UND to Summit/MVFC

[bincitysioux]

59 minutes ago, UNDColorado said:

http://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/und-football/4157810-unds-cost-savings-unclear-potential-move-summit-league-mvfc

Love it.  Excellent article and homework by Miller.

Hope this puts to bed the idea that the SumValley is some sort of big box store/discount conference.

[darell1976]

15 minutes ago, bincitysioux said:

Love it.  Excellent article and homework by Miller.

Hope this puts to bed the idea that the SumValley is some sort of big box store/discount conference.

 

Quote

 

In some sports, the numbers show a wide range in travel costs regardless of league. In volleyball, UND is spending $154,410 on travel. North Dakota State, meanwhile, playing in a more geographically friendly league, is spending $258,982. USD spends $77,130 and SDSU spends $97,369.

In men's basketball, South Dakota State is the Dakota leader in travel costs at $386,231. UND is spending less at $311,837, although UND is spending more than South Dakota at $215,254 and more than NDSU at $269,649.

North Dakota State softball, a winner of three-straight Summit League championships, spends $187,489 on travel, while UND spends $139,792 on softball travel. South Dakota State spends just $84,333 and South Dakota spends $103,569.

That's part of the reason UND's travel costs for soccer already closely resemble those of Dakota peers. UND spends $100,437 on soccer travel compared to SDSU ($100,237), NDSU ($143,158) and USD ($74,892).

NCAA financial filings show the ability for savings in football as UND spent $548,923 on football travel compared with SDSU ($487,003) and USD ($386,015). NDSU, which has won five straight FCS national titles, spent $800,676.

 

Do these numbers include how much was spent in playoff games (Frisco, the Dance, etc)? SDSU spends 75k more than UND has been to the dance more than them. NDSU won games at the dance and spent about 42k less than UND. As for football, NDSU spent more and won more titles, SDSU spent less and has been to more playoff games. Just like Miller said the cost savings is "UNCLEAR", sorry to burst your Big Sky bubble bincitysioux. 

[Siouxphan27]

40 minutes ago, darell1976 said:

 

Do these numbers include how much was spent in playoff games (Frisco, the Dance, etc)? SDSU spends 75k more than UND has been to the dance more than them. NDSU won games at the dance and spent about 42k less than UND. As for football, NDSU spent more and won more titles, SDSU spent less and has been to more playoff games. Just like Miller said the cost savings is "UNCLEAR", sorry to burst your Big Sky bubble bincitysioux. 

I think the ncaa pays for playoff travel.  Isn't that why FCS playoffs are regionalized?

so even though savings, if any, are unclear, you'd still rather give the big sky the finger?

i know what's not unclear; the costs associated with swimming and diving,softball, etc.

[bincitysioux]

1 hour ago, darell1976 said:

 

Do these numbers include how much was spent in playoff games (Frisco, the Dance, etc)? SDSU spends 75k more than UND has been to the dance more than them. NDSU won games at the dance and spent about 42k less than UND. As for football, NDSU spent more and won more titles, SDSU spent less and has been to more playoff games. Just like Miller said the cost savings is "UNCLEAR", sorry to burst your Big Sky bubble bincitysioux. 

That's the point, the savings is unclear.  Several fans, yourself included, have been saying all week that UND "can't afford" to be in the Big Sky and the travel savings in the SumValley would save so much money that we could pay coaches more and blah blah blah......

Sorry to burst YOUR bubble, but the real savings and benefits would come from dropping sports, not switching leagues.

[darell1976]

9 minutes ago, bincitysioux said:

That's the point, the savings is unclear.  Several fans, yourself included, have been saying all week that UND "can't afford" to be in the Big Sky and the travel savings in the SumValley would save so much money that we could pay coaches more and blah blah blah......

Sorry to burst YOUR bubble, but the real savings and benefits would come from dropping sports, not switching leagues.

How many sports are you willing to drop in favor of staying in the Big Sky? 

[bincitysioux]

39 minutes ago, darell1976 said:

How many sports are you willing to drop in favor of staying in the Big Sky? 

Women's hockey, men's and women's swimming/diving, men's golf.  Anything the Big Sky doesn't sponsor, and probably anything  it doesn't require.

[The Sicatoka]

The key takeaway from Miller's travel budget article:

You play distant road conference games and near non-conference games
or
You play near road conference games and distant non-conference games. 

And if that's the same basic pool of opponents (conf or non-conf) that'll cost roughly the same. 

[iramurphy]

On November 8, 2016 at 9:47 PM, UND-FB-FAN said:

The powers of the Big Sky Conference have been accused of being anti-UND; obviously they approved admission back in 2010, but they sort of belittle UND at times from what others say. For years people have spent quite a bit of time complaining about how Montana and Montana State belittled UND. Furthermore, schools like Sacramento State were huge opponents of UNDs when it came to travel and distance issues. UND is still the new guy in the conference and the Big Sky Conference powers could easily disregard UND in certain scenarios as well. 

I haven't seen evidence that the conference or either of the Montana schools have belittled UND.  What their fans say on blogs is irrelevant.  NDSU has treated us disrespectfully more than the Montana schools.  I haven't seen evidence of anti-UND bias.  We have been a good addition and competitive in FB, MBB,WBB and VB.  We are one of the new FB teams and lower budget schools aren't excited about the travel.  The issue of last years play-off snub is sour grapes.  Don't lose 4 games and don't lose to crappy teams.  If we need the league to get us a playoff spot we aren't that good and last year we weren't good enough to whine when we didn't get in,  I like the Big Sky and the schools in it.  The travel costs reviewed in Sunday Forum didn't look to be such an advantage after all.

[UND-FB-FAN]

23 hours ago, iramurphy said:

I haven't seen evidence that the conference or either of the Montana schools have belittled UND.  What their fans say on blogs is irrelevant.  NDSU has treated us disrespectfully more than the Montana schools.  I haven't seen evidence of anti-UND bias.  We have been a good addition and competitive in FB, MBB,WBB and VB.  We are one of the new FB teams and lower budget schools aren't excited about the travel.  The issue of last years play-off snub is sour grapes.  Don't lose 4 games and don't lose to crappy teams.  If we need the league to get us a playoff spot we aren't that good and last year we weren't good enough to whine when we didn't get in,  I like the Big Sky and the schools in it.  The travel costs reviewed in Sunday Forum didn't look to be such an advantage after all.

You think New Hampshire and Western Illinois should've been in over UND? Don't get me started on that different topic, Ira. 

I too like the schools in the Big Sky Conference, but I also like the regional schools that are far more relatable to UND and this region. 

If anyone thinks average attendance (which is $$ bottomline) won't be up with consistent contests against local schools (NDSU, SDSU, USD), they are largely mistaken. This needs to happen largely for that as well as the travel costs (perhaps minor but still a tangible factor). Lastly, travel to away contests and neutral site tournaments (Sioux Falls Summit League Tournament) for UND fans will improve substantially in terms of numbers. Perhaps you won't get "scenic, unique vacations" that the BSC apparently allows for some, but that isn't doable for the masses. 

I am happy to hear so many have bought into the Big Sky Conference and support it. That said, don't let inherent hate for NDSU cloud your judgement as far as which conference(s) just make more sense. 

[iramurphy]

1 hour ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

You think New Hampshire and Western Illinois should've been in over UND? Don't get me started on that different topic, Ira. 

I too like the schools in the Big Sky Conference, but I also like the regional schools that are far more relatable to UND and this region. 

If anyone thinks average attendance (which is $$ bottomline) won't be up with consistent contests against local schools (NDSU, SDSU, USD), they are largely mistaken. This needs to happen largely for that as well as the travel costs (perhaps minor but still a tangible factor). Lastly, travel to away contests and neutral site tournaments (Sioux Falls Summit League Tournament) for UND fans will improve substantially in terms of numbers. Perhaps you won't get "scenic, unique vacations" that the BSC apparently allows for some, but that isn't doable for the masses. 

I am happy to hear so many have bought into the Big Sky Conference and support it. That said, don't let inherent hate for NDSU cloud your judgement as far as which conference(s) just make more sense. 

I didn't say  NH or WI should have gotten in ahead of us. I said we weren't good enough to whine when we didn't get it.  Those schools shouldn't have whined had we been selected either.  We were a bubble team.  

NDSU has nothing to do with my opinion.  I don't have an inherent hate of them. I just don't believe we need to do whatever they do.  I prefer the Big Sky and I believe we have the resources to maintain our membership.  I'm as likely to attend games in Arizona, Montana, Colorado and California as I am to go to Illinios, Ohio, Indiana etc.  I also prefer one conference rather than two.

[UND-FB-FAN]

10 hours ago, iramurphy said:

I didn't say  NH or WI should have gotten in ahead of us. I said we weren't good enough to whine when we didn't get it.  Those schools shouldn't have whined had we been selected either.  We were a bubble team.  

NDSU has nothing to do with my opinion.  I don't have an inherent hate of them. I just don't believe we need to do whatever they do.  I prefer the Big Sky and I believe we have the resources to maintain our membership.  I'm as likely to attend games in Arizona, Montana, Colorado and California as I am to go to Illinios, Ohio, Indiana etc.  I also prefer one conference rather than two.

All fair points. 

Are you as likely to attend games in Arizona, Montana, Colorado and California as you are in North Dakota (Fargo), South Dakota, and Iowa, though?

The answer for most folks would be that biennial trips to Fargo, Brookings, and Vermillion are far more accessible and practical than trips to Missoula, Bozeman, and Greeley every other year. 

Edit: Of course UND could still add Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, etc. to non-conference scheduling; that makes more sense than playing teams from North Dakota (NDSU) and South Dakota (SDSU, USD) as non-conference opponents only every 4 years. 

[Rick]

18 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

I didn't say  NH or WI should have gotten in ahead of us. I said we weren't good enough to whine when we didn't get it.  Those schools shouldn't have whined had we been selected either.  We were a bubble team.  

NDSU has nothing to do with my opinion.  I don't have an inherent hate of them. I just don't believe we need to do whatever they do.  I prefer the Big Sky and I believe we have the resources to maintain our membership.  I'm as likely to attend games in Arizona, Montana, Colorado and California as I am to go to Illinios, Ohio, Indiana etc.  I also prefer one conference rather than two.

I agree ira, I also like the Big Sky and the schools in it.  I'm more likely to go to games at Big Sky locations than I am to go to places like Brookings, Vermillion or Fargo.  And, there is a zero % chance that I'll ever go to a game at any of the other MVFC or Summit schools.  As far as I'm concerned, picking the MVFC/Summit over the Big Sky is like picking a Chevy Impala over a Bentley Bentayga. 

I don't know why Kennedy or Faison would even consider dealing with two different conferences for these sports when they're already in a great conference.  Just like UND is the power school in the NCHC, UND is quickly becoming a power school in the Big Sky.  To me, Montana, Montana State, Idaho, Idaho State, UC Davis, Cal Poly are way more exciting than South Dakota, South Dakota State, North Dakota State, IUPUI and Fort Wayne. 

[Nodak78]

5 hours ago, Rick said:

I agree ira, I also like the Big Sky and the schools in it.  I'm more likely to go to games at Big Sky locations than I am to go to places like Brookings, Vermillion or Fargo.  And, there is a zero % chance that I'll ever go to a game at any of the other MVFC or Summit schools.  As far as I'm concerned, picking the MVFC/Summit over the Big Sky is like picking a Chevy Impala over a Bentley Bentayga. 

I don't know why Kennedy or Faison would even consider dealing with two different conferences for these sports when they're already in a great conference.  Just like UND is the power school in the NCHC, UND is quickly becoming a power school in the Big Sky.  To me, Montana, Montana State, Idaho, Idaho State, UC Davis, Cal Poly are way more exciting than South Dakota, South Dakota State, North Dakota State, IUPUI and Fort Wayne. 

I agree Big Sky all the way.  Just like NDSU leads the MVFC, UND will lead the Big Sky.

[UND-FB-FAN]

Sure must be nice to be able to fly across the country every other weekend to follow UND football. Retirement hasn't hit me yet, so give me Fargo, Brookings, and Vermillion over these ridiculous 800+ mile locations. 

I still feel, as does apparently the UND administration and athletic department, that most folks would feel biennial trips to Fargo, Brookings, and Vermillion are far more accessible and practical than trips to Missoula, Bozeman, and Greeley every other year. 

[ericpnelson]

Big Sky football refs might get me to change my mind on this whole thing

[southpaw]

What happens when the MVFC schedule comes out and UND has NDSU/SDSU/USD all at home one year and on the road the next?  Those off years are going to be filled with teams people aren't interested in seeing.

[SooToo]

13 hours ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

You think New Hampshire and Western Illinois should've been in over UND? Don't get me started on that different topic, Ira. 

I too like the schools in the Big Sky Conference, but I also like the regional schools that are far more relatable to UND and this region. 

If anyone thinks average attendance (which is $$ bottomline) won't be up with consistent contests against local schools (NDSU, SDSU, USD), they are largely mistaken. This needs to happen largely for that as well as the travel costs (perhaps minor but still a tangible factor). Lastly, travel to away contests and neutral site tournaments (Sioux Falls Summit League Tournament) for UND fans will improve substantially in terms of numbers. Perhaps you won't get "scenic, unique vacations" that the BSC apparently allows for some, but that isn't doable for the masses. 

I am happy to hear so many have bought into the Big Sky Conference and support it. That said, don't let inherent hate for NDSU cloud your judgement as far as which conference(s) just make more sense. 

Which "masses" typically attend UND road games outside of Fargo? Nerly 400 miles from Grand Forks to Vermillion. Not exactly a trip down to Valley Dairy. I think UND historically averaged a couple hundred fans for games at the South Dakota schools back in the day. Kudos to those who attend, but a minor point in choosing conference affiliation. And I think annually playing your conference BB tourney in the "neutral site" of Sioux Falls is akin to playing the AC at the "neutral site" of Scheels hockey arena in Fargo.

Bottom line, the choice seems to be between a stable conference considered a "destination conference" by most of its members or a conference that many of its members -- most notably those "local schools" in the Dakotas -- continue to aspire to leave.

 

[Cratter]

2 hours ago, southpaw said:

What happens when the MVFC schedule comes out and UND has NDSU/SDSU/USD all at home one year and on the road the next?  Those off years are going to be filled with teams people aren't interested in seeing.

Sounds like the home conference schedule this year.

[Oxbow6]

11 minutes ago, Cratter said:

Sounds like the home conference schedule this year.

Next year's home schedule does not get me jumping up and down either. Just 5 home games..........Missouri St., Sac St. UNC.  Meh......... 

I do like EWU and MSU at home.

[Gothmog]

4 hours ago, southpaw said:

What happens when the MVFC schedule comes out and UND has NDSU/SDSU/USD all at home one year and on the road the next?  Those off years are going to be filled with teams people aren't interested in seeing.

Really? What about former NCC mate UNI? I'd say that, not SDSU or USD, is the most anticipated regular season game in Fargo. Or maybe, four-time national champion Youngstown State? Wouldn't Bubba and Dale Lennon's former employer Southern Illinois generate some interest?

Don't worry about it, you won't have many uninteresting games in the MVFC.

[SiouxVolley]

29 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

Really? What about former NCC mate UNI? I'd say that, not SDSU or USD, is the most anticipated regular season game in Fargo. Or maybe, four-time national champion Youngstown State? Wouldn't Bubba and Dale Lennon's former employer Southern Illinois generate some interest?

Don't worry about it, you won't have many uninteresting games in the MVFC.

The Bizon really like to schedule Big Sky teams, except us, so NDSU must find the Sky interesting too.

[darell1976]

21 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

Really? What about former NCC mate UNI? I'd say that, not SDSU or USD, is the most anticipated regular season game in Fargo. Or maybe, four-time national champion Youngstown State? Wouldn't Bubba and Dale Lennon's former employer Southern Illinois generate some interest?

Don't worry about it, you won't have many uninteresting games in the MVFC.

SDSU, NDSU, USD, UNI, SIU, YSU, thats 6 games that has interest if they stay on the schedule every year. Big Sky has Montana, MSU, EWU, and maybe NAU that sparks any interest and thats 4 games out of a possible 9 game proposed schedule. 

[homer]

It has taken some time but I think we are just starting to see things develop in the Big Sky in the form of some rivalries.  When you enter a new conference and are a doormat no one really cares but sitting in the Alerus this year in section 215, teams really want to beat UND.  It is going to take games like the NAU game and fans will get excited as well.  I wouldn't mind being in the same conference as the other Dakota schools but outside of those three we will be starting over with UNI and everyone east. 

Gothmog it took a sideline fight and a couple years for the rivalry to get developed between UNI and NDSUI.  Until that point it was just another game for UNI.  The SDSU game is a rivalry because of time.  The other schools don't like NDSU because of their success and that is where UND needs to get in the Big Sky.  This year was the first step in that, now the challenge will be to sustain this success which will not be easy. 

I really feel the biggest revenue boost would come from the Olympic sports moving to the Summit.  There you have name recognition in NDSU, SDSU, USD, Denver and Omaha.  However, again I feel like challenging Montana and Weber for success will drive that interest for MBB.  Women's basketball just has to continue to win.

[homer]

1 minute ago, darell1976 said:

SDSU, NDSU, USD, UNI, SIU, YSU, thats 6 games that has interest if they stay on the schedule every year. Big Sky has Montana, MSU, EWU, and maybe NAU that sparks any interest and thats 4 games out of a possible 9 game proposed schedule. 

And YSU leaving could be the reason UND is suddenly being discussed by the MVFC.  I'd argue SIU as they are no better than most of the Big Sky. 

[UNDBIZ]

5 minutes ago, homer said:

I'd argue SIU as they are no better than most of the Big Sky. 

Agreed.  No Lennon = No cares given.