Is UMKC coming back?

[Grizzled_Jack]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

OK-- How about taking the middle parts of the Summit and WAC and putting them together-- travel partners:

Utah Valley and Grand Canyon
Denver and New Mexico State
Kansas City and Omaha
South Dakota and South Dakota State
North Dakota and North Dakota State

Goodbye-- West Coast WAC schools, Oral Roberts, Western Illinois (get ye to the Ohio Valley), Chicago State (if there is such a thing in the next few years), Fort Wayne (Horizon).

I know that Denver will walk if they have to get in bed with Grand Canyon, but GCU pulls actual crowds and can't be more of a diploma mill than ORU. You could move Lindenwood up and pair them with Western but only if Stugart can't right them and they drop football (or move to the Pioneer). Besides, I keep hearing rumors that they're going the other way and heading to the GLVC to save on travel costs--Louisville's a lot closer than a Kearney bus trip.

Central Missouri could make the move in all sports. They also have pretty good facilities although Warrensburg's a bit of a dump. Also like that mule logo a lot!

[Jacks-02]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

OK-- How about taking the middle parts of the Summit and WAC and putting them together-- travel partners:

Utah Valley and Grand Canyon
Denver and New Mexico State
Kansas City and Omaha
South Dakota and South Dakota State
North Dakota and North Dakota State

Goodbye-- West Coast WAC schools, Oral Roberts, Western Illinois (get ye to the Ohio Valley), Chicago State (if there is such a thing in the next few years), Fort Wayne (Horizon).

I know that Denver will walk if they have to get in bed with Grand Canyon, but GCU pulls actual crowds and can't be more of a diploma mill than ORU. You could move Lindenwood up and pair them with Western but only if Stugart can't right them and they drop football (or move to the Pioneer). Besides, I keep hearing rumors that they're going the other way and heading to the GLVC to save on travel costs--Louisville's a lot closer than a Kearney bus trip.

Central Missouri could make the move in all sports. They also have pretty good facilities although Warrensburg's a bit of a dump. Also like that mule logo a lot!

I'm guessing that set-up would impact travel budgets a bit, as adding Utah Valley, Grand Canyon and New Mexico State are some long trips.

Remember you aren't just increasing travel for basketball, you are doing so for all of the non-revenue sports in the conference as well.

[Jacks-02]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

I'd be all for adding Northern Colorado as a tenth member to partner with Denver though.

Then swap IPFW for UMKC and you'd have.

NDSU/UND
SDSU/USD
UNC/DU
ORU/UMKC
WIU/UNO

[slosho]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

I'd be all for adding Northern Colorado as a tenth member to partner with Denver though.

Then swap IPFW for UMKC and you'd have.

A really weak Confrence, and Closing in on the OLD NCC. Which was my main argument against going D1 (TBH It was a shortsighted one but closing in on accuracy)
Edit: Now that I think about the Argument more, IT was really Why spend a bunch more money to play the same teams (Which is not correct in it's entirety even if we go back to the old NCC conference mates)

[goon]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

A really weak Confrence, and Closing in on the OLD NCC. Which was my main argument against going D1 (TBH It was a shortsighted one but closing in on accuracy)
Edit: Now that I think about the Argument more, IT was really Why spend a bunch more money to play the same teams (Which is not correct in it's entirety even if we go back to the old NCC conference mates)

When many of the old NCC schools are D-1 now, and there are only so many potential suitors for conference alignment, the issue is bound to be there. I want to add UNC and UNI, both were NCC members.

[Jacks-02]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

A really weak Confrence, and Closing in on the OLD NCC. Which was my main argument against going D1 (TBH It was a shortsighted one but closing in on accuracy)
Edit: Now that I think about the Argument more, IT was really Why spend a bunch more money to play the same teams (Which is not correct in it's entirety even if we go back to the old NCC conference mates)

The UNC men were 19-10 with a 110 RPI, which would be third best in our conference.

The UNC women were 26-7 with a 32 RPI (just behind SDSU) and were a 10 seed in the NCAA tournament.

Adding UNC also brings another football playing team to the league, and opens up the possibility of a Summit football conference down the road if needed. Also adds another baseball team, which would solidify the league's auto-bid.

[filbert]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

A really weak Confrence, and Closing in on the OLD NCC. Which was my main argument against going D1 (TBH It was a shortsighted one but closing in on accuracy)
Edit: Now that I think about the Argument more, IT was really Why spend a bunch more money to play the same teams (Which is not correct in it's entirety even if we go back to the old NCC conference mates)

I have always had the opinion that the entire NCC should have moved up in the late 60's/early 70's at about the same time the Big Sky did--Morningside and Augie excepted of course.

[Mr_Tibbs]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

I just don't know why Augie alums would want to move up and play non-scholly football. If they hadn't been competitive in the last decade, that'd be one thing. But they play good football down there, and have had some post season success. If they jump up to the pioneer, I guess they could become the new San Diego and make the post season that way. I wonder how much their travel costs in the pioneer would cut into their potential savings in scholarship dollars? I'm sure it'd still save a lot of money, but flights to Ohio, North Carolina, New York, Florida, and California won't be cheap. And that's not including their out of conference games. If I'm them, I dont know if it's worth it to sacrifice their football program for their basketball program. They won the championship two years ago, but I don't think of them like a KU, where football is a distant afterthought.

I do think that if the summit is going to really become more stable, it will almost certainly have to include a D2 move up or two, in addition to maybe a UNC. The other schools people talk about just have no reason to move into this conference. Barring something dramatic, we won't see UNI, we won't see the Montana schools, and we won't see the football portion of the Valley move to the summit. I wish any or all of that would happen, but it's a non starter. They don't have enough of a reason to do so at this moment. That could change in the future, but it's unlikely.

[Grizzled_Jack]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

Why would UNC want to switch?

[Mr_Tibbs]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

Why would UNC want to switch?

The best reason I can think of is that they are in a similar situation to us with their baseball program. They are split between two leagues for their sports, and if Summit football were to ever be a thing, it would be an opportunity to house all sports in one league for all of the institutions concerned. But I will admit, they don't have a whole lot of incentive beyond that, except maybe a local rival with Denver, and even that is way overplayed in these discussions. The Big Sky might not be the best fit for them, but it's a lot more stable than the summit. The best selling point would be for the potential all sports league, which will not happen with the Big Sky unless they sponsor baseball.

Not to get off track on the UNC discussion, but I think that for the Summit to have the best chance at stability, having an all sports league is the best pathway to doing so. That'll be a very tough task, but if this league continues to have members spread out geographically and across multiple other conferences for other sports, this revolving door will keep spinning. Part of why the Big Sky has been around so long is because of its core members, who have all their sports housed in a single league. I'll be honest though, I don't see it happening, given the current makeup of the schools and the very limited options for all sports additions.

The reality is, we will probably add UMKC, and that'll be the end of it until the next school leaves a few years down the line.

[jacksfan29]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

The best reason I can think of is that they are in a similar situation to us with their baseball program. They are split between two leagues for their sports, and if Summit football were to ever be a thing, it would be an opportunity to house all sports in one league for all of the institutions concerned. But I will admit, they don't have a whole lot of incentive beyond that, except maybe a local rival with Denver, and even that is way overplayed in these discussions. The Big Sky might not be the best fit for them, but it's a lot more stable than the summit. The best selling point would be for the potential all sports league, which will not happen with the Big Sky unless they sponsor baseball.

Not to get off track on the UNC discussion, but I think that for the Summit to have the best chance at stability, having an all sports league is the best pathway to doing so. That'll be a very tough task, but if this league continues to have members spread out geographically and across multiple other conferences for other sports, this revolving door will keep spinning. Part of why the Big Sky has been around so long is because of its core members, who have all their sports housed in a single league. I'll be honest though, I don't see it happening, given the current makeup of the schools and the very limited options for all sports additions.

The reality is, we will probably add UMKC, and that'll be the end of it until the next school leaves a few years down the line.

The real reason the Big Sky has been so stable is that there is no place to go. The Western U.S. is not populated with D1 conferences that offer football. PAC, MWC, Big Sky. That's it. Big Sky schools do not have access to the PAC or the MWC thus the reason the Big Sky does not lose schools.

UNC is interesting because of DU, baseball and the fact that they have not been overly happy, or welcome in the Big Sky. They are seen as an outlier. I would think the Summit have visited with them, but who knows. The first step is to try and get them to drop their affiliation with the WAC in baseball and join the Summit. If that happens in the next year or two there is a possibility that they move. If it doesn't, they are staying put.

I want nothing to do with Augustana. I get the Sioux Falls media love the idea, I doubt anyone in Brookings, Fargo, Grand Forks or Vermillion do. Augustana leadership have already stated they don't have the money to move up yet the Sioux Falls media keep pimping the story. Augustana has a good thing going in the NSIC and in D2, they are a nice fit right where they are.

UMKC? Not interested. The athletic department is a mess and running on fumes. They would be better off dropping to D2 or even D3. We have some time. IPFW is not going anywhere, they have no place to go. The Horizon League have come out and said they are not currently looking to expand. The MVC has stated the same, for now no expansion, at least not in 2018-19. With addition of UND the Summit has a couple years before we really need to make any moves.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

I say hell no on Augie. They were at best mediocre in the NCC at least the last few years when I was in school. To think they can make the jump and be a contender is a stretch IMO.

I firmly believe their recent success (and NSU's) is helped by USD and SDSU being DI. There are a lot of kids in South Dakota that aren't DI caliber talents that the Augie's and NSU's aren't competing with State and U for.

[bigticket1]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

I say hell no on Augie. They were at best mediocre in the NCC at least the last few years when I was in school. To think they can make the jump and be a contender is a stretch IMO.

I firmly believe their recent success (and NSU's) is helped by USD and SDSU being DI. There are a lot of kids in South Dakota that aren't DI caliber talents that the Augie's and NSU's aren't competing with State and U for.

It's hard to know if the last 5 or 6 years was just a perfect storm of a group of talented players ending up there at the same time, or if that level of play is sustainable for the long term. The Schillings and Jensen helped bring in a good group of complimentary players, but no more Schillings are going to be walking in the locker room door. I think the fact that a player like Dykman went from playing 23 minutes in his one season here to starting all 30 games immediately at Augie indicates there is a drop in talent between levels.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

It's hard to know if the last 5 or 6 years was just a perfect storm of a group of talented players ending up there at the same time, or if that level of play is sustainable for the long term. The Schillings and Jensen helped bring in a good group of complimentary players, but no more Schillings are going to be walking in the locker room door. I think the fact that a player like Dykman went from playing 23 minutes in his one season here to starting all 30 games immediately at Augie indicates there is a drop in talent between levels.

There is certainly a talent drop. To argue differently would be insane.

I think my point is SDSU and USD aren't engaged in recruiting battles with Augie as much as we were when we were DII. That inevitably helps them as I think we probably won more recruiting battles back in the day than we lost.

[NebraskaJack]

Re: Is UMKC coming back?

The real reason the Big Sky has been so stable is that there is no place to go. The Western U.S. is not populated with D1 conferences that offer football. PAC, MWC, Big Sky. That's it. Big Sky schools do not have access to the PAC or the MWC thus the reason the Big Sky does not lose schools.

UNC is interesting because of DU, baseball and the fact that they have not been overly happy, or welcome in the Big Sky. They are seen as an outlier. I would think the Summit have visited with them, but who knows. The first step is to try and get them to drop their affiliation with the WAC in baseball and join the Summit. If that happens in the next year or two there is a possibility that they move. If it doesn't, they are staying put.

I want nothing to do with Augustana. I get the Sioux Falls media love the idea, I doubt anyone in Brookings, Fargo, Grand Forks or Vermillion do. Augustana leadership have already stated they don't have the money to move up yet the Sioux Falls media keep pimping the story. Augustana has a good thing going in the NSIC and in D2, they are a nice fit right where they are.

UMKC? Not interested. The athletic department is a mess and running on fumes. They would be better off dropping to D2 or even D3. We have some time. IPFW is not going anywhere, they have no place to go. The Horizon League have come out and said they are not currently looking to expand. The MVC has stated the same, for now no expansion, at least not in 2018-19. With addition of UND the Summit has a couple years before we really need to make any moves.

I hadn't heard that about the Horizon league. The last I knew, last summer the commish talked about expanding anywhere from two to four teams in the next couple of years.

The MWC has approached Gonzaga about moving....that will open up a spot in the WCC.

CSU Bakersfield will join the Big West in 2020, that will leave a shortage in the WAC especially with UMKC and Chicago State in flux.

It seems like things are going to really change out west in the next couple of years. It will be interesting to see how the dust settles.