43 million is still a big budget. They would jump to the top off the Belt if they joined.

(10-06-2013 11:54 AM)statefanatic Wrote:  43 million is still a big budget. They would jump to the top off the Belt if they joined.

They would jump to the top of CUSA also not only that but double the bottom tier of the conference

They really aren't getting a good return on their money.


In the SBC JMU would be spending more money than...

ASU
ULM
G. Southern
UALR

combine...or close to it

53million or 43million is a crazy amount of money to spend....

53 million would put them in line with the Miss, schools of the SEC

Most of the Northern teams have or show higher budgets. Some of those are because of having to utilize union workers
for things and therefore they are paid high salaries, or high amounts to do work. A few years ago a Northern school and a
Southern school both built basically the same stadium or work done, and the Northern school's payout was twice as high
as the Southern schools.
Not saying that's what it is because believe JMU has a hockey team. Remember seeing a picture of one practicing on a frozen
pond. If so that is very expensive. Unless it's a club team.
App State has, or had, a hockey club team a couple of years ago. Saw some figures on how much it would cost to have it as
a sport. No way cost wise anytime soon.

(10-06-2013 02:40 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Most of the Northern teams have or show higher budgets. Some of those are because of having to utilize union workers
for things and therefore they are paid high salaries, or high amounts to do work. A few years ago a Northern school and a
Southern school both built basically the same stadium or work done, and the Northern school's payout was twice as high
as the Southern schools.
Not saying that's what it is because believe JMU has a hockey team. Remember seeing a picture of one practicing on a frozen
pond. If so that is very expensive. Unless it's a club team.
App State has, or had, a hockey club team a couple of years ago. Saw some figures on how much it would cost to have it as
a sport. No way cost wise anytime soon.

It's a club team as far as I know.

(10-06-2013 02:40 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Most of the Northern teams have or show higher budgets. Some of those are because of having to utilize union workers
for things and therefore they are paid high salaries, or high amounts to do work. A few years ago a Northern school and a
Southern school both built basically the same stadium or work done, and the Northern school's payout was twice as high
as the Southern schools.
Not saying that's what it is because believe JMU has a hockey team. Remember seeing a picture of one practicing on a frozen
pond. If so that is very expensive. Unless it's a club team.
App State has, or had, a hockey club team a couple of years ago. Saw some figures on how much it would cost to have it as
a sport. No way cost wise anytime soon.

Yep...I live in Arkansas gittin' a pond is kinda spensive...

JMU would be an interesting addition to any major FBS conference, biggest thing I'd think about is footprint - do they really fit in SBC or MAC? CUSA might not want them, and AAC would probably feel the same.

(10-06-2013 04:56 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  JMU would be an interesting addition to any major FBS conference, biggest thing I'd think about is footprint - do they really fit in SBC or MAC? CUSA might not want them, and AAC would probably feel the same.

I think JMU wants to be in

1) CUSA
2) MAC
3) Sun Belt

In that order. I think they realize that staying in the CAA is probably not a good idea.

I'm not big on taking anyone at this point. While Texas State and USA appear to have managed the transition well (and ahead of schedule), we have a non-competitive NMSU and Idaho joining next year (sorry guys), we have Georgia State that still hasn't turned the corner, AND we have Appy and Ga Southern coming on board next year. I really don't see the point of adding another team until we get at least two more of the newbies competitive.

For me, it makes more sense for JMU to get a MAC bid and Missouri State to announce joining the Belt in 2015. The MAC wins (as they'll have balanced divisions) and the SBC wins (they get a team that's a better fit for their footprint - and they get TIME to digest the teams that are transitioning). And JMU doesn't have to play in the Belt.

Everyone wins!

I am not a big fan of JMU simply because they are 300 miles from the current outlier.

(10-06-2013 05:53 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  I am not a big fan of JMU simply because they are 300 miles from the current outlier.

Yeah, on the East Coast we probably need a team in Nova Scotia to even out the East and West outliers.

(10-06-2013 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 04:56 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  JMU would be an interesting addition to any major FBS conference, biggest thing I'd think about is footprint - do they really fit in SBC or MAC? CUSA might not want them, and AAC would probably feel the same.

For me, it makes more sense for JMU to get a MAC bid and Missouri State to announce joining the Belt in 2015. The MAC wins (as they'll have balanced divisions) and the SBC wins (they get a team that's a better fit for their footprint - and they get TIME to digest the teams that are transitioning). And JMU doesn't have to play in the Belt.

Ironic thing probably the opposite will happen. JMU to Belt, Missouri State to the MAC.

(10-06-2013 06:48 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 04:56 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  JMU would be an interesting addition to any major FBS conference, biggest thing I'd think about is footprint - do they really fit in SBC or MAC? CUSA might not want them, and AAC would probably feel the same.

For me, it makes more sense for JMU to get a MAC bid and Missouri State to announce joining the Belt in 2015. The MAC wins (as they'll have balanced divisions) and the SBC wins (they get a team that's a better fit for their footprint - and they get TIME to digest the teams that are transitioning). And JMU doesn't have to play in the Belt.

Ironic thing probably the opposite will happen. JMU to Belt, Missouri State to the MAC.

That would be quite a bit of irony. Not sure I see Missouri State getting a MAC invite though. You guys are quite a ways off from the closest MAC school.

(10-06-2013 06:06 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 05:53 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  I am not a big fan of JMU simply because they are 300 miles from the current outlier.

Yeah, on the East Coast we probably need a team in Nova Scotia to even out the East and West outliers.

The difference is your tennis team isn't going to Moscow, Idaho. The east football schools will make one trip each to there and Las Cruses every 3-4 years. The Olympic teams will play much more frequently.

(10-06-2013 06:53 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 06:48 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 04:56 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  JMU would be an interesting addition to any major FBS conference, biggest thing I'd think about is footprint - do they really fit in SBC or MAC? CUSA might not want them, and AAC would probably feel the same.

For me, it makes more sense for JMU to get a MAC bid and Missouri State to announce joining the Belt in 2015. The MAC wins (as they'll have balanced divisions) and the SBC wins (they get a team that's a better fit for their footprint - and they get TIME to digest the teams that are transitioning). And JMU doesn't have to play in the Belt.

Ironic thing probably the opposite will happen. JMU to Belt, Missouri State to the MAC.

That would be quite a bit of irony. Not sure I see Missouri State getting a MAC invite though. You guys are quite a ways off from the closest MAC school.

That is true. We are associate members in the MAC already though in field hockey and men's swimming.

(10-06-2013 07:26 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 06:53 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 06:48 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 04:56 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  JMU would be an interesting addition to any major FBS conference, biggest thing I'd think about is footprint - do they really fit in SBC or MAC? CUSA might not want them, and AAC would probably feel the same.

For me, it makes more sense for JMU to get a MAC bid and Missouri State to announce joining the Belt in 2015. The MAC wins (as they'll have balanced divisions) and the SBC wins (they get a team that's a better fit for their footprint - and they get TIME to digest the teams that are transitioning). And JMU doesn't have to play in the Belt.

Ironic thing probably the opposite will happen. JMU to Belt, Missouri State to the MAC.

That would be quite a bit of irony. Not sure I see Missouri State getting a MAC invite though. You guys are quite a ways off from the closest MAC school.

That is true. We are associate members in the MAC already though in field hockey and men's swimming.

Anything is possible, but I think the MAC is probably looking East. And they've already got 13 teams, none of whom are likely to be poached by another conference anytime soon (sorry NIU). The new G5 punishes conferences with more than 12 teams.

I don't sweat budget data much because schools and conferences all report things differently.

C-USA treats NCAA distributions for sport sponsorship and grant-in-aid as league revenue, Sun Belt just passes the check through deeming it school revenue (since it is based on what the school does that is correct and is only paid to the league as a convenience for the NCAA).

Sun Belt has low dues and takes operating revenue out of income and passes the rest to the schools, C-USA passes all the revenue to the schools on the books but takes operating expenses divides by 12 (now 14) and assesses all members dues based on that.

But no matter, there are still many people who think the stated payout of a bowl is the size of the check you get no matter what.

I think JMU need only ask and then not act weird during the official visit or say anything strange during conversations with other presidents to get an invite.

Only way JMU has an issue is if A-State and Louisiana and an ally or two take a page from Congress and hold the JMU invite hostage to force a positive vote for NMSU.

As to JMU being an outlier. Lafayette is about equidistant from JMU and NMSU and the folks at UL are all for full membership for NMSU.

Could the Belt do JMU, NMSU, and Mo. St. for all sports?

I know that we would have 13 football members, but until Idaho finds a home the western members could skip playing one western member each year. What does the MAC do for scheduling with 13?

(10-06-2013 07:43 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 07:26 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 06:53 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 06:48 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(10-06-2013 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  For me, it makes more sense for JMU to get a MAC bid and Missouri State to announce joining the Belt in 2015. The MAC wins (as they'll have balanced divisions) and the SBC wins (they get a team that's a better fit for their footprint - and they get TIME to digest the teams that are transitioning). And JMU doesn't have to play in the Belt.

Ironic thing probably the opposite will happen. JMU to Belt, Missouri State to the MAC.

That would be quite a bit of irony. Not sure I see Missouri State getting a MAC invite though. You guys are quite a ways off from the closest MAC school.

That is true. We are associate members in the MAC already though in field hockey and men's swimming.

Anything is possible, but I think the MAC is probably looking East. And they've already got 13 teams, none of whom are likely to be poached by another conference anytime soon (sorry NIU). The new G5 punishes conferences with more than 12 teams.

The MAC's additions since 1980 have been Akron (1992), Buffalo (1998), UCF (2001), Temple (2007), and UMass (2012). They've had their eyes set eastward for decades now. Don't see them expanding to the west at all.

The SBC had 12 for a very short time before WKU bolted for CUSA. I agree with arkstfan-- if JMU is ready to say yes to the SBC I think they will be invited. They serve to replace WKU in the eastern part of the conference. I really believe Benson and the SBC leaders put the big push on JMU last Spring but they were not going to commit to going anywhere before this past June 1.

I also agree that if Missouri State is ready to commit the SBC would go to 13 football playing schools if JMU and Missouri State are willing to join.

I think there is great resistance from the eastern SBC schools to allow NMSU and/or Idaho in for anything other than football.

Wonder why schools don't play regional games and matches in soccer and tennis then a conference tournament like in golf, track & CC. Teams could be seeded on a RPI basis figured on SOS and W&L. Would save a bunch of $.