"The Big Sky said no in part because of the extremely long probationary period that the NCAA had saddeled us with. Now that this has changed (or is changing) you may see the Big Sky take a second look."
No reason was given by the Big Sky for not being interested in the Dakota's proposal. That is your definition of why they said No.
the Big Sky like the WAC wants to add bodies and metro markets.
I guess if no reason was given then the Big Sky wanting to add bodies and metro markets is your definition as to why they said no (about a year ago).
Remember we are talking about the year 2020 for the WAC and this whole thing is speculation, but leagues have gone down this population based theory before.
I would rather have a Flag Ship University with a large following even if it was from a smaller state, then have a University that is 5th or 6th best in a state that has a small following. Even if that 5th or 6th University was in a "metro area"
I live in Kansas City. If the WAC was choosing between Kansas State University in Manhattan, KS (pop. 44,861) or University of Missouri-Kansas City in Kansas City (pop. 1.6 million), which do you think they would take? I know, I know UMKC dosen't have football so feel free to put in Tulsa, Buffalo, Sac-State, whomever you want. You see my point. Population does not equal following.
Do I think SDSU will be in the WAC in 2020? No. Is it a possibility? Maybe. Stranger things have happened. Is it fun to talk about. Yes, that is what chat boards are all about.