AJS

I don't a major split happening in the MWC. Why? To start, there's only two all sport members who provide value to conferences better than the MWC (UNLV, Air Force). Now, based on the member locations, they bring some value as for TV. MWC provide a higher $ value than the other bottom G6 conferences (ex: Conf USA, MAC). So, outside of UNLV, Air Force, who else would leave and where? PAC value would decrease if they add anyone but UNLV, Air Force. Current members like UTEP, NIU would make more than they would going back to other conferences. Imo, everyone but UNLV, Air Force and Grand Canyon are stuck.

The problem with your theory is the 4 teams that are in bold will already be in the new (incredibly competitive / exciting) division of Conference USA. That'll take place before any type of major split within MWC would occur.

Unless you're making 25M + in tv $ yearly, collegiate athletics should have a regional (your location can cause different definition of regional / peer institutions) and rival focus. NDSU is swinging big with this move. Where I've shifted since the announcement, is I think they're taking a bigger risk than I initially thought. Success would be if they win at a rate in the MWC / G6 as they did at the FCS level. Year in and year out being in the CFP discussion. Leverage that in 5 years into the PAC. Possible, yes. Likely if this was the collegiate landscape of 10 years ago, yes. In the current landscape, does 9-3 yearly cut it? We'll see. There's a chance their arrogance will finally catch up to them.

*As new members on a division of Conference USA* Doesn't have to happen this year or next, but the planning should start. Get everyone on the same page. I cannot think of who says no (I'm including current members of Conf USA).

Search a Kolpack article about NDSU athletic endowment. Within last 6 months. Those would be from that article. He got the numbers from the schools.

If we take a step back and really analyze the last handful of years. What would we want to be different (specially athletics)? Facilities: Nailed it. Betty is next. Cannot criticize what they've done and their vision. It's unbelievable Coaches: Fired Bubba and Berry (with years on their contracts). Told us mediocre isn't good enough. Anyone unhappy with the hires? Like with upgrades to the Betty, hoping B-Ball takes another step. My question being, based on actions, why wouldn't we think they'd be in the mix for conference realignment? What have they shown that would make us believe they aren't serious about being with other peer schools? How much of the online narrative (cannot emphasize online part) with realignment was based on winning? There's no reason not to be optimistic about the future with this leadership.

Athletic endowment was always the glaring difference between the two schools. I really feel UND missed an opportunity with their stretch goal in the Forever UND campaign to try to add say 25M for athletic scholarships. With the goal being the first FCS program to up their scholarships from 63. Initially move to 72. Would be a big deal, perception wise.

If Teammakers vs CC is 6.5 vs 4, that's actually closer than I would have thought. A lot of work to do, but still.

I'll follow up by asking, did the NDSU donors go to Cook x Larson proposing this scenario (we have X amount, get us a conference), or did NDSU officials go to donors? I would guess the latter. We don't know if UND donors would or wouldn't. Main point was conveying that if you look at the fundraising, there's no reason to believe that UND couldn't afford something that NDSU could. Some other schools. UND - 510 million (Current) NDSU - 498 million (FY 24) USD - 338.6 million (FY 25) Montana - 289.6 million (FY 24) Montana State - 287 million (FY 24) SDSU - 260.7 million (FY 24)

Good article by Miller. I'm of the opinion that the media can play apart in this type of thing. It's nice to see this as the top story currently on the Herald. https://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/college/miller-und-should-be-leery-of-next-domino-at-fcs-level-following-bison-move

Very good post. Here's one thing I'll say about the financial piece. Look at a school's endowment for a fair look into their fundraising power. From an article two weeks ago. I can't find NDSU's #'s, but would suspect that their current endowment is higher, but not significantly higher (498 million at end of 2024). If you look at facts, they will tell you that UND can hang financially with NDSU. *UND is also on the backend of their Forever UND campaign*

Who are the 4?

See below. No difference in travel for FB (same amount of bus trips). Few less than currently in the Summit for other sports but still looking at 3 bus trips. Not a similar scenario at all to the Big Sky days.

NDSU is gone as soon as they can from the Summit. Need to get the wheels moving. Good on Larson, can’t say he didn’t warn you.

Shot in the arm for Conference USA. They are at the bottom of the G6 with no way out currently. No downside for current members. As far as your theory. I'll believe that when I see it. There's a reason the AC paid 17.5 million. I can't find a reason why all schools wouldn't be on board with this. I think there'd be a real fear with administrations of being left behind. The Summit is on life support as is. Added bonus being you screw NDSU with Non-FB sports + IMO, you're in a more fun G6 league. @gfhockey you want to get this to Chavez? I don't see anything wrong with kicking the tires. My question is, who says no?