Adding UNC

bozbobcat · Post by **bozbobcat** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:50 pm

I have 2 questions:

Longhorn, can I make a suggestion? Your 12 division format is great, but if I were you, I'd switch Idaho St. and Weber St. It would be a little closer than Weber for your proposed Eastern division.

Also, did Fullerton imply that U of M would be leaving for the WAC? Or did he mean that Sac St would be leaving the conference? I'd rather kick out Sac St. than the Griz.

Cat in SoDak · Post by **Cat in SoDak** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 7:22 pm

I think North Dakota and North Dakota State would be excellent additions to the BSC. Both have great facilities, strong programs and solid athletic budgets.

The only missing link is a western team. I believe Poly and Davis are both in/joining the Big West in everything but football. Southern Utah is a stretch. Any other suggestions?

East
MSU
UM
ISU
UNC
UND
NDSU

West
PSU
EWU
NAU
WSU
Sac
???????

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 7:25 pm

Cat in SoDak wrote:I think North Dakota and North Dakota State would be excellent additions to the BSC. Both have great facilities, strong programs and solid athletic budgets.

The only missing link is a western team. I believe Poly and Davis are both in/joining the Big West in everything but football. Southern Utah is a stretch. Any other suggestions?

East
MSU
UM
ISU
UNC
UND
NDSU

West
PSU
EWU
NAU
WSU
Sac
???????

UND isn't I-AA football.......not yet anyways. I would rather have SDSU.

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 7:25 pm

bozbobcat wrote:I have 2 questions:

Longhorn, can I make a suggestion? Your 12 division format is great, but if I were you, I'd switch Idaho St. and Weber St. It would be a little closer than Weber for your proposed Eastern division.

Also, did Fullerton imply that U of M would be leaving for the WAC? Or did he mean that Sac St would be leaving the conference? I'd rather kick out Sac St. than the Griz.

Why would Sac go I-A?

Cat in SoDak · Post by **Cat in SoDak** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 7:44 pm

longhorn_22 wrote:
Cat in SoDak wrote:I think North Dakota and North Dakota State would be excellent additions to the BSC. Both have great facilities, strong programs and solid athletic budgets.

The only missing link is a western team. I believe Poly and Davis are both in/joining the Big West in everything but football. Southern Utah is a stretch. Any other suggestions?

East
MSU
UM
ISU
UNC
UND
NDSU

West
PSU
EWU
NAU
WSU
Sac
???????
UND isn't I-AA football.......not yet anyways. I would rather have SDSU.

Why SDSU?

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the Jackrabbits, but I don't think there's any comparison between what they have here in Brookings and what UND has put together in Grand Forks.

Last I heard, UND for formally considering the move. I think it's only a matter of time.

bozbobcat · Post by **bozbobcat** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 7:55 pm

longhorn_22 wrote:Why would Sac go I-A?

It's just something I heard. They recruit almost exclusively in California and have a 30,000 seat stadium, which would be good for I-A. I don't know any more about it though.

BelgradeBobcat · Post by **BelgradeBobcat** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 9:59 pm

We hashed this topic out pretty good a couple of months ago on the following two threads:

http://www.bobcatnation.com/bobcatboard ... php?t=3494

http://www.bobcatnation.com/bobcatboard ... php?t=3338

Good stuff!

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 10:08 pm

bozbobcat wrote:
longhorn_22 wrote:Why would Sac go I-A?
It's just something I heard. They recruit almost exclusively in California and have a 30,000 seat stadium, which would be good for I-A. I don't know any more about it though.

They don't fill the stadium at all though. Very little turnout.

WYOBISONMAN · Post by **WYOBISONMAN** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:06 am

Cat in SoDak wrote:
longhorn_22 wrote:
Cat in SoDak wrote:I think North Dakota and North Dakota State would be excellent additions to the BSC. Both have great facilities, strong programs and solid athletic budgets.

The only missing link is a western team. I believe Poly and Davis are both in/joining the Big West in everything but football. Southern Utah is a stretch. Any other suggestions?

East
MSU
UM
ISU
UNC
UND
NDSU

West
PSU
EWU
NAU
WSU
Sac
???????
UND isn't I-AA football.......not yet anyways. I would rather have SDSU.
Why SDSU?

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the Jackrabbits, but I don't think there's any comparison between what they have here in Brookings and what UND has put together in Grand Forks.

Last I heard, UND for formally considering the move. I think it's only a matter of time.

UND has a committee looking at D1 again, but time and time again thier President (Kupchella) has been very anti-D1. Hockey is king in Grand Forks and the hockey supporters at UND view any other D1 program as a threat. A lot of fans are, however, getting upset with NDSU getting much more notice than UND. Also remember that the powers that be at UND pulled out every trick in the bag to try and short circuit the move by NDSU to D1. If UND were to jump to D1 there would be a hell of a lot of crow to eat in Grand Forks. I doubt that we will see them jump to D1 in the near future. If administration changes ...... who knows.

In the mean time.....Great West bottom feeder UNC is in the Sky and NDSU and SDSU are out......

I suspect NDSU will push the Mid-Con hard for membership as will SDSU.

NavyBlue · Post by **NavyBlue** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:16 am

Sac State (and Portland State before they are mentioned) will not be added to the WAC. There are only two current Big Sky members with a shot at WAC membership, Montana and Montana State. That is it.

Montana could come right now if they wanted. MSU could come if it was a package deal with Montana. MSU is more qualified than Idaho is for DI-A. Atleast the Cats have a stadium, and better team and fan base.

If UM and MSU wanted to be I-A and in the WAC you guys could be now. In five or ten years from now, who knows?

BelgradeBobcat · Post by **BelgradeBobcat** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 9:59 pm

NavyBlue wrote:Sac State (and Portland State before they are mentioned) will not be added to the WAC. There are only two current Big Sky members with a shot at WAC membership, Montana and Montana State. That is it.

Montana could come right now if they wanted. MSU could come if it was a package deal with Montana. MSU is more qualified than Idaho is for DI-A. Atleast the Cats have a stadium, and better team and fan base.

If UM and MSU wanted to be I-A and in the WAC you guys could be now. In five or ten years from now, who knows?

I agree. Sac and PSU are more likely to drop football than go 1-A. They're both light years away.

The WAC has actually turned itself into a pretty nice league-except for nightmare travel to Hawaii and Louisiana Tech. It's interesting that the WAC looks an awful lot like the old Big West football conference. Boise State and Fresno State did whatever they could to move up the college football food chain and now here they are back playing pretty much the same teams they were trying to get away from.

I think things in the western U.S. will remain pretty stable unless the Pac-10 decides to become the Pac-12 so they can have a conference title game. That would shake up the Mountain West Conference which would need a couple schools from the WAC and so on. If the WAC needs to go looking for another member Montana is probably their best/only choice. What MSU chooses to do if that ever happens will be quite interesting.

89rabbit · Post by **89rabbit** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:50 pm

Cat in SoDak wrote:
Why SDSU?

SDSU = Basketball school with a good football program that can deliver the entire state of South Dakota. UND = Hockey school with a good football program that can deliver part of the smaller state of North Dakota.

Since the Big Sky doesn't have hockey . . .

Frost Arena (Cap. 9,000)

New Scoreboards part of a $3 million dollar upgrade.

All that being said, I agree with WYOBISONMAN, my guess is both NDSU and SDSU end up in the Mid-Con and stay in the Great West.

89rabbit · Post by **89rabbit** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:58 pm

While I am showing off our new scoreboards, here is what the football stadium looks like.

Coughlin-Alumni Stadium 16,000

New scoreboard - measures approximately 121 feet wide by 56 feet high and features a large full-color ProStar® video replay screen in the center.

NDSUbison · Post by **NDSUbison** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:58 am

I don't know if NDSU and SDSU will end up in the Mid Con or the Big Sky, but right now I think the Big Sky looks more favorable. It seems the Dakotas have support of Fulerton and the Montana schools so the Dakotas will probably always be brought up when talking expansion. And with a nine school league and the problems it creates for B-ball scheduling I think talks will heat up again. And I wouldn't be suprised if the Big Sky adds NDSU, SDSU, and UND to form a 12 team conference. I really hope the Big Sky adds NDSU before the Mid Con comes calling because I just don't like the Mid Con. The Mid Con schools are nothing like NDSU and there is no football. I think NDSU could develop some nice rivalries with Big Sky schools and whos knows maybe the west coast schools would grow to like the Dakota schools eventually. The Big Sky is really were I want NDSU to end up and hopefully the Big Sky presidents come to their senses and bring in the Dakota schools.

theblackgecko · Post by **theblackgecko** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 2:10 am

NavyBlue wrote:Sac State (and Portland State before they are mentioned) will not be added to the WAC. There are only two current Big Sky members with a shot at WAC membership, Montana and Montana State. That is it.

Montana could come right now if they wanted. MSU could come if it was a package deal with Montana. MSU is more qualified than Idaho is for DI-A. Atleast the Cats have a stadium, and better team and fan base.

If UM and MSU wanted to be I-A and in the WAC you guys could be now. In five or ten years from now, who knows?

Don't forget Davis. That program has enough ambition and fan base to join the WAC in a hurry. The WAC is a solid I-A football conference and has good (and recently improved) basketball along with higher national prominence, but the Big West is better for "olympic" sports, which might be one reason Davis stays where it is at now.

Pac-10 made the decision to go round robin in football (largest conference to do so), and hates champtionship games / postseason tournaments. I don't see the Pac-10 becoming the Pac-12 for a very long time. On the other hand, the Mountain West might shake things up, but is probably waiting for UTEP to rise to prominence in C-USA before stealing them away.

The seperation between Montana / Montana State and the rest of the 'Sky is growing, as the 'Sky expands by addding D-II programs like PSU/Sac/UNC. Even NAU and Weber aren't what they used ot be, both in terms of athletics and academic mission. While Montana will not move (nor do any serious research about moving) under Dennison, I see Montana joining the WAC once Dennison leaves (which should be before the end of Schweitzer's first term). Financially, playing in the 'Sky is fiscal suicide for a program of Montana's size.

MSU will probably wait a few years, looking at Montana's experiences in the WAC before jumping in. With Montana gone, MSU should start dominating the 'Sky, which will increase momentum to move into the WAC.

WYOBISONMAN · Post by **WYOBISONMAN** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:06 pm

NDSUbison wrote:I don't know if NDSU and SDSU will end up in the Mid Con or the Big Sky, but right now I think the Big Sky looks more favorable. It seems the Dakotas have support of Fulerton and the Montana schools so the Dakotas will probably always be brought up when talking expansion. And with a nine school league and the problems it creates for B-ball scheduling I think talks will heat up again. And I wouldn't be suprised if the Big Sky adds NDSU, SDSU, and UND to form a 12 team conference. I really hope the Big Sky adds NDSU before the Mid Con comes calling because I just don't like the Mid Con. The Mid Con schools are nothing like NDSU and there is no football. I think NDSU could develop some nice rivalries with Big Sky schools and whos knows maybe the west coast schools would grow to like the Dakota schools eventually. The Big Sky is really were I want NDSU to end up and hopefully the Big Sky presidents come to their senses and bring in the Dakota schools.

I am with you on all of that. I too hope we wind up in the Big Sky. I just am afraid the Mid-Con with give us the invite before the Big Sky. The Big Sky just has too much dissent right now with Sac State and PSU complaining.

BelgradeBobcat · Post by **BelgradeBobcat** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:19 am

Northern Colorado is definitely not a basketball school. They have some talented players on their team-but only a little over 800 fans crowded in their "pavillion" tonight to watch the Bobcats vs. the Bears. Manhattan High will have more people at any of their home games.

They interviewed their athletic director at halftime and showed a quick shot of some plans to renovate their gym with all around chairback seats. That will probably help. Their "pavillion" looked like your garden variety P.E. complex-a little bigger version of MSU's Shroyer Gym.

whitetrashgriz · Post by **whitetrashgriz** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:24 am

BelgradeBobcat wrote:Northern Colorado is definitely not a basketball school. They have some talented players on their team-but only a little over 800 fans crowded in their "pavillion" tonight to watch the Bobcats vs. the Bears. Manhattan High will have more people at any of their home games.

They interviewed their athletic director at halftime and showed a quick shot of some plans to renovate their gym with all around chairback seats. That will probably help. Their "pavillion" looked like your garden variety P.E. complex-a little bigger version of MSU's Shroyer Gym.

i saw this. you saw this. we all saw this. then why the hell were the commentators talking like it was duke- unc? they made comments about the noise, and the rowdy student section! what? it had to have been hard for both teams just to play there. did anyone else get the feeling that they were watching an open gym or something? it didn't even feel like a real game. apparently the refs didn't think it was real either!

bozbobcat · Post by **bozbobcat** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 9:14 am

The refs weren't great yesterday, and there was a discrepancy. In the first half, UNC shot 16 free throws vs. MSU's 6. The gym wasn't bad, but it wasn't anything special. The sad thing is it will be #6 or #7 next year in size capacity, ahead of Sac. St., Portland St., and maybe Idaho St.

NavyBlue · Post by **NavyBlue** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 10:47 am

theblackgecko wrote:
NavyBlue wrote:Sac State (and Portland State before they are mentioned) will not be added to the WAC. There are only two current Big Sky members with a shot at WAC membership, Montana and Montana State. That is it.

Montana could come right now if they wanted. MSU could come if it was a package deal with Montana. MSU is more qualified than Idaho is for DI-A. Atleast the Cats have a stadium, and better team and fan base.

If UM and MSU wanted to be I-A and in the WAC you guys could be now. In five or ten years from now, who knows?
Don't forget Davis. That program has enough ambition and fan base to join the WAC in a hurry. The WAC is a solid I-A football conference and has good (and recently improved) basketball along with higher national prominence, but the Big West is better for "olympic" sports, which might be one reason Davis stays where it is at now.

Pac-10 made the decision to go round robin in football (largest conference to do so), and hates champtionship games / postseason tournaments. I don't see the Pac-10 becoming the Pac-12 for a very long time. On the other hand, the Mountain West might shake things up, but is probably waiting for UTEP to rise to prominence in C-USA before stealing them away.

The seperation between Montana / Montana State and the rest of the 'Sky is growing, as the 'Sky expands by addding D-II programs like PSU/Sac/UNC. Even NAU and Weber aren't what they used ot be, both in terms of athletics and academic mission. While Montana will not move (nor do any serious research about moving) under Dennison, I see Montana joining the WAC once Dennison leaves (which should be before the end of Schweitzer's first term). Financially, playing in the 'Sky is fiscal suicide for a program of Montana's size.

MSU will probably wait a few years, looking at Montana's experiences in the WAC before jumping in. With Montana gone, MSU should start dominating the 'Sky, which will increase momentum to move into the WAC.

I agree with everything you said gecko. UC-Davis will be in the WAC IMHO, in the next 5 to 7 years. I read where one of their coaches said, "that you do not spend the kind of money they are on football facilites to stay in I-AA". Cal Poly is another I wonder about, they have Spanos as a booster and if and when UCD goes I-A they may need to follow, partly because they will need a conference to play in. The Great West is a short term proposition and everyone knows it. Once the NDSU and SDSU find a conference home for thier football, the Great West will be dead.

LaTech will not be in the WAC long, and while they will never admit it publicly league presidents in Honolulu, San Jose, Fresno, Reno, Moscow, Boise and Logan will be dancing with joy once they are gone. I also think eventually New Mexico State may move one but that won't be for atleast 10 years. I really think that UM and MSU will eventually have to seriously consider the WAC. Especially UM, they are having a hell of a time now finding non-conference opponets. On thier board today it says they are priced out of games with I-A schools now. There are no I-As that will pay UM as an I-AA school to visit what UM could make now for a home game. I also think as MSU's program grows and progresses they will eventually be in the same situation as UM is in now.

You are right about the Pac-10. The only schools they have shown interest in are Colorado and Texas and both have already told the Pac-10 they want to stay in the Big 12. Another thing to keep in mind is that the Pac-10 needs unanimous approval for expansion, and the WA, OR, and AZ schools will never vote to have less games against USC and UCLA which two more schools would mean to them.

As far as the MWC goes I seriosly doubt they will ever take any of the schools in the WAC. They have passed on all of them atleast a couple times now. If UTEP stays good they may add them, or look to Houston, which is mentioned a lot.