UND Leaving BSC/D1?

[WILDCAT]

It's a win - win for UND & the BIG SKY. The logistics were bad from the get go on North Dakota (and remember Fullerton's plan was for South Dakota to join at the time as well). This isn't hard to understand.

Oldrunner makes a valid point, why not look to UC Davis or Cal Poly to become full time members by joining their basketball programs up with the BSC. Would leaving the Big West for the Big Sky be so bad?

New Mexico State should strive to become invited to the Mountain West. New Mexico should push for that! That would even up the MW to an even 12 members. A better fit for them.

The Big Sky should not rush into adding a new member, especially if it would be a non-football playing member. UVU? - their President has said that the expense of adding a football program isn't agreeable to him and he seems to have support on that. There has been little push in that direction presently, nor even to get into the Big Sky.

Not sure where the info on the WAC imploding is coming from, but if it's fact then a "merger" of sorts some years ahead may be happening with some Big Sky members. Looking ahead a ways, changes are likely but for now it's totally a guessing game. :twocents:

UC Davis and Cal Poly are not going to leave a mostly California league.

Until the possibility of the WAC imploding... which I get to next.

The WAC currently has 8 members but....
One has expressed interest in joining the other Texas schools in the Southland (UT Rio Grande)
Another is questioning whether or not Div.1 basketball is still feasible for them (Chicago State)
Another is trying everything to get into the Mountain West (New Mexico State)
Another is trying to get into the WCC (Seattle)
And I remember hearing that CSUB wants in the Big West with their fellow Cali schools.
Plus they already lost NJIT (Which makes sense)

If I'm not mistaken there has to be at least 7 or 8 teams in a conference for that conference to receive an automatic bid to the NCAA's.

Though none of those teams have left the WAC, the WAC is anything but secure.

 

[sacstateman]

Just for your info...California Baptist is going D1 and headed to the WAC in 2018...

 

[WILDCAT]

Just for your info...California Baptist is going D1 and headed to the WAC in 2018...

Well, thats good for the WAC……….I guess.


I am actually in favor of inviting no one, I think the smaller the conference the best chance of having a complete H&H conference season. Which I would prefer even if it meant playing less OOC games.

 

[sacstateman]

I hate to say this but what would make sense is for Sac to move to the Big West for basketball like UC Davis is now....pair you guys with UNC, Portland with EWU, UI and ISU and everything else the same...don't think it's going to happen though...it would help us immensely with travel budget also...

 

[WILDCAT]

I hate to say this but what would make sense is for Sac to move to the Big West for basketball like UC Davis is now....pair you guys with UNC, Portland with EWU, UI and ISU and everything else the same...don't think it's going to happen though...it would help us immensely with travel budget also...

I don't think the Big Sky wants more affiliate members. The move would definitely benefit Sac though

My question is would Sac be the lone wolf team again or would Northern Colorado become the lone wolf?

 

[DeeWildcatTailgater]

UNCO needs to go to even things out.

12 football members

10 all other sports with full home/home each year in basketball.

Men's basketball can play tournament Mon-Thurs to get title game back on ESPN2 Thursday time slot. No one has ESPNU. The current setup is a complete joke.

Top 4 earn a bye, regular season champ earns a double bye to the semis.

Men's championship Monday-Thursday.

3 games Monday 10 down to 7 teams.
3 games Tuesday 7 down to 4 teams.
2 games Wednesday down to 2 teams.
Title game Thursday back on ESPN2 or cancel agreement and find a new channel.

Women's championship Wednesday-Saturday

Women's can play same schedule but have the first round with 1 game Tuesday and 2 games Wednesday. Thursday they play 3 games and have semis on Friday and title game Saturday.

(Never more than 4 games in a day)

Travel Partners
EWU/Idaho
UM/MSU
ISU/Weber
SUU/NAU
Sac/Port (odd teams out as far as distance but easy airport access)


2 football divisions

Big Sky Legends: Big Sky Leaders:
Weber ---------- Cal Poly
ISU -------------- PSU
Montana -------- NAU
MSU. ----------- SUU
Idaho ---------- Sac St.
Eastern --------- Davis

Football scheduling/ divisions

2-3 non conference games

7 or 8 conference games, 5 in division, 2-3 opposite division. (Extra game depends on whether FCS is allowed to play 12 games or not and if conference goes to 9 games)

+1 Flex game at end of year for each team predetermined yearly which division gets home game.

1. Big Sky title game (top teams in each Division)
2. Bronze Bowl (2nd team in each division)
3. Bracket buster bowl (3rd team in each division)
Should be playoff spot on the line.
4-6 Evenly matched teams that haven't played if possible.

Why the changes you ask?

Football recruits will start picking the Big Sky again because a televised title game gives something to get excited about.

With 2 6 team divisions in football, at any given time, half of the conference is in the top 3 of each division. This makes more teams feel relevant increasing fan attendance and recruiting.

In basketball, the title game is everything. When it's on ESPNU, recruits can't find it, bars don't put it on, it costs us recruits and fans.

The best team needs to have a significant advantage. A double bye protects the conference from having a terrible team earn the bid. Also, the top 4 earn a single bye. This makes the regular season relevent.

 

[SWWeatherCat]

I love pretty much everything in your detailed layout. These would be incredibly positive changes for the conference and I would think renew interest and build a better brand. Too bad most of it is unlikely to happen.

 

[oldrunner]

I love pretty much everything in your detailed layout. These would be incredibly positive changes for the conference and I would think renew interest and build a better brand. Too bad most of it is unlikely to happen.

I agree, that is probably the least likely thing to happen. I also don't think that another affiliate member would be added. If they did allow Sac to become an affiliate member, I think the new travel partner for UNC would be MSU. They would be the two most eastern teams, PSU and EWU are natural partners, UI and UM likewise.

If there are no additions or other subtractions, then I think UNC becomes the lone wolf for BB scheduling.

 

[pccatfan]

2 football divisions

Big Sky Legends: Big Sky Leaders:
Weber ---------- Cal Poly
ISU -------------- PSU
Montana -------- NAU
MSU. ----------- SUU
Idaho ---------- Sac St.
Eastern --------- Davis

Football scheduling/ divisions

2-3 non conference games

7 or 8 conference games, 5 in division, 2-3 opposite division. (Extra game depends on whether FCS is allowed to play 12 games or not and if conference goes to 9 games)

+1 Flex game at end of year for each team predetermined yearly which division gets home game.

1. Big Sky title game (top teams in each Division)
2. Bronze Bowl (2nd team in each division)
3. Bracket buster bowl (3rd team in each division)
Should be playoff spot on the line.
4-6 Evenly matched teams that haven't played if possible.

Why the changes you ask?

Football recruits will start picking the Big Sky again because a televised title game gives something to get excited about.

With 2 6 team divisions in football, at any given time, half of the conference is in the top 3 of each division. This makes more teams feel relevant increasing fan attendance and recruiting.

I think you're forgetting that if we have a title game we forfeit the FCS playoffs so in no way is that going to happen!

 

[n.ogdencat]

2 football divisions

Big Sky Legends: Big Sky Leaders:
Weber ---------- Cal Poly
ISU -------------- PSU
Montana -------- NAU
MSU. ----------- SUU
Idaho ---------- Sac St.
Eastern --------- Davis

Football scheduling/ divisions

2-3 non conference games

7 or 8 conference games, 5 in division, 2-3 opposite division. (Extra game depends on whether FCS is allowed to play 12 games or not and if conference goes to 9 games)

+1 Flex game at end of year for each team predetermined yearly which division gets home game.

1. Big Sky title game (top teams in each Division)
2. Bronze Bowl (2nd team in each division)
3. Bracket buster bowl (3rd team in each division)
Should be playoff spot on the line.
4-6 Evenly matched teams that haven't played if possible.

Why the changes you ask?

Football recruits will start picking the Big Sky again because a televised title game gives something to get excited about.

With 2 6 team divisions in football, at any given time, half of the conference is in the top 3 of each division. This makes more teams feel relevant increasing fan attendance and recruiting.

I think you're forgetting that if we have a title game we forfeit the FCS playoffs so in no way is that going to happen!

Love the ideas Dee! I am right there with you! I'm all for returning to the previous basketball tournament format or dropping it all together, but if you have to have a tournament, make it as advantageous for the conference champ as possible.

For football, Pccat is right though. If we have a title game in football, we can't participate in the FCS Playoffs. No matter, I think football divisions is the right direction. I think the Sky is going to try to go with a 9 game schedule first though.

Regrettably, the only major flaw is that UNCO isn't going anywhere. Who would take them? The Summit is full and there isn't another option for Football. Maybe the Southland? I could see Sac leaving to the Big West and becoming an affiliate member in football before UNCO goes anywhere. I think we are stuck with the cubbies and hornets.

 

[oldrunner]

I am a real fan of the Sacramento area. Sac is struggling right now, but that area has tremendous potential. With that said, and in light of UND leaving, I would love to see UC Davis brought in to the BSC. I don't know if they are interested, but I believe they fit our footprint well and would make a natural travel partner for Sac in BB. That Sacramento area is a sleeping giant. If they figure out how to get their act together, they can become a strong member of the BSC, likewise with Davis.

 

[AlumniWSU]

I am a real fan of the Sacramento area. Sac is struggling right now, but that area has tremendous potential. With that said, and in light of UND leaving, I would love to see UC Davis brought in to the BSC. I don't know if they are interested, but I believe they fit our footprint well and would make a natural travel partner for Sac in BB. That Sacramento area is a sleeping giant. If they figure out how to get their act together, they can become a strong member of the BSC, likewise with Davis.

I agree...but as Wildcat mentioned, the Big West (or S/B "Big Cali") seems to be the desired home for their basketball; or speaking of UC Davis or even Cal Poly, why didn't they join the BSC as a full member in the first place?

Careful on the BSC basketball tourney set up; some coaches will contend that giving the favorite a couple of byes actually can lead to unintended consequences by providing the underlings to be warmed up & firing on all cylinders & some slack (rust) may bite at the rested top seed's play in thee big game.

Like the two divisions idea for football (even without the title game) but really desire a 9 game football & 20-22 game basketball conference schedule the most! :thumbdown: on the patsies OOC games!! :twocents:

 

[WILDCAT]

I am a real fan of the Sacramento area. Sac is struggling right now, but that area has tremendous potential. With that said, and in light of UND leaving, I would love to see UC Davis brought in to the BSC. I don't know if they are interested, but I believe they fit our footprint well and would make a natural travel partner for Sac in BB. That Sacramento area is a sleeping giant. If they figure out how to get their act together, they can become a strong member of the BSC, likewise with Davis.

I agree...but as Wildcat mentioned, the Big West (or S/B "Big Cali") seems to be the desired home for their basketball; or speaking of UC Davis or even Cal Poly, why didn't they join the BSC as a full member in the first place?

Careful on the BSC basketball tourney set up; some coaches will contend that giving the favorite a couple of byes actually can lead to unintended consequences by providing the underlings to be warmed up & firing on all cylinders & some slack (rust) may bite at the rested top seed's play in thee big game.

Like the two divisions idea for football (even without the title game) but really desire a 9 game football & 20-22 game basketball conference schedule the most! :thumbdown: on the patsies OOC games!! :twocents:

UC Davis and Cal Poly were being courted by the WAC at the time that the WAC was also courting Montana and Montana State. Poly and Davis were considering the jump when the Big Sky offered them membership. Poly and Davis liked the idea of Big Sky football but not the idea of leaving an (at the time) all Californian Olympics conference. Poly and Davis then told the BSC that they would join as football members as long as they could keep their other programs in the Big West. The Big Sky acknowledged this request on fear of possibly losing both Montana's. Not long after that both Montana and Montana State declined WAC membership. Poly and Davis rejecting the WAC pretty much secured that conference's downfall.

I think Sacramento State has asked the Big Sky if they could do the same and the Sky basically told them no. Losing Sac could potentially hurt the conference more than it would help, mostly because of the California recruits that the Weber's and Montana's have been getting.

 

[bincitysioux]

I'm a little late to the party here, but just wanted to chime in.

I think this is a HORRIBLE move for North Dakota to make. I have really enjoyed being a part of the Big Sky. Actually I have LOVED being a part of the Big Sky. To me it is more than just about athletics. It offers so much to affiliate with quality schools like Weber, Montana, Montana St., Idaho, UC Davis, etc. Regardless of conference affiliation, we will always be tied to and have relationships with the other Dakota schools simply due to proximity and history. This move will effectively sever all ties with our new brethren out west. I understand the financial and logistical part of it, but strategically I think this move is going to set UND back.

I also understand that there will be no weeping from many Big Sky members as we exit, mostly again due to financial/logistic/travel reasons. But I will miss associating with the members of this league and their fans. Weber among them especially. As a basketball fan, it has been wonderful to be competing against a school with a basketball pedigree like Weber. There is no school in the Summit league that can come close to measuring up with the basketball tradition at Weber, and I've enjoyed being a small part of that in recent seasons.

I will look forward to the little time we have left competing in the Big Sky, and hope yet to make a trip to Ogden for my annual Big Sky football road trip. Classy bunch of fans on this forum, it's been fun!

 

[oldrunner]

IMO, it has less to do with recruiting and more to do with the Sacramento/California market. I would think that the BSC would seek to enhance that and UCD makes the most sense. SLO is a good school, just smaller and more remote. In losing a full member, I don't think the BSC would look to find an affiliate member unless it was a non football playing school who committed to adding football. If that were to happen, I could see a few options out there.

I am hoping that we can keep a good, long term relationship with UND in as many sports as possible. Both of our schools are going to need quality OOC games. :thumb: :thumb:

 

[WILDCAT]

I'm a little late to the party here, but just wanted to chime in.

I think this is a HORRIBLE move for North Dakota to make. I have really enjoyed being a part of the Big Sky. Actually I have LOVED being a part of the Big Sky. To me it is more than just about athletics. It offers so much to affiliate with quality schools like Weber, Montana, Montana St., Idaho, UC Davis, etc. Regardless of conference affiliation, we will always be tied to and have relationships with the other Dakota schools simply due to proximity and history. This move will effectively sever all ties with our new brethren out west. I understand the financial and logistical part of it, but strategically I think this move is going to set UND back.

I also understand that there will be no weeping from many Big Sky members as we exit, mostly again due to financial/logistic/travel reasons. But I will miss associating with the members of this league and their fans. Weber among them especially. As a basketball fan, it has been wonderful to be competing against a school with a basketball pedigree like Weber. There is no school in the Summit league that can come close to measuring up with the basketball tradition at Weber, and I've enjoyed being a small part of that in recent seasons.

I will look forward to the little time we have left competing in the Big Sky, and hope yet to make a trip to Ogden for my annual Big Sky football road trip. Classy bunch of fans on this forum, it's been fun!

I know a lot of people are happy about UND leaving, but I am kinda bummed out about it. Logistics and geography aside I have also really enjoyed our games both football and basketball against UND and was really starting to like the little basketball rivalry that had been starting to grow between UND and Weber. Our football games have also all been very close competitive games. Plus the Big Sky is losing a pretty good member when it comes to conference strength. UND brought a lot in terms of strength to this conference and it will be sorely missed.

I am hoping that Weber and UND can continue a yearly H&H series and develop this growing rivalry a little more over time. As well as maybe some future football games. I don't have a lot of faith that that will happen but here's to hoping.

 

[WILDCAT]

IMO, it has less to do with recruiting and more to do with the Sacramento/California market. I would think that the BSC would seek to enhance that and UCD makes the most sense. SLO is a good school, just smaller and more remote. In losing a full member, I don't think the BSC would look to find an affiliate member unless it was a non football playing school who committed to adding football. If that were to happen, I could see a few options out there.

I am hoping that we can keep a good, long term relationship with UND in as many sports as possible. Both of our schools are going to need quality OOC games. :thumb: :thumb:

The market is why the Big Sky doesn't want to lose Sac but for the sake of certain Universities who recruit heavily in California (Weber, UM) it could hurt as well. From what I saw watching the SAC/UM game earlier this year Pridget? from Montana is from that area and the Griz had a pretty good little section of people at the game. It's good for recruiting to get to take that little jaunt into California every year.

 

[DeeWildcatTailgater]

2 football divisions

Big Sky Legends: Big Sky Leaders:
Weber ---------- Cal Poly
ISU -------------- PSU
Montana -------- NAU
MSU. ----------- SUU
Idaho ---------- Sac St.
Eastern --------- Davis

Football scheduling/ divisions

2-3 non conference games

7 or 8 conference games, 5 in division, 2-3 opposite division. (Extra game depends on whether FCS is allowed to play 12 games or not and if conference goes to 9 games)

+1 Flex game at end of year for each team predetermined yearly which division gets home game.

1. Big Sky title game (top teams in each Division)
2. Bronze Bowl (2nd team in each division)
3. Bracket buster bowl (3rd team in each division)
Should be playoff spot on the line.
4-6 Evenly matched teams that haven't played if possible.

Why the changes you ask?

Football recruits will start picking the Big Sky again because a televised title game gives something to get excited about.

With 2 6 team divisions in football, at any given time, half of the conference is in the top 3 of each division. This makes more teams feel relevant increasing fan attendance and recruiting.

I think you're forgetting that if we have a title game we forfeit the FCS playoffs so in no way is that going to happen!

Correct me if I'm wrong, the reason title games and playoffs don't coexist in FCS is because the game would be played the first week of FCS playoffs. That is why you just back everything up one week and leave the final week for flex scheduling. Technically, it's not a title game, it's the conference leaving the final week open to schedule evenly matched games amongst the 12 teams. Is there a rule preventing this?

 

[WILDCAT]

2 football divisions

Big Sky Legends: Big Sky Leaders:
Weber ---------- Cal Poly
ISU -------------- PSU
Montana -------- NAU
MSU. ----------- SUU
Idaho ---------- Sac St.
Eastern --------- Davis

Football scheduling/ divisions

2-3 non conference games

7 or 8 conference games, 5 in division, 2-3 opposite division. (Extra game depends on whether FCS is allowed to play 12 games or not and if conference goes to 9 games)

+1 Flex game at end of year for each team predetermined yearly which division gets home game.

1. Big Sky title game (top teams in each Division)
2. Bronze Bowl (2nd team in each division)
3. Bracket buster bowl (3rd team in each division)
Should be playoff spot on the line.
4-6 Evenly matched teams that haven't played if possible.

Why the changes you ask?

Football recruits will start picking the Big Sky again because a televised title game gives something to get excited about.

With 2 6 team divisions in football, at any given time, half of the conference is in the top 3 of each division. This makes more teams feel relevant increasing fan attendance and recruiting.

I think you're forgetting that if we have a title game we forfeit the FCS playoffs so in no way is that going to happen!

Correct me if I'm wrong, the reason title games and playoffs don't coexist in FCS is because the game would be played the first week of FCS playoffs. That is why you just back everything up one week and leave the final week for flex scheduling. Technically, it's not a title game, it's the conference leaving the final week open to schedule evenly matched games amongst the 12 teams. Is there a rule preventing this?

The NCAA would never allow the Big Sky to start their season a whole week earlier than the rest of the FCS.

 

[wsucatfan]

2 football divisions

Big Sky Legends: Big Sky Leaders:
Weber ---------- Cal Poly
ISU -------------- PSU
Montana -------- NAU
MSU. ----------- SUU
Idaho ---------- Sac St.
Eastern --------- Davis

Football scheduling/ divisions

2-3 non conference games

7 or 8 conference games, 5 in division, 2-3 opposite division. (Extra game depends on whether FCS is allowed to play 12 games or not and if conference goes to 9 games)

+1 Flex game at end of year for each team predetermined yearly which division gets home game.

1. Big Sky title game (top teams in each Division)
2. Bronze Bowl (2nd team in each division)
3. Bracket buster bowl (3rd team in each division)
Should be playoff spot on the line.
4-6 Evenly matched teams that haven't played if possible.

Why the changes you ask?

Football recruits will start picking the Big Sky again because a televised title game gives something to get excited about.

With 2 6 team divisions in football, at any given time, half of the conference is in the top 3 of each division. This makes more teams feel relevant increasing fan attendance and recruiting.

I think you're forgetting that if we have a title game we forfeit the FCS playoffs so in no way is that going to happen!

Correct me if I'm wrong, the reason title games and playoffs don't coexist in FCS is because the game would be played the first week of FCS playoffs. That is why you just back everything up one week and leave the final week for flex scheduling. Technically, it's not a title game, it's the conference leaving the final week open to schedule evenly matched games amongst the 12 teams. Is there a rule preventing this?

The NCAA would never allow the Big Sky to start their season a whole week earlier than the rest of the FCS.

That's not what he's saying, still play your 11 game season, but the last week is open TBD and each division is paired 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, etc down the line. The only issue would be the potential for teams playing each other again.