UND and the Big Sky could go FBS

[dmksioux]

Technically (but unlikely), it could possibly happen minus CFP revenue sharing for the new split-off FBS conference (but there would have to be some crazy, secret prior agreement with the Sun Belt or they have no incentive to do this and that secret agreement alone could have the NCAA block this). But I still don't think the entire Big Sky would or should attempt it. There are only a handful of Big Sky schools that could make it work but most of those same schools already were given a chance by the WAC and they said no.

That's the only point that most on this board have been trying to point out to the Bison trolls. Most (UND Fans) believe that "Sioux Volley's" theory won't play out, but technically...at least as the rules are currently written now, it could. The Bison trolls are bending over backwards trying to provide proof that it can't happen...and technically it can. That's basically what our rivalry with NDSU has become now...arguing over technicalities and interpretations I guess...

[darell1976]

That is not gonna happen even IF there was a split. It humors me when MVFC and BSC fans think the other FBS Conferences will rip-up their contract with the P5 conferences and ESPN and then roll out the red carpet for FCS conferences. The G5 conferences want to widen the gap with FCS conferences just as much or more as the P5 conferences wants to widen the gap. Most of these university presidents bounce around from school to school their entire careers. The SEC Commish was the C-USA commish not long ago, but somehow you think those same people are greedy, money hungry, and want power and control only at Colorado, but not at Colorado State???.... makes zero sense whatsoever.... The Colorado President and PAC12 Commish want all the money and power for themselves and want to kick the Colorado State Prez and Mountain West Commish to the curb, but the Colorado State Prez and Mountain West Commish want to give flowers to Commish Fullerton and personally buy UND a new stadium as a gift and share their TV time... ? What.. are you serious?

It humors me when G5 fans think the gap widens every year between their type of teams and the FCS until FCS teams beat (or sometimes crush) the G5 teams. Upper FCS teams are not that far behind or even equal to the lower FBS teams.

[Herd]

That's the only point that most on this board have been trying to point out to the Bison trolls. Most (UND Fans) believe that "Sioux Volley's" theory won't play out, but technically...at least as the rules are currently written now, it could. The Bison trolls are bending over backwards trying to provide proof that it can't happen...and technically it can. That's basically what our rivalry with NDSU has become now...arguing over technicalities and interpretations I guess...

Technically, the B1G could invite 6 teams from the Big Sky. That wouldn't make the Big Sky FBS by osmosis either.

Do you think the CAA didn't explore all possible options too, like sending 6 teams to the MAC for 2 years, then pulling 8 back to form an FBS conference? The answer they would have received from the NCAA is too obvious to require elaboration.

[jdub27]

Technically, the B1G could invite 6 teams from the Big Sky. That wouldn't make the Big Sky FBS by osmosis either.

Do you think the CAA didn't explore all possible options too, like sending 6 teams to the MAC for 2 years, then pulling 8 back to form an FBS conference? The answer they would have received from the NCAA is too obvious to require elaboration.

You keep talking about situations that would cause competition in geographical areas. The proposed situation doesn't come close to doing that. On top of that, the SunBelt helps Idaho and NMSU move on. These things make it more plausible.

[dmksioux]

Technically, the B1G could invite 6 teams from the Big Sky. That wouldn't make the Big Sky FBS by osmosis either.

Do you think the CAA didn't explore all possible options too, like sending 6 teams to the MAC for 2 years, then pulling 8 back to form an FBS conference? The answer they would have received from the NCAA is too obvious to require elaboration.

Takes two to tango. Maybe the MAC wasn't receptive to helping form another FBS conference in its footprint. Sunbelt and Big Sky are very different geographically.

Why can't you just man up and admit that his theory is plausible based on current rules? Most of us admit that it has a very slim, if any, chance at happening.

[Herd]

Takes two to tango. Maybe the MAC wasn't receptive to helping form another FBS conference in its footprint. Sunbelt and Big Sky are very different geographically.

Why can't you just man up and admit that his theory is plausible based on current rules? Most of us admit that it has a very slim, if any, chance at happening.

I'm sorry, but I've said all along that I believe that Volley's technical interpretation of this rule is completely different than the key people that would be involved technically on this issue, namely the FBS Advisory group & NCAA. Technically, when the rules say that you have to join an existing FBS conference, I take that to mean that you cannot then later join a non-FBS conference, reach the stated number of 8 schools, and magically transform a non-FBS conference into an FBS conference.

What do you think the technical interpretation of this would be by the NCAA? I think the chances are slim to none that the NCAA would interpret this rule the same as Volley is interpreting it. I think you know that too, you just won't admit it. So no, I do not agree with Volley from a Technical standpoint. The rule is intended to prevent specifically what he is suggesting.

[The Sicatoka]

Technically, when the rules say that you have to join an existing FBS conference, ...

I take that to mean that you cannot then later join a non-FBS conference, reach the stated number of 8 schools, and magically transform a non-FBS conference into an FBS conference.

My apologies for parsing your sentence; however,

You begin absolutely correct -- a team or group of teams must join an existing conference to transition to FBS -- however, after that, you start either reading words only visible to you in the NCAA manual or applying *your* interpretation to the written rules.

Once a team or teams are of full FBS status they can realign into new conferences as they see fit. I think you're hung up on "making the Big Sky FBS".

This group would form a new western FBS conference called <name here>.

Thought exercise: What would stop full FBS members Texas, Notre Dame, Alabama, LSU, Michigan, Florida, Oklahoma, Georgia, Ohio State, and Nebraska from forming a new, eleventh FBS conference on Monday morning? (I picked the ten most valuable college football teams per Forbes for this conference.)

[Herd]

My apologies for parsing your sentence; however,

You begin absolutely correct -- a team or group of teams must join an existing conference to transition to FBS -- however, after that, you start either reading words only visible to you in the NCAA manual or applying *your* interpretation to the written rules.

Once a team or teams are of full FBS status they can realign into new conferences as they see fit. I think you're hung up on "making the Big Sky FBS".

This group would form a new western FBS conference called <name here>.

Thought exercise: What would stop full FBS members Texas, Notre Dame, Alabama, LSU, Michigan, Florida, Oklahoma, Georgia, Ohio State, and Nebraska from forming a new, eleventh FBS conference on Monday morning? (I picked the ten most valuable college football teams per Forbes for this conference.)

Nothing would stop this. These are already FBS teams, does not add FBS head count, and is a zero sum game. If the B1G or SEC wanted to split from 1 conf into 2, no one bats an eye. Big difference vs the proposal in this thread.

Now if the Sunbelt or MAC wanted to split their conf, that move would be scrutinized. You see, they don't call the shots.

[SiouxVolley]

Nothing would stop this. These are already FBS teams, does not add FBS head count, and is a zero sum game. If the B1G or SEC wanted to split from 1 conf into 2, no one bats an eye. Big difference vs the proposal in this thread.

Now if the Sunbelt or MAC wanted to split their conf, that move would be scrutinized. You see, they don't call the shots.

Your such an idiot, buttHerd. The very idea that anyone is talking FBS and Big Sky in the same sentence has got you all inflamed. There's a ton of talk about the MWC taking NDSU on Bisonville, but the MWC has no interest in taking lowly NDSU with no media presence whatsoever. The MWC takes UTSA / Rice / North Texas / UTEP before they consider anyone else. NDSU would be about 30th down. The one shot would be if Lakes wins a billion in the lottery and builds a stadium in Dilworth.

The ten most valuable BCS teams could not form a new FBS conference per the NCAA, because they don't meet continuity rules. They would get more flexibility to change the rules though, as the NCAA wouldn't want those 10 schools to leave. The 10 schools would just take their football teams out of their leagues, but keep the rest of the sports where they are. But most of those 10 schools are locked into contracts with their conferences until sometime in the next decade. They'd be sued and loose a ridiculous amount, much as Maryland had to pay a huge sum to the ACC (still in litigation, I think)

Eight teams from CUSA could form a new FBS conference and leave the other six needing to add two more, if the eight that left met continuity. That's why JMU and Mo St want CUSA: it has the potential to split into two by adding two and has better markets than the MAC and SunBelt.

If the NCAA tried to change the rules ex post facto, the schools would win a major suit worth hundreds of millions against the NCAA. If an FCS school wanted to go FBS as an independent, they could sue and would almost certainly win, as the rule is a monopoly restriction of trade. But any FCS school would hesitate to do that because it would financial suicide with the legal bills.

[Herd]

Your such an idiot, buttHerd. The very idea that anyone is talking FBS and Big Sky in the same sentence has got you all inflamed. There's a ton of talk about the MWC taking NDSU on Bisonville, but the MWC has no interest in taking lowly NDSU with no media presence whatsoever. The MWC takes UTSA / Rice / North Texas / UTEP before they consider anyone else. NDSU would be about 30th down. The one shot would be if Lakes wins a billion in the lottery and builds a stadium in Dilworth.

The ten most valuable BCS teams could not form a new FBS conference per the NCAA, because they don't meet continuity rules. They would get more flexibility to change the rules though, as the NCAA wouldn't want those 10 schools to leave. The 10 schools would just take their football teams out of their leagues, but keep the rest of the sports where they are. But most of those 10 schools are locked into contracts with their conferences until sometime in the next decade. They'd be sued and loose a ridiculous amount, much as Maryland had to pay a huge sum to the ACC (still in litigation, I think)

Eight teams from CUSA could form a new FBS conference and leave the other six needing to add two more, if the eight that left met continuity. That's why JMU and Mo St want CUSA: it has the potential to split into two by adding two and has better markets than the MAC and SunBelt.

If the NCAA tried to change the rules ex post facto, the schools would win a major suit worth hundreds of millions against the NCAA. If an FCS school wanted to go FBS as an independent, they could sue and would almost certainly win, as the rule is a monopoly restriction of trade. But any FCS school would hesitate to do that because it would financial suicide with the legal bills.

Yes, one team from the FCS can move FBS, no problem. We've established that. But that's not what you proclaimed. You said that 6 or more teams from the Big Sky will make an FBS move to the Sunbelt, then return 8 teams to the BSC and declare it an FBS conf. I say BS, the NCAA & FBS governing board and general rules are in place to prevent that from happening.

[The Sicatoka]

Yes, one team from the FCS can move FBS, no problem. We've established that. But that's not what you proclaimed. You said that 6 or more teams from the Big Sky will make an FBS move to the Sunbelt, then return 8 teams to the BSC and declare it an FBS conf. I say BS, the NCAA & FBS governing board and general rules are in place to prevent that from happening.

OK, one team can move.

OK, two different "one team" can move.

So, six different "one team" can't move?

Then, after meeting criteria to be FBS, what stops a group of "one teams" who've been in a conference together (continuity) from splitting off from a conference to form their own?

Of course I speak of the National Collegiate Hockey Conference.

And before you jump on me about "new mouths to feed", SCSU was a DII hockey program that the WCHA "made" DI (back whenever). SCSU then jumped into a newly formed conference (with a group that had continuity). Mankato and Bemidji were once DIIs and new "mouths to feed" in DI also and it was in the realm of possibilities that they would jump into the NCHC.

Once a team has been bona fide invited and has achieved FBS status, they aren't a "new mouth to feed". They are a FBS member. The way to preclude this scenario would be to prevent any FBS conference from inviting any FCS team in.

[jdub27]

Yes, one team from the FCS can move FBS, no problem. We've established that. But that's not what you proclaimed. You said that 6 or more teams from the Big Sky will make an FBS move to the Sunbelt, then return 8 teams to the BSC and declare it an FBS conf. I say BS, the NCAA & FBS governing board and general rules are in place to prevent that from happening.

What general rules are in place? And what FBS governing board? You keep talking about all these things in place to prevent it but haven't actually provided any of that. The only rules for being FBS are the ones a laid out a page or two ago. There is no limit to the amount of FCS teams an FBS conference can invite. 6 teams would be completely allowable at this point. Once those teams have transitioned fully to FBS schools and meet continuity rules, again, nothing is stopping them from breaking off and forming a new conference. Until you can provide actual documentation that there are rules currently on the books that would prevent this, you are wrong.

[#MACtion]

It humors me when G5 fans think the gap widens every year between their type of teams and the FCS until FCS teams beat (or sometimes crush) the G5 teams. Upper FCS teams are not that far behind or even equal to the lower FBS teams.

And G5 teams "beat (or sometimes crush)" the P5 teams all the time too. But there is still a gap. The win percentage of FCS teams over G5 teams is the same as G5 teams over P5 teams. But there is still a big gap.

Here is Miami's P5 wins and Bowl Victories. We have crushed SEC teams routinely in the past and have finished in the final rankings in the Top-10 four times. BUT there is still a big gap between Miami and the SEC.

MAJOR VICTORIES

1948 Texas Tech 13-12

1951 Arizona State 34-21

1954 Indiana 6-0

1955 Northwestern 25-14

1962 Purdue 10-7

1964 Northwestern 28-27

1966 Indiana 20-10

1967 Tulane 14-3

1969 Maryland 34-21

1972 South Carolina 21-8

1973 Purdue 24-19

1973 South Carolina 13-11

1973 Florida 16-7

1974 Kentucky 14-10

1974 Georgia 21-10

1975 Purdue 14-3

1975 South Carolina 20-7

1977 Indiana 21-20

1978 North Carolina 7-3

1979 Kentucky 15-14

1986 LSU 21-12

1995 Northwestern 30-28

1997 Virginia Tech 24-17

1997 Army 38-14

1998 North Carolina 13-10

1998 Army 14-13

1999 Northwestern 28-3

2000 Vanderbilt 33-30

2002 North Carolina 27-21

2003 Northwestern 44-14

2003 Louisville 49-28

2007 Syracuse 14-7

MAC BOWL VICTORIES

WATCH 1948 SUN BOWL 13-12 Texas Tech

WATCH 1951 SALAD BOWL 34-21 Arizona State

WATCH 1973 TANGERINE BOWL 16-7 Florida

WATCH 1974 TANGERINE BOWL 21-10 Georgia

WATCH 1975 TANGERINE BOWL 20-7 S. Carolina

WATCH 2003 GMAC BOWL 49-28 Louisville

WATCH 2011 GODADDY.COM BOWL 35-21 MTSU

http://miamiufootbal...-25-program.php

[dmksioux]

I'm sorry, but I've said all along that I believe that Volley's technical interpretation of this rule is completely different than the key people that would be involved technically on this issue, namely the FBS Advisory group & NCAA. Technically, when the rules say that you have to join an existing FBS conference, I take that to mean that you cannot then later join a non-FBS conference, reach the stated number of 8 schools, and magically transform a non-FBS conference into an FBS conference.

What do you think the technical interpretation of this would be by the NCAA? I think the chances are slim to none that the NCAA would interpret this rule the same as Volley is interpreting it. I think you know that too, you just won't admit it. So no, I do not agree with Volley from a Technical standpoint. The rule is intended to prevent specifically what he is suggesting.

There's nothing I need to admit. I have no idea what some committee, which we don't even know what members are on it, will interpret the rules. All I know, that as they are currently written (which is in black and white, not some assumption), that his theory is plausible. If I were a betting man, I would bet against his theory coming to fruition based on many different reasons. You just claim it's against the rules...which it isn't, at least the rules I've seen/read.

[SiouxVolley]

MAC BOWL VICTORIES

WATCH 1948 SUN BOWL 13-12 Texas Tech

WATCH 1951 SALAD BOWL 34-21 Arizona State

WATCH 1973 TANGERINE BOWL 16-7 Florida

WATCH 1974 TANGERINE BOWL 21-10 Georgia

WATCH 1975 TANGERINE BOWL 20-7 S. Carolina

WATCH 2003 GMAC BOWL 49-28 Louisville

WATCH 2011 GODADDY.COM BOWL 35-21 MTSU

http://miamiufootbal...-25-program.php

Personally attended the GMAC Bowl, which was Roethlisberger's last game (he came out to the NFL as a Jr).

Only better GMAC game was Marshall, then a MAC school, beating E Carolina in 3 or 4 OT after being 35 down. It was a cold game.

Those Miami teams of the early 1970's were really special.

[Hammersmith]

I can't believe I'm getting into this, but there were a couple questions in the thread that haven't been answered yet and a piece of information that wasn't complete.

Who exactly could stop star's idea from happening(asked by jdub27 and dmksioux)? The NCAA DI Administration Cabinet and the DI Board of Directors. The Administration Cabinet monitors schools as they reclassify to FBS and then they pass their recommendation to the BoD for the final vote. The AC also has the power to add years to the transition if they feel the school hasn't satisfied the yearly guidelines set forth in the manual. Applicable bylaws are in 20.2.4.1.

DI Administration Cabinet: http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=1ADC

DI Board of Directors: http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=BOARD

Don't know if all members of these two groups vote on FBS petitions or just the FBS representatives.

The bit of info that was left out from a previous post was about the 8 FBS member requirement for FBS conferences. Those 8 members have to be full members of the conference and not just football affiliates(20.02.6). That means the Sun Belt doesn't actually meet the requirement at the moment. If Georgia State has completed their transition, then the Sun Belt has 7; if not, the SBC is only at 6. App St and Georgia Southern will eventually get the Sun Belt to 9, and the two-year grace period will probably cover their butts until ASU2 & GSU2 finish the process. Still, the SBC is just as much on the technicality edge as some were claiming the Summit was a year ago.

This added fact also complicates star's plan. It means Cal Poly and UC Davis cannot be part of the group that moves to the Sun Belt because they would not help fulfill the 8 member requirement once they returned to the Big Sky(unless they left the Big West in all sports). It also means the plan walks a razor's edge where every single school has to do exactly the right thing or autobids are lost. If NMSU signs onto the plan, there would be a single school margin for error. Without NMSU, there is zero margin for error. To say the plan is a minefield is a massive understatement.

That said, the plan is technically possible if unlikely in the extreme.

Now if you don't care about keeping the Big Sky's FCS autobid, then it becomes a heck of a lot easier.

[Herd]

I can't believe I'm getting into this, but there were a couple questions in the thread that haven't been answered yet and a piece of information that wasn't complete.

Who exactly could stop star's idea from happening(asked by jdub27 and dmksioux)? The NCAA DI Administration Cabinet and the DI Board of Directors. The Administration Cabinet monitors schools as they reclassify to FBS and then they pass their recommendation to the BoD for the final vote. The AC also has the power to add years to the transition if they feel the school hasn't satisfied the yearly guidelines set forth in the manual. Applicable bylaws are in 20.2.4.1.

DI Administration Cabinet: http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=1ADC

DI Board of Directors: http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=BOARD

Don't know if all members of these two groups vote on FBS petitions or just the FBS representatives.

The bit of info that was left out from a previous post was about the 8 FBS member requirement for FBS conferences. Those 8 members have to be full members of the conference and not just football affiliates(20.02.6). That means the Sun Belt doesn't actually meet the requirement at the moment. If Georgia State has completed their transition, then the Sun Belt has 7; if not, the SBC is only at 6. App St and Georgia Southern will eventually get the Sun Belt to 9, and the two-year grace period will probably cover their butts until ASU2 &amp; GSU2 finish the process. Still, the SBC is just as much on the technicality edge as some were claiming the Summit was a year ago.

This added fact also complicates star's plan. It means Cal Poly and UC Davis cannot be part of the group that moves to the Sun Belt because they would not help fulfill the 8 member requirement once they returned to the Big Sky(unless they left the Big West in all sports). It also means the plan walks a razor's edge where every single school has to do exactly the right thing or autobids are lost. If NMSU signs onto the plan, there would be a single school margin for error. Without NMSU, there is zero margin for error. To say the plan is a minefield is a massive understatement.

That said, the plan is technically possible if unlikely in the extreme.

Now if you don't care about keeping the Big Sky's FCS autobid, then it becomes a heck of a lot easier.

Hammer. The thing that I think has no shot in hell of happening is an 11th FBS conf coming from a current conf at the FCS level. NCAA administrators have said specifically that FCS conferences can't move up as a group, so why would this AC allow this to happen? Also, wouldn't the SBC or any FBS conf going to more than 16 teams be a major ref flag to the AC? It's split waiting to happen. With FBS membership closely guarded, I say no way 6 get approved as a group, and no way an FCS conf would be allowed to move up, even if all the schools coming in had completed the transition.

[Hammersmith]

Hammer. The thing that I think has no shot in hell of happening is an 11th FBS conf coming from a current conf at the FCS level. NCAA administrators have said specifically that FCS conferences can't move up as a group, so why would this AC allow this to happen? Also, wouldn't the SBC or any FBS conf going to more than 16 teams be a major ref flag to the AC? It's split waiting to happen. With FBS membership closely guarded, I say no way 6 get approved as a group, and no way an FCS conf would be allowed to move up, even if all the schools coming in had completed the transition.

I don't really disagree with you. I also think something like this would raise a giant red flag to the AC and the BoD. I'm just saying there's nothing explicitly stated in the rules to prevent it. The disagreement in the different camps here is whether the NCAA would use some other method to stop it. You think yes. I tend to think yes(although I'm not as certain). Star is an emphatic no. Most around here lean no but aren't as confident as star. It comes down to spirit vs. letter of the rule and whether the NCAA has the will to use gray-area methods to enforce the spirit when there's a loophole in the letter.

But I also don't think it matters. A plan like this requires the active consent of over twenty-five different schools, each with a slightly different set of priorities. I just don't think that many can band together for a plan designed to bend the rules to the breaking point. And this would also be the beginning of the end of the Big Sky. The finished conference would have so many schools that internal tensions would eventually tear it apart. How many 14+ member conferences have withstood the test of time? Unless there are massive amounts of money holding them together(P5), a group from within eventually mutinies. See WAC, Big East, etc.

The far more likely scenario is what most of us both here and on BV think: The P5 will split off in some way(complete or partial) and eventually a new middle level will emerge with the G5 and a couple FCS conferences. It won't be immediate, but probably within a decade of the P5 split. It will also likely be a process and not a single massive change. Remember how everyone thought we were going to see four, 16-team conferences form overnight? That kind of shift was too radical for all concerned. Instead, the involved parties decided each on their own to move in steps. Some big, some small. I think the creation of a middle DI football subdivision will happen the same way. A series of steps over the next several years. But I don't believe star's plan will be part of that process.

[SiouxVolley]

The Bisonville brain trust gets into the game late.

First, if Cal Poly and UCDavis are getting serious about FBS, they will be the Big Sky when it becomes FBS. There's no incentive to move when they are in the FCS.

The Sun Belt has no worries about losing its FBS status. Ga So, Ga St, and App St are all FBS, but not full FBS. The Sun Belt was worried about losing schools to CUSA or MWC, but the FBS playoff payment money maximizes G5 conferences playoff take at about $1 mill per team, but no more than $12 mill per conference. CUSA is SOL because they've gone to 14. The Sun Belt also has UALR to UTArlington as non-football members, so the Sun Belt was under threat to having its conference status revoked as the Summit was.

The PAC12 and Big10 don't mind an FBS Big Sky, more FBS teams to schedule which lowers the FBS guarantee. Bisonville talks like the Board of Directors has the interest of the MAC, Sun Belt, MWC, and CUSA at heart. It's actually the opposite.

The only way conceiveable that NDSU can go FBS is to join the Big Sky. The Big Sky won't be inviting schools that have grudges against existing schools, so Bresciani told Taylor it would be best for him to go or sign a contract. When NDSU signs a long term agreement with UND for football H/A, it will demonstrate that NDSU is now operating on good faith with UND. NDSU will be accepted shortly thereafter, assuming there isn't too much stink from teammakers. Bresciani wants NDSU in the FBS Sky.

[bison73]

The Bisonville brain trust gets into the game late.

First, if Cal Poly and UCDavis are getting serious about FBS, they will be the Big Sky when it becomes FBS. There's no incentive to move when they are in the FCS.

The Sun Belt has no worries about losing its FBS status. Ga So, Ga St, and App St are all FBS, but not full FBS. The Sun Belt was worried about losing schools to CUSA or MWC, but the FBS playoff payment money maximizes G5 conferences playoff take at about $1 mill per team, but no more than $12 mill per conference. CUSA is SOL because they've gone to 14. The Sun Belt also has UALR to UTArlington as non-football members, so the Sun Belt was under threat to having its conference status revoked as the Summit was.

The PAC12 and Big10 don't mind an FBS Big Sky, more FBS teams to schedule which lowers the FBS guarantee. Bisonville talks like the Board of Directors has the interest of the MAC, Sun Belt, MWC, and CUSA at heart. It's actually the opposite.

The only way conceiveable that NDSU can go FBS is to join the Big Sky. The Big Sky won't be inviting schools that have grudges against existing schools, so Bresciani told Taylor it would be best for him to go or sign a contract. When NDSU signs a long term agreement with UND for football H/A, it will demonstrate that NDSU is now operating on good faith with UND. NDSU will be accepted shortly thereafter, assuming there isn't too much stink from teammakers. Bresciani wants NDSU in the FBS Sky.

Nobody knows whats going to happen when everything shakes out. Some steadfast rules might not be in play if they are looking for some team to move up.

FYI when you talk of BV and having the ear of the Mac etc there is only 2 people I repeat TWO on BV who are openly yammering constantly about going FBS.

As for the rest of your post I found it very amusing. Especially the Bresciani mention.

[SiouxVolley]

I'm just a voice in the wind that is usually right.

Ignore at your peril. Bisonville said the latest Bakken was just a phase that wouldn't last. I said the Bakken is a game changer, because its driven by technology this time. Who was right? I bet with my own money and I can prove it.

I said the Big Sky was interested in UND years ago. Bisonville poo-pooed it because Chapman couldn't get them in. You laughed and laughed at me, but I had the last laugh.

You guys are just full of !@#$. Always have been and always will be. Manure will always spew from Bisonville.

[JohnboyND7]

Only star2city would ever come up with the idea that Bresciani told Taylor he had to schedule UND or leave..... And that Taylor would choose the latter.

[bison73]

I'm just a voice in the wind that is usually right.

Ignore at your peril. Bisonville said the latest Bakken was just a phase that wouldn't last. I said the Bakken is a game changer, because its driven by technology this time. Who was right? I bet with my own money and I can prove it.

I said the Big Sky was interested in UND years ago. Bisonville poo-pooed it because Chapman couldn't get them in. You laughed and laughed at me, but I had the last laugh.

You guys are just full of !@#$. Always have been and always will be. Manure will always spew from Bisonville.

Ignore what at my peril? The Bakken? What the hell does that have to do with the subject at hand? Wasnt around when NDSU was trying to get in to the BSC. Dont care. Glad we are where we are.

From your post I take it you think people laugh at you often. May be theres a reason?

[Goon]

Question: Aren't NDSU and UND too small to be in the FBS? So, really, isn't this a mute discussion? I am just wondering.

[darell1976]

Question: Aren't NDSU and UND too small to be in the FBS? So, really, isn't this a mute discussion? I am just wondering.

Small as in enrollment or small as in city population? Because it would be a no on both.