• Hi Guest,

    We've updated the site to combine all the forums that were part of the Big Sky Fans Network into one location. This will make it easier to navigate and participate in all the discussions for each school without having to have multiple accounts, etc. We are still working out some tweaks but please let us know if you notice anything.

    With the migration, in some circumstances, your username could have been merged with one of your other usernames from the other forums. If this is the case, you can request to change your username in your account details page of your profile.
  • Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
  • Guest, do want an ad free experience on BigSkyFans.com among other benefits? Upgrade your account today!

    Simply click your profile name > account upgrades > BigSky Club > choose between the year long subscription (two free months) or month to month

    Thanks for the continued support. Cheers!

Big Sky adds Southern Utah and North Dakota

M

marceagfan5

Active member
http://www.bigskyconf.com/news/2010/11/1/GEN_1101105326.aspx

The conference just became bigger with South Dakota pending...
 
Good news. UND isn't a great fit geographically, but adding another flagship university to the conference is a good move, IMO. I'm sure they've already worked through the scheduling aspects.
 
EWURanger said:
Good news. UND isn't a great fir geographically, but adding another flagship university to the conference is a good move, IMO. I'm sure they've already worked through the scheduling aspects.
Click to expand...

I still consider EWU to be a flagship university, at least in the Spokane area;)
 
If S. Dakota joins...that would give us 14 schools in conference for football...so I'm assuming they will have to divide up the schools into a north/south or east/west division. Any thoughts as to how they will break it out?
 
marceagfan5 said:
If S. Dakota joins...that would give us 14 schools in conference for football...so I'm assuming they will have to divide up the schools into a north/south or east/west division. Any thoughts as to how they will break it out?
Click to expand...

They've said that the plan is two 7 team Division for football, although they haven't publicly addressed what that's going to look like yet. There's been a lot of guesses, though. I'd personally like it to be broken down into a "Pacific" and "Mountain" Divisions. Reason being, I don't want EWU to lose exposure in California, which is an important recruiting area for us. Meyer, Nichols, Jones, etc.....

Pacific:
EWU
PSU
SAC
POLY*
DAVIS*
NAU?? (I don't know what makes sense here)
SUU*?? (Ditto)

Mountain:
UM
MSU
UND*
USD*
UNC
ISU
WSU
 
As much as I hate admitting it, we really need that Montana game on the schedule. However, there is no doubt EWU and Montana have been the two best programs in the conference over the last 10-12 years, so logic would say we'd get split just based on that.
 
LDopaPDX said:
As much as I hate admitting it, we really need that Montana game on the schedule. However, there is no doubt EWU and Montana have been the two best programs in the conference over the last 10-12 years, so logic would say we'd get split just based on that.
Click to expand...

With 7 team Divisions, I think you'd still end up playing at least two cross-divisional games, maybe more. In that scenario, I think EWU still plays both Montana schools every year due to proximity and rivalry.

6 Divisional games
3 Cross-Divisional
1 FBS
1 Division II

or

6 Divisional Games
2 Cross-Divisional
2 FBS
1 Division II

I'm not a big fan of having 2 FBS schools on the schedule, but we all know it happens every once in a while. I think our 2012 schedule has WSU and Idaho on it, but I think it's just UW next year. Speaking of which, why are we playing Idaho? That's a lose-lose scenario - we probably won't beat them, and they offer no big pay-day. No, stick with the Pac-12, etc. that can actually pay you decently for these sorts of games. Sorry, off topic a little.
 
I'd rather see 6 divisional, 3 cross-divisional, 1 FBS/D-II, with the option for a 4th cross-divisional game instead of another FBS/D-II. With a league so big, there will still be 4 other teams available to work with. If you're going to play against them in conference every other year, why not have them fill that 11th spot after the money game if your school needs it (which pretty much all do)? Another FCS game on the schedule means another shot at a win that will count towards playoff eligibility.
 
Screamin_Eagle174 said:
I'd rather see 6 divisional, 3 cross-divisional, 1 FBS/D-II, with the option for a 4th cross-divisional game instead of another FBS/D-II. With a league so big, there will still be 4 other teams available to work with. If you're going to play against them in conference every other year, why not have them fill that 11th spot after the money game if your school needs it (which pretty much all do)? Another FCS game on the schedule means another shot at a win that will count towards playoff eligibility.
Click to expand...

This.
 
kalm said:
Screamin_Eagle174 said:
I'd rather see 6 divisional, 3 cross-divisional, 1 FBS/D-II, with the option for a 4th cross-divisional game instead of another FBS/D-II. With a league so big, there will still be 4 other teams available to work with. If you're going to play against them in conference every other year, why not have them fill that 11th spot after the money game if your school needs it (which pretty much all do)? Another FCS game on the schedule means another shot at a win that will count towards playoff eligibility.
Click to expand...

This.
Click to expand...

+ Montana as a guaranteed cross divisional game every year for EWU. :)
 
So USD snubs the Big Sky and foils the whole "Divisional" format.

So what's the plan now?

I think that Fullerton should get on the horn and contact Utah Valley State University. It's a large school and they have a decent b-ball program. No football, but rumor is they would start one if they got a BSC invite.
 
SloStang said:
Here is an even better idea I got from the Sioux board.

Give each team 4 rivals that play every year and then play 4 of the other 8 teams every other year.

Possible rivals:

UM: MSU/EWU/UND/WSU
EWU: UM/PSU/CP/Sac
PSU: EWU/CP/Sac/UCD
ISU: UND/WSU/MSU/UNC
WSU: ISU/SUU/UM/NAU
SUU: WSU/NAU/UNC/UCD
NAU: SUU/UNC/WSU/MSU
UNC: NAU/UND/SUU/ISU
UND: UNC/MSU/UM/ISU
MSU: UND/UM/ISU/NAU
CP: UCD/Sac/EWU/PSU
UCD: CP/Sac/SUU/PSU
Sac: UCD/CP/PSU/EWU

I like it. I like it a lot.
Click to expand...

I like that too, with one change to make it 9 conference games if teams so choose;

Block A would be the 4 teams played every year.
Blocks B and C would be the remaining 8 split into two.
Home = h
Away = a

Rotated on an 8 year cycle, you'd have:

Year 1: A1h, A2a, A3h, A4a, B1h, B2a, B3h, B4a, C1h + 2 OOC
Year 2: A1a, A2h, A3a, A4h, C1a, C2h, C3a, C4h, B1a + 2 OOC
Year 3: A1h, A2a, A3h, A4a, B1h, B2h, B3a, B4h, C2a + 2 OOC
Year 4: A1a, A2h, A3a, A4h, C1h, C2h, C3h, C4a, B2a + 2 OOC
Year 5: A1h, A2a, A3h, A4a, B1a, B2h, B3h, B4a, C3a + 2 OOC
Year 6: A1a, A2h, A3a, A4h, C1a, C2a, C3h, C4h, B3a + 2 OOC
Year 7: A1h, A2a, A3h, A4a, B1h, B2a, B3h, B4h, C4a + 2 OOC
Year 8: A1a, A2h, A3a, A4h, C1h, C2h, C3a, C4h, B4a + 2 OOC

Each team from blocks B and C would be played 3 years in a row at some point in the rolling 8 year cycle, then every other year after that. Starting year 9, you'd play the same schedule through again, but flip the home and away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top