Bad News For The Bison

theblackgecko · Post by **theblackgecko** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:47 pm

Big Sky presidents reject expansion idea

The Associated Press - Wednesday, October 05, 2005

Leaders of Big Sky Conference colleges continue to reject the idea of expanding the league that North Dakota State would like to join.

There are no plans to change the current format, a league spokesman said Wednesday after presidents of the schools met Wednesday in Salt Lake City.

http://www.in-forum.com/ap/index.cfm?pa ... =D8D26GQG5

While this does not come as a surprise, it is a major disappointment for those that want to see the 'Sky expand by adding the Dakota schools.

WYOBISONMAN · Post by **WYOBISONMAN** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:56 pm

It is indeed bad news for us. I am afraid that NDSU will now look to the Mid-Con for affiliation.

grizzh8r · Post by **grizzh8r** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:29 pm

Fools.

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:47 am

This disappoints me. I was looking very forward to having NDSU in the league. A bad decision in my opinion.

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:48 am

They said they would have to expand to 12 teams for NDSU to gain entry. Why?

GavinDonos · Post by **GavinDonos** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 2:19 am

The reason that they would have to expand to 12 is because all the bottom feeding asswipe schools that Fullersh!t let into the conference in the first place don't want to have to travel to NODAK... Therefore they would like two divisions for the coastal crybabies and the real big sky teams. But, then the crybabies don't like that idea because then they wouldn't be guaranteed that UM or MSU would travel to their wretched stadiums every year to boost their piss poor attendance.

I really dislike Fullerton, he keeps making the same dumb mistakes over and over again... Oh, and have I mentioned that he is an Asshat?

I apologize for the poor grammer and punctuation. I'm at work and have to type frantically.

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 6:45 am

Gav, you're at work at 2 a.m. and have to "sneak" in your posts?

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 7:21 am

We all know President Gamble is an advocate of conference expansion and would like to see us affiliated with tier one state institutions. Does anyone have any insight as to his possible influence to move us into another conference with teams of similar academics?

NavyBlue · Post by **NavyBlue** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:13 am

Cat Grad, I think you bring up an interesting point. I think other land grant ag schools in the West would love to affiliate with UM and MSU, the only problem is other than the Dakota schools all those type of schools any where near Montana are all 1-a.

Once LaTech leaves the WAC which will happen in three years when Idaho, Utah State and New Mexico State start getting full revenue shares. UM and MSU could probably join the WAC together. The only snag is the Cats and Griz would have to come up with some extra scholies.

But the the thing is if Gamble is serious about MSU associating itself with other tier one, land grant ag schools, the other than staying in the Big Sky the WAC is the only other real option. MSU would then be in a league with other land grant ag schools in Hawaii, Nevada, Idaho, Utah, and New Mexico. The WAC also has an academic alliance that would benefit MSU and MSU would also bring value to that alliance.

Hopefully, the legislature will aprove the multi-year contract issue, and the Cats and Griz will seriously consider associating themselves with peer schools and leave the Sac and Portland States behind.

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:30 am

Yeah, the WAC would make for an interesting move but what would be the benefit of joining the same old same old bunch again? MSU has played this record over and over since the 40s and unfortunately, we've been in the Big Sky since about the time we quit calling ourselves The Treasure State

Besides, I was simply asking whether or not President Gamble felt it was time for schools such as MSU and ISU to move on. I'm sure what all of the fans and supporters would like to hear and see may influence his decision, but

NavyBlue · Post by **NavyBlue** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:57 am

Well it is not quite the same "old" bunch, it is the real old bunch with some of the fomer Big Sky schools. Financially, the WAC is going to get UM and MSU more revenue from tv contracts, bowl appearances and probably most importantly NCAA basketball tournament money. Other benefits increased publicity and exposure from being in a higher profile conference. The ability to associate with tier one research universities, and of importance to MSU other land grant ag schools. The academic alliance would allow MSU to do reasearch jointly with schools like U of Idaho, Utah State, Nevada-Reno, and New Mexico State. Schools similar in mission to MSU. Those schools would also benefit by having MSU as a new partner.

Well if President Gamble feels MSU should move on he has two options

1. Join the WAC along with UM
2. Do like the MWC, call a meeting in the Denver airport, announce MSU and several other "core" schools are withdrawing from the Big Sky Conference, and start over with a new conference leaving out the schools you want to get away from,(probably Sac St. and Portland State) and add the schools you want instead (North Dakota State, South Dakota State).

I think you would be surprised. As a native Montanan and an alum of a WAC school I would love to see UM and MSU in that league. And I really believe the Montana schools could be successful there.

MSU already has a facilities advantage over Idaho!

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:11 am

I agree with virtually everything you've posted here or on EFizzle; however, the weak link with point #2 in our conference is our conference commissioner. For whatever reason, he's directionally challenged toward the west and southwest of Montana. Perhaps that's because he grew up in Hamilton and may have been stationed in Califoria in the military. I can only speculate why, but again, I'm curious as to whether or not Dr. Gamble may in fact start exploring a better fit for our school.

NDSUbison · Post by **NDSUbison** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:30 am

I don't think the door is quite shut on the Dakota's in Big Sky expansion, and this article from the Forum makes me think there still may be a chance.

The Bison faithful suffered in the fall of 2004 when it appeared the Council was ready to accept both NDSU and South Dakota State. The fact both got left out was a surprise to those closest to the situation.

Then, last week, hope was resurrected when Big Sky commissioner Doug Fullerton said “everything about North Dakota State is exactly what the Big Sky needs.”

Those comments surprised NDSU athletic director Gene Taylor.

“Especially being so open about us,” Taylor said. “I thought that was behind-closed-doors discussion but he’s open about it.”

Taylor figured expansion would come up again because a nine-team conference is brutal for basketball scheduling.

“I thought that would take place because of the frustration of nine,” he said.

Bad schedule? Frustrating? Nine teams? This discussion has already started and the Big Sky doesn’t even go to nine teams until 2006-07.

It is a year away from the nine-team schedule and already people are voicing their displeasure. Just think what athletic directors, coaches and fans will be saying after that season.

NDSU went through the nine-team schedule with the North Central Conference one year and it was a joke. The Big Sky will be saying the same thing toward the end of 2007.

That means NDSU should know by the end of 2007 if it will ever fit into the Big Sky’s future plans. It would be just in the nick of time, too, because the school will be done with its five-year transition after 2007-08.

NDSU needs to be careful to not be duped into thinking the Big Sky is the greatest league of all time. It has one team (Portland State) that apparently can’t afford a tennis program, which is a Big Sky requirement, and five teams that averaged less than 6,700 fans in football last year.

On the other hand, the Big Sky needs to figure out if it wants its lower-budget teams to run the show or if it wants to go the other way.

Until then, NDSU will be sitting in the prairie like the little kid in the back of the class who gets teased.

[/url]http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index. ... olpack[url]

NavyBlue · Post by **NavyBlue** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:31 am

I too, share your opinion of the Fullerton. But I grew up in the Bitterroot Valley and was stationed in the military in California, and I see your point.
He does seem to have a very narrow focus when it comes to expansion.

I would rather have an NDSU and SDSU that people care about than adding teams like UNC, PSU, Sac that are virtually non factor in thier respective markets.

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:41 am

I was just questioning whether anyone had information as to what MSU's president may decide to do; and again, if our boosters and supporters are going to start shelling out decent sized checks, they're not going to want to spend their money on a measly 5-10k stadium expansion and stay in a stagnant league. Anyway, to work.

BelgradeBobcat · Post by **BelgradeBobcat** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:53 am

I think the Presidents in favor of SDSU and NDSU will put more pressure on the others and commissioner once those schools are NCAA tournament eligible. Right now the Big Sky can't afford to lose PSU and Sac because they'll lose their auto bid to the NCAA basketball tournament and big bucks that go with it.