PDA

View Full Version : A reason to have NDSU in the Big Sky



Bison_Kent
11-30-2003, 11:20 AM
I am hoping that the Big Sky is looking at what NDSU (and SDSU) are doing right now and how it might effect their conference.

If the "Great Western" Conference is formed, this will compete directly with the Big Sky for I-AA playoff bids. This year the Big Sky got 3 of the 8 teams in the conference in the playoffs. Most years, they only get 2. I would think that 5 years from now (if the Great Western Conference is formed) that the Big Sky will only receive 2 at the most every year to be invited to the playoffs since the Great Western would at least get 1 and possibly 2 teams in.

Now here is my input to the Big Sky. If you expand to 10 or 12 teams, the likelyhood of three teams yearly in the I-AA playoffs yearly is great as there most likely would not be a second Western based football conference to compete with. Getting an extra playoff team in means more money and more exposure to the conference.

Now, by the Great Western Conference not forming, this would hurt those teams that would not be in the Big Sky but as a NDSU fan, I am looking out for #1.

Just my take on the conference affiliation situation.

WYOBISONMAN
11-30-2003, 02:26 PM
Those are my thoughts exactly. NDSU has to do what is right for NDSU. If we get asked to the BSC and some of the other GWC teams don't....we have to go to the BSC. After the round of playoff games yesterday, I think that NDSU would represent the BSC well in the post-season.

uncbear
11-30-2003, 04:59 PM
I know you are looking out for #1 and that is what I am out to do also. But I think that NDSU and UNC have built quite a rivalry and they should be in the same conference because it will be good for both schools. Plus, you are leaving your baseball and wrestling teams hanging without a conference. That is why UNC doesn't want the Big Sky and that is a big reason NDSU shouldn't want the big sky.

SDSUFAN
12-01-2003, 01:09 AM
There has been rumor also of forming a D1 Wrestling conference with schools such as Wright State in Ohio and other including Fresno State. *So that could fix the wrestling problem. *Once a member of the Big Sky, UNC SDSU and NDSU could argue to add Baseball. I like the Big Sky as the best conference choice, but its kind of hard to see anything in any direction at this present time. *I guess its a matter of time to find out who is joining what conference. UNC is a year ahead of SDSU and NDSU and we are learning from your struggles.

IowaBison
12-01-2003, 03:14 AM
You don't need to be a member of a conference to fill a college schedule. It would help to build rivalries and tradition, but that's about it.

Between multi-school tournaments and championships, that always seem to come early, you only need to schedule about 5 home duals, which NDSU with its tradition will have no problem doing. The nice thing is that big name programs aren't apprehensive to travel since crowds are usually not to large.

Iowa, yes Gable's Iowa, wrestled at Southwest State in Minnesota this week.

SkyRider
12-03-2003, 09:58 PM
I was surfing message boards, and found this thread from Utah State that I thought you all might find a little interesting.

http://mb3.theinsiders.com/futahstatefrm3.showMessage?topicID=4995.topic

I enjoy reading the posts here -- I believe you, SDSU, and UNC would make great additions. A few of the Big Sky schools offer sports which aren't sponsored by the conference (MSU has skiing, NAU has swimming/diving, Sac has baseball and softball...). Some have played as independents in those sports, while others have joined another conference for those sports only (Sac was in the Big West in baseball, Boise State of the WAC competes in the PAC 10 for wrestling). I just don't see it as a problem.

Look forward to seeing you on the 'Sky's schedules!

Bisonguy
12-03-2003, 10:07 PM
SkyRider,

Thanks for the link!

IowaBison
12-03-2003, 10:09 PM
Thanks for the post SkyRider, feel free to contribute again I like hearing from Big Skyers.

JBB
12-04-2003, 12:44 AM
I really like the suggestion for the Great West BB members too. Its an idea that has been gong around in my head for some time. Why not allow football only, all sports and BB only members. It could be a complete conference involving a lot of different schools. The all sports members would really benefit from this. But, I am also sure that if the conference forms at all its something we should stick with.

GoAgs
12-04-2003, 05:00 AM
In three years UC Davis and UNC are going to be competing with the Big Sky for a playoff berth regardless of if the GWC ever forms.

NDSU_grad
12-04-2003, 06:19 PM
I think our postseason probabation for basketball would be longer if we aren't in an established conference. And I agree with GoAgs. Hopefully the year following you can NDSU to your list.

Bisonguy
12-06-2003, 12:28 AM
Steve Halstrom just reported on the WDAY six o'clock news that he talked to Big Sky commish Doug Fullerton. Fullerton stated that the Big Sky presidents are looking to expand to ten teams, in case one school leaves they will still have at least eight (read: retain autobids). He stated that NDSU and SDSU are not the "ideal" candidates, but may be considered if some others do not fall through (Idaho?).

While not the best news, it still offers hope to those that want NDSU in the Big Sky.

JBB
12-06-2003, 01:03 AM
I am convinced that I dont want to be toyed with. *Our plans. independent of the BSC, are far better in my opinion. *The cities the Mid Con and GW conference offer will give NDSU fans a lot to look forward too as far as exciting competition and places to visit. *The national exposure is there as well. *Let the BSC low ball somebody else. *Maybe und wants to join? *Dealing with them is dealing from a weak position. *Move ahead and create something new.

NDSU_grad
12-06-2003, 01:05 AM
JBB,
I kind of agree with you, but if the Big Sky offers membership I think we should jump at the chance. I really don't think they are toying with us, just looking at their best interests.

IowaBison
12-06-2003, 01:13 AM
I think that the Big Sky is delusional if they think that Idaho will ever be DIAA again, I don't see why they're holding out. I think the Vandals would drop football before returning to the Big Sky, just like NDSU would never go back to the NCC/D2.

Do they think someone else if moving out? Montana?

Also, I'd pick the Big Sky over any other conference hands down. It just makes more sense to my brain that we affiliate with the Montana schools et al than Oakland, UMKC, etc.

Bison_Kent
12-06-2003, 01:28 AM
I agree with IowaBison. And the fact that NDSU and SDSU have much more in common with Montana State, Montana, and Idaho State then Valpariso, Oral Roberts, and Centerary.

I am in favor of the "Great West"/Mid Con leagues if it is the last resort but I still think the Big Sky would be the ideal situation (at least in my opinion) for all sports.

Bisonguy
12-06-2003, 02:09 AM
I think the Big Sky is holding out until NDSU/SDSU are clearly going to be DI members to make a judgement. At the end of this season (other sports), they could still remain in DII. The Big Sky invited a school that supposedly was moving up to DI in the past, only to have that school not move up after the schedules were made. I think they are protecting their best interests until it is certain that NDSU/SDSU are DI members. Maybe the GWC talk could force their hands.

Bisonfan1234
12-06-2003, 06:42 PM
I agree with IowaBison. *And the fact that NDSU and SDSU have much more in common with Montana State, Montana, and Idaho State then Valpariso, Oral Roberts, and Centerary.

I am in favor of the "Great West"/Mid Con leagues if it is the last resort but I still think the Big Sky would be the ideal situation (at least in my opinion) for all sports.



Like i've said before, Fargo is a flat-land big city and we identify ourselves with other flat-land big cities to the east.

somebison
12-06-2003, 06:49 PM
Fargo is a growing city.. but not one I would classify as "big". Institutionally we fit much better with the Big Sky national research university in a smaller state, as opposed to regional university/college in a larger state. The knock against the big sky is travel (not cost.. we would be flying all over anyway) for fans. Mid-con/MVC/ Gateway/ schools are not a great distance away from the Twin Cities (a large alumni pop.) However... Institutionally the Big Sky is a much better fit.

NDSU_grad
12-06-2003, 06:50 PM
You only have to go 20 miles west and ND suddenly takes on a western feel. I think the name recognition is the most important thing. "Ordinary" people can much more easily comprehend playing Idaho State, Montana, and Montana State than IUPUI, Oral Roberts, etc. Nothing against the latter schools, but that's just the way it is.

IowaBison
12-06-2003, 07:58 PM
I would take more pride in playing a Montana, Montana State and losing than beating up on relative no-names as Mid-Con Schools are to most folks from the Upper Midwest.

Bisonfan1234
12-06-2003, 08:48 PM
Fargo isn't big? By 2050 its population is expected to be around 250,000. Moorhead and West Fargo will aslo see this kind of growth as well. It wouldn't suprise me to see the WF-F-M metro area to be around 350,000.

We can make name recognition for ourselves when we join the mid-con or whatever.

Pride is subjective. I would take more pride in beating a team like Oral Roberts who is nationally ranked and playing very well versus a team like Montana who people might recognize more but is less talented than OR.

IowaBison
12-06-2003, 09:22 PM
When comparing the size and wealth of Cass/Clay counties there is easily enough of each to support serious athletics. We need to maintain tradition in our programs as well as develop those that are mediocre/bad.

NDSU_grad
12-06-2003, 09:48 PM
What sport is Oral Roberts nationally ranked in. They have a very good baseball program but their other sports are mediocre at best.

Bisonfan1234
12-06-2003, 09:49 PM
We can do this in the mid-con.

Bisonfan1234
12-06-2003, 09:50 PM
What sport is Oral Roberts nationally ranked in. *They have a very good baseball program but their other sports are mediocre at best.
Basketball obviously. They lost only by 5 to Missouri. What other sports matter anyway? Basketball is a big time money maker.

somebison
12-06-2003, 11:03 PM
oral roberts is not ranked in MBB

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/rankings?poll=1

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/rankings?poll=2

IowaBison
12-07-2003, 12:01 AM
that was oakland, not oral roberts.

it will take a long time for me to get excited about playing any mid-con team. montana on the other hand, already hate 'em.

Bisonfan1234
12-07-2003, 01:36 AM
Ok oakland then.

Just because we would join the mid-con doesn't mean we can't schedule Montana and start a rivalry with them.

IowaBison
12-07-2003, 04:19 AM
I think it would be more likely to play Montana if they were in conference than as a nonconference opponent.

WYOBISONMAN
12-07-2003, 02:15 PM
Again.....most NDSU fans could care less about the teams in the Mid-con. *It is a conference comprised of "Second Tier" schools in thier respective states. *NDSU should be in the Big Sky. *We would have incredible rivalries with the Montana schools and be with institutions similar to NDSU both in thier role in thier respective states and in the states they represent.

Who remembers back in 1970-1980 when we played Montana State EVERY year....it was a great game that the fans really got up for. *Or playing NAU in the Skydome at Flagstaff or on Dakotah field... *That too happened almost every year in the 70's - 81. *

NDSU needs to reclaim those rivalries as well as continue to develop one with Montana. There is no question the BSC would do more than any other conference for NDSU and that is why it needs to be our top choice.

Bisonfan1234
12-07-2003, 06:44 PM
WYO, you're so biased that it's comical! How do you know any of what you're saying is true?

"most NDSU fans could care less about the teams in the Mid-con."

I'm an NDSU fan and i care more about the mid-con than the BSC. How do you know i'm not the majority? Just because there are more people on this board in favor of the BSC doesn't mean anyting.

"It is a conference comprised of "Second Tier" schools in thier respective states"

So what? We either play second tier schools in 1st tier states (that have 1st teir prospects) or we play 1st tier schools in 2nd teir states. I'm for playing the supposed
2nd tier schools and having a good showing for 1st tier prospects.

Lastly, you go on after these 2 points about how things *used* to be and how they could be like this again.

My response to this: stop living in the past! First of all, there is no garantee that things would be like that again. Times change, people change. Second of all, you can't justify doing something just because that was the way it used to be done. The world doesn't work that way.

The east is our future, the west is our past. Onward with the future, i say.

IowaBison
12-07-2003, 07:11 PM
Baloney.

There are far more advantages to playing in the Big Sky to playing in the Mid-Con.

I didn't even know there was a Mid-Con until NDSU considered becoming a member. I had only heard of a few of the universities in the Conference until looking them up, Oakland, in Michigan? Centenary? UMKC?

How can you develop a rivalry when you aren't even familiar with the schools?

NDSU has a great deal in common athletically and academically with Montana, Montana State, and Idaho State and has a history on the field with two of them.

I don't care if we play in Chicago or Kansas City, I do care if fans are interested in and go to games.

Would you rather spend $20 bucks to see NDSU/Centenary or go to the movies?

WYOBISONMAN
12-07-2003, 07:34 PM
Being from Minnesota, as Bisonfan1234 has said he is, means he may not be as in touch with what North Dakota feels as those of us that are natives....

Bison_Kent
12-07-2003, 09:03 PM
This Bison1234,

I for one should be screaming for the Mid Con from where I live now (in Southcentral Kansas). Tulsa is about a 2 1/2 hour drive (home of Oral Roberts). Kansas City is about a 2 1/2 hour drive (home of Missouri-Kansas City). And Malcom, IL (Western Illinois) would be within 7 hours.

But I am not. I look at Montana, Montana State, and Idaho State and I see similar institutions (in size, athletic teams, and goals) as NDSU and SDSU. Even Northern Arizona and Eastern Washington are compariable in size and ambitions. Western Illinois is the only school in the Mid Con team that I could say that about.

Don't get me wrong, if the Big Sky says no I will be happy with the Mid Con but I had my choice I like the Big Sky.

Bisonfan1234
12-07-2003, 11:03 PM
I think i see what the problem here is.

You guys are already so far down the BSC road that when that road crumbled you refused to look at any other way.

You refuse to look at the future, in stead looking only at the way things *used* to be.

You keep saying the BSC is clearly the only choice and even seem to suggest that i'm anti-NDSU for suggesting otherwise.

All i ask is: why? Why is the BSC the only clear choice? I know that we have had agreat games with them in the past. So what? I don't care about the past, only the future. We can have a rivalry with whoever we play! The only think required is that the team be good. Oakland is obviously better than any BSC team when it comes to basketball (and clearly we can only be talking about basketball when comparing the BSC to the mid-con). What if Oakland came to the BSC and NDSU was beating them in a feirce battle, the whole crowd was into it, and Oakland pulled out a win with a questionable 3 pointer at the end? If that doesn't sound like a rivalry starter, then i don't know what is.

As far as distance goes, Minneapolis closer to Fargo than Dickinson (just guessing that is where you western ND'ers live), so i don't see how you can say that i'm not in touch with what is good for NDSU simply because i don't live in ND, nevermind that that argument isn't logical in the first place.

IowaBison
12-07-2003, 11:11 PM
The rivalry won't start against Oakland if there are only a thousand people in the house to watch it.

A close game is a close game, interesting for fans of any sport to watch.

The fact our win over Montana was so big was that we had tradition with them, that they talked big, that we beat them in their own house, that was full, and that Montana is a premier football school, as is NDSU.

No one, that I know of anyways, is crazy for -Insert Mid-Con School Here- -Insert Sport Here-, so why should NDSU fans?

Bisonfan1234
12-07-2003, 11:20 PM
I don't see how you can call 3 games played versus Montana a rivalry. We hadn't played them since the 70's.

You assume too much. Assuming that NDSU fans actually want to have a rivalry with the BSC and assuming that they don't want to have a rivalry with the Mid-con.

Also, i would hope more than 1000 people come to see a team that lost by only 5 points to #5 Missouri and beat Texas A&M 90-58!

Bison_Kent
12-07-2003, 11:26 PM
The only football rival in the Mid Con that would also be in basketball is S. Utah. *I just can't get excited for that game in comparison to a football game with Montana or Montana State.

D
12-07-2003, 11:52 PM
I don't understand Bisonfan1234's infatuation with Oakland (the team he thought was Oral Roberts) and the Mid-Con. It is amongst the D1 worst conferences in the country in both academics and athletics. The member schools have extremely lax admission standards (other than Valpo) and are mainly institutions located in large metro areas where media coverage of them is iffy at best. Not having football as a conference takes away from the rivalries and general atmosphere in all other sports. The hatred of other schools wouldn't nearly be what it could be if football was a Mid-Con sport. I don't think there should be any doubt that the Big Sky is NDSU's best conference fit. The Mid-Con really doesn't make a whole lot of sense, even geographically.

Bisonfan1234
12-08-2003, 12:12 AM
I don't understand Bisonfan1234's infatuation with Oakland (the team he thought was Oral Roberts) and the Mid-Con. *It is amongst the D1 worst conferences in the country in both academics and athletics. *The member schools have extremely lax admission standards (other than Valpo) and are mainly institutions located in large metro areas where media coverage of them is iffy at best. *Not having football as a conference takes away from the rivalries and general atmosphere in all other sports. *The hatred of other schools wouldn't nearly be what it could be if football was a Mid-Con sport. *I don't think there should be any doubt that the Big Sky is NDSU's best conference fit. *The Mid-Con really doesn't make a whole lot of sense, even geographically.

Thanks for your speculation. However, i feel exactly opposite as you do which makes us tie.

Lax admission standards?! Compared to the Big Sky which is all medium-sized state schools? Last time i checked it wasn't hard to get into a state school. Also i don't see how you could use this argument to degrade the mid-con's athletics when clearly our academics are not exactly NDSU's strongest selling point for recruits.

Also, the Big Sky's basketball programs are not the greatest either. In fact, i would bet the Mid-con would win in a cross-over. East Washington and Weber State have had their years, but BSC is not a powerhouse basketball league.

You can't even mention football when discussing the mid-con because it doesn't have football! If we join the mid-con we'll more than likely be making our own conference.

It isn't required to have the same schools as rivals in both bball and fball for there to be a good rivalry. Although, it seems the popular speculation that having them be the same will somehow intensify the rivalry. But being it only speculation, i speculate that the opposite is true. I guess we tie.

Last, it seems to me that many of you seem as if you wouldn't even come watch NDSU if they don't get to play Montana. We can always schedule them in NC. Is that good enough for you? You'll just have to learn to root against new rivals as NDSU moves on into the future. We already have a nice one established with Cal-Davis and that only took 2 years! It won't take long before NDSU vs. Oakland will become a hot ticket.

NDSU_grad
12-08-2003, 12:27 AM
Bisonrfan1234, I don't think anybody ever questioned your loyalty. *You just have a different opinion than the rest of us, and that's ok. *But you even got Oakland and Oral Roberts mixed up. It's *not necessarily about which conference is better (Bison Kent pointed out in an earlier post they're pretty much identical in terms of quality in men's basketball). *It's all about perception. *Of all the fans that attend sporting events, I would speculate that a majority are "casual" fans. *As much as diehard fans complain about them, every successful program needs them. *They're the ones that only come when the team is winning and they're the ones that will come to watch Montana but not Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (hereafter known as IUPUI).

Bison_Kent
12-08-2003, 12:40 AM
You can't even mention football when discussing the mid-con because it doesn't have football! If we join the mid-con we'll more than likely be making our own conference.

This is exactly why we don't like the Mid Con in comparison to the Big Sky. S. Utah would be the only common conference opponent (besides SDSU) in both sports. With a rivarly, if you lose in football you might have the bragging rights in basketball. With a two conference system you would not have this.

D
12-08-2003, 02:22 AM
This is exactly why we don't like the Mid Con in comparison to the Big Sky. *S. Utah would be the only common conference opponent (besides SDSU) in both sports. *With a rivarly, if you lose in football you might have the bragging rights in basketball. *With a two conference system you would not have this.



Exactly. A good rivalry is one that is intense on all fields, and the football field is the biggest of them all. And obviously the BSC is not a powerhouse basketall league, but neither is the Mid-Con. The conference RPI's tell the story there, and the BSC is clearly better. From the 1997-1998 season to the 2001-2002 seasons, the BSC's conference RPI were 21,18,16,25,and 22, whereas the Mid-Con was 23,24,29,22, and 21. Average in those years for BSC is about 20, for the Mid-Con it is about 23. You come in with an RPI about 14-16, as the BSC has, and your conference has a chance at getting an atlarge bid to the NCAA's. BSC is predicted better by Sporting News this year. There goes the Mid-Con is better in hoops theory.

D
12-08-2003, 02:36 AM
It won't take long before NDSU vs. Oakland will become a hot ticket.

If Oakland draws 2500 for Big 12 Texas A & M the other day, and only 4000 for top 10 Missouri, something tells me that Oakland vs NDSU won't be the hot ticket you speak of.

IowaBison
12-08-2003, 02:45 AM
I don't give a flip-flop about RPI, I want to see (1) large numbers of (2) happy fans.

While it is exciting to play ranked teams or those with high computer generated scores, how often do we really think that any BSC or Mid-Con team is going to be ranked. I want competition and rivalry and stature and pride.

I think we will get more of that from the BSC than from Chicago State.

D
12-08-2003, 02:58 AM
I don't give a flip-flop about RPI, I want to see (1) large numbers of (2) happy fans. *

While it is exciting to play ranked teams or those with high computer generated scores, how often do we really think that any BSC or Mid-Con team is going to be ranked. *I want competition and rivalry and stature and pride.

I think we will get more of that from the BSC than from Chicago State.



If you want competition, than you should care about the RPI, because it is the most technically sound rating system in all of athletics. It blows the BCS and top 25 polls out of the water, and the NCAA comittee obviously uses it on selection Sunday. The Big Sky provides for better basketball competition and opportunities.

roadwarrior
12-08-2003, 03:02 AM
It appears some of us are adamant about the Big Sky and others about the Mid-Con. The decision is not really ours to make, and I am pretty sure the conference NDSU is most hopeful of joining is the Big Sky.

Its obvious that we are going in a new direction next season, but I do think you can look at what has happened in the past in considering what conference is the best fit. The football games with the BSC members do mean something. Playing Portland and Sac State in the D-2 playoffs in the 80s. The string of games that we had against Montana State and Northern Arizona in the 70s count. This history is all in football, but name recognition of the opponents in other sports will have a positive effect on attracting fans to games.

Rivalrys in one sport with a certain school DO carry over to the number of fans that show up for other sports. I for one would like this to continue in the future. The NCC was great for us in the past, and having the major sports in one conference in the future is better than us having memberships in several conferences.

We all have to be patient as we argue amonst ourselves which direction is the best fit for NDSU. Its the presidents of the member schools that make the decision about adding new members. Us poor fans are left to sit and wait for that to happen.

JBB
12-08-2003, 12:06 PM
NDSU announced to day that the discusions at the great west formation meetings would have to include a no penalty clause for leaving if NDSU were invited to the BSC. I think that tells you where the Admin. is.

I like the Mid Con/Great Western because it is a real possibility. Unless somebody knows something I dont, and I know they do :D, Its the only real proposal out there. We cant sit and do nothing except hope for the BSC to change its mind. As such, I wouldnt want to a erect any barriers to the other alternatives.

IowaBison
12-08-2003, 02:34 PM
I agree, I'd pick the Mid-Con with certainty in a second.

Bisonfan1234
12-08-2003, 03:25 PM
This is exactly why we don't like the Mid Con in comparison to the Big Sky. *S. Utah would be the only common conference opponent (besides SDSU) in both sports. *With a rivarly, if you lose in football you might have the bragging rights in basketball. *With a two conference system you would not have this.


It isn't required to have the same schools as rivals in both bball and fball for there to be a good rivalry. Although, it seems the popular speculation that having them be the same will somehow intensify the rivalry. But being it only speculation, i speculate that the opposite is true. I guess we tie.

As you can see, i already proved this argument to be false.


Exactly. *A good rivalry is one that is intense on all fields, and the football field is the biggest of them all. *And obviously the BSC is not a powerhouse basketall league, but neither is the Mid-Con. *The conference RPI's tell the story there, and the BSC is clearly better. *From the 1997-1998 season to the 2001-2002 seasons, the BSC's conference RPI were 21,18,16,25,and 22, whereas the Mid-Con was 23,24,29,22, and 21. *Average in those years for BSC is about 20, for the Mid-Con it is about 23. *You come in with an RPI about 14-16, as the BSC has, and your conference has a chance at getting an atlarge bid to the NCAA's. *BSC is predicted better by Sporting News this year. *There goes the Mid-Con is better in hoops theory. *

The Mid-Con's average is 23 and the BSC's average is 20.

The Sporting News picked the BSC to be better? That is what you're basing your whole argument on despite the fact that the MCC has had a better RPI average for the last 5 years?

Did the Sporting News pick us to win over Montana?

I do like the point you made about winning the Big Sky versus coming in 2nd or 3rd in the Mid Con getting us an at large bid. But where is the precendent for this happening? And to even make this argument you have to assume that the MCC is better than the BSC.

D
12-08-2003, 06:41 PM
As you can see, i already proved this argument to be false.



The Mid-Con's average is 23 and the BSC's average is 20.



You are showing your true knowledge here, the lower the RPI is, the better. Therefore, the Big Sky has averaged well better there, and is be considered a better hoops conference. If you are going to argue validity, at least know the meaning of things that you are arguing against.

Bisonfan1234
12-08-2003, 07:19 PM
Alright, that point has been negated then.

The rest of my points still stand however.

In the place of the negated point i present this point: the past 2 years the Mid-con has had a better RPI than the big sky. How do we know that this isn't becoming the rule versus the exception? With the addition of SDSU (and hopefully NDSU if we get our act together) the mid-cons RPI would only continue to decrease.

D
12-08-2003, 07:36 PM
Alright, that point has been negated then.

The rest of my points still stand however.

In the place of the negated point i present this point: the past 2 years the Mid-con has had a better RPI than the big sky. How do we know that this isn't becoming the rule versus the exception? With the addition of SDSU (and hopefully NDSU if we get our act together) the mid-cons RPI would only continue to decrease.

That is a good question that has a simple answer. This year the MidCon added Centenary, a move which made no sense. It is located in Louisianna, which throws the geography of the confeence off. They're terrible in basketball, toiling down there with the worst 1/5 of the teams in the country annually. The school is best known for prodicing Robert Parrish in about 1977. It's a move that has come under pretty heavy criticism, equatable to the NCC adding Mayville St, literally. Needless to say, the conference was made worse by this move.
The Big Sky, on the other hand, is going to experience a resurgence on the basketball side. Montana hired Pat Kennedy 2 years ago, and they are now a program on the verge of becoming a mid-major power, along with Weber St., & Giacolletti's Eastern Washington.

Bisonfan1234
12-08-2003, 08:50 PM
Those are very good points.

I agree the addition of Century doesn't make alot of common sense. Perhaps there was another reason that we don't know of, usually there is. It's not like they threw darts at the map of the USA.

I also think that Weber State and East Wash. have proven themselves recently.

We'll have to see how the teams fair this year. If the BSC makes a good showing in basketball it could definately sway my opinion.

However, do we even have a chance to get into the BSC? It seems they're looking for Idaho and/or Utah State, at the least another mountain region school. NDSU is a central school, not a mountain school.

WYOBISONMAN
12-08-2003, 08:59 PM
I don't think there is any way that either Idaho or Utah State (for sure Utah State) will drop to D1AA. I suspect that both may well wind up in the WAC. That would leave the BSC with 3 teams to choose from in moving to 10 teams. Those would be NDSU and SDSU, both of whom are very interested in the BSC and UNC who has been luke warm to the BSC.

I would think the BSC would give close consideration to NDSU and SDSU when it becomes obvious that Idaho and Utah State will not move down. I am sure that in the end the BSC would like to have members who chose the BSC as thier "first choice" for conf. affiliation.

Bison_Kent
12-08-2003, 09:04 PM
Actually, Utah State has already been invited to the WAC, but Idaho has not yet. But it is speculated that Boise State will move to the Mountain West and then open the spot up for Idaho.

New Mexico State and Utah State are current members of the Sunbelt (along with Idaho). NMSU and USU are moving to the WAC next season, I believe.

IowaBison
12-08-2003, 09:23 PM
I hear about the Big Sky fans waiting for Idaho to comeback and it ain't gonna happen. I didn't think the conference commish would be as delusion as they are.

If they are actually looking for 2 or 3 more teams, I don't think they would do any better.

WYOBISONMAN
12-08-2003, 09:24 PM
I just can't see who else (of quality) would go to the BSC. Any thoughts on who other than us would go.....given that it won't be Utah State or Idaho??

Bisonfan1234
12-08-2003, 09:25 PM
There must be a reason that the BSC is waiting. Maybe not Utah State, but perhaps they're looking to add Idaho and Northern Colorado. Both schools are in the moutain region that the Big Sky represents.

Why Idaho? Isn't it true that there are certain requirements that have to be met to be D1A? Isn't it also true that Idaho is on the verge of not meeting those requirements?

IowaBison
12-08-2003, 09:44 PM
There attendance in football is low, but their not going down. They'll drop prices, give away free hotdogs, whatever.

Do you think an attendance requirement would ever make NDSU go back to the NCC?

I don't think Idaho has been meeting the requirements, 12063 to 17,000 per home game which take a couple of years of noncompliance to apply. The NCAA was also considering changing it earlier this fall don't know why?

In 1999 they had 28,330 people per game.

Bisonguy
12-08-2003, 09:48 PM
Why Idaho? Isn't it true that there are certain requirements that have to be met to be D1A? Isn't it also true that Idaho is on the verge of not meeting those requirements?

Idaho is on the verge of not meeting the I-A requirements, BUT as repeatedly stated by AD's of the programs that may not meet the requirements, there are ways around them. Most of the I-A schools do not want to drop to I-AA, and will do everything in their power to stay in I-A ($1 tickets?).

sausage
12-08-2003, 10:05 PM
There is no attendance requirements for IAA.
There should have been for Division Two.