(08-20-2018 04:26 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-20-2018 01:59 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  What's the worst case?

Um, the worst case for UTA is that the P5 decide to break away from the NCAA, and invite their G5 punching bags along with them. (For all sports)

You might as well buy asteroid insurance. You never know when an extinction event is right around the corner.

Here is my thoughts.

UTA, Little Rock and Wichita State all should start FBS football now. If there is a break away from the NCAA by the P5 schools? They would take only football schools with them. Big East would have the door slammed in their face as well since they do not care about football.

That could mean they could grab FCS schools as well. Mainly MVFC, Big Sky, Southland, OVC football schools, Chattanooga, East Tennessee State, Kennesaw State and CAA football schools.

Schools like VCU, Vermont, George Mason, Dayton, Gonzaga, College of Charleston and some other non-football schools should also look at adding FBS football for them to keep their other sports with the big boys. That includes the giant California schools who do not have football. All these schools are worried that they are afraid to be left behind for all sports.

(08-27-2018 03:53 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Here is my thoughts.

UTA, Little Rock and Wichita State all should start FBS football now. If there is a break away from the NCAA by the P5 schools? They would take only football schools with them. Big East would have the door slammed in their face as well since they do not care about football.

That could mean they could grab FCS schools as well. Mainly MVFC, Big Sky, Southland, OVC football schools, Chattanooga, East Tennessee State, Kennesaw State and CAA football schools.

Schools like VCU, Vermont, George Mason, Dayton, Gonzaga, College of Charleston and some other non-football schools should also look at adding FBS football for them to keep their other sports with the big boys. That includes the giant California schools who do not have football. All these schools are worried that they are afraid to be left behind for all sports.

This line of thinking has never quite tracked with me. The split in football already happened - the P5 have their own football championship separate from the NCAA and the G5 and operate under a system where they maintain the vast majority of the exposure and profits. If they split further it's going to be about keeping the basketball money that currently sustains the NCAA. It's never made much sense to me that the biggest names in college sports would pick the basketball teams to include in a theoretical new college basketball tournament based on whether they have some bottom-rung startup football team rather than, you know, their basketball program. If anything, having a football team and thus wanting a cut of the football profits rather than taking a "basketball only" share would be a detriment.

(08-27-2018 05:29 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 03:53 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Here is my thoughts.

UTA, Little Rock and Wichita State all should start FBS football now. If there is a break away from the NCAA by the P5 schools? They would take only football schools with them. Big East would have the door slammed in their face as well since they do not care about football.

That could mean they could grab FCS schools as well. Mainly MVFC, Big Sky, Southland, OVC football schools, Chattanooga, East Tennessee State, Kennesaw State and CAA football schools.

Schools like VCU, Vermont, George Mason, Dayton, Gonzaga, College of Charleston and some other non-football schools should also look at adding FBS football for them to keep their other sports with the big boys. That includes the giant California schools who do not have football. All these schools are worried that they are afraid to be left behind for all sports.

This line of thinking has never quite tracked with me. The split in football already happened - the P5 have their own football championship separate from the NCAA and the G5 and operate under a system where they maintain the vast majority of the exposure and profits. If they split further it's going to be about keeping the basketball money that currently sustains the NCAA. It's never made much sense to me that the biggest names in college sports would pick the basketball teams to include in a theoretical new college basketball tournament based on whether they have some bottom-rung startup football team rather than, you know, their basketball program. If anything, having a football team and thus wanting a cut of the football profits rather than taking a "basketball only" share would be a detriment.

Not only has that split taken place, UALR and Wichita State are arguably in a better position BECAUSE they lack football.

If Wichita State had football it isn't probable that their football would be a positive for AAC. With football Wichita State may well have been damaging to their push to join AAC they very well could have been in a position where they were rejected by AAC because they harmed the league's mythic quest to be "P6" in football.

Arkansas-Little Rock had they added football years ago would have been less interested in the old pre-American South merger Sun Belt and would have said no to joining and then post-merger would struggled to gain an invitation to join the conference.

There are simply no indications that anyone within the Sun Belt has any desire to see UALR or UTA add football. The league is comfortable with the current 10/12 and doesn't seem to want to have to a nurture a ratings drag new program.

Football isn't a magic solution and arguably both schools are worse off it they add football.

(08-27-2018 03:53 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Schools like VCU, Vermont, George Mason, Dayton, Gonzaga, College of Charleston and some other non-football schools should also look at adding FBS football for them to keep their other sports with the big boys. That includes the giant California schools who do not have football. All these schools are worried that they are afraid to be left behind for all sports.

Did you seriously just suggest that the UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT add FBS football????? Your Upper Iowa suggestion was more realistic.

What's wrong with that, every other New England state has one.

(08-28-2018 10:39 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What's wrong with that, every other New England state has one.

There is no FBS football in Maine, New Hampshire or Rhode Island. It is not feasible in any of them. If Vermont were to average 20,000 fans over 3% of the entire state's population would have to turn up at the game. There are 30 high school football teams in the entire state! An article in 2017 discussed the possible extinction of football in Vermont, as only 993 students were playing high school football statewide. Middle school football in Vermont is now flag football and not tackle.

But, right, tell me all about the millions of dollars UVM can put into FBS football.

If UT Arlington restarts football and eventually plays at the FBS level in the Sunbelt then NM ST should reapply to the conference for at least FB only. Adding NM ST for all sports would bring a strong Men's BB program too. Just my opinion as I have no vote.

(08-28-2018 10:57 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:39 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What's wrong with that, every other New England state has one.

There is no FBS football in Maine, New Hampshire or Rhode Island. It is not feasible in any of them. If Vermont were to average 20,000 fans over 3% of the entire state's population would have to turn up at the game. There are 30 high school football teams in the entire state! An article in 2017 discussed the possible extinction of football in Vermont, as only 993 students were playing high school football statewide. Middle school football in Vermont is now flag football abnd not tackle.

But, right, tell me all about the millions of dollars UVM can put into FBS football.

Sorry, I didn't see the FBS part.

(08-28-2018 10:57 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:39 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What's wrong with that, every other New England state has one.

There is no FBS football in Maine, New Hampshire or Rhode Island. It is not feasible in any of them. If Vermont were to average 20,000 fans over 3% of the entire state's population would have to turn up at the game. There are 30 high school football teams in the entire state! An article in 2017 discussed the possible extinction of football in Vermont, as only 993 students were playing high school football statewide. Middle school football in Vermont is now flag football and not tackle.

But, right, tell me all about the millions of dollars UVM can put into FBS football.

I'm sure Vermont has fans and alums outside of Vermont, especially in the more populated New England states and in New York.

(08-28-2018 02:13 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:57 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:39 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What's wrong with that, every other New England state has one.

There is no FBS football in Maine, New Hampshire or Rhode Island. It is not feasible in any of them. If Vermont were to average 20,000 fans over 3% of the entire state's population would have to turn up at the game. There are 30 high school football teams in the entire state! An article in 2017 discussed the possible extinction of football in Vermont, as only 993 students were playing high school football statewide. Middle school football in Vermont is now flag football and not tackle.

But, right, tell me all about the millions of dollars UVM can put into FBS football.

I'm sure Vermont has fans and alums outside of Vermont, especially in the more populated New England states and in New York.

Call it small-state mentality if you want (I'm sure someone knows someone who drives from, like, Odessa to Austin round-trip in a day for every UT home game. I don't care, it doesn't work like that in New England) but Burlington is about as isolated from the major NY/NE population centers as you can be outside of Maine, you aren't getting a couple thousand people a game driving in from the coast. If UConn and UMass can't make it work, UVM doesn't have a shot. They'd be better off pouring the money into the ice hockey and lacrosse teams, where they at least have the geography to be nationally relevant when done correctly. Hell, pour the money into basketball and try to be Wichita State Northeast while chasing an A-10 invite. However, building a football stadium and adding 150-170 scholarships per year to chase what I assume would be some form of MAC membership in conjunction with UMass would just be lighting money on fire for the fun of it.

(08-29-2018 09:17 AM)Bogg Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 02:13 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:57 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:39 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What's wrong with that, every other New England state has one.

There is no FBS football in Maine, New Hampshire or Rhode Island. It is not feasible in any of them. If Vermont were to average 20,000 fans over 3% of the entire state's population would have to turn up at the game. There are 30 high school football teams in the entire state! An article in 2017 discussed the possible extinction of football in Vermont, as only 993 students were playing high school football statewide. Middle school football in Vermont is now flag football and not tackle.

But, right, tell me all about the millions of dollars UVM can put into FBS football.

I'm sure Vermont has fans and alums outside of Vermont, especially in the more populated New England states and in New York.

Call it small-state mentality if you want (I'm sure someone knows someone who drives from, like, Odessa to Austin round-trip in a day for every UT home game. I don't care, it doesn't work like that in New England)

This is very true for the Northeast. I grew up in NYC, and was getting married in Annapolis, MD. The New Jersey cousins couldn't be bothered to make the trip to family events in Long Island, and the Long Island cousins couldn't be bothered to haul out to New Jersey.

So we figured it was safe to invite them, figuring they woulnd't make the trip. We learned our lesson--Annapolis is far enough away to justify a hotel room. So they all came.

(08-29-2018 09:17 AM)Bogg Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 02:13 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:57 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:39 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What's wrong with that, every other New England state has one.

There is no FBS football in Maine, New Hampshire or Rhode Island. It is not feasible in any of them. If Vermont were to average 20,000 fans over 3% of the entire state's population would have to turn up at the game. There are 30 high school football teams in the entire state! An article in 2017 discussed the possible extinction of football in Vermont, as only 993 students were playing high school football statewide. Middle school football in Vermont is now flag football and not tackle.

But, right, tell me all about the millions of dollars UVM can put into FBS football.

I'm sure Vermont has fans and alums outside of Vermont, especially in the more populated New England states and in New York.

Call it small-state mentality if you want (I'm sure someone knows someone who drives from, like, Odessa to Austin round-trip in a day for every UT home game. I don't care, it doesn't work like that in New England) but Burlington is about as isolated from the major NY/NE population centers as you can be outside of Maine, you aren't getting a couple thousand people a game driving in from the coast. If UConn and UMass can't make it work, UVM doesn't have a shot. They'd be better off pouring the money into the ice hockey and lacrosse teams, where they at least have the geography to be nationally relevant when done correctly. Hell, pour the money into basketball and try to be Wichita State Northeast while chasing an A-10 invite. However, building a football stadium and adding 150-170 scholarships per year to chase what I assume would be some form of MAC membership in conjunction with UMass would just be lighting money on fire for the fun of it.

I know people that make the 545 mile drive from Sidney Montana (almost on the North Dakota border) to Missoula for Montana games for most home games.

(08-29-2018 07:43 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-29-2018 09:17 AM)Bogg Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 02:13 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:57 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 10:39 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What's wrong with that, every other New England state has one.

There is no FBS football in Maine, New Hampshire or Rhode Island. It is not feasible in any of them. If Vermont were to average 20,000 fans over 3% of the entire state's population would have to turn up at the game. There are 30 high school football teams in the entire state! An article in 2017 discussed the possible extinction of football in Vermont, as only 993 students were playing high school football statewide. Middle school football in Vermont is now flag football and not tackle.

But, right, tell me all about the millions of dollars UVM can put into FBS football.

I'm sure Vermont has fans and alums outside of Vermont, especially in the more populated New England states and in New York.

Call it small-state mentality if you want (I'm sure someone knows someone who drives from, like, Odessa to Austin round-trip in a day for every UT home game. I don't care, it doesn't work like that in New England) but Burlington is about as isolated from the major NY/NE population centers as you can be outside of Maine, you aren't getting a couple thousand people a game driving in from the coast. If UConn and UMass can't make it work, UVM doesn't have a shot. They'd be better off pouring the money into the ice hockey and lacrosse teams, where they at least have the geography to be nationally relevant when done correctly. Hell, pour the money into basketball and try to be Wichita State Northeast while chasing an A-10 invite. However, building a football stadium and adding 150-170 scholarships per year to chase what I assume would be some form of MAC membership in conjunction with UMass would just be lighting money on fire for the fun of it.

I know people that make the 545 mile drive from Sidney Montana (almost on the North Dakota border) to Missoula for Montana games for most home games.

That’s insane. 615 miles if they take the interstate

(08-27-2018 01:44 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(08-20-2018 04:26 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-20-2018 01:59 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  What's the worst case?

Um, the worst case for UTA is that the P5 decide to break away from the NCAA, and invite their G5 punching bags along with them. (For all sports)

You might as well buy asteroid insurance. You never know when an extinction event is right around the corner.

The worst case usually isn't that probable. You evaluate what the worst case is, and evaluate how big a possibility it is, and you make your decision. I'm not saying that, in an environment where the FBS schools have broken away from the NCAA, being an FBS all-sports punching bag is the right move for UTA.

But if I'm the UTA administrator in charge of strategic planning in terms of athletics, then it's my job to figure that whether, in that scenario, it's better to be UT-Dallas (no meaningful athletics) or North Texas.

As it is, mostly the ACC schools that left the Big East have been upset with the Catholic 7 who kept blocking any schools to join the conference. To avoid headaches? The breakaway will be along the lines of football schools vs the non-football schools. The tv market will be a break away. The ACC schools are not the only ones who are not happy with their non-football counterparts. The schools in the CAA who have football did not College of Charleston or Elon. They did not want a Southern footprint. They wanted Stony Brook and Albany. They would vote with the P5 to get away from Hofstra and Northeastern. Same can be said for the MVC football schools who wanted to add schools with football.
The way it is for the split to happen? AAC will have to boot Wichita State and SBC would have to boot UTA and Little Rock because the football schools in the breakaway do not want to share their with the non-football schools. That is why those 3 needs to add football. This is also the reasons why the Big West schools are talking about adding football. All these schools want to position themselves to tag along. If UTA do add football? That would put pressure on Little Rock and Wichita State to add football, or be left behind.

(08-30-2018 02:50 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  As it is, mostly the ACC schools that left the Big East have been upset with the Catholic 7 who kept blocking any schools to join the conference. To avoid headaches? The breakaway will be along the lines of football schools vs the non-football schools. The tv market will be a break away. The ACC schools are not the only ones who are not happy with their non-football counterparts. The schools in the CAA who have football did not College of Charleston or Elon. They did not want a Southern footprint. They wanted Stony Brook and Albany. They would vote with the P5 to get away from Hofstra and Northeastern. Same can be said for the MVC football schools who wanted to add schools with football.
The way it is for the split to happen? AAC will have to boot Wichita State and SBC would have to boot UTA and Little Rock because the football schools in the breakaway do not want to share their with the non-football schools. That is why those 3 needs to add football. This is also the reasons why the Big West schools are talking about adding football. All these schools want to position themselves to tag along. If UTA do add football? That would put pressure on Little Rock and Wichita State to add football, or be left behind.

What? Bless your heart.

David St is right about one thing--the CAA is one unhappy, dysfunctional family.

UNCW had a hissy fit and demanded southern friends.
Hofstra wanted nothing to do with Albany or Stonybrook because they didn't want to be overshadowed. Drexel and Northeastern were all to happy to join a voting block to keep northern football schools in the league.
I'm really shocked that William & Mary didn't bolt to the Patriot, taking Richmond football with them.
JMU will be FBS eventually.