SDSU will not move without a conference

[jimdahl]

If SDSU does not have a pre-determined Division I conference in place when the Board of Regents accepts or rejects the proposed move in December, the university will not move, regardless of the decision, SDSU Athletic Director Fred Oien said.

"It's simple," Oien said. "We are not going to move unless we have a conference."

...

But, unless these three schools can form a whole new conference, SDSU must become part of another existing one.

"I don't think we (SDSU) want to be left in a conference with no resemblance to what it is now," said Dana Dykhouse, chairman of the SDSU Foundation. "The benefit to the university for moving to Division I and to a new conference extends well beyond athletics."

...

Regardless, conference officials have repeatedly said that neither Big Sky nor Gateway is interested in new members.

Oien said he recognizes those conferences' rights to want to stay as they are, but says SDSU will keep looking at all possibilities.

http://www.sdsucollegian.com/news/327951.html

[JBB]

In a previous article Oien stated he was almost certain SDSU would move to division 1. Makes you wonder whats going on. Is the conference issue settled? Is he applying pressure to certain conferences? Is SDSU cooling its heels? I guess we will have to wait and see. In the meantime NDSU is expanding its football recruiting range. I hope they arent overlooking some of those good West Fargo Boys.

[star2city]

But, unless these three schools can form a whole new conference, SDSU must become part of another existing one.

The above quote from AD Fred Oien would seem to confirm what JBB has said previously: UNC, NDSU, and SDSU are seriously looking at forming a new non-football conference. There are very limited options to get to six members. Although very speculative, this is what the AD's are probably looking at:

American Outback Conference

(travel partner arrangements)

NDSU - SDSU

UNC - Utah Valley State

Texas A&M@Corpus Christi - Texas-Pan American

There are only three other schools moving to Division I that, at present, do not have conferences: Savannah State, Morris Brown, and Indiana-Purdue-Fort Wayne. The first two, Savannah State and Morris Brown, want to get into the Mid-Eastern conference with other traditionally black colleges. IPFW does not have as much scheduling problems as the Texas independents because there are perhaps 30 Div I schools within 200 miles.

Texas A&M-CC and UTPA are so frustrated with not being invited to an existing conference, they might actually join even though both are full Div I members. If either would get invited to any other conference, they'd be gone in a nano-second.

Has Gene Taylor been on any trips to Texas recently?

[star2city]

Hope this hasn't been posted before, but the following are quotes from the Augustana student newspaper: NCC schools leave D-II ranks

From the Northern Iowa AD:

"Anyone who doesn't belong to a league is bound to fail," UNI Athletic Director Rick Hartzell said. "I don't see how in the world they can be competitive without a league."

According to Hartzell, there is no room for NDSU or UNC in the Gateway Conference.

"If they expect to get into the Gateway Conference, I don't see it happening," Hartzell said. "We've already got three teams that play in the national tournament every year. I've got to look out for us, too."

On NCC Expansion from Augustana AD Bill Gross:

"There are others who are interested," Gross said. "A school that has expressed a lot of interest in the NCC and probably will again is Nebraska-Kearney."

[JBB]

The point of view of most of you is, of course, to wish failure on the Decision 1 endeavor. But the recent post about the ongoing idea of a new conference is certainly intriguing. This New non-football conference would be what the schools need for all sports but football.

With that conference in place an independent football schedule doesn

[jimdahl]

What people are saying now may not be what they really mean and certainly may not be what they say later. This includes the messages we are getting from existing conferences as well as the schools now facing the Decision 1 Challenge.

Many of you are obsessing with the conference clause.  In your desire to wish for failure I think hanging your hat on the conference peg is a mistake.  It may be comforting but it is shortsighted.

I wondered how long it would take for you to dismiss the statements from SDSU's administration and the conferences that aren't interested in NDSU as propaganda.

We're obsessing with the conference clause because it's the key to failure (as pointed out by NDSU's consultants and discussed here ad nauseum). SDSU is playing it smart and trying to make sure they have a conference before they move. I think it irks you because it validates everything I've said (and reiterates the folly of NDSU's rushed move without a conference). I understand your position -- after everything you've posted here you can't admit that NDSU shouldn't have moved without a conference.

Why do you keep assuming that we wish NDSU ill despite that we correct you every time you say it? Many of us would love a D-I NCC made up of those teams willing to make the move. The fact remains: NDSU ignored it's consultants' advice that conference affiliation was critical. That doesn't mean things won't work out, it just presents a much more difficult road.

[The Sicatoka]

But the recent post about the ongoing idea of a new conference is certainly intriguing.

Isn't this what some of us suggested in the beginning, namely, that NDSU hoped that their move without a conference would cause the de facto formation of a new "D-IAA" NCC? Look at who's been suggested to be there in this "new" conference:

Northern Colorado

North Dakota State

South Dakota State

[JBB]

Im certain than NDSU held out a D1AA NCC as a possibility but interest from the conference schools was clear at the begining of the process so I dont think it was a critical path.

I think if you re-read the post you will begin to get the idea why I think many of you wish NDSU ill. Most have a critical or cynical tone rather than analytical. The position of your university community including the local paper has been less than complimentary if not down right obstructionist. Ed Schultz has not helped in this matter although I thnk he is now muzzled.

Most of the judgments passes by many of the posters are black and white. This issue is very nebulous with a lot of political posturing. The concdlusion that NDSU has gone against its consultants postion is rather niave (sp). It constitiutes a rush to judgment by the failure to recognize the evolving nature of process.

[The Sicatoka]

An analytic approach?

Based on the results of the feasibility study, Carr Sports Associates Inc. concluded that the Division I transition process should begin after NDSU has achieved the following:

[JBB]

Caps are yours of course.

The conference affiliation is only 1 of 4 criteria. The answer for NDSU is out there someplace, but since you don't know what it is you think nobody else does?

Do you suppose there is nothing going on behind the scenes? Do you think every decision, all negotiations, are going to take place in public for you to judge and criticize? Do you even think it will play out in the next 12 months?

I think NDSU has a handle on this, your knowledgeable and respected insights not with standing. After the provisional year if NDSU elects to advance to D1 you can be sure a solution is a certainty no matter what you and yours are aware of. In fact, that's my hunch. I believe this is being worked out and NDSU is confident that the outcome will be beneficial to their future plans.

as a footnote I would like to expand a bit:

Many people criticized the consultant contract. They said it was unnecessary. NDSU had already made up their minds. The consultants were just paid to reflect the mindset of the NDSU administration. If this is true, the conference clause was inserted because NDSU was confident of a solution, or, it is just as meaningless as the rest of the report.

[The Sicatoka]

All I know is that (effectively) the same report was given by Carr to SDSU.

They apparently (based on the Oien quote above) took the words to heart.