(04-24-2017 11:04 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:57 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:38 PM)NoDak Wrote:  And Missoula, Bozeman, Moscow and Cheyney face the same geographical challenges that we do on I29. No one wants them but believe it or not, we actually have tshirts fans, which not many G5 schools have. Why bother with conference mediocrity, as we can get together and make a better conferencexperience with natural divisions. They all have aspirations and all are better than even MVC schools academically.

But naturally outsiders wouldnt hear of it.

If Montana really had aspirations --- they'd be playing FBS ball in the MWC.

Anyway, Montana, Montana St, Idaho, Weber St, EWU, Portland St and Idaho St are a fairly geographically compact group of 7. Northern Colorado isn't as geographically close but they're a decent #8. NAU, SUU and Sac State are even less geographically close, but they're reliable enough conference members. Then they have UC-Davis and Cal Poly for football (and they're both good football schools, an additional plus).

That's a definite "critical mass" out west for the Big Sky Conference. They're fine even without the Dakota schools.

I have nothing against any of the Dakota schools, but your situation is a bit more precarious vs. theirs. The Dakota schools don't have that "critical mass." As such, I wouldn't be knocking the WIU's of the world.

Portland St and Idaho St are the poor dregs of that group, and they are in an entirely lower economic group like SUU, UVU, NC, NAU, Sac St etc The others don't want and can't afford a MW-type conference, but a MAC-like one can work. Not saying it will happen, just saying it should happen.

Yet Sac St and NAU somehow manage to offer dozens more athletic scholarships than any other remaining big sky team And both schools dominate all conference competitions

But those facts don't fit your narrative either So you choose to ignore them

(04-25-2017 09:35 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:04 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:57 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:38 PM)NoDak Wrote:  And Missoula, Bozeman, Moscow and Cheyney face the same geographical challenges that we do on I29. No one wants them but believe it or not, we actually have tshirts fans, which not many G5 schools have. Why bother with conference mediocrity, as we can get together and make a better conferencexperience with natural divisions. They all have aspirations and all are better than even MVC schools academically.

But naturally outsiders wouldnt hear of it.

If Montana really had aspirations --- they'd be playing FBS ball in the MWC.

Anyway, Montana, Montana St, Idaho, Weber St, EWU, Portland St and Idaho St are a fairly geographically compact group of 7. Northern Colorado isn't as geographically close but they're a decent #8. NAU, SUU and Sac State are even less geographically close, but they're reliable enough conference members. Then they have UC-Davis and Cal Poly for football (and they're both good football schools, an additional plus).

That's a definite "critical mass" out west for the Big Sky Conference. They're fine even without the Dakota schools.

I have nothing against any of the Dakota schools, but your situation is a bit more precarious vs. theirs. The Dakota schools don't have that "critical mass." As such, I wouldn't be knocking the WIU's of the world.

Portland St and Idaho St are the poor dregs of that group, and they are in an entirely lower economic group like SUU, UVU, NC, NAU, Sac St etc The others don't want and can't afford a MW-type conference, but a MAC-like one can work. Not saying it will happen, just saying it should happen.

Yet Sac St and NAU somehow manage to offer dozens more athletic scholarships than any other remaining big sky team And both schools dominate all conference competitions

But those facts don't fit your narrative either So you choose to ignore them

Those have the largest student bodies with student fees that pays for schollies, but the least fan participation and the lowest alumni concern.. Haven't had meaningful facility improvements for years. Sac St and NAU can't move up because they don't have alumni support. It should be different but they are effectively commuter and suitcase schools.

Page Three.

We've gone from Directional Illinois schools to Big Sky conference and how Portland State is a poor dreg. There seems to be no ability to find our way out of this derail.

All is lost.

Please send help before it's too late

Tell my wife, I love her............

(04-25-2017 09:43 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 09:35 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:04 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:57 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:38 PM)NoDak Wrote:  And Missoula, Bozeman, Moscow and Cheyney face the same geographical challenges that we do on I29. No one wants them but believe it or not, we actually have tshirts fans, which not many G5 schools have. Why bother with conference mediocrity, as we can get together and make a better conferencexperience with natural divisions. They all have aspirations and all are better than even MVC schools academically.

But naturally outsiders wouldnt hear of it.

If Montana really had aspirations --- they'd be playing FBS ball in the MWC.

Anyway, Montana, Montana St, Idaho, Weber St, EWU, Portland St and Idaho St are a fairly geographically compact group of 7. Northern Colorado isn't as geographically close but they're a decent #8. NAU, SUU and Sac State are even less geographically close, but they're reliable enough conference members. Then they have UC-Davis and Cal Poly for football (and they're both good football schools, an additional plus).

That's a definite "critical mass" out west for the Big Sky Conference. They're fine even without the Dakota schools.

I have nothing against any of the Dakota schools, but your situation is a bit more precarious vs. theirs. The Dakota schools don't have that "critical mass." As such, I wouldn't be knocking the WIU's of the world.

Portland St and Idaho St are the poor dregs of that group, and they are in an entirely lower economic group like SUU, UVU, NC, NAU, Sac St etc The others don't want and can't afford a MW-type conference, but a MAC-like one can work. Not saying it will happen, just saying it should happen.

Yet Sac St and NAU somehow manage to offer dozens more athletic scholarships than any other remaining big sky team And both schools dominate all conference competitions

But those facts don't fit your narrative either So you choose to ignore them

Those have the largest student bodies with student fees that pays for schollies, but the least fan participation and the lowest alumni concern.. Haven't had meaningful facility improvements for years. Sac St and NAU can't move up because they don't have alumni support. It should be different but they are effectively commuter and suitcase schools.

LOL - again, your ignorance is showing. NAU did a $26 million renovation to the dome just a few years ago. Other athletic facilities (other than basketball, which is fund-raising) are top-notch.


Give it up - you are clueless about every school, even your own.

(04-25-2017 10:52 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 09:43 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 09:35 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:04 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:57 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  If Montana really had aspirations --- they'd be playing FBS ball in the MWC.

Anyway, Montana, Montana St, Idaho, Weber St, EWU, Portland St and Idaho St are a fairly geographically compact group of 7. Northern Colorado isn't as geographically close but they're a decent #8. NAU, SUU and Sac State are even less geographically close, but they're reliable enough conference members. Then they have UC-Davis and Cal Poly for football (and they're both good football schools, an additional plus).

That's a definite "critical mass" out west for the Big Sky Conference. They're fine even without the Dakota schools.

I have nothing against any of the Dakota schools, but your situation is a bit more precarious vs. theirs. The Dakota schools don't have that "critical mass." As such, I wouldn't be knocking the WIU's of the world.

Portland St and Idaho St are the poor dregs of that group, and they are in an entirely lower economic group like SUU, UVU, NC, NAU, Sac St etc The others don't want and can't afford a MW-type conference, but a MAC-like one can work. Not saying it will happen, just saying it should happen.

Yet Sac St and NAU somehow manage to offer dozens more athletic scholarships than any other remaining big sky team And both schools dominate all conference competitions

But those facts don't fit your narrative either So you choose to ignore them

Those have the largest student bodies with student fees that pays for schollies, but the least fan participation and the lowest alumni concern.. Haven't had meaningful facility improvements for years. Sac St and NAU can't move up because they don't have alumni support. It should be different but they are effectively commuter and suitcase schools.

LOL - again, your ignorance is showing. NAU did a $26 million renovation to the dome just a few years ago. Other athletic facilities (other than basketball, which is fund-raising) are top-notch.


Give it up - you are clueless about every school, even your own.

Arizona treats NAU as a red headed stepson. NAU doesn't even have fans now. 20 years ago they did.

(04-25-2017 10:59 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 10:52 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 09:43 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 09:35 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:04 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Portland St and Idaho St are the poor dregs of that group, and they are in an entirely lower economic group like SUU, UVU, NC, NAU, Sac St etc The others don't want and can't afford a MW-type conference, but a MAC-like one can work. Not saying it will happen, just saying it should happen.

Yet Sac St and NAU somehow manage to offer dozens more athletic scholarships than any other remaining big sky team And both schools dominate all conference competitions

But those facts don't fit your narrative either So you choose to ignore them

Those have the largest student bodies with student fees that pays for schollies, but the least fan participation and the lowest alumni concern.. Haven't had meaningful facility improvements for years. Sac St and NAU can't move up because they don't have alumni support. It should be different but they are effectively commuter and suitcase schools.

LOL - again, your ignorance is showing. NAU did a $26 million renovation to the dome just a few years ago. Other athletic facilities (other than basketball, which is fund-raising) are top-notch.


Give it up - you are clueless about every school, even your own.

Arizona treats NAU as a red headed stepson. NAU doesn't even have fans now. 20 years ago they did.

Yawn - stick to your UND to FBS wet dreams

(04-25-2017 11:28 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 10:59 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 10:52 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 09:43 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 09:35 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  Yet Sac St and NAU somehow manage to offer dozens more athletic scholarships than any other remaining big sky team And both schools dominate all conference competitions

But those facts don't fit your narrative either So you choose to ignore them

Those have the largest student bodies with student fees that pays for schollies, but the least fan participation and the lowest alumni concern.. Haven't had meaningful facility improvements for years. Sac St and NAU can't move up because they don't have alumni support. It should be different but they are effectively commuter and suitcase schools.

LOL - again, your ignorance is showing. NAU did a $26 million renovation to the dome just a few years ago. Other athletic facilities (other than basketball, which is fund-raising) are top-notch.


Give it up - you are clueless about every school, even your own.

Arizona treats NAU as a red headed stepson. NAU doesn't even have fans now. 20 years ago they did.

Yawn - stick to your UND to FBS wet dreams

And keep up the good work as NAU's sole poster on the interweebs.

(04-25-2017 09:44 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Page Three.

We've gone from Directional Illinois schools to Big Sky conference and how Portland State is a poor dreg. There seems to be no ability to find our way out of this derail.

All is lost.

Please send help before it's too late

Tell my wife, I love her............

RIP

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

(04-24-2017 10:23 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 09:12 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Getting rid of the three eastern Slummit dregs and invite the Montanas, Idaho, EWU and Weber St and rename the conference the Great Northern League.

It will probably never happen, but I can dream. It is inherently aspirational, more than the Slummit is now. The schools are all academically similar, unlike W Ill. It's a Northern Plains Rockies version of the MAC with good fb, mbb,wbb and hockey.

Be realistic --- that's NOT going to happen. You guys just left the Big Sky - you're now in the Summit - deal with it!

Facts are facts --- the Dakotas are 4 D-1 schools in aggregate but you still need other schools to make up a full conference. And there aren't exactly dozens of D-1 schools within shouting range of Fargo, Grand Forks, Brookings or Vermillion. You're not in a position too be TOO much of a snob.

Be glad for a school that is reasonably close to you (Macomb's a lot closer to the I-29 corridor than Missoula or Moscow or Cheyney, of course) and has been a steady conference member for decades now, although not necessarily the most competitive of members athletically.

This. Your school wanted to be in the Slummit. You are now in the Slummit. Deal with it.

(04-25-2017 09:44 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Page Three.

We've gone from Directional Illinois schools to Big Sky conference and how Portland State is a poor dreg. There seems to be no ability to find our way out of this derail.

All is lost.

Please send help before it's too late

Tell my wife, I love her............

Pick a thread, any thread, and let one micro regional off topic debate begin, especially among the G5 posters, and then round up the same 20 or so posters who do this throughout the board and see what you get. It's a constant deja vu of nanny nanny boo boo minutia hell!

But it's the off season, things are slow, very slow, and it drives the # of posts which is good for business so........
come back when the season is close and things tighten up and bans are more liberally handed out.

Until then we need a soundtrack of dueling banjos for the background of some of these baseless arguments, and the "Squeals" of Ned Beatty for those who should be banned.

Bows and arrows anyone? Anyone?

(04-25-2017 01:25 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:23 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 09:12 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Getting rid of the three eastern Slummit dregs and invite the Montanas, Idaho, EWU and Weber St and rename the conference the Great Northern League.

It will probably never happen, but I can dream. It is inherently aspirational, more than the Slummit is now. The schools are all academically similar, unlike W Ill. It's a Northern Plains Rockies version of the MAC with good fb, mbb,wbb and hockey.

Be realistic --- that's NOT going to happen. You guys just left the Big Sky - you're now in the Summit - deal with it!

Facts are facts --- the Dakotas are 4 D-1 schools in aggregate but you still need other schools to make up a full conference. And there aren't exactly dozens of D-1 schools within shouting range of Fargo, Grand Forks, Brookings or Vermillion. You're not in a position too be TOO much of a snob.

Be glad for a school that is reasonably close to you (Macomb's a lot closer to the I-29 corridor than Missoula or Moscow or Cheyney, of course) and has been a steady conference member for decades now, although not necessarily the most competitive of members athletically.

This. Your school wanted to be in the Slummit. You are now in the Slummit. Deal with it.

Will deal with it by showing the slugs the door and inviting our Big Sky flagship friends.

(04-25-2017 05:13 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 01:25 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:23 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 09:12 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Getting rid of the three eastern Slummit dregs and invite the Montanas, Idaho, EWU and Weber St and rename the conference the Great Northern League.

It will probably never happen, but I can dream. It is inherently aspirational, more than the Slummit is now. The schools are all academically similar, unlike W Ill. It's a Northern Plains Rockies version of the MAC with good fb, mbb,wbb and hockey.

Be realistic --- that's NOT going to happen. You guys just left the Big Sky - you're now in the Summit - deal with it!

Facts are facts --- the Dakotas are 4 D-1 schools in aggregate but you still need other schools to make up a full conference. And there aren't exactly dozens of D-1 schools within shouting range of Fargo, Grand Forks, Brookings or Vermillion. You're not in a position too be TOO much of a snob.

Be glad for a school that is reasonably close to you (Macomb's a lot closer to the I-29 corridor than Missoula or Moscow or Cheyney, of course) and has been a steady conference member for decades now, although not necessarily the most competitive of members athletically.

This. Your school wanted to be in the Slummit. You are now in the Slummit. Deal with it.

Will deal with it by showing the slugs the door and inviting our Big Sky flagship friends.

Ok, I'm dealing with it. I'm showing them the door, but they won't go through it...

(04-24-2017 11:04 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:57 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:38 PM)NoDak Wrote:  And Missoula, Bozeman, Moscow and Cheyney face the same geographical challenges that we do on I29. No one wants them but believe it or not, we actually have tshirts fans, which not many G5 schools have. Why bother with conference mediocrity, as we can get together and make a better conferencexperience with natural divisions. They all have aspirations and all are better than even MVC schools academically.

But naturally outsiders wouldnt hear of it.

If Montana really had aspirations --- they'd be playing FBS ball in the MWC.

Anyway, Montana, Montana St, Idaho, Weber St, EWU, Portland St and Idaho St are a fairly geographically compact group of 7. Northern Colorado isn't as geographically close but they're a decent #8. NAU, SUU and Sac State are even less geographically close, but they're reliable enough conference members. Then they have UC-Davis and Cal Poly for football (and they're both good football schools, an additional plus).

That's a definite "critical mass" out west for the Big Sky Conference. They're fine even without the Dakota schools.

I have nothing against any of the Dakota schools, but your situation is a bit more precarious vs. theirs. The Dakota schools don't have that "critical mass." As such, I wouldn't be knocking the WIU's of the world.

Portland St and Idaho St are the poor dregs of that group, and they are in an entirely lower economic group like SUU, UVU, NC, NAU, Sac St etc The others don't want and can't afford a MW-type conference, but a MAC-like one can work. Not saying it will happen, just saying it should happen.

We've got a $22M+ athletics budget, sponsor 21 sports, and have an enrollment around 30k. We are nothing like the others in that list. Our issue has been weak leadership that lacked vision...which has recently been remedied.

(04-26-2017 01:19 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:04 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:57 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:38 PM)NoDak Wrote:  And Missoula, Bozeman, Moscow and Cheyney face the same geographical challenges that we do on I29. No one wants them but believe it or not, we actually have tshirts fans, which not many G5 schools have. Why bother with conference mediocrity, as we can get together and make a better conferencexperience with natural divisions. They all have aspirations and all are better than even MVC schools academically.

But naturally outsiders wouldnt hear of it.

If Montana really had aspirations --- they'd be playing FBS ball in the MWC.

Anyway, Montana, Montana St, Idaho, Weber St, EWU, Portland St and Idaho St are a fairly geographically compact group of 7. Northern Colorado isn't as geographically close but they're a decent #8. NAU, SUU and Sac State are even less geographically close, but they're reliable enough conference members. Then they have UC-Davis and Cal Poly for football (and they're both good football schools, an additional plus).

That's a definite "critical mass" out west for the Big Sky Conference. They're fine even without the Dakota schools.

I have nothing against any of the Dakota schools, but your situation is a bit more precarious vs. theirs. The Dakota schools don't have that "critical mass." As such, I wouldn't be knocking the WIU's of the world.

Portland St and Idaho St are the poor dregs of that group, and they are in an entirely lower economic group like SUU, UVU, NC, NAU, Sac St etc The others don't want and can't afford a MW-type conference, but a MAC-like one can work. Not saying it will happen, just saying it should happen.

We've got a $22M+ athletics budget, sponsor 21 sports, and have an enrollment around 30k. We are nothing like the others in that list. Our issue has been weak leadership that lacked vision...which has recently been remedied.

Support is pathetic, worse than the others. I used to root for Sac St when you had our former AD, because he infused it with integrity. But Sac St still hasn't built anything better than a Jr High gym after 20+ yrs of DI.

Since NODak is attempting to talk about Big Sky resources I have no clue, but here is data from 2015 DOE Equity in Athletics

Football:
$6,561,109 * Idaho (FBS ... Idaho did very well for a budget well below average for G5)
$6,515,106 Montana State
$5,037,234 Montana
$4,695,179 Eastern Washington
$4,478,087 UC Davis
"middle"
$4,132,357 Portland State
$4,019,362 North Dakota
$3,979,369 Northern Arizona
$3,633,139 Sacramento State
$3,571,553 Cal Poly
$3,457,618 Northern Colorado
$3,415,712 Idaho State
$3,373,651 Weber State
"low"
$2,512,834 Southern Utah

Men's Basketball:
$1,821,491 Idaho
$1,799,880 Weber State
$1,679,625 Montana State
$1,678,354 Montana
"middle"
$1,611,995 Northern Arizona
$1,579,108 North Dakota
$1,564,917 Eastern Washington
$1,490,726 Northern Colorado
$1,433,424 Sacramento State
"low"
$1,290,851 Idaho State
$1,284,182 Portland State
$1,111,575 Southern Utah

Women's Basketball:
$1,593,549 North Dakota
$1,419,275 Idaho
$1,403,877 Montana State
$1,347,236 Montana
"middle"
$1,210,358 Northern Arizona
$1,172,315 Portland State
$1,103,669 Northern Colorado
$1,076,193 Eastern Washington
$1,074,755 Idaho State
$1,065,355 Sacramento State
$1,064,953 Weber State
"low"
$ 805,832 Southern Utah

Other Men's Sports:
$6,202,970 North Dakota (includes Ice Hockey, Swimming & Diving)
$5,287,269 Sacramento State (includes Baseball, Soccer, Golf)
$3,331,493 Eastern Washington
$3,021,836 Idaho State
$1,512,736 Northern Colorado (includes Baseball, Wrestling, Golf)
$1,220,469 Montana State (includes Skiing)
$1,188,168 Idaho (includes Golf)
$1,122,673 Northern Arizona
$ 950,499 Weber State (includes Golf)
$ 904,320 Montana
$ 677,100 Southern Utah (includes Golf)
$ 502,726 Portland State

- Men's Golf is sponsored by Big Sky but most schools don't sponsor

Other Women's Sports:
$6,085,051 North Dakota (includes Softball, Ice hockey, Swimming & Diving)
$4,193,549 Northern Arizona (includes Swimming & Diving)
$3,857,917 Montana (includes Softball)
$3,750,179 Idaho (includes Swimming & Diving)
$3,633,681 Northern Colorado (includes Softball, Swimming & Diving)
$3,419,745 Portland State (includes Softball)
$2,975,012 Sacramento State (includes Softball, Beach Volleyball, Gymnastics)
$2,973,596 Weber State (includes Softball)
$2,858,977 Montana State (includes Skiing; don't sponsor Soccer)
$2,633,001 Southern Utah (includes Softball, Gymnastics)
$ 835,973 Eastern Washington
$ 726,014 Idaho State (includes Softball)