Summit League Expansion & Realignment Thread

fighting muskie · **Posted:** Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:42 pm

I don't see the Summit getting UTA or UALR unless the Sunbelt passes legislation requiring football or makes similar overtures quietly and off the record.

mozilla · **Posted:** Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:31 pm

fighting muskie wrote:

I don't see the Summit getting UTA or UALR unless the Sunbelt passes legislation requiring football or makes similar overtures quietly and off the record.

Yeah...I don't see it happening either. But, the question remains(and I don't really know the answer to it).

Is the Summit a better conference than the SBC for non fb sports?

I would guess that the SBC gets a bit more in revenue...but, not certain.

The Bishin Cutter · **Joined:** Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am **Posts:** 1411

ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:

If the MVC and the Summit are having discussions related with conference realignment, what would be for the MVFC (which it contains half of the MVC schools and the other half of Summit schools)?

I think MVFC is kind of like CAA football. MVFC would be fine. It's the Summit as a whole that might not be. MVC, Horizon, Big Sky...of course, you'd have to get others within those conferences to move.

jlog3000 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 14, 2014 6:32 am

The Bishin Cutter wrote:

ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:

If the MVC and the Summit are having discussions related with conference realignment, what would be for the MVFC (which it contains half of the MVC schools and the other half of Summit schools)?

I think MVFC is kind of like CAA football. MVFC would be fine. It's the Summit as a whole that might not be. MVC, Horizon, Big Sky...of course, you'd have to get others within those conferences to move.

The same could be said for the CAA; since almost half of its football-only members are from the America East and the other half are football-sponsoring full members (with a few that are non-football members, like former football-sponsoring schools of Hofstra and Northeastern).

TKthunder · **Joined:** Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm **Posts:** 1584

mozilla wrote:

fighting muskie wrote:

I don't see the Summit getting UTA or UALR unless the Sunbelt passes legislation requiring football or makes similar overtures quietly and off the record.

Yeah...I don't see it happening either. But, the question remains(and I don't really know the answer to it).

Is the Summit a better conference than the SBC for non fb sports?

I would guess that the SBC gets a bit more in revenue...but, not certain.

IF the SBC decided to force out UTA/UALR the most likely destination would be the Southland Conference.

Maybe the Summit could try for UALR but UTA would just go back to where they came from.

jlog3000 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 14, 2014 1:15 pm

tkalmus wrote:

IF the SBC decided to force out UTA/UALR the most likely destination would be the Southland Conference.

Maybe the Summit could try for UALR but UTA would just go back to where they came from.

Logically true. Unless if any of those two schools plan to instate football. But then again, didn't UTA once said that they planned to re-instate football when they joined the WAC from the Southland during the 2012-13 season (moving from an FCS conference to an FBS conference) before heading to the Sun Belt?

TKthunder · **Joined:** Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm **Posts:** 1584

ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:

tkalmus wrote:

IF the SBC decided to force out UTA/UALR the most likely destination would be the Southland Conference.

Maybe the Summit could try for UALR but UTA would just go back to where they came from.

Logically true. Unless if any of those two schools plan to instate football. But then again, didn't UTA once said that they planned to re-instate football when they joined the WAC from the Southland during the 2012-13 season (moving from an FCS conference to an FBS conference) before heading to the Sun Belt?

I know UTA pretty well, and it was talked about but now has almost no internal support.

In a few years it might be brought up again, or the students might push for it again, but as of right now nothing is even remotely in the works (this was told to me by a coach and an admin for UTA during a party I was at on Saturday).

fighting muskie · **Posted:** Tue Jan 14, 2014 1:45 pm

The problem with UTA and UALR going to the Southland if asked to leave the Sunbelt is that the Southland is already overcrowded. They are at 13 members after Oral Roberts leaves and conventional wisdom says that they will find a 14th members to fill that vacancy. The Summit might have interest in those two programs. The Atlantic Sun is another possibility; they are another conference that is right at the NCAA minimum.

UTA and UALR could even try to build their own league with non-football schools in there vicinity--A&M Corpus Christi, UT-Pan American, Oral Roberts, UMKC and then poach a few Atlantic Sun schools and you would have enough for a league.

With all that being said, the most comfortable home for UALR and UTA right now is the Sunbelt and they will stay there as long as the Sunbelt is willing to have them.

jlog3000 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 14, 2014 2:02 pm

fighting muskie wrote:

The problem with UTA and UALR going to the Southland if asked to leave the Sunbelt is that the Southland is already overcrowded. They are at 13 members after Oral Roberts leaves and conventional wisdom says that they will find a 14th members to fill that vacancy. The Summit might have interest in those two programs. The Atlantic Sun is another possibility; they are another conference that is right at the NCAA minimum.

UTA and UALR could even try to build their own league with non-football schools in there vicinity--A&M Corpus Christi, UT-Pan American, Oral Roberts, UMKC and then poach a few Atlantic Sun schools and you would have enough for a league.

With all that being said, the most comfortable home for UALR and UTA right now is the Sunbelt and they will stay there as long as the Sunbelt is willing to have them.

Even if they (UALR and/or UTA) might plan to instate football one point within the future?

nousefouraname · **Joined:** Fri Jan 10, 2014 8:57 am **Posts:** 8

Unfortunately, I think we're reaching a point where we won't see too many schools at the low major level starting football programs. I don't think we'll see too many conferences that aren't already in the football business going out of their way to go in that direction either. I love football, but I think it's a matter of simple economics. It's cheaper and easier to just focus on basketball, baseball, soccer, etc, especially with the realities of Title IX. I think this is especially true when it comes to the system schools. When you have a main campus that's already competing on the highest of levels, and in some cases being a revenue generator, it's hard to justify putting money into another one of your system schools when you know they are likely to be in the red. Your main campus is always going to be the first mouth that gets fed as well, and in this age of a perpetual facilities arms race big time programs are always going to be looking to put money into some new stadium addition, practice facility, or training space. The smaller schools, especially the system schools, will never be able to keep up, and in most cases they are being eliminated from the discussion when it comes to that type of funding with their university boards.

I'd love the Summit to have football. I'd love my school to have football. But, I think the Summit is probably pretty comfortable where it is and knows its identity...and I don't think that includes football anytime in the near future.

fighting muskie · **Posted:** Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:19 pm

The Summit needs to pursue North Dakota, Northern Colorado, and UMKC. North Dakota and Northern Colorado would give them 6 football schools and they could take over administration of the MVFC. Northern Colorado also means a travel partner for Denver. I think the Summit could really sell the grizzlies on a rivalry with the Pioneers and decreased travel expenses as the Summit League schools are closer than the more geographically spread out Big Sky and the Summit's geography is suited to traveling partners. UMKC brings back a major market right at the geographic center of the conference and rumor has it they are regretting the WAC move (and the WAC is very much at risk of being raided)

If UMKC isn't interested then pursue Eastern Illinois (brings a football program) or get into conversations with Chicago St--if UMKC hears that Chicago St might get the last spot it could coax them to jump.

jlog3000 · **Posted:** Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:57 pm

fighting muskie wrote:

The Summit needs to pursue North Dakota, Northern Colorado, and UMKC. North Dakota and Northern Colorado would give them 6 football schools and they could take over administration of the MVFC. Northern Colorado also means a travel partner for Denver. I think the Summit could really sell the grizzlies on a rivalry with the Pioneers and decreased travel expenses as the Summit League schools are closer than the more geographically spread out Big Sky and the Summit's geography is suited to traveling partners. UMKC brings back a major market right at the geographic center of the conference and rumor has it they are regretting the WAC move (and the WAC is very much at risk of being raided)

If UMKC isn't interested then pursue Eastern Illinois (brings a football program) or get into conversations with Chicago St--if UMKC hears that Chicago St might get the last spot it could coax them to jump.

I totally agree with you on those schools. But with Eastern Illinois (re-joining the Summit), plus UND and N. Colorado, it would bring enough schools for the Summit to sponsor football with 7.

mozilla · **Posted:** Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:08 pm

fighting muskie wrote:

The Summit needs to pursue North Dakota, Northern Colorado, and UMKC. North Dakota and Northern Colorado would give them 6 football schools and they could take over administration of the MVFC. Northern Colorado also means a travel partner for Denver. I think the Summit could really sell the grizzlies on a rivalry with the Pioneers and decreased travel expenses as the Summit League schools are closer than the more geographically spread out Big Sky and the Summit's geography is suited to traveling partners. UMKC brings back a major market right at the geographic center of the conference and rumor has it they are regretting the WAC move (and the WAC is very much at risk of being raided)

If UMKC isn't interested then pursue Eastern Illinois (brings a football program) or get into conversations with Chicago St--if UMKC hears that Chicago St might get the last spot it could coax them to jump.

Instead of UMKC, who has sucked, how about Lindenwood(St Louis area), C. Oklahoma(OKC area), C. Missouri(near KC), Mankato State, Minnesota St. Cloud, Wayne State(Detroit) or someone like that. All those schools play fb....and with fb, they would add much more than UMKC? And almost all are in or very near major metropolitan areas.

Fresno St. Alum · **Joined:** Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm **Posts:** 2803

mozilla wrote:

fighting muskie wrote:

The Summit needs to pursue North Dakota, Northern Colorado, and UMKC. North Dakota and Northern Colorado would give them 6 football schools and they could take over administration of the MVFC. Northern Colorado also means a travel partner for Denver. I think the Summit could really sell the grizzlies on a rivalry with the Pioneers and decreased travel expenses as the Summit League schools are closer than the more geographically spread out Big Sky and the Summit's geography is suited to traveling partners. UMKC brings back a major market right at the geographic center of the conference and rumor has it they are regretting the WAC move (and the WAC is very much at risk of being raided)

If UMKC isn't interested then pursue Eastern Illinois (brings a football program) or get into conversations with Chicago St--if UMKC hears that Chicago St might get the last spot it could coax them to jump.

Instead of UMKC, who has sucked, how about Lindenwood(St Louis area), C. Oklahoma(OKC area), C. Missouri(near KC), Mankato State, Minnesota St. Cloud, Wayne State(Detroit) or someone like that. All those schools play fb....and with fb, they would add much more than UMKC? And almost all are in or very near major metropolitan areas.

If you could get all of these schools to move up, it would be a better idea than trying to pry schools away, especially MVFC schools. The MVC can always just add 2 Summit schools w/ football and make it a conference spot, thus killing Summit fb.

mozilla · **Posted:** Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:54 pm

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

mozilla wrote:

fighting muskie wrote:

The Summit needs to pursue North Dakota, Northern Colorado, and UMKC. North Dakota and Northern Colorado would give them 6 football schools and they could take over administration of the MVFC. Northern Colorado also means a travel partner for Denver. I think the Summit could really sell the grizzlies on a rivalry with the Pioneers and decreased travel expenses as the Summit League schools are closer than the more geographically spread out Big Sky and the Summit's geography is suited to traveling partners. UMKC brings back a major market right at the geographic center of the conference and rumor has it they are regretting the WAC move (and the WAC is very much at risk of being raided)

If UMKC isn't interested then pursue Eastern Illinois (brings a football program) or get into conversations with Chicago St--if UMKC hears that Chicago St might get the last spot it could coax them to jump.

Instead of UMKC, who has sucked, how about Lindenwood(St Louis area), C. Oklahoma(OKC area), C. Missouri(near KC), Mankato State, Minnesota St. Cloud, Wayne State(Detroit) or someone like that. All those schools play fb....and with fb, they would add much more than UMKC? And almost all are in or very near major metropolitan areas.

If you could get all of these schools to move up, it would be a better idea than trying to pry schools away, especially MVFC schools. The MVC can always just add 2 Summit schools w/ football and make it a conference spot, thus killing Summit fb.

Well, I meant to grab one of them. But, if they grabbed a handful and started their own conference....that would be pretty cool too.

So, what kind of miracle would have to occur to get the correct number to ensure fb in the Summit? Do I remember that 8 is the minimum to start a fb league?

Summit League Expansion & Realignment Thread

Who is online