I think we all know what 3-6 teams are the most realistic shortlist of teams we could add so this thread is not in anyway about who we should add.

I'm more curious if anyone has news about what a timeline could look like? How often, and rushed, are the Presidents going to be to get together and get this discussed? Could stronger rumors come before the end of the season or will in be closer to March of next year before we know anything? The La Tech vote seemed to come together pretty quickly once Texas State announced.

I would presume to believe the conference would Not delay an announcement and that it will happen sooner rather than later. So, within a few weeks.

Would imagine it's dependent on when JMU and the Sun Belt negotiate a 2027 exit.

I thought the new thing to do was say "The Conference is not looking to add at this time", and then send someone an invite a couple weeks later.

(10-26-2026 11:24 AM)T-Dog Wrote:  Would imagine it's dependent on when JMU and the Sun Belt negotiate a 2027 exit.

I'd say this is probably accurate. I'd expect an announcement by spring with a eye for 2027 even if it's announced as being 2028.

In the end I would prefer we not rush anything and make sure the fit is the correct one. We don't another short term add. Don't get me wrong I don't blame JMU for trying to move to a perceived better opportunity but ideally I'd like to add a program that fits and wants to be here.

Conference leadership then needs to get us all on the same path. One of the issues we have today is that some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6. We need the leadership to set a budget and performance standard that all members must meet.

(10-26-2026 11:30 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  In the end I would prefer we not rush anything and make sure the fit is the correct one. We don't another short term add. Don't get me wrong I don't blame JMU for trying to move to a perceived better opportunity but ideally I'd like to add a program that fits and wants to be here.

100% agreed.

Quote:Conference leadership then needs to get us all on the same path. One of the issues we have today is that some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6. We need the leadership to set a budget and performance standard that all members must meet.

That sounds great in theory, but as we’ve been told, getting everyone to agree on the criteria is pretty much impossible.

And how do you enforce it? Are you just going to become a 9-team conference when schools can’t wave a magic wand and make piles of money appear?

Hopefully, whichever school it ends up being will be given the courtesy of sufficient to time to announce their departure from their current conference and not be facing a strict deadline from the Belt. The Belt knows JMU is gone and as mentioned it remains to determine if 2027 or 2028. So, if JMU departs in '27 and the replacement school cannot join until '28, then so be it. Work around it for one year.

(10-26-2026 11:30 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 11:24 AM)T-Dog Wrote:  Would imagine it's dependent on when JMU and the Sun Belt negotiate a 2027 exit.

I'd say this is probably accurate. I'd expect an announcement by spring with a eye for 2027 even if it's announced as being 2028.

In the end I would prefer we not rush anything and make sure the fit is the correct one. We don't another short term add. Don't get me wrong I don't blame JMU for trying to move to a perceived better opportunity but ideally I'd like to add a program that fits and wants to be here.

Conference leadership then needs to get us all on the same path. One of the issues we have today is that some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6. We need the leadership to set a budget and performance standard that all members must meet.

These statements can contradict each other:

“We don't another short term add.“

“some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6”

If you want to be the best G6 conference, that may mean you need to add the schools with the highest aspirations and growth potential to reach those aspirations. That could include wanting to advance conferences. In the meantime, they will help the Belt while here. But this isn’t new news that there is a divide within the conference around that mentality vs the opposite.

(10-26-2026 01:02 PM)High Country Student Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 11:30 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 11:24 AM)T-Dog Wrote:  Would imagine it's dependent on when JMU and the Sun Belt negotiate a 2027 exit.

I'd say this is probably accurate. I'd expect an announcement by spring with a eye for 2027 even if it's announced as being 2028.

In the end I would prefer we not rush anything and make sure the fit is the correct one. We don't another short term add. Don't get me wrong I don't blame JMU for trying to move to a perceived better opportunity but ideally I'd like to add a program that fits and wants to be here.

Conference leadership then needs to get us all on the same path. One of the issues we have today is that some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6. We need the leadership to set a budget and performance standard that all members must meet.

These statements can contradict each other:

“We don't another short term add.“

“some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6”

If you want to be the best G6 conference, that may mean you need to add the schools with the highest aspirations and growth potential to reach those aspirations. That could include wanting to advance conferences. In the meantime, they will help the Belt while here. But this isn’t new news that there is a divide within the conference around that mentality vs the opposite.

I understand your statement but I'm hoping we make the SBC the best G6 and not the best stepping stone to the best G6.

(10-26-2026 01:34 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 01:02 PM)High Country Student Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 11:30 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 11:24 AM)T-Dog Wrote:  Would imagine it's dependent on when JMU and the Sun Belt negotiate a 2027 exit.

I'd say this is probably accurate. I'd expect an announcement by spring with a eye for 2027 even if it's announced as being 2028.

In the end I would prefer we not rush anything and make sure the fit is the correct one. We don't another short term add. Don't get me wrong I don't blame JMU for trying to move to a perceived better opportunity but ideally I'd like to add a program that fits and wants to be here.

Conference leadership then needs to get us all on the same path. One of the issues we have today is that some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6. We need the leadership to set a budget and performance standard that all members must meet.

These statements can contradict each other:

“We don't another short term add.“

“some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6”

If you want to be the best G6 conference, that may mean you need to add the schools with the highest aspirations and growth potential to reach those aspirations. That could include wanting to advance conferences. In the meantime, they will help the Belt while here. But this isn’t new news that there is a divide within the conference around that mentality vs the opposite.

I understand your statement but I'm hoping we make the SBC the best G6 and not the best stepping stone to the best G6.

And it could have happened too if we had all just stuck together. Once the AAC has its top 2-4 leave and the money dropped, ECU would have come our way. I think JMU leaving really hurt the long term trajectory of the league. I hope not, but that's how I see it. We need teams to leave for P4 opportunities, not other G6 leagues. Especially ones that arent much, if any, better in football.

(10-26-2026 02:06 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 01:34 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 01:02 PM)High Country Student Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 11:30 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 11:24 AM)T-Dog Wrote:  Would imagine it's dependent on when JMU and the Sun Belt negotiate a 2027 exit.

I'd say this is probably accurate. I'd expect an announcement by spring with a eye for 2027 even if it's announced as being 2028.

In the end I would prefer we not rush anything and make sure the fit is the correct one. We don't another short term add. Don't get me wrong I don't blame JMU for trying to move to a perceived better opportunity but ideally I'd like to add a program that fits and wants to be here.

Conference leadership then needs to get us all on the same path. One of the issues we have today is that some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6. We need the leadership to set a budget and performance standard that all members must meet.

These statements can contradict each other:

“We don't another short term add.“

“some schools like the status que while others want to be the best G6”

If you want to be the best G6 conference, that may mean you need to add the schools with the highest aspirations and growth potential to reach those aspirations. That could include wanting to advance conferences. In the meantime, they will help the Belt while here. But this isn’t new news that there is a divide within the conference around that mentality vs the opposite.

I understand your statement but I'm hoping we make the SBC the best G6 and not the best stepping stone to the best G6.

And it could have happened too if we had all just stuck together. Once the AAC has its top 2-4 leave and the money dropped, ECU would have come our way. I think JMU leaving really hurt the long term trajectory of the league. I hope not, but that's how I see it. We need teams to leave for P4 opportunities, not other G6 leagues. Especially ones that arent much, if any, better in football.

Did TxSt hurt as well going Pac?

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

(10-26-2026 11:30 AM)webster Wrote:  I thought the new thing to do was say "The Conference is not looking to add at this time", and then send someone an invite a couple weeks later.

Keep in mind that's not exactly what the American said.

“The American is not proactively seeking additional members. We will continue to evaluate the changing landscape and opportunities that strengthen the conference and support our collective mission.”

That statement basically translates to "We're not poaching anyone, so don't sue us, but we're evaluating some options." It's been widely reported that JMU approached the American and not the other way around, so it was accurate for the American to state that they were not "proactively" seeking additional members.

I dont thinkTexas St hurt us leaving. They never come close to winning the conf. It took a school way out yonder away and I think a lot of schools liked that. Don't screw it up by stretching the conf a long way...I think Ohio is close enough.

If we're adding for 2027, it would need to be in the next month or so. Getting teams on little notice is very difficult with exit fees and GOR situations right now.

(10-26-2026 07:55 PM)OsageJ Wrote:  I dont thinkTexas St hurt us leaving. They never come close to winning the conf. It took a school way out yonder away and I think a lot of schools liked that. Don't screw it up by stretching the conf a long way...I think Ohio is close enough.

Ohio is fine, unless Marshall is trying to get out as well. If Marshall leaves than we’d lose the travel partner that Ohio would partner with.

(10-26-2026 08:53 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 07:55 PM)OsageJ Wrote:  I dont thinkTexas St hurt us leaving. They never come close to winning the conf. It took a school way out yonder away and I think a lot of schools liked that. Don't screw it up by stretching the conf a long way...I think Ohio is close enough.

Ohio is fine, unless Marshall is trying to get out as well. If Marshall leaves than we’d lose the travel partner that Ohio would partner with.

Marshall is not going anywhere no money to do so.

(10-27-2026 07:50 AM)goherd17 Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 08:53 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 07:55 PM)OsageJ Wrote:  I dont thinkTexas St hurt us leaving. They never come close to winning the conf. It took a school way out yonder away and I think a lot of schools liked that. Don't screw it up by stretching the conf a long way...I think Ohio is close enough.

Ohio is fine, unless Marshall is trying to get out as well. If Marshall leaves than we’d lose the travel partner that Ohio would partner with.

Marshall is not going anywhere no money to do so.

I’m cool with that. I have no desire to play those AAC schools (except ECU) no desire to play MAC or CUSA schools. I love being in the SBC.

(10-27-2026 09:07 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(10-27-2026 07:50 AM)goherd17 Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 08:53 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 07:55 PM)OsageJ Wrote:  I dont thinkTexas St hurt us leaving. They never come close to winning the conf. It took a school way out yonder away and I think a lot of schools liked that. Don't screw it up by stretching the conf a long way...I think Ohio is close enough.

Ohio is fine, unless Marshall is trying to get out as well. If Marshall leaves than we’d lose the travel partner that Ohio would partner with.

Marshall is not going anywhere no money to do so.

I’m cool with that. I have no desire to play those AAC schools (except ECU) no desire to play MAC or CUSA schools. I love being in the SBC.

100% with you .

(10-27-2026 09:07 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(10-27-2026 07:50 AM)goherd17 Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 08:53 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(10-26-2026 07:55 PM)OsageJ Wrote:  I dont thinkTexas St hurt us leaving. They never come close to winning the conf. It took a school way out yonder away and I think a lot of schools liked that. Don't screw it up by stretching the conf a long way...I think Ohio is close enough.

Ohio is fine, unless Marshall is trying to get out as well. If Marshall leaves than we’d lose the travel partner that Ohio would partner with.

Marshall is not going anywhere no money to do so.

I’m cool with that. I have no desire to play those AAC schools (except ECU) no desire to play MAC or CUSA schools. I love being in the SBC.

Same. Wish ECU was a conference game, but not at the expense of Marshall and GS. UNCC can be scheduled OOC any time. The rest of the conference gets a big ol' meh.

According to the following tweet from an account w/ 18.5k followers (feel like that makes it somewhat relevant), the conference has put together an 8 person search committee to “search for a new conference member” : https://x.com/genetics56/status/21148569...D13sHmWoIw


“Search for a new conference member” can mean multiple things but take it for what it is.