Summit Expansion?

[tony]

NorthernBison, I'd like to be the first to welcome you back to Earth - you've obviously been on a different planet for the past seven years.

Yeah, I wouldn't put the popcorn away yet. There's the June vote. If that passes, it may or may not be ruled unconstitutional. And that's in no way certain. Of course, if the ballot deal doesn't pass, that's definitely a nail in the nickname's coffin.

No matter what happens this summer, isn't there still a constitutional amendment vote in November?

[Bison bison]

You bet your a##.

[roadwarrior]

No matter what happens this summer, isn't there still a constitutional amendment vote in November?

Those petitions haven't been submitted yet.

[zooropa]

I think the Big Sky was trying to be proactive in positioning themselves (some can call it panic too).

The second thing they were looking at was competing against "Eastern Bias" and eliminating the GWFC from playoff contention by absorbing them. The reality was going to remain that Western Football was unlikely to get more than 3 or possibly 4 bids even with a 20 team bracket. Maybe Fullerton was thinking of killing two birds with one stone by inviting Poly, Davis, and UND and making them earn a spot if they were worthy.

And my response to that line of thinking (theirs, not yours), is that the Montanas to FBS thing wasn't a startling or novel idea. The conf. should have had a backup plan in place, but should not have, IMO, acted on it, unless the contingency arose. But that's just me.

--

I think the idea of eliminating the GWFC makes a certain amount of sense as a rationalization--as long as you're only talking about prestige.

In economic terms, the FCS playoffs aren't revenue generators for the conference or, indeed, for some of the schools.

Therefore, expanding in order to enhance the playoff profile and combat 'east coast bias' seems to offer no tangible benefits, with some noticeable drawbacks in terms of conference stability.

[IndyBison]

I think you are correct about Oakland being the only Summit program attractive to other conferences. That says quite a bit about the League. I also believe that NDSU is WAY down the list of attractive programs and there is no way our conference mates require a "package deal" if they happen to get an invite somewhere. We might as well get used to the Summit for the long haul. That's not totally bad. We have a pretty good run of success across the sports and should be top dog in most for a long time.

Other than geography I think NDSU is attractive for any conference outside the BCS conferences. Stable administration. Strong traditions. Excellent alumni support. The geography issue though is big. Unless a conference is willing to significantly expand its footprint or we are packaged with other Dakota schools, it could be a big enough hurdle. Being in Fargo though is an advantage we have over the SD schools. Commercial flights options do exist. MVFC officials have to pay for their own transportation and getting to Fargo is much easier than getting to Brookings or Vermillion. It's not cheap though. Flight and hotel often take up most of their game checks.

[NorthernBison]

Other than geography I think NDSU is attractive for any conference outside the BCS conferences. Stable administration. Strong traditions. Excellent alumni support. The geography issue though is big. Unless a conference is willing to significantly expand its footprint or we are packaged with other Dakota schools, it could be a big enough hurdle. Being in Fargo though is an advantage we have over the SD schools. Commercial flights options do exist. MVFC officials have to pay for their own transportation and getting to Fargo is much easier than getting to Brookings or Vermillion. It's not cheap though. Flight and hotel often take up most of their game checks.

I get that but, even our own attitudes indicate that geography tends to be way more important than stable administration, committed fanbase, etc. Look at the horrible support some of our conference mates get. The MVFC didn't want us very bad but they were fine with SDSU. (guess which football program has ALL the non-geographical advantages in that comparison). Our location is a very big negative and we really can't do much about it.

As for the Nickname thing at UND, I remain convinced that control will be returned to the SBoHE and the Administration soon. Both appear to be tired of the issue and committed to retirement. I doubt if the Amendment people can get 28,000 signatures. They barely made it to the lesser level for this measure.

Dartmouth still seethes with reminders of their nickname fight 30 years after it was retired. So, I still expect to be hearing about it from UND fans for my lifetime. I just don't expect the supporters to do much more than bark at the end of their chain once it is retired. That's what I mean by "settled".

[Gully]

I get that but, even our own attitudes indicate that geography tends to be way more important than stable administration, committed fanbase, etc. Look at the horrible support some of our conference mates get. The MVFC didn't want us very bad but they were fine with SDSU. (guess which football program has ALL the non-geographical advantages in that comparison). Our location is a very big negative and we really can't do much about it.

As for the Nickname thing at UND, I remain convinced that control will be returned to the SBoHE and the Administration soon. Both appear to be tired of the issue and committed to retirement. I doubt if the Amendment people can get 28,000 signatures. They barely made it to the lesser level for this measure.

Dartmouth still seethes with reminders of their nickname fight 30 years after it was retired. So, I still expect to be hearing about it from UND fans for my lifetime. I just don't expect the supporters to do much more than bark at the end of their chain once it is retired. That's what I mean by "settled".

Maybe I misunderstood your post but are you saying the MVFC wanted SDSU more than NDSU because of their geogrphic location? If so, that really doesn't make any sense to me. How is Brookings a geographical advantage compared to Fargo? Sorry if I completely read your post wrong.

[NorthernBison]

Maybe I misunderstood your post but are you saying the MVFC wanted SDSU more than NDSU because of their geogrphic location? If so, that really doesn't make any sense to me. How is Brookings a geographical advantage compared to Fargo? Sorry if I completely read your post wrong.

The story we have heard is that the MVFC initially wanted SDSU and was reluctant about adding NDSU. The story is that SDSU insisted on a "package deal". To date, nobody has refuted that so I'm assuming it is the case.

What I get from that is that the MVFC didn't give a rip about tradition, fan support, budget, history etc. If they did, NDSU would be the first choice every time over SDSU. I don't know if geography entered into the decision but something certainly did.

[NDSUstudent]

Actually some of the resistance to NDSU had a lot to do with our support, traditions and facilities. A few schools(especially Missouri State) were concerned about adding another strong program to an already strong conference.

[zooropa]

Maybe I misunderstood your post but are you saying the MVFC wanted SDSU more than NDSU because of their geogrphic location? If so, that really doesn't make any sense to me. How is Brookings a geographical advantage compared to Fargo? Sorry if I completely read your post wrong.

Two advantages:

The extra distance between Brookings and Fargo would turn a couple bus trips into plane flights (Illinois State and WIU, I would think).

The distance between Sioux Falls and Fargo is a significant in terms of charter flight costs. All the MVFC teams fly charter--you have to with rosters of that size--and charters are pretty much seat/mile based.

Also, don't be in a rush to play up the differences between SDSU & NDSU in NDSU's favor. These two schools are more or less interchangeable once you reach a certain distance from the Dakotas.