(09-06-2019 11:58 AM)LatahCounty Wrote:  Idaho doesn't even make it into DavidSt threads anymore. That's how far away we are.

Sorry man, that’s not how it works. Idaho just recently dropped down from FBS, so their “could factor” is very, very low. However, a school like U of Chicago and Sewanee, who dropped D1 athletics a long time ago, their “could factor” is very high. Duh. Idaho “could be” a Pac-12 candidate around 2056. Good luck!

(09-06-2019 12:28 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-06-2019 10:51 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-06-2019 10:48 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(09-06-2019 10:36 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  The WAC should have been way more aggressive with callups beginning in 2010-2011. Yes, they got Texas State and UTSA, but probably needed 2-4 more teams in that lane.

If they get just a few more teams it's probably enough to survive and the NCAA probably would've let them trudge along with 5-6 members until they could build back up.

They needed Montana to move up. That would have gotten the moveup dominoes going in the Big Sky. They just couldnt seal that deal.

Good point.

If they had gotten Montana then Montana St, Eastern Washington, and other would have been right behind.

I don't know that anyone outside the WAC commissioner's office really thought those schools should be in FBS.

Look at ticket sales, donations, ability to raise enough money to have a competitive FBS program.

Based on these statistics (from USA Today's data), why would anyone recommend that this school move to FBS?

But the have Colin Cowherd and that cool field! Lol. To be honest they were the next Big Sky team that came to mind.

(09-06-2019 12:59 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-06-2019 12:28 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-06-2019 10:51 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-06-2019 10:48 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(09-06-2019 10:36 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  The WAC should have been way more aggressive with callups beginning in 2010-2011. Yes, they got Texas State and UTSA, but probably needed 2-4 more teams in that lane.

If they get just a few more teams it's probably enough to survive and the NCAA probably would've let them trudge along with 5-6 members until they could build back up.

They needed Montana to move up. That would have gotten the moveup dominoes going in the Big Sky. They just couldnt seal that deal.

Good point.

If they had gotten Montana then Montana St, Eastern Washington, and other would have been right behind.

I don't know that anyone outside the WAC commissioner's office really thought those schools should be in FBS.

Look at ticket sales, donations, ability to raise enough money to have a competitive FBS program.

Based on these statistics (from USA Today's data), why would anyone recommend that this school move to FBS?

But the have Colin Cowherd and that cool field! Lol. To be honest they were the next Big Sky team that came to mind.

I'm sure Benson asked EWU to join the WAC just because they have a good FCS team. But there are Division I schools that don't have football that raise more money in ticket sales plus donations, without having the expenses of football.

IMO if a conference starts bringing in move-up programs that were not among the financially healthiest in FCS, and they have to add more football scholarships, make other additional football spending, and add additional sports to move to FBS, then they're bringing in the football equivalents of Chicago State.

(09-06-2019 12:17 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(09-06-2019 11:58 AM)LatahCounty Wrote:  Idaho doesn't even make it into DavidSt threads anymore. That's how far away we are.

Maryland 79 Howard 0
Penn State 79 Idaho 7

I think I know a school Idaho can compete with head up.

I don't know. I watched most of our game. We weren't as close as the score indicated.

(09-06-2019 10:36 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-06-2019 10:19 AM)solohawks Wrote:  There really are not any great answers for NMSU especially for FBS.
Ideally, they could have raided the Lonestar Conference and gotten schools like West Texas A&M, Tarleton St, and Angelo St interested in the WAC and FCS football.

This would have at least stabilized everything besides FBS in the WAC Conference and given the WAC a central/west Tx core. But it just doesn't seem those schools were interested. Perhaps now after this merger with the Heartland conference some of the bigger school will be interested

The WAC should have been way more aggressive with callups beginning in 2010-2011. Yes, they got Texas State and UTSA, but probably needed 2-4 more teams in that lane.

If they get just a few more teams it's probably enough to survive and the NCAA probably would've let them trudge along with 5-6 members until they could build back up.

Lamar wanted to join at the same time as Texas State and UTSA. If WAC did give them a call? Lamar could be in SBC now with Texas State. The other team that moved up to the WAC was UTA with no football.

MVFC was the one rumored about doing a football merger for FBS at the time period, but the WAC needed to ditch Idaho. It fell through. Since Idaho is gone, MVFC could try again with New Mexico State and grab someone like Lamar as well.

(09-06-2019 02:07 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  MVFC was the one rumored about doing a football merger for FBS at the time period, but the WAC needed to ditch Idaho. It fell through. Since Idaho is gone, MVFC could try again with New Mexico State and grab someone like Lamar as well.

This is probably the most realistic scenario to another FBS conference emerging.

I'm not sure how that would work, though, unless some school individually got waivers. I guess the conference itself could try and move up as a whole and call itself the WAC since it's just a football only conference at the moment anyway.

Mountain West Conference.

(09-06-2019 03:08 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Mountain West Conference.

New Mexico is already in the MW.

NMSU is hoping any of CUSA, Sun Belt or MW take them. I say the only realistic option at this point is Sun Belt. They didn’t want them a few years back and kicked out their FB team. CUSA is full. MW would probably take them over UTEP now but I doubt they want either of them!

I can't believe David would throw shade at Loyola Marymount and Pepperdine like that.

Maybe a new FBS league would be more like a temporary alliance with schools from multiple regions teaming up just to get on their feet. 4 schools in one part of the country working with 4 teams from another, gradually moving to 5-5 then 6-6, with the goal of someday being two full fledged leagues

(09-06-2019 04:15 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  Legit topic about NMST
Turned into this nonsence

The title isn't even legit...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Honestly, I think a lot of FCS-> FBS movement is on hold right now while we wait and see what happens with the playoffs. As it is, with FBS swelling so much there isn’t a lot of incentive with moving up right now. Think about it, why would a team want to give up the chance to play for a national championship and historic rivals to join a division where they would have no chance to even participate in the playoff, would lose old rivalries, be less competitive, and have far more expenses? If the playoff expands to at lest 8 teams though and somehow guarantees a spot for a G5 team... I think you’ll see the floodgates opening.

The playoff was not the reason any of the last group of FCS move ups moved up. FBS provides a larger marketing stage for your university, especially in the South. The End.

As for anyone left in FCS to move up, it's slim pickings at best. Most of the schools that are at the top of FCS are comfortable where they are at and there are not a lot of large metro schools that just started football with FBS in mind. Even Kennesaw State is still trying to figure out the right mix to attract fans despite being pretty successful on the field.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(09-06-2019 07:10 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s try to keep realignment scenarios grounded in reality. There is no one in D2 that is anywhere near being able to catapult into FBS.

NMSU’s best bet for an FBS conference is for there to be movement that opens a G5 slot.

Plan B is to hope for more FCS move ups/start ups to create a scheduling alliance that eventually evolves into a league.

Even if there's some sort of G5 movement (say 2 AAC teams to the Big 12, AAC raiding CUSA/SBC, and so on...), I'm kind of wondering if NMSU would get a call.

If the MWC were to lose a team, I think they'd be more likely to look at Texas school for a replacement. Certainly UTEP would trump NMSU, and my memory says UNT had expressed interest in the MWC a number of years ago. I don't know if that would still be true for UNT, since they're in a conference with several other Texas schools. But it seems unlikely NMSU is #1 in line for the MWC.

Same thing for CUSA; they're more likely to raid the Sun Belt. The only argument for NMSU is getting a travel partner for UTEP, and I don't think CUSA is really using that sort of travel matrix. But beyond travel, no real argument for them to be in over several Sun Belt teams.

Which basically leaves the Sun Belt. If they lose a team, is NMSU their #1 option?

Argument for NMSU: Certainly they would strengthen basketball, but NMSU isn't bringing home the tournament bacon with extra tourney credits from wins, so that's not a big bonus. Likely the SBC is still a one bid conference most years even with NMSU on board.

Argument against NMSU: The Sun Belt could have kept them and even added them all-sports if they valued NMSU basketball. Instead, they elected to go with a low-funded, relatively growth limited program in Coastal Carolina. Certainly CCU baseball is big time, but that's a completely different situation from FB and BB. That a school with a basically brand new FB program and no BB success was added shows that the SBC considers NMSU to be of little value and/or outside of their footprint.

Additionally, you have to wonder what other FCS call-ups are available the next time an opening occurs. Foregoing some of the lunacy in this thread, I'm looking at James Madison. They've allegedly only been willing to move up for an AAC or CUSA bid, but I think they've got to accept at this point that the SBC is their only option for FBS. If JMU has come to that realization, I think they're instantly #1 for the SBC from the reasonably realistic prospects.

Now, NMSU may line up better against some of the other oft-mentioned prospects like Eastern Kentucky and Jacksonville State. Those schools are so growth limited and minor players that NMSU has to be a better pick. Hell, I think the SBC would take UConn FB-only over those schools.

It really seems to me that FCS is tapped out for promotion-ready schools east of the Mississippi. Other than JMU and Delaware, I'm really at a loss to think of a school that is ready to move up. Kennesaw State may eventually grow into it, but they're not really ready right now. Not that CCU was really ready either, so maybe the Sun Belt would go for Kennesaw just on growth potential.

In the remainder of the SBC footprint, there's the various Louisiana and Texas FCS schools, but none of them really seem to be ready or would add value to the SBC. Is Stephen F. Austin, Central Arkansas, McNeese St, or Sam Houston St really a better pickup than NMSU at that point? I don't think so. Even some program like Incarnate Word that is being bankrolled by a billionaire isn't going to be worth adding.

Bottom-line: NMSU needs a near perfect scenario to occur for them to be #1 in line. It's just the reality of being in the middle of nowhere in a sparsely populated state. The only thing that might work out for them would be that rumored (but imo, highly unlikely) CUSA-SBC geographic shuffle to reduce the geographic overlap. That might end up with an odd number of teams in the western conference that would make NMSU a prospect.