Boise State's Kustra met with Big East officials Sunday in Washington, D.C.

By Brian Murphy
bmurphy@idahostatesman.com

Boise State President Bob Kustra met with Big East officials in Washington, D.C., on Sunday, the school confirmed Tuesday afternoon.

"It was informational in nature and Boise State continues to consider and evaluate its options," university spokesman Frank Zang said.

The meeting had been reported by several outlets, including CBSSports.com.

The Big East, reeling from the defections of Syracuse, Pittsburgh and TCU, is considering a plan to add Boise State, Air Force and Navy in football-only and Central Florida, Houston and SMU in all sports.

Reports indicate that West Virginia will also leave the league for the Big 12.

Kustra said earlier this month that face-to-face discussions were imperative to moving forward with the Big East conversation.

“I’d think if there was going to be any future conference discussions, you need face-to-face meetings instead of all this stuff over the phone. You want to get a look at these folks and shake hands and have agreements. Those are the kinds of things that would slow down the process of doing this overnight,” Kustra said Oct. 15.

You can follow Murph's Turf on Twitter.

You can find links to stories, photos and video by being a fan of Brian Murphy on Facebook.

#7?

with WVU gone, who is the 7th member to reach 12 teams?

Slowing down the process to what end?

President Kustra sez, en parte: " . . .
Those are the kinds of things that would slow down the process of doing this overnight,”.

Is doing 'this' overnight a good thing or a bad thing, per Kustra's thinking?

Is he saying it is good to slow down the process?

Or,

Is he saying it is bad to slow down the process?

If he was committed to the concept of BSU joining the Big East - slowing down the process would be of no advantage.

If he is not committed to the concept of BSU joinig the Big East and instead actually joining the Big 12, in time - using interest in the Big East as leverage and bargaining material - slowing down the process with the Big East would be most advantageious.

I just don't know how to read what Kustra is saying. His sentence is kinda confusing to me.

VNDL

while we'll never know what he meant by that, here's my guess

Sounds to me like the Big East sent BSU an invite a few weeks ago, which was the rumor at the time. It also sounds as if he didn't provide them with an answer and the Big East has been calling him back to get an answer, (which would make sense considering that they in a position in which they probably need to make some quick decisions) I think BSU is the glue that they want to use for put their conference back together and Kustra is dragging his feet. That's where the slowing down of the process comes in, or at least that's my take on it.

After our get-together at the RAM

I was kinda looking forward to the Big East. But now, all the decent teams are leaving. Is it gonna be worth going? I have a fear this conference is going to crumble the year we join it.

Remember RMS

The CUSA/MWC will be without Houston, SMU, UCF, and Air Force.........

Its just like the leave for

Its just like the leave for the MWC. Anyway you look at it, the MW is better than the WAC. The Big East left overs will still be better than the MWC bottom feeders. It does kinda suck though, every time we join a conference the rest of the good teams bolt.

A pic of weisberg playing for the Oregon Ducks

Found this in a yearbook for Oregon. It is weisberg, decked out in the yellow and green of Oregon. It was when weisberg was in his prime. He has gotten out of shape since then:

http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/ugly-people-189.htm

VNDL

The helmet says it all

He even put his initials on the helmet. Has to be him.

weisberg 2.0

aqberg

weisfunk

TROLL 70

----------

I NEVER hate telling you I was right...I would be dead if I did. Get real.

I believe the

keys to his statement are

1.) "have agreements"

2.) "slow down the process of doing this overnight"

I read this as "Who's actually signed on and let's sit down and get through this point by point, I don't want to make rash decisions"

That's how I see it anyway

evidently we've already been invited

agree or disagree?

I would tend to agree

I think he wants to wait and see what others have been invited and who have agreed.

tfunky

Sounds plausible.

VNDL

evidently we have been invited

Hello

The Big East will fold as a football conference.-I believe Boise State will stay in the MWC this silliness is becoming stupid.The leader of Boise State is feeding upon it he loves it for his ego only sad for the student athletes at Boise State

Really?

Kustra is doing this for his...ego? Now there's a line, and coming from someone of such considerable accomplishment like yourself. Give me a break. The guy is the former Lt Governor of Illinois and the president of a university that was a hybrid city college/state university when he took the job to a rapidly growing regional research university. Yes, Boise State has a LONG way to go. But, considering where they were just 9 years ago, Kustra has accomplished a great deal. He's not going to tip his hand to the media and he certainly isn't going to consult you as to how to make this decision. I have complete confidence that Dr Kustra will take the best deal available, particularly after the episode with our entrance into the Mountain West.

careful

you are replying to a mirage

Bring me my HASSENPFEFFER!

----------

I NEVER hate telling you I was right...I would be dead if I did. Get real.

HAHA!

Bugs Bunny rules!

exit strategy

Perhaps the president is negotiating an exit clause in the event that the Big East loses the AQ status it now enjoys or the mix of teams changes so drastically it becomes the Big East in name only.

It would have been nice if BSU a change of scope rider that stated "The Mountain West Conference is defined as a conference containing TCU, Utah, BYU, San Diego St and Air Force. In the event that any one of these teams are no longer a member of the MWC, Boise St. reserves the right to reconsider their membership status without penalty."

If we wait any longer there might not be anywhere to exit to

and we'll all end up (Big East included) in a big non AQ 4 division mess of a conference

I don't think

BSU should move until they are assured (agreements in place) that the others are in. I also think the BE needs to forward all past TV negotiation reports to each school. I also think that BSU should use it's BCS leverage to their advantage before they sign (ie, getting BYU in).

We'll see.

If we've learned anything at all in conference realignment,

it's that there aren't any assurances in college football. We're in a culture in which agreements are null and void for a certain dollar amount. If we would have said yes instead of saying we'll call em back, odds are that W. Virginia wouldn't have paid the increased exit fee and would still be members, but they knew they had an opening and they took it. I'm just surprised that the Big 12 was interested in them, Maybe we should have applied!

Don't kid

yourself kid, if the Big 12 were interested in Boise, they would have made that known with or without an application.

Oh but they are

Here's the scoop and the link. Maybe the Big XII isn't aggressively seeking Boise St. but. . .

The New York Post reports that BYU is still under consideration: "A source said the Big 12, by holding Missouri, might hold at 10 teams for next season and then consider a jump to 16 teams. Louisville and Cincinnati are under consideration as well as Boise State and BYU."

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/college/football/wvu_set_to_leave_big_east_for_big_aS3e4cF01Oc4fAyQ6qlw4O

One can only hope that either the Big XII or the Pac-12 (shudder at the very thought) come to their senses and snag Boise St.

Different conferences have different priorities.....

the Big E needs a BCS contender to preserve their AQ status. All other BCS conferences need TV market share (large population centers). "Applying" to get into the Big 12 or any other BCS conferences (except Big East) is laughable due to the fact BSU brings nothing to those tables. Its not about our teams wins and losses - its all about our TV market.

That and

we're not a "Land Grant" university, our endowment doesn't really measure up, and of course, we have a blue field.

:)

Like big market Morgantown?

And the large population market for Morgantown, WV -- home of West Virginia University -- is what? It's less populous than Boise or Ada County or the Treasure Valley.

Here goes that song again"!!!!!!!!!

Rip
Kustra is an obsessive actor.Why is he even getting involved with the initial investigation of the Big East? Isn't that why the AD gets paid hundreds of thousands of dollars? To deal with expansive ideas? Kustra said JUMP and BSU jumped into an empty pool. Now Kustra wants to repeat his destruction of BSU's opportunities in the real BCS world.And next year, when the AQ is realigned and the Big East loses its automatic bowl position, BSU will be right back in the empty pot again, wasting more money chasing its evanescent dream.

Presidents and chancellors are the ones who make the decisions

not athletic directors.

in layman's terms, regional managers don't make corporate decisions.

woulda been nice but.....

if they won't let us play blue on blue, you think they would have allowed us to insert such a rider? And who could have predicted that these teams all would run for cover? I didn't see or hear any such chatter anywhere before our move. Most on these boards were screaming to get out of the WAC.
For the record, I was against the move but only on the basis of the loss of ESPN coverage. Now that we're in the MWC, we need to explore all variables and proceed cautiously.
I think Kustra was scoping out the landscape and letting them know that if they went public with an invite they might end up with egg on their face 'cause he won't allow a move without due diligence.

if I bought a dozen eggs

at the store and when I got home there were only 8 eggs in the container, I'd check real close the next time I went shopping.

BSU fans please vote

BSU fans Vote once a day everyday

http://promo.espn.go.com/espn/contests/nissan/heisman/

http://www.voteobrien.org/ ----Second round is open

http://www.coachoftheyear.com/default.aspx#fbid=tGZTZqaQcI3

GO BRONCOS

Dr.Kustra

I am going to try to be kind in the following sentences

The university spokesman is issuing the press release

The sports information director where is he?

Sports releases are issued by the sports information dept?

Does Boise STATE led by Bob Kustra have a different protocol?
University spokesmen handling all press releases? very very interesting Gene is smiling

...

Does my e-mail make sense now?

..................;>

"Nope..I'm not tfunk...tfunk aint me. We've played golf (he's better)...." - Wiz

well, we've already seen the tea party...watch your head!

----------

Everybody wants to hue the knurled

TV Markets

I realize that Boise isn't the biggest TV market, but I think what may be more important is the number of TV's that are tuned in to the games when they are being played. Here are some numbers from Big 12 states.

Population by State
Oklahoma 3,751,351
Iowa - 3,046,355
Kansas - 2,853,118
Idaho - 1,567,582

All total they aren't close to the population of Texas (25 mil), but with 4 teams from Texas already in the Big 12, I'm not sure adding another increases market share.

It seems to me that a Boise St. v Iowa St game would draw more TV attention nationwide than a Kansas St. v Iowa St game. This goes for just about any game that involves BSU. People are interested because they either love BSU, hate BSU, or are curious about BSU.

Besides the Big 12 needs two more teams to get back to 12.

Don't forget

A lot of Eastern Oregon follows the Broncos, too.

Sports information director?

Where are you?

Have you been terminated?

Have you moved to the office?

The compliance office is in his office

Sometimes I believe there are clandestine operations going on in that office oh heck paranoia be straight with the citizens of Idaho to what is going on Mr. President

sid

you can have the job

you may even get a desk

presidents should lead ...

not ask permission to move forward or follow opinion polls. When somethings been decided, I figure we'll be told. Until then, it's on a need to know basis, and we don't need to know.

Fugly - pay attention - BSU already has a SID

Per a BSU Athletics Department web page:

* - Max Corbet 426-1515 Assistant Athletic Director/Media Relations (FB, WRES)

* - Joe Nickell 426-3868 Sports Information Director (FB interviews, MBB, M/W Golf)

Now that is a household name that all members of Bronco Nation and the BAA are familiar with!!

I think Sports Information at BSU is about letting people know where they can get Bronco Bobbleheads and blorange Bronco Gear and that is about it.

Sorry, weisberg can't be the BSU SID, as there is already one on the payroll. He does not provide any Sports Information to Bronco NAtion - but then again - it appears as though Bronco Bob has the BSU AD's office and all employees on a very short leash. Bronco Bob insists on doing everybody in the BSU AD's Office job, it seems.

Fugly - are you listening? Potetial Frictions of War at work with the fog of battle settling in to obsucre the vision required for target acquisition.

VNDL

weisberg 2.01

fogberg

frictionfunk

They have a lot of SIDS I gather?

----------

I NEVER hate telling you I was right...I would be dead if I did. Get real.

VNDL....yes Ugly is paying attention and I

have much to say, but will withhold right now....

Prophecies told in Jan-Feb 2011, and now coming true....

VNDL and Ugly musings holding truth....our 4 predictions of fogs:
1. Three Amigos--one must go, and then who runs the show?
2. Stadium Expansion--there is no money for it?
3. Hurrying into BCS without calculating the cost?
4. Discrediting the non-AQ system that has made Boise State famous?

Those were the main winter musings....

Is our General marching us to a cliff?

Who is the Custer not waiting for Reno?

I'm paying attention....just dont want to say much yet....

you wouldn't know Reno from Benteen

idiot

Shame on you for being so stupid - it just ain't right

Custer divided his command on 25 June, 1876, at the Crows Nest and had Benteen take the command of the second maneuver force with Custer as the first maneuver force commander (very common practice in Calvalry Regiments in those days - became analogous to 'Squadrons' when the pentagonal model of military unit structuring was put into effect in the US Army after WWI). Reno was in charge of the pack string of mules with supplies (ammo, and water) to be available to support either maneuver force at the South Fork of Sundance Creek (tributary to the Little Bighorn Creek).

Ugly is the one who is correct. Custer was waiting for support from Reno and not Benteen.

It is you who wouldn't know Reno from Benteen.

But then again, you have studied the Battle of the Little Bighorn of 26 June, 1876, in depth, and have done a Terrain Walk over those hallowed grounds of the Second Largest massacre of US Troops in US history - (and not the First Largest, as conventional US history teaches us); which by the way is he only US battlefield where the US Government Park Service monument is for the loser.

VNDL

PS - Bonus Question for you: Which Battle resulted in the First Largest masacre of US Troops, but US History ignores?

Hint - it is on the island of Samar.

PPS - Possibly you might want to read; 'The Last Stand', by Nathaniel Philbrick, 2010, Viking Press, ISBN 978-0-670-02172-7. A close and copious reading of this work will leave you wondering why you are so very stupid and not at all knowledgeable about the Battle of the Little Bighorn, and did not know this stuff all along.

Answer to Bonus Question

razor - I see you were not able to provide an answer to the Bonus Question.

Here is the answer:

Balangiga Massacre at and around the Catholic Church in Balangiga, Samar Island, Philippines.

Pronounced 'ball-an-heega'.

You could have won a set of Ginsu knives and a hand powered food processor-powdered drink stirrer, had you provided an answer and entered the drawing. Such a pity. Wasted opportunity.

VNDL

Been to the Battlefield numerous times

Wrote my history thesis on Custers E troop. The Gray horse company. Still get the willy's walking on the ground.

Reno was told to attack if he found "hostiles" and he would then be "supported by the entire command".

Benteen was told by Custer in a note to bring the packs forward. In haste, Custers Adjutant Cooke omitted "ammunition" (packs) in the note to trumpeter Martini. He did write packs twice, however. On his way to Custer, Benteen found Reno in a fight with Indians, with wounded soldiers, in a defensible position. Benteen decided to stay to help Reno and to protect the wounded. Whether Benteen disobeyed a direct order by a superior officer, or not, has been debated for over 125 years by countless historians.

JLandon - yes, yes very much debated - we will never know

Many accounts have been written about this battle. And many different versions of these accounts have been portrayed, by many different so-called 'survivors'.

For example, Page 224, The Last Stand, a passage:

" . . . It will never be known what would have happened if Benteen had done everything in his power to reach Custer in a timely manner on the afternoon of June 25 - if not with the ammunition pacs, at least with his even more desperately needed battalion of soldiers. Given the size of Sitting Bull's village and the mistakes Custer had already made, it might very well have resulted in the demise of the entire regiment. But that did not justify Benteen's passive-aggressive refusal to 'Come On' and deep down he knew it."

The importance of this passage is to point out that it is somewhat muddy as to what Custer's orders and expectations of Benteen actually were. As a second maneuvering force or a Supply Train with pack mules and supplies.

Historians are led to believe that Custer split the regiment up into two forces earlier in the day at the Crow's Nest - with Custer commanding one maneuver force and Benteen the second maneuver force (supposedly). Reno was told to stay with the Supply Trains (mules with ammunition and water) because Reno was combat innefective as he was drunk and incoherent from too much whiskey. Benteen had furnished his second command with more than adequate supply mules from Reno's supply, prior to leaving for the Southerh Hook he was instructed to make. In essence Benteen had adequate supplies and his own Supply Train and was not dependent on Reno.

Herein the confusion lies: Was Benteen's force a maneuver force or a Supply Train. We do know that Custer called on Benteen several times to hurry up and 'Come On' and Custer's requests were met by lack of action on Benteen's part. A close reading, also indicates that great amounts of whisky had been and were still being consumed by Reno, Benteen and many US Troopers all day on June 25 and up until the battle commenced on June 26 (Custer did not drink a drop as he was a 'teetotaler'). The book alludes to the thought that possibly it is the whiskey that was what was being requested from the Supply Trains, as recent studies (using GPR and other high tech archeological tools from some university) of the battlefield, have shown that the battle happened and developed very rapidly and most US Troopers did not have the capacity (single shot rifles) to have expended all of their Basic Load prior to getting kilt off (maybe 2-3 shots per US Trooper before being dispatched by the hostiles). Also, photographs of the battlefield and dead horses and US troopers from the photographer who recorded the battlefield approximately one week after the battle, indicate a lack of ammunition was not a factor in the defeat (lots of ammunition in pouches of the US Troopers). This leads to the possibility that Custer was not calling for Benteen to bring supplies, but to get the maneuvering force reinforcements to the site of a coming battle.

Who knows what happened, for all certainty.

I recommend the book, The Last Stand, as it is written in an objective manner and actually discusses the points that are in contention between historians
(and they are numerous) regarding the battle and the events that led up to the battle and transpired after the battle. It is interesting to note how many 'survivors' of the battle (US Troopers) there actualy were, that went public a few years prior to their deaths inthe 20's and 30's, with varying accounts of what happened and how it happened during the Battle. By most accounts these US Troopers were part of a somewhat large mounted company that saw what was coming and split the scene and 'skeedaddled' and kept on going accross the Rubicon, for years and years - somewhat afraid to admit what they did would lead to charges of cowardice on the battle field (which it prolly would have in those days and a hangman's rope to boot, for them). There really was not much of an accounting or an inventory of the US Troopers that were killed on the battlefied compared to the actual rolls of US Troopers who entered the fray. So the possibility is great that this is true.

I will bring the book The Last Stand to our next Board Meeting for your reading enjoyment. It is somewhat tedious reading with very vry detailed notes by the author, but I think you will find it informative, if nothing else.

VNDL