How many of you are content with the shit this conference subjects us to

[UNDfan]

Maybe San Jose State will drop out of the MWC and the Griz will get their chance.

If the MWC went looking for a school or schools, the places it would knock in order would be:

Rice
UTEP
UTSA
UNT
NMSU (assuming UTEP says no)
UCDavis (if the above are not interested)

Idaho and the Montanas would not be on the list unless SJSU was the sole remaining MWC member.

There continue to be three different discussions in this thread:

1. What UM is doing or can do to put pressure on the BSC to improve
2. What UM is doing or can do to position itself when the opportunity to move up comes so it's not caught with it's thumb up its ass because it doesn't "have the finances".
3. Whether UM can move up now.

Nearly everyone with a brain knows UM cannot move up right now, so it's useless to discuss #3. Numbers 1 and 2 are interrelated, and are interesting to discuss.

UM can move up if it joins a group of similar schools with actual aspirations, but that is ignored here.

 

[grizindabox]

Maybe San Jose State will drop out of the MWC and the Griz will get their chance.

If the MWC went looking for a school or schools, the places it would knock in order would be:

Rice
UTEP
UTSA
UNT
NMSU (assuming UTEP says no)
UCDavis (if the above are not interested)

Idaho and the Montanas would not be on the list unless SJSU was the sole remaining MWC member.

There continue to be three different discussions in this thread:

1. What UM is doing or can do to put pressure on the BSC to improve
2. What UM is doing or can do to position itself when the opportunity to move up comes so it's not caught with it's thumb up its ass because it doesn't "have the finances".
3. Whether UM can move up now.

Nearly everyone with a brain knows UM cannot move up right now, so it's useless to discuss #3. Numbers 1 and 2 are interrelated, and are interesting to discuss.

UM can move up if it joins a group of similar schools with actual aspirations, but that is ignored here.

I don't ever see UM moving away from a West Coast/Rocky Mountain footprint to join a league with a large midwest footprint. UM has a large alumni base on the West Coast.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Maybe San Jose State will drop out of the MWC and the Griz will get their chance.

If the MWC went looking for a school or schools, the places it would knock in order would be:

Rice
UTEP
UTSA
UNT
NMSU (assuming UTEP says no)
UCDavis (if the above are not interested)

Idaho and the Montanas would not be on the list unless SJSU was the sole remaining MWC member.

There continue to be three different discussions in this thread:

1. What UM is doing or can do to put pressure on the BSC to improve
2. What UM is doing or can do to position itself when the opportunity to move up comes so it's not caught with it's thumb up its ass because it doesn't "have the finances".
3. Whether UM can move up now.

Nearly everyone with a brain knows UM cannot move up right now, so it's useless to discuss #3. Numbers 1 and 2 are interrelated, and are interesting to discuss.

UM can move up if it joins a group of similar schools with actual aspirations, but that is ignored here.

I don't think it's ignored, it just doesn't make a good plan as it's dependent on all the schools you mentioned being willing and able at the exact same time. UM already has one anchor in MSU; I doubt it wants five to seven more. Hypothetically, I think everyone would agree with you. But it's kind of like saying, "All UM needs is to do is add a bunch of sports, be nationally competitive in them, and hello PAC 13, but that's ignored here."

 

[NavyBlue]

Maybe San Jose State will drop out of the MWC and the Griz will get their chance.

If the MWC went looking for a school or schools, the places it would knock in order would be:

Rice
UTEP
UTSA
UNT
NMSU (assuming UTEP says no)
UCDavis (if the above are not interested)

Idaho and the Montanas would not be on the list unless SJSU was the sole remaining MWC member. NDSU posters keep posting delusion with them and the Griz getting invites.

I don't think Rice does much for the league, as far as tv value, fan interest, or for bowls or recruiting. And I doubt they would join the MWC, if offered. I don't think from what I have heard as a fan of an MWC school that UTEP (despite its history and maybe because of its history) would get much of a look. UTSA maybe someday, but they don't do much. UNM is blackballing NMSU, same as BYU and Utah always kept Utah State out of the old WAC. UC -Davis I could see if they made the investment, don't think they will. Montana is a better candidate than Idaho. Even if the MWC lost someone, I am not even sure they would expand unless it is with someone they though would add tv value which is why they were flirting with Gonzaga a while ago. But I personally, think Montana has some upside that would be looked at if they league were to expand. UM has more season ticket holders than most of the MWC as an FCS school.

With the P5 - G5 split, the G5 leagues are on their way to de facto FCS status anyway.

 

[UNDfan]

If the MWC went looking for a school or schools, the places it would knock in order would be:

Rice
UTEP
UTSA
UNT
NMSU (assuming UTEP says no)
UCDavis (if the above are not interested)

Idaho and the Montanas would not be on the list unless SJSU was the sole remaining MWC member.

There continue to be three different discussions in this thread:

1. What UM is doing or can do to put pressure on the BSC to improve
2. What UM is doing or can do to position itself when the opportunity to move up comes so it's not caught with it's thumb up its ass because it doesn't "have the finances".
3. Whether UM can move up now.

Nearly everyone with a brain knows UM cannot move up right now, so it's useless to discuss #3. Numbers 1 and 2 are interrelated, and are interesting to discuss.

UM can move up if it joins a group of similar schools with actual aspirations, but that is ignored here.

I don't think it's ignored, it just doesn't make a good plan as it's dependent on all the schools you mentioned being willing and able at the exact same time. UM already has one anchor in MSU; I doubt it wants five to seven more. Hypothetically, I think everyone would agree with you. But it's kind of like saying, "All UM needs is to do is add a bunch of sports, be nationally competitive in them, and hello PAC 13, but that's ignored here."

The Dakota 4 have only two other schools that are semi-reliable partners, Denver and Omaha, which are both UND hockey partners. MU, MSU, and IU lack any similar schools themselves. Take Weber St as the best of the rest and move over. IPFW has wanted out for years and nobody else wants W Illinois, but UM and MSU play them. The MVC hates the Dakota schools as they are too west and too unpopulated and they won’t offer anything more than football. The MWC hates the Montanas and Idaho U’s because they are too North and too unpopulated. The Dakota 4 and the Montanas and Idaho face the same kind of geographical discrimination. It’s a no brainer to band together and make something greater, but the blind here seem to think the MWC has the hots for UM.

Your alumni on the West Coast would be thrilled with OOC regular games with Oregon and Stanford rather than Sac St and Portland St, but that is always argued here.

 

[UNDfan]

Maybe San Jose State will drop out of the MWC and the Griz will get their chance.

If the MWC went looking for a school or schools, the places it would knock in order would be:

Rice
UTEP
UTSA
UNT
NMSU (assuming UTEP says no)
UCDavis (if the above are not interested)

Idaho and the Montanas would not be on the list unless SJSU was the sole remaining MWC member. NDSU posters keep posting delusion with them and the Griz getting invites.

I don't think Rice does much for the league, as far as tv value, fan interest, or for bowls or recruiting. And I doubt they would join the MWC, if offered. I don't think from what I have heard as a fan of an MWC school that UTEP (despite its history and maybe because of its history) would get much of a look. UTSA maybe someday, but they don't do much. UNM is blackballing NMSU, same as BYU and Utah always kept Utah State out of the old WAC. UC -Davis I could see if they made the investment, don't think they will. Montana is a better candidate than Idaho. Even if the MWC lost someone, I am not even sure they would expand unless it is with someone they though would add tv value which is why they were flirting with Gonzaga a while ago. But I personally, think Montana has some upside that would be looked at if they league were to expand. UM has more season ticket holders than most of the MWC as an FCS school.

With the P5 - G5 split, the G5 leagues are on their way to de facto FCS status anyway.

College Presidents care about academics and endowments and Rice has them in spades and saw how TCU elevated their program with the MWC. TCU was scorned at too when they first joined. UTEP doesn’t want to be the only Texas program so they want other CUSA Texas programs to jump too. UTEP needed a presence in Houston and Dallas to connect with their alumni, that’s why they joined CUSA, and now UTEP doesn’t like the whole eastern side of CUSA because it means massive travel without exciting their fan base. The MWC would be much more appealing if it had teams in Houston, DFW and San Antonio. The MWC likes the idea of Texas for recruiting.

UCDavis has been raising money for an expanded 30k stadium ever since they built their new 10k seater. UCDavis will move eventually, as the want to be like UCLA, and have the academics and endowment to do it.

Would argue that Montana St is a much better moveup candidate than Montana or Idaho, as MSU has academics in key STEM areas and is the only one growing.

 

[Fahque]

Agreed as well. And I would think that starts with getting the BSC to get its shit together concurrently. I would also argue that the locker rooms & champions center ARE steps in the “move up” direction....next step is an indoor practice facility.

These are two of the best posts on this subject ever.

No one expects us to make the move immediately. But we need to begin taking the steps in that direction. Like it or not, Montana has outgrown the bsc in facilities, support, fan base, interest, and success (in all sports, not just FB). And the bsc knows it.

Take steps in the right direction? Jeez, look at my post. I'd like to see your list of steps that UM isn't or hasn't taken. UM had taken about 8 steps in the right direction.

Can't wait to see your list of the steps UM needs to take to get to FBS.

Going to the MWC is financially reckless.

Going to FBS isn’t if one has a group of schools that can achieve it in a budget way. The Sun Belt is a relative budget FBS conference and that’s why Idaho was a member for a time.

But the four Dakotas, Weber St, Mt St and Idaho would be a budget conference that is capable of FBS. That’s the only way that a Montana President or AD looks at the situation. The MWC is out of your league financially as your budget would need too drastically be expanded but your media presence is just too small for the MWC. A new Summit with football doesn’t have the financial concerns as all those schools don’t have huge budgets. If the G5 goes to G6, it could go to G8 just as easily. At G8, there would be a playoff. FCS playoffs don’t have any kind of money, but a G8 playoff would get a small piece of the CFP pie. It’s a home run for Summit schools when they move up. Insist upon taking the name Big Sky and giving the remnant Big Sky the name Summit. It’s a simple thing to do and your President is probably already all in.

FCS will be the new D2 and the G8 will become the new FCS, but this time with prize money.

All Montana needs for FBS is more scholarships and another women’s sport. Women’s lacrosse will likely be added and that team will play in the MPSF with California teams. Only 12 schollies needed but 40 players.

So how does Wyoming do it?

 

[UNDfan]

These are two of the best posts on this subject ever.

No one expects us to make the move immediately. But we need to begin taking the steps in that direction. Like it or not, Montana has outgrown the bsc in facilities, support, fan base, interest, and success (in all sports, not just FB). And the bsc knows it.

Take steps in the right direction? Jeez, look at my post. I'd like to see your list of steps that UM isn't or hasn't taken. UM had taken about 8 steps in the right direction.

Can't wait to see your list of the steps UM needs to take to get to FBS.

Going to the MWC is financially reckless.

Going to FBS isn’t if one has a group of schools that can achieve it in a budget way. The Sun Belt is a relative budget FBS conference and that’s why Idaho was a member for a time.

But the four Dakotas, Weber St, Mt St and Idaho would be a budget conference that is capable of FBS. That’s the only way that a Montana President or AD looks at the situation. The MWC is out of your league financially as your budget would need too drastically be expanded but your media presence is just too small for the MWC. A new Summit with football doesn’t have the financial concerns as all those schools don’t have huge budgets. If the G5 goes to G6, it could go to G8 just as easily. At G8, there would be a playoff. FCS playoffs don’t have any kind of money, but a G8 playoff would get a small piece of the CFP pie. It’s a home run for Summit schools when they move up. Insist upon taking the name Big Sky and giving the remnant Big Sky the name Summit. It’s a simple thing to do and your President is probably already all in.

FCS will be the new D2 and the G8 will become the new FCS, but this time with prize money.

All Montana needs for FBS is more scholarships and another women’s sport. Women’s lacrosse will likely be added and that team will play in the MPSF with California teams. Only 12 schollies needed but 40 players.

So how does Wyoming do it?

Wyoming has an enormous state trust fund from coal royalties, is the only 4yr college in the state, is close to AFA and Colorado St, almost in the Front Range, and was close to BYU and Utah. If UW had been in the center or northern part of the state, like Casper or Sheridan, UW would have been in UM’s league. Wyoming can afford one major FBS school for state pride purposes.

North Dakota now has a several billion $ trust fund too built by Bakken royal ties. Financially, the state is in an entirely different league than a decade ago.

 

[Fahque]

Take steps in the right direction? Jeez, look at my post. I'd like to see your list of steps that UM isn't or hasn't taken. UM had taken about 8 steps in the right direction.

Can't wait to see your list of the steps UM needs to take to get to FBS.

Going to the MWC is financially reckless.

Going to FBS isn’t if one has a group of schools that can achieve it in a budget way. The Sun Belt is a relative budget FBS conference and that’s why Idaho was a member for a time.

But the four Dakotas, Weber St, Mt St and Idaho would be a budget conference that is capable of FBS. That’s the only way that a Montana President or AD looks at the situation. The MWC is out of your league financially as your budget would need too drastically be expanded but your media presence is just too small for the MWC. A new Summit with football doesn’t have the financial concerns as all those schools don’t have huge budgets. If the G5 goes to G6, it could go to G8 just as easily. At G8, there would be a playoff. FCS playoffs don’t have any kind of money, but a G8 playoff would get a small piece of the CFP pie. It’s a home run for Summit schools when they move up. Insist upon taking the name Big Sky and giving the remnant Big Sky the name Summit. It’s a simple thing to do and your President is probably already all in.

FCS will be the new D2 and the G8 will become the new FCS, but this time with prize money.

All Montana needs for FBS is more scholarships and another women’s sport. Women’s lacrosse will likely be added and that team will play in the MPSF with California teams. Only 12 schollies needed but 40 players.

So how does Wyoming do it?

Wyoming has an enormous state trust fund from coal royalties, is the only 4yr college in the state, is close to AFA and Colorado St, almost in the Front Range, and was close to BYU and Utah. If UW had been in the center or northern part of the state, like Casper or Sheridan, UW would have been in UM’s league.

North Dakota now has a several billion $ trust fund too built by Bakken royalties.

Montana also has a massive coal trust fund...but it will never be tapped, at least for this purpose.

 

['68griz]

If the MWC went looking for a school or schools, the places it would knock in order would be:

Rice
UTEP
UTSA
UNT
NMSU (assuming UTEP says no)
UCDavis (if the above are not interested)

Idaho and the Montanas would not be on the list unless SJSU was the sole remaining MWC member.

There continue to be three different discussions in this thread:

1. What UM is doing or can do to put pressure on the BSC to improve
2. What UM is doing or can do to position itself when the opportunity to move up comes so it's not caught with it's thumb up its ass because it doesn't "have the finances".
3. Whether UM can move up now.

Nearly everyone with a brain knows UM cannot move up right now, so it's useless to discuss #3. Numbers 1 and 2 are interrelated, and are interesting to discuss.

UM can move up if it joins a group of similar schools with actual aspirations, but that is ignored here.

I don't ever see UM moving away from a West Coast/Rocky Mountain footprint to join a league with a large midwest footprint. UM has a large alumni base on the West Coast.

UM has virtually no historical connection to the Midwest and FCS schools there -- not going to move in that direction.

 

[UNDfan]

There continue to be three different discussions in this thread:

1. What UM is doing or can do to put pressure on the BSC to improve
2. What UM is doing or can do to position itself when the opportunity to move up comes so it's not caught with it's thumb up its ass because it doesn't "have the finances".
3. Whether UM can move up now.

Nearly everyone with a brain knows UM cannot move up right now, so it's useless to discuss #3. Numbers 1 and 2 are interrelated, and are interesting to discuss.

UM can move up if it joins a group of similar schools with actual aspirations, but that is ignored here.

I don't ever see UM moving away from a West Coast/Rocky Mountain footprint to join a league with a large midwest footprint. UM has a large alumni base on the West Coast.

UM has virtually no historical connection to the Midwest and FCS schools there -- not going to move in that direction.

The historical connection with SUU and NAU and Sac St must be overwhelming?

Don’t think you know your own states history, as the railroads like the Northern Pacific and Great Northern came from North Dakota and same with Lewis and Clark.

UM and MSU wanted UND and NDSU for generations, but the more western and southern schools insisted on Cal St-Northridge over UM and MSU’s objections.

Don’t dispute the connection with EWU and Portland St and CWU is getting in early next decade. You’ll all rejoice to be reunited with CWU.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

There continue to be three different discussions in this thread:

1. What UM is doing or can do to put pressure on the BSC to improve
2. What UM is doing or can do to position itself when the opportunity to move up comes so it's not caught with it's thumb up its ass because it doesn't "have the finances".
3. Whether UM can move up now.

Nearly everyone with a brain knows UM cannot move up right now, so it's useless to discuss #3. Numbers 1 and 2 are interrelated, and are interesting to discuss.

UM can move up if it joins a group of similar schools with actual aspirations, but that is ignored here.

I don't think it's ignored, it just doesn't make a good plan as it's dependent on all the schools you mentioned being willing and able at the exact same time. UM already has one anchor in MSU; I doubt it wants five to seven more. Hypothetically, I think everyone would agree with you. But it's kind of like saying, "All UM needs is to do is add a bunch of sports, be nationally competitive in them, and hello PAC 13, but that's ignored here."

The Dakota 4 have only two other schools that are semi-reliable partners, Denver and Omaha, which are both UND hockey partners. MU, MSU, and IU lack any similar schools themselves. Take Weber St as the best of the rest and move over. IPFW has wanted out for years and nobody else wants W Illinois, but UM and MSU play them. The MVC hates the Dakota schools as they are too west and too unpopulated and they won’t offer anything more than football. The MWC hates the Montanas and Idaho U’s because they are too North and too unpopulated. The Dakota 4 and the Montanas and Idaho face the same kind of geographical discrimination. It’s a no brainer to band together and make something greater, but the blind here seem to think the MWC has the hots for UM.

Your alumni on the West Coast would be thrilled with OOC regular games with Oregon and Stanford rather than Sac St and Portland St, but that is always argued here.

Bud, I know you think it makes sense. It doesn't. Nobody wants UM to join a midwest conference. I'm sorry the "Dakota 4" are discriminated against, I really am. I'm sure it keeps UM brass up at night to continue it. Further, nobody thinks the MWC has the "hots" for UM. You can continue to miss the point of the thread if you choose. I can't stop you.

 

[UNDfan]

UM can move up if it joins a group of similar schools with actual aspirations, but that is ignored here.

I don't think it's ignored, it just doesn't make a good plan as it's dependent on all the schools you mentioned being willing and able at the exact same time. UM already has one anchor in MSU; I doubt it wants five to seven more. Hypothetically, I think everyone would agree with you. But it's kind of like saying, "All UM needs is to do is add a bunch of sports, be nationally competitive in them, and hello PAC 13, but that's ignored here."

The Dakota 4 have only two other schools that are semi-reliable partners, Denver and Omaha, which are both UND hockey partners. MU, MSU, and IU lack any similar schools themselves. Take Weber St as the best of the rest and move over. IPFW has wanted out for years and nobody else wants W Illinois, but UM and MSU play them. The MVC hates the Dakota schools as they are too west and too unpopulated and they won’t offer anything more than football. The MWC hates the Montanas and Idaho U’s because they are too North and too unpopulated. The Dakota 4 and the Montanas and Idaho face the same kind of geographical discrimination. It’s a no brainer to band together and make something greater, but the blind here seem to think the MWC has the hots for UM.

Your alumni on the West Coast would be thrilled with OOC regular games with Oregon and Stanford rather than Sac St and Portland St, but that is always argued here.

Bud, I know you think it makes sense. It doesn't. Nobody wants UM to join a midwest conference. I'm sorry the "Dakota 4" are discriminated against, I really am. I'm sure it keeps UM brass up at night to continue it. Further, nobody thinks the MWC has the "hots" for UM. You can continue to miss the point of the thread if you choose. I can't stop you.

President have the hots for similar academic schools. That means EWU, Portland St, Sac St, SUU and Idaho State are dogs to your President and the four Dakota ones are raving beauties. The Big Ten didn’t add Rutgers for their athletics but for their academics and media presence.

Learn to think like your President and then you may actually know how Seth thinks.

BTW, the MVC fussing about the Dakotas not being midwestern but that’s all the rage here. It’s like NAU and SUU are just a short drive and very accessible by plane, to Vegas.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I don't think it's ignored, it just doesn't make a good plan as it's dependent on all the schools you mentioned being willing and able at the exact same time. UM already has one anchor in MSU; I doubt it wants five to seven more. Hypothetically, I think everyone would agree with you. But it's kind of like saying, "All UM needs is to do is add a bunch of sports, be nationally competitive in them, and hello PAC 13, but that's ignored here."

The Dakota 4 have only two other schools that are semi-reliable partners, Denver and Omaha, which are both UND hockey partners. MU, MSU, and IU lack any similar schools themselves. Take Weber St as the best of the rest and move over. IPFW has wanted out for years and nobody else wants W Illinois, but UM and MSU play them. The MVC hates the Dakota schools as they are too west and too unpopulated and they won’t offer anything more than football. The MWC hates the Montanas and Idaho U’s because they are too North and too unpopulated. The Dakota 4 and the Montanas and Idaho face the same kind of geographical discrimination. It’s a no brainer to band together and make something greater, but the blind here seem to think the MWC has the hots for UM.

Your alumni on the West Coast would be thrilled with OOC regular games with Oregon and Stanford rather than Sac St and Portland St, but that is always argued here.

Bud, I know you think it makes sense. It doesn't. Nobody wants UM to join a midwest conference. I'm sorry the "Dakota 4" are discriminated against, I really am. I'm sure it keeps UM brass up at night to continue it. Further, nobody thinks the MWC has the "hots" for UM. You can continue to miss the point of the thread if you choose. I can't stop you.

President have the hots for similar academic schools. That means EWU, Portland St, Sac St, SUU and Idaho State are dogs to your President and the four Dakota ones are raving beauties. The Big Ten didn’t add Rutgers for their athletics but for their academics and media presence.

Learn to think like your President and then you may actually know how Seth thinks.

BTW, the MVC fussing about the Dakotas not being midwestern but that’s all the rage here. It’s like NAU and SUU are just a short drive and very accessible by plane, to Vegas.

Not happenin', pard.
Not even sure WTF your last para means.

 

[grizindabox]

UNDfan just doesn't get it

 

[Ursa Major]

UM can move up if it joins a group of similar schools with actual aspirations, but that is ignored here.

I don't think it's ignored, it just doesn't make a good plan as it's dependent on all the schools you mentioned being willing and able at the exact same time. UM already has one anchor in MSU; I doubt it wants five to seven more. Hypothetically, I think everyone would agree with you. But it's kind of like saying, "All UM needs is to do is add a bunch of sports, be nationally competitive in them, and hello PAC 13, but that's ignored here."

The Dakota 4 have only two other schools that are semi-reliable partners, Denver and Omaha, which are both UND hockey partners. MU, MSU, and IU lack any similar schools themselves. Take Weber St as the best of the rest and move over. IPFW has wanted out for years and nobody else wants W Illinois, but UM and MSU play them. The MVC hates the Dakota schools as they are too west and too unpopulated and they won’t offer anything more than football. The MWC hates the Montanas and Idaho U’s because they are too North and too unpopulated. The Dakota 4 and the Montanas and Idaho face the same kind of geographical discrimination. It’s a no brainer to band together and make something greater, but the blind here seem to think the MWC has the hots for UM.

Your alumni on the West Coast would be thrilled with OOC regular games with Oregon and Stanford rather than Sac St and Portland St, but that is always argued here.

Bud, I know you think it makes sense. It doesn't. Nobody wants UM to join a midwest conference. I'm sorry the "Dakota 4" are discriminated against, I really am. I'm sure it keeps UM brass up at night to continue it. Further, nobody thinks the MWC has the "hots" for UM. You can continue to miss the point of the thread if you choose. I can't stop you.

I believe the only time the Dakota 4 are actually discriminated against is when the Golden Corral, LLC refuses to offer All-You-Can-Eat Shrimpfest at it's Dakota locations. That discrimination is based on a pure profit & loss calculation.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I don't think it's ignored, it just doesn't make a good plan as it's dependent on all the schools you mentioned being willing and able at the exact same time. UM already has one anchor in MSU; I doubt it wants five to seven more. Hypothetically, I think everyone would agree with you. But it's kind of like saying, "All UM needs is to do is add a bunch of sports, be nationally competitive in them, and hello PAC 13, but that's ignored here."

The Dakota 4 have only two other schools that are semi-reliable partners, Denver and Omaha, which are both UND hockey partners. MU, MSU, and IU lack any similar schools themselves. Take Weber St as the best of the rest and move over. IPFW has wanted out for years and nobody else wants W Illinois, but UM and MSU play them. The MVC hates the Dakota schools as they are too west and too unpopulated and they won’t offer anything more than football. The MWC hates the Montanas and Idaho U’s because they are too North and too unpopulated. The Dakota 4 and the Montanas and Idaho face the same kind of geographical discrimination. It’s a no brainer to band together and make something greater, but the blind here seem to think the MWC has the hots for UM.

Your alumni on the West Coast would be thrilled with OOC regular games with Oregon and Stanford rather than Sac St and Portland St, but that is always argued here.

Bud, I know you think it makes sense. It doesn't. Nobody wants UM to join a midwest conference. I'm sorry the "Dakota 4" are discriminated against, I really am. I'm sure it keeps UM brass up at night to continue it. Further, nobody thinks the MWC has the "hots" for UM. You can continue to miss the point of the thread if you choose. I can't stop you.

I believe the only time the Dakota 4 are actually discriminated against is when the Golden Corral, LLC refuses to offer All-You-Can-Eat Shrimpfest at it's Dakota locations. That discrimination is based on a pure profit & loss calculation.

:lol:
It's a business decision. I do look forward to using the term Dakota 4 whenever possible.

 

[AllWeatherFan]

Look, UNDfan, we appreciate the offer, we really do!

But...no thanks.

 

[AllWeatherFan]

I believe the only time the Dakota 4 are actually discriminated against is when the Golden Corral, LLC refuses to offer All-You-Can-Eat Shrimpfest at it's Dakota locations. That discrimination is based on a pure profit & loss calculation.

Profit? :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[UNDfan]

When Seth announces the same move up plan that I proposed, he will be hailed as brilliant here.

But all the while I’ll be vilified as a know nothing. That’s what always happen on egriz.