Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Polish Hammer Offline
King of all Dukes
*

Posts: 14,709
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 156
I Root For: Kent State/James Madison
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
TheBreeze Wrote:Quicker bowl eligibility hinges on NCAA Transformation Committee

Bourne provided clarity on an application he said JMU submitted in hopes of getting football bowl eligibility one year earlier — currently, the Dukes are bowl eligible for 2024. He said moving up is in the NCAA Transformation Committee’s hands, which will only allow a team to expedite its FBS transition if it knows the school is financially capable.

JMU won’t take action on its application until the fall semester if it gets past the transformation committee — maybe December, Bourne said — when the university will submit a separate waiver to the NCAA; the final step that determines if JMU can be bowl-eligible one year sooner.
06-29-2022 05:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HyperDuke Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,438
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 193
I Root For: JMU
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
Ah ok, there’s a December 2022 date possibility.
06-29-2022 06:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMURocks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,011
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 134
I Root For: James Madison
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
Interesting, given our budget and the fact we are already operating as a FBS program, the "financially capable" criteria seems like a slam dunk.

If I'm parsing this correctly, there's 3 filings/waivers potentially, one for the shortened transition, another for bowl eligibility in 2023, and maybe a third for bowl eligibility this year if we have a great season.

Guess August is when they hope to hear back from the transformation committee. That group is pretty busy, so hopefully they just stamp it and move on. Our athletic budget is larger than the majority of other G5 schools I believe.
(This post was last modified: 06-29-2022 09:22 PM by JMURocks.)
06-29-2022 07:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BleedingPurple Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,329
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 90
I Root For: JMU
Location: Amherst County, VA
Post: #24
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
(06-29-2022 12:22 PM)olddawg Wrote:  Never understood why the 1st year of transition to FBS was categorized as "FCS" independent. The moment a team enters a season above 63 scholarships, you are no longer FCS. It really is a no-mans land.

A team in transition is ramping up to 85 schollies. It is no more "FCS" than it is FBS.
FBS requires (or is supposed to require) a two year rolling average of 90% of the scholarship max to be allocated to a team. That translates to a 76.5 average of full scholarships over two years. Even if a team maxed out at 63 scholarships their last full year of FCS and 85 the next year in transitioning to FBS, they wouldn't meet the rolling average minimum in their 1st year of transition: 63+85 divided by 2 = 74 scholarships.

Covid, and the relaxation of maximum recruiting class size #s (due to the quagmire of the transfer portal), has put us in the unique position to be ready right away. To be sure, we will have some existing players that are marginal by FBS standards. I'm sure there are a few 1/2 scholarship guys that were elevated to full scholarship for depth purposes. They will be depth back markers -3rd/4th teamers, that will likely not be renewed beyond this season. Perhaps they will continue as walk ons as our recruiting ramps up.

Anyway, hoping the NCAA uses some logic and considers our situation differently than others who have made the transition. They "should" grant us bowl eligibility next year

Regarding the bold: This classification has almost nothing to do with the team that is transitioning, it's put there for the purposes of established FBS teams. The NCAA doesn't want an existing P5 or G5 to be able to have two cupcakes on their schedule that will allow that current FBS team to have an easy route to a Bowl. By considering a transitioning team as FCS, a current FBS team must still win 5 more games. My understanding is that all the FBS teams playing us this year will be able to count our game towards their own bowl eligibility. This was another arrow in our quiver to having the current SB members say yes to JMU.
07-01-2022 04:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
olddawg Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,322
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 92
I Root For: JMU
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
(07-01-2022 04:35 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  
(06-29-2022 12:22 PM)olddawg Wrote:  Never understood why the 1st year of transition to FBS was categorized as "FCS" independent. The moment a team enters a season above 63 scholarships, you are no longer FCS. It really is a no-mans land.

A team in transition is ramping up to 85 schollies. It is no more "FCS" than it is FBS.
FBS requires (or is supposed to require) a two year rolling average of 90% of the scholarship max to be allocated to a team. That translates to a 76.5 average of full scholarships over two years. Even if a team maxed out at 63 scholarships their last full year of FCS and 85 the next year in transitioning to FBS, they wouldn't meet the rolling average minimum in their 1st year of transition: 63+85 divided by 2 = 74 scholarships.

Covid, and the relaxation of maximum recruiting class size #s (due to the quagmire of the transfer portal), has put us in the unique position to be ready right away. To be sure, we will have some existing players that are marginal by FBS standards. I'm sure there are a few 1/2 scholarship guys that were elevated to full scholarship for depth purposes. They will be depth back markers -3rd/4th teamers, that will likely not be renewed beyond this season. Perhaps they will continue as walk ons as our recruiting ramps up.

Anyway, hoping the NCAA uses some logic and considers our situation differently than others who have made the transition. They "should" grant us bowl eligibility next year

Regarding the bold: This classification has almost nothing to do with the team that is transitioning, it's put there for the purposes of established FBS teams. The NCAA doesn't want an existing P5 or G5 to be able to have two cupcakes on their schedule that will allow that current FBS team to have an easy route to a Bowl. By considering a transitioning team as FCS, a current FBS team must still win 5 more games. My understanding is that all the FBS teams playing us this year will be able to count our game towards their own bowl eligibility. This was another arrow in our quiver to having the current SB members say yes to JMU.

All of what you say is true, but by the convoluted logic of the NCAA, they could just as easily say "FBS Transition"....yet they don't.
07-01-2022 08:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMUsince89 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,259
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 21
I Root For: JMU Dukes
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
Was my understanding that JMU was a full FBS team this year with full SunBelt sched, not a transition team. All games are counted as FBS for both us and opponents. Unlike Soft Houston, and Jack St. we are not eligible for FCS playoffs as they are, and still considered FCS to thier opponents. I believe if , and that may be a big if, we go say 8-3 or 9-2 we could get a bowl game if the NCAA waiver that SunBelt applied us for is granted. We can not however be considered for SunBelt Championship status. I may be wrong in my assesment.
07-02-2022 11:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KickItToScotty Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,352
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 296
I Root For: JMU
Location: VA
Post: #27
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
(07-02-2022 11:03 AM)JMUsince89 Wrote:  Was my understanding that JMU was a full FBS team this year with full SunBelt sched, not a transition team. All games are counted as FBS for both us and opponents. Unlike Soft Houston, and Jack St. we are not eligible for FCS playoffs as they are, and still considered FCS to thier opponents. I believe if , and that may be a big if, we go say 8-3 or 9-2 we could get a bowl game if the NCAA waiver that SunBelt applied us for is granted. We can not however be considered for SunBelt Championship status. I may be wrong in my assesment.

Pretty much. We are still a transitioning team, but everything is essentially the same as it normally is for year two of transition rather than year one. Year one you typically see teams play either as an FCS independent or sometimes still as a member of their old FCS conference just without being eligible for the championship or playoffs. Normally they need a lot more ramp up in scholarships than we do.

We were able to be considered an FBS team for opponents and the SBC gave us the full conference schedule while making us a member right away, just without being eligible for a championship. If we win six there could be a chance we're used to fill a bowl if there aren't enough actual bowl eligible teams. These are the things that typically only apply to the second year.

Jax State, on the other hand, will continue to play in the ASun this season while the softies will play in the WAC. App State played in the SoCon for their first year of transition, Coastal played FCS independent, unsurprisingly ODU and GSU also played independent. Pretty much comes down to whether you and your old conference still get along I suppose.
07-02-2022 02:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chiefsfan Offline
No Seriously, they let me be a mod
*

Posts: 43,711
Joined: Sep 2007
Reputation: 1061
I Root For: ASU
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
(07-02-2022 02:08 PM)KickItToScotty Wrote:  
(07-02-2022 11:03 AM)JMUsince89 Wrote:  Was my understanding that JMU was a full FBS team this year with full SunBelt sched, not a transition team. All games are counted as FBS for both us and opponents. Unlike Soft Houston, and Jack St. we are not eligible for FCS playoffs as they are, and still considered FCS to thier opponents. I believe if , and that may be a big if, we go say 8-3 or 9-2 we could get a bowl game if the NCAA waiver that SunBelt applied us for is granted. We can not however be considered for SunBelt Championship status. I may be wrong in my assesment.

Pretty much. We are still a transitioning team, but everything is essentially the same as it normally is for year two of transition rather than year one. Year one you typically see teams play either as an FCS independent or sometimes still as a member of their old FCS conference just without being eligible for the championship or playoffs. Normally they need a lot more ramp up in scholarships than we do.

We were able to be considered an FBS team for opponents and the SBC gave us the full conference schedule while making us a member right away, just without being eligible for a championship. If we win six there could be a chance we're used to fill a bowl if there aren't enough actual bowl eligible teams. These are the things that typically only apply to the second year.

Jax State, on the other hand, will continue to play in the ASun this season while the softies will play in the WAC. App State played in the SoCon for their first year of transition, Coastal played FCS independent, unsurprisingly ODU and GSU also played independent. Pretty much comes down to whether you and your old conference still get along I suppose.

And whether your new league will let you in. CUSA has shown zero interest in letting any of their new teams in early...
07-03-2022 04:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMURocks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,011
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 134
I Root For: James Madison
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
(07-03-2022 04:16 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  
(07-02-2022 02:08 PM)KickItToScotty Wrote:  
(07-02-2022 11:03 AM)JMUsince89 Wrote:  Was my understanding that JMU was a full FBS team this year with full SunBelt sched, not a transition team. All games are counted as FBS for both us and opponents. Unlike Soft Houston, and Jack St. we are not eligible for FCS playoffs as they are, and still considered FCS to thier opponents. I believe if , and that may be a big if, we go say 8-3 or 9-2 we could get a bowl game if the NCAA waiver that SunBelt applied us for is granted. We can not however be considered for SunBelt Championship status. I may be wrong in my assesment.

Pretty much. We are still a transitioning team, but everything is essentially the same as it normally is for year two of transition rather than year one. Year one you typically see teams play either as an FCS independent or sometimes still as a member of their old FCS conference just without being eligible for the championship or playoffs. Normally they need a lot more ramp up in scholarships than we do.

We were able to be considered an FBS team for opponents and the SBC gave us the full conference schedule while making us a member right away, just without being eligible for a championship. If we win six there could be a chance we're used to fill a bowl if there aren't enough actual bowl eligible teams. These are the things that typically only apply to the second year.

Jax State, on the other hand, will continue to play in the ASun this season while the softies will play in the WAC. App State played in the SoCon for their first year of transition, Coastal played FCS independent, unsurprisingly ODU and GSU also played independent. Pretty much comes down to whether you and your old conference still get along I suppose.

And whether your new league will let you in. CUSA has shown zero interest in letting any of their new teams in early...

I'm not sure SHSU or JSU even tried. Suspect they have a lot of things to sort out yet to meet FBS standards. JMU in this round at least was unique in that we already hit the scholarship numbers for FBS due to covid exemptions, and also have been operating our program a lot like a FBS program for years now. I'd argue JMU's program in 2004 was ahead of where SHSU is today, and we have massively upgraded since then. There's just a huge gap developmentally.
07-03-2022 09:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMad03 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,585
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 140
I Root For: James Madison
Location: Radford, VA
Post: #30
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
(07-03-2022 09:26 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  
(07-03-2022 04:16 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  
(07-02-2022 02:08 PM)KickItToScotty Wrote:  
(07-02-2022 11:03 AM)JMUsince89 Wrote:  Was my understanding that JMU was a full FBS team this year with full SunBelt sched, not a transition team. All games are counted as FBS for both us and opponents. Unlike Soft Houston, and Jack St. we are not eligible for FCS playoffs as they are, and still considered FCS to thier opponents. I believe if , and that may be a big if, we go say 8-3 or 9-2 we could get a bowl game if the NCAA waiver that SunBelt applied us for is granted. We can not however be considered for SunBelt Championship status. I may be wrong in my assesment.

Pretty much. We are still a transitioning team, but everything is essentially the same as it normally is for year two of transition rather than year one. Year one you typically see teams play either as an FCS independent or sometimes still as a member of their old FCS conference just without being eligible for the championship or playoffs. Normally they need a lot more ramp up in scholarships than we do.

We were able to be considered an FBS team for opponents and the SBC gave us the full conference schedule while making us a member right away, just without being eligible for a championship. If we win six there could be a chance we're used to fill a bowl if there aren't enough actual bowl eligible teams. These are the things that typically only apply to the second year.

Jax State, on the other hand, will continue to play in the ASun this season while the softies will play in the WAC. App State played in the SoCon for their first year of transition, Coastal played FCS independent, unsurprisingly ODU and GSU also played independent. Pretty much comes down to whether you and your old conference still get along I suppose.

And whether your new league will let you in. CUSA has shown zero interest in letting any of their new teams in early...

I'm not sure SHSU or JSU even tried. Suspect they have a lot of things to sort out yet to meet FBS standards. JMU in this round at least was unique in that we already hit the scholarship numbers for FBS due to covid exemptions, and also have been operating our program a lot like a FBS program for years now. I'd argue JMU's program in 2004 was ahead of where SHSU is today, and we have massively upgraded since then. There's just a huge gap developmentally.

I'm pretty sure I read an article where JSU and SHSU didn't even try to appeal. I don't know about JSU, but I have no doubt SHSU is doing everything wrong. My huge dislike for SHSU is irrelevant. They don't have the facilities. Let's not forget about just a year or so ago we didn't even have a locker room when we were there. They don't have the fan support. They are the model of how NOT to do this. And they're going into the worst run conference in FBS. I expect them to be a perennial name on the bottom 10 FBS list for years to come... if they even survive that long.
CUSA would have been setting them up for failure if they had appealed to shorten the length of their transition.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2022 09:02 AM by JMad03.)
07-05-2022 09:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMURocks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,011
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 134
I Root For: James Madison
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
(07-05-2022 09:00 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  
(07-03-2022 09:26 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  
(07-03-2022 04:16 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  
(07-02-2022 02:08 PM)KickItToScotty Wrote:  
(07-02-2022 11:03 AM)JMUsince89 Wrote:  Was my understanding that JMU was a full FBS team this year with full SunBelt sched, not a transition team. All games are counted as FBS for both us and opponents. Unlike Soft Houston, and Jack St. we are not eligible for FCS playoffs as they are, and still considered FCS to thier opponents. I believe if , and that may be a big if, we go say 8-3 or 9-2 we could get a bowl game if the NCAA waiver that SunBelt applied us for is granted. We can not however be considered for SunBelt Championship status. I may be wrong in my assesment.

Pretty much. We are still a transitioning team, but everything is essentially the same as it normally is for year two of transition rather than year one. Year one you typically see teams play either as an FCS independent or sometimes still as a member of their old FCS conference just without being eligible for the championship or playoffs. Normally they need a lot more ramp up in scholarships than we do.

We were able to be considered an FBS team for opponents and the SBC gave us the full conference schedule while making us a member right away, just without being eligible for a championship. If we win six there could be a chance we're used to fill a bowl if there aren't enough actual bowl eligible teams. These are the things that typically only apply to the second year.

Jax State, on the other hand, will continue to play in the ASun this season while the softies will play in the WAC. App State played in the SoCon for their first year of transition, Coastal played FCS independent, unsurprisingly ODU and GSU also played independent. Pretty much comes down to whether you and your old conference still get along I suppose.

And whether your new league will let you in. CUSA has shown zero interest in letting any of their new teams in early...

I'm not sure SHSU or JSU even tried. Suspect they have a lot of things to sort out yet to meet FBS standards. JMU in this round at least was unique in that we already hit the scholarship numbers for FBS due to covid exemptions, and also have been operating our program a lot like a FBS program for years now. I'd argue JMU's program in 2004 was ahead of where SHSU is today, and we have massively upgraded since then. There's just a huge gap developmentally.

I'm pretty sure I read an article where JSU and SHSU didn't even try to appeal. I don't know about JSU, but I have no doubt SHSU is doing everything wrong. My huge dislike for SHSU is irrelevant. They don't have the facilities. Let's not forget about just a year or so ago we didn't even have a locker room when we were there. They don't have the fan support. They are the model of how NOT to do this. And they're going into the worst run conference in FBS. I expect them to be a perennial name on the bottom 10 FBS list for years to come... if they even survive that long.
CUSA would have been setting them up for failure if they had appealed to shorten the length of their transition.

Posts by SHSU own fans on their board suggest things like the Athletic dept there has "its hair on fire" and is a "dumpster fire" since the FBS announcement. Those descriptions sound a little over dramatic, but I do believe they weren't prepared for FBS requirements, and are scrambling to figure out things like enough seating and ticket sales. They would not have been ready to compete this year as a FBS team.
07-05-2022 10:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMad03 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,585
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 140
I Root For: James Madison
Location: Radford, VA
Post: #32
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
(07-05-2022 10:36 AM)JMURocks Wrote:  
(07-05-2022 09:00 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  
(07-03-2022 09:26 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  
(07-03-2022 04:16 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  
(07-02-2022 02:08 PM)KickItToScotty Wrote:  Pretty much. We are still a transitioning team, but everything is essentially the same as it normally is for year two of transition rather than year one. Year one you typically see teams play either as an FCS independent or sometimes still as a member of their old FCS conference just without being eligible for the championship or playoffs. Normally they need a lot more ramp up in scholarships than we do.

We were able to be considered an FBS team for opponents and the SBC gave us the full conference schedule while making us a member right away, just without being eligible for a championship. If we win six there could be a chance we're used to fill a bowl if there aren't enough actual bowl eligible teams. These are the things that typically only apply to the second year.

Jax State, on the other hand, will continue to play in the ASun this season while the softies will play in the WAC. App State played in the SoCon for their first year of transition, Coastal played FCS independent, unsurprisingly ODU and GSU also played independent. Pretty much comes down to whether you and your old conference still get along I suppose.

And whether your new league will let you in. CUSA has shown zero interest in letting any of their new teams in early...

I'm not sure SHSU or JSU even tried. Suspect they have a lot of things to sort out yet to meet FBS standards. JMU in this round at least was unique in that we already hit the scholarship numbers for FBS due to covid exemptions, and also have been operating our program a lot like a FBS program for years now. I'd argue JMU's program in 2004 was ahead of where SHSU is today, and we have massively upgraded since then. There's just a huge gap developmentally.

I'm pretty sure I read an article where JSU and SHSU didn't even try to appeal. I don't know about JSU, but I have no doubt SHSU is doing everything wrong. My huge dislike for SHSU is irrelevant. They don't have the facilities. Let's not forget about just a year or so ago we didn't even have a locker room when we were there. They don't have the fan support. They are the model of how NOT to do this. And they're going into the worst run conference in FBS. I expect them to be a perennial name on the bottom 10 FBS list for years to come... if they even survive that long.
CUSA would have been setting them up for failure if they had appealed to shorten the length of their transition.

Posts by SHSU own fans on their board suggest things like the Athletic dept there has "its hair on fire" and is a "dumpster fire" since the FBS announcement. Those descriptions sound a little over dramatic, but I do believe they weren't prepared for FBS requirements, and are scrambling to figure out things like enough seating and ticket sales. They would not have been ready to compete this year as a FBS team.

That seems pretty fair. Look at what successful programs do when they move up. They proved they could be an FCS playoff team and win a title, but it takes a LOT more than that. Heck, in 2013 our admin didn't feel we were ready and we were in a MUCH better place than SHSU is right now.
Even with a transition year, they may not be ready. If they screw this up, they may be pulling an Idaho and have no other option but to fall back down to FCS. If that happens they can kiss any hope of getting back in their lifetime goodbye.
07-05-2022 10:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMURocks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,011
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 134
I Root For: James Madison
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
The thing I find a bit humorous about SHSU fans is how excited they get at the prospect of teams like SFA and Tarleton joining CUSA. They would love to see it become a FBS version of the SLC.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2022 11:01 AM by JMURocks.)
07-05-2022 11:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMad03 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,585
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 140
I Root For: James Madison
Location: Radford, VA
Post: #34
RE: Has there been a decision on the shortened Transition?
(07-05-2022 11:01 AM)JMURocks Wrote:  The thing I find a bit humorous about SHSU fans is how excited they get at the prospect of teams like SFA and Tarleton joining CUSA. They would love to see it become a FBS version of the SLC.

Well, they need CUSA to add some teams they can actually beat! We didn't call them Soft Houston for no reason. The only chance they will win games is if CUSA brings in more weak programs for them to beat.
07-05-2022 11:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.