(04-19-2011 11:22 AM)AtlantaJag Wrote:  

(04-18-2011 10:21 PM)stebo Wrote:  

(04-18-2011 07:01 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  USA still has a few openings later this decade (I'm not sure if USA is allowed 12 games in 2012, so there may be one available there also), but

2012 (transition, USA counts as FBS opponent): @Mississippi State, @North Carolina State, UTSA
2013 (first year eligible for postseason play): Kent State, @Navy, @Tennessee, @Tulane
2014: @Kent State, Navy, Mississippi State, @Georgia
2015: North Carolina State, @Navy
2016: Navy, @Louisiana State, @Mississippi State
2017: Oklahoma State, @Louisiana Tech, @Missisippi
2018: Louisiana Tech
2019: @Oklahoma State, @Tulane
2020: Tulane, @Oklahoma State, @Southern Mississippi
2021: Southern Mississippi

I was under the impression that the transition window is 2 years long - with the third year being the post season eligible year. Has something changed that I did not read about?

I have always read that the rules state - 2 year transition period - during those 2 years, the team must play at least 5 Div I FBS teams at home (average over the 2 years), 15K paid attendance on the average (not butts in seats, but 15K tickets sold on the average over the 2 years), and now the rule has been added that an invitation must come from a current FBS conference. If 2012 is transition year #1, how could the Jags qualify for post season in 2013? 2011 is definitely not transition year #1 - you are not playing the minimum amount of Div I FBS games. The Belt will provide 4 of the 5 home games in 2012 (UTSA will count as the 5th even though they will be transitional as well). Maybe you can count 1 FCS home game towards that 5 game requirement - but that still makes 2012 the first year of transition and 2013 as the second year - making 2014 the first year you would be eligible to play in a bowl, correct?

2011 is the transition year #1. USA can play any teams above D3 for this season. The only requirement is five home games. 2012 is where 11 games are required to be FBS.

OIC, so this year is your first year of transition... so you will actually be FBS transitional this year? Does that mean that you will count as an FBS win (or loss) for a team's bowl eligibility this year? Thanks for clarifying. :)

In 2011 USA counts as an FCS opponent for scheduling purposes, even though USA will probably have more than 63 (the FCS limit) of scholarship players. USA's 2011 schedule can be found at http://www.usajaguars.com/schedule.aspx?path=football

Per USA's site, they are allowed a 12th game in 2012.

(04-19-2011 01:48 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  NMSU believes their future is tied to the west and will stick with the WAC as long as it is remotely viable. I think they would join in football if another WAC left but just as UTEP came to the conclusion they had to go east to thrive, NMSU believes it must go west to survive. From all I gather, NMSU will not support adding additional Texas schools to the WAC unless it is the only way to stay in business.

what a mistake on their part. UTEP has thrived by being associated with Texas schools and being in a similar situation as UTEP, I see no reason why New Mexico St would not also benefit by increasing following the UTEP model and increasing their Texas presence.

(04-19-2011 09:56 PM)solohawks Wrote:  what a mistake on their part. UTEP has thrived by being associated with Texas schools and being in a similar situation as UTEP, I see no reason why New Mexico St would not also benefit by increasing following the UTEP model and increasing their Texas presence.

Every school has a different situation with regard to the fans/alumni. UTEP found most of their alumni move east to DFW, San Antonio, Austin or Houston. Thus connecting that direction makes sense for them. In NMSU's case, they evaluated and came up with a different answer. Conferences are not one size fits all and what works for one doesn't for another similar school in a reasonably close location.

(04-20-2011 11:08 AM)VideoGreenEagle Wrote:  

(04-19-2011 09:56 PM)solohawks Wrote:  what a mistake on their part. UTEP has thrived by being associated with Texas schools and being in a similar situation as UTEP, I see no reason why New Mexico St would not also benefit by increasing following the UTEP model and increasing their Texas presence.

Every school has a different situation with regard to the fans/alumni. UTEP found most of their alumni move east to DFW, San Antonio, Austin or Houston. Thus connecting that direction makes sense for them.

Funny you should mention alumni bases. North Texas alumni reside in Texas for the most part. UL has nearly as many alumni in Texas as they do in Louisiana.

Using UTEP's logic, both of our schools would do best to reside in a Texas based league, or at least a conference division based in Texas.

(04-18-2011 09:31 PM)Adler Wrote:  Bring in NMSU and Texas State. Let the others continue to build their programs with hopes of possibly being future Sun Belt expansion candidates.

If Texas State were FBS, I'd say come on in...but they're not.