Last year it was baseball. This year it is men's and women's swimming and diving and women's hockey. Brings us down to 17 sports.

We should have never entered DI with such a bloated sports offering, but it's been corrected now.

The three programs cut will save $2.4 million per year, more than the needed cuts of $1.3. Maybe we can fund our four Big Sky championships at a DI level now.

The article mentioned that the Summit has higher scholarship levels required than the Big Sky, and that North Dakota had to add scholarships to existing programs, which they planeed to do, to meet Summit funding requirements. I suspect much of the "extra" savings will wind up paying for scholarships on existing teams.

This may explain the relatively mediocre performance of the Big Sky, if schools are allowed to run fewer scholarships than other D-I conferences.

(03-30-2017 03:12 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The article mentioned that the Summit has higher scholarship levels required than the Big Sky, and that North Dakota had to add scholarships to existing programs, which they planeed to do, to meet Summit funding requirements. I suspect much of the "extra" savings will wind up paying for scholarships on existing teams.

This may explain the relatively mediocre performance of the Big Sky, if schools are allowed to run fewer scholarships than other D-I conferences.

Some Big Sky schools skimp on lower profile sports like w soccer, softball, T&F, XC and tennis. We have fully funded fb, mbb, wbb, and VB and suspect most BSC schools do. Some schools like NAU and Sac St probably are at or near the allowable for the minor sports. Know that we don't fund any men's tennis schollies and we were forced to add that sport as a condition of acceptance. We can't drop it until we leave the BSC. We have always emphasized revenue sports with full schollies and it shows.

Our mbb program pays our coaches very low for DI. That is an example of not meeting DI expectations. Also, the mbb and wbb teams should play on occasion in our 13k arena, which is a pro type place. We used to when in DII and had great crowds. Now with WIH gone, the weekend date open up again.

(03-30-2017 04:16 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 03:12 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The article mentioned that the Summit has higher scholarship levels required than the Big Sky, and that North Dakota had to add scholarships to existing programs, which they planeed to do, to meet Summit funding requirements. I suspect much of the "extra" savings will wind up paying for scholarships on existing teams.

This may explain the relatively mediocre performance of the Big Sky, if schools are allowed to run fewer scholarships than other D-I conferences.

Some Big Sky schools skimp on lower profile sports like w soccer, softball, T&F, XC and tennis. We have fully funded fb, mbb, wbb, and VB and suspect most BSC schools do. Some schools like NAU and Sac St probably are at or near the allowable for the minor sports. Know that we don't fund any men's tennis schollies and we were forced to add that sport as a condition of acceptance. We can't drop it until we leave the BSC. We have always emphasized revenue sports with full schollies and it shows.

Our mbb program pays our coaches very low for DI. That is an example of not meeting DI expectations. Also, the mbb and wbb teams should play on occasion in our 13k arena, which is a pro type place. We used to when in DII and had great crowds. Now with WIH gone, the weekend date open up again.

Which is one reason why NAU and Sac St tend to dominate the Big Sky All-Sports Trophies, and why the Big Sky's only team National Championship (as well as multiple 2nd/3rd place trophies (in a sport the Big Sky competes in) have come from NAU.

NAU has a great men's cross country team right now.

(03-30-2017 11:34 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 04:16 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 03:12 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The article mentioned that the Summit has higher scholarship levels required than the Big Sky, and that North Dakota had to add scholarships to existing programs, which they planeed to do, to meet Summit funding requirements. I suspect much of the "extra" savings will wind up paying for scholarships on existing teams.

This may explain the relatively mediocre performance of the Big Sky, if schools are allowed to run fewer scholarships than other D-I conferences.

Some Big Sky schools skimp on lower profile sports like w soccer, softball, T&F, XC and tennis. We have fully funded fb, mbb, wbb, and VB and suspect most BSC schools do. Some schools like NAU and Sac St probably are at or near the allowable for the minor sports. Know that we don't fund any men's tennis schollies and we were forced to add that sport as a condition of acceptance. We can't drop it until we leave the BSC. We have always emphasized revenue sports with full schollies and it shows.

Our mbb program pays our coaches very low for DI. That is an example of not meeting DI expectations. Also, the mbb and wbb teams should play on occasion in our 13k arena, which is a pro type place. We used to when in DII and had great crowds. Now with WIH gone, the weekend date open up again.

Which is one reason why NAU and Sac St tend to dominate the Big Sky All-Sports Trophies, and why the Big Sky's only team National Championship (as well as multiple 2nd/3rd place trophies (in a sport the Big Sky competes in) have come from NAU.

Yup. We filled out trophy cases with Oly sports BSC titles in a nice run from 06-14ish...then Wanless was forced out and we promoted a longtime staffer who didn't know what he was doing. We have since hired away SMC's AD to hopefully right the ship.

NAU has always had an impressive T&F/XC program as far as I can remember. That XC national title is very impressive.