Delaware AD: Georgia Southern/Appalachian State Aren't Really Moving Up

[BigHouseClosedEnd]

I don't think either of them mentioned TV markets, and we know that UR has shown zero interest in going FBS. BHCE has been trolling these threads lately, and AI let himself get roped in. I do think it's cute how often BHCE feels the need to rip a conference that his team has absolutely zero affiliation with. Good times!

I have no clue why You are calling me out like I'm the only person calling the Slum Belt the terrible conference that it is. Given that you keep coming back to a lowly FCS Message Board to defend the move, I'm guessing you recognize this reality too.

Is there such a thing as Sun Belch message boards? If so, they must be an awfully humbling place that keeps you coming back here, huh?

[BigHouseClosedEnd]

App State Kidd Brewer Stadium Average Attedence: 28,000 - 7,000 students = 21,000 paid attendance.
Richmond Robbins Itisy Bitsy Spider Stadium Average Attendance: 8,700 - 2,900 students = 5,800 paid attendance.

App State gets 15,200 more paid fans per game, or roughly twice the capacity of your stadium.

I hope you don't think Richslum is headed to FBS.

xdizzyx

[BigHouseClosedEnd]

Wait - is that Karl Benson on Line 2 in Norfolk State's athletic department?

xlolx

Yes. And he's trying to convince the Norfolk State AD that Morgan State is going to get a Slum Belch invite if he doesn't act in the next couple hours.

[MplsBison]

No I'm correctly proving the point that being in FCS doesn't get you in ESPN2 any more than being DII or DIII does.

The MEAC (or SWAC or Ivy for that matter) schools being in FCS is nothing more than a technicality. They would get the same coverage if they were NAIA or completely independent of any collegiate association.

[Sader87]

No I'm correctly proving the point that being in FCS doesn't get you in ESPN2 any more than being DII or DIII does.

The MEAC (or SWAC or Ivy for that matter) schools being in FCS is nothing more than a technicality. They would get the same coverage if they were NAIA or completely independent of any collegiate association.

I don't think this is necessarily true with regards to Ivy and Patriot schools. While they don't get the coverage they once did in the Northeast, they are still considered by most (and the media in the Northeast) as D1 and get much more coverage than D2 and D3 programs overall.

[MplsBison]

Again, I'm not talking about simply coverage in general. It's specifically coverage on ESPN (namely, ESPN2).

Maybe Ivy shouldn't have even been included with MEAC and SWAC, because I don't know if any Ivy football games ever make it on ESPN2, as opposed to ESPNU or some other lower ESPN channel along those lines.

I just know that ESPN2 only covers regular season FCS vs. FCS games when they know the ratings are there to support it, which only happens when "those" schools play each other.

[Sader87]

It's a different world now but the Ivies, Holy Cross and Colgate were regularly on ABC's "Regional Game of the Week" well into the 1980's.

I think the potential ratings (in the East anyway) would be just as high (if not higher) for a Harvard-Yale or a Holy Cross-Colgate game than they would for a MVFC, SoCon, Big Sky etc. game.

[superman7515]

No I'm correctly proving the point that being in FCS doesn't get you in ESPN2 any more than being DII or DIII does.

The MEAC (or SWAC or Ivy for that matter) schools being in FCS is nothing more than a technicality. They would get the same coverage if they were NAIA or completely independent of any collegiate association.

The CIAA and SIAC aren't broadcast on ESPN.

[MplsBison]

The CIAA and SIAC aren't broadcast on ESPN.

Touche. But I'm still not wrong and you know it.

Otherwise, you'd be seeing great matchups of FCS full scholarship teams from the CAA, MVFC, SoCon and Big Sky playing each other every week on ESPN2. You don't - hence I'm correct.


At the end of the day, you can 100% correctly say that the reason the FCS v FCS regular season games that DO make it onto ESPN2 has nothing to do with being in FCS. The sub-division brand itself means nothing and is worth nothing to the national college football media.


That's just fine for some people (off the top of my head, ursus - who actually does not want any national media attention for his team in Montana).

For other people (me), I think NDSU and other programs like that absolutely do deserve national media attention during the regular season. I just know we won't get it unless we get into the MAC and are playing on a weekday. I'd be happy if that happened.

[BigHouseClosedEnd]

How much does the Sun Belt tv contract pay the member schools each year?

[Twentysix]

How much does the Sun Belt tv contract pay the member schools each year?

A 12 pack of natty ice, annually.

[Accelerati Incredibilus]

Richmond, VA Metro Population 1.2 million

Boone, NC 17k

Don't kid yourself. It's about TV markets.

Not were Richmond (the school) is concerned.

[appsfan]

A 12 pack of natty ice, annually.
Which is a lot more than what the SoCon contract pays ...

[BigHouseClosedEnd]

A 12 pack of natty ice, annually.

That's funny.

But seriously. What does it pay? I can't find anything.

[superman7515]

That's funny.

But seriously. What does it pay? I can't find anything.

The last I saw was a little under $900,000 a year with the conference keeping 25% and disbursing the rest equally. I doubt the Sun Belt is gaining the cache with the additions to renegotiate the contract, so with 12 teams that would be about $56k a year.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

The last I saw was a little under $900,000 a year with the conference keeping 25% and disbursing the rest equally. I doubt the Sun Belt is gaining the cache with the additions to renegotiate the contract, so with 12 teams that would be about $56k a year.

56k? That's less than 1 home game with Idaho with 5k no shows.

[MplsBison]

The point is not the money for the Sun Belt schools.

The point is that two SB regular season games made it on ESPN2 and all four of their bowl games were on ESPN.

[BigHouseClosedEnd]

Sweet. 56 grand is pretty awesome.

Has there been an analysis of How much the Sun Belt move will require the athletics budgets at ASU and GSU to increase?

[walliver]

Sweet. 56 grand is pretty awesome.

Has there been an analysis of How much the Sun Belt move will require the athletics budgets at ASU and GSU to increase?

There was a powerpoint presentation on the GoASU.com site that suggested that a move to CUSA with a home-and-home series with ECU, and an increase in tickets prices would not be very expensive. But, the study included C-USA TV money at its older rate. Obviously, a move to the sunbelt will not have significant TV revenue and will be much more expensive. There was an earlier post on the ASU site hat says that total spending would increase by $6,000,000 a year.

[henfan]

ASU and GSU fans, has there been any mention of either school cutting sports to accommodate increased expenses in the SBC? Does either school offer sports that are not sponsored by the SBC and, if so, under which conference banner would those sports be played?

[ASUMountaineer]

I have no clue why You are calling me out like I'm the only person calling the Slum Belt the terrible conference that it is. Given that you keep coming back to a lowly FCS Message Board to defend the move, I'm guessing you recognize this reality too.

Is there such a thing as Sun Belch message boards? If so, they must be an awfully humbling place that keeps you coming back here, huh?

xlolx I'm not defending the move, and you know that. You'll notice that I'm not the one belittling a conference or a subdivision.

As for why I am still posting here, a few reasons...App State is still an FCS school for this year, and will not be a Sun Belt school until next year. I've been posting here for a long time and enjoy the board and many of its posters. Deal with it.

I'm calling you out for trolling because you have been trolling. I'm just providing accurate observations. xthumbsupx

[ASUMountaineer]

ASU and GSU fans, has there been any mention of either school cutting sports to accommodate increased expenses in the SBC? Does either school offer sports that are not sponsored by the SBC and, if so, under which conference banner would those sports be played?

Not as of yet, at least for App State. We currently offer field hockey, soccer, and wrestling that are not sponsored by the SBC. Field Hockey currently plays in the NorPac and will remain there. According to our AD, soccer and wrestling will remain in the SoCon.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

ASU and GSU fans, has there been any mention of either school cutting sports to accommodate increased expenses in the SBC? Does either school offer sports that are not sponsored by the SBC and, if so, under which conference banner would those sports be played?

If anything, they will have to add sports, at least on the women's side to accommodate Title IX considerations. 22 extra scholarships need to be balanced out.

[MplsBison]

If anything, they will have to add sports, at least on the women's side to accommodate Title IX considerations. 22 extra scholarships need to be balanced out.

Or cut 22 men's scholarships.

That is, if they intend to use that prong of the three allowed in the title IX legislation to prove compliance.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

How's wrestling funded?

[NoDak 4 Ever]

Or cut 22 men's scholarships.

That is, if they intend to use that prong of the three allowed in the title IX legislation to prove compliance.

That's usually perceived as a step backward. I'm not sure how it's perceived at Nebraska-Omaha but cutting football to start hockey left a bad taste in many mouths.

[henfan]

Not as of yet, at least for App State. We currently offer field hockey, soccer, and wrestling that are not sponsored by the SBC. Field Hockey currently plays in the NorPac and will remain there. According to our AD, soccer and wrestling will remain in the SoCon.

Interesting. Thanks for the response.

If sports aren't going to be cut at ASU, has there been any public discussion on which sports might be added? For example, are there any sports not sponsored by ASU for which the SBC sponsors championships?

[MplsBison]

That's usually perceived as a step backward. I'm not sure how it's perceived at Nebraska-Omaha but cutting football to start hockey left a bad taste in many mouths.

As long as they can prove in court that they're meeting the interests and abilities of the female student body at Appalachian State University with the current women's varsity athletic teams positions, they don't have to add squat for women's scholarships.

That's a valid way of doing it which is written right in the title IX legislation.

[MplsBison]

Interesting. Thanks for the response.

If sports aren't going to be cut at ASU, has there been any public discussion on which sports might be added? For example, are there any sports not sponsored by ASU for which the SBC sponsors championships?

Sun Belt has women's swimming & diving, in which five conference teams currently participate.

NCHSAA does sanction girl's swimming & diving. No idea how many of the DI schools in NC have the sport or how many high school athletes participate.

[dgtw]

I know they aren't going to ask me for advice, but a good sport to sponsor is sand volleyball. The only expense is a truckload of sand. You can use the same coach and then just double up on scholarships that are being used already. (Kind of like counting indoor and outdoor track and cross country three times for one person).

[MplsBison]

I know they aren't going to ask me for advice, but a good sport to sponsor is sand volleyball. The only expense is a truckload of sand. You can use the same coach and then just double up on scholarships that are being used already. (Kind of like counting indoor and outdoor track and cross country three times for one person).

If they're just going to start making crap up (you can't tell me sand volleyball is a sanctioned sport at the high school level) - then I want schools to simply be able to start giving deserving female students scholarships without having to participate in a sport.

Call them title IX equality scholarships, who cares. All it really means is that football is a unique sport that gives 85 scholarships, there is no equivalent female sport - therefore we're putting 40 extra females enrolled in school on scholarship. Big whoop.

[Skjellyfetti]

Interesting. Thanks for the response.

If sports aren't going to be cut at ASU, has there been any public discussion on which sports might be added? For example, are there any sports not sponsored by ASU for which the SBC sponsors championships?

Women's lacrosse seems to be at the top of Charlie's list to add. Women's swimming seems to be next in line (we have a first class pool, but no diving well).


If they're just going to start making crap up (you can't tell me sand volleyball is a sanctioned sport at the high school level) - then I want schools to simply be able to start giving deserving female students scholarships without having to participate in a sport.

Call them title IX equality scholarships, who cares. All it really means is that football is a unique sport that gives 85 scholarships, there is no equivalent female sport - therefore we're putting 40 extra females enrolled in school on scholarship. Big whoop.

Title IX really is bull****. My freshman year I was on a scholarship at a D-I university for swimming. A girl on our team transferred to a Big Ten school... and was offered a rowing scholarship. She had absolutely no experience competitively rowing.. but, they knew that she was in great shape and they needed warm bodies... xsmhx

[CID1990]

Women's lacrosse seems to be at the top of Charlie's list to add. Women's swimming seems to be next in line (we have a first class pool, but no diving well).



Title IX really is bull****. My freshman year I was on a scholarship at a D-I university for swimming. A girl on our team transferred to a Big Ten school... and was offered a rowing scholarship. She had absolutely no experience competitively rowing.. but, they knew that she was in great shape and they needed warm bodies... xsmhx

Why do you think title IX is BS? It's just the kind of enforced equality, penalize everybody, special protected group liberal nonsense you thrive on.

Think of it as welfare for female athletes and you'll cheer up.


Sent from the center of the universe.

[MplsBison]

Women's lacrosse seems to be at the top of Charlie's list to add. Women's swimming seems to be next in line (we have a first class pool, but no diving well).



Title IX really is bull****. My freshman year I was on a scholarship at a D-I university for swimming. A girl on our team transferred to a Big Ten school... and was offered a rowing scholarship. She had absolutely no experience competitively rowing.. but, they knew that she was in great shape and they needed warm bodies... xsmhx

App has a 50m pool?

[dgtw]

I googled "High school sand volleyball and found this.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/03/14/2750399/sand-volleyball-kicks-off.html

In Alabama, there are more sports opportunities for boys than for girls. Everything is co-ed (counting softball and baseball as the same sport) except for football, wrestling for boys and volleyball for girls. That's probably the norm in most staes. So how do high schools get around Title IX?

[Saint3333]

Yes App has a 50M pool.

http://urec.appstate.edu/pagesmith/638

[lionsrking2]

I googled "High school sand volleyball and found this.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/03/14/2750399/sand-volleyball-kicks-off.html

In Alabama, there are more sports opportunities for boys than for girls. Everything is co-ed (counting softball and baseball as the same sport) except for football, wrestling for boys and volleyball for girls. That's probably the norm in most staes. So how do high schools get around Title IX?

Public high schools don't offer athletic scholarships.

[danefan]

Public high schools don't offer athletic scholarships.


They still have to comply with Title IX.

It extends well beyond scholarships.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

They still have to comply with Title IX.

It extends well beyond scholarships.

Title IX is simply about educational opportunity. In the realm of college, the opportunity manifests itself in scholarships which provide access. Athletics provides a more concentrated example of educational inopportunity because of the number of male sports and female sports and the number of athletes for each sport is different. A football team on the FCS level needs 63 scholarships. In essence, you are talking about 63 or 85 opportunities for access for men that are not available for women. That's where it gets out of balance.

If a school were to provide the same number of scholarships or opportunities to both men and women, they would be compliant. Opportunity being the operative word.


In terms of high school, the educational opportunities are not contingent on their ability to play sports (thank goodness for me :D ). Therefore, sports don't come into the picture in high school for title IX

[The Eagle's Cliff]

Title IX is simply about educational opportunity. In the realm of college, the opportunity manifests itself in scholarships which provide access. Athletics provides a more concentrated example of educational inopportunity because of the number of male sports and female sports and the number of athletes for each sport is different. A football team on the FCS level needs 63 scholarships. In essence, you are talking about 63 or 85 opportunities for access for men that are not available for women. That's where it gets out of balance.

If a school were to provide the same number of scholarships or opportunities to both men and women, they would be compliant. Opportunity being the operative word.


In terms of high school, the educational opportunities are not contingent on their ability to play sports (thank goodness for me :D ). Therefore, sports don't come into the picture in high school for title IX

Since men and women are equal, shouldn't all school activities be co-ed with unisex locker rooms, dorms, etc? Why does there need to be gender or race quotas (which are supposedly illegal) for anything?

We've got women's sports like softball for baseball, basketball, track, soccer, tennis, swimming, etc. Why don't we have redundant sports for small and weak guys? Don't small and weak guys deserve the same educational opportunities?

See how absurd quotas are? They're impossible to justify without advocating "special" consideration for some group over another. Football should be off the table anyway. I think everyone would be happy if the number of women's scholarships had to be equal to the number of men's on an equivalent sport basis.

[ASUMountaineer]

Why do you think title IX is BS? It's just the kind of enforced equality, penalize everybody, special protected group liberal nonsense you thrive on.

Think of it as welfare for female athletes and you'll cheer up.


Sent from the center of the universe.

xoutofrepx

[walliver]

Where Title IX fails miserably, is that at most colleges with football programs, football and men's basketball are the only revenue sports. At non-football schools, men's basketball is the only revenue sport. There are a handfull of women's basketball teams that generate revenue, and a small number of baseball programs do. Even though very few college sports programs are profitable, at least football and men's basketball players "pay" part of their way.

[GannonFan]

Where Title IX fails miserably, is that at most colleges with football programs, football and men's basketball are the only revenue sports. At non-football schools, men's basketball is the only revenue sport. There are a handfull of women's basketball teams that generate revenue, and a small number of baseball programs do. Even though very few college sports programs are profitable, at least football and men's basketball players "pay" part of their way.

And the problem there is that football, at the majority of schools that play it (at all levels) doesn't make money either. Most of the BCS schools make money, and a lot of it, several non-BCS schools do, and a small handful of FCS schools do, but for most of everyone else, it's one long train of red ink. And it has a lot of red ink while sucking up most of the time almost 5x the number of athletic spots for men. If you're losing a lot of money on football and you have to cut other sports to balance the numbers for Title IX, then you shouldn't really be playing football. It's tough medicine, but it's reality.

[MplsBison]

Public high schools don't offer athletic scholarships.

Any "education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance" must comply with title IX.

All it means, in general, is that you have to have equal opportunities for males and females to participate.


That doesn't say jack about scholarships. Simply, scholarship equality is the legal scheme that most athletic departments employ in an attempt to prove they're in compliance with title IX.

[MplsBison]

Title IX is simply about educational opportunity. In the realm of college, the opportunity manifests itself in scholarships which provide access. Athletics provides a more concentrated example of educational inopportunity because of the number of male sports and female sports and the number of athletes for each sport is different. A football team on the FCS level needs 63 scholarships. In essence, you are talking about 63 or 85 opportunities for access for men that are not available for women. That's where it gets out of balance.

If a school were to provide the same number of scholarships or opportunities to both men and women, they would be compliant. Opportunity being the operative word.


In terms of high school, the educational opportunities are not contingent on their ability to play sports (thank goodness for me :D ). Therefore, sports don't come into the picture in high school for title IX

In college and high school athletics, opportunities come down to roster spots. Plain and simple.

If you have 100 roster spots on varsity athletics teams for females and 250 roster spots on varsity athletics teams for males - at a school with roughly 50/50 split in male/female enrollment....something is wrong.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

In college athletics, opportunities come down to roster spots. Plain and simple.

If you have 100 roster spots on varsity athletics teams for females and 250 roster spots on varsity athletics teams for males - for a university with roughly 50/50 split in male/female enrollment....something is wrong.

You've just described almost every single college and university in America, with the possible exceptions of VMI and The Citadel.

[MplsBison]

You've just described almost every single college and university in America, with the possible exceptions of VMI and The Citadel.

University of North Dakota had 266 male participants to 244 female participants, according to OPE web tool.

[CID1990]

You've just described almost every single college and university in America, with the possible exceptions of VMI and The Citadel.

I don't understand all the minute details, but I do know that we dropped men's soccer and golf, and added women's volleyball and cross country (and women on the rifle team) to come into Title IX compliance, and our student body was literally around 40 or so women when it happened. Just about every woman on campus was on an athletic scholarship of some kind, and virtually none of them had played their respective sports in high school. I think VMI was in a similar situation.


Sent from the center of the universe.

[MplsBison]

Citidel had 350 male participants to 106 female. (which somehow includes 123 male participants on the football team as of the day of the first scheduled contest ..... hmmm....isn't the NCAA roster limit like 105 once the season starts?)

VMI: 420 male (105 football) to 110 female.

[CID1990]

Citidel had 350 male participants to 106 female. (which somehow includes 123 male participants on the football team as of the day of the first scheduled contest ..... hmmm....isn't the NCAA roster limit like 105 once the season starts?)

VMI: 420 male (105 football) to 110 female.

Probably a record keeping oversight. Sort of like your spelling.

[dgtw]

I'm all for women having athletic opportunities in college. You can't say no one cares about women's sports, because nobody cares about men'x golf, tennis, swimming, etc. So if a school has a baseball team, they should have softball. Track, swimming and golf should be for both sexes.

The problem is football is a sport played solely by men that throws off the balance. We have sports that are much more popular among women, such as volleyball and gymnastics, that many schools have. So how is this not "offering athletic opportunities for women"? But they invent sports like sand volleyball and rowing that there is no demand for among students and are not played in high schools.

There is only one DI men's soccer team in Alabama, yet the sport is very widespread in high schools here. There is no college wrestling, yet it is also popular in high school. So how is it fair that boys playing these sports are not served?

[kdinva]

Citidel had 350 male participants to 106 female. (which somehow includes 123 male participants on the football team as of the day of the first scheduled contest ..... hmmm....isn't the NCAA roster limit like 105 once the season starts?)

VMI: 420 male (105 football) to 110 female.

more like about 96-98 for VMI football, and the VMI women are spread out. Meaning: if a woman runs cross country, indoor track, and outdoor track, then that is "3" of the 110 you quote. Plus about 16 other women on both indoor & outdoor track squads. Plus, VMI has about 5 women on the new water-polo team that are also on the swimming team. So in reality there are about 60-65 women on varsity teams in Lexington, taking up those 110 roster "spots". That "formula" applies to every college in the USA.

[kdinva]

Why do you think title IX is BS? It's just the kind of enforced equality, penalize everybody, special protected group liberal nonsense you thrive on.

Think of it as welfare for female athletes and you'll cheer up.


OUCH

[kdinva]

I don't understand all the minute details, but I do know that we dropped men's soccer and golf,

VMI dropped men's tennis and golf once the D.O.J. stepped in........first girls' sports were soccer, X-country, indoor & outdoor track. Two years later added swimming and rifle, added water polo about 24 months ago......DOJ said VMI must have seven sports for the women, even though there are only about 170-180 in barracks.......

[danefan]

Title IX is simply about educational opportunity. In the realm of college, the opportunity manifests itself in scholarships which provide access. Athletics provides a more concentrated example of educational inopportunity because of the number of male sports and female sports and the number of athletes for each sport is different. A football team on the FCS level needs 63 scholarships. In essence, you are talking about 63 or 85 opportunities for access for men that are not available for women. That's where it gets out of balance.

If a school were to provide the same number of scholarships or opportunities to both men and women, they would be compliant. Opportunity being the operative word.


In terms of high school, the educational opportunities are not contingent on their ability to play sports (thank goodness for me :D ). Therefore, sports don't come into the picture in high school for title IX

Not true. Obviously scholarships don't come into play, but you better believe if a public high school decided to cut all girls sports and leaves boys teams in tact, that TItle IX will be invoked and rightfully so.

[Accelerati Incredibilus]

Title IX has nothing to do with equality and everything to do with women receiving a benefit from something they contribute very little to. I posed this scenario to a administrator for their reaction of how equal Title IX is. The athletic department should be split in two with an Associate AD to head up each division. Student fees collected from female students goes to the women's department and fees from the male students to the men's department Give both department complete autonomy to hire their own fund raising staff and operate it how they wish, pay their coaches, schedule games, negotiate game guarantees, pay for uniforms & equipment, travel, insurance, and generally everything the AD's office does. The AD's job is oversee both departments making sure each is fully compliant with the NCAA. At the end of five years which side do you thing will still be functioning and which one will be bankrupt?

[dgtw]

Tennessee used to have a separate women's athletic department. The merged them back together a couple years ago because they were paying two people to do one person's job in many instances.

[Laker]

Tennessee used to have a separate women's athletic department. The merged them back together a couple years ago because they were paying two people to do one person's job in many instances.

Same with Minnesota and Iowa. Texas did too- I don't know if they still have a separate department. Chris Voelz was the MN AD who hired Brenda Frese who is now at Maryland coaching basketball. As you said, very expensive to do that.

[MplsBison]

Title IX has nothing to do with equality and everything to do with women receiving a benefit from something they contribute very little to. I posed this scenario to a administrator for their reaction of how equal Title IX is. The athletic department should be split in two with an Associate AD to head up each division. Student fees collected from female students goes to the women's department and fees from the male students to the men's department Give both department complete autonomy to hire their own fund raising staff and operate it how they wish, pay their coaches, schedule games, negotiate game guarantees, pay for uniforms & equipment, travel, insurance, and generally everything the AD's office does. The AD's job is oversee both departments making sure each is fully compliant with the NCAA. At the end of five years which side do you thing will still be functioning and which one will be bankrupt?

I know you mean well and probably have a fine point, but your scenario is invalid.

ANY "education program or activity" that gets federal money has to ensure fair participation between men and women. That's the end of the discussion. Your scenario has nothing to do with that.


Now...if athletic departments were totally removed from universities, ie they were private businesses that simply had an association with a university, then we wouldn't be talking about this. But they are activities whose operations are totally funded and administered by the university itself.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I know you mean well and probably have a fine point, but your scenario is invalid.

ANY "education program or activity" that gets federal money has to ensure fair participation between men and women. That's the end of the discussion. Your scenario has nothing to do with that.


Now...if athletic departments were totally removed from universities, ie they were private businesses that simply had an association with a university, then we wouldn't be talking about this. But they are activities whose operations are totally funded and administered by the university itself.

That athletics "private business" would also have to pay taxes on that money, which would bankrupt it.

[MplsBison]

That athletics "private business" would also have to pay taxes on that money, which would bankrupt it.

Of course it wouldn't, nice dream though.

Now, such a business model would only be viable at Big Ten, SEC and some Pac 12, Big XII and ACC schools - but it certainly wouldn't be bankrupt by paying taxes. Not with the incredible revenue they pull in.

Keep in mind such businesses would not need to fund any minimum number of sports. Probably football, men's bball and men's baseball down south (and hockey for a few schools up north) would be it.

[PAllen]

That athletics "private business" would also have to pay taxes on that money, which would bankrupt it.

Nope, the non-profit business model would work perfectly. Just give 85% of profits not reinvested in the "mission" of the business and taxes are not an issue.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Of course it wouldn't, nice dream though.


Nope, the non-profit business model would work perfectly.

Uh, no.

http://www.law.illinois.edu/bljournal/post/2010/02/21/Is-the-NCAA-Fulfilling-its-Tax-Exempt-Status.aspx


The National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) is an unincorporated organization that governs more than 1200 colleges, universities, athletic conferences, and sports organizations, while managing 360,000 student-athletes and eighty-eight championship events in three divisions.[4] The NCAA institutes a “principle of amateurism” in that student-athletes are amateurs and their participation should be primarily motivated by participation in their intercollegiate sport.[5] It further vows to protect student-athletes from professional and commercial enterprises,[6] and look after the best interests, education, and athletic participation of student-athletes.[7]

Because the NCAA avails itself to these principles, the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) recognizes it as a tax-exempt organization[8] The NCAA and private universities rely on an exempt status under “§501(c)(3), which provides exemption for charitable organizations such as religious and educational institutions.”[9]. In 1976, Congress passed an amendment to this section to make perfectly clear that “national or international amateur sports competition” serve a charitable purpose under the IRC.[10]

Once it becomes "professional", it's no longer a non-profit organization, and thus would have to pay taxes on those billions. I mean, people have been questioning the legality of the system already in its current form for at least the last seven years, if not more. Once you've made a semi-pro league for profit, the fig leaf is removed completely, and they won't be tax-exempt anymore.

[PAllen]

Uh, no.

http://www.law.illinois.edu/bljournal/post/2010/02/21/Is-the-NCAA-Fulfilling-its-Tax-Exempt-Status.aspx



Once it becomes "professional", it's no longer a non-profit organization, and thus would have to pay taxes on those billions. I mean, people have been questioning the legality of the system already in its current form for at least the last seven years, if not more. Once you've made a semi-pro league for profit, the fig leaf is removed completely, and they won't be tax-exempt anymore.

Except that there are numerous "professional" non-profit corporations. They are "promoting potential educational oportunities", or some other garbage and give the rest back to the universities' general funds which furthers their education goals. I've seen much worse excuses get away with it.

[MplsBison]

Uh, no.

http://www.law.illinois.edu/bljournal/post/2010/02/21/Is-the-NCAA-Fulfilling-its-Tax-Exempt-Status.aspx



Once it becomes "professional", it's no longer a non-profit organization, and thus would have to pay taxes on those billions. I mean, people have been questioning the legality of the system already in its current form for at least the last seven years, if not more. Once you've made a semi-pro league for profit, the fig leaf is removed completely, and they won't be tax-exempt anymore.

Not talking about taxing the NCAA in its current form.

I'm talking about 40-60 private businesses, located in different states, that have loose affiliations ("branding" really) with universities that schedule games against each other.

If the "University of Texas Football, LLC" business brings in $150 million revenue from 8 home football games, then that's what they would get taxed on.

[danefan]

Uh, no.

http://www.law.illinois.edu/bljournal/post/2010/02/21/Is-the-NCAA-Fulfilling-its-Tax-Exempt-Status.aspx



Once it becomes "professional", it's no longer a non-profit organization, and thus would have to pay taxes on those billions. I mean, people have been questioning the legality of the system already in its current form for at least the last seven years, if not more. Once you've made a semi-pro league for profit, the fig leaf is removed completely, and they won't be tax-exempt anymore.

Non-profit is a misnomer. Its actually "not-for-profit" which is a much more accurate title. The definition is really an organization from which the profit does not inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.

Not-for-profits can make money. Most do. Its what they do with that money that matters.

[walliver]

Not talking about taxing the NCAA in its current form.

I'm talking about 40-60 private businesses, located in different states, that have loose affiliations ("branding" really) with universities that schedule games against each other.

If the "University of Texas Football, LLC" business brings in $150 million revenue from 8 home football games, then that's what they would get taxed on.

For profit entities are taxed on profit not revenue. It is not difficult for a for-profit organization to make little or no profit.

In the case you mentioned, UT would write off player stipends, coaches salaries, stadium rental, recruiting and marketing expenses, licensing of UT intellectual property (logos, UT name, mascot image), etc. Most likely, Olympic sports would be included so that the losses in those sports would balance out football profits.

If they get Hollywood accountants involved, they will probably "lose" enough money they can ask for a government bailout.

[MplsBison]

For profit entities are taxed on profit not revenue. It is not difficult for a for-profit organization to make little or no profit.

In the case you mentioned, UT would write off player stipends, coaches salaries, stadium rental, recruiting and marketing expenses, licensing of UT intellectual property (logos, UT name, mascot image), etc. Most likely, Olympic sports would be included so that the losses in those sports would balance out football profits.

If they get Hollywood accountants involved, they will probably "lose" enough money they can ask for a government bailout.

Great post! Yes, indeed.

Seems too easy...really...why the heck hasn't this happened? Oh, yeah - those handful of universities that really do rake it in from football actually want to keep that money, tax free.

[grayghost06]

Getting back to the original topic:
Two FCS football powers, Georgia Southern and Appalachian State, announced last week they’re planning a move to the FBS Sun Belt Conference.

“When you get back to that equation of what are you “moving up” to, you have to really look at what you’re moving up to,” said Ziady, hired as Delaware AD in November after a long stint at ACC member Boston College. “We’re not [receiving] offers from the ACC or the Big Ten. Everybody’s emailing me about what Georgia Southern and Appalachian State are doing. That’s not moving up. It’s a designation that signifies you’re moving up but you’re not moving up.’’

I don't think the Delaware AD if off base at all, though I do question his publically saying so. This is a conference that has NEVER had a team ranked in the top 25 NOR has it ever beaten a team that finished the season ranked in the top 25. That's a pretty telling stat for a supposedly big boy football conference.

Even though my school is entertaining the idea of going FBS, I am not thrilled w/ the Sun Belt idea at all. The only positive it provides is a seat at the table. Frankly, I could only stomach it we did it as a football only invite. Everything else that makes a great conference is not present there.

[henfan]

Ziady's comments related to ASU, GSU and the Sun Belt, regardless of whether or not you share a similar sentiment, were completely unprofessional. If it's a reflection of an inexperienced administrator who's in the first four months of his first stint as an AD, he's got a lot of growing up to do. I'm embarrassed for him. In the incestuous world of college sports, it's probably not the best professional move to bash potential future colleagues.

If Ziady has an argument for why FBS FB isn't in Delaware's best interests at this time, let's hear it. He can and should lay out his reasoning instead of resorting to cheap and unnecessary attacks on other conferences and schools. Very bush.xthumbsdownx

[phoenix3]

There's the BCS then there's everybody else. The non-BCS/FBS is certainly a step up with 85 schollies vs 63. So the quality of on field football should certainly be better, at least overall. However, on the give a siiht meter, the BCS conferences/teams hold positions 1-5 then everyone else, (non BCS/FBS, FCS, DII, DIII, NAIA), hold the 6-10 positions. And, The gap is getting bigger every year. At least the FCS has a somewhat legitimate playoff system.

[Sader87]

^^^^^ This.

[SpeedkingATL]

There's the BCS then there's everybody else. The non-BCS/FBS is certainly a step up with 85 schollies vs 63. So the quality of on field football should certainly be better, at least overall. However, on the give a siiht meter, the BCS conferences/teams hold positions 1-5 then everyone else, (non BCS/FBS, FCS, DII, DIII, NAIA), hold the 6-10 positions. And, The gap is getting bigger every year. At least the FCS has a somewhat legitimate playoff system.

+1

[MplsBison]

There's the BCS then there's everybody else. The non-BCS/FBS is certainly a step up with 85 schollies vs 63. So the quality of on field football should certainly be better, at least overall. However, on the give a siiht meter, the BCS conferences/teams hold positions 1-5 then everyone else, (non BCS/FBS, FCS, DII, DIII, NAIA), hold the 6-10 positions. And, The gap is getting bigger every year. At least the FCS has a somewhat legitimate playoff system.

Wrong.

There is most certainly a significant gap, as far as national college football media is concerned, when it comes to FBS "group of five" vs FCS. It's a matter of non-existent (FCS) vs. some limited coverage (FBS group of five).

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Wrong.

There is most certainly a significant gap, as far as national college football media is concerned, when it comes to FBS "group of five" vs FCS. It's a matter of non-existent (FCS) vs. some limited coverage (FBS group of five).

To the guys at Gameday, Louisiana-Monroe, Lehigh, Harvard, and Appalachian State are all the same.

[MplsBison]

To the guys at Gameday, Louisiana-Monroe, Lehigh, Harvard, and Appalachian State are all the same.

Of course you're wrong. They know that Monroe and now App St play "Division I football" in the Sun Belt. And while they have heard of Harvard, obviously in the Ivy League which doesn't grant scholarships and is therefore "Division III football", they most likely have never heard of Lehigh or the Patriot League.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Of course you're wrong. They know that Monroe and now App St play "Division I football" in the Sun Belt. And while they have heard of Harvard, obviously in the Ivy League which doesn't grant scholarships and is therefore "Division III football", they most likely have never heard of Lehigh or the Patriot League.

I think they'd have a hard time identifying the Sun Belt even if you spotted them the Sun.

[CFBfan]

Wrong.

There is most certainly a significant gap, as far as national college football media is concerned, when it comes to FBS "group of five" vs FCS. It's a matter of non-existent (FCS) vs. some limited coverage (FBS group of five).

ANYTIME Mpls disagrees with you it's good news....then you know that you MUST be RIGHT!!!!

[MR. CHICKEN]

17660......SOMETHIN'...TA CHEW ON.........BROCK!


http://m.delawareonline.com/sports/article?a=2013304140043&f=1189

[MplsBison]

Delaware and JMU to the A10 and keeping football in the CAAFC for now, possible MAC football only invites later?

[Sitting Bull]

17660......SOMETHIN'...TA CHEW ON.........BROCK!


http://m.delawareonline.com/sports/article?a=2013304140043&f=1189

Wow, this guy really did his research. The A10 just loses 4 teams with several others lobbying for a new home, yet it's the CAA that's crumbling.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

Delaware and JMU to the A10 and keeping football in the CAAFC for now, possible MAC football only invites later?

I think that might be a move to position themselves for the AAC in a few years.

[ASUMountaineer]

I think that might be a move to position themselves for the AAC in a few years.

Possibly. I'm not sure why the MAC would consider expanding to 15.

[MplsBison]

Possibly. I'm not sure why the MAC would consider expanding to 15.

Two regional divisions?

Who would've thought that the Big Ten would have 12 members while the Big XII has 10 members?

[walliver]

Wow, this guy really did his research. The A10 just loses 4 teams with several others lobbying for a new home, yet it's the CAA that's crumbling.

It's because everybody is falling apart.

The ACC which has lost one member (Mayland) in 42 years (South Carolina left in 1971) is falling apart because everyone is leaving for the Big 4.
The AAC/Big East, which has already fallen apart, continues to fall apart because everybody is going to the ACC.
Conference USA, which is no longer recognisable, is falling apart because everyone is leaving for the AAC.
The SunBelt is falling apart because everyone is leaving for C-USA.
The SoCon is falling apart because everyone is leaving for the SunBelt.
The A-10 is falling apart because everyone is leaving for the AAC or Big Priest.
The CAA is falling apart because everyone is leaving for the A10 or C-USA.
The Big South is falling apart because everyone wants to leave for anywhere they can go.
I apologize for leaving out all the other conferences that are falling apart.

Currently, realignment is being driven by fear not reason.

[ASUMountaineer]

Two regional divisions?

Who would've thought that the Big Ten would have 12 members while the Big XII has 10 members?

Why not just add one and have divisions? 14 is much better than 15.

[DFW HOYA]

It's because everybody is falling apart.


Except they're not all falling apart.

The Ivy, is well, the Ivy. No one leaves, no one is invited.
The Patriot is stable for now.
The Pioneer is stable despite some who see it as an incubator for future program growth.
The Big Sky is relatively stable--five of the six charter schools remain.
The MEAC and SWAC are remarkably stable.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Except they're not all falling apart.

The Ivy, is well, the Ivy. No one leaves, no one is invited.
The Patriot is stable for now.
The Pioneer is stable despite some who see it as an incubator for future program growth.
The Big Sky is relatively stable--five of the six charter schools remain.
The MEAC and SWAC are remarkably stable.

The PFL will potentially lose a school in Mercer and is heavily rumored to lose Campbell if either the Big South needs to keep its autobid or the SoCon needs another all-sports member. Jacksonville is also on the SoCon's list and also could be a Big South target for either scholarship football only or all sports. While it probably won't mean the death of the conference or anything, it's hardly a model of stability either.

[danefan]

The only football conferences that are at risk, IMO, are the Big South and the NEC.

Big South already lost Stony Brook and could very easily lose Liberty, VMI and Coastal Carolina over the course of the next month. That would leave it with 3 teams. Even the Jersey Shore can't save them.

The NEC has already lost 2 of its best programs with others having considered leaving as well. If the CAA reshuffles, Central Ct. may be on the charts and you'd be left with 6 members, including a couple far fetched PA schools in Duquesne and RMU which may start looking elsewhere. Maybe Monmouth comes back? The NEC is not in as bad a spot as the Big South, but its certainly not a great spot either.

[MplsBison]

Why not just add one and have divisions? 14 is much better than 15.

Or add MVFC schools and go to 20 - two ten team divisions with eight division games each and a true conference championship game (where neither team would have played each other during the regular season).

A guy can dream..

West:
NDSU - UNI
Illinois St - No Illinois
Ball St - W Mich
C Mich - E Mich
Bowling Green - Toledo

East:
UMass - Buffalo
Delaware - JMU
Kent - Akron
Youngstown - Stony Brook?
Ohio - Miami

[MplsBison]

Except they're not all falling apart.

The Ivy, is well, the Ivy. No one leaves, no one is invited.
The Patriot is stable for now.
The Pioneer is stable despite some who see it as an incubator for future program growth.
The Big Sky is relatively stable--five of the six charter schools remain.
The MEAC and SWAC are remarkably stable.

The Big Sky is stable simply because there is nothing else for those schools. They're not big enough or don't aspire to the level of the Mountain West and there's no longer something between those tiers out west.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

The Big Sky is stable simply because there is nothing else for those schools. They're not big enough or don't aspire to the level of the Mountain West and there's no longer something between those tiers out west.

Several BSC schools are as big/bigger than the 3 schools you propose moving to the MAC.

[MplsBison]

Several BSC schools are as big/bigger than the 3 schools you propose moving to the MAC.

In what sense?

This isn't high school, enrollment doesn't translate into class or division.


Also, surely you'll agree that the MAC and the MWC aren't on the same tier within FBS. The MAC accepts FCS move-ups - the MWC is above that.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

In what sense?

This isn't high school, enrollment doesn't translate into class or division.


Also, surely you'll agree that the MAC and the MWC aren't on the same tier within FBS. The MAC accepts FCS move-ups - the MWC is above that.

Well you said big. I'm not sure how else to measure that. The height of each schools president? How many hot dogs they can eat?

[MplsBison]

Well you said big. I'm not sure how else to measure that. The height of each schools president? How many hot dogs they can eat?

Nope. Just was expecting you not to be obtuse for the sole purpose of trolling.

You're a smart guy, I'm sure you'll figure something out.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

Nope. Just was expecting you not to be obtuse for the sole purpose of trolling.

You're a smart guy, I'm sure you'll figure something out.

With you? Rarely. You make a blanket statement about 3 schools: NDSU, SDSU, and UNI being fully capable of joining the MAC (worst idea ever) then make a statement about how the BSC is stuck because those schools have some sort of incapability to move up.

You make no qualification or reasoning so I had to infer your meaning (big mistake).



and I took the ****ing trollbait again!

[MplsBison]

You'd have to tell me which part of NDSU and UNI being able to move directly into the MAC while any Big Sky school would be incapable of moving directly into the Mountain West you have a hard time comprehending.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

You'd have to tell me which part of NDSU and UNI being able to move directly into the MAC while any Big Sky school would be incapable of moving directly into the Mountain West you have a hard time comprehending.

all of it.

[ASUMountaineer]

Or add MVFC schools and go to 20 - two ten team divisions with eight division games each and a true conference championship game (where neither team would have played each other during the regular season).

A guy can dream..

West:
NDSU - UNI
Illinois St - No Illinois
Ball St - W Mich
C Mich - E Mich
Bowling Green - Toledo

East:
UMass - Buffalo
Delaware - JMU
Kent - Akron
Youngstown - Stony Brook?
Ohio - Miami

Well, calling going to 15 a dream makes much more sense (same as going to 20).

[MplsBison]

all of it.

Oh. Well that is bizarre that a guy as smart as you couldn't comprehend something so patently obvious. *shrug*

[ThompsonThe]

Good for Ziady for calling a spade a spade.

The Sun Belt has always been a garbage conference and will continue to be a garbage conference. All App State and Ga Southern accomplished is adding to their athletic budget while eliminating the possibility of accomplishing something meaningful each fall.

Congrats?
What the hell is a damn Richmond fan commenting about? Who the hell do you think you are Chipmunk? What's it to you, and why should we give a damn what you think. Screw UR.

[ThompsonThe]

How much does the Sun Belt tv contract pay the member schools each year?
More than Richmond gets......plus we do not have to pay for production costs.

[ThompsonThe]

ASU and GSU fans, has there been any mention of either school cutting sports to accommodate increased expenses in the SBC? Does either school offer sports that are not sponsored by the SBC and, if so, under which conference banner would those sports be played?

No App State is adding several women's programs instead, including Women's Swimming and Diving.
Why don't you tell your fairly new UD AD that he is a jack a$$ and a stupid pile of crap. Doubt he has enough sense to get in out of the rain.

[superman7515]

The latest from UD's Athletic Director...

http://www.udreview.com/sports/ud-athletics-to-stay-in-caa-for-now-says-ziady-1.3028164


Ziady reiterated that Delaware is still a proud member of the CAA and is still working to add new members in order to strengthen the conference. However, given the uncertainty the CAA is currently faced with, he said the future of Delaware athletics is unknown.

In fact, Ziady said if the right suitor came calling, such the Atlantic Coast Conference, the university would jump at the opportunity to obtain membership. There have been no reports that any major Bowl Championship Series conferences have expressed even a remote interest in offering Delaware membership. Regardless, Ziady, who spent the previous 14 years at Boston College, said he still keeps in contact with his former colleagues from the ACC.

“Certainly, I spent a lot of time in the ACC and the Big East,” Ziady said. “So I know people in those league offices. I talk to them all the time, but it doesn’t mean we’re talking about going there. Well, I may be talking about it but they aren’t really talking about it.”

As with the vast majority of conference realignment decisions, Ziady said football will be the determining factor in how Delaware navigates through the landscape of college athletics.

Ziady said the university should not move up to FBS football just for the sake of doing so, or to a conference that does not make sense for Delaware athletics’ long-term goals and aspirations.

“For us to consider moving up to the Sun Belt, so we can have a homecoming rivalry against Idaho or Louisiana-Monroe, to me, personally speaking, that’s not moving up,” Ziady said. “I really don’t think that a lot of other people think that it would be.”...

[ASUMountaineer]

The latest from UD's Athletic Director...

http://www.udreview.com/sports/ud-athletics-to-stay-in-caa-for-now-says-ziady-1.3028164

xlolx thanks for the enjoyable read!

[superman7515]

xlolx thanks for the enjoyable read!

Yeah, this guy is in over his head.

[State Line Liquors]

I've got no beef whatsoever with anything Ziady has said about the Super Melt conference. It's a bad fit for UD for sure, even as a momentary conference place holder, to get the foot in the door elsewhere. And he's right, it's a step up in name only. I think I'd rather form the Delaware Athletic Conference with Del State, Wesley & Goldey Beacom before I joined up with South Alabama.

[Saint3333]

Only crap I feel sorry for UD, this guy doesn't have a clue.

Not that I disagree that the Belt isn't right for them, but to mention the BE and ACC is crazy.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

Only crap I feel sorry for UD, this guy doesn't have a clue.

Not that I disagree that the Belt isn't right for them, but to mention the BE and ACC is crazy.

I think he referenced the BE/AAC and ACC because of his time spent at BC.

Personally, I think UD would be a solid fit for the AAC. They already have a long history with Temple and Uconn. In fact, one could argue that Delaware is Temple's biggest historical football rival. Playing them every other year at the Linc would be a blast.

The biggest issue with UD would be their basketball arena. It's nice but a bit on the small side. I'm not sure if there's a larger venue in Wilmington where they could play a few games a year.

[BigHouseClosedEnd]

Glad to see another log has been thrown on this fire.

One thing Ziady failed to mention is that UD's academic reputation deserves better than be associated with the Slum Belt schools. Most of the Sun Belch schools accept well over 80 percent of applicants.

Have a pulse and backing to make a few loan payments and you can get through the Admissions office of any of these schools without a problem.

Terrible fit for UD.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

Glad to see another log has been thrown on this fire.

One thing Ziady failed to mention is that UD's academic reputation deserves better than be associated with the Slum Belt schools. Most of the Sun Belch schools accept well over 80 percent of applicants.

Have a pulse and backing to make a few loan payments and you can get through the Admissions office of any of these schools without a problem.

Terrible fit for UD.

Which is why they fit in better with the Tulane's, SMU's Temple's, Cincinnati's, UConn's, USF's etc. of the world. The MAC also has several good schools but I don't see UD going in that direction.

UD has nothing in common with the SBC schools in terms of culture and academics. I spent some time at UD when I was at TU and I know a lot of their students also considered Temple, Rutgers, PSU, Maryland and some of the PL schools as reaches.

[Engineer86]

Which is why they fit in better with the Tulane's, SMU's Temple's, Cincinnati's, UConn's, USF's etc. of the world. The MAC also has several good schools but I don't see UD going in that direction.

UD has nothing in common with the SBC schools in terms of culture and academics. I spent some time at UD when I was at TU and I know a lot of their students also considered Temple, Rutgers, PSU, Maryland and some of the PL schools as reaches.

There is no way any NJ kid that got into UD considered Rutgers as a reach. Same goes for PA kids that got into UD for Temple. Main campus PSU or Patriot League maybe, but getting into UD as a PA, NJ, or MD student is not a simple feat.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

There is no way any NJ kid that got into UD considered Rutgers as a reach. Same goes for PA kids that got into UD for Temple. Main campus PSU or Patriot League maybe, but getting into UD as a PA, NJ, or MD student is not a simple feat.

I think you misread what I wrote. Temple, PSU, Rutgers, Maryland, Pitt, PSU etc are usually the state schools that UD students apply to. The PL type schools (and UVA/W&M) are the reaches. Delaware has a unique applicant pool because of its academic reputation and the number of out of state students it attracts.

[BisonFan02]

http://m.tribstar.com/TTS/db_/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=VoFcqbS8&full=true#display

Sunbelt contacted Indiana State....

“We were contacted by the Sun Belt. While flattering, it’s something we’re not ready for. We may be someday, but we’re not there now,” ISU Director of Athletics Ron Prettyman confirmed to the Tribune-Star.

Who isn't on SBC's list right now?

[Laker]

http://m.tribstar.com/TTS/db_/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=VoFcqbS8&full=true#display

Sunbelt contacted Indiana State....

“We were contacted by the Sun Belt. While flattering, it’s something we’re not ready for. We may be someday, but we’re not there now,” ISU Director of Athletics Ron Prettyman confirmed to the Tribune-Star.

Who isn't on SBC's list right now?

Wasn't Indiana State thinking about dropping football a few years ago after they lost to D2 Quincy?

[BisonFan02]

Wasn't Indiana State thinking about dropping football a few years ago after they lost to D2 Quincy?

Possible I guess...someone else would have to confirm that. I do know that up until recently, ISUb Football had been perennially bad (really....really bad). Any conference change for them would also be football only since they are Missouri Valley for everything else, and the SBC wouldn't be an upgrade at that point.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

http://m.tribstar.com/TTS/db_/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=VoFcqbS8&full=true#display

Sunbelt contacted Indiana State....

“We were contacted by the Sun Belt. While flattering, it’s something we’re not ready for. We may be someday, but we’re not there now,” ISU Director of Athletics Ron Prettyman confirmed to the Tribune-Star.

Who isn't on SBC's list right now?

Remember the new Georgia State head coach Trent Miles was head coach at ISUb last season. A possible link.

[DuaneAllmanLives]

Note: I have changed my mind about wanting Liberty to move to the Sun Belt or any FBS conference, and I really don't think I have to worry about it happening anyway.

What do these FCS powerhouses have to gain by leaving for the FBS? They aren't upgrading themselves, are they?

App's and Georgia Southern's acceptance to join the Sun Belt isn't really upgrading.

Look at it like this, A student has just graduated with a undergraduate degree and has landed a good job and has high reputation among his peers. However, he/she decides that they want a graduate degree that will end up costing thousands, is the student going to improve their situation by going for the extra degree?

I'm not really sure Appalachian or Georgia Southern has really improved their situation by joining the Sun Belt. Why should either school have traded in their FCS royal robes for paupers clothing in the Sun Belt. Granted it's just my opinion, but who wants to see two giants of the FCS become just another program trapped in a toilet conference, I don't.

My hope is that both programs will get to leave the Sun Belt as soon as possible, I hope both programs will land in the AAC at some point. Perhaps East Carolina could help Appalachian gain an invite someday, but who knows. With Georgia in the SEC and Georgia Tech in the ACC I would think that Georgia Southern would look real good in the AAC.

[cmaxwellgsu]

Note: I have changed my mind about wanting Liberty to move to the Sun Belt or any FBS conference, and I really don't think I have to worry about it happening anyway.

What do these FCS powerhouses have to gain by leaving for the FBS? They aren't upgrading themselves, are they?

App's and Georgia Southern's acceptance to join the Sun Belt isn't really upgrading.

Look at it like this, A student has just graduated with a undergraduate degree and has landed a good job and has high reputation among his peers. However, he/she decides that they want a graduate degree that will end up costing thousands, is the student going to improve their situation by going for the extra degree?

I'm not really sure Appalachian or Georgia Southern has really improved their situation by joining the Sun Belt. Why should either school have traded in their FCS royal robes for paupers clothing in the Sun Belt. Granted it's just my opinion, but who wants to see two giants of the FCS become just another program trapped in a toilet conference, I don't.

My hope is that both programs will get to leave the Sun Belt as soon as possible, I hope both programs will land in the AAC at some point. Perhaps East Carolina could help Appalachian gain an invite someday, but who knows. With Georgia in the SEC and Georgia Tech in the ACC I would think that Georgia Southern would look real good in the AAC.


You actually explained why I'm excited to move up. First, to that kid with the undergraduate degree. Yeah the master's may not pay off immediately. But since you have a young high achiever, he's probably going to be promoted or move to an even better job that he would need the master's to qualify for. That's how I view our move. We get across the bridge to the FBS, where we need to be if we ever to get to the AAC or any other big conference for that matter. The only school that could have ever gotten that invite from FCS was Villanova, and that is a very rare exception.

[Herder]

There are two schools of thought on what will happen with DI football.

1) Either there will be a 3 tier DI system with 80/80/80 teams in the top/mid/bottom with modified scholarship levels and 3 championships (or) 2) There will continue to be 2 championships in DI football, with the top level (FBS) expanding the championship to provide access to all FBS conferences.

I believe that scenario 2) will occur, and by 2018 there will be a 12 team playoff including 8 conference champions (Conf Champs of top 6 conferences, and bottom 4 conferences playoff for 2 spots in the bracket) and 4 at-large teams. In this playoff, the top 4 seeds will have a 1st round bye, and will only need to win 3 games to be the champ. The teams that do not make the 12 team field will play in some pre-christmas holdiay bowls to provide some post season access outside the 12 team championship. Again, all conference champs will have access to competing for the NC.

This scenario will create annual access for the SunBelt, MAC, MWC, America, and CUSA. Under this scenario, FCS schools will be clamoring to get to the FBS level, as it will be similar to ncaa basketball today. However, once this system is setup, it will take a conference invite and a couple million bucks to get to the FBS. The cost of moving will stop most movement.

[MplsBison]

There are two schools of thought on what will happen with DI football.

1) Either there will be a 3 tier DI system with 80/80/80 teams in the top/mid/bottom with modified scholarship levels and 3 championships (or) 2) There will continue to be 2 championships in DI football, with the top level (FBS) expanding the championship to provide access to all FBS conferences.

I believe that scenario 2) will occur, and by 2018 there will be a 12 team playoff including 8 conference champions (Conf Champs of top 6 conferences, and bottom 4 conferences playoff for 2 spots in the bracket) and 4 at-large teams. In this playoff, the top 4 seeds will have a 1st round bye, and will only need to win 3 games to be the champ. The teams that do not make the 12 team field will play in some pre-christmas holdiay bowls to provide some post season access outside the 12 team championship. Again, all conference champs will have access to competing for the NC.

This scenario will create annual access for the SunBelt, MAC, MWC, America, and CUSA. Under this scenario, FCS schools will be clamoring to get to the FBS level, as it will be similar to ncaa basketball today. However, once this system is setup, it will take a conference invite and a couple million bucks to get to the FBS. The cost of moving will stop most movement.

Very plausible scenario.

Any FCS school that can realistically play FBS level football in the Sun Belt or MAC that receives an invitation now should not think twice about leaving. There are probably less than 10 spots left that will open up in the next few years.

[walliver]

There are two schools of thought on what will happen with DI football.

1) Either there will be a 3 tier DI system with 80/80/80 teams in the top/mid/bottom with modified scholarship levels and 3 championships (or) 2) There will continue to be 2 championships in DI football, with the top level (FBS) expanding the championship to provide access to all FBS conferences.

I believe that scenario 2) will occur, and by 2018 there will be a 12 team playoff including 8 conference champions (Conf Champs of top 6 conferences, and bottom 4 conferences playoff for 2 spots in the bracket) and 4 at-large teams. In this playoff, the top 4 seeds will have a 1st round bye, and will only need to win 3 games to be the champ. The teams that do not make the 12 team field will play in some pre-christmas holdiay bowls to provide some post season access outside the 12 team championship. Again, all conference champs will have access to competing for the NC.

This scenario will create annual access for the SunBelt, MAC, MWC, America, and CUSA. Under this scenario, FCS schools will be clamoring to get to the FBS level, as it will be similar to ncaa basketball today. However, once this system is setup, it will take a conference invite and a couple million bucks to get to the FBS. The cost of moving will stop most movement.


Why would the people with the money and power want to share it?

The bottom line is that the lower FCS conferences are not competing at the same level as the big boys, and that is not going to change. IF you expand the playoffs to 12 teams, 11 of them would come from the Big 5.

The MAC, C-USA, AAC, SBC, and MWC may hope for #2, but #1 is more likely. Most likely is that there will be the Big Boy Subdivision vs. everybody else. The also-rans may push for a three tier arrangement, but it makes no sense for the NCAA to go there. The NCAA knows the money is with the SEC not the SBC.

[CFBfan]

You've gotta know that Any scenario that mpls thinks makes sense is absurd and will not happen!

[MplsBison]

Why would the people with the money and power want to share it?

The bottom line is that the lower FCS conferences are not competing at the same level as the big boys, and that is not going to change. IF you expand the playoffs to 12 teams, 11 of them would come from the Big 5.

The MAC, C-USA, AAC, SBC, and MWC may hope for #2, but #1 is more likely. Most likely is that there will be the Big Boy Subdivision vs. everybody else. The also-rans may push for a three tier arrangement, but it makes no sense for the NCAA to go there. The NCAA knows the money is with the SEC not the SBC.

Nothing wrong with a pessimistic viewpoint, but that's all it is. There's absolutely no reason to think that the FBS playoff won't one day award auto bids to each of the ten conferences in some sense.

To answer your original question: because that will enable them to make even more money than they do by playing only themselves. I've said it a million times and it's as correct as it ever has been and ever will be: the only truly compelling storyline in sports is the underdog trying to beat the odds.

[parr90]

Wow some of you are missing the point. The AD said in the ACC eye's the sun belt doesn't exist. He is exactly right as the teams and fans from the BCS conferences could care less about the mid majors, FCS, D2 etc. And yes most of those fans are arrogant and incompetent regarding football, but it is still true. That's why it's clear they will have their own division soon.

Georgia Southern will compete for the Sun Belt championship in 2015 so it seems like a lateral move to me. Not sure how people are upset over facts.

Facts? Well the ACC can say what they want but they are struggling as well and just ask Ga Tech about Midd Tennessee's thumping them this past season. The Sunbelt may be the bottom right now but if you look at the growth of the schools in that conference they may not be long. La monroe beat Arkansas this year, and Troy has beatn some top 20 teams in the last few years, these teams in this conference are getting better and it may not be long before this conference is looked on a little different.

[MplsBison]

I know the Division I Mid American Conference (MAC) is not as often talked about on this forum as the Division I Sun Belt Conference (SBC), but thought it was worthwhile bringing up the fact that the number one overall draft pick during last night's NFL draft was from Central Michigan.

http://www.freep.com/article/20130426/SPORTS08/304260069/Eric-Fisher-nfl-kansas-city-chiefs

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I know the Division I Mid American Conference (MAC) is not as often talked about on this forum as the Division I Sun Belt Conference (SBC), but thought it was worthwhile bringing up the fact that the number one overall draft pick during last night's NFL draft was from Central Michigan.

http://www.freep.com/article/20130426/SPORTS08/304260069/Eric-Fisher-nfl-kansas-city-chiefs

This and a dollar gets you a cup of coffee...