Everyone is thinking way too much into the decision. The MVFC is stable, the Summit schools wanted UND. The MVC schools said, whatever just don't screw up the scheduling. The Summit schools aren't taking over, seems as if there is a great working relationship between the MVC and the Summit schools and everyone is pretty happy.

As for basketball. The MVC is likely a one bid conference this year just like the Summit. That said, the Summit is down this year, way down. SDSU is the problem. We have a ton of talent up front, but Nagy left the program with no quality guards. Give it a year or two and the Summit and SDSU will be back. Solid, but just below the MVC.

(01-30-2017 11:09 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(01-28-2017 03:26 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-28-2017 01:10 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  3. MVFC is essentially just a football scheduling alliance and the schools worked together to help out stabilize the Summit League for all sports.

Anyone else smell that?

It's fear.

Fear from the historical MVC schools with FCS football that are as stagnate as a mucky pond, while the Summit League schools (mainly the Dakotas) soar fast and high above them.

What fear? You are as clueless as NoDak. MVC schools helped the Summit League schools by voting UND into the league to help stabilize the Summit League. Of course you were also crowing early this year how the Summit was passing the MVC by in basketball. Funny how you got quiet about that after Missouri State thumped NDSU and SDSU got thumped by Wichita State and UNI.

(01-30-2017 11:26 AM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  NDSU have no place to go. The MAC, if they took an FCS move up would take Illinois State or possibly UNI if UNI could afford the move. The MWC will never take an FCS team, not NDSU not either Montana school. If they expand they are going to Texas, that's a lock. The Sun Belt are a now regional conference uninterested in bringing in anyone outside their footprint (see NMSU, Idaho being dumped).

NDSU is in FCS and they aren't leaving anytime soon.

(01-28-2017 05:13 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-28-2017 11:44 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Just want to say: this move is correct.

UND should've been added to the Summit and MVFC when USD was. That always should've been the case, and glad that a glaring mistake is being corrected.




NoDak,

You will now be forced to admit the following truth: if there any new FBS conference in the west in the future, it will either have to be: i) without North Dakota, or ii) including both UND and NDSU, at least, and probably SDSU and USD too.

Impossible to get around that. You can try to lie, but it will be a naked lie.

So admit it and move on. No response defaults to you admitting it.

Strange how NDSU got out of scheduling a fb game at UND for 17 years. Now that fb is restored prominently in Fargo again, apparently they will play at UND. The MVFC was steadfast against more than 10 members back when UND applied earlier, yet it's OK with it now.

I have admitted that I erroneously thought boosters would have sponsored a remodel of our on campus stadium to get to FBS. Apparently that is not enough for you.

My biggest fear is that NDSU will now get the only FBS slot for the Dakotas. Before you recently only very reluctantly say a WAC FBS is possible, but that will certainly be shut down. Now all the Dakota schools are going FBS?

The WAC option hasn't been closed, as much as you despise that.

SIUE would be a good add for the Summit.Not sure if their travel costs would be more than the OVC--if so--maybe not. Eastern Illinois could work.

(01-30-2017 12:58 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 11:26 AM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  NDSU have no place to go. The MAC, if they took an FCS move up would take Illinois State or possibly UNI if UNI could afford the move. The MWC will never take an FCS team, not NDSU not either Montana school. If they expand they are going to Texas, that's a lock. The Sun Belt are a now regional conference uninterested in bringing in anyone outside their footprint (see NMSU, Idaho being dumped).

NDSU is in FCS and they aren't leaving anytime soon.

(01-28-2017 05:13 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-28-2017 11:44 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Just want to say: this move is correct.

UND should've been added to the Summit and MVFC when USD was. That always should've been the case, and glad that a glaring mistake is being corrected.




NoDak,

You will now be forced to admit the following truth: if there any new FBS conference in the west in the future, it will either have to be: i) without North Dakota, or ii) including both UND and NDSU, at least, and probably SDSU and USD too.

Impossible to get around that. You can try to lie, but it will be a naked lie.

So admit it and move on. No response defaults to you admitting it.

Strange how NDSU got out of scheduling a fb game at UND for 17 years. Now that fb is restored prominently in Fargo again, apparently they will play at UND. The MVFC was steadfast against more than 10 members back when UND applied earlier, yet it's OK with it now.

I have admitted that I erroneously thought boosters would have sponsored a remodel of our on campus stadium to get to FBS. Apparently that is not enough for you.

My biggest fear is that NDSU will now get the only FBS slot for the Dakotas. Before you recently only very reluctantly say a WAC FBS is possible, but that will certainly be shut down. Now all the Dakota schools are going FBS?

The WAC option hasn't been closed, as much as you despise that.

It has for UND and it will never open for NDSU. They are NOT going to the WAC.

(01-30-2017 02:31 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  SIUE would be a good add for the Summit.Not sure if their travel costs would be more than the OVC--if so--maybe not. Eastern Illinois could work.

Outside of the trip to Jacksonville State, everybody in the OVC is within a 6 hour drive for both SIUE and Eastern Illinois.

You are right.I like to think my geography is pretty good but I missed that one!

OVC also uses divisions which helps.

(01-30-2017 02:41 PM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 12:58 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 11:26 AM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  NDSU have no place to go. The MAC, if they took an FCS move up would take Illinois State or possibly UNI if UNI could afford the move. The MWC will never take an FCS team, not NDSU not either Montana school. If they expand they are going to Texas, that's a lock. The Sun Belt are a now regional conference uninterested in bringing in anyone outside their footprint (see NMSU, Idaho being dumped).

NDSU is in FCS and they aren't leaving anytime soon.

(01-28-2017 05:13 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-28-2017 11:44 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Just want to say: this move is correct.

UND should've been added to the Summit and MVFC when USD was. That always should've been the case, and glad that a glaring mistake is being corrected.




NoDak,

You will now be forced to admit the following truth: if there any new FBS conference in the west in the future, it will either have to be: i) without North Dakota, or ii) including both UND and NDSU, at least, and probably SDSU and USD too.

Impossible to get around that. You can try to lie, but it will be a naked lie.

So admit it and move on. No response defaults to you admitting it.

Strange how NDSU got out of scheduling a fb game at UND for 17 years. Now that fb is restored prominently in Fargo again, apparently they will play at UND. The MVFC was steadfast against more than 10 members back when UND applied earlier, yet it's OK with it now.

I have admitted that I erroneously thought boosters would have sponsored a remodel of our on campus stadium to get to FBS. Apparently that is not enough for you.

My biggest fear is that NDSU will now get the only FBS slot for the Dakotas. Before you recently only very reluctantly say a WAC FBS is possible, but that will certainly be shut down. Now all the Dakota schools are going FBS?

The WAC option hasn't been closed, as much as you despise that.

It has for UND and it will never open for NDSU. They are NOT going to the WAC.

Their board is sure talking about it, after they build a new stadium. You have a new must do for your life now to stop the NDSU FBS WAC talk.

(01-30-2017 04:06 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 02:41 PM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 12:58 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 11:26 AM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  NDSU have no place to go. The MAC, if they took an FCS move up would take Illinois State or possibly UNI if UNI could afford the move. The MWC will never take an FCS team, not NDSU not either Montana school. If they expand they are going to Texas, that's a lock. The Sun Belt are a now regional conference uninterested in bringing in anyone outside their footprint (see NMSU, Idaho being dumped).

NDSU is in FCS and they aren't leaving anytime soon.

(01-28-2017 05:13 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Strange how NDSU got out of scheduling a fb game at UND for 17 years. Now that fb is restored prominently in Fargo again, apparently they will play at UND. The MVFC was steadfast against more than 10 members back when UND applied earlier, yet it's OK with it now.

I have admitted that I erroneously thought boosters would have sponsored a remodel of our on campus stadium to get to FBS. Apparently that is not enough for you.

My biggest fear is that NDSU will now get the only FBS slot for the Dakotas. Before you recently only very reluctantly say a WAC FBS is possible, but that will certainly be shut down. Now all the Dakota schools are going FBS?

The WAC option hasn't been closed, as much as you despise that.

It has for UND and it will never open for NDSU. They are NOT going to the WAC.

Their board is sure talking about it, after they build a new stadium. You have a new must do for your life now to stop the NDSU FBS WAC talk.

What's your deal? You are acting like DavidSt when it comes to this topic. It doesn't matter what evidence to the contrary you just refuse to believe it. The WAC is done as an FBS conference.

(01-30-2017 04:25 PM)Scoochpooch Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 04:06 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 02:41 PM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 12:58 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 11:26 AM)jacksfan29 Wrote:  NDSU have no place to go. The MAC, if they took an FCS move up would take Illinois State or possibly UNI if UNI could afford the move. The MWC will never take an FCS team, not NDSU not either Montana school. If they expand they are going to Texas, that's a lock. The Sun Belt are a now regional conference uninterested in bringing in anyone outside their footprint (see NMSU, Idaho being dumped).

NDSU is in FCS and they aren't leaving anytime soon.

The WAC option hasn't been closed, as much as you despise that.

It has for UND and it will never open for NDSU. They are NOT going to the WAC.

Their board is sure talking about it, after they build a new stadium. You have a new must do for your life now to stop the NDSU FBS WAC talk.

What's your deal? You are acting like DavidSt when it comes to this topic. It doesn't matter what evidence to the contrary you just refuse to believe it. The WAC is done as an FBS conference.

Just informing this board NDSU fans are talking about joining an FBS WAC. Look for yourself. That's the last thing I want now. I guess you would do well as a message board policeman.

The key to this for a force expansion is Liberty. They could get a joint law suit against the NCAA and FBS with other schools in FCS that wants to move up. Does the FBS schools really want to fight this in court or would they settled to let those schools move up?

The only real way for the WAC FBS dream to vanish is for the WAC itself to vanish. That ain't likely to happen.

The NCAA clearly has a set of discriminatory rules that prohibit schools who are willing to make the investment to play at Division I FBS standards unless they have an invitation from an existing conference. Furthermore, the scheduling rules for transitional schools make it impossible for a group of schools to move up together and play a league schedule among themselves during their transition years.

Anyone willing to challenge the NCAA in court on this has a valid case. The NCAA shouldn't be in the business of playing gate keeper in order to protect its existing members.

The problem is that even if you do challenge the NCAA and win you're not entitled to any money because the Playoff System is its own separate animal and an agreement among ten conferences in which 5 of them dictated the terms. If you were to try to bring up a new league ideally you would want to time it so that you'd coincide with the Playoff's renewal but even then, the powers at be could decide that the newcomers don't get a slice of the pie.

(01-30-2017 06:00 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The NCAA clearly has a set of discriminatory rules that prohibit schools who are willing to make the investment to play at Division I FBS standards unless they have an invitation from an existing conference. Furthermore, the scheduling rules for transitional schools make it impossible for a group of schools to move up together and play a league schedule among themselves during their transition years.

Anyone willing to challenge the NCAA in court on this has a valid case. The NCAA shouldn't be in the business of playing gate keeper in order to protect its existing members.

The problem is that even if you do challenge the NCAA and win you're not entitled to any money because the Playoff System is its own separate animal and an agreement among ten conferences in which 5 of them dictated the terms. If you were to try to bring up a new league ideally you would want to time it so that you'd coincide with the Playoff's renewal but even then, the powers at be could decide that the newcomers don't get a slice of the pie.

I could see these schools having a case if say the entire Big Sky wanted to move up but were denied. I don't see as much a case say if Liberty wants to move up alone. Sure, they should be able to move up if they want but who are they going to play? Will the court say that they must be admitted to the Big Ten? Plus you can't force performance, so you can't force any current FBS team to play Liberty if they refuse.

(01-30-2017 06:11 PM)Scoochpooch Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 06:00 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The NCAA clearly has a set of discriminatory rules that prohibit schools who are willing to make the investment to play at Division I FBS standards unless they have an invitation from an existing conference. Furthermore, the scheduling rules for transitional schools make it impossible for a group of schools to move up together and play a league schedule among themselves during their transition years.

Anyone willing to challenge the NCAA in court on this has a valid case. The NCAA shouldn't be in the business of playing gate keeper in order to protect its existing members.

The problem is that even if you do challenge the NCAA and win you're not entitled to any money because the Playoff System is its own separate animal and an agreement among ten conferences in which 5 of them dictated the terms. If you were to try to bring up a new league ideally you would want to time it so that you'd coincide with the Playoff's renewal but even then, the powers at be could decide that the newcomers don't get a slice of the pie.

I could see these schools having a case if say the entire Big Sky wanted to move up but were denied. I don't see as much a case say if Liberty wants to move up alone. Sure, they should be able to move up if they want but who are they going to play? Will the court say that they must be admitted to the Big Ten? Plus you can't force performance, so you can't force any current FBS team to play Liberty if they refuse.

I agree. If someone is going to challenge the rule they ought to do it en masse. Either one giant block from the Big Sky (8+ including NMSU and the CA affiliates) or a smaller Big Sky block of 5-7 schools in conjunction with a block of 5-7 MVFC schools who would agree to serve as the Eastern "division" of this enterprise.

(01-30-2017 05:05 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The key to this for a force expansion is Liberty. They could get a joint law suit against the NCAA and FBS with other schools in FCS that wants to move up. Does the FBS schools really want to fight this in court or would they settled to let those schools move up?

Confusing your issues.
If Liberty wants to sue over must invite, I think they have a decent case but if they sue why the hell would they want to join the WAC?
They can find a home for their other sports closer than the WAC, presumably Big South even lets them stay.

(01-30-2017 06:00 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The NCAA clearly has a set of discriminatory rules that prohibit schools who are willing to make the investment to play at Division I FBS standards unless they have an invitation from an existing conference. Furthermore, the scheduling rules for transitional schools make it impossible for a group of schools to move up together and play a league schedule among themselves during their transition years.

Anyone willing to challenge the NCAA in court on this has a valid case. The NCAA shouldn't be in the business of playing gate keeper in order to protect its existing members.

The problem is that even if you do challenge the NCAA and win you're not entitled to any money because the Playoff System is its own separate animal and an agreement among ten conferences in which 5 of them dictated the terms. If you were to try to bring up a new league ideally you would want to time it so that you'd coincide with the Playoff's renewal but even then, the powers at be could decide that the newcomers don't get a slice of the pie.

You lost me at the complaint about the scheduling rules.

(01-30-2017 06:00 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The NCAA clearly has a set of discriminatory rules that prohibit schools who are willing to make the investment to play at Division I FBS standards unless they have an invitation from an existing conference. Furthermore, the scheduling rules for transitional schools make it impossible for a group of schools to move up together and play a league schedule among themselves during their transition years.

Which rule is that scheduling rule in? I was looking for that a couple of weeks ago and couldn't find it.

(01-30-2017 06:34 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 06:11 PM)Scoochpooch Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 06:00 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The NCAA clearly has a set of discriminatory rules that prohibit schools who are willing to make the investment to play at Division I FBS standards unless they have an invitation from an existing conference. Furthermore, the scheduling rules for transitional schools make it impossible for a group of schools to move up together and play a league schedule among themselves during their transition years.

Anyone willing to challenge the NCAA in court on this has a valid case. The NCAA shouldn't be in the business of playing gate keeper in order to protect its existing members.

The problem is that even if you do challenge the NCAA and win you're not entitled to any money because the Playoff System is its own separate animal and an agreement among ten conferences in which 5 of them dictated the terms. If you were to try to bring up a new league ideally you would want to time it so that you'd coincide with the Playoff's renewal but even then, the powers at be could decide that the newcomers don't get a slice of the pie.

I could see these schools having a case if say the entire Big Sky wanted to move up but were denied. I don't see as much a case say if Liberty wants to move up alone. Sure, they should be able to move up if they want but who are they going to play? Will the court say that they must be admitted to the Big Ten? Plus you can't force performance, so you can't force any current FBS team to play Liberty if they refuse.

I agree. If someone is going to challenge the rule they ought to do it en masse. Either one giant block from the Big Sky (8+ including NMSU and the CA affiliates) or a smaller Big Sky block of 5-7 schools in conjunction with a block of 5-7 MVFC schools who would agree to serve as the Eastern "division" of this enterprise.

You could add the 3 Southland, 2 OVC and a couple of the CAA schools to the list, and book, you could have like 18 schools that could challenge the NCAA. We could actually see schools like North Dakota State, Eastern Washington and James Madison in a bowl game instead of a 5-7 North Texas team.

(01-31-2017 01:05 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 06:00 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The NCAA clearly has a set of discriminatory rules that prohibit schools who are willing to make the investment to play at Division I FBS standards unless they have an invitation from an existing conference. Furthermore, the scheduling rules for transitional schools make it impossible for a group of schools to move up together and play a league schedule among themselves during their transition years.

Which rule is that scheduling rule in? I was looking for that a couple of weeks ago and couldn't find it.

I don't recall exactly where it's found but I believe that in their transitional years schools moving up have to play all but one of their games against current FBS schools which would mean that they can't play a league schedule while they are moving up. This would be terribly prohibitive.

http://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/4...s-programs

With the latest ND budget cuts, UND is facing a 6.9% cut. The sports need to be announced by middle of February. Would expect that they will be M/W tennis and possibly M/W swimming. We meet Title IX and baseball was cut earlier. We have 20 sports now, which is way too many.

Meanwhile at NDSU, they will need to cut 12.2% out of their budget, as they haven't announced cuts to this date. NDSU only has 16 sports.