Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

UND and the Big Sky could go FBS


Recommended Posts

That was not a quote of something Spear said, it was the reporter from CdA referring to three of the more local teams.

To your point:

He envisions a league with Idaho and New Mexico State and some of the high-end Big Sky schools (including Eastern Washington, Montana and Montana State) in that second tier.

Based on how that's written, Spear probably said "NMSU and high-end Big Sky schools" and the local writer filled in the names of local schools his readers would recognize.

Side note: You need 8 full conference members to be an FBS conference. (UI, NMSU, UM, MSU, EWU isn't enough.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I actually don't believe cutting the football program is that far fetched.  Sioux ID is with Hockey, not football.  With the current interim President, (former Gov), it is certainly possible he could

I disagree with a lot of what he is predicting as well.  It's not like everyone that posts here is 100% agreeing with him.  But the fact that you two Bison trolls come on this thread and reply to ever

Because he ran out of possible long lost relatives of Carson Wentz to interview?

Posted Images

Hopefully, a new stadium on campus will be a major part of that, financed by wealthy alumni. Plus there would be more money for TV, bowl contracts, P5 guarantees and later a very small piece of the huge CFP pot.

You realize a new stadium would still need to actually be full in order to be a positive in the fund category correct? I know it's easy to spend other peoples money but you have to look at all of this a bit more realistically.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

To your point:

Based on how that's written, Spear probably said "NMSU and high-end Big Sky schools" and the local writer filled in the names of local schools his readers would recognize.

Side note: You need 8 full conference members to be an FBS conference. (UI, NMSU, UM, MSU, EWU isn't enough.)

A bigger question is, are we a "high-end Big Sky school"?   Not trying to bash my alma matter, but we haven't even had a winning Big Sky record in either basketball or football.    I've got a feeling he wasn't talking about us.   It's hard to be considered high end when we can't even get over 500.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You realize a new stadium would still need to actually be full in order to be a positive in the fund category correct? I know it's easy to spend other peoples money but you have to look at all of this a bit more realistically.

Not to mention most teams lose money when they attend a bowl game. Usually lots of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For starters, the MWC has a good basketball profile, and a deal with ESPN to televise games.  Second, SDSU was a sweet 16 team last year.   Their football being FBS has zero to do with it.   The Sunbelt and MAC are FBS too, and their BB sucks in comparison.

 

MAC is rated as a higher basketball conference than the Mountain West and also has a deal with ESPN to televise games.  MAC basketball is not even close to the Sun Belt and never has.  MAC is #10 and Sun Belt is #22.  C-USA is #15 or so.  MAC has 6 teams in the RPI Top 100.  No clue what you are talking about, MAC basketball is way better than you care to give it credit for.  Missouri Valley has two Top 20 teams, but yet the MVC is rated below the MAC top to bottom because after Wichita State and UNI, the rest of the valley is terrible.

 

B9m7ZZzCAAA_qBP.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

MAC is rated as a higher basketball conference than the Mountain West and also has a deal with ESPN to televise games.  MAC basketball is not even close to the Sun Belt and never has.  MAC is #10 and Sun Belt is #22.  C-USA is #15 or so.  MAC has 6 teams in the RPI Top 100.  No clue what you are talking about, MAC basketball is way better than you care to give it credit for.  Missouri Valley has two Top 20 teams, but yet the MVC is rated below the MAC top to bottom because after Wichita State and UNI, the rest of the valley is terrible.

 

B9m7ZZzCAAA_qBP.jpg

Please excuse the Bison fan....they don't like facts.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

You realize a new stadium would still need to actually be full in order to be a positive in the fund category correct? I know it's easy to spend other peoples money but you have to look at all of this a bit more realistically.

Many nay-sayers said the REA would never sell out too.  If a philanthropic alumni wants to donate a stadium, would this board revolt?  I think there's several that would join with the bison trolls, with the refrain that UND shouldn't move ahead as it would end in failure just like the REA. :whistling:

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A bigger question is, are we a "high-end Big Sky school"?   Not trying to bash my alma matter, but we haven't even had a winning Big Sky record in either basketball or football.    I've got a feeling he wasn't talking about us.   It's hard to be considered high end when we can't even get over 500.

Of course we are a high end school in the Big Sky.  Only Idaho has more research by ratings, and that's because Idaho is both the flagship and land grant in that state.

 

UND is one of the few U's with a med school, law school, engineering, and has an aerospace school to boot. 

 

Idaho doesn't have a med school.

Montana doesn't have a med school or engineering.

MSU has engineering and ag but little else.

Most of the other Big Sky schools are glorified teachers colleges, that have expanded over the last 50 years, but don't have key components of being a hgh end research school.

 

Idaho put in their contract that the Big Sky had to have Mont, Mont St, and UND, otherwise they would have gotten an out card.  Academic programs were a big reason for that.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Many nay-sayers said the REA would never sell out too. If a philanthropic alumni wants to donate a stadium, would this board revolt? I think there's several that would join with the bison trolls, with the refrain that UND shouldn't move ahead as it would end in failure just like the REA. :whistling:

How big is this stadium?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course we are a high end school in the Big Sky.  Only Idaho has more research by ratings, and that's because Idaho is both the flagship and land grant in that state.

 

UND is one of the few U's with a med school, law school, engineering, and has an aerospace school to boot. 

 

Idaho doesn't have a med school.

Montana doesn't have a med school or engineering.

MSU has engineering and ag but little else.

Most of the other Big Sky schools are glorified teachers colleges, that have expanded over the last 50 years, but don't have key components of being a hgh end research school.

 

Idaho put in their contract that the Big Sky had to have Mont, Mont St, and UND, otherwise they would have gotten an out card.  Academic programs were a big reason for that.

We might be high end with academics, but when it comes to athletics most people think of the big 3, UM, MSU, and EWU, then lump the rest in a lower tier.    I realize some of this is only a perception problem, but it still exists.      It's still the big 3 and then everyone else when it comes to Big Sky sports.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that in all sports or just football? It seems like our women's basketball and volleyball teams have each held their own in the conference. The men's basketball team also made it close to March Madness the past two seasons, despite the road losses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not going to happen. We can't even get people to attend now, and with FBS we'd need to up our attendence massively. Let's just worry about being competitive in FCS first and not go off half cocked on some FBS dream. Coming up with money for another 22 scholarships isn't going to be easy to find either.

Spot on TRex, you read my mind.
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is this contract agreement between Idaho and the Big Sky Conference?

 

It exists (too lazy to find it but there are links on this board to it in threads).

 

Basically, when the join date (July 2014) arrived for Idaho to come back to the BSC, if UM, MSU, and UND were not in the BSC Idaho could leave *and* get their deposit to join back. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We might be high end with academics, but when it comes to athletics most people think of the big 3, UM, MSU, and EWU, then lump the rest in a lower tier.    I realize some of this is only a perception problem, but it still exists.      It's still the big 3 and then everyone else when it comes to Big Sky sports.

 

Is the B1G aligned by common sports interests, or by the Committee on Institutional Cooperation. BIG sports make them money; CIC is where the real money is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We might be high end with academics, but when it comes to athletics most people think of the big 3, UM, MSU, and EWU, then lump the rest in a lower tier.    I realize some of this is only a perception problem, but it still exists.      It's still the big 3 and then everyone else when it comes to Big Sky sports.

You may be right from fans' perception, but the fans' perception matters little in the conference affiliation game, which is what this thread is about.  To the things that matter to the people who make the decisions on conference affiliation, UND clearly is a "high-end" program in the Big Sky.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My take away was that he is saying it's going to get harder to balance an athletic budget with an FCS football squad in your athletic dept.

It might be a step down and tough move to go FCS for Idaho, but it's certainly going to be an uphill battle for Idaho in the Sunbelt.  They play a couple of high majors each year just to pay some bills, and get totally destroyed.  On top of that, Idaho is far from even competing for a Sunbelt title.   If relevancy for Idaho is 0-3 wins with two - million dollar games, that's a pretty worthless existence.  Compare that to Georgia Southern's existence, and Idaho should just throw a white flag.

 

The moment that Idaho was given the thumbs down by the MWC (their geographic home for FBS football), they should have moved to the FCS Big Sky.  There is no doubt about that.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

So, will Idaho going FCS help the Big Sky go FBS?    Umm, I don't think so.   Dodd aparently does not agree with the Big Sky grand plan.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... ty-is-real

 

 

I'll give you credit.  You found something as in-depth on this subject as a graduate of the College of Home Economics could handle:

 

"This is Idaho's last season in FBS."

 

Might be true, though. 

 

"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll give you credit.  You found something as in-depth on this subject as a graduate of the College of Home Economics could handle:

 

"This is Idaho's last season in FBS."

 

Might be true, though. 

 

"

 

Dennis Dodd is usually a credible source.  Contrast that with the author of this thread.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dennis Dodd is usually a credible source.  Contrast that with the author of this thread.

 

 

If I had to bet money, I would say that Idaho would probably join the Big Sky as FCS over any FBS dreams of the Big Sky.  But, I've been wrong before...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...