NCAA changes to FBS and FCS Football?

[BobIwabuchiFan]

Seems to be a lot of talk and articles on the board about this change...Can we start a discussion of what we know is fact and then progress into what we think will happen for the folks that don't track NCAA committees and meetings?

[82SiouxGuy]

Seems to be a lot of talk and articles on the board about this change...Can we start a discussion of what we know is fact and then progress into what we think will happen for the folks that don't track NCAA committees and meetings?

There aren't many facts at this point. The commissioners of most of the largest conferences have talked about making a change of some kind. The head of the NCAA says that the organization needs to look at making a change. This was the first stab at figuring out how to make something work. Another group is meeting in October. The entire organization will discuss at meetings in January. Everything is speculation right now, except for the fact that people are looking at potential changes. So a thread with just the facts would be pretty short.

[BobIwabuchiFan]

As I stated at the end of my initial post, we can also progress into what we think will happen...So, basic premise is to get rid of the two-tier Division I system we currently have and just have a smaller group at DI and put the rest into what would be called DII again? It seems many posters are stating that the Big Sky conference would have a leg up over others to make the jump...Why so?

[dmksioux]

As I stated at the end of my initial post, we can also progress into what we think will happen...So, basic premise is to get rid of the two-tier Division I system we currently have and just have a smaller group at DI and put the rest into what would be called DII again? It seems many posters are stating that the Big Sky conference would have a leg up over others to make the jump...Why so?

Purely speculation on my part, but the BSC may have an easier time moving up due to lack of programs in the west. Granted there is less population also. Currently in the West you only have three football playing conferences, The Pac-12, MWC, and the Big Sky. Lot more conferences sponsoring football in the east meaning a lot more competition in moving up to an existing FBS conference. Less (new) FBS schools in the west would make it more expensive for existing FBS schools...if that makes sense. It also doesn't hurt to have Montana and Montana State in the conference as they are positioned fairly well to move up to FBS. If the BSC could attract the 'SU's and UND financially commits to FBS, That would be a pretty good core to move up. Again, purely speculation on my part.

[Hayduke]

Purely speculation on my part, but the BSC may have an easier time moving up due to lack of programs in the west. Granted there is less population also. Currently in the West you only have three football playing conferences, The Pac-12, MWC, and the Big Sky. Lot more conferences sponsoring football in the east meaning a lot more competition in moving up to an existing FBS conference. Less (new) FBS schools in the west would make it more expensive for existing FBS schools...if that makes sense. It also doesn't hurt to have Montana and Montana State in the conference as they are positioned fairly well to move up to FBS. If the BSC could attract the 'SU's and UND financially commits to FBS, That would be a pretty good core to move up. Again, purely speculation on my part.

I agree that many of the schools are in a good position to move into a lesser FBS conference. UND/Montana -flagship institutions. MSU - large and capable. Eastern Washington has a good population to draw from for fans...etc, etc...

*IF* this comes down the way it looks, I think USD/SDSU and the University of Agriculture and Applied Science would be wise to try to get into the BSC.

[mksioux]

One thing is fairly certain if this proposal comes to fruition, NDSU will not stand for moving down a division. They will go FBS no matter what it takes. I assume UNI might feel the same way. And I'm pretty sure SDSU will follow NDSU, and USD will have to try to follow SDSU if they can keep up. For UND, we'll probably have to rely on the Big Sky conference and Doug Fullerton and the Presidents having some sort of plan. What concerns me is that I don't think this proposal is the "split" Doug Fullerton had in mind. I think he imagined a split where the BCS schools broke off and the Big Sky would be positioned to be in the second-tier with the bottom FBS and top FCS schools. I don't know if he has a plan for moving up all or part of the Big Sky to the top tier. The good thing for UND is that I think Montana and Montana State will have the same attitude as NDSU and that moving down a division will be unacceptable. So hopefully if this proposal comes to fruition, UND can ride the coattails of the Montana schools into FBS.

[SiouxVolley]

The Big Sky has a number of schools where FBS is the long range plan:

Portland St (new stadium)

Sac St

Montana

Montana St

Two from the WAC

Idaho

N Mexico St (possibly stay in Sun Belt)

Two affiliates that could move

Cal Poly

UCDavis

Four stretches

UND

NAU

Weber St

EWU

There are rules preventing a conference moving up to FBS, but the Big Sky can claim that it has heirs rights to the WAC FBS status. The MVC, Colonial, OVC,and Southland teams that want FBS can still make FBS by jumping conferences, like EKU, JMU, and Delaware will likely do.

[SiouxVolley]

One thing is fairly certain if this proposal comes to fruition, NDSU will not stand for moving down a division. They will go FBS no matter what it takes. I assume UNI might feel the same way. And I'm pretty sure SDSU will follow NDSU, and USD will have to try to follow SDSU if they can keep up. For UND, we'll probably have to rely on the Big Sky conference and Doug Fullerton and the Presidents having some sort of plan. What concerns me is that I don't think this proposal is the "split" Doug Fullerton had in mind. I think he imagined a split where the BCS schools broke off and the Big Sky would be positioned to be in the second-tier with the bottom FBS and top FCS schools. I don't know if he has a plan for moving up all or part of the Big Sky to the top tier. The good thing for UND is that I think Montana and Montana State will have the same attitude as NDSU and that moving down a division will be unacceptable. So hopefully if this proposal comes to fruition, UND can ride the coattails of the Montana schools into FBS.

A school can not move to FBS until it receives a conference invite. That is the dilemma.

[jodcon]

There's so many variables that are unknown it is almost impossible to try to predict where everyone will fall when this finally happens.

How many levels will there be?

How many scholarships will there be at each level?

How many sports will each level be required to offer?

What will be the facility requirements at each level?

These are questions that could force schools to choose one path or another, even within the Big Sky and MVFC there could be the haves and the have-nots depending on what the requirements are. These two conferences could very well end up looking very different with one being filled with the more financially sound teams in a higher level and the other with the teams that couldn't afford the move staying at something that resembles the level they are currently at. Hopefully when this does happen the NCAA will take all that into account and set the levels so that the current FCS teams will (mostly) all be able to move together to whatever the new level will be, but it's no guarantee, teams like NDSU and Montana might have a lot of pull in FCS but in the NCAA's grand scheme of things they are not going to affect the process that much, and may be forced to make a difficult decision.

In the hypothetical situation that scholarship/sport/facility requirements are something similar to what FBS is requiring now, it's going to knock a lot of potential movers out of the picture. When Montana was considering moving a couple years ago the upfront cost was over $30 million for facility upgrades (and our facilities are pretty decent) and the athletic budget would have went from $16 to $23 million/year. I assume under that scenario some schools simply would not be able to comply because they would be forced to build new stadiums for at least one sport and they just couldn't afford it, plus their athletic budgets are probably much less than the $16 million that Montana spends, which would be even more money they would have to come up with yearly.

If I had to guess, and that's all ANYBODY can do at this point, I think they will set the level that will affect teams that are currently upper FCS at somewhere between where they are now and what the current FBS requirements are... scholarships somewhere in the middle, another required sport or two, and a lower requirement on facilities.

Where those requirements fall is going to tell the tale as far as where the teams in this area are going to end up...if they are only a slight increase over what is required now, the Big Sky and MVFC will probably look about the same as it does today...if the requirements are going to take a substantial amount of money, the upper end of the Big Sky and MVFC might have to make a difficult decision and may be forced to join forces in a move. The good news for the Montana and North Dakota schools is they each have a cash cow that helps their budget, football for the Montanas and NDSU, hockey for UND...that is one advantage many schools don't have.

But at this point it's all speculation, and like the old saying goes..."everybody has an opinion, just like an a**hole". There's no sense worrying about it until something more concrete shows up.

[jdub27]

There are rules preventing a conference moving up to FBS, but the Big Sky can claim that it has heirs rights to the WAC FBS status.

Just curious what you base on that on? I can't see any argument holding water that the "big boys" would allow.

[BobIwabuchiFan]

Again, I apologize for my ignorance on these potential changes, but if I understand correctly its to eliminate the two tier Div I system, correct? The main reason being is that the majority of the Div I teams cannot compete on a financial basis with say the top 40-50 teams? Hence, they want to go back to two divisions, one for the big boys and one that would be essentially an FCS light version?

[82SiouxGuy]

Again, I apologize for my ignorance on these potential changes, but if I understand correctly its to eliminate the two tier Div I system, correct? The main reason being is that the majority of the Div I teams cannot compete on a financial basis with say the top 40-50 teams? Hence, they want to go back to two divisions, one for the big boys and one that would be essentially an FCS light version?

The big boys are driving this issue. They want more control over their own fate. Right now they can be outvoted on NCAA rules by smaller schools. They are also being driven by money. They want more football money and more television money. They can get those by developing the football playoff system and not having to include the smaller FBS conferences. They also feel that they are subsidizing the smaller schools since most of the March Madness television money is based on the appeal of the big schools, but all of Division I gets a piece of it. And they are tired of all of the smaller schools moving up to be part of Division I. So you can boil it down to the big schools wanting more power and more money, and they want to quit playing with the little guys.

[darell1976]

After the BCS is done away with in favor of a 4 team playoff starting next year the terms "FBS" and "FCS" will become obsolete. What will they be changed to? I'm hoping for a return to I-A and I-AA, as I had always known them before somebody decided they had to fix something that wasn't broken.

It should be just one division like basketball. 200+ teams for the National Title.

[SiouxVolley]

Just curious what you base on that on? I can't see any argument holding water that the "big boys" would allow.

The WAC still can invite FCS teams to FBS. The WAC invites Big Sky teams en masse and the Big Sky invites WAC teams so you have a swap. Rename the conferences and you have a FBS Big Sky and a non-football WAC - just takes a payment to the WAC for it to happen. Easier said then done, but entirely possible and legal.

[darell1976]

The WAC still can invite FCS teams to FBS. The WAC invites Big Sky teams en masse and the Big Sky invites WAC teams so you have a swap. Rename the conferences and you have a FBS Big Sky and a non-football WAC - just takes a payment to the WAC for it to happen. Easier said then done, but entirely possible and legal.

I think the WAC only has another year to retain their football membership or else its a lost football conference. I thought I read it had 2 years to get football going or else its dead.

[Herd]

Again, I apologize for my ignorance on these potential changes, but if I understand correctly its to eliminate the two tier Div I system, correct? The main reason being is that the majority of the Div I teams cannot compete on a financial basis with say the top 40-50 teams? Hence, they want to go back to two divisions, one for the big boys and one that would be essentially an FCS light version?

There are so many details that are very very complicated when anything other than FB is discussed. For people to sit there and say that the BSC is in a better position than the MVC from an all sports standpoint is ludicris. Half of the MVFC teams are in a top10 BB league (MVC), so dont try to tell me the BSC is going to be in a better position than either the MVC or the MVFC. You have 2-3 Haves in the BSC and the rest are have nots. The MVC may be pulled up in a split, putting the MVFC in a better position than the BSC for sure which would not be pulled up. Quite honestly, the BB situation is complicated. You are telling me a proposal to change DI BB from 340 to 120 will just happen? I say no way.

Sorry Bob, im really taking to some of the other posters here.

[SiouxVolley]

There are so many details that are very very complicated when anything other than FB is discussed. For people to sit there and say that the BSC is in a better position than the MVC from an all sports standpoint is ludicris. Half of the MVFC teams are in a top10 BB league (MVC), so dont try to tell me the BSC is going to be in a better position than either the MVC or the MVFC. You have 2-3 Haves in the BSC and the rest are have nots. The MVC may be pulled up in a split, putting the MVFC in a better position than the BSC for sure which would not be pulled up. Quite honestly, the BB situation is complicated. You are telling me a proposal to change DI BB from 340 to 120 will just happen? I say no way.

Sorry Bob, im really taking to some of the other posters here.

So your brilliance is saying Ill State and N Iowa will turn down the MAC, but will choose to stay in an MVC that is weaker with no NCAA entry to FBS. With Creighton gone and Wichita St likely to leave, MVC basketball will not be the same. Mo St has a standing offer from the Sun Belt. Somehow the basketball schools are going to accept Youngtown St, W Ill, and the Dakota 3 to strengthen a basketball conference? The MVC has no options for FBS and will not recruit nearly as well for basketball by not being in the highest division. The whole FBS / FCS split is the deathknell to the MVC : football has to flee in order to be FBS as the MVC has no future path to FBS.

[Herd]

So your brilliance is saying Ill State and N Iowa will turn down the MAC, but will choose to stay in an MVC that is weaker with no NCAA entry to FBS. With Creighton gone and Wichita St likely to leave, MVC basketball will not be the same. Mo St has a standing offer from the Sun Belt. Somehow the basketball schools are going to accept Youngtown St, W Ill, and the Dakota 3 to strengthen a basketball conference? The MVC has no options for FBS and will not recruit nearly as well for basketball by not being in the highest division. The whole FBS / FCS split is the deathknell to the MVC : football has to flee in order to be FBS as the MVC has no future path to FBS.

Compared to the BSC, the MVC and MVFC are higher profile and in better shape if a basketball/football split would occur. The BSC doesnt have standing in either sport, and its teams are isolated and not going antwhere. Are you kidding me! Wow, what a bunch of garbage being spewed here by a few of you (no offense to most of you here).

[Herd]

The WAC still can invite FCS teams to FBS. The WAC invites Big Sky teams en masse and the Big Sky invites WAC teams so you have a swap. Rename the conferences and you have a FBS Big Sky and a non-football WAC - just takes a payment to the WAC for it to happen. Easier said then done, but entirely possible and legal.

So you have created a league that Sunbelt will beat up on, where does that get you? Spending more to not be playing at the highest level of college FB in a BB league that's not a top 20 league. Great idea, and the otber half of the teams that cant afford to spend more on FB do what, drop FB? So that move is going to somehow keep you playing the top level of BB and FB? You've got quite the imagination there.

So this isn't a game of shells anymore, please outline the following for all of us so we understand the details of this split with clairvoyance like you have please.

Ohio State 1) Division 2)Subdivision 3) # FB Schollies 4) FB Championship 5) Basketball Championship Playing for

Akron 1) Division 2)Subdivision 3) # FB Schollies 4) FB Championship 5) Basketball Championship Playing for

Youngstown 1) Division 2)Subdivision 3) # FB Schollies 4) FB Championship 5) Basketball Championship Playing for

[Hayduke]

I think the WAC only has another year to retain their football membership or else its a lost football conference. I thought I read it had 2 years to get football going or else its dead.

There's not much of a light at the end of the tunnel for the WAC. Volley could be right about the invite status of the WAC, but there's not enough time.

This whole FBS shakeup has yet to be played out. That letter is only a suggestion, although from a collective that has respect from the NCAA, but there will be a lot of negotiating coming up. I still believe that the big five conferences will split away from FBS and form something. What happens from there is what programs like those in the Big Sky and other FCS conferences will need to place themselves in positions to either move up or get derailed to a lower classificiation.

It sure is funny how the county fair princesses from the two time tier II champions of the College of Home Economics at the University of Agriculture and Applied Science think that their parolees' success on the gridiron lends them more cred...

What a bunch of tools!

[Siouxperfan7]

There's not much of a light at the end of the tunnel for the WAC. Volley could be right about the invite status of the WAC, but there's not enough time.

This whole FBS shakeup has yet to be played out. That letter is only a suggestion, although from a collective that has respect from the NCAA, but there will be a lot of negotiating coming up. I still believe that the big five conferences will split away from FBS and form something. What happens from there is what programs like those in the Big Sky and other FCS conferences will need to place themselves in positions to either move up or get derailed to a lower classificiation.

It sure is funny how the county fair princesses from the two time tier II champions of the College of Home Economics at the University of Agriculture and Applied Science think that their parolees' success on the gridiron lends them more cred...

What a bunch of tools!

Ok, we get it. You think FCS is "Tier II" and that they don't win Championships at the highest level and that you like calling NDSU ""University of Agriculture and Applied Science." We all know your opinion of NDSU. But do you have to reference it every time and in every post you make? It's pretty annoying. If takes away from any point you are trying to make when you do stuff like that. Pretty immature if you ask me. Why don't you try to make posts that are incitefull and add to the discussion instead of doing what you do know which is consistently embarass yourself with disparaging remarks.

[Hayduke]

Ok, we get it. You think FCS is "Tier II" and that they don't win Championships at the highest level and that you like calling NDSU ""University of Agriculture and Applied Science." We all know your opinion of NDSU. But do you have to reference it every time and in every post you make? It's pretty annoying. If takes away from any point you are trying to make when you do stuff like that. Pretty immature if you ask me. Why don't you try to make posts that are incitefull and add to the discussion instead of doing what you do know which is consistently embarass yourself with disparaging remarks.

Okay, we get it.

You don't like reality.

Tough.

[SiouxVolley]

I think the WAC only has another year to retain their football membership or else its a lost football conference. I thought I read it had 2 years to get football going or else its dead.

An FBS / FCS split may occur by next year so there is time. Keep in mind that the FBS side, no matter how weak the conference, will gain the option of offering a stipend, which mid-major basketball conferences will be unable to do. The FBS side will have overall benefits within the NCAA structure, no matter if it the weakest FBS conference. Just the perception of playing at the highest level will matter.

The Big 5 have decided to bring along the rest of the FBS (it still needs the games, playing them considerably raises the Big 5 record and ensures the majority of the Big 5 have enough home games and a winning record). The Big Ten would have an average losing record if it couldn't play the MAC. The Big 5 throws a bone to the other FBS conferences, offering them enhanced standing which will strengthen the rest of all their programs relative to FCS and non-football leagues. Its a brilliant move by the Big 5, as they won;t be a political backlash.

The lowest level league in FBS, even if new, will have enormous advantages in perception in recruiting for non-football athletes.

[Herd]

An FBS / FCS split may occur by next year so there is time. Keep in mind that the FBS side, no matter how weak the conference, will gain the option of offering a stipend, which mid-major basketball conferences will be unable to do. The FBS side will have overall benefits within the NCAA structure, no matter if it the weakest FBS conference. Just the perception of playing at the highest level will matter.

The Big 5 have decided to bring along the rest of the FBS (it still needs the games, playing them considerably raises the Big 5 record and ensures the majority of the Big 5 have enough home games and a winning record). The Big Ten would have an average losing record if it couldn't play the MAC. The Big 5 throws a bone to the other FBS conferences, offering them enhanced standing which will strengthen the rest of all their programs relative to FCS and non-football leagues. Its a brilliant move by the Big 5, as they won;t be a political backlash.

The lowest level league in FBS, even if new, will have enormous advantages in perception in recruiting for non-football athletes.

Sorry, but there will be a huge political backlash if half the teams who are today DI, are not allowed to play DI BB and other sports and forced out of DI. DI is sub divided for FB, not for all other sports. Di BB is the carrot, and a major backlash will occur, if what you suggest occurs. What will playing today FBS football (FBS will need to be completely redefined under yourscenario) matter if you are in a garbage BB conf?

Who in the BSC could afford to play 85 scholly FB? Nobody, the same as most of todays FCS? So if you are saying todays FBS schooly levels will be redefined to make it affordable, please specify. That is wnat i have said would need to happen for FCS to stay connected and keep games with the top level.

I suggested: FB only

DI 90 w/ stipends

DI 70-85 w/o stipends

DI 0-50 also rans

But kicking half of teams out of DI is a different animal, with lawyers on speed dial.

[82SiouxGuy]

Sorry, but there will be a huge political backlash if half the teams who are today DI, are not allowed to play DI BB and other sports and forced out of DI. DI is sub divided for FB, not for all other sports. Di BB is the carrot, and a major backlash will occur, if what you suggest occurs. What will playing today FBS football (FBS will need to be completely redefined under yourscenario) matter if you are in a garbage BB conf?

Who in the BSC could afford to play 85 scholly FB? Nobody, the same as most of todays FCS? So if you are saying todays FBS schooly levels will be redefined to make it affordable, please specify. That is wnat i have said would need to happen for FCS to stay connected and keep games with the top level.

If the big 5 or 6 conferences leave the NCAA they will take most of the basketball money with them. The CBS contract for March Madness is based on the big boys playing in the tournament. Neither CBS nor any other network will be willing to pay the NCAA nearly the same amount of money without the big conferences. That gives the big conferences power to potentially overhaul what Division I looks like, including the number of schools that are part of Division I. The membership of the NCAA will strongly consider any proposal to realign as long as they can keep the big basketball contract.

You just don't seem to grasp that this has the potential to be a whole new world in college athletics. The rules that everyone knows right now may have nothing to do with the rules that will control college athletics in the future. But none of these new rules have been decided yet, so you constantly asking what those rules are going to be is a waste of time. No one knows what the final result will be. What they do know is that things are about to change. The rest is speculation.