Summit Expansion?

[The_Sicatoka]

Folks, just because a conference sponsors a sport doesn't mean each member must: see Summit men's soccer.

The deeper issue is as taper previously spelled it out: Viability and Survivability of the Summit League.

If the Summit pulled in the NCHC as "Summit Hockey" it would:
- begin to compensate for the SL losing three men's soccer affiliates, it's now at minimum six teams
- add a men's sport to the Summit to get about minimum sponsored
- help protect should WIU or ORU bolt and put baseball or soccer playing members under minimums
- consolidate conference administrative costs for UND, DU, Omaha, and presumably StT, from each paying for two commissioners to just one
- further solidify the Summit* as an all-sport Division I conference

Josh Fenton is no fool. He knows the NCHC and now the Summit. If he's pondering this it's for good reasons (like above, or maybe even better media deals).

*Could we rebrand the whole works to something more inspiring?

[The_Sicatoka]

You know what I meant

Look at the new landscape of the portal and NIL in D1 athletics

Look at the demographic trends for higher ed in the upper Midwest, and juxtapose that against the Dakota higher ed models, the MN system, and the collective population of the states

What you guys are throwing around is basically the old D2 gang, at the D1 level, in a time of rapid change that is not in our favor on many fronts

I don’t believe in Bison fatigue, but there is a palpable perception of moving backwards in all this talk

Whether or not that’s something people want appears to be the question

The college sports landscape is rapidly becoming haves and have nots.
I believe that actual cut line will be much higher than we'd guess now, like top 60-70 then "else".

Schools like WasSu and OrSU are being left behind as afterthoughts. That's a massive tell.

[abc123]

NDSU is also the only Dakota school that is R1, if that matters to anyone. Obviously, it matters to me

The reason that it isn't a bigger deal is because the large majority of the funds aren't from competitive grants, which is the metric that is most looked at, but instead propped up by state mandated funding.
Given the amount that is handed to NDSU on a silver platter, it is even more perplexing that they fell out of that category to begin with. Still waiting to see actual plans on budget cuts and see what effects that has.

[WhoRepsTheLurker]

The reason that it isn't a bigger deal is because the large majority of the funds aren't from competitive grants, which is the metric that is most looked at, but instead propped up by state mandated funding.
Given the amount that is handed to NDSU on a silver platter, it is even more perplexing that they fell out of that category to begin with. Still waiting to see actual plans on budget cuts and see what effects that has.

I don't believe you are correct fwiw
And how rich coming from a UND guy who's med school gets its own special pot of $$$ set aside on multiple fronts
Too funny

You're the school with the 'silver platter'

[abc123]

I don't believe you are correct fwiw

The data on competitive vs. non-competitive grants is all publicly available. Feel free to peruse by yourself. Historically, the difference in total research funding/spending between NDSU and UND is within the difference between what is received from mandated funding sources that NDSU receives as the land-grant institution in the state.
Feel free to check with anyone at Nebraska if there is a difference in how the funding sources are viewed. It was one of the factors (but not the only one) in why they lost their AAU status.

[WhoRepsTheLurker]

The data on competitive vs. non-competitive grants is all publicly available. Feel free to peruse by yourself. Historically, the difference in total research funding/spending between NDSU and UND is within the difference between what is received from mandated funding sources that NDSU receives as the land-grant institution in the state.
Feel free to check with anyone at Nebraska if there is a difference in how the funding sources are viewed. It was one of the factors (but not the only one) in why they lost their AAU status.

Oh I've perused those numbers a plenty, and what I see is that NDSU earned its R1 status, in spite of massive cuts in state support

[BigLakeBison]

Hockey is a flippin expensive sport and it doesn't do much to elevate the athletic program being a niche sport with similar national appeal to FCS football. Men's basketball is where there's opportunity to elevate the athletic department and money spent starting a hockey program would be much better spent investing in the men's basketball program.

Yes sir. It would take minimum $2 million annually to fund a hockey program and likely more if we have to add Women's Hockey to meet Title 9. If NDSU would increase the basketball budgets by that same amount and invested in the correct ways, it would likely do wonders for improving our national profile in basketball.

[taper]

Yes sir. It would take minimum $2 million annually to fund a hockey program and likely more if we have to add Women's Hockey to meet Title 9. If NDSU would increase the basketball budgets by that same amount and invested in the correct ways, it would likely do wonders for improving our national profile in basketball.

Completely agree.

Is anyone actually saying NDSU should add hockey? Just because the Summit might sponsor it doesn't mean we will.

[GCWaters]

The reason that it isn't a bigger deal is because the large majority of the funds aren't from competitive grants, which is the metric that is most looked at, but instead propped up by state mandated funding.
Given the amount that is handed to NDSU on a silver platter, it is even more perplexing that they fell out of that category to begin with. Still waiting to see actual plans on budget cuts and see what effects that has.

I don't think it is the "metric most looked at"....Carnegie looks at STEM and non-Stem research expenditures, and I don't think they care about the source...they also look at number of research staff and number of doctorates in four different areas. So only two of the seven metrics index research spending....

[abc123]

Oh I've perused those numbers a plenty, and what I see is that NDSU earned its R1 status, in spite of massive cuts in state support

That's what happens when your enrollment tanks and the President doesn't have a real great vision of the future higher education.
But that is also a completely separate discussion than where and how NDSU gets a very significant portion of its research funding.

I don't think it is the "metric most looked at"....Carnegie looks at STEM and non-Stem research expenditures, and I don't think they care about the source...they also look at number of research staff and number of doctorates in four different areas. So only two of the seven metrics index research spending....

Depending on the group and how they are looking at things, I would agree there are other very important metrics including those that you mentioned.