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.