NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Tue Jul 22, 2014 4:17 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1302 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 ... 87  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 10:47 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 8:54 am
Posts: 19
mozilla wrote:
Can Alabama support all five teams in Alabama if Jacksonville St. gets the call up? I just don't see it.

Liberty is not second place to JMU. There is a huge gap in quality between the two. The SunBelt needs a team that has had recent success. Liberty doesn't qualify by any measurement.

If the SunBelt only picks up one team....they are going to find themselves right back in the same predicament as soon as the next round of expansion hits again. They need more than one team, in my opinion.

JSU attendance wise is already on par with all but the big two. Troy will be the biggest loser if more are added. Money wouldn't change as the largest amounts go to the SEC schools. TV markets wouldn't change as you never see or hear of Troy or USA in North Alabama or UAB and JSU in South Alabama.
To me the MAC has it right by having a tight footprint and realizing they play a different game than the SECs of the world.

Troy is isolated which make recruiting hard. UAB is falling and can't get up. If it does UAT will kick it back down. USA of the present FBS schools has the most upside in the state.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 6:20 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1003
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
So if JMU gets a CUSA invite, who would be #16? Arkansas St.? MAC makes the most sense to me and then get UMass to join as all or nothing. Will they sacrifice football for a watered down A-10 that will still lose St.Louis and Dayton or Richmond? Then the SBC can take Jacksonville St. It will be the nicest neatest fix the fbs has ever had. 14,14,14,12,10...12,12,12,14,14


Should JMU join C-USA, it would at least pair up the 2 divisions at 7 teams each still, with Charlotte still in FBS transition (being non-football). But for the 2015 season, with JMU, C-USA does need a 16th member to even up the divisions again.

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 11:25 am 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 10:23 am
Posts: 76
Ok so help me understand. How come a Div 1 non-football playing school (like UNCC) can join a FBS conference like C-USA and then start a football team and play at a FBS conference level when you have other FCS schools that already have football programs and are excluded from moving up to FBS level because their attandence is too low or their facliities don't seat enough people. Why should UNCC not be held to the same standards? Since they are now already in C-USA, they can start a football team, play one year as a FCS independant and then move right up into FBS level without meeting any avg. attendance issue that face current FCS schools! This doesn't seem right! So that would mean that UTA or UALR could start a football program and do the same thing since they are already in a FBS conference! Seems like a FCS program has a disadvantage, it would be better for a Div 1 school to focuse on basketball and recieved an invite due to basketball then just start a football team! This is crazy!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 1:44 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1003
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
hibbett2222 wrote:
Ok so help me understand. How come a Div 1 non-football playing school (like UNCC) can join a FBS conference like C-USA and then start a football team and play at a FBS conference level when you have other FCS schools that already have football programs and are excluded from moving up to FBS level because their attandence is too low or their facliities don't seat enough people. Why should UNCC not be held to the same standards? Since they are now already in C-USA, they can start a football team, play one year as a FCS independant and then move right up into FBS level without meeting any avg. attendance issue that face current FCS schools! This doesn't seem right! So that would mean that UTA or UALR could start a football program and do the same thing since they are already in a FBS conference! Seems like a FCS program has a disadvantage, it would be better for a Div 1 school to focuse on basketball and recieved an invite due to basketball then just start a football team! This is crazy!


Remember that UNC-Charlotte was originally a non-football school, and former full member of C-USA. As of this season, they ARE a full member of C-USA, but re-joined as a non-football member while playing football in the FCS level as an Indy. But prior to this, Charlotte was also formerly a member of the Sun Belt as well. In my opinion, the 49ers should have its football program scheduled for C-USA play starting next season (2014) instead of 2015. With the departures of East Carolina, Tulane and Tulsa to the AAC, plus the addition of Old Dominion football (like Charlotte, starting as a non-football full member this season) and upcoming full member Western Kentucky (and former Sun Belt member along with other ex-SB schools like FIU, FAU, Middle Tennessee St. & North Texas), C-USA will have 13 football full members (one of the divisions will have 6 teams and the other 7; talk about unbalanced). I assume that C-USA would plan to jump ship on trying to take another member from the hybrid Sun Belt, preventing it to have a proposed/future CCG and/or 12 members.

Keep in mind that UALR has been longer than UTA in terms of being in an FBS conference as non-football members UALR has been on the Sun Belt for 20+ years from the then-TAAC now turned A-Sun; while UTA joined from the WAC this past season from its over previous affiliation within the Southland (an FCS conference). Both of them have possible great facilities to qualify for sponsoring a football stadium. UALR's case is the War Memorial Stadium (a.k.a. Arkansas' alternate stadium) while UTA's case should be Rangers Ballpark In Arlington (in case their on-campus Maverick Stadium wouldn't be expandable for FBS requirements).

Oh, when it comes to non-football members in FBS conferences, here are some sampes: Denver was formerly a non-football FBS full member until they left to join the WAC for last season only to join the Summit. Denver should had joined the MW to "fill-in" Hawaii's fb-only slot for the other sports that conference has. The same went for New Orleans, who went D-I Indy for a while to get into D-II, only to cancel it to maintain as a D-I member, which led them to an invite by the Southland, who'll also eventually will plan to have a football program.

However Hibbett, I do agree with you on the fact that D-I schools should be recognized as full all sports members, primarily by sports like basketball, soccer, volleyball and baseball (in case football doesn't apply).

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 1:46 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1692
Whoa - you've got several different issues going on here.....

First the attendance issue.... that has never been enforced.
At one time it was an attempt to prevent a "rampant" spate of FCS -> FBS move-ups, which never became a problem.

A lot of the rest of your perceived obstacles to playing FBS are more related to belonging to an FBS conference,
and being capable of scheduling enough FBS opponents....

Right now you have 3 true FBS independents. Army, BYU, and Notre Dame.
Their decision to not join a conference was largely driven by their ability to find 12 opponents willing to schedue them
(which isn't easy when you get to the latter part of the season, and most teams are locked up in intra-conferenece battles EVERY WEEK.

Army, BYU, and Notre Dame have enough friends or can work out lucrative financial deals that benefit confernece FBS teams to fit them in.

When the WAC imploded, NMSU and Idaho suddenly found themselves as FBS independents and had a VERY DIFFICULT time scheduling games.
I think last year, they may have played each other twice.
When the Sun-Belt agreed to take them in as football affiliates, suddenly they had a pre-made conference schedule of 8 games,
and those scheduling problems went away.
Otherwise both schools were potentially faced with having to dump FB scholarships and move down to FCS.
Idaho would've been welcomed with open arms into Big Sky Football, NMSU didn't have such a ready-made fall-back position.

With regard to UNC-Charlotte, starting up football team (at the FCS / FBS level) was announced before they had been invited to an FBS conference.
This was sort of a risk they took... a catch 22.
They didn't want to commit before they had a new conference home, yet an FBS confernece wanted to see a commitment to a future FBS team.
A few years ago, they decided to bite the bullet and announce a commitment,making it known to potentially-expanding FBS conferneces that they would be available to play FBS football.
When CUSA needed to re-stock (after losing about 8 schools to "the American"), they were well positioned.

JMU has apparently made the decision to go FBS, and (although it's never been officailly announced and all parties will deny it), they have been invited for all sports by the Sun-Belt.
JMU would be a geographic outlier in the Sun-Belt, and would much rather be with ODU, Marshall, UNCC in CUSA-East.
Unfortunately IT APPEARS that CUSA may not be interested in expanding at this time.
MAYBE the MAC is an option. The MAC has met on expansion during the past year, and not made public any of thier plans.
One would have to think, they would prefer even numbers for all sports, and having UMasss as a FB-ony affiliate is not preferred for the long term.

The main point is - if you want to go into FBS football, you really need to be a member or football affiliate of an FBS conference, otherwise scheduling will be hellish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:04 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1003
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
Well then Tute. If C-USA won't be interested to expand, then how come they will face the fact of having 13 football schools for unbalanced division play by next season with a non-football member still in the process to join conference play?

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 4:45 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 10:23 am
Posts: 76
Ok i know that i am new to this discussion board, but i am still confused! Someone has stated that attendance doesn't matter when deciding/ being invited to move up from FCS to FBS. However i was a student at App State during the three year national championship run from 05-07, and there was a lot of discussion back then about moving up from FCS to FBS, and even more in 2007 after App State beat Michigan (who was ranked in the top 10 at that time). However App State could not get any attention from any FBS conference because our facilities did not seat enough people. At that time it only held around 16000+. The plan was set in motion back then to expand the facilities and now they seat over 22000. Also App State sold out every home game for 5 years until this year when they had one home game that only had 18000+. It is confusing to me how schools (like App State) have such a hard time getting invited to FBS conferences when they are selling out with 16000+ every week and you have schools like (most of the SBC, C-USA, and MAC) that when you see them on TV bearly even have a third of their seats filled! I thought FBS football was supposed to be the best level of college football, but a lot of these Mid-Major school (and some Power 5 schools, i.e. Iowa State, Wake Forest, U of Minn., etc) are much worse than many FCS schools, and this is proven by their records and terrible attendance! It is crazy that it is all about the size of your TV market instead of the size of your attendance. What good is it that you are in the 40th best TV market in America if no one is watching your team play?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 7:00 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 626
Location: Columbus, OH
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Well then Tute. If C-USA won't be interested to expand, then how come they will face the fact of having 13 football schools for unbalanced division play by next season with a non-football member still in the process to join conference play?


Having unbalanced divisions for one year while giving UNC Charlotte another year to get up to par is hardly a travesty for C-USA. The MAC has had unbalanced divisions for most of the past 15 years. The only question is do Southern Miss and UAB both move over to the West in 2014 or does Southern Miss go West in 2014 leaving the weaker East with an extra team for a season until UAB moves over in 2015, or do both schools move in 2014 leaving the West 1 school heavy for the 2014 season?

Personally, I think they should let UAB play one more season in the East.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2013 6:37 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1003
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
fighting muskie wrote:
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Well then Tute. If C-USA won't be interested to expand, then how come they will face the fact of having 13 football schools for unbalanced division play by next season with a non-football member still in the process to join conference play?


Having unbalanced divisions for one year while giving UNC Charlotte another year to get up to par is hardly a travesty for C-USA. The MAC has had unbalanced divisions for most of the past 15 years. The only question is do Southern Miss and UAB both move over to the West in 2014 or does Southern Miss go West in 2014 leaving the weaker East with an extra team for a season until UAB moves over in 2015, or do both schools move in 2014 leaving the West 1 school heavy for the 2014 season?

Personally, I think they should let UAB play one more season in the East.


About the MAC, you're right about that. But it was all because of that "affiliate member" to put up the odds: like Central Florida was from 2001-2005 (then representing the A-Sun on other sports), then Temple from 2007-2012 (while still in the A-10 for others), now UMass. All the rest of the full members in the MAC are evenly paired-up. One other thing, the schedule balancing. Can you explain me that? Plus, I believe that Southern Miss would be heading to the C-USA West for next season until UAB follows up suit with UNC-Charlotte joining by in 2015.

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2013 8:16 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 277
Location: Austin, Texas
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
fighting muskie wrote:
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Well then Tute. If C-USA won't be interested to expand, then how come they will face the fact of having 13 football schools for unbalanced division play by next season with a non-football member still in the process to join conference play?


Having unbalanced divisions for one year while giving UNC Charlotte another year to get up to par is hardly a travesty for C-USA. The MAC has had unbalanced divisions for most of the past 15 years. The only question is do Southern Miss and UAB both move over to the West in 2014 or does Southern Miss go West in 2014 leaving the weaker East with an extra team for a season until UAB moves over in 2015, or do both schools move in 2014 leaving the West 1 school heavy for the 2014 season?

Personally, I think they should let UAB play one more season in the East.


About the MAC, you're right about that. But it was all because of that "affiliate member" to put up the odds: like Central Florida was from 2001-2005 (then representing the A-Sun on other sports), then Temple from 2007-2012 (while still in the A-10 for others), now UMass. All the rest of the full members in the MAC are evenly paired-up. One other thing, the schedule balancing. Can you explain me that? Plus, I believe that Southern Miss would be heading to the C-USA West for next season until UAB follows up suit with UNC-Charlotte joining by in 2015.


What he is saying is....
That conferences won't get bothered to have odd numbers for a few years.
They are willing to wait a year or two for schools to get their team up to FBS levels.
They will NOT...add teams to get even numbers just for a year or two while they wait.
The biggest example of this is the B1G....they had 11 teams for many years...with no problems.
Schedule balancing isn't that difficult for the conferences to figure out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2013 8:24 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1003
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
mozilla wrote:
What he is saying is....
That conferences won't get bothered to have odd numbers for a few years.
They are willing to wait a year or two for schools to get their team up to FBS levels.
They will NOT...add teams to get even numbers just for a year or two while they wait.
The biggest example of this is the B1G....they had 11 teams for many years...with no problems.
Schedule balancing isn't that difficult for the conferences to figure out.


Everything you said Mozilla, you have a point. But know this. The B1G has been on 11 schools before adding Nebraska because of Penn State. But explain me something. What would happen if Penn State would join the old Big East or the ACC at that time?

Oh, another thing, back to everything you said, would it also affect the Sun Belt for next season as well?

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2013 9:16 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 277
Location: Austin, Texas
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
mozilla wrote:
What he is saying is....
That conferences won't get bothered to have odd numbers for a few years.
They are willing to wait a year or two for schools to get their team up to FBS levels.
They will NOT...add teams to get even numbers just for a year or two while they wait.
The biggest example of this is the B1G....they had 11 teams for many years...with no problems.
Schedule balancing isn't that difficult for the conferences to figure out.


Everything you said Mozilla, you have a point. But know this. The B1G has been on 11 schools before adding Nebraska because of Penn State. But explain me something. What would happen if Penn State would join the old Big East or the ACC at that time?

Oh, another thing, back to everything you said, would it also affect the Sun Belt for next season as well?


I really don't get what you are driving at??

It doesn't matter what number a conference has in it. They can schedule without issue. And, until recently...a CCG wasn't seen as a 'must have' for conferences. So, no one worried about having 12 teams.

Same with the SunBelt. It doesn't make a bit of difference to the SB to not have enough for a CCG for a season or two. These conferences want to make the best moves possible. And adding teams...just to kick them out a few years later....will not be considered a 'best move' scenario.

The B1G added Nebraska...because Nebraska, at that point in time, wasn't happy where they were at. It wasn't that the B1G went out looking. It was that Nebraska went out looking....and caught the eye of the B1G. And we know one thing.....the B1G isn't a group of dummies. And the deal was struck.

But, maybe you are trying to ask some other question...and I missed it?? Was that the question you were asking, because you have mentioned it a few times?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2013 8:41 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1402
mozilla wrote:
The B1G added Nebraska...because Nebraska, at that point in time, wasn't happy where they were at. It wasn't that the B1G went out looking.

This is completely incorrect, the B1G announced that it wanted to expand and went out looking and basically set the entire AQ realignment wheel in motion in 2010.

Other than that I agree with your post.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2013 9:50 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 277
Location: Austin, Texas
tkalmus wrote:
mozilla wrote:
The B1G added Nebraska...because Nebraska, at that point in time, wasn't happy where they were at. It wasn't that the B1G went out looking.

This is completely incorrect, the B1G announced that it wanted to expand and went out looking and basically set the entire AQ realignment wheel in motion in 2010.

Other than that I agree with your post.


I stand corrected, then.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 06, 2013 9:54 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
mozilla wrote:
tkalmus wrote:
mozilla wrote:
The B1G added Nebraska...because Nebraska, at that point in time, wasn't happy where they were at. It wasn't that the B1G went out looking.

This is completely incorrect, the B1G announced that it wanted to expand and went out looking and basically set the entire AQ realignment wheel in motion in 2010.

Other than that I agree with your post.


I stand corrected, then.

Nebraska didn't like how the B12 had become a southern take over w/ the game moving to Jerry's World but had no where to go until B1G said we want to expand, then Nebraska let their gripes be known.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1302 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 ... 87  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group