June 12, 2013 12:46 pm ET

So now realignment has stopped.

The ACC's grant of rights two months ago effectively pumped the brakes on big-conference poaching, but one decision still loomed: Conference USA possibly going from 14 to 16 teams. Commissioner Britton Banowsky spoke extensively about this to me in April.

But C-USA presidents decided not to pursue a 16-team model for the foreseeable future as CBSSports.com first reported Tuesday. This closes the door on small-conference moves and probably limits the number of FCS schools transitioning into the College Football Playoff revenue pie.

The Sun Belt seems OK with this.

Sun Belt Commissioner Karl Benson told me today he spoke with Banowsky on Tuesday and is “pleased to see the announcement.” The Sun Belt is losing FIU, FAU, North Texas, Middle Tennessee to Western Kentucky to C-USA in the next two years. In March, the Sun Belt back-filled with Appalachian State and Georgia Southern.

“Hopefully this will allow both C-USA and the Sun Belt to go forward in a stable way and allow both conferences to focus on competition rather than membership,” Benson said.

The Sun Belt will be an 11-team league starting July 1, 2014, Benson said, and though a 12-team model is “still a possibility,” the league won't further evaluate the issue until after the first of the year.

Maybe then someone like Liberty will get the call and make the difficult, often costly move to FBS. But for now, all 10 conferences appear stable.


http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... sion-pause

Your link doesn't work.

Sounds good to me, we either state our intentions now or forever hold our tounges. Still think we'll hear something after the July 1 dateline. JMU wont say anything until then, however it does sound like they are gonna be left with the other wall flowers of FBS wanna b's.

(06-12-2013 03:05 PM)JMUsince89 Wrote:  Sounds good to me, we either state our intentions now or forever hold our tounges. Still think we'll hear something after the July 1 dateline. JMU wont say anything until then, however it does sound like they are gonna be left with the other wall flowers of FBS wanna b's.

FBS wanna b's? You could make the argument that the JMU Administration hasn't expressed any real desire to play FBS football.

All of the rumors/comments on these boards for the last two-three years are just speculation mixed in with sporadic insider information. The powers at be at JMU have been very mum about their intentions for 'big boy' football, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Try this:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...sion-pause

(06-12-2013 03:05 PM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  Your link doesn't work.

Try This Link

Someone posted this over at CAAZone as well. Here's what I said there:

potus#4;1896288 Wrote:Silly article. There's no way the sunbelt wants to stay at 11 members. And the alleged coast-to-coast stability is an illusion. It could happen, but the faith in all those grant of rights agreements is misplaced. If they're an indication that all these schools are truly done looking and listening - period - then I suppose that could lead to great stability. But there's a very strong possibility that public schools such as UVa and VaTech have been advised by legal council that these agreements are unenforceable against public schools without prior approval of the state legislature. All it will take is one "offer we couldn't refuse" to start the dominoes falling all over again.

The truth is, JMU's FBS opportunities have always been limited, and they still are. That's what happens when you are at the bottom of the food chain. IMO, there's no doubt that the SB opportunity is still out there if JMU wishes to go in that direction. I'm not so confident about any of the other semi-realistic options - at least not in the next year or so.

Your right only the board posters and JMU supporters have expressed the desire to move up to FBS. JMU's admin has been mum on this with only the blurb by JB that JMU would move up in 18 months. No other outputs from our leaders since. I was just making the point we may have waited too long to get the invite all of us were looking for. Doors seem to be closing radiply now, but we dont know what has been said and what has been promised yet either by powers that be. I would hate for JMU to be like Liberty and stand there waving arms saying "pick me,,, pick me"!!!!! just sayin'.

Perhaps this is what the JMU Admin want? If the door closes, they can then get away with the "hey, we tried" excuse.

(06-12-2013 03:24 PM)JMUsince89 Wrote:  Your right only the board posters and JMU supporters have expressed the desire to move up to FBS. JMU's admin has been mum on this with only the blurb by JB that JMU would move up in 18 months. No other outputs from our leaders since. I was just making the point we may have waited too long to get the invite all of us were looking for. Doors seem to be closing radiply now, but we dont know what has been said and what has been promised yet either by powers that be. I would hate for JMU to be like Liberty and stand there waving arms saying "pick me,,, pick me"!!!!! just sayin'.

Except that the powers at be at JMU aren't saying "pick me...pick me!"
Only the posters on this board are doing that. The decision makers at JMU are more along the lines "Yeah, we're thinking about it, but we don't like the costs of moving up and the thought of being in a conference with Texas State and UL-Lafayette."

(06-12-2013 03:18 PM)POTUS#4 Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 03:05 PM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  Your link doesn't work.

Try This Link

Someone posted this over at CAAZone as well. Here's what I said there:

potus#4;1896288 Wrote:Silly article. There's no way the sunbelt wants to stay at 11 members. And the alleged coast-to-coast stability is an illusion. It could happen, but the faith in all those grant of rights agreements is misplaced. If they're an indication that all these schools are truly done looking and listening - period - then I suppose that could lead to great stability. But there's a very strong possibility that public schools such as UVa and VaTech have been advised by legal council that these agreements are unenforceable against public schools without prior approval of the state legislature. All it will take is one "offer we couldn't refuse" to start the dominoes falling all over again.

The truth is, JMU's FBS opportunities have always been limited, and they still are. That's what happens when you are at the bottom of the food chain. IMO, there's no doubt that the SB opportunity is still out there if JMU wishes to go in that direction. I'm not so confident about any of the other semi-realistic options - at least not in the next year or so.

Interesting thought about public schools. I think the Maryland / ACC suits will offer some insight there.

(06-12-2013 03:27 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  Perhaps this is what the JMU Admin want? If the door closes, they can then get away with the "hey, we tried" excuse.

If this is what we end up finally hearing from the admin, I'm 100% certain they will also hear the same in return from fans, thousands of them... " Hey, we tried to give you the benefit of doubt and time to make the move and you didn't. We will no longer try either."

If JMU publicly says they tried and there are no options, thousands will take that as one huge fib and the season tic collapse starts. If any of you here think 25K will continue to pay the higher and higher prices and donations to watch us play C Cn St, St, Fran, and an ever weakening CAA while all around us we are passed by, you are somking far too much purple something. I hope this never comes, but fear more each month that it just well may be our "future."

(06-12-2013 03:27 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  Perhaps this is what the JMU Admin want? If the door closes, they can then get away with the "hey, we tried" excuse.

Yea, but wait for the backlash on their "failed" attempt or lack there of.....

(06-12-2013 04:15 PM)PiKappDuke Wrote:  If JMU publicly says they tried and there are no options, thousands will take that as one huge fib and the season tic collapse starts.

First, define "season ticket collapse" with a specific number. Second, give me a specific timeframe in which you expect that to happen. Because I'll probably take you up on that if you want to make it a bet, depending on your answers.

(06-12-2013 03:27 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  Perhaps this is what the JMU Admin want? If the door closes, they can then get away with the "hey, we tried" excuse.

This notion has been thrown out for years by many...the admin can't wait until the doors close, case closed. I go back and forth on what I believe.

It's hard to believe that intelligent people would build a $75M half finished fcs football stadium with luxury suites and a 70 ft video board.

What I think is happening. JMU built the stadium with FBS intentions "someday" and the window opened sooner than expected during president turnover...or put another way, JMU's admin, AD and BOV were caught UNPREPARED. Because all of the "leaders" fit this categorization and all are members of the "good 'ol boys" club nobody is accountable, JMU status quo.

Carr may be a half hearted swing for the fence or more likley a "we tried" excuse, please pick up the check.

(06-12-2013 05:34 PM)Jay M. Youix Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 04:15 PM)PiKappDuke Wrote:  If JMU publicly says they tried and there are no options, thousands will take that as one huge fib and the season tic collapse starts.

First, define "season ticket collapse" with a specific number. Second, give me a specific timeframe in which you expect that to happen. Because I'll probably take you up on that if you want to make it a bet, depending on your answers.

You may not agree with the post but don't take me for dumb. I would never make a bet with a stranger over the net. It stuns me that some of the posters here do just that. As far as define goes, I don't know. Never claimed to give specifics. The post is intended to provide an opinion that says tic sales will decline and so will donations if we stay IAA. I believe that is a definate if we stay IAA. Likely over the course of a few years time.

Or....just maybe....just maybe....they (the JMU Administration) are still doing what they do best....stay tight lipped and require whoever they are negotiating with to do the same. Please stop believing everything the media has to say. Its not that they are lying, they simply don't know everything they think they do.

We didn't have a clue the WVU game was going to happen until the papers were signed. That information came from left field and the boards went crazy within minutes.

(06-12-2013 06:28 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  Or....just maybe....just maybe....they (the JMU Administration) are still doing what they do best....stay tight lipped and require whoever they are negotiating with to do the same. Please stop believing everything the media has to say. Its not that they are lying, they simply don't know everything they think they do.

We didn't have a clue the WVU game was going to happen until the papers were signed. That information came from left field and the boards went crazy within minutes.

We shall know soon enough - one thing we posters have on our side this last round is we will know the answer if the admin comnunicates verbal or not

(06-12-2013 03:27 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  Perhaps this is what the JMU Admin want? If the door closes, they can then get away with the "hey, we tried" excuse.

Get away with that excuse with who? All the purple seats in Bridgeforth Stadium?

(06-12-2013 06:26 PM)PiKappDuke Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 05:34 PM)Jay M. Youix Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 04:15 PM)PiKappDuke Wrote:  If JMU publicly says they tried and there are no options, thousands will take that as one huge fib and the season tic collapse starts.

First, define "season ticket collapse" with a specific number. Second, give me a specific timeframe in which you expect that to happen. Because I'll probably take you up on that if you want to make it a bet, depending on your answers.

You may not agree with the post but don't take me for dumb. I would never make a bet with a stranger over the net. It stuns me that some of the posters here do just that. As far as define goes, I don't know. Never claimed to give specifics. The post is intended to provide an opinion that says tic sales will decline and so will donations if we stay IAA. I believe that is a definate if we stay IAA. Likely over the course of a few years time.

I agree with Pikapp, but it appears that tic sales have already declined and donations do not seem to be on the rise from what I have been told. I have posed that question on this board before. But he is right; it will only get worse.