Fullerton Still Talking Big Sky Expansion

[star2city]

Not to be too harsh, but Denver hockey (and DU sports in general) is nothing more than an after thought along the Front Range. I would gauge the interest somewhere above Wyoming athletics (football excluded) and below John Elway's son starting at Cherry Creek.

2005-6 Average Attendance

6721 CC hockey

5917 DU hockey

5671 Wyoming basketball

5018 CU basketball

4303 CSU basketball

3822 Air Force basketball

2254 DU basketball

If DU hockey is an afterthought, CU and CSU basketball certainly are too.

The idea that a DU, UND hockey rivalry will get UND into the Big Sky and that this rivalry will increase BB crowds is laughable.

Another bison fan that can't think strategically.

UND needs to hope and pray they can get in the Mid Con for all sports but FB which they can play in the Great West.

So, in other words, Bison fans are hoping and praying a UND --> Big Sky doesn't happen.

[star2city]

I have yet to see a reason why the big sky is going to want to expand as far east as UND. Adding a canadian school and denver doesn't really help UND, no matter what the expanded attendance for Denver is. Like it or not, Denver will see the big sky as step down in basketball, and UND playing basketball in the conference as well certainly isn't going to help that perception any. Is one game a year of higher basketball attendance worth moving your entire athletic identity? If canadain schools are going to be added, why would the sky only add one school from canada? If this scenario proves to be right, I've got a million dollars for starcity ready to go.

So will this stipend be in cash, securities, treasuries, or real estate?

[jbuck]

So will this stipend be in cash, securities, treasuries, or real estate?

Yes, CU and CSU BB are both after thoughts in Colorado as is DU hockey and all other DU sports. That wasn't the point. The point was that no one cares about UND in Colorado and to make a statement that the Big Sky wants UND based on a perceived big hockey rivalry is silly speculation. Again, the Big Sky could care less about UND hockey and will not be expanding east and until Montana decides to move up. When Montana moves up the Big Sky will look to expand out west based on the needs of the Western schools and they won't be looking to either North or South Dakota.

[aff]

So will this stipend be in cash, securities, treasuries, or real estate?

I'll think about that as soon as the time comes around. On that point, what evidence would you need to actually convince you that UND isn't going to be in the big sky anytime soon? Is there anything that could possibly occur that would lead you to believe something other than UND being the sky in the next 5-10 years? I really want to know, because I can't think of a more cut and dried case of something not happening that UND to the sky. You're basically saying that a single UND/denver basketball game per season is more enticing to the big sky than the entire athletic programs of both SDSU and NDSU? Do you really beleive that?

[jimdahl]

Again, the Big Sky could care less about UND hockey and will not be expanding east and until Montana decides to move up.

Though perhaps Big Sky could care less, they still don't care very much about UND hockey. Rather, some people are just noting that UND already has an existing athletic relationship with Denver and sends a ridiculous number of grads to the Denver area. While not statistically relevant, the fact that a Denver fan showed up on the board to say it would be nice to see UND in more sports is significantly more relevant than *SU fans wishing it weren't so.

When Montana moves up the Big Sky will look to expand out west based on the needs of the Western schools and they won't be looking to either North or South Dakota.

Another theory people have floated is that those "Western schools" could include Western Canada if potential NCAA rule changes occurred. No one thinks Big Sky cares about hockey; rather, if BSC were interested in expanding into Canadian markets, it wouldn't escape their attention that UND is a better known brand in Canada than most BSC schools.

No one is claiming that UND has a secret invite to BSC in their pocket (like Bison fans were claiming when NDSU was at this point), we're just tossing around possible conference moves and realignments that could create slots for UND. It's interesting how some people (who frequent a UND message board) are so anxious to refute any UND fans' speculation about potential scenarios that could land UND in Big Sky.

[aff]

Though perhaps Big Sky could care less, they still don't care very much about UND hockey. Rather, some people are just noting that UND already has an existing athletic relationship with Denver and sends a ridiculous number of grads to the Denver area. While not statistically relevant, the fact that a Denver fan showed up on the board to say it would be nice to see UND in more sports is significantly more relevant than *SU fans wishing it weren't so.

Another theory people have floated is that those "Western schools" could include Western Canada if potential NCAA rule changes occurred. No one thinks Big Sky cares about hockey; rather, if BSC were interested in expanding into Canadian markets, it wouldn't escape their attention that UND is a better known brand in Canada than most BSC schools.

No one is claiming that UND has a secret invite to BSC in their pocket (like Bison fans were claiming when NDSU was at this point), we're just tossing around possible conference moves and realignments that could create slots for UND. It's interesting how some people (who frequent a UND message board) are so anxious to refute any UND fans' speculation about potential scenarios that could land UND in Big Sky.

I have no problem saying that UND and Denver have a rivalry. But saying that a single mens basketball game is enough to get UND admitted into any conference, with any combination of schools is absolutely ludicrous.

I think fans are simply pointing out how crazy a theory that involves a canadian school, denver, and UND sounds. Admitting a canadian school to the big sky does nothing but take away opportunities for UND to join the big sky, because if one goes in, there are several others that could join too that make more sense than UND does from a geography standpoint. Saying that Denver will get UND into the big sky because they will want that extra basketball game with a couple thousand extra fans makes little sense. If denver wants UND that badly, then they will just schedule them out of conference, home and home. Is UND going to refuse that? Absolutely not.

The line about "I find it interesting that fans of other schools refute every possibility of conference alignment for UND interesting" is getting real old. Here's a thought that may not have occured to people on this board... maybe these are getting refuted because they defy any sense of logic? Ever think that? Oh no, it must be all of the jealousy of UND and its hockey program, I mean how could it not be.

[82SiouxGuy]

I have no problem saying that UND and Denver have a rivalry. But saying that a single mens basketball game is enough to get UND admitted into any conference, with any combination of schools is absolutely ludicrous.

I think fans are simply pointing out how crazy a theory that involves a canadian school, denver, and UND sounds. Admitting a canadian school to the big sky does nothing but take away opportunities for UND to join the big sky, because if one goes in, there are several others that could join too that make more sense than UND does from a geography standpoint. Saying that Denver will get UND into the big sky because they will want that extra basketball game with a couple thousand extra fans makes little sense. If denver wants UND that badly, then they will just schedule them out of conference, home and home. Is UND going to refuse that? Absolutely not.

The line about "I find it interesting that fans of other schools refute every possibility of conference alignment for UND interesting" is getting real old. Here's a thought that may not have occured to people on this board... maybe these are getting refuted because they defy any sense of logic? Ever think that? Oh no, it must be all of the jealousy of UND and its hockey program, I mean how could it not be.

Hey aff, here's a thought. If you you think that this line of discussion is "getting real old", DON'T READ IT. People have a right to discuss ideas without people putting them down, whether the ideas make sense or not. This entire scenario coming true is almost unbelievable. But, as has been noted before, crazier things have actually happened. So you can count me as 1 person that likes to read the different scenarios even though I am very aware that noone on this board knows what is going to happen to UND in their search for a conference and very little (if any) of what is discussed will actually come true.

Also, the thought isn't that a single BB game with UND in Denver is the deciding factor in making Denver want to join the BSC, thereby getting UND into the BSC. But building a rivalry in all sports, and building on an existing rivalry in hockey, may be a part of the mix in the BSC trying to attract Denver. And that small item is 1 difference in the draws of UND versus the SU's for the BSC. It is going to take a lot more than this to make UND attractive to the BSC. We all know about the geography problems and the feelings of the West Coast schools. But it often takes a bunch of small items to add up to the whole and make the entire project viable. Maybe bringing UND along as a rival for Denver might be one of those small linchpins that make it work for the BSC expansion either now or later. If you want you can just think of it as a little North Dakota Dreaming.

[aff]

Hey aff, here's a thought. If you you think that this line of discussion is "getting real old", DON'T READ IT. People have a right to discuss ideas without people putting them down, whether the ideas make sense or not. This entire scenario coming true is almost unbelievable. But, as has been noted before, crazier things have actually happened. So you can count me as 1 person that likes to read the different scenarios even though I am very aware that noone on this board knows what is going to happen to UND in their search for a conference and very little (if any) of what is discussed will actually come true.

Also, the thought isn't that a single BB game with UND in Denver is the deciding factor in making Denver want to join the BSC, thereby getting UND into the BSC. But building a rivalry in all sports, and building on an existing rivalry in hockey, may be a part of the mix in the BSC trying to attract Denver. And that small item is 1 difference in the draws of UND versus the SU's for the BSC. It is going to take a lot more than this to make UND attractive to the BSC. We all know about the geography problems and the feelings of the West Coast schools. But it often takes a bunch of small items to add up to the whole and make the entire project viable. Maybe bringing UND along as a rival for Denver might be one of those small linchpins that make it work for the BSC expansion either now or later. If you want you can just think of it as a little North Dakota Dreaming.

I've never seen a post filled with more contradictions in my entire posting career. First you tell me that I shouldn't read anything that I don't like, and then ignore you're own advice and tell me about why I shouldn't post my opinion. How about this, if you don't like my opinion DON'T READ IT. Then you talk about how you like to read about possible scenarios, but I guess that doesn't include scenarios that aren't positive for UND. You should maybe modify you're post to say "Count me as 1 person that likes to read the different HOMER scenarios". You say you're very aware that nobody on this board knows what is going to happen to UND, and yet you seem to have the need to attack a post that isn't positive for a scenario. If you already know that it most likely won't occur, then what was you're problem with what I posted? I was merely stating what you already knew in you're head, right?

The truth is that I posted something not positive for UND, and it pissed you off. Next time come out and say that, and don't pretend that you're not being a homer.

[jimdahl]

I've never seen a post filled with more contradictions in my entire posting career. First you tell me that I shouldn't read anything that I don't like, and then ignore you're own advice and tell me about why I shouldn't post my opinion. How about this, if you don't like my opinion DON'T READ IT. Then you talk about how you like to read about possible scenarios, but I guess that doesn't include scenarios that aren't positive for UND. You should maybe modify you're post to say "Count me as 1 person that likes to read the different HOMER scenarios". You say you're very aware that nobody on this board knows what is going to happen to UND, and yet you seem to have the need to attack a post that isn't positive for a scenario. If you already know that it most likely won't occur, then what was you're problem with what I posted? I was merely stating what you already knew in you're head, right?

The truth is that I posted something not positive for UND, and it pissed you off. Next time come out and say that, and don't pretend that you're not being a homer.

Woah -- reread his post and then this diatribe. You accuse him of being "pissed off", yet his post contained none of the vitriol yours did and made some good non-contradictory points. You didn't address the substance at all, but spent half a page railing on him as a "homer" for saying he was interested in discussions about potential conference scenarios for UND.

The people here who seem to be getting upset when they read something they don't like are those who have reacted so violently against any discussion of factors that could make UND attractive to Big Sky.

[Riverman]

and don't pretend that you're not being a homer.

A Sioux fan a "homer" on a Fighting Sioux board???

[aff]

Woah -- reread his post and then this diatribe. You accuse him of being "pissed off", yet his post contained none of the vitriol yours did and made some good non-contradictory points. You didn't address the substance at all, but spent half a page railing on him as a "homer" for saying he was interested in discussions about potential conference scenarios for UND.

The people here who seem to be getting upset when they read something they don't like are those who have reacted so violently against any discussion of factors that could make UND attractive to Big Sky.

Really, what would you call the phrase "Hey aff, here's a thought. If you you think that this line of discussion is "getting real old", DON'T READ IT." That doesn't sound hostile to you? But I guess its alright because "People have a right to discuss ideas without people putting them down, whether the ideas make sense or not.", but I guess that freedom to discuss ideas is limited only to those ideas that are positive to UND, if you point out a flaw in those ideas, I guess you are acting "violently" as you stated in your post. I guess I'm going to have to work on my "violent" behavior and try to get that under control in the future. I apologize for any injuries I've caused with my destructive behavior in the last couple of days.

I find it funny that the underlying assumption of all of these posts is that I, a non-UND fan, is somehow trampling on peoples freedom to post positive ideas for UND. I guess there isn't quite enough positive posts for UND on this board yet. I'm one person posting pretty irregularly, and yet somehow I'm holding back hundreds of posters from putting ideas up about how great UND is? Show me one time where I've said that people shouldn't post about conference situations for UND. Show me where I've said people don't have a right to post their thoughts? I haven't, and I have no problem with debate.

The problem comes in when all of these freedoms I keep hearing about don't apply both ways. If someone has the right to post a conference situation that makes little sense, and I make a post that points that out, haven't I excercised that same freedom you're telling me that I'm trampling for everyone else? Don't I have a right to post thoughts about conference situations for UND, even if their outcome isn't the best or what posters here would have hoped for? I think the freedom of speech in the constitution was meant to protect the minority and their opinion. The claims I've read here apparently think that one person is making hundreds not post their ideas. The only way that could occur is if the minority was using a logical approach, and perhaps the majority was incorrect?

It all comes down to being logical or not. If you post something that doesn't make sense, and I point that out, and you then get embarrased, I don't really see how thats my problem. That would be you're own sense of dignity that you're protecting. I'm not stopping a single person from posting a single idea, and I never will be. You're feelings of looking foolish when you post a foolish idea are what is stopping people from posting. I've always thought that was the best way to get a realistic view of the world. If you only want to hear about postive ideas about UND, maybe you could obtain some moderating tips from countries such as china, iran, or saudi arabia. Nothing but good news comes out of those countries!

[aff]

A Sioux fan a "homer" on a Fighting Sioux board???

No, a sioux homer pretending to be objective on a fighting sioux board.

[Smoggy]

A Sioux fan a "homer" on a Fighting Sioux board???

Say it ain't so!

[Shawn-O]

No, a sioux homer pretending to be objective on a fighting sioux board.

I like reading your opinions on UND/Big Sky, just like I enjoy reading Star2City's. Wild scenarios and debating are what makes the discussion interesting. I just wish we didn't have to regress into the rules of engagement around the debate all the time.

[DUGrad]

I'm new to this whole conversation. I live and work in Denver and was talking to a co-worker who is a UND graduate. I had never heard of the whole "UND to Big Sky" debate until yesterday. My co-worker told me to check out this board and look at the theory. I read various threads and here are some thoughts.....

After reading the scenario, I just don't know if the scenario really seems realistic. In my opinion, several things would need to occur prior to UND/USD being looked at.

NAU, Eastern Washington and Portland State would all need to change their mood on travelling to the Dakotas. While UND might be a great academic and athletic school the fact is that those schools simply don't have any motivation to expand that far east. If the conference was looking to expand there would need to be significant interest by at least 2 of those three schools. I am not totally sure but I believe that 7 of 9 schools would need to vote for a UND site visit in order for it to happen.... NAU might be able to be convinced but I don't know about Portland State and East Wash...

Another thought regarding expansion to Canada, USD and UND. If the Big Sky were to expand the Canada school would get in right away. That puts the BSC at 10 teams... If there where thoughts of expanding further wouldn't they take a look at SUU before coming to the Dakotas??? At most of the schools in the BSC, money is a HUGE HUGE HUGE deal... While academic quality, programs, etc are important, the conference is for athletics and ultimately, cost will be the decision maker. SUU has horrible programs but the low cost of travel, in my opinion, would be more important than the quality of UND/USD's programs.

Maybe i'm missing something. While the theory can not be ruled out (since the BSC officially has no comment on UND/USD), shouldn't the Sioux backers try to temper optimism since it's less than realistic? Please someone post something that makes sense regarding expansion. Most of what's posted seems like propaganda and there obviously is much hate between NDSU and UND people. Since i'm not really interested in either of your schools (i'm not into hockey) someone please respond and be objective about reasons why this might be feasible.... I'm open to other ideas.

[southpaw]

I'm new to this whole conversation. I live and work in Denver and was talking to a co-worker who is a UND graduate. I had never heard of the whole "UND to Big Sky" debate until yesterday. My co-worker told me to check out this board and look at the theory. I read various threads and here are some thoughts.....

After reading the scenario, I just don't know if the scenario really seems realistic. In my opinion, several things would need to occur prior to UND/USD being looked at.

NAU, Eastern Washington and Portland State would all need to change their mood on travelling to the Dakotas. While UND might be a great academic and athletic school the fact is that those schools simply don't have any motivation to expand that far east. If the conference was looking to expand there would need to be significant interest by at least 2 of those three schools. I am not totally sure but I believe that 7 of 9 schools would need to vote for a UND site visit in order for it to happen.... NAU might be able to be convinced but I don't know about Portland State and East Wash...

Another thought regarding expansion to Canada, USD and UND. If the Big Sky were to expand the Canada school would get in right away. That puts the BSC at 10 teams... If there where thoughts of expanding further wouldn't they take a look at SUU before coming to the Dakotas??? At most of the schools in the BSC, money is a HUGE HUGE HUGE deal... While academic quality, programs, etc are important, the conference is for athletics and ultimately, cost will be the decision maker. SUU has horrible programs but the low cost of travel, in my opinion, would be more important than the quality of UND/USD's programs.

Maybe i'm missing something. While the theory can not be ruled out (since the BSC officially has no comment on UND/USD), shouldn't the Sioux backers try to temper optimism since it's less than realistic? Please someone post something that makes sense regarding expansion. Most of what's posted seems like propaganda and there obviously is much hate between NDSU and UND people. Since i'm not really interested in either of your schools (i'm not into hockey) someone please respond and be objective about reasons why this might be feasible.... I'm open to other ideas.

we obviously know that this scenario is a long shot. we're not overly optimistic it will happen, but it would be a good thing to see for UND. most people on the board are just throwing out ideas. brainstorming. we know that a majority of the things that are suggested (other than ndsu and sdsu voting UND into the midcon in a couple years) are not realistic.

aff... the reason so many people are annoyed by your posts is because we know that what we're suggesting is far from reality. it's just fun to toss out ideas, even if they may seem to be ridiculous. we understand that you don't think UND will get into any conference other than the midcon. for most UND fans, unfortunately, that seems like the only feasible option. however, you have to know that going into this we're not expecting ubc to join the the big sky, then demand that du comes with, in turn UND would get invited. we're just throwing out possibilities, no matter how small they may be. we don't constantly need to hear "this will never happen because of blah blah blah..." we know it most likely will never happen. but we're just tossing out ideas. what fun would it be if we only speculated on things that were guaranteed to happen?

[DUGrad]

we obviously know that this scenario is a long shot. we're not overly optimistic it will happen, but it would be a good thing to see for UND. most people on the board are just throwing out ideas. brainstorming. we know that a majority of the things that are suggested (other than ndsu and sdsu voting UND into the midcon in a couple years) are not realistic.

aff... the reason so many people are annoyed by your posts is because we know that what we're suggesting is far from reality. it's just fun to toss out ideas, even if they may seem to be ridiculous. we understand that you don't think UND will get into any conference other than the midcon. for most UND fans, unfortunately, that seems like the only feasible option. however, you have to know that going into this we're not expecting ubc to join the the big sky, then demand that du comes with, in turn UND would get invited. we're just throwing out possibilities, no matter how small they may be. we don't constantly need to hear "this will never happen because of blah blah blah..." we know it most likely will never happen. but we're just tossing out ideas. what fun would it be if we only speculated on things that were guaranteed to happen?

I understand that this thread is speculative at best. My question is why the posters to this board are stuck on the Big Sky? I would think that the Mid-Con would have more to offer UND than the Big Sky. In my opinion, the only thing that the Big Sky seems to offer (over the Mid-Con) is 1 division for all sports. Outside of that the Mid-con seems to be better. They have better teams and better markets which make recruiting and national exposure (as a whole) easier...

As it stands, the GWFC seems to have as much or better talent than the BSC. Assuming that the GWFC adds UND and USD that league (with association with Mid-Con) could stand to be one of the more talented divisions in D1AA. While there currently is no autobid for playoffs this could certainly be possible in the next 3-5 years. Outside of an autobid, I forsee at least one team from the GWFC added as an atlarge bid for football playoffs in the near future.

So, in the end, I question why UND fans would be stuck on the BSC when there really is no big advantage.

[star2city]

Maybe i'm missing something. While the theory can not be ruled out (since the BSC officially has no comment on UND/USD), shouldn't the Sioux backers try to temper optimism since it's less than realistic? Please someone post something that makes sense regarding expansion. Most of what's posted seems like propaganda and there obviously is much hate between NDSU and UND people. Since i'm not really interested in either of your schools (i'm not into hockey) someone please respond and be objective about reasons why this might be feasible.... I'm open to other ideas.

DUGrad:

I can appreciate your skepticism, but there is a lot of additional information that you need to consider.

First, because of new NCAA regulations for conference autobids, the Big Sky needs one additional DI core member, a status that takes 13 years at the DI level to acheive. UNC, UND, USD, NDSU, SDSU, and UBC are not core members and will not be till late next decade or early in the 2020's. The only two real possibilities to fulfill this need of the Big Sky are DU and SUU. Adding SUU would destabilize the BSC further, as both Montana and Montana State would start seriously looking a the WAC if SUU was added. For future stability, the BSC badly needs DU and is pursuing it with vigor IMHO.

Second, DU and the Sunbelt are not a match. The Sunbelt is a IA football league that really would like to see DU move on (so it can add future IA football schools, like Texas St., and perhaps Appalachian St and Georgia Southern). DU's athletics clearly does not fit with such a conference, especially after New Mexico St left. DU's conference options are minimal: the Horizon chose to stay a purely Great Lakes conference, the Mo Valley is full and stable, the WCC has declined DU's offers of transportation subsidies, and the WAC interest in a 10th non-football playing member has subsided. DU will not stoop to the level of the MidCon and would prefer not to be in the Big Sky, unless it upgraded itself more to DU's liking.

Third, with UBC likely receiving NCAA DI membership, it will be (and probably has been) pursuing conference membership. Since UBC will be playing football at the IAA level, the only western conference options for it would be the Big Sky or a WCC/Great West Football combo. The WCC has expressed no interest in adding a large public university, so that leaves the Big Sky. With UBC being practically a PAC-10 university academically and offering the large Vancouver media market, the Big Sky would hugely benefit from more media exposure, television $'s and would be viewed more positively academically. UBC would get very strong support from schools like Portland St., EWU, Montana for membership. With UBC in the Big Sky, the Big Sky would effectively be looked at as THE NCAA conference in the western Canada (consider the media dollars that would bring in). In the future, other western Canadian universities would look to the Big Sky first if they were to join the NCAA. Since UBC would be an upgrade academically and has a unique athletic offering similar to DU, DU would be much more likely to want to join the BSC.

Finally, a third school would be needed to get conference membership to 12 (11 is a bad number for scheduling). Who would that be? Not SUU (DU as well as UM and MSU would not agree to that). Likely not a second Canadian school until UBC is firmly established. Since most Big Sky schools are not familiar to western Canadian audiences, it would be natural for the Big Sky to add one that is: UND. UND is a familiar name with Canadian sports fans, especially after the World Juniors Hockey tournament. UND would have allies in its bid from UNC, DU, MSU, UM, and UBC. Portland St, Sac St, and EWU, having been placated with a UBC and DU addition, will not object so stridently on geographic terms. UND does offer the Big Sky a media package that no other existing Big Sky schools can match: a Fighting Sioux Sports Network on cable systems in North and South Dakota and NW Minnesota. This same cable network could also offer a Big Sky sports package with the FSSN is not televising: added $'s and exposure to the Big Sky.

Getting DU to move to the Big Sky is the linchpin for this whole scenario. As PuckSwami, a very knowledgable DU fan (mostly posts on USCHO) stated:

As a Denver fan, there are lots of permuations here that we need to kind of wait and see where the chips fall.

From DU's perspective, they want out of the Sun Belt, but only if the alternative adds value. DU would love to be in the WCC with other western private schools that are all similar sized, but the WCC said no due to distance - even with DU willing to pay its way in.

....

But if UND joins the Big Sky, it would hold more alot interest for Denver, and if UND and UBC join the Bg Sky, Denver would be all over it, IMHO.

I am not the only one that sees potential here.

[star2city]

I understand that this thread is speculative at best. My question is why the posters to this board are stuck on the Big Sky? I would think that the Mid-Con would have more to offer UND than the Big Sky. In my opinion, the only thing that the Big Sky seems to offer (over the Mid-Con) is 1 division for all sports. Outside of that the Mid-con seems to be better. They have better teams and better markets which make recruiting and national exposure (as a whole) easier...

As it stands, the GWFC seems to have as much or better talent than the BSC. Assuming that the GWFC adds UND and USD that league (with association with Mid-Con) could stand to be one of the more talented divisions in D1AA. While there currently is no autobid for playoffs this could certainly be possible in the next 3-5 years. Outside of an autobid, I forsee at least one team from the GWFC added as an atlarge bid for football playoffs in the near future.

So, in the end, I question why UND fans would be stuck on the BSC when there really is no big advantage.

So as a DU grad, would you like to see the Pioneers in the MidCOn? Your administration would never.

[Hammersmith]

I understand that this thread is speculative at best. My question is why the posters to this board are stuck on the Big Sky? I would think that the Mid-Con would have more to offer UND than the Big Sky. In my opinion, the only thing that the Big Sky seems to offer (over the Mid-Con) is 1 division for all sports. Outside of that the Mid-con seems to be better. They have better teams and better markets which make recruiting and national exposure (as a whole) easier...

As it stands, the GWFC seems to have as much or better talent than the BSC. Assuming that the GWFC adds UND and USD that league (with association with Mid-Con) could stand to be one of the more talented divisions in D1AA. While there currently is no autobid for playoffs this could certainly be possible in the next 3-5 years. Outside of an autobid, I forsee at least one team from the GWFC added as an atlarge bid for football playoffs in the near future.

So, in the end, I question why UND fans would be stuck on the BSC when there really is no big advantage.

Your points are definitely valid and I think most UND fans are doing the same thing we NDSU fans were doing a few years ago. I think it boils down to two reasons. First, BSC is a well-respected I-AA football conference. Like NDSU(though not quite to the same degree), UND fans want a recognized home for one of their top sports; BSC gives them that. Second, several of the BSC schools are "like us", state flagship schools with good professional and research departments and on-campus populations. Most are even located in rural/small urban settings like the Dakota schools. Related to that is the fact that we know some of them from years past(esp the Montana's). The MCC schools are mostly smaller schools (many are commuter schools) that are in urban settings. Most are also schools we've never heard of before NDSU started working on an invite.

I think UND fans will come-around quicker than we did(many have already) and start giving MCC a serious look. I also firmly believe that UND fans will very quickly discover how agonizing it is to be independant, and that any conference is far superior to having no conference at all.

[DUGrad]

DUGrad:

I can appreciate your skepticism, but there is a lot of additional information that you need to consider.

First, because of new NCAA regulations for conference autobids, the Big Sky needs one additional DI core member, a status that takes 13 years at the DI level to acheive. UNC, UND, USD, NDSU, SDSU, and UBC are not core members and will not be till late next decade or early in the 2020's. The only two real possibilities to fulfill this need of the Big Sky are DU and SUU. Adding SUU would destabilize the BSC further, as both Montana and Montana State would start seriously looking a the WAC if SUU was added. For future stability, the BSC badly needs DU and is pursuing it with vigor IMHO.

Second, DU and the Sunbelt are not a match. The Sunbelt is a IA football league that really would like to see DU move on (so it can add future IA football schools, like Texas St., and perhaps Appalachian St and Georgia Southern). DU's athletics clearly does not fit with such a conference, especially after New Mexico St left. DU's conference options are minimal: the Horizon chose to stay a purely Great Lakes conference, the Mo Valley is full and stable, the WCC has declined DU's offers of transportation subsidies, and the WAC interest in a 10th non-football playing member has subsided. DU will not stoop to the level of the MidCon and would prefer not to be in the Big Sky, unless it upgraded itself more to DU's liking.

Third, with UBC likely receiving NCAA DI membership, it will be (and probably has been) pursuing conference membership. Since UBC will be playing football at the IAA level, the only western conference options for it would be the Big Sky or a WCC/Great West Football combo. The WCC has expressed no interest in adding a large public university, so that leaves the Big Sky. With UBC being practically a PAC-10 university academically and offering the large Vancouver media market, the Big Sky would hugely benefit from more media exposure, television $'s and would be viewed more positively academically. UBC would get very strong support from schools like Portland St., EWU, Montana for membership. With UBC in the Big Sky, the Big Sky would effectively be looked at as THE NCAA conference in the western Canada (consider the media dollars that would bring in). In the future, other western Canadian universities would look to the Big Sky first if they were to join the NCAA. Since UBC would be an upgrade academically and has a unique athletic offering similar to DU, DU would be much more likely to want to join the BSC.

Finally, a third school would be needed to get conference membership to 12 (11 is a bad number for scheduling). Who would that be? Not SUU (DU as well as UM and MSU would not agree to that). Likely not a second Canadian school until UBC is firmly established. Since most Big Sky schools are not familiar to western Canadian audiences, it would be natural for the Big Sky to add one that is: UND. UND is a familiar name with Canadian sports fans, especially after the World Juniors Hockey tournament. UND would have allies in its bid from UNC, DU, MSU, UM, and UBC. Portland St, Sac St, and EWU, having been placated with a UBC and DU addition, will not object so stridently on geographic terms. UND does offer the Big Sky a media package that no other existing Big Sky schools can match: a Fighting Sioux Sports Network on cable systems in North and South Dakota and NW Minnesota. This same cable network could also offer a Big Sky sports package with the FSSN is not televising: added $'s and exposure to the Big Sky.

Getting DU to move to the Big Sky is the linchpin for this whole scenario. As PuckSwami, a very knowledgable DU fan (mostly posts on USCHO) stated:

I am not the only one that sees potential here.

I read and re-read your post... A few things that I don't get...

1. You mention that a third school would be needed to get the BSC to 12... Is this assuming that DU joins the BSC with UBC? The presumed third school would be UND?

2. Why would SUU destabilize the BSC? Are the Montanta schools looking to leave and would that push them over the edge to do so? What are the chances that BOTH Montana schools get into another league?

3. The last thing (and I am probably the least knowledgable person on this board), why would UBC's allowance into the NCAA make schools like Portland State, Sac State and NAU want to include UND? I get the DU rivalry with UND and the familiarity/likeness of the Montana schools. That would certainly make a case for those schools to vote in favor. In my opinion, unless UBC and DU's addition gets them more $$$ from the NCAA they would never want to accrue the extra expense.... More travel = more expense. Is there some reason that i'm not seeing regarding the swaying of those three schools??? From what i've read, NDSU/SDSU were not considered becasue of travel expense. Certainly those schools are all similar institutions. Presumably if money is the big issue in their case why would it not the the deciding factor in UND's case?

[MplsBison]

I also don't see how SUU would destabilize the BSC.

SUU is on the same academic level as Weber State, UNC, and EWU. They obviously don't have the markets that those 3 have. But they're reasonably close to Las Vegas and NAU.

SUU seems like the perfect 10th basketball member for the Big Sky and I honestly think that they will add the Tbirds this fall.

The fact that SUU has upped football scholarships to 57 and will be a DIA counter in 2008 as well as the fact that they are planning to bring volleyball back only strengthens this argument.

I know that U Montana fans are continually displeased with the "dumbing down" of the big sky, going from schools like Nevada, Boise State, and Idaho, to Sac State, Northern Col., and now possibly Southern Utah. And, of course, Montana State fans will push for their school to stay with Montana, where ever they go.

Realistically, I don't see Montana in any DI-A conference right now. Their basketball program is improving, though. But still, if they were in the WAC right now, football and bball would be middle to bottom of the pack. And they don't have baseball/softball due to the goofy sport set that the Big Sky requires, something that most WAC schools would probably require. And if Montana State were able to follow Montana, they'd be at the bottom in almost all WAC sports.

[GeauxSioux]

I understand that this thread is speculative at best. My question is why the posters to this board are stuck on the Big Sky? I would think that the Mid-Con would have more to offer UND than the Big Sky. In my opinion, the only thing that the Big Sky seems to offer (over the Mid-Con) is 1 division for all sports. Outside of that the Mid-con seems to be better. They have better teams and better markets which make recruiting and national exposure (as a whole) easier...

As it stands, the GWFC seems to have as much or better talent than the BSC. Assuming that the GWFC adds UND and USD that league (with association with Mid-Con) could stand to be one of the more talented divisions in D1AA. While there currently is no autobid for playoffs this could certainly be possible in the next 3-5 years. Outside of an autobid, I forsee at least one team from the GWFC added as an atlarge bid for football playoffs in the near future.

So, in the end, I question why UND fans would be stuck on the BSC when there really is no big advantage.

I think that the general consensus among UND and probably NDSU and SDSU fans is that the Big Sky is a better fit insofar as peer instiutions. I see UND having more in common as an institution with the likes of Montana and Montana state than I do with UMKC or Centenary. I also think that nationally the Big Sky is a more prestigious conference than the Mid-Con as well.

Grand Forks on the east border of the state. A border war with the Montana schools would solidify UND's fan base throughout North Dakota and really fuel some rivalries. I don't think you would get the same rivalries in the Mid-Con.

[DUGrad]

I think that the general consensus among UND and probably NDSU and SDSU fans is that the Big Sky is a better fit insofar as peer instiutions. I see UND having more in common as an institution with the likes of Montana and Montana state than I do with UMKC or Centenary. I also think that nationally the Big Sky is a more prestigious conference than the Mid-Con as well.

Grand Forks on the east border of the state. A border war with the Montana schools would solidify UND's fan base throughout North Dakota and really fuel some rivalries. I don't think you would get the same rivalries in the Mid-Con.

I am wondering what having a common peer school has to do with Athletics? While I think that it's important that a conference isn't made up of horrible academic schools, the fact that the schools are "land grant" doesn't seem to make much sense to me. The only thing that I think is truly important (from an athletics perspective) is $$$. No matter the conference UND would be wise to join one which will have similar schollys.

I do think that the Montana schools would be a good rivalry but not as good as that of NDSU, SDSU and USD. The history between those three schools can not be argued. In my opinion, I think that UND and USD should join SDSU and NDSU in the GWFC. If they can also get into the Mid-Con, all of a sudden a large percentage of the Mid-Con consists of plains states (including UMKC). For that to be the case Centenary and possibly SUU would have to leave. If that were to happen I think that the Mid-Con (in conjunction with GWFC) could possibly become a premier league. As it stands now the Mid-Con seems to be a stepping stone for bigger better pastures. UND and USD could add HUGE amounts of stability and credibility to that league.

As far as perception around the nation. I don't know that I agree that the big-sky is more prestigious. They are only known in football. Even then they are usually only a middle of the pack conference. The BSC has quickly been outdone by the GWFC(even with only 5 teams).

[GeauxSioux]

I am wondering what having a common peer school has to do with Athletics? While I think that it's important that a conference isn't made up of horrible academic schools, the fact that the schools are "land grant" doesn't seem to make much sense to me. The only thing that I think is truly important (from an athletics perspective) is $$$. No matter the conference UND would be wise to join one which will have similar schollys.

I do think that the Montana schools would be a good rivalry but not as good as that of NDSU, SDSU and USD. The history between those three schools can not be argued. In my opinion, I think that UND and USD should join SDSU and NDSU in the GWFC. If they can also get into the Mid-Con, all of a sudden a large percentage of the Mid-Con consists of plains states (including UMKC). For that to be the case Centenary and possibly SUU would have to leave. If that were to happen I think that the Mid-Con (in conjunction with GWFC) could possibly become a premier league. As it stands now the Mid-Con seems to be a stepping stone for bigger better pastures. UND and USD could add HUGE amounts of stability and credibility to that league.

As far as perception around the nation. I don't know that I agree that the big-sky is more prestigious. They are only known in football. Even then they are usually only a middle of the pack conference. The BSC has quickly been outdone by the GWFC(even with only 5 teams).

You are correct that NDSU and SDSU would be huge rivals, but they would be regardless of which conference UND is invited to. Look at Florida/Florida State. Different conferences, huge rivalry. I would look to expand upon what UND would already have.

I disagree with your perception of Big Sky not being more prestigious. Whether or not they are just known for football or not the conference is well known. The main reason anyone has heard of the Mid-Con is throught the expolits of Valpo in MBB. They are leaving for the Horizon. What does that say for the Mid-Con? Look at the overall stability of the Big Sky over the past 20 years and compare that to the Mid-Con. I am not trying to run the Mid-Con down, I just don't think that it is as highly regarded as the Big Sky.