It would seem to me that it would behoove the NCAA to relax both the 1-AA move to 1-A Independent rules and the rules for the formation of a new 1-A conference as well.

I too, don't think that a lawsuit will be necessary, as the marketplace that is college football will eventually work itself out. There is just too much upside for Liberty for any of the conferences, including the Sun Belt, to ignore for too much longer. Our time will come eventually.

(04-11-2015 11:18 PM)LUOrange Wrote:  It would seem to me that it would behoove the NCAA to relax both the 1-AA move to 1-A Independent rules and the rules for the formation of a new 1-A conference as well.

I too, don't think that a lawsuit will be necessary, as the marketplace that is college football will eventually work itself out. There is just too much upside for Liberty for any of the conferences, including the Sun Belt, to ignore for too much longer. Our time will come eventually.

There's upside, but the NCAA just eliminated the need to add anyone that has any downside. To Quote UTA's AD last year when Liberty was discussed "Why are we talking about adding the Lesser of two evils when we don't have to add anyone with any evils at all"

That's what Liberty is fighting. The NCAA just told the SBC essentially. Here, you no longer have to have 12 for a league title game. Considering we just sat last year and didn't add anyone, and were prepared to do the same this year, I just don't see us suddenly choosing to add a Liberty/EKU/Jacksonville State type when we now have the ability and potential to wait out a JMU.

I liked Jay Walker. He seems like a pretty nice and fair guy. He made it sound like Liberty was one of if not the finalist last year but there were enough schools that were uneasy about it so they weren't invited. It left me feeling positive that one Liberty changes a couple things then they'll be invited, or if some other part of the landscape shifts. It was interesting to hear that Eastern Kentucky wasn't thought of very highly and I don't remember JMU or Missouri State being discussed.

(04-12-2015 12:57 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(04-11-2015 11:18 PM)LUOrange Wrote:  It would seem to me that it would behoove the NCAA to relax both the 1-AA move to 1-A Independent rules and the rules for the formation of a new 1-A conference as well.

I too, don't think that a lawsuit will be necessary, as the marketplace that is college football will eventually work itself out. There is just too much upside for Liberty for any of the conferences, including the Sun Belt, to ignore for too much longer. Our time will come eventually.

There's upside, but the NCAA just eliminated the need to add anyone that has any downside. To Quote UTA's AD last year when Liberty was discussed "Why are we talking about adding the Lesser of two evils when we don't have to add anyone with any evils at all"

That's what Liberty is fighting. The NCAA just told the SBC essentially. Here, you no longer have to have 12 for a league title game. Considering we just sat last year and didn't add anyone, and were prepared to do the same this year, I just don't see us suddenly choosing to add a Liberty/EKU/Jacksonville State type when we now have the ability and potential to wait out a JMU.

JMU has always been perceived as the first priority for the SBC in call ups. This has likely rekindled the JMU/SBC FBS dialogue with JMU needing a majority of political approval beginning July 2016. That should be ample time for JMU to get it's house in order to make the move. If JMU does not make the move before July 2016, they'll likely be forever FCS.

Has there ever been a time more beneficial for JMU to consider FBS than now? And as that windows shrinks everyday, it's time for the school to back up it's bravado with the move. If it fails to make a SBC or CUSA move, there will be a huge fallout to the many fans who have waited, debated and been baited for FBS. And each fallout, time lapse and inactivity by JMU only adds to the Liberty appeal.

(04-12-2015 07:38 PM)NewTimes Wrote:  

(04-12-2015 12:57 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(04-11-2015 11:18 PM)LUOrange Wrote:  It would seem to me that it would behoove the NCAA to relax both the 1-AA move to 1-A Independent rules and the rules for the formation of a new 1-A conference as well.

I too, don't think that a lawsuit will be necessary, as the marketplace that is college football will eventually work itself out. There is just too much upside for Liberty for any of the conferences, including the Sun Belt, to ignore for too much longer. Our time will come eventually.

There's upside, but the NCAA just eliminated the need to add anyone that has any downside. To Quote UTA's AD last year when Liberty was discussed "Why are we talking about adding the Lesser of two evils when we don't have to add anyone with any evils at all"

That's what Liberty is fighting. The NCAA just told the SBC essentially. Here, you no longer have to have 12 for a league title game. Considering we just sat last year and didn't add anyone, and were prepared to do the same this year, I just don't see us suddenly choosing to add a Liberty/EKU/Jacksonville State type when we now have the ability and potential to wait out a JMU.

JMU has always been perceived as the first priority for the SBC in call ups. This has likely rekindled the JMU/SBC FBS dialogue with JMU needing a majority of political approval beginning July 2016. That should be ample time for JMU to get it's house in order to make the move. If JMU does not make the move before July 2016, they'll likely be forever FCS.

Has there ever been a time more beneficial for JMU to consider FBS than now? And as that windows shrinks everyday, it's time for the school to back up it's bravado with the move. If it fails to make a SBC or CUSA move, there will be a huge fallout to the many fans who have waited, debated and been baited for FBS. And each fallout, time lapse and inactivity by JMU only adds to the Liberty appeal.

JMU is not joining the Sun Belt, nor will they have any difficulty getting the General Assembly to approve a 1-A move. They will gladly stay in the CAA until they can get into CUSA or the MAC. Both LU and JMU will eventually become 1-A, just on different timetables due to our different priorities.

(04-12-2015 10:47 PM)LUOrange Wrote:  

(04-12-2015 07:38 PM)NewTimes Wrote:  

(04-12-2015 12:57 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(04-11-2015 11:18 PM)LUOrange Wrote:  It would seem to me that it would behoove the NCAA to relax both the 1-AA move to 1-A Independent rules and the rules for the formation of a new 1-A conference as well.

I too, don't think that a lawsuit will be necessary, as the marketplace that is college football will eventually work itself out. There is just too much upside for Liberty for any of the conferences, including the Sun Belt, to ignore for too much longer. Our time will come eventually.

There's upside, but the NCAA just eliminated the need to add anyone that has any downside. To Quote UTA's AD last year when Liberty was discussed "Why are we talking about adding the Lesser of two evils when we don't have to add anyone with any evils at all"

That's what Liberty is fighting. The NCAA just told the SBC essentially. Here, you no longer have to have 12 for a league title game. Considering we just sat last year and didn't add anyone, and were prepared to do the same this year, I just don't see us suddenly choosing to add a Liberty/EKU/Jacksonville State type when we now have the ability and potential to wait out a JMU.

JMU has always been perceived as the first priority for the SBC in call ups. This has likely rekindled the JMU/SBC FBS dialogue with JMU needing a majority of political approval beginning July 2016. That should be ample time for JMU to get it's house in order to make the move. If JMU does not make the move before July 2016, they'll likely be forever FCS.

Has there ever been a time more beneficial for JMU to consider FBS than now? And as that windows shrinks everyday, it's time for the school to back up it's bravado with the move. If it fails to make a SBC or CUSA move, there will be a huge fallout to the many fans who have waited, debated and been baited for FBS. And each fallout, time lapse and inactivity by JMU only adds to the Liberty appeal.

JMU is not joining the Sun Belt, nor will they have any difficulty getting the General Assembly to approve a 1-A move. They will gladly stay in the CAA until they can get into CUSA or the MAC. Both LU and JMU will eventually become 1-A, just on different timetables due to our different priorities.

That is an extremely risky statement saying that JMU will have no problem getting political approval. With political decisions, there is always the whim of an elected official going with the sentiment at the time. As football is the darling sport that most everyone wants to ride the coattails of, a sports pro politician would support it.

An extremists, Tea party, ultra conservative could justify not agreeing as a loss of revenue to a luxury, non essential entertainment entity. There is no guarantee on political actions. An example of this is the sponsor of this state support/limit legislation is a JMU alum. It truly is a twisted, unusual action, by a politician.

(04-13-2015 07:03 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  

(04-12-2015 10:47 PM)LUOrange Wrote:  

(04-12-2015 07:38 PM)NewTimes Wrote:  

(04-12-2015 12:57 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(04-11-2015 11:18 PM)LUOrange Wrote:  It would seem to me that it would behoove the NCAA to relax both the 1-AA move to 1-A Independent rules and the rules for the formation of a new 1-A conference as well.

I too, don't think that a lawsuit will be necessary, as the marketplace that is college football will eventually work itself out. There is just too much upside for Liberty for any of the conferences, including the Sun Belt, to ignore for too much longer. Our time will come eventually.

There's upside, but the NCAA just eliminated the need to add anyone that has any downside. To Quote UTA's AD last year when Liberty was discussed "Why are we talking about adding the Lesser of two evils when we don't have to add anyone with any evils at all"

That's what Liberty is fighting. The NCAA just told the SBC essentially. Here, you no longer have to have 12 for a league title game. Considering we just sat last year and didn't add anyone, and were prepared to do the same this year, I just don't see us suddenly choosing to add a Liberty/EKU/Jacksonville State type when we now have the ability and potential to wait out a JMU.

JMU has always been perceived as the first priority for the SBC in call ups. This has likely rekindled the JMU/SBC FBS dialogue with JMU needing a majority of political approval beginning July 2016. That should be ample time for JMU to get it's house in order to make the move. If JMU does not make the move before July 2016, they'll likely be forever FCS.

Has there ever been a time more beneficial for JMU to consider FBS than now? And as that windows shrinks everyday, it's time for the school to back up it's bravado with the move. If it fails to make a SBC or CUSA move, there will be a huge fallout to the many fans who have waited, debated and been baited for FBS. And each fallout, time lapse and inactivity by JMU only adds to the Liberty appeal.

JMU is not joining the Sun Belt, nor will they have any difficulty getting the General Assembly to approve a 1-A move. They will gladly stay in the CAA until they can get into CUSA or the MAC. Both LU and JMU will eventually become 1-A, just on different timetables due to our different priorities.

That is an extremely risky statement saying that JMU will have no problem getting political approval. With political decisions, there is always the whim of an elected official going with the sentiment at the time. As football is the darling sport that most everyone wants to ride the coattails of, a sports pro politician would support it.

An extremists, Tea party, ultra conservative could justify not agreeing as a loss of revenue to a luxury, non essential entertainment entity. There is no guarantee on political actions. An example of this is the sponsor of this state support/limit legislation is a JMU alum. It truly is a twisted, unusual action, by a politician.

I don't think it would be a Republican versus a Democrat issue so let's not make it that. Both parties would have their reasons to support or oppose the increased cost of football for a state run school.

CUSA will make a decision about a expansion within the next year or so. My guess is that they give UAB a year to find a new home out of respect for them. I believe JMU will gamble there due to the better perception of CUSA and ODU. They also like the demographics of the MAC vs. the SBC. I think they also feel the CAA is a better conference than the SBC, and in many ways, I agree with them. CAA is just not an option for us right now because they're not 1-A. That's just our choice, just as it is JMU's that the SBC isn't an option for them.

Again, JMU will have no problems with the General Assembly. JMU and the politicians will see it as a economic draw for the Commonwealth. Remember, it was a politician, then Gov. Warner, who forced UVA to push for VT's inclusion into the ACC. And don't worry, even Tea Partiers like college football.

I also think JMU won't have a problem with moving up but it does pose a problem of at least some uncertainty. I don't expect C-USA to invite JMU unless they fall below their current 13 members and even they may not get the nod in that case. The MAC doesn't appear to want to expand past 12. It looks like Sun Belt or bust for their FBS hopes. I don't see anything that changed since last time that would make the Sun Belt more attractive for JMU.

(04-13-2015 09:23 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I also think JMU won't have a problem with moving up but it does pose a problem of at least some uncertainty. I don't expect C-USA to invite JMU unless they fall below their current 13 members and even they may not get the nod in that case. The MAC doesn't appear to want to expand past 12. It looks like Sun Belt or bust for their FBS hopes. I don't see anything that changed since last time that would make the Sun Belt more attractive for JMU.

JMU won't do a thing until CUSA resolves UAB on 6.8.15.

The SBC looks more attractive now that the MAC no longer needs to expand.

(04-13-2015 10:09 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(04-13-2015 09:23 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I also think JMU won't have a problem with moving up but it does pose a problem of at least some uncertainty. I don't expect C-USA to invite JMU unless they fall below their current 13 members and even they may not get the nod in that case. The MAC doesn't appear to want to expand past 12. It looks like Sun Belt or bust for their FBS hopes. I don't see anything that changed since last time that would make the Sun Belt more attractive for JMU.

JMU won't do a thing until CUSA resolves UAB on 6.8.15.

The SBC looks more attractive now that the MAC no longer needs to expand.

Many of the UAB people are saying it is a matter of when, not if, UAB leaves C-USA. They are on their way out. Things are allegedly getting serious between South Alabama and C-USA to replace UAB.

What has changed from the perspective of JMU from last year when you told the Sun Belt that you weren't ready to move up at that time? There is the new law but I don't see how that makes the Sun Belt more attractive to JMU which appears to be the problem.

I admit that I love message boards and reading others opinions. With that said, what I've learned over the past couple years is it's very unusual for any poster to know more than their opinion. We don't know what JMU is thinking at this point. We don't for sure what's going to happen with UAB. It's comical when posters write things as facts when it's really just their opinion.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

The sad part is if Liberty is the same athletically and academically, public, and called Hill City University: we are already in the SBC by now. With sbc it seems private vs public is the deal breaker.

(04-13-2015 11:48 AM)knucklehead Wrote:  The sad part is if Liberty is the same athletically and academically, public, and called Hill City University: we are already in the SBC by now. With sbc it seems private vs public is the deal breaker.

Liberty is at best second in the FBS sweepstakes. True we all express what we believe to happen, and there are many who attempt to speak with authority about what they hope to happen.

As someone who is active in local politics, don't be fooled into thinking a political statement made today is an absolute for tomorrow. Anytime more steps and hurdles occur, it always increases the risk of a change. The folks on the JMU boards have a genuine about this.

If LU gets no invite and JMU does, the route for LU will likely be Indy/challenge.

(04-13-2015 05:29 PM)NewTimes Wrote:  If LU gets no invite and JMU does, the route for LU will likely be Indy/challenge.

I agree. LU has done about all it can to be FBS ready. If no conference invite comes we'll have to pursue other methods. It'll be tough to make it as an indy and we better get use to 5 homes (4 FBS & 1 FCS). Hopefully we can get a nice home/home going with The other Indy's, but I know Army and BYU aren't hard pressed for finding opponents, and I won't even entertain playing ND.

There could be a lot more movement coming? In 2016?

http://csnbbs.com/thread-733922-post-119...id11996779

If you believe what's been written on the SB board it's been stated many times that the SB presidents wouldn't even put liberty up for a vote the past two years. I don't see things changing that quickly. Maybe I'm jaded, but I think liberty is still years away from getting an invite.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I don't expect an invite to come our way by June but I hope something comes up. I would hate for the Power 5 conferences to fill up and there would be no room for us. There is such a limited number of slots available.

I don't expect an invite from from the Sun Belt... ever. I think it will be a few more years before Liberty has its chance in FBS and a tougher conference..... But that time IS coming.

The longer Liberty goes without am invite, and if JMU and any other FCS team gets an invite, that's when we can expect LU to then be proactive seeking indy. I too believe we will only receive an invite from the SBC if their conference existence is at state. Let's hope the CUSA ask us. We'd be a better geographic fit and it is a more stable conference.