star2city Posted July 24, 2004 Share Posted July 24, 2004 Fans of our two former conference mates are getting all lathered up again, with the recent statements by the Big Sky Commissioner and the Forum and Argus-Leader articles. NDSU's odds increase for Big Sky: North Dakota State is on the verge of making another run at membership in the Big Sky Conference. This time, the league may take NDSU more seriously. But the Forum, Kolpack, Taylor, et al. fail to take a deeper look at what has been transpiring behing the scenes for the last two months. In addition to the Denver/UNC rumor to the Big Sky posted on the Bisonville site by a UNC fan, take a look at these items: First this story from Denver: Altitude Sports - New Cable Satellite Network Then, the Big Sky announces that their games will be on Altitude Sports: Altitude Sports & Entertainment and Big Sky Conference Reach Multi-Year Telecast Agreement Now, Altitude Sports has signed a distribution agreement with DISH Network, practically assuring that it will survive (unlike Victory Sports in Minnesota): DISH Network First Major Distributor to Broadcast Altitude's Network So, a new sports network based in Colorado, that only has been signing up Colorado-based sports teams (including deals with Division II Metropolitan State basketball and the RMAC), also signs a deal with the Big Sky Conference, that has no Colorado exposure? Behind the scenes, the University of Denver has known to have been working on television deals to get into a new conference and out of the SunBelt. Putting two and two together, it is rather apparent that Denver and UNC are going to be added to the Big Sky. The Big Sky last had a non-football playing team with Gonzaga, and will allow it again because of the publicity and money Denver will bring. Fullerton has not mentioned Denver as a candidate because it is poor etiquette among conference commissioners to mention a school belonging to another conference as an expansion candidate. The whole expansion discussion by the Big Sky is August is likely a farce, as the real decision was made on June 3rd when the Big Sky signed the agreement with Altitude Sports. So what does this do for NDSU/SDSU? Screws them big time. Not only will the Big Sky not be inviting them, but the Great West Conference will lose a founding member, UNC, and be down to five. The Great West will not be an auto bid conference unless Sac State leaves the Big Sky and joins the Big West/Great West. In the meantime, the MidCon, who was hoping to unload Southern Utah to the Big Sky, is still stuck with them. Their choices now seem be to adding one team, or adding Utah Valley State for a SUU travel partner and two other teams. It would be highly improbable that they would add Utah Valley and NDSU/SDSU, as that would mean three teams in the conference on Div I probation. A more likely approach is that they will add one team (TxAM-CC ?), and wait to see if SUU gets in the Big Sky if/when Sac State leaves. If chances of conference affiliation seems low for the the ‘SU’s now, their situation by the end of August is likely to be much less hopeful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMeNow Posted July 25, 2004 Share Posted July 25, 2004 FARGO=NO $$$$ TOO FAR for the BIG SKY - nice though you would have totally BAILED on the BRATWURST conference after FOUNDING it for your own livelihood!! WAY TO GO you self aggrandizing jerks!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 The BSC as a ten-team conference with nine playing football? That wouldn't make bad scheduling in the BSC revenue sports: Football: Nine teams would mean eight conference games (four home, four road) and room for each team to have three non-conference games in an 11-game schedule. Basketball: Ten teams would mean two games (home/road) against nine other conference opponents for an 18-game confernence schedule leaving room for 10 to 12 non-conference games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison_Kent Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 I don't think Denver will be an option. What happens when one team leaves (such as Sac State or Montana). Now your down to nine total team with eight that play football. I think the Big Sky will be smart an remain an entirely All-Sport conference. The Big Sky is wanting to expand because it thinks teams will be leaving. No teams have yet but it is speculated that several teams in the Big Sky may want to jump to I-A ball. Adding Denver just leaves a hole that can't be easily filled. Northern Colorado, Southern Utah, NDSU, and SDSU are the teams that will be discussed. I am not saying NDSU will be the team picked but I am sure the league will pick schools that play all the Big Sky sports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 I think the Big Sky will be smart an remain an entirely All-Sport conference. Wasn't it just recently that the Portland State Vikings begged the BSC for permission to drop mens and womens tennis, normally required for Big Sky membership, and the conference reluctantly agreed? That shows a recent willingness to move from the "all sport" philosophy, yes? Plus, only one BSC school currently meets the DI-A football attendance requirements that go into effect in August. I'm not sure which others would consider it (considering they don't meet the minimums). But like you say, who knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 It will be interesting to see what comes out of the August meeting. I think that the Sky is nervous about loosing Sac State and/or Portland State. Who knows, pure speculation.....but that is what makes these sports boards fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Crazy, out of the blue thought: Isn't Gonzaga in Spokane, WA? Gonzaga would go from the far north outpost of the West Coast Conference (nearest conference foe: U of Portland in Portland, OR) to near the middle of the Big Sky. However, Gonzaga would lose all the California exposure that comes with WCC basketball. If there's even a remote thought of taking a "no football" Denver, wouldn't that (a "no football" Gonzaga) make some sense too? This speculating IS fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bisonguy Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Gonzaga was a charter member of the Big Sky. Denver would need to add men's and women's indoor and outdoor track, and cross country to sponsor the sport offerings of the Big Sky. They would also need to find a home for swimming and diving, as the Big Sky doesn't sponsor it. Sounds like a lot of work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Gonzaga would seem to make a hell of a lot more sense than Denver if the Sky was going to allow a non-football school in. They would for sure bring a top notch BB program to the conference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison_Kent Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Gonzaga likes where they are in the West Coast Conference. ESPN has a deal with the WCC to show their games and I think it is a better TV deal then the Big Sky has for basketball. Money talks!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bisonguy Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Gonzaga likes where they are in the West Coast Conference. ESPN has a deal with the WCC to show their games and I think it is a better TV deal then the Big Sky has for basketball. Money talks!!! The Big Sky has a TV deal with Altitude sports network. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 28, 2004 Author Share Posted July 28, 2004 The Big Sky has a TV deal with Altitude sports network. Yeah, and if the Big Sky is moving into the eastern Dakota's, Altitude's coverage area certainly doesn't anticipate it: DISH Network will broadcast Altitude to customers in Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Montana, Idaho, Nebraska, Kansas, western South Dakota, northeastern Nevada and northern New Mexico. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aff Posted July 28, 2004 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Yeah, and if the Big Sky is moving into the eastern Dakota's, Altitude's coverage area certainly doesn't anticipate it: QUOTE DISH Network will broadcast Altitude to customers in Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Montana, Idaho, Nebraska, Kansas, western South Dakota, northeastern Nevada and northern New Mexico. I hate to be the one that tells you, but the Eastern south/north dakota media markets, huge as the are , aren't that hard to break into. The company is already broadcasting in western south dakota, its not that hard to go over the missouri. If I was using your logic I would have posted a thread that said that SDSU is in the sky for sure, because theres a broadcast deal for south dakota. As for broadcasting in colorado, I don't understand why you think thats such a big deal. Where do you think all of the graduates of big sky schools work when they graduate? Podunk, Montana, or Denver, Colorado. I don't have proof, but I would think that most college graduates in the denver area have graduated from the big sky schools. Anyway, I doubt that a network is hoping that its going to produce enough ratings by broadcasting bball games from a school that averages around 1000 fans per game in a major media market. How about you reply to this list star city, and than i'll believe you about denver: 1. Why is the big sky going to allow a school that doesn't sponsor football, track, cross country etc. into its all sports conference? 2. Why would denver show interest in a conference that doesn't sponsor its swimming events, which already have a home. 3. Why would UNC have a change of heart about its baseball teams getting into the midcon, when the midcon is discussing expansion. After the last meeting of the midcon, I think that UNC is less likely than ever to go to the big sky. 4. The big sky is worried about portland and sacstate leaving. If denvers in the conference there going to be in a mess if these two leave (dropping to 7 for fball). Why wouldn't they just take SDSU, NDSU, and call it good, since they'll be safe if both schools leave then. I have several more reasons, but I'm tired of typing, and this message is getting too long, so I'll post more later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakotadan Posted July 28, 2004 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Last I heard, Big Sky was talking with UMary and Minot State about joining! I guess UND and USD turned down their invitations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 29, 2004 Author Share Posted July 29, 2004 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 29, 2004 Author Share Posted July 29, 2004 Other reasons: - Because Sac State or Portland State could leave, the Big Sky is practically forced to add schools within a year. - The Great West gets a potentially mortal blow, certainly to their auto bid. (Sac State would like this, as it would damage Cal-Davis’ football, with whom they are both competing long-term for a WAC bid). - With the Great West damaged, Big Sky stability improves (it becomes much less likely that Sac State or Portland State would leave for the Great West/Big West.) - It’s probably less time consuming and cheaper to travel to Denver for most schools than it is to each other. - As travel partners, UNC and Denver would be the most convenient combo in the Big Sky. - Since their are a lot of alumni of Big Sky schools in the Denver, those alumni can go to a game (and reinvolve themselves with their school), when they wouldn’t have the time to go back to Bozeman or Pocatello. - Denver media: i.e. press in the Rocky Mountain News and Denver Post - UNC is similar to existing Big Sky schools. - Only one school, UNC, is a provisional Div I team. This is not the logistic problem that two provisional teams are. - Denver metro is a recruiting area for all the Big Sky teams. Coaches can now promise that a Denver high school athlete will be able to play in front of friends and family during his college career. -Denver basketball is on the rise, and their winter sports are more than respectable. - UNC football is more than respectable. - The Big Sky Conference tournament in the Pepsi Center - Corporate sponsorships will be more attainable because of higher media visibility Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted July 29, 2004 Share Posted July 29, 2004 The smart money in Vegas is on the Dakotas.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aff Posted July 29, 2004 Share Posted July 29, 2004 Because Sac State or Portland State could leave, the Big Sky is practically forced to add schools within a year.If both of these leave, you have to take SDSU/NDSU or fb will be screwed up. The Great West gets a potentially mortal blow, certainly to their auto bid. (Sac State would like this, as it would damage Cal-Davis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison_Kent Posted July 30, 2004 Share Posted July 30, 2004 The 10/9 rule might come true!! But just not in the Big Sky. The WAC is looking to add another member that does not play football according to the Honolulu paper and WAC Commish Benson. Denver is in the Sun Belt and the WAC just took three western teams from the Sun Belt (Idaho, Utah State, New Mexico State). Wouldn't it be in Denver's best interest to look at the WAC instead of the Big Sky? Denver would keep its three western rivals from the Sun Belt and the WAC (a much stronger basketball league) would get the Denver market. The 10/9 arguement holds water for the more basketball power WAC then it does for the Big Sky. I see Denver going here instead of the Big Sky. Here is the Honolulu paper link: http://starbulletin.com/breaking/breaking.php?id=2814 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted July 30, 2004 Share Posted July 30, 2004 It is incredible the amount of conference turmoil. Makes me wonder when it will find an equilibrium point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bisonguy Posted July 30, 2004 Share Posted July 30, 2004 Add to this part of Fullerton's quote -all the schools that are going to play I-AA," Fullerton said Monday Unless Denver is looking at adding a I-AA football program, I doubt the Big Sky is contacting Denver. Anybody know where the WAC headquarters is located? Looks like Denver is a lock for the WAC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 30, 2004 Author Share Posted July 30, 2004 Denver is in the Sun Belt and the WAC just took three western teams from the Sun Belt (Idaho, Utah State, New Mexico State). Wouldn't it be in Denver's best interest to look at the WAC instead of the Big Sky? Denver would keep its three western rivals from the Sun Belt and the WAC (a much stronger basketball league) would get the Denver market. The 10/9 arguement holds water for the more basketball power WAC then it does for the Big Sky. I see Denver going here instead of the Big Sky. I agree, if Denver had a choice, they would accept a WAC invite immediately. Their conference preferences are probably as follows: MWC (no way would they get an invite, as there are already have three Front Range teams), then WAC, then the Big Sky or West Coast, then the Mid-Con. The WAC woud probably have Gonzaga on the top of its list, followed by Denver, with a number of Southern California schools as a distant third choice. Even if Gonzaga went to the WAC, it could change things, as then the West Coast Conference would have an opening and Denver might want to be with them, as it is a private school conference. The article does prove one thing: a 10/9 conference arrangement can make sense. The recent postings prove another point: Denver is a potentially attractive school for a mid-level conference. Which practically proves the point of this thread: the Big Sky would be foolish not to look at Denver and it probably already has an offer on the table for the Pioneers to join. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted July 30, 2004 Share Posted July 30, 2004 I suspect that Gonzaga is happy in the WCC. It seems a good fit for them. I am sure the WAC tosses their name out there for sex appeal. Given what the WAC has been saying, I would think that Denver would be a very logical choice. Out here the WAC is SO overshaddowed by the Mountain West (who wouldn't touch Denver with a 20' pole) and so the WAC would love a team in the Front Range market. The MWC has 3 already (and actually 4 if you count Wyoming) and has a lock on that Front Range Market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WYOBISONMAN Posted July 30, 2004 Share Posted July 30, 2004 Over on Bisonville NDSU_grad said that the WAC may worry about loosing its baseball autobid if Denver is admitted (who doesn't have baseball). Gonzaga on the other hand does have baseball....hmmm...rather up in the air! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 30, 2004 Share Posted July 30, 2004 WYOBISONMAN said, "It is incredible the amount of conference turmoil. Makes me wonder when it will find an equilibrium point." -- I agree. Isn't the point of this conference shell-game trying to move up? Would Gonzaga rather be in the WCC or the WAC? Would DU rather be in the Sun Belt or the Big Sky or WCC*? The flip side is: Which schools fit into which conference's demographics and desires? Who does the WAC want? Gonzaga? DU? Who would the WCC want if they were looking? * DU wanted into the WCC when it went DI a while back. The WCC didn't want them (geography) and DU was left to go with the Sun Belt. 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.