jacksfan29

SDSU beat 2. One is the #1 seed who we beat on the road and the other was rated just outside the top 10 all year. We laid an egg against Cal Poly and it is hard as hell to get through the MVFC without a loss. But hey, your killer schedule has been noted. Where did USD finish in the MVFC? Just about where UND would have finished. This is why I really wanted UND to be in the same POD as SDSU and NDSU. That said, I've heard Richmond may be getting their #2 QB back. If that happens I'm not sure UND gets a trip to Cheney.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/matchup?gameId=400871380 The final score likely has more to do with mistakes (including a fumble in the end zone) by SDSU. When you look at the final stats SDSU ran the ball 52 times for over 400 yards and had 630 total yards to USD 353. Our coaching staff have been working on building up a running game to go with a top 5 FCS passing game. If we get to come to Grand Forks it should be fun. Indoors, turf... I'll now take my leave and let you continue with your pity party.

( Summit: (flagship, medical and law) USD, (research/land grant) NDSU, SDSU, (medical and law) IUPUI, (law) DU Big Sky Olympic: (flagship, medical and law) UND, Idaho, UM (research/land grant) MSU The remaining schools in the Summit and BSC are R3 directionals, or in the case of Weber and Idaho State, glorified community colleges

Leon very clearly states the intent in the letter. The process has been both enjoyable and intense. It's led me to believe that while the first 100 days of my time leading your athletic department have been important, the next 100 days are crucial. During this time, we will be organizing our thoughts to create a strategic plan that captures the current state of Bobcat Athletics and provide the direction for the next five years. This plan will focus on creative ways to develop our student-athletes academically, athletically, and socially. It will also entail methods to support our coaches and athletes with unique programs and updated facilities. The end result will be the framework of what Bobcat Athletics will become. So no, he isn't going to announce that MSU are moving to the WAC. He is very clear as to what he will be discussing. Besides, he came from SDSU not a P5 school. If I recall, when MSU initially hired an assistant AD from Utah you said it was a sign that they needed P5 experience to move up. Well, Leon did not come from a P5, just lowly SDSU. He is a facilities and program guy. Instrumental in updating SDSU facilities to what we have today. He is an incredibly talented and a really good guy. If you read the letter his announcement will be facility and program related. You are over reaching just like you did when the BSC were making the big app announcement.

Actually I can make your case better with updated SDSU salaries. Nagy left for a job at Wright State ($500,000 per year). We hired TJ Otzelberger from Iowa State for $300,000 per year before bonuses. Jones is grossly underpaid for the area. Our Women's coach Aaron Johnston earns, in salary only $215,000 per year.

Leaving the other Texas schools out of the discussion let us just talk UTEP. You do know where UTEP came from and you do know where El Paso is located? The MWC will look to Texas, especially a mountain west school like UTEP long before any FCS (think Idaho, UM, MSU) western school would be considered. And UTEP would jump at the chance to get into the MWC. The link below will explain it to you much better than I can. http://www.elpasotimes.com/story/sports/college/2016/08/02/realignment-could-mean-new-home-utep/87965578/ As for UTSA. The MWC were interested in them prior to their joining CUSA. If UTEP goes to the MWC (which they would if an offer was given) UTSA or Rice could get an offer as a 2nd Texas school and both would jump at the chance to upgrade to a better conference. Sorry, that's just the way it is. Idaho has no option other than the BSC. NMSU is a different story. They have never been FCS/D1AA. They made the best choice they could for themselves. They have a 35,000 seat FB stadium and their geographic location, though not ideal is better than Idaho's. They can go Independent for a few years while hoping for enough conference shifts to open a spot in CUSA, MWC or the SBC. If that doesn't happen they will need to make some hard decisions. It could mean dropping down or it could mean walking away from FB.

Nope. NMSU have an outside shot, a very outside shot if the MWC loses 2. The MWC will backfill a loss of 2 schools with UTEP and either Rice or UTSA. Idaho's time in FBS is coming to an end and no twisting of words, statements, etc. will change that. Idaho has only one option for an all sports conference. The BSC. Idaho is back where they belong.

Must be the urban NYC area that hurts the numbers. I'm not sure, but it would seem that having a FB team in an NYC high school would be a luxury that most can't/don't want to pay for. But that's just a guess. As for Kansas. Any top recruits are going to be leaving the state or going KSU/KU. If Wichita was such a hot bed of recruits WSU would have been good prior to dropping the sport. They weren't. In fact they had not won a conference title in 30 years, one of the reasons they dropped the sport. The city, school and alumni were so apathetic that when a group tried to raise private funds to save the program the dollar figure raised... ZERO!

Nope, the SD BOR had nothing to do with it. That's a story told by folks who don't want to admit the USD took the better offer while UND got hung out by the MVFC and the folks in Vermillion. I do think that both SDSU, NDSU and UNI all wanted USD in and they were more of a geographical fit. And if you read the article it is obvious that the President's were talking expansion and had discussed adding USD. Will UND ever get an invite into the MVFC? Not sure. I think it will take one or more likely two schools leaving. Or another school from the east (Ohio Valley) moving in before there is an opening. As for your President. Reading some of your posts makes me wonder if he isn't setting the table for Women's Hockey going away. It would be the more controversial choice but it seems like a logical step.

NDSU and UND both offered PWO. USD came in late and offered a scholarship. SDSU did not offer, PWO or scholarship.

http://idahostatejournal.com/members/isu-football-commissioner-williams-talks-expansion-tv-deal-for-big/article_a5b7ceca-4c89-11e6-8dc6-23bb72220822.html http://billingsgazette.com/sports/college/big-sky-conference/montana-state-university/football/questions-remain-over-idaho-rejoining-big-sky/article_0a6dc925-c8bc-58ea-81f8-a8c2f4fc0862.html I believe she is quoted as saying there is no discussion of expansion beyond Idaho. So, where do you get that she is discussing further expansion? A message board? Also, all you need to do is use Google and you will find the WSU President, very thoughtfully admitting that FB is not a given. His goal is to generate discussion by studying the issue and finding out just how much money it would cost (done)(a lot). These quotes are after his big tweet of a helmet and logo, not really expensive to do if you have a graphic arts department in your school. There are also articles quoting faculty and supporters who are against adding FB due to the cost. It is not a done deal at WSU. Seven days left in the month of July. Have we heard any announcements yet? Or are you pushing the date back again?

Other than the associate commissioner from the MVC runs the MVFC and all FB playing MVC schools play in the MVFC. Did you read the article? In a nutshell. Patty clearly stated that the MVFC and the MVC are aligned in not entertaining WSU FB if the Shockers came calling in need of an FCS home before moving on to an AAC or MWC. That may be confusing to some of you, but the reality is that the MVFC schools who play BB in the MVC would have no interest in assisting WSU in their departure from the conference. WSU will need to go Independent if they intend to use FCS. Not a big deal, but since some of you made it a big deal, figured some clarification was in order.

USD was called on the speculative document written by a consultant. Oh, I disagree with you that only two will move on. I expect it to be three, the two who have been successful in transition (SDSU/NDSU) and the one who seems to be working hard to upgrade and improve (USD). I full well expect UND will continue putting all their dollars into Men's and Women's Hockey leaving their other sports to suffer the fate of being average forever. By the way, has Idaho had their press conference yet? Wasn't it last week that they were to come out and state they made a mistake in accepting the BSC spot?

So let me be sure to get SV's timeline correct. 1) Idaho will announce this week that they made a mistake and they are now going to stay FBS? 2) The Big Sky 6 or 7 who intend to move up will begin FBS play in 2018? 20.4.2.1.2 Notification/Application Requirement. The chancellor or president rom a Football Championship Subdivision institution that intends to petition for reclassification to the Football Bowl Sub-division, per Bylaw 20.4.2, shall submit to the national office written notice of the institution’s intention to reclassify and a completed application. The notice and application shall be received in the national office (by mail or electronic transmission) not later than June 1 two years prior to the August 1 when the institution intends to reclassify to the Football Bowl Subdivision. Any form received after June 1 shall be postmarked not later than May 25. The notice and application shall be accompanied by a $5,000 fee and a strategic plan that addresses the Division I philosophy statement (see Bylaw 20.9.2) and the institutional performance program requirements. If the institution fails to qualify for membership in the Football Bowl Subdivision, the application fee shall be refunded, less any expenditure for educational costs related to the reclassification process. So, according to NCAA bylaws the Big Sky teams moving up better get moving. They have till the end of this month to get their application in.

Did any of you actually read the consultant report. Below is what you are discussing. Notice a few errors in what S2C has been saying about the report? Regarding SDSU and NDSU. Neither want anything to do with the WAC/BSC. It doesn't state that the schools think they will get an MVC invite, it simply states that there has been strong speculation (likely outside of the schools) that both may get an MVC invite. In the notes about recreating a WAC FBS it states that the idea from Fullerton and Hurd was shot down. But the consultants than go on to say that if the discussions regenerated a possible scenario would include USD and UND. Not that it IS GOING TO HAPPEN or that any discussions are even occurring but IF THEY DO. As noted by a USD friend. One has to wonder how much expertise the consultants had. The likelihood of USD going FBS is less than 10%, if that high. It won't happen. So before all get excited about S2C's WAC ideas you may want to actually read the report. Oh by the way, Idaho's President was looking at 3 options. Independent, FCS/BSC or trying to bring the WAC/FBS back from the dead. He chose FCS/BSC because the least best option was bringing back the WAC/FBS. CONFERENCE NOTES Western Athletic Conference Collegiate Consulting has had multiple discussions with the WAC regarding its grandfathered status as a FBS conference, despite not offering football as a sport for two-plus years. Marlon Edge, the WAC’s compliance officer, confirmed with the NCAA that the WAC does meet the criteria. NCAA Bylaw 20.02.6 Football Bowl Subdivision Conference - A conference classified as a Football Bowl Subdivision conference shall be comprised of at least eight full Football Bowl Subdivision members that satisfy all bowl subdivision requirements NCAA Bylaw 20.4.2.1.1 Eligibility for Reclassification - Before a Football Championship Subdivision institution may apply for reclassification to the Football Bowl Subdivision, the institution must receive a bona fide invitation for membership from a Football Bowl Subdivision conference or a conference that previously met the definition of a Football Bowl Subdivision conference. If the WAC were to reinstate football, it would need eight football-playing members. There could be an opportunity with Idaho and New Mexico State. The University of Texas at Rio Grande Valley has recently released an RFP to conduct a football feasibility study. If these three institutions were to have an interest in WAC football, the conference would need to bring in five additional institutions. Collegiate Consulting has spoken with various institutions to discuss interest in the FBS and WAC; the synopsis of information is detailed:  North Dakota State and South Dakota State have stated publicly they do not have an interest in moving to FBS. However, it appears from discussions with each school there is not an interest in the WAC, should it reinstate football or go with a combined WAC/Big Sky option. As a side note, there has been strong speculation that both institutions could be invited to join the Missouri Valley Conference as a full member, not just the MVFC.  If the WAC were to pursue Big Sky institutions, independent of the scenario discussed below, it seems reasonable that Montana and Montana State would make a collaborative decision. Big Sky Conference There have been “off-line” discussions with Big Sky officials as well as several Big Sky presidents and athletic directors. Doug Fullerton, the soon-to-be-retired commissioner of the Big Sky, has stated that he would like to see Idaho join as a full member, including football, by the time of his retirement on June 30, 2016. It was also discussed if pressure would be placed on Idaho to drop to FCS or risk losing its current membership in the Big Sky. Discussions with various stakeholders have stated that “the conference, presidents and ADs are O.K. with the current situation; however, everyone has stated that it could change with the new commissioner. There are schools in the Big Sky Conference that would prefer Idaho (and New Mexico State) not join the league for football as they fear it will create an “arms race” at this level. Big Sky Conference/Western Athletic Conference Three years ago, Big Sky Commissioner Doug Fullerton and WAC Commissioner Jeff Hurd visited about the possibility of combining the two conferences, and having part of the league participate in FBS and the remainder in FCS for football. The idea did gain some interest, but was ultimately shot down. However, there could be an opportunity to rekindle these discussions. Here is a possible scenario should it gain traction: Football  FBS – Idaho, New Mexico State, Montana, Montana State, North Dakota, South Dakota, Cal Poly and Northern Arizona (8 teams).  FCS – Eastern Washington, Idaho State, Portland State, UC-Davis, Sacramento State, Southern Utah and Northern Colorado (7 teams). If they can meet the academic criteria and budget criteria, and have an interest in “moving up” to FBS, they certainly would be considered. Basketball  North Division – Montana, Montana State, North Dakota, South Dakota, Eastern Washington, Portland State, Idaho State, Seattle University and Idaho (9 teams).  South Division – Sacramento State, Southern Utah, New Mexico State, Northern Colorado, Weber State, Utah Valley, Grand Canyon State, UTRGV and CSU-Bakersfield (9 teams). With this, most rivalries would be maintained – and some enhanced. Scheduling would be much easier, and schools would be much more similar. There would be a lot of parity in all leagues. Academic criteria under the Carnegie rating service would also be a consideration. There would also be possibilities for more revenue streams for higher-level FCS product in terms of television, ticket pricing, NCAA/conference monies and corporate dollars. Plus, with more regional competition, there could be money savings in travel, etc.

You make up more crap than anyone I have ever seen on any message board. You have no facts, no sources, no links, nothing to justify your "facts". As for NMSU in the BSC. The reality is they are talking to the BSC because if they drop down to FCS (a very real possibility) the BSC is their only choice. They aren't looking at it for the mythical BSC to FBS move. Was DU thrilled joining the Summit? Not really. They would have preferred an invite to a certain private school conference out west. Or the MVC. There was a chance that DU would go to the BSC. Hell, just the thought of being associated with UNC is enough for DU to run the other way, fast. But hey, you were in their athletic department after the announcement was made, and it was a "morgue". Please continue to live in the little fantasy land you have created. Oh by the way, never saw it discussed on here but how did you feel when Fullerton stated that his greatest regret was not getting NDSU? Funny stuff... http://billingsgazette.com/sports/college/big-sky-conference/fullerton-proud-of-tenure-as-big-sky-commissioner/article_2d2dcd92-112f-5cb0-9169-9b0e2990148a.html

They do? Can you provide the source for that one? As for NMSU. That will depend on whether they go Independent or drop to FCS. If they drop the BSC is the only option out there. If they go Independent they will likely want to go to a basketball conference that is of a much higher quality than the BSC. And do any of you really think Omaha are going to drop the I29 connection to travel out west and play in a FB conference?

Fullerton will be gone. Of course that can likely be spun by SV into "he is going to run the FBS BSC" so take what he has to say for what it is...

No one is leaving the Summit. The talk of expansion comes from Douple and the member school's Presidents. The conference has been contacted by several schools, no one has said who those schools are and there is nothing concrete out there, but one rumor is that NMSU and UMKC are looking to bail on the WAC. NMSU are likely to go Independent in FB and want to get into a better basketball conference while they bide their time to see what shakes in FBS (realignment/expansion). UMKC have been unhappy since joining the WAC and (again) rumor has it they have contacted the Summit looking to get back in. No word on if, or when that could happen.

Do you ever get anything correct? He is getting $500K over 5 years to go back to the area he was raised, to a school willing to throw a lot of money at Nagy and their BB program in the hopes of building themselves into another Butler. Nagy is 49 and will be turning 50 soon. He has been at SDSU for 21 years. He either moves now or never, especially if he ever wants a major conference job (see Illinois). Jones? Funny. Walthall? Funny. Neither will sniff the job. Oh, and that is 3 NCAA dances SDSU (just like NDSU) have been to. SDSU have what some are deeming a top 25 NCAA player on the roster for the next 3 years http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/stars-college-basketball-2016-2017/story?id=38153309. I'm pretty sure whoever we bring in SDSU's Men will be just fine. And maybe you should read better. I don't see a lot of crying going on over at the SDSU board. Some shock to start but I see more excitement and anticipation than anything else. But, you are the master at taking one post from a message board and turning it into your own facts. Oh, for good measure, Since you are such a Summit hater. USD won the Women's WNIT this year and SDSU were seconds away (for the 2nd time in school history) from making the Women's Sweet 16. Next season SDSU's Women will likely start the season ranked in the Top 25 and will still be a year away from what many think will be the best team in SDSU Women's history. Better than the 2009 version that was ranked 15th in the country. Things are going pretty well for the 3 other "Dakota" schools in what you deem the Slummit. How are things in the Big Sky? Still planning on going FBS? Funny stuff.

Oh the butt hurt. Third time in 5 years, had NDSU not upset this team with "no talent" last year (when Daum was red-shirting) it would have been 4 of 5. That's the same team who had so little talent minus Daum that they took down CSU, the #1 seed in the NIT last year, in Ft. Collins. Must have been some good home cooking going on there. Oh, we also have not finished below 2nd in the regular season conference race for the past 5 years. But in your mind the wins in the SL tournament are due to a home court and the referees, OK, call LakesBison, you and he can be buddies. The "Slummit" is the 11th conference in RPI, 15th in Sagarin. The BSC is 28th and if not for Weber and UM they would be 30 or 31. UND is a low 200 RPI BB team, SDSU 28. Oh, and to top it off our women are making trip 7 in the past 8 season. They also have a 12 seed while starting all underclass women. We are likely a year or two from making the same type of run we made in 2009. The year our Women were ranked 15th in the AP and almost took down Baylor in the second round, in Texas when they had Griener. But hey, I'm sure their success is also due to home cooking and a home court advantage. To make it all better for you. NDSU has won 5 national titles in a row in FB. Also, NDSU; as a 12 seed (wonder if they passed the "eye" test) took down Oklahoma in the NCAA tournament. It really has to kill you that the two State schools have had any success. Call when the BSC moves to FBS. All because the NCAA loves Idaho so much they are going to change the rules to help them out. Funny stuff.

How is SDSU seeded a couple spots too high? They have 3 top 100 wins, Ken Pom 80, BPI 80 and RPI 28. The lowest they were looking at was 13. The closest 14 to us is Fresno who have a 105 Ken Pom, 106 BPI, 66 RPI. The Summit was a top 15 conference and it is SDSU's 3rd trip in 5 years. Maryland will be a tough draw. Though they did lose to Minnesota who we dominated. They are up and down and do not play up to their ability. It will depend on if the SDSU guards can hit the 3s and which MD team decides to come play. But seeded to high? No.

When Oakland and ORU played for the title in the old SF Arena there were over 6K in the stands, so no; wrong answer. The tournament is a big draw because you have a lot of BB fans in the area. It is also why the tournament will never leave. The women's non-Dakota games drew over 3,000 this year. The Men's non-Dakota drew over 6,000. As for the same schools every year. SDSU and USD have put together women's programs to compete with the P5 conferences. SDSU has been ranked in the top 25 and again this year were drawing votes in the AP. SDSU's men have an RPI of 37. NDSU, SDSU, IPFW joined at the same time and are the top 3 teams in the league. Omaha are up and coming and even USD looks like they will make a move next year with 3 transfers. Whether you want to admit it or not, the Summit is on its way to becoming a high mid-major BB league. By the way, isn't it Weber or Montana every year in the BSC?

No one leaves the BSC because there is no place to go. Outside of UM and maybe MSU there is not one member that any other conference would be interested in. The best BSC schools not located in Montana have already left for greener pastures. Is the Summit interested in UND. Honestly I think most members could care less what UND does. That said, if an invite was given I think the upper tier schools would want the invite to be on the condition that you upgrade your programs to be able to compete. Right now, your WBB may make it to mid-pack with a low RPI (tolerable, not preferable) your MBB would be a drag on the conference. We just don't need any new bottom feeders. The goal is to improve the level of play in the conference not slide backwards by inviting teams that can't compete.

It would have an affect, but I don't think it would be a negative on anyone involved except the UND fans who want UND to be in the BSC. It would strengthen the MVFC and make the some western schools very happy in the BSC.