President Kennedy Message on Athletics

[JackJD]

22 hours ago, jdub27 said:

22 hours ago, jdub27 said:

...USD was in the Summit in 2011 in all sports except football. The switch to the Big Sky was going to happen in 2012. The Great West disbanded in 2012, causing the need for both UND and USD to find homes for their football team.

 

I stand corrected: FSSD and jdub27 are correct in pointing out in posts responding to a post I made, USD agreed to join the Summit League for the 2011-12 school year. I had written "USD was not in the Summit at the time (it was certainly being pursued by the Summit but the lack of a home for USD football was a big sticking point)...."  I suppose I could have claimed that technically, in 2010, USD was not in the Summit but the fact is, which I had forgotten, sometime in 2010 USD had agreed to join the Summing starting in 2011-12.  It was in the fall of 2010 that USD gave serious consideration to moving to the Big Sky which would provide a home for USD's football team.  FSSD and jdub27 both correctly stated USD had been admitted into the Summit League for the 2011-12 season. 

The MVFC invited USD in 2010 just before USD announced it was going to the Big Sky (the Big Sky Conference head office had announced days earlier that USD was "on the verge" of announcing it was joining the Big Sky).  As a result, USD followed through with joining the Summit League effective 2011-12 and entered the MVFC in 2012.

I did a little digging on this topic. The following are interesting reading:  First, a press release from UND dated 10/5/10 ":Summit League to conduct site visit to UND" which can still be found on the UND site: http://www.undsports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=13500&ATCLID=205006602

From the UND release (confirms FSSD's and jdub27's comment that USD had agreed to join the Summit starting 2011-12):

"Now in its 29th year, The Summit League offers 19 championship sports and has a combined enrollment of over 125,000 at 10 member institutions: Centenary College of Louisiana, IPFW (Indiana University-Purdue University-Fort Wayne), IUPUI (Indiana University-Purdue University-Indianapolis), UMKC (University of Missouri-Kansas City), North Dakota State University, Oakland University, Oral Roberts University, South Dakota State University, Southern Utah University and Western Illinois University. The Summit League has two associate members in the University of South Dakota, who will begin full Summit League membership in 2011-12 and currently serves as an associate member for swimming and diving, and Eastern Illinois University, which currently competes in swimming and diving and will join in men's soccer in 2011."

 

Here's a story (I'm pasting the entire story with apologies -- I don't know if this board's rules proscribe pasting an entire published story) from the Bozeman, MT, Daily Chronicle, published a month later, 11/4/10, having the headline "South Dakota Will Not Join Big Sky Conference"

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/sports/bobcats/south-dakota-will-not-join-big-sky-conference/article_a76f88ac-e871-11df-b0ea-001cc4c002e0.html

 

The Big Sky Conference is no longer “on the verge” of adding the University of South Dakota.

But so far, that hasn’t affected the thinking of the University of North Dakota or Montana State.

According to a press release issued Thursday, the University of South Dakota has joined the Missouri Valley Football Conference and Summit League just three days after the Big Sky was counting on the school to bring it to 14 teams for football and 12 for all other sports.

Big Sky commissioner Doug Fullerton, whose conference had said it was “on the verge” of announcing the addition of South Dakota Monday, said he found out about USD’s change in plans at 5 p.m. on Wednesday.

This was after Missouri Valley commissioner Patty Viverito called South Dakota athletic director David Sayler on Tuesday morning asking if it was too late to offer his school an invitation to her conference.

“He just kind of sighed and told me he’d have to get back to me,” Viverito said.

Viverito admitted that the nine-team MVFC only became interested in South Dakota after realizing the school could be added by itself to bring the conference to 10 teams.

“As early as August, we had some serious conversations about expansion looking at a 12-team format,” Viverito said. “The thought was that North Dakota, South Dakota and Southern Utah would all be looking for homes.”

But when it became clear that Southern Utah was more interested in the Big Sky, Viverito said the MVFC’s university presidents soured on the idea of expansion. (On Monday, Southern Utah and North Dakota announced they were joining in the Big Sky).

“There was no support about abandoning an optimum nine-team league in favor of an 11-team model, which has challenges,” Viverito said. “The 10-team model, on the other hand, was one we were willing to consider.”

Two of the schools currently on board with the MVFC are South Dakota State and North Dakota State, which compete in the conference for football and the Summit League for all other sports. South Dakota, which has not played tradition rival SDSU since 2004, will now have the same arrangement with both conferences.

At this point, Viverito said her league is not interested in adding North Dakota.

It means UND will become one of 11 full Big Sky members and 13 teams for football in 2012, which would mean, Fullerton said, that the league would not split up into divisions.

Instead, Fullerton said, the Big Sky will use a football scheduling model similar to the one that had previously been used by the Big Ten when the league had 11 members.

“They play rivals every year, plus they rotate the rest of the league through,” he said.

This odd number of teams in the league also affects basketball scheduling.

While having more teams allows the conference to schedule more Division I basketball games, something that Fullerton said has become difficult in the West, having 11 teams will make scheduling difficult. With an odd number of teams, the easier travel partner scheduling model will still be impossible.

“Anytime you have an odd number in basketball, it’s more awkward,” Fullerton said. “I will absolutely agree with that.”

In the immediate future, Fullerton said the conference is not planning on adding any more schools.

“I think the presidents want to take a breath,” he said. “There is a lot of talk going on in the big conferences about expanding. I believe we’re about to enter in to another round.”

Some of that talk is coming from the Big East Conference. On Tuesday, the Football Bowl Subdivision league’s presidents agreed, according to ESPN, that it would be “in their best interest” to add two football schools.

The possible addition of TCU or Central Florida to the Big East, which has been mentioned, could send ripple affects through the WAC, which could also be felt by the Big Sky.

Regardless, this question has been raised: What will happen with North Dakota?

Now the lone Dakota school left out of the Missouri Valley and Summit League, UND athletic director Brian Faison said things have changed since the school agreed to join the Big Sky Monday, but not enough to sap the excitement level in Grand Forks.

“We knew all along that South Dakota had some issues they needed to get cleared up internally,” Faison said. “Our interest was never paired with theirs.”

While Faison said “it would have certainly been nice” to have South Dakota in the Big Sky and that “it’s really too early to quantify” what UND fans think, he reaffirmed that “the Big Sky is still where North Dakota wants to be.”

“We went from Monday to Thursday with a lot of ying and yang in the middle, but this is a big deal to step into a whole different level of competitiveness,” Faison said. “You look at this conference’s brand, it’s so strong. We’re rock solid on the Big Sky.”

If UND decides it isn’t rock solid with the agreement it signed Monday, which doesn’t require the school to be a Big Sky member for a minimum number of years, Fullerton said there could be a financial penalty. But only if UND goes about it “the wrong way.”

Fullerton didn’t explain what that way would be, but said if North Dakota was up front about all its dealings before an exit from the conference there would be no buyout fee.

If the school chose to seek a new conference home behind the Big Sky’s back, Fullerton said, it would be charged a buyout fee of $1 million.

 

 

22 hours ago, jdub27 said:

 

 

 

Okay, I'll let myself out of the room and assign myself to message-board detention after submitting the longest post on a minor point barely connected to the topic of this thread. JackJD

[Matt]

4 hours ago, SiouxVolley said:

So Kennedy takes away the financial officer from Faison because he screwed the pooch.  How's that in English for you?

 

Yeah...there again I think I'm gonna go with Occam's Razor on this one rather than the yarns you are spinning.

[GeauxSioux]

13 hours ago, bison73 said:

Not athletic. So youre safe there.

EERC or Aerospace related?

[Yotes]

10 hours ago, SiouxVolley said:

Another XDSU troll supplying his so-called wisdom.  How novel!  Their boards are full of posts about going FBS, but UND, even though it has more resources, can't.  Their hate never ends.

The idea of reviving WAC football by inviting a bunch of FCS schools is delusional. UND will not be going FBS. It's far more likely that we will see a restructuring of D1 football so that there are three levels and UND (plus other Dakotas) end up on the second tier.

[The Sicatoka]

47 minutes ago, Yotes said:

The idea of reviving WAC football by inviting a bunch of FCS schools is delusional. UND will not be going FBS. It's far more likely that we will see a restructuring of D1 football so that there are three levels and UND (plus other Dakotas) end up on the second tier.

Isn't that the effective reality today?

Most claim DI FB is two tier, namely FBS and FCS. To me that is just ... well ... f-BS.

DI FB is three-tiers today: the P5, the G5, and FCS.

I dare make that claim of an "effective third tier" because there is a group of schools out there (the G5) claiming to be "FBS" who will never play in the four-team playoff*. The G5 tier gets some of the perks of FBS (the crumbs left in the bottom of the key lime pie** pan of television money) and to claim FBS status. And they get to say they play at the same level as 'bama and LSU, above those "little DI-AA" guys. 

It's three tiers, but not formalized. I won't be surprised if it becomes formalized, but not before it makes fiscal sense for ... the P5. (Golden rule in play here; they have the gold, they make the rules.) 

I will again harken to Nick Saban and the SBC commish each about five years ago saying there should be the top 80 or so (the P5) and then the next group ... of about 80. I believe them so I guess I agree with you to a point. There are only 120ish FBS. That would mean taking the bottom 40 of FBS and the top 40 or so of FCS. That would leave the rest of FCS (about 80) to play. 

 

*You ain't never seein' Georgia State and 'bama in the National Championship playoff title game. Sorry. Never. Boise State at its peak wouldn't have gotten there. 
**Mmmmm ... key lime pie .... 

[mksioux]

10 hours ago, JackJD said:

Okay, I'll let myself out of the room and assign myself to message-board detention after submitting the longest post on a minor point barely connected to the topic of this thread. JackJD

The article that you posted (which was circulated and discussed on this board at the time) shows that the MVFC had no interest in adding UND back in 2010.  Unless something has changed, I don't see any reason to think UND might be going to the Summit/MVFC.  Does the MVFC all of sudden want to go to 11 teams, which they were so adamantly against back in 2010?  I doubt it.  And I'm someone who would love to see UND in the Summit/MVFC, but I just don't see it happening unless the MVFC loses a team or two.  

I have no interest in pursuing a Big Sky football-only membership and going to the Summit for other sports (even if it were a possibility, which I doubt it is). 

In short, the MVFC holds all the cards.  If they ever want UND, I think there is a reasonable chance it would happen.  Until then, I believe UND will stay in the Big Sky.

[The Sicatoka]

Patty V of the MVFC has been very and consistently outspoken that the MVFC is not looking for teams. 

[Siouxperfan7]

22 hours ago, bison73 said:

Nope.  I would love to tell you but it would compromise my source.  When  I get conformation I will post it.  I can tell you this. They were talking about it in Bismark.

However, the Summit League and the MVFC do work closely together.  If UND showed some behind the scenes interest to join the Summit, would Douple and the rest of the League want them?  And if they did, would he make a push to the MVFC to add them?

 

[UNDvince97-01]

Patty V of the MVFC has been very and consistently outspoken that she has no vision or leadership qualities for the MVFC and is not looking for teams.

She also has stated she will continue to be reactive rather than proactive in the tumultuous climate and landscape that currently is college football.

She has no interest in securing the long term future of what currently is the MVFC with a geographical core of the Dakota schools.

So, the 100% opposite of Doug Fullerton.

[GeauxSioux]

Quote

Viverito added the league is currently not contemplating expansion beyond its 10 teams. Each team plays an eight-game league schedule that includes four home games and four road games.

 

[Siouxperman8]

3 hours ago, mksioux said:

The article that you posted (which was circulated and discussed on this board at the time) shows that the MVFC had no interest in adding UND back in 2010.  Unless something has changed, I don't see any reason to think UND might be going to the Summit/MVFC.  Does the MVFC all of sudden want to go to 11 teams, which they were so adamantly against back in 2010?  I doubt it.  And I'm someone who would love to see UND in the Summit/MVFC, but I just don't see it happening unless the MVFC loses a team or two.  

I have no interest in pursuing a Big Sky football-only membership and going to the Summit for other sports (even if it were a possibility, which I doubt it is). 

In short, the MVFC holds all the cards.  If they ever want UND, I think there is a reasonable chance it would happen.  Until then, I believe UND will stay in the Big Sky.

This is why we aren't in the MVFC and Summit. We tried for 4+ years and were constantly turned down.  At some point we had to make a move and took the Big Sky offer.  It's revisionist history to say that we should have waited on a MVFC/Summit offer.  It wasn't coming and we needed a football home.  I hope that has changed but I haven't heard that it has.

[jdub27]

3 minutes ago, Siouxperman8 said:

This is why we aren't in the MVFC and Summit. We tried for 4+ years and were constantly turned down.  At some point we had to make a move and took the Big Sky offer.  It's revisionist history to say that we should have waited on a MVFC/Summit offer.  It wasn't coming and we needed a football home.  I hope that has changed but I haven't heard that it has.

It hasn't. Patty V continues to make that known publicly and privately.

[dakotadan]

49 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

However, the Summit LEague and the MVFC do work closely together.  If UND showed some behind the scenes interest to join the Summit, sould Douple and the rest of the League want them?  And if they did, would he make a push to the MVFC to add them?

 

UND already tried that. Didn't work. 

The Big Sky is a great conference with some great schools. I hope we are a long term member. 

[Herd]

3 hours ago, The Sicatoka said:

Patty V of the MVFC has been very and consistently outspoken that the MVFC is not looking for teams. 

You do realize that the MVFC was not looking for teams either when USD joined, right?   See, it's called leverage.

[jdub27]

11 minutes ago, Herd said:

You do realize that the MVFC was not looking for teams either when USD joined, right?   See, it's called leverage.

Viverito admitted that the nine-team MVFC only became interested in South Dakota after realizing the school could be added by itself to bring the conference to 10 teams.

“As early as August, we had some serious conversations about expansion looking at a 12-team format,” Viverito said. “The thought was that North Dakota, South Dakota and Southern Utah would all be looking for homes.”

But when it became clear that Southern Utah was more interested in the Big Sky, Viverito said the MVFC’s university presidents soured on the idea of expansion. (On Monday, Southern Utah and North Dakota announced they were joining in the Big Sky).

“There was no support about abandoning an optimum nine-team league in favor of an 11-team model, which has challenges,” Viverito said. “The 10-team model, on the other hand, was one we were willing to consider.”

[The Sicatoka]

22 minutes ago, Herd said:

You do realize that the MVFC was not looking for teams either when USD joined, right?   See, it's called leverage.

And you do realize to use leverage you need a fulcrum. 

USD's fulcrum was the league's willingness to be at 10 teams (but not 11). 

[UNDColorado]

Some of these bison and south dakota(s) fans are incredibly delusional about what actually happened. There was NEVER a mvfc invite nor was it even discussed beyond simple speculation. Knowing that the summit was never an option either. That said the Big Sky is the place for us to be and I love it. I will be at the UNC game on 11/5 as I am sure many other Colorado based UND Alums will. 

[The Sicatoka]

One other things people forget is that the world knew that the MVFC wasn't seriously looking at anything beyond 10 teams.

The MVFC visit that UND cancelled was going to be nothing more than a courtesy visit. Go look at the history in various posting forums. It was well discussed then. 

[dakotadan]

There was more to USD getting into the MVFC than what Patty V reported to the media. And USD was very shady in how they treated the Big Sky and what they told BSC officials (and UND) during all of it. 

On the same note, there were many in the USD athletic department that actually preferred to go to the Big Sky. But the SD BOR wanted to keep them with SDSU and help cement Sioux Falls as a Summit tournament location. 

[goyotes]

Like I stated earlier, I think UND joining the Summit is a win/win and would definitely add strength and stability to the Summit.  That still leaves the football question.  A strong Summit is good for the MVFC.  UND's path to joining the MVFC comes down to these 2 questions:

1)How much leverage could USD, SDSU, NDSU & WIU exert on the MVFC to add UND?  The MVFC without the 4 Summit schools would be on dangerous footings. 

2)Would the 4 Summit League schools exercise that leverage?   

[The Sicatoka]

1 minute ago, goyotes said:

2)Would the 4 Summit League schools exercise that leverage?   

In a word: No.
They didn't before; why would they now. 

[Siouxperman8]

12 minutes ago, goyotes said:

Like I stated earlier, I think UND joining the Summit is a win/win and would definitely add strength and stability to the Summit.  That still leaves the football question.  A strong Summit is good for the MVFC.  UND's path to joining the MVFC comes down to these 2 questions:

1)How much leverage could USD, SDSU, NDSU & WIU exert on the MVFC to add UND?  The MVFC without the 4 Summit schools would be on dangerous footings. 

2)Would the 4 Summit League schools exercise that leverage?   

NDSU administration has been very clear by their actions that their intention is to stick it to UND football for not scheduling them during their transition.  I don't think they are looking to do us any favors with a large issue like league membership.

[jacksfan29]

37 minutes ago, dakotadan said:

There was more to USD getting into the MVFC than what Patty V reported to the media. And USD was very shady in how they treated the Big Sky and what they told BSC officials (and UND) during all of it. 

On the same note, there were many in the USD athletic department that actually preferred to go to the Big Sky. But the SD BOR wanted to keep them with SDSU and help cement Sioux Falls as a Summit tournament location. 

Nope, the SD BOR had nothing to do with it. That's a story told by folks who don't want to admit the USD took the better offer while UND got hung out by the MVFC and the folks in Vermillion. I do think that both SDSU, NDSU and UNI all wanted USD in and they were more of a geographical fit. And if you read the article it is obvious that the President's were talking expansion and had discussed adding USD. Will UND ever get an invite into the MVFC? Not sure. I think it will take one or more likely two schools leaving. Or another school from the east (Ohio Valley) moving in before there is an opening. As for your President. Reading some of your posts makes me wonder if he isn't setting the table for Women's Hockey going away. It would be the more controversial choice but it seems like a logical step.

[bison73]

5 hours ago, GeauxSioux said:

 

I think the school Presidents might of had input in her statement..

[Siouxperman8]

I don't believe UND will eliminate women's hockey because of Title IX.  It is arguably the highest profile women's team due to consistently ranking in the top 10-15 nationally and would face a lot of criticism for that reason.