Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted
21 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

So the unranked, 4-2 three-way tie-break winner from the < direction > hosts the top five ranked, 6-0 winner of the < other direction >?

If it came to that than yes.

 

Posted
3 hours ago, gundy1124 said:

I know 14 teams is a joke of a conference when the conference champions are nothing more than 'paper champions'.  Split them 7 and 7.  Your 6 games count towards your seed in your respective half.  Last week of the season 1 plays 1 for the title.  2 plays 2, and so on.  I didn't need a 1,500 page report to come up with that.  That guarantees 7 conference games and fill the rest of schedule with 3 - 4 'non conference', which could be Big Sky teams.

yeah.  This ain't happening. sorry.

Posted
1 hour ago, The Sicatoka said:

So the unranked, 4-2 three-way tie-break winner from the < direction > hosts the top five ranked, 6-0 winner of the < other direction >?

What if you had an undefeated team from each side, how sweet would that be??  I didn't say it would be perfect each year, but at least it determines a champion by playing a game called the "Big Sky Championship Game!!"  It's really not that different from the power 5 FBS conference championship games except everyone plays in the conference, not just the top 2.  If this isn't considered.....why the hell not!!

Posted

The biggest hurdle with an east/west or north/south split feels like the traditionally powerful teams (Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, and now Idaho and hopefully UND) would mostly be together, while the teams that are more often the not-so-powerful (for example Weber, Sac State, UC Davis, and maybe Idaho State) would be in the other half.

If you look at it that way, a Big Sky/WAC reorg makes more sense.

Posted

If there was a geography split I have always liked the following

Big Sky Conf / Mountain Division

Idaho, Idaho State, Montana, Montana State, North Dakota, Northern Colorado and Weber State

Pacific Coast Conf / Pacific Division

Cal Poly, Eastern Washington, Northern Arizona, Portland State, Sacramento State, Southern Utah and UC Davis.

 

Pretty balanced and it keeps the founding members (Weber, Montana, Montana State, Idaho State, Idaho) together.

  • Upvote 3
Posted
28 minutes ago, WILDCAT said:

If there was a geography split I have always liked the following

Big Sky Conf / Mountain Division

Idaho, Idaho State, Montana, Montana State, North Dakota, Northern Colorado and Weber State

Pacific Coast Conf / Pacific Division

Cal Poly, Eastern Washington, Northern Arizona, Portland State, Sacramento State, Southern Utah and UC Davis.

 

Pretty balanced and it keeps the founding members (Weber, Montana, Montana State, Idaho State, Idaho) together.

I like this set up.

 

Posted
20 hours ago, The Sicatoka said:

Sounds easy.

Who gets the Week 7 home games. :huh: :0

Now it gets tricky ... ;) 

Alternate the divisions for the 4 thru 7 games each year, hosting for those doesn't matter much any way.  Have the 1 thru 3 games at Mile High Stadium in Denver as part of Big Sky Playoff Showdown weekend.  Have the games at 11, 3 and 7, with the Championship last.  You would also have quality games for your other playoff contenders to wrap up the regular season.  With six schools, you would have the potential for a good turnout and you would generally know well in advance if your team was going to make the Showdown, so travel plans would be easier.  Denver is a pretty easy flight for all schools as well, and it would draw some exposure to the league, and also be convenient for Root Sports to cover.

Posted
2 hours ago, WILDCAT said:

If there was a geography split I have always liked the following

Big Sky Conf / Mountain Division

Idaho, Idaho State, Montana, Montana State, North Dakota, Northern Colorado and Weber State

Pacific Coast Conf / Pacific Division

Cal Poly, Eastern Washington, Northern Arizona, Portland State, Sacramento State, Southern Utah and UC Davis.

 

Pretty balanced and it keeps the founding members (Weber, Montana, Montana State, Idaho State, Idaho) together.

That would be a nice division.

Posted
6 hours ago, nodakvindy said:

Alternate the divisions for the 4 thru 7 games each year, hosting for those doesn't matter much any way.  Have the 1 thru 3 games at Mile High Stadium in Denver as part of Big Sky Playoff Showdown weekend.  Have the games at 11, 3 and 7, with the Championship last.  You would also have quality games for your other playoff contenders to wrap up the regular season.  With six schools, you would have the potential for a good turnout and you would generally know well in advance if your team was going to make the Showdown, so travel plans would be easier.  Denver is a pretty easy flight for all schools as well, and it would draw some exposure to the league, and also be convenient for Root Sports to cover.

Kudos for the original idea!!  Let's get you on the committee.

Posted
On 6/8/2016 at 10:07 AM, nodakvindy said:

Alternate the divisions for the 4 thru 7 games each year, hosting for those doesn't matter much any way.  Have the 1 thru 3 games at Mile High Stadium in Denver as part of Big Sky Playoff Showdown weekend.  Have the games at 11, 3 and 7, with the Championship last.  You would also have quality games for your other playoff contenders to wrap up the regular season.  With six schools, you would have the potential for a good turnout and you would generally know well in advance if your team was going to make the Showdown, so travel plans would be easier.  Denver is a pretty easy flight for all schools as well, and it would draw some exposure to the league, and also be convenient for Root Sports to cover.

Looks like there is a proposal to add 12th game to the FCS schedule permanently.  Not sure if the proposal is so conferences can have the option for a "Championship" game or if it's just to get another game on the schedule...

 

  • 2 months later...
Posted

Was the guy at USD with the non-USD backpack and phone in a public place? Were there postings about "no cameras" or such?

If the guy was in a public place doing nothing prohibited he should've told the GA to pound sand.

And the guy should've never given the GA a student ID to prove anything. Go pound some more. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

Was the guy at USD with the non-USD backpack and phone in a public place? Were there postings about "no cameras" or such?

If the guy was in a public place doing nothing prohibited he should've told the GA to pound sand.

And the guy should've never given the GA a student ID to prove anything. Go pound some more. 

GA didn't do anything wrong though (unless he suggested he had authority he didn't have). Sounds like phone guy is just kind of a coward and crappy spy.

  • Upvote 1
Posted
2 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

Very interesting development down in Vermillion...

 

Maybe Bill Billicheck sent him to scout potential draft picks. 

Or a USD opponent paid for books to get some Intel...they say, if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying. :D

Posted
19 minutes ago, ericpnelson said:

GA didn't do anything wrong though (unless he suggested he had authority he didn't have). 

I never said the GA did anything wrong. I agree with your assessment. 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Old School Guy said:

Maybe Bill Billicheck sent him to scout potential draft picks. 

Or a USD opponent paid for books to get some Intel...they say, if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying. :D

ok, I'll start it. I think we all know whose MVFC logo he was wearing.... 

  • Upvote 2
Posted
3 hours ago, ericpnelson said:

ok, I'll start it. I think we all know whose MVFC logo he was wearing.... 

You sure you want to start the speculation?  Because I'm sure eventually it will come out which logo was on the back pack, and you will look brilliant or foolish. 

Keep in mind, although it's easy to draw the conclusion that whatever athletic department had something to do with this, there isn't any proof and just as easily could be a coincidence

Posted
42 minutes ago, 2TRU4U said:

You sure you want to start the speculation?  Because I'm sure eventually it will come out which logo was on the back pack, and you will look brilliant or foolish. 

Keep in mind, although it's easy to draw the conclusion that whatever athletic department had something to do with this, there isn't any proof and just as easily could be a coincidence

A little defensive.  

  • Upvote 4
Posted
14 hours ago, ericpnelson said:

ok, I'll start it. I think we all know whose MVFC logo he was wearing.... 

 

10 hours ago, 2TRU4U said:

You sure you want to start the speculation?  

We know it wasn't the SDSU bunnies. The article said so.

So who would be silly enough to transfer to USD, to see USD as an aspirational school. I'll go WIU.

(Other MVFC schools have other aspirational schools.)

Posted
15 hours ago, 2TRU4U said:

You sure you want to start the speculation?  Because I'm sure eventually it will come out which logo was on the back pack, and you will look brilliant or foolish. 

Keep in mind, although it's easy to draw the conclusion that whatever athletic department had something to do with this, there isn't any proof and just as easily could be a coincidence

img_E0Dm8Z.jpg

it was a joke

  • Upvote 2
Posted
On August 18, 2016 at 6:51 PM, ericpnelson said:

ok, I'll start it. I think we all know whose MVFC logo he was wearing.... 

Maybe UND should close their practices. Maybe they they would have gained more than 61 yards last year...

  • Downvote 8

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...