Mountain West Conference says it is not expanding

By Brian Murphy

WAC to discuss options Wednesday

Western Athletic Conference commissioner Karl Benson told the Idaho Statesman on Tuesday that the non-expansion by the Mountain West clears the way for his league move forward.

"This now allows us to get serious about exploring our options and we do have options," Benson said. "Now that San Jose State (and) Utah State are going to be part of the WAC's future, we can move forward and complete the plan that we have started."

The league scheduled a conference call for Wednesday to discuss its next steps — in light of the Mountain West meetings. Membership will be a topic, but Benson does not expect any decisions to be made on the call.

The WAC will have seven football-playing members and one non-football school (Denver) in 2012. Benson said the priority is finding football members.

"We have to be realistic that the pool of football candidates more than likely doesn't exist in the West," Benson said.

That could mean more attention in Texas.

He also said the league could add additional non-football-playing members.

"When we look at the football side, nine would be a good number. Then it's just a matter of how many non-football we might look at," Benson said.

Mountain West will not expand now

The Mountain West Conference has decided 10 is enough — for now.

Boise State's new league will not be adding teams, as has been speculated for the last 24 hours. The league issued a statement Tuesday afternoon. The full statement is below, but here is the key part:

"The Board feels strongly the membership configuration already established going forward creates outstanding prospects for future success."

Here is the MWC's 2012 lineup;

Air Force
Boise State
Colorado State
Fresno State
Hawaii (football only)
New Mexico
San Diego State

Quick thoughts on the Mountain West's decision:

• It is very good news for Idaho and the WAC. It means the league has a future going forward and the Vandals have a place to play without worrying about exploring other options, such as returning to FCS. (See below for more on Idaho)

• It is terrible news for Utah State. Sources around the Aggies' program have been telling reporters that they were in, so obviously Utah State must have believed they were getting an invite.

Yes, this could be similar to the Boise State situation from this summer where Utah State gets in later, but this has got to be a painful blow.

• It is good news for Boise State. The Broncos' football program could have been put in an Eastern Division with none of the California teams, Nevada teams or Hawaii, if Utah State and San Jose State were invited. That would have hurt attendance and recruiting in California.

• It is good for the Mountain West. The league, in my opinion, can take a wait-and-see attitude. What is going to happen with the Big 12 where there are rumblings Texas A&M is not happy with Texas' big TV deal with ESPN? What is going to happen with the Big East, which sounds like it is still looking for another football member?

The Mountain West does not need to reach to take Utah State and San Jose State. It can afford to be more selective.

Full statement from Mountain West Conference

The Mountain West Conference just issued a statement at the conclusion of its meetings:

"Over the past two days, the Board of Directors has engaged in a very thorough discussion of several key topics pertinent to the future of the Mountain West Conference. This has included, but not been limited to, issues related to television, the Bowl Championship Series and membership. The Board feels strongly the membership configuration already established going forward creates outstanding prospects for future success. In addition, we are continuing with our strategic initiatives related to our television partnerships and the MWC's efforts to effect change in the BCS structure. The Board is excited about what is undoubtedly a bright future for the Conference."

Idaho president: 'It's been a good thing for us to be at the FBS level'

With reports from the Utah media that Western Athletic Conference schools Utah State and, potentially, San Jose State could be the next programs to jump the Mountain West Conference, Idaho's athletic department could be in a precarious position.

If Utah State and San Jose State join the Mountain West, the Vandals would be left in a league with current members New Mexico State and Louisiana Tech and incoming members Texas State, UT-San Antonio and non-football playing Denver.

That is if the WAC survives at all.

Since Boise State accepted an invitation to the Mountain West in June, fellow current WAC members Fresno State, Nevada and Hawaii have also left the WAC for the Mountain West. Hawaii is joining the league as a football-only member.

The Mountain West has eight teams for the 2011 football season, including Boise State and TCU.

Currently, the league has 10 teams for the 2012 football season — with Fresno State, Nevada and Hawaii entering and TCU departing for the Big East.

I spoke with Idaho president Duane Nellis on Tuesday about the Vandals' athletic future.

Question: In light of the media reporters, have you had conversations about where the best place for the University of Idaho is long-term?

Answer: We continue to have discussions internally and externally about what’s best for the University of Idaho. I don’t want to speculate on what might happen as conferences continue to go through these adjustments, but we certainly want to position the University of Idaho to provide an athletic environment for our teams and be consistent with the mission of our university, too.

We’ve been exploring a lot of different options, including a reconfigured Western Athletic Conference. We’re also looking at a lot of different options right now, but I prefer not to speculate.

There’s always a lot of interesting — rumors may be too strong a word — but there’s a lot of that out there. It’s hard to know exactly where this is all going to end up.

We’ve appreciated the Western Athletic Conference and what it’s provided to the University of Idaho and, if you look, we’ve been very competitive.

Question: Is a return to the FCS a consideration?

Answer: Let me just say we’ve been committed to staying at the FBS level. So, I think that’s important for our university as we try to move forward. I guess that’s all I’ll say about that: It’s been a good thing for us to be at the FBS level.

Question: Are you dismayed by this conference realignment and losing geographic touch?

Answer: It is disappointing that, I think, American college athletics is being driven primarily by TV contract and revenue. I think it’s taking away a lot of actual rivalries. I think it’s been great our rivalry with Boise State for over 40 years. Over 40 years. And I think it’s important for our state.

I was in the Big 12 Conference. I was at Kansas State University as the senior vice president and provost. And the Nebraska/K-State rivalry went back, I think, close to 100 years, maybe over 100 years. It’s gone now.

Colorado had been in the former Big 7, Big 8 and then Big 12 and a lot of long-term rivalries there. Again, driven, I think, by interest in TV revenue. And some of the configurations, the amount of travel for college athletes, is that best relative to them as student-athletes? I think there’s a trade-off in that, too.

So I think we’ve lost some focus. I think nationally there’s been some movement away from again what is best from the tradition of rivalries and what’s best for college athletics.

You can follow Murph's Turf on Twitter.


It is a sad thing to watch pride kill the right decision. In my opinion the Big sky is the best option. I do not say that with sarcasm or vitriol but with honesty. If UI tries to stick it out in a fledgling WAC it will end in the big sky anyway, Why not make the right decision and go now, saving the millions of dollars and a few "lost years." UI should recommit to education up to and including building the character of its students, Cmon UI, make us idahoans proud, win the big sky, produce quality people that make the world a better place. Because right now you are a drunken frat boy wasting your parents money. And the taxpayers as the parents deserve better.

Your comments show you're not interested in anything good..

for the University of Idaho.

"Drunken frat boy wasting your parents money."


Idaho is VERY committed to education and building character. The university is experiencing annual growth in all areas (enrollment, endowment, national merit scholars, overall gpa, research dollars, etc). Of course, no one south of Lewiston would know this since the Idaho Statesman rarely reports on anything related to the University of Idaho unless it is negative. There are positive stories and accomplishments coming out of the university every week - academic and athletic - for those willing to take a look.

The taxpayers deserve more? Why, because our football team doesn't win all the time? Seriously? Who's your alma mater?

A lot of people in Boise seem to forget that there is much more to college than football... Every team who doesn't post a 12-1 football record shouldn't give up their sports programs or move to D-1AA. Quit being ridiculous.


it is what I wrote. Your pride betrays your logic. I graduated from a small private school in MT, but if you ever read these boards for more than just getting upset you would know that.

I would never send my kids to Idaho, and like it or not idaho has a reputation that deserved or not needs to be adressed. But to be honest it is a problem in MOST universities nowdays. UI would earn the respect and trust of the great state of Idaho if it were to be the frontrunner in leading acedemia in a new birth of "educating the whole person"

" A lot of people in Boise forget that there is much more to college than football..."

Yup, and most of them are UI alums.....
Big sky, character, stewardship.... these three things should be UI's future.

Well, I guess this conversation is done...

If your opinion of the University of Idaho is that narrow-minded, misguided, and ignorant, there's not much hope. Take a look and you'll find there's a lot you don't know about the University of Idaho.

Sorry, I don't remember you (some annoymous person) or your educational background. Don't take it personally. It's just a newspaper web site. I don't put much stock or time into the place. So, I'm guessing you went to Carroll? That must be where your "high and mighty" attitude stems from.

Now you are high and mighty

how dare you diss rocky mountain college like that. Not even a consideration, shame shame shame. But yes I did go to Carroll, but perhaps it is to the great state of MT that UI should look. Not to Carroll or Rocky, but to the UM, who makes money in the Big sky, Happily educating and competing in the imperfect world of college athletics.

Being an FBS school

Being an FBS school does more to bring alumni back to Moscow, especially to watch games. I remember sitting in the dome watching UI play Mankato St in front of 2,000 people in attendance. Today, I enjoy attending games against the likes of Colorado St, Western Michigan, etc. Meanwhile, you have no control over what the alumni and university stakeholders desire so you should just "push on" and leave this subject alone.

Attendance, on average, was better in the FCS days

The Kibbie Domes biggest football crowd was in 1989 (against Boise State) with 17,600. The biggest basketball attendance was during the 1982-83 season with crowds in the dome over 11,000. UI has yet to play a FBS AQ school in the Kibbie Dome as an FBS school.

I don't care if Idaho stays in FBS, drops down to FCS, or gives up football altogether. There is no debate that their longest period of sustained success came in the Big Sky. Is that a reason to go back? That is up to the UI.

One thing that will change is the WAC likely won't see BCS money of any substance for quite awhile. 2011 might be the last chance for a long time. After that it will be like the Sunbelt years. The conference won't be strong and you will have to play more games on the road to pay the bills. It's going to be tough. Regardless, it is UI's decision.

Good post


estimated attendance

The attendance figures have always been estimates. It's only been the past few years the "actual" attendance has been recorded. I worked in the athletic department for four years and attended every home game. I can tell you God as my witness the attendance was much less in the Big Sky days. I think the people in charge averaged up in hopes of hosting playoff games and then prayed for good attendance, which was futile the Saturday after Thanksgiving. I remember sitting through a playoff game against Weber St where there was only 4 to 5 thousand people in attendance. Attendance was even worse against non Big Sky teams such as Mankato St, Sac St, Portland St, etc.

Today, the gameday experience is much more entertaining and exciting to watch when the Vandals play Mountain West and MAC teams. In the Big Sky days we always had to play those teams on the road. Therefore, as a Vandal the only time you get to watch an interesting game is when they play in Seattle, Eugene, Tuscon, etc. Therefore, as an Alum, my vote will always be to support UI as an FBS program and I send money to backup my support.

I can

appreciate your support of you school. But nothing can change the fact that Idaho ranked 112th in attendance in 2010 (it's not much better over the last 10 years). The attendance combined with no TV marketability and the geography issues, I have a hard time arguing for Idaho staying FBS


It's not your problem and somebody has to be last in attendance. If UI wasn't in the FBS there would be somebody else in last place. However, it doesn't change the fact the majority of the Alumni support the programs direction. In the meantime, it appears the athletic department has unleashed a few plans to generate more revenue. So, time will tell how it all works out. In the meantime, I'm satisfied with the progress UI's made.

Actually, I ask VNDL

not too long ago why the Idaho alumni do not support the football efforts. Given the fact that Idaho has 5 times the alumni of BSU, why don't they contribute? why is Idaho still playing in a 16K dome? You say there is support, but show me where that support is........

tfunky - yes you did ask me and here is my response

tfunky great question - its a generational OldYoung Vandal thing

Submitted by aqfunk on Fri, 01/21/2011 - 3:08pm.

I can't speak for other Vandals, only for myself.

I think this all started out when Elizabeth Zinser was President of the UoI. She was the first to raise a clarion call to move up from the Big Sky to Division I (as it was called then) ball. She was in the minority and basically, her bulldog approach and turning a deaf ear to alumni, led to her demise in the long run. But it did get younger Vandals wanting the UoI to be a football oriented school. She lit the fire, as unrealistic as it is.

Over the years, Idaho alumni have contributed waaaaay more proportionately to academics than to athletics. The pride most older Vandals have in Idaho is rooted in academics and not athletics. Athletics (i.e., football) was viewed as entertainment and good spirited competition between academic minded universitities. Somethng fun to do on a Saturday afternooon in the Fall. An excuse to have a Pre-Function or a Post-Function. Football and the success of the Athletics Department were not the primary focus of the university or the alumni base. Academics were, in those days.

Then we had a couple of Presidents (Hoover and White) after Crazy Lizzy, who went to great lengths to push football into prominence and to advocate equality of athletics to academics - using the old worn out arguement that football is good for academics and draws students to Moscow (kinda the same crap that Bronco Bob is spewing toward the Bronco Faithful). The balance of the priority scales got tipped from academics over athletics to where it is now - football as an equal partner with academics, as a justification for Idaho's continued existence.

I am one of a large silent group of older alumni who have contributed over the years to Idaho's academics and sometimes (not always) to football. Older Idaho alumni are beginning to question where this emphasis on football will eventually take Idaho. Younger Vandals seem to enthusiastically support the concept of football being an equal partner with academics, as the focus of Idaho's mission and purpose. Basically, many potential older alumni donors have backed off their contributions, just waiting to see how far football will go at Idaho and placing their contributions on hold until the Idaho Administration wakes up and puts the priorities of the university back where they used to be (scales weighed heavily in favor of academics and football returning to be entrtainment and not a large focus.

The problems is there is a smaller, very rich, minority of younger Vandals who are enamored with football and the thought of someday surpassing BSU as a football power. You and I both know, that day will never come. Many other, wiser, more reasonable, younger Vandals, also realize this and are not willing to contribute money for stadium expansion and other athletics projects, only to see a 35,000 capacity stadium stand nearly empty as a monument to misdirected emotionalistic thinking.

The current President Duane Nellis, so far appears to be a weak sister and not a leader. He aparently occupies the seat, yet provides no real direction or visionary thinking pertaining to the future focus of Idaho. It is kind of like a sailboat with all sails set, yet adrift in the Sargaso (sic) Sea and in the doldrums - going nowhere fast - not even a map or compass on board.

I, myself am hesitant to reinvolve myself in alumni contributions, as I am not really sure what future university I would be contributing to. A university that prides itself on higher education and superior academics, or a university that is chasing the dream of someday surpassing BSU as the Fotball King of Idaho. There are many alumni like me. I know. I have lunch with them or have other contact with many of them, on a daily and weekly basis, and this subject is almost always a topic of discussion as we kibbitz and yak.


PS - Also, in all fairness; the Hoover debacle with the Idaho Center SNAFU in Boise a few years ago, and the millions of dollars still unaccounted for, left a very dark cloud of suspicion and distrust over the heads of many alumni. I am still feeling the effets of it, myself, and will think twice before I get my checkbook out and contribute a substantial amount, again.

Which was a very good response

And, to a certain extent, explains why alumni support for Idaho "football" is less than alumni support for BSU football.

tfunk - possibly the answer to your basic question is . . .

. . . Idaho alumni support Idaho academics and BSU alumni support football?

Possibly, it is that simple, really.

Also, as part of your analysis; don't forget to factor in that many members of Bronco Nation and donors and contributors to Bronco football, are not BSU alumni nor connected to BSU, but are simply fans following a 'hot' young team with a national presence, in their locale, for absence of any professional sport to follow and fill the void, in the Fall.

I reach that observation by looking at Bronco BBall, and the proportionate lack of support it receives, as compared to Bronco football.


PS - Galena had an excellent post this thread, re: Idaho going to the Big Sky. As you know, I share his observation.

PPS - Also, am curious as to whether non-BSU alumni and corporate sponsors contribute to Bronco football via the BAA, and if you are counting those contributions into your total for BSU alumni support of Bronco football (i.e., I have a neighbor who is not connected to BSU other than buying season tickets to Bronco Games and giving an annual $5,000.00 contribution to BAA via his dairy - he would prolly think a thesaurus was some type of dinasaur - and he is constantly making fun of 'college educated dummies' - so he is not an advocate of 'higher learning' or college). Possibly, this is the prototype BSU alumni who supports football, per your experiential perspective?


but we still get back to Idaho. Do they have the alumni and "fan" support to continue as an FBS program.

I don't get the continued support of how Idaho is this academic mecca, yet alumni continue to ignore the needs of the athletic department.

My question isn't about BSU, it's about Idaho.

tfunky - your question was comparative

You stated, en parte: " . . . why alumni support for Idaho "football" is less than alumni support for BSU football."

That was your question - it included a BSU football component. I answered your question, accordingly.

I do not believe Idaho alumni and 'fan' support is solid enuff for Idaho to continue as an FBS program - nor should it be. I believe the focus should be on academics first and football as entertainment, and not an 'equal' reason (equality with academics) for the University of Idaho to fulfill its mission.

Idaho alumni continue to ignore the needs of the athletic department, because their focus is on academics and not athletics. It is so basal and primal - maybe that is why it is hard for you to grasp and hard for others, as well.

Even some Vandals are having a hard time accepting that Idaho's best future may lie in a return to the Big Sky.


PS - Students choose Idaho because of the academics. Students choose BSU because of the opportunity to commute to college and/or live at home. Both universities serve extremely differing student profiles and populations.

A large # of students choose UofI because of the experience

If they wanted a good education they would get a WUE scholly and go to Utah, or a number of Pac-10 schools. Maybe thats how it was back in the day but the high school kids I graduated with a few years ago wanted to go up there to get away from the folks and party. They post their party pics every weekend on facebook. Thats not a bad thing, its the college experience, and Idaho being in a small college town it does have that appeal. You'll see the whole snooty Idaho academia thing become less valid over the next ten years as CWI surpases 10000 enrolled and BSU continues to progress by being able to continue to increase its enrollment standards. If you've been on campus lately you'd notice a ton of kids from Oregon, Washinton, and Alaska. That wasn't the case before the football program made the big stage.

Some can't hack it - some quit - some are just duds

bluNorange sez, en parte: " . . . BSU continues to progress by being able to continue to increase its enrollment standards."

Possibly, you have not been diligently following BSU's pursuit of academic excellence. Last Fall, BSU officially announced graduation requirements for Bachelor Degrees have been lessened from the traditional 128 credit hours required by the other three Idaho public universitities/colleges, to 120 credit hours for BSU. Maybe this alone, explains the increase in Oregon, Washington, and Alaskan students on the Boise campus? Or maybe it is the muktuk at Murphy's?

Actually, I really don't care if BSU progresses academically or not. I am a fan of Bronco football, because I want to see an Idaho based university win a FBS National Championship. If BSU sinks or swims academically is of no significance. BSU academics does not affect the results on the football field. So I am not the one to be having a debate about BSU academics with, as this is a subject I don't usually engage in.


PS - I am somewhat curious though - If BSU has a large influx of young students who have migrated to Boise because of Bronco fotball - why such a large vacant space in the student seating area at Bronco Stadium on game days? Why the consternation on, OBNUG, and these blogs concerning the lack of attendance and support by BSU students for Bronco football? The BSU students, ultimately get the blame for not filling up and maxing out Bronco Stadium.

PPS - Also, curious as to what years you attended Idaho and if you lived on campus or in Moscow? Or - just formed your opinion of Idaho from second hand information you received from friends of yours who attended Idaho, couldn't hack it for asundry reason(s), flunked out or got pregnant, and went back to Boise with bitterness and self-loathing in their hearts?

That crap is pretty universal though.


Happy Jesus Thing and a Chinese New Year

tfunky - President Nellis is not a leader - just a wimp

I went back and reread what I posted regarding President Nellis being a weak sister. And, then I reread the interview of Nellis per the main thread article.

It would be nice if Nellis would have said, with conviction, what he viewed as Idaho's best future - one way or the other. If he believes Idaho should continue with FBS, he should have said 'Hel!, yea'. If he believes Idaho should go back to the Big Sky and FCS ball, he should have said 'Hel!, yea'.

But he didn't. Just another politicaly correct, finger to the wind, mouselike hack. The most inept and detached President Idaho has had so far.

So - Alumni money sits on the sidelines; waiting and waiting, for a purpose. Choices: To donate money for academic purposes, only to see that money go for naught, because Idaho's focus, appears, like a poorly constructed hologram, to be, for the moment, football in the FBS. Or, to donate money for football purposes, only to see that money go for naught, because Idaho's focus is heavily weighted for academics with football in the FCS and Big Sky being entertainment. That is the conundrum. Two competing sets of Vandal alumni priorities and passions.

Mature minded and fiscally responsible Vandals or emotionally minded and 'beat BSU at all costs' Vandals.

Academics or football.

While Nellis procrastinates, Vandal alumni take their money and put it elsewhere for other purposes.

So, what is it Nellis? Whre is Idaho going? FBS or FCS? Staying in the WAC or a return to fiscal sanity and the Big Sky?

I have no clue as to what he actually believes to be Idaho's direction per football, nor do I have any idea as to the 'real' amount of conviction or committment of the Idaho Athletic Department toward pursuing FBS excellence.

It appears as though, both Idaho and BSU need new Presidents. Bronco Bob needs to be more focused on BSU as a university and not a football factory; and Pollyanna Nelly needs to be able to choose a course of action and stick with it - whatever that may be.

Nellis has most Vandals wondering what the future of Idaho football will be - a continuation of a Death of a Thousand Cuts in the FBS - or a return to FCS ball and a committment to academic excellence paired with some football entertainment in the Fall.

At this time I have no idea where Idaho football is headed or if Idaho football is the 'new' focus and mission of the UoI.

Idaho needs a leader who will take the university somewhere - anywhere.

Come on Duane. Just come out and say Idaho is gonna go back to the FCS and Big Sky. There might be a little grumbling at first from younger Vandals who mistakenly think Idaho can somehow compete with BSU in the FBS world; but there will be ultimately more Vandals with level heads, who will welcome a return to fiscal sanity and a resurgent shift of priorities back to academics first and fotball as entertainment in the Fall.


PS - I believe the future of Idaho hinges on this debate. A return to Academics First and football as entertainment second (FCS and Big Sky option) will ensure the viability of the UoI. A continuance of the FBS emphasis and the penchant for competing with BSU in football, will only lead to Idaho's decline over the next ten to twenty years.

Great input

But I'm curious, didn't the Interactive Learning Center, the Micron Business Building, the Norco Nursing and University Health Services Building, and the Center for Environmental Science and Economic Development (CESED) all fall under Bronco Bob's watch? Hasn't research funding more than tripled since Bronco Bob arrived?

I'm just don't see where Bronco Bob has been that bad....

tfunky - you can't see the Public's Perception

A small group of interested folks follow BSU's academic advancements, which is good.

A large group of Bronco Nation folks follow Bronco Bob's Hate Idaho and Hate the BCS Speeches and pronouncements, which is not good.

A still larger group of Idahoan folks follow the 'Big News Of The Day' as is spoon fed to them by a sensationalistic mdia, which is terrible.

When was the last time Bronco Bob got any national media attention for discussing his 'good works' in advancing BSU academics?

When was the last time Bronco Bob got any national media attention for bashing Idaho and bashing the BCS?

It is a matter of public perception.

Does the public perceive Bronco Bob to be an academician or do they perceive Bronco Bob to be an Idaho and BCS hate filled Bronco Football Advocate.

Perception is reality.


So are you saying

it doesn't matter what "real" good Bronco Bob has done academically, he must go because of how certain public perceive him?

tfunky - slip slidin' away

Basically, yes.

Isn't that what happens to many 'good' politicians and public servants?

Look back over your life. I am sure you know examples of people who have done 'good works', but due, to negative public perception, their 'good works' have been outweighed by a careless public comment or two, which has then been magnified tenfold by a hyper media on a slow news day? The people have more than likely, moved on to greener pastures, and been forgotten by the public that held the negative perception of them to begin with.

Larry Craig is a perfect example. For many years, he was instrumental in getting millions of dollars for projects throughout the entire state of Idaho. He was once the 'Darling' of Idaho' - a respected Senior Senator. But due, to an immoral and illegal action on his part, in an airport men's room and the following negative public perception, he is now an Idaho Scourge of the First Magnitude - his many 'good works' having been long forgotten.

The best way Bronco Bob can serve BSU, at this juncture is to move on to greener pastures. He will always be identified and perceived by the Idaho Public, as a Hater and not a Builder; as a Football Advocate and not an academician.

You know it is true.

It is sad; but, I didn't manufacture his negative public prception - his mouth did.

He can't recover.

Any reputable image consultant, at this point, would advise him to quietly move on.


Well, that is an interesting take

Comparing Larry Craig to Bronco Bob is, frankly, a little around the bend. I have tried to find this overwhelming negative public perception and it's just not there. Sure, UofI alumni don't like him but beyond that, on a national level Bronco Bob is pretty well respected. In fact, his presentation to the Idaho legislature this morning was reported in several western newspapers.

Sorry but I don't see the perception you see.

tfunk - there is more to Idaho than just the Treasure Valley

Have you looked outside of the COU?

I am interested in learning about the national level of respect you refer to, regarding Bonco Bob. Do you care to provide any credible and verifiable cites, links, or references to support your claim; or are we left with interpreting your statement, as being your humble opinion?


PS - Comparing Larry Craig to Bronco Bob is spot on, for purposes of this scenario. Both, influential public servants. Both, supposedly having done good deeds. Both, recipients of massive amounts of negative media. Both having had, at one time or another, admirers and now detractors. The only difference being, Larry Craig no longer resides in Idaho, while Bronco Bob is still under the microscope of constant public perception of Idahoans and therefore, is subject to possibly even more extensive negative public perception, over and above his current level of ignominy.


First your comparison of Larry and Bob couldn't be more off, in your own words about Larry:

"But due, to an immoral and illegal action on his part,"

Please provide us with information in which Bronco Bob is guilty of the same.....

I have read several articles about academics in which Bronco Bob was quoted (in papers all over the country). The only negative I can find is his comments on Idaho and those comments have come from Idaho. I can find nothing that is negative about Bronco Bob concerning Academics......

tfunky - the normally accepted protocol for a debate . . .

. . . is who asks for supporting information first. I, in essence coopted the field and froze that line of reasoning and subsequent response.

However, I will respond to your comment and statement that Bronco Bob's only negative comments came from Idaho.

This is just not true. What about Sports Ill@strated taking Bronco Bob to the wood shed and the national firestorm that resulted?

I will concede the point that Bronco Bob's actions may not have been illegal, when weighed by conventional standards. My choice of words was not totally accurate - a little off. You are right.

However, even the most reasonable and objective of minds, such as yours, will readily admit the spirit of his actions was just plain rotten and egregious; while prolly not illegal, as that term is normally understood, by laymen, to be.

A slight literary exploitation and debate multiplier and enhancer on my part. Sorry.

Okay, your turn.


if you went to a private school in MT

and are willing to admit it, then you went to a university with a virtually identical graduation rate and median ACT as UI (has).

And you probably spent $65,000 more attaining that degree vs an Idaho resident attending UI.

But keep preaching.

scholarship, my parents

were not rich just quality. I definatley got a better education than most. I wish everyone could do that. Sadly not everyone can. Just as sad is the idea that someone would think that UI is a preferable choice to help shape a young mind as any school. If I can I will send my kids to the best school I can, I pray it isnt UI.

it sounds like

you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about, and you'd probably be much better served if you let your kids choose a university on their own.

That is the plan

infiniti... But it is my money, hopefully I will do a good enough job raising them that they at 18ish can make a quality decision. So many kids cant. Hence why you have late 20 somethings going back to school because they haven't figured out their vocations yet. With all girls so far I cringe at sending them anywhere..... but I can hope for the best....
As for the new agey idea of letting adolecents decide major life decisions on their own without heavy guidence from the parents they know and love, I think that is irresposible. Call me oldfashioned but I think it is you sir who probably does not have the slightest clue about letting kids choose a school.


"I do not say that with sarcasm or vitriol..." " are a drunken frat boy wasting your parents money."

Maybe I didn't learn the proper definition of "vitriol"...or I was possibly just too drunk to understand.

Maybe you should pull your head out of the blorange kool-aid and actually attempt to learn something on your own instead of depending upon Doc Bobby to provide you with your belief of what happens in Moscow. Just keep telling yourself something long enough and it becomes true.

ok teke

but I couldnt resist and I think it a competent analogy. How else would you describe throwing money after this FBS BS. I really do think that it is best for the UI to reevaluate its priorities, that was the part I was not being sarcastic or vitriolic about. I really do want UI to become something that more than just its alum have pride in. BSU definately is not a model for what a University should be, but neither is UI, and BSU seems to take a more realistic view of where it is at and what it wants to be.

Let's address the main flaw in your arguement...

The point in argueing all of the side facts of your post is counterproductive. The point is that Idaho football makes a great deal of money. It is one of the only profitable sports (much like BSU football is on BSU's campus) Basketball struggles at both schools and no matter how good wrestling becomes, it is not a cash cow. The point is that not a cent of taxpayer money is being wasted on U of I's football program. In fact, it is football that supplements the rest of the sports that bring in nothing or lose money. Montana is arguably the most sucessful D-2 program in existence today and they do well if they break even. Take a look at the facts and plese know what you are talking about before you spout off on an unregulated forum like this one.

Id love to see you support that with

some facts.... and a quick look to the future means that the biggest donor to UI football, BSU, is not in the mix anymore.

The UM had a great article on the fiscal side of a football program.
It is important to remember that it isnt just football that has to be productive, but football is the vehicle of revenue for the entire program. As the father of three girls, i can attest that Title nine is one of the best things you can have, but is it feasable at this level for the UI? no. The argument could be made the same for many shcools. including BSU It is just that at UI football has not and will never be what it is supposed to be, a funder for other programs.

How do you figure?

I still see a great deal of flaw in your argument. What would these money losing programs do if football went back to Div. 2? Where would additional funds come from at that point? You say you support title 9, but then want to strip the revenue stream away from the only program that allows these non-profitable programs to exist? Huh? That is some weird logic. The numbers are all a matter of public record. I am not going to waste my time digging the figures up for you but encourage you to take a lok. They can be found through the Division of Financial Management through the Governo's office or you can look on the state Department of Public Instruction's website. Please do. Operating budgets are clearly listed in each instance.

Also, don't hurt your shoulder patting yourself on the back. BSU's funds for BCS games go towards themselves more than anything. The distribution percentage is certainly not enough for me to pull my hair out. That is of little concern to any of the rest of the members of the WAC. Now, go and congratulate yourself in front of the mirror for choosing to be a BSU fan. Those of us who are not fair weather fans will remember the 18:1 ratio in grant dollars that Idaho draws yearly vs. what BSU brings into the state. That number makes BSU’s football revenue look like a meager tip on an expensive tab. Talk about generating tax revenue, let's see which institution does that better and compare who puts more Idahoans to work through those grants. Again all a matter of public record.

Got no problem with all that

and the UI is a great grant institution. that does not give them the right to waste money staying in the WAC on a path of only one end. As for being on the bandwagon I have two thoughts. 1) Isnt it funny how winning teams have bandwagon fans, and yet somehow standing by a team that is dismal is considered somethign to have pride in? It kinda speaks to what one wants to identify with. A winner or a loser.... I as a BSU fan welcome any bandwagon fan we can get. heck, it has earned us mucho dinero from espn and such. 2) you better be careful.... the average bandwagon fan does not even give two cents about the UI. they actually say things like "I feel bad for the UI" and "I want to root for both teams from Idaho" but the person who has been with BSU for the long haul hates the UI because of the past and the present, a true blue BSU fan remembers UI beatdowns that would embarass even the nicest of fans. A true blue fan knows the history of the SBOE and state government handshakes that enabled the UI to funnel money and corruption to the highest places. the alum that settled in the "old boise" areas that refuse to see the change in the power structure of the valley.
The best thing (and maybe the only good thing) the california rush to Idaho did was crush the hold that the UI held on power in this state.

Its one thing to have pride in your school, and to stick with your team through thick and thin, but you might want to question just what it is you should be asking of the UI. A winning program? sure, but more importantly a quality institution.
Are you just following the UI because you want to or do you want the best for them, do you demand excellence from the UI at every level, because that is what this D1 football is about. Otherwise you would have no problem going to the big sky, saving mucho dinero with scholarships and pumping out grants and potato farmers. And the UI has let its fans, and yes even its detractors embarassed. Dont you think you should have some kind of self respect and hold your own school accountable for its failings instead of being upset about broncos that pile on.

ebb and flow

don't let ebb of cable-holt-akey era lead ya to think vandal football is down forever - bronco d1 success is unprecedented - lets enjoy the bsu ride while at same time hopeful idaho can get on track be it fbs or fcs

Ω Lights

Somebody remember to turn them off.

"That is if the WAC survives at all." Doesn't look like it.

I guess the term "very competative" is relative

1 bowl game, 0 football championships, 0 basketball championships, 0 wins agains BSU in football, I guess they are very competative against san diego. this is the type of myopic small picture thinking that is leading UI in the wrong direction. How long before quality logical and wise people start calling for a change in failed leadership?

Once again, there's more to college than football...

0 wins against BSU? You're showing how new of a band-wagon fan you are. How short-sighted are you to not remember (or know about) Idaho thumping BSU for a dozen years in a row? That's just as "relevant" as your current winning streak. Relevance is in the eye of the beholder...

Teams rise and they fall. I hope you'll continue to support "your" school when their fall comes. No team in the history of college football has ever gone with out highs and lows.

Quit being a homer.

I was raised on watching

football in Boise on a green field, I lived through UI alum owning the SBOE, Iremember when "the streak" wasnt something frat boys did. I watched as the Ingrams attacked the cressent owners, friend, you have posted on here for over a year? is it possible your UI education has not taught you to read, use logic and rhetoric? Many UI alums agree with the big sky plan.
Many programs do not win every year, but tell me how smart it is to lose money when you are entrusted with the money to educate the future. Perhaps you could contact a BSU alum to have them help you with this idea of business economics. Bottom line, If there really is more to the UI than football then I would think ensuring money for education would be it, not pridefully refusing to see the reality of tossing good money after foolish pride. The reality of the geographic isolation, a 16000 seat stadium that isnt filled, the refusal of teams wanting to go to UI to play, the reality of a depleted WAC not being able to generate the little money it has in the past. And most importantly the reality of the mush filled little minds that are waiting to be filled with real education, the kind that costs money, the kind of money that UI is siphoning into a pipedream.

Still Living In The Past

The Vandal faithful that remember the days of old like Some-Guy seems to is exactly why Idaho will never be relevant at the FBS level. Back in the day, when Idaho did all it could to pirate the "lions share" of state money, their administrators built the one thing that would ensure they would never be able to improve and grow as an FBS school needs to today. The Kibbie Dome. The nostalgic venture into the realm of small dome syndrome didn't help much. In fact history has proven that in all the years that the University of Idaho has been in existence, only 21 of those years produced winning seasons. Yes the UofI beat Boise State in the past. It's not likely to happen ever again, and if it does, it certainly won't be by the blow-out wins the Broncos enjoy. All the Vandal faithful remember what it used to be like, with hopes and wishes of returning to the past. It is not going to happen. Quit fooling yourselves into thinking that it will.

Quit being a homer?

do you even know what being a fan is about? The only reason I even brought up UI;s dismal WAC record is because your pres, brought up UI's competativeness at that level. Sounds like the only "homers" around are the UI people who refuse to look past their gold I will support BSU when they lose, but you can bet that BSU will never be as pittyful as UI, a 5-7 year for BSU 10 years from now will be a sad sight, but there will still be more buts in the seats than the UI will ever have. It isnt a dig at UI but rather just an observation from a geographical standpoint. UI needs to redefine itself so we can be as proud of it as we are of the Bronco football team.

Poor misguided potato2...

For someone who "definatley [sic] got a better education than most," it doesn't show. Your writing is atrocious. Seriously, look back at what you just typed. Maybe you should try to demonstrate your superior education while claiming that the University of Idaho is not a "preferable choice to help shape a young mind." M'kay?

Your ignorance continues to be impressive. And your misguided disdain toward the University of Idaho is rather strange for someone who didn't even attend BSU.

The sooner you quit trying to compare BSU football to UI football, the less your frustration.

"UI needs to redefine itself so we can be as proud of it as we are of the Bronco football team."

Bwahaha. Really? Once again, your ignorance is truly something else. I'd rather have all the University of Idaho's accomplishments off the field than a short-lived run at football "greatness." Do you have any idea how woefully inadequate BSU is as a university? The job of a university is to educate students. BSU graduates 6% of degree-seeking students in four years and 27% in six years. That is dismal and one of the worst graduation rates in the Western U.S. Most community colleges have better graduation rates. But, that's okay because their football team wins games!

And you're the one griping about wasting taxpayer money? That's irony at its finest. If Idaho needs to do the "responsible" thing by giving up FBS football, then BSU needs to do the "responsible" thing by scrapping the university and becoming an arena league football team. Taxpayers would be much better served by having the money wasted on BSU distributed to competent institutions of higher learning, such as ISU and UI.

Well, some dude.....

what makes you any better?

What the H3LL is wrong with supporting both universities for different reason?

Not sayin, just sayin

I aplologize for the

typing and I know it is somewhat ironic but as it is I have my hands full right now. BSU cannot be an areana football league as it is because it is competing at the collegiate level. Yup I do know how inadequate they are as a university. But the diference is they are not throwing money after a dream of d1 football. If you want to talk about a University that is putting football before education you need only to look at the UI.

UI can and should become better and should do it by focusing on where they can improve. the same can be said for any shcool including BSU.

PS do you really laugh the way you spell it? Bwahaha? because that would mean you are either a social recluse or a young teen who spends too much time on facebook.

either way, at least you wont have kids and have to make the aweful decision to send them to UI. I cannot for the life of me understand why that is all a parent would want for their kids. If by some sad loophole social protocol you do procreate, I hope you will aske for more than the UI or BSU is currently giving.

Wow, you care enough to know who I am!

That's right, I'm a young teenage social recluse. Those are some great "arguments" you have. When you have to stoop to that type of nonsense, I know you don't have much left.