ShilohSioux

In an ideal world, all four Dakota schools would be in the same conference. As you say, the BSC and MVFC are about even when it comes to football, and the BSC is a much stronger/better league that the current Summit for the other sports. Down the road, it would be nice to see all four Dakota schools in either an eastern division of the BSC, or in a revamped MVC that looks like the current football conference. For the moment, I'm delighted UND is in the Big Sky rather than the Summit, but honestly it would be nice to be with the other three Dakota schools too and build on those historic and geographic rivalries.

I hope you're right. 8-3 or better would be a GREAT way to enter the Big Sky. I'm not a negative person, but I'm afraid we're going to go 1-3 against the quartet of USD, the two Cal schools and SUU. And UNC did lose to Big Sky champ Montana State by just two in Bozeman, and national finalist EWU had to score two touchdowns in the last three minutes to beat the Bears by seven so UNC is capable of playing good football even if they didn't give the Yotes a game. 8-3 would be nice but I'm not seeing it. Hope I'm wrong.

No, not clueless but maybe you don't understand how far we have yet to go. We're still in a building mode. First, Sioux Falls is no "cupcake" and pulling out more than two wins against the following will be challenging -- not impossible but challenging. Especially if we don't get the QB situation nailed down. With the right leadership, we'll get there and ultimately we'll be a regular contender for post-season in the Big Sky (we have too many resources NOT to be a contender year in, year out) but it's going to take time. If we get more than 2 wins against these, who will it be? @ Idaho @ Fresno State @ Cal Davis Cal Poly @ Southern Utah @ Northern Colorado South Dakota

Some OOC games for Big Sky teams next year: Finished: Weber State Wyoming Utah State Southern Utah Idaho State Washington State BYU Western State (Division II) Montana At Tennessess Cal Poly Western Oregon (Division II) Still to announce, but these games are confirmed: Eastern Washington Cal Poly University of Washington (also in 2014) 2012 – Washington State, Idaho 2013 – Oregon State Montana State Utah Northern Arizona Arizona Northern Colorado Colorado State Sacramento State Oregon State UC Davis Also, here's SUU's. One game still to book: S3 Open S10 @ San Diego* S17 UTSA S24 @UNLV O1@ Northern Arizona* O8 North Dakota* O15 @ Cal Poly* O22 @ Weber State* O29 UC Davis* N5 @ South Dakota* N12 Dixie State* N19 Open

I think 6-5 can be called a "successful" season next year. Anything less will be disappointing.

Agreed on Sioux Falls...they will challenge us. Montana Western will not.

Maybe it doesn't make sense, but could a case be made for UND and USD to play twice next season -- home and home -- rather than host some NAIA or Division II move up? This happens at the FBS level with conference championship games -- see Auburn-SC and Nebraska-Oklahoma this year. Would it work in this case?

Not saying that I like Montana Western as an opponent, but that NAIA school has played Idaho State, Weber State and Eastern Washington -- all BSC teams -- in the last few years. Games haven't been that competitive, however.

Here

Right now, this may be a blessing. We aren't ready to compete with even Minnesota, or any of the regional FBS teams. While a win can do wonders for a program, a blowout loss can actually set us back. While NDSU and USD have beaten FCS teams Minnesota (twice), Kansas, etc... we probably would be on the short end of a large blowout. Remember, a 7-loss Idaho team beat us 45-0 this year. Wait until we're better, then play those games.

I have some insight on the Idaho situation due to ties there. You can rightly argue that they never should have gone FBS to begin with (Boise State envy, particularly when they are academically superior to BSU), but they are there now and they are hell-bent on staying FBS, with some even calling for the university to give up football before returning to FCS. Also, after a steady diet of teams like Hawaii, Nevada, Fresno State, and MWC teams like Colorado State, UNLV and San Diego State coming to the Kibbie Dome, there's no interest in playing teams like Weber State, NAU, Portland State (they would, however, be ok with Montana, MSU and UND probably...but that's about it in the Big Sky). That said, I think they realize they're in a tough spot and some, including the athletic administration, realize a return to the Big Sky for all sports except football might be their best option. Their facilities are FCS level and so is their game attendance so they will never be attractive to another FBS conference such as the MWC. I think most Idaho fans understand this. So, their options are really to stick it out with the WAC and see if that can survive, or return to the Big Sky at some level. I think they're waiting to see what becomes of the WAC first, and any decision to return to the Big Sky for non-football sports won't happen until they've exhausted that road.

How's San Jose State doing as an FBS team? Don't see them taken seriously by too many Bay Area sports fans. Sac State and PSU don't have the money or the fan passion to make the upgrade. I could see both dropping football before making the enormous investment to move up to FCS. Frankly, I see Idaho as the only remaining viable western candidate for the Big Sky. I'm guessing the Big Sky is regretting extending an invite to SUU and wouldn't have if they new USD would back out and that Montana would not move to FBS. That would have left them with 10 for non-football and 12 for football....much more viable.

An interesting concept but Sac State and Portland State are about as far away from FBS as a school can be. Their attendance is among the worst in FCS, and they are in the shadows of Pac-10 FBS teams. Compounding that are serious financial problems for the states of California and Oregon. UND will be ready for FBS before SacState and Portland State are. A more like scenario is for the Big Sky to invite Idaho as a non-football member, bringing the league to 12 for all sports but football. They could do the same with USU and NMSU but NMSU would rather join the Sun Belt than the Big Sky and USU is still hoping for the MWC invite it turned down earlier. San Jose State is struggling to keep football and may be headed to the Big West for non-football sports soon.

"Fighting Norse." Don't we have another name for them -- Vikings?

Right. Idaho is out of options. No one else wants them because their facilities and crowds are I-AA sized. But they are too stubborn to return to the Big Sky, even for non-football sports. They view themselves as the flagship institution in Idaho (and academically they are) but to return to the Sky would give them the appearance of being a lower institution that Boise State, which has very weak academics. To some at Idaho, this is unacceptable, even though they will soon be playing league games in Texas and Louisiana. It would be great if they would get some sense but I don't look for them to be back in the Big Sky in the foreseeable future. Since the Big Sky will likely get only one berth to the NCAA tournaments, I would support a 20-game league basketball schedule. Determining a true regular season champion is important when you only get one berth....especially if home court is at stake for the post-season conference tournament. Finally, divisions are going to be tough to create. The one mentioned above will surely be opposed by ISU and WSU, who are nearby rivals and won't want to split.

We all, of course, want the "Sioux" name to remain and a few would prefer just to be known as "UND" or "North Dakota" if we can't keep "Sioux," but we're gonna have to pick a name. No doubt there are more, but here's a list of those I found on the other sites that weren't made in jest. Which one is likely to emerge? Also, nearly all are used by professional sports teams, other colleges and universities, minor league teams (yes, there's the "Wyoming Cavalry"), etc..... What are the rules for using names already taken by others? Clearly, there are duplicates, triplicates, etc... of these out there so are there limitations? Blizzard Cavalry Colts Hawks Mavericks Mustangs Nokota (Horse) North Stars Outlaws Rangers Roughriders Shockers (as in

The Big Sky post-season tournament has been notorious the past 20 years for producing a different tournament champion from the regular season champion. Another factor in all this will be how the conference is divided, if at all. If there's no north/south or east/west divisions, that means the regular season won't produce a true champion many years as each team will play others once in some cases, twice in others. Unlike the current situation where every Big Sky team plays home-and-away with everyone. A 11 team league would mean 20 league games for that to continue. Don't think that will happen.

With 13 teams for football and 11 for basketball (baring any more changes), has there been any talk about dividing into two divisions? I know that was the plan when USD was going to join -- for football at least -- but is that now off the table?

I well understand the desire to keep the Sioux name, but let's suppose there's no midnight reprieve. Is there a leading replacement candidate? One or two that are surfacing?