Stugray2
Heisman
![*](images/groupimages/heisman.gif)
Posts: 7,229
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 683
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
Now the flip side
https://twitter.com/UTRGV_AD/status/945321401032105986
Quote: Chris King @UTRGV_AD
You do realize it is Christmas Day?!?! The Sky is not falling, the WAC is not crumbling and there is no merger talks.....
Quote:spartypants @WACspartypants
@UTRGV_AD any truth to the claim that Idaho AD says wac and big sky discussing merger?
7:52 AM - 25 Dec 2017
*******************
My personal take, Rob Spear has an agenda, or at least a need to spin for his donor base. So maybe he stretched things a bit.
CSU Bakersfield leaving after 2019-20 season leaves no margin for the WAC. If the UMKC rumors of rejoining the Summit are true (and we will probably know a lot more in March and April if this will happen) then the WAC is pretty much done, as GCU will definitely bolt.
To rehash, supposedly GCU turned down the Horizon last year, which is why they turned to IUPUI, but the relationship was not damaged. Further there was a report that one school's President pitched GCU (and NMSU) to the Big Sky last year and there was general agreement that the for profit status was not an issue for the Presidents, although nothing came of it at the time. So GCU definitely has actionable options if they want.
The question for NMSU to they want to continue to ride the WAC like they did the exodus at the start of the decade, or do they jump to a safer ship?
The "merger" and "divisions" talks, if they actually happened (Rob Spear talking here) were/are more likely conversations with individual school ADs (maybe a Prez or two), on a conceptual "what-if" level. GCU and NMSU are definitely who they would contact, and possibly SU. The concept of Divisional play suggests 12 or even 14 schools for Olympics. And that makes me think "merger" is likely to morph into invite for one to three schools. Obviously NMSU or GCU would be the "one" and "two"
|
|
12-28-2017 03:22 PM |
|
dbackjon
Hall of Famer
![*](images/groupimages/halloffamer.gif)
Posts: 12,084
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 667
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
If the Big Sky Northern schools are unhappy with 11/13, why would expanding further south make them happier?
Especially since it will be just more mouths to feed?
10 is really a good sweet spot for conferences like the Big Sky and WAC - not too many schools to split the pot, and enough for scheduling home games, and a margin for defections.
|
|
12-28-2017 04:18 PM |
|
Stugray2
Heisman
![*](images/groupimages/heisman.gif)
Posts: 7,229
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 683
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-28-2017 04:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote: If the Big Sky Northern schools are unhappy with 11/13, why would expanding further south make them happier?
Especially since it will be just more mouths to feed?
10 is really a good sweet spot for conferences like the Big Sky and WAC - not too many schools to split the pot, and enough for scheduling home games, and a margin for defections.
If they "kill off" the WAC then they can spin off a new FB conference (using the WAC name for an in-house FB only conference say in 2021 or 2022) without moving Sac State into a different Olympic conference, effectively keeping the Big Sky intact.
Divisional play could work to reduce travel in Olympics. Nobody cares about a single bid in the lesser sports (Soccer, Volleyball, Softball), except Basketball. A 12 or 14 school Basketball conference would face that issue, and that would be the primary sticking point.
But I doubt they'd turn down a request to join from either GCU or NMSU. So they would have to figure that out.
(This post was last modified: 12-28-2017 04:34 PM by Stugray2.)
|
|
12-28-2017 04:34 PM |
|
NoDak
Jersey Retired
Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 105
I Root For: UND
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-28-2017 04:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote: If the Big Sky Northern schools are unhappy with 11/13, why would expanding further south make them happier?
Especially since it will be just more mouths to feed?
10 is really a good sweet spot for conferences like the Big Sky and WAC - not too many schools to split the pot, and enough for scheduling home games, and a margin for defections.
Been saying forever that the Northern Big Sky was unhappy, and here we are.
The WAC will get Southland and southern Big Sky schools that want FBS or quality basketball, like Sam Houston St, Lamar, S F Austin, Davis,Sac St, Cal Poly, and ORU.
The new Summit will take The Montanas, Idaho, and EWU and go FBS too.
The Big Sky will have to take Seattle, UVU, Dixie St, and Azusa and maybe Cal Baptist.
A complicated swap system is ongoing, and the Big West has provided a major clue. This has been five years in planning.
(This post was last modified: 12-28-2017 06:10 PM by NoDak.)
|
|
12-28-2017 05:38 PM |
|
dbackjon
Hall of Famer
![*](images/groupimages/halloffamer.gif)
Posts: 12,084
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 667
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-28-2017 05:38 PM)NoDak Wrote: (12-28-2017 04:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote: If the Big Sky Northern schools are unhappy with 11/13, why would expanding further south make them happier?
Especially since it will be just more mouths to feed?
10 is really a good sweet spot for conferences like the Big Sky and WAC - not too many schools to split the pot, and enough for scheduling home games, and a margin for defections.
Been saying forever that the Northern Big Sky was unhappy, and here we are.
The WAC will get Southland and southern Big Sky schools that want FBS or quality basketball, like Sam Houston St, Lamar, S F Austin, Davis,Sac St, Cal Poly, and ORU.
The new Summit will take The Montanas, Idaho, and EWU and go FBS too.
The Big Sky will have to take Seattle, UVU, Dixie St, and Azusa and maybe Cal Baptist.
A complicated swap system is ongoing, and the Big West has provided a major clue. This has been five years in planning.
No, there is no proof outside of a few message board posters and the bitter Idaho AD that the northern schools are unhappy.
But dream on, dream on, dream on...
You have about 100 days until you have to disappear. Post wisely.
|
|
12-28-2017 06:59 PM |
|
SDHornet
Special Teams
![*](images/groupimages/specialteams.gif)
Posts: 985
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-28-2017 10:39 AM)NoQuestion Wrote: (12-27-2017 06:37 PM)SDHornet Wrote: Oh and the montucky twins come as a package deal then, now, and forever. Their Board is dominated by MSU grads (and always has been I think), no way they let UM go anywhere without MSU tagging along. 2 montucky mouths to feed is no way to operate at FB conference at the FBS level.
It's funny how things get said and then handed down year after year. MSU and UM are tied at the hip, but not because of any rule. Think of it more of a hand shake agreement. The board of regents can change every year or two and sometimes there is a MSU majority and some years a UM majority. The Commissioner of Higher Education is a UM grad and has held that position for 5 years.
I don't know who would be considered the one "tagging" along anymore. A little research on both schools might help. One school is continually growing and the other is not.
Never said there was a rule, was alluding more to in-state politicking which you confirmed so thanks for that. I also know that UM is having enrollment issues compared to MSU. I think there are multiple issues causing that (rape-gate didn't help) but I think it has more to do with UM being more of a liberal arts school and MSU having the real stuff (STEM degrees). The enrollment issue is something UM should be very concerned about.
But no, you are wrong about "tagging along". In the sporting world UM has all the pedigree and tradition and no casual fan outside of the state of montucky even remotely thinks the 2 are on par athletically. UM has all the hardware when comparing the 2 schools, it ain't even close. That can obviously change over time but for now its all UM.
But none of that really matters. There will never be an FBS conference in its current form interested in either of the montucky schools. Both schools reside in a state with minimal D1 talent, neither bring a market, and both would be geographical outliers; all of which make them a mouth to feed on pretty much every FBS metric. Only hope for FBS for the montucky twins is NoDak's Great Dakota Conference pipe dream...and even that concept has its pitfalls.
|
|
12-28-2017 08:22 PM |
|
SDHornet
Special Teams
![*](images/groupimages/specialteams.gif)
Posts: 985
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-28-2017 06:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote: (12-28-2017 05:38 PM)NoDak Wrote: (12-28-2017 04:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote: If the Big Sky Northern schools are unhappy with 11/13, why would expanding further south make them happier?
Especially since it will be just more mouths to feed?
10 is really a good sweet spot for conferences like the Big Sky and WAC - not too many schools to split the pot, and enough for scheduling home games, and a margin for defections.
Been saying forever that the Northern Big Sky was unhappy, and here we are.
The WAC will get Southland and southern Big Sky schools that want FBS or quality basketball, like Sam Houston St, Lamar, S F Austin, Davis,Sac St, Cal Poly, and ORU.
The new Summit will take The Montanas, Idaho, and EWU and go FBS too.
The Big Sky will have to take Seattle, UVU, Dixie St, and Azusa and maybe Cal Baptist.
A complicated swap system is ongoing, and the Big West has provided a major clue. This has been five years in planning.
No, there is no proof outside of a few message board posters and the bitter Idaho AD that the northern schools are unhappy.
But dream on, dream on, dream on...
You have about 100 days until you have to disappear. Post wisely.
I still think it's funny that people think Idaho has some sway in the BSC all of a sudden...like they are a shining beacon of how to do things right.
|
|
12-28-2017 08:28 PM |
|
NoQuestion
Bench Warmer
![*](images/groupimages/benchwarmer.gif)
Posts: 157
Joined: Apr 2014
Reputation: 2
I Root For: MSU
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
I think it's funny when people use montucky.
|
|
12-28-2017 08:54 PM |
|
dancingNMSUaggie
1st String
![*](images/groupimages/1ststring.gif)
Posts: 1,324
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 33
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
Stupid thread. The AD from Idaho is an idiot.
|
|
12-28-2017 09:11 PM |
|
gleadley
1st String
![*](images/groupimages/1ststring.gif)
Posts: 1,982
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 42
I Root For: GCU
Location: Phoenix. AZ
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
Isn't there a realignment area of the CSNbbs Lounge where you ladies can be cat-fighting over these fantasy realignment scenarios?
|
|
12-28-2017 10:55 PM |
|
SDHornet
Special Teams
![*](images/groupimages/specialteams.gif)
Posts: 985
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-28-2017 10:55 PM)gleadley Wrote: Isn't there a realignment area of the CSNbbs Lounge where you ladies can be cat-fighting over these fantasy realignment scenarios?
Get use to it. WAC membership is back into "panic mode" until things get sorted out post-Bako.
|
|
12-28-2017 11:51 PM |
|
gleadley
1st String
![*](images/groupimages/1ststring.gif)
Posts: 1,982
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 42
I Root For: GCU
Location: Phoenix. AZ
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
Who is in panic mode? If supporters of any full-member WAC schools who post here have been panicking, I must've missed it. General reaction of regular posters here to CSUB leaving seems to have been "We'll be just fine. Don't let the door hit ya, CSUB."
|
|
12-29-2017 12:00 AM |
|
NoDak
Jersey Retired
Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 105
I Root For: UND
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-28-2017 06:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote: (12-28-2017 05:38 PM)NoDak Wrote: (12-28-2017 04:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote: If the Big Sky Northern schools are unhappy with 11/13, why would expanding further south make them happier?
Especially since it will be just more mouths to feed?
10 is really a good sweet spot for conferences like the Big Sky and WAC - not too many schools to split the pot, and enough for scheduling home games, and a margin for defections.
Been saying forever that the Northern Big Sky was unhappy, and here we are.
The WAC will get Southland and southern Big Sky schools that want FBS or quality basketball, like Sam Houston St, Lamar, S F Austin, Davis,Sac St, Cal Poly, and ORU.
The new Summit will take The Montanas, Idaho, and EWU and go FBS too.
The Big Sky will have to take Seattle, UVU, Dixie St, and Azusa and maybe Cal Baptist.
A complicated swap system is ongoing, and the Big West has provided a major clue. This has been five years in planning.
No, there is no proof outside of a few message board posters and the bitter Idaho AD that the northern schools are unhappy.
But dream on, dream on, dream on...
You have about 100 days until you have to disappear. Post wisely.
The few NAU fans will be weeping for days soon. The Montanas and Idaho do not consider them of a viable program, as it doesn't have fans. Weber St is the only central and southern Big Sky program that they would miss.
The Idaho, SUU, and Weher St admins have all tated their will be major changes, but message board fools insist that nothing changes.
|
|
12-29-2017 02:55 AM |
|
dbackjon
Hall of Famer
![*](images/groupimages/halloffamer.gif)
Posts: 12,084
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 667
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-29-2017 02:55 AM)NoDak Wrote: (12-28-2017 06:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote: (12-28-2017 05:38 PM)NoDak Wrote: (12-28-2017 04:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote: If the Big Sky Northern schools are unhappy with 11/13, why would expanding further south make them happier?
Especially since it will be just more mouths to feed?
10 is really a good sweet spot for conferences like the Big Sky and WAC - not too many schools to split the pot, and enough for scheduling home games, and a margin for defections.
Been saying forever that the Northern Big Sky was unhappy, and here we are.
The WAC will get Southland and southern Big Sky schools that want FBS or quality basketball, like Sam Houston St, Lamar, S F Austin, Davis,Sac St, Cal Poly, and ORU.
The new Summit will take The Montanas, Idaho, and EWU and go FBS too.
The Big Sky will have to take Seattle, UVU, Dixie St, and Azusa and maybe Cal Baptist.
A complicated swap system is ongoing, and the Big West has provided a major clue. This has been five years in planning.
No, there is no proof outside of a few message board posters and the bitter Idaho AD that the northern schools are unhappy.
But dream on, dream on, dream on...
You have about 100 days until you have to disappear. Post wisely.
The few NAU fans will be weeping for days soon. The Montanas and Idaho do not consider them of a viable program, as it doesn't have fans. Weber St is the only central and southern Big Sky program that they would miss.
The Idaho, SUU, and Weher St admins have all tated their will be major changes, but message board fools insist that nothing changes.
Yes, the only Big Sky school with not one, but two national Championships in a widely competed sport, a doctoral research institute, largest residential school in the conference, soon to be largest overall school, 3rd highest endowment (5 times EWU, 3 times ISU), located in a growing and populous state (almost twice as large as Idaho, Montana and the Dakotas COMBINED). Yeah, we are far more viable and wanted than UND.
|
|
12-29-2017 12:24 PM |
|
jacksfan29
Special Teams
![*](images/groupimages/specialteams.gif)
Posts: 592
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 19
I Root For: So Dak St/CU
Location: Western Colorado
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-29-2017 12:24 PM)dbackjon Wrote: (12-29-2017 02:55 AM)NoDak Wrote: (12-28-2017 06:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote: (12-28-2017 05:38 PM)NoDak Wrote: (12-28-2017 04:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote: If the Big Sky Northern schools are unhappy with 11/13, why would expanding further south make them happier?
Especially since it will be just more mouths to feed?
10 is really a good sweet spot for conferences like the Big Sky and WAC - not too many schools to split the pot, and enough for scheduling home games, and a margin for defections.
Been saying forever that the Northern Big Sky was unhappy, and here we are.
The WAC will get Southland and southern Big Sky schools that want FBS or quality basketball, like Sam Houston St, Lamar, S F Austin, Davis,Sac St, Cal Poly, and ORU.
The new Summit will take The Montanas, Idaho, and EWU and go FBS too.
The Big Sky will have to take Seattle, UVU, Dixie St, and Azusa and maybe Cal Baptist.
A complicated swap system is ongoing, and the Big West has provided a major clue. This has been five years in planning.
No, there is no proof outside of a few message board posters and the bitter Idaho AD that the northern schools are unhappy.
But dream on, dream on, dream on...
You have about 100 days until you have to disappear. Post wisely.
The few NAU fans will be weeping for days soon. The Montanas and Idaho do not consider them of a viable program, as it doesn't have fans. Weber St is the only central and southern Big Sky program that they would miss.
The Idaho, SUU, and Weher St admins have all tated their will be major changes, but message board fools insist that nothing changes.
Yes, the only Big Sky school with not one, but two national Championships in a widely competed sport, a doctoral research institute, largest residential school in the conference, soon to be largest overall school, 3rd highest endowment (5 times EWU, 3 times ISU), located in a growing and populous state (almost twice as large as Idaho, Montana and the Dakotas COMBINED). Yeah, we are far more viable and wanted than UND.
You are stating facts to a fool. Don't worry, 4/20/18, the time period which his newest, greatest, bestest prediction will come true, is just around the corner.
|
|
12-29-2017 03:02 PM |
|
jacksfan29
Special Teams
![*](images/groupimages/specialteams.gif)
Posts: 592
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 19
I Root For: So Dak St/CU
Location: Western Colorado
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-28-2017 03:22 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: Now the flip side
https://twitter.com/UTRGV_AD/status/945321401032105986
Quote: Chris King @UTRGV_AD
You do realize it is Christmas Day?!?! The Sky is not falling, the WAC is not crumbling and there is no merger talks.....
Quote:spartypants @WACspartypants
@UTRGV_AD any truth to the claim that Idaho AD says wac and big sky discussing merger?
7:52 AM - 25 Dec 2017
*******************
My personal take, Rob Spear has an agenda, or at least a need to spin for his donor base. So maybe he stretched things a bit.
CSU Bakersfield leaving after 2019-20 season leaves no margin for the WAC. If the UMKC rumors of rejoining the Summit are true (and we will probably know a lot more in March and April if this will happen) then the WAC is pretty much done, as GCU will definitely bolt.
To rehash, supposedly GCU turned down the Horizon last year, which is why they turned to IUPUI, but the relationship was not damaged. Further there was a report that one school's President pitched GCU (and NMSU) to the Big Sky last year and there was general agreement that the for profit status was not an issue for the Presidents, although nothing came of it at the time. So GCU definitely has actionable options if they want.
The question for NMSU to they want to continue to ride the WAC like they did the exodus at the start of the decade, or do they jump to a safer ship?
The "merger" and "divisions" talks, if they actually happened (Rob Spear talking here) were/are more likely conversations with individual school ADs (maybe a Prez or two), on a conceptual "what-if" level. GCU and NMSU are definitely who they would contact, and possibly SU. The concept of Divisional play suggests 12 or even 14 schools for Olympics. And that makes me think "merger" is likely to morph into invite for one to three schools. Obviously NMSU or GCU would be the "one" and "two"
Where has it been stated that GCU turned down the Horizon? On a message board? A made up opinion piece by a fake news reporter with a website in the Phoenix area? By all accounts, the Horizon had every intention of staying a bus league, picking up IUPUI fit that goal.
In addition, what is it GCU provides the Horizon? Another 200 + RPI mouth to feed? They have plenty of those already. The difference, this one requires all your Olympic Sports to get on a plane and stretches your league from Ohio to Arizona.
|
|
12-29-2017 03:11 PM |
|
NoDak
Jersey Retired
Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 105
I Root For: UND
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-29-2017 12:24 PM)dbackjon Wrote: (12-29-2017 02:55 AM)NoDak Wrote: (12-28-2017 06:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote: (12-28-2017 05:38 PM)NoDak Wrote: (12-28-2017 04:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote: If the Big Sky Northern schools are unhappy with 11/13, why would expanding further south make them happier?
Especially since it will be just more mouths to feed?
10 is really a good sweet spot for conferences like the Big Sky and WAC - not too many schools to split the pot, and enough for scheduling home games, and a margin for defections.
Been saying forever that the Northern Big Sky was unhappy, and here we are.
The WAC will get Southland and southern Big Sky schools that want FBS or quality basketball, like Sam Houston St, Lamar, S F Austin, Davis,Sac St, Cal Poly, and ORU.
The new Summit will take The Montanas, Idaho, and EWU and go FBS too.
The Big Sky will have to take Seattle, UVU, Dixie St, and Azusa and maybe Cal Baptist.
A complicated swap system is ongoing, and the Big West has provided a major clue. This has been five years in planning.
No, there is no proof outside of a few message board posters and the bitter Idaho AD that the northern schools are unhappy.
But dream on, dream on, dream on...
You have about 100 days until you have to disappear. Post wisely.
The few NAU fans will be weeping for days soon. The Montanas and Idaho do not consider them of a viable program, as it doesn't have fans. Weber St is the only central and southern Big Sky program that they would miss.
The Idaho, SUU, and Weher St admins have all tated their will be major changes, but message board fools insist that nothing changes.
Yes, the only Big Sky school with not one, but two national Championships in a widely competed sport, a doctoral research institute, largest residential school in the conference, soon to be largest overall school, 3rd highest endowment (5 times EWU, 3 times ISU), located in a growing and populous state (almost twice as large as Idaho, Montana and the Dakotas COMBINED). Yeah, we are far more viable and wanted than UND.
UND Hockey: 250,000 fans paying premium pricing each year for the 8 time champs
NAU CC: zero paying fans
Needless to say, Big Sky presidents are impressed with so many paying customer. If Big Sky Presidents value cross country so much, they will start charging admission.
(This post was last modified: 12-29-2017 07:30 PM by NoDak.)
|
|
12-29-2017 05:46 PM |
|
SDHornet
Special Teams
![*](images/groupimages/specialteams.gif)
Posts: 985
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-29-2017 05:46 PM)NoDak Wrote: UND Hockey: 250,000 fans paying premium pricing each year for the 8 time champs
NAU CC: zero paying fans
Needless to say, Big Sky presidents are impressed with so many paying customer. If Big Sky Presidents value cross country so much, they will start charging admission.
Yup, BSC brass valued hockey attendance so much that they booted the only member with a D1 hockey program to the slummit. Quality logic right there...hockey dictating FB membership...I think that outflanks the "Idaho is now calling realignment decisions" logic. Amazing. These realignment threads never fail to entertain.
|
|
12-29-2017 11:08 PM |
|
NoDak
Jersey Retired
Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 105
I Root For: UND
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-29-2017 11:08 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (12-29-2017 05:46 PM)NoDak Wrote: UND Hockey: 250,000 fans paying premium pricing each year for the 8 time champs
NAU CC: zero paying fans
Needless to say, Big Sky presidents are impressed with so many paying customer. If Big Sky Presidents value cross country so much, they will start charging admission.
Yup, BSC brass valued hockey attendance so much that they booted the only member with a D1 hockey program to the slummit. Quality logic right there...hockey dictating FB membership...I think that outflanks the "Idaho is now calling realignment decisions" logic. Amazing. These realignment threads never fail to entertain.
Sac St should be in demand, but their 300 odd fans at mbb games fail to impress.
As per normal, this board clearly has a bad carseat econcomics. UND has a tremenous fan base while Sac St has next to nothing. Idaho and the Montana's understand economics far better than this board
|
|
12-30-2017 02:43 AM |
|
Lopes87
1st String
![*](images/groupimages/1ststring.gif)
Posts: 1,581
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 40
I Root For: GCU
Location:
|
RE: Are WAC and Big Sky merge/split talks going on again?
(12-30-2017 02:43 AM)NoDak Wrote: (12-29-2017 11:08 PM)SDHornet Wrote: (12-29-2017 05:46 PM)NoDak Wrote: UND Hockey: 250,000 fans paying premium pricing each year for the 8 time champs
NAU CC: zero paying fans
Needless to say, Big Sky presidents are impressed with so many paying customer. If Big Sky Presidents value cross country so much, they will start charging admission.
Yup, BSC brass valued hockey attendance so much that they booted the only member with a D1 hockey program to the slummit. Quality logic right there...hockey dictating FB membership...I think that outflanks the "Idaho is now calling realignment decisions" logic. Amazing. These realignment threads never fail to entertain.
Sac St should be in demand, but their 300 odd fans at mbb games fail to impress.
As per normal, this board clearly has a bad carseat econcomics. UND has a tremenous fan base while Sac St has next to nothing. Idaho and the Montana's understand economics far better than this board
I understand that Sacramento and California in general has a lot to offer to their citizens where North Dakota with most mid-west flyover states do not have anything besides harsh winter, tornados, casseroles, and generally friendly ppl.
It doesn't take a dummy to realize that ppl in the Sacramento is close to Tahoe, Shasta, San Francisco, the beach, San Diego, LA, Disneyland, multiple pro sports, big P5 sports options among other stuff ppl can do year round.
|
|
12-30-2017 11:46 AM |
|