Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Could FBS and FCS merge back into one tier?
Author Message
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 9,477
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 766
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #21
RE: Could FBS and FCS merge back into one tier?
(10-28-2015 02:43 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 02:07 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 12:56 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 11:34 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Would the differential in quality of play between the very best FBS program (say, Ohio St) and the very worst FCS program (say Miss. Valley St or Davidson, not sure which is worse) be much different than the differential between the very best DI men's basketball program (say, Kentucky) and the very worst DI men's basketball program (no idea? there are some very tiny gyms, though ... high school gyms) ??

I don't think it would be that much different.

I couldn't find a single top basketball program without a horrible loss to a bad school since 2008:

In 2008, Kentucky lost to VMI. In 2012, they lost to Robert Morris. In 2009, UNC lost to College of Charleston and East Tennessee State. Duke lost to Leheigh in 2012. In 2009, Syracuse lost to a D-2 school (Le Moyne), and in 2008 they lost to Cleveland State (who turned out to be pretty good that year, but hadn't been to an NCAA tournament in 20 years at that point). UConn lost to Yale last year. Louisville lost to Western Carolina in 2009 and Drexel in 2010. UCLA lost to Cal State Fullerton, Portland, and Long Beach State in 2009. UCLA also lost to Montana in 2010, Loyola Marymount in 2011, and Cal Poly in 2012.

In football the top teams don't play FCS schools very often, but their dominance against the worst 3 FBS conferences is arguably better than UK, IU, etc. dominance over bad FCS schools:

Since 1960, against current MAC, Sun Belt, C-USA, and FCS schools: Ohio State is 28-0, Michigan is 32-2, Notre Dame is 5-0, and Alabama is 61-9. If you take out Southern Miss and Louisiana Tech, Alabama is 32-2. These records don't include 8 games that Alabama & Ohio State forfeited due to NCAA violations.

You want dominance? Since 1960, Notre Dame is 52-12 against Big 12, MWC, and American conference schools not named Navy.

In short, great football programs have much bigger advantages than great basketball programs.

Thanks for the analysis.

But I wasn't necessarily talking just W-L. Hence why I said "program".


Yeah, Ohio St has a huge 100k+ stadium while some FCS schools have almost high school stadiums.

But then Kentucky, Louisville and some others play in 20k+ bball arenas while some DI bball programs literally are in high school-looking gyms.

Look beyond superficial stats like stadium size - it cost a hell of a lot less money to put together a successful basketball program. There are fewer players, fewer coaching positions, and a smaller facilities footprint. The fact that there are only 13 b-ball scholarships per school seems to level the playing field - there's simply more talent to go around after the big guys get their pick.

It's not even an issue of "talent to go around." It's an issue of luck.

Let's say you're a lower-level program in basketball. If you get lucky and have one player who develops into an All-American, you're practically a shoo-in for an at-large bid to the NCAA tournament. If you get 2 All-American candidates, you've got a legit shot at a Final Four run (see the Butler Bulldogs).

If you're a lower-level program in football, you could luck into 3 legit All-America candidates, and it will barely matter unless one is a QB. Example: last year Fresno had 3 draft picks from a team that went 6-8.
10-28-2015 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Could FBS and FCS merge back into one tier?
(10-28-2015 09:49 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 09:31 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  There are FCS schools masquerading as FBS.

There are FBS schools stuck in FCS.

Enforce the guidelines and the whole problem takes care of itself.

Other than Liberty, EKU and Jacksonville State are there any other schools who WANT to be FBS who have been denied a path? EKU still needs some budget work for their own sake.

As for enforcing the rules. Attendance criteria is arbitrary, NCAA knows that. There are 11 full members of the MAC that aren't Eastern Michigan.

EMU keeps its paperwork in order in compliance and no one cares to check it out.

What is the overall harm EMU creates to FBS?
Whatever harm there is, will be most pronounced on the 11 other MAC institutions. If EMU is some form of harm to the MAC, then 9 of the 11 can vote to expel them from the conference, maybe even replace them with an attractive FCS.

Yet the people in equity partnership with EMU do not consider them too harmful to remain in the partnership, absent some compelling evidence EMU isn't following the rules (and it has been asserted frequently they have a large corporate sponsor who makes a purchase every two years to keep them in compliance) then what motivation exists for the NCAA to tweak the rule to close the loophole?

The MAC tried to force EMU out a couple of times actually.

EMU's administration has never waivered in commitment to the MAC even if the school can't afford a true FBS commitment. One day an administration may choose to chart a different direction in athletics for the school.

The rules to play at the top level can change at anytime. This stability of pro sports isn't there in college sports. Every decade or so its a major upheaval whether realignment or changed governance rules or both.

Over the course of decades, the schools that commit the most resources are the ones that end up with the most success. Schools willing to spend extra to get a better coach. Memphis invested with Calapari and it paid big. SMU with Larry Brown put them on the map. Boise State paid money and kept Petersen around for a while.

If there is an FBS/FCS split there might be minimum athletic budget required for entering the top level (40 million) to join the new Division 1. Administrations are going to have to decide whether they are serious about Athletics or not.
10-28-2015 06:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #23
RE: Could FBS and FCS merge back into one tier?
(10-28-2015 02:43 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 02:07 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 12:56 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 11:34 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Would the differential in quality of play between the very best FBS program (say, Ohio St) and the very worst FCS program (say Miss. Valley St or Davidson, not sure which is worse) be much different than the differential between the very best DI men's basketball program (say, Kentucky) and the very worst DI men's basketball program (no idea? there are some very tiny gyms, though ... high school gyms) ??

I don't think it would be that much different.

I couldn't find a single top basketball program without a horrible loss to a bad school since 2008:

In 2008, Kentucky lost to VMI. In 2012, they lost to Robert Morris. In 2009, UNC lost to College of Charleston and East Tennessee State. Duke lost to Leheigh in 2012. In 2009, Syracuse lost to a D-2 school (Le Moyne), and in 2008 they lost to Cleveland State (who turned out to be pretty good that year, but hadn't been to an NCAA tournament in 20 years at that point). UConn lost to Yale last year. Louisville lost to Western Carolina in 2009 and Drexel in 2010. UCLA lost to Cal State Fullerton, Portland, and Long Beach State in 2009. UCLA also lost to Montana in 2010, Loyola Marymount in 2011, and Cal Poly in 2012.

In football the top teams don't play FCS schools very often, but their dominance against the worst 3 FBS conferences is arguably better than UK, IU, etc. dominance over bad FCS schools:

Since 1960, against current MAC, Sun Belt, C-USA, and FCS schools: Ohio State is 28-0, Michigan is 32-2, Notre Dame is 5-0, and Alabama is 61-9. If you take out Southern Miss and Louisiana Tech, Alabama is 32-2. These records don't include 8 games that Alabama & Ohio State forfeited due to NCAA violations.

You want dominance? Since 1960, Notre Dame is 52-12 against Big 12, MWC, and American conference schools not named Navy.

In short, great football programs have much bigger advantages than great basketball programs.

Thanks for the analysis.

But I wasn't necessarily talking just W-L. Hence why I said "program".


Yeah, Ohio St has a huge 100k+ stadium while some FCS schools have almost high school stadiums.

But then Kentucky, Louisville and some others play in 20k+ bball arenas while some DI bball programs literally are in high school-looking gyms.

Look beyond superficial stats like stadium size - it cost a hell of a lot less money to put together a successful basketball program. There are fewer players, fewer coaching positions, and a smaller facilities footprint. The fact that there are only 13 b-ball scholarships per school seems to level the playing field - there's simply more talent to go around after the big guys get their pick.

Another thing that levels the field more in hoops is that elite players (and those who just think they are) want to play right away and have many options. An elite HS point guard, unlike an elite linebacker, doesn't want to sit for 2 years before starting, he wants to be in the NBA by then. The top hoops programs can't warehouse freshman and sophomore talent like the top football programs do (and even in football it's more level now than it was in the old days when some teams had 100-plus players on scholarship).
10-28-2015 07:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,010
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Could FBS and FCS merge back into one tier?
(10-28-2015 02:43 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 02:07 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 12:56 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 11:34 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Would the differential in quality of play between the very best FBS program (say, Ohio St) and the very worst FCS program (say Miss. Valley St or Davidson, not sure which is worse) be much different than the differential between the very best DI men's basketball program (say, Kentucky) and the very worst DI men's basketball program (no idea? there are some very tiny gyms, though ... high school gyms) ??

I don't think it would be that much different.

I couldn't find a single top basketball program without a horrible loss to a bad school since 2008:

In 2008, Kentucky lost to VMI. In 2012, they lost to Robert Morris. In 2009, UNC lost to College of Charleston and East Tennessee State. Duke lost to Leheigh in 2012. In 2009, Syracuse lost to a D-2 school (Le Moyne), and in 2008 they lost to Cleveland State (who turned out to be pretty good that year, but hadn't been to an NCAA tournament in 20 years at that point). UConn lost to Yale last year. Louisville lost to Western Carolina in 2009 and Drexel in 2010. UCLA lost to Cal State Fullerton, Portland, and Long Beach State in 2009. UCLA also lost to Montana in 2010, Loyola Marymount in 2011, and Cal Poly in 2012.

In football the top teams don't play FCS schools very often, but their dominance against the worst 3 FBS conferences is arguably better than UK, IU, etc. dominance over bad FCS schools:

Since 1960, against current MAC, Sun Belt, C-USA, and FCS schools: Ohio State is 28-0, Michigan is 32-2, Notre Dame is 5-0, and Alabama is 61-9. If you take out Southern Miss and Louisiana Tech, Alabama is 32-2. These records don't include 8 games that Alabama & Ohio State forfeited due to NCAA violations.

You want dominance? Since 1960, Notre Dame is 52-12 against Big 12, MWC, and American conference schools not named Navy.

In short, great football programs have much bigger advantages than great basketball programs.

Thanks for the analysis.

But I wasn't necessarily talking just W-L. Hence why I said "program".


Yeah, Ohio St has a huge 100k+ stadium while some FCS schools have almost high school stadiums.

But then Kentucky, Louisville and some others play in 20k+ bball arenas while some DI bball programs literally are in high school-looking gyms.

Look beyond superficial stats like stadium size - it cost a hell of a lot less money to put together a successful basketball program. There are fewer players, fewer coaching positions, and a smaller facilities footprint. The fact that there are only 13 b-ball scholarships per school seems to level the playing field - there's simply more talent to go around after the big guys get their pick.


There are many HBCU schools that have the stadiums to be FBS.
Tennessee State and Jackson State have the largests that could be P5 stadium size. I think Tennessee State plays at the Titans' stadium.
Even several D2 schools could reach close to 30,000 and some at the lower end of FBS like North Alabama for seating.
10-29-2015 01:29 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LR Eagle Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 888
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 11
I Root For: USM
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Could FBS and FCS merge back into one tier?
(10-29-2015 01:29 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 02:43 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 02:07 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 12:56 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 11:34 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Would the differential in quality of play between the very best FBS program (say, Ohio St) and the very worst FCS program (say Miss. Valley St or Davidson, not sure which is worse) be much different than the differential between the very best DI men's basketball program (say, Kentucky) and the very worst DI men's basketball program (no idea? there are some very tiny gyms, though ... high school gyms) ??

I don't think it would be that much different.

I couldn't find a single top basketball program without a horrible loss to a bad school since 2008:

In 2008, Kentucky lost to VMI. In 2012, they lost to Robert Morris. In 2009, UNC lost to College of Charleston and East Tennessee State. Duke lost to Leheigh in 2012. In 2009, Syracuse lost to a D-2 school (Le Moyne), and in 2008 they lost to Cleveland State (who turned out to be pretty good that year, but hadn't been to an NCAA tournament in 20 years at that point). UConn lost to Yale last year. Louisville lost to Western Carolina in 2009 and Drexel in 2010. UCLA lost to Cal State Fullerton, Portland, and Long Beach State in 2009. UCLA also lost to Montana in 2010, Loyola Marymount in 2011, and Cal Poly in 2012.

In football the top teams don't play FCS schools very often, but their dominance against the worst 3 FBS conferences is arguably better than UK, IU, etc. dominance over bad FCS schools:

Since 1960, against current MAC, Sun Belt, C-USA, and FCS schools: Ohio State is 28-0, Michigan is 32-2, Notre Dame is 5-0, and Alabama is 61-9. If you take out Southern Miss and Louisiana Tech, Alabama is 32-2. These records don't include 8 games that Alabama & Ohio State forfeited due to NCAA violations.

You want dominance? Since 1960, Notre Dame is 52-12 against Big 12, MWC, and American conference schools not named Navy.

In short, great football programs have much bigger advantages than great basketball programs.

Thanks for the analysis.

But I wasn't necessarily talking just W-L. Hence why I said "program".


Yeah, Ohio St has a huge 100k+ stadium while some FCS schools have almost high school stadiums.

But then Kentucky, Louisville and some others play in 20k+ bball arenas while some DI bball programs literally are in high school-looking gyms.

Look beyond superficial stats like stadium size - it cost a hell of a lot less money to put together a successful basketball program. There are fewer players, fewer coaching positions, and a smaller facilities footprint. The fact that there are only 13 b-ball scholarships per school seems to level the playing field - there's simply more talent to go around after the big guys get their pick.


There are many HBCU schools that have the stadiums to be FBS.
Tennessee State and Jackson State have the largests that could be P5 stadium size. I think Tennessee State plays at the Titans' stadium.
Even several D2 schools could reach close to 30,000 and some at the lower end of FBS like North Alabama for seating.

Memorial Stadium is a decrepit dump. There's more to a stadium than just nunbers of seats.
10-29-2015 07:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Could FBS and FCS merge back into one tier?
(10-28-2015 03:32 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 02:43 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Look beyond superficial stats like stadium size - it cost a hell of a lot less money to put together a successful basketball program. There are fewer players, fewer coaching positions, and a smaller facilities footprint. The fact that there are only 13 b-ball scholarships per school seems to level the playing field - there's simply more talent to go around after the big guys get their pick.

It's not even an issue of "talent to go around." It's an issue of luck.

Let's say you're a lower-level program in basketball. If you get lucky and have one player who develops into an All-American, you're practically a shoo-in for an at-large bid to the NCAA tournament. If you get 2 All-American candidates, you've got a legit shot at a Final Four run (see the Butler Bulldogs).

If you're a lower-level program in football, you could luck into 3 legit All-America candidates, and it will barely matter unless one is a QB. Example: last year Fresno had 3 draft picks from a team that went 6-8.

(10-28-2015 07:01 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Another thing that levels the field more in hoops is that elite players (and those who just think they are) want to play right away and have many options. An elite HS point guard, unlike an elite linebacker, doesn't want to sit for 2 years before starting, he wants to be in the NBA by then. The top hoops programs can't warehouse freshman and sophomore talent like the top football programs do (and even in football it's more level now than it was in the old days when some teams had 100-plus players on scholarship).


Thanks for the responses, guys.

You are probably right. But I do want to add one more thing.


It seems to me that you guys are only making a case that it is (much) easier in basketball to go from the middle of the pack to a legitimate top 25 team.

But that's still not what I was pointing out.

I was pointing out that the range in "program level" between the top of the top and the bottom of the bottom in DI basketball and FCS+FBS football is not much different.

You have FBS programs at the top that generate millions of dollars, have millions of viewers, great attendance, etc. And you have FCS programs at the bottom that don't draw 1000 people and play in high school stadiums.

Likewise, you have programs at the top of DI basketball that generate millions of dollars, have millions of viewers, great attendance, etc. And you have programs at the bottom of DI basketball that don't draw 100 people and play in high school gyms.



I don't think any bottom DI bball program is suddenly going to land a top level player, even though I agree adding just one such player could get them into the big dance and maybe win a game.



And so, I guess my point is simply that no one seems to care that a fully integrated DI bball structure exists where teams with high school gyms exist in the same class as teams like Kentucky or Louisville that draw like NBA teams -- and so, why should it bother anyone if teams that play in high school stadiums are in the same class as teams like Ohio St or Alabama?
(This post was last modified: 10-29-2015 01:33 PM by MplsBison.)
10-29-2015 01:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,010
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Could FBS and FCS merge back into one tier?
(10-29-2015 07:17 AM)LR Eagle Wrote:  
(10-29-2015 01:29 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 02:43 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 02:07 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(10-28-2015 12:56 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I couldn't find a single top basketball program without a horrible loss to a bad school since 2008:

In 2008, Kentucky lost to VMI. In 2012, they lost to Robert Morris. In 2009, UNC lost to College of Charleston and East Tennessee State. Duke lost to Leheigh in 2012. In 2009, Syracuse lost to a D-2 school (Le Moyne), and in 2008 they lost to Cleveland State (who turned out to be pretty good that year, but hadn't been to an NCAA tournament in 20 years at that point). UConn lost to Yale last year. Louisville lost to Western Carolina in 2009 and Drexel in 2010. UCLA lost to Cal State Fullerton, Portland, and Long Beach State in 2009. UCLA also lost to Montana in 2010, Loyola Marymount in 2011, and Cal Poly in 2012.

In football the top teams don't play FCS schools very often, but their dominance against the worst 3 FBS conferences is arguably better than UK, IU, etc. dominance over bad FCS schools:

Since 1960, against current MAC, Sun Belt, C-USA, and FCS schools: Ohio State is 28-0, Michigan is 32-2, Notre Dame is 5-0, and Alabama is 61-9. If you take out Southern Miss and Louisiana Tech, Alabama is 32-2. These records don't include 8 games that Alabama & Ohio State forfeited due to NCAA violations.

You want dominance? Since 1960, Notre Dame is 52-12 against Big 12, MWC, and American conference schools not named Navy.

In short, great football programs have much bigger advantages than great basketball programs.

Thanks for the analysis.

But I wasn't necessarily talking just W-L. Hence why I said "program".


Yeah, Ohio St has a huge 100k+ stadium while some FCS schools have almost high school stadiums.

But then Kentucky, Louisville and some others play in 20k+ bball arenas while some DI bball programs literally are in high school-looking gyms.

Look beyond superficial stats like stadium size - it cost a hell of a lot less money to put together a successful basketball program. There are fewer players, fewer coaching positions, and a smaller facilities footprint. The fact that there are only 13 b-ball scholarships per school seems to level the playing field - there's simply more talent to go around after the big guys get their pick.


There are many HBCU schools that have the stadiums to be FBS.
Tennessee State and Jackson State have the largests that could be P5 stadium size. I think Tennessee State plays at the Titans' stadium.
Even several D2 schools could reach close to 30,000 and some at the lower end of FBS like North Alabama for seating.

Memorial Stadium is a decrepit dump. There's more to a stadium than just nunbers of seats.


UAB plays in a decrepit dump as well. Jackson State would benefit better if they are in the Sun Belt to help improve their stadium.
10-30-2015 02:28 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.