(04-14-2013 11:10 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 09:32 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Can we please stop diluting FBS by calling up every community college with a goal post in the name of "adding new markets"?

We are not helping ourselves at all. There are already 9 teams that have recently began the transition from FCS to FBS with talks of more on the way.

That's an entire conference worth of FCS schools we've invited ove the last couple of years to share our revenue and exposure with all so we could keep 5 non-AQ conferences when we only need 4.

If it's too late to kick the 9+ newbies back down to FCS can we at least stop with the new additions? Its getting ridiculous.

Based on the NCAA's 2011 attendance report (the most recent that I could find), four of those newbies you consider yourselves above (Appalachian State, UTSA, Georgia Southern, Old Dominion) would be above the MAC's average. App State and UTSA would lead the conference easily among current members, and so would James Madison if they moved up. ODU would be second, and that's with a small stadium as a rate limiter.

I'm sorry, but you're not really in a position to get all haughty about FCS callups diluting the pristine waters of the FBS.

Ohio leads the MAC in football attendance at 22,000 a game and founded the MAC in 1946 as the original member.

As an established and quality member of the G5 I do think our opinion counts. Ohio recruits Georgia and Florida heavily and doesn't want the upgrades.

Personally I think a 60 member G5 is fine with 5 conferences of 12. Right now we are at 63 members with FCS call ups UMass, Charlotte and ODU in the ranks.

With all these FCS schools moving up that is going to lead to a collapse in FCS strength as 9 more schools equals 180 more scholarships heading to FBS.

(04-14-2013 11:23 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 11:10 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 09:32 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Can we please stop diluting FBS by calling up every community college with a goal post in the name of "adding new markets"?

We are not helping ourselves at all. There are already 9 teams that have recently began the transition from FCS to FBS with talks of more on the way.

That's an entire conference worth of FCS schools we've invited ove the last couple of years to share our revenue and exposure with all so we could keep 5 non-AQ conferences when we only need 4.

If it's too late to kick the 9+ newbies back down to FCS can we at least stop with the new additions? Its getting ridiculous.

Based on the NCAA's 2011 attendance report (the most recent that I could find), four of those newbies you consider yourselves above (Appalachian State, UTSA, Georgia Southern, Old Dominion) would be above the MAC's average. App State and UTSA would lead the conference easily among current members, and so would James Madison if they moved up. ODU would be second, and that's with a small stadium as a rate limiter.

I'm sorry, but you're not really in a position to get all haughty about FCS callups diluting the pristine waters of the FBS.

Ohio leads the MAC in football attendance at 22,000 a game and founded the MAC in 1946 as the original member.

As an established and quality member of the G5 I do think our opinion counts. Ohio recruits Georgia and Florida heavily and doesn't want the upgrades.

Personally I think a 60 member G5 is fine with 5 conferences of 12. Right now we are at 63 members with FCS call ups UMass, Charlotte and ODU in the ranks.

With all these FCS schools moving up that is going to lead to a collapse in FCS strength as 9 more schools equals 180 more scholarships heading to FBS.

I never said Ohio or MAC fans shouldn't have opinions. I said they shouldn't be so haughty about FCS callups when most of the MAC's schools average less than 20,000 fans (and in some cases well less than 20,000).

You can make the case that some of the FCS callups shouldn't be making the move, and that's fair. But you can also make the case that there's at least an equal number of FBS schools that have no business existing at that level.

I sincerely doubt the likes of App State, Ga. Southern, UTSA and ODU are going to do any more damage to the FBS than the likes of Idaho and Eastern Michigan already are.

(04-14-2013 11:35 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 11:23 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 11:10 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 09:32 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Can we please stop diluting FBS by calling up every community college with a goal post in the name of "adding new markets"?

We are not helping ourselves at all. There are already 9 teams that have recently began the transition from FCS to FBS with talks of more on the way.

That's an entire conference worth of FCS schools we've invited ove the last couple of years to share our revenue and exposure with all so we could keep 5 non-AQ conferences when we only need 4.

If it's too late to kick the 9+ newbies back down to FCS can we at least stop with the new additions? Its getting ridiculous.

Based on the NCAA's 2011 attendance report (the most recent that I could find), four of those newbies you consider yourselves above (Appalachian State, UTSA, Georgia Southern, Old Dominion) would be above the MAC's average. App State and UTSA would lead the conference easily among current members, and so would James Madison if they moved up. ODU would be second, and that's with a small stadium as a rate limiter.

I'm sorry, but you're not really in a position to get all haughty about FCS callups diluting the pristine waters of the FBS.

Ohio leads the MAC in football attendance at 22,000 a game and founded the MAC in 1946 as the original member.

As an established and quality member of the G5 I do think our opinion counts. Ohio recruits Georgia and Florida heavily and doesn't want the upgrades.

Personally I think a 60 member G5 is fine with 5 conferences of 12. Right now we are at 63 members with FCS call ups UMass, Charlotte and ODU in the ranks.

With all these FCS schools moving up that is going to lead to a collapse in FCS strength as 9 more schools equals 180 more scholarships heading to FBS.

I never said Ohio or MAC fans shouldn't have opinions. I said they shouldn't be so haughty about FCS callups when most of the MAC's schools average less than 20,000 fans (and in some cases well less than 20,000).

You can make the case that some of the FCS callups shouldn't be making the move, and that's fair. But you can also make the case that there's at least an equal number of FBS schools that have no business existing at that level.

It's a free country. People are entitled to their opinions.

(04-14-2013 11:40 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 11:35 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 11:23 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 11:10 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 09:32 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Can we please stop diluting FBS by calling up every community college with a goal post in the name of "adding new markets"?

We are not helping ourselves at all. There are already 9 teams that have recently began the transition from FCS to FBS with talks of more on the way.

That's an entire conference worth of FCS schools we've invited ove the last couple of years to share our revenue and exposure with all so we could keep 5 non-AQ conferences when we only need 4.

If it's too late to kick the 9+ newbies back down to FCS can we at least stop with the new additions? Its getting ridiculous.

Based on the NCAA's 2011 attendance report (the most recent that I could find), four of those newbies you consider yourselves above (Appalachian State, UTSA, Georgia Southern, Old Dominion) would be above the MAC's average. App State and UTSA would lead the conference easily among current members, and so would James Madison if they moved up. ODU would be second, and that's with a small stadium as a rate limiter.

I'm sorry, but you're not really in a position to get all haughty about FCS callups diluting the pristine waters of the FBS.

Ohio leads the MAC in football attendance at 22,000 a game and founded the MAC in 1946 as the original member.

As an established and quality member of the G5 I do think our opinion counts. Ohio recruits Georgia and Florida heavily and doesn't want the upgrades.

Personally I think a 60 member G5 is fine with 5 conferences of 12. Right now we are at 63 members with FCS call ups UMass, Charlotte and ODU in the ranks.

With all these FCS schools moving up that is going to lead to a collapse in FCS strength as 9 more schools equals 180 more scholarships heading to FBS.

I never said Ohio or MAC fans shouldn't have opinions. I said they shouldn't be so haughty about FCS callups when most of the MAC's schools average less than 20,000 fans (and in some cases well less than 20,000).

You can make the case that some of the FCS callups shouldn't be making the move, and that's fair. But you can also make the case that there's at least an equal number of FBS schools that have no business existing at that level.

It's a free country. People are entitled to their opinions.

Hence the line about "I never said Ohio or MAC fans shouldn't have opinions."

Or do you believe that once someone has an opinion, they're automatically shielded from criticism of it? Because if that's the case, I'm selling all my message board stock while I still can.

The more appropriate title should be "FBS pretenders, please move down". The NCAA would have been smart to enforce the standards they set.

There are plenty of teams that don't belong in FBS and their attendance shows it.

The NCAA won't ever do anything about them because being in FBS is worth a ton of revenue to schools so any attempt to divorce them from the TV money would leave to massive lawsuits.

Whats more likely is that with the playoff emerging and destroying the major post season difference between FCS and FBS, eventually what we will have is a defacto system where there really is a single Divison 1 that is divided into several subdivisions of approx 60 schools each that all play for separate national championships for football.

(04-14-2013 12:31 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Whats more likely is that with the playoff emerging and destroying the major post season difference between FCS and FBS, eventually what we will have is a defacto system where there really is a single Divison 1 that is divided into several subdivisions of approx 60 schools each that all play for separate national championships for football.

That's not going to happen soon. The 4-team FBS playoff (which will be around for at least 12 years) resembles the BCS much more than it resembles the FCS playoff tournament. No truly new system will emerge as long as the bowl game parasites still have their tentacles wrapped around the "playoff".

Well, what's more important, success on the field, or attendance? Especially when TV is given priority over game dates/times.

(04-14-2013 01:05 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 12:31 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Whats more likely is that with the playoff emerging and destroying the major post season difference between FCS and FBS, eventually what we will have is a defacto system where there really is a single Divison 1 that is divided into several subdivisions of approx 60 schools each that all play for separate national championships for football.

That's not going to happen soon. The 4-team FBS playoff (which will be around for at least 12 years) resembles the BCS much more than it resembles the FCS playoff tournament. No truly new system will emerge as long as the bowl game parasites still have their tentacles wrapped around the "playoff".

True, and I didn't mean that we will ever have a playoff like FCS.

More what I was getting at is that we won't have the system the mid-majors want which is the NCAA Basketball model where everybody in D1 gets to participate and send their champion to a massive playoff.

Instead we'll have several subdivisions of D-1 of approx 60 schools each that each have some kind of playoff (big or small) that determines THEIR national champion.

Frankly, I don't know why any school wouldn't either (1) move from FCS or FBS if they can cover the Title IX and facilities costs (unless you're one of the Big East schools with an FCS football program, in which case you're better off just collecting your basketball paychecks) or (2) drop football altogether. FCS is financial purgatory - you still have to spend about 70-80% of the costs that a low level FBS program would have with none of the revenue upside. With the new college football postseason revenue structure, I think you'll see a LOT more movement from FCS to FBS unless the NCAA steps in and puts a cap on further upgrades. You saw the Idahos and New Mexico States of the world absolutely refuse to even consider downgrading even when they couldn't find a conference home, and it honestly makes sense in this new world. FCS football is almost a guaranteed money-loser for an athletic department. FBS at least gives you a chance to make some revenue and the cost of the extra scholarships is likely worth it.

(04-14-2013 01:20 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 01:05 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 12:31 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Whats more likely is that with the playoff emerging and destroying the major post season difference between FCS and FBS, eventually what we will have is a defacto system where there really is a single Divison 1 that is divided into several subdivisions of approx 60 schools each that all play for separate national championships for football.

That's not going to happen soon. The 4-team FBS playoff (which will be around for at least 12 years) resembles the BCS much more than it resembles the FCS playoff tournament. No truly new system will emerge as long as the bowl game parasites still have their tentacles wrapped around the "playoff".

True, and I didn't mean that we will ever have a playoff like FCS.

More what I was getting at is that we won't have the system the mid-majors want which is the NCAA Basketball model where everybody in D1 gets to participate and send their champion to a massive playoff.

Instead we'll have several subdivisions of D-1 of approx 60 schools each that each have some kind of playoff (big or small) that determines THEIR national champion.

The "mid-majors" don't want everyone to participate in the playoffs. They just want their top team at least to be in them. That way the best team isn't determined by a vote, which you might as well just do at the beginning of the year and save yourself all the trouble of playing the games.

(04-14-2013 01:36 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Frankly, I don't know why any school wouldn't either (1) move from FCS or FBS if they can cover the Title IX and facilities costs (unless you're one of the Big East schools with an FCS football program, in which case you're better off just collecting your basketball paychecks) or (2) drop football altogether. FCS is financial purgatory - you still have to spend about 70-80% of the costs that a low level FBS program would have with none of the revenue upside. With the new college football postseason revenue structure, I think you'll see a LOT more movement from FCS to FBS unless the NCAA steps in and puts a cap on further upgrades. You saw the Idahos and New Mexico States of the world absolutely refuse to even consider downgrading even when they couldn't find a conference home, and it honestly makes sense in this new world. FCS football is almost a guaranteed money-loser for an athletic department. FBS at least gives you a chance to make some revenue and the cost of the extra scholarships is likely worth it.

A few years ago, I expected FCS schools to be dropping football or scholarships like crazy. Yet in this recession, the opposite is happening. Non-scholarship and low scholarship schools (i.e. Patriot League) are adding scholarships and more schools, especially commuter schools in the south, are adding football. Just off the top of my head, commuter schools in the last 20 years or less that have added (or will soon be adding) fb-UTSA, Lamar, SE Louisiana, South Alabama, Alabama-Birmingham, Georgia State, Kennesaw State, Central Florida, South Florida, FIU, FAU, Coastal Carolina, UNC-Charlotte and Old Dominion. That doesn't include schools like Houston Baptist, Incarnate Word and a bunch of division II/III & NAIA private schools.

Apparently they are convinced the intangible costs are worth it in order to connect with alumni and draw students, particularly male students, who are attending in lower numbers. I don't see any trend towards dropping football or scholarships.

FCS is a financial black hole, worse than being the bottom of FBS and worse than Division II with significantly fewer scholarships (although without Division I basketball revenues). But its not going away.

(04-13-2013 11:40 PM)darkdragon99 Wrote:  I hate "backfilling" and anyone who uses that word. Sunbelt is the lowest on the totem poll so they are forced to backfill with FCS schools.

How can the Sun Belt conference be the lowest of the low, when they actually added FCS power house schools.

Take a good look at CUSA. CUSA has 1 school that has been playing football for only 1 or 2 years; and another school that has never played football at all. That doesn't even address the other group of schools that CUSA added that have historically not been very good; and the fact that CUSA was pretty bad to begin with.

(04-14-2013 02:22 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 11:40 PM)darkdragon99 Wrote:  I hate "backfilling" and anyone who uses that word. Sunbelt is the lowest on the totem poll so they are forced to backfill with FCS schools.

How can the Sun Belt conference be the lowest of the low, when they actually added FCS power house schools.

Take a good look at CUSA. CUSA has 1 school that has been playing football for only 1 or 2 years; and another school that has never played football at all.

They chose to go after good teams instead of markets.

(04-14-2013 02:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 01:36 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Frankly, I don't know why any school wouldn't either (1) move from FCS or FBS if they can cover the Title IX and facilities costs (unless you're one of the Big East schools with an FCS football program, in which case you're better off just collecting your basketball paychecks) or (2) drop football altogether. FCS is financial purgatory - you still have to spend about 70-80% of the costs that a low level FBS program would have with none of the revenue upside. With the new college football postseason revenue structure, I think you'll see a LOT more movement from FCS to FBS unless the NCAA steps in and puts a cap on further upgrades. You saw the Idahos and New Mexico States of the world absolutely refuse to even consider downgrading even when they couldn't find a conference home, and it honestly makes sense in this new world. FCS football is almost a guaranteed money-loser for an athletic department. FBS at least gives you a chance to make some revenue and the cost of the extra scholarships is likely worth it.

A few years ago, I expected FCS schools to be dropping football or scholarships like crazy. Yet in this recession, the opposite is happening. Non-scholarship and low scholarship schools (i.e. Patriot League) are adding scholarships and more schools, especially commuter schools in the south, are adding football. Just off the top of my head, commuter schools in the last 20 years or less that have added (or will soon be adding) fb-UTSA, Lamar, SE Louisiana, South Alabama, Alabama-Birmingham, Georgia State, Kennesaw State, Central Florida, South Florida, FIU, FAU, Coastal Carolina, UNC-Charlotte and Old Dominion. That doesn't include schools like Houston Baptist, Incarnate Word and a bunch of division II/III & NAIA private schools.

Apparently they are convinced the intangible costs are worth it in order to connect with alumni and draw students, particularly male students, who are attending in lower numbers. I don't see any trend towards dropping football or scholarships.

FCS is a financial black hole, worse than being the bottom of FBS and worse than Division II with significantly fewer scholarships (although without Division I basketball revenues). But its not going away.

True - I don't think it's going away, although the trend you're describing is largely along the lines of what I was thinking: schools keep wanting to upgrade (whether it's adding scholarships at the FCS level or moving fully to FBS) and very few are contemplating any type of downgrade. In a vaccum, I think it would be better to have no football at all than having an FCS program from a pure financial standpoint, but decisions obviously aren't made in a vacuum or solely based on financial reasons. Regardless, the OP's call for a stop to FCS-to-FBS moves is likely going to go unheeded - if anything, the trend is going to accelerate.

(04-14-2013 02:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 01:36 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Frankly, I don't know why any school wouldn't either (1) move from FCS or FBS if they can cover the Title IX and facilities costs (unless you're one of the Big East schools with an FCS football program, in which case you're better off just collecting your basketball paychecks) or (2) drop football altogether. FCS is financial purgatory - you still have to spend about 70-80% of the costs that a low level FBS program would have with none of the revenue upside. With the new college football postseason revenue structure, I think you'll see a LOT more movement from FCS to FBS unless the NCAA steps in and puts a cap on further upgrades. You saw the Idahos and New Mexico States of the world absolutely refuse to even consider downgrading even when they couldn't find a conference home, and it honestly makes sense in this new world. FCS football is almost a guaranteed money-loser for an athletic department. FBS at least gives you a chance to make some revenue and the cost of the extra scholarships is likely worth it.

A few years ago, I expected FCS schools to be dropping football or scholarships like crazy. Yet in this recession, the opposite is happening. Non-scholarship and low scholarship schools (i.e. Patriot League) are adding scholarships and more schools, especially commuter schools in the south, are adding football. Just off the top of my head, commuter schools in the last 20 years or less that have added (or will soon be adding) fb-UTSA, Lamar, SE Louisiana, South Alabama, Alabama-Birmingham, Georgia State, Kennesaw State, Central Florida, South Florida, FIU, FAU, Coastal Carolina, UNC-Charlotte and Old Dominion. That doesn't include schools like Houston Baptist, Incarnate Word and a bunch of division II/III & NAIA private schools.

Apparently they are convinced the intangible costs are worth it in order to connect with alumni and draw students, particularly male students, who are attending in lower numbers. I don't see any trend towards dropping football or scholarships.

FCS is a financial black hole, worse than being the bottom of FBS and worse than Division II with significantly fewer scholarships (although without Division I basketball revenues). But its not going away.

It does seem like an odd trend. It would make a lot of financial sense for many FCS schools to adopt the no-scholarship football, Pioneer League model -- but they're not doing that. There are many private schools and smaller public schools that have no realistic chance of having 10,000 real, live, paying ticketholders in the seats at their home games, yet they persist in pouring money into football (and the women's sports that are also needed when you have all those football scholarships).

I guess I can see the thinking for schools like that, even though it's a perpetual money loser for them. It's one thing for schools like, say, UC-Irvine, UC-Santa Barbara, etc. to have no football team -- they have a prestigious university name and will always be turning away more applicants than they admit. They don't need it. But schools without public funding, or without as much public funding, and without the university name recognition, might think they need football and D-I sports just to remind the average member of the public that they are a full-service university and not a community college or an online degree mill. There are a bazillion colleges out there these days, and maybe those that don't have big name recognition to draw on are looking to D-I and/or football to make them stand out in the crowd.

(04-13-2013 09:32 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Can we please stop diluting FBS by calling up every community college with a goal post in the name of "adding new markets"?

We are not helping ourselves at all. There are already 9 teams that have recently began the transition from FCS to FBS with talks of more on the way.

That's an entire conference worth of FCS schools we've invited ove the last couple of years to share our revenue and exposure with all so we could keep 5 non-AQ conferences when we only need 4.

If it's too late to kick the 9+ newbies back down to FCS can we at least stop with the new additions? Its getting ridiculous.

I'd say we kick down 9 current FBS schools that have never done anything and let some new teams give it a shot. We can start with Ohio U.

Appalachian State's 2011 average football attendance was just over 26,000. Seeing as some of these FCS call ups have better average attendance than many current FBS teams, why complain?

App State topped these schools in average attendance in 2011, just to name a few:
Akron
Arkansas St.
Ball St.
Bowling Green
Colorado St.
Duke
Eastern Michigan
FIU
FAU
Idaho
Kent State
ULM
Marshall
Memphis
Miami (OH)
MTSU
Nevada
New Mexico
New Mexico St.
Northern Illinois
Ohio
Rice
San Jose St.
SMU
Toledo
Troy
Tulane
Tulsa
UAB
UNLV
Utah St.
Western Kentucky
Western Michigan
Wyoming

And we were only behind a few of these teams by a less than ten thousand fans, our stadium capacity holding us back:
Boise St.
Boston College
Connecticut
Fresno St.
Hawaii
Houston
ULL
Navy
Northwestern
Southern Miss.
TCU
Temple
UCF
Vanderbilt
Wake Forest
Washington St.

So, I see your point, but I don't get your point at all. Some of these FCS move-ups are going to be stronger teams than some that are already in the FBS. Who are you to say who can move up and who can't?

(04-14-2013 09:44 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-14-2013 09:25 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-13-2013 09:32 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Can we please stop diluting FBS by calling up every community college with a goal post in the name of "adding new markets"?

My only question here is, who is this "we" you speak of?

Its silly to pretend that the "adding new markets" is the driving force for the call-ups. The driving force for the call-ups are the efforts of Mid-Major FBS conferences to survive while coping with the aftershocks of Major FBS conference expansion.

If Major FBS conference expansion stops, the FCS call-ups will come to a stop shortly thereafter.

So in the end this is a call for "can we please stop the game of Major FBS conference realignment", and while I'm all for it, its not quite clear who this "we" is on this board who is doing the game of Major FBS conference realignment and who can therefore stop doing it.

I think the whole points, how many overlapping non-AQ conferences are rally needed to give everyone a home? Do we really need a MAC, Sunbelt, CUSA, and a AAC? Probably not.

What we really need is a serious meeting of the G5 schools where all exit and entry fees are suspended. Have tv people there. Let the schools that want to be together be together. Reorganize and hopefully come up with new conference lineups that make sense for everyone and cut costs while allowing like universities to associate. Make it a week long and have tv people and NCAA there to aid in the decision making. The only rule is that at the end of the conference, everyone has a home. The goal is ending the stream of FCS move ups. After this conclave there is a moratorium on move ups. Come to think of it, maybe the power 5 should have one of one of these too (before the G5 has theirs).

That would be like that time when a girl blows of her friends to hang out with the most popular girl in school, then the popular girl says shes not cool enough to she acts like her old friends are okay.

Reorganizing would never work because Troy may want to be in a league with USA, USM, UAB, Georgia State, Middle Tenn, Georgia Southern, WKU, ASU, ULL, and La Tech. But I can point to at least three schools who think they are better than each other on that short list. USM wont want to be with South, La Tech wont want to be with ULL, UAB wont want to be with Troy, Marshall wont want to be with Georgia State or Troy.

Now imagine doing this with over 50 schools, would be madness. For the record I remember when Texas State beat you guys, Houston fans were sick to their stomach and acted like they lost to a girls team. I'm pretty sure Houston doesn't want to be in a conference with UNT, Texas State, and UTSA.

(04-14-2013 07:45 PM)rknj8993 Wrote:  Appalachian State's 2011 average football attendance was just over 26,000. Seeing as some of these FCS call ups have better average attendance than many current FBS teams, why complain?

.......

So, I see your point, but I don't get your point at all. Some of these FCS move-ups are going to be stronger teams than some that are already in the FBS. Who are you to say who can move up and who can't?

26K, 16K, who cares? neither number is anywhere near what the big schools do. Do you think the commission of the SEC looks at 26K and thinks that's impressive? its all small potatoes. nobody but other non-AQ fans waste time splitting hairs over such relatively tiny numbers.

and why would I want stronger teams to move up? I'm rooting for my team, not yours. I'm selfish, I don't want to share and i was his here first. Unfair and unreasonable? YES. as is everything else about college football.