Big Sky to look at adding only UNC

[mslacat]

If we only let in UNC join the Big Sky from their confrence old Duke is going to very pissed!

[velochat]

Big Sky picks UNC as sole candidate

Official: Expansion is not inevitable

Sam Mustari
December 14, 2004


The University of Northern Colorado athletic department received the best news possible Monday afternoon -- UNC is the Big Sky Confer-

ence's sole candidate for possible expansion for the 2006-07 academic year.

At a meeting of the Big Sky Conference Presidents Council

in Salt Lake City, officials decided to take a closer look at UNC, eliminating other applicants North Dakota State University, South Dakota State University and Southern Utah University from the mix.

The Bears are close to completing their third year of a five-year transition from NCAA Division II to Division I (I-AA for football). They are competing as a Division I Independent.

A selection committee from the Big Sky Conference will visit the UNC campus next month.

The committee will report to the Presidents Council via conference call in March. A formal invitation to the Bears could come in March or April, or not at all.

UNC president Kay Norton can't wait for Big Sky Conference officials to arrive and take a closer look.

"This is their chance to walk around and kick the tires, and we look forward to that," Norton said. "I'm flattered. We know we're special, and it's nice to know that it appears that way to others."

UNC's proximity to Big Sky Conference members may have played a key role in Monday's decision. The Big Sky Conference consists of eight schools in seven states -- Eastern Washington University, Idaho State University, University of Montana, Montana State University, Northern Arizona University, Portland (Ore.) State University, California State University-Sacramento and Weber State (Utah) University.

Big Sky Conference commissioner Doug Fullerton explained that travel issues for member schools California State-Sacramento and Portland State may have worked against NDSU and SDSU.

NDSU athletic director Gene Taylor isn't quite ready to give up as the Bison are in their second year of transition from Division II to Division I.

"If it's geography that it boils down to, maybe there are some things we can do to get them past it," Taylor said. "There is a preconceived notion that Fargo is a negative. We're not ready to give up just yet."

In the meantime, UNC officials are preparing to prove to the Big Sky Conference officials who visit the campus that their decision is the correct one.

"We're thrilled to have gotten this far, but we still have a long way to go," said Ken McConnellogue, UNC vice president for university advancement. "I think as they look at us, they're going to see a lot of positive things. First is our academic reputation and geography.

"We know our athletic budget is not where it needs to be, but we can prove our revenue streams and obviously we need to improve our facilities. We can do those things -- in fact, we're on the road to doing those things right now."

UNC first-year athletic director Jay Hinrichs echoed McConnellogue's statements, including those about UNC's $4.5 million athletic budget, which ranks among the lower half of Big Sky Conference schools.

"We can make a very strong emphasis on our financial structure at this time," Hinrichs said. "We have a plan for funding from private donors and a strong budgetary process."

McConnellogue went on to explain that at the top of UNC's priority list for improving facilities is the completion of bleachers for the east side of Nottingham Field. Also improvements to the school's strength and conditioning center and the training and rehabilitation center are needed.

"We also have to absolutely do something with the inside of Butler-Hancock Hall," McConnellogue added.

Big Sky Conference officials, including Fullerton, officially asked UNC, NDSU, SDSU and Southern Utah to apply for membership in October. All four schools then took the next step by answering an expansion questionnaire.

Fullerton said the Big Sky presidents "were committed to building a consensus in this process. The University of Northern Colorado is where they reached a consensus."

The Presidents Council also established criteria to evaluate the four schools, including academic quality, athletic competitiveness, commitment to gender equity, commitment to student-athlete success and location in regard to cost and travel time.

"We have to put the full-court press on and do everything in our power to make sure we can close this deal," McConnellogue said.

[SacHornetFan]

I honestly think that EWU, PSU, NAU and us did not vote for the Dakotas because of the travel. Even though they are in Spokane, EWU would probably have to take 2 connecting flights just to get to Minneapolis. For us, we have direct flights to Minneapolis twice a day on Northwest. Otherwise, we have to do at least one-stop on the other airlines.

I don't have any inside info, but, I hope we do go to the WAC in all sports. Californians, sadly, have no clue about I-AA football, and in the valley, the Big Sky Conference.

With our president (Dr. Gonzalez) changing our campus from a commuter to a residential (new dorms to house 5,500; a new 8,000 arena and rec center; a new performing arts center; new planetarium) and wanting to be the flagship campus of the CSU, the Big Sky will probably not be a great fit.

The CSU's are about to begin a fight with the UC's regarding research and doctoral programs. Currently, the state constitution forbids any CSU from giving a doctoral degree by itself. It has to be a joint with fUC. The constitution gives exclusive rights to doctorals and research. That's about to change.

[mslacat]

Does anybody know if the Unversity of Denver has been considered or interested in the Sky. They would make a good travel partner for UNC jr.

[jack100]

I honestly think that EWU, PSU, NAU and us did not vote for the Dakotas because of the travel. Even though they are in Spokane, EWU would probably have to take 2 connecting flights just to get to Minneapolis. For us, we have direct flights to Minneapolis twice a day on Northwest. Otherwise, we have to do at least one-stop on the other airlines.

With our president (Dr. Gonzalez) changing our campus from a commuter to a residential (new dorms to house 5,500; a new 8,000 arena and rec center; a new performing arts center; new planetarium) and wanting to be the flagship campus of the CSU, the Big Sky will probably not be a great fit.

There are several daily direct flights from Spokane to Minneapolis. Secondly, if you build it they still won't come. Face it - very few people in Sacramento care about Sac State.

[89rabbit]

Not that it really matters anymore, unless it is a non-conf. game, but here is the skinny on getting to Brookings.

Via Sioux Falls:

Sioux Falls is serviced by Northwest, United, American, Delta, America West, and Allegiant. Sioux Falls has non-stops to Chicago, Denver, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Cincinnati. Sioux Falls is 45 min. South of Brookings right on I-29.

Direct to Brookings:

Brookings is serviced by Mesa Airlines (doing business and US Airways Express) and has daily flights from Omaha and Kansas City.


P.S. from everything I read and hear it came down to PSU and Sac State saying no to the Dakotas. It would have been a 6-2 vote, but the Presidents decided (ahead of time) that they would only have an offical vote if they had a "consensus". Meaning a unanimous opinion on a school. The only school that could clear this hurdle was UNC.

[WYOBISONMAN]

The one thing that all of us have to realize....is that if Sac and PSU bolted the Sky, the BB autobid would be lost unless another playoff eligible school were to be added. In this way Sac and PSU can control the Sky until UNC, NDSU and SDSU become eligible. Right now if Sac and PSU bolted.....the sky would HAVE to add SUU to have the minimum of 7 eligible members.

[SacHornetFan]

[/quote]There are several daily direct flights from Spokane to Minneapolis. Secondly, if you build it they still won't come. Face it - very few people in Sacramento care about Sac State.[/quote]


See, this is why I get so upset with people outside of California who do not know the real story.

Our last president was in office for 19 years. When he retired at the end of the Spring of 2003, he was 74 years old. He was an academic thru and thru. All 3 of his PolySci degrees were from the Univ. of Chicago (not exactly these days a hotbed for athletics). He admitted that he treated athletics like every other dept. on campus.

That was the problem we had, and why most Sacramentans do not know we have Div. I athletics or care about it. Coupled with the fact that the major Sacramento newspaper only cares Kings and pro teams who are 100 miles away (which is funny since they have 4 major dailies in the Bay Area who cover them already).

The changes in the past 2 years for the dept in getting the facilities has been nothing but awesome. First, we renovated our baseball and softball stadiums. They are actually stadiums now instead of fields with portable bleachers. Second, finally got soccer a permanent facility. Third, we are building the new arena with student and community support. The students voted to tax themselves to help build plus Alex Spanos, who owns the Chargers, gave us a $10 million check for the arena and football stadium renovation.

[Cat Grad]

Unfortunately, this is all just old news and speculation. We can't seem to get the people in our conference to listen, and yes, our only recourse is when the phones start ringing for money, to take it out on a poor telemarketer from Virginia and the morons ruining our flagship institutions still won't listen to us when we call; we get some lame excuse as to how important etc., etc. and a whole lot of yes buts...all of which equates to less butts in every seat whether it's classroom or stadium..."Never mistake academia for intelligensia...or confuse intelligensia with academia..."

[jack100]

There are several daily direct flights from Spokane to Minneapolis. Secondly, if you build it they still won't come. Face it - very few people in Sacramento care about Sac State.[/quote]


See, this is why I get so upset with people outside of California who do not know the real story.

Our last president was in office for 19 years. When he retired at the end of the Spring of 2003, he was 74 years old. He was an academic thru and thru. All 3 of his PolySci degrees were from the Univ. of Chicago (not exactly these days a hotbed for athletics). He admitted that he treated athletics like every other dept. on campus.

That was the problem we had, and why most Sacramentans do not know we have Div. I athletics or care about it. Coupled with the fact that the major Sacramento newspaper only cares Kings and pro teams who are 100 miles away (which is funny since they have 4 major dailies in the Bay Area who cover them already).

The changes in the past 2 years for the dept in getting the facilities has been nothing but awesome. First, we renovated our baseball and softball stadiums. They are actually stadiums now instead of fields with portable bleachers. Second, finally got soccer a permanent facility. Third, we are building the new arena with student and community support. The students voted to tax themselves to help build plus Alex Spanos, who owns the Chargers, gave us a $10 million check for the arena and football stadium renovation.[/quote]




You didn't address Sac State's problem - very few will ever care about Sac State athletics. Most Sac State's students, alumni, and Sacramento residents just do not care and do attend athletic events. Sac State can keep building - they still will not come. I know the real story - Sac State is the bottom feeder of the Big Sky Conference.