Here is an interesting article from VandalVenue.com:

http://idaho.theinsiders.com/2/237697.html

This is very interesting to me. It lists the 5 schools for CUSA as Toledo, LaTech, North Texas, Temple and UTEP. It also lists the information that many people see Idaho in the WAC.

"It’s very important to have the right conference affiliations and regional rivalries. Playing schools that make geographic sense helps on a lot of different fronts. We did an analysis when we put together information for the WAC Presidents, and when we play schools that make geographic sense we average 15,600 at home. When we play Sun Belt schools where there isn’t a lot of interest we average about 11,400 or 11,500. When you look at that figure, obviously it makes sense. From a recruiting standpoint it makes sense too, because we’re going to continue to recruit kids from the northwest. Their family, friends, and parents want to be able to see them play in the northwest. So, being able to have regional rivalries is critical long-term." --Rob Spear, Idaho AD

Indeed it is true that the Idaho President and AD were out putting info together for the WAC presidents. These numbers are very interesting and I see first-hand that they are true. When we play closer schools, we draw better.

This article goes a long way to show the viability of UI as a 1-A school. I hope Idaho gets into the WAC and soon. It will help push everything (fundraising, facility upgrades, etc.) quicker. I think people would be more likely to give $$$ to a school in a good regional conference. It is more difficult being in the Sun Belt.

Also, one last item to mention: Why is CUSA taking so long? How long does it take to look at 5 schools? Maybe 30 days tops... Hurry up all ready!!! ;)

good luck on getting idaho in the wac, i hope they can pull it off.

I D A H O, idaho idaho go go go!!!!!!! the vandals will get their wish but it will take your help!!!! send your emails to the presidents of the wac schools now (except boise states) With our pressure and prayers were as good as in!!!!!

KIBBIE DOME!

I've said it once, I'll say it again. Kibbie Dome is a mute point. We can play one game at a neutral site (as allowed per NCAA) to meet the attendance requirement. If we are playing WAC schools, we could average at least 12,000 (we do already) and probably closer to 15,000. So we average 15,000 for 4 games in the Dome. All we would need is 15,000 for the neutral site game (Martin Stadium at WSU). If we averaged 12,000, then all we would need is 27,000. More difficult, but it can be done.

I think that the removal of the 30,000 seat stadium requirement helps a lot of schools meet the 1-A criteria. I think that it definitely helps Idaho. We will make it.

Vandal, is there any thought of making Martin Stadium the home stadium? That was done a few years back, right? I know the weather gets a little iffy in Moscow come late Nov., but its OK until then. Maybe schedule a late game against SJSU or NMSU (assuming WAC membership) at Kibbie and call THAT the neutral (and warm) site...Just a thought. :)

Yes. In fact next year we have a home game there. What I would like to see is maybe the September and October home game in Martin and then move the November games into the Dome. I like outside football, but when it is snowing or very, very cold it isn't too much fun. Cost is another issue, but WSU has been pretty good about working with UI for these games. When we were at Martin Stadium, we averaged 25,000. Not too bad.

Nothing is more attractive to conference executives than the stability offered by the prospect of being a secondary tenant at a stadium on another school's (proximate) campus. Just ask Temple.

Didn't seem to bother the UCLA Bruins from 1943 - 1981. ;D

Idaho is facing about the same size overall university budget deficit that San Jose State has right now, if not bigger. I doubt that leads to to the decision SJSU is contemplating, but attempting a "building program" would pretty much cheese off Idaho taxpayers in the most Republican state in the union. WAC berth or no, that's a hosing in the making.

Then there's the fundraising arm of the university getting their feet, legs, knees, and hands stuck in the cement over the University Place project in Boise that has gone spectacularly bad, putting the foundation in a serious deficit (talk of anything from default to begging the legislature for a bailout, which touches back on paragraph 1).

Under these conditions, Idaho would literally have to get a gift of membership from the WAC in order to justify paying rent to Martin Stadium, and I don't see that guaranteeing attendance improvement. The WAC already has no room to toy with members whose 1-A status is up in the air. Of course, if Louisiana Tech doesn't get into CUSA, North Texas becomes extremely valuable to the WAC.

Yes, Idaho has had some problems. But they are being solved as we speak. Idaho has added Women's Swimming to comply with Title IX.

I think the main thing about Martin Stadium is that it is outside and it is a larger stadium. Many people around here really do want an outdoor stadium. I think that's why so many showed up and attended when we played an entire season at Martin. If Idaho were to have plans regarding a stadium, all of it would come from private donations and sponsorships. The state would never fund it... Even before we had these financial problems, I don't think the state would fund it.

I think in Idaho, too many people are all about Boise State. Most of their money raised from donors goes to athletics. Most of UI's money goes to academics. It's just a difference of focus. I'd like to see BSU's graduation rates as well. I think that at one time their football grad rate was one of the lowest in the nation. Ours is much better. Again, our focus is academics, BSU focuses on athletics. I'd like to see a better focus on athletics here. Hell, I'd like to see the vandal win more than 6 times in 4 years. OUCH! :( I think that our program would be much better off if the football team won a few games here and there. It seems to help no matter what.

I still think that if LaTech goes to CUSA that Idaho will be added. You also have to look at the current WAC members. How quickly would they leave if MWC expanded again? Or if the Pac-10 looked to expand? I think the point is that even though Idaho hasn't done things right, they should be in a western conference and not in the SunBelt. We are on par academically with all of the schools in the WAC and even the MWC. I think that Idaho would add value to the WAC. They will meet the minimums (keeping 1-A status) and provide some good regional competition. We have natural rivalries with Boise State, Utah State, NM State, Nevada-Reno, etc. I think we fit, regardless of the "problems" we are having.

Another issue is many people say "move down to 1-AA." Given all the budget problems across many schools, how realistic is that? I think that it would cost more to move back down. If a school has made a commitment to 1-A, and has increased their sports (women's soccer, women's swimming), increased their fundraising, upgraded their athletic workout facility, been able to recruit a few good coaches (men's bball, women's bball, football), etc., I think that it would be almost impossible to drop down to 1-AA. We would have to phase out and eliminate some sports. Our coaches would leave because we are no longer 1-A. We would lose players because they wouldn't want to go to 1-AA. The budget may or may not be better off. Reduced travel expenses, but the reduced competition would cause lower payouts (we play Pac10 schools every year mainly for the $$$). It would also cause lower attendance. So, if this happens we would be in 1-AA, have an athletic department that is ravaged, a failing budget, and low attendance. We have a better situation than that now. Obviously moving down to 1-AA is not a viable option. I think that very few schools (only those in serious financial difficulties) would be able to move back down.

So, if indeed, UTEP goes to C-USA, are Idaho's chances getting into the WAC enhanced?
And, if LA Tech stays in the WAC, does N. Texas and LA-L and/or Ark State get invited to the WAC also, to give LA Tech a travel partner(s)?
If this happened, and the WAC tried to go for 12, there would be a real dilemma to create 2 six team divisons:

WEST:
Fresno State
Utah State
San Jose State
Boise State
Idaho
Nevada

EAST:
New Mexico State
North Texas
LA Tech
LA-Laf.
Ark State
Hawaii ?

Any combination for the EAST part does not look very bonded, and "Hawaii" looks better WEST, but switch with who, of which none fit eastward?

Maybe best, if LA TECH stays and UTEP goes, just add Idaho and N. Texas (if they can get them), and keep it at ten. Twelve just seems not very appealing. The current western WAC teams probably don't want any more Louisiana schools, nor Ark. State.

"Nothing is more attractive to conference executives than the stability offered by the prospect of being a secondary tenant at a stadium on another school's (proximate) campus. Just ask Temple."

"Didn't seem to bother the UCLA Bruins from 1943 - 1981."

Now, granted there was some careful wording involved in the original post (oh, legalese), but...has USC ever owned the LA Coliseum? I thought it was owned/administered by the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission (i.e. they beat the NFL in court) but just happened to be located *near* the *white* campus in the *black* part of town. Penn is a private institution, and presumably they own Franklin Field. Presumably Washington State (or the State of Washington) owns Martin Stadium. Hence, the comparison does not bear fruit. Yes, UCLA was once a tenant at the location near USC where the Trojans are current tenants...but so were the LA Rams, the LA Chargers, the LA Express, the LA Raiders, and the LA Xtreme. Come on son...don't do me like that...d**n careful wording, oh well...

Well, it looks like North Texas and other schools have declined interest in the WAC:

http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040527/NEWS03/405270362/1037

This is EXCELLENT! This is what I thought would happen because SunBelt schools are happy (except for IDAHO). So now there is an opportunity to have Idaho leave for the WAC. That makes us happy. The only other school that would be unhappy is LaTech. Maybe they'll stay, but I think if they are smart they would look into rejoining the SunBelt. Makes much more regional sense and the SunBelt isn't what it used to be, actually much better than it used to be...

GO VANDALS!!!

Yeah but the coliseum was in the same state as UCLE.... obviously Martin Stadium is not. It makes no sense. The WAC would be truly desperate if they add Idaho.... Unless Idaho announce plans to build an on campus football stadium.

P.S. Why did you interject *race* into your argument?