BIG SKY Expansion & Realignment Thread

accseahawk · **Posted:** Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:48 am

you would think UND would like to put their non football sports in Oral Roberts slot in the Summit. With the California schools being football only, no reason North Dakota can't too. Would save everyone a lot of money.

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3757

accseahawk wrote:

you would think UND would like to put their non football sports in Oral Roberts slot in the Summit. With the California schools being football only, no reason North Dakota can't too. Would save everyone a lot of money.

It's foolish UND pride. They'd rather bankrupt the state with the asinine travel for tier 2 sports since they aren't in the MVFC with the other Dakota schools. The summit was on the table for UND, just with no MVFC spot.

dbackjon · **Joined:** Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:50 pm **Posts:** 267

Quinn wrote:

accseahawk wrote:

you would think UND would like to put their non football sports in Oral Roberts slot in the Summit. With the California schools being football only, no reason North Dakota can't too. Would save everyone a lot of money.

It's foolish UND pride. They'd rather bankrupt the state with the asinine travel for tier 2 sports since they aren't in the MVFC with the other Dakota schools. The summit was on the table for UND, just with no MVFC spot.

Or maybe they see the Big Sky as a better conference, more stable, and more in-line with their institutional profile.

While the Big Sky did make an exception for CP and UC-D, for football only, that was more because the CA schools had no other option. I don't see the Big Sky doing something similar for UND. Either all in, or not at all.

accseahawk · **Posted:** Tue Oct 25, 2011 11:20 am

I understand why UND turned down the Summit slot the 1st go round, they needed a home for football and the Big Sky wanted all or nothing. This go round if a Summit slot is offered, it makes too much sense not to take it while keeping Football in the Big Sky, just like the california schools, that solves the numbers problem for the Big Sky and the travel worries for non revenue sports for UND

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3757

dbackjon wrote:

Quinn wrote:

accseahawk wrote:

you would think UND would like to put their non football sports in Oral Roberts slot in the Summit. With the California schools being football only, no reason North Dakota can't too. Would save everyone a lot of money.

It's foolish UND pride. They'd rather bankrupt the state with the asinine travel for tier 2 sports since they aren't in the MVFC with the other Dakota schools. The summit was on the table for UND, just with no MVFC spot.

Or maybe they see the Big Sky as a better conference, more stable, and more in-line with their institutional profile.

While the Big Sky did make an exception for CP and UC-D, for football only, that was more because the CA schools had no other option. I don't see the Big Sky doing something similar for UND. Either all in, or not at all.

Jon, we get it, you're a fan of a school in the Big Sky

But really, we're not talking about the WCC and that UND was actually a christian school looking for a better fit. Contrary to beliefs, USD, NDSU and SDSU are pretty close to the UND profile. And the Big Sky isn't exactly offering top academic schools (more so than Summit for example) that would boost the UND profile. There just isn't a drastic difference between USD, NDSU, SDSU, UNO, etc than Idaho st., Weber St, NoCo, etc....except lots of money in travel costs.

But we also need to include that since this is not money making FBS, basketball is the revenue sport...and the Summit is a better basketball conference than the big Sky.

dbackjon · **Joined:** Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:50 pm **Posts:** 267

Quinn wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

Quinn wrote:

accseahawk wrote:

you would think UND would like to put their non football sports in Oral Roberts slot in the Summit. With the California schools being football only, no reason North Dakota can't too. Would save everyone a lot of money.

It's foolish UND pride. They'd rather bankrupt the state with the asinine travel for tier 2 sports since they aren't in the MVFC with the other Dakota schools. The summit was on the table for UND, just with no MVFC spot.

Or maybe they see the Big Sky as a better conference, more stable, and more in-line with their institutional profile.

While the Big Sky did make an exception for CP and UC-D, for football only, that was more because the CA schools had no other option. I don't see the Big Sky doing something similar for UND. Either all in, or not at all.

Jon, we get it, you're a fan of a school in the Big Sky

But really, we're not talking about the WCC and that UND was actually a christian school looking for a better fit. Contrary to beliefs, USD, NDSU and SDSU are pretty close to the UND profile. And the Big Sky isn't exactly offering top academic schools (more so than Summit for example) that would boost the UND profile. There just isn't a drastic difference between USD, NDSU, SDSU, UNO, etc than Idaho st., Weber St, NoCo, etc....except lots of money in travel costs.

But we also need to include that since this is not money making FBS, basketball is the revenue sport...and the Summit is a better basketball conference than the big Sky.

Summit is losing their best basketball school, and best baseball school.

Academically, Big Sky is miles ahead of the Summit.

Travel wise, Summit makes more sense for UND, but institutionally, nope.

tkalmus · **Joined:** Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm **Posts:** 1035

Wouldn't the Big Sky benefit from UND moving its other sports to the Summit? Right now they have a 11/13 split w/ the Cal schools as fb only, UND moving everything but fb would make it a 10/13 split and if they can get into the MVFC then it would be perfect at 10/12. Doesn't that move benefit everybody? UND doesn't do anything for the Big Sky and they Big Sky doesn't do anything for UND's non football sports or academics...

accseahawk · **Posted:** Tue Oct 25, 2011 12:54 pm

UND and La Tech seem as if they are like minded instiutions

i kid i kid

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3757

dbackjon · **Joined:** Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:50 pm **Posts:** 267

Big Sky has outstanding academic schools.

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3757

dbackjon wrote:

Quinn wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

Quinn wrote:

accseahawk wrote:

you would think UND would like to put their non football sports in Oral Roberts slot in the Summit. With the California schools being football only, no reason North Dakota can't too. Would save everyone a lot of money.

It's foolish UND pride. They'd rather bankrupt the state with the asinine travel for tier 2 sports since they aren't in the MVFC with the other Dakota schools. The summit was on the table for UND, just with no MVFC spot.

Or maybe they see the Big Sky as a better conference, more stable, and more in-line with their institutional profile.

While the Big Sky did make an exception for CP and UC-D, for football only, that was more because the CA schools had no other option. I don't see the Big Sky doing something similar for UND. Either all in, or not at all.

Jon, we get it, you're a fan of a school in the Big Sky

But really, we're not talking about the WCC and that UND was actually a christian school looking for a better fit. Contrary to beliefs, USD, NDSU and SDSU are pretty close to the UND profile. And the Big Sky isn't exactly offering top academic schools (more so than Summit for example) that would boost the UND profile. There just isn't a drastic difference between USD, NDSU, SDSU, UNO, etc than Idaho st., Weber St, NoCo, etc....except lots of money in travel costs.

But we also need to include that since this is not money making FBS, basketball is the revenue sport...and the Summit is a better basketball conference than the big Sky.

Summit is losing their best basketball school, and best baseball school.

Academically, Big Sky is miles ahead of the Summit.

Travel wise, Summit makes more sense for UND, but institutionally, nope.

This might be the first time I've ever read a mention of "academics" (as a positive) and "Big Sky" in the same sentence.

tkalmus · **Joined:** Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm **Posts:** 1035

dbackjon wrote:

Big Sky has outstanding academic schools.

I'm not saying they have bad or good academics, but how are they compared to the Summit League? I don't have any idea, if you have a link to back up your remarks I would like to see it...

Edit: just a quick google search gave me this op piece about the Big Sky...
"Few conferences in the nation have a lower academic rating than the Big Sky Conference."
http://mustangdaily.net/big-sky-reaction-letter/

Edit 2: found this comparing the WAC Big Sky and MWC
http://wasatchswagger.blogspot.com/2011 ... g-sky.html

Not finding anything on the Summit but I'm starting to think your statement that the "Big Sky has outstanding academic schools" my not be that accurate, but still it may be better than the Summit which I'd love to find out...

dbackjon · **Joined:** Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:50 pm **Posts:** 267

tkalmus wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

Big Sky has outstanding academic schools.

I'm not saying they have bad or good academics, but how are they compared to the Summit League? I don't have any idea, if you have a link to back up your remarks I would like to see it...

Edit: just a quick google search gave me this op piece about the Big Sky...
"Few conferences in the nation have a lower academic rating than the Big Sky Conference."
http://mustangdaily.net/big-sky-reaction-letter/

And he doesn't really back up his numbers either. Are we Ivy League? Nope. But some very good National Universities (Flagship Montana schools and UND) and outstanding regional (NAU/ISU etc). UNC/SUU/WSU are decent regionals.

And of course, football affliates UC-D and Cal Poly are top national schools.

Fresno St. Alum · **Posted:** Tue Oct 25, 2011 1:52 pm

tkalmus wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

Big Sky has outstanding academic schools.

I'm not saying they have bad or good academics, but how are they compared to the Summit League? I don't have any idea, if you have a link to back up your remarks I would like to see it...

Edit: just a quick google search gave me this op piece about the Big Sky...
"Few conferences in the nation have a lower academic rating than the Big Sky Conference."
http://mustangdaily.net/big-sky-reaction-letter/

It's the damn Canadians so close to the BSky schools coming in and bringing down their standards

tkalmus · **Joined:** Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm **Posts:** 1035

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

tkalmus wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

Big Sky has outstanding academic schools.

I'm not saying they have bad or good academics, but how are they compared to the Summit League? I don't have any idea, if you have a link to back up your remarks I would like to see it...

Edit: just a quick google search gave me this op piece about the Big Sky...
"Few conferences in the nation have a lower academic rating than the Big Sky Conference."
http://mustangdaily.net/big-sky-reaction-letter/

It's the damn Canadians so close to the BSky schools coming in and bringing down their standards

That's what happens when 90% of their population lives within 90 miles of the US border...we just should invade and move the border 90 miles North...

BIG SKY Expansion & Realignment Thread

Who is online