CUSA Presidents make the Decisions.

Unity is important. If there were some disagreements over the Sacramento decision--not good.

(January---turned down offer from SAC)

If everybody is on the same page--fine.

This is not the "first rodeo" for some of the Presidents and the Commish. In fact I would say CUSA has been closely studying the situation Constantly.

I'm frustrated by the SAC decision--but of course--don't know the details or future plans that may be in the works.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

This move by the MAC "may" clarify things for CUSA or for some of their prospects.

Problem is--we hardly have any prospects.

Add Tarleton.

Then give Illinois St. and SDSU a phone call--won't hurt to ask.

There just Isn't Anybody Else.

I've changed my view from a month ago>> IMO staying at TEN in the current FBS "climate" is too risky.

The FCS, the former I-AA, practically doesn't exist anymore. If any more of the better programs make the move to FBS then FCS will implode. Then what? Well, I think the "elites" namely the SEC and BIG 10, will make a move to separate themselves from this "bloated" FBS and a new tier will be created such as FBS 1 and FBS 2. About 60 or so programs will be invited to step up into the new FBS 1 (or whatever they choose to call it) and the rest of us will be relegated to FBS 2.

(02-15-2026 07:15 AM)Tech80 Wrote:  The FCS, the former I-AA, practically doesn't exist anymore. If any more of the better programs make the move to FBS then FCS will implode. Then what? Well, I think the "elites" namely the SEC and BIG 10, will make a move to separate themselves from this "bloated" FBS and a new tier will be created such as FBS 1 and FBS 2. About 60 or so programs will be invited to step up into the new FBS 1 (or whatever they choose to call it) and the rest of us will be relegated to FBS 2.

If there is a formal split, making the P and G divisions de jure rather than de facto levels, I do think the G will start bringing in the top level of the FCS and you might see entire conferences (like the Big Sky) move up as a whole. A lot will depend on what rules they set up for scholarship limits.

I think we will be fine without Sacramento State. They are in the footprint of the MWC and the PAC but both didn’t want them. The Pac-8 would rather have everyone play someone twice rather than take Sacramento. Yes, they are in a big market but they certainly don’t move the needle like NDSU does. Do you think the average college football fan has even heard of them?

I understand being at ten puts you in a precarious position and NMSU is certainly a flight risk but I think we have better options than a FB-only in California. If we announced right now we were taking Tarleton and Illinois State I wouldn’t be throwing a party but I also wouldn’t be upset.

I think their long term goal is to get into one of the western conferences and will bail at the first opportunity.

(02-15-2026 08:16 AM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(02-15-2026 07:15 AM)Tech80 Wrote:  The FCS, the former I-AA, practically doesn't exist anymore. If any more of the better programs make the move to FBS then FCS will implode. Then what? Well, I think the "elites" namely the SEC and BIG 10, will make a move to separate themselves from this "bloated" FBS and a new tier will be created such as FBS 1 and FBS 2. About 60 or so programs will be invited to step up into the new FBS 1 (or whatever they choose to call it) and the rest of us will be relegated to FBS 2.

If there is a formal split, making the P and G divisions de jure rather than de facto levels, I do think the G will start bringing in the top level of the FCS and you might see entire conferences (like the Big Sky) move up as a whole. A lot will depend on what rules they set up for scholarship limits.

I think we will be fine without Sacramento State. They are in the footprint of the MWC and the PAC but both didn’t want them. The Pac-8 would rather have everyone play someone twice rather than take Sacramento. Yes, they are in a big market but they certainly don’t move the needle like NDSU does. Do you think the average college football fan has even heard of them?

I understand being at ten puts you in a precarious position and NMSU is certainly a flight risk but I think we have better options than a FB-only in California. If we announced right now we were taking Tarleton and Illinois State I wouldn’t be throwing a party but I also wouldn’t be upset.

I think their long term goal is to get into one of the western conferences and will bail at the first opportunity.

I think this applies to WAY more schools than we on here would like to imagine. Like who even is an "average college football fan"? Probably someone who casually follows a P4? Because if thats the case they probably cant even name the g6 conferences much less half of the teams.

(02-15-2026 08:16 AM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(02-15-2026 07:15 AM)Tech80 Wrote:  The FCS, the former I-AA, practically doesn't exist anymore. If any more of the better programs make the move to FBS then FCS will implode. Then what? Well, I think the "elites" namely the SEC and BIG 10, will make a move to separate themselves from this "bloated" FBS and a new tier will be created such as FBS 1 and FBS 2. About 60 or so programs will be invited to step up into the new FBS 1 (or whatever they choose to call it) and the rest of us will be relegated to FBS 2.

If there is a formal split, making the P and G divisions de jure rather than de facto levels, I do think the G will start bringing in the top level of the FCS and you might see entire conferences (like the Big Sky) move up as a whole. A lot will depend on what rules they set up for scholarship limits.

I think we will be fine without Sacramento State. They are in the footprint of the MWC and the PAC but both didn’t want them. The Pac-8 would rather have everyone play someone twice rather than take Sacramento. Yes, they are in a big market but they certainly don’t move the needle like NDSU does. Do you think the average college football fan has even heard of them?

I understand being at ten puts you in a precarious position and NMSU is certainly a flight risk but I think we have better options than a FB-only in California. If we announced right now we were taking Tarleton and Illinois State I wouldn’t be throwing a party but I also wouldn’t be upset.

I think their long term goal is to get into one of the western conferences and will bail at the first opportunity.

With Tech moving on I realize we don't have skin in the game, but I do agree with this. I'm also really confused as to what the MAC hopes to gain by adding them. The MAC had this very well established identity as a tightly-knit midwestern league made up of solid academic schools with a decent athletics pedigree, and some history on their side. I didn't understand their flirtation with Eastern schools before, but adding Sac State as FB only makes even less sense now.

Answer for jpw67----

18 MILLION for several MAC schools who are BROKE and desperate for revenue.

Short term marriage for MONEY (happens all the time in society).

MAC gives Zero share of CFP money and probably No or only partial media money--and of course no other MAC revenue.

Might get a better Media Deal>>which is the REAL GOAL.

(02-15-2026 12:19 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Answer for jpw67----

18 MILLION for several MAC schools who are BROKE and desperate for revenue.

Short term marriage for MONEY (happens all the time in society).

Might get a better Media Deal>>which is the REAL GOAL.

Heck, each MAC school will probably make more money off of their share of the $18 million than they will for the media "deal" (i.e. any increase in media monies that the Sac State addition brings)

I think something CUSA will keep an eye on is if anyone is unhappy in the MAC. Specifically Ball State, Ohio, Toledo, and Miami OH. I could see down the road taking 2-4 teams from there. Obviously NMSU is a flight risk but the majority of our conference isn’t going to be heading anywhere anytime soon. Tarleton is likely the replacement if NMSU bolts.

(02-15-2026 12:52 PM)Ewglenn Wrote:  I think something CUSA will keep an eye on is if anyone is unhappy in the MAC. Specifically Ball State, Ohio, Toledo, and Miami OH. I could see down the road taking 2-4 teams from there. Obviously NMSU is a flight risk but the majority of our conference isn’t going to be heading anywhere anytime soon. Tarleton is likely the replacement if NMSU bolts.

As I said in another thread--MAC posters are saying the same thing about UD, WKU, and Mo St..

Tarleton likely to CUSA SOON.

The characterization of NMSU as a "flight risk" is making me chuckle a bit.

Don't get me wrong -- they would 100% absolutely, positively leave YESTERDAY if the MWC or PAC invited them -- but they're stuck here with us because those invites (to date) have not come.

You can probably say the same for any team on the fringes of our footprint: FIU, Liberty, Delaware. Arguably, even Mo State and Sammy, if there were another FBS conference in their region willing to issue an invitation.

The problem is, in almost all these cases, there either ISN'T an FBS conference waiting in the wings to poach them, or the realistic options available aren't enough of an upgrade to warrant any serious consideration.

I've said this before, but it bears repeating: While I'm not naive enough to think it CAN'T happen, I don't think ANY of our schools will get poached any time soon. There just aren't enough slots open above us which would make sense from a financial/travel/fan interest standpoint, and where the interest might be there, it's decidedly one-way.

It's going to take some big dominoes crashing down above all of us to change that. In the meantime, our focus needs to be on getting stronger, not on adding additional weakness.

(02-16-2026 11:17 AM)whupemall Wrote:  The characterization of NMSU as a "flight risk" is making me chuckle a bit.

Don't get me wrong -- they would 100% absolutely, positively leave YESTERDAY if the MWC or PAC invited them -- but they're stuck here with us because those invites (to date) have not come.

You can probably say the same for any team on the fringes of our footprint: FIU, Liberty, Delaware. Arguably, even Mo State and Sammy, if there were another FBS conference in their region willing to issue an invitation.

The problem is, in almost all these cases, there either ISN'T an FBS conference waiting in the wings to poach them, or the realistic options available aren't enough of an upgrade to warrant any serious consideration.

I've said this before, but it bears repeating: While I'm not naive enough to think it CAN'T happen, I don't think ANY of our schools will get poached any time soon. There just aren't enough slots open above us which would make sense from a financial/travel/fan interest standpoint, and where the interest might be there, it's decidedly one-way.

It's going to take some big dominoes crashing down above all of us to change that. In the meantime, our focus needs to be on getting stronger, not on adding additional weakness.

The key for NMSU moving on is for us to add a travel partner for them. The second we add another far west program, they will get their invite.

I don’t really think there is much chance of NMSU leaving but they are in the footprint of two other conferences. That said, the PAC decided having everyone do a home/home with a conference rival rather than invite NMSU or Sacramento State was a better idea.

(02-16-2026 01:54 PM)freshtop Wrote:  The key for NMSU moving on is for us to add a travel partner for them. The second we add another far west program, they will get their invite.

This.

So much this.

IF CUSA is truly interested in South Dakota State as a Football Only member...

It starts with respect. A copycat of the MAC/SAC deal won't work.

There have been some criticisms of that deal--nationally and in South Dakota.

Yes CUSA will need a fairly large amount of money--but there are other aspects.

1.) Just invite them as a permanent FB Only member--No "term". No--"we'll see how things look in four or five years".
Simply have a fixed, basic exit fee of 8(?) million dollars. A flat amount that doesn't change.

2.) No paying every penny of everybody's full travel to SDSU for every team. That is a little insulting. Just have a fixed set amount of $250,000 yearly sent to the conference--or deducted from revenues--that will be fairly dispersed to schools that travel there each year in a proportional amount.

3.) Media Money Share ascending method: Year 1--0%, 2-20%, 3-40%, 4-60%, 5 and years forward-80%.

4.) CFP money share--none till next CFP deal is negotiated--then full share.

5.) Entry Amount--negotiable-- but I suggest 10-12 Million with 4 Million up front and the rest paid over three years.

In short--it needs to look more like the NDSU deal--not the SAC deal.

(02-17-2026 01:45 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  IF CUSA is truly interested in South Dakota State as a Football Only member...

It starts with respect. A copycat of the MAC/SAC deal won't work.

There have been some criticisms of that deal--nationally and in South Dakota.

Yes CUSA will need a fairly large amount of money--but there are other aspects.

1.) Just invite them as a permanent FB Only member--No "term". No--"we'll see how things look in four or five years".
Simply have a fixed, basic exit fee of 8(?) million dollars. A flat amount that doesn't change.

2.) No paying every penny of everybody's full travel to SDSU for every team. That is a little insulting. Just have a fixed set amount of $250,000 yearly sent to the conference--or deducted from revenues--that will be fairly dispersed to schools that travel there each year in a proportional amount.

3.) Media Money Share ascending method: Year 1--0%, 2-20%, 3-40%, 4-60%, 5 and years forward-80%.

4.) CFP money share--none till next CFP deal is negotiated--then full share.

5.) Entry Amount--negotiable-- but I suggest 10-12 Million with 4 Million up front and the rest paid over three years.

In short--it needs to look more like the NDSU deal--not the SAC deal.

Honestly, if we are going to consider SDSU as a football only, then I think we should bite the bullet and add Montana and Montana State as well. All three are well supported and have titles or champ game appearances in the last decade.

Toss in Tarleton all-sports as well.

Football:

East:
Liberty, Delaware, WKU, MTSU, Jax State, KSU, FIU

West:
Montana State, Montana, SDSU, Missouri State, SHSU, NMSU, Tarleton

Easy scheduling. Play everyone in your division, 3 home, 3 away. Play two cross division, 1 home, 1 away.

Charge 3 mil a year each over a 4 year period, GoR for that same time frame. 6 mil per year remaining in exit-fees. No CFP money until next contract. No media payout until next contract (unless ESPN/CBS offer an early reup). Media payout at 2/3rd for football only.

That would be 48 mil incoming over the next four years. 1.2m per existing program, per year.

(02-17-2026 02:29 PM)freshtop Wrote:  

(02-17-2026 01:45 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  IF CUSA is truly interested in South Dakota State as a Football Only member...

It starts with respect. A copycat of the MAC/SAC deal won't work.

There have been some criticisms of that deal--nationally and in South Dakota.

Yes CUSA will need a fairly large amount of money--but there are other aspects.

1.) Just invite them as a permanent FB Only member--No "term". No--"we'll see how things look in four or five years".
Simply have a fixed, basic exit fee of 8(?) million dollars. A flat amount that doesn't change.

2.) No paying every penny of everybody's full travel to SDSU for every team. That is a little insulting. Just have a fixed set amount of $250,000 yearly sent to the conference--or deducted from revenues--that will be fairly dispersed to schools that travel there each year in a proportional amount.

3.) Media Money Share ascending method: Year 1--0%, 2-20%, 3-40%, 4-60%, 5 and years forward-80%.

4.) CFP money share--none till next CFP deal is negotiated--then full share.

5.) Entry Amount--negotiable-- but I suggest 10-12 Million with 4 Million up front and the rest paid over three years.

In short--it needs to look more like the NDSU deal--not the SAC deal.

Honestly, if we are going to consider SDSU as a football only, then I think we should bite the bullet and add Montana and Montana State as well. All three are well supported and have titles or champ game appearances in the last decade.

Toss in Tarleton all-sports as well.

Football:

East:
Liberty, Delaware, WKU, MTSU, Jax State, KSU, FIU

West:
Montana State, Montana, SDSU, Missouri State, SHSU, NMSU, Tarleton

Easy scheduling. Play everyone in your division, 3 home, 3 away. Play two cross division, 1 home, 1 away.

Charge 3 mil a year each over a 4 year period, GoR for that same time frame. 6 mil per year remaining in exit-fees. No CFP money until next contract. No media payout until next contract (unless ESPN/CBS offer an early reup). Media payout at 2/3rd for football only.

That would be 48 mil incoming over the next four years. 1.2m per existing program, per year.

The is the best plan I have heard that group would definitely elevate our conference to a top tier G6

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

Last season those four were:
SDSU - 99
Montana - 73
Montana State - 47
Tarleton - 82

Average - 75.25

CUSA last year ranged from 94 to 207. Average of 134.42

I saw a theoretical plan two or three years ago about CUSA expanding into the Midwest/Upper Midwest.

You could even add Illinois State FB-only into the mix instead or in addition to the Montanas.

A new, untapped region of the country for G6 Football.

IMO the Montanas are the least interested--but combining them with other area schools--and letting them keep all their other sports in their current conference--Works-----At least on Paper.

Getting everybody to go for this plan would be difficult---You may need a well known consultant with lot's of credibility to get all sides to listen---and have a chance of this plan happening.

Kinda wish we had Dr Caboni from WKU back heading the conference’s executive committee during this time. Nothing against those currently there, I just really liked his leadership during some difficult times. He did a great job adding the right schools.

I'm sure all the Presidents give their input--and use their connections to help whenever possible.