CAA Interest to Move Up as Conference?

[Green26]

Would the CAA ever move up to FBS as a conference? I have seen some references to such a possibility several times, but couldn't find much on it in a quick Google. I assume some of you would know about this subject. Thx.

Is this even a possibility? Has the CAA even considered it? From afar, it wouldn't seem to make much sense or be very doable.

If this has already been discussed on AGS, my apologies (and please tell me where). I don't look at AGS much.

[TexasTerror]

I do not think the CAA has considered it, just like I do not think the CAA saw two programs dropping football in rapid succession as we saw with Hofstra and Northeastern.

The only leagues that I have seen fans discuss it here are the SLC (in wake of the Texas schools looking at FBS) and MVFC (more recently with the Summit League issue).

[NHwildEcat]

I don't think it would be feasible for them to do so...I can understand the southern schools because they tend to fill in the seats and are in essence "bigger programs" in comparison to the northern schools. UNH averaged over 7K fans last season per game...however that is a skewed number because homecoming alone brought in 14K+...I am not too familair with the other schools but that doesn't scream FBS football to me.

[Green26]

See the last para of the below June 15 post by a credible poster on BobcatNation. Jim O'Day is the AD at Montana. Note O'Day tends to say things that come to mind (and are all over the ballpark).

"I tracked down Jim O'Day this afternoon to get his take on the latest movement in the realignment saga. While the PAC 10/11/12 has been shot down, he still thinks the Big Ten is out for more and that other conferences will continue to look at realignment over time, which is what Pat Forde of ESPN is saying. So I guess we still have something to do this summer.

His biggest tidbit was probably that he plans to go ahead with the UM realignment study in the near future, which sounded to me like next week sometime. He said numerous other FCS schools are doing the same thing and that it won't tell UM what to do, just where they sit. So perhaps we'll have something more concrete in the not-to-distant future.

I asked him where he thought the FCS teams stand in the WAC's eyes and he said that he thinks they are probably looking at Sacramento State and Portland State as the top two most inviting prospects. As many of you have said it's the TV market that is most appealing to the conferences, including the WAC, so no big surprise there. He said he thinks the WAC will add from 2-4 teams, but didn't elaborate about where he tought UM stood.

He said that despite the appearance of Texas A/M and Texas sticking together he didn't think that was the case, because everyone is looking out for No. 1 right now. As for how that pertains to UM and MSU he said that he really wants them to stick together and thinks the Regents do as well.

Also of note was his thought that the entire CAA might move up. If that happens he said it will really put a damper on the FCS. Sorry nothing real earth-shattering to report."

[LeadBolt]

Would the CAA ever move up to FBS as a conference? I have seen some references to such a possibility several times, but couldn't find much on it in a quick Google. I assume some of you would know about this subject. Thx.

Is this even a possibility? Has the CAA even considered it? From afar, it wouldn't seem to make much sense or be very doable.

If this has already been discussed on AGS, my apologies (and please tell me where). I don't look at AGS much.

In the absence of knowledge I will venture an opinion, I don't think so. xtwocentsx

When I was @ W&M and in the area in the 1970's we played WVU, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest, UNC, Navy, Rutgers, Pitt, Vanderbilt, UVA, Boston College, Mississippi State and ECU (conference foe @ time) and had a hard time competing on a regular basis, although we had some success.

Since that time the divide between those schools and CAA schools like W&M has grown in terms of money, facilities, etc. I don't know if we would ever be able to build and maintain the facilities to move up. If the super conferences come about, the TV pie for CAA type schools is going to shrink dramatically from what it is today in the FBS.

I for one am much happier making the playoffs now in good years than I was then being 6-5 in good years. xnodx

In 8 consecutive years during the 1960's and 1970's the head coaches were Marv Levy and Lou Holtz, pretty decent coaches, who had a combined 36-45-2 record @ W&M.

I much prefer having Coach Laycock averaging 6.7 wins/year, than the aforementioned coaches averaging 4.5 wins/year.

In 1970 we won the conference and went to a bowl with a losing record, ending up 5-7. In 1971, we had a lead in the 4th qtr. of all 11 games and ended up 5-6, due to a lack of depth. xbangx

[URMite]

I can't see the CAA moving up...but are there enough east coast FCS teams capable of moving up, if they wanted to start a new Non-BCS conference?

Just off the top of my head, how does this look in a few years?

Delaware
ASU
JMU
ODU
SCSU
GA St

Maybe add GA So and UMass?

And I did say with the capacity to move, not the desire to move...:p

[jcmanson]

I can't see the CAA moving up...but are there enough east coast FCS teams capable of moving up, if they wanted to start a new Non-BCS conference?

Just off the top of my head, how does this look in a few years?

Delaware
ASU
JMU
ODU
SCSU
GA St

Maybe add GA So and UMass?

And I did say with the capacity to move, not the desire to move...:p

You can add Liberty to that list.

[andy7171]

I can't see the CAA moving up...but are there enough east coast FCS teams capable of moving up, if they wanted to start a new Non-BCS conference?

Just off the top of my head, how does this look in a few years?

Delaware
ASU
JMU
ODU
SCSU
GA St

Maybe add GA So and UMass?

And I did say with the capacity to move, not the desire to move...:p

I've said it before here and in other forums. If Delaware, JMU and ODU move up, Towson will follow. I don't like it and think it would be bad, but those schools are who Towson wants to associate with.

Throw Liberty into that conference as well.

[henfan]

Sorry, I don't have the wherewithal to check for the links but CAA Commish Tom Yeager has publicly stated in the past that the conference has investigated and expressed interest in reclassification. I would imagine that the CAA will continue to look at the matter going forward and position itself accordingly should the D-I FB landscape change such that reclassification makes sense. I'd be surprised if most FCS conferences haven't look at the idea to some extent.

In any case, I'd doubt anything is on the immediate horizon, as several CAA schools don't meet NCAA FBS attendance requirements. Most, if not all, would have difficultly meeting the financial constraints required for extra FB aid.

[URMite]

You can add Liberty to that list.

I knew I was missing somebody. Would you guys make the playoffs so I won't forget about you? :D

[49RFootballNow]

There's such a big difference between CAA schools on the football front that it's doubtful all current 12 CAA football teams would be able to go up. There's also the difficulty of nearly half palying their other sports in the A10.

I would think they would need to form a third conference (along with CAA and A10) to do this, plus add teams from outside like App St, Liberty, Charlotte, Georgia Southern.

This group I'd consider most likely to move up (right circumstances):

Georgia St.
James Madison
Old Dominion
UMass

[BigHouseClosedEnd]

With the additional costs, Title 9 implications, and a down economy ... no, I don't see this happening.

The only CAA teams I could see making the jump in the next 10 years are Ga State, ODU and maybe JMU. I am doubtful any of them even will.

What is the reward of moving up to the MAC, C-USA or Sun Belt, anyway?

[apaladin]

The FBS powers to be would certainly not let this happen even if it was feasible which it is not. The current FBS wants less teams not more. Why do you think there is currently a moratorium on moving up?

[DFW HOYA]

What is the reward of moving up to the MAC, C-USA or Sun Belt, anyway?

An appearance in the Beef O'Brady's Bowl?

[Bogus Megapardus]

I knew I was missing somebody. Would you guys make the playoffs so I won't forget about you? :D

Hmmm . . . I think Liberty would first have to show that it can consistently beat the academic-index, no-redshirt, no-JUCO-transfer Patriot League teams. It's been a struggle for them to date. God forbid the PL should gain a scholarship or three in the meantime.

[DFW HOYA]

Hmmm . . . I think Liberty would first have to show that it can consistently beat the academic-index, no-redshirt, no-JUCO-transfer Patriot League teams. It's been a struggle for them to date.

Why would the PL ban transfers from a junior college if their grades were in order?

[BigHouseClosedEnd]

An appearance in the Beef O'Brady's Bowl?

xlolxxlolxxlolx

Go get 'em boys!

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

Why would the PL ban transfers from a junior college if their grades were in order?

I'm pretty sure JUCO's are permitted. Not the same as other FCS conferences but stil allowed.
The PL doesn't get nearly the FBS guys the CAA schools do. Those are the difference makers imo.

Lehigh got Theo Moss from Nassua in the early 2000's. He was a great player but ultimately got arrested and kicked off the team. They've had so-so success with FBS guys.

[Bogus Megapardus]

Why would the PL ban transfers from a junior college if their grades were in order?

Quality, not quantity, my dear DFW.

[DFW HOYA]

Quality, not quantity, my dear DFW.

Easy to say if you're not 5-38.

[Bogus Megapardus]

Easy to say if you're not 5-38.

The PL prohibits scholarships and redshirting, and it imposes rationally incomprehensible academic guidelines on its incoming athletes. It does not, however, restrict qualified transfers - you are correct in this regard. It's just that the number of qualified transfers into the PL over the years can be counted on a first grade abacus. Liberty, by contrast, seems to take an otherwise-minded view towards collegiate free agency. That's my only point.

[henfan]

I would think they would need to form a third conference (along with CAA and A10) to do this, plus add teams from outside like App St, Liberty...

At that point, the conference would be something other than the CAA.

But back to the point of the thread, the question was asked whether or not there was interest in conference reclassification and, again, the answer from the conference's perspective would have to be affirmative. There just isn't the means, motivation or collective desire to do pursue it at this time. Wholesale conference reclassification seems very remote, unless there's a dramatic change in the D-I landscape.

As for individual schools most likely to reclassify, there is absolutely none right now in the CAA capable or willing do it. Some might be closer than others in terms of support and infrastructure but none possess the desire or financial ability to pull it off.

[jcmanson]

I knew I was missing somebody. Would you guys make the playoffs so I won't forget about you? :D

Touche.

We'll be there this year as we finally get the auto bid.

[TokyoGriz]

I honestly think The AD at Montana Oday just spews misinformation to keep everyone in the dark. Or he really has no clue whats going on... or people just make stuff up about what he says. Because he is all over the place IMO on statements about the current state of the athletic department at U of M, the complete lack of preparation for even thinking about transitioning...etc.

One day hes saying montana has 3 options because the athletic department is in crisis. They are moving up, dropping down to D 2 (eh seriously?) or ditching all or most of the out of state schollies for FB. Its like the guy is just saying all this junk to keep everyone "guessing" what the real deal is.

[henfan]

I honestly think The AD at Montana Oday just spews misinformation to keep everyone in the dark. Or he really has no clue whats going on... or people just make stuff up about what he says.

Or the comments are strategic in purpose to encourage boosters & potential donors to open their wallets. After all, nobody associated with UM wants to see the program have to resort to reducing scholarships or worse, right?

Ri-damm-diculous.

[Jackman]

Keep in mind that the real CAA, the all-sports conference, has 12 members, 6 of which do not play football at all. So any time this subject comes up, what you're really talking about is a new conference with former CAA members at its core. The 6 no-football CAA members aren't going to approve a FBS move, because they know they'll soon be looking for new homes if they do. That adds an extra element of difficulty to get a move organized, because the members who might be interested don't have a commissioner or other point man working just for them, and they would need non-CAA members to be involved to meet the minimum 8 members required for a FBS conference.

[49RFootballNow]

Keep in mind that the real CAA, the all-sports conference, has 12 members, 6 of which do not play football at all. So any time this subject comes up, what you're really talking about is a new conference with former CAA members at its core. The 6 no-football CAA members aren't going to approve a FBS move, because they know they'll soon be looking for new homes if they do. That adds an extra element of difficulty to get a move organized, because the members who might be interested don't have a commissioner or other point man working just for them, and they would need non-CAA members to be involved to meet the minimum 8 members required for a FBS conference.

Would a new conference that still had 6 members who have played each other for 3 years straight (in the CAA) still qualify for automatic post-season NCAA play, or would they have to wait 3 years? I know the 6 team/3 years together rule is being reviewed by the NCAA right now.

This conference might work:

Charlotte
Georgia State
Georgia Southern
James Madison
Liberty
Old Dominion
Delaware
Temple
UMass
Fordham?????
App St.?????
Coastal Carolina?????

But I'd want as basketball-onlies:

VCU
Dayton
Xavier
George Washington

That's a viable football and basketball league.

I'd take any current CAA football school as well but I don't think the others want to move to FBS.

They'll need at least 3 (hopefully more) bowl games in:

Atlanta
Charlotte
Washington
Baltimore
Philadelpia
New York City

[henfan]

49er- before throwing a bunch of names together, it's probably a good idea to examine how a proposed conglomoration would mesh with respect to other sports, institutional missions & philosophies, etc. Where do top ranked MLAX programs at UMass & UD go, for example? How about Dayton's low equivalancy FB program? How does App St. & GaSoU address the added travel costs shipping their Olympic sports teams up and down the east coast and to what advantage? With all due respect, this group wouldn't exactly strike fear into the hearts of the major D-I FB conferences.

On the surface and purely from the FB standpoint, lumping these schools together might SEEM like a good idea but, alas, it's not all about FB for the majority of the schools mentioned, most of whom lose money on FB.

[49RFootballNow]

49er- before throwing a bunch of names together, it's probably a good idea to examine how a proposed conglomoration would mesh with respect to other sports, institutional missions & philosophies, etc. Where do top ranked MLAX programs at UMass & UD go, for example? How about Dayton's low equivalancy FB program? How does App St. & GaSoU address the added travel costs shipping their Olympic sports teams up and down the east coast and to what advantage? With all due respect, this group wouldn't exactly strike fear into the hearts of the major D-I FB conferences.

On the surface and purely from the FB standpoint, lumping these schools together might SEEM like a good idea but, alas, it's not all about FB for the majority of the schools mentioned, most of whom lose money on FB.

I didn't know we were going into academics to form hypothetical athletic conferences. I seriously doubt Men's Lacrosse will be a major or deciding factor in forming conferences for your revenue sports. I'm sure odd non-revenue sports can find a home if the new conference can't support them. Dayton plays non-scholarship football and doesn't look to want to upgrade. If they do they'll find a home in the new conference if they want, just like Villanova would be in the Big East if they upgraded. Divisional or pod play can address travel concerns for teams at the extreme geographic ends of the conference.

I don't see a significant academic difference between any of these institutions that would preclude their mutual association in athletics.

[Jackman]

Where do top ranked MLAX programs at UMass & UD go, for example?


That's the easy part. If Towson intends to hang on to this group for dear life the way some of their fans think they would, you'd already have a core group of UMass, UD, TU and Penn State, and the real question would be what the hell would Hofstra and Drexel do. Plus there's always the ECAC. Men's Lax is the least of the problems with this idea.


How does App St. & GaSoU address the added travel costs shipping their Olympic sports teams up and down the east coast and to what advantage?


Just choose sports that don't travel much. Many only have one conference meet per year. Also, maybe the far northern members and far southern members could agree not to play the same non-revenue team sports.


With all due respect, this group wouldn't exactly strike fear into the hearts of the major D-I FB conferences.


Gotta start somewhere. Wasn't that long ago that this conference didn't strike that much fear into other FCS conferences either.

[rufus]

I personally think that in the next 5-10 years, we'll either see some form of a CAA move to FBS football or the FCS CAA as we know it will not exist. What about the possiblity of the CAA sponsoring an FBS football-only conference?

JMU
ODU
Georgia St.
Delaware
Temple
UMass
Charlotte
App State

Everyone gets to keep their existing conferences for other sports. The A10 teams already play football as associate members in other conferences, so it's really no different from the current state for them. App State could stay in the SoCon and play football in the CAA, just like Davidson plays football in the Pioneer League.

Now I agree that this conference won't "strike fear into the hearts of the major D-I FB conferences", but it would be no worse than the MAC, WAC, or Sun Belt.

If the CAA doesn't make the push for FBS, I think you'll see JMU, ODU, and Georgia State make a push out of the CAA. I could see Delaware coming along under the right circumstances.

[henfan]

I didn't know we were going into academics to form hypothetical athletic conferences. I seriously doubt Men's Lacrosse will be a major or deciding factor in forming conferences for your revenue sports. I'm sure odd non-revenue sports can find a home if the new conference can't support them. Dayton plays non-scholarship football and doesn't look to want to upgrade. If they do they'll find a home in the new conference if they want, just like Villanova would be in the Big East if they upgraded. Divisional or pod play can address travel concerns for teams at the extreme geographic ends of the conference.

I don't see a significant academic difference between any of these institutions that would preclude their mutual association in athletics.

No offense intended but hypothetical conferences are just that and continue to remain in the realm of message board fantasy. Back in the real world, many NCAA D-I mid-major schools make decisions about the future of their athletic departments based on what is right and good for their institutions, not particular sports teams.

It's not as easy as you suggest for Olympic sport teams to just find a home somewhere, nor is it terribly desirable for schools to pay for affiliate memberships and have to juggle multiple conference affiliations, where they have little control over the direction of those leagues. It also makes it more difficult to develop multi-sport rivalries when your teams play in multiple leagues. (Delaware's 'been there, done that' and doesn't seem to be in a huge rush to return to conference purgatory, as far as I can tell.)

While maybe seemingly hard to imagine for some, academic philsophies, particularly as they relate to sports, do indeed matter to BOTs and CEOs trying to market their schools to a majority that couldn't give a fig about how the campus football or hoop teams perform.

[henfan]

App State could stay in the SoCon and play football in the CAA, just like Davidson plays football in the Pioneer League.

Now I agree that this conference won't "strike fear into the hearts of the major D-I FB conferences", but it would be no worse than the MAC, WAC, or Sun Belt.

What leads you to believe that the SoCon would be fine with allowing ASU Olympic sports in the the league if they moved their FB program? The league wasn't fine allowing that exception for ETSU or VMI. (Davidson is an exception because their low equivalancy FB program was forced by the NCAA into D-I from D-III in 1993.)

The CAA is already on a competitive level with the MAC, WAC and Sun Belt without having to forego the expense of reclassification. Unless there's a huge pot of gold waiting for us, conference reclassification makes absolutely no sense at all right now, especially absent the opportunity to compete for a championship.

[49RFootballNow]

No offense intended but hypothetical conferences are just that and continue to remain in the realm of message board fantasy. Back in the real world, many NCAA D-I mid-major schools make decisions about the future of their athletic departments based on what is right and good for their institutions, not particular sports teams.

It's not as easy as you suggest for Olympic sport teams to just find a home somewhere, nor is it terribly desirable for schools to pay for affiliate memberships and have to juggle multiple conference affiliations, where they have little control over the direction of those leagues. It also makes it more difficult to develop multi-sport rivalries when your teams play in multiple leagues. (Delaware's 'been there, done that' and doesn't seem to be in a huge rush to return to conference purgatory, as far as I can tell.)

While maybe seemingly hard to imagine for some, academic philsophies, particularly as they relate to sports, do indeed matter to BOTs and CEOs trying to market their schools to a majority that couldn't give a fig about how the campus football or hoop teams perform.

Just curious but can I assume you don't think Delaware would be interested in moving up to FBS and/or being in a conference with some of the schools I listed? I'm curious as to why you think so if that is indeed your train of thought on the matter?

[rufus]

What leads you to believe that the SoCon would be fine with allowing ASU Olympic sports in the the league if they moved their FB program? The league wasn't fine allowing that exception for ETSU or VMI. (Davidson is an exception because their low equivalancy FB program was forced by the NCAA into D-I from D-III in 1993.)
Then offer them full membership in the CAA. I think they fit the profile (size, academics, etc.), and it would probably be an upgrade for them in most sports.


The CAA is already on a competitive level with the MAC, WAC and Sun Belt without having to forego the expense of reclassification. Unless there's a huge pot of gold waiting for us, conference reclassification makes absolutely no sense at all right now, especially absent the opportunity to compete for a championship.
Why not compete for championships in FBS? Boise State transitioned to FBS thirteen years ago, and you could argue that they could conceivably compete for a national championship now. I would actually take any BCS bowl over the FCS championship, based on money and publicity. Non-BCS FBS teams can get there. Boise State, TCU, Hawaii, and Utah (twice) have done it. Marshall (1999 and 2002) and Miami OH (2003) would have done it under the current BCS rules as well. That's roughly 10% of non-BCS teams in a 10-year period.

What percent of FCS teams have played in the national championship in the past 10 years? I would guess that the odds aren't terribly different.

[henfan]

Just curious but can I assume you don't think Delaware would be interested in moving up to FBS and/or being in a conference with some of the schools I listed?

I don't have any idea what UD would be interested in doing.

My GUESS based on their history is that they would not make the mistake of allowing a single sport to dictate the course of their entire AD, nor would they seek affiliations with schools or leagues that don't fit the model of how they'd like to market their school. Also, there would have to be a worthwhile financial incentive to encourage a change of conferences.

We won't even get into the logistics and costs of starting a brand new conference.

[wr70beh]

Then offer them full membership in the CAA. I think they fit the profile (size, academics, etc.), and it would probably be an upgrade for them in most sports.


Why not compete for championships in FBS? Boise State transitioned to FBS thirteen years ago, and you could argue that they could conceivably compete for a national championship now. I would actually take any BCS bowl over the FCS championship, based on money and publicity. Non-BCS FBS teams can get there. Boise State, TCU, Hawaii, and Utah (twice) have done it. Marshall (1999 and 2002) and Miami OH (2003) would have done it under the current BCS rules as well. That's roughly 10% of non-BCS teams in a 10-year period.

What percent of FCS teams have played in the national championship in the past 10 years? I would guess that the odds aren't terribly different.

You still couldn't compete for championships in FBS. Boise St. and Utah weren't set up to play for a national championship. They were just in a BCS bowl that had a higher payout than a regular bowl. Unless you're in a BCS conference, you're not playing for a BCS championship. The BCS would never allow it. They might let you into their party at the end and give you some money to make you happy, but you're not playing for a championship. This is based totally on the setup as it is right now.

A move to FBS by ANY FCS school is made for money and recognition, and the hope that they move to an NCAA-sponsored playoff at that level one day. As far as increasing the academic profile of the school, I don't think Boise State's academic profile has gone up ever since they started winning. Their athletic department has benefited, but not the school overall.

[mikebigg]

Wow... I thought you guys were adamant in your support of FCS. When the SWAC discussed with the MEAC about a Bowl game, we were bashed and asked "Why don't yall go FBS is you're not happy" (maybe not that direct quote but the message was clear). Now here you guys are talking about pulling the FCS power that be together for a move to FBS... Won't this hurt your playoffs? How is your looking at "what if" different from what the SWAC mentioned but got criticized for?

Waiting on replies....

[rufus]

You still couldn't compete for championships in FBS. Boise St. and Utah weren't set up to play for a national championship. They were just in a BCS bowl that had a higher payout than a regular bowl. Unless you're in a BCS conference, you're not playing for a BCS championship. The BCS would never allow it. They might let you into their party at the end and give you some money to make you happy, but you're not playing for a championship. This is based totally on the setup as it is right now.
I disagree with that statement, but I'm speculating just as much as you are. TCU was 2 points away from a probable BCS championship game appearance last season, but Texas beat Nebraska 13-12 and Cincinnati beat Pitt 45-44. Had those games ended slightly differently, TCU would have finished #2 in the BCS rankings. I know there are BCS conspiracy theorists that say the BCS would have simply gone around the rules and invited a lower ranked BCS team, but I think the public reaction to that move would have spelled the beginning of the end for the BCS.

Anyway, my point was that I would rather see JMU play in any BCS bowl over the FCS championship game, not just the BCS championship game. On the basis of money and exposure, there is really no comparison.

[rufus]

Wow... I thought you guys were adamant in your support of FCS. When the SWAC discussed with the MEAC about a Bowl game, we were bashed and asked "Why don't yall go FBS is you're not happy" (maybe not that direct quote but the message was clear). Now here you guys are talking about pulling the FCS power that be together for a move to FBS... Won't this hurt your playoffs? How is your looking at "what if" different from what the SWAC mentioned but got criticized for?

Waiting on replies....
JMU has some fans who love the FCS playoff system, but most would prefer FBS. I think you'll find very little support for FCS at ODU or Gerogia State. Delaware and UMass fans are a mixed bag. Most of the support for FCS really comes from the smaller schools in the CAA. The schools with ~20,000 - 30,000 students seem less likely to be supportive.

[mikebigg]

JMU has some fans who love the FCS playoff system, but most would prefer FBS. I think you'll find very little support for FCS at ODU or Gerogia State. Delaware and UMass fans are a mixed bag. Most of the support for FCS really comes from the smaller schools in the CAA. The schools with ~20,000 - 30,000 students seem less likely to be supportive.

I appreciate your honest response without trying to hem/haw about it... I understand your fans wanting to move up and agree that looking out for your program isn't being anti-playoffs. However, when the SWAC fans mention similar concerns we get attacked from seemingly all corners.

[ur2k]

I don't see a conference move as a whole. You fall in line below the MAC and Sun Belt - what's the benefit in that? Will you get ESPN games on at 2pm on a Weds afternoon? As a conference, you'd be seen as an FCS conference that just happened to reclassify.

Its more likely that individual schools move up when and if the opportunity presents itself.

[henfan]

Most of the support for FCS really comes from the smaller schools in the CAA. The schools with ~20,000 - 30,000 students seem less likely to be supportive.

Hard to generalize, IMO. Students probably have different opinions than alums and older fans, etc. Across the board though, I'd imagine that everyone prefers their school play at the highest level that makes sense both competitively and financially. The disagreement comes in when deciding what is competitively and financially feasible.

Most fans don't have to worry about the financial repercussions of FCS vs. FBS, so it's easy to lobby in favor of playing at the highest level. The hard part rests with universities, who have economic issues other than FB with which to contend.

Some fans do indeed enjoy the opportunity to watch their team compete in the NCAA's playoff system for a possible championship, while others might prefer the finality of a single minor bowl game with no shot at a championship. I don't know if there's a clear majority either way.

Hey, we all want the best for the teams & schools we love. It's hard to take issue with anyone who thinks that minor conference FBS football & a GMAC Bowl invite are terrific things. God bless 'em. I'd rather my team compete in a championship playoff, but that's just me.

[Jackman]

Old Dominion's AD made this comment at the end of this article today (http://hamptonroads.com.nyud.net/2010/06/fcs-conferences-still-worried-even-after-exhaling):

"When you look at it, the CAA is a group of I-AA football schools that might qualify for I-A under the guidelines if they felt it was the right thing to do.

"It puts the question on the table: What do we want to be?"


I think the concern that a fledgling FBS conference could end up being stuck playing in its own sandbox is matched by the concern that, if Montana and App State leave, the CAA would kind of be doing that at the FCS level too. Who becomes the big non-CAA name after they're gone, McNeese State? Montana's AD expressed the same concern if the CAA teams leave. The problem is, successful FCS programs keep leaving.

So if its somewhat a CAA sandbox at either level, I think the ODU AD's "What do we want to be?" question is valid.

[henfan]

The problem is, successful FCS programs keep leaving.

Which 'successful FCS programs' have left recently? WKU? xchinscratchx

Schools come and go all of the time and for a variety of reasons. That's been the nature of things in I-AA/FCS. Those that have left don't typically reclassify because they've been wildly successful at the FCS level. Those that have left have been replaced by strong programs like NDSU, SDSU, ODU, etc.

The FCS will be fine if one or two schools vamoose, even if an entire conference leaves. People have been predicting doom since 1978.

[jmufan999]

I don't see a conference move as a whole.

this is what keeps driving me nuts.... is there ANY precedent for an entire conference moving up from FCS (I-AA) to FBS (I-A)? has this ever happened? to my knowledge, it hasn't. we're spending a lot of time talking about something that seems very, very unlikely. it's hard enough to move up for just ONE school, no less an entire conference. all the schools would have to WANT to move, all would have to have the money to do so, all would have to have support from administration/fans, and all would have to do this at exactly the same time. besides all that, there may be some NCAA rule about creating a new FBS conference, i don't know.

again, i may be wrong and some conference may have done this, but i've never heard of it. doesn't mean it's impossible, just extremely unlikely.

[rufus]

this is what keeps driving me nuts.... is there ANY precedent for an entire conference moving up from FCS (I-AA) to FBS (I-A)?

MAC - 1982

[jmufan999]

MAC - 1982

i stand corrected. that's interesting, had no idea about that.

well, if moving up as a conference would mean we'd turn into the MAC, Part II... i'll pass.

[rufus]

i stand corrected. that's interesting, had no idea about that.

well, if moving up as a conference would mean we'd turn into the MAC, Part II... i'll pass.

Those are some questionable critical reasoning skills. You are really going to establish a causal relationship between that move and the lack of success in the MAC? I expect more from a JMU grad/student.

Is it not possible that the MAC's lack of success stems from its members' lackluster athletic budgets (sub-CAA), subpar facilities, Rust Belt markets, etc.?

[jmufan999]

Those are some questionable critical reasoning skills. You are really going to establish a causal relationship between that move and the lack of success in the MAC? I expect more from a JMU grad/student.

Is it not possible that the MAC's lack of success stems from its members' lackluster athletic budgets (sub-CAA), subpar facilities, Rust Belt markets, etc.?

last i checked, Ohio university was in the same state as OHIO STATE.

what state is Buffalo in? i forget. it starts with an N and it's a pretty big state. plenty of recruits to go around in NY.

Northern Illinois..... hmm.. i've heard of that area before.... Chicago? i think that's the name of the area. ever heard of it? it's time to take your CAA blinders off and check whether you're maybe a little too biased. there is nothing wrong with their "markets".

BESIDES all of that, as someone already stated, we would NOT become a BCS conference. if you disagree with that, then i would expect more from YOU.

if we're not a BCS conference, we're not playing for a national title. i agree with whoever said that earlier. you disagree, you don't need to repeat that. if you really believe TCU had a chance at playing for the national title game, you're out of your mind. how many times since the inception of the BCS has a team from a non-BCS conference played for a NC? ZERO. that would be 24 OUT OF 24 that have come from a BCS conference.

Boise State is not playing for a national title as long as they're in a non-BCS conference. you can have your crappy FBS conference, i like competing for national titles.

so if you'd like for the CAA to become the first non-BCS conference to EVER have a team play for a BCS title, don't hold your breath. i'll be on planet Earth watching my team compete in the playoffs.

[jmufan999]

I know there are BCS conspiracy theorists that say the BCS would have simply gone around the rules and invited a lower ranked BCS team, but I think the public reaction to that move would have spelled the beginning of the end for the BCS.

this is my favorite argument, by the way.

how outraged was the public when Auburn went undefeated in the nation's top conference and still got left out of the BCS title game? did public reaction make a LICK of difference? why do you think that TCU being left out would have mattered more than that? i can personally guarantee that there are far, far, far more Auburn fans in this country than TCU fans.

[rufus]

there is nothing wrong with their "markets".
Look, I'm just saying that the Rust Belt is not the country's best market. I am by no means saying that it is the only reason for the MAC's troubles, but it could at least be a contributing factor. The MAC's biggest problem is its members' lack of investment in their athletic programs.


BESIDES all of that, as someone already stated, we would NOT become a BCS conference. if you disagree with that, then i would expect more from YOU.
So you would expect more from me under this hypothetical scenario in which I disagree with you on this point? I suppose I would too. The thing is, I don't disagree with you.


if you really believe TCU had a chance at playing for the national title game, you're out of your mind. how many times since the inception of the BCS has a team from a non-BCS conference played for a NC? ZERO.
Really man? This is another logical fallacy. The fact that something has not happened, does not mean that it cannot happen. There have been a total of 12 BCS championship games. Do you really believe that 12 is a sufficient sample size to calculate the probability of a non-BCS team playing in the championship game?

I do believe that if Texas and Cinci had lost those close games, TCU would have finished at #2 in the BCS rankings. Looking at the BCS scores, this is not an unreasonable expectation. It is obviously speculation, but I do not think it's unreasonable. I also believe that if TCU had finished at #2, the BCS would have permitted them to play for the national championship.

You, on the other hand, believe that the BCS would done some combination of the following to keep TCU out of the championship:
1) Conspire with the AP, ESPN, Jeff Sagarin, the Seattle Times, and the New York Times to edit their polls/rankings, while also conspiring with every person who knows how to use Excel and recalculate the Sagarin ratings, etc.
2) Alter the BCS formula or input data (which is made public after the season)
3) Simply tell TCU that they can't play despite a #2 ranking

And I'm the one who's out of my mind? I'm actually a pretty cynical person, but that conspiracy theory is absolutely outlandish.

[jmufan999]

Really man? This is another logical falicy.

if you're going to try to use phrases you learned in Dr. Flage's Critical Thinking 101 class, at least spell them right. FALLACY. goodbye, credibility!


The fact that something has not happened, does not mean that it cannot happen. There have been a total of 12 BCS championship games. Do you really believe that 12 is a sufficient sample size to calculate the probability of a non-BCS team playing in the championship game?

this was a clever attempt. much more clever than you attempting to use words that you can't spell. what you did was take the 24 TOTAL teams that have played in the game, and cut the number in half by saying there are only 12 games. but there are TWO TEAMS in each game. or, two "opportunities" for a team to play in the NC game. 24 out of 24... you can't argue with that, so you did the best you could: you cut the number in half. that's all you could do. and to answer your question, ABSOLUTELY 24 out of 24 is WITHOUT QUESTION an appropriate sample size. what's a good number for you..... 300? 4,000? let me know what a good sample size for you would be and the rest of the world will revolve around what is convenient for you.

when a non-BCS team makes it, then you re-evaluate. that's part of being a rational human being. you don't get stuck on one idea. if the MEAC wins a playoff game anytime soon, then that streak would be broken. until then, one should not expect a MEAC team to win the national title. history speaks for itself.


I do believe that if Texas and Cinci had lost those close games, TCU would have finished at #2 in the BCS rankings. Looking at the BCS scores, this is not an unreasonable expectation. It is obviously speculation, but I do not think it's unreasonable. I also believe that if TCU had finished at #2, the BCS would have permitted them to play for the national championship.

that's great that you believe that. congrats. i believe that a flying spaghetti monster exists. anyone catch that reference?


You, on the other hand, believe that the BCS would done some combination of the following to keep TCU out of the championship:
1) Conspire with the AP, ESPN, Jeff Sagarin, the Seattle Times, and the New York Times to edit their polls/rankings, while also conspiring with every person who knows how to use Excel and recalculate the Sagarin ratings, etc.
2) Alter the BCS formula or input data (which is made public after the season)
3) Simply tell TCU that they can't play despite a #2 ranking

EVEN IF Nebraska and Pitt would have won, you can't prove TCU would have been there, because at least one of the factors in the computer rankings is margin of victory. in addition, we don't know how the voters would have voted... who knows what they would have done? there are WAY too many factors for you to say (even SPECULATE) that TCU would have gotten in IF those two games had gone differently.

i have 24 out of 24 teams that back up my argument... you have guesses and speculation.

[rufus]

The guy who doesn't know that sentences begin with a capital letter is criticizing my typo? Wow. I better fix it.

Don't act like my use of 12 was somehow intellectually dishonest. In order for a team to get into the national championship game, they need to finish with a ranking of #2 or better, which typically equates to a .9400-.9500 BCS average. There have been 12 opportunities for any given non-BCS team to cross that threshold, but it has never happened. I'm sure someone with some quant skills and too much free time could actually build a model to calculate the odds of an undefeated non-BCS team making it to the championship game. Of course that model would have a massive margin of error, because there's simply not enough BCS data out there. We can go with your 24 number, but it doesn't really change anything. Both 12 and 24 are very, very small samples.

Your "24 teams" don't really support your argument. It's like claiming that because no one has ever run a 3 minute mile, no one will ever run a 3 minute mile (and that's in a massive number of attempts).

My point is, your claim that the BCS will never allow a non-BCS team in is just as speculative as my contrary claim.

[superman7515]

Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (http://www.venganza.org/)

[ThompsonThe]

I personally think that in the next 5-10 years, we'll either see some form of a CAA move to FBS football or the FCS CAA as we know it will not exist. What about the possiblity of the CAA sponsoring an FBS football-only conference?

JMU
ODU
Georgia St.
Delaware
Temple
UMass
Charlotte
App State

Everyone gets to keep their existing conferences for other sports. The A10 teams already play football as associate members in other conferences, so it's really no different from the current state for them. App State could stay in the SoCon and play football in the CAA, just like Davidson plays football in the Pioneer League.

Now I agree that this conference won't "strike fear into the hearts of the major D-I FB conferences", but it would be no worse than the MAC, WAC, or Sun Belt.

If the CAA doesn't make the push for FBS, I think you'll see JMU, ODU, and Georgia State make a push out of the CAA. I could see Delaware coming along under the right circumstances.
I really do not like the idea of not being a full member of a conference. Hard to develop rivalries when you split your sports associations. I am pretty sure that our administration feels the same way. Would not be any worse travel, it seems, than App State being in the Sun Belt, MAC, or C-USA.


What leads you to believe that the SoCon would be fine with allowing ASU Olympic sports in the the league if they moved their FB program? The league wasn't fine allowing that exception for ETSU or VMI. (Davidson is an exception because their low equivalancy FB program was forced by the NCAA into D-I from D-III in 1993.)

The CAA is already on a competitive level with the MAC, WAC and Sun Belt without having to forego the expense of reclassification. Unless there's a huge pot of gold waiting for us, conference reclassification makes absolutely no sense at all right now, especially absent the opportunity to compete for a championship.That and a $12.00 bill will get you a cup of coffee. LOL


Then offer them full membership in the CAA. I think they fit the profile (size, academics, etc.), and it would probably be an upgrade for them in most sports.


Why not compete for championships in FBS? Boise State transitioned to FBS thirteen years ago, and you could argue that they could conceivably compete for a national championship now. I would actually take any BCS bowl over the FCS championship, based on money and publicity. Non-BCS FBS teams can get there. Boise State, TCU, Hawaii, and Utah (twice) have done it. Marshall (1999 and 2002) and Miami OH (2003) would have done it under the current BCS rules as well. That's roughly 10% of non-BCS teams in a 10-year period.

What percent of FCS teams have played in the national championship in the past 10 years? I would guess that the odds aren't terribly different.

The CAA would be a hard group to agree on anything that changing. Seems like their administrators are an independent lot.

[ngineer]

Not in its present form. Such a move will blow the conference apart. Too many schools who cannot meet (or would want to mee) the requirements to move to that level. Richmond is way too small and UNH and Maine certainly do not have the necessary attendance levels. Yes, Delaware, JMU, could make such a move themselves in the future, but why? Villanova does not have the facilities or fan base to support--they failed before hence, they're dropping of the sport back in the 1980's. The CAA will die by over expanding adn thinking it's bigger than it really is. Sort of like Boston Market which had great success and then believed it could expand to anywhere it wanted, only to implode. Some people are never satisfied, and bigger aint necessarily better. The CAA has a high quality football product right now. I cannot understand why they would want destroy it.

[LeadBolt]

Not in its present form. Such a move will blow the conference apart. Too many schools who cannot meet (or would want to mee) the requirements to move to that level. Richmond is way too small and UNH and Maine certainly do not have the necessary attendance levels. Yes, Delaware, JMU, could make such a move themselves in the future, but why? Villanova does not have the facilities or fan base to support--they failed before hence, they're dropping of the sport back in the 1980's. The CAA will die by over expanding adn thinking it's bigger than it really is. Sort of like Boston Market which had great success and then believed it could expand to anywhere it wanted, only to implode. Some people are never satisfied, and bigger aint necessarily better. The CAA has a high quality football product right now. I cannot understand why they would want destroy it.

Amen!

[rufus]

Some schools might want to "destroy" that because they see an opportunity to compete at a higher level. Why would a school want to go and do that? For most schools, it is the potential for increased revenues and/or increased name recognition, which may in some cases result in more applications, greater selectivity, and ultimately an improved academic profile. It's debatable whether prominent athletic programs actually have that effect, but the effect is at least perceived by many administrators. The Ivy League and Patriot League schools certainly seem to be doing fine academically without big time football. On the other hand, Virginia Tech saw drastic increases in admissions selectivity once their football team started winning regularly. We can't establish a causal relationship without a controlled experiment, so I won't spend any more time on this point.

Academic impact aside, there is the clear potential for increased revenues with a move to FBS football. Of course, there is also the possibility that those increased revenues will not fully offset the increased costs of funding that program. So while moving to FBS should increase expected returns, it may also increase the variability of those expected returns. It's up to each school to evaluate these expected returns and variability when deciding in which division to compete.

Some will choose FBS, others will choose FCS, and still others will choose to drop football entirely. In each case, the schools will attempt to make the decision that suits them best. I've never understood why people get worked up about other teams moving up or dropping football entirely. Each school has to do what makes sense for itself.

[LeadBolt]

Some schools might want to "destroy" that because they see an opportunity to compete at a higher level. Why would a school want to go and do that? For most schools, it is the potential for increased revenues and/or increased name recognition, which may in some cases result in more applications, greater selectivity, and ultimately an improved academic profile. It's debatable whether prominent athletic programs actually have that effect, but the effect is at least perceived by many administrators. The Ivy League and Patriot League schools certainly seem to be doing fine academically without big time football. On the other hand, Virginia Tech saw drastic increases in admissions selectivity once their football team started winning regularly. We can't establish a causal relationship without a controlled experiment, so I won't spend any more time on this point.

Academic impact aside, there is the clear potential for increased revenues with a move to FBS football. Of course, there is also the possibility that those increased revenues will not fully offset the increased costs of funding that program. So while moving to FBS should increase expected returns, it may also increase the variability of those expected returns. It's up to each school to evaluate these expected returns and variability when deciding in which division to compete.

Some will choose FBS, others will choose FCS, and still others will choose to drop football entirely. In each case, the schools will attempt to make the decision that suits them best. I've never understood why people get worked up about other teams moving up or dropping football entirely. Each school has to do what makes sense for itself.

How true that each school should and will choose for themselves!

The CAA is not homogenous in its types and sizes of schools or their visions, therefore it will eventually break apart. Trying to force the issue on a conference basis, rather than an individual school basis will speed up its demise. It has a great product today on a FCS level, but that will only last as long as it stays together in FCS. At the FBS level its product is mediocre.

If the FBS evolves into super conferences as it appears it will, the financial rewards will shrink for teams at the lower FCS level and I don't think your financial reward argument will hold.