bincitysioux

That could never happen.............. Wright's personal #buttRPI is higher than Nash's.......................

I'm thinking we actually do have a situation where the host school is under-reporting the attendance numbers in an effort to the retain more of the gate revenue. Been reading the Weber St. board, and their fans are saying that reported attendance for the men's championship game is around 6,200 but fans are saying that it was closer to 8,000 butts in the seats for the title game. Similar situation to the last few years of DII football playoffs, and the last year the women basketball team hosted a DII regional. Case in point: I only went to a handful of basketball games this year. We officially drew 2,033 for the men when Montana was in town, which I was at. The Sioux Center was way more full for the Women's Big Sky title game this weekend by comparison. It was the best crowd I've seen at the Sioux Center since the 2007 women's regional outside of this year's men's NDSU game.

I never said the Summit was "terrible". I said it is "weaker" than the Big Sky, and traditionally it is as far as I can tell. Just look at the #buttRPI. The #buttRPI is never wrong and always says who is best. Just look at the #buttRPI, srsly, #buttRPI is where it is at. The #buttRPI is not prejudice. The #buttRPI does not play favorites. We would not have won the Big Sky conference this year if not for our #buttRPI. The #buttRPI is key.

Hope that is not the case. Whether they are Seniors or Freshmen, I hope they cherish every opportunity they get to play in a game atmosphere. Only a select few get in this world get to play ball at this level. I'd hope they'd look forward to every opportunity they get.

I agree that FU may win a game. They are a good team and got a favorable match up. Good luck to you!

OK........... Now I split off all the posts that I moved from the Weber thread to the Big Sky Format Thread that dealt with "Big Sky beats Summit" and vice-versa. It seems we have to continue to explain why the Big Sky is superior to the Summit every single year, so let's just do it here until next season. Thanks for your cooperation.

I guess shrewd is one way to put it. As an NDSU fan, would you have like it if the ND State Board of Higher Education would have stepped in and told Joe Chapman you can't join "X" conference, you must join "Y" conference, because we know what is better for the school than the President, A.D., coaches, etc? I know I certainly would have been very disgruntled if the NDSBoHE would have stepped in and told us to join a certain league rather than one UND's administration was advocating for.

Southern Utah and Montana both in the WNIT. Big Sky is a solid "Mid-Major" women's basketball league............. Congrats to both of them......

True or False: While under contract to become a member of the Summit League, the President of USD accepted an invitation to join another league.

USD is a 15 seed and will play 2 seed Stanford. I kind of have a hard time with that. USD's RPI is 137 and they very surprisingly won the tourney in a much weaker conference. 14 seed UND's RPI is 75 and they won in a much stronger league. Seems like there should be more separation there. I guess my suspicions are confirmed: buttRPI don't mean much..............

USD was for all intensive purposes a Summit member but then the President and A.D. advocated accepting the Big Sky invite. Is that a falsehood?

North Dakota pushed for MVFC membership for 3 years to no avail. They WERE pushing for it 2010. The MVFC seems to want as little exposure to the state of ND as possible. Don't forget, they didn't want NDSU either, SDSU had to convince the league to take the Bison when they were invited. For better or worse, North Dakota and USD didn't have the same relationship. The MVFC is a great league, and I would have loved to be a part of it at one time. However, MVFC membership seems to mean Summit membership, so I am really glad we were able to dodge that bullet. I really feel bad for USD in some respects. Their President, their A.D., their coaches, and their fans all prefered the Big Sky invite when it finally came, but their Board of Regents put the kabosh to it because of the Summit league buyout. Oh well. Fact still remains that 5 of 6 former NCC schools have tried to get into the Big Sky. It must not be so bad then. Sorry you miss us so much.

Do schools host games at campus sites in the women's tournament?

I split all of the posts from the Weber game thread that dealt with the tourney format the Big Sky uses over to this thread. Seems like a valid topic, that generates some interest. I'm on record that I like the way the Big Sky does it. Now having experienced it both ways with the women's team hosting, and the men's team travelling, I feel even more strongly that this is the way the Big Sky should do it. It does make the regular season very exciting, both in that the venue is up for grabs, and that not all teams make it. Weber wasn't even a complete lock to host it this year until UNC started to falter the last 2-3 weeks. Next year, when 8 teams make the tourney, that 1st round bye will be eliminated, and that will mitigate a bit more of the advantage that the host school has. The vast geography even makes a pre-determined or neutral site of the league no guarantee that it would be better attended. Had 6,000 plus for the men's title game, and 2,000 for the women's. I don't think it would be close to that for either if the tourney were in Denver or Las Vegas which seem to be the two most mentioned possible neutral sites. If it were going to be a neutral site, I really think the best options would be either Boise or Salt Lake City. Boise is reasonably situated between WSU, ISU, UI, UM, MSU, and EWU. SLC would still bring the Weber crowd. But you'd still probably have the same number of UND, PSU, SAC, NAU, UNC fans as you did this weekend. So I like the idea of these schools getting the opportunity to host it once in a while. And I do like the idea of giving the league's best team the best chance to get into the NCAA Tournament. Weber has an awful seed and matchup this year, but how bad would it be if SUU were included in the field, got hot, and won the tournament?

My group is making our first trip to the cities for the Conference Tournament. We are staying near the Mall of America and are planning on taking the Light Rail downtown to the Target Center for the games. Just curious if this is a good idea or not?

Unfortunately North Dakota rarely gets even 2,000 fans to show up in Grand Forks. Therefore I find it unlikely that Sioux fans would show up in droves to Sioux Falls. But when we host it at the Sioux Center it could fill it up. I like the current format.

Watching 1st hockey webcast of the season on NCHC website. Has it been this crappy on UND Insider all season? If so, glad I didn't subscribe. Money well kept.......

Weber got hosed. Seeded 16, will face Arizona.

Dumb question, but where is the Med School going? Is that what is all going on just to the South of Happy Harry's complex?

You are the one that said it is "too bad" that Denver can't be traded for North Dakota. Obviously you desire North Dakota to be in the Summit. Most of us here don't feel that way. Too bad for you.......

We sure do love the Big Sky. We get to play great new opponents that you mentioned plus we still play all the Dakota schools, but don't have to deal with the rest of the ugliness in the Summit. Best of both worlds.

Too bad for you. Not for us....................

You wish.........

How about $15.......

College Sports Madness has North Dakota as a 15 seed opening against Baylor. USD as a 14 opening against Nebraska.