Herd

You are assuming what after 2-3 years? That the NCAA & FBS governing board would allow the teams out of the Sunbelt to exist in a new FBS conference 'The Big Sky' managed by Doug Fullterton, where they would share a $12 million piece of pie and live happily ever after? If any of the Big Sky teams want to be FBS, then pull up your pants and do it like everyone else has been required to do it. You need to forget this silly notion of a large group of teams or an entire conference by-passing standard operations. What you are suggesting would throw up a massive red flag to the NCAA and FBS governing structure, and be stopped instantly. If what you are suggesting could be done, the CAA would have done it long ago. You can't goto a conference for a couple of years, then start your own conference.

6 Teams from FCS added to the Sunbelt is not a Zero sum game. It is a Plus 6. The BE/AAC, new conf, but zero sum to FBS FB/BB. Adding 6 teams from the BSC by the Sunbelt would be a major red flag for both the NCAA the current FBS conferences. Good luck with that. The intentions look obvious. That's why is best to move alone or at most with a partner. It an individual decision then and passes the smell test. Why would 12 Sunbelt teams want to share $12 million with 18 teams instead of 12? Who benefits from that. Still think its a zero sum game? If the 6 BSC teams agree to move without taking any of the Sunbelt pie, well that a major problem for teams that have budget issues now. If you were in the BSC footprint, why would you want to play Sunbelt teams? Why not try to join the MWC, or in UND's case the closer MAC? Why would Fullerton want to kill football in the BSC? That is what he would be doing. The BSC could have made some of these issues go away had they merged with the WAC. Kinda late now Your entire premise is built on another $12 million showing up for the current BSC teams and a new conference forming from Non-FBS teams. That's laughable. If Montana wanted to be FBS, why wouldn't they do it on their own in a low risk move. Why even think about a high risk move with teams that can't afford it?

Biggg differences here. A additional FBS conference was not formed. The rights for football were moved from the Big East (no FB) to the AAC (FB). No teams were added. And the the Key Thing, all the teams involved were already playing FBS football, it was a zero sum game. This is way way different than a new FBS conference being formed out non-FBS teams . . . out of an FCS conference. Yes, teams can move FBS, but whole FCS conferences cannot move FBS, this has been clarified and demonstrated over and over. Look at what you are saying here, this is not how it works. Do you think the 10 Current FBS conferences are going to approve 13 more Idaho's into FBS football? This theory is laughable. When the WAC split into the WAC/MWC, they were all already FBS teams, zero sum. If BSC teams goto the Sunbelt to play FBS football, they will be locked into the Sunbelt, and will not be BSC football teams any longer. Tell me this, why would the Sunbelt (or any G5 or P5 conf or team) want to add 8-10-13 BSC teams to share in their 12 million? Why would BSC want to (or be able to afford) moving FBS is they are not getting at least 1 million + to move? Lots of holes the in the theories being suggested here. Anyone involved in FBS football would see this as a disaster of Idahox13 waiting to happen. Bottom line, if you want to be FBS, do it quickly, decisively, and in a group of 1 or 2 like ODU, GSU, APP, etc, into conferences with less than 12 teams. Anything else won't be welcome by the rest of FBS. If there are major structural changes involving scholarship reductions for the G5, then things could be different. But the Big Sky being FBS in the current structure? No You're trying to tell me that Idaho would be allowed to move out of the Sunbelt after 2 years, then start it's down FBS conference somewhere else within an FCS conference? No, that's not a zero sum game.

Forming a new conference to play FBS football would be nearly impossible. It would need to be approved by the existing 10 conferences. The chances of that happening are slim and none, and slim just walked out. For Idaho or any other Big Sky school, they can play FBS football in the Sunbelt (others besides Idaho would need to be accepted), or they can play FCS football in the Big Sky. If an FBS Idaho moves their football to the Big Sky, that would make them FCS. Sorry, that's the way it works. A move to FBS requires an invitation from an existing conference. Current FCS conference are not allowed to move to the FBS level enmass, but must join an existing conference. Thats the way it is, and the way it has always been.

"It was my understanding that a Big Sky FBS would have a share of the $90 million" You are embarrassing yourself, Bwasaaaaa!!!!! My side is hurting from laughter. Right, the other conferences will invite the BSC with open arms, and they will magicly get a $12 million share. Not only would the Big Sky not get any money, but they would not be approved for FBS status even at a zero share. You are completely lost!

When and if Idaho moves FB to the Big Sky, that will mean Idaho is playing FCS football. If one FBS team joins an FCS conf, that does nothing to make a conf FBS, contrary to this foolish theory. A conf will be FBS only when the NCAA governing group for FB says so. Zero conferences in FBS FB would support the Big Sky being FBS, even Fullerton is fully aware of this. Volley, you are full of it, please stop the madness.

Also, hockey is a non factor when comparing budgets to the Sunbelt. Unds contribution to that comparison would be $22 - hockey = X. And yes, lots of FCS conferences compare to the Sunbelt, but that doesn't allow them to play 85 scholarship FB.

Except for tiny little fact that entire conferences are strictly prohibited from moving FBS. You have to join an existing conferece! There is no way in hell that any FCS conferece moves FBS. But you refuse to understand this overwhelming fact. And as for your suggestion That the BS will use the Sunbelt to do it, well someone's been in the liquor cabinet without permission.

Why doesn't UND's single digit winning Softball team play NDSU's perennial 35-40 win team in the regular season? NDSU's VB and WBB teams are down from where they have been traditionally, yet we play UND. Who is afraid to lose a game? Is UND unwilling to play unless it is favorable for them? So it seems.

IMO, Mankato could be equally as successful at the DI level as UND or Omaha, but they would need to cull sports (ala Omaha) to be successful. Mankato's major sports would need to be . . . Hockey, Basketball, Baseball . . . like Omaha (or) Football, Basketball, Baseball . . . like NDSU They would not survive: Hockey, Football, Basketball, Baseball . . . except at the DII level, too many $

Mankato, SC, and Duluth can't go DI with their same sports. Football would be gone at all 3, assuming Hockey would be chosen as their priority sport. I could see Mankato dropping hockey to keep FB at the DI level, but not at SC or UMD. To be honest, being able to afford hockey and FB was a DI deterent at UND. NDSU is better equipped to have FB success for this reason.

There is no DI-AA, there is only DI. You are playing for the same championship as every other DI school in every sport except football. Even in football at the FCS level, the spending is way more than DII. The only schools in the NCC that could afford to be DI are the Dakotas. The rest would need to restructure to be DI, look at UNO. Someone finally had the balls the leave the NCC, and that was Chapman.

There it is Darrell, do we have an agreement in principle so we can pass this along to the lawyers? If you want, I'll throw in some club level seats for you, BF and your significant others for the Fargo games. How's that sound. Can we get this done? $150 and transporation for a Guarantee in 2015. Home/Home in 2017(gFU) / 2019 (Fargo). The buyout is $500 in 2019, set your price for 2017. (make it a million, knock yourself out)

If your not part of the solution Jdub, you are part of the problem. We're at a tenuous point in the negotiation, I hope you understand.

Good thing Darrell is negotiating, as he is doing so in good faith, unlike yourself. If you could reserve your input until Darrell has weighed in, as to not disrupt the negotiation, eveyone would appreciate it.

'83 seems to have stepped away from the negotiating table. I guess it's you Darrell. By the way, the game is in Grand Forks in 2017, so that makes it a home game for you. Darrell, the brokered deal is on the table. Do I have your agreement? $150 and transporation for a Guarantee in 2015. Home/Home in 2017(gFU) / 2019 (Fargo). The buyout is $500 in 2019, set your price for 2017. (make it a million, knock yourself out)

Sioux83, the brokered deal is on the table. Do I have your agreement? $150 and transporation for a Guarantee in 2015. Home/Home in 2017(gFU) / 2019 (Fargo). The buyout is $500 in 2019, set your price for 2017. (make it a million, knock yourself out)

I'll give you $150k (and pick up your travel cost, ha, ha, rent you a school bus), and a home/home. Take it or leave it. Do we have a deal in principle Sioux83?

That would also require a commitment by BF to a guarentee game in 2015. Does he have the stones for that?

If I was BF, I'd take the 2015 game as guarantee, with a commitment for a home/home in 2017/2019. That, my friend, is as sweet as the deal is going to get. I think GT would sign that deal too. That would be a nice compromise IMO.

How it typically goes . . . BF informs media. Media seeks out GT. BF provides information to the Media, ensuring that the media will seek out GT to ask specific questions about what BF told them. The media confronts GT, and he is put on the spot to answer questions setup by BF. It has happened over, and over, and over and over, and over . . . as this is BF mode of operation. How it should go . . . Media approaches BF. His response . . . we are in contact working on a deal, hoping to get something done. Nothing to report yet, but we'll let you know when something has been finalized. Thanks for asking. Media approaches GT: His response . . . we are in contact working on a deal, hoping to get something done. Nothing to report yet, but we'll let you know when something has been finalized. Thanks for asking.

Using the Media, as he is, is showing BF's true character.

The MVC was leveraging KC to get a better deal in StL. If they goto Vegas I'd be shocked. Pretty sure that aint happening, too far outside the footprint. As for the Summit being a holdout? The SL will be in a brand new arena that seats 12,000 in the footprint, with 4 of the 9 teams within driving distance. That beats the crap out of going to Vegas. Frankly, if the Summit League was in Vegas, that would suck, both for attendance, and the financial deal. The money will be good in SF.

Is BF capable of a negotiation where he doesn't have the media on speed dial and blurt every last detail with his spin? Open records, Riiight! This isn't helping. Keep it out of the media and it will get done. Keep this up and it won't. Each time he uses the media, he hurts the negotiation. And as for Weber State . . . they played NDSU during our transition, when some refused.

GT has not been as successful in your mind "Getting out in Front of It", and "Assuring us that he's handling it Iinternally" as BF has been. That's on this board of course. We really have no idea what either of them are doing in handling discipline internally, but BF is obviously doing it much better than GT, although we have no idea what either of them are doing as I said. Over the last year, it been BF with much more opportunity than GT.