(03-02-2021 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 01:47 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 12:10 PM)ken d Wrote:  Essentially my goal would be to substantially increase barriers to entry into D-I so as to significantly reduce the size of that division.

Is that the goal of any of the "power" conferences or schools? AFAIK, no P5 commissioner and no AD or president at an athletic powerhouse have said they want to reduce the size of D-I.

If anyone was serious about doing this, they would do it by speaking the universal language: Money. They could change the March Madness distribution so that only teams that win at least one game in the tournament earn a revenue share for their conference. Of course, the NCAA will never do that, which is just one more indication that no one with influence is serious about reducing the number of schools in Division I.

I agree with this. I don't see evidence that the P5 wants to reduce D1 for hoops or FBS in football. E.g., personally, I think more than half of the G5 football programs are ridiculously insolvent (the rest are merely very insolvent) and should be moved down to FCS or something to a more sustainable level of investment.

But it's clear to me that the P5 doesn't think the same. They like having G5 around to play as OOC games, and if G5 are dumb enough to incur $25 million in operating losses each year for the privilege of playing against P5, the P5 has zero issue with that.

That’s a good point—they are essentially paying through the nose to be in college football’s highest tier on paper only.

It would make far more sense for the vast majority of the G5 to come together and conclude it’s not worth it anymore and collectively re-class to FCS and being the upper crust of FCS.

The trouble though is making FCS football a marketable product for television and convincing your fan base that having a legit shot at a national title is better than an occasional upset of a big boy and trips to the Dollar General Bowl.

There’s maybe 20 teams in the P5 that I think should stay in the FBS ranks.

(03-03-2021 10:35 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 01:47 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 12:10 PM)ken d Wrote:  Essentially my goal would be to substantially increase barriers to entry into D-I so as to significantly reduce the size of that division.

Is that the goal of any of the "power" conferences or schools? AFAIK, no P5 commissioner and no AD or president at an athletic powerhouse have said they want to reduce the size of D-I.

If anyone was serious about doing this, they would do it by speaking the universal language: Money. They could change the March Madness distribution so that only teams that win at least one game in the tournament earn a revenue share for their conference. Of course, the NCAA will never do that, which is just one more indication that no one with influence is serious about reducing the number of schools in Division I.

I agree with this. I don't see evidence that the P5 wants to reduce D1 for hoops or FBS in football. E.g., personally, I think more than half of the G5 football programs are ridiculously insolvent (the rest are merely very insolvent) and should be moved down to FCS or something to a more sustainable level of investment.

But it's clear to me that the P5 doesn't think the same. They like having G5 around to play as OOC games, and if G5 are dumb enough to incur $25 million in operating losses each year for the privilege of playing against P5, the P5 has zero issue with that.

That’s a good point—they are essentially paying through the nose to be in college football’s highest tier on paper only.

It would make far more sense for the vast majority of the G5 to come together and conclude it’s not worth it anymore and collectively re-class to FCS and being the upper crust of FCS.

The trouble though is making FCS football a marketable product for television and convincing your fan base that having a legit shot at a national title is better than an occasional upset of a big boy and trips to the Dollar General Bowl.

There’s maybe 20 teams in the P5 that I think should stay in the FBS ranks.

Some FCS schools are just fine being FCS. I am affiliated with one such school. But some are itching to be FBS.

The core problem is aspirational. When USF was FCS, we couldn't become FBS fast enough, because in our mind, being FBS was part of the overall mission to become "peers" with established state schools like Florida and Florida State. Being FCS would somehow send a signal that we were content, as an institution, to be forever in the shadow of those two schools. So we hustled our way up to FBS. Of course, once in FBS, we came to realize that there is a P5/G5 distinction so we had to become AQ/P5. Then we got that status, then lost it, so are now trying to regain it. Basically, being G5 *is* like being quasi-FCS. You're above FCS, but below the top rung. Limbo.

IMO, and I admit I do not speak for a majority of USF fans, who are clearly gung-ho about how much we spend on football, it is not necessary for USF to be "top rung" in football to be a great school. The last eight years is proof of that - we were demoted from P5 to G5 and yet our standing as an institution has continued to rise anyway. Would I pop a bottle of Cristal if we got an ACC or Big 12 invite? Sure. But I would rather run a fiscally sustainable football program that doesn't soak our students for huge fees than to chase that dream forever.

You do have FCS teams that do belong in FBS while there are some FBS schools that belong to FCS. JMU, Jacksonville State, Delaware, Eastern Kentucky, Montana, Montana State, EWU, NDSU, SDSU, Northern Iowa, Weber State, NC A&T, Florida A&M, Chatanooga, Towson, New Hampshire, Stony Brook etc belongs in FBS and schools like San Jose State, La.-Monroe, Charlotte, Texas State, Eastern Michigan, Ball State, Akron and some others belong in FCS.

I think there should be an honor system for football for FBS, FCS and D2 schools that can be gradutaing upwards. FBS G5 schools football team and be demoted to FCS while FCS schools' football team can be promoted to a G5 conference. Sam Houston State gets promoted to the SBC while Texas State gets demoted in football. Presbyterian's football team can be demoted to D2 while Valdosta's football team can be promoted to FCS. It can keep things fresh at all levels to get fan interests. JMU can be C-USA being promoted while ODU or Charlotte gets demoted to FCS.

(03-04-2021 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-03-2021 10:35 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 01:47 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 12:10 PM)ken d Wrote:  Essentially my goal would be to substantially increase barriers to entry into D-I so as to significantly reduce the size of that division.

Is that the goal of any of the "power" conferences or schools? AFAIK, no P5 commissioner and no AD or president at an athletic powerhouse have said they want to reduce the size of D-I.

If anyone was serious about doing this, they would do it by speaking the universal language: Money. They could change the March Madness distribution so that only teams that win at least one game in the tournament earn a revenue share for their conference. Of course, the NCAA will never do that, which is just one more indication that no one with influence is serious about reducing the number of schools in Division I.

I agree with this. I don't see evidence that the P5 wants to reduce D1 for hoops or FBS in football. E.g., personally, I think more than half of the G5 football programs are ridiculously insolvent (the rest are merely very insolvent) and should be moved down to FCS or something to a more sustainable level of investment.

But it's clear to me that the P5 doesn't think the same. They like having G5 around to play as OOC games, and if G5 are dumb enough to incur $25 million in operating losses each year for the privilege of playing against P5, the P5 has zero issue with that.

That’s a good point—they are essentially paying through the nose to be in college football’s highest tier on paper only.

It would make far more sense for the vast majority of the G5 to come together and conclude it’s not worth it anymore and collectively re-class to FCS and being the upper crust of FCS.

The trouble though is making FCS football a marketable product for television and convincing your fan base that having a legit shot at a national title is better than an occasional upset of a big boy and trips to the Dollar General Bowl.

There’s maybe 20 teams in the P5 that I think should stay in the FBS ranks.

Some FCS schools are just fine being FCS. I am affiliated with one such school. But some are itching to be FBS.

The core problem is aspirational. When USF was FCS, we couldn't become FBS fast enough, because in our mind, being FBS was part of the overall mission to become "peers" with established state schools like Florida and Florida State. Being FCS would somehow send a signal that we were content, as an institution, to be forever in the shadow of those two schools. So we hustled our way up to FBS. Of course, once in FBS, we came to realize that there is a P5/G5 distinction so we had to become AQ/P5. Then we got that status, then lost it, so are now trying to regain it. Basically, being G5 *is* like being quasi-FCS. You're above FCS, but below the top rung. Limbo.

IMO, and I admit I do not speak for a majority of USF fans, who are clearly gung-ho about how much we spend on football, it is not necessary for USF to be "top rung" in football to be a great school. The last eight years is proof of that - we were demoted from P5 to G5 and yet our standing as an institution has continued to rise anyway. Would I pop a bottle of Cristal if we got an ACC or Big 12 invite? Sure. But I would rather run a fiscally sustainable football program that doesn't soak our students for huge fees than to chase that dream forever.

TV dollars have unfortunately turned FBS into an all-in or all-out situation.

The bottom quarter of the P5 and top quarter of the G5/BYU are virtually identical in quality of program and if you took a data set of say 200 games between members of those 2 groups the results for the P5s and G5’s would be pretty similar.

However, having ties to a handful of tent pole programs gets you 10s of millions in tv revenue, not having them means earning crumbs.

BYU, Boise St, San Diego St, Fresno St, AFA, Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati, ECU, USF, UCF, Temple, Army, and Navy all belong in the top tier and you could probably throw SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa in there too.

The MAC, SBC, C-USA, and bottom half of the MWC should all really be in FCS.

(03-04-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-03-2021 10:35 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 01:47 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Is that the goal of any of the "power" conferences or schools? AFAIK, no P5 commissioner and no AD or president at an athletic powerhouse have said they want to reduce the size of D-I.

If anyone was serious about doing this, they would do it by speaking the universal language: Money. They could change the March Madness distribution so that only teams that win at least one game in the tournament earn a revenue share for their conference. Of course, the NCAA will never do that, which is just one more indication that no one with influence is serious about reducing the number of schools in Division I.

I agree with this. I don't see evidence that the P5 wants to reduce D1 for hoops or FBS in football. E.g., personally, I think more than half of the G5 football programs are ridiculously insolvent (the rest are merely very insolvent) and should be moved down to FCS or something to a more sustainable level of investment.

But it's clear to me that the P5 doesn't think the same. They like having G5 around to play as OOC games, and if G5 are dumb enough to incur $25 million in operating losses each year for the privilege of playing against P5, the P5 has zero issue with that.

That’s a good point—they are essentially paying through the nose to be in college football’s highest tier on paper only.

It would make far more sense for the vast majority of the G5 to come together and conclude it’s not worth it anymore and collectively re-class to FCS and being the upper crust of FCS.

The trouble though is making FCS football a marketable product for television and convincing your fan base that having a legit shot at a national title is better than an occasional upset of a big boy and trips to the Dollar General Bowl.

There’s maybe 20 teams in the P5 that I think should stay in the FBS ranks.

Some FCS schools are just fine being FCS. I am affiliated with one such school. But some are itching to be FBS.

The core problem is aspirational. When USF was FCS, we couldn't become FBS fast enough, because in our mind, being FBS was part of the overall mission to become "peers" with established state schools like Florida and Florida State. Being FCS would somehow send a signal that we were content, as an institution, to be forever in the shadow of those two schools. So we hustled our way up to FBS. Of course, once in FBS, we came to realize that there is a P5/G5 distinction so we had to become AQ/P5. Then we got that status, then lost it, so are now trying to regain it. Basically, being G5 *is* like being quasi-FCS. You're above FCS, but below the top rung. Limbo.

IMO, and I admit I do not speak for a majority of USF fans, who are clearly gung-ho about how much we spend on football, it is not necessary for USF to be "top rung" in football to be a great school. The last eight years is proof of that - we were demoted from P5 to G5 and yet our standing as an institution has continued to rise anyway. Would I pop a bottle of Cristal if we got an ACC or Big 12 invite? Sure. But I would rather run a fiscally sustainable football program that doesn't soak our students for huge fees than to chase that dream forever.

TV dollars have unfortunately turned FBS into an all-in or all-out situation.

The bottom quarter of the P5 and top quarter of the G5/BYU are virtually identical in quality of program and if you took a data set of say 200 games between members of those 2 groups the results for the P5s and G5’s would be pretty similar.

However, having ties to a handful of tent pole programs gets you 10s of millions in tv revenue, not having them means earning crumbs.

BYU, Boise St, San Diego St, Fresno St, AFA, Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati, ECU, USF, UCF, Temple, Army, and Navy all belong in the top tier and you could probably throw SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa in there too.

The MAC, SBC, C-USA, and bottom half of the MWC should all really be in FCS.

That last point resonates, because what you say about the bottom of P5/top of G5 being essentially the same applies in the other end as well - the top of FCS also overlaps with the bottom of G5. Heck there have been a few FCS, like NDST and JMU, that have been as good as some P5.

(03-04-2021 02:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-03-2021 10:35 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(03-02-2021 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I agree with this. I don't see evidence that the P5 wants to reduce D1 for hoops or FBS in football. E.g., personally, I think more than half of the G5 football programs are ridiculously insolvent (the rest are merely very insolvent) and should be moved down to FCS or something to a more sustainable level of investment.

But it's clear to me that the P5 doesn't think the same. They like having G5 around to play as OOC games, and if G5 are dumb enough to incur $25 million in operating losses each year for the privilege of playing against P5, the P5 has zero issue with that.

That’s a good point—they are essentially paying through the nose to be in college football’s highest tier on paper only.

It would make far more sense for the vast majority of the G5 to come together and conclude it’s not worth it anymore and collectively re-class to FCS and being the upper crust of FCS.

The trouble though is making FCS football a marketable product for television and convincing your fan base that having a legit shot at a national title is better than an occasional upset of a big boy and trips to the Dollar General Bowl.

There’s maybe 20 teams in the P5 that I think should stay in the FBS ranks.

Some FCS schools are just fine being FCS. I am affiliated with one such school. But some are itching to be FBS.

The core problem is aspirational. When USF was FCS, we couldn't become FBS fast enough, because in our mind, being FBS was part of the overall mission to become "peers" with established state schools like Florida and Florida State. Being FCS would somehow send a signal that we were content, as an institution, to be forever in the shadow of those two schools. So we hustled our way up to FBS. Of course, once in FBS, we came to realize that there is a P5/G5 distinction so we had to become AQ/P5. Then we got that status, then lost it, so are now trying to regain it. Basically, being G5 *is* like being quasi-FCS. You're above FCS, but below the top rung. Limbo.

IMO, and I admit I do not speak for a majority of USF fans, who are clearly gung-ho about how much we spend on football, it is not necessary for USF to be "top rung" in football to be a great school. The last eight years is proof of that - we were demoted from P5 to G5 and yet our standing as an institution has continued to rise anyway. Would I pop a bottle of Cristal if we got an ACC or Big 12 invite? Sure. But I would rather run a fiscally sustainable football program that doesn't soak our students for huge fees than to chase that dream forever.

TV dollars have unfortunately turned FBS into an all-in or all-out situation.

The bottom quarter of the P5 and top quarter of the G5/BYU are virtually identical in quality of program and if you took a data set of say 200 games between members of those 2 groups the results for the P5s and G5’s would be pretty similar.

However, having ties to a handful of tent pole programs gets you 10s of millions in tv revenue, not having them means earning crumbs.

BYU, Boise St, San Diego St, Fresno St, AFA, Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati, ECU, USF, UCF, Temple, Army, and Navy all belong in the top tier and you could probably throw SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa in there too.

The MAC, SBC, C-USA, and bottom half of the MWC should all really be in FCS.

That last point resonates, because what you say about the bottom of P5/top of G5 being essentially the same applies in the other end as well - the top of FCS also overlaps with the bottom of G5. Heck there have been a few FCS, like NDST and JMU, that have been as good as some P5.

Competitively, the top 25 of FCS is comparable with all of G5 except the top 5-10 G5 programs (e.g. Cincinnati and Boise) and when an FCS program is on a NDSU like roll they're competitive with the middle of P5 programs.

I’d curious what what the results would be if you took each MAC team and ran a simulation of the results if they played every MVFC team. Out of 11 MVFC games how many victories would each MAC school score?

Want to really shake things up? Requite Division I schools to sponsor the following five sports:

Men's basketball
Women's basketball
Football
Men's soccer
Women's soccer

All D-I teams sponsor men's and women's basketball, though that wasn't always the case (Miami famously did not play men's basketball from 1971-1988). Around 100 Division I schools do not sponsor football, 150 do not sponsor men's soccer (including most of the Big 12) and 20 that do not play women's soccer.