(02-22-2013 04:15 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  If a conference has the best Gof5 football team two of the three sections add money to the conference with the best team.
That would add what $12,000,000 to $15,000,000 to the conference for each year that it has the best football team.
And they estimate it will go up considerably soon. So sounds as if football could bring a lot more money to a conference.

(02-22-2013 07:42 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  The CFP is going to pull in more like 12 to 26 million depending if a conference hits all performance elevators.

But wouldn't the ADDED amount of having the best football team amount to an additional $12 million to $15 million, in addition to what the conference would make otherwise? Seems like that would be about the added money brought in by a successful conference football team. Not even considering the overall money.
Plus it would help the conference with the good football teams tremendously in their TV/media deals.

(02-22-2013 11:16 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(02-22-2013 04:15 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  If a conference has the best Gof5 football team two of the three sections add money to the conference with the best team.
That would add what $12,000,000 to $15,000,000 to the conference for each year that it has the best football team.
And they estimate it will go up considerably soon. So sounds as if football could bring a lot more money to a conference.

(02-22-2013 07:42 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  The CFP is going to pull in more like 12 to 26 million depending if a conference hits all performance elevators.

But wouldn't the ADDED amount of having the best football team amount to an additional $12 million to $15 million, in addition to what the conference would make otherwise? Seems like that would be about the added money brought in by a successful conference football team. Not even considering the overall money.
Plus it would help the conference with the good football teams tremendously in their TV/media deals.

My calculations are that with all the elevators such as being Top G5 conference during the regular season overall along with the most ranked teams and placing a team in an Access bowl would net a conference in total around 26 million.

A last place finishing conference on all accounts will be looking at 12 million. I should go back over my numbers that I placed up on the MAC just to be sure.

That would be about a $14,000,000 difference, so that sounds within line of the additional money that a conference could make in a year from having the best Gof5 team would think.

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 11:51 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Chris I don't think the western teams are thrilled about going into North Carolina or deeper into Georgia. I suspect they would prefer a Chattanooga/Missouri State solution if either is prepared to go FBS.

Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

Since when is averaging 11,000+ to watch a 2-9 FCS (which here in big 12/SEC country is viewed the same as D2) football team struggling with attendance? This area is DYING for another FBS team and Missouri is the largest state in the US to only have one.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

(02-22-2013 09:36 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 11:51 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Chris I don't think the western teams are thrilled about going into North Carolina or deeper into Georgia. I suspect they would prefer a Chattanooga/Missouri State solution if either is prepared to go FBS.

Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

Sounds like a good way to end up busted to me.

(02-22-2013 09:57 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-22-2013 09:36 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 11:51 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Chris I don't think the western teams are thrilled about going into North Carolina or deeper into Georgia. I suspect they would prefer a Chattanooga/Missouri State solution if either is prepared to go FBS.

Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

Sounds like a good way to end up busted to me.

Agreed... if it in in fact the case, I would be pretty fuming.

(02-22-2013 10:00 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-22-2013 09:57 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-22-2013 09:36 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 11:51 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Chris I don't think the western teams are thrilled about going into North Carolina or deeper into Georgia. I suspect they would prefer a Chattanooga/Missouri State solution if either is prepared to go FBS.

Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

Sounds like a good way to end up busted to me.

Agreed... if it in in fact the case, I would be pretty fuming.

I don't question the information, but I don't understand what makes the MAC more interesting than the Sun Belt for MoState. At least not as it looks right now, with WKU and the Arkansas schools in the SBC. Will Akron and Central Michigan sell more tickets in Springfield than Texas State and South Alabama? Or is it basketball or Athletics department quality overall? Or academics? Someone please enlighten me, because in my mind, Sun Belt in its current configurarion looks pretty close to perfect for Missouri State.

Missouri State is already a MAC member in multiple sports. I think that's where the attraction comes from. Also, Missouri as a state tends to have a slightly more midwestern culture as opposed to a southern one.

The MAC is a little bit of ahead of the Sun Belt in terms of bowls, but that can be a double-edged sword-If more teams from a conference call qualify a bowl it may make it harder MSU to qualify for a bowl themselves.

If the Sun Belt loses any more teams, they may be some of the closest ones to MSU (WKU, Arkansas State, Louisiana).

(02-22-2013 09:36 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 11:51 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Chris I don't think the western teams are thrilled about going into North Carolina or deeper into Georgia. I suspect they would prefer a Chattanooga/Missouri State solution if either is prepared to go FBS.

Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

Since when is averaging 11,000+ to watch a 2-9 FCS (which here in big 12/SEC country is viewed the same as D2) football team struggling with attendance? This area is DYING for another FBS team and Missouri is the largest state in the US to only have one.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

Missouri St averaged 8,700 in attendance so they almost need to double it to get to 15,000.

Sun Belt is better off staying away. The last thing they need is another school that doesn't want to be there and is immediately looking to leave and could have the opportunity to do so.

The Mac seems to be considerably more stable. At least up until now.

(02-23-2013 07:36 AM)uakronkid Wrote:  Missouri State is already a MAC member in multiple sports. I think that's where the attraction comes from. Also, Missouri as a state tends to have a slightly more midwestern culture as opposed to a southern one.

Really depends on the part of the state you are in. Missouri, the old "Gateway to the West" has a very different feel depending on where you are.

Start a little north of St. Louis and draw a line toward the SW at about a 40 degree angle and the region below that line was pro-secession. Their history, culture and economy has been more tied to the south. Walk around St. Louis on a summer weekend and you will see people wearing shirts from teams and places in Arkansas, Tennessee, and Kentucky and plenty of license plates from those states. Go north of I-70 and people are more midwestern oriented. The western area is more Great Plains oriented.

With Mizzou now in the SEC the orientation wil shift more southern. In Arkansas the change has meant with the exception of loving the Cowboys, people are far less Texas oriented than 20 years ago.

(02-22-2013 09:36 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 11:51 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Chris I don't think the western teams are thrilled about going into North Carolina or deeper into Georgia. I suspect they would prefer a Chattanooga/Missouri State solution if either is prepared to go FBS.

Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

Then Missouri State's administration is living in fantasy land.

Mountain West: They may go to 16 but that is going to be with BYU, Tulsa, SMU, Houston. Perhaps Tulane finds a MW lifeboat. The MW has never added an FCS school though so Missouri State may as well forget about it.

Conference USA: This league does like the FCS upgrade but I cannot see them adding Missouri State before Arkansas State which is a whole state closer and established with a good FBS team. No chance without a Top 50 local media market.

Mid American: The MAC hasn't looked west for membership in 15+ years. All the emphasis has been placed on building east for highly populated markets. Schools like Delaware and JMU fit more in with Ohio and Buffalo than what Missouri State fits in with Northern Illinois and Ball State culturally.

(02-24-2013 01:18 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-22-2013 09:36 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 11:51 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Chris I don't think the western teams are thrilled about going into North Carolina or deeper into Georgia. I suspect they would prefer a Chattanooga/Missouri State solution if either is prepared to go FBS.

Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

Then Missouri State's administration is living in fantasy land.

Mountain West: They may go to 16 but that is going to be with BYU, Tulsa, SMU, Houston. Perhaps Tulane finds a MW lifeboat. The MW has never added an FCS school though so Missouri State may as well forget about it.

Conference USA: This league does like the FCS upgrade but I cannot see them adding Missouri State before Arkansas State which is a whole state closer and established with a good FBS team. No chance without a Top 50 local media market.

Mid American: The MAC hasn't looked west for membership in 15+ years. All the emphasis has been placed on building east for highly populated markets. Schools like Delaware and JMU fit more in with Ohio and Buffalo than what Missouri State fits in with Northern Illinois and Ball State culturally.

The MWC may go to 16 if the BE falls completely apart; however, they would have to be willing to give all of the teams you mentioned (with the exception of Tulsa) a Boise-type deal to lure them away unless the BE folds first.

The most likely additions for the MWC (I would think) would be of the following schools, depending on how many members they wanted to expand with: UTEP, UTSA, Tulsa, NMSU (New Mexico advocated them last time around if I remember correctly) and Montana. If Montana comes they will bring along Montana State for the ride.

(02-24-2013 02:14 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(02-24-2013 01:18 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-22-2013 09:36 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 11:51 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Chris I don't think the western teams are thrilled about going into North Carolina or deeper into Georgia. I suspect they would prefer a Chattanooga/Missouri State solution if either is prepared to go FBS.

Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

Then Missouri State's administration is living in fantasy land.

Mountain West: They may go to 16 but that is going to be with BYU, Tulsa, SMU, Houston. Perhaps Tulane finds a MW lifeboat. The MW has never added an FCS school though so Missouri State may as well forget about it.

Conference USA: This league does like the FCS upgrade but I cannot see them adding Missouri State before Arkansas State which is a whole state closer and established with a good FBS team. No chance without a Top 50 local media market.

Mid American: The MAC hasn't looked west for membership in 15+ years. All the emphasis has been placed on building east for highly populated markets. Schools like Delaware and JMU fit more in with Ohio and Buffalo than what Missouri State fits in with Northern Illinois and Ball State culturally.

The MWC may go to 16 if the BE falls completely apart; however, they would have to be willing to give all of the teams you mentioned (with the exception of Tulsa) a Boise-type deal to lure them away unless the BE folds first.

The most likely additions for the MWC (I would think) would be of the following schools, depending on how many members they wanted to expand with: UTEP, UTSA, Tulsa, NMSU (New Mexico advocated them last time around if I remember correctly) and Montana. If Montana comes they will bring along Montana State for the ride.

mo. state is not far from stAte so would make good addition to sun belt and is comparable to the other schools in that conference. tulsa would certainly have no desire to join the mwc. utep is more like the rest of the schools in the mwc so could go back with them and maybe convince tulsa to go too, but they would be like a fish out of water in that conference. tulsa will probably end up with smu and houston in the nbe. not one western blog has mentioned utsa. and montana and montana state have repeatedly said they are staying put.

(02-24-2013 09:35 AM)runamuck Wrote:  

(02-24-2013 02:14 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(02-24-2013 01:18 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-22-2013 09:36 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

Then Missouri State's administration is living in fantasy land.

Mountain West: They may go to 16 but that is going to be with BYU, Tulsa, SMU, Houston. Perhaps Tulane finds a MW lifeboat. The MW has never added an FCS school though so Missouri State may as well forget about it.

Conference USA: This league does like the FCS upgrade but I cannot see them adding Missouri State before Arkansas State which is a whole state closer and established with a good FBS team. No chance without a Top 50 local media market.

Mid American: The MAC hasn't looked west for membership in 15+ years. All the emphasis has been placed on building east for highly populated markets. Schools like Delaware and JMU fit more in with Ohio and Buffalo than what Missouri State fits in with Northern Illinois and Ball State culturally.

The MWC may go to 16 if the BE falls completely apart; however, they would have to be willing to give all of the teams you mentioned (with the exception of Tulsa) a Boise-type deal to lure them away unless the BE folds first.

The most likely additions for the MWC (I would think) would be of the following schools, depending on how many members they wanted to expand with: UTEP, UTSA, Tulsa, NMSU (New Mexico advocated them last time around if I remember correctly) and Montana. If Montana comes they will bring along Montana State for the ride.

mo. state is not far from stAte so would make good addition to sun belt and is comparable to the other schools in that conference. tulsa would certainly have no desire to join the mwc. utep is more like the rest of the schools in the mwc so could go back with them and maybe convince tulsa to go too, but they would be like a fish out of water in that conference. tulsa will probably end up with smu and houston in the nbe. not one western blog has mentioned utsa. and montana and montana state have repeatedly said they are staying put.

Montana State and Montana are waititing for the right time to move up. Also I don't know if Montana State is ready.

(02-25-2013 04:19 PM)etsuandpurdue3 Wrote:  Montana State and Montana are waititing for the right time to move up. Also I don't know if Montana State is ready.

Under the new rules requiring a conference invitation, there's no such thing as a "right time" for you to move up. There's only a right time for them, meaning the conference doing the inviting. They call, you go, if you're ever going to go. But unless the Mountain West gets absolutely ransacked by another conference, there's nowhere for Montana to go, nevermind Montana State. It was gameover once they refused to save the WAC.

(02-25-2013 05:21 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 04:19 PM)etsuandpurdue3 Wrote:  Montana State and Montana are waititing for the right time to move up. Also I don't know if Montana State is ready.

Under the new rules requiring a conference invitation, there's no such thing as a "right time" for you to move up. There's only a right time for them, meaning the conference doing the inviting. They call, you go, if you're ever going to go. But unless the Mountain West gets absolutely ransacked by another conference, there's nowhere for Montana to go, nevermind Montana State. It was gameover once they refused to save the WAC.

That's correct. Neither of the Montana twins is on the MWC radar screen. Neither is NMSU. UTEP and Tulsa are prospects, but behind BYU, Houston and SMU in desirability. The MWC is comfortable at 12 and unlikely to expand unless it can land at least one of the latter three.

I think long term, Montana and Montana St are really going to realize they majorly screwed up not going to the WAC. They may never have a chance to move up again.

I think their only hope quite frankly is if a group of schools from the Big Sky all wanted to move up and sued the NCAA to move up without an invite from a current FBS conference.

(02-24-2013 09:35 AM)runamuck Wrote:  

(02-24-2013 02:14 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(02-24-2013 01:18 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-22-2013 09:36 PM)MSUBear42 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 06:32 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  Chattanooga has been the doormat of the SoCon for 20 years and Missouri St has had one winning season in the last 20. Both teams struggle with attendance and neither have made the FCS playoffs in over 20 years. Not exactly a recipe for success to improve the Sun Belt's football product. But if a conference's primary mission is to promote good travel routes, then I guess they should be considered. Forget the fact App State and Ga Southern have more national titles than these teams have had winning seasons.

FWIW, I've heard that its CUSA, MWC, MAC, or bust for MO State. I don't agree with it, just saying that is what I'm hearing from those "close to the situation"

Then Missouri State's administration is living in fantasy land.

Mountain West: They may go to 16 but that is going to be with BYU, Tulsa, SMU, Houston. Perhaps Tulane finds a MW lifeboat. The MW has never added an FCS school though so Missouri State may as well forget about it.

Conference USA: This league does like the FCS upgrade but I cannot see them adding Missouri State before Arkansas State which is a whole state closer and established with a good FBS team. No chance without a Top 50 local media market.

Mid American: The MAC hasn't looked west for membership in 15+ years. All the emphasis has been placed on building east for highly populated markets. Schools like Delaware and JMU fit more in with Ohio and Buffalo than what Missouri State fits in with Northern Illinois and Ball State culturally.

The MWC may go to 16 if the BE falls completely apart; however, they would have to be willing to give all of the teams you mentioned (with the exception of Tulsa) a Boise-type deal to lure them away unless the BE folds first.

The most likely additions for the MWC (I would think) would be of the following schools, depending on how many members they wanted to expand with: UTEP, UTSA, Tulsa, NMSU (New Mexico advocated them last time around if I remember correctly) and Montana. If Montana comes they will bring along Montana State for the ride.

mo. state is not far from stAte so would make good addition to sun belt and is comparable to the other schools in that conference. tulsa would certainly have no desire to join the mwc. utep is more like the rest of the schools in the mwc so could go back with them and maybe convince tulsa to go too, but they would be like a fish out of water in that conference. tulsa will probably end up with smu and houston in the nbe. not one western blog has mentioned utsa. and montana and montana state have repeatedly said they are staying put.

Axtually no they did not. They did say they werw not going to the WAC