And still not a candidate to join forces with the current AAC schools. Nice stadium though...

(06-14-2017 12:02 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  And still not a candidate to join forces with the current AAC schools. Nice stadium though...

I'll settle for power 5 schools visiting

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

James Madison and Delaware have more value than FAU and FIU.
Missouri State have some value.
Stony Brook is a program on the rise.

Eastern Kentucky wants to get into the SBC. Eastern Kentucky and Jacksonville State could help save SBC, and so can Lamar and Sam Houston State. UCA might be valuable some place down the road as well for SBC.

(06-13-2017 09:28 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Okay here is the full example. No P5-to-P5 realignment.

B12 (BYU, Col St, Houston, Cincinnati)
AAC-Stay at 10.
MWC (UTEP)

The indies are NMSU, Liberty, UMass and Army that are unplaced. UMass and Army have a lot of value, IMO and should bet able to score a G5 conference. Liberty is questionable and NMSU stinks at football so keep them out of the G5.

Then make a 10 team eastern based conference.

Massachusetts
Army
Marshall
Old Dominion
Charlotte
App State
Georgia State
Georgia Southern
Florida Atlantic
Florida International

These leaves CUSA at 8 teams and the SBC at 7 teams.

CUSA could then grab Ark State and Louisiana from the SBC to go back to 10.

Western Ky
Middle Tenn
Ark State
UAB
Southern Miss
La Tech
Louisiana
North Texas
Rice
UTSA

The CFP decides to go with the new conference with Army and CUSA for the G5 lineup.

The leftovers are then NMSU, Texas State, ULM, Troy, South Alabama, Coastal, Liberty....7 lower value FBS schools all as Indy. CFP decides not to offer them a G spot in the structure.

MWC 12
MAC 12
AAC 10
CUSA 10
New 10
Indy 7

54 teams in the G with another 7 or 8 hanging around indy, acting as filler for bowl games with a recruiting disadvantage existing outside the CFP structure. Instead of thinking these schools will drop down to FCS like Idaho think about alienation as a non-CFP school.

BYU and CSU will nat get into the B12. BYU because of LGBT protests and CSU because they suck at football and have for many years. Boise and San Diego are better candidates if Big 12 wants to come West. My guess is it would be UH and Cincy.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(06-14-2017 12:27 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  James Madison and Delaware have more value than FAU and FIU.
Missouri State have some value.
Stony Brook is a program on the rise.

Eastern Kentucky wants to get into the SBC. Eastern Kentucky and Jacksonville State could help save SBC, and so can Lamar and Sam Houston State. UCA might be valuable some place down the road as well for SBC.

Here's the thing. There are 36 FBS teams between AAC SBC and CUSA and if anything breaks loose in P5 it probably means 4-6 Big XII teams are picking up the pieces from a raid.

So that's 40-42 teams.

Just not a high probability anyone needs to turn to an FCS. Remember EKU presented to the Sun Belt and Sun Belt called Coastal who wasn't looking to go FBS.

I didn't read the whole thread but the simple answer is that no one will be next. No one else has an administration that is as ignorant and foolish. Any time the option of dropping is brought up at any other school the president and/or AD laugh the option off as stupid. Even being associated with the idea of dropping down is considered embarrassing and damaging to recruiting.

(06-14-2017 12:27 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  James Madison and Delaware have more value than FAU and FIU.
Missouri State have some value.
Stony Brook is a program on the rise.

Eastern Kentucky wants to get into the SBC. Eastern Kentucky and Jacksonville State could help save SBC, and so can Lamar and Sam Houston State. UCA might be valuable some place down the road as well for SBC.

I always wondered why Delaware didn't try to elevate itself. It'd make a good member in the current version of C-USA or even the MAC to complement UMass when they were in the league.

(06-14-2017 12:27 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  James Madison and Delaware have more value than FAU and FIU.
Missouri State have some value.
Stony Brook is a program on the rise.

Eastern Kentucky wants to get into the SBC. Eastern Kentucky and Jacksonville State could help save SBC, and so can Lamar and Sam Houston State. UCA might be valuable some place down the road as well for SBC.

I'm pretty sure the Sun Belt doesn't want to become the Southland in the same way the Big East/AAC became Conference USA.

(06-14-2017 02:19 AM)Cave_Johnson Wrote:  I didn't read the whole thread but the simple answer is that no one will be next. No one else has an administration that is as ignorant and foolish. Any time the option of dropping is brought up at any other school the president and/or AD laugh the option off as stupid. Even being associated with the idea of dropping down is considered embarrassing and damaging to recruiting.

Because Idaho has been recruiting so well over the past 20 years of losing.

As former Idaho star Mark Schlereth stated, in a tweet when the announcement was made. And I paraphrase, FINALLY, Idaho is back where they belong.

Idaho belongs in FBS, regardless if one guy who played for Idaho back in the Big Sky glory days thinks otherwise.

jacks, didn't know you were yet another FCS fan who favors dragging down lower FBS teams to the FCS level. That's too bad, there are already far too many of you who think like that.

Idaho dropped for many reasons, money only being one of them. They wanted to play regional teams, pretty hard when your closest rival in SBC is in New Mexico. They now have teams in Montana, Washington, Idaho and Oregon. This attracts a larger fan base and helps in recruiting. This was a good move for them. They will probably lose Petrino as coach soon, and he is the only reason they have won more than 2-3 games a year recently. Finally, their stadium only seats 16k, which is below minimum FBS requirement.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(06-10-2017 05:21 PM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  Please. Please stop with the "expansion/realignment" threads. Please.

That's the POINT for this board!

(06-14-2017 10:15 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Idaho belongs in FBS, regardless if one guy who played for Idaho back in the Big Sky glory days thinks otherwise.

jacks, didn't know you were yet another FCS fan who favors dragging down lower FBS teams to the FCS level. That's too bad, there are already far too many of you who think like that.

Idaho never put a serious effort into being an FBS program. Frankly, they should have dropped football and focused on other things. Hell, if they had cared at all, they'd have been in the Pac-12 along with Montana many moons ago.

Idaho's drop wasn't the least bit surprising.
Sun Belt teams hated the trip, there is no easy way to get to Moscow. They were stuck playing teams that have very little brand awareness in the region in October and November. The university had never made a strong commitment to athletics. They had the third smallest university support for athletics in the Sun Belt and one of the two behind them (ULL) is pulling in $6 million more in self-generated revenue. There are only 13 FBS schools that can drive their equipment truck to Idaho in a day without having to have two CDL drivers to comply with hour restrictions and six of those schools are P5 and not likely to go home/home with Idaho and another is Boise State who won't play them.

If you look at like a university administrator then you really aren't so concerned about the loss of big paydays or whatever share of CFP the Sun Belt let you have (the Sun Belt took a good portion to reimburse teams traveling there) you care about how much has to come out of the school and student pockets to pay for the program and being FBS meant that money would have to increase post-Sun Belt or they could forego that money to have a football schedule that looks like the basketball schedule and not have to increase and maybe even decrease how much flows over to support athletics.

(06-14-2017 10:37 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Idaho dropped for many reasons, money only being one of them.

Money wasn't a reason. We lose more money as an FCS school than in FBS.

Quote:They wanted to play regional teams, pretty hard when your closest rival in SBC is in New Mexico. They now have teams in Montana, Washington, Idaho and Oregon.

In this case "they" refers to one guy in the President's office, some anti-sports faculty, and about 20% of the interested fanbase. And even in that 10%, most of them say "I don't want FCS, but what choice do we have?"

Nobody at Idaho cares about any of these "regional rivals" we're supposedly developing other than Montana. We've been in the Big Sky for basketball the past few years with some pretty good teams and attendance and interest are lower than they've ever been.

Quote:This attracts a larger fan base

I'll bet you any amount of money you want that Idaho's attendance drops in the Big Sky.

Quote: and helps in recruiting.

Ask Paul Petrino how this move is helping recruiting. Oh, wait -- reporters already have. It's killing us.

Quote: This was a good move for them.

As long as you don't consider revenue, fan interest, public relations or state politics.

Quote: They will probably lose Petrino as coach soon, and he is the only reason they have won more than 2-3 games a year recently.

Most G5 schools are coach-dependent. Hire a good one and they win. Hire a bad one and they lose.

Quote: Finally, their stadium only seats 16k, which is below minimum FBS requirement.

No it isn't.

I get that FCS people get some kind of sad validation by dragging schools down to their level, but this is a bad move for Idaho or really any other FBS school.

(06-14-2017 10:47 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 10:15 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Idaho belongs in FBS, regardless if one guy who played for Idaho back in the Big Sky glory days thinks otherwise.

jacks, didn't know you were yet another FCS fan who favors dragging down lower FBS teams to the FCS level. That's too bad, there are already far too many of you who think like that.

Idaho never put a serious effort into being an FBS program. Frankly, they should have dropped football and focused on other things. Hell, if they had cared at all, they'd have been in the Pac-12 along with Montana many moons ago.

I think you know this but others might not, Idaho was in the PAC until the early 60s. They couldn't cut it then, and they can't now.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(06-14-2017 11:09 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 10:47 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 10:15 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Idaho belongs in FBS, regardless if one guy who played for Idaho back in the Big Sky glory days thinks otherwise.

jacks, didn't know you were yet another FCS fan who favors dragging down lower FBS teams to the FCS level. That's too bad, there are already far too many of you who think like that.

Idaho never put a serious effort into being an FBS program. Frankly, they should have dropped football and focused on other things. Hell, if they had cared at all, they'd have been in the Pac-12 along with Montana many moons ago.

I think you know this but others might not, Idaho was in the PAC until the early 60s. They couldn't cut it then, and they can't now.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Actually 1958, then independent until joining the Big Sky in Mid 60's.

But is that a big deal?

Actually the big deal is that conference affiliation and the level of competition that schools have sponsored has ebbed and flowed over the years. For Example: Maryville College beat the university of Tennessee 11 - 0 in 1906, and they also regularly played the likes of Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Kentucky.

Now they are D3, and reasonably successful there, but definitely not FBS. Other schools have elevated their level of competition. These scenarios played out over and over.

The lesson is that over time the level at which schools play will change, the only mystery is who will change in what direction.

(06-14-2017 10:47 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 10:15 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Idaho belongs in FBS, regardless if one guy who played for Idaho back in the Big Sky glory days thinks otherwise.

jacks, didn't know you were yet another FCS fan who favors dragging down lower FBS teams to the FCS level. That's too bad, there are already far too many of you who think like that.

Idaho never put a serious effort into being an FBS program. Frankly, they should have dropped football and focused on other things. Hell, if they had cared at all, they'd have been in the Pac-12 along with Montana many moons ago.

What other things should they focus on?

There is nothing wrong with playing FCS football, if that is where you think your level is. Just like nothing wrong with staying D2, etc.

Montana and Idaho never had a chance to be in the Pac 12.

(06-14-2017 11:01 AM)LatahCounty Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 10:37 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Idaho dropped for many reasons, money only being one of them.

Money wasn't a reason. We lose more money as an FCS school than in FBS.

Quote:They wanted to play regional teams, pretty hard when your closest rival in SBC is in New Mexico. They now have teams in Montana, Washington, Idaho and Oregon.

In this case "they" refers to one guy in the President's office, some anti-sports faculty, and about 20% of the interested fanbase. And even in that 10%, most of them say "I don't want FCS, but what choice do we have?"

Nobody at Idaho cares about any of these "regional rivals" we're supposedly developing other than Montana. We've been in the Big Sky for basketball the past few years with some pretty good teams and attendance and interest are lower than they've ever been.

Quote:This attracts a larger fan base

I'll bet you any amount of money you want that Idaho's attendance drops in the Big Sky.

Quote: and helps in recruiting.

Ask Paul Petrino how this move is helping recruiting. Oh, wait -- reporters already have. It's killing us.

Quote: This was a good move for them.

As long as you don't consider revenue, fan interest, public relations or state politics.

Quote: They will probably lose Petrino as coach soon, and he is the only reason they have won more than 2-3 games a year recently.

Most G5 schools are coach-dependent. Hire a good one and they win. Hire a bad one and they lose.

Quote: Finally, their stadium only seats 16k, which is below minimum FBS requirement.

No it isn't.

I get that FCS people get some kind of sad validation by dragging schools down to their level, but this is a bad move for Idaho or really any other FBS school.

Fin

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(06-10-2017 06:05 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Games can be cancelled or honored despite rapid changes. Heck, what's the difference between an EMU-Ohio State payday game with them at FBS or FCS? Very little.

That said, I agree they aren't going anywhere any time soon though they're just not much of a D-I program or at least FBS. They can't even compete in the MAC, let alone with any of their bigger neighbors, including the behemoth 8 miles down the road.

I'm not reading this entire thread but EMU actually does well at the other sports not counting football. It's really just football that has been the issue. And they did ok last year.