(07-25-2017 07:26 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 06:27 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  USD, along with other Universities (like SD school of Mines, Colorado State, both linked above) are using the facilities at Sanford to conduct specific research programs)

I'd be surprised if USD even had a whole research center working there. More than likely, just a physics faculty or two proposing a grant.

Could be wrong of course, but I think the SD constitution setup SD Mines to be the main technical/engineering school, with SDSU the agriculture school, and USD the "professional" school (law, medicine, journalism, business, etc.).

USD is lead on ONE experiment (out of many) going on at Sanford:

http://www.sanfordlab.org/article/cubed-counts-4850l

CUBED has been designated a Governor?s Research Center. The experiment is a collaboration of 11 research universities from throughout the nation, led by USD, and funded by South Dakota, the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy EPSCoR program.


Maybe this is where NoDak is confused - mixing up one research area with the entire facility

(07-25-2017 04:24 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  In fantasy world it would be great if you could drop Youngstown's program on Minnesota State.

Why? Craig T. Nelson has done well enough.

(07-25-2017 06:08 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 06:05 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 06:03 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 05:43 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 01:38 PM)NoDak Wrote:  And you as an MSU fan think you can make statements that you are out of your league to make.

More than you speaking for the President of his university

A President of a research school is normally impressed by new world class research capability. Strange how common sense is so much attacked here. But that's your and others style and refrain.

Never mind diversity of opinion, which is under attack by posters like you too, who seem to want to stamp it out, as if that will change anything.

What your little mind fails to understand is that USD gets zero credit for the research - they are only one of dozens of universities that have a professor or two somewhat involved.

so no, Cruzado, or anyone other than you, is not impressed.

USD gets to be a lead grant university out of the deal. The Sanford facility is under their name. Try again. Sanford has given USD and SDSU and even NDSU a lot of money to improve their facilities for an eventual FBS move.

Your going to have to get over losing the Montanas eventually and not personally take it so hard.. NAU and other Big Sky schools simply don't have community support for their athletic programs. Weber St is an exception.

Wrong, Sanford gave the three schools a lot of money so he can get his name on the facilities. He also gave a lot of money to the U of M which named their sports hall of fame after him. He has put a lot of money into the three Dakota schools and into the Sioux Falls sports scene plus a lot of other causes in the area. The money he gave had nothing to do with any of the three schools going FBS. He is a U of M graduate.

(07-25-2017 06:08 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 06:05 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 06:03 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 05:43 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 01:38 PM)NoDak Wrote:  And you as an MSU fan think you can make statements that you are out of your league to make.

More than you speaking for the President of his university

A President of a research school is normally impressed by new world class research capability. Strange how common sense is so much attacked here. But that's your and others style and refrain.

Never mind diversity of opinion, which is under attack by posters like you too, who seem to want to stamp it out, as if that will change anything.

What your little mind fails to understand is that USD gets zero credit for the research - they are only one of dozens of universities that have a professor or two somewhat involved.

so no, Cruzado, or anyone other than you, is not impressed.

USD gets to be a lead grant university out of the deal. The Sanford facility is under their name. Try again. Sanford has given USD and SDSU and even NDSU a lot of money to improve their facilities for an eventual FBS move.

Your going to have to get over losing the Montanas eventually and not personally take it so hard.. NAU and other Big Sky schools simply don't have community support for their athletic programs. Weber St is an exception.

Where did you see that the facility is under their name?

I'm sure Sanford will have its name on a UND sports facility, soon enough, as well. The guy likes throwing around cash in the Dakotas, to pump up the name/brand/image of the medical clinics. Guessing he wants Sanford to be the main, perhaps only, major healthcare clinic network in the Dakotas.

(07-25-2017 12:04 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 11:53 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Izzo's tweet is quoting the MVFC commish as saying there is currently no 12th team they're looking at.

Divisions sound good in principle, but teams like MO St, UNI, and even W ILL, who've all been with the MVFC since Gateway days, will fight like h___ against being stuck in a divison with Dakotas ... simple as that.

W ILL might lose that argument on account of being in the Summit, but that still only gives five, and UNI and MO St won't lose that argument. Would really, really like to see E ILL come to the Summit and be put in that division, in that case.

Or, would take UNC in the Summit, but don't think that's in the cards. No moveup in the upper Midwest can afford MVFC football, either. And probably zero chance for Oral, Denver, Omaha, or Kansas City to (re)start football.

Viverito is quoted that "a twelve team league with two divisions is attractive to us", but denied any school is being looked at. Hardly a denial.

Murray St is in and RMU is in too when the Dakotas take their balls and start a Summit only fb league with the Montanas, Idaho and EWU.

So the Big Sky lets their top four football programs leave but does not kick them out.
They would still have nine schools and travel would be better but that seems far fetched.
Wouldn't a SFC need six Summit members not five and four affiliate members.
If allowed letting WIU stay in the MVFC would make it a little better.
For a seven game conference schedule for the SFC and MVFC with Murray St.
The Big Sky would have an eight game round robbin schedule.

Not that the rules allow it even if it could benefit the schools involved.
The WAC/Big Sky/Summit working together to reduce travel cost and increase fan interest would be better.
NAU, Sac St, SUU to WAC for a Southwest conference.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(07-26-2017 10:45 AM)MJG Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 12:04 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(07-25-2017 11:53 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Izzo's tweet is quoting the MVFC commish as saying there is currently no 12th team they're looking at.

Divisions sound good in principle, but teams like MO St, UNI, and even W ILL, who've all been with the MVFC since Gateway days, will fight like h___ against being stuck in a divison with Dakotas ... simple as that.

W ILL might lose that argument on account of being in the Summit, but that still only gives five, and UNI and MO St won't lose that argument. Would really, really like to see E ILL come to the Summit and be put in that division, in that case.

Or, would take UNC in the Summit, but don't think that's in the cards. No moveup in the upper Midwest can afford MVFC football, either. And probably zero chance for Oral, Denver, Omaha, or Kansas City to (re)start football.

Viverito is quoted that "a twelve team league with two divisions is attractive to us", but denied any school is being looked at. Hardly a denial.

Murray St is in and RMU is in too when the Dakotas take their balls and start a Summit only fb league with the Montanas, Idaho and EWU.

So the Big Sky lets their top four football programs leave but does not kick them out.
They would still have nine schools and travel would be better but that seems far fetched.
Wouldn't a SFC need six Summit members not five and four affiliate members.
If allowed letting WIU stay in the MVFC would make it a little better.
For a seven game conference schedule for the SFC and MVFC with Murray St.
The Big Sky would have an eight game round robbin schedule.

Not that the rules allow it even if it could benefit the schools involved.
The WAC/Big Sky/Summit working together to reduce travel cost and increase fan interest would be better.
NAU, Sac St, SUU to WAC for a Southwest conference.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Here is your easiest move to make to simplify and stabilize the conferences - Northern Colorado to the Summit League.

Summit is at 10. Fairly solid travel partners. 12 in MVFC for football.
Big Sky is at 10. Solid travel partner pairs. 12 in Big Sky football.
WAC at 9 with California Baptist moving up. Just waiting for some more D2 call ups.

Would you sign off on UNC in the MVFC ... if Youngstown was able to force MO St into the Dakota/Colorado division??


Again, I respect the history that UNC shared with the NCC. The Summit wouldn't be able to turn them down, especially given that they have baseball.

But when you look at UNC ... look at their football stadium, look at their basketball arena ... what do you see? I'll tell you what I see: Division II. Their football and basketball facilities look very much like the DII schools in the Northern Sun Conf ....

What do you gain? NoCo is just as far away as YSU and not near as committed to putting out a string football program.

For NoCo you have to fly to Denver then bus 61 minutes to Greeley. For YSU you have to fly to Cleveland and bus 75 minutes to Youngstown (I looked them up on google).

(low prices google, mostly for scale)
Denver to/from Fargo $506, 1 h 55 min
Denver to/from Grand Forks, $542, 3 h 55 min+ (1 stop)
Denver to/from Sioux Falls, $137, 1 h 40 min
Denver to/from Omaha, $130, 1h 30 min
Denver to/from Springfield, $515, 1 h 55 min
Denver to/from Indianapolis, $148, 2h 20 min

Cleveland to/from Fargo $536, 3 h 40 min+ (1 stop)
Cleveland to/from Grand Forks, $596, 3 h 40 min+ (1 stop)
Cleveland to/from Sioux Falls, $338, 3 h 30 min+ (1 stop)
Cleveland to/from Omaha, $298, 3 h 15 min+ (1 stop)
Cleveland to/from Springfield, $490, 3 h 50 min+ (1 stop)
Cleveland to/from Indianapolis, $272, 2 h 45 min+ (1 stop) This is better to Bus trip (only one that works)

The basic issue I see is alack of direct flights. If one charters the distances are almost identical for most of the schools. YSU is in busing distance of the Indiana schools.

But this idea that you are removing an outlier in Youngstown State and gaining an in-footprint school with Northern Colorado is bunk. What you are exchanging is a Midwestern school for a Western school. And again this goes back to the fantasy of UND fans who think the school is in the far west near Malibu or something, and not part of the Midwest connected to Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin especially.

He's talking about the MVFC having a division of just the football members since the mid 1980's, all of which are MVC except Western: MO St, UNI, W ILL, ILL St, S ILL, IN St.

That dumps Youngstown, dumps the Dakotas, and wouldn't be affected by UNC coming onboard --- those would all belong to the "Outsiders Division".

While NoCo coming on board would be helpful for the Dakotas, it does nothing for NoCo. They recruit West for both students and athletes. The natural rivals for them are the four corner states. And the way the flight patterns are set up Sac State is quicker and cheaper to reach than any Summit League school. Weber is the easiest, then the direct hops to most of the other schools.

Again this is a case of North Dakota trying to convince folks they are western.

(07-26-2017 02:26 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  it does nothing for NoCo. They recruit West for both students and athletes. The natural rivals for them are the four corner states.

Given their long history in the RMAC, I mostly accept this at face value.

You can't however, no matter how hard you try, erase the decades of history in the NCC.

(07-26-2017 02:26 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  And the way the flight patterns are set up Sac State is quicker and cheaper to reach than any Summit League school. Weber is the easiest, then the direct hops to most of the other schools.

Simply untrue. DEN has direct flights to Fargo, Sioux Falls, Omaha, Tulsa, Chicago, and Indianapolis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denver_Int...stinations

(07-26-2017 02:26 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Again this is a case of North Dakota trying to convince folks they are western.

Who is the "they" in this statement? If it's UND, then that is patently false. UND knows it isn't western, hence why its leaving for the Summit and MVFC.

If the "they" is NoCO, then I doubt that is the case either, as the lone UND fan on here is trying to propose a Montana Dakota conference, not bring NoCO to the Summit.

Actually, the person who has presented NoCO to the Summit the most is a Missouri State fan ...

Ok, the Big Sky was founded in 1963 by the Montanas, Weber, ISU, Idaho and Gonzaga. Boise and NAU were added in 1970. Gonzaga and Nevada swapped a few years later as WCC had no football.

I mentioned all of that to say that this conference core has been together for over 50 years (Idaho went FBS and came back, Boise and Nevada going FBS). The point of that is why after being together for 50+ years is it is quite certain the Montanas are not going to leave stability just because NoDak thinks they should.

Also, at this level, research plays a very minor point in football affiliation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, the problem you see is that every school in the Big Sky Conference have an instate rival for all sports. The outliers are Northern Colorado, Sacramento State, Eastern Washington and Northern Arizona. Should Big Sky expand for all sports in those states?

North Colorado/Colorado Mesa
Eastern Washington/Central Washington
Sacramento State/Azusa Pacific
Northern Arizona/?

Northern Arizona would be hard to fill unless you have Dixie State or Western New Mexico to be with them. Arizona, one of the fastest growing states, is lack of public 4 year schools.

sturay shows he has no clue what he is talking about again.

Look at UNC's roster.
http://www.uncbears.com/roster.aspx?path=football
http://www.uncbears.com/roster.aspx?path=mbball

So many four state players on them. He is another NoDak, another one whose is always wrong.

(07-26-2017 11:16 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Would you sign off on UNC in the MVFC ... if Youngstown was able to force MO St into the Dakota/Colorado division??


Again, I respect the history that UNC shared with the NCC. The Summit wouldn't be able to turn them down, especially given that they have baseball.

But when you look at UNC ... look at their football stadium, look at their basketball arena ... what do you see? I'll tell you what I see: Division II. Their football and basketball facilities look very much like the DII schools in the Northern Sun Conf ....

Admittedly, the capacities for both UNC's football and basketball facilities are on the small side for Division I (FCS) / Division I. Even so, with UNC's current football stadium capacity of 8,533 and basketball arena capacity of 2,992, there are over 30 NCAA Division I (FCS) football stadiums and over 30 NCAA Division I basketball arenas with less capacity according to the Wikipedia lists for each.

For basketball, the Budweiser Events Center in Loveland (capacity of 7,200) 19 miles to the west of UNC could be used if demand exceeded UNC's basketball arena capacity. According to Google maps travel from UNC to the Budweiser Events Center would be close to (22-35 minutes travel time) the 2.5 mile trip from Seattle University to the Redhawks off campus home, Key Arena (12-40 minutes travel time) for 6:30 pm arrivals.

(07-26-2017 02:26 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  While NoCo coming on board would be helpful for the Dakotas, it does nothing for NoCo. They recruit West for both students and athletes. The natural rivals for them are the four corner states. And the way the flight patterns are set up Sac State is quicker and cheaper to reach than any Summit League school. Weber is the easiest, then the direct hops to most of the other schools.

Again this is a case of North Dakota trying to convince folks they are western.

They do? May I suggest you take a look at their 2017 football roster. You have 37 from Colorado/Wyoming but you have more kids coming from the Midwest and Southeast then the Big Sky states. Add the 15 Texans to those non-Big Sky numbers and it isn't even close. They do recruit California, but they bring in far more kids east of Colorado then west.

Their student population comes from the Front Range, mostly the Northern Front Range but also the Denver metro, Western NE and Eastern WY. It is a blue collar school. Greeley is a cow town. The meat packing plant influence has lessened but it is still a big part of the towns identity.

UNC does not have strong ties to the BSC. They have never built any rivalries and they have struggled to translate their D2 success to D1. The Summit has Denver and UNC have wanted to be tied to DU for a long time. DU has not been interested. I'm not saying UNC is going to move, but if an offer is made and and MVFC slot can be found they will seriously consider jumping.

Being tied to DU and renewing the old rivalries with the XDSU's and Omaha is something they would definitely consider, strongly.

And I'm not from North Dakota and didn't go to school in North Dakota. I went to school at SDSU and CU. I'm in my 3rd decade living in Colorado and know the Front Range (used to live) and the Western Slope (where I now live) very well. I know the UNC history, know the school and have a lot of friends who went there and now send their kids there. It is not what you think it is.

Texas is not part of the Dakotas

Yes, Denver area schools (CSU, NoCo) do have more Midwestern kids than others in the West. But the Mix is Western, then Texas, then Chicago, and of course a few Kansas and Nebraska kids. I did a breakdown earlier and showed they were more Western.

You can also go through the stats on out of State for the school. The out of State proportion is small, under 10%. The Western States make up the majority (not counting foreign citizens, who actually are the largest group of out of state). Texas is next. Again the Chicago connection to Colorado schools is here with the next largest chunk. This seems to be a Denver thing, and it fits the gateway to the west that is the city and towns on the upper front range. Californians the most, then Texans, Chicago area transplants, and then smatterings of others, the Western States most of those.

Your argument falls apart because the Summit is neither Chicago nor Texas.

They'd still consider it, Stu. Because of their history in the NCC with Dakotas and Omaha. Might not pull the trigger, but would consider it.

(07-26-2017 04:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Texas is not part of the Dakotas

Yes, Denver area schools (CSU, NoCo) do have more Midwestern kids than others in the West. But the Mix is Western, then Texas, then Chicago, and of course a few Kansas and Nebraska kids. I did a breakdown earlier and showed they were more Western.

You can also go through the stats on out of State for the school. The out of State proportion is small, under 10%. The Western States make up the majority (not counting foreign citizens, who actually are the largest group of out of state). Texas is next. Again the Chicago connection to Colorado schools is here with the next largest chunk. This seems to be a Denver thing, and it fits the gateway to the west that is the city and towns on the upper front range. Californians the most, then Texans, Chicago area transplants, and then smatterings of others, the Western States most of those.

Your argument falls apart because the Summit is neither Chicago nor Texas.

You really are just as bad as NoDak. Clueless to the core, unwilling to admit you are wrong, and have very little knowledge.