Should the U of M move into true 1A conference like the WAC?

[SeatownGrizzly]

Actually, Boise's metro population is more like 500,000 (464,000 as of 2000). Its metro area is roughly the size of Spokane's.

 

[SeatownGrizzly]

Responding in order....

CityGriz: I break the mold of the long in the tooth types who remember leather helmets sans face masks. A hearty thumbs up from this geezer for elevating the Griz program.

GrizinmyYard: If I had your address I send along a Rand MacNally Atlas (so use Google Earth) to prove that there is precious little difference in travel requirements between our beloved BSC and the WAC. Even Las Cruces (NM St) is easier to get to than Flagstaff. And too, a trip to Honolulu would be a whole lot more appealing to GrizNation than one more night at dreary Sac State where we routinely outnumber the locals.

Bobaloo: Nothing could be more disingenuous than for George D to mention the Vandals in the same breath with the Griz. That baseless argument wore out its welcome long ago. He knows that (1) Idaho generates fewer than 3,000 season ticket holders compared to UM's 17,000+ (2) still plays football in a glorified silo that endures because there are no funds for a new modern venue (3) UI has zero winning tradition (4) is in an isolated hard to reach neck of Idaho in sparsely populated Latah County, and (5) must compete for the entertanment dollar with a far more attractive program 9 mile away at Wazzu

Furthermore, GD also knows that 60% of Griz football fans reside outside of Missoula County. He's got a good thing going with a cash cow program that is devoted more to raising coin than providing GrizNation and UM teams with meaningful competition with peer schools in the West.

That's a great post. Though I disagree with Idaho having "zero" winning tradition. Maybe since they've reached 1-A winning has been elusive, but Idaho has a proud football tradition. It's too bad that their program has crumbled over the last decade.

I love the argument that the Griz would become Idaho in the WAC, which I think is ridiculous for reasons already pointed out. I attended the University of Idaho for a year before realizing I needed to get the hell out of Moscow. Having spent a year there, the recruiting challenges Idaho faces are obvious.

Missoula would be far more attractive considering the superior facilities, larger, more attractive town for potential recruits. And Missoula doesn't have orange water and a water treatment plant that stinks up the town like Moscow has. When I lived there, the tap water was orange because of algae and iron in the water supply, and the town smelled of rotten shit at night. Not only that, part of the reason I left was because the academics at U of I went to hell during the budget crisis that still cripples the institution.

Montana would not have to worry at all about "becoming Idaho" if it moved to the WAC. But perhaps Idaho is a cautionary tale that has made the brass at the UM realize that they need to be ready if they want to move up. UI overextended itself financially in order to follow and keep up with Boise St., and it killed them.

 

[grizindabox]

The one reason I have a difficult time when people compare Montana with Idaho is the fact that U of I is 8 miles from WSU. This will always make Idaho athletics the little brother, or even stepbrother compared to WSU. I believe that Idaho gets left out, or receives minimal support from area financial sources compared to what Wazzu athletics does. I see UM as far better off in this area compared to what U of I has been capable. As for the comparison to Boise, yes it will be more difficult, but I see Montana closer to Boise than being in the same situation as Idaho.

 

[votb]

this has been a hot topic for years and i've distilled a few observations.
1. this is a subject that seems to break down by age, with the older guys who remember the pac coast conference or the old skyline conference adamantly opposed, while the younger fans are more for it.
2. the split now is about 50-50, but the "mo" is on the side of the movers and shakers.
3. we need to look hard before we leap. the obvious choice is the wac, where we'd renew rivalries with boise state, idaho, utah state and nevada, but if boise and fresno leave, the wac would be an extremely weak conference. my first choice, the mwc, is probably beyond our reach right now, but might not be in a few years as we improve our facilities and montana develops into a better tv market.
4. politics is an issue, especially as to whether the board of regents would let us move without montana state. (i personally think this is a red herring, since for most of their existence, montana and montana state played in separate conferences, and it did nothing to sour the rivalry.)
5. money is a big issue, of course, yet not one poster has ever come on here with good figures as to how much it would cost to move up, versus the revenue to be gained from a new conference. except for wash-griz, the big sky has not one revenue source, unless you consider a first-round win at the big dance. to the best of my memory, that has only happened twice, once by weber, and two years ago by us.
6. despite what anybody says, montana has, since the departures of idaho, boise state and nevada, absolutely dominated the big sky conference in both football and women's basketball, while making more than its share of trips to the big dance. with its superior fan base, facilities, revenues, traditions, montana will remain a "big sky power," much to the increasing boredom of many of its fans, including this one.

All I can do is wonder what you've been drinking if you think Montana has any kind of shot, or should deserve a shot at the MWAC. Think about it...UM vs. BYU, Utah, TCU every year???!!!??? I don't think so. Are you ready to expand WG Stadium to 40-thousand, and fill it every week? You'd have to be able to do that to survive in that conference. And how many schools in the MWAC are going to want to travel to Missoula? The WAC is a worthy (if maybe unrealistic) goal...the MWAC is a pipe dream.

 

[Grizbacker1]

this has been a hot topic for years and i've distilled a few observations.
1. this is a subject that seems to break down by age, with the older guys who remember the pac coast conference or the old skyline conference adamantly opposed, while the younger fans are more for it.
2. the split now is about 50-50, but the "mo" is on the side of the movers and shakers.
3. we need to look hard before we leap. the obvious choice is the wac, where we'd renew rivalries with boise state, idaho, utah state and nevada, but if boise and fresno leave, the wac would be an extremely weak conference. my first choice, the mwc, is probably beyond our reach right now, but might not be in a few years as we improve our facilities and montana develops into a better tv market.
4. politics is an issue, especially as to whether the board of regents would let us move without montana state. (i personally think this is a red herring, since for most of their existence, montana and montana state played in separate conferences, and it did nothing to sour the rivalry.)
5. money is a big issue, of course, yet not one poster has ever come on here with good figures as to how much it would cost to move up, versus the revenue to be gained from a new conference. except for wash-griz, the big sky has not one revenue source, unless you consider a first-round win at the big dance. to the best of my memory, that has only happened twice, once by weber, and two years ago by us.
6. despite what anybody says, montana has, since the departures of idaho, boise state and nevada, absolutely dominated the big sky conference in both football and women's basketball, while making more than its share of trips to the big dance. with its superior fan base, facilities, revenues, traditions, montana will remain a "big sky power," much to the increasing boredom of many of its fans, including this one.

All I can do is wonder what you've been drinking if you think Montana has any kind of shot, or should deserve a shot at the MWAC. Think about it...UM vs. BYU, Utah, TCU every year???!!!??? I don't think so. Are you ready to expand WG Stadium to 40-thousand, and fill it every week? You'd have to be able to do that to survive in that conference. And how many schools in the MWAC are going to want to travel to Missoula? The WAC is a worthy (if maybe unrealistic) goal...the MWAC is a pipe dream.

VOTB,

As much as I and may others agree with you, the chances you will sway the few move up proponents with logic, reasoning, facts, et al is about as likely as Fullerton admitting Bigskytv sucks. What is the latest with the investigation of your AD Bubb?

 

[Turd Ferguson]

Ya, I know what division 1 means my reference was in regards to the fact the Big Sky has a sub-division or competes in a sub-division for one of it's sports. The a true 1A CONFERENCE is where all the sports compete in the same division. Sorry if that was not clear. GrizbbisKing where do you get your info from on the hoop comparisions?

RPI rankings. collegerpi.com has that which I have used for women's bb. Also, kenpom.com has RPI ranking (which I use for men's). collegerpi.com you have to pay to get the best info for men's but it is free for women's. kenpom.com handles only men's bb.

But, For women's basketball, Big Sky is ranked 19th and WAC is ranked 20th. For men's basketball, Big sky is ranked 25th, WAC is ranked 20th.

The Big Sky is rated higher than the WAC in WBB because UM is in the Big Sky! If UM were in the WAC it would probably look more like WAC --> 16th, Big Sky -->25th.

UM has been carrying the Big Sky in WBB like it does in football. If Tinkle gets this men's BBall thing straightened out again, UM will be a three headed monster again and continue to lead the conference in wins and attendance on a yearly basis without any competition. Yippee!

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Boise's 300,000 metro population is a combo of Nampa and Caldwell etc. which is similiar to the griz drawing fans from the Flathead, Mission, and Bitteroot Valleys that combined with the Missoula Valley have to be close in population to 300,000 or more. I wonder if ole George has information on that or contradictatory to that? Western Montana is growing pretty steady from what I've scene hence why Washington Grizzly Stadium has had to grow.

According the census estimates listed on wikipedia, the metro population of Boise is around 650,000. I am skeptical that Missoula can draw from this large of a population base in the neighboring counties, when that figure is 2/3 of the total state population.

Grizband is right:

Boise metro est=650,000

Caldwell to BSU stadium=29mi.
Nampa to BSU Stadium=21mi.
Meridian to BSU Stadium=13mi.
The west end of the entire population corridor, Ontario, Oregon=57mi!!!


Missoula, Flathead, Ravalli, Lake, Granite, Powell, Mineral, and Sanders County combined population= 256,971

Kalispell to Missoula=121mi.
Polson to Missoula=70mi.
Superior to Missoula=58mi.
Hamilton to Missoula=47mi.
Deer Lodge to Missoula=81mi.

Just a tad different......

 

[votb]

[/quote]

VOTB,

As much as I and may others agree with you, the chances you will sway the few move up proponents with logic, reasoning, facts, et al is about as likely as Fullerton admitting Bigskytv sucks. What is the latest with the investigation of your AD Bubb?[/quote]

GB1...I realize you're right...and i LOVE your comparison to fullerton admitting BigSkyTV isn't the greatest.

Still no official university word about the Bubb situation...I'm sure they're trying to reach some kind of settlement and won't be making any statements until that's done. I don't see any way in heck he's coming back. There must be some sticky issues involved though, because I know the school president isn't one to hesitate making decisions.