Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
Author Message
Schadenfreude Offline
Professional Tractor Puller
*

Posts: 9,634
Joined: Jun 2003
Reputation: 238
I Root For: Bowling Green
Location: Colorado

CrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #61
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(04-30-2016 11:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(04-30-2016 02:07 PM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  
(04-30-2016 01:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  And the big decline in the MAC was when they expanded from 6 to 10 teams with 4 new members in the same footprint during the mid-70s. Maybe Illinois St. or Missouri St. could work if they were interested and able to move up to FBS, but not the rest of the MVC.

Neither Ball State nor Northern Illinois were within the MAC's footprint. Both grew the footprint, and both were good additions. (Ball State is not a major football power, but they have had their moments, and they have a good basketball following.)

Central Michigan was also a good addition. The Chippewas won several football championships soon after joining the conference, and they have remained competitive.

They all recruit the same territory and were moved up from Division II.

The MAC was regularly ranked until expansion-Ohio #20 '68, Toledo 12-'70 and 14-'71, Miami 15-'73, 10-'74 and 12-'75. Then they went 20 years before they were ranked again.

I know the history. But correlation does not mean causality. Expansion isn't the reason Miami went 3-8 in 1976. I don't know why MAC football seemed to take a step back in the late 1970s, but it could have been any number of reasons. Heck, the league didn't even have a bowl tie in during that era.

Ball State and Northern Illinois brought two new states to the conference. I can't see that as a bad thing.

As far as Michigan: You could argue against expansion there, but Central Michigan came in and competed right away, finishing second in 1977 and 1978 before finally winning the league title with a 10-0 record in 1979. Central Michigan was an asset, especially when you consider that Western Michigan had never done much in football.

In retrospect, it's fair to question whether the MAC should have added Eastern Michigan. Proponents would point to the limited basketball success and all the Olympic sport successes. Opponents would point to the football: One league title in 40 years and limited prospects for future success.
05-01-2016 10:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #62
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(04-30-2016 01:45 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(04-29-2016 06:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-29-2016 09:08 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 02:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-27-2016 08:35 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Most of the math used to justify FBS is shakey.

That's because football at EMU is surely a money drain, and also because keeping football isn't about the cold hard math, it's about intangibles, like boosters and administrators ego, wanting to front that the school is "big time" because it has a football team, no matter how lousy.

But you can't just come out and say that, so ... faulty math is concocted.

If you draw 29k over the course of the season you may want to look at whether the booster/fan ego is relevant.

My point was that one often hears from defenders of money-bleeding football programs that the intangible costs of dropping football would be greater than the actual costs of keeping it - i.e., stuff like lost prestige, lost booster ego pride, lower public profile, public perception that the school is diminishing, etc.

And with their results and fan support, it could be argued that keeping the program loses prestige, lowers booster pride, creates an embarrassing public profile and gives the impression that the school is diminishing.

Don't get me wrong. In most cases, such as in EMU's, I do not agree with those who defend keeping football on intangible costs grounds.
05-01-2016 11:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #63
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(04-30-2016 05:53 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(04-29-2016 06:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  My point was that one often hears from defenders of money-bleeding football programs that the intangible costs of dropping football would be greater than the actual costs of keeping it - i.e., stuff like lost prestige, lost booster ego pride, lower public profile, public perception that the school is diminishing, etc.
A principle intangible cost being whether they are seen as a peer of CMU and WMU or seen as a lesser school.

Which is why the discussion of which BBall conference EMU might join if they dropped out of the MAC is so relevant to whether EMU would voluntarily drop out of the MAC. Dropping out of the MAC to play in the Horizon League would be a clear and obvious drop in status.

Well, it's kind of like an old woman who used to be rich but now isn't and yet keeps spending money she doesn't have so she can walk the street with the trappings of wealth -expensive jewelry, purses, coats, cars, etc. - and thus keep up appearances. At a certain point, it makes sense to just give up the ghost ...
05-01-2016 11:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,099
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #64
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(05-01-2016 11:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-30-2016 05:53 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(04-29-2016 06:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  My point was that one often hears from defenders of money-bleeding football programs that the intangible costs of dropping football would be greater than the actual costs of keeping it - i.e., stuff like lost prestige, lost booster ego pride, lower public profile, public perception that the school is diminishing, etc.
A principle intangible cost being whether they are seen as a peer of CMU and WMU or seen as a lesser school.

Which is why the discussion of which BBall conference EMU might join if they dropped out of the MAC is so relevant to whether EMU would voluntarily drop out of the MAC. Dropping out of the MAC to play in the Horizon League would be a clear and obvious drop in status.

Well, it's kind of like an old woman who used to be rich but now isn't and yet keeps spending money she doesn't have so she can walk the street with the trappings of wealth -expensive jewelry, purses, coats, cars, etc. - and thus keep up appearances. At a certain point, it makes sense to just give up the ghost ...
I was discussing what was likely to happen. I wasn't addressing whether it make sense.

And if the funding is coming in large part from a share of the per credit hour activities fee, then given that EMU's enrollment is growing, the "keeps spending money she doesn't have" doesn't really apply.
05-01-2016 08:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #65
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(05-01-2016 08:20 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(05-01-2016 11:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-30-2016 05:53 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(04-29-2016 06:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  My point was that one often hears from defenders of money-bleeding football programs that the intangible costs of dropping football would be greater than the actual costs of keeping it - i.e., stuff like lost prestige, lost booster ego pride, lower public profile, public perception that the school is diminishing, etc.
A principle intangible cost being whether they are seen as a peer of CMU and WMU or seen as a lesser school.

Which is why the discussion of which BBall conference EMU might join if they dropped out of the MAC is so relevant to whether EMU would voluntarily drop out of the MAC. Dropping out of the MAC to play in the Horizon League would be a clear and obvious drop in status.

Well, it's kind of like an old woman who used to be rich but now isn't and yet keeps spending money she doesn't have so she can walk the street with the trappings of wealth -expensive jewelry, purses, coats, cars, etc. - and thus keep up appearances. At a certain point, it makes sense to just give up the ghost ...
I was discussing what was likely to happen. I wasn't addressing whether it make sense.

And if the funding is coming in large part from a share of the per credit hour activities fee, then given that EMU's enrollment is growing, the "keeps spending money she doesn't have" doesn't really apply.

If the football program spends more $$$$ than is brought in by those fees and other revenue, it does apply.
05-01-2016 10:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,099
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #66
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(05-01-2016 10:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the football program spends more $$$$ than is brought in by those fees and other revenue, it does apply.
If the University is spending money they have, then people can question whether they are spending it wisely, but it still is not the same as spending money they do not have.
05-02-2016 12:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #67
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
I agree. EMU does not have the money to continue FBS. They would be the first Michigan school in the FCS if they dropped down.
05-02-2016 05:45 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #68
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(05-02-2016 05:45 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  I agree. EMU does not have the money to continue FBS. They would be the first Michigan school in the FCS if they dropped down.

Wayne State plays football in Division II, and they are a successful public university - good enrollment, good research and faculty, etc.
05-02-2016 07:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #69
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(05-02-2016 12:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(05-01-2016 10:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the football program spends more $$$$ than is brought in by those fees and other revenue, it does apply.
If the University is spending money they have, then people can question whether they are spending it wisely, but it still is not the same as spending money they do not have.

Point taken. Should have been more careful with my wording. EMU is soaking its regular students to fund athletics. In that, they are far from alone, but they might be the worst example right now.
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2016 01:45 PM by quo vadis.)
05-02-2016 01:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 34,240
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #70
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(05-02-2016 01:43 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-02-2016 12:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(05-01-2016 10:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the football program spends more $$$$ than is brought in by those fees and other revenue, it does apply.
If the University is spending money they have, then people can question whether they are spending it wisely, but it still is not the same as spending money they do not have.

Point taken. Should have been more careful with my wording. EMU is soaking its regular students to fund athletics. In that, they are far from alone, but they might be the worst example right now.

I wonder what their tuition costs are compared to the other schools. If tuition is noticeably less, then even extra fees for athletics and other stuff doesn't make the price uncompetitive. They are, after all, increasing in enrollment, from what I've heard.
05-02-2016 04:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sultan of Euphonistan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,999
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation: 80
I Root For: Baritones
Location: The Euphonistan Tree
Post: #71
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(05-02-2016 04:29 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  
(05-02-2016 01:43 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-02-2016 12:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(05-01-2016 10:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the football program spends more $$$$ than is brought in by those fees and other revenue, it does apply.
If the University is spending money they have, then people can question whether they are spending it wisely, but it still is not the same as spending money they do not have.

Point taken. Should have been more careful with my wording. EMU is soaking its regular students to fund athletics. In that, they are far from alone, but they might be the worst example right now.

I wonder what their tuition costs are compared to the other schools. If tuition is noticeably less, then even extra fees for athletics and other stuff doesn't make the price uncompetitive. They are, after all, increasing in enrollment, from what I've heard.

That is one thing I have noticed is that people look at the percentage of subsidy but not the amount they pay. I remember I looked at Kent State's fee that in part pays for football and even though the subsidy percentage was more than some schools the amount they were paying in that subsidy was actually less than these other schools (and I am talking about G5 schools). So that money was more important to Kent's efforts but they were putting less of a burden on the student than these other schools that had a higher subsidy but it made up less of their overall budget.
05-02-2016 07:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UpStreamRedTeam Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,844
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #72
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(04-28-2016 07:34 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:17 AM)Chappy Wrote:  In my opinion the FBS requirement should be 20,000 an average tickets sold for an entire conference OR 25,000 tickets sold for FBS independence.

Whether or not EMU should stay in FBS is really not my business, but that of the school and the MAC. That said, I just don't understand how they can sustain the costs of running an FBS program with less than 10,000 people at their games.


I was thinking of 2 tiers at the FBS level. You have to sell 30,000 tickets to be tier 1. This would boot Duke and Wake Forest out of the P5 into tier 2 level. Tier 2 is where you have to sell between 12,000 to 29,000 tickets. Some D2 schools do fit in that category. Big Sky, MVFC, Southland, OVC, CAA fit in this area plus schools like Liberty and so forth. West Texas A&M, North Alabama and some others could fit.
Tier 3 is for schools that cant afford to go to tier 2. That would be the SWAC, MEAC, Big South and so forth. Some D2 schools could be added at this level.
Tier 4 is for conferences like the Ivy League and Pioneer. Several D3 schools could be brought up in certain parts of the country. San Diego could play schools like Redlands, CMS, Laverne, Linfield, Pacific Lutheran, Puget Sound, Willamette, and so forth. Colorado College, Southwestern, Trinity Texas, and some others could go here as will along with Johns Hopkins, Birmingham Southern, and several others in key areas. You could create new conferences with tier 4 called Pioneer League.

Based on 2015 attendance, there is exactly one DII school (Grand Valley State) and 16 FCS schools that would qualify for Tier 2.
06-06-2016 12:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,007
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 655
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #73
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(06-06-2016 12:38 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:34 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:17 AM)Chappy Wrote:  In my opinion the FBS requirement should be 20,000 an average tickets sold for an entire conference OR 25,000 tickets sold for FBS independence.

Whether or not EMU should stay in FBS is really not my business, but that of the school and the MAC. That said, I just don't understand how they can sustain the costs of running an FBS program with less than 10,000 people at their games.


I was thinking of 2 tiers at the FBS level. You have to sell 30,000 tickets to be tier 1. This would boot Duke and Wake Forest out of the P5 into tier 2 level. Tier 2 is where you have to sell between 12,000 to 29,000 tickets. Some D2 schools do fit in that category. Big Sky, MVFC, Southland, OVC, CAA fit in this area plus schools like Liberty and so forth. West Texas A&M, North Alabama and some others could fit.
Tier 3 is for schools that cant afford to go to tier 2. That would be the SWAC, MEAC, Big South and so forth. Some D2 schools could be added at this level.
Tier 4 is for conferences like the Ivy League and Pioneer. Several D3 schools could be brought up in certain parts of the country. San Diego could play schools like Redlands, CMS, Laverne, Linfield, Pacific Lutheran, Puget Sound, Willamette, and so forth. Colorado College, Southwestern, Trinity Texas, and some others could go here as will along with Johns Hopkins, Birmingham Southern, and several others in key areas. You could create new conferences with tier 4 called Pioneer League.

Based on 2015 attendance, there is exactly one DII school (Grand Valley State) and 16 FCS schools that would qualify for Tier 2.


Please do not insert reality into David's posts
06-06-2016 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UpStreamRedTeam Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,844
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #74
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(06-06-2016 12:46 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  
(06-06-2016 12:38 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:34 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:17 AM)Chappy Wrote:  In my opinion the FBS requirement should be 20,000 an average tickets sold for an entire conference OR 25,000 tickets sold for FBS independence.

Whether or not EMU should stay in FBS is really not my business, but that of the school and the MAC. That said, I just don't understand how they can sustain the costs of running an FBS program with less than 10,000 people at their games.


I was thinking of 2 tiers at the FBS level. You have to sell 30,000 tickets to be tier 1. This would boot Duke and Wake Forest out of the P5 into tier 2 level. Tier 2 is where you have to sell between 12,000 to 29,000 tickets. Some D2 schools do fit in that category. Big Sky, MVFC, Southland, OVC, CAA fit in this area plus schools like Liberty and so forth. West Texas A&M, North Alabama and some others could fit.
Tier 3 is for schools that cant afford to go to tier 2. That would be the SWAC, MEAC, Big South and so forth. Some D2 schools could be added at this level.
Tier 4 is for conferences like the Ivy League and Pioneer. Several D3 schools could be brought up in certain parts of the country. San Diego could play schools like Redlands, CMS, Laverne, Linfield, Pacific Lutheran, Puget Sound, Willamette, and so forth. Colorado College, Southwestern, Trinity Texas, and some others could go here as will along with Johns Hopkins, Birmingham Southern, and several others in key areas. You could create new conferences with tier 4 called Pioneer League.

Based on 2015 attendance, there is exactly one DII school (Grand Valley State) and 16 FCS schools that would qualify for Tier 2.


Please do not insert reality into David's posts

My apologies.
06-06-2016 01:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #75
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(06-06-2016 12:38 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:34 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:17 AM)Chappy Wrote:  In my opinion the FBS requirement should be 20,000 an average tickets sold for an entire conference OR 25,000 tickets sold for FBS independence.

Whether or not EMU should stay in FBS is really not my business, but that of the school and the MAC. That said, I just don't understand how they can sustain the costs of running an FBS program with less than 10,000 people at their games.


I was thinking of 2 tiers at the FBS level. You have to sell 30,000 tickets to be tier 1. This would boot Duke and Wake Forest out of the P5 into tier 2 level. Tier 2 is where you have to sell between 12,000 to 29,000 tickets. Some D2 schools do fit in that category. Big Sky, MVFC, Southland, OVC, CAA fit in this area plus schools like Liberty and so forth. West Texas A&M, North Alabama and some others could fit.
Tier 3 is for schools that cant afford to go to tier 2. That would be the SWAC, MEAC, Big South and so forth. Some D2 schools could be added at this level.
Tier 4 is for conferences like the Ivy League and Pioneer. Several D3 schools could be brought up in certain parts of the country. San Diego could play schools like Redlands, CMS, Laverne, Linfield, Pacific Lutheran, Puget Sound, Willamette, and so forth. Colorado College, Southwestern, Trinity Texas, and some others could go here as will along with Johns Hopkins, Birmingham Southern, and several others in key areas. You could create new conferences with tier 4 called Pioneer League.

Based on 2015 attendance, there is exactly one DII school (Grand Valley State) and 16 FCS schools that would qualify for Tier 2.


I was going back 10 years based on attendance. Tuskegee would qualified as tier 2 since one year they averaged like close to 15,000. West Texas A&M and North Alabama would meet the mark if they were playing against D1 schools.
06-06-2016 08:51 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 11,898
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 502
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #76
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(06-06-2016 08:51 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(06-06-2016 12:38 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:34 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:17 AM)Chappy Wrote:  In my opinion the FBS requirement should be 20,000 an average tickets sold for an entire conference OR 25,000 tickets sold for FBS independence.

Whether or not EMU should stay in FBS is really not my business, but that of the school and the MAC. That said, I just don't understand how they can sustain the costs of running an FBS program with less than 10,000 people at their games.


I was thinking of 2 tiers at the FBS level. You have to sell 30,000 tickets to be tier 1. This would boot Duke and Wake Forest out of the P5 into tier 2 level. Tier 2 is where you have to sell between 12,000 to 29,000 tickets. Some D2 schools do fit in that category. Big Sky, MVFC, Southland, OVC, CAA fit in this area plus schools like Liberty and so forth. West Texas A&M, North Alabama and some others could fit.
Tier 3 is for schools that cant afford to go to tier 2. That would be the SWAC, MEAC, Big South and so forth. Some D2 schools could be added at this level.
Tier 4 is for conferences like the Ivy League and Pioneer. Several D3 schools could be brought up in certain parts of the country. San Diego could play schools like Redlands, CMS, Laverne, Linfield, Pacific Lutheran, Puget Sound, Willamette, and so forth. Colorado College, Southwestern, Trinity Texas, and some others could go here as will along with Johns Hopkins, Birmingham Southern, and several others in key areas. You could create new conferences with tier 4 called Pioneer League.

Based on 2015 attendance, there is exactly one DII school (Grand Valley State) and 16 FCS schools that would qualify for Tier 2.


I was going back 10 years based on attendance. Tuskegee would qualified as tier 2 since one year they averaged like close to 15,000. West Texas A&M and North Alabama would meet the mark if they were playing against D1 schools.

Trump U would get 15,000 if they played D-1 schools David.
Cheers!
06-06-2016 09:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #77
RE: EMU Regents say: We're not eliminating football, we're not leaving the MAC
(06-06-2016 09:09 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(06-06-2016 08:51 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(06-06-2016 12:38 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:34 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(04-28-2016 07:17 AM)Chappy Wrote:  In my opinion the FBS requirement should be 20,000 an average tickets sold for an entire conference OR 25,000 tickets sold for FBS independence.

Whether or not EMU should stay in FBS is really not my business, but that of the school and the MAC. That said, I just don't understand how they can sustain the costs of running an FBS program with less than 10,000 people at their games.


I was thinking of 2 tiers at the FBS level. You have to sell 30,000 tickets to be tier 1. This would boot Duke and Wake Forest out of the P5 into tier 2 level. Tier 2 is where you have to sell between 12,000 to 29,000 tickets. Some D2 schools do fit in that category. Big Sky, MVFC, Southland, OVC, CAA fit in this area plus schools like Liberty and so forth. West Texas A&M, North Alabama and some others could fit.
Tier 3 is for schools that cant afford to go to tier 2. That would be the SWAC, MEAC, Big South and so forth. Some D2 schools could be added at this level.
Tier 4 is for conferences like the Ivy League and Pioneer. Several D3 schools could be brought up in certain parts of the country. San Diego could play schools like Redlands, CMS, Laverne, Linfield, Pacific Lutheran, Puget Sound, Willamette, and so forth. Colorado College, Southwestern, Trinity Texas, and some others could go here as will along with Johns Hopkins, Birmingham Southern, and several others in key areas. You could create new conferences with tier 4 called Pioneer League.

Based on 2015 attendance, there is exactly one DII school (Grand Valley State) and 16 FCS schools that would qualify for Tier 2.


I was going back 10 years based on attendance. Tuskegee would qualified as tier 2 since one year they averaged like close to 15,000. West Texas A&M and North Alabama would meet the mark if they were playing against D1 schools.

Trump U would get 15,000 if they played D-1 schools David.
Cheers!


Trump U. is a scam university and so is Donald Trump. I wish they both just go away.
06-06-2016 10:24 PM
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.