Herd

If NDSU started a hockey program, would UND schedule money games with NDSU one at a time at gFU to their own liking, or would they play home/home with a fledgling NDSU team that was viewed as light years behind them in the recruiting race? Would a UND home/home with a fledgling NDSU hockey team help regional perception of NDSU hockey, and assist them immensely? Is the picture clearing up for anyone here?

If Faison is being influenced, its by Bubba, you can count on that. Bubba's road is a tough one until he is viewed by recruits in his key areas as being on the same level as NDSU, SDSU, UNI. Even if he is on the same level as these three, he is still recruiting players in MN, WI, IA, and IL to play in the Mountain/Pac time zones for half their games. That's one strike even if you are level on the field.

Flagship/Sinking Ship . . . something like that.

Taylor has always done what's in NDSU's best interest. Does "NDSU's best interest" need to be defined for everyone?

Any remarks made by NDSU toward the MSU AD were well deserved. Sure, you can easily buy out a game by enacting a buying clause, but you don't do that unless you are classless. Would UND buyout a USD or SDSU game? No, you don't do those sort of things to a school within your group of peer institutions. Sure you can, but you don't. Und would get BBQ'd in SD for a move like that, as did MSU in ND. MSU probably will remember the NDSU reaction, and I know NDSU fans will remember the MSU decision. It did kinda worked itself out though, with Karma tanking the MSU 2013 season.

I don't blame Fullerton for trying to keep the Big Sky together, nothing wrong with that. But it seems like he is either foolish or being deceitful in his comments about taking an FCS conference to the FBS level. Maybe his is just trying to prime the NCAA to soften them up. If he is so urgent to get the Big Sky to FBS, he really screwed up. He would have needed to use the WAC to get that done. Now, I don't see a way to take a large group FBS. (not that taking a large group FBS is a good idea, I don't think it is) You are familiar with the roadblocks to the CAA and the SCon when they were trying to do the same thing, right? I'm not trying to tell Montana, Montana State or UND what to do, they can do whatever they want. They would all need to decide if they could take on the burden of another $4-5 million annually to get to 85 scholarships, and that's really an individual decision. I think they would be wise to wait and see if there is a P5/G5 split into two championships and a reduced scholarship level for the G5. If that happened, a door might open for all FCS conferences to adjust up to 70+ scholarship to complete for the DI G5 title. Heck, if you could play two P5 games a year at the G5 level, that would pay for your move to 70-75 scholarships. Until then, there is 1 DI FBS title, and things don't change too much for the FCS, other than fewer FBS games available for the FCS. If you rely on FBS games to meet your FCS budget, it could be a tough time though I suppose. If you were starting from Scratch NCAA, Football Scholarships might look something like this. I think this is what most of the P5 would prefer, but it won't happen overnight. This would define 5 Championships, instead of 4 like there is today. DI FBS P5 Group 81 Min - 90 Max (or 81-90 Slot) 1/3 of DI B12, B1G, SEC, ACC, PAC, AAC DI FBS G5 Group 70 Min -80 Max (or 70 - 80 Slot) 1/3 of DI MWC, CUSA, MAC, SBC, MVFC, BSC, CAA DI FCS 0 Min - 50 Max 1/3 of DI Rest of FCS DII 0 - Min 30 Max DIII 0

Maction, the truth isn't very well received around here, but I think you are right on the Money regarding what the Big Sky would be allowed to do. If the Big Sky pursues what Fullerton is suggesting, the doors on this idea would close quickly. For now, there is no separation between the P5 & G5. Same scholarship level, same championship. If the P5/G5 stay at the same level, I'm not overly concerned about the FCS level. The FCS will be impacted by fewer FBS game opportunities, but if that is your only source of funding your program, you were already in trouble. If there is a P5/G5 split (meaning . . . separate championships/separate scholarhsip levels), the G5 scholarship levels needs to come down from 85 for many in FCS to even think about trying to join the current G5 level. If there was a split, and the G5 allowed a 70-85 scholarship level slot to be included in their championship, then you'd see 3-4 FCS conferences try to get to 70-75. Until the G5 situation changes, it's a wait and see for FCS football. IMO, step back from the ledge until something actually changes. If I were Montana or NDSU and wanted to goto the G5 level, then I'd do it by myself or with 1 other partner. I would not even think about trying to do it with a big group . . . bad idea. As for Eastern Kentucky . . . are we really talking about Eastern Kentucky? I thought they were already extinct.

Its a very important hire, so they probably won't try to hire someone quickly at a bargain price, and do so before most people have started paying attention. I know others have used this practice, but it will be a thoughtful, drawn out process where they work to maintain previous salary level and grow the position. . . . a novel concept to many I know.

Taylor abssolutly had NDSU's best interests as his #1 priority. Hard to argue his position with regard to gFU. Look at the separation generated by his plans. Hopefully his replacement won't be too soft on NDSU's interests.

Ha ha . . . Those schools offer more than NDSU? Fanbase, support, winning tradition, history, attendance, regional importance. Did you say Lamar, Sam Houston, UTA? Somebody give this guy a mic, it's amateur night.

The MVC is not a football conf, the MVFC is. The is absolutely no requirement to be in the MVC to go FBS with the MVFC. The Big Sky would need SDSU USD and NDSU to have enough team to even consider going FBS, but the answer would be a resounding NO, and UND would be begging to come east and join them n the Summit/Valley. The MVFC could move up and immediate challenge and be on par with the MAC, while the BSC would be the Sunbelt of the west. See 2013 Sagarin ratings, as the MVFC is already challenging the MAC with 22 fewer scholarships.

If the Big Sky can move FBS, then the MVFC can also, apparently it's easy. I would rather be playing football with UNI, SIU, IL St, WIL, MO St, USD, SDSU . . . Schools that could afford FBS football, schools in the central time zone. Add in YSU and IN St and you have a conference that would strongly rival the MAC. FBS in the Valley and Summit would be much preferred. With that list of Mountain and Pacific schools, no way NDSU would go west, are you kidding?

Folley. . . Post after post of this ridiculous blather, you are embarrassing yourself. Your looney bin episode here is obviously fueled by NDSU hatred which is pretty childish on your part. Go ahead with your mindless Big Sky fantasy, but enough with trying to tie NDSU Into it. Not remotely related at all. As for the Summit exit fee, that's just good business for the league, nothing more nothing less.

Hey, don't forget about the other things you predicted . . . illegal children from Gautemala would enter the US by the 1000's, Hezballah would unite with the Palestinians to attack Israel, the Dow would reach the 17,000 mark in June 2014, the Bison would 3peat by the time Un_ go through their transition. Your the man! Nailed them all!

Hammer. The thing that I think has no shot in hell of happening is an 11th FBS conf coming from a current conf at the FCS level. NCAA administrators have said specifically that FCS conferences can't move up as a group, so why would this AC allow this to happen? Also, wouldn't the SBC or any FBS conf going to more than 16 teams be a major ref flag to the AC? It's split waiting to happen. With FBS membership closely guarded, I say no way 6 get approved as a group, and no way an FCS conf would be allowed to move up, even if all the schools coming in had completed the transition.

Yes, one team from the FCS can move FBS, no problem. We've established that. But that's not what you proclaimed. You said that 6 or more teams from the Big Sky will make an FBS move to the Sunbelt, then return 8 teams to the BSC and declare it an FBS conf. I say BS, the NCAA & FBS governing board and general rules are in place to prevent that from happening.

Nothing would stop this. These are already FBS teams, does not add FBS head count, and is a zero sum game. If the B1G or SEC wanted to split from 1 conf into 2, no one bats an eye. Big difference vs the proposal in this thread. Now if the Sunbelt or MAC wanted to split their conf, that move would be scrutinized. You see, they don't call the shots.

I'm sorry, but I've said all along that I believe that Volley's technical interpretation of this rule is completely different than the key people that would be involved technically on this issue, namely the FBS Advisory group & NCAA. Technically, when the rules say that you have to join an existing FBS conference, I take that to mean that you cannot then later join a non-FBS conference, reach the stated number of 8 schools, and magically transform a non-FBS conference into an FBS conference. What do you think the technical interpretation of this would be by the NCAA? I think the chances are slim to none that the NCAA would interpret this rule the same as Volley is interpreting it. I think you know that too, you just won't admit it. So no, I do not agree with Volley from a Technical standpoint. The rule is intended to prevent specifically what he is suggesting.

Technically, the B1G could invite 6 teams from the Big Sky. That wouldn't make the Big Sky FBS by osmosis either. Do you think the CAA didn't explore all possible options too, like sending 6 teams to the MAC for 2 years, then pulling 8 back to form an FBS conference? The answer they would have received from the NCAA is too obvious to require elaboration.

$12 Million here, and $12 million there. No, I don't think the P5/NCAA want more FBS conferences. If they did, it would be an easy move. It is not. If anything, most of the P5 (ironically) want 5 FBS conferences.

The NCAA will interpret this as they see fit. My likely scenario of what the NCAA will say . . . The Big Sky is not an existing FBS Conference, therefore it could not be setup as a FBS conference, even if it brings in 8 teams that are technically FBS. FBS teams could goto any of the existing 10 conferences, but the NCAA would not establish the Big Sky as the 11th FBS conference. This is why invitations are required, and why it's unlikely that 6 teams would be invited at one time. If the 6 teams from Big Sky were accepted into the Sunbelt, then they could remain FBS as long as they maintained status in an existing FBS conference. The NCAA would Not view the Big Sky as an existing FBS conference, so the Big Sky would not be an option for teams playing FBS football. I don't say the above because it's the Big Sky. The NCAA would give the same interpretation to the CAA, MVFC or any FCS conference that was trying to move it's conference FBS.

http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2013/06/why-cant-fcs-conferences-move-as-unit.html

You fail to realize that there is NCAA and DI oversight on any moves made to DI or DI FBS. What is being suggested doesn't pass the basic sniff test, and it would never get off the ground. The gorilla in the room is basic oversight in place to prevent underhanded moves. Do you think the P5 would like to have 6-13 teams added so there are more mouths to feed in FBS football. Basic oversight of this move squelch this quickly.

Both the NCHC and BE/AAC situations were zero sum. Not even close to the same scenarios. The Big Sky football situation would be similar to if the DII NSIC merged with the DI Summit for 5 years, with the intentions of then decided to spin off back to the DI NSIC league. This ploy by the NSIC wouldn't have a prayer of even getting off the ground. Neither would the similar situation being discussed with Big Sky football. Both bypass general guidelines for move up, which have ncaa and DI oversight. Division I membership is guarded from DII in a similar fashion that DI FBS membership guarded from DI FCS. NCHC-WCHA or BE-AAC, not on the same plane at all.

And your not smart enough to see the massive difference in these two scenarios? Oh please, I'd like to give you a little credit for being smarter than that.