SloStang Posted November 4, 2010 Share Posted November 4, 2010 If the Big Sky stays at 13 teams for football it will make it tough to split into two divisions (I have a strong feeling that UM is headed to the WAC which would leave the BSC at 10/12 teams and 2 divisions would then work). What I think they should do if they stay at 13 teams is have each school have two schools designated as permanent rivals of each school and play them each year. After that rotate through the remaining 10 teams for the other 6 or 7 conference games (depending if they go with 8 or 9 total conference games). This is what the Big Ten does. Here is how I would designate rivals: UM: MSU/EWU EWU: UM/PSU PSU: EWU/ISU ISU: PSU/WSU WSU: ISU/SUU SUU: WSU/NAU NAU: SUU/NC NC: NAU/UND UND: NC/MSU MSU: UND/UM CP: UCD/Sac UCD: CP/Sac Sac: UCD/CP What do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlsiouxfan Posted November 4, 2010 Share Posted November 4, 2010 If the Big Sky stays at 13 teams for football it will make it tough to split into two divisions (I have a strong feeling that UM is headed to the WAC which would leave the BSC at 10/12 teams and 2 divisions would then work). What I think they should do if they stay at 13 teams is have each school have two schools designated as permanent rivals of each school and play them each year. After that rotate through the remaining 10 teams for the other 6 or 7 conference games (depending if they go with 8 or 9 total conference games). This is what the Big Ten does. Here is how I would designate rivals: UM: MSU/EWU EWU: UM/PSU PSU: EWU/ISU ISU: PSU/WSU WSU: ISU/SUU SUU: WSU/NAU NAU: SUU/NC NC: NAU/UND UND: NC/MSU MSU: UND/UM CP: UCD/Sac UCD: CP/Sac Sac: UCD/CP What do you think? Would rather have UND's rivals be Montana and Montana State but understand that would create some odd couples on the other side so I'd be happy with that arrangement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMD Posted November 4, 2010 Share Posted November 4, 2010 If the Big Sky stays at 13 teams for football it will make it tough to split into two divisions (I have a strong feeling that UM is headed to the WAC which would leave the BSC at 10/12 teams and 2 divisions would then work). What I think they should do if they stay at 13 teams is have each school have two schools designated as permanent rivals of each school and play them each year. After that rotate through the remaining 10 teams for the other 6 or 7 conference games (depending if they go with 8 or 9 total conference games). This is what the Big Ten does. Here is how I would designate rivals: UM: MSU/EWU EWU: UM/PSU PSU: EWU/ISU ISU: PSU/WSU WSU: ISU/SUU SUU: WSU/NAU NAU: SUU/NC NC: NAU/UND UND: NC/MSU MSU: UND/UM CP: UCD/Sac UCD: CP/Sac Sac: UCD/CP What do you think? Fullerton alluded to this same scenario a few minutes ago on http://www.billingssportsstation.com/. His underling is working on the details...bring on the Bears and the Bobcats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakvindy Posted November 5, 2010 Share Posted November 5, 2010 I would designate four rivals to play every year, then alternate the four of the remaining 8 you play every other year. That gives you an 8 game conference slate. UM: MSU/EWU/UND/WSU EWU: UM/PSU/CP/Sac PSU: EWU/ISU/Sac/UCD ISU: PSU/WSU/MSU/UNC WSU: ISU/SUU/UM/NAU SUU: WSU/NAU/UNC/UCD NAU: SUU/UNC/WSU/MSU UNC: NAU/UND/SUU/ISU UND: UNC/MSU/UM/CP MSU: UND/UM/ISU/NAU CP: UCD/Sac/EWU/UND UCD: CP/Sac/SUU/PSU Sac: UCD/CP/PSU/EWU I tried to preserve as many "old school" Big Sky rivalries as possible, as well as a Great West rivalry for each school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMD Posted November 5, 2010 Share Posted November 5, 2010 I would designate four rivals to play every year, then alternate the four of the remaining 8 you play every other year. That gives you an 8 game conference slate. UM: MSU/EWU/UND/WSU EWU: UM/PSU/CP/Sac PSU: EWU/ISU/Sac/UCD ISU: PSU/WSU/MSU/UNC WSU: ISU/SUU/UM/NAU SUU: WSU/NAU/UNC/UCD NAU: SUU/UNC/WSU/MSU UNC: NAU/UND/SUU/ISU UND: UNC/MSU/UM/CP MSU: UND/UM/ISU/NAU CP: UCD/Sac/EWU/UND UCD: CP/Sac/SUU/PSU Sac: UCD/CP/PSU/EWU I tried to preserve as many "old school" Big Sky rivalries as possible, as well as a Great West rivalry for each school. Considering UND has only ever played Cal Poly three times I doubt they would feel bad if we just skipped the whole Great West rivalry for each school scenario. For UND...switch ISU for CP and vice versa for PSU. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegas_Sioux Posted November 5, 2010 Share Posted November 5, 2010 I think the Northern Colorado game would be a great game that is UND heritage yes it is a post NCC world but those were some exciting games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SloStang Posted November 5, 2010 Author Share Posted November 5, 2010 Considering UND has only ever played Cal Poly three times I doubt they would feel bad if we just skipped the whole Great West rivalry for each school scenario. For UND...switch ISU for CP and vice versa for PSU. UM: MSU/EWU/UND/WSU EWU: UM/PSU/CP/Sac PSU: EWU/CP/Sac/UCD ISU: UND/WSU/MSU/UNC WSU: ISU/SUU/UM/NAU SUU: WSU/NAU/UNC/UCD NAU: SUU/UNC/WSU/MSU UNC: NAU/UND/SUU/ISU UND: UNC/MSU/UM/ISU MSU: UND/UM/ISU/NAU CP: UCD/Sac/EWU/PSU UCD: CP/Sac/SUU/PSU Sac: UCD/CP/PSU/EWU I like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted November 5, 2010 Share Posted November 5, 2010 I would designate four rivals to play every year, then alternate the four of the remaining 8 you play every other year. That gives you an 8 game conference slate. I like this concept. - Play your four rivals for 2H and 2A games per year. - You see your rivals twice home and twice road in four years as it should be. - Play the other eight on a rotating basis where over four years you see each of the eight once at home and once on the road. That concept should make the west coast schools happy as they'd only be going to GF once every four years (assuming UND wouldn't have a west coast rival). From a travel POV, yes, the most cost effective rivals (for them) for UND would be UNC, ISU, UM, and MSU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakvindy Posted November 5, 2010 Share Posted November 5, 2010 UM: MSU/EWU/UND/WSU Year 1 PSU CP ISU SUU Year 2 NAU UCD Sac UNC EWU: UM/PSU/CP/Sac Year 1 UCD UNC WSU SUU Year 2 MSU UND ISU NAU PSU: EWU/CP/Sac/UCD Year 1 UM UND ISU NAU Year 2 MSU UNC WSU SUU ISU: UND/WSU/MSU/UNC Year 1 UM PSU UCD SUU Year 2 EWU Sac CP NAU WSU: ISU/SUU/UM/NAU Year 1 MSU UND EWU CP Year 2 PSU UCD Sac UNC SUU: WSU/NAU/UNC/UCD Year 1 UM EWU ISU Sac Year 2 MSU UND PSU CP NAU: SUU/UNC/WSU/MSU Year 1 UND Sac PSU UCD Year 2 UM EWU ISU CP UNC: NAU/UND/SUU/ISU Year 1 MSU Sac EWU CP Year 2 UM PSU WSU UCD UND: UNC/MSU/UM/ISU Year 1 PSU CP WSU NAU Year 2 EWU Sac SUU UCD MSU: UND/UM/ISU/NAU Year 1 Sac UCD UNC WSU Year 2 CP PSU EWU SUU CP: UCD/Sac/EWU/PSU Year 1 UM UND WSU UNC Year 2 MSU ISU SUU NAU UCD: CP/Sac/SUU/PSU Year 1 MSU EWU ISU NAU Year 2 UM UND WSU UNC Sac: UCD/CP/PSU/EWU Year 1 MSU SUU NAU UNC Year 2 UM UND ISU WSU I like it. When I first did it, I actually had ISU and UND (wanted the Potato Bowl matchup), and UNC and Poly. I switched ISU and Poly so UNC had two Old Big Sky and two new Big Sky. Didn't see the PSU switch, but really like it. The above grouping is pretty solid and I think most schools would be pretty happy with it. The pacific schools only have to come to North Dakota once every four years. I put hypothetical groupings for all team above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted November 5, 2010 Share Posted November 5, 2010 I think another question that I'm looking forward to hearing an answer on is how many conference games? 8 seems to be thrown around the most, but isn't it going to be more difficult now for everyone to fill out an FCS non-conference schedule? Not everyone can play San Diego. North Dakota is really the only Big Sky school remotely close to other FCS schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted November 5, 2010 Share Posted November 5, 2010 When I first did it, I actually had ISU and UND (wanted the Potato Bowl matchup), and UNC and Poly. I switched ISU and Poly so UNC had two Old Big Sky and two new Big Sky. Didn't see the PSU switch, but really like it. The above grouping is pretty solid and I think most schools would be pretty happy with it. The pacific schools only have to come to North Dakota once every four years. I put hypothetical groupings for all team above. You should forward that to Faison so he can throw it in front of the rest of the A.D.s when they start to iron this stuff out. I like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted November 5, 2010 Share Posted November 5, 2010 I think another question that I'm looking forward to hearing an answer on is how many conference games? 8 seems to be thrown around the most, but isn't it going to be more difficult now for everyone to fill out an FCS non-conference schedule? Not everyone can play San Diego. North Dakota is really the only Big Sky school remotely close to other FCS schools. A lot of schools are only going to want 8 so that they can get 1 or 2 FBS games plus 1 or 2 OOC, especially Montana. It is possible to play another league school as an OOC game, it just wouldn't count in the standings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SloStang Posted November 5, 2010 Author Share Posted November 5, 2010 I think another question that I'm looking forward to hearing an answer on is how many conference games? 8 seems to be thrown around the most, but isn't it going to be more difficult now for everyone to fill out an FCS non-conference schedule? Not everyone can play San Diego. North Dakota is really the only Big Sky school remotely close to other FCS schools. You could still schedule the other 4 conference teams for OOC games. They just would not count towards conference standings. Also nodakvindy great work on the scheduling. I also think this should be passed on to all the ADs. Great idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakvindy Posted November 6, 2010 Share Posted November 6, 2010 I fully fleshed out the mock schedule. For the rivals you play the first two listed and home and the second two away, then alternate. For the others, the home and away is listed for years 1 and 2, this would again just flip for years 3 and 4 UM: MSU/EWU/UND/WSU Year 1 PSU CP @ISU @SUU Year 2 NAU UCD @Sac @UNC EWU: PSU/CP/Sac/UM Year 1 UCD UNC @WSU @SUU Year 2 MSU NAU @UND @ISU PSU: UCD/Sac/EWU/CP Year 1 UND ISU @UM @NAU Year 2 SUU UNC @MSU @WSU CP: PSU/Sac/EWU/UCD Year 1 UND WSU @UM @UNC Year 2 MSU ISU @SUU @NAU UCD: CP/SUU/Sac/PSU Year 1 MSU ISU @EWU @NAU Year 2 UND WSU @UM @UNC Sac: UCD/EWU/CP/PSU Year 1 SUU NAU @UNC @MSU Year 2 UM WSU @UND @ISU ISU: UND/WSU/MSU/UNC Year 1 UM SUU @PSU @UCD Year 2 EWU Sac @CP @NAU WSU: UM/NAU/ISU/SUU Year 1 MSU EWU @UND @CP Year 2 UNC PSU @Sac @UCD SUU: WSU/UNC/NAU/UCD Year 1 UM EWU @ISU @Sac Year 2 CP UND @PSU @MSU NAU: SUU/MSU/UNC/WSU Year 1 PSU UCD @UND @Sac Year 2 ISU CP @EWU @UM UNC: NAU/ISU/UND/SUU Year 1 CP Sac @MSU @EWU Year 2 UM UCD @PSU @WSU UND: UM/UNC/MSU/ISU Year 1 WSU NAU @PSU @CP Year 2 EWU Sac @SUU @UCD MSU: UND/ISU/NAU/UM Year 1 UNC Sac @UCD @WSU Year 2 PSU SUU @CP @EWU So the Sioux schedules would be 2012 - Home: Montana, Northern Colorado, Weber State, Northern Arizona Away: Montana State, Idaho State, Portland State, Cal Poly 2013 - Home: Montana State, Idaho State, Sacramento State, Eastern Washington Away: Montana, Northern Colorado, Southern Utah, UC-Davis 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hambone Posted November 6, 2010 Share Posted November 6, 2010 I fully fleshed out the mock schedule. For the rivals you play the first two listed and home and the second two away, then alternate. For the others, the home and away is listed for years 1 and 2, this would again just flip for years 3 and 4 UM: MSU/EWU/UND/WSU Year 1 PSU CP @ISU @SUU Year 2 NAU UCD @Sac @UNC EWU: PSU/CP/Sac/UM Year 1 UCD UNC @WSU @SUU Year 2 MSU NAU @UND @ISU PSU: CP/Sac/EWU/UCD Year 1 UND ISU @UM @NAU Year 2 SUU UNC @MSU @WSU CP: UCD/Sac/EWU/PSU Year 1 UND WSU @UM @UNC Year 2 MSU ISU @SUU @NAU UCD: PSU/SUU/Sac/CP Year 1 MSU ISU @EWU @NAU Year 2 UND WSU @UM @UNC Sac: UCD/EWU/CP/PSU Year 1 SUU NAU @UNC @MSU Year 2 UM WSU @UND @ISU ISU: UND/WSU/MSU/UNC Year 1 UM SUU @PSU @UCD Year 2 EWU Sac @CP @NAU WSU: UM/NAU/ISU/SUU Year 1 MSU EWU @UND @CP Year 2 UNC PSU @Sac @UCD SUU: WSU/UNC/NAU/UCD Year 1 UM EWU @ISU @Sac Year 2 CP UND @PSU @MSU NAU: SUU/MSU/UNC/WSU Year 1 PSU UCD @UND @Sac Year 2 ISU CP @EWU @UM UNC: NAU/ISU/UND/SUU Year 1 CP Sac @MSU @EWU Year 2 UM UCD @PSU @WSU UND: UM/UNC/MSU/ISU Year 1 WSU NAU @PSU @CP Year 2 EWU Sac @SUU @UCD MSU: UND/ISU/NAU/UM Year 1 UNC Sac @UCD @WSU Year 2 PSU SUU @CP @EWU So the Sioux schedules would be 2012 - Home: Montana, Northern Colorado, Weber State, Northern Arizona Away: Montana State, Idaho State, Portland State, Cal Poly 2013 - Home: Montana State, Idaho State, Sacramento State, Eastern Washington Away: Montana, Northern Colorado, Southern Utah, UC-Davis I really like this - Kudos! Maybe you should forward this to Fullerton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted November 6, 2010 Share Posted November 6, 2010 I really like this - Kudos! Maybe you should forward this to Fullerton Along with an invoice.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersioux Posted November 6, 2010 Share Posted November 6, 2010 I really like this - Kudos! Maybe you should forward this to Fullerton The big challenge will be that everyone will want to play Montana every year because they travel so well....asuming they are still in the Big Sky in 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted November 6, 2010 Share Posted November 6, 2010 UM: MSU/EWU/UND/WSU EWU: UM/PSU/CP/Sac PSU: EWU/CP/Sac/UCD ISU: UND/WSU/MSU/UNC WSU: ISU/SUU/UM/NAU SUU: WSU/NAU/UNC/UCD NAU: SUU/UNC/WSU/MSU UNC: NAU/UND/SUU/ISU UND: UNC/MSU/UM/ISU MSU: UND/UM/ISU/NAU CP: UCD/Sac/EWU/PSU UCD: CP/Sac/SUU/PSU Sac: UCD/CP/PSU/EWU I like it. I like this idea a lot. The best idea I've seen on the topic. I really like UND's rivals under this particular model, but even if the particular rivals are tweaked, I really like the idea of a 4-rival system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 The 4 team permanent rival model isn't receiving a very warm welcome over at EGRIZ.............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SloStang Posted January 2, 2011 Author Share Posted January 2, 2011 The 4 team permanent rival model isn't receiving a very warm welcome over at EGRIZ.............. The ones complaining are upset because the Griz did not jump to the FBS. They will complain no matter what the make up of the Big Sky is. What it is not is the FBS in their eyes. I would not worry too much about what a few idiots on eGriz think. It is the best plan I have seen for a 13 team conference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShilohSioux Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 The ones complaining are upset because the Griz did not jump to the FBS. They will complain no matter what the make up of the Big Sky is. What it is not is the FBS in their eyes. I would not worry too much about what a few idiots on eGriz think. It is the best plan I have seen for a 13 team conference. How does the NSIC do it with 14 teams (I know, they have 10 league games, but there still needs to be a process to determine who they play and don't play)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Would it be more equitable to adopt a MAC-style divisional schedule minus the championship game? One 7 team division and one 6 team division with 5 divisional games and 3 cross-divisional games. The members of the 7 team divison would skip one team in that division each year as the MAC East does. Big Sky 7 Eastern Washington Portland St. Sacramento St. Northern Arizona Cal Poly UC Davis Southern Utah Big Sky 6 Idaho St. Montana Montana St. Weber St. North Dakota Northern Colorado Just throwing another idea out there........................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 One 7 team division and one 6 team division ... Let's call the divisions Legends and Leaders. Or maybe Bludgeoned and Bleeders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShilohSioux Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Interesting outtake from this Spokesman-Review article: http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/jan/05/john-blanchette-colonial-knows-football But there are other dynamics to consider. The Big Sky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EWURanger Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Hello all, Just wanted to drop by and say that I'm looking forward to seeing UND in the Big Sky in 2012 along with SUU and Cal Poly and Davis for football. I think, under this new format, the Big Sky will rival the CAA in football. It's not far off now. I think most Big Sky fans have a fairly positive outlook on the conference expansion. Adding the two California schools increases exposure there and can only be good for recruiting for the conference as a whole. Southern Utah has been improving it's athletics programs and fits well within the geographical footprint of the historical conference. And while I think many are concerned with UND's geography, most acknowledge that this will be a good addition. Not only because UND Is a flagship university, but because you also seem to have a good tradition in athletics. IMO, the fact that UND is somewhat isolated in the conference isn't a major problem in itself, although I will admit that USD giving the BSC the snub does present some problems as far as travel partners go. Under the 11 member all-sports format for the 2012 season, does UND have a travel partner, or is this something that is still being worked through? How do you all see the 13 member conference football conference working out? Thoughts on who the 14th member for football might be? An all-sports member seems to make sense, IMO, putting the Big Sky at 12/14. On the flip side, I think there's some out there that are worried UND is going to jump ship if the MVFC tries to expand again - any merit in this? I personally don't see this happening, as the Big Sky > Summit and generally on par with the MVFC - and probably better the last decade or so. Also, how do UND folks feel about the direction their football program is going in? I was able to watch the Montana-UND game this season and it seemed to be competitive at times, although it seems like it was a bit of a down year for you guys. Are you already at the full compliment of scholarships, or still in transition in that regard? Are there plans in the works in regards to the football program in terms of facilities, etc. Sorry for all the questions, but I'm trying to learn about all of our future conference mates, and no better way to get answers than to go to the source. Thanks in advance Also, I am one of the mods over at www.bigskyfans.com/eagles - feel free to drop by anytime. 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.