|
Post by oldhare on May 10, 2016 12:45:44 GMT -6
The first chance to buy 2017 tickets was when I purchased 2016 tickets. If you bought that day, you had to buy 2 years of tickets. It is not the best location. It is not in the corner and it is not center court. 2015 I had seats just beyond the baseline 10 rows up and it was still good line of vision. Although, the parent crowd for the teams all are able to sit between the free throw lines so there are some good tickets available. The year before USD was eligible, the tickets were on sale the day the tourney started. This tournament has normally had the tickets on sale very early. If you were to be in the lottery for the Final 4 men's games, you would have needed to have sent the money in for the drawing for next year. The scalpers will only want double face value if you want to wait on those tickets. The Summit League will be raising the lower level ticket price in 2018 is my prediction.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on May 10, 2016 13:04:59 GMT -6
You will see the tournament rotating as soon as another location can provide a bid as attractive as Sioux Falls. That will include a list of private money sponsors as well as the paid crowd to spice the bid. This event appears to be a major money maker for the teams of the Summit plus some extra publicity for the conference. Taking a much lower income for the conference does not find interest for the members who do not have the ability to host or have close proximity to the tournament. If there was interest from another venue, there would be competitive bids on Douple's desk. Do you think that Rutgers or Maryland will be moving the Big 10 conference tourney to NYC or Baltimore to be fair? Kansas City is not likely to lose the Big 12 anytime soon either. It will take a big reason to change anytime soon. The 2017 B1G tourney is in Washington DC, and the 2018 tourney is in Madison Square Garden in NYC. So, yes, the big conferences move it closer to other schools on occasion also. That's not quite the same. The Big Ten is moving into those major media markets for increased exposure, increased market penetration (think BTN subscribers), and, in the end, increased cash. The Summit could put the conference tournament in Indianapolis, KC, etc, etc and it would not move the needle on the local market at all. Page 8 sports section for coverage if you are lucky.
|
|
|
Post by gopheryote on May 11, 2016 6:07:24 GMT -6
So, it looks like this thread also went down a rabbit hole (yes, it is a pun). As was mentioned earlier, all SD fans - regardless of school - want the tourney in Sioux Falls, and it would be ridiculous to say otherwise. However, the point of the thread was how would a school like IPFW feel, or how would a potential new member feel. I dont want to speak for oldhare, but the B1G reference was in regard to how new members were treated (and likely 'recruited') and not a comparison of the SL vs. B1G. Someone asked earlier - if a school put all its eggs in the BB basket, would they want it all to be determined in someone else's backyard every year? It is likely something all non-dakota schools consider, regardless of the success of the tourney.
|
|
|
Post by yoteforever on May 11, 2016 6:42:43 GMT -6
I agree with that. To their credit, they jumped on board when it initially started, and has played a role in their success. It's a home court advantage for them. That being said, when you look at average attendances across the league in conference games, it's not like there are sell outs occurring. So if you are an "I" school, unless you are a die hard or a parent, we aren't really big time enough league that gets you excited about traveling to a tournament. Unless you win it, your seasons over with a loss. Look at attendance figures in the Big 12 when they moved the tournament to Oklahima City and Dallas....the fan base of Iowa State dwindled in a big way. There were no sell outs, the cities hosting didn't treat the tournament in the same fashion as Knsas City did, so it died a slow death.
Sioux Falls treats the Summit League tournament like a rock start. The issue is with tickets ( or lack thereof ) for outside the area teams. I'm not sure what the policy is, but perhaps you could divvy them up equally at the onset of sales, then those schools could turn whatever they didn't sell back in, and the league could then divide those tickets on a prorated basis. If those schools couldn't sell them, then again the tickets come back and go to the local schools ( USD/SDSU ) to sell out the tournament. At minimum, no one could say they didn't have n opportunity to get good seats.
I do agree with the scenario that schools in the east could live for a different league. Initially, when we were deciding what league to join, I must admit I was somewhat of a proponents of the Big Sky, if for no other reason than stability. Playing in two conferences isn't good or healthy unless the guarantors are such that no one could afford to leave. Don't kid yourselves here, if SDSU gets a chance to jump to another league with more stability, they will. It's a dog eat dog world out there in sports alignments. The dream answer for us is the Missouri Valley turns into an all sports league. But I don't see that happening. It's the same old thing...schools like UNI look down at us, as does SDSU and NDSU because they made the move first. I would hope that discussions are taking place behind closed doors amongst all the Dakota schools regarding a "what if" scenario playing out.
|
|
|
Post by usdtator on May 11, 2016 6:53:16 GMT -6
Interesting story on letsgodu.com/ about conference realignments coming soon... The Big 12 is considering adding two new teams and that would potentially open up spots in the WCC and Big East. According to the article, if given the opportunity, Denver would most likely bolt for one of those two conferences, most likely the WCC, because the West Coast Conference offers, "... a league membership which is much more aligned with DU than the Summit League." They also state a few reasons why the Big East would be good fit for them as well... Read the full article below. letsgodu.com/2016/05/04/conference-realignment-talk-triggers-possibilities/#more-17248
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on May 11, 2016 7:47:57 GMT -6
Denver was a great get for the League, but reading that article, and others on that blog site, There are multiple reasons for Denver to be less than thrilled to have landed in the Summit League. (at least from their fans' perspective)
The SLT in SF is one of those gripes. Not just the tournament itself, but the cost of travel, weather, and dirth of fun things to do (from a big-city perspective). All of the positives we see in the tournament are lost on some fans, who just see Sioux Falls as a Nowhere-ville tundra wasteland, and a permanent home-court advantage for the state schools. You can argue the positives all you want, but perception is reality for many.
We can say, well, too bad. If you don't like it, leave. The problem with that attitude is that Denver (and ORU) are the type of schools that we should be trying to keep in the league. IMO that is a "Longhorn" type mentality like what broke up the Big 12.
I would be fine with adding UND, but really, what do they add? We should be looking at bigger targets, especially ones that geographically tie the conference together from the "bridge states" of Kansas, Nebraska, Missouri, Iowa and Minnesota. Hell, grab 3 teams as a buffer for when a team or two inevitably leave.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on May 11, 2016 8:08:48 GMT -6
UND adds local rivalry for the Dakota schools, obviously, but beyond that they provide stability to the core of the Summit League by becoming another solid member school. Also, UND has a long, long standing history with Denver in hockey. Having UNO and UND (both NCHC schools with DU) gives that fan base some familiarity with at least some of the schools in the Summit League. It makes it harder for them to leave because doing so would hurt those schools, and DU still has to live with them in the NCHC. Adding UND would more tightly bind DU into the Summit, IMO.
Name the targets for the Summit in the "bridge states" of Kansas, Nebraska, Missouri, Iowa and Minnesota. If there are any legit mid-major D1 targets in those states that I am not aware of I'd like to know who they are.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on May 11, 2016 8:46:49 GMT -6
I doubt that St. Louis would leave the Atlantic-10, but they are a geographic outlier in that conference, and already play ORU in non-con occasionally.
UMKC or UNC from the WAC wouldn't be bad to get back.
Drury University in Missouri is a D-2 Private College BB power. They also play ORU in non-con.
The Northern Sun and the MIAA have the highest BB attendance of all the D-2 conferences. Both are in the footprint of the Summit League. Both conferences are at the top of D-2 competition, as well. There might be some legitimate candidates from those schools.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on May 11, 2016 8:57:20 GMT -6
Fort Hays, Washburn, Emporia State from Kansas. Central Missouri, Missouri Southern. St. Cloud, Mankato.
I realize that D-2 schools wouldn't be considered "big targets" by most, but we were D-2 not long ago. And these schools represent the top of the division by competitive and attendance numbers, at least. Their size and endowments are pretty similar to Summit League schools.
Obviously, they would have to have the desire to transition up to D-1.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on May 11, 2016 9:06:23 GMT -6
Fair points on UND. I think the only reason they are not in the SL is butthurt over the nickname issue.
|
|
|
Post by oldhare on May 11, 2016 9:09:09 GMT -6
Denver to the west coast is further than Denver to Indianapolis. Sioux Falls is half the distance. The footprint for the WCC is not a great advantage for DU. On the women's side WCC offers beach volleyball and rowing in the 9 sports. The Summit offers track/field and swimming/diving in the 9 sports. The men's sports offer 6 in the WCC and 9 sports in the Summit. The Summit offers track/field and swimming/diving as the extra sports. DU has hockey, skiing, lacrosse, and gymnastics that do not fit either conference. They do have swimming/diving. They can be a multiple conference school regardless of where they land. They moved to the popular WAC just before it started a steep decline. If BYU jumps from the WCC, will there be more good basketball schools like Gonzaga starting to search as well? Golf , tennis, soccer, and basketball is the match DU would get at the WCC. The DU blogger seems to think the move would enhance their programs. The DU bloggers were predicting that Denver would rule the Summit in basketball too. also, I recall ORU leaving for the Southland Conference as they felt the high plains conference was not as attractive as opportunities in the South. It is a long ways from Tulsa to the southern end of Texas for travel. The Summit may not be perfect in every way, but it is improving a bit every year. The Summit golf tournaments were in Nebraska and Kansas this year. Last year they were both in California. The men's and women's soccer championship has been in Denver the past 2 years for men and Nov 2014 for women. WIU had the track and field last year. These events are all non revenue sports. The baseball follows the winner of the previous year(I think). I visit with a few guys from outside of SD who come to the SLT basketball every year without even knowing which team is favored since they like the games and atmosphere. Is there a home court advantage? There sure is. Is there a chance that USD or SDSU could come in as 7 or 8 seeds and win the tourney with the home court? Not likely.
|
|
|
Post by GoYotes on May 11, 2016 9:09:49 GMT -6
UND - win win for both UND & Summit League - 4 Dakota's provided a solid nucleus for the North Central Conference and any logical person realizes all 4 should be in the same conference for all sports
Northern Colorado - have read some comments that Denver looks down on Northern Colorado. However, they would provide a regional rival for Denver. Would also reestablish some old rivalries from the North Central Conference days. Like Denver, they kind of sit on an island when you look at a map of potential conference choices. The sports they offer are much more consistent with those of other Summit League schools. Would like to keep Denver, but if forced to pick one or the other, I would take the Bears over the Pioneers.
Northern Iowa - they have bigger ambitions than the Summit and like most Missouri Valley schools, look down on the Summit. If Wichita State leaves the Valley, UNI will be looking to make a move. Their first choice would likely be the MAC, if they want to move football to the FBS level, but if not, then it likely comes down to the Horizon or Summit. Would love to see them in the Summit.
Drake - see above comments regarding Northern Iowa. Not as desirable as the Panthers, but would be a great geographic fit.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on May 11, 2016 10:57:41 GMT -6
If the MVC imploded and Wichita State left, like in goyotes's scenario above, Missouri State would be another excellent school to try and poach. Unfortunately, I could see it going the other way, too. With the MVC poaching SDSU and NDSU. I think we are gaining on the Horizon in competitiveness, though.
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on May 11, 2016 19:14:28 GMT -6
The only conferences the Summit is poaching anytime soon would be the WAC or D2, anyone else is just unreasonable outside of maybe UND. Most of the other D1 schools that might be looked at as being near our level and a good get likely bolted from the Summit once before already and would have no interest in coming back. In fact, here is a list of teams that bolted the Summit for greener pastures:
University of Illinois - Chicago Eastern Illinois University UNI Oakland Missouri State Southern Utah University (Big Sky offered them a home for football) University of Wisconsin - Green Bay University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Valparaiso Wright State Youngstown State
What trend do you see? Historically, teams holding an offer from the Horizon or MVC will jump from the Summit. We are never going to poach a school from those conferences and are going to have trouble getting Big Sky schools due to the football issue. Heck even looking at D2 schools (Mankato comes to my mind as an option) any school worth adding currently sponsors football and would have no home for it with the Summit. If Denver and ORU ever leave I think we will be forced to look towards the absolute worst D1 conference in the WAC - and the one respectable school available (NMSU) has that football issue and is more likely to go Big Sky because of it.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on May 11, 2016 19:51:00 GMT -6
Yotes,
That is exactly why the Summit League better take care of their own and that includes those that reside outside the I-29 Corridor. It's gonna be tough to get any new schools to join the Summit outside UND and that is exactly why I feel Douple and the Presidents should be looking to expand this conference to 10 at minimum but ideally 12. If the Summit does fall apart for whatever reason I can see USD going in one of two directions. Either they will be a part of a merger to the Missouri Valley or will most likely join a version of what is now the Big Sky. If the Valley takes only SDSU and NDSU that leaves USD in a bad spot.
My preference first of all would be to join the Valley as all sports members with all the other schools. If that wasn't a possibility I would like to see USD go into a mega big sky conference which could include a pod system of divisions. Something like 3 pods of 6 schools each. A conference which would include Idaho and New Mexico State as new members as well. USD could be in a division with UNO, NDSU, SDSU, UND and possibly some combo of UNC or the Montana's. They wouldn't need to have as many annual games against the Western Big Sky schools. The basketball tourney could be rotated between Sioux Falls and a Western site.
|
|