Interview (without the apparent Qs and As, perhaps) with the deputy commissioner of the Big Sky.
http://www.standard.net/Basketball/2018/03/08/As-Big-Sky-membership-changes-deputy-talks-schedule-shifts-expansion
So now it's time to discuss the general trends and how it affects the Big Sky.
20 basketball conference games is a thing because the major conferences are announcing or planning to do the same. The number of exposure/money games will go down, so the Big Sky pretty much has to follow suit. This is a problem for the Big Sky because of already low visibility... but that also informs why Gonzaga is considering the Mountain West at this point. Gonzaga will probably bring a touch of ESPN with them to enhance Mountain West exposure; the current WCC has perhaps four watchable games per year.
Continuing on this vein... there's talk about "regionalization" realignments because the Sun Belt and C-USA cover the same territory and schools are burdened with the costs of travel and the increasing sensibility towards study time for student athletes.
(On a side note, that makes you wonder if the WCC could be broken up. That could make things interesting out west to say the least. But anyone see that happening? Probably not. There's still too much fit among those schools.)
I expect the Big Sky to downplay any talk of a split while Idaho just barely conceals their promotion of it. The key issue for football is obvious... all the schools in the northern half benefit from Montana. A question: can a handful of southern-based regional schools be persuaded to start (or bring back) football, or move up from D2? Then, can NAU/Poly/Sac/Davis/maybe Southern Utah be persuaded to go their own way? Would that be a good idea? The bad news: the most likely schools to move up are probably in Colorado... and I kind of suspect Northern Colorado prefers staying where it is. They'd need Azusa Pacific to get out of D2, almost certainly. You'd think Grand Canyon could be drawn in, but they seem more ambitious than to get with that group.
But before I say "there we are," gotta walk back to the regionalization issue. It's noted now with the Mountain West and it's hinted at in the south and it needs to be mentioned. That paragraph about football I wrote is about survival... plus kind of how the Big Sky is unwieldly in its current structure. The point: the moves you are about to see being made will be about basketball instead of football. Only the P5 conferences have the juice to really make money off football anymore. Still, out west, I doubt that means any conference is about to go after Weber State. Still, keeping an ear to the ground (as the interview states) is always necessary.
http://www.standard.net/Basketball/2018/03/08/As-Big-Sky-membership-changes-deputy-talks-schedule-shifts-expansion
So now it's time to discuss the general trends and how it affects the Big Sky.
20 basketball conference games is a thing because the major conferences are announcing or planning to do the same. The number of exposure/money games will go down, so the Big Sky pretty much has to follow suit. This is a problem for the Big Sky because of already low visibility... but that also informs why Gonzaga is considering the Mountain West at this point. Gonzaga will probably bring a touch of ESPN with them to enhance Mountain West exposure; the current WCC has perhaps four watchable games per year.
Continuing on this vein... there's talk about "regionalization" realignments because the Sun Belt and C-USA cover the same territory and schools are burdened with the costs of travel and the increasing sensibility towards study time for student athletes.
(On a side note, that makes you wonder if the WCC could be broken up. That could make things interesting out west to say the least. But anyone see that happening? Probably not. There's still too much fit among those schools.)
I expect the Big Sky to downplay any talk of a split while Idaho just barely conceals their promotion of it. The key issue for football is obvious... all the schools in the northern half benefit from Montana. A question: can a handful of southern-based regional schools be persuaded to start (or bring back) football, or move up from D2? Then, can NAU/Poly/Sac/Davis/maybe Southern Utah be persuaded to go their own way? Would that be a good idea? The bad news: the most likely schools to move up are probably in Colorado... and I kind of suspect Northern Colorado prefers staying where it is. They'd need Azusa Pacific to get out of D2, almost certainly. You'd think Grand Canyon could be drawn in, but they seem more ambitious than to get with that group.
But before I say "there we are," gotta walk back to the regionalization issue. It's noted now with the Mountain West and it's hinted at in the south and it needs to be mentioned. That paragraph about football I wrote is about survival... plus kind of how the Big Sky is unwieldly in its current structure. The point: the moves you are about to see being made will be about basketball instead of football. Only the P5 conferences have the juice to really make money off football anymore. Still, out west, I doubt that means any conference is about to go after Weber State. Still, keeping an ear to the ground (as the interview states) is always necessary.