How Committed to the MVC Do You think Your School Is?

by **DoubleJayAlum** » September 6th, 2011, 12:44 pm

Since the conference realignment discussion has dominated the last few weeks, I thought maybe we should look at it from another perspective. Are FB schools as devoted as non-football schools? We know that certain MSU fans thought their school was CUSA bound and have heard the same thing from IlSU fans in the past. Are any other schools shopping around?

I'll give my opinion of Creighton.

Because we don't have football and there aren't many options for schools without FB, I'd say that CU is pretty committed to the conference. The exception would be if the Big East blows up and the catholic schools in the Big East (and A-10?) form a basketball focused conference. In that situation, I think Creighton would be desperate to get with its Jesuit and Catholic brethren (Xavier, Dayton, DePaul, Marquette, SLU, etc.) and would lobby for admission. Obviously, whether they get in or not would be another matter.

Outside of soccer, for which there has been some discussion of moving that sport only to a different conference, I've not heard anything about any movement to any existing conferences.

Anyone else care to contribute?

**Sponsor**

by **unipanther99** » September 6th, 2011, 1:06 pm

I would say UNI is very committed to the current MVC/MVFC structure. The current situation has allowed the Panthers to achieve at UNI's highest level in the sports our fans care about the most. It's a bit of "the best of both worlds" as far as Men's basketball and football are concerned.

We're not going to FBS football anytime soon. If the NCAA were to change how the divisions are structured, I think we would be well positioned to compete with any and all non-BCS football schools in the country. Until then, FCS is where we belong and we are considered a national power within the division.

As for basketball, the MVC offers the right balance of competition and exposure. We don't have the money or fans to compete with schools in larger conferences, and I think UNI fans feel like we've graduated from the old "Mid-Con" type of basketball program. 10 years ago, I would have said we were probably better suited for Mid-Con/Summit, etc.

by **CaseyGarrisonforPrez** » September 6th, 2011, 2:06 pm

From a Missouri State perspective, I think that the Valley has been okay for us. Not great. But not terrible. A good waiting room in between the Mid-Continent days and whatever lies in front of us. We would love to be in Conference USA because i think it fits better with what we are in the state of Missouri. According to various accounts, our AD nad administration has been in contact with Banowsky the CUSA commissioner on multiple occasions. There has been some talk of the Sun Belt, but I think we'd much prefer to stay in the Valley that suffer throught that. The other scenario that has been bandied about has been joining the WAC. They need schools and it could be a fit for football at the very least. At the women's soccer game with Kansas this last Friday, I heard from a good friend who is well tuned in to the happenings at MSU that we could very well stay in the Valley and then be a football only member of the WAC starting in 2015 or 2016 which would allow us to get the program up to speed.

As a school I think we are content right now, but we want bigger things and know that however things shake out with all of this realignment, we know that we will have several appealing options. It's at times like these that I wish that Bill Rowe, Barry Hinson, Coach Abe, Keith Guttin, and Randy Ball hadn't wrecked us up so much. But we are still in good shape. We occupy a large state and are in the third largest metropolitan area at that. We will land on our feet regardless.

by **DoubleJayAlum** » September 6th, 2011, 2:21 pm

CaseyGarrisonforPrez wrote:At the women's soccer game with Kansas this last Friday, I heard from a good friend who is well tuned in to the happenings at MSU that we could very well stay in the Valley and then be a football only member of the WAC starting in 2015 or 2016 which would allow us to get the program up to speed.

While I admit that what I know about MVFC could fit in a thimble, it still seems to this uninformed observer than MSU should probably work on getting its FB program up to speed in the MVFC before worrying about getting the FB program up to speed with the WAC or anybody else. Might also want to work on that $1.4 million dollar deficit and 800+ attendance too.

by **SubGod22** » September 6th, 2011, 2:29 pm

Too committed :Bam:

by **Aargh** » September 6th, 2011, 3:34 pm

WSU has almost no options.

by **uniftw** » September 6th, 2011, 3:43 pm

SubGod22 wrote:Too committed

What options are there? The only hope for WSU and Creighton is that there is some very very big shake ups and the A10 and non football Big East schools form some sort of conference and are willing to let teams from this far west in.

I know you like your non-football athletic departments, and honestly it frees a lot of money up. However, these moves are all about football...which is why a school like Kansas could end up f-ed even though they have a football team. Without a football team schools like WSU and Creighton are almost worthless as a conference move partner

by **valleychamp** » September 6th, 2011, 4:05 pm

CaseyGarrisonforPrez wrote:From a Missouri State perspective, I think that the Valley has been okay for us. Not great. But not terrible. A good waiting room in between the Mid-Continent days and whatever lies in front of us. We would love to be in Conference USA because i think it fits better with what we are in the state of Missouri. According to various accounts, our AD nad administration has been in contact with Banowsky the CUSA commissioner on multiple occasions. There has been some talk of the Sun Belt, but I think we'd much prefer to stay in the Valley that suffer throught that. The other scenario that has been bandied about has been joining the WAC. They need schools and it could be a fit for football at the very least. At the women's soccer game with Kansas this last Friday, I heard from a good friend who is well tuned in to the happenings at MSU that we could very well stay in the Valley and then be a football only member of the WAC starting in 2015 or 2016 which would allow us to get the program up to speed.

As a school I think we are content right now, but we want bigger things and know that however things shake out with all of this realignment, we know that we will have several appealing options. It's at times like these that I wish that Bill Rowe, Barry Hinson, Coach Abe, Keith Guttin, and Randy Ball hadn't wrecked us up so much. But we are still in good shape. We occupy a large state and are in the third largest metropolitan area at that. We will land on our feet regardless.

LMAO

by **glm38** » September 6th, 2011, 6:12 pm

Unfortunately I think pretty much all of the MVC schools (including MSU) are fully committed - until a better offer comes along.

But I'm not sure those offers will come in the immediate future? There seem to be obstacles to most Valley schools moving up. And who wants to move down? Is a lateral move worth losing the rivalries we've built? Unlike some of my fellow MSU fans I'm not sure C-USA is a step up. At least not in basketball.

There seems to be a lot of shakeups among the power conferences though and it could filter down to us.

by **Haha** » September 6th, 2011, 6:22 pm

WSU and CU may have no value as far as other conferences are concerned but think about the valley without those two. I really wish WSU had football but since they don't I really wish they were in a league with that had zero schools with football. WSU, BU, CU, etc.

As for Garrisons comments, what exactly is MSU to Missouri as you put it?