bincitysioux

I love all of this chaos.

Douple did get schooled by Doug Fullerton............................Fullerton got the University of North Dakota in his conference, Douple got the three stooges of the Dakotas. Not really understanding this argument. Even if a week wait would have allowed USD to get their BOR in a board room, Abbott and Sayler would have still showed their hand to the Summit when they started talking to Douple about the exit fee and then the MVFC would have been brought into the picture a week later with the same result. UND & the Big Sky delaying their announcement by a week would have resulted in USD announcing their intentions to join the MVFC on November 11 rather than November 4. I guess the biggest effect this will have on me is that I don't have to drive to Vermillion every other year anymore. Hello Big Sky!!

With all of the conference stuff going on the last couple months, I haven't been paying as close of attention to the Great West as I normally do, but have done some digging on this weekend's game. UC Davis is coming in with a record of 3-5 and have lost two straight. They have wins over South Dakota, FBS San Jose St., and non scholarship San Diego. Although UCD may be favored this weekend, this is probably North Dakota's best chance to improve upon their record this season. Some interesting statistics stand out to me: I'll bet that nobody here would have ever guessed that UND is second in the GWC in scoring defense. Davis gives up the most points of anyone in the league. This matchup pits the two most unproductive offenses in the conference against one another. The Aggies are pass-happy and don't run much (which hasn't been a good combo for our defense) but are last, by quite a margin, in total offense. Here's another one I wouldn't have guessed: UND is actually second in the league in pass defense. UCD is 2nd in pass offense. UND is 2nd in the league rushing, while UCD is second in the league in rush defense. UND is second in the league in sacks, and UCD has given up the second highest number of sacks in the Great West. It is looking like a pretty evenly matched game, and I think UND has a good chance to get a W if we can limit penalties, run the ball effectively, and keep Davis out of the Red Zone. I'm gonna go with the home team in a nail-biter................ 21-20 North Dakota

IMO, USD is going to the Big Sky. They were invited to the Summit a year and a half ago. Douple has had 18 months to work on getting them into the MVFC and gotten nowhere...................I find it highly unlikely that he would be able to make any inroads in the last 3 days. In their 25 year history, the only times the MVFC has ever expanded was immediately after losing a member. They have had the same commissioner for their entire existence, and she has never shown the propensity to encourage her president's to expand, except when there is a defection. I've seen nothing to indicate that she has altered that mode of operations. The Big Sky would have never so prominently mentioned or discussed South Dakota in their official press releases if there was even the slightest chance that they would not be coming into the fold. Just my two cents.

That article also had the following: Montana's FBS feasibility study will be completed in two weeks. I imagine that is when they will indicate their short term intentions.

What? He didn't ask the Youngstown or Indiana St. coaches? Just the one closest to USD (save for SDSU of course) ?

As long as the "Jersey" thread was at the top of the home page, I'll ask this........................... My daughter wants a #17 jersey with Gregoire's name on the back.....................I don't think I can just buy this at the SiouxShop...............what is the procedure for getting a jersey personalized?

For me, 4:00 is ideal......................... I travel a little bit of distance each game. 4:00 doesn't blow the whole day for me (1:00 does). I can work in the morning, watch football in the late afternoon, and be home before midnight.................... I admit........................I am selfish.......... Also, I think the "party" crowd prefers the later starts.................

HOLY HELL!!!!!!!!!!!! I just realized something................................ We are going to be in the Big Sky Conference!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! EDIT: The above statement just seems to randomly run through my mind throughout the day..........

For those that have ever heard Tom Douple speak, and not Doug Fullerton, I'd recommend watching the video. It is pretty easy to see why Brian Faison stated several times that one of the reasons they decided to go with the Big Sky over the Summit was because he has been impressed with the Big Sky's commissioner.

You are correct. But I think the point is that the majority of the MVFC is made up of MVC schools, and they will think of protecting the MVC brand first and foremost. That is why their permission was needed to replace the Gateway name with the Missouri Valley name. Personally, I think it is a moot point, because I believe that the MVFC is probably the most stable of all FCS conferences............Football is a second-class citizen at virtually every member school, save for NDSU and perhaps Youngstown, neither of which are members of the MVC. And, as in the past, they will never proactively expand, rather only reactively, as in if they lose a member. I believe their history shows this.

Here's a link to Montana State's beat writer's blog: LINK He's posted audio interviews with Faison, a USD beat writer, USD's A.D., SUU's A.D., MSU's A.D., and MSU's football coach Rob Ash.................................. Sayler (USD A.D.) wouldn't say "on the record" that USD is joining, but are working hard toward that goal and the reason for the delay is getting South Dakota's Board of Regents together to approve the move. Sounds like a formality. He also said that the exit fees from the Summit are not holding up the process and that the amount of the exit fee being reported at various outlets is "greatly exaggerated". MSU's A.D. appears excited about the expansion..................the Big Sky sponsoring softball was news to him. He also said he felt that a reason that the conference was open to Dakota expansion now when they weren't 5 years ago possibly had something to do with the fact that most of the Big Sky schools had new leadership at the presidential level than they did at that time. MSU's football coach liked the way things were set up before, is not excited about divisional play, longer road trips, fewer home games, and going away from a round-robin schedule.

Nevermind.....................it was in the next article down.

I don't see the part about the $250k buy in...............am I blind?

No.

Per Wayne Nelson: Hope they're coming along for the ride!

Can someone also explain why UND couldn't bus to the Montana schools? I know it is something like a 10 hour drive to Bozeman and 12 hour to Missoula, but it is an easy one on Interstate all the way. The football team bused to Dekalb this year, which is fewer miles, but a much more broken up route and actually more driving time. Obviously not ideal, but is doable is it not?

Thanks, fixed it...........

How soon can we expect to begin conference play? Is 2012 workable or totally out of the question? I assume at the very least we will still retain the 4 games against USD, Poly, Davis, and SUU that year. Will Big Sky schools be "encouraged" to schedule the new members in 2012 (and maybe even 2011), with full competition starting in 2013. Gosh I hope it is 2012. How about the rest of the sports? How far out do they schedule? It is also worth noting that Montana St. is scheduled to play NDSU in 2013 and Montana in 2014, both games in Fargo. I wonder if Big Sky expansion will impact those games? Montana especially likes home games, and if the Big Sky does go to a 9 game conference schedule, that only gives them 2 potential OOC home games. Will they travel, or go for the home games that generate so much money for them? Someone remind me which years upcoming have 12 games schedules..............I know there is at least 1 or perhaps even two in the next 5 years. If either of those games are cancelled, I'm sure the Sioux/Bison game proponents will be out in full force. And of course, North Dakota will be blamed for damaging NDSU's schedule, just like back in '04.

I'd prefer if you didn't vote then!

Anybody care to take a stab at how the division lines are going to be drawn? For football, I'd like to see: North/East Eastern Washington Montana Montana St. Idaho St. Northern Colorado North Dakota South Dakota South/West Portland St. Weber St. Northern Arizona Sacramento St. Southern Utah Cal Poly UC Davis Weber and Idaho St. could be assigned as permanent rivals, ala Pac 10/12 with their 4 CA schools. Will there be 2 or 3 cross-division games? 2 would provide an equal number of home and away conference games each year and allow an extra non-conference game. But 3 would allow for more conference competition which could help sort out the conference champ with 9 games rather than 8. I think I'm leaning toward 3 cross-division games. Will they go to divisions for basketball and other sports? I hope so. If they do, move ISU into the South/West division. With divisional play for basketball etc., we'd have 10 divsion games, and 6 cross-division games for a total of 16, which is what the current Big Sky plays now. Travel would basically be the same for all the current members, and probably greatly reduced for ISU, Weber, SUU, and NAU. This would also allow for lots of OOC scheduling flexibility for the Pacific schools to play Big West and WCC teams, the Mountain schools to play WAC and MWC teams, and the Dakota schools to play Summit , MVC, and Horizon teams. Non divisional play in baskeball etc. would fill out the schedules nicely, but I think this is where travel would become a real burden for virtually everybody, much moreso than in any football alignment.

But I started that thread over 4 years ago! And I'm pretty proud that it reached 139 pages!

There is a poll going on over at FightingSioux.com asking if football start times should be 1:00, 4:00, or 6:00. Currently 1:00 is getting 53% of the vote. Personally, this is a shock to me. I had thought the 4:00 start times this year were pretty well received. Get over and vote if you agree with me. If not, ignore this post...........

Agree with everything you say. In the first quarter, I believe it was his first throw, he missed a wide open Hardin badly on a 3rd and long that would have moved the chains or perhaps even scored with some creative yards after the catch. At the time I thought "oh boy, this is gonna be painful". But other than that I thought he did fine, and ended up being pleasantly surprised. Agree that he will struggle alot more if and when teams take away the intermediate stuff. One thing I can't figure out about Goska's "package", as the coaching staff likes to refer to it, is why there is never any true option stuff in it. Seems with the apparent limited vertical passing threat, that could be an interesting wrinkle that could be difficult for defenses to defend with Murray or Sutton flanking him, rather than just having Goska fake the handoff and run off-tackle all game long. At any rate, the offense gained yards today, and that was good to see. Also nice to see the D measure up against a pass first offense finall. Although the most talented opponent, they like to throw the ball and didn't have much luck with that today. The attendance was so disappointing.....................There were probably 25 Lamar fans there, and not many more students. Thank you to the band for always showing up to do your thing, and participating while in the stands as the football team does their thing.

I voted no.............. And I also tend to agree with dakotadan................. I predict that this thread will end badly.