Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
FWIW, a handful of other well connected FBS reporters like Matt Brown have been quietly saying the same thing in tweets and various posts. It’s not just the Fargo press.
I think the whole narrative that it’s all up to ML and that we can just force our way into a FBS conference has always been a dumb take. There’s a lot more involved that we simply don’t control.
The current situation with the P2 is why many of us have been critical of what seemed like a wait and see approach regarding FBS until more recently. Would it have changed the outcome? Maybe not but I don't think it would have hurt us either and we just may have found a chair earlier in this big game of musical chairs. If the P2 are now putting up barriers for FCS movement, than being less aggressive to move FBS is even more worthy of criticism. Also, criticism of ML isn't just about FBS. At least not for me. ML has also not shown much in the way of helping to build a more balanced athletic department in terms of funding and success. If you want to make ML a victim, so be it. I just don't see it that way and much like many have stated regarding Entz, his public PR approach has rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
I do believe that the CFP people have urged the Pac Who and the Mountain West not to add any FCS schools.
My question is why?
To be sure they don't want to add extra slices to the money pie. That seems reasonable to me.
But the niggling thought I have is this. If it is inevitable that the P4 is going to break away and form their own professional football league why would they care who G6 conferences adds or not?
Is it possible a break away is not really on the table yet?
Why did the MW schools sign a GOR in force until 2032. The ACC GOR ends in 31. Why did the MW waive any exit fees for all their members if schools are invited to a P4 conference?
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigLakeBison
Also, criticism of ML isn't just about FBS. At least not for me. ML has also not shown much in the way of helping to build a more balanced athletic department in terms of funding and success. If you want to make ML a victim, so be it.
I don't think ML is a victim or perfect, just that some of the anger is misplaced. There is tendency here to believe that because of our FCS results every conference should be falling over themselves to add us, and this simply isn't true. The criteria and decision making process is much more complex, and geography does work against us. The primary reason Missouri St was more appealing to a couple conferences is geography. G5 prefer to travel less.
Where I agree is that the athletic department should be "more balanced" and in particular spend more on basketball. Nothing grabs other conferences attention more than some March Madness deep runs. That translates into more credits, money and prestige that all the conferences want. To fund basketball properly costs a fraction of what we've been plowing into football. Increasing basketball budget by a few million would move the needle. However, its not clear if there would be a direct economic return to NDSU in the short term, unless our fanbase chooses to embrace basketball.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
Why the fuck does Sankey care? I could see why the B1G would not want the XDSUs in FBS (see goldy and bucky), but who in the SEC gives a rat’s ass? This is all garbage BS and if the G5 leadership is eating it then they deserve the fate that awaits them
I don't think the SEC is thinking about the XDSU's, they're thinking about all the FCS schools in the southeast--and there are a lot of them--trying to move up and dilute the money flow....eventually, the SEC and the BG10 will maneuver things so that they control virtually everything. They're moving more slowly than most people thought they would, but this is a first step....
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gully
Does college football have an anti-trust exemption? Since this is all apparently 'business' now with 'employees', how can industry incumbents work together (collude) to reduce competition? Seems like a clear case to me.
Time to form our own conference if Sankey wants to block us from the MWC, bring every damn Dakota school up, the Montana schools and Idaho. If he doesn't want it he can fight 4 Governors, 8 Senators and 4 attorney generals.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NI4NI
This is what I was asking. If we get an invite, do we control our own destiny? Or can those inside our own camp sabotage this?
Are you asking that if we get an invite to the PAC and Softball says they don't want to do it are we screwed?
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
Why the fuck does Sankey care?
Money.
Fewer slices of the pie means more pie for Sankey.
Don't think like a football fan; think like a college administrator watching the dollars. More for me; none for you.
As GCW says, the SEC and B1G are on a path to total control.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BISONBRI53
Are you asking that if we get an invite to the PAC and Softball says they don't want to do it are we screwed?
Did you read the Forum article last week about Bucky? During the initial move to D1, he opposed it and was pretty open with Gene about that. He eventually came around, but that move wasn't unanimous internally.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSUstudent
Time to form our own conference if Sankey wants to block us from the MWC, bring every damn Dakota school up, the Montana schools and Idaho. If he doesn't want it he can fight 4 Governors, 8 Senators and 4 attorney generals.
The problem is even if this was successful, it wouldn't force any other FBS school to schedule us OOC, or for us to be added to the CFP, which is a private corporate entity outside of NCAA jurisdiction. We could "win" and still find ourselves in the equivalent of a FBS Ivy league or SWAC type situation. This was the whole idea of the UAC, which doesn't seem to be going anywhere yet.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BISONBRI53
Are you asking that if we get an invite to the PAC and Softball says they don't want to do it are we screwed?
Correct
That is what I was questioning
