SiouxMD Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 ESPN - Overall State Football Rankings 24 - Minnesota 46 - North Dakota No. 48 pro | No. 44 college | No. 40 high school: The Peace Garden State has no DI or NFL teams. 47 - South Dakota 49 - Montana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDSUFREAK10 Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 ESPN - Overall State Football Rankings 24 - Minnesota 46 - North Dakota 47 - South Dakota 49 - Montana It doesnt seem to be very recent sense it says that North Dakota has no DI colleges, and no DI scholarships. They must only count FBS teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdahl Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 It doesnt seem to be very recent sense it says that North Dakota has no DI colleges, and no DI scholarships. They must only count FBS teams. The NCAA considers NDSU to be D-II until they've finished their transition. Nonetheless, you're probably right that North Dakota won't budge much when the two D-II teams complete reclassifying to I-AA (or CS or whatever it's going to be called then). Montana, which arguably has very successful I-AA teams, is only #42 in college football to N.D.'s #44. I'm afraid that to rise to being one the 40 most important states in college football would require a bowl-eligible team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMD Posted December 27, 2006 Author Share Posted December 27, 2006 It doesnt seem to be very recent sense it says that North Dakota has no DI colleges, and no DI scholarships. They must only count FBS teams. If you look at Montana, New Hampshire and Maine...it states the same "no DI or NFL teams." BTW...it is recent. The article was found on the ESPN College Football front page...today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdahl Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 If you look at Montana, New Hampshire and Maine...it states the same "no DI or NFL teams."Oops, missed that. DaveK -- NDSUFREAK was referring to the previously discussed renaming of D-I divisions. I-AA has chosen to instead call itself the Football Championship Subdivision of D-I because some of its members were sick of their basketball and other teams being called I-AA (a moniker that should only apply to their football teams). I'm afraid that they'll quickly learn that a simple renaming won't confuse the public as to who's mid-major. To quote the NCAA memo:Isn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDSUFREAK10 Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Dont worry, guys. I'm on the same boat as not likeing the name change, but I guess I have to go with it. Besides, being in the highest level of championship football is alright. I guess if you take it that way then it is alright. I dont know if you heard the "There's no BS in the CS" motto but that pretty much sums it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDSUFREAK10 Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 If you look at Montana, New Hampshire and Maine...it states the same "no DI or NFL teams." BTW...it is recent. The article was found on the ESPN College Football front page...today. Yeah, that is what I meant with not counting FCS teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDSUFREAK10 Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 The NCAA considers NDSU to be D-II until they've finished their transition. Nonetheless, you're probably right that North Dakota won't budge much when the two D-II teams complete reclassifying to I-AA (or CS or whatever it's going to be called then). Montana, which arguably has very successful I-AA teams, is only #42 in college football to N.D.'s #44. I'm afraid that to rise to being one the 40 most important states in college football would require a bowl-eligible team. same reason as to why we arent included in any of the stats. somehow we can get a payton award finalist, but not be included in that stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryP Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 I just have to put in a little something for my home state. Ohio has a few intangibles that ESPN apparently did not take into account. 1 Ohio was a pioneer in early professional football. 1904 A field goal was changed from five points to four. Ohio had at least seven pro teams, with Massillon winning the Ohio Independent Championship, that is, the pro title. Talk surfaced about forming a state-wide league to end spiraling salaries brought about by constant bidding for players and to write universal rules for the game. The feeble attempt to start the league failed. Halfback Charles Follis signed a contract with the Shelby (Ohio) AC, making him the first known black pro football player. http://www.nfl.com/history/chronology/1869-1910 2 Ohio is the home of the Pro Football HOF. 3. Some great coaches have roots in Ohio. Sid Gillman, Paul Brown, Woody Hayes, Jim Tressel, Urban Meyer, Bo Schembechler, and of course, Miami University, "the cradle of coaches" IMO Ohio should be ranked higher than 5th if history and tradition are factored into the criteria. Oh yeah. There SHOULD be another national championship soon. 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.