(02-02-2019 11:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 10:51 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 08:06 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:10 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 09:37 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Well you said only 85 make the cut.

Someone has to drop and if UTEP/Rice aren't included in the drops....maybe North Texas.

North Texas was not a program that was even mentioned in the article. Nor should it have been. The Mean Green have been to four bowls in the last 5 seasons, and averaged over 23,000 fans per game last season. We are on the upswing. If you really want me to create a list of 40 to 45 teams that could/should be removed from the FBS, I can do that.

Cutting to 85 only provides room for like 22 G5 programs.

The entire AAC is probably in one would figure. Then BYU/Army. That is 14 right there.

At least 8 programs in the MWC are worthy, if not the whole conference.

I don't see where there is room for UNT and they would be behind So Miss, Marshall, AState and a few others listed in the article for making that type of cut. Not enough history and a glut of Texas schools hurts.

You are mistaken. Not every program in the AAC or MWC deserves to be in the 85. If there was a cut off at 85 programs, those 21 or 22 spots in the FBS should go to programs that have the best combinations of resources, commitment to playing at the FBS level, and on the field success. If you look at attendance numbers, athletic budgets, facilities, OOC scheduling, records over the last five season, and bowl appearances over the last five seasons, it becomes clearer which programs should get those 21/22 spots. Of course even under these standards, some programs that are weak in an area or two will still be included. There are just not enough G5 programs to fill all of the spots with solid performers in each area.

Here are the programs that I think would have the best chance at making the cut of 85. And I'll be upfront about my choices. I do give a higher consideration to public universities with larger alumni bases. In my opinion, they just seem to have more access to resources, and greater potential for growth.

Without reading further, let me guess ... North Texas is on that list?

But it doesn't really matter who is or isn't on these lists because these discussions about cuts are IMO a pipe dream. Nobody currently in FBS is going to be "cut" by some higher authority. And that's because the highest authority, the major conferences, want the G5 teams around. To an Alabama or an Ohio State, it's wonderful that some MAC or whatever school is willing to soak its students for $25 million in fees each year so it can puff out its chest and pretend it is a "big time" university because it is somehow tangentially in the same football category, thus allowing the real big time schools to play and beat them for full credit.

Basically, at Eastern Michigan, students are paying about $1,000 each per year for the "privilege" of being able to occasionally schedule and get beat by Michigan or whoever. That's a dream situation for Michigan.

In the past, they have, a couple of times, raised the standards once the top division gets too much bigger than 100.

That's what they will do, raise the cost of staying. Actual cost of attendance was the first step. They may raise the financial aid and scholarship requirements at some point, but the P5 seems content for now to simply outspend everyone else.