BSU president backs Idaho for WAC
Kustra says it is good for rivalry to let Vandals in

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nick Jezierny

The Idaho Statesman | Edition Date: 05-28-2004
Boise State President Bob Kustra said he is rooting for the Idaho Vandals to gain membership in the Western Athletic Conference.

Kustra and the rest of the WAC presidents are expected to address expansion at the conference's board meeting June 3-4 in Half Moon Bay, Calif.

The eight-team WAC has expressed interest in expanding to nine to balance out the football schedule.

The conference also could remain at eight teams going into the 2005-06 season.




<a href='http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040528/NEWS0307/405280339' target='_blank'>The Rest of the Story</a>

What else can he say, there aren't any other options. Public PR, nothing more.

Sad, sad time for Bronco fans. Our progression up has taken a big hit by adding the vandal boat anchor to our conference.

Roughrider Wrote:What else can he say, there aren't any other options. Public PR, nothing more.

Sad, sad time for Bronco fans. Our progression up has taken a big hit by adding the vandal boat anchor to our conference.

I thought it would be good for Broncos to add the Vandals so BSU can schedule more OOC games against the BCS?

It does help our OOC. That's the one benefit to this from where I sit. But it's not enough to want them in our conference. Unfortunately, we're measured by the company we keep and the WAC needs to improve, not go backwards.

Quote:the WAC needs to improve, not go backwards.

How do you propose to improve the WAC without Idaho? North Texas said no. Do you want to add another Louisiana team and stretch the conference further? I don't see where staying at 8 makes the WAC improve; rather it leaves it highly vulnerable to losing a team either to another conference or I-AA.

Unless you think you can get one or both of the Montana schools to I-A in time to help out the WAC, I don't see how not adding Idaho and not adding anyone else makes the WAC improve (you worry about competition; wasn't Idaho competitive with Boise when you were both I-AA? Couldn't that happen again?). I also think adding a Louisiana school or any other "eastern" team only weakens the lower end of the WAC due to travel (or at least maintains some weakness already caused by having to travel to Louisiana Tech). If the WAC loses teams (either to conference predation or to I-AA due to travel expenses), what will Boise do when the WAC is no longer a viable conference? The MWC already chose TCU over Boise, and the PAC10 isn't taking applications from anyone.

Boise is doing great things right now. What will happen to all of that if you don't have a conference? Independence kills. You don't want to go back to I-AA. The MWC and PAC10 aren't calling. If you want to keep improving Boise, you'd better want the WAC to be stable and healthy too.

josephconlin Wrote:(you worry about competition; wasn't Idaho competitive with Boise when you were both I-AA? Couldn't that happen again

Boise went 3-2 vs. Idaho in I-A when both were in the Big West.
Idaho went 15-9-1 vs. Boise in the Big Sky.

The past few years have been all in favor of Boise with Broncos leading 6-1.

josephconlin Wrote:How do you propose to improve the WAC without Idaho? North Texas said no. Do you want to add another Louisiana team and stretch the conference further? I don't see where staying at 8 makes the WAC improve; rather it leaves it highly vulnerable to losing a team either to another conference or I-AA.

Unless you think you can get one or both of the Montana schools to I-A in time to help out the WAC, I don't see how not adding Idaho and not adding anyone else makes the WAC improve (you worry about competition; wasn't Idaho competitive with Boise when you were both I-AA? Couldn't that happen again?). I also think adding a Louisiana school or any other "eastern" team only weakens the lower end of the WAC due to travel (or at least maintains some weakness already caused by having to travel to Louisiana Tech). If the WAC loses teams (either to conference predation or to I-AA due to travel expenses), what will Boise do when the WAC is no longer a viable conference? The MWC already chose TCU over Boise, and the PAC10 isn't taking applications from anyone.

Boise is doing great things right now. What will happen to all of that if you don't have a conference? Independence kills. You don't want to go back to I-AA. The MWC and PAC10 aren't calling. If you want to keep improving Boise, you'd better want the WAC to be stable and healthy too.

Boise isn't the issue. Dr Kustra has already stated that he supports Idaho's addition.
The questions are going to be more about long term stability. Can they afford to add anyone? Is it in their best interest to split the conference income one more way and add the extra cost of the travel to one more school? We will know for sure within 33 days.

gaard Wrote:

josephconlin Wrote:How do you propose to improve the WAC without Idaho?&nbsp; North Texas said no.&nbsp; Do you want to add another Louisiana team and stretch the conference further?&nbsp; I don't see where staying at 8 makes the WAC improve; rather it leaves it highly vulnerable to losing a team either to another conference or I-AA.

Unless you think you can get one or both of the Montana schools to I-A in time to help out the WAC, I don't see how not adding Idaho and not adding anyone else makes the WAC improve (you worry about competition; wasn't Idaho competitive with Boise when you were both I-AA?&nbsp; Couldn't that happen again?).&nbsp; I also think adding a Louisiana school or any other "eastern" team only weakens the lower end of the WAC due to travel (or at least maintains some weakness already caused by having to travel to Louisiana Tech).&nbsp; If the WAC loses teams (either to conference predation or to I-AA due to travel expenses), what will Boise do when the WAC is no longer a viable conference?&nbsp; The MWC already chose TCU over Boise, and the PAC10 isn't taking applications from anyone.

Boise is doing great things right now.&nbsp; What will happen to all of that if you don't have a conference?&nbsp; Independence kills.&nbsp; You don't want to go back to I-AA.&nbsp; The MWC and PAC10 aren't calling.&nbsp; If you want to keep improving Boise, you'd better want the WAC to be stable and healthy too.

Boise isn't the issue. Dr Kustra has already stated that he supports Idaho's addition.
The questions are going to be more about long term stability. Can they afford to add anyone? Is it in their best interest to split the conference income one more way and add the extra cost of the travel to one more school? We will know for sure within 33 days.

I apologize. I don't mean to imply that BSU is the problem. Roughrider seems to be a BSU fan, and I only wanted to point out to them that their favorite team would be hurting without a conference. I don't see staying at 8 to be a very stable situation to be in, nor do I see it improving the WAC. Roughrider says the WAC is better without Idaho. I want to know why they think that, given the points I brought up.

Your points about being able to afford another member and split the income pie one more way are good ones. I think that, for stability, we need to split that pie at least one more way, and the most cost effective way, in my mind, is by adding Idaho. Travel there should be cheaper for the rest of the conference, minus LA Tech, than it would be to any other Sun Belt schools. Having local, identifiable conference opponents will help with attendance, donations, facility improvements, etc.

Go WAC!

My position hasnt changed since UTEP left; stand at 8 and work to get all programs that we have better. There are no worthy additions that add anything more than a ninth team out there right now and our presidents don't see the light on going to a 12 team league.

You're taking idaho because they are the only option (and that SUS-idaho land grant brotherhood thingee), but that smells of desparation and the WAC can make it at 8 like the MWC did for a few years. Then we can see where idaho, Montana, etc are and where the NCAA is as a whole. If idaho steps it up, starts construction on an actual stadium, signalling that they may acually be able to recruit the talent level required, etc., then great we add them. If Montana is ready and willing, and we only want to go to 9, which is better for the WAC? If we add idaho now, it's moot, we're stuck with them, hoping that they improve.

Roughrider Wrote:My position hasnt changed since UTEP left; stand at 8 and work to get all programs that we have better. There are no worthy additions that add anything more than a ninth team out there right now and our presidents don't see the light on going to a 12 team league.

You're taking idaho because they are the only option (and that SUS-idaho land grant brotherhood thingee), but that smells of desparation and the WAC can make it at 8 like the MWC did for a few years. Then we can see where idaho, Montana, etc are and where the NCAA is as a whole. If idaho steps it up, starts construction on an actual stadium, signalling that they may acually be able to recruit the talent level required, etc., then great we add them. If Montana is ready and willing, and we only want to go to 9, which is better for the WAC? If we add idaho now, it's moot, we're stuck with them, hoping that they improve.

I think it is a moot point. It really looks like Idaho will be invited this next week.

Let's all cross our fingers that all this expansion stuff has ended. It could all blow up again if the Big East decides to strengthen its conference for football in the future, but it looks like they may be satisfied with the super basketball league it has created. Personally, I'd like to see the western conferences (Pac-10, MWC, and WAC) stand together and help each other out against the EastBeasts. Unfortunately, the Pac-10 only worries about themselves, but if the MWC is smart, they will realize that keeping the WAC alive and healthy is good for them, the west, and college football in general. Let's welcome Idaho and strongly encourage them to improve their facilities and programs to help the conference. If SJSU football stays alive, the future looks bright...for now. :ninja: