The New Big Sky Conference

[bincitysioux]

I must admit I'm a bit bummed and surprised at all the apparent negativity about North Dakota joining the Big Sky. I admit the geography is troublesome, but aside from that I think North Dakota brings alot to the Big Sky table. At the very least, Sac St. fans should be pleased that we've taken their place as the geographic bastard of the league.

North Dakota brings alot of past success and tradition to the conference in football and men's & women's basketball, and has an emerging volleyball program.

They will probably have the largest and most loyal fanbase in the conference save for Montana and perhaps Montana St. Football attendance was at an all-time high in 2008. I am optimistic that as we enter the Big Sky in 2012 interest and attendance will rise quickly to the point where our home stadium will be routinely full within the first few years of our membership. And our fans probably travel as well or better than any current Big Sky school other than Montana for road games, and there are lots UND alums in Colorado, California, Arizona, and Washington.

While we don't bring a large media market to the league, we do bring a large media presence. By adding North Dakota, it means the Big Sky will likely gain 3 or more annual football games, 5-6 men's basketball games, and 5-6 women's basketball games that will be broadcast on national television.

North Dakota will have some of the best facilities in the conference, that will only get better.

Academically, North Dakota is major research university that would be at the top of the conference, UC Davis not withstanding as an affiliate member. Given the many reports that this was apparently an important factor to Montana and Montana St. and their support of our inclusion, it should help to stabilize the "core" of the conference, if you consider the 4 remaining charter members the "core".

Mostly, I feel that North Dakota brings a state school that has the backing of its entire state. It is not a commuter school in a large metro with poor fan support. It is not a former community school that is experiencing tremendous growth due to a population boom. It is a 100+ year old traditonal public university that serves a large region that includes North Dakota and neighboring Minnesota. All of this is a large reason that the University has a long and storied tradition of success in all of our major sports that I fully expect to continue on into the coming decades as a member of the Big Sky.

As far as the logistics of a 13 team football league, there are obvious issues there, but there are other leagues that play unbalanced schedules and seem to make it work. The 11 team basketball league is no more awkward than the 9 team one that the Big Sky has been operating at for the past 6 years. The league doesn't use travel partners now, so bringing in UND is not eliminating them.

[JBB]

Nice presentation.

Mostly, I feel that North Dakota brings a state school that has the backing of its entire state. It is not a commuter school in a large metro with poor fan support.

Like many of the other schools in the Big Sky?

A "State School" is always a good addition. Congratulations to the Big Sky for its astute business acumen in selecting this State School.

Backing of the entire state might be a little strong, but good backing within the State is certainly an acceptable boast.

UND brings a couple other things too:

1) a 3-8 football team on a 4 year slide
2) basketball teams that are not competitive
3) hockey

It might be possible for UND to build competitive programs, that depends on the commitment and available finances. EWU has done it, so why not UND?

UND brings excellent media. None better and a huge plus for the Big Sky.

The BSC has Slo Stang. In a minute or two he will be in here railing on me and ruining any open discussion. I hope not. Bincity has put together a very nice presentation. Its not without rebuttal and worthy of conversation.

My question is this: All the schools in the Big Sky are going to suffer increased expenses by having UND on their conference schedules. This is a date they could have used to schedule more efficiently OOC. How does UND make that up to them? I dont think a few TV games on the UND deal is going to do it.

[SuperHornet]

1. Given the presence of NAU, we were never the "geographical bastards" of the Big Sky. And even if we were, the acquisition of UCD and CP would have eliminated that, anyway.

2. UND as a "major research university?" I highly doubt that they compare with Montana, Davis, and Poly in that regard.

3. UND has the backing of the "entire state?" I'm sure that's news to NDSU fans that hate UND's guts.

What a laugh riot.

[cats2506]

1. Given the presence of NAU, we were never the "geographical bastards" of the Big Sky. And even if we were, the acquisition of UCD and CP would have eliminated that, anyway.

2. UND as a "major research university?" I highly doubt that they compare with Montana, Davis, and Poly in that regard.

3. UND has the backing of the "entire state?" I'm sure that's news to NDSU fans that hate UND's guts.

What a laugh riot.

speaking of a laughing riot, you are aware the um is a liberal arts school with very little research. MSU has over twice as much in research grants

[EWURanger]

I must admit I'm a bit bummed and surprised at all the apparent negativity about North Dakota joining the Big Sky. I admit the geography is troublesome, but aside from that I think North Dakota brings alot to the Big Sky table. At the very least, Sac St. fans should be pleased that we've taken their place as the geographic bastard of the league.

North Dakota brings alot of past success and tradition to the conference in football and men's & women's basketball, and has an emerging volleyball program.

They will probably have the largest and most loyal fanbase in the conference save for Montana and perhaps Montana St. Football attendance was at an all-time high in 2008. I am optimistic that as we enter the Big Sky in 2012 interest and attendance will rise quickly to the point where our home stadium will be routinely full within the first few years of our membership. And our fans probably travel as well or better than any current Big Sky school other than Montana for road games, and there are lots UND alums in Colorado, California, Arizona, and Washington.

While we don't bring a large media market to the league, we do bring a large media presence. By adding North Dakota, it means the Big Sky will likely gain 3 or more annual football games, 5-6 men's basketball games, and 5-6 women's basketball games that will be broadcast on national television.

North Dakota will have some of the best facilities in the conference, that will only get better.

Academically, North Dakota is major research university that would be at the top of the conference, UC Davis not withstanding as an affiliate member. Given the many reports that this was apparently an important factor to Montana and Montana St. and their support of our inclusion, it should help to stabilize the "core" of the conference, if you consider the 4 remaining charter members the "core".

Mostly, I feel that North Dakota brings a state school that has the backing of its entire state. It is not a commuter school in a large metro with poor fan support. It is not a former community school that is experiencing tremendous growth due to a population boom. It is a 100+ year old traditonal public university that serves a large region that includes North Dakota and neighboring Minnesota. All of this is a large reason that the University has a long and storied tradition of success in all of our major sports that I fully expect to continue on into the coming decades as a member of the Big Sky.

As far as the logistics of a 13 team football league, there are obvious issues there, but there are other leagues that play unbalanced schedules and seem to make it work. The 11 team basketball league is no more awkward than the 9 team one that the Big Sky has been operating at for the past 6 years. The league doesn't use travel partners now, so bringing in UND is not eliminating them.

It's just the travel thing. We'll have to see how it works out. Not doubting anything you've mentioned and I'm sure UND is a fine institution, but it's the travel costs everyone has a problem with.

[bincitysioux]

1. Given the presence of NAU, we were never the "geographical bastards" of the Big Sky. And even if we were, the acquisition of UCD and CP would have eliminated that, anyway..

It's a 9 hour drive for either Sacramento or Flagstaff to each schools closest conference opponent. North Dakota will be 11 hours from Bozeman. Since NAU now has SUU in relative proximity, I guess that means North Dakota and Sac will be nearly equal geographic bastards..............

I'm takin' basketball and olympic sports here, not just football.

2. UND as a "major research university?" I highly doubt that they compare with Montana, Davis, and Poly in that regard.

I suppose "major" is a discretionary word. Davis is in a league of it's own, amongst MIT, Minnesota, Harvard, Yale, etc.........after that amongst Big Sky members, it would go: Montana St., North Dakota, Montana..................

3. UND has the backing of the "entire state?" I'm sure that's news to NDSU fans that hate UND's guts.

"Backing of the entire state" doen't necessarily mean we have the most fans or most of the fans. We may or we may not. It means what I say: UND has the backing of the entire state of North Dakota..........financially, academically, athletically,...................NDSU gets the same.

Does Sacramento St. even get the backing of the city in which it is located?

[AZGrizFan]

1. Given the presence of NAU, we were never the "geographical bastards" of the Big Sky. And even if we were, the acquisition of UCD and CP would have eliminated that, anyway..

It's a 9 hour drive for either Sacramento or Flagstaff to each schools closest conference opponent. North Dakota will be 11 hours from Bozeman. Since NAU now has SUU in relative proximity, I guess that means North Dakota and Sac will be nearly equal geographic bastards..............

I'm takin' basketball and olympic sports here, not just football.

2. UND as a "major research university?" I highly doubt that they compare with Montana, Davis, and Poly in that regard.

I suppose "major" is a discretionary word. Davis is in a league of it's own, amongst MIT, Minnesota, Harvard, Yale, etc.........after that amongst Big Sky members, it would go: Montana St., North Dakota, Montana..................

3. UND has the backing of the "entire state?" I'm sure that's news to NDSU fans that hate UND's guts.

"Backing of the entire state" doen't necessarily mean we have the most fans or most of the fans. We may or we may not. It means what I say: UND has the backing of the entire state of North Dakota..........financially, academically, athletically,...................NDSU gets the same.

Does Sacramento St. even get the backing of the city in which it is located?

Um....isn't UC-Davis located across the fricking bridge from Sac State?

[SloStang]

JBB, I agree with you that UND may not be the best fit in the Big Sky because of their remote location, but I think they bring a lot to the conference in alot of the areas bincity pointed out and will be a top FCS program in time. I have never said anything but good things about the MVFC and even said that it was a good fit for all of the Dakota schools including UND. What I have said is I would rather be UND with all their teams in the conference (except Hockey) than to be in the MVFC/Summit. I think the Big Sky Conference is a bigger name conference (who the hell is IUPUI, IUFW and Centenary?) and it builds better rivalries with all your teams in one conference.

[JBB]

I really couldnt care less where you might want to be. Your post is good. It was, well relevant without insulting me. I can buy into that.

Fact is The Big Sky has UND for better or worse. Good luck.

Those Summit schools are some major universities training doctors. lawyers, businessmen and scientists. Those campuses are huge. Not konwing is a fault of yours. Look them up.

[SDHornet]

Those Summit schools are some major universities training doctors. lawyers, businessmen and scientists. Those campuses are huge. Not konwing is a fault of yours. Look them up.

As relevant as they are in the academic world, I think Slo was making the point that no one heard of them/knows where they are in the athletic world. Obviously UND feels that the BSC is a better athletic fit for them as they decided to accept a full membership invitation.

[SDHornet]

It's a 9 hour drive for either Sacramento or Flagstaff to each schools closest conference opponent. North Dakota will be 11 hours from Bozeman. Since NAU now has SUU in relative proximity, I guess that means North Dakota and Sac will be nearly equal geographic bastards..............

I'm takin' basketball and olympic sports here, not just football.

I assume both fans and teams fly pretty much everywhere in the large BSC footprint. I would think Sac would be an easier/cheaper place to get to than some of the others. I don't know if teams can fly direct into Flagstaff, and if they can, would it be cheaper than flying into Phoenix and driving to Flagstaff? Same issue with SUU and UND. Can one fly direct into Grand Forks in a cost efficient manner? Or is it cheaper to fly into Fargo and bus to GF? Can one fly into Cedar City in a cost efficient manner or is it cheaper to fly into Vegas or SLC then bus it? Cal Poly has a similar dilemma but at least that travel concern will only come up every other year at most. The AD's at the current BSC schools will have to answer these questions but more importantly find a way to fund these trips.

"Backing of the entire state" doen't necessarily mean we have the most fans or most of the fans. We may or we may not. It means what I say: UND has the backing of the entire state of North Dakota..........financially, academically, athletically,...................NDSU gets the same.

Does Sacramento St. even get the backing of the city in which it is located?

Does any team outside of Missoula have significant backing from its home city/town?

I hate to answer your posts with more questions but there are plenty more that comes with the recent BSC expansion.

[bojeta]

One problem faced by Cal Poly and probably by others is when the game schedule conflicts with quarterly terms. This year, the first home game was played a week before students arrived on campus. The following week, the Montana game sold out. The next home game wasn't until SIX WEEKS later!! This has a great impact on a school like Poly where the town's population nearly doubles when a school term begins. I certainly don't understand all the challenges facing the marketing team for the Athletic Director, compounded by scheduling difficulties, so I'm not gonna throw out any uninformed solutions. Just something else for everyone here to consider. I know that when the students arrive, Poly's stadium is near or at capacity every game except when a home game is scheduled on Halloween when many students are too hammered to make it to the game. I also know that Sac State and Davis bring big crowds. Once in the same conference, the expanded stadium which will hold approx 23,000 will fill for these games as well as the Montana game which sells out every time.

Nice presentation Ranger. Your point is made and taken.

Both are good conferences. I was never arguing which conference was better, that was Mr. Slo Stang...s

[/quote]

[EWURanger]

One problem faced by Cal Poly and probably by others is when the game schedule conflicts with quarterly terms. This year, the first home game was played a week before students arrived on campus.

EWU is on the quarter system and has this same situation. We usually play at least one home game before classes start, which is usually in mid to late September. This year that game was the Montana game, so it drew well anyways, but in other years attendance suffers when you have one or more games before the dorms are open, etc.

The even wackier thing about being on the quarter system is when your team makes it to the playoffs. I believe classes were out prior to our first playoff game this year, and obviously attendance really suffered because of it for the first two games. Sucks, but there doesn't seem to be many work-arounds. In someplace like Washington where the weather is pretty bad in the winter, kids that go home for the break aren't very likely to make it back for a playoff game prior to classes starting back up.

[cats2506]

Does any team outside of Missoula have significant backing from its home city/town?

Yes, MSU

[Herky]

1. Given the presence of NAU, we were never the "geographical bastards" of the Big Sky. And even if we were, the acquisition of UCD and CP would have eliminated that, anyway.

2. UND as a "major research university?" I highly doubt that they compare with Montana, Davis, and Poly in that regard.

3. UND has the backing of the "entire state?" I'm sure that's news to NDSU fans that hate UND's guts.

What a laugh riot.

Every time I read one of your posts, the term TOOL comes to mind.

UND, at least academically, will be one of the best institutions in the BSC. MSU just attained Tier I (Research) status and UM has never had it, so there really is no comparison (academically). And I'm not slamming either of those institutions, just stating fact, they're both fine academic universities.

UND has a bigger backing than most other schools in the BSC, probably even better than Sac State, and definitely better backing than EWU (National Champs!), ISU, UNC, WSU, and PSU.

[native]

I must admit I'm a bit bummed and surprised at all the apparent negativity about North Dakota joining the Big Sky. I admit the geography is troublesome, but aside from that I think North Dakota brings alot to the Big Sky table. At the very least, Sac St. fans should be pleased that we've taken their place as the geographic bastard of the league. ....

Hey, welcome aboard! Glad to have you! The only part I am bummed about is that North Dakota has been forced to change the name of your mascot even though the tribes favored the old one!

[CPAlum]

Well I guess as the new kids we don't have quite as much to say on this but I think UND is a great add to the BSC. I also think much of what is being said above is horse hsit.

Sac State as of now is easily one of the more central teams in the conference. Easy airport access, across the street from Davis and an easy drive from Poly.

UND has good facilities and great fans, with all the shifting/realignment crap going on these days the BSC looks to be in great shape. The WAC would pay to have these problems.

[kemajic]

speaking of a laughing riot, you are aware the um is a liberal arts school with very little research. MSU has over twice as much in research grants

That is a BS statement. UM has endured the reign of a President who was a history professor who built his legacy around new buildings, needed or not, and attention to research grants suffered. By intention, the new President is a chemist with a key measureable to reverse that trend. The sciences at UM are every bit the equal, if not superior to MSU. It is the Engineering school at MSU that inflates the grant total at MSU and labeling those "research" is being quite generous.

[Wildcat Ryan]

The WAC would pay to have these problems.

[bojeta]

I must admit I'm a bit bummed and surprised at all the apparent negativity about North Dakota joining the Big Sky. I admit the geography is troublesome, but aside from that I think North Dakota brings alot to the Big Sky table. At the very least, Sac St. fans should be pleased that we've taken their place as the geographic bastard of the league. ....

Hey, welcome aboard! Glad to have you! The only part I am bummed about is that North Dakota has been forced to change the name of your mascot even though the tribes favored the old one!

I've watched UND play enough times now to appreciate their abilities and I for one like the geographic diversity. Let's face it, the West is more sparsely populated in all regards than the East Coast. By broadening our region, we reach parity with the other conferences. It's not that they've ever been inherently better on the East Coast, they've just had numbers on their side. The reality is that, proportionally, the West has been amazingly strong. The new Big Sky Conf. has got some folks puckering on the backside. lol It's only gonna get stronger unless a bunch of our teams bolt for the WAC in few years.

[BearIt]

UND, at least academically, will be one of the best institutions in the BSC. MSU just attained Tier I (Research) status and UM has never had it, so there really is no comparison (academically). And I'm not slamming either of those institutions, just stating fact, they're both fine academic universities.

Better check again. UM is also Tier I.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandrevie ... s-rankings

[JBB]

Survival trumps all else, including common sense.

UND offered the same assets to any conference that may have been considering them. If they are a "good add" to the BSC they are a "good add" to the Southland, Summit and MVFC. The problem is not their assets, the problem is what is to cost to the conference members of all the negatives to allow them in.

The Summit had interest. Traditionally they have a history of turnover. A stable membership is something they want and need. UND had a reasonable travel location, although not the best but that was the only negative for them. For UND they didn't have football.

The MVFC had no interest. Membership stable why would they add a travel burden?

The BSC was facing uncertainty. The conference itself now had realistic scenarios in front of it the threatened its survival as a vibrant profitable association. For those presidents the added cost of UND was a hedge, with USD it even made some sense if you dont mind a conference spread out over half the USA. At least there was some semblance of order for some sports with a second stop on their 3,000 mile journey.

For UND anything that gave all their sports a home was a good deal. They would have joined a Mexican conference, or Canadian conference if those problems were solved.

UND has a lot of positive and a lot of negatives. The nature of the organization is probably the biggest negative. The nickname fight has now resurfaced in State politics and if the legislators pushing the new bill are successful there are going to be major changes in the structure of the SBoHE and certainly on-going animosity with the NCAA. These are problems the BSC may not want any part of and certainly there will be no support from the NCAA institutions if that organization is bullied.

For my part I am glad they are in the BSC. Obviously a peer institution with at least 1 school in the BSC, a travel budget that will cost them millions and no way to support it except diversion of funds from other productive areas. They were disruptive members of the NCC and likely the BSC as well. Welcome to the BSC, Good Luck and Goodbye.

[SuperHornet]

1. Given the presence of NAU, we were never the "geographical bastards" of the Big Sky. And even if we were, the acquisition of UCD and CP would have eliminated that, anyway.

2. UND as a "major research university?" I highly doubt that they compare with Montana, Davis, and Poly in that regard.

3. UND has the backing of the "entire state?" I'm sure that's news to NDSU fans that hate UND's guts.

What a laugh riot.

Every time I read one of your posts, the term TOOL comes to mind.

UND, at least academically, will be one of the best institutions in the BSC. MSU just attained Tier I (Research) status and UM has never had it, so there really is no comparison (academically). And I'm not slamming either of those institutions, just stating fact, they're both fine academic universities.

UND has a bigger backing than most other schools in the BSC, probably even better than Sac State, and definitely better backing than EWU (National Champs!), ISU, UNC, WSU, and PSU.

"Tool" implies being used. Being used implies an user.

Who the cr@p is using me? I may have some crazy opinions, but I'm NOBODY's tool.

You must be exaggerating about "every" time. Some of the most respected folk on this board have praised my posts at times, even if it is rather rare. Where have you been at those times? Or do you just have a short memory?

[TheHerd]

Those Summit schools are some major universities training doctors. lawyers, businessmen and scientists. Those campuses are huge. Not konwing is a fault of yours. Look them up.

As relevant as they are in the academic world, I think Slo was making the point that no one heard of them/knows where they are in the athletic world. Obviously UND feels that the BSC is a better athletic fit for them as they decided to accept a full membership invitation.

UND didn't choose the BSC. That would imply they actually had another option. Bottom line is is that the BSC was there only choice and while it is a good conference I am sure the majority if not all UND fans would rather be in the MVFC and Summit for basketball.....it just makes more sense all the way around. UND got really lucky when the BSC came a calling, cuz it doesn't sound like the MVFC wanted them, only USD. I do believe they would have gotten into the Summit for all other sports if they would have just waited a little bit, but the football program would have been screwed with no conference, so they had to do the BSC.

[ArmyOfDarkness]

Sooooooo, I have gone through every page of this thread and have only one serious question. First though, welcome to the BSC UND, CP, SUU, and Cal Davis (for the umpteenth time ). Anyways, my question....










When will this BSC envy stop for NDSU, and they get the offer? Oh, and one more question. If NDSU was in the BSC would it become a stronger conf than the mighty MVFC?