Conference Realignments - Take 2

[The Sicatoka]

If UND and the Summit are such a match made in heaven, where are:

- the MVFC invite

- the Summit invite

- the fiscal analyses showing $(Summit + MVFC) > $(Big Sky)

As The Bard said, "Me thinks thou doth protest too much" when it comes to the droning on by Summit fans at this time. As SiouxVolley points out, the Summit is dangerously, precariously, close to losing its autobids in key sports (i.e. MBB).

All this noise from the SDSU board, and from the NDSU fans here, comes across to me as the classic marketing/sales technique called "herd mentality" (with the association to NDSU's mascot being a coincidence). "Herd mentality" sales are based claiming "everyone else is doing it" or "get in now before everyone else". Get into WHAT exactly? A conference that didn't take in UND Baseball? An alignment that would've (and still would) put UND FB out in the cold?

To me the Summit would have to approach UND with a package that makes it clearly stronger than what UND has today in the Big Sky ... and I don't see that happening because the Summit can't produce that.

[SiouxVolley]

You've said this several times... where the heck are the Summit schools going to go?

The Slummit football schools can end up it the WAC, which does not affect the MVFC. No teams lost by the MVFC. Patty V would be fine with that. Bison fans love to trash the SKY but wait till they are in the WAC.

[SiouxVolley]

If UND and the Summit are such a match made in heaven, where are:

- the MVFC invite

- the Summit invite

- the fiscal analyses showing $(Summit + MVFC) > $(Big Sky)

As The Bard said, "Me thinks thou doth protest too much" when it comes to the droning on by Summit fans at this time. As SiouxVolley points out, the Summit is dangerously, precariously, close to losing its autobids in key sports (i.e. MBB).

All this noise from the SDSU board, and from the NDSU fans here, comes across to me as the classic marketing/sales technique called "herd mentality" (with the association to NDSU's mascot being a coincidence). "Herd mentality" sales are based claiming "everyone else is doing it" or "get in now before everyone else". Get into WHAT exactly? A conference that didn't take in UND Baseball? An alignment that would've (and still would) put UND FB out in the cold?

To me the Summit would have to approach UND with a package that makes it clearly stronger than what UND has today in the Big Sky ... and I don't see that happening because the Summit can't produce that.

SDSU and NDSU insist that a move by UND to the Slummit is desirable because it is for the the Jacks and Bi sons to keep from falling off a conference cliff. The Slummit is a sinkhole waiting to happen, and the NCAA isn't going to shed a tear.

The only thing that the Summit has that is attractive is certain teams have MidCon Sports coverage. Wait!

[darell1976]

If the roles were reversed the SU's would be saying the BSC is better than the SL. After all NDSU tried not once but TWICE to get into the Big Sky despite travel issues (which they love to bring up to UND fans). Look at the meltdown they (FU fans) had after the BSC took Northern Colorado and not them. As for which basketball conference is better...its the SAME!! You will see one SL team and one BSC team in the dance. We aren't the Big 12 or Big 10 and have 4 or 5 teams in the dance. We are a 1 bid conference. I know Bison fans love to pump up the SL but look at who you have...USD, UNO, the Indiana teams...you telling me that screams superiority?? Just talking basketball, NDSU was king in 2009, last 2 years it was SDSU, who (that is still in the conference) won it besides those two? IUPUI in 2003, then WIU in 1984 (the conference debut), your powerhouses are gone, Valpo, ORU, Oakland; Denver's last bb tournament appearance was in DII in 96. As for UND joining, if the XDSU fans were so gung ho on having UND join, they should have their AD's (or presidents) tell the MVFC to let UND in so that they can have the same deal as South Dakota instead of crying out for the MAC, MVC to let them in. IMO its either MVFC/SL or no deal.

[jackal]

If UND and the Summit are such a match made in heaven, where are:

- the MVFC invite

- the Summit invite

- the fiscal analyses showing $(Summit + MVFC) > $(Big Sky)

As The Bard said, "Me thinks thou doth protest too much" when it comes to the droning on by Summit fans at this time. As SiouxVolley points out, the Summit is dangerously, precariously, close to losing its autobids in key sports (i.e. MBB).

All this noise from the SDSU board, and from the NDSU fans here, comes across to me as the classic marketing/sales technique called "herd mentality" (with the association to NDSU's mascot being a coincidence). "Herd mentality" sales are based claiming "everyone else is doing it" or "get in now before everyone else". Get into WHAT exactly? A conference that didn't take in UND Baseball? An alignment that would've (and still would) put UND FB out in the cold?

To me the Summit would have to approach UND with a package that makes it clearly stronger than what UND has today in the Big Sky ... and I don't see that happening because the Summit can't produce that.

All of what noise? I read through that 7 page thread,there was a couple of mentions of UND. Get over yourself

[SiouxVolley]

Just proves that Sdsu fans aare delusional.

[NorCalJack]

If the roles were reversed the SU's would be saying the BSC is better than the SL. After all NDSU tried not once but TWICE to get into the Big Sky despite travel issues (which they love to bring up to UND fans). Look at the meltdown they (FU fans) had after the BSC took Northern Colorado and not them. As for which basketball conference is better...its the SAME!! You will see one SL team and one BSC team in the dance. We aren't the Big 12 or Big 10 and have 4 or 5 teams in the dance. We are a 1 bid conference. I know Bison fans love to pump up the SL but look at who you have...USD, UNO, the Indiana teams...you telling me that screams superiority?? Just talking basketball, NDSU was king in 2009, last 2 years it was SDSU, who (that is still in the conference) won it besides those two? IUPUI in 2003, then WIU in 1984 (the conference debut), your powerhouses are gone, Valpo, ORU, Oakland; Denver's last bb tournament appearance was in DII in 96. As for UND joining, if the XDSU fans were so gung ho on having UND join, they should have their AD's (or presidents) tell the MVFC to let UND in so that they can have the same deal as South Dakota instead of crying out for the MAC, MVC to let them in. IMO its either MVFC/SL or no deal.

It is not the same. The Summit League is a true Basketball conference, it has no football. The MVFC is a football Conference, it has no basketball. The xDSU's have the benefit of being in two conferences that focus on one or the other. The Big Sky in my opinion (don't jump on me for having an opinion either) is a football conference. All of the decisions the Big Sky makes are geared toward football. And for that reason basketball will suffer and is/has suffered for it. The MVC years ago recognized that football and basketball could not co-exist so they split out the football and made it its own conference. The MVC has flourished in basketball because it does not make decisions based upon football.

I don't know why the Big Sky does not do the same thing and split off football into its own conference. That would allow the Big Sky to add teams like Denver, Oral Roberts, Wichita State etc. that does not have football. That was before Wichita State went to the Final Four. Gonzaga would have also been an option years ago, but the Big Sky would never consider anyone if they don't have football. But now the league has so many football programs that I can't see the Big Sky adding any more teams.

[homer]

It is not the same. The Summit League is a true Basketball conference, it has no football. The MVFC is a football Conference, it has no basketball. The xDSU's have the benefit of being in two conferences that focus on one or the other. The Big Sky in my opinion (don't jump on me for having an opinion either) is a football conference. All of the decisions the Big Sky makes are geared toward football. And for that reason basketball will suffer and is/has suffered for it. The MVC years ago recognized that football and basketball could not co-exist so they split out the football and made it its own conference. The MVC has flourished in basketball because it does not make decisions based upon football.

I don't know why the Big Sky does not do the same thing and split off football into its own conference. That would allow the Big Sky to add teams like Denver, Oral Roberts, Wichita State etc. that does not have football. That was before Wichita State went to the Final Four. Gonzaga would have also been an option years ago, but the Big Sky would never consider anyone if they don't have football. But now the league has so many football programs that I can't see the Big Sky adding any more teams.

Idaho- no football

Cal Poly & UC Davis= football only

If your a school looking to move around, having a sepeate conference for football and basketball is beneficial. If your a conference looking to retain members, only being able to offer one or the other can be a road block to keep from becoming a revolving door. See last 10 years of Summit league.

[SiouxVolley]

Under NCAA rules, a football comference is sufficient to satisfy the basketball autobid. If the Big Sky split itself in two, it would have to add 2 other team sports like baseball or hockey or soccer to satisfy the NCAA bb autobid.

THe Summit could add football and be secure. Why doesntb that get suggested?

[darell1976]

Under NCAA rules, a football comference is sufficient to satisfy the basketball autobid. If the Big Sky split itself in two, it would have to add 2 other team sports like baseball or hockey or soccer to satisfy the NCAA bb autobid.

THe Summit could add football and be secure. Why doesntb that get suggested?

Actually one person has...Mplsbison. I don't know if he comes on here anymore but on AGS he advocated a SL football conference until other Bison fans ripped him for a stupid idea.

[darell1976]

It is not the same. The Summit League is a true Basketball conference, it has no football. The MVFC is a football Conference, it has no basketball. The xDSU's have the benefit of being in two conferences that focus on one or the other. The Big Sky in my opinion (don't jump on me for having an opinion either) is a football conference. All of the decisions the Big Sky makes are geared toward football. And for that reason basketball will suffer and is/has suffered for it. The MVC years ago recognized that football and basketball could not co-exist so they split out the football and made it its own conference. The MVC has flourished in basketball because it does not make decisions based upon football.

I don't know why the Big Sky does not do the same thing and split off football into its own conference. That would allow the Big Sky to add teams like Denver, Oral Roberts, Wichita State etc. that does not have football. That was before Wichita State went to the Final Four. Gonzaga would have also been an option years ago, but the Big Sky would never consider anyone if they don't have football. But now the league has so many football programs that I can't see the Big Sky adding any more teams.

If the SL is a basketball conference why is DU ( a hockey school), NDSU (football school) members? It should have more bball members. UNO is a hockey school, USD, SDSU, and WIU are more of a borderline basketball schools. I think only the Indiana schools are true basketball schools (crappy ones, but bball schools). I meant the same as far as bids to the tournament. We won't see more than one team at the dance. The big advantage the BSC has over the SL is stability and I would take that as #1 priority in a league. No need to split conferences into football and basketball.

You know instead of the SU's trying to get UND to join why doesn't the SU's join the BSC as non football members like Idaho. You could have east/west divisions. Just a thought.

[Herd]

If the roles were reversed the SU's would be saying the BSC is better than the SL. After all NDSU tried not once but TWICE to get into the Big Sky despite travel issues (which they love to bring up to UND fans). Look at the meltdown they (FU fans) had after the BSC took Northern Colorado and not them. As for which basketball conference is better...its the SAME!! You will see one SL team and one BSC team in the dance. We aren't the Big 12 or Big 10 and have 4 or 5 teams in the dance. We are a 1 bid conference. I know Bison fans love to pump up the SL but look at who you have...USD, UNO, the Indiana teams...you telling me that screams superiority?? Just talking basketball, NDSU was king in 2009, last 2 years it was SDSU, who (that is still in the conference) won it besides those two? IUPUI in 2003, then WIU in 1984 (the conference debut), your powerhouses are gone, Valpo, ORU, Oakland; Denver's last bb tournament appearance was in DII in 96. As for UND joining, if the XDSU fans were so gung ho on having UND join, they should have their AD's (or presidents) tell the MVFC to let UND in so that they can have the same deal as South Dakota instead of crying out for the MAC, MVC to let them in. IMO its either MVFC/SL or no deal.

To answer your question . . . Would NDSU be in the Big Sky alone, or with SDSU/USD/UND? Would we be 100 miles from the nearest conference mate, or 1000 miles? That would make a big difference.

[gfhockey]

looks like the summit wants ORU back according to the ORU fan board.

[FSSD]

It is not the same. The Summit League is a true Basketball conference, it has no football. The MVFC is a football Conference, it has no basketball. The xDSU's have the benefit of being in two conferences that focus on one or the other. The Big Sky in my opinion (don't jump on me for having an opinion either) is a football conference. All of the decisions the Big Sky makes are geared toward football. And for that reason basketball will suffer and is/has suffered for it. The MVC years ago recognized that football and basketball could not co-exist so they split out the football and made it its own conference. The MVC has flourished in basketball because it does not make decisions based upon football.

I don't know why the Big Sky does not do the same thing and split off football into its own conference. That would allow the Big Sky to add teams like Denver, Oral Roberts, Wichita State etc. that does not have football. That was before Wichita State went to the Final Four. Gonzaga would have also been an option years ago, but the Big Sky would never consider anyone if they don't have football. But now the league has so many football programs that I can't see the Big Sky adding any more teams.

I think Mid-Major conferences tend to cycle. I think the top of the Big Sky and Summit League are comparable. Both conferences will have dog teams. But, both PSU and Sac St. are building new facilities that should help both schools going forward.

NOTE: I believe that UNC has a nice win this year against Kanas St.

[gfhockey]

Montana bout to end sdsu 30 game home streak

[SiouxVolley]

Actually one person has...Mplsbison. I don't know if he comes on here anymore but on AGS he advocated a SL football conference until other Bison fans ripped him for a stupid idea.

Said years ago that the Slummit should add GVSU and Wayne St and add football, but NDSU and SDSU were too stubborn because they valued MVFC membership more than Summit membership. The Summit's problems are self inflicted, and can be set at the feet of NDSU and SDSU. GVSU and Wayne St don't have anywhere to go: they need an FCS football conference.

[SiouxVolley]

It is not the same. The Summit League is a true Basketball conference, it has no football. The MVFC is a football Conference, it has no basketball. The xDSU's have the benefit of being in two conferences that focus on one or the other. The Big Sky in my opinion (don't jump on me for having an opinion either) is a football conference. All of the decisions the Big Sky makes are geared toward football. And for that reason basketball will suffer and is/has suffered for it. The MVC years ago recognized that football and basketball could not co-exist so they split out the football and made it its own conference. The MVC has flourished in basketball because it does not make decisions based upon football.

I don't know why the Big Sky does not do the same thing and split off football into its own conference. That would allow the Big Sky to add teams like Denver, Oral Roberts, Wichita State etc. that does not have football. That was before Wichita State went to the Final Four. Gonzaga would have also been an option years ago, but the Big Sky would never consider anyone if they don't have football. But now the league has so many football programs that I can't see the Big Sky adding any more teams.

Wichita State, Gonzaga, and Oral Roberts have no interest in the Sky, but would have interest in the AAC or Big East as bb only members. Gonzaga left the Big Sky years ago for greener pastures. The Big Sky hasn't had a non-football member since.,

[UND1983]

Nice little win for Montana tonight at SDSU.

[darell1976]

Wichita State, Gonzaga, and Oral Roberts have no interest in the Sky, but would have interest in the AAC or Big East as bb only members. Gonzaga left the Big Sky years ago for greener pastures. The Big Sky hasn't had a non-football member since.,

Idaho will be the only non-football member when they rejoin the BSC next year.

[darell1976]

To answer your question . . . Would NDSU be in the Big Sky alone, or with SDSU/USD/UND? Would we be 100 miles from the nearest conference mate, or 1000 miles? That would make a big difference.

I think USD and SDSU are in the SL for good since the tourny is in SF...but maybe NDSU needs to think about leaving for the BSC especially if more teams leave. Imagine the new BSA hosting a conference tournament, not possible in the SL. Time will tell if they and SDSU are connected to the hip.

[SiouxVolley]

Idaho will be the only non-football member when they rejoin the BSC next year.

Idaho has football so it cant concentrate its resources on basketball. If Denver had FBS football in another league, they would get in the Big Sky.

[darell1976]

Idaho has football so it cant concentrate its resources on basketball. If Denver had FBS football in another league, they would get is the Big Sky.

If you call that FB Time for them to be a bottom feeder in the Sun Belt.

[jdub27]

Montana bout to end sdsu 30 game home streak

Wait, what? Not possible.

Good thing the Summit added UNO, they are the only team with an OOC D-1 win this year (a nice one against NIU and another against former Summit member UMKC). 2-13 on the year for the conference. Big Sky not fairing a whole lot better, are 3-7 on the year.

[zonadub]

the Summit may be a basketball league, but they better become a baseball or soccer league soon.

[mksioux]

I love that any criticism of the route UND has taken over the last decade makes me some sort of NDSU double agent. When I wanted muss fired years ago (thats where i first got my rep here), it's because I wanted UND to fail and NDSU to win, before that, when I wanted UND to move up with NDSU and SDSU, it was because i was an NDSU fanboy. Same old dumb argument. It seems to me that UND has repeatedly gone down the wrong path because of this attitude that UND can't be seen following NDSU or doing anything that might have the side affect of benefiting NDSU, and in the long run all it's done is put UND in a worse position that it would otherwise be.

Yes, UND in the summit would benefit NDSU. It would also be good for UND and it's fans, most of whom live in the summit footprint. Hopefully some of you wake up before NDSU surpasses UND, because that is where the trend-lines lead.

You act as if there is a decision to make. Even if we take your word that the Summit is a better basketball conference, without a home for football, it simply doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if the Summit has a better RPI, has a better tournament, includes traditional rivals, is less expensive, etc. UND is simply never going to voluntarily choose a conference affiliation that leaves its football team independent. It will never happen. It's not even a remote consideration. The fatal flaw in your argument here is that there is no evidence that the MVFC wants UND. All of the public information available suggests that MVFC does not want UND. You don't claim to have any inside information that contradicts the public record. Thus, this "debate" is a complete waste of time in my opinion because you are making a gigantic assumption (UND can easily get into the MVFC) without a shred of evidence.