UND and the Big Sky could go FBS

[SiouxVolley]

I just saw our AD David Sayler and a WMU rep being named on the NCHC new board, Sayler is a great AD and came from SDSU as their AD and did a good job there too with fundraising and buildings. Josh Fenton from Miami was also a great pick as NCHC Commish. Miami lost a good one there. So there are plenty of MAC ties with the NCHC schools if games are wanting to be scheduled, Im just not sure UND has a priority to play us in football/basketball.

Sayler came from USD. Their new BB arena, which is needed for a Di school with only one real facility, is badly needed.

Idaho St, S Utah, N Col, and maybe Weber St and NAU would be hard pressed to go FBS. Cal Poly, UCDavis, Sac St, Portland St and the Montanas always had FBS in their long term plans, but 2012 was just too early to move up as all of them had major facility issues.

[FSSD]

I certainly think WMU and Miami would play North Dakota in both, travel would be the only impediment. Travel probably doesn't seem like as big of a deal to UND or any schools west of the Mississippi because thats just the way of life in athletics out there as it is much less densely populated and schools have to travel but to everybody east there is always the evaluation of why not just play somebody closer we can bus too and save the money and travel time issues on the student-athletes. I don't think Miami would come to Grand Forks for Football because I can't remember the last time any FBS team has played on the road at a FCS school, but Miami would certainly welcome the Sioux in football in Oxford. I could also see a home and home in basketball if that is something UND wanted. Northern Illinois would also play UND.

I just saw our AD David Sayler and a WMU rep being named on the NCHC new board, Sayler is a great AD and came from SDSU as their AD and did a good job there too with fundraising and buildings. Josh Fenton from Miami was also a great pick as NCHC Commish. Miami lost a good one there. So there are plenty of MAC ties with the NCHC schools if games are wanting to be scheduled, Im just not sure UND has a priority to play us in football/basketball.

I wonder if there is much chatter between Sayler and Faison after the USD going MVFC/Summit vs Big Sky. I remember Saylor talking to the media about how UND and USD were paired together during the conference shuffle.

[Bulk Truck]

I personally agree with 99% of what #MACtion is presenting! He or she has become the so called out of town expert. Many of his points have been brought out by others, but his perspective has helped clarify several important issues. The only thing I don't feel will happen in large measure is that the MAC would ever become a destination conference for any of the Dakota Schools. Basically Buffalo is the only peer institution in the whole league. All of this is just my opinion of course.

[The Sicatoka]

That makes more sense. Never understood why the Big Sky schools would turn down the WAC offer and let them go exstinct and then turn around and want to go FBS. If your theory holds true, its just a delayed WAC revival.

At the time I couldn't figure out why Fullerton and the Big Sky didn't do everything possible to save the WAC. (The WAC, at the time, had the power to invite teams into FBS.)

Instead, the BSC let the WAC go extinct (as you say) as an FBS entity.

The only reason I could see them letting that happen is to have some other mechanism to get to FBS and the only way I see that is the theory put forth by SiouxVolley.

The BSC schools that want FBS have issues, either facilities or sport offerings. They need time to get their houses in order.

As you say, this theory is a delayed WAC revival and it is pivoting around U of Idaho.

(This is where I'm glad that U of Idaho's paperwork to join the BSC insisted that Montana, Montana State, and North Dakota had to be in the conference when they arrived or they'd be allowed to freely step away.)

[#MACtion]

Which one of you is "NoDak" over on the CSNBBS board?

http://csnbbs.com/th...330-page-5.html

The only problem I see with this "agreement" is yes the Sun Belt can add as many teams as they want, but the payout from the CFP contract is for a maximum of 12 teams. So every team after 12 then dilutes the revenue from the other Sun Belt teams. Maybe that was agreed upon, I dunno. Also if then the Big Sky teams split back off from the Sun Belt teams and form a new FBS conference, then they will not receive any CFP money as they are not in the contract as a conference that splits the $90 million, just the Sun Belt. maybe thats OK and the Big Sky just wants to be FBS and is willing to not receive the extra $15 per year.

Either way, this would not be the case for any other FCS conference and the Big Sky wouldn't "become FBS" it would have to leave behind some of the weaker BSC teams and form a new conference and new name. It would be like how the NCHC was formed. The top of the Big Sky would breakaway like Denver and UND did and then leave behind the other WCHA teams (Bemidji, Michigan Tech = NAU, Idaho State) and create a new conference name. The Big Sky would remain a FCS conference just like the WCHA was left behind. No FBS for CAA, MVFC, etc... although NDSU would likely join new conference with UND, EWU, Montana, Idaho etc...

[The Sicatoka]

The only problem I see with this "agreement" is yes the Sun Belt can add as many teams as they want, but the payout from the CFP contract is for a maximum of 12 teams. So every team after 12 then dilutes the revenue from the other Sun Belt teams.

Run this concept:

- Sun Belt (SBC) invites a group from the BSC (a group large enough to break away as its own western FBS conference in two years)

- that group lives in the SBC for two years (teams reaching full FBS status with SBC helping with the scheduling issues for new FBS teams)

- after two years that group leaves for their own pasture

During the two year window, yes the "share" for legacy SBC teams might go down, or the agreement might say the newbies get no cut, or maybe the buy-in covers the difference.

[SiouxVolley]

Which one of you is "NoDak" over on the CSNBBS board?

http://csnbbs.com/th...330-page-5.html

The only problem I see with this "agreement" is yes the Sun Belt can add as many teams as they want, but the payout from the CFP contract is for a maximum of 12 teams. So every team after 12 then dilutes the revenue from the other Sun Belt teams. Maybe that was agreed upon, I dunno. Also if then the Big Sky teams split back off from the Sun Belt teams and form a new FBS conference, then they will not receive any CFP money as they are not in the contract as a conference that splits the $90 million, just the Sun Belt. maybe thats OK and the Big Sky just wants to be FBS and is willing to not receive the extra $15 per year.

Either way, this would not be the case for any other FCS conference and the Big Sky wouldn't "become FBS" it would have to leave behind some of the weaker BSC teams and form a new conference and new name. It would be like how the NCHC was formed. The top of the Big Sky would breakaway like Denver and UND did and then leave behind the other WCHA teams (Bemidji, Michigan Tech = NAU, Idaho State) and create a new conference name. The Big Sky would remain a FCS conference just like the WCHA was left behind. No FBS for CAA, MVFC, etc... although NDSU would likely join new conference with UND, EWU, Montana, Idaho etc...

I post as NoDak on CSNbbs. I believe the Big Sky will sponsor FCS and FBS eventually. There's no rule that a conference can't sponsor FBS and FCS at the same time. The other schools they have an interest in are NDSU, SDSU, USD, and likely NMSU. Fullerton said they are monitoring certain schools for additions. NDSU's AD just resigned to go to Iowa, because he see's the writing on the wall IMO. The only way NDSU can go FBS is if they join the Big Sky and join UND, and Gene Taylor wants no part of that. He'll have no choice in the matter, so he chose a lateral move as a deputy assistant AD, like Barney Fife and Dwight Shrute.

It was my understanding the a BIg Sky FBS would have a share of the $90 million. The playoff system will expand to 8 teams further down the road and the pot will only get bigger.

[#MACtion]

Doesn't sound like Fullerton believes any Big Sky schools will be going to FBS. He is trying to talk Idaho into becoming FCS and Idaho says they have no interest and will stay FBS because FCS would hurt their other sports financially. Don't know why Fullerton or Idaho would care if there was some BSC/WAC/Sun Belt FBS theory going on.

http://www.idahostat...ter-chance.html

[SiouxVolley]

Doesn't sound like Fullerton believes any Big Sky schools will be going to FBS. He is trying to talk Idaho into becoming FCS and Idaho says they have no interest and will stay FBS because FCS would hurt their other sports financially. Don't know why Fullerton or Idaho would care if there was some BSC/WAC/Sun Belt FBS theory going on.

http://www.idahostat...ter-chance.html

What the article doesn't state is one word was left out: there was a "presumably" before FCS in parenthesis. Idaho isn't making any moves to FCS because of their scheduling multiple FBS teams after 2018. They are contractually bound to be in Big Sky football come 2018. Admittedly, the Big Sky has to work out issues on the funding, facility, TV fronts.

[SiouxVolley]

You left out "The Case for FBS at Idaho" by the Statesman. The arguments there apply to the entire Big Sky.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/2014/06/29/3258683/idahos-case-for-fbs-more-revenue.html

[#MACtion]

The arguments there apply to the entire Big Sky.

Of course they do, they apply for every FCS school, and schools like Eastern Kentucky, Jax State, Illinois State, Youngstown State, etc all want to be FBS but they can't because they don't have an invite. So what's your point?

I'd like Miami to be in the Big Ten and share their money too, but it's not gonna happen.

[SiouxVolley]

Of course they do, they apply for every FCS school, and schools like Eastern Kentucky, Jax State, Illinois State, Youngstown State, etc all want to be FBS but they can't because they don't have an invite. So what's your point?

I'd like Miami to be in the Big Ten and share their money too, but it's not gonna happen.

There's entirely different dynamics from Miami going B1G and the Big Sky going FBS. Ohio State would single handedly stop Miami. There's a different route for the Big Sky that you haven't even discussed.

Moreover, Fullerton was trying to make the case that all Big Sky schools need to be at the same classification. If Idaho isn't going to FCS, the rest of the Sky needs to upgrade.

Fullerton himself has said the Big Sky looks an awful like an FBS conference. Why would he say that if he didn't want it, which he does.

[darell1976]

There's entirely different dynamics from Miami going B1G and the Big Sky going FBS. Ohio State would single handedly stop Miami. There's a different route for the Big Sky that you haven't even discussed.

Moreover, Fullerton was trying to make the case that all Big Sky schools need to be at the same classification. If Idaho isn't going to FCS, the rest of the Sky needs to upgrade.

Fullerton himself has said the Big Sky looks an awful like an FBS conference. Why would he say that if he didn't want it, which he does.

Nothing can happen until there is either a split in the FBS or BSC teams (including UND) upgrade their stadiums to over 15k.

[zonadub]

Interesting how Fullerton lists Montana, Montana State and North Dakota in the Statesman article. Reminds me of the "significant members" Sioux Volley brought up after getting the Sun Belt / Big Sky conference affiliation information from Idaho months ago. Fullerton specifically names the same schools that are listed as significant members and the key schools that Idaho views as it's peer institutions.

Doesn't sound like Fullerton believes any Big Sky schools will be going to FBS. He is trying to talk Idaho into becoming FCS and Idaho says they have no interest and will stay FBS because FCS would hurt their other sports financially. Don't know why Fullerton or Idaho would care if there was some BSC/WAC/Sun Belt FBS theory going on.

http://www.idahostat...ter-chance.html

(Just have to quote BD's post here)

Only in your mind. Fact is there isn't a team in the BSC that wouldn't trade you guys for NDSU in a heartbeat.

According to bison and jack fans, the Big Sky can't wait to get rid of UND. But according to the Big Sky's own documents, the Big Sky considers Montana, Montana State, and UND to be the three key schools in the conference. Idaho's own acceptance is dependent on those three still being members, otherwise Idaho can back out of joining at no cost:

Upon acceptance of this memoradum the University of Idaho shall immediately deposit 50% of $250,000 entry fee with the Big Sky conference. This entry fee is non-refundable. The only exception shall be, should there be a significant loss of membership by the Big Sky Conference prior to July 1, 2014, the University of Idaho may notify the league of its intention not to join the league and the deposit will be refunded. A significant loss of members would be defined as the loss of any or all of the following institutions from the Big Sky Conference: the University of Montana, Montana State University, or the University or North Dakota. The remaining 50% is due July 1, 2014.

[Herd]

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.

[Herd]

I post as NoDak on CSNbbs. I believe the Big Sky will sponsor FCS and FBS eventually. There's no rule that a conference can't sponsor FBS and FCS at the same time. The other schools they have an interest in are NDSU, SDSU, USD, and likely NMSU. Fullerton said they are monitoring certain schools for additions. NDSU's AD just resigned to go to Iowa, because he see's the writing on the wall IMO. The only way NDSU can go FBS is if they join the Big Sky and join UND, and Gene Taylor wants no part of that. He'll have no choice in the matter, so he chose a lateral move as a deputy assistant AD, like Barney Fife and Dwight Shrute.

It was my understanding the a BIg Sky FBS would have a share of the $90 million. The playoff system will expand to 8 teams further down the road and the pot will only get bigger.

"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!

[Herd]

Which one of you is "NoDak" over on the CSNBBS board?

http://csnbbs.com/th...330-page-5.html

The only problem I see with this "agreement" is yes the Sun Belt can add as many teams as they want, but the payout from the CFP contract is for a maximum of 12 teams. So every team after 12 then dilutes the revenue from the other Sun Belt teams. Maybe that was agreed upon, I dunno. Also if then the Big Sky teams split back off from the Sun Belt teams and form a new FBS conference, then they will not receive any CFP money as they are not in the contract as a conference that splits the $90 million, just the Sun Belt. maybe thats OK and the Big Sky just wants to be FBS and is willing to not receive the extra $15 per year.

Either way, this would not be the case for any other FCS conference and the Big Sky wouldn't "become FBS" it would have to leave behind some of the weaker BSC teams and form a new conference and new name. It would be like how the NCHC was formed. The top of the Big Sky would breakaway like Denver and UND did and then leave behind the other WCHA teams (Bemidji, Michigan Tech = NAU, Idaho State) and create a new conference name. The Big Sky would remain a FCS conference just like the WCHA was left behind. No FBS for CAA, MVFC, etc... although NDSU would likely join new conference with UND, EWU, Montana, Idaho etc...

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.

[jdub27]

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.

While I don't think it is likely to happen anytime in the near future, I'm not so certain your thoughts on it being impossible are correct either. Theoretically, couldn't Big Sky schools be invited into the Sun Belt and then split off into a new Big Sky after a couple of years, very similar to what the Big East did splitting into the new Big East and the American Athletic Conference? The Sun Belt would collect "entrance" fees for any school looking to move up and in the end a conference that far west is not a competitive problem for them. Again, I don't see it happening in the near future, but am I missing something that would actually prevent the possibility of a similar situation happening?

[Herd]

While I don't think it is likely to happen anytime in the near future, I'm not so certain your thoughts on it being impossible are correct either. Theoretically, couldn't Big Sky schools be invited into the Sun Belt and then split off into a new Big Sky after a couple of years, very similar to what the Big East did splitting into the new Big East and the American Athletic Conference? The Sun Belt would collect "entrance" fees for any school looking to move up and in the end a conference that far west is not a competitive problem for them. Again, I don't see it happening in the near future, but am I missing something that would actually prevent the possibility of a similar situation happening?

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.

[darell1976]

What people are forgetting is Fullerton's idea is based on a p5 split and a merge between top FCS and the rest of the FBS teams, so conferences like the BSC, MVFC, etc can move up as a whole.

[jdub27]

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.

Again, my thoughts on it are being unlikely but I'm just looking at if it is actual plausible that it could happen:

-The Sunbelt invites 6 Big Sky schools for football only and creates a western division (with Idaho and NMSU). The whole conference would never go.

-Those 6 schools pay large "entrance" fees of $1-2 million, giving the other SunBelt schools a nice little bump to offset any sharing of other revenues they receive or even write the contract so that the new schools don't receive any league money until they are a full member.

-After a few years when they have fully transitioned and are FBS teams, the western division breaks off and forms a new conference for football "Big Sky FBS" or something.

No new FBS teams are created as the ones breaking off are full FBS members. Your zero sum game you keep bringing up. Yes a new conference is created, but the Big East split did exactly that in basketball. UND and Denver created a brand new hockey conference. I don't recall seeing any commentary on anyone outside of school presidents related to it voting on either of the matters. And in both cases, it required a new autobid to be issued to the national tournament and some sort of revenue sharing. I haven't read the NCAA bylaws to see who's approval is necessary, but I'm not certain that it needs to be voted on by NCAA membership. Now there would be some issues with the language of the current TV and playoff contract, but at that point it would be close to time to renegotiate anyway, would the other conferences really leave them out for fear of anti-trust issues?

Just want to reiterate that I don't see it happening because there are way too many moving parts and uncertainty in the overall landscape but again, I don't think its impossible like you are claiming. And with the possible shifting of the P5, it likely doesn't matter.

[The Sicatoka]

Welcome to Theoretical Land, I'm your host.

I started digging into the details of FCS --> FBS (20.4.2 of DI manual).

Some key information from that regarding transitioning from FCS --> FBS:

(a) it's a two year transition period

(b) have to have a full FBS schedule in just Year Two, and

© you count as an FBS opponent in Year Two.

Keys to making the FCS --> FBS move:

20.4.2.1.1 -- bona fide invite ... OK, your have to be invited in by an FBS conference

20.4.2.1.3 -- you don't have to meet the FBS schedule req's in Year One of transition (my item (b) above)

20.9.9.2.2.1 -- you count as an FBS opponent in Year Two of transition (teams aren't hurt playing you, item © above)

Say the Sun Belt invited a large block (say 7 of BSC) of teams. In Year Two all those teams could play each other as FBS opponents, and if the Sun Belt politely shoved Idaho and NMSU toward that block to create "Sun Belt -- West Division" everyone would have 8 games, plus any body-bag money games already scheduled. Most would only need to worry about one more (to make five, 20.9.9.2) home FBS games.

If the Belt was truly nice, they'd cover that required fifth home game for those who need it by providing a Sun Belt "East" team (that would probably get a two-for-one in return). Or, for someone like UND, we could try to get a game in Milwaukee or Green Bay v. Wisconsin or such as a "home" game (for attendance minimums, 20.9.9.3).

And then at some point in the future the "Sun Belt - West Division" goes the way of the WAC/MWC split back in the day --> Two conferences.

Now, why would the Sun Belt do this? Say they charged the teams in that block a cool $1 million each. There's the incentive.

Now, unarguably there is the "large pool of money split another way" ($12 million per conf today) conversation (the eleventh FBS conference). That's a whole other set of politics.

So, is it logistically possible under the rules? Yes. Are there money issues? Yes, but surely not insurmountable.

Thus ends this adventure into Theoretical Land. Thank you for your time.

[The Sicatoka]

Again, my thoughts on it are being unlikely but I'm just looking at if it is actual plausible that it could happen:

-The Sunbelt invites 6 Big Sky schools for football only and creates a western division (with Idaho and NMSU). The whole conference would never go.

-Those 6 schools pay large "entrance" fees of $1-2 million, giving the other SunBelt schools a nice little bump to offset any sharing of other revenues they receive or even write the contract so that the new schools don't receive any league money until they are a full member.

-After a few years when they have fully transitioned and are FBS teams, the western division breaks off and forms a new conference for football "Big Sky FBS" or something.

Dang there j-dub, great minds, eh?

[Herd]

Again, my thoughts on it are being unlikely but I'm just looking at if it is actual plausible that it could happen:

-The Sunbelt invites 6 Big Sky schools for football only and creates a western division (with Idaho and NMSU). The whole conference would never go.

-Those 6 schools pay large "entrance" fees of $1-2 million, giving the other SunBelt schools a nice little bump to offset any sharing of other revenues they receive or even write the contract so that the new schools don't receive any league money until they are a full member.

-After a few years when they have fully transitioned and are FBS teams, the western division breaks off and forms a new conference for football "Big Sky FBS" or something.

No new FBS teams are created as the ones breaking off are full FBS members. Your zero sum game you keep bringing up. Yes a new conference is created, but the Big East split did exactly that in basketball. UND and Denver created a brand new hockey conference. I don't recall seeing any commentary on anyone outside of school presidents related to it voting on either of the matters. And in both cases, it required a new autobid to be issued to the national tournament and some sort of revenue sharing. I haven't read the NCAA bylaws to see who's approval is necessary, but I'm not certain that it needs to be voted on by NCAA membership. Now there would be some issues with the language of the current TV and playoff contract, but at that point it would be close to time to renegotiate anyway, would the other conferences really leave them out for fear of anti-trust issues?

Just want to reiterate that I don't see it happening because there are way too many moving parts and uncertainty in the overall landscape but again, I don't think its impossible like you are claiming. And with the possible shifting of the P5, it likely doesn't matter.

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?

[jdub27]

6 Teams from FCS added to the Sunbelt is not a Zero sum game. It is a Plus 6.

Adding 6 teams from the BSC would be a major red flag for both the NCAA the current FBS conferences. Good luck with that. The intentions look obvious.

Why would 12 Sunbelt teams want to share $12 million with 18 teams instead of 12? Who benefits from that.

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.

I'm still talking about the possibility it would happen not whether is actually likely to happen.

-Adding 6 teams would not be against any rules I've seen. I don't know of any measure in place that would allow the other conferences to stop the Sunbelt from doing it. Correct, inviting any teams up isn't a zero sum game, this isn't much different other than it being a few more teams. I don't know of anything that legal prevents this regardless of intentions or how it looks. (I was referring to it in terms of a new conference, at that point it is a zero sum game as the teams would already be FBS)

-"Entrance" fees along with some sort of structure that offsets their loss in the $12 million could easily be put in place for the existing teams. I believe that GSU and App St had something in their invite that they didn't receive revenue immediately.

-Again, only a 2-3 year issue, parts of which can be offset with non-conference guarantees that are well more than double of what the exact same team would be receiving as an FBS team once they are in year 2 and count as "FBS" wins (see Sicatoka's post)

-It would be a 2-3 year agreement and if there were east-west divisions, you'd be looking at 1, maybe 2 away games cross-division for 2 or maybe 3 years. The SunBelt may actually be willing to do something along these lines as it would help them help Idaho and NMSU move on. The MWC and to a lesser degree the MAC wouldn't do it because it would be creating competition in their geographical region. No such concern with the SunBelt.

-Fullerton wouldn't be killing football in the BSC, he's still have a full (though less competitive) conference while knowing that the other schools would come back as they would still have all other sports under the Big Sky umbrella. The Big Sky would then "manage" the operations of the FBS conference.

You have some very valid arguments on the money side of it, but they are not insurmountable if teams really want to go FBS. On the legal side of it, I am not sure there is anything that can prevent it (that I have seen). In terms of practicality, very doubtful but doable.

I'm not sold on it for many reasons but mainly because I don't think there is a rush to go FBS in the current landscape.