"This scheduling agreement could allow the Flames to play 4-6 games per season against another G5 conference, such as the Conference USA or Sun Belt, and then schedule another 4-6 games against other Independent schools and Power 5 opponents with 1 FCS game per season."
Apparently Liberty is trying to get a Notre Dame/ACC agreement. The SBC and CUSA are being the main ones talked about. Would y'all be interested in this? Would this be essentially a tryout for them to get into the conference if needed later on? I'm just looking to see what the pros and cons in yalls mind would be of agreeing to this.
(03-02-2017 08:38 AM)Ewglenn Wrote: [ -> ]"This scheduling agreement could allow the Flames to play 4-6 games per season against another G5 conference, such as the Conference USA or Sun Belt, and then schedule another 4-6 games against other Independent schools and Power 5 opponents with 1 FCS game per season."
Apparently Liberty is trying to get a Notre Dame/ACC agreement. The SBC and CUSA are being the main ones talked about. Would y'all be interested in this? Would this be essentially a tryout for them to get into the conference if needed later on? I'm just looking to see what the pros and cons in yalls mind would be of agreeing to this.
I'll believe it when I see it.
(03-02-2017 08:38 AM)Ewglenn Wrote: [ -> ]"This scheduling agreement could allow the Flames to play 4-6 games per season against another G5 conference, such as the Conference USA or Sun Belt, and then schedule another 4-6 games against other Independent schools and Power 5 opponents with 1 FCS game per season."
Apparently Liberty is trying to get a Notre Dame/ACC agreement. The SBC and CUSA are being the main ones talked about. Would y'all be interested in this? Would this be essentially a tryout for them to get into the conference if needed later on? I'm just looking to see what the pros and cons in yalls mind would be of agreeing to this.
I can't see what's in it for the SBC unless Liberty is throwing money at us to do it. Liberty could really benefit from this type of agreement using it to solidify themselves as an FBS school. Should we need them they will be there and more than willing to join plus there are so many G5 schools in the eastern US they should have no problem filling out a schedule with at least 4 home FBS games (plus the one FCS) every year.
I say if CUSA wants to get in bed with Liberty let um but we should be just fine.
Just a thought but I would think that maybe their tv network might have something to do with it. I saw somewhere that they reach 90 million households with it. Maybe all those games get televised? Just something I was thinking.
Unless they are writing the conference MASSIVE checks, there is absolutely zero to be gained from this. Obviously, it would benefit Liberty, but not the Sun Belt.
Being seen as a conference tied to Strayer / Devry / ITT Tech / Liberty does not help anyone's image, whether that is the Sun Belt or CUSA or the MAC or whoever.
And I speak from experience as a Coastal fan.
(PS: keep in mind that their fan base has been pretty clear in their opinion that the Sun Belt is beneath their lofty potential.)
I would rather schedule games with real school that bring excitement to the fan bases, then be forced to play Liberty.
I get it though if I'm GS and can't force anyone even at gunpoint to play in Statesboro.
Excuse me for asking why some are so upset about Liberty? They made a major effort to become a member of the Sun Belt and it failed. They want to be FBS and had to make their decision to go independent to achieve there objective. Why should that get posters here upset? They do what they want, each of us do what we want. It's fair play. SBC teams schedule FCS schools each year according to their needs, why not the same with Liberty? Are we jealous? Do some just enjoy kicking Liberty? Some are upset because they are a christian school, so what? They are what they are. If it fits a schools scheduling needs, they will be contacted. If it fits Liberty's needs, I suppose they will accept. Lets not make an even more big deal out of this. Personally I support one doing what ever it takes to achieve their athletic goals and give Liberty a big CLAP for doing there thing.
Who cares either way. CoastalAlum you need to slow down with the education swipes at Liberty, same goes for just about all Belt schools. They are being judged nationally not regionally like Coastal. GaSt post graduate programs are about the only that has any bragging rights in this conference.
(03-02-2017 09:52 AM)Florida RedWolf Wrote: [ -> ]Excuse me for asking why some are so upset about Liberty? They made a major effort to become a member of the Sun Belt and it failed. They want to be FBS and had to make their decision to go independent to achieve there objective. Why should that get posters here upset? They do what they want, each of us do what we want. It's fair play. SBC teams schedule FCS schools each year according to their needs, why not the same with Liberty? Are we jealous? Do some just enjoy kicking Liberty? Some are upset because they are a christian school, so what? They are what they are. If it fits a schools scheduling needs, they will be contacted. If it fits Liberty's needs, I suppose they will accept. Lets not make an even more big deal out of this. Personally I support one doing what ever it takes to achieve their athletic goals and give Liberty a big CLAP for doing there thing.
No two works: IAN McCAW
(03-02-2017 09:52 AM)Florida RedWolf Wrote: [ -> ]Excuse me for asking why some are so upset about Liberty? They made a major effort to become a member of the Sun Belt and it failed. They want to be FBS and had to make their decision to go independent to achieve there objective. Why should that get posters here upset? They do what they want, each of us do what we want. It's fair play. SBC teams schedule FCS schools each year according to their needs, why not the same with Liberty? Are we jealous? Do some just enjoy kicking Liberty? Some are upset because they are a christian school, so what? They are what they are. If it fits a schools scheduling needs, they will be contacted. If it fits Liberty's needs, I suppose they will accept. Lets not make an even more big deal out of this. Personally I support one doing what ever it takes to achieve their athletic goals and give Liberty a big CLAP for doing there thing.
Agree . . I have no problem with the Red Wolves playing Liberty in any sport. Liberty is fighting hard to achieve their goals . . KUDOS to Liberty !!
(03-02-2017 08:38 AM)Ewglenn Wrote: [ -> ]"This scheduling agreement could allow the Flames to play 4-6 games per season against another G5 conference, such as the Conference USA or Sun Belt, and then schedule another 4-6 games against other Independent schools and Power 5 opponents with 1 FCS game per season."
Apparently Liberty is trying to get a Notre Dame/ACC agreement. The SBC and CUSA are being the main ones talked about. Would y'all be interested in this? Would this be essentially a tryout for them to get into the conference if needed later on? I'm just looking to see what the pros and cons in yalls mind would be of agreeing to this.
No
(03-02-2017 08:52 AM)Ewglenn Wrote: [ -> ]Just a thought but I would think that maybe their tv network might have something to do with it. I saw somewhere that they reach 90 million households with it. Maybe all those games get televised? Just something I was thinking.
Their network may reach that many people, but how many actually watch it? Heck, they put their games on ESPN3 as well so I don't think their network adds much of value.
I'm not upset about Liberty. I think they took the right approach with the NCAA because I don't think the must invite rule is on solid legal ground.
As to a scheduling agreement. If there are Sun Belt members who are having a hard time filling their slots for home/home schedule agreements then by all means sign on to play Liberty.
Something that is more formalized where the conference is telling members that two out of every four years or two out of six years you give up a non-conference date to play Liberty and the league handles the scheduling of that? The question quickly becomes "What's in it for me?"
Exposure on their network? No thanks. Most of the stations I've looked up are low power religious stations unavailable on many cable and satellite systems and a mix of national channels buried deep in the program guide. I have a rooftop antenna and getting the Little Rock affiliate is a challenge. Some days won't come in at all. Hard or impossible to find while the announcers are employed by Liberty and we are just this weeks villain facing the good guys / home team and the graphics are employing Liberty logos prominently. I don't see any benefit in that, I'll take the hit or miss quality of ESPN3. If they were taking ESPN3 pool announcers and using ESPN graphics and ESPN is willing to let them distribute those games elsewhere, that's not a bad deal.
But money talks. If Liberty is offering say $200,000 for a trip to play them and willing to take $100,00 for returning the game, that isn't program changing money but it's a better deal than any of us get for home and home and I suspect the AD's will be willing to listen.
I don't think there will be any goodness of our heart deals and I really don't think what Liberty offers in television would be considered to hold any value, that doesn't mean a mutually beneficial agreement is impossible.
I know Karl would be idiotic enough to agree to a deal like that but I'm hoping if this is true CUSA beats us to the punch
(03-02-2017 10:16 AM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not upset about Liberty. I think they took the right approach with the NCAA because I don't think the must invite rule is on solid legal ground.
As to a scheduling agreement. If there are Sun Belt members who are having a hard time filling their slots for home/home schedule agreements then by all means sign on to play Liberty.
Something that is more formalized where the conference is telling members that two out of every four years or two out of six years you give up a non-conference date to play Liberty and the league handles the scheduling of that? The question quickly becomes "What's in it for me?"
Exposure on their network? No thanks. Most of the stations I've looked up are low power religious stations unavailable on many cable and satellite systems and a mix of national channels buried deep in the program guide. I have a rooftop antenna and getting the Little Rock affiliate is a challenge. Some days won't come in at all. Hard or impossible to find while the announcers are employed by Liberty and we are just this weeks villain facing the good guys / home team and the graphics are employing Liberty logos prominently. I don't see any benefit in that, I'll take the hit or miss quality of ESPN3. If they were taking ESPN3 pool announcers and using ESPN graphics and ESPN is willing to let them distribute those games elsewhere, that's not a bad deal.
But money talks. If Liberty is offering say $200,000 for a trip to play them and willing to take $100,00 for returning the game, that isn't program changing money but it's a better deal than any of us get for home and home and I suspect the AD's will be willing to listen.
I don't think there will be any goodness of our heart deals and I really don't think what Liberty offers in television would be considered to hold any value, that doesn't mean a mutually beneficial agreement is impossible.
LU does all production in house and ESPN just rebroadcasts it. We have our own announcers and production team for LFSN, this is why our games look so high quality. If you can't get the local channel or ESPN 3 then it will be free online. Just go to the Flames athletic page or Flames FB page for the link for the game.
(03-02-2017 08:38 AM)Ewglenn Wrote: [ -> ]"This scheduling agreement could allow the Flames to play 4-6 games per season against another G5 conference, such as the Conference USA or Sun Belt, and then schedule another 4-6 games against other Independent schools and Power 5 opponents with 1 FCS game per season."
Apparently Liberty is trying to get a Notre Dame/ACC agreement. The SBC and CUSA are being the main ones talked about. Would y'all be interested in this? Would this be essentially a tryout for them to get into the conference if needed later on? I'm just looking to see what the pros and cons in yalls mind would be of agreeing to this.
Why would we agree to this? There's nothing in it for our teams. Nothing. At all. Their TV network is a big ole nothing. Why take the reputational hit of being aligned with LU? I don't get the benefit.
Why are we willing to help Liberty when we aren't willing to help out Idaho or NMSU? Destroy the programs that helped us out and help out the program that wont hire Gays or Jews? Absolutely ridiculous.
I'll be rather unhappy if USA or the Belt affirms LU's discriminatory practices and subjects our fans to discriminatory treatment.
There should be no alignment (which is an endorsement) of Liberty's discrimination by the Sun Belt Conference. If a member institution wishes to subject its students, faculty, athletes, fans and staff to LU, that's between them and their fans (and their LGBT and aligned student, faculty, alumni, and student groups - by the way - expect them to be involved if this happens).
Any school working with LU is affirming keeping Jews and Gays out of employment and participation in FBS athletics and employment. Full stop.
Again, if we're giving away 'scheduling alliances', I'd argue that NMSU is more deserving, UMass can probably offer more (basketball), and LU cant offer much to us.
(03-02-2017 09:50 AM)SENOREIDA Wrote: [ -> ]I would rather schedule games with real school that bring excitement to the fan bases, then be forced to play Liberty.
I get it though if I'm GS and can't force anyone even at gunpoint to play in Statesboro.
If GS wants to schedule Liberty I have no problem with that after all the very first win in "Our House" was against the Flames but what is being proposed here is a Notre Dame like football scheduling agreement whereby x number of SBC teams will have to play Liberty in any given year as part of the conference schedule. No Thanks.
As far as GS scheduling goes our OOC dance card is full for the next three seasons so get back to me when Coastal can say the same.
I wouldn't mind hosting them in a guarantee game that they pay us for. Makes no sense but they have the money right? I don't really wish failure upon them but I am curious about what would happen if they cannot manage to get the required number of FBS home games. Would the NCAA force them back down? Probably not but I'd wanna see what happens.
If we schedule them before they get up to FBS numbers at least we might be able to beat them.
On the other hand maybe we should build a scheduling relationship with them? If they travel well or have a large enough fan base they could be an extremely attractive option in a few years if they can manage some success. Maybe if we're nice to them now maybe they can help us out if ,God forbid, they somehow surpass the schools in our conference.
(03-02-2017 10:52 AM)Bobcat2013 Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't mind hosting them in a guarantee game that they pay us for. Makes no sense but they have the money right? I don't really wish failure upon them but I am curious about what would happen if they cannot manage to get the required number of FBS home games. Would the NCAA force them back down? Probably not but I'd wanna see what happens.
If we schedule them before they get up to FBS numbers at least we might be able to beat them.
On the other hand maybe we should build a scheduling relationship with them? If they travel well or have a large enough fan base they could be an extremely attractive option in a few years if they can manage some success. Maybe if we're nice to them now maybe they can help us out if ,God forbid, they somehow surpass the schools in our conference.
Why don't we offer that deal to NMSU? At least everyone can participate in the benefits of that.