Conference Opportunities

[GeauxSioux]

I know that some have come to the conclusion that UND in the Summit is a slam dunk, but with all of the possible realignments coming in the next couple of years are there other possible opportunities? Big Sky? New conference?

MplsBison, this isn't intended to get your blood boiling, just some off-season banter.

[MplsBison]

Unless you're in one of the top conferences of the division (like the Big 10 in DI or previously the NCC in DII), there will always be conference shuffling and opportunities to move somewhere else...eventually.

In the next 5 years, the Summit is UND's only opportunity to get in an autobid conference.

After that? Of course there will be chances elsewhere. It's just too hard to see.

The prime movers usually come from the top. Something like a Big East split/expansion or an NCAA divisional re-classification would cause a fairly major shake-up that would ultimately filter down.

For the life of me, though, I still can't believe that people don't realize that the Dakota 4 have an opportunity to make the Summit League something special and turn some heads in the rest of the country...show some people that yeah, they can play up there in the tundra.

The Summit doesn't have to be like an Atlantic Sun or MEAC.

[WYOBISONMAN]

Unless you're in one of the top conferences of the division (like the Big 10 in DI or previously the NCC in DII), there will always be conference shuffling and opportunities to move somewhere else...eventually.

In the next 5 years, the Summit is UND's only opportunity to get in an autobid conference.

After that? Of course there will be chances elsewhere. It's just too hard to see.

The prime movers usually come from the top. Something like a Big East split/expansion or an NCAA divisional re-classification would cause a fairly major shake-up that would ultimately filter down.

For the life of me, though, I still can't believe that people don't realize that the Dakota 4 have an opportunity to make the Summit League something special and turn some heads in the rest of the country...show some people that yeah, they can play up there in the tundra.

The Summit doesn't have to be like an Atlantic Sun or MEAC.

One thing I have learned is that what may seem like the most logical end or route to a conference can look totally different in 18 months. Never count your chickens before they hatch.....and ....... one may hatch and you didn't even know there was an egg!!! It is interesting, nerve racking.....and exciting.

[GeauxSioux]

My Advice to the Mountain West Conference: It's Time to Expand

The writer of this piece thinks that the MWC should expand and two of the most obvious choices would be taking both Boise State and Fresno State from the WAC. The third team he supports in such a move is Houston.

If the MWC were to take two WAC teams, there would obviously be some reshuffling of the conferences in the western part of the US. Would some of the Big Sky teams look to make the leap to FBS? With the Great West all but dying in a couple years what will happen to Cal Poly and Davis?

Since UND has not yet been invited into the Summit, is the WAC a possiblity for UND and a leap to FBS? I'm sure I'll take my lumps for that one.

[82SiouxGuy]

My Advice to the Mountain West Conference: It's Time to Expand

The writer of this piece thinks that the MWC should expand and two of the most obvious choices would be taking both Boise State and Fresno State from the WAC. The third team he supports in such a move is Houston.

If the MWC were to take two WAC teams, there would obviously be some reshuffling of the conferences in the western part of the US. Would some of the Big Sky teams look to make the leap to FBS? With the Great West all but dying in a couple years what will happen to Cal Poly and Davis?

Since UND has not yet been invited into the Summit, is the WAC a possiblity for UND and a leap to FBS? I'm sure I'll take my lumps for that one.

The 2 teams out of the Big Sky that would make the most sense to me would be Montana and Montana State. That would make the Big Sky less desirable to UND. But it might make the Big Sky look at Cal Poly and Davis, or more likely Southern Utah and Utah Valley University. Southern Utah going to the Big Sky would probably make a lot of Summit League members happy because they could shrink their footprint and decrease travel. But anyone leaving the Great West for football would hurt UND.

UND would have a tough time making the leap to FBS with the current facilities, even without looking at things like travel to compete in the WAC and scholarships and all of the other things it would entail. UND would have to build a new football stadium plus the indoor training facility before they would have any chance to move up. Plus they would have to develop the attendance at all sports. UND won't be ready to even think about another move up to FBS for quite a while.

[GeauxSioux]

The 2 teams out of the Big Sky that would make the most sense to me would be Montana and Montana State. That would make the Big Sky less desirable to UND. But it might make the Big Sky look at Cal Poly and Davis, or more likely Southern Utah and Utah Valley University. Southern Utah going to the Big Sky would probably make a lot of Summit League members happy because they could shrink their footprint and decrease travel. But anyone leaving the Great West for football would hurt UND.

UND would have a tough time making the leap to FBS with the current facilities, even without looking at things like travel to compete in the WAC and scholarships and all of the other things it would entail. UND would have to build a new football stadium plus the indoor training facility before they would have any chance to move up. Plus they would have to develop the attendance at all sports. UND won't be ready to even think about another move up to FBS for quite a while.

Not that I want use Idaho as the poster child for UND to move to FBS, but I think UND's facilities are whole lot better than Idaho's facilities.

The training facility is a definite need for UND, but I think the Alerus would work in the short term even with the 15,000 attendance requirement, as discussed here.

[82SiouxGuy]

Not that I want use Idaho as the poster child for UND to move to FBS, but I think UND's facilities are whole lot better than Idaho's facilities.

The training facility is a definite need for UND, but I think the Alerus would work in the short term even with the 15,000 attendance requirement, as discussed here.

I think it would be tough using the Alerus for any length of time without a major overhaul, and I believe that said overhaul would be a tough sell for the city unless UND paid for it. I think that adding another 44 scholarships (going from 63 to 85 for football and the same increase for women) would be very difficult. I think that the travel would be tougher and more expensive for other sports when compared to the Summit. And it might be a tough sell to go alone, unless at least one of the other Dakota schools went along. NDSU would of course be the most logical, but that would require the schools working together.

Bottom line, it would cost a lot of money to make it happen and UND would need to increase their ticket buying fanbase for football and basketball by a significant margin to make it worthwhile. It isn't impossible, but it would definitely be a tough task and a tough sell at this time. Especially to the people that think UND should have stayed in DII.

[GeauxSioux]

I think it would be tough using the Alerus for any length of time without a major overhaul, and I believe that said overhaul would be a tough sell for the city unless UND paid for it. I think that adding another 44 scholarships (going from 63 to 85 for football and the same increase for women) would be very difficult. I think that the travel would be tougher and more expensive for other sports when compared to the Summit. And it might be a tough sell to go alone, unless at least one of the other Dakota schools went along. NDSU would of course be the most logical, but that would require the schools working together.

Bottom line, it would cost a lot of money to make it happen and UND would need to increase their ticket buying fanbase for football and basketball by a significant margin to make it worthwhile. It isn't impossible, but it would definitely be a tough task and a tough sell at this time. Especially to the people that think UND should have stayed in DII.

The key to all of your questions = Answer

I agree with pretty much everything you said. The move to FBS is likely many years away, but you never know what could happen if some dropped a nice large donation on UND.

I would love to see UND and NDSU work on such a move together.

[82SiouxGuy]

The key to all of your questions = Answer

I agree with pretty much everything you said. The move to FBS is likely many years away, but you never know what could happen if some dropped a nice large donation on UND.

I would love to see UND and NDSU work on such a move together.

NDSU would probably need a similar sized donation to make it happen. So we need several schools switching conferences and multi-million dollar donations made to both UND and NDSU all within a fairly short window in time. I think that's doable.

[star2city]

The 2 teams out of the Big Sky that would make the most sense to me would be Montana and Montana State. That would make the Big Sky less desirable to UND. But it might make the Big Sky look at Cal Poly and Davis, or more likely Southern Utah and Utah Valley University. Southern Utah going to the Big Sky would probably make a lot of Summit League members happy because they could shrink their footprint and decrease travel. But anyone leaving the Great West for football would hurt UND.

UND would have a tough time making the leap to FBS with the current facilities, even without looking at things like travel to compete in the WAC and scholarships and all of the other things it would entail. UND would have to build a new football stadium plus the indoor training facility before they would have any chance to move up. Plus they would have to develop the attendance at all sports. UND won't be ready to even think about another move up to FBS for quite a while.

The WAC commissioner has been stating that they won't expand: but if adding Boise St gets the MWC closer to a BCS bid, it will happen. Some sports columnists say next summer an announce will be made, and Boise St gone will begin a two year transition to the MWC. Fresno St and Houston are also considered targets if the MWC goes to 12.

The WAC officially denies anything like that will happen, but their likely just projecting a confident public mode when their actually almost panis-strickened:

WAC has no interest in a 10th team. It's possible the WAC could lose three teams (Boise, Fresno, LaTech).

Keep in mind that an FBS league must have eight members, but those members can be football-only members. FAU, FIU, Utah State, Idaho, and La-Monroe were all football-only members of the Sunbelt for a time. Rutgers, WVU, Virginia Tech were once football-only members of the Big East. CUSA had Army. The WAC can add football-only and all-sports members (like a Denver) separately.

Cal Poly and UCDavis would likely never accept a Big Sky offer: their sports offerings are too different. The WAC has always been their goal: and their attendance would likely increase substantially if they played more local schools and were at the FBS level. FAU and FIU didn't have 15,000 seat stadiums when they moved up: Poly and Davis would have time too.

[bincitysioux]

also the Summit was #26 in RPI last year the BSC was #24 Summit actually passed the BSC once in the regular season, the BSC is not as strong of a conference as you like to think but your hatred for NDSU causes you to distort the truth.

This isn't related to scheduling, but personally I feel that in general, the Big Sky is a better overall conference than the Summit. You have larger state-named "flagship" schools like Montana, Montana St., & Idaho St., along with a high quality school in Weber St., and a traditionally familiar school in Northern Colorado versus commuter schools like IUPUI, IPFW, Oakland, and UMKC.

Don't get me wrong, I would love for North Dakota to get an invite to the Summit..............all the other Dakota schools plus an auto-bid home for every sport. That would be awesome.

But on top of the "prestige" factor, a UND fan has to consider that Summit membership means across the board, one set of opponents for football (Great West), another set for hockey (WCHA), and another entirely different set for basketball/everything else (Summit League).

UND won't be given the choice, but if they were, I'd take the Big Sky every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[Goon]

UND won't be given the choice, but if they were, I'd take the Big Sky every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I would too, I wonder if our administrators are focused in on only the Summit

[82SiouxGuy]

I would too, I wonder if our administrators are focused in on only the Summit

I am pretty sure that they are open to all league possibilities. However, the Big Sky has shown very little interest in expansion and even less interest in expanding to the Central time zone. Something major would have to change within the league before they would seriously consider UND. The only league that currently is actively interested in expansion and makes sense geographically is the Summit.

[MplsBison]

This isn't related to scheduling, but personally I feel that in general, the Big Sky is a better overall conference than the Summit. You have larger state-named "flagship" schools like Montana, Montana St., & Idaho St., along with a high quality school in Weber St., and a traditionally familiar school in Northern Colorado versus commuter schools like IUPUI, IPFW, Oakland, and UMKC.

Don't get me wrong, I would love for North Dakota to get an invite to the Summit..............all the other Dakota schools plus an auto-bid home for every sport. That would be awesome.

But on top of the "prestige" factor, a UND fan has to consider that Summit membership means across the board, one set of opponents for football (Great West), another set for hockey (WCHA), and another entirely different set for basketball/everything else (Summit League).

UND won't be given the choice, but if they were, I'd take the Big Sky every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I guess we are going to do this in this thread..ok. But feel free to split off.

1) you're wasting your time/breath/fingers on this. West Coast schools will never allow Dakota expansion. That's simply the end of the story.

Sorry.

And don't think any huffing and puffing from Montana schools is going to scare them. They tried when NDSU/SDSU wanted in. Nothing.

Until Montana has a WAC invite, the west coast BSC schools know they have no where to go.

2) without the MT schools, the BSC is as worthless of a conference as you can get. It has zero appeal to UND in that scenario

3) Montana and MSU are the only flagship public schools in the conference.

Idaho State is NOT a flagship, neither perceived or actual. They were a junior college that did a Utah Valley type move some years ago and snatched up the "ISU" naming rights before Boise St could.

The rest of the schools are 4th or worse in their respective states.

4) I believe there is a small chance that eventually we (the SL) could peel off the MT schools and form a northern plains/mountain conference, either wholly by itself or as part of the SL, that would be the U and State in ND, SD and MT. That could be a 6 team division in the SL with Metro schools in the Eastern div (Oakland Detroit, IPFW Fort Wayne, IUPUI Indy, UNK Cincy, UMKC KC, WIU) while letting SUU, ORU and Cent leave.

Far fetched, but you never know.

[tjbison]

This isn't related to scheduling, but personally I feel that in general, the Big Sky is a better overall conference than the Summit. You have larger state-named "flagship" schools like Montana, Montana St., & Idaho St., along with a high quality school in Weber St., and a traditionally familiar school in Northern Colorado versus commuter schools like IUPUI, IPFW, Oakland, and UMKC.

Don't get me wrong, I would love for North Dakota to get an invite to the Summit..............all the other Dakota schools plus an auto-bid home for every sport. That would be awesome.

But on top of the "prestige" factor, a UND fan has to consider that Summit membership means across the board, one set of opponents for football (Great West), another set for hockey (WCHA), and another entirely different set for basketball/everything else (Summit League).

UND won't be given the choice, but if they were, I'd take the Big Sky every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Fair enough at least you supported your thoughts with something other than this >

[mksioux]

I guess we are going to do this in this thread..ok. But feel free to split off.

1) you're wasting your time/breath/fingers on this. West Coast schools will never allow Dakota expansion. That's simply the end of the story.

Sorry.

And don't think any huffing and puffing from Montana schools is going to scare them. They tried when NDSU/SDSU wanted in. Nothing.

Until Montana has a WAC invite, the west coast BSC schools know they have no where to go.

2) without the MT schools, the BSC is as worthless of a conference as you can get. It has zero appeal to UND in that scenario

3) Montana and MSU are the only flagship public schools in the conference.

Idaho State is NOT a flagship, neither perceived or actual. They were a junior college that did a Utah Valley type move some years ago and snatched up the "ISU" naming rights before Boise St could.

The rest of the schools are 4th or worse in their respective states.

4) I believe there is a small chance that eventually we (the SL) could peel off the MT schools and form a northern plains/mountain conference, either wholly by itself or as part of the SL, that would be the U and State in ND, SD and MT. That could be a 6 team division in the SL with Metro schools in the Eastern div (Oakland Detroit, IPFW Fort Wayne, IUPUI Indy, UNK Cincy, UMKC KC, WIU) while letting SUU, ORU and Cent leave.

Far fetched, but you never know.

All fair points. And if UND were sitting pretty in the Missouri Valley Football Conference like NDSU, then obviously the Summit would be preferable to the Big Sky. But the fact that the Big Sky offers football in and of itself makes it more appealing than the Summit Conference. UND's football conference situation may not yet be dire, but it's pretty close to getting there. The Great West Football Conference is not a viable conference long-term and UND needs to find a more permanent home. That is not a knock on the Great West. UC-Davis and Cal Poly are great institutions and have great football programs. But the reality is that everyone in that conference would bolt for a different home if given the opportunity.

But I agree with you to the extent that there are no signs that the the Big Sky is at all interested in UND and, therefore, UND should not pass up an opportunity at the Summit for the remote possibility that the Big Sky might eventually consider UND.

In the meantime (to get this back on the topic of schedules), I applaud all games scheduled against Big Sky and MVFC schools. UND should be establishing relationships with as many of those schools as possible.

[UNDvince97-01]

Geographically, I think I would would prefer the Summit and the MVFC over the Big Sky. Also, the MVFC is a MUCH better football conference from top to bottom than the BSC. The regional scheduling alliances with certain schools would be the biggest key for me for football. I also would hope that we could have USD along as well. What a great conference for football that would be. The BSC probably has the better overall basketball conference though. Getting into the Summit lends a helping hand to eventually getting into the MVFC, which is what should be our ultimate goal in my opinion.

[MplsBison]

Geographically, I think I would would prefer the Summit and the MVFC over the Big Sky. Also, the MVFC is a MUCH better football conference from top to bottom than the BSC. The regional scheduling alliances with certain schools would be the biggest key for me for football. I also would hope that we could have USD along as well. What a great conference for football that would be. The BSC probably has the better overall basketball conference though. Getting into the Summit lends a helping hand to eventually getting into the MVFC, which is what should be our ultimate goal in my opinion.

BSC may have better overall basketball right now...by a smidge.

But add in UND and USD... I think the advantage is now back to the Summit, once those two programs get ramped up to full DI bball status. And who knows, maybe down the road both will have new 6-8k bball specific arenas?

[MplsBison]

All fair points. And if UND were sitting pretty in the Missouri Valley Football Conference like NDSU, then obviously the Summit would be preferable to the Big Sky. But the fact that the Big Sky offers football in and of itself makes it more appealing than the Summit Conference. UND's football conference situation may not yet be dire, but it's pretty close to getting there. The Great West Football Conference is not a viable conference long-term and UND needs to find a more permanent home. That is not a knock on the Great West. UC-Davis and Cal Poly are great institutions and have great football programs. But the reality is that everyone in that conference would bolt for a different home if given the opportunity.

But I agree with you to the extent that there are no signs that the the Big Sky is at all interested in UND and, therefore, UND should not pass up an opportunity at the Summit for the remote possibility that the Big Sky might eventually consider UND.

In the meantime (to get this back on the topic of schedules), I applaud all games scheduled against Big Sky and MVFC schools. UND should be establishing relationships with as many of those schools as possible.

Despite all the message board losers who want to deny UND/USD access to the MVFC, purely out of hatred for me personally...I think it's inevitable that both U's will be in. It makes no sense to include only half of the state flagships.

Now..if we added the MT flagships to that equation and give IN SU the boot...

UM

MT SU

NDSU

UND

USD

SDSU

UNI

WIU

SIU

IL SU

MO SU

YSU

The mid-country version of the CAA.

[bincitysioux]

I guess we are going to do this in this thread..ok. But feel free to split off.

1) you're wasting your time/breath/fingers on this. West Coast schools will never allow Dakota expansion. That's simply the end of the story.

Sorry.

And don't think any huffing and puffing from Montana schools is going to scare them. They tried when NDSU/SDSU wanted in. Nothing.

Until Montana has a WAC invite, the west coast BSC schools know they have no where to go.

I'm not really wasting my time, since I know the chances are about 1% or less that UND will ever be in the Big Sky. And it's not like lobbying for UND to make a huge push for the Big Sky, I was just saying that personally, I prefer the Big Sky to the Summit, but I like both. I also prefer the Big 12 to the Big 10, but I like both.

But things do and can change. Times are tough in CA, particularly in the CS-University system, how viable is Sac State's football program. They're probably fine, but you never know. 2 seasons ago Portland State was putting a stipulation in their game contracts that they would be "off the hook" if they decided to to drop football.

2) without the MT schools, the BSC is as worthless of a conference as you can get. It has zero appeal to UND in that scenario

Last I checked, the MT schools are in the Big Sky conference. Northern Colorado is appealing to UND fans because the familiarity and past rivalry. Weber St. is an exceptional school.

3) Montana and MSU are the only flagship public schools in the conference.

Idaho State is NOT a flagship, neither perceived or actual. They were a junior college that did a Utah Valley type move some years ago and snatched up the "ISU" naming rights before Boise St could.

The rest of the schools are 4th or worse in their respective states.

Why do you hate on Idaho St. so much? I know that they are no western power-house in college athletics, but they are a state-named school similar in size to all of the Dakota schools. That alone makes them a more appealing opponent than say IUPUI or IPFW to the casual sports fan.

Other than the 3 Dakota Summit schools, where do you rank the rest of the Summit League members in their respective states?

4) I believe there is a small chance that eventually we (the SL) could peel off the MT schools and form a northern plains/mountain conference, either wholly by itself or as part of the SL, that would be the U and State in ND, SD and MT. That could be a 6 team division in the SL with Metro schools in the Eastern div (Oakland Detroit, IPFW Fort Wayne, IUPUI Indy, UNK Cincy, UMKC KC, WIU) while letting SUU, ORU and Cent leave.

Far fetched, but you never know.

That ain't gonna happen, but if it did, why would you want to jettison Oral Roberts, the most high-profile member of your league?

On a side note, how does an announcement of two games, one of which won't be played for a year and the other for 4 years, ignite such discussion about conference affiliation?

We're also playing two Big 12 schools in men's basketball this year.............where's the UND to the Big 12 thread!?

[MplsBison]

I'm not really wasting my time, since I know the chances are about 1% or less that UND will ever be in the Big Sky. And it's not like lobbying for UND to make a huge push for the Big Sky, I was just saying that personally, I prefer the Big Sky to the Summit, but I like both. I also prefer the Big 12 to the Big 10, but I like both.

But things do and can change. Times are tough in CA, particularly in the CS-University system, how viable is Sac State's football program. They're probably fine, but you never know. 2 seasons ago Portland State was putting a stipulation in their game contracts that they would be "off the hook" if they decided to to drop football.

Last I checked, the MT schools are in the Big Sky conference. Northern Colorado is appealing to UND fans because the familiarity and past rivalry. Weber St. is an exceptional school.

Why do you hate on Idaho St. so much? I know that they are no western power-house in college athletics, but they are a state-named school similar in size to all of the Dakota schools. That alone makes them a more appealing opponent than say IUPUI or IPFW to the casual sports fan.

Other than the 3 Dakota Summit schools, where do you rank the rest of the Summit League members in their respective states?

That ain't gonna happen, but if it did, why would you want to jettison Oral Roberts, the most high-profile member of your league?

On a side note, how does an announcement of two games, one of which won't be played for a year and the other for 4 years, ignite such discussion about conference affiliation?

We're also playing two Big 12 schools in men's basketball this year.............where's the UND to the Big 12 thread!?

Idaho State is a "[state name] State University" in name only. They are not a high research school like NDSU, SDSU and MSU are. They are not a land grant, like NDSU, SDSU and MSU are. They are really just above a junior college in that they offer bachelor's degrees. Academically, they are no where close to the same level.

That fact that casual fans stupidly associate all "[state name] State University" schools as the same is not my problem. South Carolina State is a HBCU, for crying out loud. About as opposite as you can get from NDSU.

Don't think I need to comment on the rest. The fact that you like the Big Sky is based on the Montana schools being in it, just as it is for every other single UND fan who prefers the Big Sky. Without them, it has no appeal.

[star2city]

What's interesting about the Montana - UND series is that Montana has now scheduled home-home series with three Great West teams (UC-Davis, Cal Poly, UND) that should give Montana more of a game than most of their Big Sky opponents. Montana could have continued scheduling Western State or Dixie State and still sold out their stadiums. Instead Montana seems to want to chose to be somewhat benevolent to and strengthen western schools that may have FBS potential if Montana ever leaves the Big Sky.

If the WAC ends up losing Boise State (likely) and Fresno State (possible) to the MWC, the WAC will almost need to reinvent itself as a FBS conference (adding non-football core members and affiliate football members). UND to the Big Sky is no longer possible, but affiliate membership in a WAC football league (Summit in other sports) might be:

A WAC Pacific (football only) division of

Nevada - full member

UC Davis (stays in Big West )

Sac St - full member

Cal Poly (Stays in Big West)

Hawaii - full member

San Jose St - full member

A WAC Mountain (football only) division of

Idaho - full member

Utah St - full member

N Mex S - full member

Montana - full member

Montana St - full member

(someone else - few other options - UND, as affiliate?)

I have serious doubts about UND getting into the MVFC (USD likely has a much better shot, which would make 10 members). FBS membership might have to be considered at some point in order to firm up a football affiliation.

[Herd]

What's interesting about the Montana - UND series is that Montana has now scheduled home-home series with three Great West teams (UC-Davis, Cal Poly, UND) that should give Montana more of a game than most of their Big Sky opponents. Montana could have continued scheduling Western State or Dixie State and still sold out their stadiums. Instead Montana seems to want to chose to be somewhat benevolent to and strengthen western schools that may have FBS potential if Montana ever leaves the Big Sky.

If the WAC ends up losing Boise State (likely) and Fresno State (possible) to the MWC, the WAC will almost need to reinvent itself as a FBS conference (adding non-football core members and affiliate football members). UND to the Big Sky is no longer possible, but affiliate membership in a WAC football league (Summit in other sports) might be:

A WAC Pacific (football only) division of

Nevada - full member

UC Davis (stays in Big West )

Sac St - full member

Cal Poly (Stays in Big West)

Hawaii - full member

San Jose St - full member

A WAC Mountain (football only) division of

Idaho - full member

Utah St - full member

N Mex S - full member

Montana - full member

Montana St - full member

(someone else - few other options - UND, as affiliate?)

I have serious doubts about UND getting into the MVFC (USD likely has a much better shot, which would make 10 members). FBS membership might have to be considered at some point in order to firm up a football affiliation.

Why would you want to join WAC football and not join the WAC for all sports. Easily the biggest hurdle (sport wise) is football due to the significant cost. Why would you make that investment to leave your other sports in the Summit or GW? If you were going to join the WAC in football, you would insist on doing it for all sports or you wouldn't do it in the first place. From the WAC's standpoint, if they wanted to take a football member, they would want them for all sports or they probably wouldn't want them in the first place.

I could see where a Cal Poly might join the WAC as a football affiliate for 1-2 years, but they would do it with a WAC all sports guarantee after that time if they were smart. For a school like UND where you are looking for an all sport conference with outbids, joining the WAC for football only would be a death sentence to you other sports if they didn't also move the WAC as the football cost would suck you dry in all other areas. Trying to understand your logic.

Don't get me wrong, a move to the WAC with a partner like Montana would be awesome, but I wouldn't do it and leave my other sports in the GW or even the Summit. Montana wouldn't do it, why would UND.

[star2city]

Why would you want to join WAC football and not join the WAC for all sports. Easily the biggest hurdle (sport wise) is football due to the significant cost. Why would you make that investment to leave your other sports in the Summit or GW? If you were going to join the WAC in football, you would insist on doing it for all sports or you wouldn't do it in the first place. From the WAC's standpoint, if they wanted to take a football member, they would want them for all sports or they probably wouldn't want them in the first place.

I could see where a Cal Poly might join the WAC as a football affiliate for 1-2 years, but they would do it with a WAC all sports guarantee after that time if they were smart. For a school like UND where you are looking for an all sport conference with outbids, joining the WAC for football only would be a death sentence to you other sports if they didn't also move the WAC as the football cost would suck you dry in all other areas. Trying to understand your logic.

Don't get me wrong, a move to the WAC with a partner like Montana would be awesome, but I wouldn't do it and leave my other sports in the GW or even the Summit. Montana wouldn't do it, why would UND.

If UND was offered full membership to the WAC, that would obviously trump any other option. But full membership isn't going to happen to UND (or NDSU) anytime soon, if ever.

Pretty simple short explanation: if Boise, Fresno (and La Tech and possibly NMSU) are gone, the WAC would need entry-level FBS schools with no questions asked, but could be much more geographically selective about all-sports members (without football).

Longer explanation:

If the WAC loses Boise and Fresno, the WAC would basically drop to a very low-level FBS league: lower than the current Sunbelt. Keeping the WAC viable would take a different plan than normal. The WAC would likely have to offer affiliate membership to Cal Poly and UC-Davis in football (Big West fits better for them for all-sports would be lower risk). Idaho is struggling now: the loss of it's Boise St rivalry would leave it as a northern outpost in a conference with no true rival. The WAC schools have to keep Idaho and Utah State healthy as FBS schools. What the WAC would really need is regional grouping of football schools to assure that attendance (and interest) stay high. If BOise State's gone, I think Montana's interest in the WAC would increase as Montana would be more than competitive with the remainder of the WAC (Montana has not desire to be the little dogs in a conference to Boise and Fresno: too much risk).

Having division groupings like Nevada-San Jose-Davis-Sacramento-Poly plus another grouping like Idaho-Montana-Montana St-Utah St-UND would allow a number of rivalries and high visitor attendance for division games. An Idaho-UC-Davis football game would not do much for either fan base, but an Idaho-Montana or UC-Davis-Nevada game would be sell outs.

The Sun Belt FBS league was basically an amalgamation of FBS schools that needed each other: N Mex St, La-Monroe, Troy, FIU, FAU were all affiliate members first before any of them became full members (NMSU later left for the WAC and could go back to the Sunbelt if the WAC loses prestige). Non-FBS core members like W Kentucky, New Orleans, South Alabama, and UA-LR kept the Sun Belt together as an all-sports until football became strong enough to be the main driver. If the WAC loses Boise St and Fresno St, it's football side could have to evolve similar to how lthe Sunbelt did. The WAC is more likely to need an FBS football program (UND football) than UND all-sports.

[MplsBison]

What's interesting about the Montana - UND series is that Montana has now scheduled home-home series with three Great West teams (UC-Davis, Cal Poly, UND) that should give Montana more of a game than most of their Big Sky opponents. Montana could have continued scheduling Western State or Dixie State and still sold out their stadiums. Instead Montana seems to want to chose to be somewhat benevolent to and strengthen western schools that may have FBS potential if Montana ever leaves the Big Sky.

If the WAC ends up losing Boise State (likely) and Fresno State (possible) to the MWC, the WAC will almost need to reinvent itself as a FBS conference (adding non-football core members and affiliate football members). UND to the Big Sky is no longer possible, but affiliate membership in a WAC football league (Summit in other sports) might be:

A WAC Pacific (football only) division of

Nevada - full member

UC Davis (stays in Big West )

Sac St - full member

Cal Poly (Stays in Big West)

Hawaii - full member

San Jose St - full member

A WAC Mountain (football only) division of

Idaho - full member

Utah St - full member

N Mex S - full member

Montana - full member

Montana St - full member

(someone else - few other options - UND, as affiliate?)

I have serious doubts about UND getting into the MVFC (USD likely has a much better shot, which would make 10 members). FBS membership might have to be considered at some point in order to firm up a football affiliation.

Why do you doubt UND or USD will eventually be in the MVFC? Makes no sense to only have half of the Dakota flagships.