, I suspect streaming will play a significant role in getting eyeballs on Hornet football. Once FBS status is approved, Hornet admin needs to be pounding the door of our regional and local media stations that broadcasts our games to get a new contract as well as looking to a streaming partner to get games available via that avenue. All of that will be revenue directly into our coffers without having to share a dime of it to a conference. Ticket prices, merchandise, tailgating, etc will/should see an increase in pricing to generate more revenue.

IMO scheduling will be the make or break factor for this move. '25 is set already, and I would assume Hornet admin is already in discussions with FBS programs for games in '26 and beyond. With phase 2 of the stadium build set for completion before the '26 season, this will go a long way in getting known brands on the schedule in Hornet Stadium. For those familiar with the Sac area fans, you already know that people will show up for what is deemed as "noteworthy" games. Home games against regional peer institutions (Fresno State, Nevada, San Jose State, San Diego State) will sell tickets. If we can even land a home game against a bigger name (former Pac 12 schools) it'll be a financial and PR boon for Hornet football. For those thinking the bigger names won't come, you have to consider that those west coast B1G programs will likely want to stay as regional as possible in non-conference scheduling so I would believe a home and home is a possibility.

Long post, so sorry for droning on. Bottom line is our situation is unique given the current environment of college football compared to other FCS programs looking to make a move to FBS. Our uniqueness is one that, IMO, makes it worth taking the risk on going FBS even if Indy status.
Click to expand...
Sounds like someone’s been spending too much time with Dr. Wood …

IMG-3313.jpg
 
IMO football will become basically 3 levels for division 1.
Level 1. Big boy football. Ohio st, Alabama, ect.
Level 2. Mid major. Boise st, James Madison, Texas st, liberty, Sam Houston, app st, Jacksonville st, Wyoming
Level 3: we play who??? Teams that don't matter in college football world. FCS. Teams that didn't even get mentioned in ncaa 2025 football video game.

It is already started that the big boys will be stop scheduling fcs school for body bag games because the playoffs will be determined by strength of schedule. Mid majors will schedule fcs teams but for less them we make for a home game. So teams like eastern wa and 90% of the fcs this is still an option to make money. But montana and dakotas this is loss of revenue.

Asking who in the west had successfully moved to fbs is loaded question. There is only 1 west fcs conference. Big sky. Till the pac 12 implosion there is only 1 Mid major conference in the west. What is your sample size. Zero? Idaho, boise st, Texas st, sam Houston, and who? Only team to move down is idaho. That is partly because they had a power 5 school 30 minutes away who consumed all the media and money from idaho. Idaho didn't have a fighting chance even though they did try to fight tooth and nail to stay in the fbs. But there is a ton of fcs programs that done well in the east being a Mid major. They are not Alabama but they do have success as a Mid major and much more relevant then montana in football when 15 years ago montana use to say they a good team but not as good as montana. Now they are better then montana.
So please stop saying montana plays great football. For fcs yes we do but over all college football no. We below average not even a Mid major program. We are division 2 like minded.
Sac st will have growing pains just like Texas st and liberty and many others that mafe the jump. But by 2032 when they redo college football landscape they will heads above montana.
I love my griz more then most things in my life. Maybe even above some of my family haha. I think if we are not move up then we should invest in the basketball programs more and stop with football. We have reached our highest level at the fcs. At least in basketball we are still considered as a Mid major not a d2 level program.
 
Hey if you don't believe me. Take a look at facilities of the big sky vs division 2. You can look them up on YouTube. Not much difference besides maybe 3 schools.
 
flowtowngriz said:
IMO football will become basically 3 levels for division 1.
Level 1. Big boy football. Ohio st, Alabama, ect.
Level 2. Mid major. Boise st, James Madison, Texas st, liberty, Sam Houston, app st, Jacksonville st, Wyoming
Level 3: we play who??? Teams that don't matter in college football world. FCS. Teams that didn't even get mentioned in ncaa 2025 football video game.

It is already started that the big boys will be stop scheduling fcs school for body bag games because the playoffs will be determined by strength of schedule. Mid majors will schedule fcs teams but for less them we make for a home game. So teams like eastern wa and 90% of the fcs this is still an option to make money. But montana and dakotas this is loss of revenue.

Asking who in the west had successfully moved to fbs is loaded question. There is only 1 west fcs conference. Big sky. Till the pac 12 implosion there is only 1 Mid major conference in the west. What is your sample size. Zero? Idaho, boise st, Texas st, sam Houston, and who? Only team to move down is idaho. That is partly because they had a power 5 school 30 minutes away who consumed all the media and money from idaho. Idaho didn't have a fighting chance even though they did try to fight tooth and nail to stay in the fbs. But there is a ton of fcs programs that done well in the east being a Mid major. They are not Alabama but they do have success as a Mid major and much more relevant then montana in football when 15 years ago montana use to say they a good team but not as good as montana. Now they are better then montana.
So please stop saying montana plays great football. For fcs yes we do but over all college football no. We below average not even a Mid major program. We are division 2 like minded.
Sac st will have growing pains just like Texas st and liberty and many others that mafe the jump. But by 2032 when they redo college football landscape they will heads above montana.
I love my griz more then most things in my life. Maybe even above some of my family haha. I think if we are not move up then we should invest in the basketball programs more and stop with football. We have reached our highest level at the fcs. At least in basketball we are still considered as a Mid major not a d2 level program.
Click to expand...
Not sure you are right on the FBS playoffs being based on strength of schedule. Aren't the big conferences planning to lock in at least 4 slots for their conferences, in an expanded format?

I don't understand what you are saying here: " But montana and dakotas this is loss of revenue."

There used to be another FCS conference in the west. There is also the MVC.

UM isn't D2 minded. That's incorrect, and actually silly.

Some posters seem to like to change their "facts" to fit their narrative, in my view.
 
mthoopsfan said:
Why would you think they aren't and haven't been looking at the future, including changes in landscape and FBS? When they say that FCS is the right place for UM, it's because they have been following and looking at alternatives. Jeez, have some faith in the leadership. They are not asleep. But they are realistic. With money and the right alternative, UM would move, is my view. That being said, I can't imagine the money will ever be there. O'Day would have supporting moving up, if there had been a credible path. I know that. I assume Haslam is the same.
Click to expand...
 
Montana and dakotas don't need to play body bag games like eastern wa or most other fcs programs to make money to for there athletic budgets. We make more money playing home games then we do playing group 6 teams. Yes we get a nice pay check if we play a power 4 but that doesn't happen very often maybe once or twice every 10 years.
Being Montana a division 2 like mind is fcs is now a glorified division 2. A division or tag that no one cares about except for the fans of those teams example Montana fans. We care about the griz but most of the other fcs programs have no followers hence the division 2 tag.
The other fcs conference use to be sac st, ND ndsu, cal poly, and some other programs that dropped football.
 
It seems that the administration has always backed away from making a change as long as they can maintain the current stadium revenue. They know that the current conference affiliation results in an inferior product, however, the majority of the Griz fans accept watching competition provided by FCS teams. However, the administration doesn’t seem to realize that a change to FBS competition would benefit our entire athletic program. Our basketball team would be able to recruit more talented athletes merely by removing the negative of the Big Sky Conference and the teams we compete against. I understand that you enjoy FCS football, but please consider the overall benefits to our athletic program that a conference change would provide. Finally, I respect and agree with your view that a change would require the necessary financial strength.
 
I believe most Griz fans wonder what the future holds for the Griz football program as well as the athletic programs as a whole. The suggestion that the FCS is becoming less relevant may or may not be accurate. However, I will again remind everyone including those who say UM should leave FCS and "move up", that it is easier said than done. First, an FBS conference needs to "want" you and "invite" you. The only way that happens in todays world is if you bring "more eyeballs" to the TV set, period! Not "some eyeballs" but "more eyeballs". TV is where the money is! So far, it appears no conference has invited us. Secondly and just as important, are the finances of such a move. Kent has a better handle on that and has expressed the financial challenges UM would need to overcome should such a invitation come knocking! I too wish UM,MSU and the Dakota Schools could join something like the Moutain West but it looks like they are looking elsewhere and that ship may have sailed. Again, I assume we don't offer the media (TV) impact they require.
Go Griz!!!
 
Montana viewership is on par for the mwc. Out tv ratings is above average for g6. The brawl is also a selling point. We need to show that we want to move up. Montana is not in a position to wait for a invite. We made all the infrastructure upgrades that hindered in early 2000s. We have average to above average facilities for g6 conferences. But do not have the leadership or stomach put ourselves in the unknown. Sac st just did that. Kudos to them for having the balls. Not saying they are going to be successful right away but in 7 years from now they will be most likely in a better position than Montana. Aka Texas st, James Madison, sam Houston are right now. If we play it safe and worry about what could happen then we will be left behind. Not saying that it will end Montana football but imo if we are not trying to move forward with the football program then we should switch our focus to the basketball program.
Having more exposure brings in more money, more students, and lifts the whole community up. Not that we really want more people in missoula lol. But if you are not growing your going backwards. We are pretty much tapped out at the fcs level. Only thing we can do better is win natty more consistently. Which the natty in the foreseeable future is going to be dakota/Montana rival. The rest of the fcs doesn't holf a candle to these programs. They might a team or 2 that pops up but 99% it going to be Montana vs dakota. Not really a national title if you ask me. Fun to watch at the end of the year but most regular season games are going to be lack luster.
 
flowtowngriz said:
Level 3: we play who??? Teams that don't matter in college football world. FCS. Teams that didn't even get mentioned in ncaa 2025 football video game.
Click to expand...
I worked on the Madden series for a few years (NCAA's development is very similar) and have seen glimpses into NCAA's tooling. It was a miracle to even get all of FBS represented despite heavy investments that could take stadium creation from a few months down to ~6 weeks per stadium. Word is that FCS was considered, but had to be abandoned due to time and uncertainty over just how well NCAA would actually sell - sure they expected robust sales but nowhere near where they ended up landing.
 
Griz til I die said:
Ya except in Basketball that equates to only 16 conference games which means you'd have to schedule 15 non-conference games whereas right now its 18 conference and 13 non-conference which is much easier. Trying to schedule non-conference games has become so incredibly tough that the more conference games you are able to play, the better.
Click to expand...
Wrong forum for that argument.
 
Spanky2 said:
It seems that the administration has always backed away from making a change as long as they can maintain the current stadium revenue. They know that the current conference affiliation results in an inferior product, however, the majority of the Griz fans accept watching competition provided by FCS teams. However, the administration doesn’t seem to realize that a change to FBS competition would benefit our entire athletic program. Our basketball team would be able to recruit more talented athletes merely by removing the negative of the Big Sky Conference and the teams we compete against. I understand that you enjoy FCS football, but please consider the overall benefits to our athletic program that a conference change would provide. Finally, I respect and agree with your view that a change would require the necessary financial strength.
Click to expand...
The administration hasn't gone FBS because UM can't afford to do it, and there are haven't been any opportunities for years. Stadium revenue is important but that's not why UM doesn't go FBS.
 
flowtowngriz said:
Montana viewership is on par for the mwc. Out tv ratings is above average for g6. The brawl is also a selling point. We need to show that we want to move up. Montana is not in a position to wait for a invite. We made all the infrastructure upgrades that hindered in early 2000s. We have average to above average facilities for g6 conferences. But do not have the leadership or stomach put ourselves in the unknown. Sac st just did that. Kudos to them for having the balls. Not saying they are going to be successful right away but in 7 years from now they will be most likely in a better position than Montana. Aka Texas st, James Madison, sam Houston are right now. If we play it safe and worry about what could happen then we will be left behind. Not saying that it will end Montana football but imo if we are not trying to move forward with the football program then we should switch our focus to the basketball program.
Having more exposure brings in more money, more students, and lifts the whole community up. Not that we really want more people in missoula lol. But if you are not growing your going backwards. We are pretty much tapped out at the fcs level. Only thing we can do better is win natty more consistently. Which the natty in the foreseeable future is going to be dakota/Montana rival. The rest of the fcs doesn't holf a candle to these programs. They might a team or 2 that pops up but 99% it going to be Montana vs dakota. Not really a national title if you ask me. Fun to watch at the end of the year but most regular season games are going to be lack luster.
Click to expand...
Show us the links and quotes for your statements in your first 2 sentences.

I don't agree with this: "Having more exposure brings in more money, more students, and lifts the whole community up. Not that we really want more people in missoula lol. But if you are not growing your going backwards." Especially that not moving up is moving backwards. That's just a cliche.
 
It has been reported when the griz play on espn that UofM searches go 7p 10x. If we get 10% shit even 1% that go to the U. That is added revenue t9 the school,plus added recruiting. FBS conferences travel much better then FCS. So more out of town visitors brings in more money. 30 ro 35k in wa griz is achievable if we want to expand. I know that Colorado st will bring more fans then 500. More like 5k. That is some reasons but not all
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top