NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 5:45 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 111 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:40 pm 
The only reason for that support is the tradition of winning!!

People don't just go "OMG SALLY! WE HAVE TO GO SUPPORT OUR STATE'S FLAGSHIP!!!!".

No no no, people go to games because they want to see their team ******win******.

Give it 10 years. Louisville and SM will be the flagships in their states.


BTW, USM is a doctoral extensive, so their academics are the same as Miss. and Miss. State.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:11 pm 

Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 12.216.234.87

Frozen Tundra
Re: Big Sky Expansion Thread & Poll Comments
« Reply #102 on 12/10/2004 at 6:18pm »
[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]




Quote:
The only reason for that support is the tradition of winning!!

People don't just go "OMG SALLY! WE HAVE TO GO SUPPORT OUR STATE'S FLAGSHIP!!!!".

No no no, people go to games because they want to see their team ******win******.

Give it 10 years. Louisville and SM will be the flagships in their states.


BTW, USM is a doctoral extensive, so their academics are the same as Miss. and Miss. State.


In order for that to happen, both Louisville and USM would have to expand their stadiums and have it be justified to expend scarce and scant financial resources to do so, meaning, they would have to know that those fans would show up.

UK fans are not all of a sudden going to go, "Hey, lets stop being UK fans and be Louisville fans". College football fans are fairly fair-weather, even if their team loses. Especially if they are allumni. UK has more allumni than U Louisville, because its been a bigger U longer than Louisville. USM was just made a university within the last 40 years. Both Ole Miss and MSU have been universities for 1.5 centuries or more and despite having slightly less enrollment to USM, they both probably have way more allumni than USM each.

If more people move to Kentucky and Mississippi, which isn't a lot as the population of those two states are most likely growing due to birth rates exceeding death rates -- net natural increase being the greatest contributor to their respective population growth, they are going to follow either the team that has the most household name, for Kentucky that would be UK, and for Mississippi, that would be Ole Miss and MSU over USM. But these are not states that are recieving rapid amounts of new people moving in, migrating to those states. The population growth is due to the birth rate exceeding the death rate. Which means that if their parents were UK fans, they are going to be UK fans, and there are more UK fans than Louisville fans and people are not going to convert their allegiances. Same with Mississippi, children of Ole Miss and MSU fans are most likely going to be fans of Ole Miss and MSU and not USM. Both USM and Louisville have been consistent enough in having winning seasons, and their growth in the fans hasn't changed much over the last 7 years or so, except when Louisville built Papa Johns stadium, maybe. Papa Johns Stadium of 42K is still quite a ways from the 65K found at UK's stadium in Lexington.

Btw, you don't change flagships based how a team does on the football field. The term "Flagship" relates to the role of the academic instution in the state, in its academic purpose. Louisville and USM are not Flagships.

Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:09 pm 

Quote:
BTW, USM is a doctoral extensive, so their academics are the same as Miss. and Miss. State.


Well, this is what the University of Mississippi's website says, according to this website link:

http://www.olemiss.edu/hospitality/about/history.html


Quote:
The story began in 1848 when The University of Mississippi – the flagship university of the state – opened its doors to its first 80 students. The research extensive, doctoral degree-granting University now has nine academic divisions on its main campus: College of Liberal Arts; the Schools of Accountancy, Applied Sciences, Business Administration, Education, Engineering, Pharmacy, and Law; and the Graduate School. Research excellence has led to UM's selection as home for more than 20 major research centers that garner national and international attention. The McDonnell-Barksdale Honors College, Croft Institute for International Studies, Lott Leadership Institute, and Institute for Racial Reconciliation also strengthen and expand the academic experience.
The health sciences complex in Jackson trains health professionals in the fields of medicine, nursing, health-related professions, and dentistry. With a goal of bringing the resources of the university to the people it serves, Ole Miss continues to expand academic courses and degree offerings on its Tupelo and Southaven campuses.


And this is what the MSU website says about MSU, as being the only Doctoral I institution according the Southern Accredidation Board, in the state of Mississippi, and we've already established that Land Grant Universities are flagships of the County Extension Service, and have a very statewide purpose:

http://www.msstate.edu/web/gen_info.htm


Quote:
The University
After more than 125 years, through the efforts and dedication of generations of men and women, Mississippi State University has come to be a comprehensive, doctoral-degree-granting university offering to a diverse and capable student body a wide range of opportunities and challenges for learning and growth; to the world of knowledge, vigorous and expanding contributions in research, discovery, and application; and to the State and its people in every region, a variety of expert services. Mississippi State University is the only institution in Mississippi designated as a Doctoral I university by the Southern Regional Education Board. In its continuous and continuing growth to this stature, it is at once representative of the American Land-Grant tradition and distinctive in its own character and spirit, born of its Mississippi heritage and the vision and loyal perseverance of those who have labored in its development. Mississippi State University is accredited by the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (1866 Southern Lane, Decatur, Georgia 30033-4097; telephone 1-404-679-4501) to award baccalaureate, master's, specialist, and doctoral degrees.


And the University is the flagship university for the Commonwealth of Kentucky, as stated on their website (its also the Land Grant U):

http://www.uky.edu/Home/2003-06Strategic%20Plan/vision.html


Quote:
The University, as the flagship institution, plays a critical leadership role for the Commonwealth by promoting human and economic development that improves lives within Kentucky's borders and beyond. The University models a diverse community characterized by fairness and social justice.


So you are wrong about Louisville and USM being flagships in their respective states. Those roles are already taken by UKentucky, Ole Miss, and MSU, respectively.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:33 pm 
Also, the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Kentucky established the University of Louisville as a metropolitan university for the Commonwealth, meaning, its like what Boise State is, i.e. not a flagship:

http://www.louisville.edu/about/mission.html


Quote:
The University of Louisville shall serve as Kentucky's urban/metropolitan university. Located in the Commonwealth's largest metropolitan area, it shall serve the specific educational, intellectual, cultural, service, and research needs of the greater Louisville region. It has a special obligation to serve the needs part-time, nontraditional students.


And USM's website was down at the time I am posting this. But I have visited that website before, and in its history, it was established as a Normal School, like many other "directionals". It now has research and doctorate granting capabilities, but its not a flagship school for the state, as the University of Mississippi owns that designation and role, not USM, as noted in the previous post.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:42 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
Frozen tundra is a good name to describe the way this thread is turning. Hattiesburg and the state of Kentucky will be frozen tundra when USM and Louisville are the top universities in their state in either academics or fan support. UL has a short history as a good fb team. UK draws closer to 65k when they aren't awful like this year. Louisville isn't #1 in Louisville, let alone the rest of the state. USM isn't in as good a shape as Louisville except that they have had good fb teams for a longer time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 4:56 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:57 pm
Posts: 1291
Location: Portland! (and about time!)
Once upon a time, this was a Big Sky Expansion thread.

What I post here probably makes it a "Big Sky Membership Issues" thread. Elsewhere, the thread about a Big Sky school contemplating dropping football should be noted, and I'm sure we'll integrate that into the proceedings.

Meanwhile, one of the debates that has gone around the bend and back again is Sacramento State. Are they destined for better things? Worse?

One of their positive outlooks was supposed to center on the arena/rec center project approved by students. It appears that this indeed is going up... as a rec center, not an arena. http://hornets.bigskyfans.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=41

Meanwhile, the school newspaper recently sported an editorial suggesting Sac State move to the Big West Conference... but mentions in the process that there are rumors of the Big West moving in a direction to perhaps accomodate Sac State. http://media.www.statehornet.com/media/ ... 9050.shtml

I think we're going to see mid-major and low-major conferences tighten their geography in this manner. The BCS schools, not so much.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:33 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1719
Assuming that we are correct in guessing that Northern Arizona is seriously contemplating dropping football, this will at least merit serious discussions within the Big Sky membership.

Would they kick NAU out ? In kinda doubt it. There are not a ton of FCS football-playing schools in that footprint.

Here's the list -
Cal Poly (Big West, Great West FC)
UC Davis (Big West, Great West FC)
Southern Utah (Summit, Great West FC)
North Dakota (Independent - perhaps soon to join the Summit, Great West FC)
South Dakota (ditto)
North Dakota State (Summit, MVFC)
South Dakota State (ditto)

U of San Diego plays non-scholly football in the Pioneer, I doubt they have the budget to go for more, and the Big Sky would be a travel hassle for San Diego.

Canadian teams could also be a possibility, but I'm not sure the NCAA has formally approved that, as the NAIA has...

Pounder, you mention Sacramento State. What is their long-term plan ? The Big West works well for travel, but has no solution for their football team, so they would seem to have to look at the GWFC, which will have not have an FCS AQ for some time, since North Dakota and South Dakota are still transitioning to D-1, and the GWFC has only 5 teams and is a tad unstable to say the least. I could see Sacramento State and UC Davis jumping up to the WAC in 5-10 years, but they need to have an increase in Athletic budget and facilities to support that. Both schools seem to be upgrading facilities, but on what schedule ?

So the Big Sky could face the loss of a football team, and a full member, and they need to make contingency plans now.
Some thought on candidates -

Southern Utah - would join in a heartbeat. The Big Sky claimed to have issues with their Academics. That's a convenient excuse, when it suits them. If needed, their academics could suddenly show "remarkable improvement".

Denver - no football, no plans for football. If NAU allowed to remain in the conference with no football, then the Big Sky has changed the rules, and Denver is no longer disqualified. Denver is inside the footprint, and I think they would join (they are looking for a western conference (not the Summit) since the Sun-Belt would rather they move on). IF NAU remains in the Big Sky without football, adding SUU and Denver would give 9 FB schools (8 opponents) and 11 for other sports (10 opponents). That may actually work out nicely.

NDSU / SDSU - should be happy in the MVFC (probably face a nasty exit fee to leave), might prefer the Big Sky over the Summit for other sports, however the Summit may work out well long term, if and when NDU / SDU are added.

North Dakota / South Dakota - no conference entanglements yet. Both schools would certainly join in a heartbeat. Does the Big Sky want 2 schools at this point ? Might they want all 4 Dakota schools in the future IF they lose some surrent members ? Don't know...

California Schools (Cal Poly, UC Davis) - This would provide a better home for their football program. But what else ??? This would also increase travel costs dramatically. I get the feeling that they might be happier staying with the Big West / GWFC up until the time they perhaps contemplate FBS and the WAC. After all, Sacramento State has been studying the attractiveness of the Big West / GWFC combo vs. Big Sky for some time, so the advantages of a compact conference and low travel costs are a serious plus.

My gut feel is that Candidate #1 for Big Sky expansion is Southern Utah. They have football, and are a natural geographic fit. And if NAU drops football, Big Sky expansion will be discussed more seriously.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:55 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7439
Pounder and Tute79,I initially thought that this thread should be locked since it dealt with Big Sky expansion in 2003-2004 which is not the current situation at all.However,since the discussion appears to be about current Big Sky realignment this thread may be sufficient.

On another thread on this board I have developed the NAU/drop FB story which may or may not be the vanguard for future Big Sky realignment.The NAU financial situation as well as those of various Big Sky schools appears to be fluid at this time.The question mark is the state of the economy and the drying up of state funding for mid major schools.

As I pointed out in the other thread,one of the "replacement school candidates" most widely speculated about,Southern Utah has it's own financial problems which "may" cause them to also cut athletic programs.Link to article regarding their problems(previously posted on this board) at http://www.thespectrum.com/article/2009 ... /902050324


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:49 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 11:15 pm
Posts: 261
Location: Louisville, KY
bullet wrote:
Frozen tundra is a good name to describe the way this thread is turning. Hattiesburg and the state of Kentucky will be frozen tundra when USM and Louisville are the top universities in their state in either academics or fan support. UL has a short history as a good fb team. UK draws closer to 65k when they aren't awful like this year. Louisville isn't #1 in Louisville, let alone the rest of the state. USM isn't in as good a shape as Louisville except that they have had good fb teams for a longer time.


Whether Louisville or Kentucky is #1 in the city we can debate that all day, but it ends up going nowhere because there is no documented evidence who everyone in the city actually roots for. What is provable was that the state legislature held up Louisville's stadium expansion for two years because of UofL's threat to UK's "superiority." The expansion has been all set to go (and funding was already in place, none of it state money) since right after the 2006 season, yet construction has just started after this past season. Considering the run of sold-out games at PJCS, the funding was all there, and none of it was from the state, it's pretty obvious why it was held up, especially when you look at the reasons the state government gave for doing so.

Also, academics-wise (not necessarily by mission, but looking at the breakdown as to which programs are more emphasized), UK and Louisville do tend to break down as far as the traditional UX and XSU do, where one tends to emphasize Liberal Arts, and the other tends to emphasize Technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:13 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 11:15 pm
Posts: 261
Location: Louisville, KY
tute79 wrote:
Assuming that we are correct in guessing that Northern Arizona is seriously contemplating dropping football, this will at least merit serious discussions within the Big Sky membership.

Would they kick NAU out ? In kinda doubt it. There are not a ton of FCS football-playing schools in that footprint.

Here's the list -
Cal Poly (Big West, Great West FC)
UC Davis (Big West, Great West FC)
Southern Utah (Summit, Great West FC)
North Dakota (Independent - perhaps soon to join the Summit, Great West FC)
South Dakota (ditto)
North Dakota State (Summit, MVFC)
South Dakota State (ditto)

U of San Diego plays non-scholly football in the Pioneer, I doubt they have the budget to go for more, and the Big Sky would be a travel hassle for San Diego.

Canadian teams could also be a possibility, but I'm not sure the NCAA has formally approved that, as the NAIA has...

Pounder, you mention Sacramento State. What is their long-term plan ? The Big West works well for travel, but has no solution for their football team, so they would seem to have to look at the GWFC, which will have not have an FCS AQ for some time, since North Dakota and South Dakota are still transitioning to D-1, and the GWFC has only 5 teams and is a tad unstable to say the least. I could see Sacramento State and UC Davis jumping up to the WAC in 5-10 years, but they need to have an increase in Athletic budget and facilities to support that. Both schools seem to be upgrading facilities, but on what schedule ?

So the Big Sky could face the loss of a football team, and a full member, and they need to make contingency plans now.
Some thought on candidates -

Southern Utah - would join in a heartbeat. The Big Sky claimed to have issues with their Academics. That's a convenient excuse, when it suits them. If needed, their academics could suddenly show "remarkable improvement".

Denver - no football, no plans for football. If NAU allowed to remain in the conference with no football, then the Big Sky has changed the rules, and Denver is no longer disqualified. Denver is inside the footprint, and I think they would join (they are looking for a western conference (not the Summit) since the Sun-Belt would rather they move on). IF NAU remains in the Big Sky without football, adding SUU and Denver would give 9 FB schools (8 opponents) and 11 for other sports (10 opponents). That may actually work out nicely.

NDSU / SDSU - should be happy in the MVFC (probably face a nasty exit fee to leave), might prefer the Big Sky over the Summit for other sports, however the Summit may work out well long term, if and when NDU / SDU are added.

North Dakota / South Dakota - no conference entanglements yet. Both schools would certainly join in a heartbeat. Does the Big Sky want 2 schools at this point ? Might they want all 4 Dakota schools in the future IF they lose some surrent members ? Don't know...

California Schools (Cal Poly, UC Davis) - This would provide a better home for their football program. But what else ??? This would also increase travel costs dramatically. I get the feeling that they might be happier staying with the Big West / GWFC up until the time they perhaps contemplate FBS and the WAC. After all, Sacramento State has been studying the attractiveness of the Big West / GWFC combo vs. Big Sky for some time, so the advantages of a compact conference and low travel costs are a serious plus.

My gut feel is that Candidate #1 for Big Sky expansion is Southern Utah. They have football, and are a natural geographic fit. And if NAU drops football, Big Sky expansion will be discussed more seriously.


The problem is that NAU is also likely the main protagonist for SUU joining the conference. Granted, it would be the logical solution to accept SUU and keep NAU in other sports (they would keep 9 in fb for the even number of conference games, but would also have 10 in other sports to have set travel partners). What the BSC really wants though, is to get Cal Poly or UCD in, namely UCD, since they have proximity to Sac State, instead of going there and playing one game, the schools could fly in and out of the same airport and be able to play two games. But Poly also brings in a quality football team, one that has a legitimate chance of ending Montana's stranglehold football-wise. This would also be the logical place to go if either school has aspirations of moving into I-A.

If the BSC does end up kicking out NAU should they drop football, this pretty much eliminates SUU from joining, since they don't really add much to what the conference just got rid of. This might actually increase the pressure for Sac State to move up, to eliminate the southern portion of travel. This could open the door for the Dakota schools to join, and maybe wrestle away the Dakota State schools from the Summit/MVC football. While this definitely widens the footprint, at least if NAU and Sac State are gone it only widens it in one dimension (East-West) instead of widening it east-west and northeast-southwest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 3:02 pm 
Offline
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811
Locking this one up to start a new thread. I'll include a link to this thread so people can easily reference their old thoughts, etc.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 111 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 

cron




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group