NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Sat Apr 19, 2014 9:30 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 356 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 24  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2011 10:44 am 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3802
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Quinn wrote:
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Quinn wrote:
We're talking about a school that just recently upgraded to D1, is not yet NCAA compliant due to the nickname, and being threatened to be be dropped by a low tier D1 conference in the Big Sky...and you're talking about North Dakota going FBS?


No, we are talking about them going to the WAC if they are dropped. And you've said it yourself, UND isn't being dropped for athletic or academic issues, it's a distance and even number school thing. The football situation is up to them. FCS indy or move up. wbyeager makes the same point I was about to make, if the WAC can even get a small start up north, it could lead to the Montanas later. And UND would definitely appease Idaho, USU, Denver, Seattle, and maybe even SJSU.

Them moving up football is not something that has to happen right now either. Lamar is probably coming up next year to the WAC so it's not a desperate situation. The WAC can wait, but not forever.

And it's not like the WAC has better options. CSUB also just came up and is apparently so bad that they can't even get into a conference to be dropped from. But they were #3 on the list.

I'll say it again, highly unlikely, but definitely something to consider if the Big Sky does drop them. That was a surprisingly perfect fit for their sports in the WAC especially since Men's Swimming and Diving would probably get cut for the increases in football scholarships should they move up. If they stay down, I'm sure neither side would mind if the one sport competes in C-USA.



No. The Big Sky is just posturing to force UNDs hand regarding the nickname situation. Knowing that UND has no other option, the Big Sky is strictly supporting the NCAA decision by doing what they can to help resolve the UND nickname situation promptly. Did the Big Sky hope USD would join for a Dakota pair and a 12/14 membership split? Yes. But the Big Sky is too classy to pull the plug on a school just because what they thought was to be didn't happen (not to mention legally they had no ground to revoke an invite since the invite was never specifically issued as a tandem offering). The references to the distance of UND from BSky schools or the 11/13 membership are just that...references to observations. And yes, it would be a blessing in disguise if UND played hardball and refused, forcing the Big Sky to act (which still seems doubtful at this point). But thus far, it is simple posturing to force resolution.

And again...we're talking about an athletics program that not long ago was Division 2. They play in a stadium smaller than many FCS schools have. They are still in North Dakota. So it does seem very far fetched to think that despite all these limitations, and with the NCAA situation still there, that they would opt to upgrade, and reach out to the WAC...which would then be in the same spot as the Big Sky having to deal with UND drama.


I definitely agree with you on what you're saying, and like I said before, this is a longer shot than Summit/MVFC even if they get kicked out. One thing we don't do a lot of is look at things from a non football point of view. In this case UND allows the conference to sponsor softball and most likely helps the conference in other sports. I'm with you on this just being the Big Sky bluffing especially since it's possible they could lose members one day and then the 11/13 thing won't be important.

But. On the off chance that UND does get kicked out, the WAC will become a very real option. I know you keep making the point about them just moving up but you should realize by now that the WAC doesn't have many options, especially up North. And as I've said before, but it keeps getting disregarded, CSUB is one of the top (if not number 1 now) candidates for a WAC Western/Northern division. But this is all pointless until a decision is made one way or another, but so far neither has blinked.



Summit football will never happen, that we know. The house of cards is even less stable with SUU gone and UNO dropping football. All it would take is a single MVC al-sports invite and POOF, it's over. And there are ZERO options for a replacement. You can't form a football league, ask the MVFC to downgrade in conference affiliation (from MVFC) and be in a position that if 1 schools leaves, your conference is over.

As for the WAC, no, still don't see it as anything more than a "dream scenario" in my lifetime. You say the WAc has no options, but they do. It's the WAC who has stepped AWAY from adding more Texas schools in order to wait on the potential of western schools joining. If the WAC is telling Lamar and SHSU to slow down since they won't have an invite even if they do upgrade, what makes you possibly think the WAC would say "let's pass on Texas schools...that might actually provide access to big markets like Houston...in order to wait on western schools to upgrade...and instead go after a tiny market, recent D2 upgrade, with a small stadium, small fan base and 1000 miles away on average from the other WAc schools? And again, why would the WAC, a conference higher than the Big Sky in status, CHOOSE to take on the same problems that the low level D1 Big Sky is posturing to pass on? The idea of UND in the WAC, based on all these points, makes about as much sense as Jacksonville St. joining the Mountain West.

_________________
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  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:52 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
Quinn wrote:
Summit football will never happen, that we know. The house of cards is even less stable with SUU gone and UNO dropping football. All it would take is a single MVC al-sports invite and POOF, it's over. And there are ZERO options for a replacement. You can't form a football league, ask the MVFC to downgrade in conference affiliation (from MVFC) and be in a position that if 1 schools leaves, your conference is over.

As for the WAC, no, still don't see it as anything more than a "dream scenario" in my lifetime. You say the WAc has no options, but they do. It's the WAC who has stepped AWAY from adding more Texas schools in order to wait on the potential of western schools joining. If the WAC is telling Lamar and SHSU to slow down since they won't have an invite even if they do upgrade, what makes you possibly think the WAC would say "let's pass on Texas schools...that might actually provide access to big markets like Houston...in order to wait on western schools to upgrade...and instead go after a tiny market, recent D2 upgrade, with a small stadium, small fan base and 1000 miles away on average from the other WAc schools? And again, why would the WAC, a conference higher than the Big Sky in status, CHOOSE to take on the same problems that the low level D1 Big Sky is posturing to pass on? The idea of UND in the WAC, based on all these points, makes about as much sense as Jacksonville St. joining the Mountain West.


I'm not sure why you bring up Summit sponsoring football. UND would likely want a Summit invite to join their Dakota brothers and join the MVFC, as I said.

Come on Quinn, are you serious? You really think they're holding off on Lamar because they're so close to getting a school like Montana? How many times do these guys have to say no? Who was on the table this month? Seattle, UVU (blocked by Utah State), and CSU Bakersfield. If anyone better than that was available and wanted in, they'd already be in. That makes CSUB the number one remaining option. We've gone through this in other threads, no one is going to leave a conference for the WAC. Could that change in a year? Maybe if the economy picks up, but I doubt anything will change.

And I have a hard time believing that Lamar is bringing in a huge tv following. I'd like to see them try to sell that to ESPN. "We have the Bay Area, Seattle, Denver, San Antonio and Houston gives us a huge contract." Somehow I don't think that will work.

As for why do it? How long do you think the Montana schools would be happy with UND (a school they feel they are at least equal to, if not better than) in a higher level than them? The name thing will be resolved one way or another. No school would compete in the NCAA if they were always being sanctioned, you just can't do it. Now, I don't know how it will be resolved whether a name change or not, but I think we all know it will be resolved eventually.

Like you said before, it's probably a good thing for UND and the Big Sky to part ways. It's quite a distance for teams on the coast. Now, I don't know what the thinking is in the conference. It's possible that some of the schools want UND out now that USD didn't come with them. If that is the case and they are just using the name thing as an excuse to appease the coastal schools or something like that then a scenario like this is certainly possible.

As I keep saying, I consider this extremely unlikely, but these are serious comments. If you take them seriously and believe them, then you have to think of UND alternatives. I've presented two (three if you count being independent in everything, but I don't count that). The Summit/MVFC isn't happening without a 12th and if they had a 12th (and wanted 12) they would have been invited already.

It's not ideal for the WAC either, but there are certainly a lot worse options for both sides should the commissioner back up what he has said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:39 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2744
Location: Reedley, CA
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Quinn wrote:
Summit football will never happen, that we know. The house of cards is even less stable with SUU gone and UNO dropping football. All it would take is a single MVC al-sports invite and POOF, it's over. And there are ZERO options for a replacement. You can't form a football league, ask the MVFC to downgrade in conference affiliation (from MVFC) and be in a position that if 1 schools leaves, your conference is over.

As for the WAC, no, still don't see it as anything more than a "dream scenario" in my lifetime. You say the WAc has no options, but they do. It's the WAC who has stepped AWAY from adding more Texas schools in order to wait on the potential of western schools joining. If the WAC is telling Lamar and SHSU to slow down since they won't have an invite even if they do upgrade, what makes you possibly think the WAC would say "let's pass on Texas schools...that might actually provide access to big markets like Houston...in order to wait on western schools to upgrade...and instead go after a tiny market, recent D2 upgrade, with a small stadium, small fan base and 1000 miles away on average from the other WAc schools? And again, why would the WAC, a conference higher than the Big Sky in status, CHOOSE to take on the same problems that the low level D1 Big Sky is posturing to pass on? The idea of UND in the WAC, based on all these points, makes about as much sense as Jacksonville St. joining the Mountain West.


I'm not sure why you bring up Summit sponsoring football. UND would likely want a Summit invite to join their Dakota brothers and join the MVFC, as I said.

Come on Quinn, are you serious? You really think they're holding off on Lamar because they're so close to getting a school like Montana? How many times do these guys have to say no? Who was on the table this month? Seattle, UVU (blocked by Utah State), and CSU Bakersfield. If anyone better than that was available and wanted in, they'd already be in. That makes CSUB the number one remaining option. We've gone through this in other threads, no one is going to leave a conference for the WAC. Could that change in a year? Maybe if the economy picks up, but I doubt anything will change.

And I have a hard time believing that Lamar is bringing in a huge tv following. I'd like to see them try to sell that to ESPN. "We have the Bay Area, Seattle, Denver, San Antonio and Houston gives us a huge contract." Somehow I don't think that will work.

As for why do it? How long do you think the Montana schools would be happy with UND (a school they feel they are at least equal to, if not better than) in a higher level than them? The name thing will be resolved one way or another. No school would compete in the NCAA if they were always being sanctioned, you just can't do it. Now, I don't know how it will be resolved whether a name change or not, but I think we all know it will be resolved eventually.

Like you said before, it's probably a good thing for UND and the Big Sky to part ways. It's quite a distance for teams on the coast. Now, I don't know what the thinking is in the conference. It's possible that some of the schools want UND out now that USD didn't come with them. If that is the case and they are just using the name thing as an excuse to appease the coastal schools or something like that then a scenario like this is certainly possible.

As I keep saying, I consider this extremely unlikely, but these are serious comments. If you take them seriously and believe them, then you have to think of UND alternatives. I've presented two (three if you count being independent in everything, but I don't count that). The Summit/MVFC isn't happening without a 12th and if they had a 12th (and wanted 12) they would have been invited already.

It's not ideal for the WAC either, but there are certainly a lot worse options for both sides should the commissioner back up what he has said.

The WAC is better off w/ Lamar, SHSU and CSUB over UND with 2 of those 3, even though UND may have the better fb program. Why? that formation of of the WAC w/ 4 TX 1 LA 1 NM school, and the 6 western schools makes for a nice tight regional geography, plus they won't have to deal w/ any nickname questions that were powerful enough to get them kicked out of the Sky even if it was for 10/12 over 11/13 purposes. There would be no other school remotely close to UND in the WAC. Both the E & W schools would block in favor of the 3 I named.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/60/Cbd1.PNG

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:26 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3802
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Quinn wrote:
Summit football will never happen, that we know. The house of cards is even less stable with SUU gone and UNO dropping football. All it would take is a single MVC al-sports invite and POOF, it's over. And there are ZERO options for a replacement. You can't form a football league, ask the MVFC to downgrade in conference affiliation (from MVFC) and be in a position that if 1 schools leaves, your conference is over.

As for the WAC, no, still don't see it as anything more than a "dream scenario" in my lifetime. You say the WAc has no options, but they do. It's the WAC who has stepped AWAY from adding more Texas schools in order to wait on the potential of western schools joining. If the WAC is telling Lamar and SHSU to slow down since they won't have an invite even if they do upgrade, what makes you possibly think the WAC would say "let's pass on Texas schools...that might actually provide access to big markets like Houston...in order to wait on western schools to upgrade...and instead go after a tiny market, recent D2 upgrade, with a small stadium, small fan base and 1000 miles away on average from the other WAc schools? And again, why would the WAC, a conference higher than the Big Sky in status, CHOOSE to take on the same problems that the low level D1 Big Sky is posturing to pass on? The idea of UND in the WAC, based on all these points, makes about as much sense as Jacksonville St. joining the Mountain West.


I'm not sure why you bring up Summit sponsoring football. UND would likely want a Summit invite to join their Dakota brothers and join the MVFC, as I said.

Come on Quinn, are you serious? You really think they're holding off on Lamar because they're so close to getting a school like Montana? How many times do these guys have to say no? Who was on the table this month? Seattle, UVU (blocked by Utah State), and CSU Bakersfield. If anyone better than that was available and wanted in, they'd already be in. That makes CSUB the number one remaining option. We've gone through this in other threads, no one is going to leave a conference for the WAC. Could that change in a year? Maybe if the economy picks up, but I doubt anything will change.

And I have a hard time believing that Lamar is bringing in a huge tv following. I'd like to see them try to sell that to ESPN. "We have the Bay Area, Seattle, Denver, San Antonio and Houston gives us a huge contract." Somehow I don't think that will work.

As for why do it? How long do you think the Montana schools would be happy with UND (a school they feel they are at least equal to, if not better than) in a higher level than them? The name thing will be resolved one way or another. No school would compete in the NCAA if they were always being sanctioned, you just can't do it. Now, I don't know how it will be resolved whether a name change or not, but I think we all know it will be resolved eventually.

Like you said before, it's probably a good thing for UND and the Big Sky to part ways. It's quite a distance for teams on the coast. Now, I don't know what the thinking is in the conference. It's possible that some of the schools want UND out now that USD didn't come with them. If that is the case and they are just using the name thing as an excuse to appease the coastal schools or something like that then a scenario like this is certainly possible.

As I keep saying, I consider this extremely unlikely, but these are serious comments. If you take them seriously and believe them, then you have to think of UND alternatives. I've presented two (three if you count being independent in everything, but I don't count that). The Summit/MVFC isn't happening without a 12th and if they had a 12th (and wanted 12) they would have been invited already.

It's not ideal for the WAC either, but there are certainly a lot worse options for both sides should the commissioner back up what he has said.


You want an alternative for the WAC than UND? Here's one: anyone. If anyone is not available, the #2 option is still better than UND: nobody.

_________________
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  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 8:42 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
Quinn wrote:
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Quinn wrote:
Summit football will never happen, that we know. The house of cards is even less stable with SUU gone and UNO dropping football. All it would take is a single MVC al-sports invite and POOF, it's over. And there are ZERO options for a replacement. You can't form a football league, ask the MVFC to downgrade in conference affiliation (from MVFC) and be in a position that if 1 schools leaves, your conference is over.

As for the WAC, no, still don't see it as anything more than a "dream scenario" in my lifetime. You say the WAc has no options, but they do. It's the WAC who has stepped AWAY from adding more Texas schools in order to wait on the potential of western schools joining. If the WAC is telling Lamar and SHSU to slow down since they won't have an invite even if they do upgrade, what makes you possibly think the WAC would say "let's pass on Texas schools...that might actually provide access to big markets like Houston...in order to wait on western schools to upgrade...and instead go after a tiny market, recent D2 upgrade, with a small stadium, small fan base and 1000 miles away on average from the other WAc schools? And again, why would the WAC, a conference higher than the Big Sky in status, CHOOSE to take on the same problems that the low level D1 Big Sky is posturing to pass on? The idea of UND in the WAC, based on all these points, makes about as much sense as Jacksonville St. joining the Mountain West.


I'm not sure why you bring up Summit sponsoring football. UND would likely want a Summit invite to join their Dakota brothers and join the MVFC, as I said.

Come on Quinn, are you serious? You really think they're holding off on Lamar because they're so close to getting a school like Montana? How many times do these guys have to say no? Who was on the table this month? Seattle, UVU (blocked by Utah State), and CSU Bakersfield. If anyone better than that was available and wanted in, they'd already be in. That makes CSUB the number one remaining option. We've gone through this in other threads, no one is going to leave a conference for the WAC. Could that change in a year? Maybe if the economy picks up, but I doubt anything will change.

And I have a hard time believing that Lamar is bringing in a huge tv following. I'd like to see them try to sell that to ESPN. "We have the Bay Area, Seattle, Denver, San Antonio and Houston gives us a huge contract." Somehow I don't think that will work.

As for why do it? How long do you think the Montana schools would be happy with UND (a school they feel they are at least equal to, if not better than) in a higher level than them? The name thing will be resolved one way or another. No school would compete in the NCAA if they were always being sanctioned, you just can't do it. Now, I don't know how it will be resolved whether a name change or not, but I think we all know it will be resolved eventually.

Like you said before, it's probably a good thing for UND and the Big Sky to part ways. It's quite a distance for teams on the coast. Now, I don't know what the thinking is in the conference. It's possible that some of the schools want UND out now that USD didn't come with them. If that is the case and they are just using the name thing as an excuse to appease the coastal schools or something like that then a scenario like this is certainly possible.

As I keep saying, I consider this extremely unlikely, but these are serious comments. If you take them seriously and believe them, then you have to think of UND alternatives. I've presented two (three if you count being independent in everything, but I don't count that). The Summit/MVFC isn't happening without a 12th and if they had a 12th (and wanted 12) they would have been invited already.

It's not ideal for the WAC either, but there are certainly a lot worse options for both sides should the commissioner back up what he has said.


You want an alternative for the WAC than UND? Here's one: anyone. If anyone is not available, the #2 option is still better than UND: nobody.


Well that's definitely your opinion that's for sure.

And I'll ask again, who is taking UND? Because you have yet to name a single conference that wants them. I'm not sure how long the Great West will still qualify as a conference (or if they even still do) but I highly doubt that's a better option for UND over the WAC.

There is literally no option for football until a 12th comes along to the MVFC. Could a D-II school upgrade? Maybe, but I'll just assume for now football stays independent.

Other sports? Summit doesn't seem like they want them, otherwise I assume they would have been invited back when USD was invited. The Horizon is the next closest conference at their level, I find that extremely unlikely. OVC? That would be pretty generous of them. I've got nothing Quinn.

I'm just going to drop this though because like I've said before, this is pointless until we find out just how serious this threat is. But I find it odd that you think the WAC should pass on a school in their regional footprint if that school was desperate for a conference. Especially since that school would likely lead to Northern expansion in the future.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 9:28 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 9:41 pm
Posts: 749
Location: Wilmington, NC
I guess the thing against UND in the WAC is that they do expand the footprint at a time when the WAC is trying to consolidate that footprint. No one in the WAC wants a Great Lakes school when they are trying to settle on a Southwest/West Coast Balance. That being said, there are worse schools than UND the WAC could add. I think UND ends up in the Summit and Indy for football for the time being if the Big Sky does not work out. But then again, no one will want to touch them if the Big Sky cuts them lose due to the Nickname issue. Very unfortunate what the NCAA is doing to UND.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 9:49 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1323
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
And I'll ask again, who is taking UND? Because you have yet to name a single conference that wants them. I'm not sure how long the Great West will still qualify as a conference (or if they even still do) but I highly doubt that's a better option for UND over the WAC.

There is literally no option for football until a 12th comes along to the MVFC. Could a D-II school upgrade? Maybe, but I'll just assume for now football stays independent.

Other sports? Summit doesn't seem like they want them, otherwise I assume they would have been invited back when USD was invited. The Horizon is the next closest conference at their level, I find that extremely unlikely. OVC? That would be pretty generous of them. I've got nothing Quinn.

I'm just going to drop this though because like I've said before, this is pointless until we find out just how serious this threat is. But I find it odd that you think the WAC should pass on a school in their regional footprint if that school was desperate for a conference. Especially since that school would likely lead to Northern expansion in the future.
I see them staying in the Great West for a couple years unless the Summit offers them, which they eventually will since they have the other 3 Dakota schools, as far for football maybe the Big Sky takes pity on them (since they kinda screwed them over) and allows them to be an associate fb member for a while until Youngstown St gets its invite to the CAA. If the Summit did invite UND they'd need a 12th school like UNK maybe, and if they got in the MVFC there would be a 6/6 split between the Valley and the Summit (maybe they'd change the name to the Summit Valley Football Conference).

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 11:23 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2744
Location: Reedley, CA
you mean NKU ;)

Option 1 UND stays in the Big Sky
Option 2 UND goes to the Summit and fb in Big Sky
Option 3 UND goes to the Summit and fb Indy
Option 4 UND stays in the GWC and fb Indy (GWC has never been a real conf. in fb or bball)

What UND really wants is Summit and fb in the MVFC

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:37 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3802
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Quinn wrote:
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Quinn wrote:
Summit football will never happen, that we know. The house of cards is even less stable with SUU gone and UNO dropping football. All it would take is a single MVC al-sports invite and POOF, it's over. And there are ZERO options for a replacement. You can't form a football league, ask the MVFC to downgrade in conference affiliation (from MVFC) and be in a position that if 1 schools leaves, your conference is over.

As for the WAC, no, still don't see it as anything more than a "dream scenario" in my lifetime. You say the WAc has no options, but they do. It's the WAC who has stepped AWAY from adding more Texas schools in order to wait on the potential of western schools joining. If the WAC is telling Lamar and SHSU to slow down since they won't have an invite even if they do upgrade, what makes you possibly think the WAC would say "let's pass on Texas schools...that might actually provide access to big markets like Houston...in order to wait on western schools to upgrade...and instead go after a tiny market, recent D2 upgrade, with a small stadium, small fan base and 1000 miles away on average from the other WAc schools? And again, why would the WAC, a conference higher than the Big Sky in status, CHOOSE to take on the same problems that the low level D1 Big Sky is posturing to pass on? The idea of UND in the WAC, based on all these points, makes about as much sense as Jacksonville St. joining the Mountain West.


I'm not sure why you bring up Summit sponsoring football. UND would likely want a Summit invite to join their Dakota brothers and join the MVFC, as I said.

Come on Quinn, are you serious? You really think they're holding off on Lamar because they're so close to getting a school like Montana? How many times do these guys have to say no? Who was on the table this month? Seattle, UVU (blocked by Utah State), and CSU Bakersfield. If anyone better than that was available and wanted in, they'd already be in. That makes CSUB the number one remaining option. We've gone through this in other threads, no one is going to leave a conference for the WAC. Could that change in a year? Maybe if the economy picks up, but I doubt anything will change.

And I have a hard time believing that Lamar is bringing in a huge tv following. I'd like to see them try to sell that to ESPN. "We have the Bay Area, Seattle, Denver, San Antonio and Houston gives us a huge contract." Somehow I don't think that will work.

As for why do it? How long do you think the Montana schools would be happy with UND (a school they feel they are at least equal to, if not better than) in a higher level than them? The name thing will be resolved one way or another. No school would compete in the NCAA if they were always being sanctioned, you just can't do it. Now, I don't know how it will be resolved whether a name change or not, but I think we all know it will be resolved eventually.

Like you said before, it's probably a good thing for UND and the Big Sky to part ways. It's quite a distance for teams on the coast. Now, I don't know what the thinking is in the conference. It's possible that some of the schools want UND out now that USD didn't come with them. If that is the case and they are just using the name thing as an excuse to appease the coastal schools or something like that then a scenario like this is certainly possible.

As I keep saying, I consider this extremely unlikely, but these are serious comments. If you take them seriously and believe them, then you have to think of UND alternatives. I've presented two (three if you count being independent in everything, but I don't count that). The Summit/MVFC isn't happening without a 12th and if they had a 12th (and wanted 12) they would have been invited already.

It's not ideal for the WAC either, but there are certainly a lot worse options for both sides should the commissioner back up what he has said.


You want an alternative for the WAC than UND? Here's one: anyone. If anyone is not available, the #2 option is still better than UND: nobody.


Well that's definitely your opinion that's for sure.

And I'll ask again, who is taking UND? Because you have yet to name a single conference that wants them. I'm not sure how long the Great West will still qualify as a conference (or if they even still do) but I highly doubt that's a better option for UND over the WAC.

There is literally no option for football until a 12th comes along to the MVFC. Could a D-II school upgrade? Maybe, but I'll just assume for now football stays independent.

Other sports? Summit doesn't seem like they want them, otherwise I assume they would have been invited back when USD was invited. The Horizon is the next closest conference at their level, I find that extremely unlikely. OVC? That would be pretty generous of them. I've got nothing Quinn.

I'm just going to drop this though because like I've said before, this is pointless until we find out just how serious this threat is. But I find it odd that you think the WAC should pass on a school in their regional footprint if that school was desperate for a conference. Especially since that school would likely lead to Northern expansion in the future.



You're asking a question that you and the rest of the world already knows the answer to, an answer I just implied in my last post: NOBODY wants UND right now with the nickname situation. If it is resolved, then the answers are Big Sky (their current/future conference) and the Summit, which would add them for non-football sports. Problem of course being that UND would have no football home. And for UND to be on the Summit radar, it would mean the nickname issue was resolved in which case they'd be happy members of the Big Sky.

The issue I take with the direction of the thread regarding UND, is that somehow, while UND is at it's lowest negotiating spot, you're discussing options that would only be available to programs on the RISE, not a program that is being threatened by it's existing FCS level conference. The very concept that saying UND could turn the nickname PR flop/NCAA sanctions into a gateway to UPGRADE to FBS..which is still in the NCAA with the same sanctions...and that a conference that has opted against currently going after other Texas schools (where they already have 2) in favor of a small market team thousands of miles away from most WAC members...this very concept is one I personally find to be beyond a stretch. The WAC might be in a tough spot with few options, but right now, they need no options. They have enough members. If they lost members then yes, it becomes desperation. And that is when you'll see Lamar on deck as a replacement and perhaps SHSU...but after the western schools have made their final "No"...which likely won't be the case in 3 years.

_________________
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  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:43 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7292
Couple of articles out of the Dakotas with update on Big Sky/UND nickname situation at http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/208163

and at http://www.thedickinsonpress.com/event/ ... p/homepage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 2:14 pm 
Offline
Sophomore
Sophomore

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:22 pm
Posts: 58
Sometimes a nickname is just a nickname and a logo is just a logo. Even as a traditionalist myself, I must say this affair is much ado about nothing, and a colossal waste of time, money, and energy. Many schools have changed their school nickname over the past 3 decades. If a third of the affected parties polled believe the nickname is offensive, then it is offensive. Even if only a handful of Sioux find it offensive, it is still offensive. It can be justified every which way, still offensive to some, therefore the need to change it. End of story.
Pick another innocuous name like the Prairie Dogs or such and MOVE ON. Please. The NCAA is the sanctioning body and they have deemed the nickname/logo offensive and that is that. If you don't like it find another place to play, such as the NAIA. Yes that sounds ridiculous because so is this whole issue. This is a university with many different ethnicities in its student body and the last thing they need is the perception of their school as a denizen of intolerance all due to some external political grandstanding. Think of the children, er, student athletes--nobody seems to give a damn about how this issue ultimately affects them. Change it, move on, play ball.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 3:47 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1650
At this juncture, I think the best thing that could happen would be the following scenario:

1) An impasse.
2) Big Sky boots out North Dakota (no exit fee, they never joined).
3) North Dakota legislature comes to it's senses, repeals the law, school adopts new nickname.
4) North Dakota joins Summit, plans on football being FCS independent for the time being.
(I think the Summit will take them, the hold-up had been the nickname issue and North Dakota chose Big Sky because they offered a home for FB).
5) North Dakota applies to MVFC (1st choice), and to Big Sky (assoicate FB member only - 2nd choice).

Yeah, the nickname thing is silly, and has taken on a life of it's own.
First of all, I can see where a nickname like Redskins is offensive. But how is "Fighting Sioux" or "Seminoles" worse than "Fighting Irish" ?
Maybe lose the "Fighting" part. But I don't think the nickname is intended to be disrespectful and the logo is certainly not disrespectful.
So why did hte NCAA get into this entire business of political correctness ? Clue: Myles Brand was formerly a professor of philosophy.
I think the NCAA perhaps went beyond their scope of athletics supervision, and the North Dakota legislature apparently agrees. But they should have filed suit in Federal Court many moons ago.

At this point it seems to be a simple thing to switch nicknames, except the logo is plastered all over campus and the Ralph Engelstadt arena.
As a point of reference, when the Houston Astors Home (Enron Field) became Minute Maid Stadium, it cost roughly $2.5 million to replace the logos /signage.
I have wondered if they could go with "Chiefs" and keep the logo. Undoubtedly, the NCAA would find something intolerable with that....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 4:24 pm 
Offline
Sophomore
Sophomore

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:22 pm
Posts: 58
Agreed, political correctness does get silly. Fighting Irish or Seminoles isn't the issue: it is a case by case scenario, whereby, certain tribe members had a beef w/ the nickname. This is a flagship state institution of higher learning, therefore, you have to respect these citizens who are offended and change the nickname--even if it's only a perceived small number of malcontents. Again, big picture, this is a nickname/logo at issue here--meaningless in the whole scope of things micro or macro.

Yes, the replacement of logos and nicknames on signage can be costly, and here the NCAA should extend a helping hand, it would be the noble thing to do. Since that'll never happen, here is a solution:
Fighting S_o_x
Fighting __o_x
Fighting S__ux


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 6:02 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7292
Article out of Grand Forks with report that ND Governor will head state delegation on July 25th to Indianapolis(how ironic or appropriate?) to plead the case on keeping an Indian nickname.Link at http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/208251


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 6:18 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1323
86mets wrote:
Agreed, political correctness does get silly. Fighting Irish or Seminoles isn't the issue: it is a case by case scenario, whereby, certain tribe members had a beef w/ the nickname. This is a flagship state institution of higher learning, therefore, you have to respect these citizens who are offended and change the nickname--even if it's only a perceived small number of malcontents. Again, big picture, this is a nickname/logo at issue here--meaningless in the whole scope of things micro or macro.
If I'm not mistaken the Native American tribes don't pay taxes so they have little say in deciding the nickname of a public institution, that honor falls to the people elected to represent the public, who said they want to keep the nickname. Do you really believe a handful of people should be able to override an entire state? That sounds idiotic, what if the environmentalist decide that the Lumberjacks is an offensive nickname, or the Greeks deem the Spartans and Trojans offensive? You can't give in to tiny minorities for PC reasons or it will never stop. It's extremely ironic that the NCAA is coming down on UND while Auburn, Oregon, UNC, and Ohio St are getting away with bloody murder...or should I rephrase that last part because it may be offensive to families or murder victims?

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Last edited by tkalmus on Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 356 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 24  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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:  
 

 




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