As an Idaho fan who's watched 2 different western FBS conferences fold out from under us for lack of membership candidates, it's almost insufferable to read these boards and see FCS fans talking about how they should be able to move up on their timetables and under whatever rules they make up because it's "fair" and they "deserve" it. There's never been anything remotely fair about college football. You guys had multiple chances to move up and decided to stay in your comfy 2nd-rate leagues while Idaho/NMSU twisted in the wind.

I've given up on all of them. The only good guys in my mind? The Sun Belt. When the Big West folded, they had a home for us. When the WAC folded, they made a home for our football. Personally, I'd love another western conference but if our current arrangement with the Belt weren't so tenuous and full of escape clauses I'd never give those ideas another thought.

So enjoy FCS, fellas. You had your opportunities, but unless our administration is dumb enough to move us down (and I wouldn't put it past them) we'll be playing in different divisions for the foreseeable future.

(02-12-2016 11:40 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(02-12-2016 10:34 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-12-2016 09:49 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(02-12-2016 06:37 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  

(02-12-2016 06:24 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Liberty, Sam Houston, Lamar, and Jacksonville St showed repeated interest. Idaho and NMSU turned them down because they thought something better would show up. The Sun Belt was alarmed because it did not want another league in its territory. That's part of why NMSU and Idaho were offered affiliation, as the Belt wanted to drive a knife through an FBS WAC.

That's a big reason that I think the NCAA will loosen FCS to FBS rules. Idaho and NMSU were made promises and the Belt didn't want another league encroaching on potential schools and recruits.

Almost none of that is accurate.

Under your scenario, Idaho and NMSU had 2 choices:

1. Full membership in a western FBS conference
2. Temporary football-only affiliate membership in a southern FBS conference.

And chose option #2. Either you believe the administrations at both universities huff a gallon of paint thinner a day or you understand there's no way they'd take #2 if #1 were available.

Actually, both Idaho and NMSU had to endure 2 years of uncertainty and a full year of FBS indy before the Sun Belt lost enough members to other conferences to offer the football-only invites.

Exactly, NMSU/Idaho were desperate. They'd take Jacksonville State. They'd take NDSU. They'd take Lamar. They'd take UTPA. They'd take Grand Canyon (which isn't even a real college - its for profit and someone's personal private property). And I'd bet dollars against donuts they called Lamar and Jacksonville State, NDSU, and JMU, and were told 'no thanks' by all of them. The NCAA would have granted a waiver for them to try to save a conference. But they're not going to grant a waiver to CREATE a conference.

Basically what we have here are a bunch of schools that want to move up, but who expect the NCAA to compel the existing teams in FBS to create their desired moveup scenario. We in FBS have a collective name for such schools. We call them "FCS Institutions".

Again, you guys had your chance to move up within the rules. But virtually all of you guys said 'no thanks' when the rubber met the road. Its not our fault you guys weren't ready when the time came. Or didn't want to join the place you had a slot in.

Perhaps at some future point, another opening will present itself to you guys. I'd advise taking any ticket to FBS more seriously.

Ive said it over and over. While the fans of many of these Big Sky and MVC schools have dreams of FBS, their administrations are not really interested. They have looked at the numbers and don't like what they see. These administrations had a once in a lifetime opportunity to move up handed to them on a platter and not one of them showed the slightest interest. All this talk of the Big Sky moving up as a conference---yet not a single Big Sky or MVC school responded aggressively to the 2011-2012 WAC situation?

That tells you all you need to know. These schools obviously looked at the numbers and said---"Nah, Im good."

Or, they want to stay together as a whole.

A good chunk of those schools could have moved up together. The reality is some Big Sky schools will never be FBS ready (another reason the full conference scenario is a fantasy), so that was about as close to the perfect opportunity as those schools were ever going to get.

Turning this back to the original topic...Wichita State.

It appears to me that WSU and JMU are looking for the same thing. A CUSA, perhaps a MAC bid, or an AAC bid.

1) AAC ain't happening. They are having enough trouble as it is trying to 'pretend' that they're really still a peer of the P5. Adding a FCS moveup and a greenfield program will destroy whatever fiction exists of the "AAC is really P5" meme.

2) JMU wants the MAC and WSU might take a MAC bid. But the MAC is stable at 12 teams and has tried this before. With UCF. With UMass. With Marshall. With Temple. None of these attempts worked out for them. The only add that worked out for them was Buffalo and that team was in the footprint. I'm not seeing the MAC as a likely expansion, although its possible. Its worth noting that WSU would be over 650 miles from the nearest MAC school. And the nearest MAC institution is over a 5 hour drive from JMU. For the MAC, these are large distances.

3) CUSA. CUSA does take outliers (UTEP is close to no one), but they have 14 existing members. And CUSA has another issue....they're moveup heavy. Just like the AAC, they're worried about maintaining 'separation' with the Sun Belt. CUSA has UAB (an effective greenfield), the F_U twins, UNCC, UTSA, and ODU. Adding another moveup could upset the apple cart. Of course they could offer stAte and WSU. But stAte might actually turn that down (alone among SBC schools - they've been less interested in paying 4 million to join CUSA). For WSU - maybe. For JMU - looking even less likely at this point.

4) There is of course, the chance that the MWC might decide to take WSU. They'd need another team to even out the divisions. Do they go back to UTEP. Possible I suppose.

5) Then there's the Sun Belt. But neither of them are willing to go all sports with the Belt. So no on that count.

----

It looks like WSU's discussion of football is really just a play to have a FCS team in place in case realignment shakes open a spot in CUSA, the MAC, or the MWC. But even this is problematic.

First, its possible that nothing happens.

And even if it does. There's its possible that realignment sorts itself out without opening up a slot for WSU. Big XII takes 2 AAC teams - say U-Conn and Houston. The AAC responds by taking Air Force and Army. The MWC then bids out UTEP and then CUSA has to decide between FCS WSU and 5 Belt teams, all of whom are seasoned FBS teams. Or even worse. A scenario where CUSA loses two teams and then says "We're staying at 12".

Its possible it works out for WSU. But this isn't a slam dunk.

If the Big XII takes UConn and Houston, the AAC is taking another Texas team, as Navy wants a guaranteed conference game in the state of Texas each year, so that would mean Rice to the AAC. UConn would be replaced by another eastern team, and Marshall or UMass would be next up. Air Force will not want to leave its I-25 corridor rivals, and no one from the AAC West is moving east, including Navy.

If C-USA lands at 12, there will be no more expansion. WSU's only hope would be is that the Sun Belt parts with Idaho and possibly New Mexico at some point.

(02-13-2016 07:07 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  If the Big XII takes UConn and Houston, the AAC is taking another Texas team, as Navy wants a guaranteed conference game in the state of Texas each year, so that would mean Rice to the AAC. UConn would be replaced by another eastern team, and Marshall or UMass would be next up. Air Force will not want to leave its I-25 corridor rivals, and no one from the AAC West is moving east, including Navy.

If C-USA lands at 12, there will be no more expansion. WSU's only hope would be is that the Sun Belt parts with Idaho and possibly New Mexico at some point.

the Sun Belt will not trade football only members .

(02-13-2016 07:07 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  If the Big XII takes UConn and Houston, the AAC is taking another Texas team, as Navy wants a guaranteed conference game in the state of Texas each year, so that would mean Rice to the AAC. UConn would be replaced by another eastern team, and Marshall or UMass would be next up. Air Force will not want to leave its I-25 corridor rivals, and no one from the AAC West is moving east, including Navy.

If C-USA lands at 12, there will be no more expansion. WSU's only hope would be is that the Sun Belt parts with Idaho and possibly New Mexico at some point.

Not sure if Rice would get the nod or not. Rice has a relatvely low ceiling due to its small student body. If the AAC wants better bowls, it can't replace large western public schools with more small private schools (that's already an issue for the bowls for the western division). Texas St and UTSA probably have more upside over the long haul thatn Rice, though the lack Rice's academic prestige.

If UConn leaves, I'm not sure the AAC will even bother with returning to the New England area. Is not like New England is a crazy for college football. If there was a great prospect there, I imagine we would take them---but the prospect.s there offer extremely weak football with extremely low attendance. Temple might end up as the northeast edge of the conference, I doubt Marshall would get an invite. They are not a fit academically and thier success would be seriously impaired without the ability to take NQ's.

The reality is Air Force and Colorado St would be about the best replacements possible in that situation---though, there is a fairly low probability of those two saying yes to the AAC.

Wichita State will have numbers and an idea of what is needed to be done by the end of May. They plan to have solid/accurate numbers to present to the business community, fans and students at that time. I did read an article that they've looked at a couple of recent startups whose expenses are all under 7M I believe. Which is much less than what The Bardo has said would be the planned budget for football early on. He's mentioned being at 15M at least in the early stages. Most of this will come down to the big money donors and if they see a benefit to this direction.

It also sounds like at least for the first few years, we'd play in Cessna Stadium which I believe has a capacity of around 31,500 right now. Some modifications may have to be made but it would keep startup costs down while funding and planning of a new stadium could be done. Probably built on the east side of campus where the golf course used to stand.

We're two months away from having an idea as to where this is all headed.