Realignment

[AFCAT]

I’ve always been for moving up if the invitation is presented. Heck I can remember back in the day playing Fresno State, Boise, Reno, and being competitive with all of those teams. The move up would bring new realities and opportunities as well as funding and costs. I think the competition level would be an upgrade, but didn’t we just beat a UNM team that is FBS and our support and program easily wins the day. I also believe that the fan base is more interested in playing harder competition than they are playing Mercyhurst and Simon Fraser or Utah Tech or even Maine. I get that it’s fun to watching winning football, but I would contend the win over UNM was far more exciting and entertaining for more fans than the wonderful time had at Gold Rush against Maine…the game day notwithstanding!

Move up, adjust, compete, win…and have some fun again with Boise, Wyoming, the DSU’s, the Renos and Fresno States of whatever conference we’d be offered in!

Let’s also remember that when MSU was playing Boise and Reno, those teams were 1-AA/FCS programs. The last ten meetings against Boise the Cats were 3-7 and all time against Reno 6-12.
Everyone mentions teams like Maine or Utah Tech as teams they don’t want to play. I totally get that and understand the point, but there are two types of teams the Cats would play in pre-conference games at the FBS level. Those pre-conference games would be money games against power five teams or playing lower level games against FCS schools. Heck, even Maine is playing Oklahoma this season. Utah Tech played UNLV. New Mexico played MSU. Wyoming played Idaho. Colorado State played Northern Colorado. Fresno State and San Jose State played Sac State. Those pre-conference games would be either against lower level FCS opponents at home or big FBS money games away with the odd same level opponent thrown in, just like the Cats do now. There isn’t going to be much change in that part of the schedule. Conference will be different though.

Except we currently play multiple lower level FCS opponents on our conference schedule every year. Those games would go away. Instead of play as many as 5 "down" games a year we'd play 1.

As far as MSU's record back in the day, do you think we have a better program now than we did back then or not?

My comment was about pre-conference games not conference. Those games against teams like Utah Tech, Maine, and lower level talent Big Sky teams that everyone hates to play would still occur, they’d just be before conference play. People hate playing lower level talent teams in pre-conference play but that’s exactly what would happen with a move up to FBS, just look at who the MW teams play on their pre-conference schedule today. Nothing would change there. There will be also “down” games against MW teams in conference play too. The MW isn’t some conference where the teams have total parity in talent. There are good MW teams and bad MW teams and always will be.

I know the Cats have had good teams for the past five seasons and the program has grown. I also remember the bad years after the Cats won championships and we thought they would be dominant forever and they were anything but.

UM, MSU, the DSUs are not playing down for the MW conference. They are pretty evenly matched.

Once again, my comment was on pre-conference games the Cats would play, not conference games. There is little to no difference in how pre-conference scheduling would happen in the MW than it is in the Big Sky. MW teams play lower level talented FCS schools all the time in pre-conference games, including this season. MSU would still play games in pre-conference schedules against less talented FCS schools (probably Big Sky teams since they are close by....Hello Northern Colorado), money games against power five schools and other schools, and home and home games against comparative skilled schools. Conference games would have competitive games and non-competitive games, just like the Big Sky conference has. People will get tired of beating up on Hawaii every year just like they get tired of beating up on Northern Colorado.

[msu_agfan]

10-15 years ago I wanted no part in moving up, but the CFB landscape has changed a lot since then. The Montana schools need to take whatever invitation is available to move up when it’s available, because once the P4 splits off from the G5 (G6?), that opportunity will be gone. I understand where the people who love the playoff atmosphere are coming from, but I have lost a ton of interest in the regular season in the last few years. It’s painful to only have 1-2 meaningful football games before November.

If the Dakota schools move up and we don’t, the national championship is going to come down to us, the Griz, and maybe Idaho every single season. That is not a healthy football division. Like someone said earlier, if your idea of fun football is just beating up on weak teams, let’s just move down and save some money

I know its very, very complicated. But i dont see many people wanting to move down, very few right? Using reverse reasoning, a lot of people would like, or could be persuaded to like, the move up. I struggle with what my own desires are, but seeing who is left at the FCS level is helping me want to move up. I only go to a game about once every 3 years, and i'd much rather go see us play Wyoming or New Mexico instead of Utah Tech.

[luckyirishguy25]

Sac St is going to be gone.

[CalgaryCat]

10-15 years ago I wanted no part in moving up, but the CFB landscape has changed a lot since then. The Montana schools need to take whatever invitation is available to move up when it’s available, because once the P4 splits off from the G5 (G6?), that opportunity will be gone. I understand where the people who love the playoff atmosphere are coming from, but I have lost a ton of interest in the regular season in the last few years. It’s painful to only have 1-2 meaningful football games before November.

If the Dakota schools move up and we don’t, the national championship is going to come down to us, the Griz, and maybe Idaho every single season. That is not a healthy football division. Like someone said earlier, if your idea of fun football is just beating up on weak teams, let’s just move down and save some money

I know its very, very complicated. But i dont see many people wanting to move down, very few right? Using reverse reasoning, a lot of people would like, or could be persuaded to like, the move up. I struggle with what my own desires are, but seeing who is left at the FCS level is helping me want to move up. I only go to a game about once every 3 years, and i'd much rather go see us play Wyoming or New Mexico instead of Utah Tech.

Nobody wants to move down, it’s just hyperbole at expense of those who want to just keep beating up on bad teams and being the big fish in a little pond. I do understand the people where the people wanting to keep the status quo are coming from. The problem is the status quo keeps changing whether we want it or not. When I was in school there were around a dozen FCS teams that could reasonably contend for a title each year. For the last several years, at best, you could say there are 5. And it’s pretty much been the same 4 with maybe 1 wild card every year since Sam Houston and James Madison left. And in my opinion, the parity is only going to get worse. Competitive teams will leave, and nobody is going to take their place.

[CalgaryCat]

Sac St is going to be gone.

That’s my thought as well. Their sights on the Pac are a bit out of reach in my opinion, but they probably have more going for them to join the MWC than the Montana schools do unfortunately. Unfortunately, fan support doesn’t mean very much.

[Bobcat Sig]

Sac St is going to be gone.

That’s my thought as well. Their sights on the Pac are a bit out of reach in my opinion, but they probably have more going for them to join the MWC than the Montana schools do unfortunately. Unfortunately, fan support doesn’t mean very much.

Agreed. The academic integrity of the new PAC conference is much different and the addition of Sac State does nothing to help in that regard. And as stated earlier, taking Sac because of their alleged media market is a stretch. It’s a commuter school, which if I’m a conference commissioner; that wouldn’t be appealing.

[Hawks86]

[CalgaryCat]

Sac St is going to be gone.

That’s my thought as well. Their sights on the Pac are a bit out of reach in my opinion, but they probably have more going for them to join the MWC than the Montana schools do unfortunately. Unfortunately, fan support doesn’t mean very much.

Agreed. The academic integrity of the new PAC conference is much different and the addition of Sac State does nothing to help in that regard. And as stated earlier, taking Sac because of their alleged media market is a stretch. It’s a commuter school, which if I’m a conference commissioner; that wouldn’t be appealing.

Frankly Cal Poly and UC Davis would fit in a lot more academically with the rest of them. Although the addition of Boise St. clearly shows academics doesn’t mean as much to the Pac as it used to.

[Prodigal Cat]

https://www.extrapointsmb.com/p/im-hear ... ybody-else

[Bobcat Sig]

Sac St is going to be gone.

That’s my thought as well. Their sights on the Pac are a bit out of reach in my opinion, but they probably have more going for them to join the MWC than the Montana schools do unfortunately. Unfortunately, fan support doesn’t mean very much.

Agreed. The academic integrity of the new PAC conference is much different and the addition of Sac State does nothing to help in that regard. And as stated earlier, taking Sac because of their alleged media market is a stretch. It’s a commuter school, which if I’m a conference commissioner; that wouldn’t be appealing.

Frankly Cal Poly and UC Davis would fit in a lot more academically with the rest of them. Although the addition of Boise St. clearly shows academics doesn’t mean as much to the Pac as it used to.

Very much agreed. Heck, I’d put Sac ahead of Boise CC with regards to academics.

[Travelingcat]

If there were a move up would it have any appreciable effect on players jumping into the portal? Exceptional players would probably leave regardless to go to the "bigger time" programs. And could we possibly be able to pickup/recruit a tad higher quality individual?

I think it helps us a ton with the portal. One of the biggest reasons I am for it. Playing against better competition means that there's far less incentive for someone who is basically happy here to make the jump. If there an NFL prospect, they'll be dinged a bit for the "level of competition" for playing in G5 versus Power 4, but nothing like we have today.

Plus Power 4 guys will be much more relaxed about jumping here to get playing time in a program with a strong fanbase.

It will be a big upgrade.

[BelgradeBobcat]

Like many on here, I can well remember the times when MSU struggled to beat or lost to the likes of Humboldt State, Chadron State, Adams State, Central Washington, Mesa State or whoever. I remember lots of 4-7 seasons. So I'm far from bored with beating up on non-conference opponents and watching our subs play the entire second half.

For me it's most important that we keep affiliated with and keep playing our current rivals. On that front, Idaho rejoining the Big Sky was a huge coup. The tipping point would be if any Big Sky school or Dakota school leaves FCS for FBS. If that happens we've gotta go too-if we're invited. FCS has been watered down, but it's still okay. It won't be if we lose anybody else in the league or a neighboring state.

If market size matters it's interesting that the two smallest markets in the new 6-Pac are the power schools Washington State and Oregon State-by far.
I'm guessing the next moves for the Pac are AAC schools like Memphis and Tulane and maybe UTSA and North Texas (huge markets there), especially since geography doesn't matter anymore.

If market matters to the MWC, Fargo and Sioux Falls are way, way bigger than Bozeman and Missoula. However, I just can't believe any MWC school wants to go to the Dakotas. I think NDSU is really ham-strung by their relatively tiny dome. I think the MWC will grab UTEP and New Mexico State and probably hold there.

It'd be great fun to play Wyoming and Utah State regularly, but I'm okay with what we have in the Big Sky while meeting the Dakotas regularly in the FCS playoffs.

[Cats92]

Like many on here, I can well remember the times when MSU struggled to beat or lost to the likes of Humboldt State, Chadron State, Adams State, Central Washington, Mesa State or whoever. I remember lots of 4-7 seasons. So I'm far from bored with beating up on non-conference opponents and watching our subs play the entire second half.

For me it's most important that we keep affiliated with and keep playing our current rivals. On that front, Idaho rejoining the Big Sky was a huge coup. The tipping point would be if any Big Sky school or Dakota school leaves FCS for FBS. If that happens we've gotta go too-if we're invited. FCS has been watered down, but it's still okay. It won't be if we lose anybody else in the league or a neighboring state.

If market size matters it's interesting that the two smallest markets in the new 6-Pac are the power schools Washington State and Oregon State-by far.
I'm guessing the next moves for the Pac are AAC schools like Memphis and Tulane and maybe UTSA and North Texas (huge markets there), especially since geography doesn't matter anymore.

If market matters to the MWC, Fargo and Sioux Falls are way, way bigger than Bozeman and Missoula. However, I just can't believe any MWC school wants to go to the Dakotas. I think NDSU is really ham-strung by their relatively tiny dome. I think the MWC will grab UTEP and New Mexico State and probably hold there.

It'd be great fun to play Wyoming and Utah State regularly, but I'm okay with what we have in the Big Sky while meeting the Dakotas regularly in the FCS playoffs.

Money

[kwcat]

Another article. I didn’t see this one posted.
https://nevadasportsnet.com/news/report ... defections

[onceacat]

I’ve always been for moving up if the invitation is presented. Heck I can remember back in the day playing Fresno State, Boise, Reno, and being competitive with all of those teams. The move up would bring new realities and opportunities as well as funding and costs. I think the competition level would be an upgrade, but didn’t we just beat a UNM team that is FBS and our support and program easily wins the day. I also believe that the fan base is more interested in playing harder competition than they are playing Mercyhurst and Simon Fraser or Utah Tech or even Maine. I get that it’s fun to watching winning football, but I would contend the win over UNM was far more exciting and entertaining for more fans than the wonderful time had at Gold Rush against Maine…the game day notwithstanding!

Move up, adjust, compete, win…and have some fun again with Boise, Wyoming, the DSU’s, the Renos and Fresno States of whatever conference we’d be offered in!

Let’s also remember that when MSU was playing Boise and Reno, those teams were 1-AA/FCS programs. The last ten meetings against Boise the Cats were 3-7 and all time against Reno 6-12.
Everyone mentions teams like Maine or Utah Tech as teams they don’t want to play. I totally get that and understand the point, but there are two types of teams the Cats would play in pre-conference games at the FBS level. Those pre-conference games would be money games against power five teams or playing lower level games against FCS schools. Heck, even Maine is playing Oklahoma this season. Utah Tech played UNLV. New Mexico played MSU. Wyoming played Idaho. Colorado State played Northern Colorado. Fresno State and San Jose State played Sac State. Those pre-conference games would be either against lower level FCS opponents at home or big FBS money games away with the odd same level opponent thrown in, just like the Cats do now. There isn’t going to be much change in that part of the schedule. Conference will be different though.

Except we currently play multiple lower level FCS opponents on our conference schedule every year. Those games would go away. Instead of play as many as 5 "down" games a year we'd play 1.

As far as MSU's record back in the day, do you think we have a better program now than we did back then or not?

My comment was about pre-conference games not conference. Those games against teams like Utah Tech, Maine, and lower level talent Big Sky teams that everyone hates to play would still occur, they’d just be before conference play. People hate playing lower level talent teams in pre-conference play but that’s exactly what would happen with a move up to FBS, just look at who the MW teams play on their pre-conference schedule today. Nothing would change there. There will be also “down” games against MW teams in conference play too. The MW isn’t some conference where the teams have total parity in talent. There are good MW teams and bad MW teams and always will be.

I know the Cats have had good teams for the past five seasons and the program has grown. I also remember the bad years after the Cats won championships and we thought they would be dominant forever and they were anything but.

If moving to the MW, the nonconference would be scheduled similarly as it is now but on a G5 (not FCS) scale. Meaning instead of playing @UNM, @Utah Tech, Vs Maine, & Vs Mercyhurst…we would instead play a nonconference schedule like: @Oregon (like next season), Vs. FCS Ewu/Psu, @ Boise State (moving to the new PAC), and vs. Tulsa (or any FBS school of similarity). Sure, maybe once a season or every other season we would bring in an FCS squad, but we are not playing 3/4 of our nonconference against Utah Tech, Maine, and Mercyhurst. Look at ESPN schedule week to week for the Mountain west in the nonconference. A mix of big time schools and big sky schools mostly. Especially with the growth of Bozeman/MSU, ease of flying in to Bozeman, and the final stadium expansion we will hopefully be hearing about sooner rather than later, MSU has a great template to move up if they so choose after an offer is extended. I personally am not a fan of moving up unless the G5 playoff becomes a reality, which it appears it will be eventually.

I think that’s pretty much what I wrote in another post on this thread. The non conference schedule would be some FCS teams interspersed with the odd money game against a bigger program along with the occasional home and home against a comparative school. That’s what most MW teams do now. The same basic non conference schedule the Cats play now. However, Mercyhurst is an outlier game because of the cancellation of SFA. Look at next years MSU schedule. Home and home against SDSU, money game against Oregon, and lower level FCS against Drake.

Mercyhurst is NOT an outlier. As you point out, we play Drake next year.

Did you forget 2 games against Utah Tech? The game agains Maine? Stetson? Morehed State? McNeese? Bryant? The cancelled SFA game? Conference games against the likes of ISU & Cal Poly?

Mercyhurst ins't an outlier, its the quality of team that makes up 50-75% of the schedule.

There are FCS playoff teams that would struggle in an away game against the Bozeman Hawks. Better just to accept that this is the new normal in the FCS.

[AFCAT]

I’ve always been for moving up if the invitation is presented. Heck I can remember back in the day playing Fresno State, Boise, Reno, and being competitive with all of those teams. The move up would bring new realities and opportunities as well as funding and costs. I think the competition level would be an upgrade, but didn’t we just beat a UNM team that is FBS and our support and program easily wins the day. I also believe that the fan base is more interested in playing harder competition than they are playing Mercyhurst and Simon Fraser or Utah Tech or even Maine. I get that it’s fun to watching winning football, but I would contend the win over UNM was far more exciting and entertaining for more fans than the wonderful time had at Gold Rush against Maine…the game day notwithstanding!

Move up, adjust, compete, win…and have some fun again with Boise, Wyoming, the DSU’s, the Renos and Fresno States of whatever conference we’d be offered in!

Let’s also remember that when MSU was playing Boise and Reno, those teams were 1-AA/FCS programs. The last ten meetings against Boise the Cats were 3-7 and all time against Reno 6-12.
Everyone mentions teams like Maine or Utah Tech as teams they don’t want to play. I totally get that and understand the point, but there are two types of teams the Cats would play in pre-conference games at the FBS level. Those pre-conference games would be money games against power five teams or playing lower level games against FCS schools. Heck, even Maine is playing Oklahoma this season. Utah Tech played UNLV. New Mexico played MSU. Wyoming played Idaho. Colorado State played Northern Colorado. Fresno State and San Jose State played Sac State. Those pre-conference games would be either against lower level FCS opponents at home or big FBS money games away with the odd same level opponent thrown in, just like the Cats do now. There isn’t going to be much change in that part of the schedule. Conference will be different though.

Except we currently play multiple lower level FCS opponents on our conference schedule every year. Those games would go away. Instead of play as many as 5 "down" games a year we'd play 1.

As far as MSU's record back in the day, do you think we have a better program now than we did back then or not?

My comment was about pre-conference games not conference. Those games against teams like Utah Tech, Maine, and lower level talent Big Sky teams that everyone hates to play would still occur, they’d just be before conference play. People hate playing lower level talent teams in pre-conference play but that’s exactly what would happen with a move up to FBS, just look at who the MW teams play on their pre-conference schedule today. Nothing would change there. There will be also “down” games against MW teams in conference play too. The MW isn’t some conference where the teams have total parity in talent. There are good MW teams and bad MW teams and always will be.

I know the Cats have had good teams for the past five seasons and the program has grown. I also remember the bad years after the Cats won championships and we thought they would be dominant forever and they were anything but.

If moving to the MW, the nonconference would be scheduled similarly as it is now but on a G5 (not FCS) scale. Meaning instead of playing @UNM, @Utah Tech, Vs Maine, & Vs Mercyhurst…we would instead play a nonconference schedule like: @Oregon (like next season), Vs. FCS Ewu/Psu, @ Boise State (moving to the new PAC), and vs. Tulsa (or any FBS school of similarity). Sure, maybe once a season or every other season we would bring in an FCS squad, but we are not playing 3/4 of our nonconference against Utah Tech, Maine, and Mercyhurst. Look at ESPN schedule week to week for the Mountain west in the nonconference. A mix of big time schools and big sky schools mostly. Especially with the growth of Bozeman/MSU, ease of flying in to Bozeman, and the final stadium expansion we will hopefully be hearing about sooner rather than later, MSU has a great template to move up if they so choose after an offer is extended. I personally am not a fan of moving up unless the G5 playoff becomes a reality, which it appears it will be eventually.

I think that’s pretty much what I wrote in another post on this thread. The non conference schedule would be some FCS teams interspersed with the odd money game against a bigger program along with the occasional home and home against a comparative school. That’s what most MW teams do now. The same basic non conference schedule the Cats play now. However, Mercyhurst is an outlier game because of the cancellation of SFA. Look at next years MSU schedule. Home and home against SDSU, money game against Oregon, and lower level FCS against Drake.

Mercyhurst is NOT an outlier. As you point out, we play Drake next year.

Did you forget 2 games against Utah Tech? The game agains Maine? Stetson? Morehed State? McNeese? Bryant? The cancelled SFA game? Conference games against the likes of ISU & Cal Poly?

Mercyhurst ins't an outlier, its the quality of team that makes up 50-75% of the schedule.

There are FCS playoff teams that would struggle in an away game against the Bozeman Hawks. Better just to accept that this is the new normal in the FCS.

It's obvious you don't understand what I'm writing about, so I'm done trying to explain it. Have a nice day.

[onceacat]

Like many on here, I can well remember the times when MSU struggled to beat or lost to the likes of Humboldt State, Chadron State, Adams State, Central Washington, Mesa State or whoever. I remember lots of 4-7 seasons. So I'm far from bored with beating up on non-conference opponents and watching our subs play the entire second half.

For me it's most important that we keep affiliated with and keep playing our current rivals. On that front, Idaho rejoining the Big Sky was a huge coup. The tipping point would be if any Big Sky school or Dakota school leaves FCS for FBS. If that happens we've gotta go too-if we're invited. FCS has been watered down, but it's still okay. It won't be if we lose anybody else in the league or a neighboring state.

If market size matters it's interesting that the two smallest markets in the new 6-Pac are the power schools Washington State and Oregon State-by far.
I'm guessing the next moves for the Pac are AAC schools like Memphis and Tulane and maybe UTSA and North Texas (huge markets there), especially since geography doesn't matter anymore.

If market matters to the MWC, Fargo and Sioux Falls are way, way bigger than Bozeman and Missoula. However, I just can't believe any MWC school wants to go to the Dakotas. I think NDSU is really ham-strung by their relatively tiny dome. I think the MWC will grab UTEP and New Mexico State and probably hold there.

It'd be great fun to play Wyoming and Utah State regularly, but I'm okay with what we have in the Big Sky while meeting the Dakotas regularly in the FCS playoffs.

Exactly.

But even though Fargo & Sioux Falls are a bit bigger than Bozeman or Missoula, their TV markets aren't. Which is the metric that matters.

[catsrback76]

I’ve always been for moving up if the invitation is presented. Heck I can remember back in the day playing Fresno State, Boise, Reno, and being competitive with all of those teams. The move up would bring new realities and opportunities as well as funding and costs. I think the competition level would be an upgrade, but didn’t we just beat a UNM team that is FBS and our support and program easily wins the day. I also believe that the fan base is more interested in playing harder competition than they are playing Mercyhurst and Simon Fraser or Utah Tech or even Maine. I get that it’s fun to watching winning football, but I would contend the win over UNM was far more exciting and entertaining for more fans than the wonderful time had at Gold Rush against Maine…the game day notwithstanding!

Move up, adjust, compete, win…and have some fun again with Boise, Wyoming, the DSU’s, the Renos and Fresno States of whatever conference we’d be offered in!

Let’s also remember that when MSU was playing Boise and Reno, those teams were 1-AA/FCS programs. The last ten meetings against Boise the Cats were 3-7 and all time against Reno 6-12.
Everyone mentions teams like Maine or Utah Tech as teams they don’t want to play. I totally get that and understand the point, but there are two types of teams the Cats would play in pre-conference games at the FBS level. Those pre-conference games would be money games against power five teams or playing lower level games against FCS schools. Heck, even Maine is playing Oklahoma this season. Utah Tech played UNLV. New Mexico played MSU. Wyoming played Idaho. Colorado State played Northern Colorado. Fresno State and San Jose State played Sac State. Those pre-conference games would be either against lower level FCS opponents at home or big FBS money games away with the odd same level opponent thrown in, just like the Cats do now. There isn’t going to be much change in that part of the schedule. Conference will be different though.

Definitely recognize that the past days playing Nevada, Boise and Fresno occurred when they were FCS. Hopefully you can recognize that todays MSU program is in significantly better position to succeed that 20+ years ago.

I’m wrote the actual records against those teams in the past in response to the statement the Cats were competitive against those teams. Hopefully, you can recognize that.

Hmmm…. Based on your position against moving up, it appeared as if you were saying MSU was not competitive by posting those records of 3-7 and 6-12.

Were they?

How did 76 turn out? Beat North Dakota and NDSU, Beat Idahos, gris, Boise, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Akron, Weber, and lost to Fresno. And hung a banner! So, yes, there are years you win, and years you lose…but the point I want to make is that being “competitive” is that those games are fun to watch, challenging, and with the potential of being a huge upside in a W.

This year, at least for me, the most entertaining game was UNM not just because we won…obviously, but because it showed us who we were at that point as we were being challenged by a team “above us”. Getting it together and storming back to win was a very nice thing to see and I think has given the juice to the team to float through the remaining schedule of non-cons and get into the meat of our conference games which have meaning.
A move up would cost us some “wins” but the wins when they come would be more consequential and appropriate for where Bozeman is now and wants to play…IMO!

[Prodigal Cat]

Watched Saluka (former Holy Cross QB) and UNLV beat KU on ESPN with probably 1 to 2 million people watching and Cats absolutely belonged on that field.

[AFCAT]

I’ve always been for moving up if the invitation is presented. Heck I can remember back in the day playing Fresno State, Boise, Reno, and being competitive with all of those teams. The move up would bring new realities and opportunities as well as funding and costs. I think the competition level would be an upgrade, but didn’t we just beat a UNM team that is FBS and our support and program easily wins the day. I also believe that the fan base is more interested in playing harder competition than they are playing Mercyhurst and Simon Fraser or Utah Tech or even Maine. I get that it’s fun to watching winning football, but I would contend the win over UNM was far more exciting and entertaining for more fans than the wonderful time had at Gold Rush against Maine…the game day notwithstanding!

Move up, adjust, compete, win…and have some fun again with Boise, Wyoming, the DSU’s, the Renos and Fresno States of whatever conference we’d be offered in!

Let’s also remember that when MSU was playing Boise and Reno, those teams were 1-AA/FCS programs. The last ten meetings against Boise the Cats were 3-7 and all time against Reno 6-12.
Everyone mentions teams like Maine or Utah Tech as teams they don’t want to play. I totally get that and understand the point, but there are two types of teams the Cats would play in pre-conference games at the FBS level. Those pre-conference games would be money games against power five teams or playing lower level games against FCS schools. Heck, even Maine is playing Oklahoma this season. Utah Tech played UNLV. New Mexico played MSU. Wyoming played Idaho. Colorado State played Northern Colorado. Fresno State and San Jose State played Sac State. Those pre-conference games would be either against lower level FCS opponents at home or big FBS money games away with the odd same level opponent thrown in, just like the Cats do now. There isn’t going to be much change in that part of the schedule. Conference will be different though.

Definitely recognize that the past days playing Nevada, Boise and Fresno occurred when they were FCS. Hopefully you can recognize that todays MSU program is in significantly better position to succeed that 20+ years ago.

I’m wrote the actual records against those teams in the past in response to the statement the Cats were competitive against those teams. Hopefully, you can recognize that.

Hmmm…. Based on your position against moving up, it appeared as if you were saying MSU was not competitive by posting those records of 3-7 and 6-12.

Were they?

How did 76 turn out? Beat North Dakota and NDSU, Beat Idahos, gris, Boise, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Akron, Weber, and lost to Fresno. And hung a banner! So, yes, there are years you win, and years you lose…but the point I want to make is that being “competitive” is that those games are fun to watch, challenging, and with the potential of being a huge upside in a W.

This year, at least for me, the most entertaining game was UNM not just because we won…obviously, but because it showed us who we were at that point as we were being challenged by a team “above us”. Getting it together and storming back to win was a very nice thing to see and I think has given the juice to the team to float through the remaining schedule of non-cons and get into the meat of our conference games which have meaning.
A move up would cost us some “wins” but the wins when they come would be more consequential and appropriate for where Bozeman is now and wants to play…IMO!

I understand your position and I respect that. My opinion is just different. I also remember the mid 80s through the early 2000s when MSU was a terrible program. I remember the Ash years when the Cats were one and done in the playoffs. I remember the streak. Yes, the Big Sky has its share of lousy teams, but I also know that the Big Sky conference is the most competitive conference in the FCS right now, sending four teams to the playoffs last season. The Cats will play three of those playoff teams this season. I can’t wait for those games. Heck, MSU and UM have each only finished first in the Big Sky once in the past decade. Weber, SAC, and EWU have more titles in that time period than the Montana schools do and UCD has a title as well. No doubt, there are lousy programs in the Big Sky, but there is a lot of great programs in the Big Sky too. You’ll also find those lousy bottom dweller teams in the FBS conferences too. Moving up will be an adrenaline shot for a while but then reality will set in and I’m not sure the after effects, including the higher costs, will be that much fun. Play up game wins, like at New Mexico, will be harder to find at that level and National championship banners too.