Announcement

**filbert** · 01-05-2007, 12:33 PM

Re: Why have so many fans quit coming to bb games?

Originally posted by juice

[
How many years do you have to be DI before you can count towards a conference receiving an automatic bid? Doesn't a conference have to have a certain percentage of teams that have been DI for a certain length of time? If so, what is that amount of time? . . . What other options are there?

NCAA conferences must have seven "core members" to maintain their men's basketball automatic bid.

First, there's the five-year reclassification period before a school becomes a full D-I member.

Then, the school needs to become a "core member." A core member is a school that has been a full D-I member for eight years. The NCAA bylaws do not preclude a conference from petitioning the NCAA to reduce the eight-year requirement.

Additionally, a conference must maintain its stability, by having six core members in the conference together for five years. The NCAA bylaws DO state that "there shall be no exception to the five-year waiting period."

So, from the beginning of Year One of the reclassification process, the bylaws lay out a period of thirteen years until a transitioning D-II school does a conference any good at all from a core member point of view, and five more years beyond that until the school actually counts toward providing stability in a conference. The only wiggle room I see is if a conference petitions to have a school declared a "core" member after a period shorter than eight years as a full D-I member, or if the five-year reclassification period is shortened.

So, if USD's Year One is 2008-09, it seems to me like the Coyotes are looking at the 2020-21 season as their first as a "core institution."

Based on the experience of Northern Colorado, NDSU, and SDSU, USD should probably be looking at Year 3 of the reclassification process as when they'll start being interesting to basketball-playing conferences--that would be 2010, I believe. I think the Mid-Con is pretty much the only game in town for the U's. But getting ten Mid-Con members to agree to take in two more Dakota state flagship universitites might be an interesting discussion--given the competitive complaints of some Gateway members to the prospect of adding NDSU and SDSU.

USD and UND to the GWFC in 2008 is pretty much a no-brainer, regardless of whether or not SDSU and NDSU move on to the Gateway. The threats to the continued existence of the GWFC are 1) Cal Poly and/or UC Davis decide 'to heck with this' and move up to the Bowl Subdivision, or 2) the Big Sky has a sanity attack and reconsiders adding Southern Utah. I'd consider the former more likely than the latter, personally.

We may have to move some of these posts out of the Smack section . . .

**juice** · 01-05-2007, 02:06 PM

Re: Why have so many fans quit coming to bb games?

Originally posted by filbert

[quote author=juice link=1167963957/15#16 date=1168019941][
How many years do you have to be DI before you can count towards a conference receiving an automatic bid? �Doesn't a conference have to have a certain percentage of teams that have been DI for a certain length of time? �If so, what is that amount of time? �. . . �What other options are there?

NCAA conferences must have seven "core members" to maintain their men's basketball automatic bid.

First, there's the five-year reclassification period before a school becomes a full D-I member.

Then, the school needs to become a "core member." �A core member is a school that has been a full D-I member for eight years. �The NCAA bylaws do not preclude a conference from petitioning the NCAA to reduce the eight-year requirement.

Additionally, a conference must maintain its stability, by having six core members in the conference together for five years. �The NCAA bylaws DO state that "there shall be no exception to the five-year waiting period."

So, from the beginning of Year One of the reclassification process, the bylaws lay out a period of thirteen years until a transitioning D-II school does a conference any good at all from a core member point of view, and five more years beyond that until the school actually counts toward providing stability in a conference. �The only wiggle room I see is if a conference petitions to have a school declared a "core" member after a period shorter than eight years as a full D-I member, or if the five-year reclassification period is shortened. �

So, if USD's Year One is 2008-09, it seems to me like the Coyotes are looking at the 2020-21 season as their first as a "core institution."

Based on the experience of Northern Colorado, NDSU, and SDSU, USD should probably be looking at Year 3 of the reclassification process as when they'll start being interesting to basketball-playing conferences--that would be 2010, I believe. �I think the Mid-Con is pretty much the only game in town for the U's. �But getting ten Mid-Con members to agree to take in two more Dakota state flagship universitites might be an interesting discussion--given the competitive complaints of some Gateway members to the prospect of adding NDSU and SDSU.

[/quote]

There is a lot of numbers being thrown out here, I just want to see if I'm understanding you correctly. If year one for USD is 2008-09 then their first year as a full D-I member will be 2013-2014. There is no wiggle room on the 5 year wait period to be a full D-I member. Then it takes another 8 years on top of that to be considered a core member. The 8 year requirement may possibly be shortened.

If I understand you, there is no requirement that a certain percentage of the teams in a conference be core members, just as long as there are 6 core members together for five years. If you guys and NDSU stay in the Mid-Con until you become core members will you guys count right away towards the six members needed for conference stability? Or will you need to be core members for five years?
How many core members does the Mid-Con have and is there any threat of losing them anytime soon?

What do you guys honestly think the chances are that the mid-con would think about adding USD and UND during our third year of reclassification? I don't see it as very promising myself, I just don't think they would want to add two more Dakota schools after just adding two. I think you guys are probably more in tune with how they think than I am though, so I'm sure you could give some better insight into what our chances would be down the road.

**EQguy** · 01-05-2007, 03:51 PM

Re: Why have so many fans quit coming to bb games?

I would think the best chance the UXD's would have is if a team or two leaves the Mid-con in the next 5 years. There is always a possibility considering the futility and budget of Centenary and the open desire for Southern Utah to be in the Sky.

**filbert** · 01-05-2007, 08:13 PM

USD's Conference Search

I'll move some messages over from an unrelated Smack thread which discussed USD's future D-I conference search in (what was for the Smack forum) unreasonable civility.

**filbert** · 01-05-2007, 09:45 PM

Re: Why have so many fans quit coming to bb games?

Originally posted by juice

There is a lot of numbers being thrown out here, I just want to see if I'm understanding you correctly. If year one for USD is 2008-09 then their first year as a full D-I member will be 2013-2014. There is no wiggle room on the 5 year wait period to be a full D-I member. Then it takes another 8 years on top of that to be considered a core member. The 8 year requirement may possibly be shortened.

If I understand you, there is no requirement that a certain percentage of the teams in a conference be core members, just as long as there are 6 core members together for five years. If you guys and NDSU stay in the Mid-Con until you become core members will you guys count right away towards the six members needed for conference stability? Or will you need to be core members for five years?
How many core members does the Mid-Con have and is there any threat of losing them anytime soon?

What do you guys honestly think the chances are that the mid-con would think about adding USD and UND during our third year of reclassification? I don't see it as very promising myself, I just don't think they would want to add two more Dakota schools after just adding two. I think you guys are probably more in tune with how they think than I am though, so I'm sure you could give some better insight into what our chances would be down the road.

Almost. There are two five-year wait periods. The first is for an individual school to reclassify to Division I. The second is the continuity-of-membership criterion for a conference to maintain an automatic bid.

Conferences need to have seven core members, six of which have been together in the conference for five years.

Here's my best understanding of the Mid-Continent Conference's men's basketball autobid situation:

The Mid-Con goes below the seven core member requirement next year, when Valparaiso leaves for the Horizon League. Centenary will have been a member of the Mid-Con for five years after the 2007-08 year, so the Mid-Con will play that season under a two-year grace period to meet the seven core member requirement until the next year when Centenary meets the core member/league continuity criterion.

IPFW is a D-I core member. It will meet the conference membership requirement for the Mid-Con in the 2012-13 season, so if no other league members leave, their core member count will be up to eight at that time. SDSU and NDSU will be D-I core members in 2017-18, I believe, after becoming full D-I schools in 2008-09 and becoming core institutions after eight more seasons in D-I.

So, in theory, the Mid-Con can afford to lose one, but only one member, before the 2015-16 season, when they could lose as many as two more to drop below the seven-core-member requirement and get them back with SDSU and NDSU before the two-year grace period expires.

The Mid-Con needs to do everything it can to keep all of it's current members--it's margin for error is drastically slim. Should another member leave, I'd expect Texas-Pan American to get into the league, because they're already a core D-I member.

It's difficult to single out schools which might leave the Mid-Con in the foreseeable future. Anything could happen. Valparaiso's departure was a bolt from the blue--I'm not sure anybody saw it coming. The other school which could potentially pull a Valpo is probably Oral Roberts. They've probably got the league's strongest athletic program from top to bottom. The problem there is that the only league they'd probably have an real incentive to jump to is the Missouri Valley, who aren't hiring right now.

Nobody in the Mid-Con likes the Southern Utah trip. Think of it as the Northern Colorado trip from the NCC days, but over twice as long, with Cedar City being slightly harder to get to than Greeley is from Denver. But, SUU's former AD is now commissioner of the Mid-Con. He's trying to build the Great West Football Conference into a strong football affiliate of the Mid-Con, but these efforts may take a serious hit if SDSU and NDSU get invited into the Gateway Football Conference. SUU would ideally be in the Big Sky, but several BSC schools have gone out of their way to put up objections to SUU moving into the Big Sky.

Centenary has a long tradition as a D-I institution, but they're a very small college (smaller than Augustana) in a fairly difficult market. LSU is the big dog in the state, and Louisiana Tech, Louisiana-Monroe, Grambling, and Northwestern State are competing for the Northern Louisiana college sports dollar. They've tried to get into the Southland in the past and were turned away. There are no other leagues which would be a significant improvement over the Mid-Con.

UMKC occasionally makes sounds about improving the school's athletics. Like so many other schools, they'd rather be in the Valley, but that's not likely. The other Mid-Con schools, Western Illinois, Oakland and IUPUI, have more potential options than some of their western conference-mates, so it's important to the Mid-Con to do what they can to keep those schools happy, too. WIU is another in the long line of schools who'd rather be in the Valley. The Horizon is probably more attractive to Oakland and IUPUI.

That's how I see it right now, anyway.

**JackJD** · 01-05-2007, 11:20 PM

Re: USD's Conference Search

Filbert: Nice job summarizing some confusing NCAA Rules. To see if I understand correctly, can you confirm the following:

Assuming no other defections in the Mid-Con in the foreseeable future,..

a. Will SDSU and NDSU be eligible for the NCAA Tourney if either wins the Mid-Con conference championship in their first year with the conference, 2007-08? I think the answer is "No" because both schools are in their last year of transition.

b. Will SDSU and NDSU be eligible for the NCAA Tourney if either wins the Mid-Con conference championship in their second year with the conference, 2008-09? I think the answer is "Yes" because both schools have completed their five-year transition and are in an established conference having the necessary core membership.

I think my conclusions are correct but I'm not certain.

**NightHawk78** · 01-06-2007, 12:06 AM

Re: USD's Conference Search

JackJD, neither SDSU nor NDSU will be eligible to win the Mid-Con conference championship next season. We will play the regualr-season slate of games, but neither school will participate in the conference tournament. Volleyball, however, is the exception as that program (along with wrestling) are both eligible to compete for the NCAA Championship. Come March 2009, we will be playing for a NCAA Tournament berth for men's and women's basketball in the Mid-Con conference tournament.

As for UND and USD's conference chances, I honestly feel that a shake-up of the Big Sky (with one or two of the West Coast teams leaving) is their best chance to receive a conference invite in the forseeable future. The Mid-Con is full and is unlikely to have two openings for quite sometime (it if does, then everyone will likely be leaving the conference as the auto-bid will likely go away).

Ugh....these core school/conference continuity requirements are really a bunch of confusing, bush-league crap. I know that they're in place so a group of wannabe Us can't start a conference and instantly claim a tourney bid and a slice of the TV money, but it's unfair to the schools that actually make real efforts to build solid, all-around D-I programs.

**Yote53** · 01-06-2007, 10:24 AM

Re: USD's Conference Search

After reading this thread here is what I take away from it.

The Mid Con is a transition D1 conference with most of the schools in it seeming to want ot go somewhere else. �This brings up this question, would they expand again to bring the Dakota U's which would give the conference an anchor of schools that have a long history of sticking in the same conference together? �

From everything that I have read the SU's are happy to be in this conference and plan on taking up residence and calling it home for many years and improving it from within. �The only other possibility is the Valley, and they don't seem to anxious to do any expansion.

The Big Sky is a real possibility for the U's. �That conference might be kicking themselves for passing on the SU's and may not want to make the same mistake with the U's.

On another note, USD AD Nielson was on the radio in Sioux City this week and future conference talk came up. �He said he has had conversations with several interested conferences already and one of the things they like about USD is its location. �Being located in SE SD it can deliver a statewide following as a state school, the Sioux Falls media market, and the Sioux City media market covering all of NW Iowa. USD is being compared to UNI at the time of its move up facility wise (DDome, UNIDome), USD will be expanding its athletic facilities but not until after its transition is complete (read BBall arena breaking ground in 5 years), and that they have had positive feedback from an energized alumni base.

**SUPERBUNNY** · 01-06-2007, 11:10 AM

Re: USD's Conference Search

The Big Sky is a real possibility for the U's. �That conference might be kicking themselves for passing on the SU's and may not want to make the same mistake with the U's.

Not quite factual but close! �The Big Sky may or may not be kicking themselves for not taking the SU's. �There is a chance that they will SETTLE for the U's if there is turmoil in their schools. �A couple of schools are looking to move up to a bigger conference which would make adding schools a top priority just as it was for the Mid-Con.

On another note, USD AD Nielson was on the radio in Sioux City this week and future conference talk came up. �He said he has had conversations with several interested conferences already and one of the things they like about USD is its location. �Being located in SE SD it can deliver a statewide following as a state school, the Sioux Falls media market, and the Sioux City media market covering all of NW Iowa. �USD is being compared to UNI at the time of its move up facility wise (DDome, UNIDome), USD will be expanding its athletic facilities but not until after its transition is complete (read BBall arena breaking ground in 5 years), and that they have had positive feedback from an energized alumni base.

I don't mean this as smack but what else is Mr. Nielson supposed to say. �That he has not been able to have discussions with conferences that are interested, our location is a deterent, and it all depends on the benjamins? �Of course that is what he is saying and that is what he is supposed to be doing. �The difference is that until you have a conference asking for information from your school in a proposal then there really isn't much of any great significance happening. �That is what happened with SDSU! �Dr. Oien said those same things and I'm sure he was obviously visiting with several conferences on a preliminary basis. �Once they requested a prospectus is when things get going. �As far as location goes, it was an issue for SDSU that was outweighed by the other positives but it will be a bigger issue for USD, not that it can't be overcome!

My point is that most of these statements are window dressing for the change ahead. �I'm on record many times on this board that I wish the best for USD. �I hope their alumni base is enerized. �I hope their leaders have the guts to make it work. I hope USD can find a conference. �I just think it is going to be a much more difficult battle for USD than it has been for SDSU unless the cards fall into place.

Good luck to the 'Yotes!

SUPERBUNNY

**jackmd** · 01-06-2007, 11:21 AM

Re: USD's Conference Search

Originally posted by Yote53

On another note, USD AD Nielson was on the radio in Sioux City this week and future conference talk came up. �He said he has had conversations with several interested conferences already and one of the things they like about USD is its location. �Being located in SE SD it can deliver a statewide following as a state school, the Sioux Falls media market, and the Sioux City media market covering all of NW Iowa. �USD is being compared to UNI at the time of its move up facility wise (DDome, UNIDome), USD will be expanding its athletic facilities but not until after its transition is complete (read BBall arena breaking ground in 5 years), and that they have had positive feedback from an energized alumni base.

Yep, he is sure saying the right things. Right now its a lot of talk and not a lot of action. Buidings aren't built with words and the cost of construction is ever increasing. Conferences don't sit around waiting for institutions to ask for membership and then say "sure we could always use more unproven institutions with questionable finances." The suggestion that conferences like the location of Vermillion is just that, a suggestion. I don't think any study has been done to support those "hopes".

Nielsen and Abbott may have the money in place but until we see the budget increase its still a question. Conference discussions may have taken place but until an offer of membership is made its just a discussion. Will USD be at the Mid-Con, BSC, GWFC or Gateway meetings? I must admit I haven't heard about it if they have been invited.

SDSU doesn't gain anything if USD struggles during its transition to DI and USD stands to lose a lot. No way insightful and bright men like Nielsen and Abbott would let USD take this leap without fully expecting things to go as they have planned. Therefore, I hope and I trust that all of this talk will be substantiated by action sooner than later. If and when it is it will be as it should, so there won't be a need to say "I told you so".

**Yote53** · 01-06-2007, 11:27 AM

Re: USD's Conference Search

I agree, it is his job to be out there with the positive spin. That is what is goignt on at this point.

I just think it is going to be a much more difficult battle for USD than it has been for SDSU unless the cards fall into place.

I disagree here. I think what the SU's have done has made the U's more attractive to conferences.

I also disagree, obviously, with the statement about the Big Sky settling. I think protecting their conference, making their conference stronger in numbers is a better word. Settling just isn't the right word.

Don't try to spin it any other way, the SU's had their sights set on the Big Sky from the start of their move. Up until the MidCon invite you would have been overjoyed to be in that conference. If the U's end up there, don't try to spin it negatively.

**SUPERBUNNY** · 01-06-2007, 11:41 AM

Re: USD's Conference Search

Originally posted by Yote53

I agree, it is his job to be out there with the positive spin. �That is what is goignt on at this point.

I just think it is going to be a much more difficult battle for USD than it has been for SDSU unless the cards fall into place.

I disagree here. �I think what the SU's have done has made the U's more attractive to conferences.

I also disagree, obviously, with the statement about the Big Sky settling. �I think protecting their conference, making their conference stronger in numbers is a better word. �Settling just isn't the right word.

Don't try to spin it any other way, the SU's had their sights set on the Big Sky from the start of their move. �Up until the MidCon invite you would have been overjoyed to be in that conference. �If the U's end up there, don't try to spin it negatively.

Yote53,

I'm not trying to upset anyone with what I said above. Another word other than settling can be used if you like. My point being that if the Big Sky chose to not take SDSU and NDSU than I seriously doubt that they are excited about the prospects of USD and UND becoming members. It just isn't as strong a package as SU's and I dount you would argue that point.

No spin on my comment either. The SU's were pretty firmly fixed on two conferences, the Big Sky and the Mid-Con. They were easily the best fits for both schools. The Big Sky was obviously stronger for Football and the Mid-Con is stronger for basketball and the large number of sports offered. The dissapointment came in the fact that the Big Sky was talking a lot with both SU's and asked for the prospectus from them and eventually chose to go with UNC. It was a tough deal to take since it held a lot of promise and would have been a quick answer to where we would call home. SDSU caught a break when the Mid-Con lost a couple of schools there is no question about that. I ALWAYS HAD THE BIG SKY AND THE MID-CON AS A COIN FLIP! If we get into the Gateway for football than the Big Sky will be a very distant bad memory for SDSU!

All the best Yote53!

SUPERBUNNY

**MID-CON_JACK** · 01-06-2007, 01:00 PM

Re: USD's Conference Search

Originally posted by Yote53

Don't try to spin it any other way, the SU's had their sights set on the Big Sky from the start of their move. �Up until the MidCon invite you would have been overjoyed to be in that conference. �If the U's end up there, don't try to spin it negatively.

I think the SU's had hopes for a Big Sky invite because they were guessing that was the most likely route...and when the Big Sky showed interest, everone got excited. In retrospect, the Mid-Con will turn out to be a much better fit for reasons stated by other posters (more sports, better basketball etc.) and for another very important reason: time zones. I think it will be much easier to keep the fans involved when they can watch the Jacks on the new TV or listen to a game on the radio at a time we are accustomed to.

I predict NDSU and SDSU's addition to the MId-Con (and, I hope, the Gateway Football Conferences) will only raise the level of play in those already competitive conferences and it will stabilize the conference for the next 20 years.

I have my cowbell out for the game tonight. Forgot to take it to the Marquette women's game and look what happened!

**filbert** · 01-06-2007, 11:36 PM

Re: USD's Conference Search

I think the best description of the current attitude of the Big Sky towards expansion is: fat, dumb, and happy.

Until such time as the BSC loses a member or two or three to the Bowl Subdivision, I don't see as terribly likely any scenario where they want to leap 600 miles east into another time zone in order to find new members. They're fine with nine.

Not that you'll ever hear BSC commissioner Fullerton every say anything nearly that clearly. It'll be a lot of "considering our options" and "they're certainly attractive institutions" when discussing the U's. I think he has sense enough not to burn a bridge he may need to cross some day. But that's not the same thing as scheduling a site visit.

Announcement

USD's Conference Search

USD's Conference Search

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment