Future of 1-AA

catatac · Post by **catatac** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:12 pm

Not trying to open up a huge debate here, but there are posts on egriz about the Griz possibly going 1A for the 2007 season. My one question is regarding the idea that the regents won't allow UM to go 1A without MSU and vice-versa. Does anyone actually know the facts about that supposed rule?

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:16 pm

I don't believe there is an actual law that prohibits it. However, the "unwritten rule" is still out there.

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:22 pm

I think alot of people in Montana want to dee the Cats and Griz in the same conference, battling every year in each sport. There would be a pretty sizable loss of income around the state if MSU and Montana were not in the same conference.

theblackgecko · Post by **theblackgecko** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:26 pm

From what I know, the Board of Regents won't stand in the way if Montana decides to leave for the WAC. Montana will have to show how the move benefits the University of Montana, and discuss the financial aspects of such a move. Montana State doesn't factor into the question as much as cost/benefit analysis.
And, to counter the snickering about the budget deficit that Montana has been dealing with, Montana could simply point out that Montana State divertes $1M per year in state support more than Montana from academics to athletics.
The Board of Regents doesn't really care about athletics or rivalries, just how much revenue and expense they entail.

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:30 pm

theblackgecko wrote:From what I know, the Board of Regents won't stand in the way if Montana decides to leave for the WAC. Montana will have to show how the move benefits the University of Montana, and discuss the financial aspects of such a move. Montana State doesn't factor into the question as much as cost/benefit analysis.
And, to counter the snickering about the budget deficit that Montana has been dealing with, Montana could simply point out that Montana State divertes $1M per year in state support more than Montana from academics to athletics.
The Board of Regents doesn't really care about athletics or rivalries, just how much revenue and expense they entail.

With Mercer now heading the Regents I would argue that the Regents is a VERY political board.

GOKATS · Post by **GOKATS** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:41 pm

I seriously doubt the regents would allow either UM or MSU to bump without both going.

Personally I don't think either school is ready for D1 football. It was no doubt the stupidest move Idaho ever made.

hokeyfine · Post by **hokeyfine** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:41 pm

blackgecko: i think msu can get away with that because it's given as a lump sum, and msu brings in significantly more research dollars.

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 2:28 pm

theblackgecko wrote:From what I know, the Board of Regents won't stand in the way if Montana decides to leave for the WAC. Montana will have to show how the move benefits the University of Montana, and discuss the financial aspects of such a move. Montana State doesn't factor into the question as much as cost/benefit analysis.
And, to counter the snickering about the budget deficit that Montana has been dealing with, Montana could simply point out that Montana State divertes $1M per year in state support more than Montana from academics to athletics.
The Board of Regents doesn't really care about athletics or rivalries, just how much revenue and expense they entail.

I would have to disagree on a couple things you said:

First, MSU Athletics gets a $1MM from the General Fund, not Academics, per se. There's more to the General Fund that hiring teachers and teachers' props.

Second, if the Regents were ONLY concerned about revenue and income, they would have unanimously voted to allow UM to close the University golf course and build condos - which they voted down by a wide margin. I don't have the numbers at hand, but the university stood to gain MILLIONS by selling condos, and the golf course makes thousands. In fact, the university wasn't even going to sell the real estate, just the condos.

CARDIAC_CATS · Post by **CARDIAC_CATS** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 2:44 pm

hokeyfine wrote:blackgecko: i think msu can get away with that because it's given as a lump sum, and msu brings in significantly more research dollars.

Yep, hit the nail on the head. MSU is leaps and bounds ahead of UM in the ability to snag research dollars. I think the last article I read on research money at MSU was like in the 85 million dollar a year range and has been growing by like 10-15% a year? AWESOME!

CatfaninGA · Post by **CatfaninGA** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 3:18 pm

Isin't the minimum still 30K for home football games? I have no doubt if they built it the frizzlies would be able to come close to 30k per game, but it would not be easy, plus the 30k rule if I remember correctly is an average and it must be maintained the entire year.

Not really sure how Idaho or Nevada ever got past that rule, does Idaho even average 2K per game?

mquast53000 · Post by **mquast53000** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 3:26 pm

What always kills me is when you tell a Griz fan that their outcome could be the same as Idaho’s (the universities and cities are similar), they snap back they would be more like Boise. I don’t know how they figure that, Boise has almost 200,000 in the city limits and how many more tens of thousands within 50 miles? The Griz always are saying that the WAC really wants them to join, but what are the regulations to join the WAC. Do the Griz have adequate facilities for ALL of their sports, and do they have enough sports? Griz fans only think about football when they talk about leaving the Big Sky, but they don’t realize that they are at best average in every other sport that they compete in.

Robcat · Post by **Robcat** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:05 pm

I would say bye-bye. Let UM compete in the WAC. It will create a losing program, at least for a while. Crawling out of the losing hole really takes time and time is money. Why be on the bottom of the pile, or in the middle at best, when you can be one of the contenders each year for a post season game or NC.

Personally I am sick of all this talk about the Griz going into 1A. I say good ridence. What happens to UM is not important to me, now if you want to talk about the future of MSU that excites me.

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:57 pm

I've said before that I think that having "them" move up to the WAC would be good for the State, and actually, good for MSU. But, I couldn't care less what they do...let 'em do what they think is best for their program.

Like Robcat said, I'm only concerned with MSU athletics and the decisons that are made within that program...everything else will take care of itself.

Cat Pride · Post by **Cat Pride** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:59 pm

mquast53000 wrote:What always kills me is when you tell a Griz fan that their outcome could be the same as Idaho’s (the universities and cities are similar), they snap back they would be more like Boise. I don’t know how they figure that, Boise has almost 200,000 in the city limits and how many more tens of thousands within 50 miles? The Griz always are saying that the WAC really wants them to join, but what are the regulations to join the WAC. Do the Griz have adequate facilities for ALL of their sports, and do they have enough sports? Griz fans only think about football when they talk about leaving the Big Sky, but they don’t realize that they are at best average in every other sport that they compete in.

Well said.

Grizlaw · Post by **Grizlaw** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 7:17 pm

mslacat wrote:There would be a pretty sizable loss of income around the state if MSU and Montana were not in the same conference.

msla: what's your thinking behind this? If UM and MSU were in different conferences, I'm sure they would still schedule each other, and the games would still be attended, just as they are now. How do you think the state's economy would be negatively impacted?

Don't get me wrong; there are pros and cons to the Griz moving up; I'm just not sure I see this one as a "con."

Helcat72 · Post by **Helcat72** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 8:41 pm

Robcat wrote:I would say bye-bye. Let UM compete in the WAC. It will create a losing program, at least for a while. Crawling out of the losing hole really takes time and time is money. Why be on the bottom of the pile, or in the middle at best, when you can be one of the contenders each year for a post season game or NC.

Personally I am sick of all this talk about the Griz going into 1A. I say good ridence. What happens to UM is not important to me, now if you want to talk about the future of MSU that excites me.

I agree...If they move I don't even care if we ever play them again. Let them find a rival in Boise or Colorado State, or Utah. Might be awhile before they win a rival game unless they choose Idaho. Just imagine 25,000 screaming fans cheering them on against Idaho!

CatfaninGA · Post by **CatfaninGA** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 8:41 pm

Only good thing if the frizzlies moved up to 1-a and we stayed at the 1-AA level, is the frizzlies would have to pay MSU a nice big fat check in order for us to continue to play them.

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 8:46 pm

CatfaninGA wrote:Only good thing if the frizzlies moved up to 1-a and we stayed at the 1-AA level, is the frizzlies would have to pay MSU a nice big fat check in order for us to continue to play them.

Unless home-and-home deals were used.

Eastcoastgriz · Post by **Eastcoastgriz** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:22 pm

Cat Pride wrote:
mquast53000 wrote:What always kills me is when you tell a Griz fan that their outcome could be the same as Idaho’s (the universities and cities are similar), they snap back they would be more like Boise. I don’t know how they figure that, Boise has almost 200,000 in the city limits and how many more tens of thousands within 50 miles? The Griz always are saying that the WAC really wants them to join, but what are the regulations to join the WAC. Do the Griz have adequate facilities for ALL of their sports, and do they have enough sports? Griz fans only think about football when they talk about leaving the Big Sky, but they don’t realize that they are at best average in every other sport that they compete in.
Well said.

Poorly said. If you have followed EGRIZ, this has been discussed at length. All points have been covered.

While I don’t think we would end up like Boise, I also don’t think we would end up like Idaho. The Griz have better fan, city and state support than Idaho.

We are currently averaging 23K per game. Last year we sold around 18K season tickets. Call our field office and try to get tickets for this season games, it's already slim picking. It is very conceivable we could average 28K to 30k per game. We will get the opportunity with the planned stadium expansion.

Whether we could upgrade our other teams to be competitive in the WAC is a big question with most GRIZ fans.

Oh, by the way, I am against going 1A

Eastcoastgriz · Post by **Eastcoastgriz** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:32 pm

CARDIAC_CATS wrote:
hokeyfine wrote:blackgecko: i think msu can get away with that because it's given as a lump sum, and msu brings in significantly more research dollars.
Yep, hit the nail on the head. MSU is leaps and bounds ahead of UM in the ability to snag research dollars. I think the last article I read on research money at MSU was like in the 85 million dollar a year range and has been growing by like 10-15% a year? AWESOME!

Not leaps and bounds any more and in fact, our research dollars are growing at a faster pace the msu. Last year we had 65.7 million in snagged research dollars