Investigate the Big Sky?

[yoteforever]

When USD made the move to go D-1, then announced they were joining the Summit and MVC for football, I was bummed out. All along, we were joining the Big Sky, then a last second invite by the MVC changed the administrations tune. I felt at the time it was the wrong move, and still feel that way. From a football perspective, we're in a good situation. Tough league, some regional opponents, basically Midwestern people. But from the all sports perspective, it was not a good move. In reality, the Summit is a bottom feeder league with relatively little loyalty. Teams are going to jump everything there is an opportunity to jump. In other words, they are going to watch out for their own skin.I think the administrations of USD, SDSU, and NDSU should investigate a three team switch to the Big Sky. Or individually they should do that. Here is the basis for the argument. One of the factors that made USD's move into the Summit at the time was Montana was considering jumping to the WAC. Then in 2010, they made the commitment to stay in the Big Sky, therefore ending all the turmoil. As you look at the Big Sky today, there are 11 institutions that are part of the all sports conference. Then there are two that play in the league from a football perspective only. If the commissioner of the Big Sky had a proposal to bring in the remaining Dakota schools, that would give them a 14 team league for ALL SPORTS. If the kept Cal-Poly and Cal-Davis for football, they could have 2 divisions of 8. The western division could have USD, SDSU, UND, NDSU, UNC, UM, MSU, and say Idaho State. The other division would be the remaining teams. If from a strategic standpoint you had the alumni office layout the foot print of alumni in our existing league and compare it to the proposed league, I would venture a guess that it would be close to the same, if not slightly higher for the Big Sky. The Big Sky would certainly have to look closely at the proposal, and out some teeth into an exit strategy involving a still penalty of dollars that would be hard to fund in schools are size, and now you are in a league with stability, existing rivalries, and have all sports. If that meant USD had to add baseball and some other women's program to balance the move, then so be it.I love the MVC in football. I do. But the Summit is a sleeper in all the other sports. And the stability and continuity of the Summit concerns the hell out of me.You haven't had a chance to blast 'ol YFE for awhile, so nows your opportunity. Have at it.

[Jacks-02]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

I prefer the Summit by far over the Big Sky.

Trying to listen/watch games with Pacific time starts is not enjoyable as a fan.

[sdsu_drake]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

With the Summit League Touney relatively close to SDSU, USD, and NDSU I as a fan would rather stay in the Summit until they move the Tourney. I think being able to attend the tourney with out having to drive more than 4 hours is a good reason to stay.

[Yote53]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

I think I'm with YFE in saying that I would rather be in a conference, a stable conference, then have a conference tournament close to home with not enough teams to comprise a conference.

Also, a bold move like what YFE is proposing would surely raise the alarm to the other MVFC members that they can't sit by and do nothing about what is going on with the Summit. As long as any MVFC school remains on shaky ground with their conference situation then the MVFC will not be solid.

Something is going to need to be done by our schools and I think we should start exploring this sooner rather than later.

[OldHare]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

The Summit may be a grown up conference someday, but it will take solid membership to get there. If one thinks that the Horizon League is safe, you might want to reconsider that they will be cannabalized as soon as a larger conference to the east needs some fresh blood. Hopefully, the Summit can get a good base of membership in the current footprint. At this time, it may be difficult to consider a large number of the mid to low major conferences a sure thing during the wave of changes. I may have more confidence in the Summit survival than is realistic. Although, the moving to the Big Sky does not appear at this time the best geographical move for a safe conference. Is there teams in the Big Sky looking to move up or down in conference affiliation? Will those teams have a more positive attitude to coming to the Dakotas for winter games? If only the conference commissioner would send memos to us on any progress, it might quell our anxieties. Or it might be that Douple has put a hold on furnishing the Summit suite at the new Sanford Arena. If the latter is the case, then we might be hearing more rumors similar to Oakland moving to the Horizon such as USD to the Big Sky and the WAC paying for SDSU & NDSU exit fees from the Summit. The grass may be greener over there or not...

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

Win the regular season Big Sky title and host the tournament. Would solve the problem of traveling for the conference tourney.

[OldHare]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

Win the regular season Big Sky title and host the tournament. Would solve the problem of traveling for the conference tourney.

Are men and women tourneys at different time and location?

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

Are men and women tourneys at different time and location?

The University of MT men and women each played the Big Sky title game on 3/16 in Missoula because they both won the regular season title. I don't know specifics of the tournament up to that point. Could have been that the first round games are hosted by the higher seed.

[LakeJack]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

Summit all the way, over the Big Sky. Travel costs for the non-rev. sports is a killer. Pacific time zone yuck. The Summit isn't going anywhere - auto bids are way too valuable.

[joeboo22]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

Are you listening to UND fans? I know that the Summit is one of those leagues that will always have to worry about membership but the reason the Big Sky doesn't worry is because the schools in it are in terrible locations and aren't that valuable. The travel is terrible, and yes I understand that basketball it can be made to work, but for the softball and volleyball and other sports its not good.

[filbert]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

Are you listening to UND fans? I know that the Summit is one of those leagues that will always have to worry about membership but the reason the Big Sky doesn't worry is because the schools in it are in terrible locations and aren't that valuable. The travel is terrible, and yes I understand that basketball it can be made to work, but for the softball and volleyball and other sports its not good.

I was composing a post that said this, but not quite so bluntly.

If the Summit starts looking really, really shaky (let's face it, everybody below the Big 10, Pac-12, SEC, and maybe the ACC and Big 12 is to some extent shaky right now) then the Summit can go after any number of fairly attractive upper-midwest/north central U.S. D-II schools. If you pick the right mix of newly uplifted D-II schools, you could not only start Summit football but start D-I Summit Hockey (which would make Denver and UNO happy campers) (and this would also drive the Bison faithful absolutely bat$###--even more so than bringing in D-II schools to play football with the Mighty Bison in a Summit Football League).

Fortunately, it doesn't look right now like either the Summit or the MVFC is any more unstable than anybody else out there, so it's academic at this point.

(If I were Tom Douple however, I'd be touching base every few months with the likes of Minnesota State-Mankato and Grand Valley State, just in case.)

[89rabbit]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

If from a strategic standpoint you had the alumni office layout the foot print of alumni in our existing league and compare it to the proposed league, I would venture a guess that it would be close to the same, if not slightly higher for the Big Sky.

http://www.statealum.com/s/1108/images/editor_documents/2013/maps/usaalumni2013.pdf



Not a lot of Alumni in Montana, Idaho, Oregon, Utah. Summit seems to be the better fit.



Go State!

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

When USD made the move to go D-1, then announced they were joining the Summit and MVC for football, I was bummed out. All along, we were joining the Big Sky, then a last second invite by the MVC changed the administrations tune. I felt at the time it was the wrong move, and still feel that way. From a football perspective, we're in a good situation. Tough league, some regional opponents, basically Midwestern people. But from the all sports perspective, it was not a good move. In reality, the Summit is a bottom feeder league with relatively little loyalty. Teams are going to jump everything there is an opportunity to jump. In other words, they are going to watch out for their own skin.I think the administrations of USD, SDSU, and NDSU should investigate a three team switch to the Big Sky. Or individually they should do that. Here is the basis for the argument. One of the factors that made USD's move into the Summit at the time was Montana was considering jumping to the WAC. Then in 2010, they made the commitment to stay in the Big Sky, therefore ending all the turmoil. As you look at the Big Sky today, there are 11 institutions that are part of the all sports conference. Then there are two that play in the league from a football perspective only. If the commissioner of the Big Sky had a proposal to bring in the remaining Dakota schools, that would give them a 14 team league for ALL SPORTS. If the kept Cal-Poly and Cal-Davis for football, they could have 2 divisions of 8. The western division could have USD, SDSU, UND, NDSU, UNC, UM, MSU, and say Idaho State. The other division would be the remaining teams. If from a strategic standpoint you had the alumni office layout the foot print of alumni in our existing league and compare it to the proposed league, I would venture a guess that it would be close to the same, if not slightly higher for the Big Sky. The Big Sky would certainly have to look closely at the proposal, and out some teeth into an exit strategy involving a still penalty of dollars that would be hard to fund in schools are size, and now you are in a league with stability, existing rivalries, and have all sports. If that meant USD had to add baseball and some other women's program to balance the move, then so be it.I love the MVC in football. I do. But the Summit is a sleeper in all the other sports. And the stability and continuity of the Summit concerns the hell out of me.You haven't had a chance to blast 'ol YFE for awhile, so nows your opportunity. Have at it.

There will be turmoil for the next 5-10 years at least (probably longer) regardless of conference. Some conferences are better equipped to deal with it than others, but I think the Summit will be OK as long as SDSU/NDSU/USD/WIU/Omaha/Denver stay.

For all the drawbacks, there are a ton of positives to belonging to the Summit over the Big Sky.

I wouldn't jump off a bridge if SDSU ended up in the Big Sky someday, but at this point I prefer the Summit.

[91jack]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

I think I'm with YFE in saying that I would rather be in a conference, a stable conference, then have a conference tournament close to home with not enough teams to comprise a conference.

Also, a bold move like what YFE is proposing would surely raise the alarm to the other MVFC members that they can't sit by and do nothing about what is going on with the Summit. As long as any MVFC school remains on shaky ground with their conference situation then the MVFC will not be solid.

Something is going to need to be done by our schools and I think we should start exploring this sooner rather than later.

I think the main point I get is "not enough teams to comprise a conference".

As long as there is a Summit League it has a lot of positives over the Big Sky. I really don't know how many sports the Summit or Big Sky have a higher RPI, Saragin Rating, etc... in but I like the shorter travel, the eastern or central time zones and things like that.

I wonder what USD's budget will look like if the have to increase their travel budget. SDSU and NDSU wouldn't like it either but I think it would hurt USD the most. Of course, I don't know any of this for a fact, just somebody throwing a guess out there.

[zooropa]

Re: Investigate the Big Sky?

A 14 team conference competing for -one- autobid that sprawls over 970,000 square miles, such that a neutral site conference bb tournament is laughable.

Yes. I'd like some more of that please.

Oh, and let's pretend that a 14 team conference competing for one autobid would not be *incredibly* unstable, and that none of the Big Sky teams would consider moving to the WAC to have a better shot at making the tournament.