(05-29-2021 04:25 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 03:58 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 03:26 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(05-28-2021 09:09 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  

(05-27-2021 11:32 PM)HerdZoned Wrote:  And not a one of them have the community support, facilities or athletic budget to survive the travel or extra 22 scholarships. The highest athletic budget belongs to Sam Houston at 17.3 million per year. Which would put them next to dead last in IA budgets.

As of right now and going into the future there are only 3 programs that could actually make the jump and succeed at it, North Dakota State, Jacksonville State and James Madison.

FYI, some of your comments don’t match current facts. Sam Houston’s budget is several million above Jacksonville State, for example. And virtually every one of the Texas4 spends more than LA Monroe, which holds the “honor” of being dead last in D1 FBS spending. I’m not sure how you can conclude some of these schools lack the alum or community support to fund the additional scholarships?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

I do agree that James Madison would have no trouble making the jump to FBS. A number of schools are better positioned than Jax State though...UC Davis and Cap Poly for starters.

Those last two would have to want to make a move first. And even if they did, they'd aim to be with their regional peers. Not some randoms like Tarleton State, Abilene Christian and Sam Houston State. No offense.

Do you follow FCS football? Sam Houston outside of NDSU is the most winningest football team of the last decade. And with this recent national championship arguably has a record that eclipsed even James Madison. No offense, but no one who follows college football would consider Tarleton State (one of the most winningest program from their time as a D2 program), ACU (great history of success, with a rising stock among FCS programs) or Sam Houston the recent Division 1 national champion a “bunch of randoms”. Especially compared to UC Davis and Cal Poly. Two Big Sky programs that have done literally nothing on the gridiron.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I do not follow FCS football; if I did I'd be a USD Torero supporter.

But I am an alum of a school which shares a conference with Cal Poly and UC Davis. If they had a choice of FBS and aligning with Nevada, Fresno State and Boise State - Cal Poly briefly was in a conference with Boise and Nevada in the mid 90s - vs FBS and aligning with Sam Houston State, ACU and Tarleton State, they'd choose the former. It's more about joining regional peers than anything else.

This. The idea of Cal Poly and/or the dungpilers joining some TX programs for a shot at FBS is nonsensical.

(05-29-2021 08:30 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 04:25 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 03:58 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 03:26 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(05-28-2021 09:09 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  FYI, some of your comments don’t match current facts. Sam Houston’s budget is several million above Jacksonville State, for example. And virtually every one of the Texas4 spends more than LA Monroe, which holds the “honor” of being dead last in D1 FBS spending. I’m not sure how you can conclude some of these schools lack the alum or community support to fund the additional scholarships?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

I do agree that James Madison would have no trouble making the jump to FBS. A number of schools are better positioned than Jax State though...UC Davis and Cap Poly for starters.

Those last two would have to want to make a move first. And even if they did, they'd aim to be with their regional peers. Not some randoms like Tarleton State, Abilene Christian and Sam Houston State. No offense.

Do you follow FCS football? Sam Houston outside of NDSU is the most winningest football team of the last decade. And with this recent national championship arguably has a record that eclipsed even James Madison. No offense, but no one who follows college football would consider Tarleton State (one of the most winningest program from their time as a D2 program), ACU (great history of success, with a rising stock among FCS programs) or Sam Houston the recent Division 1 national champion a “bunch of randoms”. Especially compared to UC Davis and Cal Poly. Two Big Sky programs that have done literally nothing on the gridiron.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I do not follow FCS football; if I did I'd be a USD Torero supporter.

But I am an alum of a school which shares a conference with Cal Poly and UC Davis. If they had a choice of FBS and aligning with Nevada, Fresno State and Boise State - Cal Poly briefly was in a conference with Boise and Nevada in the mid 90s - vs FBS and aligning with Sam Houston State, ACU and Tarleton State, they'd choose the former. It's more about joining regional peers than anything else.

This. The idea of Cal Poly and/or the dungpilers joining some TX programs for a shot at FBS is nonsensical.

Since I’m the one who mentioned these two schools I’ll clarify my comment. The question was which schools have the budget to move to FBS not which schools will join the WAC. I pointed out both Cal Poly and UCD have much larger athletic budgets budgets than Jacksonville State, one of the schools mentioned as one of the few FCS programs with the resources to move up along with James Madison and NDSU.

(05-30-2021 05:50 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 08:30 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 04:25 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 03:58 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 03:26 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  Those last two would have to want to make a move first. And even if they did, they'd aim to be with their regional peers. Not some randoms like Tarleton State, Abilene Christian and Sam Houston State. No offense.

Do you follow FCS football? Sam Houston outside of NDSU is the most winningest football team of the last decade. And with this recent national championship arguably has a record that eclipsed even James Madison. No offense, but no one who follows college football would consider Tarleton State (one of the most winningest program from their time as a D2 program), ACU (great history of success, with a rising stock among FCS programs) or Sam Houston the recent Division 1 national champion a “bunch of randoms”. Especially compared to UC Davis and Cal Poly. Two Big Sky programs that have done literally nothing on the gridiron.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I do not follow FCS football; if I did I'd be a USD Torero supporter.

But I am an alum of a school which shares a conference with Cal Poly and UC Davis. If they had a choice of FBS and aligning with Nevada, Fresno State and Boise State - Cal Poly briefly was in a conference with Boise and Nevada in the mid 90s - vs FBS and aligning with Sam Houston State, ACU and Tarleton State, they'd choose the former. It's more about joining regional peers than anything else.

This. The idea of Cal Poly and/or the dungpilers joining some TX programs for a shot at FBS is nonsensical.

Since I’m the one who mentioned these two schools I’ll clarify my comment. The question was which schools have the budget to move to FBS not which schools will join the WAC. I pointed out both Cal Poly and UCD have much larger athletic budgets budgets than Jacksonville State, one of the schools mentioned as one of the few FCS programs with the resources to move up along with James Madison and NDSU.

You said CP and ucd are "better positioned" which can mean a lot of things. I think there are a number of FCS programs that are "better positioned" from a budgetary standpoint. However when you factor in other metrics those in budgetary standing fall by the wayside.

Not that it matters as none of the CA FCS programs will be going FBS anytime soon, if ever; but CP has quite a bit of issues from an FBS standpoint. Sac State is better positioned than them on a number of fronts.

(05-30-2021 04:40 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(05-30-2021 05:50 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 08:30 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 04:25 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(05-29-2021 03:58 PM)coogkat14 Wrote:  Do you follow FCS football? Sam Houston outside of NDSU is the most winningest football team of the last decade. And with this recent national championship arguably has a record that eclipsed even James Madison. No offense, but no one who follows college football would consider Tarleton State (one of the most winningest program from their time as a D2 program), ACU (great history of success, with a rising stock among FCS programs) or Sam Houston the recent Division 1 national champion a “bunch of randoms”. Especially compared to UC Davis and Cal Poly. Two Big Sky programs that have done literally nothing on the gridiron.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I do not follow FCS football; if I did I'd be a USD Torero supporter.

But I am an alum of a school which shares a conference with Cal Poly and UC Davis. If they had a choice of FBS and aligning with Nevada, Fresno State and Boise State - Cal Poly briefly was in a conference with Boise and Nevada in the mid 90s - vs FBS and aligning with Sam Houston State, ACU and Tarleton State, they'd choose the former. It's more about joining regional peers than anything else.

This. The idea of Cal Poly and/or the dungpilers joining some TX programs for a shot at FBS is nonsensical.

Since I’m the one who mentioned these two schools I’ll clarify my comment. The question was which schools have the budget to move to FBS not which schools will join the WAC. I pointed out both Cal Poly and UCD have much larger athletic budgets budgets than Jacksonville State, one of the schools mentioned as one of the few FCS programs with the resources to move up along with James Madison and NDSU.

You said CP and ucd are "better positioned" which can mean a lot of things. I think there are a number of FCS programs that are "better positioned" from a budgetary standpoint. However when you factor in other metrics those in budgetary standing fall by the wayside.

Not that it matters as none of the CA FCS programs will be going FBS anytime soon, if ever; but CP has quite a bit of issues from an FBS standpoint. Sac State is better positioned than them on a number of fronts.

Yea. Budget is not the end all be all. Neither is program success otherwise we'd be FCS still lol.

Comments from the Eastern Kentucky AD about ASUN football going FBS.

Quote: Roan isn’t sure if the football league will have aspirations to move up to the FBS eventually, but added it will depend on what the “collective wants to do.”

“If one of them, including ourselves, said, ‘hey, we would like to test the FBS waters, (the commissioner) would be supportive and the league office would be supportive and the membership would be supportive,’” Roan said. “ I think the same can be said that if the league as a whole said, ‘hey, we’d like to see if there’s a pathway to FBS — there could be that pursuit of that as well.’”

https://www.murrayledger.com/sports/stat...71db9.html

(05-23-2021 04:09 PM)FirstandGoal Wrote:  Even mighty North Dakota State would require a significant boost in facilities. For an FCS school they have a great facility in the Fargo Dome, but how much would it cost to renovate or replace that facility with one large enough to meet the seating requirement.

The Fargo Dome already meets the minimum seating requirement. The requirement is 15000 and the Dome seats just over 18000.

(07-09-2021 03:54 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  

(05-23-2021 04:09 PM)FirstandGoal Wrote:  Even mighty North Dakota State would require a significant boost in facilities. For an FCS school they have a great facility in the Fargo Dome, but how much would it cost to renovate or replace that facility with one large enough to meet the seating requirement.

The Fargo Dome already meets the minimum seating requirement. The requirement is 15000 and the Dome seats just over 18000.

There is no seating requirement anymore for FBS (D1A) football. There is only the requirement for averaging 15,000 tickets sold over a two year period (with a third year to get back into compliance). This means a school really has to just buy up enough tickets once every 3 years to get to the average. You could have a 10,000 seat stadium and make this easy target. The reason one needs more seats is to attract non-conference home games from other FBS schools, particularly from schools that can help the bottom line. This is particularly true if your school is not located in a hotbed for recruiting. It takes a stadium of over 20,000 seats (probably more) and amenities like skyboxes to begin to maximize revenue. This is a tough investment for most schools since covid ravaged budgets and there was a general decline in athletic event attendance (and admissions) prior to the pandemic. That is likely to continue so a school has no guarantee they will recoup their investment in facilities expansion, let alone ever see a significant return on that investment. Having said that, the WAC has an interesting group of schools, many of which are bucking the current trends of shrinking enrollments as they are located in areas with rapidly growing populations, interest in athletics, decent recruiting bases, and appear ambitious (the Texas and Utah schools in particular).