6-5 would be a huge accomplishment. This is a tough schedule for an established FBS program, let alone a new one transitioning.

(04-20-2022 07:31 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  6-5 would be a huge accomplishment. This is a tough schedule for an established FBS program, let alone a new one transitioning.

I know Cignetti would never say it publicly, but I do wonder what he thinks is truly possible.
Perhaps I am too high on Cignetti, but I have a feeling he is going to shatter our expectations.

(04-20-2022 05:59 AM)HyperDuke Wrote:  Sure, you didn’t say 8 wins. What is your expected win total?

It would absolutely be huge. It has nothing to do with coach/player mentality or approach.

A winning season may be “huge” for you…but it is expected by players and coaches, who play and prepare for games, and whose “mentality and approach” has EVERYTHING to do with a game’s and season’s outcomes.

(04-20-2022 07:31 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  6-5 would be a huge accomplishment. This is a tough schedule for an established FBS program, let alone a new one transitioning.

Enough of this nonsense. It’s as if those subscribing to this line of thinking believe JMU just started playing D1 tackle football.

I can guarantee that there’s not a current JMU football player or coach who anticipates losing a single game, or posting a losing record this season. Hedging predictions on the 2022 season record based on the rationale that this is JMU’s inaugural FBS season has fundamentally turned JMU fandom on its head.

I’m all for being rational and setting reasonable expectations. In the last 10 years of FCS success, JMU fans have become legendary for becoming disgruntled because our guys didn’t win every game, every year. That said, lowering expectations (now) to the level where having a winning season would be “huge” only because JMU is in its first year of FBS play, is a manifestation of the same legendary attitude of outsized expectations, but only in reverse.

JMU may (or may not) win (or lose) every game this year. Yet, as a reminder, there was a reason why JMU was granted a fast-track to full FBS status.

JMU is (to be accurate) not in “transition” this year. JMU is playing a full FBS schedule THIS YEAR. Why? Because JMU (the FB program, team and university) is considered prepared and ready to compete, and win, as a full FBS team THIS YEAR. This is not a transition year, it is simply the first year of JMU playing FB as a member of FBS.

Sure, I’m hopeful (as are all JMU fans should be) that the recruiting profile of the FB program will become stronger, and will grow and improve with future years playing at the FBS level. But that anticipated level of future success in recruitment has nothing to do with the caliber and ability of the current 2022 JMU team, or it’s ability to compete and win this year.

Winning every game is the goal. Finishing the season with a winning season is the expectation. Qualifying a winning season in 2022 as “huge” is demeaning to the ability of the current players and coaches.

I (like every JMU fan) who participates on this board is looking forward to the 2022 FB season. If JMU posts a winning season that would be great, expected, but a good start. If JMU loses every game I’ll be disappointed, and surprised. But 6-5? That’s now “huge”?

6-5 would not (IMO) qualify as “huge”…certainly it would not be as “huge”as winning JMU’s first FCS NC, or it’s second. A 6-5 inaugural FBS season would not be as “huge” as defeating UVA way-back-when, or a ranked VT at their place. Not as “huge” as the women winning the NC in Lax. Not as “huge” as the women making the WCWS and winning its first two games. Not as “huge” as hosting Game Day, or changing conferences. Finishing undefeated would be huge, and receiving an exemption to play in a 2022 Bowl game would be “huge.”

Insufferable and delusional.

(04-20-2022 09:29 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  Enough of this nonsense. It’s as if those subscribing to this line of thinking believe JMU just started playing D1 tackle football.

I can guarantee that there’s not a current JMU football player or coach who anticipates losing a single game, or posting a losing record this season.

What a pile of garbage. You’re arguing against a position no one has articulated. No one said the players think they will lose games. No one said the coaches don’t expect to win.

Do you acknowledge the stupidity of this position after our first loss this season? I suspect you won’t. I imagine more insane mental gymnastics are up next.

Huge for 2022, absolutely. Would it be huge for 2023? Probably not. Come on dude. Get a grip.

Just for the record, here is an article from Hero Sports detailing the records of the most recent FCS schools to move to FBS.
https://herosports.com/fcs-football-to-f...ions-bzbz/
Based on history, 6-5 isn't that out of the norm. However, no team has ever went full into FBS in one year since Marshall in the 90s.

And while we can argue semantics, what we are doing is making a transition:
"the process or a period of changing from one state or condition to another"
We were in FCS and will be FBS, therefore we are transitioning. Perhaps not in the same way other schools have, but what we are doing is just that: transitioning.
And we aren't eligible for post season or bowl games, therefore we aren't fully FBS in the way that every other FBS team will be this year.

(04-20-2022 11:04 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  We were in FCS and will be FBS, therefore we are transitioning. Perhaps not in the same way other schools have, but what we are doing is just that: transitioning.
And we aren't eligible for post season or bowl games, therefore we aren't fully FBS in the way that every other FBS team will be this year.

Correct, effectively we are just skipping year one of transition and starting at year 2 as a full member of an FBS conference and games counting as FBS games. It is still officially an NCAA transition year.

Believe JMU filed (or will file) for an exemption that cuts one year off the transition and grants us full FBS status with postseason access in 2023 season. If not already approved, it seems a foregone conclusion that it will be.

(04-20-2022 11:04 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  Just for the record, here is an article from Hero Sports detailing the records of the most recent FCS schools to move to FBS.
https://herosports.com/fcs-football-to-f...ions-bzbz/
Based on history, 6-5 isn't that out of the norm. However, no team has ever went full into FBS in one year since Marshall in the 90s.

And while we can argue semantics, what we are doing is making a transition:
"the process or a period of changing from one state or condition to another"
We were in FCS and will be FBS, therefore we are transitioning. Perhaps not in the same way other schools have, but what we are doing is just that: transitioning.
And we aren't eligible for post season or bowl games, therefore we aren't fully FBS in the way that every other FBS team will be this year.

Ah, Semantics. It’s not a matter of “we will be FBS”….JMU will be (as of July 1, 2022) fully FBS. There’s nothing to parse word-wise there.

There’s no “ramping” up by adding scholarships over a 2-year period. There will be no balance of games against FCS & FBS teams on the schedule during the first year of FBS play. JMU will be, as of July 1, fully FBS, and playing a full conference schedule against fellow SBC programs.

The only “transition” from June 30th to July 1st is in nomenclature, and the restriction JMU will play under in 2022 excluding JMU from the possibility of participating in a Bowl game (should JMU’s record meet the regular season requirements).

None of the above of which has anything to do with the silly notion that a 6-5 regular season record (in year one) should be considered “huge.”

Speaking of semantics, some synonyms for “huge” are “colossal, enormous, gigantic, mammoth, and vast”...

Yes, a season record of 6-5 (as I’ve already acknowledged) would be good. as winning every game is the objective. But really, when in the history of JMU FB does a 6-5 record qualify it as “Colossal”? “Enormous”? “Gigantic”? What fundamental difference would a 6-5 record bring about in the history of JMU athletics that a 5-6 record would not? A 6-5 record is “huge”? So what does that make a 5-6 record? Almost “huge”? Give me a break.

Yes, the level of competition in 2022 will have changed. Yes, as fans, we don’t know how the Dukes will stack up during its first season in SBC play. It’ll be fun, regardless of the final W-L record, but let’s not get carried away with heralding a 6-5 record.

I’ve already shared what (IMO) would make the first FBS season “huge”….going undefeated, or nearly so. Getting an exemption to play in a bowl game because JMU surprises in its first year. Does anyone think that (given the schedule) that if JMU won 11 (maybe even 10) games the Dukes would not be ranked in the top 25? THAT would be “huge” (or fill in the appropriate synonym). That sort of performance would significantly change the FB landscape for JMU, just as the VT win, the NCs, etc. did. A first year 6-5? Not so much.

JMU is transitioning, we're essentially in year two of transition. Playing a full FBS schedule but not eligible for the conference championship or a bowl game. We're (hopefully) cutting the transition in half, not cutting it out completely.

(04-20-2022 01:19 PM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:04 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  Just for the record, here is an article from Hero Sports detailing the records of the most recent FCS schools to move to FBS.
https://herosports.com/fcs-football-to-f...ions-bzbz/
Based on history, 6-5 isn't that out of the norm. However, no team has ever went full into FBS in one year since Marshall in the 90s.

And while we can argue semantics, what we are doing is making a transition:
"the process or a period of changing from one state or condition to another"
We were in FCS and will be FBS, therefore we are transitioning. Perhaps not in the same way other schools have, but what we are doing is just that: transitioning.
And we aren't eligible for post season or bowl games, therefore we aren't fully FBS in the way that every other FBS team will be this year.

Ah, Semantics. It’s not a matter of “we will be FBS”….JMU will be (as of July 1, 2022) fully FBS. There’s nothing to parse word-wise there.

There’s no “ramping” up by adding scholarships over a 2-year period. There will be no balance of games against FCS & FBS teams on the schedule during the first year of FBS play. JMU will be, as of July 1, fully FBS, and playing a full conference schedule against fellow SBC programs.

The only “transition” from June 30th to July 1st is in nomenclature, and the restriction JMU will play under in 2022 excluding JMU from the possibility of participating in a Bowl game (should JMU’s record meet the regular season requirements).

None of the above of which has anything to do with the silly notion that a 6-5 regular season record (in year one) should be considered “huge.”

Speaking of semantics, some synonyms for “huge” are “colossal, enormous, gigantic, mammoth, and vast”...

Yes, a season record of 6-5 (as I’ve already acknowledged) would be good. as winning every game is the objective. But really, when in the history of JMU FB does a 6-5 record qualify it as “Colossal”? “Enormous”? “Gigantic”? What fundamental difference would a 6-5 record bring about in the history of JMU athletics that a 5-6 record would not? A 6-5 record is “huge”? So what does that make a 5-6 record? Almost “huge”? Give me a break.

Yes, the level of competition in 2022 will have changed. Yes, as fans, we don’t know how the Dukes will stack up during its first season in SBC play. It’ll be fun, regardless of the final W-L record, but let’s not get carried away with heralding a 6-5 record.

I’ve already shared what (IMO) would make the first FBS season “huge”….going undefeated, or nearly so. Getting an exemption to play in a bowl game because JMU surprises in its first year. Does anyone think that (given the schedule) that if JMU won 11 (maybe even 10) games the Dukes would not be ranked in the top 25? THAT would be “huge” (or fill in the appropriate synonym). That sort of performance would significantly change the FB landscape for JMU, just as the VT win, the NCs, etc. did. A first year 6-5? Not so much.

In regards to scholarships, yes, we will fully be FBS.
We still won't be eligible for the post season or bowl games? Why? Because we are in the eyes of the NCAA "transitioning". Perhaps not in the same way as most of the teams before us (aside from Marshall).
I know many will disagree with this, but I truly believe the quality of players is going to go up now that we are FBS. That has to play at least a small factor.
That being said, even with a JMU FCS roster we should be better than the ESPN RPI.
I suppose the point I'm making is while we are ahead of where most are, I don't expect our full potential to be seen this season.
I do agree to an extent that 6-5 probably shouldn't be heralded as "huge" or "colossal" or whatever synonym you choose to use, but it isn't a call to action either.
Just planning to enjoy this season regardless of the outcome. The best is yet to come.

(04-20-2022 01:19 PM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:04 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  Just for the record, here is an article from Hero Sports detailing the records of the most recent FCS schools to move to FBS.
https://herosports.com/fcs-football-to-f...ions-bzbz/
Based on history, 6-5 isn't that out of the norm. However, no team has ever went full into FBS in one year since Marshall in the 90s.

And while we can argue semantics, what we are doing is making a transition:
"the process or a period of changing from one state or condition to another"
We were in FCS and will be FBS, therefore we are transitioning. Perhaps not in the same way other schools have, but what we are doing is just that: transitioning.
And we aren't eligible for post season or bowl games, therefore we aren't fully FBS in the way that every other FBS team will be this year.

Ah, Semantics. It’s not a matter of “we will be FBS”….JMU will be (as of July 1, 2022) fully FBS. There’s nothing to parse word-wise there.

There’s no “ramping” up by adding scholarships over a 2-year period. There will be no balance of games against FCS & FBS teams on the schedule during the first year of FBS play. JMU will be, as of July 1, fully FBS, and playing a full conference schedule against fellow SBC programs.

The only “transition” from June 30th to July 1st is in nomenclature, and the restriction JMU will play under in 2022 excluding JMU from the possibility of participating in a Bowl game (should JMU’s record meet the regular season requirements).

None of the above of which has anything to do with the silly notion that a 6-5 regular season record (in year one) should be considered “huge.”

Speaking of semantics, some synonyms for “huge” are “colossal, enormous, gigantic, mammoth, and vast”...

Yes, a season record of 6-5 (as I’ve already acknowledged) would be good. as winning every game is the objective. But really, when in the history of JMU FB does a 6-5 record qualify it as “Colossal”? “Enormous”? “Gigantic”? What fundamental difference would a 6-5 record bring about in the history of JMU athletics that a 5-6 record would not? A 6-5 record is “huge”? So what does that make a 5-6 record? Almost “huge”? Give me a break.

Yes, the level of competition in 2022 will have changed. Yes, as fans, we don’t know how the Dukes will stack up during its first season in SBC play. It’ll be fun, regardless of the final W-L record, but let’s not get carried away with heralding a 6-5 record.

I’ve already shared what (IMO) would make the first FBS season “huge”….going undefeated, or nearly so. Getting an exemption to play in a bowl game because JMU surprises in its first year. Does anyone think that (given the schedule) that if JMU won 11 (maybe even 10) games the Dukes would not be ranked in the top 25? THAT would be “huge” (or fill in the appropriate synonym). That sort of performance would significantly change the FB landscape for JMU, just as the VT win, the NCs, etc. did. A first year 6-5? Not so much.

We are in year 2 of the transition, skipping year one. While we are playing a full FBS schedule, we are not a full FBS team as shown by the fact that we are not bowl eligible.

As far as expectations I do agree that a lot of people's expectations are a bit low. Most of us have been saying we could beat most if not all of these teams while were FCS so why not now. I understand one game is different than 11, but I think 5-6 and 6-5 is a bit low.

(04-20-2022 01:40 PM)jmu98 Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 01:19 PM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:04 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  Just for the record, here is an article from Hero Sports detailing the records of the most recent FCS schools to move to FBS.
https://herosports.com/fcs-football-to-f...ions-bzbz/
Based on history, 6-5 isn't that out of the norm. However, no team has ever went full into FBS in one year since Marshall in the 90s.

And while we can argue semantics, what we are doing is making a transition:
"the process or a period of changing from one state or condition to another"
We were in FCS and will be FBS, therefore we are transitioning. Perhaps not in the same way other schools have, but what we are doing is just that: transitioning.
And we aren't eligible for post season or bowl games, therefore we aren't fully FBS in the way that every other FBS team will be this year.

Ah, Semantics. It’s not a matter of “we will be FBS”….JMU will be (as of July 1, 2022) fully FBS. There’s nothing to parse word-wise there.

There’s no “ramping” up by adding scholarships over a 2-year period. There will be no balance of games against FCS & FBS teams on the schedule during the first year of FBS play. JMU will be, as of July 1, fully FBS, and playing a full conference schedule against fellow SBC programs.

The only “transition” from June 30th to July 1st is in nomenclature, and the restriction JMU will play under in 2022 excluding JMU from the possibility of participating in a Bowl game (should JMU’s record meet the regular season requirements).

None of the above of which has anything to do with the silly notion that a 6-5 regular season record (in year one) should be considered “huge.”

Speaking of semantics, some synonyms for “huge” are “colossal, enormous, gigantic, mammoth, and vast”...

Yes, a season record of 6-5 (as I’ve already acknowledged) would be good. as winning every game is the objective. But really, when in the history of JMU FB does a 6-5 record qualify it as “Colossal”? “Enormous”? “Gigantic”? What fundamental difference would a 6-5 record bring about in the history of JMU athletics that a 5-6 record would not? A 6-5 record is “huge”? So what does that make a 5-6 record? Almost “huge”? Give me a break.

Yes, the level of competition in 2022 will have changed. Yes, as fans, we don’t know how the Dukes will stack up during its first season in SBC play. It’ll be fun, regardless of the final W-L record, but let’s not get carried away with heralding a 6-5 record.

I’ve already shared what (IMO) would make the first FBS season “huge”….going undefeated, or nearly so. Getting an exemption to play in a bowl game because JMU surprises in its first year. Does anyone think that (given the schedule) that if JMU won 11 (maybe even 10) games the Dukes would not be ranked in the top 25? THAT would be “huge” (or fill in the appropriate synonym). That sort of performance would significantly change the FB landscape for JMU, just as the VT win, the NCs, etc. did. A first year 6-5? Not so much.

We are in year 2 of the transition, skipping year one. While we are playing a full FBS schedule, we are not a full FBS team as shown by the fact that we are not bowl eligible.

As far as expectations I do agree that a lot of people's expectations are a bit low. Most of us have been saying we could beat most if not all of these teams while were FCS so why not now. I understand one game is different than 11, but I think 5-6 and 6-5 is a bit low.

After looking at the recent history of FCS to FBS teams, I agree with that.
Another thing to consider is that we are absolutely going to get an uptick in talent just by having the FBS label. Our talent pool is going to increase, therefore should have a stronger, deeper roster than we do this year.
We have been barely able to capitalize on the move yet.
The best of JMU is yet to come. We ARE a sleeping giant that is just starting to wake up. Right now we are a bit drowsy.

This emphasis on "transitioning" is entertaining to me. Will there be an increase in the level of competition, absolutely, but let's look at the realities of where the JMU football program is at right now.
1. Full 85 scholarships in 2022. Due to the COVID year and some roster moves by the coaching staff, we are indeed at full strength for an FBS team.
2. Many of JMU's players chose JMU over FBS programs. Whether right out of high school or by transferring from an FBS school to JMU, I am confident in the skill level of our current players. We have transfers from Marshall, AState, Coastal, Liberty, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Colorado State and likely more that I don't recall while typing this. Look at how many guys have transferred to JMU from FBS schools that never saw the field and subsequently left the program because the talent we already had on the roster was superior. Talent, size, speed and intelligence are not of concern to me at this point. If we could dominate ECU, push the heck out of NC State, beat SMU, compete against UNC and scare the wits out of WVU then I am good with feeling confident going into SBC play. ECU, UNC, and NC State had future NFL QB's when we played them.
3. JMU football and JMU athletics in general have built a winning culture and have the facilities, support and ability to compete and win.
4. Depth concerns are not talent for me, but rather experience. However, we have been playing a high percentage of backups for some years now. Add this years transfers and I expect to have plenty of depth. Physical conditioning is top notch and will not be a problem.
5. For years now, we have gotten everybody's best game. Out of all opponent's 11 games JMU was the big game for them all. Will there be an increase in the level of play from our opponents, assuredly there will, but we had more talent and depth than all of our previous opponents NDSU somewhat excepted. SBC play will be exciting and challenging but not over our heads.
6. Will talent improve in the years to come? I fully expect it will because of all that JMU has to offer and because only the P5 will consistently have better talent and more money.
7. Like every year, I approach the season expecting to win every game. Those expectations will be adjusted as results come in, but for now I am excited and looking for great things from JMU football.

(04-20-2022 02:49 PM)AllForDukes Wrote:  This emphasis on "transitioning" is entertaining to me. Will there be an increase in the level of competition, absolutely, but let's look at the realities of where the JMU football program is at right now.
1. Full 85 scholarships in 2022. Due to the COVID year and some roster moves by the coaching staff, we are indeed at full strength for an FBS team.
2. Many of JMU's players chose JMU over FBS programs. Whether right out of high school or by transferring from an FBS school to JMU, I am confident in the skill level of our current players. We have transfers from Marshall, AState, Coastal, Liberty, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Colorado State and likely more that I don't recall while typing this. Look at how many guys have transferred to JMU from FBS schools that never saw the field and subsequently left the program because the talent we already had on the roster was superior. Talent, size, speed and intelligence are not of concern to me at this point. If we could dominate ECU, push the heck out of NC State, beat SMU, compete against UNC and scare the wits out of WVU then I am good with feeling confident going into SBC play. ECU, UNC, and NC State had future NFL QB's when we played them.
3. JMU football and JMU athletics in general have built a winning culture and have the facilities, support and ability to compete and win.
4. Depth concerns are not talent for me, but rather experience. However, we have been playing a high percentage of backups for some years now. Add this years transfers and I expect to have plenty of depth. Physical conditioning is top notch and will not be a problem.
5. For years now, we have gotten everybody's best game. Out of all opponent's 11 games JMU was the big game for them all. Will there be an increase in the level of play from our opponents, assuredly there will, but we had more talent and depth than all of our previous opponents NDSU somewhat excepted. SBC play will be exciting and challenging but not over our heads.
6. Will talent improve in the years to come? I fully expect it will because of all that JMU has to offer and because only the P5 will consistently have better talent and more money.
7. Like every year, I approach the season expecting to win every game. Those expectations will be adjusted as results come in, but for now I am excited and looking for great things from JMU football.

I mostly agree with you. There is no doubt that Covid year helped us big time in terms of being ready for this.
In terms of point 2, that really goes both ways. We have gotten players from FBS and lost players to FBS. I don't know really what that says for the future, though. I would like to say that less of that will happen to our detriment, but I think it could also continue to happen for a lot of the same reasons.
We could absolutely compete with FBS programs when we were FCS. The question was never talent as much as it was depth. Our 1s could match up against their 1s, but when we needed to get to our 2s and 3s, that wasn't the case. Even now I would say that's an issue, but for the reason you said.... experience, not talent.
The winning culture absolutely plays a big factor in this. We are carrying that into FBS and can only help us. I have no doubt that this team is going into next season expecting to win every game.
As for point 5, I agree that we've been getting everyone's best. There is a difference between a lower tier FCS school (which we certainly have faced enough of) giving their best verses FBS teams. In some of those lesser FCS schools we certainly showed signs of struggle at times. In FCS, we win those games. I'm not so sure that's the case in FBS these next few years. I could be wrong.
Point 6 is exactly why I believe the best is yet to come.
I see no reason why we cannot be a winning program in year 1 of FBS. I can also see how next year could be more of a challenge.

Yeah, I’m just not trying to cloud my joy for long-awaited FBS season 1 with concerns about our record. I’m sure that will come to me later. I certainly don’t imagine we are in for a 1-2 win season, BUT I’m not trying to let any result dampen my positivity with this move to FBS. It is all positive. Winning season? Well I would be tickled.

(04-20-2022 05:23 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  Yeah, I’m just not trying to cloud my joy for long-awaited FBS season 1 with concerns about our record. I’m sure that will come to me later. I certainly don’t imagine we are in for a 1-2 win season, BUT I’m not trying to let any result dampen my positivity with this move to FBS. It is all positive. Winning season? Well I would be tickled.

Well said. I'm going into every game as a fan looking for and expecting a win. On the flip side, this year will have many challenges, and we may take some lumps. Saying we expect to go undefeated is unrealistic, there are multiple teams on the schedule at or above an ndsu level game. The new talent being added may take us to a new level of success, but that is TBD. This year will set our FBS baseline against a challenging schedule, and we should expect to grow from there in future seasons.

Just going from playing ONE exciting FBS game in a good season to having 10 this year is amazing. We will for the first time have HOME field advantage in some FBS games. I have relatives that have never been to a JMU game that want to go this year. The future is bright.

I think some people are also ignoring the fact we are going into probably the strongest conference any transitioning team has ever gone to. 6-5 is not unrealistic when you are playing an ACC school, 3 very strong programs, an improved ODU, and the rest of the teams the coaches/ players have zero experience playing or preparing for

Another thing, we do have fbs talent on the roster but we also have way more fcs talent on the roster than most teams in the SBC. Starters will be fine but the question will be depth. Just look at how our team performed last year against FCS talent in some games when key players were out. I full expect a 5-1 or 4-2 start but unfortunately I would say 4 of our toughest opponents are at the end of the season (Marshall, Louisville, ODU, Coastal). Really going to test the depth on this team to finish the year strong