Bison_Kent

Lennon's comments on the Alerus sounds like a bunch of whinning. "We don't have what NDSU has. We need more Sioux logos and Sioux championship pictures." Whine, Whine Whine, Whine!!!! Why wasn't the Alerus budget to add such things in the first place? Grand Forks voters knew that Sioux football was going into the place. And how much money would it take to put up a few banners and Sioux Heads? Why not ask UND alumni to donate some money for such things? By the way, where was that Alerus on budget; over, under, or right on target? It must have been way over budget to not have a few banners and Sioux heads added into that budget. There seemed to be a better way of trying to make the Alerus feel like home then putting a coach's editorial in the GFH.

With these articles, it seems NDSU is far more ready for I-AA then UNC. We are playing Montana and Cal-Davis, who are in I-AA this year, in football. I am sure we will get them again in 2004 along with some other I-AA teams such as Western Illinios and Montana State, who we have been discussing with already. NDSU also is in a better situation in baseball. I believe we already have a deal with the Gophers to play a home and home. Also, Newman Field is going to rival any Division I teams. It is very close to the Wichita State stadium (I live close to Wichita and have gone to some games). Wichita State is usually one of the top baseball schools in the country. Wrestling has always been a top sport for NDSU and shouldn't have any trouble getting Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, and other top Division I wrestling schools in home and homes. Remember, 8-9 years ago Iowa came to a sold out Bison Sports Arena when Iowa had two Bismarck natives on the team. I hope the best for N. Colorado but I don't think their fan base or recruiting base is going to be any bigger. With UC, CSU, and Air Force in the state, I don't think anyone is going to add into the Bear's fan base.

Here is a topic on how UND thinks on the Division I-AA or Division II debate. http://www.theinformationminister.com/pres...hp?ID=612180282

This is just the start. There are going to be stumbling blocks along the way to getting into Division I. The first five-ten years might mean affliations and independent sports but after the waiting period time there, I am sure a more stable conference will be found. Most teams that have moved up played independent or affliated schedules in their probationary periods. A lot of conference will shy away from bringing in a DII team since it will cost the other teams RPI (especially basketball) in their conference standings and that may mean one less at-large team getting into the tournament. When UND moves up, they are going to face the same issues. Most likely they will not be a full member of any conference until the probationary period is gone. I ask you to wait 5 years and see where NDSU and UND are. Probably by the time UND does move up the probationary periods will only be longer and UND will be wishing they went up at the same time NDSU did.

Just looking at the article, I don't think it was that Taylor was going to hire Lennon. Taylor just admired his coaching style and was looking for that kind of style in his hiring. There were also two other coaches Taylor admired and they were Jim Tressel, Ohio State University head coach and Naval Academy

Bisonguy, I think you are right about the Big Sky. If NDSU & SDSU were already Division I, they probably would have let us in right away but since there is a five year probationary period, this might be why the Big Sky was against it right now. Also, I think there are going to be many more changes in college football in 3-4 years as well. Teams like Idaho, New Mexico State, San Jose State, and Utah State might be forced down to I-AA. Having this temporary conference would be a good fit in the probationary period as NDSU can compete for a conference title against like teams. The three independent schools, from what I have heard, are not full 63 scholorship football schools so they can grow along with the newly created I-AA teams.

FINALLY, A SIOUX FAN WITH SOME INTELLIGENT MESSAGING!!! You guys before TeamSioux are speaking before thinking. How can you guys talk how bad the Bison schedule is before looking at your own? Lets just do a little comparing in the scheduling: Bison Game 1: Tusculum 7-4, last year, 5th place in the South Atlantic Conf. Sioux Game 1: Minnesota-Crookston 1-10, last year, last place in NSIC. Bison Game 2: at Montana 11-3, quarterfinalist in I-AA playoff, tied for Big Sky Conference crown Sioux Game 2: at Mesa State, 5-6, third place in RMAC Bison Game 3: California-Davis, 9-3, independent, quarterfinalist in D2 playoff. Sioux Game 3: Newberry 1-10, last year, last place in South Atlantic Conf. Bison Game 4: Concordia-St. Paul, 9-2, third place in NSIC Sioux Game 4: no game scheduled (as of yet) Lets compare. NDSU's non-conference opponents total combined records from last year: 36-12 (.750 winning pct). UND's combine opponents total combined records from last year: 7-26 (.269 winning pct). This isn't even going into the fact that Montana and Cal-Davis are a higher class. Even if we would throw that out, I suggest Sioux fans look for facts before posting how bad our scheduling is. You better look in the mirror first.

I usually wouldn't reply to a UND hockey forum but since it veered off to something of a NDSU hater post. Yes, I didn't agree with the article in the Spectrum. But why should you guys care what the Spectrum publishes. I don't care what the UND paper publishes. IT IS JUST A STUDENT NEWSPAPER. There is envy which goes both ways. NDSU is envious of the Division I publicity UND gets with hockey. UND is envious of the publicity the NDSU football and success the team has had in the past. UND must have been envious of the NDSU's FargoDome. Otherwise, no new stadium would have been built there. Lets face the facts. There is envy which goes both ways. This is rivalry. Envy goes with a rivalry. Whenever one school does something that is better then the other, the other is going to be envious of them. Sure, we are going to post things that go bad for the other school but if you look at the bisonville or bisoninsider site, you will see very little useless knowledge posted like this post has turned into.

That is good news. Michigan Tech has never been a power or even made the DII playoffs but is a well known college in the DII ranks. I hope they can keep the team going. There is still Mass-Lowell that is dropping out of DII football. I know NDSU is looking for another home game. Maybe NDSU can get an easy team that is from the Northeast 10 Conference to play the 11th game of the season to have an easy non-conference game.

I will agree due to past selection committee playoff selections. They seem to not follow the rules of picking the four best teams in the region as set by the NCAA. By NCC middle teams beating the NSIC top teams, I don't see how the committee could ever pick a NSIC team even if they go undefeated in the conference. It seems UND92,96 you are correct that record alone is the standard set by the committee and the supposedly top catagory gets thrown out in the strength of schedule. I can't argue that point since it has happened in the past but it is not the criteria that the committee has set forth. But to add another topic. Lets get back to have the top 16 teams in the NCAA playoffs like it used to be instead of this stupid regional system. Keep the top seeds in their respective region, if possible (there might be two top teams in the same region and one would have to move) and keep first round match-ups as close as possible, like the NCAA Division I tournament where it might be seed 1 against 15 and 2 against 16 if the traveling made better sense. People would say that travel would be so much more because this but most teams have to fly anyway. Is it that much more to fly to Kansas or Missouri then it would be to go to Texas or Mississippi or Pennslyvania? The fan support of the road team would be the same reqardless. This way, the NCC would have two team minimum every year in the playoffs and most times three. Also, the number 1 and number 2 ranked teams would meet in the championship game and not the quarterfinals as has happened in the past. Look back to 1992 when NDSU and Pitt. St played an epic battle when they were ranked 1-2. If this would have been the championship game instead of the quarterfinals, it would be talked about as one of the top championship games of all time and not forgotten about by non-NDSU and non-Pitt loyalists as it was just aquarterfinal match-up.

Actually, playing I-AA teams has no risks from what I understand. It will only help your cause. Just as many I-AA teams play I-A teams. I know is also a big payday for the lower division team but has not hurt their playoff chances. Look at McNeese State, a I-AA team of power, playing Nebraska last year. McNeese still was ranked as the top team in I-AA. With no risk, why not play a team of a higher division.

It looks like to me that the strength of schedule is the #1 criteria along with the records are ahead of head to head. I agree with having this as the criteria. In college football, home field advantage plays a big role and since you only play once per year it takes this criteria to a lower extent. This takes the home field advantage out of play. You have to play well both away and at home the whole season but if two teams are tied, the strength of schedule would be a better tie breaker then the winner of the game if the winner was at home. In basketball, you get a home and a road game against an opponent. In football, you get just one game so in my opinion it is better to take an overall schedule strength especially between two conference teams that played the same conference teams with the win-loss record second before using the head to head tie-break. This also supports my position of playing a tough schedule instead of playing pansies.

Agreed. I wouldn't be surprised if we do start 1-2. We are a Division II team playing two I-AA teams in Montana and Cal-Davis (first year in I-AA). Just as in I-AA play playing I-A , playing I-AA talent can only help you as far as playoffs are concerned, if I am not mistaken. But even if we lose these two games, it will tell what type of team we have and will ready us for the NCC play and for us, NDSU, tell us what we need to do to compete in I-AA. Northern Colorado would have went undefeated last year had they not played Montana but it will help them in the type of recruiting needed and in game stragies to compete at the I-AA level.

I am not saying UND didn't make the conference look good in the post season a couple of years ago or N. Colorado a couple of years before that or NDSU of the entire 1980s and 1990 but it doesn't help for this 2003 season for UND or any of the other teams in the conference to schedule pansies. It doesn't show that what the kind of conference it nationally this year if you don't play teams on the top side this year before the playoffs. There is no measuring stick for the conference against another conference if you don't play and the playoff committee will have decide just on record alone. By scheduling tougher teams, the committee is going to reward you as long as you perform well against those teams and have a strong conference showing. I am not saying that you should have all tough games. If you have one tough non-conference game against a tradional national power, the other game(s) could be an easier team(s).

As a fan of a NCC team, I want the other teams in the conference to make the conference look good. NDSU has made the NCC look good across the country in past season by scheduling such top Division II teams as Pitt St., Texas A & M-Kingsville, Grand Valley St., Indiana of Pennsylvania, Delta St. of Mississippi, and Cal-Davis for its non-conference schedule over the past 10-12 years and winning most of these contests. I want the other teams in the conference to receive some more national creditability. St. Cloud has steped to the plate, in my opinion, in scheduling Pitt. St. this year. Yes, there are risks in scheduling such top notch opponents if you lose. But the benifits of the conference as a whole much outway the risks, in my opinion. But even if you lose, it gets you ready to play your best right away and gets you ready for top notch play in the conference. And if you win it makes you and your conference look good in the eyes of the national media. I am glad this is NDSU's last year of DII. We will have a similar schedule, I am sure next year and years beyond. What ever conference we get in will have quality non-conference schedules for playoff reasons.

Yes, NDSU would be viewed as a weak opponent until they can prove otherwise. This all you can base an opponent on is how they finished last year. I am not saying NDSU will be 2-8 this year but until proven otherwise I think NDSU is a weak opponent. A head coaching change, a new quarterback, and new wide receiver that have had much experience might prove otherwise but until they show it on the field, yes, NDSU would have to be classified as a weak opponent. The same can be said of UND, finishing 5-6. Until there are wins to prove it on the field, every team that finished below .500 has to be classified as weak opponent. Now, back to scheduling. Are you saying that since St. Cloud is playing a better Division II team, like Pitt. St. won't be good towards their playoff hopes? If St. Cloud would win that game, it would prove that the NCC should deserve two teams and the MAIC should get just one. By scheduling a team that has playoff history and winning, it will give you the edge should you finish in second place. Last year, both St. Cloud and C. Missouri scheduled poor out-of-conference opponents. It was hard to decide between two second place teams that schedule this way so the playoff committee had to go by total wins and losses. There just weren't any quality non-conference wins or close road losses that made the decsion easier. Had St. Cloud scheduled Pitt. St. last year, I think they would have made it if they played close or won. One more thing on the Sioux. Why wouldn't you schedule a top NSIC team instead of a bottom feeder like MN-Crookston? Last year, NDSU scheduled Winona, the winner of the league the year before. If UND had scheduled MN-Duluth or Winona St., I wouldn't have an complaints on the out-of-conference schedule if one of the top NSIC teams or one of the top MAIC teams was picked. It would also look good at the end of the year. I think the entire NCC (excluding NDSU and St. Cloud-this year) needs stronger out of conference scheduling. What looks good is winning against another good regional team or even out-of-region top team. It gives the playoff committee a reason to take a team with maybe an extra in-conference loss if teams from that conference won more games in the region then the other conference. It might back fire if the NCC would lose more then they win but there wouldn't be any complaints as to why the other conference received two teams.

I agree the talent level is declining in DII but there are still some good teams. I will give you Mesa State as an average opponent. The other two are bottom feeders though. If UND would get a descent 11th game, I think this would really help out their playoff possibilities. Quality of opponents might mean a trip to the playoffs. Look at St. Cloud last year. They finished 9-2 and second in the NCC and didn't get invited. They played three under .500 non-conference teams last year. This year, St. Cloud is playing Pitt. State because of this. With Northern Colorado out of the conference, I think St. Cloud has to be considered the front runner to begin the season with Neb-Omaha, UND, and NDSU picked after (in no particular order).

Since the Sioux season is over, I thought I would bring up a new topic in the hockey world. In searching through the Big Sky schools, I found that Weber State, along with Colorado State, BYU, Utah, Arizona, and Arizona State are starting a new western hockey league next year. Here is a link to the Weber State site stating this. http://bigskyconference.community.everyone.net and go to Weber State and then Weber Hockey Moving Up. Any one else heard of this happening and what the waiting period for an automatic bid is?

Jim, I agree. Going up a division shouldn't be as easy as just going up. I have a solution for moving up. Here is a solution I propose: 1. The school looking to go up has to average the attendance of the average of the division that the school (in all sports in participates) is looking to go up to over the past five year period and in each of those five years. If the average is not attained in any of that five year period, you can't move up. 2. The athletic budget needs to be have a similar average as the attendance. Each year you have to meet the average of what the new division you are moving to have. 3. The facilites need to meet the average capacity of the past five years with no exception. There is no membership until the facilities are upgraded to meet the average facility. I say do away with the 5 year probationary period for I-AA football and the 13 year wait in Division I basketball. I say let the school do the upgrades to show that they are Division I or II ready and then let them in. This would have kept several of the Divisioin I bottom feeders from getting in. Let them have two years of probation after all the above criteria are meet and the same criteria is still in play. This would be a seven year program for all sports. If a team in say Division III can meet these criteria right away, two years later the can be in Division II. It would give the school a goal to meet in order of just letting them in if they don't meet it.

Sicatoka, I agree with your accessment of the situation but I wouldn't include NDSU, SDSU or UND in the classification of the small fish into Division I. I think these should go to those 5,000 student and less schools (majority in the southeastern part of the US) that flooded Division I about 5-10 years ago. Sure there are several schools that have succeeded such as the Troy States and the Indiana U, Purdue U at Indianpolis for example (both making the Big Dance this year) but there are several others that have not been successful. These schools are just in Division I for the money. They had no intention of having a very successful program. NDSU's reason for moving up to have tougher competition and give the university more national notarity. The Division II situtation is much the same. There are the NAIA and Division III schools that see the same money in Division II. So I agree on your arguement but not to include any of the top NCC schools as the bottom feeders.

Leif, You are right. Actually right now, NDSU is on the average side of I-AA spending but would not be too great of a feat to get to get to a higher ground. The following is an excert from the Excutive Financial Survey: The following table presents a comparison of NDSU

What kind of schedule is this? No team on the schedule made any playoffs last year. Newberry was a 1-10 team. Minn-Crookston was also 1-10. Mesa State had a record of 5-6. If UND doesn't win by 4 touchdowns in each of these games, I would call each game a loss. I guess scheduling tough non-conference teams is a thing of the past for UND. No more Central Washington's that might upset the Sioux at home. Only pansies from now on. Let's look at NDSU's non-conference schedule. Tusculum finished 7-4 and is considered to be a front runner in the South Atlantic Conference in DII. Next comes the two time I-AA champion, Montana, a team that made it to the quarterfinals of the I-AA playoffs last year. And if that is not enough, we next have Cal-Davis, a DII semi-finalist from last year who is the first year of I-AA action. If UND and NDSU finish with identical records in the conference, who do you think the playoff committee is going to pick?

Northern Iowa?? What does that have to do with this topic. NDSU right now has more finacial support then Northern Iowa does right now. After being in Division I fully, NDSU will have even more support. Northern Iowa is the third university in Iowa. Iowa and Iowa State have the top billing in that state. It would be like saying Minot State is not finanially stable as NDSU & UND. All are state funded schools but the top two get more students and more state funding. And what does Northern Iowa mean to D2 scholorship reductions? Plus, what is the source of the finicial demise? A lot of schools are getting lower funding right now due to the poor economical situation our country is in. D2 is going down hill. That is a fact. It is not the same division it was in the 1970s and 1980s. The first scholorship reduction was a sign of its decline. It is further becoming a lower class division then its name. If you look at the DII championship games in football from 1973 on, over half of the champions and runners-up have left to go to I-AA or higher. It has shown that the top schools can not be held down by these scholorship reductions. They will keep the scholorships by going up a division. And, in most cases, have the ability to give more scholorships. Look at NDSU. NDSU has always had the ability to give the maximum scholorships. DII pushed the number down so NDSU had to go along with it to stay in DII. The next reduction has pushed NDSU over the edge. Really, NDSU should have left DII the last time the scholorships were reduced in my opinion. Also, of these teams that have made the move up, I have not heard of any that are in terrible finiacial terms with maybe the exception of teams that should be in I-AA that are in I-A football like Idaho and the rest of the ill fated Sun Belt conference.

Montana is expanding by 4,000 seats to give them 23,000 or so this up-coming year. NDSU could average a sell out of 18,500 and still be in the Top 5 I-AA attendance. I-AA provides more exposure and more traveling. Opposing teams travel to see their teams better in I-AA. If NDSU gets into the Big Sky, expect around 1,000 fans from Montana or Montana St. to travel to Fargo. It is rare for NCC teams to have that number with the exception of NDSU at an opposing team's stadium. We will just have to what and see how the Big Sky presidents decide on expansion.

You are right about why UND & NDSU stayed in D2. When I-AA began in the late 1970s, there was talks back then to have the schools added but there wasn't a conference in the close proximity. If I am not mistaken, there was talk back then to be added in the Big Sky. Both schools thought it was better at the time to stay in DII. Probably back then, it was. It allowed both schools to build championships in DII and both have increased athletic revenues, as well as student populations. Both schools are different then the were in the 1970s. I agree with adding a new division. It seems like about half of the current DII can afford 36 scholorships. The other half would rather half that number. There is no middle ground. DIII allows no scholorships for football. However, I believe SDSU, UND & NDSU belong in DI-AA. They have the facilities right now, the revenue, and the fan support to be in this division.