(01-25-2013 10:52 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-25-2013 09:39 AM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  If schools like this continue to move up to FBS, there is no way the Big Five can contract. They'll lose voting control over football matters within the NCAA. That's at lease one reason why all this ACC implosion talk is overblown.

Actually what the Gang of 5 have to worry about are two possibilities:
1) FBS/FCS distinction gets thrown out, making G of 5 a Gang of 15 sharing the same money and status.
2) The Big 4 or 5 simply leave the NCAA.

I keep thinking this is inevitable.

(01-25-2013 02:17 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(01-25-2013 01:59 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(01-24-2013 08:49 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  They are a good get for FBS. Mizzou St would be the only other FBS program besides Mizzou that plays at that level...am I correct? The population size of Missouri would easily support them.

I always wondered why a state with well over six million people only has one FBS school. I live in Miss now and even they have three.

No kidding. Politics? I must say I don't like to see many FCS move up to pressure the bigger conferences any more....or maybe they aren't pressured because their pie is cut already and FCS move ups is just hurting the lower five more which weakens some of the conferences more. I wish some of the MAC schools could be go down to FCS so some of the bigger FCS schools could move up without watering down the FBS division.

What a waste of a post. Totally agree. The MAC should drop a couple teams so we can invite more Texas schools. Since obviously FBS hasn't been watered down enough with those. EMU might be the only valid argument on this one otherwise maybe by MAC you meant to say Sun Belt who seems to be the new feeder conference. Almost every MAC school has made an appearance in the top 25 the last decade. Don't see how that doesn't translate into belonging over teams with no football credible history or startup programs.

(01-25-2013 07:15 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(01-25-2013 02:17 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(01-25-2013 01:59 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(01-24-2013 08:49 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  They are a good get for FBS. Mizzou St would be the only other FBS program besides Mizzou that plays at that level...am I correct? The population size of Missouri would easily support them.

I always wondered why a state with well over six million people only has one FBS school. I live in Miss now and even they have three.

No kidding. Politics? I must say I don't like to see many FCS move up to pressure the bigger conferences any more....or maybe they aren't pressured because their pie is cut already and FCS move ups is just hurting the lower five more which weakens some of the conferences more. I wish some of the MAC schools could be go down to FCS so some of the bigger FCS schools could move up without watering down the FBS division.

What a waste of a post. Totally agree. The MAC should drop a couple teams so we can invite more Texas schools. Since obviously FBS hasn't been watered down enough with those. EMU might be the only valid argument on this one otherwise maybe by MAC you meant to say Sun Belt who seems to be the new feeder conference. Almost every MAC school has made an appearance in the top 25 the last decade. Don't see how that doesn't translate into belonging over teams with no football credible history or startup programs.

The MAC contains the major statewide residential campuses of the the states in which it has schools (non-land grant).

Michigan: WMU, CMU, EMU
Ohio: Kent, BG, Ohio, Miami
Indiana: Ball State
Illinois: Northern Illinois

There are a lot of of other minor public universities operating in those states but those are primarily the residential schools.

EMU while it doesn't have much of a reputation is like the UC-Irvine of the MAC, its still considered a tier above publics like Oakland, Ferris State, Northern Michigan and Grand Valley State.

Toledo and Akron are more questionable, IMO as to whether they fit into the conference from a role standpoint.

Missouri State may also be questioning the future of the MVC. Creighton is likely gone to the post-football BIg East and Evansville is considering the Horizon League. If the post-football Big East picks up four from the Atlantic 10, the Atlantic 10 could reload at the expense of the Missouri Valley.

Creighton - Big East (C7)
Wichita State - Summit
Missouri State - Sun Belt
Southern Illinois - Atlantic 10
Northern Iowa - Summit
Drake - Atlantic 10
Illinois State - MAC
Bradley - Atlantic 10
Indiana State - Atlantic 10
Evansville - Horizon

(01-25-2013 10:50 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  Missouri State may also be questioning the future of the MVC. Creighton is likely gone to the post-football BIg East and Evansville is considering the Horizon League. If the post-football Big East picks up four from the Atlantic 10, the Atlantic 10 could reload at the expense of the Missouri Valley.

Creighton - Big East (C7)
Wichita State - Summit
Missouri State - Sun Belt
Southern Illinois - Atlantic 10
Northern Iowa - Summit
Drake - Atlantic 10
Illinois State - MAC
Bradley - Atlantic 10
Indiana State - Atlantic 10
Evansville - Horizon

No way the shockers are forced to the summit. They're arguably the second best program in the mvc

(01-25-2013 10:50 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  Illinois State - MAC

NO

STupid yankee question:

IF Arkansas can support two FBS teams, why can't Missouri?

Are their any plans to add a student fee for athletics? If he is doing this as part of a FBS plan, Missouri St will have to add a fee as competing in FBS with an $11.6 million athletic budget is extremely difficult and maybe impossible depending upon their title IX situation. We were in a similar position a year ago and our President pushed forward a student vote for a fee increase which passed and was approved by the state board of regents. This added $4 million to our budget and will put us in the $17 million range in FBS.

We will find out how serious Missouri state is if the President begins to talk about fee increases. Otherwise, I would say this could just be politics and posturing so that he can say he tried, but FBS was not in the cards. I would say it will take them a year to be ready to even accept an invite. No President will pursue or accept An invite if the money is not lined up.

http://www.the-standard.org/sports/budge...f6878.html

And considering in the last 20 years they have never come close to making the FCS playoffs,their best season is 6-5, and their attendance was only 9,600, it just seems like FBS is not practicable.

(01-25-2013 05:51 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(01-25-2013 05:44 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(01-25-2013 03:45 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(01-24-2013 08:49 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  They are a good get for FBS. Mizzou St would be the only other FBS program besides Mizzou that plays at that level...am I correct? The population size of Missouri would easily support them.

Any college football fan in Missouri is already a tiger fan. So while MSU *could* find support it's not a given.

Not exactly true. While there is alot of Tiger fans in state, there are alot of Kansas, K-State, Nebraska, Illinois, Iowa, Iowa State and Oklahoma fans as well. Not to mention the thousands of alumni that would go to games and watch on tv if we were in FBS. Alot would stop being Wal-Mart fans of the other big regional schools. There is a market in Missouri for a school to get 25k to 40k in attendance if done right. Heck we average around 10k now with a lousy FCS team.

And the Missouri population is anything but centralized...

Compared to New York... Yes, Yes it is

(01-25-2013 10:50 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  Missouri State may also be questioning the future of the MVC. Creighton is likely gone to the post-football BIg East and Evansville is considering the Horizon League. If the post-football Big East picks up four from the Atlantic 10, the Atlantic 10 could reload at the expense of the Missouri Valley.

Creighton - Big East (C7)
Wichita State - Summit
Missouri State - Sun Belt
Southern Illinois - Atlantic 10
Northern Iowa - Summit
Drake - Atlantic 10
Illinois State - MAC
Bradley - Atlantic 10
Indiana State - Atlantic 10
Evansville - Horizon

The future is the big question for the MVC.

I'm not sure that outside of Creighton and Evansville anyone has a serious offer from somewhere else but with the new playoff revenue sharing and possible pooling of bowl games any FBS offer would have to be considered a good one.

The SBC could surprise by taking Missouri State into the conference along with Lamar and NMSU. These are the type of schools that CUSA isn't going to target in the future. CUSA could take Georgia State shifting everything to the West for the SBC.

SBC Football
NMSU, Tx State, Lamar, ULM, ULL, USA, Troy, Ark St, Missouri St, WKU

This would make the SBC a lot more stable moving forward.

(01-26-2013 08:29 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  STupid yankee question:

IF Arkansas can support two FBS teams, why can't Missouri?

Traditionally in Missouri, it's been Mizzou on top and every other public school placed a tier below them, they were the first land-grant college after all. The directional schools like SEMO and commuter schools like UMKC hung in DII for a while until they moved up as they stood out, though they've never seriously threatened Mizzou for a significant share of the state. Truman State and Missouri S&T emerged academically over time too, but Missouri State has been the only one to enter a position of relative power, mainly because Springfield is a decent sized city and the school has really grown over time.

A little bit of the problem might be that there's too many public 4-year colleges too, but it all goes back to how Mizzou was placed on top, not it's really their fault. Like I said on another post on this thread, a school like UMKC, SLU, or UMSL could've played the role of Cincinnati to Ohio State if the athletic program developed differently over time, but that obviously never happened.

I have no doubt that Benson is burning up the phone line to MSU. They should be neck in neck with App and GaSo on the SBC expansion radar with what they are planning.

(01-26-2013 11:58 AM)ChooChoo Wrote:  I have no doubt that Benson is burning up the phone line to MSU. They should be neck in neck with App and GaSo on the SBC expansion radar with what they are planning.

Missouri State would be an excellent replacement in basketball for MTSU and help to retain WKU in the conference where if not taken by CUSA they may be tempted to move to the MAC.

This is a good time for MSU to consider a time to leave the Missouri Valley if Creighton's departure is going to throw the TV contract in question.

How does a President accept a bid with an $11.6 million budget and title IX to address? I just don't see how their President can address that by June 1. Missouri St is a little late for this round of realignment. Also, with the importance of conference strength in the new payout system, Missouri State's stock dropped as their best record in the last 20 years is 6-5. Without a big market this is too much to overcome. Also seems to be a lack on interest with attendance at 9,600.

(01-26-2013 12:27 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  How does a President accept a bid with an $11.6 million budget and title IX to address? I just don't see how their President can address that by June 1. Missouri St is a little late for this round of realignment. Also, with the importance of conference strength in the new payout system, Missouri State's stock dropped as their best record in the last 20 years is 6-5. Without a big market this is too much to overcome. Also seems to be a lack on interest with attendance at 9,600.

Better than UConn when they got invited to the BE.

(01-26-2013 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-26-2013 12:27 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  How does a President accept a bid with an $11.6 million budget and title IX to address? I just don't see how their President can address that by June 1. Missouri St is a little late for this round of realignment. Also, with the importance of conference strength in the new payout system, Missouri State's stock dropped as their best record in the last 20 years is 6-5. Without a big market this is too much to overcome. Also seems to be a lack on interest with attendance at 9,600.

Better than UConn when they got invited to the BE.

I assume you mean BE FB. UConn got a free pass there because they were a member already. Somewhat like Charlotte getting back into C-USA--being an OG counts sometimes.

(01-26-2013 12:27 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  How does a President accept a bid with an $11.6 million budget and title IX to address? I just don't see how their President can address that by June 1. Missouri St is a little late for this round of realignment. Also, with the importance of conference strength in the new payout system, Missouri State's stock dropped as their best record in the last 20 years is 6-5. Without a big market this is too much to overcome. Also seems to be a lack on interest with attendance at 9,600.

9,600 attendance is pretty good considering our record of late, imagine how much it would increase with a winning record or actually playing a school anyone has ever heard of before. The $11.6 budget doesn't include our new $67 million dollar basketball arena that is already getting a $2 million locker room update, the $32 million baseball stadium we play at. The $40 million football stadium expansion in the works and brand new softball complex. They are also planning on adding 2 new women's sports in the next year. The soccer and track teams are going to get a brand new facility as they are moving out of the football stadium next year. To look at the official budget number doesn't really reflect how much money has been and will be spent on facilities.

(01-26-2013 01:06 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-26-2013 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-26-2013 12:27 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  How does a President accept a bid with an $11.6 million budget and title IX to address? I just don't see how their President can address that by June 1. Missouri St is a little late for this round of realignment. Also, with the importance of conference strength in the new payout system, Missouri State's stock dropped as their best record in the last 20 years is 6-5. Without a big market this is too much to overcome. Also seems to be a lack on interest with attendance at 9,600.

Better than UConn when they got invited to the BE.

I assume you mean BE FB. UConn got a free pass there because they were a member already. Somewhat like Charlotte getting back into C-USA--being an OG counts sometimes.

The point is UConn has made some bowls and is averaging 35-40k despite being mediocre in FCS. Missouri State has similar upward potential. I would contrast that to Appalachian State and Montana who draw better than a lot of FBS schools and could compete decently in the Sun Belt or MAC right away, but have probably peaked out as far as attendance. Both are in sparesely populated areas and Appalachian already has 5 going on 6 FBS programs in a state w/o a lot of fb talent.

(01-26-2013 01:19 PM)msu_bears Wrote:  

(01-26-2013 12:27 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  How does a President accept a bid with an $11.6 million budget and title IX to address? I just don't see how their President can address that by June 1. Missouri St is a little late for this round of realignment. Also, with the importance of conference strength in the new payout system, Missouri State's stock dropped as their best record in the last 20 years is 6-5. Without a big market this is too much to overcome. Also seems to be a lack on interest with attendance at 9,600.

9,600 attendance is pretty good considering our record of late, imagine how much it would increase with a winning record or actually playing a school anyone has ever heard of before. The $11.6 budget doesn't include our new $67 million dollar basketball arena that is already getting a $2 million locker room update, the $32 million baseball stadium we play at. The $40 million football stadium expansion in the works and brand new softball complex. They are also planning on adding 2 new women's sports in the next year. The soccer and track teams are going to get a brand new facility as they are moving out of the football stadium next year. To look at the official budget number doesn't really reflect how much money has been and will be spent on facilities.

Those are nice improvements and ones that are being considered, but that does not change the annual operating budget of $11.6 million which must be addressed. As far as winning, why would you expect that to suddenly improve in FBS when Missouri state has never even made the FCS playoffs. If anything it will get worse as the competition increases and the advantages MSU should have over other mostly smaller FCS schools is gone.

(01-26-2013 11:46 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(01-26-2013 08:29 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  STupid yankee question:

IF Arkansas can support two FBS teams, why can't Missouri?

Traditionally in Missouri, it's been Mizzou on top and every other public school placed a tier below them, they were the first land-grant college after all. The directional schools like SEMO and commuter schools like UMKC hung in DII for a while until they moved up as they stood out, though they've never seriously threatened Mizzou for a significant share of the state. Truman State and Missouri S&T emerged academically over time too, but Missouri State has been the only one to enter a position of relative power, mainly because Springfield is a decent sized city and the school has really grown over time.

A little bit of the problem might be that there's too many public 4-year colleges too, but it all goes back to how Mizzou was placed on top, not it's really their fault. Like I said on another post on this thread, a school like UMKC, SLU, or UMSL could've played the role of Cincinnati to Ohio State if the athletic program developed differenntly over time, but that obviously never happened.

The regional normal school idea was pretty decent concept for early 1900s when it started but in current times not as much. But it sure has helped the MIAA dominate D2 sports espeically since the NCC folded.