Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)


Post Reply 
Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,034
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 118
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #41
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-14-2014 02:18 PM)asupatch Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 12:16 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 11:57 AM)asupatch Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 11:53 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 11:45 AM)asupatch Wrote:  I actually kind of like the Kibbie. Look forward to seeing it once before Idaho moves. I like weird little stadiums though. Very unique.

Minor league baseball stadiums can be quite enchanting too. But lets be clear, you need more than 16k seats to compete at the FBS level. And does Idaho actually fill that thing up for every game (I'm talking about real, not announced attendance)? Just curious.



They averaged 14k last year so pretty darn close.

Not actual attendance though. Varied between 6 to 10k with butts in seat.

Did you attend these game or are just throwing out a guess?

I was using the quotes from Idaho's board of people attending the games.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=205
(This post was last modified: 04-14-2014 02:45 PM by MWC Tex.)
04-14-2014 02:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,847
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 432
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #42
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
The reason I asked that question was that most of the pictures I've seen from the games show a not even close to full Kibbie Dome.
04-14-2014 02:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MJG Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,279
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 30
I Root For: U I , UMich, SC
Location: Myrtle Beach
Post: #43
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-14-2014 12:37 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 08:52 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 12:27 AM)dmacfour Wrote:  
(04-13-2014 08:07 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  1. Kibbie Dome. (when you had to 'borrow' Wash. St. stadium to qualify for FBS and still haven done any stadium expansion to get to 25K at minimum that's a big tell tale sign you are not FBS worthy)
2. Attendance. Even at 16k capacity you didn't sell out your tiny stadium. There some tickets sold but the crowd on TV showed around 6k.

Either start breaking ground on a stadium for FBS or go down to FCS.
Idaho is by no means that only one that should drop down. Eastern Michigan should drop down also....they even had worse attendance than Idaho. Performance on the field doesn't mean anything if you can't bring in the crowd. And if UMass can't get it together, they should drop back down also.

Here's the thing though: How can Idaho justify a 25K stadium when a P5 school can't hit capacity 6 miles away? Wazzu would barely fill a 25K stadium with their attendance figures. MWC schools struggle to hit 60% capacity with 30K+ stadiums. Idaho could certainly use 9K more seats for bigger games, needs they to work out other issues before worrying about looking good on paper.

But for what it's worth, they have plans to expand to 27K. Who knows when it'll actually happen.

I don't think you saw WSU attendance figures last year. Their upgraded stadium has 33K capacity and averaged 29,737. They are actually upgrading the press box and club suites which I think was just completed.
Idaho has always had 'plans'. If Idaho was really serious about stay FBS they would actually have put in $$ into their facilites regardless, becasue that is what is necessary to be in this level. As for MWC schools, at least they have FBS stadiums and there are some schools preparing to build new stadiums.
Eastern Michigan...God love them, with their pitful 4k average attendance at least put $$ in a 30K stadium. I am calling for them to move down the FCS.

Idaho touted an expansion of the Kibbie Dome in the fall of 2012. That was the last time I heard anything mentioned about upgrades. Idaho likes to talk which is very cheap. In Las Cruces the local High School Football stadium holds 12,000 for comparison to the Kibbie.

That is true and NMSU only sold out their stadium for a high school game . A NMSU fan posted the pictures on here to show that fan support is possible if wins come.

Idaho has recently spent 27 million on the dome adding suites a new press box and enhancing safety. We actually lost seats from eighteen thousand. I would call that the first phase of expanding and upgrading the dome. Twenty two thousand sideline seats is the max. The West end is open and can be built into a horseshoe . The East end is home to meeting rooms coaches offices and one of the best weight rooms at this level.

Seats are the only thing lacking ( I know pretty important missing part) . Idaho is not as far from having really good facilities. How much flack did WKU get for having twenty two thousand seats.
We have already done what UMASS and Missouri St are currently doing to their stadiums.
(This post was last modified: 04-14-2014 05:40 PM by MJG.)
04-14-2014 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Louisianafanrcajun90 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,890
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 30
I Root For: UL
Location: New Orleans
Post: #44
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-13-2014 07:05 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Just curious. Idaho always gets flack for staying in the FBS, but I never see people giving it to New Mexico State.

Perhaps the so called Kibbie Dome. It is a strange little dome that if Idaho is serious should be torn down.
04-14-2014 05:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BamaCajun Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 217
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 10
I Root For: Leggy Red Heads
Location: Richmond, VA
Post: #45
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-13-2014 07:13 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  
(04-13-2014 07:09 PM)Bleeds_Purple Wrote:  
(04-13-2014 07:05 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Just curious. Idaho always gets flack for staying in the FBS, but I never see people giving it to New Mexico State.
Better geography for New Mexico State I guess? Their proximity to Texas. They border Texas and Texas border's Louisiana etc.

To be fair, there are 11 FBS teams in or around the state of Idaho.

Hooray!
07-coffee3
04-14-2014 06:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,847
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 432
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #46
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-14-2014 05:21 PM)MJG Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 12:37 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 08:52 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 12:27 AM)dmacfour Wrote:  
(04-13-2014 08:07 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  1. Kibbie Dome. (when you had to 'borrow' Wash. St. stadium to qualify for FBS and still haven done any stadium expansion to get to 25K at minimum that's a big tell tale sign you are not FBS worthy)
2. Attendance. Even at 16k capacity you didn't sell out your tiny stadium. There some tickets sold but the crowd on TV showed around 6k.

Either start breaking ground on a stadium for FBS or go down to FCS.
Idaho is by no means that only one that should drop down. Eastern Michigan should drop down also....they even had worse attendance than Idaho. Performance on the field doesn't mean anything if you can't bring in the crowd. And if UMass can't get it together, they should drop back down also.

Here's the thing though: How can Idaho justify a 25K stadium when a P5 school can't hit capacity 6 miles away? Wazzu would barely fill a 25K stadium with their attendance figures. MWC schools struggle to hit 60% capacity with 30K+ stadiums. Idaho could certainly use 9K more seats for bigger games, needs they to work out other issues before worrying about looking good on paper.

But for what it's worth, they have plans to expand to 27K. Who knows when it'll actually happen.

I don't think you saw WSU attendance figures last year. Their upgraded stadium has 33K capacity and averaged 29,737. They are actually upgrading the press box and club suites which I think was just completed.
Idaho has always had 'plans'. If Idaho was really serious about stay FBS they would actually have put in $$ into their facilites regardless, becasue that is what is necessary to be in this level. As for MWC schools, at least they have FBS stadiums and there are some schools preparing to build new stadiums.
Eastern Michigan...God love them, with their pitful 4k average attendance at least put $$ in a 30K stadium. I am calling for them to move down the FCS.

Idaho touted an expansion of the Kibbie Dome in the fall of 2012. That was the last time I heard anything mentioned about upgrades. Idaho likes to talk which is very cheap. In Las Cruces the local High School Football stadium holds 12,000 for comparison to the Kibbie.

That is true and NMSU only sold out their stadium for a high school game . A NMSU fan posted the pictures on here to show that fan support is possible if wins come.

Idaho has recently spent 27 million on the dome adding suites a new press box and enhancing safety. We actually lost seats from eighteen thousand. I would call that the first phase of expanding and upgrading the dome. Twenty two thousand sideline seats is the max. The West end is open and can be built into a horseshoe . The East end is home to meeting rooms coaches offices and one of the best weight rooms at this level.

Seats are the only thing lacking ( I know pretty important missing part) . Idaho is not as far from having really good facilities. How much flack did WKU get for having twenty two thousand seats.
We have already done what UMASS and Missouri St are currently doing to their stadiums.

From me, WKU got flack.
04-14-2014 06:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MJG Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,279
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 30
I Root For: U I , UMich, SC
Location: Myrtle Beach
Post: #47
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-14-2014 05:54 PM)Louisianafanrcajun90 Wrote:  
(04-13-2014 07:05 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Just curious. Idaho always gets flack for staying in the FBS, but I never see people giving it to New Mexico State.

Perhaps the so called Kibbie Dome. It is a strange little dome that if Idaho is serious should be torn down.

I guess I watch to many home improvement shows.
Looking at Texas State and Georgia Southern before and after expansion I am for expansion. The dome is incredibly loud if even close to capacity. Raise that capacity by 25 to 50 percent I want to see that.

A twenty thousand plus seat Kibbie would be the best under thirty thousand seat stadium. Probably the loudest period if the team got rolling.
Georgia Southern will have twenty two thousand seats next year. I liked Paulson before the expansion and endzone F.O.S. Statesboro is a nice town. Southern will sell out and average more than twenty thousand. Thirty three schools averaged under twenty thousand most inflated numbers. Idaho sold 14777 tickets per game actual attendance was less. Three straight poor years plus negative press will hurt attendance. The actual attendance increased this year vs last. Despite a 1-11 year that is pretty good. Washington State will play in an expanded Kibbie the A.D. has publicly stated such.
(This post was last modified: 04-14-2014 07:11 PM by MJG.)
04-14-2014 07:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,052
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 20
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-14-2014 12:38 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  My thoughts.

1. Idaho has a viable option were they to go FCS. The Big Sky is ready and willing to take the Vandals and there are some games to be played in the Big Sky that will sell more tickets than playing Sun Belt Schools. Future schedules show only one game vs. Washington State or Boise State the two nearest schools of interest in FBS. NMSU has no viable FCS option. NMSU has long-term scheduling with UTEP and New Mexico.

2. Idaho is not a viable full member for the Sun Belt. From a marketing standpoint, it is to the advantage of the league as a whole as well as the membership individually to have schedules in the various sports that are similar. NMSU's best sports are the sports not in the Sun Belt. While travel to Las Cruces isn't great, it is viable and NMSU can improve the quality and perception of the Sun Belt in men's and women's basketball, baseball, and volleyball.

Moving down to FCS is not an option for an FBS school. Idaho is making $1.1 million for their game at USC in 2015. That wouldn't happen at the FCS level, because USC does not play FCS schools. Idaho recruits California and playing USC in LA and getting paid $1.1 million is about as good as it gets.

The paid attendance for five games in 2013 averaged 14,744 per game. That is actually good considering the 16,000 seat capacity for the Kibbie Dome. Playing in the Big Sky is not going to increase the ticket sales.

Idaho needs to win and work on expanding the Kibbie Dome. If they do that they will be fine. They can get MWC opponents at home with their current stadium. They have Nevada at home in 2015, UNLV at home in 2017 and Wyoming in 2018. They need a stadium expansion to have a chance to attract a PAC-12 opponent.

Idaho is in the Pacific Time Zone and I think they could actually pick up a conference game or two on ESPNU in the Saturday Night time slot at 7:30 (pacific time). The Pac-12 divides their games up between Fox, the Pac-12 Network and the ESPN family of channels. The MWC has games on CBS Sports Cable and some on ESPN. Idaho and NMSU give ESPN another option. That would be good for the SBC. Imagine Arkansas State at Idaho on ESPNU.
04-15-2014 01:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Online
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 21,338
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 610
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #49
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-15-2014 01:32 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 12:38 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  My thoughts.

1. Idaho has a viable option were they to go FCS. The Big Sky is ready and willing to take the Vandals and there are some games to be played in the Big Sky that will sell more tickets than playing Sun Belt Schools. Future schedules show only one game vs. Washington State or Boise State the two nearest schools of interest in FBS. NMSU has no viable FCS option. NMSU has long-term scheduling with UTEP and New Mexico.

2. Idaho is not a viable full member for the Sun Belt. From a marketing standpoint, it is to the advantage of the league as a whole as well as the membership individually to have schedules in the various sports that are similar. NMSU's best sports are the sports not in the Sun Belt. While travel to Las Cruces isn't great, it is viable and NMSU can improve the quality and perception of the Sun Belt in men's and women's basketball, baseball, and volleyball.

Moving down to FCS is not an option for an FBS school. Idaho is making $1.1 million for their game at USC in 2015. That wouldn't happen at the FCS level, because USC does not play FCS schools. Idaho recruits California and playing USC in LA and getting paid $1.1 million is about as good as it gets.

The paid attendance for five games in 2013 averaged 14,744 per game. That is actually good considering the 16,000 seat capacity for the Kibbie Dome. Playing in the Big Sky is not going to increase the ticket sales.

Idaho needs to win and work on expanding the Kibbie Dome. If they do that they will be fine. They can get MWC opponents at home with their current stadium. They have Nevada at home in 2015, UNLV at home in 2017 and Wyoming in 2018. They need a stadium expansion to have a chance to attract a PAC-12 opponent.

Idaho is in the Pacific Time Zone and I think they could actually pick up a conference game or two on ESPNU in the Saturday Night time slot at 7:30 (pacific time). The Pac-12 divides their games up between Fox, the Pac-12 Network and the ESPN family of channels. The MWC has games on CBS Sports Cable and some on ESPN. Idaho and NMSU give ESPN another option. That would be good for the SBC. Imagine Arkansas State at Idaho on ESPNU.

Start running the math.

Reduced travel costs playing Big Sky vs. Sun Belt.
Can reduce salary costs in FCS vs. FBS
Can cut expenses by recruiting a smaller area.
Save 23 scholarships (potentially 46 if you reduce on the women's side proportionally).
Replace $1.1 million at USC with $350,000 at Fresno or SDSU.

You can save enough to offset the difference in playing a money game at Fresno vs. USC and more than likely come out ahead by selling more tickets because they will likely sell more tix for Idaho State than Texas State or Arkansas State and more tickets for Wyoming than Louisiana or Troy.
04-15-2014 08:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,034
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 118
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #50
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-15-2014 08:33 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(04-15-2014 01:32 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 12:38 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  My thoughts.

1. Idaho has a viable option were they to go FCS. The Big Sky is ready and willing to take the Vandals and there are some games to be played in the Big Sky that will sell more tickets than playing Sun Belt Schools. Future schedules show only one game vs. Washington State or Boise State the two nearest schools of interest in FBS. NMSU has no viable FCS option. NMSU has long-term scheduling with UTEP and New Mexico.

2. Idaho is not a viable full member for the Sun Belt. From a marketing standpoint, it is to the advantage of the league as a whole as well as the membership individually to have schedules in the various sports that are similar. NMSU's best sports are the sports not in the Sun Belt. While travel to Las Cruces isn't great, it is viable and NMSU can improve the quality and perception of the Sun Belt in men's and women's basketball, baseball, and volleyball.

Moving down to FCS is not an option for an FBS school. Idaho is making $1.1 million for their game at USC in 2015. That wouldn't happen at the FCS level, because USC does not play FCS schools. Idaho recruits California and playing USC in LA and getting paid $1.1 million is about as good as it gets.

The paid attendance for five games in 2013 averaged 14,744 per game. That is actually good considering the 16,000 seat capacity for the Kibbie Dome. Playing in the Big Sky is not going to increase the ticket sales.

Idaho needs to win and work on expanding the Kibbie Dome. If they do that they will be fine. They can get MWC opponents at home with their current stadium. They have Nevada at home in 2015, UNLV at home in 2017 and Wyoming in 2018. They need a stadium expansion to have a chance to attract a PAC-12 opponent.

Idaho is in the Pacific Time Zone and I think they could actually pick up a conference game or two on ESPNU in the Saturday Night time slot at 7:30 (pacific time). The Pac-12 divides their games up between Fox, the Pac-12 Network and the ESPN family of channels. The MWC has games on CBS Sports Cable and some on ESPN. Idaho and NMSU give ESPN another option. That would be good for the SBC. Imagine Arkansas State at Idaho on ESPNU.

Start running the math.

Reduced travel costs playing Big Sky vs. Sun Belt.
Can reduce salary costs in FCS vs. FBS
Can cut expenses by recruiting a smaller area.
Save 23 scholarships (potentially 46 if you reduce on the women's side proportionally).
Replace $1.1 million at USC with $350,000 at Fresno or SDSU.

You can save enough to offset the difference in playing a money game at Fresno vs. USC and more than likely come out ahead by selling more tickets because they will likely sell more tix for Idaho State than Texas State or Arkansas State and more tickets for Wyoming than Louisiana or Troy.

If there is paid attendance of 14k but only 8k show up, what effect does that have on additional revenue from concessions? The Big Sky is a perfect conference for Idaho since they don't want to spend any money to have FBS facilites.
04-15-2014 09:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoApps70 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 20,650
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 290
I Root For: Appalachian St.
Location: Charlotte, N. C.
Post: #51
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
Even with all the logical reasons doubt Idaho will drop to FCS.
They consider themselves the state university even though that was legislatively
taken away from them.
04-15-2014 09:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,052
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 20
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-15-2014 08:33 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(04-15-2014 01:32 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 12:38 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  My thoughts.

1. Idaho has a viable option were they to go FCS. The Big Sky is ready and willing to take the Vandals and there are some games to be played in the Big Sky that will sell more tickets than playing Sun Belt Schools. Future schedules show only one game vs. Washington State or Boise State the two nearest schools of interest in FBS. NMSU has no viable FCS option. NMSU has long-term scheduling with UTEP and New Mexico.

2. Idaho is not a viable full member for the Sun Belt. From a marketing standpoint, it is to the advantage of the league as a whole as well as the membership individually to have schedules in the various sports that are similar. NMSU's best sports are the sports not in the Sun Belt. While travel to Las Cruces isn't great, it is viable and NMSU can improve the quality and perception of the Sun Belt in men's and women's basketball, baseball, and volleyball.

Moving down to FCS is not an option for an FBS school. Idaho is making $1.1 million for their game at USC in 2015. That wouldn't happen at the FCS level, because USC does not play FCS schools. Idaho recruits California and playing USC in LA and getting paid $1.1 million is about as good as it gets.

The paid attendance for five games in 2013 averaged 14,744 per game. That is actually good considering the 16,000 seat capacity for the Kibbie Dome. Playing in the Big Sky is not going to increase the ticket sales.

Idaho needs to win and work on expanding the Kibbie Dome. If they do that they will be fine. They can get MWC opponents at home with their current stadium. They have Nevada at home in 2015, UNLV at home in 2017 and Wyoming in 2018. They need a stadium expansion to have a chance to attract a PAC-12 opponent.

Idaho is in the Pacific Time Zone and I think they could actually pick up a conference game or two on ESPNU in the Saturday Night time slot at 7:30 (pacific time). The Pac-12 divides their games up between Fox, the Pac-12 Network and the ESPN family of channels. The MWC has games on CBS Sports Cable and some on ESPN. Idaho and NMSU give ESPN another option. That would be good for the SBC. Imagine Arkansas State at Idaho on ESPNU.

Start running the math.

Reduced travel costs playing Big Sky vs. Sun Belt.
Can reduce salary costs in FCS vs. FBS
Can cut expenses by recruiting a smaller area.
Save 23 scholarships (potentially 46 if you reduce on the women's side proportionally).
Replace $1.1 million at USC with $350,000 at Fresno or SDSU.

You can save enough to offset the difference in playing a money game at Fresno vs. USC and more than likely come out ahead by selling more tickets because they will likely sell more tix for Idaho State than Texas State or Arkansas State and more tickets for Wyoming than Louisiana or Troy.

I did run the numbers. In 2015 Idaho has two money games worth $2.1 million with USC and Auburn. They also get the College football playoff revenue of at least $1.1 million. So Idaho just lost $3.2 million in revenue and potentially more based on the success of the conference and any TV revenue. In your scenario, Idaho picked up $350,000 playing at SDSU, which does not come close to making up for the revenue loss.

Idaho is still going to be recruiting California. That is not going to change. Idaho will need to lower the ticket prices for the FCS games and will can never get an MWC school to their homefield. They will get to drop scholarships (both men and women) and lay people off for the prestige of moving down to FCS football. Just not going to happen.
04-15-2014 09:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoApps70 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 20,650
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 290
I Root For: Appalachian St.
Location: Charlotte, N. C.
Post: #53
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
Which brings up the question exactly which teams have been FBS and have voluntarily gone
to FCS other than being forced to by the NCAA?
04-15-2014 10:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
trueeagle98 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,606
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 11
I Root For: GS Eagles
Location: the Holy City
Post: #54
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
The only thing people are really saying is Idaho needs to be out of the SBC. If they can find another FBS conference or make it as an Indy, great and good luck.
People are only throwing out the FCS suggestion because being an Indy is nearly impossible.
04-15-2014 10:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dtd_vandal Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 155
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-15-2014 08:33 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(04-15-2014 01:32 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(04-14-2014 12:38 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  My thoughts.

1. Idaho has a viable option were they to go FCS. The Big Sky is ready and willing to take the Vandals and there are some games to be played in the Big Sky that will sell more tickets than playing Sun Belt Schools. Future schedules show only one game vs. Washington State or Boise State the two nearest schools of interest in FBS. NMSU has no viable FCS option. NMSU has long-term scheduling with UTEP and New Mexico.

2. Idaho is not a viable full member for the Sun Belt. From a marketing standpoint, it is to the advantage of the league as a whole as well as the membership individually to have schedules in the various sports that are similar. NMSU's best sports are the sports not in the Sun Belt. While travel to Las Cruces isn't great, it is viable and NMSU can improve the quality and perception of the Sun Belt in men's and women's basketball, baseball, and volleyball.

Moving down to FCS is not an option for an FBS school. Idaho is making $1.1 million for their game at USC in 2015. That wouldn't happen at the FCS level, because USC does not play FCS schools. Idaho recruits California and playing USC in LA and getting paid $1.1 million is about as good as it gets.

The paid attendance for five games in 2013 averaged 14,744 per game. That is actually good considering the 16,000 seat capacity for the Kibbie Dome. Playing in the Big Sky is not going to increase the ticket sales.

Idaho needs to win and work on expanding the Kibbie Dome. If they do that they will be fine. They can get MWC opponents at home with their current stadium. They have Nevada at home in 2015, UNLV at home in 2017 and Wyoming in 2018. They need a stadium expansion to have a chance to attract a PAC-12 opponent.

Idaho is in the Pacific Time Zone and I think they could actually pick up a conference game or two on ESPNU in the Saturday Night time slot at 7:30 (pacific time). The Pac-12 divides their games up between Fox, the Pac-12 Network and the ESPN family of channels. The MWC has games on CBS Sports Cable and some on ESPN. Idaho and NMSU give ESPN another option. That would be good for the SBC. Imagine Arkansas State at Idaho on ESPNU.

Start running the math.

Reduced travel costs playing Big Sky vs. Sun Belt.
Can reduce salary costs in FCS vs. FBS
Can cut expenses by recruiting a smaller area.
Save 23 scholarships (potentially 46 if you reduce on the women's side proportionally).
Replace $1.1 million at USC with $350,000 at Fresno or SDSU.

You can save enough to offset the difference in playing a money game at Fresno vs. USC and more than likely come out ahead by selling more tickets because they will likely sell more tix for Idaho State than Texas State or Arkansas State and more tickets for Wyoming than Louisiana or Troy.

Travel cost reduction is not that much since we are talking about only 4 road football games. Idaho still has to fly to most Big Sky schools.

Not true, Idaho would still recruit the same areas and recruiting isn't a huge cost outlay anyway.

Cutting 46 scholarships for deserving young men and women is a negative in my mind, not a positive.

Idaho would not sell more tickets for Big Sky teams except for maybe Montana. Take a look at the game played against Eastern Washington two years ago, a team from an hour down the road. This was the 2nd lowest home attendance of the year behind a game played on Thanksgiving weekend when the students weren't in town and the team was 1-10.

There would be some cost savings in a few areas with a drop down, but you are basically gutting your athletic department in order to save a few hundred thousand dollars in expenses and giving up any chance for improved revenue streams in the future. Not worth it in my opinion.
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2014 10:51 AM by dtd_vandal.)
04-15-2014 10:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoApps70 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 20,650
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 290
I Root For: Appalachian St.
Location: Charlotte, N. C.
Post: #56
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
So basically no schools have voluntarily gone FCS?
Thought there might have been some.
Doesn't sound feasible for Idaho then, does it.
04-15-2014 11:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,034
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 118
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #57
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-15-2014 11:22 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  So basically no schools have voluntarily gone FCS?
Thought there might have been some.
Doesn't sound feasible for Idaho then, does it.

Well, that is only really half true. The Big West schools dropped football all together, however, there are a bunch on schools now starting up FCS footbal because it is viable.\
I think if some of the Cali Big West school had a FCS conference to fall into, they would have. There was only the Big Sky and they were not looking to expand at the time. Now there is the Pioneer Conference which is a FCS football only conference that is non-scholarship. They now have an auto to the FCS playoffs.
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2014 11:49 AM by MWC Tex.)
04-15-2014 11:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dmacfour Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,822
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 67
I Root For: Idaho Vandals
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-15-2014 09:49 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Even with all the logical reasons doubt Idaho will drop to FCS.
They consider themselves the state university even though that was legislatively
taken away from them.

The word flagship was taken from our mission, but we're still the flagship university by definition.
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2014 03:21 PM by dmacfour.)
04-15-2014 03:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GaSoEagle Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,887
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 47
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location:
Post: #59
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
I have nothing against Idaho but to have Idaho in the Sun Belt just makes very little sense. I know they were invited last year when we thought we would have 12 until WKU left. But going forward, especially if you don't need 12 anymore for a championship game, it is a very tough sell convincing Sun Belt members that Idaho should be in this conference.
04-15-2014 03:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoApps70 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 20,650
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 290
I Root For: Appalachian St.
Location: Charlotte, N. C.
Post: #60
RE: Why are people calling for Idaho to drop down and not NMSU?
(04-15-2014 03:15 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  
(04-15-2014 09:49 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Even with all the logical reasons doubt Idaho will drop to FCS.
They consider themselves the state university even though that was legislatively
taken away from them.

The word flagship was taken from our mission, but we're still the flagship university by definition.

Not trying to tell Idaho what to do, but would get with the football stadium improvements.

[Image: tumblr_mtikf2oBFD1s2gg27o1_400_zpsfa386623.gif~original]
04-15-2014 07:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.