As the B1G thinks of upping their conference games....

[Lehigh Football Nation]

... the Pac 12 is thinking the opposite.

RT @BFeldmanCBS One of the topics Pac-12 coaches will discuss this wk is trying to go to 8 conf. games (like SEC does it) down from 9.

Which means, potentially, more OOC home games for them, which also could mean more games for FCS schools. xthumbsupx

Next season, 9 of the Pac 12 have OOC games against FCS schools, with USC, UCLA, and Stanford the only three teams not scheduling one. Stanford has scheduled FCS games in the past, while USC and UCLA have never, I believe, scheduled FCS teams since the split.

[Apphole]

That is quite the stretch man. xlolx

This might indirectly impact one or two FCS schools a year.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Wait, I forgot. The Pac 12 is hurrying to get this through so that they can schedule 1-for-1 deals with App State. Carry on.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

That is quite the stretch man. xlolx

This might indirectly impact one or two FCS schools a year.

You're probably talking about the B1G, which is true.

[Go Green]

. Stanford has scheduled FCS games in the past.

And lost.

http://www.ucdavisaggies.com/sports/m-footbl/recaps/091805aaa.html

:)

[MplsBison]

What we have here folks, is a conflation of two entirely independent topics:

A) the question of whether top level FBS conferences should disallow its member teams from scheduling home games against FCS opponents

B) the question of whether top level FBS conferences should mandate 8 or 9 conference games each season.


Clearly, this thread is attempting to speciously combine the topics into a single decision. I say speciously...because that's what it is: superficially plausible, but absolutely wrong.


Discuss the merits or disadvantages of the B1G and Pac-12 scheduling 8 or 9 conference games all you want. Whether they allow non-conference home games to be scheduled against FCS teams is another thread.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

What we have here folks, is a conflation of two entirely independent topics:

A) the question of whether top level FBS conferences should disallow its member teams from scheduling home games against FCS opponents

B) the question of whether top level FBS conferences should mandate 8 or 9 conference games each season.


Clearly, this thread is attempting to speciously combine the topics into a single decision. I say speciously...because that's what it is: superficially plausible, but absolutely wrong.


Discuss the merits or disadvantages of the B1G and Pac-12 scheduling 8 or 9 conference games all you want. Whether they allow non-conference home games to be scheduled against FCS teams is another thread.

Well because they are doing one under the auspices of the other, I say the are inextricably linked and the bifurcation which you seek is impossible.

Looks like we're having a sale on $5 words today.....

[MplsBison]

The Pac-12 could absolutely and quite easily mandate that only 8 conference games shall be played, thus allowing every member team to schedule 4 non-conference games and that no non-conference game shall be scheduled against any FCS team.

Absolutely plausible and perhaps likely.

[Laker]

Well because they are doing one under the auspices of the other, I say the are inextricably linked and the bifurcation which you seek is impossible.

Looks like we're having a sale on $5 words today.....

I'm not sure what that word means- but it sounds painful. xeyebrowx

[Lehigh Football Nation]

The Pac-12 could absolutely and quite easily mandate that only 8 conference games shall be played, thus allowing every member team to schedule 4 non-conference games and that no non-conference game shall be scheduled against any FCS team.

Absolutely plausible and perhaps likely.

Sure. They want to trade a home game that costs them $0 in guarantees so that they'll pay $1 million+ in guarantees for New Mexico State to pay a visit.

More likely they are trading a problem (some teams to have more home conference games than away games) in order to get more home games. If they want more home games for the best price, it's likely that FCS games are a big part of the equation.

[MplsBison]

Sure. They want to trade a home game that costs them $0 in guarantees so that they'll pay $1 million+ in guarantees for New Mexico State to pay a visit.

More likely they are trading a problem (some teams to have more home conference games than away games) in order to get more home games. If they want more home games for the best price, it's likely that FCS games are a big part of the equation.

Or give New Mexico St, Idaho, BYU or MWC schools 2-for-1 or home/home deals for no money.

[TheRevSFA]

Or give New Mexico St, Idaho, BYU or MWC schools 2-for-1 or home/home deals for no money.

Why would a school like USC or Oregon want to travel to Moscow Idaho or Las Cruces for a game?

[MplsBison]

Why would a school like USC or Oregon want to travel to Moscow Idaho or Las Cruces for a game?

Every Pac-12 team travels a place 10 miles from Moscow, ID.

[TheRevSFA]

Every Pac-12 team travels a place 10 miles from Moscow, ID.

Yes to play in a conference game. No one wants to go play in a 15k stadium that doesn't sell out.

[MplsBison]

Yes to play in a conference game. No one wants to go play in a 15k stadium that doesn't sell out.

So schedule away games at BYU or MWC schools then, if you're that elitist. Sheesh. Non-argument.

The funny thing is that all the Big Sky schools, for all their pining to pull Idaho back down into the 'Sky and for all their ridicule of Idaho and claims that they're no better than 'Sky schools -- Idaho is the one who is going to be getting the home games with Pac-12 schools if the Pac agrees that no more FCS teams shall be scheduled.

Maybe, just maybe then - would that finally be the push/shove that the Montana's need to seek FBS membership? Probably not.

[CrazyCat]

So schedule away games at BYU or MWC schools then, if you're that elitist. Sheesh. Non-argument.

The funny thing is that all the Big Sky schools, for all their pining to pull Idaho back down into the 'Sky and for all their ridicule of Idaho and claims that they're no better than 'Sky schools -- Idaho is the one who is going to be getting the home games with Pac-12 schools if the Pac agrees that no more FCS teams shall be scheduled.

Maybe, just maybe then - would that finally be the push/shove that the Montana's need to seek FBS membership? Probably not.

Seek FBS membership in what conference ? Take your pick. PAC-12 or MWC.

[dgtw]

If everyone but the LA schools are playing an FCS team while playing nine league games, how is going to eight games going to help the FCS? They aren't going to start playing two FCS games a year?

[Sandlapper Spike]

I don't think the Pac-12 going to eight league games would do anything to change the FCS/FBS dynamic, except to make it less likely the SEC feels pressured to move to nine conference games...and I don't think the SEC is feeling any pressure on that front, anyway.

[Saint3333]

If everyone but the LA schools are playing an FCS team while playing nine league games, how is going to eight games going to help the FCS? They aren't going to start playing two FCS games a year?

No but it does make it more likely they will continue to schedule them which would have been in jeopardy had they gone to 9 conference games. It will really depend if other conferences follow the Big Ten's lead and more importantly how SOS is calculated.

[MplsBison]

Seek FBS membership in what conference ? Take your pick. PAC-12 or MWC.

Obviously MWC is the only possible choice.

Strictly speaking football program-wise, I don't see MSU and particularly Montana as being worse than San Jose St, Utah St or Idaho. Are the head coaches salaries even any different? Scholarships is nothing, boost from 63 to 85.

The thing that, of course, kills the Montanas is (lack of) market. Even if you could sell the MWC on bringing the entire state of Montana between the two programs, that's still only a million people. Granted of course that Wyoming would not be able to get into the MWC today with their lack of market, they're basically grandfathered in by tradition.


Not saying the Montanas should try or that they will try, just making a little observation - wondering if they could bare to see SJSU, Utah St and Idaho reaping the rewards of being FBS when their programs are really no better.

[MplsBison]

I don't think the Pac-12 going to eight league games would do anything to change the FCS/FBS dynamic, except to make it less likely the SEC feels pressured to move to nine conference games...and I don't think the SEC is feeling any pressure on that front, anyway.

Correct.

That's because the 8/9 conference games decision is completely decoupled from the allowing FCS games decision.


Again, I see it completely plausible that the Pac could announce disallowing FCS games from being scheduled at the same time as announcing a move to 8 conference games.

[MplsBison]

No but it does make it more likely they will continue to schedule them which would have been in jeopardy had they gone to 9 conference games. It will really depend if other conferences follow the Big Ten's lead and more importantly how SOS is calculated.

It's going to completely depend on the humans who are in control: the selection committee. It's not going to be some formula or mathematical system.

And some humans "know" that FCS teams simply don't count the same as FBS teams, unlike formulas.

Hence why the B1G (and likely their partners in crime, the Pac) aren't going to take any chances, therefore disallowing FCS games moving forward.