Anyone seen Stu's recent blog on the Argus? While he finally admitted he might have been wrong about some things, he still manages to get his shots in. Too bad he can't just finally give in and admit we have been successful in this transition. He also throws in there that he thinks USD will be a member of the Summit within five years and the rivalry will be renewed in full. I guess we will just see. udot is going to need our help on that one....
"All I know is what I read on the message boards."
"Oh, well, there's your problem, then."
Anyone seen Stu's recent blog on the Argus? While he finally admitted he might have been wrong about some things, he still manages to get his shots in. Too bad he can't just finally give in and admit we have been successful in this transition. He also throws in there that he thinks USD will be a member of the Summit within five years and the rivalry will be renewed in full. I guess we will just see. udot is going to need our help on that one....
BTW, he's entitled to his opinions. In the case of the NCC, in it's heyday 70-92 it was a D-I league wrapped in a D-II cloak. The NCC sponsored more sports than most D-I leagues do. It was the top D-II league, and led the NCAA to regionalize playoffs, otherwise many years NCC members would have been the top 3 of 8 teams. SDSU had fabulous WBB, but with NDSU/UND they would end their season in the Regionals.
Regarding the Summit taking in the UxD's. I predict they will be members also, but it may be longer than 5 years. Centenary and SUU will be the drivers of how soon the Summit league turns to add the UxD's. I predict that we'll see UxD's as affiliate Swim members as early as 2009. And with toe-hold......
I don't think there is any more to be said on the NCC. I am beginning to tire of this trip down memory lane. Its not comparable to where we are moving with the Summit and the MVC in football. Good competition in the past? Yes it was, but it was also following D2 rules so I dont think it was D1 in reality as to what some would attest. NCC could play D1 opponents close maybe, but never take on entire D1 conference and come out the champion. That I dont that think would happen even with the best Bison team with 45 scholarships in football.
I am reluctant to assess where and when UND and USD begin their rivalies again with NDSU AND SDSU and are admitted to the Summit. I believe there are a few more schools in transition or will start transition with USD and UND so that might make a difference in ease of entry.
I dont think Summit is the cupcake that Stu would like his readers to believe. After seeing a round robin of home games, the talent and coaching is much superior to what we saw in the NCC, men or woment bb, take your pick.
I would like to see UND on our football schedule first. They have had a very solid program, more so than USD.
BTW, he's entitled to his opinions. In the case of the NCC, in it's heyday 70-92 it was a D-I league wrapped in a D-II cloak. The NCC sponsored more sports than most D-I leagues do. It was the top D-II league, and led the NCAA to regionalize playoffs, otherwise many years NCC members would have been the top 3 of 8 teams. SDSU had fabulous WBB, but with NDSU/UND they would end their season in the Regionals.
Regarding the Summit taking in the UxD's. I predict they will be members also, but it may be longer than 5 years. Centenary and SUU will be the drivers of how soon the Summit league turns to add the UxD's. I predict that we'll see UxD's as affiliate Swim members as early as 2009. And with toe-hold......
I understand that he is entitled to his opinion and I do realize that his blog is focused on the NCC and its ultimate demise, I was just acknowledging the fact that while he did recognize our success he still manages to take a shot. I enjoyed the NCC very much and recognize the history of the league. I don't deny that I am biased in what I write - the smack thread in particular - but since its smack I guess I can take an irrational aim at my least favorite sports writer.
"All I know is what I read on the message boards."
"Oh, well, there's your problem, then."
I agree that Stu likes to turn the crank of the Jackrabbit Nation and this item is really no exception. I also think that what he writes is true. The Summit League is not the Shangri-La that we in the Jackrabbit Nation want it to be. It's what Stu doesn't write that shows his shortsightedness as a journalist.
Stu doesn't write that South Dakota State University and North Dakota State University have advanced their athletic programs into an area where they belong. He doesn't write that all of their programs are probably still on the way up. Oh sure, there will be backsliding in some sports in some seasons but it is only now that recruiting can be carried out with the full promise of full Division I membership. Stu doesn't write that the Summit League's strength was increased by the addition of the State Universities. Stu doesn't write that South Dakota State University women's volleyball and women's basketball have already become the new standards by which universities like Oral Roberts and Oakland will measure themselves. And they and other members of the Summit League will do their best to measure up.
NDSU has its own successes in the Summit which will challenge the rest of the conference. Don't believe for a minute that the other members aren't trying to figure out how to compete with the Bison in men's basketball and in Track and Field for both the men and the women. The presence of the Bison and the Jackrabbits will help the conference grow toward that Shangri-La that Stu mentions. It won't happen overnight, but it is already starting.
Stu also fails to mention the entry of the Bison and the Jackrabbits into the Missouri Valley Football Conference. It's hard to overlook that one. Both universities have played in the top 25 teams of the division before becoming post-season eligible. They have been invited to join what is probably the best balanced and best over-all football conference in FCS. How did Stu not write about that?
It's okay to lament the end of the era of the NCC. But the truth is, the NCC ended because its strongest members outgrew it. In a realistic sense, other members recognized that they had not. There is no shame for either of these groups moving on in their best interests. Stu could have acknowledged that.
Stu doesn't write about an awful lot of intelligent things. Maybe Stu needs more column inches in the paper so that he has room to do so!
Last edited by West-River_Jack; 06-19-2008, 09:59 PM.
Reason: Usage error: used their instead of there.
Finding is never about seeking. It is about opening yourself to what is already there. - Henry Meloux
I don't know if I'd call SDSU's volleyball team the "standard" of the league. I want to see how they rebound after losing most of their starters. There are lots of times that you have a class that carries your team and you struggle after they leave. I'm not saying our team will get last place but there are big holes to fill.
NDSU's men's basketball team could be in the same boat. After next year, they'll lose 4 of 5 starters. They have other talented players but probably not as talented as that class. They'll be solid but I don't know about teams being scared.
SDSU's women's basketball team should be in the top 2 teams for the next 5 years(or so). They don't have a class that carries them and they reload every year.
I look at NDSU and SDSU to be up there in track most years, too. I think SDSU's team is getting better and NDSU's team was dominate. If NDSU had more sports, both schools could get 1st and 2nd in the Commissioner's Cup most years.
Stu must just not like change. He likes the SD schools playing each other. When you played in the NCC, the travel was minimal. The talent is DI is better on a night in and night out basis. Do you want to see teams you know play against each other or do you want you teams to be challenged? Did SDSU indirectly break up the NCC? Probably! Was it the best move for SDSU? Yes! It might have even been a good move for Augie. In the NCC, they weren't a competitive as they will be in the Northern Sun(my opinion). I think USD is the real loser in the move.
West-River Jack is right on the money about the assesment of where it is at and when it comes to Stu-pid.
The fact of the matter is that we are hearing far less from the naysayers and more and more about the great things happening at SDSU in Athletics and campus wide.
Stu-pid is never going to write an endorsement of SDSU with his precious column inches. It is funny that SDSU is a much less-frequent target for small-minded ramblings.
I'm just saying that near the end of transition we are in a great place and there is more upside potential.
Aren't we all looking forward to his columns about the struggles of transition at USD. If he has the courage to write about it. If he has any true journalistic ability he will show it over the next few years!
Final comment, thank you for putting Terry Vandrovec as our beat writer.
That guy's a jerk. I am sorry that I cheer for the Spartans with that jerk a grad there. You would think that a MSU grad would be a fan of another land grant U.
I regret that this guy can push my buttons and yes he should not be allowed to rent space, but his comments about the Summit are flat wrong, such as the Summit losing their qualification for the Big Dance. How will that happen? If Centenary has upgrade building plans, that does not sound like a back step to NAIA. Right now the Summit has 10 solid members and there apparently are no explansion plans. What does Stu know that we dont? Not much more. Also I dont see SUU going away either, especially with their new basketball coach. The Summit is not less than the NCC, it is greater. In all the glory days of the NCC, how many first round NBA choice came from the NCC? None, the Summit has George Hill going first round to the Spurs. The talent is much better overall in the Summit and better than the NCC ever thought of being.
Comment