johnson Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Hawaii is in a major bind. When fuel costs were lower, they probably could have gone independent in football, but with their other programs in the Big West. Now, they really need conference football games to fill the schedule. When the WAC lost UTEP, SMU, Tulsa, and Rice seven or eight years ago, all the sportswriters were declaring the WAC dead. In the 90's, when the MWC 8 left the WAC16, the whole sports wold declared the WAC dead. When Arizona and Arizona St left the WAC 30 some years ago, the whole sports world declared the WAC dead. The WAC always reinvents itself. The major issue for UND is having a plan for a 15,000 seat capacity stadium in which we have to play more than half our games. Seven years ago, NDSU made the move and didn't have a conference. An FBS conference is available. The only ingredient missing is a 15,000 seat stadium, which means a funds must be quickly raised. An indoor practice facility is the first step, but either an addition to the Alerus or a Memorial Stadium renovation to 15,000+ is needed. FAU and FIU didn't have facilities for years that met FBS standards, yet the NCAA didn't kick them out. As long as UND has plans and is working on them, the NCAA's precedence has shown it doesn't care. We need to think about this from an historic standpoint. When the WAC fills up again with schools, will they then go looking or North Dakota five or ten years from now? No. This is our shot. Every school that the WAC is looking at - with the possible exception of Texas schools - are in states with major budget crisis. UND and North Dakota are in better financial shape than comparably any time in our history. We have to recruit Texas and California for FCS recruits anyway: why not make that full commitment? While SDSU can probably make a leap to FBS much later in the future, their budget of only $10 mill is very low for all the sports they offer even at the FCS level. USD's budget is even low compared to the low rent district of the Big Sky. Those two schools would be more than happy in the MVFC. That said, one of the beauties of a new WAC is the ability to control costs, even at the FBS level. A major expense of FBS at most schools is paying coaches high six or even seven figures. If coaches salaries are controlled like at Sunbelt levels in a new WAC, it is affordable. It was mentioned this spring when all the conference speculation was flying around that in order for NDSU to be relatively competitive in the FBS the school would have to raise approx. $7 million more a year. That didn't include the 22 more scholarships needed to reach the 85 allowed for football. If things really hit the fan I could see NDSU making the move but I believe they want to make the move the right way when the money and support is there. I don't think NDSU is ready to go and ask the state for $7 million more a year for athletics. I think the best thing for UND right now would be to look at the Big Sky if/when some of those schools make the move and then build from there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted August 20, 2010 Author Share Posted August 20, 2010 It was mentioned this spring when all the conference speculation was flying around that in order for NDSU to be relatively competitive in the FBS the school would have to raise approx. $7 million more a year. That didn't include the 22 more scholarships needed to reach the 85 allowed for football. If things really hit the fan I could see NDSU making the move but I believe they want to make the move the right way when the money and support is there. I don't think NDSU is ready to go and ask the state for $7 million more a year for athletics. I think the best thing for UND right now would be to look at the Big Sky if/when some of those schools make the move and then build from there. It all depends on what schools you are comparing yourself with. If NDSU wanted to be competitive in the MWC, it probably would be $7 million. In the old WAC, $4 million. In the Sunbelt, new WAC, MAC, $2 million. Bowling Green, which has a DI hockey program and FBS football and was in a bowl game, has a budget of $18 million. UND has one of $17 million. NDSU: $13 mill Ball State: $19 mill. Idaho: $16 mill. in a bowl game Utah State: $18 mill San Jose St: $18 mill Troy: $15 mill La Tech: $16 mill La-Monroe: $10 mill Granted, all of the programs noted are low budget FBS, either in the WAC, MAC, or Sunbelt. That's the beauty of a new WAC: all the programs would have low budgets (except Hawaii if they are still there). No outrageous coaches salaries. FBS football at budget prices. But also remember, conference reimbursements are much higher in the WAC: more NCAA money, more basketball bid money, more TV money. Idaho's AD has stated it could no longer afford to go FCS, as it would lose so much with WAC payments and with one-time deals with FBS opponents. (Idaho is being paid much more than SDSU for playing Nebraska, because the Idaho-Nebraska game counts as a true FBS game.) The WAC payments are certain to go down, so Idaho may struggle even more financially. But Idaho games are shown nationally on ESPN2 on Thursday nights. That's publicity Idaho can't buy at the FCS level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 While the article certainly doesn't make the WAC look very enticing today, we have to ask ourselves where we see this whole thing going in 5 years or so. DI athletics is going to change. This summer was the firing of the first shot but changes are coming. Why wouldn't we look at being a part of a 16 team conference with schools from Montana, Utah, Cal., etc.? I realize that NDSU is in a better place today than UND but from a financial perspective, how much more would have to be raised? Both schools have facilities that are looking to be renovated or built anyway, just build them a little bigger. Whats 20 more scholarships for football? Its not like either school is having trouble finding players and our recruiting has already stretched in to Calif. and Ariz. NDSU is very active in Texas already so whats the big deal. 7 years ago NDSU made the leap and UND didn't. We didn't and today, we're paying for our short-sightedness and narrow-minded thinking. Do we want to make that same mistake again now? Especially when we have no real conference and absolutely no rivalry games on our schedule. If the WAC came to UND, NDSU, SDSU, and USD and said they would put us in a conference along with Montana, Mont. St., and whoever else would we really be telling ourselves not to make that jump? C'mon folks, this could be the answer to all our problems!!!!! I just don't think the money is there to do this. As hostile as the legislature is toward higher ed, the state will never pay for it and the private funds in a down economy won't support it. Wyoming has more money that ND (as a state) and we only have one school and the Cowboys are marginally competative in the MWC. Besides the fact that the WAC is a train wreck today, it is about money. And we still have not discussed the issue of needing a bigger stadium. Remember FBS requires average attendance of 15,000 as a minimum. That being said, a conference that had the ND and MT schools in it would really create some great rivalry games. Although, I do have to say that the "manuactured rivalry" between NDSU and SDSU has actually turned into the real McCoy. I know myself and most of the fans I am friends with really don't like those folks from Brookings. And.....I really don't like the UNI bunch either, and that one was never really pushed as a rivalry. The just have very irritating fans. And the ORU bunch is not to high on my list either.......LOL. None the less, annual games between the MT and ND schools would be great events. All that being said, I would be opposed to a jump to the WAC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 I don't think the question is whether the WAC would be a good idea for UND. The WAC would solve all of UND's problems and would exceed anyone's wildest expectations. The larger question is whether the WAC, even in its present situation, would be even remotely interested in UND. I've seen nothing indicating it would be. I think the money could be raised if WAC membership was a reality, I just don't think it is. More importantly, in the Herald, Faison didn't even hint that it was a remote possibility or that he's even exploring it. He seems content with monitoring the situation and maybe filling a spot in the Big Sky if it loses schools to the WAC. Maybe there's something going on behind the scenes, but I doubt it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 UND shouldn't concern itself with what NDSU wants to do. If UND accepted, NDSU would immediately panic and then accept. Same with Montana and Montana St. NDSU wouldn't be breaking their contract with MVC: they just exercise the exit clause. It's looking more and more like La Tech will leave the WAC, even for the Sunbelt. If that is the case, as stated before, the WAC could become the Big Sky on steroids. Hawaii San Jose St Cal Poly Sac St UC Davis Utah St Idaho Montana Montana St N Dakota NDSU NMexSt http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/14499/wac-commish-karl-benson-comes-out-firing Benson said the remaining six schools, though, aren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Hawaii is in a major bind. When fuel costs were lower, they probably could have gone independent in football, but with their other programs in the Big West. Now, they really need conference football games to fill the schedule. When the WAC lost UTEP, SMU, Tulsa, and Rice seven or eight years ago, all the sportswriters were declaring the WAC dead. In the 90's, when the MWC 8 left the WAC16, the whole sports wold declared the WAC dead. When Arizona and Arizona St left the WAC 30 some years ago, the whole sports world declared the WAC dead. The WAC always reinvents itself. The major issue for UND is having a plan for a 15,000 seat capacity stadium in which we have to play more than half our games. Seven years ago, NDSU made the move and didn't have a conference. An FBS conference is available. The only ingredient missing is a 15,000 seat stadium, which means a funds must be quickly raised. An indoor practice facility is the first step, but either an addition to the Alerus or a Memorial Stadium renovation to 15,000+ is needed. FAU and FIU didn't have facilities for years that met FBS standards, yet the NCAA didn't kick them out. As long as UND has plans and is working on them, the NCAA's precedence has shown it doesn't care. We need to think about this from an historic standpoint. When the WAC fills up again with schools, will they then go looking or North Dakota five or ten years from now? No. This is our shot. Every school that the WAC is looking at - with the possible exception of Texas schools - are in states with major budget crisis. UND and North Dakota are in better financial shape than comparably any time in our history. We have to recruit Texas and California for FCS recruits anyway: why not make that full commitment? While SDSU can probably make a leap to FBS much later in the future, their budget of only $10 mill is very low for all the sports they offer even at the FCS level. USD's budget is even low compared to the low rent district of the Big Sky. Those two schools would be more than happy in the MVFC. That said, one of the beauties of a new WAC is the ability to control costs, even at the FBS level. A major expense of FBS at most schools is paying coaches high six or even seven figures. If coaches salaries are controlled like at Sunbelt levels in a new WAC, it is affordable. I will take exception about requirement to recruit in California and Texas. IMO, that's an accountant's view of college football recruiting, from his desk. The majority of NDSU starters, even in the skill positions will be from the upper midwest. There is nothing genetically different about a HS player in CA or TX than there is with a HS player in MN or WI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted August 20, 2010 Author Share Posted August 20, 2010 I don't think the question is whether the WAC would be a good idea for UND. The WAC would solve all of UND's problems and would exceed anyone's wildest expectations. The larger question is whether the WAC, even in its present situation, would be even remotely interested in UND. I've seen nothing indicating it would be. I think the money could be raised if WAC membership was a reality, I just don't think it is. More importantly, in the Herald, Faison didn't even hint that it was a remote possibility or that he's even exploring it. He seems content with monitoring the situation and maybe filling a spot in the Big Sky if it loses schools to the WAC. Maybe there's something going on behind the scenes, but I doubt it. All good points. I don't think the WAC would be interested in any North Dakota school until both Montana and Montana State are in - getting both in might be a stretch, but is conceivable. Benson is playing to La Tech and NMSU, to keep them in, and he can do that be adding UTSA and Texas State. But those type schools are disaster for Idaho and San Jose St. La Tech and NMSU are flight risks anyway, so the WAC needs to be looking at schools that would strengthen San Jose State and Idaho. Benson needs to be more concerned with SJSU and Idaho dropping to FCS or dropping football. Cal Poly, UCDavis, and Sac St would all be big boosts for San Jose St, while Montana, Montana St, and to a lesser extent UND and NDSU would be peers and rivals of Idaho. What UND needs to do is show the WAC that it has a plan for FBS and that it would be a reliable partner. If La Tech leaves soon, Benson will have to reevaluate his thoughts on UTSA and Texas State, as San Jose St, Idaho, and Hawaii would be opposed to those schools for anything but a last resort option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 If I may generalize.....I think those mid-west kids have a better work ethic and team ethic. But....being from ND I likely am biased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 I don't think the question is whether the WAC would be a good idea for UND. The WAC would solve all of UND's problems and would exceed anyone's wildest expectations. The larger question is whether the WAC, even in its present situation, would be even remotely interested in UND. I've seen nothing indicating it would be. I think the money could be raised if WAC membership was a reality, I just don't think it is. More importantly, in the Herald, Faison didn't even hint that it was a remote possibility or that he's even exploring it. He seems content with monitoring the situation and maybe filling a spot in the Big Sky if it loses schools to the WAC. Maybe there's something going on behind the scenes, but I doubt it. The biggest question right now is.....will Hawaii leave and will MT get an invite? Also.....would MT accept? I think the more likely scenario for UND would be filling a hole in the Sky created by movement to the WAC. But, remember, in the past the Big Sky has shown aversion to travel to ND and playing in the Central timezone. With MT out of the Sky a lot of objection to SUU would be gone and I think SUU is a more likely pick. The domino effect of that one would be to open up a slot in the Summit. That still does not solve your football problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted August 20, 2010 Author Share Posted August 20, 2010 I just don't think the money is there to do this. As hostile as the legislature is toward higher ed, the state will never pay for it and the private funds in a down economy won't support it. Wyoming has more money that ND (as a state) and we only have one school and the Cowboys are marginally competative in the MWC. Besides the fact that the WAC is a train wreck today, it is about money. And we still have not discussed the issue of needing a bigger stadium. Remember FBS requires average attendance of 15,000 as a minimum. That being said, a conference that had the ND and MT schools in it would really create some great rivalry games. Although, I do have to say that the "manuactured rivalry" between NDSU and SDSU has actually turned into the real McCoy. I know myself and most of the fans I am friends with really don't like those folks from Brookings. And.....I really don't like the UNI bunch either, and that one was never really pushed as a rivalry. The just have very irritating fans. And the ORU bunch is not to high on my list either.......LOL. None the less, annual games between the MT and ND schools would be great events. All that being said, I would be opposed to a jump to the WAC. ND doesn't actually have a down economy and ND now has more money than Wyoming. I'm not advocating at all that ND pay for a UND or a NDSU FBS venture. What I am saying is that ND likely won't be cutting higher education budgets anytime in the forseeable future. I believe that UND alumni would step forward in a significant way if it meant UND moving to a higher level in other sports. As far as Wyoming and the MWC, the finance of the MWC are by and large a whole other level higher than the WAC. The MWC took the three of the four WAC teams that had comparable budgets (Boise, Fresno, Nevada, but not Hawaii because of its huge travel and scheduling issues). Wyoming's athletic budget is $26 million, much higher than UND would have to go, and Wyoming gets a much higher level of subsidy from the state. As far as the 15,000 attendance rule, remember, it's 15,000 every other year, and it doesn't have to be butts in the seats. All tickets sold at 1/3rd the list price plus student attendance counts. The 15,000 facility is the catch, but UND has Memorial Stadium that could be renovated to 18,000 for three games, and then the final two games at the Alerus. If we moved to FBS, we could sign a home and "home" with Minnesota, and play our "home" game in either the Metrodome or a new Vikings stadium. Minnesota would actually go for that, as we'd be an FBS counter that wouldn't cost them a dime. The attendance in the Vikings stadium would all count as UND's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted August 20, 2010 Author Share Posted August 20, 2010 Sporting News: Hawaii considering going independent Maybe Hawaii is gone. Perhaps La Tech is gone. A Big Sky on steroids is looking more and more possible. UND is easily compliant now with the 16 sports requirement, unlike Montana, Montana State, UTSA, and Texas State. Meanwhile, the WAC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Actually Wyoming is sitting with between $4 billion and $5 billion in our mineral trust fund. Almost any instate kid that goes to the University gets at least a 50% scholie from the state.....pretty sweet deal.....especially when you got college age kids.... My link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Actually Wyoming is sitting with between $4 billion and $5 billion in our mineral trust fund. Almost any instate kid that goes to the University gets at least a 50% scholie from the state.....pretty sweet deal.....especially when you got college age kids.... My link I suppose I could look this up myself, but do you happen to know whether most mineral rights in Wyoming are held by the state, or by private landowners? The reason I ask is that I'm curious whether there are a lot of "oil millionaires" in Wyoming, and whether a sizeable amount of money has found its way to the university in the form of donations from these people. In ND, I'm expecting that in time, UND and NDSU may be the beneficiaries of large donations by alums who own land in the oil-producing parts of ND. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 I suppose I could look this up myself, but do you happen to know whether most mineral rights in Wyoming are held by the state, or by private landowners? The reason I ask is that I'm curious whether there are a lot of "oil millionaires" in Wyoming, and whether a sizeable amount of money has found its way to the university in the form of donations from these people. In ND, I'm expecting that in time, UND and NDSU may be the beneficiaries of large donations by alums who own land in the oil-producing parts of ND. Yes, there are a lot of folks who have made it big in oil here. Many of the recent athletic improvements, especially to War Memorial Stadium, have come from major donors. Wyoming is essentially split where the Eastern part of the state has private lands and private minerals where as most of the west has public lands and public minerals. Most of our state revenue comes from mineral severance taxes and property taxes on severed minerals. We pay no state income tax here. And, as for folks making it big from mineral wealth in ND......they are probably farmers.....LOL.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Yes, there are a lot of folks who have made it big in oil here. Many of the recent athletic improvements, especially to War Memorial Stadium, have come from major donors. Wyoming is essentially split where the Eastern part of the state has private lands and private minerals where as most of the west has public lands and public minerals. Most of our state revenue comes from mineral severance taxes and property taxes on severed minerals. We pay no state income tax here. And, as for folks making it big from mineral wealth in ND......they are probably farmers.....LOL.... I realize you were being facetious, but as you probably know a substantial portion of the mineral rights were severed from the surface rights years ago, and are now held by descendants of farmers/ranchers who haven't lived in western ND for many years, if ever. I know several UND grads who fall into that category, and I'm sure some NDSU grads are in a similar situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted August 20, 2010 Author Share Posted August 20, 2010 Idaho Statesman: Idaho destined to be in a WAC-lite Idaho's $13.3 million budget is tiny - by WAC standards. It fits right in with the WAC Lite. The number doesn't figure to rise under this new configuration - at a time when the richest conferences and the new MWC schools bring in even more dollars. Idaho: Return to your roots and invite in your peers: Montana, Montana State, UND, NDSU. It would be all about what college athletics is supposed to be: fun and with real rivals and real neighbors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted August 20, 2010 Author Share Posted August 20, 2010 ESPN: BYU issues and Rebuilding the WAC Benson said the league has time to decide what it will do and added that his phone has been ringing off the hook from members to join the remaining six schools for 2012 -- Hawaii, Utah State, Louisiana Tech, San Jose State, Idaho and New Mexico State. The most interested schools are Texas-San Antonio and Texas State. Benson said the league has made multiple attempts to invite the Sun Belt's North Texas, to no avail. Other schools that have been in contact, such as Montana, Montana State, Sacramento State, Cal Poly and UC Davis, would have to decide if they want to bump up their programs into the Football Bowl Subdivision. This is the perfect situation for Montana and Montana State to move up. No big budget teams to have to contend with. Montana and Montana State will very likely pull the trigger this fall after they have had more time to analyze the issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Sporting News: Hawaii considering going independent Maybe Hawaii is gone. Perhaps La Tech is gone. A Big Sky on steroids is looking more and more possible. I'm curious why you think the WAC would want to go the "Big Sky on steroids" and expand all the way to 16 schools. It seems much more likely they will stop well short of reaching 16. I agree that if they go all the way to 16, UND might be in the mix. But if they go to a more conventional number, I don't think UND would be in consideration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 I'm curious why you think the WAC would want to go the "Big Sky on steroids" and expand all the way to 16 schools. It seems much more likely they will stop well short of reaching 16. I agree that if they go all the way to 16, UND might be in the mix. But if they go to a more conventional number, I don't think UND would be in consideration. Maybe after the eviscerating the WAC has suffered at the hands of the MWC has them paranoid and the thinking is get so many you will be safe from loosing your conference. Just pure conjecture, but who knows what that fool Benson is thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted August 20, 2010 Author Share Posted August 20, 2010 I'm curious why you think the WAC would want to go the "Big Sky on steroids" and expand all the way to 16 schools. It seems much more likely they will stop well short of reaching 16. I agree that if they go all the way to 16, UND might be in the mix. But if they go to a more conventional number, I don't think UND would be in consideration. My reference to "Big Sky on steroids" is more about athletic budgets, not the number of schools. A WAC-lite would be like the Big Sky without all the skinny kids that Montana beats on. Right now, most of the Big Sky is in the $ 8 -12 million range, with the exceptions of Montana, Montana State, Sac State (and maybe one or two others). Schools like Idaho State, EWU, NAU, UNC, and even Portland State really struggle in finances. If the WAC-lite or "Big Sky on steroids" schools all had $15-20 budgets, that's precisely where UND is at. Of course UND would have to add a couple mill for FBS football. These schools all have similar budgets to UND: Utah St, Idaho (actually depending on the year, was $13 million), Montana, Montana St, Sac St, San Jose St. Because UND has been traveling all over the earth for the Great West, it's not like our travel budget will get stretched any more than it already is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 I'm curious why you think the WAC would want to go the "Big Sky on steroids" ... I think the key word in there is ... want. They don't want to do any of this. What they have to do is shore up the viability of a conference and correspondingly their programs and budgets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 My reference to "Big Sky on steroids" is more about athletic budgets, not the number of schools. A WAC-lite would be like the Big Sky without all the skinny kids that Montana beats on. Okay, but in previous posts, you conjecture that the WAC may go to 16. Just curious why you think they would add so many. 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.