(02-17-2017 04:02 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(02-17-2017 03:57 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-17-2017 03:40 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-17-2017 02:59 PM)YNot Wrote:  Excuse my ignorance, but aren't there several FCS institutions that already operate at similar budgets to many of the Sun Belt, MAC, and C-USA schools? Especially recent call-ups like Charlotte, Old Dominion, Coastal Carolina, etc.

WEST: Montana, Montana St., NDSU, South Dakota St., (and Wichita St.)[Idaho and NMSU]
EAST: Liberty, JMU, Delaware, Jacksonville St., Youngstown St. [UMass]

Operating at the same level of weakest FBS teams is not really the test--nor should it be. It could be argued that those lowest level programs should be in jeopardy of being removed from FBS rather than serving as the bar to reach FBS status.

That's right. If a school wants a waiver of the conference-invitation rule, they should have to show that they have the resources to survive in FBS long-term as a football independent.

Having a budget that's one dollar more than that of some established FBS conference member — who has 8 or 9 guaranteed conference football games each year — is nowhere near enough to justify a waiver allowing a school to transition as an independent.

So what is the hurdle if a group of schools want to go FBS when they are now FCS together in a conference? With that kind of schedule already in place, the hurdle isn't nearly as much as going FBS as an independent.

Like a lot of things on this board, there are two different questions there: (1) What is a reasonable prediction of what the NCAA would do, and (2) What would you do if you were the dictator of the NCAA and didn't have to answer to anyone else.

For (1), while I doubt that any significant number of FCS schools are serious about moving to FBS, if a large number did try, I would predict that the prospect of 10, 20, or 30 schools wanting to join FBS without a conference invitation would be met with so much resistance that it could not happen. The money aspect would be one reason the NCAA could give for saying no -- they can say, "We gave a waiver to Liberty, their annual athletic budget is $39 million, if your athletic department's budget is $20 million, forget it, you're not even close."

IMO one very big issue is that the NCAA hates the prospect of any new Division I conferences that would seek autobids to NCAA championships (for basketball reasons of course). I would predict that the existing G5 conferences would also be hostile for football reasons, including that they see their share of CFP money as a static pool and any new FBS conference (or large number of new indies) would decrease the share of each existing G5 school, and (by increasing supply) would also lower the money received for each football "money game". Just one school, Liberty, moving into FBS is a far smaller issue to the NCAA and existing FBS members than the possibility of 10, 20, or 30 FCS teams trying to exploit the Liberty waiver as an excuse to drastically increase FBS membership. The FBS membership would see this as another undesirable "cash grab" like what happened when the basketball tournament TV money exploded and about a hundred new schools joined Division I just to get their hands on some of the March Madness loot.

As for (2), my personal opinion is that, in addition to NCAA obstacles, any school that tries to do this without enough money, in a half-assed way, would be making a gigantic mistake. Even if an athletic department doesn't need all of $39 MM/year (Liberty's current budget as an FCS member) to do this, they should be spending $30 MM/year in a sustainable way before trying to move to FBS. Don't move up to barely survive in FBS like, say, UL-Monroe. Start out with a median G5 budget, not a budget that's barely above the lowest. IMO, nearly all FCS presidents and ADs would agree with what I just wrote, and that's another reason why there won't be any serious attempt to turn the Liberty waiver into a loophole for many others to exploit.