Conference Realignments - Take 2

[jdub27]

38 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

Still trying to see where it says if a conference doesn't have 2 other mens sports (besides MBB) that it loses its autobid in ALL mens sports.  Obviously they would lose it for that individual sport.  But, if they don't meet the MBB + 2 team sports requirement of 6 schools, where does it say they lose the autobid for all?

It seems a little bit gray but my interpretation is that in order to be eligible for automatic bids, a conference has to be considered a core conference, which requires it to be a multisport conference. There would obviously be waivers and extensions, but if a conference can't meet the definition, then it would seem at some point, they no longer would qualifying for the automatic bids.

 

Quote

31.3.4.4 Additional Requirements—Sports Other Than Basketball.
31.3.4.4.1 Multisport Conference. To be considered eligible for automatic qualification in a particular sport, a multisport conference (see Bylaw 20.02.5) must be a core conference (see Bylaw 31.02.3) and must include six institutions that sponsor the sport and conduct conference competition together.

 

Quote

31.3.4.5 Additional Requirements—Basketball. To be considered eligible for automatic qualification in basketball, a member conference must be a core conference (see Bylaw 31.02.3) and must meet the requirements of Bylaw 20.02.5.

 

Quote

20.02.5 Multisport Conference. A Division I multisport conference shall satisfy the requirements of this section.

20.02.5.1 Minimum Number of Members. A multisport conference shall be composed of at least seven active Division I members. The member conference shall include at least seven active Division I members that sponsor both men’s and women’s basketball. 

20.02.5.2 Sports Sponsorship. A multisport conference shall satisfy the following requirements:
(a) The conference shall sponsor a minimum of 12 Division I sports;
(b) The conference shall sponsor a minimum of six men’s sports, one of which shall be men’s basketball. In addition to men’s basketball, the conference shall sponsor football or two other men’s team sports. A minimum of seven members shall sponsor men’s basketball. A minimum of six members shall sponsor five other sports, including football or two additional men’s team sports; and
(c) The conference shall sponsor a minimum of six women’s sports, one of which shall be women’s basketball. In addition to women’s basketball, the conference shall sponsor two other women’s team sports. A minimum of seven members shall sponsor women’s basketball. A minimum of six members shall sponsor five other sports, including two additional women’s team sports (or a minimum of five members for an emerging sport for women).

 

[The Sicatoka]

I wonder if UND has words in its agreement to join the Summit about "changes in membership" between the signing of the agreements and the actual joining. 

[geaux_sioux]

The Insiders just had Douple on to talk about the state of the Summit and he sounds like a complete doofus. The IUPUI exit blind sided the league and he seems to favor more southern options or D2 teams to fill the void.

[Siouxperfan7]

3 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said:

The Insiders just had Douple on to talk about the state of the Summit and he sounds like a complete doofus. The IUPUI exit blind sided the league and he seems to favor more southern options or D2 teams to fill the void.

He said something about the NCAA giving a conference a 2 year window to fill if a sport dropped below the 6 for the autobid.  So if Fort Wayne leaves (or any other school that puts baseball or soccer below 6) the Summit would have 2 years to find another school that sponsors those sports to fill the void. 

**This is according to Douple, assuming he knows what he is talking about (huge risk)

[Yote 53]

14 hours ago, SiouxVolley said:

And nobody believes the Montanas will leave the Big Sky except the Idaho President and AD.  Really is a major revelation, as most think the Montanas are permanent fixtures in the BSC, but Idaho doesn't think that as they know differently.

The Montanas have wanted the Dakotas in the Sky since the 60s, but they were always outvoted.  Now for the first time, Idaho needs us if we all agree to go FBS, so they will agree with the Montanas.  EWU will go where ever those other three go as remaining in the Sky will be a disaster, as those three schools have by far the most interest in E Wash.+

SV has said some crazy stuff over the years, and what he is saying may still be crazy, but nobody believed Idaho, Boise State, etc, etc would ever leave...until they were gone.  Now people don't think the Montanas will ever leave...

It's kind of like the old NCC, people didn't actually believe schools would leave and go D1...until they did.

[jdub27]

12 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

He said something about the NCAA giving a conference a 2 year window to fill if a sport dropped below the 6 for the autobid.  So if Fort Wayne leaves (or any other school that puts baseball or soccer below 6) the Summit would have 2 years to find another school that sponsors those sports to fill the void. 

**This is according to Douple, assuming he knows what he is talking about (huge risk)

He actually does in this instance because they've already went through it once with baseball: 

• The Summit was at 6 teams in 2013 but one of them was Omaha, who was not considered a full D-1 member, meaning they were really at 5.
• Oakland left after the 2014 season, so they were down to 5 (4 counters), making 2014 the second season the Summit was below the 6 eligible team threshold. 
• Oral Roberts came back in 2015, putting them at 6 (5 counters) and the Summit received a waiver for the 2015 season as they had a plan to get back to the minimum of 6 (Omaha finally became eligible in 2016).

[SWSiouxMN]

3 minutes ago, Yote 53 said:

SV has said some crazy stuff over the years, and what he is saying may still be crazy, but nobody believed Idaho, Boise State, etc, etc would ever leave...until they were gone.  Now people don't think the Montanas will ever leave...

It's kind of like the old NCC, people didn't actually believe schools would leave and go D1...until they did.

What's your opinion on where the Summit should go for membership? 

[Yote 53]

2 minutes ago, SWSiouxMN said:

What's your opinion on where the Summit should go for membership? 

The Great North Conference.

The destiny for the Dakota 4 has always been to hook up with the Montanas. 

What should have happened was for USD to go with UND to the BSC.  Then when all the Summit defections happened the XDSU's would have been brought in and the Dakotas, Montanas, and a couple of other schools would have made up the BSC North division.  After a while we would have all become cozy and realized we didn't need some of those other schools and a split would have happened forming the The Great Northern Conference, or Big North Conference, whatever you want to call it.  The split would have been amicable with the BSC South as both sides would see the benefit of both conferences having autobids yet still having the ability to have a cross conference scheduling alliance.

The problem with that is that I don't believe you can just create a new autobid conference out of thin air.  Well, you can if you are the AAC or some other FBS level conference, but that won't fly for us little FCS types.  No, we'd have to wait over a decade for an autobid.  So we need a shell to take over and make our own and rebrand, enter the Midcontinent Conference.  Ever notice how they changed the name to the Summit League (mountains) yet there are no mountains in the conference footprint, except DU, who was added later?  Anyway,  the Summit provides the shell for the Dakotas, Montanas, etc. to move into to make their own.  It just takes time to shed off a few of the schools in the conference, add a few in, and mold it into what you want.  The core of the conference will be the Dakotas and Montanas, and now Idaho.  We'll fill in the rest around the edges.

A conference like that is a conference that will provide 100 years of stability no matter what happens in the P5, G5, FCS.  We'd be positioned to move and flow with those changes with the right membership of like minded, peer institutions that share common bonds.

[Yote 53]

I type all of that and it sounds crazy.  I really think the Dakotas are in lockstep now and are thinking big.  USD has had a ton of relationships with administrators from Montana, etc.  These people talk and things don't happen in a vacuum.  University presidents are people, as are our congressmen and women.  They don't just sit there and go, "ahh, too bad, sorry about your misfortune.  I hope your State University doesn't go belly up over this."  No, they talk, and they come up with solutions.  The Big North is the grand solution and it elevates all of our schools above all in the FCS. 

[Rick]

40 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

I wonder if UND has words in its agreement to join the Summit about "changes in membership" between the signing of the agreements and the actual joining. 

I really hope they do.  I want to stay in the Big Sky with Montana, Montana State, Idaho, EWU, NAU & NCU.  The Summit has no appeal.  I still think more alumni see UND play in Colorado, Montana and Arizona than in all the Summit locations. 

[The Sicatoka]

And now we break from our regularly scheduled thread to cut live to a Tom Douple press conference already in progress. 

[UNDBIZ]

Good job of misdirection regarding the future conference moves by entering into a non-conference home and home contract with Montana.  Go get 'em Kennedy!

[North Dakota]

I prefer we stay with the other Dakota schools but this seems like the perfect opportunity to get the best of the Summit and BSC schools together. The Great North Conference sounds like the ideal situation to me.

[The Sicatoka]

11 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Good job of misdirection regarding the future conference moves by entering into a non-conference home and home contract with Montana.  Go get 'em Kennedy!

As things sit today, yes, Montana and North Dakota will be non-conference in 2024 and 2025. 

But tell me what things will look like in 2024. 

[SiouxVolley]

1 hour ago, Yote 53 said:

I type all of that and it sounds crazy.  I really think the Dakotas are in lockstep now and are thinking big.  USD has had a ton of relationships with administrators from Montana, etc.  These people talk and things don't happen in a vacuum.  University presidents are people, as are our congressmen and women.  They don't just sit there and go, "ahh, too bad, sorry about your misfortune.  I hope your State University doesn't go belly up over this."  No, they talk, and they come up with solutions.  The Big North is the grand solution and it elevates all of our schools above all in the FCS. 

Yote truly gets what's coming.  Douple is a total doofus and somebody else will be commissioner of the Great Northern.

[jdub27]

1 hour ago, UNDBIZ said:

Good job of misdirection regarding the future conference moves by entering into a non-conference home and home contract with Montana.  Go get 'em Kennedy!

Clearly Kennedy (on the job for just over a year) and Sheila Stearns (current UM Interim President for the last 6 months) must have realized that people were on to the plan to move Montana to the Summit so they had Faison and Haslam slap together a contract for 7-8 years down the road to throw everyone off.

For the record, I'm not saying something like this can't or won't happen (in fact I'd love if it did), I'm saying that there is currently no grand master plan to make it happen as we sit today. UND moving to the Summit/MVFC wasn't part of any greater plan than to reunite with the other Dakota schools and cut travel costs.

[Yote 53]

Quit punching holes in my narrative.  If we keep talking about the Great North Conference then eventually, maybe, somebody will listen and it will become a reality.

[UNDColorado]

11 minutes ago, Yote 53 said:

Quit punching holes in my narrative.  If we keep talking about the Great North Conference then eventually, maybe, somebody will listen and it will become a reality.

I am in 100% agreement with you on this idea. It would create an unbreakable core for a long time.

[SWSiouxMN]

I am all for this Great North Idea.

I don't think it would hurt to call the Montana schools about them joining.

Saw someone ask about Utah Valley, I'd take them over GCU but would still be at the bottom of my list.

[The Sicatoka]

Call me greedy, but I'd like a conference where a super-majority of the schools are named either:

University of < state name >
or
< state name > State University

[Siouxperfan7]

16 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

Call me greedy, but I'd like a conference where a super-majority of the schools are named either:

University of < state name >
or
< state name > State University

What, you don't like alphabet soup?!!

[SiouxVolley]

5 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

What, you don't like alphabet soup?!!

IPFW, soon to be PUFW, doesn't want to in a flagship conference.  The soups schools don't want the Dakotas.

When IPFW is such a key member, as they sponsor both key sports, and they are a veritable island now separated from IUPUI, Douple has to understand that getting SIU-E to switch conferences isn't a long term solution.  

[The Sicatoka]

36 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

What, you don't like alphabet soup?!!

< see VMeister's avatar >  

[The Sicatoka]

28 minutes ago, SiouxVolley said:

... getting SIU-E ...

Let's see ...

IUPUI is pronounced ooh-eee-pooh-eee. So is SIU-E ... soo-whee! 

[The Sicatoka]

4 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

The Insiders just had Douple on to talk about the state of the Summit and he sounds like a complete doofus. The IUPUI exit blind sided the league and he seems to favor more southern options or D2 teams to fill the void.

Wow.
Just ... wow. 

It's effectively July 1, 2017. That's a deadline to announce a transition (DII to DI). So, no one is making that date right now unless they've said nothing and will be hand-delivering surprise paperwork to Indianapolis by close of business Friday.  

If a DII announced they'd more likely start the five year process on July 1, 2018 ... 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 ... Yes, on July 1, 2023, they'd be a DI.