GeauxSioux
-
Posts
5,579 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Posts posted by GeauxSioux
-
-
What sense would that make? You think the BSC would essentially trade exisiting members for new ones?
?
That adds stability?
As much as fans like to dream up scenarios, this one makes no sense (you are one of many of have entertained it, geauxsious).
I was playing off the posts by both sicatoka and wyobisonman stating that the west coast big city schools would bolt for a conference that is a better fit.
Schools like Sac and PSU will never be the stability for that conference.As soon as SacSt, PortSt, or UBC for that matter could find a conference that fits that I'm sure they'd bolt.And yes, I think that the Dakota schools would offer better stability to a conference. How long were all of them in the NCC? Was it 1926 that it started? That is pretty stable. How many conferences in the country have had that kind of stability?
-
Questions for anyone who may know.
If a majority of the presidents did decide that they wanted some stability for the future and voted all 4 of the Dakota schools in, who would bolt the conference? How would that affect the auto-bid for the Big Sky? How long would it take insofar as the "core school" portioin of the equation?
I doubt that the 4 school scenario would happen all at once. It would need to be done incrementally.
From past experience the Big Sky has always said that geography was the biggest stumbling block to the Dakotas, but if they had an attractive arrangement I would think that could overcome the geography problem. Perhaps taking NDSU and SDSU wasn't attractive enough to overtake geography. Perhaps a UND/NDSU or USD/SDSU would be due to the natural rivalries.
I know much more about the UND/NDSU than the USD/SDSU. I would think that a conference would love to have what the North Dakota combo has to offer. The schools are less than 80 miles apart, nearly the same size and very competitive with each other.
-
I don't think anyone is "disappointed" with the MidCon. With the current make up of the MidCon NDSU will have a very real shot at going to the Big Dance in our first year of elgibility and that is fantastic. Yes, most of us did prefer the Big Sky, but after all the jacking around and delays, the MidCon is a good alternative. I also would agree that the Big Sky would provide more peer institutions and great gates with the Montana Schools, but we can still be playing them in OOC competition.
All in all I think most NDSU fans are happy with a MidCon invite and having a realistic shot at the Big Dance in year one.
Also to think that UND is a cinch for the Sky shows how foolish and out of touch with reality some UND fans are. To think that is not even credible.
I think if you had asked any Bison fan 1 year or even 6 months ago what they thought of the Mid-Con you would have had a much different answer than you have today. It may be that they just "warmed up" to the idea of being in the Mid-Con, but I would guess that most would still rather be in the Mid-Con. Good luck with your upcoming campus visits from the Mid-Con people.
I don't recall any UND poster saying that a BSC invitation is a "cinch". Star2City seems to have done the most research on the Big Sky and even some of his posts have been tempered with "hope". As for me, I too am just hopeful that it is possible in the near future, as I think the BSC is the best fit for UND.
-
The gang that couldn't shoot straight.
Late Friday, Potts said no one had spoken to him about continuing on as chancellor after Tuesday.The search committee, of which Paulsen was chairman, had suggested hiring an interim chancellor for 17 months to 24 months. However, at a board meeting Thursday, members voted 5-3 to reject the longer term, favoring arguments by board member Bruce Christianson that the job should be filled by July 2007.
Vickers said he spoke to Paulsen about the debate Friday, and described him as frustrated by its outcome.
"It's obvious that there are differing opinions among the board members regarding the interim position, the length of the position, and the responsibilities," Vickers said. "Clearly, this is a board perogative, so they will, I'm sure, work that out."
Paulsen, asked if he agreed with the description, said, "I voted against the proposal to shorten the term. I think that speaks for itself."
It seems to me that Paulson wants Potts gone Now and doesn't want to wait for until July 2007.
http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/20...tate/118458.txt
-
I saw this in the Bismarck Tribune.
Potts' agreement says he must remain as chancellor until an interim successor is hired but also allows him to take another full-time job at any time until his contract ends on June 30, 2007.As it stands Potts will remain the chancellor.
-
You are correct. There is no comparison between NDSU's football championships to the amount of worldwide publicity and recognition UND receives for its hockey program and championships.
If we were talking about a big time BCS type football championship with a huge national audience and the capture all of media outlets around the globe, you may have a point, but Division II or even I-AA championships don't enjoy that kind of attention.
By the way, I know you think that the comparison between your new logo and the Cowardly Lion from the Wizard of Oz is being overdone, but I still laugh everytime I see it. It's almost as if the Cowardly Lion was morphed into the logo. You may have some copyright problems with that.
-
From what I have heard it was a typo. It should have been $300,000.
-
As a overall dii sport dept. NDSU was better than UND. ie all the nc in most of the dii sports and before leaving the NCC capturing the all NCC sports championship.
Yes overall NDSU has more national championships than UND, but you will have to agree that most of those are in low profile, non-revenue sports. I am not trying to slight the championships or the athletes that earned them, just an observation that they are not something that give you high profile as an athletic department to the fan/supporter. The revenue sports is where UND was shining more brightly than NDSU and therefore leaving NDSU in a shadow.
I know that you Bison fans don't like hearing it, but UND has 7 NCAA DIVISION I NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. That leaves a huge shadow for someone else.
-
To attempt to say Kuppy thought this thing out is BS. Kuppy made a stupid decision because he is not a visionary. The fans and alumni forced the move after seeing the success of NDSU. Kuppy has done little for UND.....I am surprised you guys try to defend him. The best admin guy at UND right now is your AD.....he really seems to have it together.
To say that Kupchella is not a visionary is inaccurate. His visions tend to be more academic than athletic, but he does have a vision for the University.
He had also gone through a similar classification transition in Missouri and learned how painful they can be. You couple that together with the list that Star2CIty enumerated and he felt that it wasn't the right time. To say that he didn't think about it is being disingenuous.
I think that UND was comfortable with where they were. We had a good solid D2 conference. The hockey team plays and excels in the best conference in the country. Why not be somewhat comfortable.
I also believe that NDSU moved to get out from UND's shadow. Football is THE sport at NDSU and you were losing that battle to UND for the better part of 10 years and something had to be done.
I do agree that Buning is doing a great job, but I think Kupchella is as well.
-
GF Herald story on Schmidt.
On Wednesday, Schmidt officially returned to college football as he was named the outside linebackers coach and director of football operations for the Sioux. He replaces former Sioux assistant Josh Kotelnicki, who left to become the defensive coordinator at Truman State in Missouri.http://www.grandforks.com/mld/grandforks/sports/15131743.htm
-
I looked at the site on the link. It has Sioux the spelling correct but it shows a helmet with NDSU and a bison logo.
The title banner on the top of the page spells Sioux "Souix".
Is that offensive or abusive?
-
Why would that be bad?
Florida and Florida State are in two different. Each have great conference rivals and an awesome non-conference game (spelled: gate revenues) each year automatically in the schedule.
Iowa and Iowa State,
Colorado and CSU,
Utah and Utah State,
UNM and NMSU ....
Clemson and South Carolina
Georgia and Georgia Tech are a couple of more that come to mind.
Last game played in the year and big $$$ event.
-
-
This is really a story about what Jones has been doing so far, but it does touch on scheduling as well.
UND already has received calls from Division I coaches about possible games when the Sioux begin their transition to Division I. "But we still want a schedule that gives us a chance to win," Jones said.http://www.grandforks.com/mld/grandforks/sports/15122941.htm
-
Attendance requirement may not be an issue.
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.d.../607230310/1001
Another reason for changing the I-AA name and including everyone in Division I is scheduling. Currently Division I-A teams can count one game against I-AA opponents each season toward bowl eligibility. Removal of the I-AA moniker could make scheduling easier for all schools in Division I."It wouldn't be a conflict in scheduling if everybody was Division I," LaFleur said. "It would be a huge gap between the schools that are I-AA and I-A. I would go for having one moniker."
There would also be benefits to the Division I-A schools. Currently, Division I-A schools have to meet minimum football attendance requirements (average 15,000 fans in actual or paid attendance per home game).
With all schools in Division I, the attendance requirement would no longer be necessary.
"You may also be able to lose the attendance requirements for I-As," Burnett said. "We're all Division I. Why are we worried about attendance. You would just make a decision what championship are you going to play for."
The schools in Division I-A could be Bowl Championship Series schools while schools currently in I-AA could be Playoff Championship Series schools.
-
I didn't say that UND has been dominant in the last 15 years. In fact the Glas years have been a disppointment with the exception of the early 90's when he had great assistants like McDermott. In showing the records against the SU's and USD I was demonstrating that over the long haul UND has faired well for being a "hockey school". You chose to take a snapshot of the last 15 years of men's basketball to make your point. There is one thing that is changing with the move to Division I and that change has already occured in coaching.What are those basketball records for the last 20 years? Saying UND has had a dominant basketball program for the last 15 years is pretty off base. Its been awhile since UND had some dominant teams in mens bball. I don't see that changing to much with a move to division I.And I commend you for going to three different games in a day, but realistically, how many people are going to be able to do that? Thats quite a time commitment that not too many people can make to UND athletics. Especially if the choice is Minnesota in hockey, or almost anybody else that UND can get into grand forks for basketball. The team names aren't going to be as glamorous for bball as they are for hockey, and your current basketball attendance is likely to suffer from where its currently at.I was not alone in my trek between the venues. You can still go to a hockey games against Minnesota after playing a basketball game against, say UWGB. They typically start the hockey games later when the basketball team is home.
If you need more evidence of where UND's priorities are, just read the article on the other thread where football is getting 21 scholarships, but basketball will be "next in line". I know that getting 57 gives you the chance to play money games, but come on, its 3 scholarships, 4 or 5 if you throw in scholies for girls in the current ratio you have been, but you can't find the money for that? SDSU and NDSU both immediately put mens and womens basketball all the way up, as almost all schools do.I'm not involved in the decision making of scholarships, but if you can get a money game in a couple of years after playing I-AA football and the basketball team will not be able to get to "the dance" for a few years it would seem that football is where the scholarships should be allocated. The $$ made of the "money game" in football could pay for scholarships elsewhere.
I realize that some conferences such as the Mid-Con would look at basketball scholarships first others such as Big Sky would look toward the football scholarships. Some may look at that as a telling sign of where UND is trying to position itself.
-
I think that people believe hockey will be a hinderance to a successful D-I basketball program, because unlike football and basketball, hockey and basketball are competing at identical times of the year for the same fan base. If you tell someone that you are averaging 11,000 for hockey, thats great, but now tell me what the chances of UND averaging 11,000 for mens basketball is going to be? It simply won't happen, because there isn't a large enough fan base a mid-major type school to have that many fans for 2 different simultaneous sports. Saying "Football is kind at XXX, and their basketball is fine", is a fallacy, because football and basketball aren't directly competing for fans with each other, in fact, they are probably assisting each other, because football fans will likely be bored in the winter, and may switch over to watching basketball. Hockey fans are probably going to watch hockey at UND though, and basketball fans are going to watch basketball.
Also, what do you think the mid con is going to assume your priorities are? If UND has a losing season in hockey, and 5-25 season in mens basketball, both likely because of funding, which is UND going to put more money into? Hockey of course, because thats the money maker, and thats where UND gets its claim to fame from. How is the mid-con going to like that though? They'll be stuck playing a low RPI team, screwing over their most important sport. (This is a hypothetical situation to show the importance of certain sports teams at UND, don't tell me that its unlikely to happen, I know that). Douple has been talking about getting the conference up to two bid status in the future, and the presidents want that to be their goal. In order to do that they will need to bring the bottom feeders in the conference up in RPI, by getting them to add more funding. I think that they'll consider UND's basketball success probability very, very hard to add them to the conference. Even the most die hard UND fans have to admit that NDSU/SDSU combination presents a better chance for D-I basketball success than UND does. I know that neither school has exactly been dominating, but NDSU really looks like they've put together a great team, and SDSU has almost everything in place, including the history, to produce a winner. That has to come across as better than mens basketball being your fourth priority (hockey, football, womens basketball).
Finally, mid con coaches are going to know that hockey is going to be used against UND in the recruiting process in basketball. Its hard enough to get D-I talent, how is it going to be trying to get talent, when other coaches are telling your recruits that they are the last priority at UND, so they should attend somewhere else to play?
Yes hockey and basketball are played at the same time of the year, but they don't play at the same time of the day and they are not always at home on the same weekend. There are many nights when I would go to WBB, MBB and hockey all in the same night and that was when you had to walk in the dead of winter from Hyslop to the old REA.
Hockey has been the primary sport at UND for quite some time and yet have winning records against:
NDSU 156-128
USD 94-77
SDSU 105-77
I think that shows some commitment to basketball.
-
I have read on other board where others feel our success in hockey will work against us. Their point often being that with hockey being king at UND everything else suffers and that conferences wouldn't invite UND because we wouldn't put money or effort into the other programs that would be a part of their conference.
I have a different take on the issue. I think that the exposure that UND hockey receives would enhance the visibility of the conference in which the remainder of UND's sports would be members. I also believe that UND hockey would see an expanded fan base, especially if we were able to get into the Big Sky. I have read that there is quite a significant hockey following in Montana for instance who may end up following UND hockey.
I have family in New Orleans that are huge UNO Privateer fans that have since started following Denver Pioneer hockey, only because they are both in the Sunbelt Conference.
-
I agree. Why waste all that money on a new facility when they could have just as easily played their games at Pizza Hut?
Does a ticket include free salad bar? Cool.
-
Besides the 2 Montana schools the rest of the BSC doesn't hold any more interest than any team in the Mid-Con. I don't think the alumni base would give more one way or the other. If the GWFC is stable I don't see a real advantage of the BSC (besides the Montana schools). I'm trying to figure out why most of the UND fans scum the Mid-Con and say it's BSC or nothing. Believe me when the time comes you'll jump at any DI conference invite whether it's the Mid-Con or not.
I'm not scumming the Mid-Con. The end of my post says "if given a choice". It just seems that the majority of the Bison fans that are posting here are saying that they wouldn't jump if the Big Sky did offer.
I think that you would have to admit that the Big Sky is much more in line with peer institutions than the Mid-Con.
-
No way would the Big Sky have a championship game. You could only play 10 regular season games, thus missing out one home gate every year. It just doesn't make financial sense in I-AA to have a conference championship game.
It makes sense in I-A, but I agree that it doesn't in I-AA unless I-AA goes away from the playoff system. Which I think most would agree isn't going to happen anytime soon.
I'm trying to understand why it seems many Bison fans on SS.com are saying that NDSU wouldn't jump to the Big Sky if offered. I would think that the alumni base ($$$) would be more inclined to give if NDSU was Big Sky rather than Mid-Con. I'm assuming that NDSU has a sizable alumni population in Denver and the western states, more so than in Mid-Con land. Big Sky makes more finanacial sense if given a choice.
-
If NDSU gets into the Mid-Con they will stay put.
I disagree that NDSU would stay put in the Mid-Con if they were invited to the Big Sky. I think they would jump.
The reason Fullerton is spouting off is he knows that the BSC will never come east.If he knows that they will never come east, why say anything at all. He would gain nothing by saying it.
-
Still hold firm on October prediction: UND, NDSU, and DU get invited for campus visits. BSC gets the UND/NDSU combo in 2008-9. MidCon gets the SDSU/USD combo in 2008-9.
I'm hoping that you're right. I don't know NDSU is going to handle their MidCon invite, as I think it is coming. They would need something concrete from the BSC to turn down an invitation from the MidCon.
-
Geauxsioux,
Univ of MT's stadium is an outside stadium and it is a lot easier to expand its seating, they will have a really hard time expanding the seating in the AL but I am all for it. Hell, I wish we would play outside again but that will never happen.
The new gopher stadium they just passed is being built to seat 50k but they say by the time it is built it will end up closer to 80k. They used the 50k to get it passed and then plan to add on to it right away.
You're right that indoor is much more difficult to expand. I believe that is why Sicatoka said some "creative engineering" may be required. My point is you need to start somewhere. Hopefully there was some mindset during design that expansion could happen in the years to come.
As for playing outside, I think you would see the attendance fall back down. When I lived in GF I never missed a game, no matter what the weather, but back in the 80's and 90's attendance was a far cry from where it is now. I went to the Potato Bowl last year and it was great to be indoors. The crowd was great, the atmosphere, the noise. I don't remember Memorial rocking like that for a many years (with the exception of the Bison games), even when we had good teams.
Fullerton Still Talking Big Sky Expansion
in NCAA News
Posted
Hence my questions:
Does this sound like stability?
My original post started out that I had questions regarding auto-bid and "core" schools regarding the BSC. Do you have any information on how each of these would impact the Big Sky or do you want to drop the facade and just call me stupid?