SiouxCrew11 Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I've said it before and been railroaded for it, but I'll say it again: Football is not the flagship athletic program at UND (neither is mbb), and that is definitely part of the problem... But, if we can establish one of these "power sports" and add that to the unprecedented publicity and revenue we get from MHockey I think UND's Athletic Department could be great. NDSU always talks about their superior power sports (MBball and Footbal), so just imagine if we can get one or both of those sports in order to couple with Mens Hockey !? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkster Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I just find it extremely appalling that we are still scheduling D2 teams like St. Cloud State. I thought the whole point of moving up to D1 was to avoid teams like SCSU? Before someone says FCS teams playing D2 teams is no different then FBS playing FCS, I want to disagree. Both FBS and FCS are Division one, so there is a little parity there, even if the scholly level is different. I really think this whole transition has been a failure. Colleges like NDSU are whooping FBS teams and we are still playing (and sometimes losing) to NAIA and D2 teams. I certainly hope moving to the Big Sky cures these problems, but then I thought it couldn't get any worse after we scheduled Sioux Falls and I was surely mistaken on that estimation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 According to this press release, September 7, 2013. Thanks. You would think they would have listed it on the website schedule. Only the home game with Montana, which will probably switch, is listed. 2013 UND Football Schedule Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crevec Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 ...Both FBS and FCS are Division one, so there is a little parity there, even if the scholly level is different. I really think this whole transition has been a failure. Colleges like NDSU are whooping FBS teams and we are still playing (and sometimes losing) to NAIA and D2 teams. I certainly hope moving to the Big Sky cures these problems, but then I thought it couldn't get any worse after we scheduled Sioux Falls and I was surely mistaken on that estimation. OK I am tired of hearing about the wins that regional schools have won against FBS and that the Sioux should be up there right with them. Would I like to see the Sioux win against a regional FBS team? You can bet just about anything that I would! But the fact of the matter is that it isn't as easy as some posters make it out to being to beat a FBS opponent! And this point emphasizes that more than any other I have seen. You say that FBS and FCS are basically the same, by using that logic EWU should be playing who exactly, Auburn or Oregon, I guess it would be Auburn since they are #1 in the BCS? I mean the scholarships don't matter and FBS and FCS are the same right? As far as winning against FBS opposition, it takes a lot for an FCS team to actually beat an FBS team. And by a lot, I mean a lot of skill... and a lot of luck! I mean look at a game earlier this year, UMass lost to the University of Michigan (yes, that U of M) by only 7 points. Are you really saying that UMass is just a bit worse than the UMich? I say no. And last year the darling FCS team of Appalachian St. went to the Univ. of Florida and lost 48-10. That was the best FCS vs. one of the best FBS teams! It is just that as a fanbase of a school playing at the FCS level we only look at the results of several games that have turned out favorably for some of our peer schools and easily ignore the losses of those same teams. I really wish I could easily find the record of the two divisions records against the other but I am unable to at this point. From memory there are only about 5 victories that I can think of for FCS teams out of the numerous games that were played. So please, to all Sioux fans, don't use the FBS victory mark as a measuring stick for the program! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightingsioux4life Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I agree with your sentiments, but not your conclusion. I think a DII team should be scheduled only as a last resort. I know a lot of people liked to make fun of NDSU scheduling low-scholarship or non-scholarship FCS schools to their schedule, but that's the right way to do it if you want to have an "easy" game on your schedule. Schedule a Wagner or a Valpo if you're looking for an easy win. Scheduling a DII school does nothing to advance UND's chances of making it to the playoffs. Wanting to play FCS teams is not just about labels or being "macho" as some have suggested. Playing FCS teams is rewarded come playoff selection time, playing DII schools is not. I realize it's probably more expensive to bring in a Wagner or a Valpo than a St. Cloud or a Sioux Falls, but saving a few bucks to bring in a DII schools is short sighted. UND consistently in the playoff hunt is the best way long term way to make sure the program is financially sound, and the best way to do that is to play as many FCS schools as possible. I think there should be 10 FCS teams on the schedule every year. Then with the 11th, you go with the FBS game. Maybe a DII team is acceptable on years where you get a 12th game, but that's it. This is not mission impossible. All we're talking about is two non-conference FCS games to schedule per year. Schedule an annual game with USD, and then we're talking about only one game per year. With that one game per year, schedule a guaranty game with a low- or non-scholarship FCS team, or schedule home-and-homes with NDSU, SDSU, or UNI. If Faison can't get that done, then I don't know what to say. Hopefully this St. Cloud rumor has no truth to it and we're getting worked about nothing. I see your point that scheduling D-II schools does nothing to get us in the playoffs. I guess I am open to it if we get into a scheduling pinch (if someone cancels on us and we can't find another FCS team to fill the date), but you are right that we should have a pure FCS schedule with one FBS money game whenever possible. My message to the athletic department is simple: Start running our Division I programs like Division I programs or else just go non-scholarship in everything except Men's and Women's hockey. Anything in-between is a waste of our time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I see your point that scheduling D-II schools does nothing to get us in the playoffs. I guess I am open to it if we get into a scheduling pinch (if someone cancels on us and we can't find another FCS team to fill the date), but you are right that we should have a pure FCS schedule with one FBS money game whenever possible. My message to the athletic department is simple: Start running our Division I programs like Division I programs or else just go non-scholarship in everything except Men's and Women's hockey. Anything in-between is a waste of our time. Well put. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkster Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 OK I am tired of hearing about the wins that regional schools have won against FBS and that the Sioux should be up there right with them. Would I like to see the Sioux win against a regional FBS team? You can bet just about anything that I would! But the fact of the matter is that it isn't as easy as some posters make it out to being to beat a FBS opponent! And this point emphasizes that more than any other I have seen. You say that FBS and FCS are basically the same, by using that logic EWU should be playing who exactly, Auburn or Oregon, I guess it would be Auburn since they are #1 in the BCS? I mean the scholarships don't matter and FBS and FCS are the same right? As far as winning against FBS opposition, it takes a lot for an FCS team to actually beat an FBS team. And by a lot, I mean a lot of skill... and a lot of luck! I mean look at a game earlier this year, UMass lost to the University of Michigan (yes, that U of M) by only 7 points. Are you really saying that UMass is just a bit worse than the UMich? I say no. And last year the darling FCS team of Appalachian St. went to the Univ. of Florida and lost 48-10. That was the best FCS vs. one of the best FBS teams! It is just that as a fanbase of a school playing at the FCS level we only look at the results of several games that have turned out favorably for some of our peer schools and easily ignore the losses of those same teams. I really wish I could easily find the record of the two divisions records against the other but I am unable to at this point. From memory there are only about 5 victories that I can think of for FCS teams out of the numerous games that were played. So please, to all Sioux fans, don't use the FBS victory mark as a measuring stick for the program! My point was more so that we shouldn't be playing D2 teams. I'm not all that upset that we aren't beating FBS teams, but it sure bothers me that we lower our standards and play D2, D3, and NAIA teams. I was happy we played out in Idaho this year, even if it wasn't a good showing. But we have to start getting better, both in our play and the quality of the opponents we select. Overall, I consider our performance in the transition to be an embarrassment. Sometimes the truth hurts, but we have to face it before we can improve it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crevec Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 My point was more so that we shouldn't be playing D2 teams. I'm not all that upset that we aren't beating FBS teams, but it sure bothers me that we lower our standards and play D2, D3, and NAIA teams. I was happy we played out in Idaho this year, even if it wasn't a good showing. But we have to start getting better, both in our play and the quality of the opponents we select. Overall, I consider our performance in the transition to be an embarrassment. Sometimes the truth hurts, but we have to face it before we can improve it. Well I am sorry if I misread your previous posts but many of them have just seem to run together at this point. There have been other posters in the past who seem to think that it is just the fact that you are playing an FBS team that we should be getting a win. As was pointed out a couple of posts ago, I think that the D2, D3, NAIA teams should be reserved only as a last resort, i.e. we only have 3-4 home games with less than a year to schedule someone else for the year and the other team has an open date. I think that it is most important to schedule a team that can get us closer to FCS playoff eligibility, and anything less than a D1 team doesn't do that. And you are right that the team does have to start getting better. I think that the players, coaches and FANS (myself included) need to be better to the team. How many of us have decided against going to a game because they were playing a "poor" team. Along those lines have you not gone to a game because of the team being "bad?" Unfortunately I have to say yes to both of those. I think like many other people out there, fans like to see winners and right now that is not the Fighting Sioux football team. All we can do as fans really is to show up on gameday, cheer like we are the best team in the country and hope that the coaches and the decisions they make are the best possible for the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShilohSioux Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 So, if I have it right, our future schedules look like this (so far): 2012 (11 games allowed) Sept. 8 -- @San Diego State Sept. 15 -- Central Arkansas One other non-league game, possibly home with St. Cloud State (Sept. 1) or @ South Dakota (Oct. 27) 8 Big Sky games, including either Montana or Montana State at home 2013 (12 games allowed) Sept. 7 -- South Dakota State TBD -- @New Mexico State 8 Big Sky games, including either Montana or Montana State at home Plus two games yet to be scheduled Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 So, if I have it right, our future schedules look like this (so far): 2012 (11 games allowed) Sept. 8 -- @San Diego State Sept. 15 -- Central Arkansas One other non-league game, possibly home with St. Cloud State (Sept. 1) or @ South Dakota (Oct. 27) 8 Big Sky games, including either Montana or Montana State at home 2013 (12 games allowed) Sept. 7 -- South Dakota State TBD -- @New Mexico State 8 Big Sky games, including either Montana or Montana State at home Plus two games yet to be scheduled While it would be nice if Montana and Montana State came to Grand Forks in alternating years, unless I missed something, I haven't seen anywhere where that has been decided. While I'm hopeful UND will play both Montana and Montana State every year, I don't think even that has been decided yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herd Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 We've been thinking about scheduling down here as well. I have an idea that could help both schools and allow us to maintain our rivalry. It looks like in the future both our schools will have 8 conference games, 4 home/4 away, and one FBS money game. That leaves 2 games a year to schedule. Why not schedule USD to a home/home series indefinitely then set up home and home FCS games with other OOC schools (NDSU, ahem, or other MVFC schools) with the home game falling on the years you travel to Verm. USD would do the same thing with our home/home series with BSC or Southland schools alternating the years for when we travel to GF. Sure, it would result in only 5 home games per year, but that is the reality of things when FCS schools have to play that FBS game. 5 home/5 away FCS games per year with one FBS game. The best way for all of us Dakota schools to deal with this reality is to at least schedule our OOC games against rival schools within driving distance. It would be even better for UND if you could get the annual game with NDSU back. You could play 8 BSC games, and alternate NDSU at home, USD away, then the next year USD at home, and NDSU away, plus an annual FBS game. Talk about making scheduling easy, the only game to schedule each year would be the FBS game. In years where 13 games are allowed a 6th home game could be added by buying an FCS non schollie or D2 game. Bottom line is scheduling would get a whole lot easier for both our schools if we could just agree on continuing the UND/USD series. Yote . . . if you were thinking in the best interest of making the playoffs, you'd try to bring in a guarantee game vs. someone a little more winnable than UND. Financially a home/home with UND might make the most sense. Keep in mind, if you make it through the schedule, including the Valley meat grinder with 6 wins and a loss to UND, that won't look like a very wise decision though will it. Playing the in Valley has shown me that the best formula with the 3 OOC games is . . . 1 FBS, 1 FCS winnable game, 1 other FCS. If you go 2 FCS winnable games, your playoff chances go up significantly. Play a DII and forget it most years, the margin for error is too small. If I was the AD in Vermillion, I'd be trying to work out a 2 for 1 with someone like Drake. Easy travel (check) winnable FCS (check) smaller guarantee with 2-1 (check) IMO, perfect situation for USD. The 2-1 would be a small usd concession, and Drake would probably bite. Of course, if you played Drake and UND, that would be good for your 2 OOC FCS games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yote 53 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 That Drake and UND OOC lineup is the exact thing I had in mind. An OOC FCS game against a good opponent and an OOC FCS winnable game. A 2-1 with Drake would be great. Nice town, easy drive and it's a nice horseshoe stadium (I played a game there years and years ago). Othe OOC options would be an FCS buy-in, or straight home/home against another conference. The strength of the schedule would not bother me. The whole point is to play a full D1 schedule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herd Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 That Drake and UND OOC lineup is the exact thing I had in mind. An OOC FCS game against a good opponent and an OOC FCS winnable game. A 2-1 with Drake would be great. Nice town, easy drive and it's a nice horseshoe stadium (I played a game there years and years ago). Othe OOC options would be an FCS buy-in, or straight home/home against another conference. The strength of the schedule would not bother me. The whole point is to play a full D1 schedule. Total agreement! You are the one Dakota school who could develop a nice thing with Drake. Home/home OOC games against UND would also help to fill schedule while maintaining cost control, that's a good plan! Right now usd might have a little advantage on und, but that matchup will be pretty even over the long haul. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yote 53 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I fail to see how USD is the "one" Dakota school that could develop something with Drake. What prevents the other 3 schools from scheduling them? Drake is not very good but is an FCS counter. We played them back in 2009 and beat them like a drum. Wasn't even close. We've had games against NAIA schools (NW Oklahoma St) that were better opponents. Bottom line is Drake is a recognizable "name" school and is FCS. Modify: Doesn't UND open the season with Drake next year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShilohSioux Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I fail to see how USD is the "one" Dakota school that could develop something with Drake. What prevents the other 3 schools from scheduling them? Drake is not very good but is an FCS counter. We played them back in 2009 and beat them like a drum. Wasn't even close. We've had games against NAIA schools (NW Oklahoma St) that were better opponents. Bottom line is Drake is a recognizable "name" school and is FCS. Modify: Doesn't UND open the season with Drake next year? I wonder how long Drake and the other non-scholarship FCS teams will want to schedule UND and the MVFC teams if they keep getting pounded like Drake has by UNI, USD and Montana State the past three years? Might not be an option down the road that we can count on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfhockey Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Faison said today at the news conferences that he has 8 conference games locked in when und enters the big sky and its exaclty what he wanted. 4 home 4 away Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShilohSioux Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Faison said today at the news conferences that he has 8 conference games locked in when und enters the big sky and its exaclty what he wanted. 4 home 4 away Plus @San Diego State (the "other" SDSU) Central Arkansas @USD (if we can keep that one on the schedule after they join the MVFC) Hopefully we get one of the Montana schools home each year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Plus @San Diego State (the "other" SDSU) Central Arkansas @USD (if we can keep that one on the schedule after they join the MVFC) Hopefully we get one of the Montana schools home each year. I believe all Big Sky schools travel to one Montana school & host the other Montana school each season. There is no travel to both in one season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakotadan Posted January 26, 2011 Author Share Posted January 26, 2011 Did he happen to say if the actual Big Sky Conference schedule was completed of who will play who? Or just that they have decided on an 8-game conference schedule? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShilohSioux Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Plus @San Diego State (the "other" SDSU) Central Arkansas @USD (if we can keep that one on the schedule after they join the MVFC) Hopefully we get one of the Montana schools home each year. I believe all Big Sky schools travel to one Montana school & host the other Montana school each season. There is no travel to both in one season. What I was referring to here was that, with a 13-team conference, there's no guarantee we'll get both of the Montana schools on our schedule each year, or if we'll get one of them at home each season. That's why it would be nice if they'd add one more team, so they'd split into divisions. Every division scenario would place us with Montana and MSU, meaning annual games with each -- likely one at home and one away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tho0505 Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 What I was referring to here was that, with a 13-team conference, there's no guarantee we'll get both of the Montana schools on our schedule each year, or if we'll get one of them at home each season. That's why it would be nice if they'd add one more team, so they'd split into divisions. Every division scenario would place us with Montana and MSU, meaning annual games with each -- likely one at home and one away. They did that with the Big Ten. They have no protected rivalries built into schedules. Even though Michigan and OSU are in different divisions they play each other each year. Completely agree though, its important to start building an annual game with BOTH MSU and Montana so that rivalry can grow. Since we can kiss goodbye an annual game with South Dakota or NDSU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersioux Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 They did that with the Big Ten. They have no protected rivalries built into schedules. Even though Michigan and OSU are in different divisions they play each other each year. Completely agree though, its important to start building an annual game with BOTH MSU and Montana so that rivalry can grow. Since we can kiss goodbye an annual game with South Dakota or NDSU. I think everybody in the Big Sky will have that request since Montana travels so well. I doubt UND will play both MSU and UM every year. If the go with 1 "Rival" I would guess that UND would be paired with Northern CO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tho0505 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I think everybody in the Big Sky will have that request since Montana travels so well. I doubt UND will play both MSU and UM every year. If the go with 1 "Rival" I would guess that UND would be paired with Northern CO. True, the Grizz love their football thats for sure. I still remember watching games at the Memorial Stadium with the Golden Bears in town. I sure hope that doesn't become our "rival." That would make this whole big sky decision, not a good decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersioux Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Its obivious (from fasions press conference) that UND has the Big Sky's schedule in 2012 thru 2015. I wonder when they'll make those schedules public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfhockey Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Faison said he wasnt supposed to mention the football deal lol. it slipped out of his mouth on the coaches show he said our rivals are UNC and Montana state Each team has two rivals Montana State would be us and Montana So we are not oging to be paired with the grizzlies. The basketball sehculde is also 20 game congerence season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.