UND and the Big Sky could go FBS

[#MACtion]

When a MAC team plays a Big Ten team (or SEC, ACC, Big XII, etc), that MAC team gets paid between $900,000 - $1.2 million and keeps it for themself. If a FCS team plays a Big Ten team, they are paid $300,000 - $500,000. The Big Ten pays extra for an FBS opponent. They have now said they will no longer play FCS opponents which will dry up some revenue for FCS teams.

In comparison, when an FCS team visits a MAC team, we pay between $200,000 - $400,000. Often MAC teams will schedule 2-for-1 (2 away vs 1 home) with these large revenue conferences and then offset the lack of return trip from the Big Ten school with a FCS school. Most MAC schedules have 1 Big Ten team and 1 FCS team one year and sometimes 2 Big Ten teams another. On the year it is 1 BT and 1 FCS we collect $1 million from the BT team and then pay $300,000 to the visiting FCS team. This balances out our strenght of schedule and home vs away schedule with one hard and one easy game while pocketing $700,000 in revenue.

As far as the discussion of FCS vs FBS. This is straight from the Montana AD comparing the most successful and richest FCS team (Montana) vs the least successful and poorest FBS team (Idaho):

http://missoulian.com/article_44bbeda2-cdde-11df-9730-001cc4c002e0.html

As far as the "FBS split" noise. Here is the proposal from the FARS. Notice that it is endorsed by every FBS conference on the left side of the cover page.

"

It clearly states there is no desire for just the Big 5 to breakaway as there wouldn't be enough teams to compete.

The NCAA tournament would not change.

Objectives:

(4) the FBS must be the master of its own fate, particularly with regard to matters of enhancement of the student-athlete experience that depend on increased revenue allocation

Division I/FBS combined championships rather than separate FBS championships

Third, because we believe that the Division I championship structure works well, we see no good reason to isolate FBS teams and conferences. (Moreover, although we have not examined competition numbers, we wonder whether some FBS-only championships would have a sufficient number of teams and student-athletes to warrant separate championships."

http://www.ubbullrun.com/2013/9/24/4765194/new-ncaa-governance-proposal-would-include-all-fbs-conferences

Actual Proposal:

http://cdn2.sbnation.com/assets/3277511/Governance_Proposal.pdf

There is another article that states in this springs D1 NCAA convention in San Diego that all 10 FBS conferences and the Big East basketball conference all voted for and endorsed stipends. That is key.

[darell1976]

Division I/FBS combined championships rather than separate FBS championshipsThird, because we believe that the Division I championship structure works well, we see no good reason to isolate FBS teams and conferences. (Moreover, although we have not examined competition numbers, we wonder whether some FBS-only championships would have a sufficient number of teams and student-athletes to warrant separate championships."

When a MAC, SB, MW team is playing for a National Title and Alabama, Auburn, Nebraska, Ohio State is at home watching this I will believe the NCAA won't isolate FBS teams and conferences. Boise State had how many times to play for a NC but the NCAA prevented them from doing it. Just because there is a 4 team playoff doesn't mean it won't be 4 S5 teams. Wyoming, ULM, Miami (OH), and Marshall will never be a final 4 in the FBS championship tournament. It will most likely be Alabama, Ohio State, UCLA, Florida State. The day a non Super 5 teams wins a NC in football is the day UND wins the dance.

[#MACtion]

When a MAC, SB, MW team is playing for a National Title and Alabama, Auburn, Nebraska, Ohio State is at home watching this I will believe the NCAA won't isolate FBS teams and conferences. Boise State had how many times to play for a NC but the NCAA prevented them from doing it. Just because there is a 4 team playoff doesn't mean it won't be 4 S5 teams. Wyoming, ULM, Miami (OH), and Marshall will never be a final 4 in the FBS championship tournament. It will most likely be Alabama, Ohio State, UCLA, Florida State. The day a non Super 5 teams wins a NC in football is the day UND wins the dance.

The 4-team playoff will eventually expand. The rules have relaxed already over the years and why the MAC sent a team to the Orange Bowl already and almost again this last season. In 2003 when Miami O finished #10 in the country we also would have been in that bowl under the current rules. Besides, having a chance for the auto-bid Fiesta Bowl slot is still way better than a FCS Championship (think NIT, nobody watches)

The last 2 seasons the MAC Championship game in football had better attendance and TV ratings than the FCS Championship. More people are interested in the 12-team MAC Conference race than the entirety of FCS and their nationwide title.

MAC had higher TV ratings on ESPN2 than the Mountain West Conference had on prime-time CBS.

[darell1976]

The 4-team playoff will eventually expand. The rules have relaxed already over the years and why the MAC sent a team to the Orange Bowl already and almost again this last season. In 2003 when Miami O finished #10 in the country we also would have been in that bowl under the current rules. Besides, having a chance for the auto-bid Fiesta Bowl slot is still way better than a FCS Championship (think NIT, nobody watches)

The last 2 seasons the MAC Championship game in football had better attendance and TV ratings than the FCS Championship. More people are interested in the 12-team MAC Conference race than the entirety of FCS and their nationwide title.

MAC had higher TV ratings on ESPN2 than the Mountain West Conference had on prime-time CBS.

Think of it this way between the FBS and FCS, if your school is playoff eligible in the FCS you have a shot at a NC, in the FBS you think anyone at Miami, OH, Western Michigan, Louisiana-Monroe, Marshall think they have a shot (a realistic shot) at a NC? No. If Miami went perfect and won the MAC they won't be playing for a NC against the big boys. If they expand it that's more S5 teams in unless it turns into March Madness. That's the only way the little guys have a shot at a NC. I love the FCS way!

[fightingsioux4life]

It's only a matter of time before the 4 team FBS playoff expands. As soon as the bean counters realize how much profit potential there is in playoff expansion, it will happen. I see it expanding to 8 teams in a few short years. The biggest it could get is 16 teams (11 auto bids and 5 at-large). Of course, if this radical realignment ever happens, it would change the timetable on this.

[Herd]

The ideal scenario for FBS . . .

12 Team Playoff; Each of the 10 conferences has a opportunity to be in the 12.

Top 4 FBS Rated Conference Chamions IN: 4 Teams

Bottom 6 Conference champions Play-In. 6 Teams Play-IN: 3 Teams In

5 At Large Berths: 5 Teams

All teams seeded 1-12

Round 1: 4 Games 5 v 12, 6 v 11, 7 v 10, 8 v 9 (on campus of highest ranked team)

Round 2: 4 Games 1 v 8/9, 2 v 7/10, 3 v 6/11, 4 v 5/12 (on campus of highest ranked team)

Round 3: Final 4 site

Round 4: Championship Site (3 games to a championship for 1-4 ranked teams; 4 games for 5-12 ranked teams)

12 Shares paid out to the conferences who are participating. Usually 7 of the 10 FBS conferences would be represented in the chamionship, 3 losing the Play-In games.

Every FBS conference would have ACCESS to the championship. All teams not participating in the 12 team playoff are eligible for a Bowl, including play-In game losers.

[FargoBison]

The top 5 conference will never allow that. They own FBS football, they control it and can do whatever they want. The NCAA doesn't care and the bottom five conferences don't care as long as they can still be in the same room and share one seat at the table.

Grow the playoff to 20 teams and at best maybe you get one or two teams in that isn't from a top 5 conference. That is the reality of FBS football and that reality isn't ever going to change.

This isn't like NCAA basketball where the little guys drive up tournament TV ratings. Nobody really cares about the little guy when it comes to football.

[darell1976]

The top 5 conference will never allow that. They own FBS football, they control it and can do whatever they want. The NCAA doesn't care and the bottom five conferences don't care as long as they can still be in the same room and share one seat at the table.

Grow the playoff to 20 teams and at best maybe you get one or two teams in that isn't from a top 5 conference. That is the reality of FBS football and that reality isn't ever going to change.

This isn't like NCAA basketball where the little guys drive up tournament TV ratings. Nobody really cares about the little guy when it comes to football.

You are dead on! It's sad that they treat the little guy who is supposed to be their division equal like a DII team. Think of the outrage by the S5 conference teams if the NC game was Wyoming vs Marshall.

[JohnboyND7]

You are dead on! It's sad that they treat the little guy who is supposed to be their division equal like a DII team. Think of the outrage by the S5 conference teams if the NC game was Wyoming vs Marshall.

There would be no outrage if Wyoming and Marshall played. They would have won games in the tourney. No one was mad when Butler made it in basketball. Now if Wyoming and Marshall played without a playoff... You'd see outrage.

[darell1976]

Alright.....who had August

http://espn.go.com/c...nce-subdivision

Southeastern Conference commissioner Mike Slive spoke for the big schools when he said, "What we're trying to give them is what [student-athletes] are asking for."

Slive visited the University of Massachusetts last week as the executive-in-residence for the Mark H. McCormack Department of Sport Management. In a keynote address, Slive laid out seven goals for the new subdivision of Division I that will house the following conferences: SEC, Atlantic Coast, Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-12.

• providing the full cost of attendance to grant-in-aid recipients

• fulfilling the health, safety and nutrition needs of student-athletes

• allowing student-athletes who have exhausted their eligibility to complete their undergraduate degree without cost

• ending the cold war against agents and advisers so that players testing the professional waters can receive better information

• harnessing the demands of sports so that student-athletes get more balance in their lives -- i.e., another crack at the "20-hour rule"

• more and better assistance for academically at-risk student-athletes

• giving student-athletes a role and a vote in NCAA governance that affects them

That list could come just as easily from a union guy as from the commissioner of one of the most powerful leagues in intercollegiate athletics.

After the speech, Slive said, "I was careful to say that what I was interested in is what the student-athletes were interested in getting, not how they got it."

Slive, as do his colleagues, want to modify the collegiate model, not do away with it.

"I'm not in favor of them being employees," Slive said. "What does 'payment' mean? If payment means they are going to be employees, then I am not in favor of it. ... Whatever we do, at least from my perspective and the perspective of my colleagues, is to be done within the collegiate model. ... This is about higher education, so we need to do more within the context of higher education, not in the context of employment." .

.

.The NCAA expects to create the five-conference subdivision in August. Slive estimated that it will take until at least the first of the year to draw up the rules by which the schools will govern themselves. In the current model, presidents make decisions as members of the NCAA Board of Directors. The five conferences want more responsibility in the hands of their athletic administrators.

[UNDColorado]

Hmmm...This article was published today and direct quotes from the commish of the SEC seems to be legit.

Is this the oppty Volley has been talking about?

[darell1976]

Hmmm...This article was published today and direct quotes from the commish of the SEC seems to be legit.

Is this the oppty Volley has been talking about?

Now will the NCAA combine the rest of the FBS with the upper FCS conferences, dump the bowls for a playoff and live happily ever after? Also what does this do for UND's games with Utah and Washington? Will they (PAC-12) still want to play FCS teams?

[UNDColorado]

Now will the NCAA combine the rest of the FBS with the upper FCS conferences, dump the bowls for a playoff and live happily ever after? Also what does this do for UND's games with Utah and Washington? Will they (PAC-12) still want to play FCS teams?

My answer to your first question is: I have no idea what will happen. I want to make sure this is actually happening before I elaborate any further.

I would be willing to bet that our Pac 12 games will still be on because they will still need non-conference games and even if we are still FCS we are still classified as division 1 so it should still count for their record.

[darell1976]

My answer to your first question is: I have no idea what will happen. I want to make sure this is actually happening before I elaborate any further.

I would be willing to bet that our Pac 12 games will still be on because they will still need non-conference games and even if we are still FCS we are still classified as division 1 so it should still count for their record.

I hope they (PAC-12) don't go the way the Big 10 did and shut the FCS out.

[homer]

Where is that FU fan that always comes on here claiming this was never going to happen. How likely is it they stop at football only?

[The Sicatoka]

Where is that FU fan that always comes on here claiming this was never going to happen. How likely is it they stop at football only?

The way that article is written, is that new DI subdivision football only or for all sports in those five conferences?

[FargoBison]

I'm not even sure if this excludes football. The power conferences have an agreement with the other conferences that gives them access to bowls and college football playoff revenue for the next 12 years.

[Herd]

I suspect for now that a new subdivision of DI would short term, allow for new rule making, but not fully dseparate the FBS championship.

FBS-1 P5 85 Scholly combined FBS 4-Team Playoff/Bowls separate rule making body

FBS-2 L5 85 Scholly combined FBS 4-Team Playoff/Bowls still at same basic champioship level as P5 for now

FCS 63 Scholly 24 team Playoff

This would be my suspicion. It could really be setup for all sports, not just fooball. Something like this would reakky hurt the concept of a level playing field, worse than it already is.

[The Sicatoka]

... a level playing field ...

A-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!

</Common Man Dan Cole hysterical laughter>

No. Wait. Were you serious?

When 'The' Ohio State University spends nearly as much on athletics as an entire DI conference, there's no level playing field.

[nodakvindy]

This superdivision would have to be all sports. There's no way you could only offer those benefits to football players (read: males) and not unleash legal hell on the Title IX front, which not even the BCS schools are immune from.

Everything championship wise will remain the same, all schools will be equal, the super 5 will just be more equal.

Could be an interesting thing in Hockey, with the Big 10 schools being able to potentially offer more benefits to players than any other hockey schools. Would think Hockey East might be able to prevent BC and Notre Dame from doing so by passing league rules.

[SiouxVolley]

Wyoming's ability to stay FBS

http://www.wyosports.net/university_of_wyoming/football/surviving-at-the-top-uw-feels-confident-it-can-compete/article_a0b0246c-d39c-11e3-b96b-0019bb2963f4.html#user-comment-area

Comparing Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana's football programs

http://www.wyosports.net/university_of_wyoming/football/surviving-at-the-top-while-some-schools-uw-s-size/article_bd98349c-d339-11e3-b4cd-001a4bcf887a.html

[SiouxVolley]

Griz working on some projects before the 2017 season, much as I predicted if that is the Big Sky transiton to FBS season.

http://m.billingsgaz...bile_touch=true

EWU, UC Davis, Cal Poly and UND need to announce expanded stadiums.

[cberkas]

Griz working on some projects before the 2017 season, much as I predicted if that is the Big Sky transiton to FBS season.

http://m.billingsgaz...bile_touch=true

EWU, UC Davis, Cal Poly and UND need to announce expanded stadiums.

That didn't say anything to back up your claims.

[SiouxVolley]

That didn't say anything to back up your claims.

Haslam told the Wyosports previously that Montana would have to build an academic center, locker rooms, and weight rooms to go FBS. That's exactly what they are doing and what I predicted earlier.

Haslam also said the move up would cost “millions and is not a one-time investment.” He said salaries for head coaches alone are about four to five times larger in the MW than in the Big Sky.

Like Idaho did, Montana would have to add sports, and major work would have to be done on its facilities. Not with its football stadium, but with things like weight rooms, locker rooms and academic centers.

He added he “would never say never” in terms of the possibility of moving up to the FBS, but he also said Montana wants to be in a position “where we can act instead of being acted upon. It would have to make sense for us.”

[SiouxVolley]

The Freedom of Information released here from Idaho created waves of angst among the Idaho fan base. Their AD commented here:

http://www.thevandalnation.com/?p=9067

Idaho will officially join the Sun Belt Conference as a football-only member on a four-year guarantee beginning in 2014-15 and running through 2017-18.

After the 2015-16 season, Idaho’s second in the league, the Sun Belt Conference board of governors will meet to decide whether to extend Idaho’s football-only agreement beyond 2017-18.

It’s a set-up that Idaho athletic director Rob Spear said gives both Idaho and the Sun Belt flexibility in a college football landscape that both parties expect to continue to evolve.

A number of scenarios could play out, one that could mean a new FBS conference in the west. Further off in the future, Spear also speculates that could mean a definitive break-off between the power conferences and the lower conferences, combining FBS and FCS into three separate tiers, which Spear believes Idaho would belong in the second one.

“There’s a lot of noise in the system as I would describe it still with the whole governance thing up in the air and will soon come to a resolution,” he said. ” … I think it’s going to benefit the five big conferences. We need to see how that shakes out and whether or not there any repercussions from that. So the four-year agreement I think seems like the right timeframe for me, for us.”

Some speculation has centered around Big Sky football programs looking for a way into the FBS, but when asked what he’s heard on that front, Spear responded: “Nothing.”

- See more at: http://www.thevandalnation.com/?p=9067#sthash.3tCVquJo.dpuf