(04-24-2017 07:55 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 02:52 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Are those 2 schools, schools that North Dakota play against?

His school (U of North Dakota) is joining the Summit, which has WIU.

He hates the Summit, and has a for a long time. No surprise he's trying to undermine what is now his own conference.

WIU is not a worthy DI school, and never has been. Don't see the point of it being in our "new" conference.

The MVC is above inviting them, so why should we keep them?

(04-24-2017 08:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 02:32 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 12:50 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 12:14 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  However, it absolutely boggles my mind how anyone can look at the other half of Chicago that has nothing to do with the "SAD!" Tweets from our orange-haired imperialist in the White House (the downtown area and the North Side) and see anything other than one of the most vibrant, wealthy and educated urban areas of the entire country with complete cross-section of cultural amenities that only NYC can trump (pun intended). It's like bizarro world when I see the comments from people critiquing the livability of Chicago as some type of war zone that live in cities or regions of the country that have nowhere near the affluence or education levels and frankly have higher levels of crime (as they forget that Chicago has nearly 3 million people).

How'd that prediction on the election work out for you?

Bottom line is that "your side" of Chicago doesn't give a flying **** about the "other side" unless they end up on your favorite athletic programs. Without context on all of those cities demographics Chicago's high horse has a broken leg. Chicago might as well be 2 separate cities.

Well, on that last point, you're correct that Chicago effectively consists of two separate cities. Essentially, it's what you'd get if San Francisco and Oakland were combined into one single city as opposed to being separate entities. I'm not saying that's a good thing. My issue is with these outsiders making it sound like people are getting murdered on North Michigan Avenue (which is guaranteed to be a nicer street than any street in anyone's hometown here unless you live in Manhattan or Beverly Hills). This would be like saying that the large amount of crime that occurs in Atlanta (which has a higher violent crime rate than Chicago) means that people are getting shot in Buckhead. It's ridiculous.

Except that folks have been shot in Buckhead. It's really no different in any city. Knoxville is a wonderful city but has an area you don't want to be around after dark. Birmingham is the same way. Montgomery is worse than any of them IMO. It's just the nature of the new segregation which isn't done by race, but by income. So....what's changed?

Unfortunately, nothing has changed. It's not a good thing. That's a broad national (and even global) issue.

My specific issue here is the national portrayal of crime in Chicago where many people are throwing stones acting as if though it has an extraordinary level of danger when their own backyards are actually even worse in terms of the violent crime rate. I'm personally tired of the narrative.

(04-24-2017 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 07:55 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 02:52 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Are those 2 schools, schools that North Dakota play against?

His school (U of North Dakota) is joining the Summit, which has WIU.

He hates the Summit, and has a for a long time. No surprise he's trying to undermine what is now his own conference.

WIU is not a worthy DI school, and never has been. Don't see the point of it being in our "new" conference.

The MVC is above inviting them, so why should we keep them?

What exactly is wrong with Western Illinois? I'm not saying that they're world beaters or even a good athletic department, but there are plenty of Division I athletic departments that aren't that great on-the-field. If they're a good conference citizen, a school isn't getting kicked out.

(04-24-2017 08:32 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 02:32 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 12:50 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 12:14 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  However, it absolutely boggles my mind how anyone can look at the other half of Chicago that has nothing to do with the "SAD!" Tweets from our orange-haired imperialist in the White House (the downtown area and the North Side) and see anything other than one of the most vibrant, wealthy and educated urban areas of the entire country with complete cross-section of cultural amenities that only NYC can trump (pun intended). It's like bizarro world when I see the comments from people critiquing the livability of Chicago as some type of war zone that live in cities or regions of the country that have nowhere near the affluence or education levels and frankly have higher levels of crime (as they forget that Chicago has nearly 3 million people).

How'd that prediction on the election work out for you?

Bottom line is that "your side" of Chicago doesn't give a flying **** about the "other side" unless they end up on your favorite athletic programs. Without context on all of those cities demographics Chicago's high horse has a broken leg. Chicago might as well be 2 separate cities.

Well, on that last point, you're correct that Chicago effectively consists of two separate cities. Essentially, it's what you'd get if San Francisco and Oakland were combined into one single city as opposed to being separate entities. I'm not saying that's a good thing. My issue is with these outsiders making it sound like people are getting murdered on North Michigan Avenue (which is guaranteed to be a nicer street than any street in anyone's hometown here unless you live in Manhattan or Beverly Hills). This would be like saying that the large amount of crime that occurs in Atlanta (which has a higher violent crime rate than Chicago) means that people are getting shot in Buckhead. It's ridiculous.

Except that folks have been shot in Buckhead. It's really no different in any city. Knoxville is a wonderful city but has an area you don't want to be around after dark. Birmingham is the same way. Montgomery is worse than any of them IMO. It's just the nature of the new segregation which isn't done by race, but by income. So....what's changed?

Unfortunately, nothing has changed. It's not a good thing. That's a broad national (and even global) issue.

My specific issue here is the national portrayal of crime in Chicago where many people are throwing stones acting as if though it has an extraordinary level of danger when their own backyards are actually even worse in terms of the violent crime rate. I'm personally tired of the narrative.

I have heard Chicago thrown in with a myriad of other places in that same narrative. I would be willing to bet that if you wanted to officially report how tired you were of it that you would have to get in a queue blocks long with numerous people from cities all over to file your claim. Sensationalism and "What bleeds, leads" is as much to blame as anything as it only fuels urban legends which then are incessantly reported as fact.

(04-24-2017 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  The MVC is above inviting them, so why should we keep them?

If both Indiana schools were taken by the Horizon, leaving WIU on an island ... you might have a point.

And I would additionally require UMKC as well as Minn-Duluth (drop football to move up), to get to 8.

(04-24-2017 08:36 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 07:55 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 02:52 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Are those 2 schools, schools that North Dakota play against?

His school (U of North Dakota) is joining the Summit, which has WIU.

He hates the Summit, and has a for a long time. No surprise he's trying to undermine what is now his own conference.

WIU is not a worthy DI school, and never has been. Don't see the point of it being in our "new" conference.

The MVC is above inviting them, so why should we keep them?

What exactly is wrong with Western Illinois? I'm not saying that they're world beaters or even a good athletic department, but there are plenty of Division I athletic departments that aren't that great on-the-field. If they're a good conference citizen, a school isn't getting kicked out.

He has an axe to grind against schools he sees as "in the way" for his school to get the FBS callup

My assumption is he'd like illinois college athletics to fold under political and financial pressure and that might pave the way for a MAC invite for his school. I THINK that's what he's angling for with this article

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

(04-24-2017 08:36 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 07:55 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 02:52 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Are those 2 schools, schools that North Dakota play against?

His school (U of North Dakota) is joining the Summit, which has WIU.

He hates the Summit, and has a for a long time. No surprise he's trying to undermine what is now his own conference.

WIU is not a worthy DI school, and never has been. Don't see the point of it being in our "new" conference.

The MVC is above inviting them, so why should we keep them?

What exactly is wrong with Western Illinois? I'm not saying that they're world beaters or even a good athletic department, but there are plenty of Division I athletic departments that aren't that great on-the-field. If they're a good conference citizen, a school isn't getting kicked out.

It is the only school to remain in the 40 odd years of the Summit, meaning it doesn't have fan support for an aspirational move. It only has $40 mill in endowment, has a rapidly declining enrollment under 10k, and typically votes within conference for the low budget way out, and doesn't have an appreciable TV audience. In addition, it doesn't have a dance appearance in 40 years of trying. There is a difference between a humble school and a deadbeat one. I wish them the best, but don't see a future for them in DI unless the OVC takes them. E Ill has worse issues, but the OVC took them. The one sport that they seem to excel in, fb, their coach skeedaddled to the lowest Dakota stature school because he was fearful of the forthcoming financial cataclysmic event in Illinois.

(04-24-2017 08:52 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  The MVC is above inviting them, so why should we keep them?

If both Indiana schools were taken by the Horizon, leaving WIU on an island ... you might have a point.

And I would additionally require UMKC as well as Minn-Duluth (drop football to move up), to get to 8.

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.

(04-24-2017 08:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:32 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 02:32 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 12:50 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  How'd that prediction on the election work out for you?

Bottom line is that "your side" of Chicago doesn't give a flying **** about the "other side" unless they end up on your favorite athletic programs. Without context on all of those cities demographics Chicago's high horse has a broken leg. Chicago might as well be 2 separate cities.

Well, on that last point, you're correct that Chicago effectively consists of two separate cities. Essentially, it's what you'd get if San Francisco and Oakland were combined into one single city as opposed to being separate entities. I'm not saying that's a good thing. My issue is with these outsiders making it sound like people are getting murdered on North Michigan Avenue (which is guaranteed to be a nicer street than any street in anyone's hometown here unless you live in Manhattan or Beverly Hills). This would be like saying that the large amount of crime that occurs in Atlanta (which has a higher violent crime rate than Chicago) means that people are getting shot in Buckhead. It's ridiculous.

Except that folks have been shot in Buckhead. It's really no different in any city. Knoxville is a wonderful city but has an area you don't want to be around after dark. Birmingham is the same way. Montgomery is worse than any of them IMO. It's just the nature of the new segregation which isn't done by race, but by income. So....what's changed?

Unfortunately, nothing has changed. It's not a good thing. That's a broad national (and even global) issue.

My specific issue here is the national portrayal of crime in Chicago where many people are throwing stones acting as if though it has an extraordinary level of danger when their own backyards are actually even worse in terms of the violent crime rate. I'm personally tired of the narrative.

I have heard Chicago thrown in with a myriad of other places in that same narrative. I would be willing to bet that if you wanted to officially report how tired you were of it that you would have to get in a queue blocks long with numerous people from cities all over to file your claim. Sensationalism and "What bleeds, leads" is as much to blame as anything as it only fuels urban legends which then are incessantly reported as fact.

Come on, now. When it's the hometown of the preceding president and now the current president can't stop talking about how violent Chicago is specifically (whether through his speeches or his tweets), this is not a "normal" level of coverage. (Of course, the crime rate was actually worse in Chicago back when the current president decided to build his largest and most expensive building anywhere on the Chicago River, but that doesn't fit the current need for a punching bag to rile up the base that has no concept of the city outside of it being the precedeing president's home. Funny how the current president's perspective on the economic and cultural vitality of Chicago was quite different when it came to investing his own money.)

(04-24-2017 09:17 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:32 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 02:32 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Well, on that last point, you're correct that Chicago effectively consists of two separate cities. Essentially, it's what you'd get if San Francisco and Oakland were combined into one single city as opposed to being separate entities. I'm not saying that's a good thing. My issue is with these outsiders making it sound like people are getting murdered on North Michigan Avenue (which is guaranteed to be a nicer street than any street in anyone's hometown here unless you live in Manhattan or Beverly Hills). This would be like saying that the large amount of crime that occurs in Atlanta (which has a higher violent crime rate than Chicago) means that people are getting shot in Buckhead. It's ridiculous.

Except that folks have been shot in Buckhead. It's really no different in any city. Knoxville is a wonderful city but has an area you don't want to be around after dark. Birmingham is the same way. Montgomery is worse than any of them IMO. It's just the nature of the new segregation which isn't done by race, but by income. So....what's changed?

Unfortunately, nothing has changed. It's not a good thing. That's a broad national (and even global) issue.

My specific issue here is the national portrayal of crime in Chicago where many people are throwing stones acting as if though it has an extraordinary level of danger when their own backyards are actually even worse in terms of the violent crime rate. I'm personally tired of the narrative.

I have heard Chicago thrown in with a myriad of other places in that same narrative. I would be willing to bet that if you wanted to officially report how tired you were of it that you would have to get in a queue blocks long with numerous people from cities all over to file your claim. Sensationalism and "What bleeds, leads" is as much to blame as anything as it only fuels urban legends which then are incessantly reported as fact.

Come on, now. When it's the hometown of the preceding president and now the current president can't stop talking about how violent Chicago is specifically (whether through his speeches or his tweets), this is not a "normal" level of coverage. (Of course, the crime rate was actually worse in Chicago back when the current president decided to build his largest and most expensive building anywhere on the Chicago River, but that doesn't fit the current need for a punching bag to rile up the base that has no concept of the city outside of it being the precedeing president's home. Funny how the current president's perspective on the economic and cultural vitality of Chicago was quite different when it came to investing his own money.)

Sorry Frank, I don't pay him any attention so I didn't know he was picking on Chicago. But then I didn't pay Obama any attention either. They work for the same corporate interests, and sometimes competing ones, but they don't usually work for us. They say things like I will shut down Gitmo or Build a Wall, or I'll have us completely out of Iraq and Afghanistan, or there will be tax reform and.............................crickets! Why? It's business as usual that's why. They don't even build party platforms anymore because people actually held them to that. It's much easier to push a social agenda from the right or left and leave the masses believing that they had a say for whatever it is that energizes them, so long as it doesn't affect international trade, treaties, or taxes. We've been banning guns and standing up for guns since way before you were born. We've been debating pro abortion and anti abortion almost as long. We've had a moral majority since Billy Sunday scammed the yocals, and we've had a Bill Maher figure or a Rush Limbaugh type guy since before Washington needed wooden teeth.

The public in general only cares about the issues put before them. Keeping their nose out of business is priority #1, #2, & #3. And above all else if we get too divided we need an external enemy to temporarily pull us back together so we all can agree to spend more on defense.

So there's no need to respond to me. Just wait until you are a Geezer and then tell the next generation all about everything you've witnessed in your life, and they will disbelieve you as well. Just about the time we really get wise to these kinds of perpetual scams we die. The young pass us off as being old and ill informed, they will grow up enraged at the injustices around them and will vote for the candidate they resonate with, and it will be business as usual over and over again, and about the time they see it for what it is the next generation will just think they are old and ill informed. Frank, it's a P.T. Barnum moment for you. Take it in.

(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.

(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.

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 conference with natural divisions. They all have aspirations and all are better than even MVC schools academically.

Omaha and Denver actually need us more than we need them. UND is in a position to be the glue for that conference, as we'discussed have been involved with all members.

But naturally outsiders wouldnt hear of it.

(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.

(04-24-2017 10:38 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Omaha and Denver actually need us more than we need them. UND is in a position to be the glue for that conference, as we'discussed have been involved with all members.

Omaha - yes, I agree. They need the Summit. If the Summit collapses, they don't have a ton of D-1 options (it may be back to the MIAA).

Denver has a ton going for it and they'd easily find a home if the Summit collapsed.

(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.

(04-24-2017 11:01 PM)Nittany_Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:38 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Omaha and Denver actually need us more than we need them. UND is in a position to be the glue for that conference, as we'discussed have been involved with all members.

Omaha - yes, I agree. They need the Summit. If the Summit collapses, they don't have a ton of D-1 options (it may be back to the MIAA).

Denver has a ton going for it and they'd easily find a home if the Summit collapsed.

Denver's hockey needs us and we need them. We were the two schools that brought about the power NCHC. We hate but respect each other at the same time. Denver needs to protect it hockey revenue, which is much of its total revenue, and that means it needs us.

The Montanas are above Idaho in revenues, but the MWC is too big a leap financially. The old WAC is more in reach financially, without Boise of course, but the Montanas would have been in a huge conference based in the Southeast, so it was turned down.

(04-24-2017 09:17 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:32 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 02:32 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Well, on that last point, you're correct that Chicago effectively consists of two separate cities. Essentially, it's what you'd get if San Francisco and Oakland were combined into one single city as opposed to being separate entities. I'm not saying that's a good thing. My issue is with these outsiders making it sound like people are getting murdered on North Michigan Avenue (which is guaranteed to be a nicer street than any street in anyone's hometown here unless you live in Manhattan or Beverly Hills). This would be like saying that the large amount of crime that occurs in Atlanta (which has a higher violent crime rate than Chicago) means that people are getting shot in Buckhead. It's ridiculous.

Except that folks have been shot in Buckhead. It's really no different in any city. Knoxville is a wonderful city but has an area you don't want to be around after dark. Birmingham is the same way. Montgomery is worse than any of them IMO. It's just the nature of the new segregation which isn't done by race, but by income. So....what's changed?

Unfortunately, nothing has changed. It's not a good thing. That's a broad national (and even global) issue.

My specific issue here is the national portrayal of crime in Chicago where many people are throwing stones acting as if though it has an extraordinary level of danger when their own backyards are actually even worse in terms of the violent crime rate. I'm personally tired of the narrative.

I have heard Chicago thrown in with a myriad of other places in that same narrative. I would be willing to bet that if you wanted to officially report how tired you were of it that you would have to get in a queue blocks long with numerous people from cities all over to file your claim. Sensationalism and "What bleeds, leads" is as much to blame as anything as it only fuels urban legends which then are incessantly reported as fact.

Come on, now. When it's the hometown of the preceding president and now the current president can't stop talking about how violent Chicago is specifically (whether through his speeches or his tweets), this is not a "normal" level of coverage. (Of course, the crime rate was actually worse in Chicago back when the current president decided to build his largest and most expensive building anywhere on the Chicago River, but that doesn't fit the current need for a punching bag to rile up the base that has no concept of the city outside of it being the precedeing president's home. Funny how the current president's perspective on the economic and cultural vitality of Chicago was quite different when it came to investing his own money.)

You sound like an Atlantan denying the city's problems. The southside has gone nuts. Trump isn't starting it. He's just mentioning existing news stories.

(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.

Those are facts. Other facts:
1. UND, NDSU, SDSU, USD are all state flagship/landgrants, (or at least sound like them, which is almost as good), as are Montana, MSU, Idaho and Idaho State.
2. The theory that conference affiliation helps define your peer group is widely shared among ADs, presidents, etc.

So the idea of a "Great Northern League" with a core of Great Plains U of States and State Us and filled out with quality western city schools (Denver, SEattle, UN-Omaha, UI-Chicago, UMKC, maybe Sacramento State, Portland State) has something to it.

On the other hand, the big obstacle is the existing NCAA rulebook, which reflects the balance of power in the NCAA and heavily disadvantages startup conferences.

(04-24-2017 10:38 PM)NoDak 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.

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 conference with natural divisions. They all have aspirations and all are better than even MVC schools academically.

Omaha and Denver actually need us more than we need them. UND is in a position to be the glue for that conference, as we'discussed have been involved with all members.

But naturally outsiders wouldnt hear of it.

Maybe a few MVC teams, but no.

Unlike Georgia, which has recently consolidated a number of institutions, Illinois doesn't have a ton of duplication at the university level. At first glance, I would recommend merging Chicago State, Northeastern Illinois, and Governors State all into one large Northern Illinois institution. Reduce the footprint where possible and give the combined institution the mission of serving the various communities served by the existing institutions.

Beyond that, the only other option for consolidation would be minimal - combining SIU-Edwardsville back into SIU with a limited administrative savings.

I did not have time to look at the Illinois Community College system, but I'd imagine there is an opportunity to leverage some synergies there as Georgia has done with geographically proximate institutions.