"D1 by June 1"

[McNeese75]

I was in the San Marcos area this past weekend for a golf tournament and that catchy little saying is plastered all over town. I listened to a few groups talking about it and they are really excited about the possibility of moving up to the FBS and competing with Texas and Texas A&M (not my words, theirs). I had to laugh but after hearing the conversations, I really believe the Cat following will be happier going 2-10 every year and playing in that division. I certainly hope they learn to travel better than they do now because there will not be a lot of home games in the future.

More power to em! Well, at least that way they will not have to play any of the Louisiana SLC teams anymore :D

[patssle]

really believe the Cat following will be happier going 2-10 every year and playing in that division

yeah, its something I don't understand. I would NEVER want to see SHSU move to that level. We compete well at the FCS level, why destroy that credibility?

[appfan2008]

that would be silly to move up... i would like to keep them here but if they do move up ... good luck to them!

[youwouldno]

They have only had 1 good year in FCS anyway. Not a significant loss at all, should they move "up" to the Sun Belt.

[BigApp]

They have only had 1 good year in FCS anyway.

not arguing this topic one way or another, but success or failure on this level does not equate to success or failure on another.

[appfan2008]

no but if you cant succeed here... how are they supposed to succeed at the next level...

[BigApp]

ask UConn that. or for the flip side, ask Arkansas State.

[appfan2008]

well there you go... its a straight up crap shoot

[james_lawfirm]

not arguing this topic one way or another, but success or failure on this level does not equate to success or failure on another.

BigApp:

Not sure I agree with you. In fact, I am pretty sure I disagree. Assuming you are equating success/failure to win/loss record, then teams who have done poorly at FCS truly stink at FBS level. And for successful teams in FCS, then most fail at FBS. Marshall comes to mind as the only team with even a scintilla of success after moving up. Therefore, the true statement is that:

"Regardless of a team's success or failure at the FCS level, if they move up to the FBS subdivision, then they fail almost all of the time."

I would be delighted to learn of any team that has moved up and done well.

[appfan2008]

BigApp:

Not sure I agree with you. In fact, I am pretty sure I disagree. Assuming you are equating success/failure to win/loss record, then teams who have done poorly at FCS truly stink at FBS level. And for successful teams in FCS, then most fail at FBS. Marshall comes to mind as the only team with even a scintilla of success after moving up. Therefore, the true statement is that:

"Regardless of a team's success or failure at the FCS level, if they move up to the FBS subdivision, then they fail almost all of the time."

I would be delighted to learn of any team that has moved up and done well.
you could also use boise st in that argument

[BigApp]

I would be delighted to learn of any team that has moved up and done well.

Seems everyone has a differing opinion of it, but as you asked the question, what do you define as "done well"?

[slycat]

im not in the group of cat fans excited to move up. i think its a stupid idea. maybe something to look for in the distant future but not now. i cant imagine how messed up it would be if we jumped as fast a possible without looking at all the problems and solutions.

itll be tough for me to be a fan if we go to the sun belt.

[Marcus Garvey]

not arguing this topic one way or another, but success or failure on this level does not equate to success or failure on another.

Excellent point. Connecticut has absolutely no winning football tradition, yet they've been competitive with the move to I-A. Granted, it helps that they are in a BCS conference. When UConn announced the move, I thought it was insane. I have no problems admitting I was wrong on that one.

Boise St. was a very successful I-AA program that has done well since moving up. Conversely, Idaho was also successful as I-AA, but they've struggled since moving to I-A.

[slycat]

a lot of the push to get it done fast comes from the fact that UTSA says they want to go FBS. this puts pressure on texas st to move up so they dont hurt our local recruiting.

[BigApp]

I agree with you about UConn MG. Also Arkansas State was a top-shelf I-AA program and has vomited. Nevada and Marshall have maintained their successes. Buffalo was bad here, they're bad there.

There really isn't a direct correlation at all.

[dbackjon]

One correlation is the amount of support that the programs have, both from the school inself, and the community.

Nevada, Boise, Marshall and UConn have had tremedous support. All but UConn had it before they moved to FBS, UConn's came after - but was predicated based on them being in a BCS conference, which was and is a totally unique situation.

Nevada, Boise and Marshall have the distinct advantage of being one of the top two state schools in their particular state. Boise and Nevada also have good sized Metro areas where they ARE the only game in town.

I don't see Texas State having any of these pluses. If they do well - great, but to expect a Boise/Marshall/Nevada type of success is unrealistic, IMHO.

[Marcus Garvey]

One correlation is the amount of support that the programs have, both from the school inself, and the community.

Nevada, Boise, Marshall and UConn have had tremedous support. All but UConn had it before they moved to FBS, UConn's came after - but was predicated based on them being in a BCS conference, which was and is a totally unique situation.

Nevada, Boise and Marshall have the distinct advantage of being one of the top two state schools in their particular state. Boise and Nevada also have good sized Metro areas where they ARE the only game in town.

I don't see Texas State having any of these pluses. If they do well - great, but to expect a Boise/Marshall/Nevada type of success is unrealistic, IMHO.

Agreed. Look at the established FBS programs among state-supported schools in Texas: Texas Tech, UTEP, Houston and North Texas. All 4 struggle for fan support and recruits. Yes, UTEP has had a mini-resurgence under Mike Price, but they aren't on the same level as UT or A&M. Tech never seriously contends for the Big 12 South. Even in the old Southwest Conf, Baylor and SMU (pre Ron Meyer/paying players era) were far more competitive.

In Texas college footbal the pecking order is: Texas, Texas A&M, everybody else.

[slycat]

One correlation is the amount of support that the programs have, both from the school inself, and the community.

Nevada, Boise, Marshall and UConn have had tremedous support. All but UConn had it before they moved to FBS, UConn's came after - but was predicated based on them being in a BCS conference, which was and is a totally unique situation.

Nevada, Boise and Marshall have the distinct advantage of being one of the top two state schools in their particular state. Boise and Nevada also have good sized Metro areas where they ARE the only game in town.

I don't see Texas State having any of these pluses. If they do well - great, but to expect a Boise/Marshall/Nevada type of success is unrealistic, IMHO.

people at texas st pushing the move say yeah the fans are there but theyll come when we move up.xrolleyesx

please i could see more people coming to see houston if we went to conference usa but not that many more. plus if we went to sun belt who is there other then UNT? im sure people will come out of the woodwork to see FIU play.

[GeauxColonels]

I was in the San Marcos area this past weekend for a golf tournament and that catchy little saying is plastered all over town. I listened to a few groups talking about it and they are really excited about the possibility of moving up to the FBS and competing with Texas and Texas A&M (not my words, theirs). I had to laugh but after hearing the conversations, I really believe the Cat following will be happier going 2-10 every year and playing in that division. I certainly hope they learn to travel better than they do now because there will not be a lot of home games in the future.

More power to em! Well, at least that way they will not have to play any of the Louisiana SLC teams anymore :D
Is there some kind of unspoken guarantee that they will get to play against Texas and Texas A&M as soon as they move up?! If that's the only reason...I don't see the point. The Longhorns took on SHSU and Texas State went to College Station and should have beaten the Aggies. This was all while the 2 schools were I-AA. So I really can't see that being the ONLY driving force to move up.

I think you're always going to have people at almost ANY FCS school that looks down on the subdivision as nothing more than glorified D-II. And it will stay like that until they get more coverage in the mainstream press.

It's a shame if you ask me. xsmhx xsmhx xsmhx xsmhx xsmhx

[chrisattsu]

I think you're always going to have people at almost ANY FCS school that looks down on the subdivision as nothing more than glorified D-II. And it will stay like that until they get more coverage in the mainstream press.

It's a shame if you ask me. xsmhx xsmhx xsmhx xsmhx xsmhx

You have a very good point in my opinion. Following Texas State's 2005 season the radio announcers in San Antonio were still calling it D2 football.

I am not sure how much credit the state in general gives to FCS, but I know it is not a lot. With the amount of FBS teams in the state everybody has their favorite, and the rest of our schools just bubble under the surface in the minds of the general sports fan. If you ask the average dullard, they are going to assume that SFA and West Texas A&M compete at the same level.

[ucdtim17]

Nevada, Boise, Marshall and UConn have had tremedous support. All but UConn had it before they moved to FBS, UConn's came after - but was predicated based on them being in a BCS conference, which was and is a totally unique situation.


Nevada has not had tremendous support - it's been a problem for them since moving up. They've obviously adjusted well on the field, but the fans don't show up

[Fresno St. Alum]

I think the main reason for this is the race to beat UTSA to FBS and get the 14th spot in the Sun Belt and be the 10th FB member. That would leave UTSA out in the cold in FBS unless there is a conference split.

[McNeese75]

:D OK, somebody is trying to be politically correct here (changed the title of the thread from D1 by June 1), BUT, the banners actually say that, Not FCS by June 1xlolx

[slycat]

:D OK, somebody is trying to be politically correct here (changed the title of the thread from D1 by June 1), BUT, the banners actually say that, Not FCS by June 1xlolx

yeah they sure do. my guess is because not everyone is as smart as us. heck even the media can hardly get FCS right. my guess is putting DI makes it so everyone can understand.

[Fresno St. Alum]

well slycat are you guys going or saying? ETSU bringing back football was a done deal so we thought. So maybe all there FBS banners are all for not.

[GeauxColonels]

:D OK, somebody is trying to be politically correct here (changed the title of the thread from D1 by June 1), BUT, the banners actually say that, Not FCS by June 1xlolx
The name of the thread shouldn't have been changed without your approval or request. Now the name has much less meaning.

WAY TO GO whoever did that! xnonono2x

[Fresno St. Alum]

mod 22? or mod 33? who done it?

[chrisattsu]

I think the main reason for this is the race to beat UTSA to FBS and get the 14th spot in the Sun Belt and be the 10th FB member. That would leave UTSA out in the cold in FBS unless there is a conference split.

QFT

[Fresno St. Alum]

QFT? i don't speak abbreviation. except for WTF

[chrisattsu]

QFT? i don't speak abbreviation. except for WTF

Quoted for truth

[*****]

The name of the thread shouldn't have been changed without your approval or request. Now the name has much less meaning.
WAY TO GO whoever did that!LOL, read the TOS before bashing AGS mgmt. xtwocentsx

"Now the name has much less meaning" So do you think that Texas State is NOT D-I now? Perhaps AGS should just continue the stupidity and bias?

The name referred to is FBS, not D1 [sic] or D-I.

D-I in football = FBS AND FCS!

[patssle]

change their website too while your at it

http://www.d1june1.com/

[Fresno St. Alum]

Quoted for truth
thanks for the lessonxthumbsupx

[*****]

change their website too while your at it
d1june1.comWow, what a mumbo-jumbo site. xlolx xsmhx xeekx xoopsx

[GeauxColonels]

LOL, read the TOS before bashing AGS mgmt. xtwocentsx

"Now the name has much less meaning" So do you think that Texas State is NOT D-I now? Perhaps AGS should just continue the stupidity and bias?

The name referred to is FBS, not D1 [sic] or D-I.

D-I in football = FBS AND FCS!
Bashing AGS management? No. I am saying that changing the name of this thread was inappropriate given the subject matter of the thread. The signs actually say "D1 by June 1" - therefore, no matter WHAT the NCAA calls it, the thread name is now degraded.

I know Texas State is D-I. So don't call me out on that or attempt to talk down to me. If you look at ALL the previous posts, you would see that the fans in San Marcos are the one labelling the subdivision incorrectly. NOT the faithful on this board. The point of the thread - AND its title - was to point out the ignorance of the signs made by those students and supporters. But changing the name of the thread without first asking the originator of this thread is inappropriate in my opinion - and I stand by that opinion. xtwocentsx xtwocentsx

[Fresno St. Alum]

change their website too while your at it

http://www.d1june1.com/
See this is why teams (or fans/adminstrators) want to leave the FCS for the FBS. Many casual fans don't even see Texas St. as a D-I football team unless they are FBS.

[*****]

Bashing AGS management? No. I am saying that changing the name of this thread was inappropriate... Woah nelly... I am saying that read the TOS and see that it is not inappropriate. Everything and anything is appropriate. I'll suggest to the Mods (since I get the feeling no one else here has done it, just belly-ached in a public forum about it) that the thread title be reinstated.

[GeauxColonels]

change their website too while your at it

http://www.d1june1.com/
Wow...AWFUL!!!


Can we compete? September 22, 2005 Texas A&M 44, Texas State 31; September 11, 2004 Baylor 24, Texas State 17.
Ummmm, hello. You lost BOTH games. And I really wouldn't consider Baylor to be a benchmark of FBS.



What have other schools done? Boise State won one conference championship in 16 years and then moved to a better D-IAA conference, won two more conference championships and moved up to IA. There is not a good IAA conference for Texas State.
Can we kick them out now?



Do we meet the requirements? Yes. Texas State will meet the requirements for Division IA football easily. Requirements are 15,000 in actual or paid attendance over two years, scheduling games against DIA opponents in the second year.
Last I checked....NO.

My personal favorite is this:

What else does IA football mean for Texas State? A number of things…
- Regional rivalries with DIA programs, no regional rivalries possible in IAA.
Wow. Sorry SHSU and SFA.

[GeauxColonels]

Woah nelly... I am saying that read the TOS and see that it is not inappropriate. Everything and anything is appropriate.
Everything and anything is appropriate?! You and I both know that that isn't the case.

Nonetheless, the point is, the name of the thread made sense before. Now it makes much less sense.

[chrisattsu]

What else does IA football mean for Texas State? A number of things…
--Regional rivalries with DIA programs, no regional rivalries possible in IAA.
--Ideal conference with peer institutions.
--Access to conference realignment. Conference realignment will happen in a year or less. We must have Division IA football to be party to the realignment.
--More people to San Marcos to watch games = more revenue for everyone.
--Better division + better conference = guaranteed television and media contracts.
--Largest school with a football program south of the University of Texas.
--150 athletes leave Texas each year for other DIA football programs due to lack of DIA schools.
--Plans are in place for funding stadium renovations and expansion.
--Multimillion dollar offer made for stadium naming rights contingent on DIA football.
--Division IA football will help raise money for baseball/softball complex.
--Able to retain quality coaches as DIA program


According to the website, FBS is a good thing for Texas State.

[*****]

See this is why teams (or fans/adminstrators) want to leave the FCS for the FBS. Many casual fans don't even see Texas St. as a D-I football team unless they are FBS.Gee, that's a good reason to lose millions of dollars. xrolleyesx Seems rather egotistical and shallow to me. xcoffeex

[*****]

According to the website, FBS is a good thing for Texas State.The website is an atrocity of errors. How anyone can believe that is beyond belief.

[Fresno St. Alum]

yes it does seem egotistical. but most fans don't care or know about how much money the school is losing. They just want to play the Texas's,Baylor's,Texas A&M's,N.Texas's, and Texas Tech's of football.

[*****]

Thread title restored! I'm your helper

[chrisattsu]

Ummmm, hello. You lost BOTH games. And I really wouldn't consider Baylor to be a benchmark of FBS.


But if you ask our student body president and many others around the university, "They would rather lose to teams that people have heard of" <looking for the source of this quote, but I have heard it and read it on several occations>

[GeauxColonels]

Thread title restored! I'm your helper
Thank you. Nothing personal. It just makes more sense like that.


But I think we can all agree that the site is a joke...put together by a few students that are truly clueless. I'm curious as to how many games they have actually attended.

[GeauxColonels]

OK guys...enough joking around....this is serious...they even have a "artist's rendition" of possible stadium expansion xrolleyesx xrolleyesx :

http://connect07.accountsupport.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/bobcatstadium-CSO.jpg

[*****]

... "They would rather lose to teams that people have heard of" <looking for the source of this quote, but I have heard it and read it on several occations>said by those who agree with alums who claim it is "their" team... no doubt. xnonono2x

[*****]

OK guys...enough joking around....this is serious...they even have a "artist's rendition" of possible stadium..."candy colored clown they call the sandman..."

http://www.lynchnet.com/bv/pics/bv083.jpg

Want to go for a ride neighbor?

http://www.lynchnet.com/bv/pics/bv052.jpg

[Fresno St. Alum]

is that Al from quantum leap & Dennis Hopper

[slycat]

But if you ask our student body president and many others around the university, "They would rather lose to teams that people have heard of" <looking for the source of this quote, but I have heard it and read it on several occations>

wow. so why the hell would we rather lose to teams we have heard of. as far as i have ever seen no one shows up for a losing team. in that case we will lose tons of money and become the new laughing point of football. no thanks im happy taking our chances in FCS.

this just shows the stupidity of the people behind the move.

stay in the FCS.

[Fresno St. Alum]

in the NFL the Packers always sell out, 4-12 or 12-4 they always sell out. It's to ban there are fans that only care about you if you're good. Who knows maybe TSU will be lucky and have some success in the FBS if they go.

[slycat]

in the NFL the Packers always sell out, 4-12 or 12-4 they always sell out. It's to ban there are fans that only care about you if you're good. Who knows maybe TSU will be lucky and have some success in the FBS if they go.

i could only hope so. heck texas loves football so you never know.

[GeauxColonels]

wow. so why the hell would we rather lose to teams we have heard of. as far as i have ever seen no one shows up for a losing team. in that case we will lose tons of money and become the new laughing point of football. no thanks im happy taking our chances in FCS.

this just shows the stupidity of the people behind the move.

stay in the FCS.
You are a wise man Slycat. Who's to say that one day Texas State couldn't be competitive in FBS. Now is not the time for them, however.

[McNeese75]

I doubt Texas State could be competitive in FBS any time soon. But, as Slycat can probably attest, the general thought process going around the campus is that they will be better off by moving up. I love the "Possible schedule" section of the website where they have Texas, etc penciled in for 2008 in the Alamo Dome. As if, the UT fans are going to agree to play Tx State in San Antonio xlolx.

[McNeese75]

in the NFL the Packers always sell out, 4-12 or 12-4 they always sell out. It's to ban there are fans that only care about you if you're good. Who knows maybe TSU will be lucky and have some success in the FBS if they go.

Anything is possible but comparing the Bobcats to the Packers is quite a stretch xnodx

[GeauxLions94]

Not bashing the Texas State folks (you have to admire their passion), but I just cracked up when I saw this on the DIJune1 board ...

Can we compete? September 22, 2005 Texas A&M 44, Texas State 31; September 11, 2004 Baylor 24, Texas State 17.

Based on those two games, against a Baylor team that went 3-8 and an A&M squad that finished 5-6, then yes.








But, you forgot to mention ...
2001 - Missouri 40, Texas State 6
2002 - Minnesota 42, Texas State 0
2003 - New Mexico 72, Texas State 8
2003 - Tulsa 41, Texas State 15
2006 - Kentucky 41, Texas State 7

xsmiley_wix

[dbackjon]

Nevada has not had tremendous support - it's been a problem for them since moving up. They've obviously adjusted well on the field, but the fans don't show up

The slip in attendance has happened in the past few years, for whatever reason. They still have tremendous corporate/donor supporate, as well as the 100% attention of the state's #2 media market.

[slycat]

I doubt Texas State could be competitive in FBS any time soon. But, as Slycat can probably attest, the general thought process going around the campus is that they will be better off by moving up. I love the "Possible schedule" section of the website where they have Texas, etc penciled in for 2008 in the Alamo Dome. As if, the UT fans are going to agree to play Tx State in San Antonio xlolx.


yup. the idea is that there are big donars just waiting to give money if we move up. i'd love to see evidence of that other then rumors by bobcatfans posters. everytime i ask for proof i get no response.

the possible schedule is a joke. they should show a more realiatic one of us playing sunbelt teams.

[Fresno St. Alum]

Anything is possible but comparing the Bobcats to the Packers is quite a stretch xnodx
I wasn't really comparing, I was pointing out that Green Bay's are loyal to a bad team so many others aren't. Didn't Texas St.'s attendence drop off from the 2005 season last year. If yes then it's showing that the fans want to see a playoff team or they don't care to see you play.

[slycat]

I wasn't really comparing, I was pointing out that Green Bay's are loyal to a bad team so many others aren't. Didn't Texas St.'s attendence drop off from the 2005 season last year. If yes then it's showing that the fans want to see a playoff team or they don't care to see you play.

the season average actually went up. some of that was due to the fact that not as many showed up at the start of the 2005 season.

itll be intersting to see the attendence this season since we kick things off with cal poly. we need that win to bring people to watch abilene christian the next week.

[McNeese75]

Didn't Texas St.'s attendence drop off from the 2005 season last year. If yes then it's showing that the fans want to see a playoff team or they don't care to see you play.

Based on their trend in attendence I would guess the increase resulted directly from their participation in the playoffs.