FSSD

When I select the link - nothing happens - it just keeps telling me about how great UVU is!?!? which I guess is ok but it is not the game.

Is anyone able to get the video link working? - all I get is UVU Tech College promo video..

Gregs

Frats

It is a nice schedule, but it has five home games and one of them is DII. In addition, the SDSU game is a 1 for 2 - that is a steep price for a home game. Faison got a home and home with SDSU. Again, I think scheduling will be much better when UND is in the Big Sky. I think USD has said that they will play home and home games with UND. So, in the near future a 11 game schedule would look like: 1 FBS, 1 FCS home/away rotation (ie USD), 8 conference games and one other game. Plus, I think we still have return games with UCA and SDSU coming. I agree this year looks bad, but it looks like a one year hit.

Conference Standing UVU 13 9 5 1 NJIT 8 12 3 1 UND 10 10 3 1 USD 11 10 3 1 CSU 5 17 2 4 HBU 3 18 2 4 UTPA 3 20 0 6 RPI predicts a 68-79 lose for the Sioux UND RPI - 38.9 position 276 USD RPI - 37.51 position 288 Big game tonight - can UND win on the road and keep pace with Utah Valley. A win would be a big step forward for the program. I'm not sure that they have enough to win tonight. I think it will be 73 - 65. The dome is tough to shot in and outside shooting is a weakness for this team. If Schuler has a big game from the outside and if Huff can shut down Thomas again they might be able to win.

A third of the way through the season - here are the standings: UVU - 4-1 RPI 66.41 USD - 3-1 RPI 64.62 UND - 3-1 RPI 61.93 NJT - 3-1 RPI 58.23 CSU - 2-3 RPI 52.98 HBU - 1-4 RPI 55.81 TPA - 0-5 RPI 56.95 Based on the RPI it looks like UVU should run the table and win the conference. The projected final standing are: UVU - 11-1 USD - 10-2 UND - 8-4 NJT - 5-7 CSU - 3-9 TPA - 3-9 HBU - 2-10 Key Conference Games - Remaining: 1) UND @ USD 2/5 2) UND @ NJT 2/10 3) USD @ NJT 2/12 4) USD @ UVU 2/17 5) UND @ UVU 2/19 6) NJT @ USD 2/24 7) NJT @ UND 2/26 8) UVU @ NJT 3/3

Well, just make sure that we go on full thread drift mode. I looked at all the BSC basketball facilities - most schools could host the conference tournament. The only schools that would be limited are PSU, Sac St. and UNC. But, I am sure the PSU and Sac St have other options within the community. I am not sure what UNC would do.. Ranking 1. Weber St - capacity approx. - 12,000 - Wow impressive - basketball only http://www.weberstatesports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=39740&SPID=3486&temp_site=NO&DB_OEM_ID=8600&ATCLID=1206048 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dee_Events_Center UND - capacity approx - Ralph 11,500 http://www.fightingsioux.com/ViewArticle.dbml?&&DB_OEM_ID=13500&ATCLID=736148 UM - capacity approx. - 7,500 - very nice http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahlberg_Arena http://www.montanagrizzlies.com/pages/?p=72&m=68 MSU - capacity approx. - 7,250 http://www.msubobcats.com/sports/2009/9/20/Facilities.aspx? SUU - capacity approx. - 5,300 - I can see the SUU program pick up with a new conference rival in Weber St. They have a nice facility. http://www.suutbirds.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=20100&KEY=&ATCLID=1302653 EWU - capacity approx. - 6,000 http://www.goeags.com/facilities/ewas-reesecourt.html UNA - capacity approx. - 7,000 - Dome http://www.nauathletics.com/information/facilities/skydome ISU - capacity approx. - 8,000 - Dome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holt_Arena new court - http://www.isubengals.com/index.aspx?path=mbball UNC - capacity approx. - 2,734 http://uncbears.com/information/facilities/athletic_facilities PSU - capacity approx. - 1,500 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Stott_Center Sac St. - capacity approx. - 1,200 http://www.hornetsports.com/sports/wbball/Arena.asp

Actually joe blow from Maine would say Missouri Valley Conference has football?!?!?!?

I am not sure about your definition of tournament bust based on the attendance of one game. Year - Conference - Tournament Avg Att.. 2009 - BS - 3,714 2009 - SL - 4,421 2010 - BS - 4,156 2010 - SL - 3,574 2010 Data Source http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/8753820042742b01b8b6be967b4a3893/Awide_Mbkbattlists.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=8753820042742b01b8b6be967b4a3893 2009 Data Source http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=375643 In reference to your comments about the structure of the conference tournaments between Big Sky and SL. I think both have pros and cons: NOTE: I understand that the Big Sky could change how the tournament works going forward with the addition of teams. It would be a good question to the fans. What is your preferred approach for conference tournaments - central location or host school? Hosted by Regular Season Champ Pro: Nice reward to individual school, helps to build local support, and typically has solid attendance. I also like the fact that only 6 teams make the conference post season. It makes the regular season more meaningful. In addition, I like first round games being hosted by the 3 and 4 seeds. So, the reward of hosting post season is shared by multiple schools. Cons: too much of a home court advantage, short notice travel plans for fans. Central Host: Pro: Set location and date makes it more of a planned event. If planned correctly it can continue to grow on annual basis. Cons: too much of neutral court -if the game continues in SF will they alienate schools on the edges of the conference ie SL - Oakland and ORU.

I am not sure how much of the Missouri Valley brand has carried over on a national level for football because the MVFC conference plays at the FCS level. I would say that Missouri Valley Football and Big Sky are peer conferences in football. I would agree that the Missouri Valley brand has greater national recognition than the Big Sky and Summit in basketball. Hey - how do you guys feel about the name "Summit League". It has always seemed strange to me kind of like the Big Ten using Legends and Leaders. Something just seems off with the name.. I wonder with the recent dumping of Cent C, Chicago St. and SUU and addition of USD if they will rethink the name?

UND doesn't need new sports facilities, we have everything we need - what?!?!? Really - Baseball, track and field and football need facility improvements. I think that it is fine that Scheels gave NDSU money - they can do as they see fit... But, I won't shop at Scheels in the future.

I just neg'd your post - but I do hope that you are feeling better.

Malone

Just a reminder to "Blue" that the deal for UND was Big Sky or Summit/Indy football. Given those two options - I say go Big Sky and don't look back. Now on to your question about comparing Big Sky to Summit/Valley. I think the competition levels in Football and Basketball are very similar. So, for me I like the Big Sky over Summit/Valley because: Plus: - Big Sky is a destination FCS Level conference Schools leaving the Big Sky go BCS. The Summit is not viewed as the final home for many of its members - note: I am not saying the Summit is a bad conference. - Big Sky has direct control over membership The primary draw back with the Summit/Valley is just that - the Summit and Valley FC are hooked at the hip. As we saw with UND what might be good for the Summit might not be viewed that way for the Valley FC. So, you have this strange relationship with the MVFC calling the shots for the Summit and member schools are OK with that because they have this long term dream of Valley/Valley FC. It will be interesting to see how the leadership of these two groups work together going forward. The recent conference realignment game is shaking out in the west right now.. but the east and south are next. - In general, I look to the west... I am not sure why but my entire life, my family and I have always looked west. I just don't have an interest in anything in the eastern part of the US. But, I would look into going West for a fall road trips to: Portland, Pacific Coast (Poly and Davis), Montana, Idaho or Washington areas. Minus: - Well, I doubled my FSC giving this year and I will look into doubling again next year. - No direct renewal of games with SUs, but at this point I am not sure how execited I am with those games.

I agree in conference (Big Sky and MVFC) the Morningside games are gone.... but you still have PL and a large number of East Coast programs that are junk.

I understand the 7 win rule - but I find it curious that a non-scholly FCS win counts but a Div II scholarship school does not count. Plus, you would think that a conference that has three teams in a 20 team playoff format would have at least one win against a top 30 FCS program as a conference. And you have Poly sitting at home for some silly 7 win rule that most major FCS programs are just buying around. Do you really have solid/equitable playoff?

It is going to take a while for me to get used to the FCS playoff system: NDSU has a 7-4 record 1) The best win is against the ISU Blue - NOTE: The trees 6-5 actually had a losing record agains Div 1 teams (4 - 5) - they played two NAIA teams. 2) 1 FBS win against Kanas - new coach, new system, 3 - 8 overall record. Poly has a 7-4 record 1) 3 wins against teams with winning record including Montana at home, McNeese St on road and Old Dominion on the road. Its not like the MVFC was lights out in non conference play this year - and they got three teams in the playoffs.. MVFC FCS OoC - record Wins - UND (trans) (61), E. Illinois (84), 2 x USD (trans) (53) , Central Conn (52), Sam Houston St (33), Morgan St (106), Bulter (108) Loses - Murray St, (42) SF Austin (5), SE Missouri St. (17), Delaware (1) So, the OoC highlights - Kansas (109 in Div 1 - NOTE: Minnesota was ranked 110) and Sam Houston St.

Hey I found this online - ESPN 3 webstream http://espn.go.com/espn3/player#

Seems like a lot of people are fired up about the punt... I am not sure that I agree with the call. I am sure he was going with the fact that special teams and defense had given the team more opportunties to score by making plays - more than the offense had to that point in the game. Let's face it the best QB on this team was playing WR two weeks ago - that does not leave you with many options..

I think it will be up and down next year also... unless one of the QBs in the system comes out firing... spring ball will be interesting.

If Davis, Townsend and the other recievers had not gone down early and Bamba leaving the team - he would have red shirted. I think it came down to body counts at the position. This years team was paper thin at WR/RB/OL and QB. I think that will be changing as things start to balance out going forward.

I would ask this question? Do you see much difference in this team if Dale L was still coach of this team. I don't, Lennon left because he saw the writing on the wall and that it was going to take about 4/5 years to build the program at the FCS level. Plan and simple it will take time to build the program at the FCS level. You have two basis paths - JUCO and FBS transfers or recruit and build. It is hard to go with option one when you do not have playoffs as an option. So, you have to go with recruit and build and that is a slow process that takes 2 to 3 years to see the any results. Plus, recruiting to this point has been at a disadvantage because of no playoffs. Again, I am not saying that I am happy with the state of the program. But, it is going to take time to build the program.

I disagree with most of you - I think the Coach Muss is doing fine. Last year during spring practice he talked about how this was going to be an up and down season. In fact, I believe that he noted that this team will have a rough couple of years because it was going to be young. In addition, he noted how important it was last year to get QBs and skill players into the system. He seemed very happy to have the two QB recruits last year. I think we saw this year what he saw coming. Unfortunately, it take time to turn things around. So, I do not look for drastic improvements until 2012.

Do you have a link supporting your statement? It would be interesting to see the numbers.