(01-08-2023 12:16 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  Shizzle's not a fan of the Random Texans. Or SJSU. Why is that?

Half their fan bases root for other teams first. They don't have the brand necessary and dilute the brand product for TV. Some people think you shouldn't care if other teams are at the FBS level because it doesn't affect you but it does- it affects scheduling. If you have 92 or 105 programs in FBS, the P5 has less opportunity to schedule the dregs, and the new dregs brand wise aren't bad brands to begin with (schools like ECU and Wyoming).

Division 1-A should be for the schools that represent their region, state, area, or city.

Division 1-AA should be for provincial schools that offer scholarships.

Division 1-AAA should be for provincial schools that don't offer scholarships or the Ivy League or Patriot.

(01-08-2023 03:56 AM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 03:44 AM)unalions Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 03:11 AM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Is this a "slam" on WKU for being poor? If so-- we claim guilty as charged. Budget cuts and dropping enrollment has been hurting our income for quite some time.

Yet-- we have remained VERY competitive and near the top of C-USA in most sports. It incredible what we have been able to accomplish. Our athletic facilities are among some of the best in G5.

Thanks for making my point-- If schools like WKU who are already FBS and get a share of CFP are just getting by-- how much more difficult it would be for some schools to move to FBS with no CFP money and also in need of much facility improvement.

WKU budget-now approx. 24 million

Univ. of Alabama---------- 179 million

Despite the 7 to 1 outspent ratio-- we've had some good results recently:


Men's BB
WKU 73 Tide 71 (in Tusc.) 2020-21

SOFTBALL

WKU 3 Tide (#5) 1 (2022)

Yes, it’s a bit easier to get wins over SEC schools in sports that aren’t football. UNA knocked off Ole Miss recently in men’s hoops and their budget is $109M.

Good deflection. My main point being half the schools on the WACSUN list do not have the money to move to FBS--- especially w/o CFP money. Even your own AD's admitted to this fact in public media.

We can only look to WKU’s own athletics budget when it was in FCS just 15 years ago as a reference of how that can change. They found ways to make it work as they transitioned and established themselves into a budget FBS program.

It’s good to know you can be relatively successful with a budget at or near the bottom of an FBS conference. Gives transitioning schools some hope.

And yes, our local paper called out UNA on trying to go D1 on a budget. I’m glad they did. It’s no secret you have to spend more money in D1. But, they can’t just dip into the general fund to prop up athletics. UNA athletics currently has a percentage cap of the overall university budget to deal with and will have to get more creative with outside revenue streams.

(01-08-2023 11:06 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 10:57 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  If this actually happened, I don't see why the CAA, MVFC, Big Sky, SWAC, or Southern wouldn't try to join FBS as well.

Exactly. It's a total money grab by programs not nearly ready to compete at the highest level.

As has already been pointed out, there really isn’t much money to grab when you compare it to overall SEC budgets. A drop in the bucket in comparison.

It’s really more about survival. Many think FCS is all but dead in the south. It’s drying up for sure. Most southerners have the mindset that the only legit college football being played is in FBS, and even then, they roll their eyes at G5s. FCS is like junior college to the masses down here.

(01-08-2023 11:57 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  

(01-07-2023 10:15 AM)Bluedevil16 Wrote:  Article behind a subscriber wall. Any good tidbits?

It's only eight bucks :)

(01-07-2023 05:54 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Good. More to the party is welcome. Adding more schools to the pie can help bring in more money, more advertisers and all that. ESPN would love that. ESPN is the boss, and all the conferences have to bow to them for the CFP.

ESPN already has the rights to all of these schools, and I can assure you, they don't care either way about what classification level Utah Tech or SFA compete at in 2026. They only care about not paying more for the CFP than they have to.

Exactly. And this league moving to FBS isn’t going to change that overall amount ESPN shells out in total.

Also, if ESPN was against this, they would be pouring cold water on this in their coverage. They’re not. Mainly because, as you said, these are all ESPN-tied schools already.

Then, you have the ESPN article from late November that discusses the potential for FBS teams to limit or stop scheduling FCS schools because of SOS positioning for the expanded playoff. If those go away as a revenue source, many FCS teams are doomed.

(01-08-2023 12:17 AM)unalions Wrote:  Will college football realignment be the end of FCS vs. FBS?

by Ryan McGee, ESPN Senior Writer (November 18, 2022)

But as the sport as a whole continues to change directions more often and more unpredictably than a Hogwarts staircase, there are questions about when and if that previous sentence, the one that began "They are the last ..." might one day end with "... FCS vs. FBS games ever scheduled."

"Do I think these games are going to go away? Yes, I do." Russ Huesman said it flatly at the start of this 2022 season. His Richmond Spiders were preparing to travel south to Virginia, a game they lost 34-17. In 14 seasons as head coach at Chattanooga and Richmond, he has taken FCS teams into Auburn, Nebraska, Tennessee, Florida State, Boston College, Virginia Tech and made three trips to Alabama. His teams are 0-13 in those games. "I do know some of those FBS coaches don't want these games to go away. I think they know that Division I college football, which we play at the FCS level, is really important. We'll just have to see how important it is to some people."
...
That's great, Coach. But when we all look into our crystal footballs, will that support from above keep going?

"You know, I think it depends on where it goes," Smart responded. "What they require you to do and where the FCS, some of those conferences, end up with the realignment and some of those things ... the scheduling, how many conference games you're playing. I honestly don't know."

No one does. But many seem to believe that a glimpse of the FBS vs. FCS future came in 2020, when the college football calendar was thrown into the COVID-19 shredder and the SEC led the charge into a conference-only schedule.
...
The push toward a nine-game conference schedule has been verbally led by Saban, the de facto commissioner of college football. He has never shied away from his belief that college football should be strong at all levels, but he also has done the post-realignment math. It's not Toledo science. Take the SEC alone. When it expands to 16 teams, a nine-game conference schedule becomes necessary to ensure every member gets a shot at all the others at least occasionally. Saban has even said it might take 10 games to make that happen. That leaves only three, or even two, nonconference weekends. Once that calendar fills up with traditional cross-conference rivalries, CFP-friendly Power 5 cross-conference games and maybe one Group of 5 matchup, there are no chairs left for FCS when the fight songs stop playing.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...fcs-vs-fbs

(01-08-2023 12:33 PM)unalions Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 11:06 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 10:57 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  If this actually happened, I don't see why the CAA, MVFC, Big Sky, SWAC, or Southern wouldn't try to join FBS as well.

Exactly. It's a total money grab by programs not nearly ready to compete at the highest level.

As has already been pointed out, there really isn’t much money to grab when you compare it to overall SEC budgets. A drop in the bucket in comparison.

It’s really more about survival. Many think FCS is all but dead in the south. It’s drying up for sure. Most southerners have the mindset that the only legit college football being played is in FBS, and even then, they roll their eyes at G5s. FCS is like junior college to the masses down here.

I live in the south and I can tell you that it won’t make a lick of difference if a school plays in FCS or the G5, so I agree there.

I also don’t think they’ll get any playoff money if they somehow move up. It’s the attempt that I’m talking about. Trying to get their foot in the door before the contract after next.

(01-08-2023 12:45 PM)unalions Wrote:  Then, you have the ESPN article from late November that discusses the potential for FBS teams to limit or stop scheduling FCS schools because of SOS positioning for the expanded playoff.

Except that falls apart if you think about it. With expansion to 12 teams, it's EASIER to get into the CFP with a glittering record against a weak SOS.

Did the CFP committee say anything about TCU's weak OOC schedule? FCS Tarleton State, who's barely Division I, SMU and Colorado?

What about Michigan? People DID talk about Michigan's soft OOC schedule, but that's because they didn't have a quality OOC opponent. They had 3 G5 body-bag games in HAwaii, UConn and Colorado State.

Let's take a look at who were *just* outside the playoff based on this year's rankings. FSU was 9-3, with an FCS win over Duquense. Does anybody think they'd have been ranked over Penn STate if they had pulverized Ball State or South Alabama instead of Duquesne?

Washington ended up 10-2, ranked #12. They had an FCS win. Do they make the playoff if they open the season against Wyoming instead of Porland State? I don't really think so.

The committee hasn't said anything about looking at SOS numbers. They don't seem to care about computer formulas or cross-referenced ranking systems. When they talk about SOS, it's pretty clear they mean "did you play a big quality OOC game?" Sometimes it means "who did you beat or who did you play in the top 10." They really don't seem to care about your 2 or 3 buy games, whether you played South Alabama or North Alabama on ESPN+.

(01-08-2023 01:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 12:45 PM)unalions Wrote:  Then, you have the ESPN article from late November that discusses the potential for FBS teams to limit or stop scheduling FCS schools because of SOS positioning for the expanded playoff.

Except that falls apart if you think about it. With expansion to 12 teams, it's EASIER to get into the CFP with a glittering record against a weak SOS.

Did the CFP committee say anything about TCU's weak OOC schedule? FCS Tarleton State, who's barely Division I, SMU and Colorado?

What about Michigan? People DID talk about Michigan's soft OOC schedule, but that's because they didn't have a quality OOC opponent. They had 3 G5 body-bag games in HAwaii, UConn and Colorado State.

Let's take a look at who were *just* outside the playoff based on this year's rankings. FSU was 9-3, with an FCS win over Duquense. Does anybody think they'd have been ranked over Penn STate if they had pulverized Ball State or South Alabama instead of Duquesne?

Washington ended up 10-2, ranked #12. They had an FCS win. Do they make the playoff if they open the season against Wyoming instead of Porland State? I don't really think so.

The committee hasn't said anything about looking at SOS numbers. They don't seem to care about computer formulas or cross-referenced ranking systems. When they talk about SOS, it's pretty clear they mean "did you play a big quality OOC game?" Sometimes it means "who did you beat or who did you play in the top 10." They really don't seem to care about your 2 or 3 buy games, whether you played South Alabama or North Alabama on ESPN+.

The committee hasn’t had to say anything about SOS with 4. It becomes a much bigger issue at 12 & 16. But, the article also discussed how SEC expansion could simply cause there not to be enough open weeks for them to schedule FCS.

(01-08-2023 01:17 PM)unalions Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 01:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 12:45 PM)unalions Wrote:  Then, you have the ESPN article from late November that discusses the potential for FBS teams to limit or stop scheduling FCS schools because of SOS positioning for the expanded playoff.

Except that falls apart if you think about it. With expansion to 12 teams, it's EASIER to get into the CFP with a glittering record against a weak SOS.

Did the CFP committee say anything about TCU's weak OOC schedule? FCS Tarleton State, who's barely Division I, SMU and Colorado?

What about Michigan? People DID talk about Michigan's soft OOC schedule, but that's because they didn't have a quality OOC opponent. They had 3 G5 body-bag games in HAwaii, UConn and Colorado State.

Let's take a look at who were *just* outside the playoff based on this year's rankings. FSU was 9-3, with an FCS win over Duquense. Does anybody think they'd have been ranked over Penn STate if they had pulverized Ball State or South Alabama instead of Duquesne?

Washington ended up 10-2, ranked #12. They had an FCS win. Do they make the playoff if they open the season against Wyoming instead of Porland State? I don't really think so.

The committee hasn't said anything about looking at SOS numbers. They don't seem to care about computer formulas or cross-referenced ranking systems. When they talk about SOS, it's pretty clear they mean "did you play a big quality OOC game?" Sometimes it means "who did you beat or who did you play in the top 10." They really don't seem to care about your 2 or 3 buy games, whether you played South Alabama or North Alabama on ESPN+.

The committee hasn’t had to say anything about SOS with 4. It becomes a much bigger issue at 12 & 16.

They do talk about SOS a decent amount. The issue is, what they mean by SOS. They don't mean your ranking in some computre formula. They mean--who did you play in your big OOC game? How strong is / was your conference (using their subjective eye tests)? Who was your biggest win?

None of that is subject to "gaming the metrics" by doing things like dropping Missouri Valley, Southland, Colonial Athletic Assocation FCS games and adding MAC and CUSA and Sun Belt games.

And I don't see that changing when they go from 4 to 12. I don't think they start acting more like the basketball committee, where they do look at least a little bit at those numbers.

Quote:But, the article also discussed how SEC expansion could simply cause there not to be enough open weeks for them to schedule FCS.

When the SEC goes to 9 conference games, who do you think Tennessee drops off of this year's OOC schedule?
Their OOC game with Pitt, which ended up on ABC?
Their $1.5M body bag game against Ball STate?
Their $1M body bag game against Akron?
Their $500,000 body bag game against UT Martin?

(The $500,000 number is UT Martin's guarantee for their trip to Athens, GA in 2023, but it's good enough for me.)

The Big Ten pushed their schools not to schedule FCS games, partially because the Big Ten owns 40% of BTN, and MAC games are a little better than FCS games for ratings and carriage fees.

The Committee can change their philosophy any time they want to, but if you assume that the P5 will get what they want, and the SEC will especially get what THEY want--what they want is NOT to pay more money for body bag games to no real benefit.

SOS and a 12 team playoff MAY incentivize P5 vs P5 OOC games. (It may not, since you can probably go 10-2 in the SEC or Big Ten wth 3 OOC creampuffs--or 12-1 or 11-2 in the other P5 conferences-- and probably still be #10).

In all the arguing this year about Ohio State getting the #4 spot over Alabama, and whether Alabama should get the spot instead, I don't think I heard anyone anywhere cite the fact that Alabama played an FCS game and OSU didn't.

I figure the same logic applies if the new system were in place and we were arguing Penn State vs Washington for the last at-large spot.

(01-08-2023 01:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 12:45 PM)unalions Wrote:  Then, you have the ESPN article from late November that discusses the potential for FBS teams to limit or stop scheduling FCS schools because of SOS positioning for the expanded playoff.

Except that falls apart if you think about it. With expansion to 12 teams, it's EASIER to get into the CFP with a glittering record against a weak SOS.

Did the CFP committee say anything about TCU's weak OOC schedule? FCS Tarleton State, who's barely Division I, SMU and Colorado?

What about Michigan? People DID talk about Michigan's soft OOC schedule, but that's because they didn't have a quality OOC opponent. They had 3 G5 body-bag games in HAwaii, UConn and Colorado State.

Let's take a look at who were *just* outside the playoff based on this year's rankings. FSU was 9-3, with an FCS win over Duquense. Does anybody think they'd have been ranked over Penn STate if they had pulverized Ball State or South Alabama instead of Duquesne?

Washington ended up 10-2, ranked #12. They had an FCS win. Do they make the playoff if they open the season against Wyoming instead of Porland State? I don't really think so.

The committee hasn't said anything about looking at SOS numbers. They don't seem to care about computer formulas or cross-referenced ranking systems. When they talk about SOS, it's pretty clear they mean "did you play a big quality OOC game?" Sometimes it means "who did you beat or who did you play in the top 10." They really don't seem to care about your 2 or 3 buy games, whether you played South Alabama or North Alabama on ESPN+.

No there is no difference in beating Utah Tech or Balls St. both are terrible. But there is a difference in beating Boise St instead of Utah tech and actually over Balls St as well.

(01-08-2023 02:28 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 01:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 12:45 PM)unalions Wrote:  Then, you have the ESPN article from late November that discusses the potential for FBS teams to limit or stop scheduling FCS schools because of SOS positioning for the expanded playoff.

Except that falls apart if you think about it. With expansion to 12 teams, it's EASIER to get into the CFP with a glittering record against a weak SOS.

Did the CFP committee say anything about TCU's weak OOC schedule? FCS Tarleton State, who's barely Division I, SMU and Colorado?

What about Michigan? People DID talk about Michigan's soft OOC schedule, but that's because they didn't have a quality OOC opponent. They had 3 G5 body-bag games in HAwaii, UConn and Colorado State.

Let's take a look at who were *just* outside the playoff based on this year's rankings. FSU was 9-3, with an FCS win over Duquense. Does anybody think they'd have been ranked over Penn STate if they had pulverized Ball State or South Alabama instead of Duquesne?

Washington ended up 10-2, ranked #12. They had an FCS win. Do they make the playoff if they open the season against Wyoming instead of Porland State? I don't really think so.

The committee hasn't said anything about looking at SOS numbers. They don't seem to care about computer formulas or cross-referenced ranking systems. When they talk about SOS, it's pretty clear they mean "did you play a big quality OOC game?" Sometimes it means "who did you beat or who did you play in the top 10." They really don't seem to care about your 2 or 3 buy games, whether you played South Alabama or North Alabama on ESPN+.

No there is no difference in beating Utah Tech or Balls St. both are terrible. But there is a difference in beating Boise St instead of Utah tech and actually over Balls St as well.

Scheduling Boise State isn't a body-bag game. Everyone else, though, when a P5 schedules a G5 the P5 is a pretty heavy favorite.

Interesting interview Sam Herder had with the MVFC commissioner last week where she said, in regard to the ASUN/WAC idea to go FBS, and I quote, "if the NCAA allows THAT group of schools to go FBS, they can expect a few current FCS leagues to petition to move up."

(01-08-2023 03:51 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  Interesting interview Sam Herder had with the MVFC commissioner last week where she said, in regard to the ASUN/WAC idea to go FBS, and I quote, "if the NCAA allows THAT group of schools to go FBS, they can expect a few current FCS leagues to petition to move up."

Why not? SDSU dominating the title game so far. They could beat anyone in G5.

(01-08-2023 03:51 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  Interesting interview Sam Herder had with the MVFC commissioner last week where she said, in regard to the ASUN/WAC idea to go FBS, and I quote, "if the NCAA allows THAT group of schools to go FBS, they can expect a few current FCS leagues to petition to move up."

Ironic since the MVFC supposedly turned down the WAC a decade ago. Idaho of course eventually moved back to FCS, and I suspect Seattle could have made alternate arrangements if that was indeed the holdup on the merger, especially since the Summit League would be in serious trouble had it gone through.

(01-08-2023 04:13 PM)unalions Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 03:51 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  Interesting interview Sam Herder had with the MVFC commissioner last week where she said, in regard to the ASUN/WAC idea to go FBS, and I quote, "if the NCAA allows THAT group of schools to go FBS, they can expect a few current FCS leagues to petition to move up."

Why not? SDSU dominating the title game so far. They could beat anyone in G5.

If you honestly can't understand "why not" (In the opinion of current FBS) then I can't help you.

(01-08-2023 02:39 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 02:28 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 01:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 12:45 PM)unalions Wrote:  Then, you have the ESPN article from late November that discusses the potential for FBS teams to limit or stop scheduling FCS schools because of SOS positioning for the expanded playoff.

Except that falls apart if you think about it. With expansion to 12 teams, it's EASIER to get into the CFP with a glittering record against a weak SOS.

Did the CFP committee say anything about TCU's weak OOC schedule? FCS Tarleton State, who's barely Division I, SMU and Colorado?

What about Michigan? People DID talk about Michigan's soft OOC schedule, but that's because they didn't have a quality OOC opponent. They had 3 G5 body-bag games in HAwaii, UConn and Colorado State.

Let's take a look at who were *just* outside the playoff based on this year's rankings. FSU was 9-3, with an FCS win over Duquense. Does anybody think they'd have been ranked over Penn STate if they had pulverized Ball State or South Alabama instead of Duquesne?

Washington ended up 10-2, ranked #12. They had an FCS win. Do they make the playoff if they open the season against Wyoming instead of Porland State? I don't really think so.

The committee hasn't said anything about looking at SOS numbers. They don't seem to care about computer formulas or cross-referenced ranking systems. When they talk about SOS, it's pretty clear they mean "did you play a big quality OOC game?" Sometimes it means "who did you beat or who did you play in the top 10." They really don't seem to care about your 2 or 3 buy games, whether you played South Alabama or North Alabama on ESPN+.

No there is no difference in beating Utah Tech or Balls St. both are terrible. But there is a difference in beating Boise St instead of Utah tech and actually over Balls St as well.

Scheduling Boise State isn't a body-bag game. Everyone else, though, when a P5 schedules a G5 the P5 is a pretty heavy favorite.

Scheduling MVFC teams are tough as well. Recent P5 sculps came from them than any other conferences. North Dakota State is the Boise State. People tend to vote NDSU as a FBS team at the end of the season.

Well speaking of MVFC? Congrates to South Dakota State for the FCS title with under 3 minutes left leading big over the Bisons. Looks like the stands are full with very few empty seats. Those fans do travel, and would be valuable in FBS.

(01-08-2023 04:36 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 04:13 PM)unalions Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 03:51 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  Interesting interview Sam Herder had with the MVFC commissioner last week where she said, in regard to the ASUN/WAC idea to go FBS, and I quote, "if the NCAA allows THAT group of schools to go FBS, they can expect a few current FCS leagues to petition to move up."

Why not? SDSU dominating the title game so far. They could beat anyone in G5.

If you honestly can't understand "why not" (In the opinion of current FBS) then I can't help you.

No one, literally no one, is asking for your help. Lol.

(01-08-2023 05:02 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Well speaking of MVFC? Congrates to South Dakota State for the FCS title with under 3 minutes left leading big over the Bisons. Looks like the stands are full with very few empty seats. Those fans do travel, and would be valuable in FBS.

The Jackrabbits were absolutely dominant today! Congrats to SDSU on their first FCS title!