PDA

View Full Version : Big Sky Conference Presentation by NDSU?



BisonInTexas
12-01-2002, 02:47 AM
Did NDSU make a presentation to the Big Sky Conference as Taylor stated earlier this year? Anyone know how it went or did it not happen at all?

Craig

BisonInTexas
12-04-2002, 07:33 PM
Just received word from a source that no presentation was made to the Big Sky this fall. He thinks Chapman is still working it behind the scenes, however.

Finding a conference is going to be tough. There is still a lot of time however. I think the most likely (but not most desired) may be forming a new conference, but this will be tough as well if SDSU gets voted down by the BoR this week.

Didn't Taylor state at the D1 announcement that if NDSU didn't have a conference affiliation by next fall he should be run out of town?

Craig

tony
12-04-2002, 07:55 PM
Yeah, he sure did. It kind of makes me think that they have a fall-back position, the Mid-continent or some other no-football conference.

I think that NDSU would want to find out about SDSU before approaching the Big Sky.

BisonInTexas
12-04-2002, 09:01 PM
Yeah, he sure did. It kind of makes me think that they have a fall-back position, the Mid-continent or some other no-football conference.

I think that NDSU would want to find out about SDSU before approaching the Big Sky.


I agree that SDSU is an important ally in any conference negotiations. It makes you wonder what Taylor was thinking when he announced that NDSU would be presenting at the Big Sky Conference meeting in October. I am surprised he hasn't been called out on this statement by the press.

Craig

Guest
12-05-2002, 03:52 AM
Even if the Board Of Regents votes down SDSU proposal to move up, its not going to mean the death of this issue. There are many Augie and USD fans contacting Denny Everson, President of the SDSU Alumni Association as the article in the Yankton Daily Press & Dakotan states. The dont realize how things are organized at SDSU. The Alumni Association is purely a social ogranizatin. It maintains mailing addresses, organizations pregame tailgates etc and has a council that meets four times a year. I was on that council for a couple of years. We did not do a whole lot so these USD and Augie fans are barking up a tree thinking that 48,000 SDSU alums will listen. The ALumni Assoication does not collect dues nor does it do much fund raising. There is another organization called the SDSU Foundation and that is made up of movers and shakers who have given big time bucks. The foundation and alumni assoication work together had have mutual members.

The Board of Regents has four memebers who terms expire in January 2003. Most of the current members are Janklow appointees and have ties to USD. This the big reason SDSU move may get shot down. The Governor Elect is Mike Rounds, is a SDSU ALUM and was a Jackrabbit baseball pitcher once upon a time. I know he was asked three or four years ago about what he thought about SDSU moving to D1. I was told by a reliable source that he was in favor of the move. So 2003 once Rounds is Governor Rounds and new appointments to the B of D, the proposal could be re-introduced to the B of R for consideration. I dont think the B Of R will be able to kill it for good. They may slow the train but will not be able to derail it.
After January Janklow and his cronies will be Washington DC and not in Pierre South Dakota. Heaven help us.

BisonInTexas
12-06-2002, 03:24 PM
Even if the Board Of Regents votes down SDSU proposal to move up, its not going to mean the death of this issue. There are many Augie and USD fans contacting Denny Everson, President of the SDSU Alumni Association as the article in the Yankton Daily Press & Dakotan states. *The dont realize how things are organized at SDSU. *The Alumni Association is purely a social ogranizatin. It maintains mailing addresses, organizations pregame tailgates etc and has a council that meets four times a year. I was on that council for a couple of years. We did not do a whole lot so these USD and Augie fans are barking up a tree thinking that 48,000 SDSU alums will listen. *The ALumni Assoication does not collect dues nor does it do much fund raising. There is another organization called the SDSU Foundation and that is made up of movers and shakers who have given big time bucks. The foundation and alumni assoication work together had have mutual members. *

The Board of Regents has four memebers who terms expire in January 2003. *Most of the current members are Janklow appointees and have ties to USD. This the big reason SDSU move may get shot down. The Governor Elect is Mike Rounds, is a SDSU ALUM and was a Jackrabbit baseball pitcher once upon a time. I know he was asked three or four years ago about what he thought about SDSU moving to D1. I was told by a reliable source that he was in favor of the move. *So 2003 once Rounds is Governor Rounds and new appointments to the B of D, the proposal could be re-introduced to the B of R for consideration. *I dont think the B Of R will be able to kill it for good. They may slow the train but will not be able to derail it.
After January Janklow and his cronies will be Washington DC and not in Pierre South Dakota. Heaven help us.

I hope it works out for SDSU, be it now or later. I guess this begs the question: Can a later B of R revoke SDSU's DI status after it has been okayed?

I imagine there are some safeguards in place to prevent this, otherwise it would be hard to get acceptance in any conference if you couldn't guarantee that sometime in the future a bunch of USD alums on the B of R tell SDSU to move back to DII just so they can play USD again.

Craig

Guest
12-07-2002, 12:20 AM
The way the Board of Regents works in South Dakota and I dont know much other than this is that the eight members are appointed by the Elected Governor. Governor Elect Rounds, I suppose could ask for resignations of all eight on inaugration day, but thats not likely. They do serve at the gov's pleasure and checking those terms that expire in 2003, some would probably vote to allow SDSU to move forward. So new appointments may not help. I think after what happen at public forum in Sioux Falls, the approval could possibly come. The SDSU Foundation made some interesting comments, like for instance they plan to raise 9 million for athletics. The endowed monies for scholarships now total 5.5 million with an announcement that a donor recently deceased had given SDSU 2.7 million for athletics scholarships. The amount endowed would yield about $225,000 per year just from earnings assuming a 5% return. At about 8000 per year for a full ride would fund nearly 30 scholarships with out a ticket sold or a request for a check from a booster. I think SDSU Adminstration and Foundation made a good presentation and how those with ties to USD accept that will be the key to the decision.

We have a very good former basketball coach, Jim Marking who is really negative on this issue and he a great guy. I dont understand his negativity.

Could the regents recind their decision if was approved and subsequently reconsidered? The answer to that is probably in their bylaws. I dont think they would be it pressure from USD or Northern. There is no money being requested from the Legislature. USD got 4 million for the roof on the DaKota Dome and a lot of SDSU folks would remind the B of D of that. USD like UND has the business, law and medicine school but does not have the power in state government that UND has. There are differences in that sense.

I dont think that USD could come up with a valid reason to recind a prior decision, especially since the money has been raised by the SDSU Foundation and the move is sucessful. Finding a conference will be the next issue if approval is granted next week.

I am hopeful from the public forum that they may just decide that the B of D since no money is being requested, will conclude that they don't have a dog in this hunt and give it approval. President Miller by the Argus Leader made some very hopeful comments about the academics being in great shape and that she saw athletics as a way to build academics. The B of D, no matter how USD red their blood may be have to appear non-partisian. The movers and shakers in the foundation and on campus are finally speaking their piece on this issue and I think they will not be afraid to be critical of the B Of D voting this down on the loyality to USD. The funny part that I have noticed is that many USD alums are envious of SDSU for being progressive on other issues. So if an approval is made, then USD may find them selves looking in the mirror and rethinking every thing.

JBB
12-07-2002, 02:21 PM
Your last comment about the USD feelings seems to be right on. I have no doubt, especially after listening to the und fans that they are feeling much the same way. Now than Lennon is looking for work as a D1AA coach, and has been quoted as saying he is very disappointed about the und D1 postition, it wouldnt suprise me a bit to see them on the band wagon next summer. If SDSU makes the move your probably right about usd reconsidering too. I hope neither school does.

BisonInTexas
12-07-2002, 05:01 PM
Your last comment about the USD feelings seems to be right on. I have no doubt, especially after listening to the und fans that they are feeling much the same way. Now than Lennon is looking for work as a D1AA coach, and has been quoted as saying he is very disappointed about the und D1 postition, it wouldnt suprise me a bit to see them on the band wagon next summer. If SDSU makes the move your probably right about usd reconsidering too. I hope neither school does.

I think UND will move up, but if they want to announce by next year, they had better start doing their studies now (Carr report, etc.). I think it will be after 2005 before they finally get moving. It will take a couple of years with a schedule full of Crookstons, Northern States, Bemidji and the like to set in before they see the light (as well as the reduction in scholarships that will probably be ratified by DII in the not so distant future).

Craig

The_Sicatoka
12-11-2002, 07:10 PM
BisonInTexas:

I'm not looking to argue but let me ask:

Would it be worth the money for UND to do the studies at this point? They'll say: Mission, Market (aka Money), Plan, Conference. They can look at NDSU's and SDSU's and see the issues and concerns from similar situations both in a larger and smaller metro area.

If they made such a move, they'd probably come out with a long epiphany about how the landscape has rapidly changed (by pointing to the NCAA 2003 DII resolution by the RMAC to look at scholarship levels) to align themselves with Dr. Kupchella's position paper (from back in February) and then just announce the move.

The hidden benefit? They'd still have the $100k that NDSU and SDSU each spent on Carr and CSL reports. ;) ;D

Like I've said, patience. This will all play out. I figured the 2004 look at divisions by the NCAA would trigger it. The 2003 resolution by the RMAC just may be the trigger. We'll see.

PS - None of this solves the binding issue for all: Conference.

tony
12-11-2002, 07:38 PM
Where'd you get the $100,000 number anyway? UND's situation is not identical to NDSU's. Plus you seem to be mistaking/combining the Carr Report with the marketing report.

UND, just like NDSU, needs somebody from the outside to look at their athletic program. While similar, UND's Title IX situation is a lot different than NDSU's. Not to mention that UND hasn't done anything like NDSU's marketing report - is Roger Thomas going to look at NDSU alumni and student polling and just assume that the numbers are the same for UND alumni? That doesn't seem to make sense since so many UND fans seem to object on general principles to DI.

BisonInTexas
12-11-2002, 08:18 PM
BisonInTexas:

I'm not looking to argue but let me ask:

Would it be worth the money for UND to do the studies at this point? They'll say: Mission, Market (aka Money), Plan, Conference. *They can look at NDSU's and SDSU's and see the issues and concerns from similar situations both in a larger and smaller metro area.

If they made such a move, they'd probably come out with a long epiphany about how the landscape has rapidly changed (by pointing to the NCAA 2003 DII resolution by the RMAC to look at scholarship levels) to align themselves with Dr. Kupchella's position paper (from back in February) and then just announce the move.

The hidden benefit? They'd still have the $100k that NDSU and SDSU each spent on Carr and CSL reports. *;) *;D

Like I've said, patience. This will all play out. I figured the 2004 look at divisions by the NCAA would trigger it. The 2003 resolution by the RMAC just may be the trigger. We'll see.

PS - None of this solves the binding issue for all: Conference.

I would be surprised if UND didn't show due diligence and commission the reports. While it is ALWAYS a good idea to follow NDSU ;D, as Tony said, just because UND is 80 miles north doesn't mean that the situations are the same. Not to mention the fact that UND detractors of NDSU are claiming that NDSU jumped the gun despite all of the research they did into the move. That same preparation doesn't apply to UND?

Your president would look like a buffoon after writing editorials stating all of the reasons not to move up and then next August just stating out of the blue "Oh yeah, um, we decided to move up to - we'll just skip all of this report stuff and get started on the transition". It would be extremely arrogant and leave themselves wide open for criticism.

Not to mention that any conference wouldn't even consider letting UND join without a independent market assessment and Carr report data. Go ahead, save your $100K, but remember, the saying is "Penny wise, pound foolish".

Craig

PS I didn't mean to imply that I was impatient with UND's position at this time. I was just stating that if they do decide to move up, they had better do the preparation first. That's why I said it'll be 2005 or later before they are ready to begin DI.

The_Sicatoka
12-11-2002, 08:41 PM
Guys, relax. It was just a question/scenario.

I'm just saying that market-wise, GF is somewhere between Fargo and Brookings. There's data for those two.

The numbers I'd heard in Fargo media was $40 or 50k for the Carr Report and $30k for the CSL Report. Toss in NDSU's time and talent to hire the work to be done and then analyze it I'm guessing I'm close at $100k.

Would UND have some serious paddling to do if they did it? Oh yeah. Do I think they would? Nah. They take such a measured approach to most things they'd probably do the same here.

If they did pull a stunt like that, they'd better have cash-money to cover all of the increased costs in hand.

But then again, the conference issue would still be open.

One last question: If you have other Carr and CSL reports available, how hard would it be to create the equivalent report? A lot of the data looks like stuff you could get from the US Census Bureau or from game summaries (attendance, etc). The flip side is you wouldn't have been evaluated by an 'outside' group. Then again, am I sure that "BisonInTexas" and "tony" aren't "consultants" looking to make a buck? ;) :D

BisonInTexas
12-11-2002, 08:56 PM
Guys, relax. It was just a question/scenario.

Then again, am I sure that "BisonInTexas" and "tony" aren't "consultants" looking to make a buck? ;) :D

You caught me - well, there goes my finder's fee for UND! ;D

Could you make up your own report? Maybe, but it would always be viewed as self-serving no matter how accurate. The Carr report is very focused on the steps to go DI and is very institution-specific, while the CSL report is more data, demographic intensive. In fact, the CSL report fulfills a requirement of the Carr report.

Craig

JBB
12-12-2002, 03:51 AM
Although it's not suprising at all to see und alums so anxious to move with NDSU that they would forgo the necessary steps needed to make the move smoothly and soundly. It also wouldnt be suprising to see und move in a haphazard and careless fashion. They should do the reports and all the rest of it just like NDSU. Theres already enough trouble up their with finances because of corner cutting and this type of arogance.

The_Sicatoka
12-12-2002, 02:09 PM
No JBB, believe it or not, you've pointed me to the one item that pushed me to the "DI may not be such a crazy idea" column, namely, the 2003 resolution to DII from the RMAC to look at numbers of scholarships. That is quite telling.

I've long believed that 2004 (NCAA to relook at all divisions) would be the push to move UND, but that 2003 resolution just may do it.

BisonInTexas, what if UND filed to align themselves with (and this is just for JBB) ndsu's timeline and studied it during the provisional year. If the reports are bad they could still back out, right?

PS - JBB, problems with the finances? We've left the Baker era, can you as well? ;)

BisonInTexas
12-12-2002, 02:53 PM
BisonInTexas, what if UND filed to align themselves with (and this is just for JBB) ndsu's timeline and studied it during the provisional year. If the reports are bad they could still back out, right?

That would be great, but I am not sure that there is time to align with NDSU's timeline (provisional year in 2003, beginning DI in 2004). These reports take months to complete and then a few weeks to digest. As Tony has pointed out there is also the matter of surveying your boosters to see if they can support the increased budget. Perhaps they could still get everything done in time to make a decision by 9/1 to inform the NCC that 2003 is a provisional year and begin play in DI in 2004, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Craig

The_Sicatoka
12-12-2002, 03:45 PM
I'm asking so be nice:

Isn't really the only thing necessary to UND on the same track as NDSU letter to the NCC and NCAA?

NDSU's provisional starts on (roughly) 09/01/03. I believe you have until late August to file to meet that date. Couldn't you do the reports/studies during the 03/04 season and go/no-go in April of '04? Isn't that what the 'provisional' year is for?

Next, I thought NDSU was scheduled and ready to go to present to the Big Sky. What happened? Was it on the NDSU end or the BSC end that it didn't happen? (I'd be willing to bet it wasn't on NDSU's end.)

BisonInTexas
12-12-2002, 04:32 PM
I'm asking so be nice:

Isn't really the only thing necessary to UND on the same track as NDSU letter to the NCC and NCAA?

NDSU's provisional starts on (roughly) 09/01/03. I believe you have until late August to file to meet that date. Couldn't you do the reports/studies during the 03/04 season and go/no-go in April of '04? Isn't that what the 'provisional' year is for?

Next, I thought NDSU was scheduled and ready to go to present to the Big Sky. What happened? Was it on the NDSU end or the BSC end that it didn't happen? (I'd be willing to bet it wasn't on NDSU's end.)

Come now, I am always nice to the less fortunate... *;D

I think the concept of the 'provisional' year kind of follows the logic that you stated. *However, the practical realities of moving up make the suggestion you stated a big risk. *

First of all, the NCC wouldn't be too receptive to "We are exploring moving up, but we'll get back to you next year after you have filled our schedule spots if we decide against it". *You *basically have to have done your homework before you take that step and better be pretty sure you can make a go of it regardless (or be prepared to be an independent in DII).
Not to mention the fact that the NCC might be gone (sounds kind of far fetched, but imagine the scenario if UND announces it is moving up, so UNO bolts for the MIAA, and the rest of the NCC merges with the NSIC).

Second, by using your provisional year in that manner, you basically are assuring yourself of being an independent at least when you begin DI play. *You need to have your ducks in a row when petitioning conferences and I would dare say that no conference is going to accept a new member at that late date - schedules have already been set.

Third, you can't throw a schedule together in April '04 for the '04-'05 season even as an independent. *This is perhaps the biggest hurdle for the provisional year.

Kind of makes you see that a two year plan to move up as NDSU did has some merit.

As far as the Big Sky presentation goes, scroll up to the second post in this thread. *I would agree with you that it wasn't NDSU's idea.

Craig

The_Sicatoka
12-12-2002, 06:39 PM
Back to the primary rub: Conference (a.k.a. schedule).

JBB
12-13-2002, 04:53 PM
Its interesting to see how you have finally settled on the conference issue as your last hope for failure on the part of NDSU and now probably SDSU. Its very clear you want und to make the move as well, but you will not say anything positive about D1AA football or other D1 sports other than hockey. If you ever do announce its going to be something forced on tyou and you will act reluctant.

Its becoming more and more obvious that NDSU and SDSU have made the right decisions. The conference issue is going to be solved very soon. Im sure this is the final piece of that puzzle. SDSU/NDSU is a great pair to welcome into any conference.

The_Sicatoka
12-13-2002, 06:14 PM
JBB, I've said it before. You showed me (the 2003 RMAC resolution to the NCAA DII board) that the dismantling of DII as we know it is on a faster track than any of us really realized.

Hey, IAA football is fine. I just still believe it's plain old nuts that UND, NDSU, Duke, and Texas would all be playing "at the same level" in basketball and baseball.

There's a larger problem at work here. DII is being stretched by the "Moorheads" of the world (not to pick on the Dragons).

Now DI is being stretched by schools that have budgets 10% of those of the existing major powers. (NDSU proposed max budget by CSL: < $8 million. Ohio State athletic budget last year: ~ $80 million.)

That's a bigger problem. What'll the NCAA do about it if anything at all? Ask me in 2004.

If UND made the move because the landscape around them shifted, I wouldn't have to like it, I'd just have to do it (meaning support UND, just like you support NDSU).

Bengal1
12-13-2002, 08:27 PM
Congrats to SDSU and NDSU. Being able to market yourselves as travel partners will be a big plus.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Big Sky did in fact delay the presentation by NDSU. I mentioned before that Doug Fullerton, the commish, wants the league to be at 10 teams. Idaho, a former Big Sky member, is struggling at I-A, and it's no secret the Big Sky would like them back (would bring back a lot of natural rivalries). Idaho made a request to join the Sun Belt Conference for all sports (stupid as it sounds), but they have to get approval from the State Board of Education. That was to happen this month, but the board delayed it until March. There's talk the Board might reject their claim, and it's no secret the Big West wants to become an all California league (USU is already going to the Sun Belt for all sports).

If the SBOE allows Idaho to join the Sun Belt, then I believe the Big Sky will seriously consider SDSU and NDSU. If they don't allow them to join, then I believe Idaho will be forced down to I-AA either by them or the NCAA (may happen either way anyway), and the Big Sky will wait for them (in 2 years or so).

This is just my theory -- who knows what could happen. Most fans I know are indifferent to inviting Idaho back -- they've been less than kind vocally since they left. Most believe, too, that SDSU and NDSU would be good additions (although the travel would be hard between these locations and Flagstaff, Sac, or Portland).

As far as money is involved, we (ISU) have a budget of 5-6 Million (probably similar to you), and we made a profit of $232,000 for 2002. Boise State in the WAC made less than a thousand dollars profit, while Idaho in the Big West (Sun Belt football) lost $165,000. So, it's definitely possible to break even and even make money at the I-AA level. I believe after 2004, we will have new additions to I-AA, and I doubt anything will happen as far as the other sports (March Madness, for example, is a HUGE moneymaker BECAUSE of the interest in the "little guys.").

Sorry for taking all the space, but we definitely look forward to adding you all to the schedules (hopefully on a yearly basis!).

SDSUFAN
12-14-2002, 03:28 PM
So Boise State is not doing so well financially, but is the bowl game that they will play in this month going to bring big $$$$$? I travelled through Boise and Idaho, but find it kind of unusal that Boise State seems to have gotten ahead of IU and ISU in terms of athletic programs, or am I being naive in making that observation.

It would be good to hear more about Idaho especially Idaho State. I drove through Pocatello when going to the U-Montana and SDSU game in 1993. I found this community to be very typical clean college town. I hope to follow the Jackrabbit there to a football game in the near future.

I see one your alums Mike English is joining Joe Glenn.
Mike Breske is a SDSU alum and was a finalist at SDSU in 1996, but when he is going to get $125,000 at Wyoming, I dont think he will want to come back to his Alma Mater for anything less than that.

SDSU has a good coach in Stieglemeier. Our football program has been on the lean side. I think in terms of dollars we are not where UND and NDSU are in terms of a budget. So going to D1AA, our football program will be getting a big financial shot I hope. Also to come are improvements to Coughlin-Alumi Staduim built in 1962 for about $300,000 hard earned dollars.

We have a dressing room adjacant to the staduim that houses only 65 guys build in 1962 with the staduim. Very adequate for the time since, Freshman were ineligible for playing and NCC squads were no more than 45 for home games. Replacing this is the number one priority. The visiting opponents have to walk back to Frost Arena at half time as thats where they dress. I think that has worked against us over the years as it gives coaching staffs time to think about their first half decisions and make adjustments in their mind during this slow walk. So when they get to Frost, they are often ready to talk to their guys at half time. Just my theory as we have had problems holding first half leads. ;D

tony
12-14-2002, 06:26 PM
Thanks for the insight Bengal1. Of course, SDSU and NDSU would love to be in the Big Sky but I can see how they'd want to wait until the end of the 2003-04 season to make a decision.

JBB
12-16-2002, 06:28 PM
Somebody might be able to tell me Im crazy, but I remember seeing Idaho on a list of D1 schools making a ton of money in DI. They were like #20 or something.They may be struggling in some ways, but they are piling up the cash and I dont think a voulntary move down is very likely.

The_Sicatoka
12-16-2002, 11:09 PM
JBB:

Is Idaho being caught in the DIA 15000 average FB attendance trap like some others?

JBB
12-17-2002, 03:15 PM
I dont know, but Idaho, NDSU, SDSU, UNC and Wyoming would sure make a nice looking core for a new conference.

Im not sure the attendance rule is going to be able to force anyone down. There has been talk about it on other boards and there is a lot of confusion as to when the measuring period begins, whos counting the crowds etc etc. Its going to be tough to enforce.

Slappy
12-18-2002, 02:13 PM
I dont know, but Idaho, NDSU, SDSU, UNC and Wyoming would sure make a nice looking core for a new conference.




Since Wyoming has a new coach making $500,000 a year, I don't think dropping to I-AA is anywhere close to an option. UNC will fit in somewhere. They wanted out of the NCC for quite some time because they didn't want to play the North Dakota schools. A new I-AA conference where they still have to travel to North Dakota probably isn't an option either.

JBB
12-21-2002, 01:28 PM
Today Forum article was interesting. Wanless didnt sound too positive. I wonder if the other West Coast schools feel differently?

Bisonguy
12-21-2002, 02:48 PM
Here's the article for those who don't want to look it up. I thought Wanless sounded less negative than he did a couple months back. I guess being vague and sitting on both sides of the fence are a trait of current and former UND ADs and presidents.

NDSU shooting for Big Sky
By Jeff Kolpack
jkolpack@forumcomm.com
The Forum - 12/21/2002
North Dakota State will seek membership into the Big Sky Conference.

School President Joseph Chapman said Friday NDSU and South Dakota State will send letters to the league saying they would like to apply. Chapman and SDSU President Peggy Miller finalized their schools’ intent to do it together in a Friday morning conference call.

In response, Montana State President Geoffrey Gamble said he’s convening a meeting of the Big Sky Council of Presidents in January to discuss the issue. An exact date has yet to be finalized.

Gamble said prospective membership by NDSU and SDSU must be taken in two steps, the first being general discussion of expansion.

“Depending on that conversation, the next step would be to look at the requests of North Dakota State and South Dakota State,” Gamble said.

NDSU’s attraction to the Big Sky is no surprise. Since the school began its Division I exploration in the fall of 2001, the league has been discussed as NDSU’s potential first choice.

The trigger was SDSU, which received Division I approval from its Board of Regents last week.

Miller said SDSU also is talking to the Mid-Continent Conference. But she said the Big Sky is the only league the school has addressed in a formally-written letter.

“You can’t be sure if they’re serious about you,” she said. “But they’re serious about looking at the structure of their conference and we think that’s heartening. I think we can offer them some good things. Let’s hope.”

Chapman and Miller said NDSU and SDSU present the Big Sky similar land-grant portfolios to current league members Montana State, University of Montana and Idaho State.

“They are just excellent matches for NDSU and SDSU,” Chapman said.

Other Big Sky members Portland State, Northern Arizona, Weber State (Utah), California State University Sacramento and Eastern Washington are regionally-based public universities.

Gamble said he expects travel and scheduling to be the two major obstacles for NDSU and SDSU.

“The equation changes a little bit with partner institutions,” Gamble said. “It makes travel more reasonable. It will be interesting to see how that conversation goes. We’ll have to walk our way through those.”

Sacramento State athletic director Terry Wanless said flying from Sacramento to Fargo is a minimum 6- to 7-hour operation.

“And that’s pretty difficult,” Wanless said. “Geography is one of the major issues. That’s the most difficult thing the Big Sky has to look at for consideration of any schools in the Midwest.”

Wanless, a former University of North Dakota athletic director, said it’s not easy for him to oppose bringing NDSU and SDSU on board.

“I have a great personal stake in this in a roundabout way,” he said. “But at the same point, my first responsibility is to this institution. And for the betterment of our program, putting them on the schedule doesn’t make sense.”

Gamble said he does not have a firm grasp on which schools, if any, in the Big Sky would be in favor of adding NDSU and SDSU.

“I think it’s possible,” he said. “But, having said that, there are seven other presidents who have to make a decision.”

Miller echoed that thought, saying, “It’s their conference. We’re going to come in as an applicant and hope to make a case that will make them believe they are better with us.”