(08-09-2018 08:17 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  For the WAC to need to get to the numbers, you need to invite FBS football only schools that are Independents.

UMass.
Army
Liberty

Those three are without a conference that could get the WAC to 4. Could Idaho be given a spot to stop them from completely downgrading tham?

That gives you this.

Idaho
New Mexico State
UMass.
Army
Liberty

Now, you can give Sam Houston State and Lamar an invite now for them to be fully FBS by 2021. That gets you up to 7. That would be 2019/20 season. For 2020-21 season, you could give football only invites to Jacksonville State and James Madison. 2021-2022 school year, you could add Stony Brook and Youngstown State. 2022-2023 would be UTRGV FBS football. That would bring them up to 12.

West:
Idaho
New Mexico State
UTRGV
Lamar
Sam Houston State
Jacksonville State

East:
UMass.
Liberty
Army
Youngstown State
James Madison
Stony Brook

If any of these schools get picked up by another conference? WAC could backfilled with schools like Delaware, Wichita State football only, SFA, McNeese State, Missouri State, Northern Iowa, Illinois State, North Alabama or Eastern Kentucky. If it is Northern Iowa, McNeese State, SFA, Illinois State or Missouri State? You could move Jacksonville State to the east.

WAC could still add schools like Central Washington, Azusa Pacific, West Texas A&M, Dixie State and Colorado Mesa in the future.

Not possible.
You 8 full members that play FBS football to be a FBS conference.
Army and Liberty are not going to join fully in the WAC.

The WAC could take the CUSA West division and become a football conference that way. Everything else is just silly talk.

(08-09-2018 08:47 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 08:17 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  For the WAC to need to get to the numbers, you need to invite FBS football only schools that are Independents.

UMass.
Army
Liberty

Those three are without a conference that could get the WAC to 4. Could Idaho be given a spot to stop them from completely downgrading tham?

That gives you this.

Idaho
New Mexico State
UMass.
Army
Liberty

Now, you can give Sam Houston State and Lamar an invite now for them to be fully FBS by 2021. That gets you up to 7. That would be 2019/20 season. For 2020-21 season, you could give football only invites to Jacksonville State and James Madison. 2021-2022 school year, you could add Stony Brook and Youngstown State. 2022-2023 would be UTRGV FBS football. That would bring them up to 12.

West:
Idaho
New Mexico State
UTRGV
Lamar
Sam Houston State
Jacksonville State

East:
UMass.
Liberty
Army
Youngstown State
James Madison
Stony Brook

If any of these schools get picked up by another conference? WAC could backfilled with schools like Delaware, Wichita State football only, SFA, McNeese State, Missouri State, Northern Iowa, Illinois State, North Alabama or Eastern Kentucky. If it is Northern Iowa, McNeese State, SFA, Illinois State or Missouri State? You could move Jacksonville State to the east.

WAC could still add schools like Central Washington, Azusa Pacific, West Texas A&M, Dixie State and Colorado Mesa in the future.

Not possible.
You 8 full members that play FBS football to be a FBS conference.
Army and Liberty are not going to join fully in the WAC.

Those 2 get football only spots.

(08-08-2018 05:18 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 02:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 02:00 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 01:40 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  The study provided a timeline for UTRGV to begin playing football as early as 2021-22, though the proposed process is well behind schedule.

If UTRGV were to pursue a football program at any level, issues of funding and facilities would be at the forefront, according to the report. Projected yearly expenses ranged from $377,474 during the announcement year of an FCS program to $10,971,529 for the first year of FBS play.

So this could take a while, if it does happen. In the meantime, the WAC is still not a football conference.

The whole option is dependent upon qualifying for the new CFP contract. One doesn’t want to be early because expenses really add up, but too late is a terrible possibility, possibly terminal. The eight core FBS and FBS wannabe schools have to be deeply committed, namely financially.

A WAC resurrecting in 2014 or 2017 didn’t have financial backing.

For UTRGV, starting FBS will be easier than FCS. Just like UTSA and FIU, the FCS is a non-starter and FBS can be financed mainly on the backs of student fees. With more than 30k students, the increased fees aren’t that significant compared to a ~15k school.

Assuming everything you assert is true.

We know based on past timelines that the next CFP contract will likely be signed between July 1, 2022 and July 1, 2024 with the historic sweet spot being July 1, 2023

Let's assume the latter date.

That means anyone who desires a chance to be at the table probably needs to compete as an FBS conference the prior year the 2024 season. That is must be an FBS league in 2023.

That means the new league must do transition year 2 in 2022 and transition year 1 in 2021. That means getting the paperwork in early in 2021.

For a school that desires to add football that means they have to be playing FCS football in 2020.

If you are talking about creating this mythic new league in time to gain a seat at the table, you better have eight schools playing FCS football in 2020 or there is no chance of it happening and if the contract renews early, on the same timeline as the first CFP contract you have to do everything I outlined one year earlier.

This all hinges on the next couple weeks. UTRGV will need to have a fb team in 2020 or before, even if they only play JCs and JVs. UTSA and USA fast tracked their programs. Confident those in charge know the CFP timeline with much more certainty.

The South Alabama "fast track"
Program approved Dec 6, 2007
2008 hired coach brought in some players
2009 played as a club program
2010 FCS
2011 FCS playing transition year 1
2012 FCS playing transition year 2
2013 FBS

If UTRGV announces this year on that fast track timeline
2019 hire coach
2020 club
2021 FCS
2022 FCS transition year 1
2023 FCS transition year 2
2024 FBS

And odds are the new CFP deal is signed prior to 2024.

(08-09-2018 05:00 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 05:18 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 02:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 02:00 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 01:40 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  The study provided a timeline for UTRGV to begin playing football as early as 2021-22, though the proposed process is well behind schedule.

If UTRGV were to pursue a football program at any level, issues of funding and facilities would be at the forefront, according to the report. Projected yearly expenses ranged from $377,474 during the announcement year of an FCS program to $10,971,529 for the first year of FBS play.

So this could take a while, if it does happen. In the meantime, the WAC is still not a football conference.

The whole option is dependent upon qualifying for the new CFP contract. One doesn’t want to be early because expenses really add up, but too late is a terrible possibility, possibly terminal. The eight core FBS and FBS wannabe schools have to be deeply committed, namely financially.

A WAC resurrecting in 2014 or 2017 didn’t have financial backing.

For UTRGV, starting FBS will be easier than FCS. Just like UTSA and FIU, the FCS is a non-starter and FBS can be financed mainly on the backs of student fees. With more than 30k students, the increased fees aren’t that significant compared to a ~15k school.

Assuming everything you assert is true.

We know based on past timelines that the next CFP contract will likely be signed between July 1, 2022 and July 1, 2024 with the historic sweet spot being July 1, 2023

Let's assume the latter date.

That means anyone who desires a chance to be at the table probably needs to compete as an FBS conference the prior year the 2024 season. That is must be an FBS league in 2023.

That means the new league must do transition year 2 in 2022 and transition year 1 in 2021. That means getting the paperwork in early in 2021.

For a school that desires to add football that means they have to be playing FCS football in 2020.

If you are talking about creating this mythic new league in time to gain a seat at the table, you better have eight schools playing FCS football in 2020 or there is no chance of it happening and if the contract renews early, on the same timeline as the first CFP contract you have to do everything I outlined one year earlier.

This all hinges on the next couple weeks. UTRGV will need to have a fb team in 2020 or before, even if they only play JCs and JVs. UTSA and USA fast tracked their programs. Confident those in charge know the CFP timeline with much more certainty.

The South Alabama "fast track"
Program approved Dec 6, 2007
2008 hired coach brought in some players
2009 played as a club program
2010 FCS
2011 FCS playing transition year 1
2012 FCS playing transition year 2
2013 FBS

If UTRGV announces this year on that fast track timeline
2019 hire coach
2020 club
2021 FCS
2022 FCS transition year 1
2023 FCS transition year 2
2024 FBS

And odds are the new CFP deal is signed prior to 2024.

UTRGV’s study actually says 2022 as the first year of FBS transition.

The authors of that study either are totally incompetent, or they know an FBS bid is coming with relative certainty. No existing FBS league would grant them FBS status on that time frame. Schools don’t want to waste funds on FCS anymore.

Meanwhile, Wichita State is resurrecting a 200 member marching band with 100 scholarships for marching on a basketball court.

(08-08-2018 06:06 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If I'm UTRGV and I'm contemplating football my first call is to the Southland to see if they have any interest. If they won't bite then I think you chase FBS where NMSU, UMass, and Liberty are looking for help filling schedules.

That would be a quick call. UTRGV is not close to being ready for football. Their $11 million athletic budget is barely cutting it for Olympic sports. The men's basketball budget is $1.4 million. They need to upgrade facilities and athletics before they consider football. The last thing the Southland needs is another mediocre athletic program.

NMSU, UMass and Liberty are having no problems with scheduling. Liberty's football schedule is done through 2021. UMass has completed their football schedule through 2020. NMSU has completed their schedule for the 2019 season and has seven games scheduled for both 2020 and 2021. UTRGV does not have the revenue to go FCS, so jumping to FBS is a pipe dream.

(08-09-2018 05:41 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 05:00 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 05:18 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 02:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 02:00 PM)NoDak Wrote:  The whole option is dependent upon qualifying for the new CFP contract. One doesn’t want to be early because expenses really add up, but too late is a terrible possibility, possibly terminal. The eight core FBS and FBS wannabe schools have to be deeply committed, namely financially.

A WAC resurrecting in 2014 or 2017 didn’t have financial backing.

For UTRGV, starting FBS will be easier than FCS. Just like UTSA and FIU, the FCS is a non-starter and FBS can be financed mainly on the backs of student fees. With more than 30k students, the increased fees aren’t that significant compared to a ~15k school.

Assuming everything you assert is true.

We know based on past timelines that the next CFP contract will likely be signed between July 1, 2022 and July 1, 2024 with the historic sweet spot being July 1, 2023

Let's assume the latter date.

That means anyone who desires a chance to be at the table probably needs to compete as an FBS conference the prior year the 2024 season. That is must be an FBS league in 2023.

That means the new league must do transition year 2 in 2022 and transition year 1 in 2021. That means getting the paperwork in early in 2021.

For a school that desires to add football that means they have to be playing FCS football in 2020.

If you are talking about creating this mythic new league in time to gain a seat at the table, you better have eight schools playing FCS football in 2020 or there is no chance of it happening and if the contract renews early, on the same timeline as the first CFP contract you have to do everything I outlined one year earlier.

This all hinges on the next couple weeks. UTRGV will need to have a fb team in 2020 or before, even if they only play JCs and JVs. UTSA and USA fast tracked their programs. Confident those in charge know the CFP timeline with much more certainty.

The South Alabama "fast track"
Program approved Dec 6, 2007
2008 hired coach brought in some players
2009 played as a club program
2010 FCS
2011 FCS playing transition year 1
2012 FCS playing transition year 2
2013 FBS

If UTRGV announces this year on that fast track timeline
2019 hire coach
2020 club
2021 FCS
2022 FCS transition year 1
2023 FCS transition year 2
2024 FBS

And odds are the new CFP deal is signed prior to 2024.

UTRGV’s study actually says 2022 as the first year of FBS transition.

The authors of that study either are totally incompetent, or they know an FBS bid is coming with relative certainty. No existing FBS league would grant them FBS status on that time frame. Schools don’t want to waste funds on FCS anymore.

Meanwhile, Wichita State is resurrecting a 200 member marching band with 100 scholarships for marching on a basketball court.

It's hypothetical. Like, in theory this would be UT-RGV's path to FBS. The authors of that study are not incompetent, nor is an FBS bid coming with relative certainty.

(08-10-2018 09:11 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 05:41 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 05:00 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 05:18 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 02:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Assuming everything you assert is true.

We know based on past timelines that the next CFP contract will likely be signed between July 1, 2022 and July 1, 2024 with the historic sweet spot being July 1, 2023

Let's assume the latter date.

That means anyone who desires a chance to be at the table probably needs to compete as an FBS conference the prior year the 2024 season. That is must be an FBS league in 2023.

That means the new league must do transition year 2 in 2022 and transition year 1 in 2021. That means getting the paperwork in early in 2021.

For a school that desires to add football that means they have to be playing FCS football in 2020.

If you are talking about creating this mythic new league in time to gain a seat at the table, you better have eight schools playing FCS football in 2020 or there is no chance of it happening and if the contract renews early, on the same timeline as the first CFP contract you have to do everything I outlined one year earlier.

This all hinges on the next couple weeks. UTRGV will need to have a fb team in 2020 or before, even if they only play JCs and JVs. UTSA and USA fast tracked their programs. Confident those in charge know the CFP timeline with much more certainty.

The South Alabama "fast track"
Program approved Dec 6, 2007
2008 hired coach brought in some players
2009 played as a club program
2010 FCS
2011 FCS playing transition year 1
2012 FCS playing transition year 2
2013 FBS

If UTRGV announces this year on that fast track timeline
2019 hire coach
2020 club
2021 FCS
2022 FCS transition year 1
2023 FCS transition year 2
2024 FBS

And odds are the new CFP deal is signed prior to 2024.

UTRGV’s study actually says 2022 as the first year of FBS transition.

The authors of that study either are totally incompetent, or they know an FBS bid is coming with relative certainty. No existing FBS league would grant them FBS status on that time frame. Schools don’t want to waste funds on FCS anymore.

Meanwhile, Wichita State is resurrecting a 200 member marching band with 100 scholarships for marching on a basketball court.

It's hypothetical. Like, in theory this would be UT-RGV's path to FBS. The authors of that study are not incompetent, nor is an FBS bid coming with relative certainty.

The only way UTRGV has a chance for FBS is the WAC’s ability to offer FBS.

UTRGV will be opening a nice new B.B. arena and have access to a state of the art minor league stadium for Houston Dynamo MLS team. The revenues would shoot up just based on those, because UTRGV has had dismal attendance in the past. UTRGV, just by adding a $100 athletic fee per semester would gain nearly $6 million a year. FBS is far from a pie in the Sky venture.

(08-10-2018 10:35 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 09:11 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 05:41 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 05:00 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-08-2018 05:18 PM)NoDak Wrote:  This all hinges on the next couple weeks. UTRGV will need to have a fb team in 2020 or before, even if they only play JCs and JVs. UTSA and USA fast tracked their programs. Confident those in charge know the CFP timeline with much more certainty.

The South Alabama "fast track"
Program approved Dec 6, 2007
2008 hired coach brought in some players
2009 played as a club program
2010 FCS
2011 FCS playing transition year 1
2012 FCS playing transition year 2
2013 FBS

If UTRGV announces this year on that fast track timeline
2019 hire coach
2020 club
2021 FCS
2022 FCS transition year 1
2023 FCS transition year 2
2024 FBS

And odds are the new CFP deal is signed prior to 2024.

UTRGV’s study actually says 2022 as the first year of FBS transition.

The authors of that study either are totally incompetent, or they know an FBS bid is coming with relative certainty. No existing FBS league would grant them FBS status on that time frame. Schools don’t want to waste funds on FCS anymore.

Meanwhile, Wichita State is resurrecting a 200 member marching band with 100 scholarships for marching on a basketball court.

It's hypothetical. Like, in theory this would be UT-RGV's path to FBS. The authors of that study are not incompetent, nor is an FBS bid coming with relative certainty.

The only way UTRGV has a chance for FBS is the WAC’s ability to offer FBS.

UTRGV will be opening a nice new B.B. arena and have access to a state of the art minor league stadium for Houston Dynamo MLS team. The revenues would shoot up just based on those, because UTRGV has had dismal attendance in the past. UTRGV, just by adding a $100 athletic fee per semester would gain nearly $6 million a year. FBS is far from a pie in the Sky venture.

The minor league soccer stadium would be a great place for them to play especially if they are going to be FCS.

The trouble with WAC FBS football is where are the other 5-6 football teams going to come from if NMSU and UTRGV are the first two? No one out west is talking FBS right now and you'd need half the Big Sky to do it.

(08-11-2018 04:44 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 10:35 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 09:11 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 05:41 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 05:00 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The South Alabama "fast track"
Program approved Dec 6, 2007
2008 hired coach brought in some players
2009 played as a club program
2010 FCS
2011 FCS playing transition year 1
2012 FCS playing transition year 2
2013 FBS

If UTRGV announces this year on that fast track timeline
2019 hire coach
2020 club
2021 FCS
2022 FCS transition year 1
2023 FCS transition year 2
2024 FBS

And odds are the new CFP deal is signed prior to 2024.

UTRGV’s study actually says 2022 as the first year of FBS transition.

The authors of that study either are totally incompetent, or they know an FBS bid is coming with relative certainty. No existing FBS league would grant them FBS status on that time frame. Schools don’t want to waste funds on FCS anymore.

Meanwhile, Wichita State is resurrecting a 200 member marching band with 100 scholarships for marching on a basketball court.

It's hypothetical. Like, in theory this would be UT-RGV's path to FBS. The authors of that study are not incompetent, nor is an FBS bid coming with relative certainty.

The only way UTRGV has a chance for FBS is the WAC’s ability to offer FBS.

UTRGV will be opening a nice new B.B. arena and have access to a state of the art minor league stadium for Houston Dynamo MLS team. The revenues would shoot up just based on those, because UTRGV has had dismal attendance in the past. UTRGV, just by adding a $100 athletic fee per semester would gain nearly $6 million a year. FBS is far from a pie in the Sky venture.

The minor league soccer stadium would be a great place for them to play especially if they are going to be FCS.

The trouble with WAC FBS football is where are the other 5-6 football teams going to come from if NMSU and UTRGV are the first two? No one out west is talking FBS right now and you'd need half the Big Sky to do it.

Oh, but everyone has money for FBS. Haven't you heard?

(08-11-2018 04:44 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 10:35 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 09:11 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 05:41 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 05:00 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The South Alabama "fast track"
Program approved Dec 6, 2007
2008 hired coach brought in some players
2009 played as a club program
2010 FCS
2011 FCS playing transition year 1
2012 FCS playing transition year 2
2013 FBS

If UTRGV announces this year on that fast track timeline
2019 hire coach
2020 club
2021 FCS
2022 FCS transition year 1
2023 FCS transition year 2
2024 FBS

And odds are the new CFP deal is signed prior to 2024.

UTRGV’s study actually says 2022 as the first year of FBS transition.

The authors of that study either are totally incompetent, or they know an FBS bid is coming with relative certainty. No existing FBS league would grant them FBS status on that time frame. Schools don’t want to waste funds on FCS anymore.

Meanwhile, Wichita State is resurrecting a 200 member marching band with 100 scholarships for marching on a basketball court.

It's hypothetical. Like, in theory this would be UT-RGV's path to FBS. The authors of that study are not incompetent, nor is an FBS bid coming with relative certainty.

The only way UTRGV has a chance for FBS is the WAC’s ability to offer FBS.

UTRGV will be opening a nice new B.B. arena and have access to a state of the art minor league stadium for Houston Dynamo MLS team. The revenues would shoot up just based on those, because UTRGV has had dismal attendance in the past. UTRGV, just by adding a $100 athletic fee per semester would gain nearly $6 million a year. FBS is far from a pie in the Sky venture.

The minor league soccer stadium would be a great place for them to play especially if they are going to be FCS.

The trouble with WAC FBS football is where are the other 5-6 football teams going to come from if NMSU and UTRGV are the first two? No one out west is talking FBS right now and you'd need half the Big Sky to do it.

Sam Houston St and Lamar would jump almost instantly for a chance at FBS. Other Southland schools might do it too. SHSU and Lamar wanted Sun Belt membership in 2013, but no peep out of them about FBS has been heard since.

Mo St and Wichita St would also join as affiliates.

Northern Iowa wanted to go FBS in 2013. Get West Texas A&M to move up? They could be a better fit for New Mexico State. Northern Arizona have an FBS dome. We do not know who might want to move over. I thought the WAC wanted to expand before July 1st, but they have not. It would be hard to get any D1 to jump to the WAc right now. You may have to invite D2 schools that have stadiums that is over 15,000 stadium or as low as 10,000 to move up. Central Oklahoma, Dixie State and Azusa Pacific have below 15,000, but they could expand. AP is not that far from the Rose Bowl to use until they get their stadium upgraded. There are a couple of Lone Star schools that do play in stadiums over 15,000 already. They could be the future WAC FBS as well.

(08-11-2018 09:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Northern Iowa wanted to go FBS in 2013. Get West Texas A&M to move up? They could be a better fit for New Mexico State. Northern Arizona have an FBS dome. We do not know who might want to move over. I thought the WAC wanted to expand before July 1st, but they have not. It would be hard to get any D1 to jump to the WAc right now. You may have to invite D2 schools that have stadiums that is over 15,000 stadium or as low as 10,000 to move up. Central Oklahoma, Dixie State and Azusa Pacific have below 15,000, but they could expand. AP is not that far from the Rose Bowl to use until they get their stadium upgraded. There are a couple of Lone Star schools that do play in stadiums over 15,000 already. They could be the future WAC FBS as well.

(08-11-2018 09:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Northern Iowa wanted to go FBS in 2013. Get West Texas A&M to move up? They could be a better fit for New Mexico State. Northern Arizona have an FBS dome. We do not know who might want to move over. I thought the WAC wanted to expand before July 1st, but they have not. It would be hard to get any D1 to jump to the WAc right now. You may have to invite D2 schools that have stadiums that is over 15,000 stadium or as low as 10,000 to move up. Central Oklahoma, Dixie State and Azusa Pacific have below 15,000, but they could expand. AP is not that far from the Rose Bowl to use until they get their stadium upgraded. There are a couple of Lone Star schools that do play in stadiums over 15,000 already. They could be the future WAC FBS as well.

You need to check the rules just once. A DII school can’t aspire to being FBS right when it a transitional DI because the NCAA requires a full DI school first. GCU is only eligible now, CBU would need to wait five more years. The DI transition is 2.5 times longer than the FBS transition.

If NMSU had wanted to fill the WAC with FCS schools from DII, it would have already happened.

Any plan considering UMass is a fallacy. They turned down the MAC. No way they would consider any of this gobbledygook. JMU also turned down the Sunbelt so considering them is foolish. Army wouldn't join the AAC for football only so why would they do this? Liberty has a lot of money and has shown an ability to get games of local interest, so why would they join this mishmash?

(08-12-2018 12:48 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-11-2018 09:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Northern Iowa wanted to go FBS in 2013. Get West Texas A&M to move up? They could be a better fit for New Mexico State. Northern Arizona have an FBS dome. We do not know who might want to move over. I thought the WAC wanted to expand before July 1st, but they have not. It would be hard to get any D1 to jump to the WAc right now. You may have to invite D2 schools that have stadiums that is over 15,000 stadium or as low as 10,000 to move up. Central Oklahoma, Dixie State and Azusa Pacific have below 15,000, but they could expand. AP is not that far from the Rose Bowl to use until they get their stadium upgraded. There are a couple of Lone Star schools that do play in stadiums over 15,000 already. They could be the future WAC FBS as well.

You need to check the rules just once. A DII school can’t aspire to being FBS right when it a transitional DI because the NCAA requires a full DI school first. GCU is only eligible now, CBU would need to wait five more years. The DI transition is 2.5 times longer than the FBS transition.

If NMSU had wanted to fill the WAC with FCS schools from DII, it would have already happened.

You need to recheck the rules. You have flaunted rules out of thin air about your supposed Great North Conference scheme. As for D2 schools that have the money to move up to FBS right away after spending a year or 2 in FCS? Than they can be counted. NCAA have always given waivers. Once Liberty was given the waiver? I could see other schools who wants to be FBS could challenge the rule. That includes D2 schools. The Liberty situation have opened the can of worms, and we could see more schools challenge the NCAA in the near future.

I think the only way the WAC goes FBS is to rip apart the MVFC. Northern Iowa, Missouri State, North Dakota, South Dakota, North Dakota State, and South Dakota State get the WAC to seven. Grab a couple of Southland schools to make it nine. UTRGV eventually makes it ten for football.

This brings the all-sports Missouri Valley down to eight. They grab Illinois-Chicago and Milwaukee. The Horizon takes Fort Wayne and Chicago State, and the Cougars survive their non-renewal from the WAC.

Oral Roberts, Omaha, Denver, Western Illinois, are in a bit of a pickle. They invite Grand Canyon, Utah Valley, Seattle, and Cal Baptist to keep the lights on. Sacramento State and Northern Colorado join for baseball only.

Western Illinois, Youngstown State, Illinois State, Southern Illinois, and Indiana State join the OVC for football only, pushing the OVC to 14 in football.

WAC
North - Northern Iowa, NDSU, SDSU, UND, USD
South - UTRGV, Southland #1, Southland #2, New Mexico State, Missouri State
Non-football - UMKC

Omaha and Denver eventually replace UMKC in the WAC, and then the WAC invites Arizona State, Colorado College, and Air Force for hockey only.

(08-12-2018 09:41 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(08-12-2018 12:48 AM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-11-2018 09:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Northern Iowa wanted to go FBS in 2013. Get West Texas A&M to move up? They could be a better fit for New Mexico State. Northern Arizona have an FBS dome. We do not know who might want to move over. I thought the WAC wanted to expand before July 1st, but they have not. It would be hard to get any D1 to jump to the WAc right now. You may have to invite D2 schools that have stadiums that is over 15,000 stadium or as low as 10,000 to move up. Central Oklahoma, Dixie State and Azusa Pacific have below 15,000, but they could expand. AP is not that far from the Rose Bowl to use until they get their stadium upgraded. There are a couple of Lone Star schools that do play in stadiums over 15,000 already. They could be the future WAC FBS as well.

You need to check the rules just once. A DII school can’t aspire to being FBS right when it a transitional DI because the NCAA requires a full DI school first. GCU is only eligible now, CBU would need to wait five more years. The DI transition is 2.5 times longer than the FBS transition.

If NMSU had wanted to fill the WAC with FCS schools from DII, it would have already happened.

You need to recheck the rules. You have flaunted rules out of thin air about your supposed Great North Conference scheme. As for D2 schools that have the money to move up to FBS right away after spending a year or 2 in FCS? Than they can be counted.

I kick NoDak in the shale deposits regularly for being wrong about conference continuity, but I don't know that he's wrong about having to be a full Division I member to apply for FBS (i.e. done with your Division I transition). Neither of you has given a cite to NCAA bylaws about what you're saying.

It's very plausible to me that the FBS rules require you to be a full Division I member. It's also very plausible that they don't, because who would even think that a Division I startup would be a credible FBS candidate?

Quote:NCAA have always given waivers.

Umm, no. NCAA waivers, or wholesale rewrites of the rules, happen regularly for those "inside the club" (Save-the-WAC rule, Big East automatic bid waiver) but very rarely for the benefit of those "outside the club" (Liberty to FBS--Liberty had a pretty good case to take to court about religious discrimination, and about Liberty meeting the legitimate purposes of the FBS restrictions--they've shown no problems funding or scheduling at an FBS level.)

Quote:Once Liberty was given the waiver? I could see other schools who wants to be FBS could challenge the rule. That includes D2 schools. The Liberty situation have opened the can of worms, and we could see more schools challenge the NCAA in the near future.

The point of granting Liberty a waiver was so that the NCAA didn't take the chance of losing in court, having the rules struck down and any run-down back-woods academic-toilet school jumping into FBS. So no.

Here's a link to the PDF, available for free download. Find out what the rules actually say.

EDIT: Oops. Here's the link

(08-08-2018 06:05 PM)NoDak Wrote:  UTSA never competed for a Southland fb championship. They may have played some Southland schools, but never intended FCS as a destination. FCS was never ever a destination target for UNC-Charlotte, FIU, USA, USF and was merely a convenient short stop at FAU, UCF, ODU, Ga State, and other large public metro schools.

Fully expect the eventual WAC FCS will align fb with the Summit (Great Northern) for one last year of FCS, and then all those schools will be under the WAC banner for the FBS transition, and then divide among the Summit or WAC.

This incorrect re: ODU. They “restarted” football with FCS as the goal. VCU & GMU left the CAA and Wood Selig took over as AD, who pushed for C-USA (& FBS). It wasn’t AT ALL like UTSA/USA.

(08-11-2018 09:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Northern Iowa wanted to go FBS in 2013. Get West Texas A&M to move up? They could be a better fit for New Mexico State. Northern Arizona have an FBS dome. We do not know who might want to move over. I thought the WAC wanted to expand before July 1st, but they have not. It would be hard to get any D1 to jump to the WAc right now. You may have to invite D2 schools that have stadiums that is over 15,000 stadium or as low as 10,000 to move up. Central Oklahoma, Dixie State and Azusa Pacific have below 15,000, but they could expand. AP is not that far from the Rose Bowl to use until they get their stadium upgraded. There are a couple of Lone Star schools that do play in stadiums over 15,000 already. They could be the future WAC FBS as well.

After the conversion of bleachers to seatbacks, NAU has 10,000 seats in the dome. The 15K number was only possible if it was 15,000 anorexic models.