|
Post by TrimBV on Nov 5, 2010 0:18:07 GMT -6
Also, another congrats and welcome from Bisonville. I like the Summit even more after the latest shake-up.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Nov 5, 2010 0:24:07 GMT -6
It would be nice if the Summit could add another program soon, but preferrably 3 more to make the stability greater. I like larger conferences a bit better. How about the Summit add Oklahoma, Indiana and Ohio State. That would add another Indiana school, give Oral Roberts a nice travel partner and really increase the desirablity of the Summit. Come on Douple what are you waiting for. :-)
|
|
|
Post by #1CoyoteFan (Admin) on Nov 5, 2010 0:30:45 GMT -6
What realistic programs are out there for the Summit League to add? USD is adding more stability to the conference than what Southern Utah and Centenary brought combined.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Nov 5, 2010 8:16:46 GMT -6
There are none. That is the problem with the Summit and that is why I was for the BSC. I think Pres Abbott made a mistake not going to the BSC.
So now that we are staying in the Summit what conference do we set our sights on now? Isn't that what every school that's ever entered this conference has done, used it as a stepping stone to a better conference? Based on location, our only options are the Valley for all sports and the Big Sky Conference. Wait, we just turned down the Sky and we're never getting in a Valley invite. Great.
|
|
|
Post by pierreyote on Nov 5, 2010 10:32:27 GMT -6
Yote53 I will have to respectfully disagree. Yes, the Summit League (Mid-Con) has historically been a conference that universities have used to start and then move on. However, the Summit league has quite possibly found a new identity with the additions of the XDSU and USD. The footprint is much tighter and the competition level of teams and academic profile has improved. Conference shifts happen everywhere. The BSC has also had its fair share of teams move on. The one thing to remember is that our location will remain static but universities moving up or down conferences will be dynamic. Nothing in athletics is constant other than change. We are 3 years into a transition and just landed, imho, in the best conference for our university on so many levels. Is a MVC invite possible within 10-30 years? Who knows, but we have to deal with the now. We need build to our fan base and compete and win Summit League championships on a consistent basis. If that happens doors will open. No one and I mean no one can look in the crystal ball and know what is going to happen in D-1 athletics as far as conference affialitions will go. There are just too many moving parts. Again, I respect your thoughts and we can both agree that this is exciting times for USD.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Nov 5, 2010 10:56:37 GMT -6
So when the Summit starts to implode, when ORU starts flirting with the Southland,when the Indiana schools start talking with the Horizon, what will USD do then? But hey, at least we get to play SDSU.
Even if the Montanas left the BSC it would still be better because the top tragets would have been the XDSU's.
|
|
|
Post by pierreyote on Nov 5, 2010 11:22:52 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by #1CoyoteFan (Admin) on Nov 5, 2010 11:29:58 GMT -6
The only thing about Oral Roberts to the Southland is I don't think they have football, and that would be a deal breaker for them right there I think.
The Horizon is at 10 teams, so I wouldn't be surprised if they expanded, and who knows, maybe IUPUI and IPFW would be the additions. I don't know if they are strong enough for that conference though.
The last strong school to leave was Valpo, but they are doing just okay in the Horizon after Butler, Wright State, Cleveland State UGB-Wisconsin.
Looking at it now, the Summit is stronger for Centenary and SUU leaving since Centenary is going down to D-III and SUU is in a lot better conference for it's placement. Plus both schools added nothing to the conference performance wise.
BUT, the Summit does have that history. There is no denying that. Maybe they are becoming more stable now. That's what USD has to hope.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Nov 5, 2010 16:08:43 GMT -6
I have cooled down alot over the past several hours regarding the conference situation. I realise the Big Sky was a fun opion and my preferred choice but I do realise that more fans wanted the Summit League so my opinion is outnumbered. I want USD to succeed in whatever situation that they choose. What I would like to ask of every fan reading this is to please take heart and care about every team in the Summit and the MVFC as much as you may care about SDSU. I can say that is true with me and I hope it is true with you, it not I hope it will be in the future.
USD had a whirlwind last 2 weeks but especially the last couple of days. There was craziness going on and it might have lead to some wounds being opened between USD and other schools and/or conferences. Wounds do heal in time and hopefully that will be the case because USD could still use the good relationships with the west for good non conference opportunities.
I was a bit hard on the admin yesterday but now I am coming back down to earth but only with the conference juggling element. I still hold the admin accountable to produce a good and winning product. I am also glad that Sayler is very motivated to get an arena built. After winning my next biggest motivation is seeing USD get a new basketball facility.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Nov 5, 2010 16:11:01 GMT -6
There are none. That is the problem with the Summit and that is why I was for the BSC. I think Pres Abbott made a mistake not going to the BSC. So now that we are staying in the Summit what conference do we set our sights on now? Isn't that what every school that's ever entered this conference has done, used it as a stepping stone to a better conference? Based on location, our only options are the Valley for all sports and the Big Sky Conference. Wait, we just turned down the Sky and we're never getting in a Valley invite. Great. refreshing post, thanks for making it. Thanking for thinking big.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Nov 5, 2010 16:13:47 GMT -6
Yote53 I will have to respectfully disagree. Yes, the Summit League (Mid-Con) has historically been a conference that universities have used to start and then move on. However, the Summit league has quite possibly found a new identity with the additions of the XDSU and USD. The footprint is much tighter and the competition level of teams and academic profile has improved. Conference shifts happen everywhere. The BSC has also had its fair share of teams move on. The one thing to remember is that our location will remain static but universities moving up or down conferences will be dynamic. Nothing in athletics is constant other than change. We are 3 years into a transition and just landed, imho, in the best conference for our university on so many levels. Is a MVC invite possible within 10-30 years? Who knows, but we have to deal with the now. We need build to our fan base and compete and win Summit League championships on a consistent basis. If that happens doors will open. No one and I mean no one can look in the crystal ball and know what is going to happen in D-1 athletics as far as conference affialitions will go. There are just too many moving parts. Again, I respect your thoughts and we can both agree that this is exciting times for USD. Good post but that sentence is by far the best part of the entire post and the part that everyone should expect.
|
|
|
Post by #1CoyoteFan (Admin) on Nov 5, 2010 16:17:29 GMT -6
I don't think thinking big is the real problem here, it's the fact of how was USD going to pay to get out of the Summit League and then the entry fee to get into the Big Sky and then say travel costs wouldn't be that bad when you sink in $750,000 to get into the BSC.
For me it's not about quality of conferences but about the coinage. Nebraska has to pay serious chuck of change, $9 mill, to get out of the Big 12. However, the Cornhuskers should make $21 mill in its first year in the big 10.
USD would pay $750,000 plus travel costs in the first year of BSC play, but it would receive $145,000 a year in the BSC in money earned. It would take USD over five years to make up the cost basically. You can't tell me that didn't play a factor there.
When talking about competing in the Summit League, USD STILL would've had to build it's fan base in the BSC. USD would still have to build the fan base if they were D-II or NAIA honestly.
|
|
|
Post by sd4ever on Nov 5, 2010 16:22:47 GMT -6
Hey Mr. CF it is good to have you here and I think that was a good post. I have not been very active because I'm pretty busy with my senior year studies and other activities but I try to keep up as much as I can. I'm pretty excited about the whole situation and am really looking forward to 'smacking' the Jackies into submission and bringing them into some reasonable sense of reality. My goodness!
I'm gonna get a hold of my uncle in Phoenix and make sure he is on top of everything that has been going on. Did you hear him on the Craig and John show today on KWSN? He was listening on line and called in. It was great. Almost 90 in the desert.
If he is not already registered I will give him a little push. I think he was on the old board.
Any way, Go South Dakota, Go Coyotes, Forever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL
|
|
|
Post by jimmyjack on Nov 5, 2010 19:17:47 GMT -6
I'll just throw this out there. I have heard, from a decent source, that St. Cloud has at least been discussed for addition to the Summit. If they drop football (which I have heard is a foregone conclusion) they could become a candidate.
You take away the expense of football and distribute some of those scholarships across Summit sports, and St. Cloud might not be a bad addition.
Just talk. But who knows?
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Nov 5, 2010 22:28:03 GMT -6
I would welcome St. Cloud with open arms if they wanted to move up and request in. As long as they would be ok financially. Would St. Cloud be able to afford to move up? I guess without football it is certainly a possibility. I would want that personally if I were a St. Cloud fan.
|
|