Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
EagNBran Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,833
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location:
Post: #1
FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
12-31-2016 09:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bit_9 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 10,964
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 297
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #2
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
sign me up.
12-31-2016 09:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Migser31 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 328
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 18
I Root For: UTSA
Location:
Post: #3
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
So who are the 29 teams and what happens to the conferences, and left over teams, that get decimated? Relegation and Elevation, has to be in there as well. You can't limit it and lock it up forever, you'll get the FTC after you for unfair trade practices. There is some merit to this, but the NCAA doesn't have the balls to truly police this and I can't see it ever being implemented.
12-31-2016 09:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AndreWhere Offline
Banned

Posts: 6,189
Joined: Dec 2009
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: DunwoodY
Post: #4
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
If the NCAA would enforce some perfectly reasonable attendance rules, we'd be back to the status quo ante as of about 1999, and USM would still be relevant.
12-31-2016 09:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lumber Eagle Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 56
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 5
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #5
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
I'm officially dumber
12-31-2016 09:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
FIU4Ever Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 2,800
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: FIU
Location:
Post: #6
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
(12-31-2016 09:38 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  If the NCAA would enforce some perfectly reasonable attendance rules, we'd be back to the status quo ante as of about 1999, and USM would still be relevant.

The "relevance" of USM is dependent on the attendance of other programs?
12-31-2016 10:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


KNIGHTTIME Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,511
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 308
I Root For: '17 Natty Champ
Location:
Post: #7
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
(12-31-2016 10:11 AM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  
(12-31-2016 09:38 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  If the NCAA would enforce some perfectly reasonable attendance rules, we'd be back to the status quo ante as of about 1999, and USM would still be relevant.

The "relevance" of USM is dependent on the attendance of other programs?

I think he is saying if there was a threshold of say 25k per game that Southern Miss would be included with a revelant grouping of teams. In the 90's they were very relevant. I watched them beat Alabama on espn and ranked in the top 25 many times.
12-31-2016 10:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ThreeifbyLightning Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,885
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 370
I Root For: Univ of Middle Tennessee
Location:
Post: #8
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
In other words, this USM fan is scared of competition. Basically, new schools moving up to I-A have stolen recruits away that otherwise would have went to USM. USM is the Radio Shack of college football. Unable to adapt to the times and begin to go by the wayside.

With that said, I do agree with the premise of limiting I-A teams (just not for the reason that this USM fan does).

When Middle Tennessee made the move up we had to meet numerous criteria that don't exist anymore including both attendance and stadium size. There needs to be some criteria in place and to that I agree with the writer.
12-31-2016 11:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
monarx Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,382
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 268
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #9
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
The P5 are pushing hard for fewer teams and are well in their way to cutting it back to 64.
12-31-2016 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
galojah Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,713
Joined: Aug 2003
Reputation: 100
I Root For: WKU & NC State
Location: Raleigh, NC

Donators
Post: #10
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
I am not sure why attendance is always the measuring stick for a successful, competing, program. Just because a program doesn't have 30,000 fans, doesn't mean it is an unsuccessful or unworthy program.

WKU has had its attendance struggles. But, does that make WKU unworthy of being FBS? Our record and performance on the field would say otherwise.

If a program can financially and competitively compete then they should have a chance. Survival of the fittest. I just hate arbitrary ceilings and requirements just to eliminate.

The bigger issue is the subsidy of football that many Universities are providing (WKU included.) If you want to look at a real problem with lower-level FBS, look at how much money is being spent from tuition and state dollars (if allowed) to support a program that cannot support itself. That is what is alarming and should perhaps send some schools down to FCS.

I love athletics, but let's not forget what the primary purpose of our insitutions is -- educate.
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2016 11:32 AM by galojah.)
12-31-2016 11:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WKUApollo Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 6,518
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 699
I Root For: WKU Hilltoppers
Location:
Post: #11
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
Attendance? LOL.

Why choose 25,000 as a cutoff? The top 30 average starts at around 50,000. They laugh at 25,000.

Oh wait....The top 10 average around 100,000 and more. They giggle at 50,000 and belly laugh at 25,000.
12-31-2016 11:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


goliath74 Offline
5318008
*

Posts: 8,945
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 558
I Root For: FAU, FSU
Location: Hollywood, Florida
Post: #12
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
That's 5 minutes of my life I will never get back.
12-31-2016 12:06 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
T_Won1 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,987
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 91
I Root For: Louisiana Tech
Location: Dallas, TX
Post: #13
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
(12-31-2016 11:18 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  USM is the Radio Shack of college football. Unable to adapt to the times and begin to go by the wayside.

04-bow
12-31-2016 12:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ECBrad Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,533
Joined: Apr 2014
Reputation: 57
I Root For: ECU
Location: Auckland, NZ
Post: #14
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
This is an attendance list from a year ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/4i..._rankings/

If you assume the data is correct you could set the cutoff at 20k and end up with 99 teams.

If you wanted it to be 15k you'd lose 9 teams.

25k would leave us with only 82 teams, this would probably remove most of the criticisms about undersupported teams but would also lose some valuable schools. The Mountain West would be left with 3 schools (maybe 4 if CSU was having even a marginally down year), C-USA would have 2. The MAC and the Sunbelt would be gone entirely. Only the AAC would come out reasonably in tact with 9 teams remaining. At that point I suppose Marshall and USM would be absorbed into the AAC and the MWC schools to the PAC. Army ND and BYU would be the remaining independents. Also in this scenario there are no losses for P5 conferences.
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2016 12:16 PM by ECBrad.)
12-31-2016 12:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dawgxas Offline
#FreeDeb025

Posts: 6,874
Joined: Jan 2015
I Root For: Louisiana Tech
Location:
Post: #15
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
(12-31-2016 09:38 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  If the NCAA would enforce some perfectly reasonable attendance rules, we'd be back to the status quo ante as of about 1999, and USM would still be relevant.

In CUSA 2.0? USM was still not relevant on the national scene and neither was Tech. If relevant do you mean being associate with some stronger FBS programs yes, but USM was still ignored by the national sports media.

I get it, This writer wants to turn back time when USM was in a stronger G5, have not conference. I agree with the sentiment that there are too many FBS programs that are a drain on their Universities with little support.
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2016 12:15 PM by Dawgxas.)
12-31-2016 12:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ODUalum78 Offline
Overseer of the Unwashed Masses
*

Posts: 9,325
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 158
I Root For: ODU
Location: Chesterfield, Va

Lion's Den Poster of the Year
Post: #16
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
(12-31-2016 12:14 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  
(12-31-2016 09:38 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  If the NCAA would enforce some perfectly reasonable attendance rules, we'd be back to the status quo ante as of about 1999, and USM would still be relevant.

In CUSA 2.0? USM was still not relevant on the national scene and neither was Tech. If relevant do you mean being associate with some stronger FBS programs yes, but USM was still ignored by the national sports media.

I get it, This writer wants to turn back time when USM was in a stronger G5, have not conference. I agree with the sentiment that there are too many FBS programs that are a drain on their Universities with little support.

I suspect that more than a few FBS school admins would love to move down due to overwhelming costs, and would jump at the chance to be able to blame it on NCAA rules to their ADs and Donors.
12-31-2016 12:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


galojah Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,713
Joined: Aug 2003
Reputation: 100
I Root For: WKU & NC State
Location: Raleigh, NC

Donators
Post: #17
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
(12-31-2016 12:22 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  I suspect that more than a few FBS school admins would love to move down due to overwhelming costs, and would jump at the chance to be able to blame it on NCAA rules to their ADs and Donors.

I'd say you are right. Even as a diehard fan that I am, I am uneasy about the amount of money WKU funnels to athletics.
12-31-2016 12:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HogDawg Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,354
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 549
I Root For: LA Tech
Location: FranklinTNMcKinneyTX
Post: #18
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
(12-31-2016 09:13 AM)EagNBran Wrote:  https://southernmiss.rivals.com/news/fbs...mpionships

I LOVE it! Especially the part about forcing some programs who routinely have 7 and 8 home games a year to go on the road and win. That's LONG overdue, and it would give the rest of us a much better chance.

Quote:If the NCAA is truly concerned about the overall health of FBS football and not just those teams at the very top (from a budge perspective) they should place a 10 year moratorium on the addition of any new FBS teams.

The second step would be to install attendance standards at the FBS level. A good starting point would be 20,000 paid or actual per game with a minimum of six home games.

If this would have been enforced over the previous three years roughly 25 teams would be relegated to FCS level and Coast Carolina would not meet the 15,000 transition period average to move up.

In all likelihood the number of FBS team would stabilize around 96-100. This would allowed reorganization into seven conferences and a truly equitable 12-team play-off system could be installed. Each league champion receiving an automatic bid with five at-large bids to follow.

This would also allow a reduction in the overall number of bowls and while maintaining a healthy meaningful bowl system.

A third step would be to limit FBS programs from having more than 34 home games in a rolling 5 year period of time to force some programs who routinely have 7 and 8 home games a year to go on the road and win.

These steps are simple but they would not be easy to implement.
12-31-2016 12:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HerdZoned Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 19,105
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 348
I Root For: The Herd
Location: South Charleston

Folding@NCAAbbsCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #19
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
(12-31-2016 11:24 AM)monarx Wrote:  The P5 are pushing hard for fewer teams and are well in their way to cutting it back to 64.

Only 10-12 programs are actually pushing for that. The majority of so called power 5 schools could not compete that way. Just like the 4 team beauty contest was set up for 8-12 teams and no one else. Dabo Sweeny and Clemson is crashing their party though and so is Washington this year
12-31-2016 12:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HogDawg Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,354
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 549
I Root For: LA Tech
Location: FranklinTNMcKinneyTX
Post: #20
RE: FBS needs fewer teams, not more championships
(12-31-2016 09:38 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  If the NCAA would enforce some perfectly reasonable attendance rules, we'd be back to the status quo ante as of about 1999, and USM would still be relevant.

The point of the article is clear: The barriers to entry are too low for FBS football. There should be some minimal standards implemented for the good of us all.

This article does a good job of exposing the "watering down" of FBS football that has happened over the past 20 years due to the plethora of "wanna be" football programs trying to move up too fast. We all know who they are. They think all it takes is a little money and a little effort, and they can be a big boy too. LA Tech fans have seen this up close and personal, with ULM only 30 miles away. ULM truly has no business being in FBS, and is nothing more than a local irritant pulling media attention and the occasional recruit away from the legitimate G5 schools in the area. Problem is, schools like ULM hurt all G5 programs in the long run because they give all G5's a bad name.
12-31-2016 01:31 PM
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.