nodakhoops Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Hypothetical question.................... If NDSU were to trade places with UNC as the only former NCC school in the Big Sky, and everything else being equal with SDSU, USD, UNO, UNC, and Denver all in in the Summit/MVFC, the Summit Tourney in Sioux Falls, which conference would you prefer UND to be in? My guess is that everyone here pining for the Summit/MVFC would be in favor of the Big Sky in that instance. Am I wrong? There are a lot of other things I like about the summit/mvfc more than the Big Sky, but the majority of it hinges on the increased fan interest by playing NDSU USD SDSU. I think the Montana schools balance out the SD ones so this scenario would probably work for me. I don't see any of the Dakota schools leaving though because they see the advantages of the MVFC/Summit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 If the 2013 home schedule didn't get people to buy season tickets, I'm not sure what will. Valpo SDSU UM MSU EWU Sac St UNC That's 4 teams that regularly make the playoffs and should be household names to anyone who pays any attention to football plus old foe UNC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakhoops Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I can see attendace increasing, obviously, for NDSU games. But UNI, W. Ill, and Missiouri State...thos games are no more of a draw than any Big Sky team. Sure you will have people that would buy season tickets to gaurantee they get tickets to the Bison game. But 4000-5000...not a chance. It has been said many times in many threads on this site. The thing that is going to to get butts in the seats at the Alerus and the Betty is WINNING. I'd put the minimum at 3500 extra at least that would buy season tickets just for that game. UND football season tickets are what $80? Bison fans alone would probably buy at least 2000 if not more. They'd probably even join the Champions Club for tickets. I think your underestimating how valuable those tickets would be. That extra money would sure be nice to have those lean years when your not winning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 If the 2013 home schedule didn't get people to buy season tickets, I'm not sure what will. Apparently a home schedule like this: Texas A&M Kingsville St Cloud St. Wisconsin-LaCrosse Western Washington Southern Utah Those are the teams that visited the Alerus Center when UND set its all time season attendance record. I wonder if being arguably the best football program in our division for something like 7 straight years prior to that season had anything to do with it. Win and they will come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-1 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 If the 2013 home schedule didn't get people to buy season tickets, I'm not sure what will. Valpo SDSU UM MSU EWU Sac St UNC That's 4 teams that regularly make the playoffs and should be household names to anyone who pays any attention to football plus old foe UNC. Thus the issue at hand. The slightly casual football fan knows nothing about the Big Sky teams. They are the 9000-11500 group of the attendance total that is NOT showing up right now. Put SDSU, USD, UNI, and NDSU on the schedule every year and they will instantly have some sort of connection through familiarity geography wise. I agree with Vince. I also understand that winning would bring in 1,000+ more fans, also. But, until they are winning 9+ games per year and making the playoffs we will not see much of a spike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightingsioux4life Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Thus the issue at hand. The slightly casual football fan knows nothing about the Big Sky teams. They are the 9000-11500 group of the attendance total that is NOT showing up right now. Put SDSU, USD, UNI, and NDSU on the schedule every year and they will instantly have some sort of connection through familiarity geography wise. I agree with Vince. I also understand that winning would bring in 1,000+ more fans, also. But, until they are winning 9+ games per year and making the playoffs we will not see much of a spike. When (not if, but when) Bubba gets this program back to where it belongs, people will start becoming familiar with Big Sky teams and will start showing up to games, especially those match-ups with conference title and/or playoff implications. We haven't had games like that for such a long time that people have forgotten how awesome it is to have these games to look forward to all work week long in the autumn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Thus the issue at hand. The slightly casual football fan knows nothing about the Big Sky teams. They are the 9000-11500 group of the attendance total that is NOT showing up right now. Put SDSU, USD, UNI, and NDSU on the schedule every year and they will instantly have some sort of connection through familiarity geography wise. I agree with Vince. I also understand that winning would bring in 1,000+ more fans, also. But, until they are winning 9+ games per year and making the playoffs we will not see much of a spike. I'd hope that the casual football fan does get Montana, Montana State and Eastern Washington. If they don't, I'd argue they haven't watch much if any FCS football. And SDSU was on the home schedule that year. I honestly don't think UND will ever have a more attractive home schedule than they did that year regardless of conference they are in, mainly because they won't ever have 7 home games again with two of the non-conference games being the equivalent of UM and SDSU. Winning will be the turning point, not the schedule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagger Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 To a large part either conference would be fine . People will be in the seats if we WIN!!!! Just win baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-1 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 When (not if, but when) Bubba gets this program back to where it belongs, people will start becoming familiar with Big Sky teams and will start showing up to games, especially those match-ups with conference title and/or playoff implications. We haven't had games like that for such a long time that people have forgotten how awesome it is to have these games to look forward to all work week long in the autumn. Not denying that at all. I do, however, feel that geography and the sense of pride it brings to see your team beat another local team is being understated in this conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Thus the issue at hand. The slightly casual football fan knows nothing about the Big Sky teams. They are the 9000-11500 group of the attendance total that is NOT showing up right now. Put SDSU, USD, UNI, and NDSU on the schedule every year and they will instantly have some sort of connection through familiarity geography wise. I bet that the casual football fan has next to no idea what or where UNI is. I bet the casual football fan probably assumes that SDSU is still the perennial doormat just like they were in the NCC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-1 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I bet that the casual football fan has next to no idea what or where UNI is. I bet the casual football fan probably assumes that SDSU is still the perennial doormat just like they were in the NCC. ...and thus would assume UND will beat them, possibly prompting them to want to see them beat a local rival. FYI, SDSU was far from a perennial doormat. I could be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 ...and thus would assume UND will beat them, possibly prompting them to want to see them beat a local rival. FYI, SDSU was far from a perennial doormat. I could be wrong. Im well aware of SDSUs football pedigree. Perhaps doormat was a strong word. My point is nobody used to care when they came to town because here were always so so. Now they are a Top 15 FCS program every year and I bet most casual fans are unaware of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakhoops Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I'd hope that the casual football fan does get Montana, Montana State and Eastern Washington. If they don't, I'd argue they haven't watch much if any FCS football. And SDSU was on the home schedule that year. I honestly don't think UND will ever have a more attractive home schedule than they did that year regardless of conference they are in, mainly because they won't ever have 7 home games again with two of the non-conference games being the equivalent of UM and SDSU. Winning will be the turning point, not the schedule. These are the fans/alums UND is trying to attract and most don't know FCS football, but they know MVFC/Summit League because that is what the vast majority of media outside Grand Forks covers in the Dakotas. That is the conference people read and hear about. Even if UND was at the top of the Big Sky in FB and MBB that conference would probably still get more media attention. I fully agree winning will eventually put butts in the seats, but winning in a conference with the other Dakota schools will do it a lot faster. Like I mentioned I know Bison fans that have told me they would attend more UND games when NDSU was gone if they were in the MVFC because that is the conference they follow. They might come now to watch the Montana schools, but other than that could care less. Believe it or not, some of those casual Bison fans are who UND needs to make casual UND fans too. You do that by getting them to games and I think playing in the MVFC does that better than the Big Sky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDvince97-01 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 When is the last time we had 10,000 at the Alerus?... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 When is the last time we had 10,000 at the Alerus?... Well played........... It was SDSU. For Potato Bowl, which is often one of the top attended games of the year. Southern Utah is the next most recent 10,000+ game in the Alerus. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zonadub Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I must have missed it... When did UND get an invite to the MVFC/Summit league? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDvince97-01 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I must have missed it... When did UND get an invite to the MVFC/Summit league? You also must have missed the part where I said is wasn't an option at the time and that it was hypothetical and that UND took the only invite they had in the Big Sky, which was a great invite and option. And since conference affiliations never change, specifically within the last 10 years or so, I suppose it shouldn't be discussed as a potential option moving forward either. The title of this thread? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDvince97-01 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I disagree that the Big Sky teams would have the same effect on ticket sales as the MVFC teams on a year to year basis. Montana is by far the most appealing BSC draw for UND Football fans. We have hosted them 3 times so far: 2012 - 9000 2013 - 9726 2014 - 9025 Average 9250. Not bad, but I tend to think it would be behind the Dakota school averages in a MVFC schedule. If anything, I believe it has been proven and shown that UND fans care less about the Big Sky teams when compared to the Dakota schools and even maybe UNI (weve never hosted them for football, but we have for basketball). Hosting these schools every other year would make a big difference in ticket sales in my opinion. And yes, winning obviously helps everything, I agree 100%. But all equal, the MVFC annual schedule brings much more interest from casual UND football fans, and in turn ticket sales. I know many, many people who would be inclined to purchasing season football tickets simply because of the certainty of one game specifically on the schedule every other year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risky Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Judging by the general reactions of people the order of priorities is (1) win games (2) Play the other 3 Dakota schools (3) play the Montana schools (4) the ultimate situation would be to win games and play the schools from Dakota and Montana all the time. In other words be in the same conference with everyone else and win. Maybe some day it will happen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakhoops Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I disagree that the Big Sky teams would have the same effect on ticket sales as the MVFC teams on a year to year basis. Montana is by far the most appealing draw for UND Football fans. We have hosted them 3 times so far: 2012 - 9000 2013 - 9726 2014 - 9025 Average 9250. Not bad, but I tend to think it would be behind the Dakota school averages in a MVFC schedule. If anything, I believe it has been proven and shown that UND fans dont care about the Big Sky teams nearly as much as the Dakota schools and even maybe UNI (weve never hosted them for football, but we have for basketball). Hosting these schools every other year would make a big difference in ticket sales in my opinion. And yes, winning obviously helps everything, I agree 100%. But all equal, the MVFC annual schedule brings much more interest from casual UND football fans, and in turn ticket sales.I know many, many people who would be inclined to purchasing season football tickets simply because of the certainty of one game specifically on the schedule every other year. This is 100% spot on, specifically the bolded last sentence. I'll stand by my comment that if NDSU is on the home schedule season tickets increase by a minimum 3500, but I think it would be way more than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I disagree that the Big Sky teams would have the same effect on ticket sales as the MVFC teams on a year to year basis. Montana is by far the most appealing draw for UND Football fans. We have hosted them 3 times so far: 2012 - 9000 2013 - 9726 2014 - 9025 Average 9250. Not bad, but I tend to think it would be behind the Dakota school averages in a MVFC schedule. If anything, I believe it has been proven and shown that UND fans dont care about the Big Sky teams nearly as much as the Dakota schools and even maybe UNI (weve never hosted them for football, but we have for basketball). Hosting these schools every other year would make a big difference in ticket sales in my opinion. And yes, winning obviously helps everything, I agree 100%. But all equal, the MVFC annual schedule brings much more interest from casual UND football fans, and in turn ticket sales. I know many, many people who would be inclined to purchasing season football tickets simply because of the certainty of one game specifically on the schedule every other year. Have to continue to agree to disagree and that of course is fine. 2012-14 were 3 years in what has been one of the worst eras of Sioux Football. I will continue to argue that the reason attendance has been so low the last 6 seasons is because we have gone 30-37 over the last six seasons. I'm sure attendance for the Montana games would have been better if it were on Potato Bowl like that SDSU game was, or if we had been to the playoffs for several consecutive seasons and fans felt the game might have some national significance. Sadly we've been terrible for the last 6 or 7 years, and few people want to watch the product that has been on the field. As long as we are looking at attendance for games where the Griz are the opponent, look at NDSU's schedule last year. Their game against Montana outdrew their games against SDSU. So Montana must be a more attractive opponent right? I wonder how attendance would be at the Fargodome if NDSU were 30-37 the last six years instead of 70-16. The product on the field means way more than the opponent as far as I am concerned. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDSU grad Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Some of the Bison posters can chime in but I think the MVFC and Summit Leagues both have deals with ESPN3. All of UNDs home games for football and basketball would be on Midco or FSN like now and if the majority of road games are on ESPN3 I don't see much difference to BigSkyTV. Another thing would be UND would get more coverage on midco as I think they have a Summit League show every week along with summit basketball games on Wednesdays and Saturdays (i think) so we'd actually probably see more road games broadcasted right on Midco. Just a guess, but I'd imagine anytime we'd play USD or SDSU on the road in any sport it would be broadcasted on Midco. While I agree BigSkyTV is awesome I think UND would actually gain more coverage in the MVFC/Summit. BigSkyTV is great, but i'll take ESPN3 over that, if they do have that deal. I'll also take the regional/national exposure the UND/NDSU football game gives the State/University every year and gives Grand Forks every other year when they host. I have no idea if there is a formal agreement between those conferences and ESPN3 to air games, but a quick look shows 7 of 16 NDSU conference basketball games on ESPN3 and all but 2 of the regular season conference football games. All the football playoff games and the Summit League tournament were on ESPN3. It would be awesome to get more content online, especially now that I joined the technology age and got a Roku. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDColorado Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I tend to like the Big Sky more but this would be a much more legitimate debate if we actually had an active or past offer from the MVFC. Until that happens this debate is nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herd Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I tend to like the Big Sky more but this would be a much more legitimate debate if we actually had an active or past offer from the MVFC. Until that happens this debate is nonsense. If und told the Summit, we'd like to join, but we need a mvfc invite too before we'd come . . . Then it would happen w/I two years. Und would have to make commitment to the Summit, then the summit would leverage the mvfc to make it happen. Pretry simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-1 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 If und told the Summit, we'd like to join, but we need a mvfc invite too before we'd come . . . Then it would happen w/I two years. Und would have to make commitment to the Summit, then the summit would leverage the mvfc to make it happen. Pretry simple. Pretty sure they did that previously and Patty didn't want to expand. Then, in her infinite wisdom she figured out that USD was going to the Big Sky, too, so she took them quick. 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.