-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
https://theathletic.com/3621500/2022...-ucla-big-ten/
Quote:
"Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff sent a letter to the University of California Board of Regents on Thursday in an attempt to overturn the UCLA chancellor’s decision to leave the Big Ten in 2024, a source confirmed to The Athletic."
"He wrote that UCLA athletes could see their academic and health status decline due to increased time traveling on planes to road games. Family and friends of those athletes would also have a more arduous and expensive time seeing the Bruins compete further away from California. Kliavkoff stated travel costs — currently $8.1 in the Pac-12 — would jump to $23.7 million if flights were chartered in the Big Ten."
Quite the commissioner there.
Meanwhile Oregon is offering up whatever the B1G would want (including adding sports).
Circus.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Sicatoka
Quote:
travel costs — currently $8.1 in the Pac-12 — would jump to $23.7 million if flights were chartered in the Big Ten.
Woof! And some here don't want to admit that travel is a real factor/consideration when moving conferences.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Not sure that this applies to FBS realignment issues like noted above but one reason why NDSU would experience some significantly higher travel expenses is because we'd need to add a women's sport. That is a 0-100% increase for that sport, plus moderately more expensive trips for our current sports.
The thing that I don't know is that according to what conference we get in - MW vs MAC, for instance - our players and coaches may have more hotel stays than they currently experience. That obviously can add up quickly as well.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OrygunBison
Not sure that this applies to FBS realignment issues like noted above but one reason why NDSU would experience some significantly higher travel expenses is because we'd need to add a women's sport.
You're at the right number (16) and mix of sports (8/8) for FBS per NCAA DI manual.
I believe the issue would be I'm told you're fully funded and to add men's scholarships you'd need to place women's equity dollars somewhere, so, yes, you might be right as adding might be one (expensive) option. Letting Hammersmith get after the budget to find somewhere to place equity dollars might be better (and cheaper).
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
Woof! And some here don't want to admit that travel is a real factor/consideration when moving conferences.
To be fair, that commish points out the $15M travel increase, but doesn't point out the extra $45M (over today) the B1G will garner UCLA.
Is there an FBS conference that will give enough share to balance out added travel expense from this region? Pretty sure the MAC and MWC don't give shares that size. Anyone?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Sicatoka
You're at the right number (16) and mix of sports (8/8) for FBS per NCAA DI manual.
I believe the issue would be I'm told you're fully funded and to add men's scholarships you'd need to place women's equity dollars somewhere, so, yes, you might be right as adding might be one (expensive) option. Letting Hammersmith get after the budget to find somewhere to place equity dollars might be better (and cheaper).
Why do you keep pushing this Title IX argument? Of all the things holding NDSU back from FBS, Title IX is barely worth talking about. We can easily add whatever our women's programs need. Just because UND has 3 active Title IX lawsuits doesn't mean NDSU needs some. That's one metric I'm quite happy you taking the lead on.
Here's the text of Title IX
Quote:
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
That's it. 37 words. No mention of athletics. We make this way more complicated than it needs to be.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
This all just comes down to "want to." Does NDSU want to move to FBS?
Do the MW or Mac etc..want to add NDSU
It isn't location. It isn't title IX, It isn't the travel. It isn't increased costs.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
Why do you keep pushing this Title IX argument? Of all the things holding NDSU back from FBS, Title IX is barely worth talking about. We can easily add whatever our women's programs need. Just because UND has 3 active Title IX lawsuits doesn't mean NDSU needs some. That's one metric I'm quite happy you taking the lead on.
Here's the text of Title IX
That's it. 37 words. No mention of athletics. We make this way more complicated than it needs to be.
My only point was the added travel for an entirely new offering needed to be accounted. People keep saying the difference in travel is negligible but with added scholarships for football, new scholarships for an entirely new women's sport, and likely added hotel nights for games further away, it will add up. I still don't think it's an impediment though.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
This all just comes down to "want to." Does NDSU want to move to FBS?
Do the MW or Mac etc..want to add NDSU
It isn't location. It isn't title IX, It isn't the travel. It isn't increased costs.
If it wasn't for location - travel costs - NDSU would be FBS (such as if they were geographical located where JMU or GSU are).
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Sicatoka
You gonna mention the part where the California Board of Regents asked him for the letter in the first place? Or you just gonna pretend that he just did it on his own?
Lol
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
Why do you keep pushing this Title IX argument? Of all the things holding NDSU back from FBS, Title IX is barely worth talking about. We can easily add whatever our women's programs need. Just because UND has 3 active Title IX lawsuits doesn't mean NDSU needs some. That's one metric I'm quite happy you taking the lead on.
Here's the text of Title IX
That's it. 37 words. No mention of athletics. We make this way more complicated than it needs to be.
Well he's a UND fan so he 1) Pretends to be an expert in Title IX and 2) Has to try to throw cold water on NDSU
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
If the MW wanted NDSU they would invite you..Location plays no role.
If NDSU does not want to move up because of travel cost, location plays a role..
I don't know about other conferences but I suspect neither the MW or NDSU is interested in partnering up. No "want" to on either side..
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
This all just comes down to "want to." Does NDSU want to move to FBS?
Do the MW or Mac etc..want to add NDSU
It isn't location. It isn't title IX, It isn't the travel. It isn't increased costs.
You're looking at a binary decision as if it happens in a vacuum...
Travel, increased costs, geography and more all play into whether NDSU is a 1 or a 0 on "wanting to be FBS"
Travel, media $, program quality, brand, academics and more all play into whether a given FBS conference is a 1 or a 0 on "wanting NDSU"
I would bet my bottom dollar NDSU is a 1 on the MW, I would double down my bottom dollar the MW is a 0 on NDSU because there's no room in the inn as you've said
That may change someday, hopefully but that's where we're at
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
We can easily add whatever our women's programs need.
Well in that case, here ya go, the obvious answer:
https://www.google.com/search?q=ndsu...hrome&ie=UTF-8
NDSU uses the "third prong" test (on-campus interest). There's the interest. Here's the standard summarized by experts in Title IX law.
And tell me you're playing; you really are not so naive to believe it's just those 37 words.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
You're looking at a binary decision as if it happens in a vacuum...
Travel, increased costs, geography and more all play into whether NDSU is a 1 or a 0 on "wanting to be FBS"
Travel, media $, program quality, brand, academics and more all play into whether a given FBS conference is a 1 or a 0 on "wanting NDSU"
I would bet my bottom dollar NDSU is a 1 on the MW, I would double down my bottom dollar the MW is a 0 on NDSU because there's no room in the inn as you've said
That may change someday, hopefully but that's where we're at
Change can and will come. However, to me, NDSU is taking on all the risk by moving to the MW. The MW is holding all the cards at the moment. Does NDSU really want to add to their costs, take a smaller piece of the pie and add the cumbersome travel.
I would guess, they don't..
I am operating on the theory that if the MW wanted you they would invite you..They haven't
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
How is travel cumbersome bro there are planes they exist and they go really fast
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
Change can and will come. However, to me, NDSU is taking on all the risk by moving to the MW. The MW is holding all the cards at the moment. Does NDSU really want to add to their costs, take a smaller piece of the pie and add the cumbersome travel.
I would guess, they don't..
I am operating on the theory that if the MW wanted you they would invite you..They haven't
Adding costs isn't a problem if you're adding revenue to offset them. We've gone over this probably a dozen times on this board. Our outgoing president and current AD have been on the record saying the money to go FBS actually works out quite well - it's not the money at this point (except for the CUSA). At least not from NDSU's point of view...
The MW is holding the cards like you say. I'm very confident that if the MW invited NDSU would accept. Even the most cautious on this board would likely agree with that. If for no other reason that if it got out that we were invited but said no, the president and AD could probably kiss their jobs goodbye. With how stagnant everything has gotten, it would kill our program support.
The problem is the MW doesn't think adding NDSU is a net positive right now, so they haven't. There are reasons why they think that way. That's where we're at. All the other talking about it here is window dressing.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
Change can and will come. However, to me, NDSU is taking on all the risk by moving to the MW. The MW is holding all the cards at the moment. Does NDSU really want to add to their costs, take a smaller piece of the pie and add the cumbersome travel.
I would guess, they don't..
I am operating on the theory that if the MW wanted you they would invite you..They haven't
I'm sure you're right. In that case you can probably stop spending your time thinking and typing about it then.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
I could..However, I am interested in the debate..
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Sicatoka
The difference between UND and NDSU is we have competent administration that I trust to maintain compliance in all areas. Title IX simply isn't an issue with us. Just because your school can't understand those 37 words doesn't mean we can't.
TITLE IX IS NOT AN ISSUE WITH FBS NDSU. Is that clear enough?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
The difference between UND and NDSU is we have competent administration that I trust to maintain compliance in all areas. Title IX simply isn't an issue with us. Just because your school can't understand those 37 words doesn't mean we can't.
TITLE IX IS NOT AN ISSUE WITH FBS NDSU. Is that clear enough?
NDSU is out of balance regarding athletics funding M vs F. That's fine, nothing wrong with it, agree, completely compliant, ... until a group of female NDSU students asks for a ________ team to be formed. But then "third prong" test used by NDSU (campus interest and ability) kicks in and the funding disparity comes into focus. Hope no group of NDSU female students ask for a varsity team. (For comparison, UND uses "first prong", funding proportionate to enrollments, for compliance.)
Code:
2021 EADA Reports NDSU UND
M F M F
Student Enrollment 52.9% 47.1% 53.1% 46.9%
Duplicated Participation 58.0% 42.0% 53.4% 46.6%
Unduplicated Participation 63.7% 36.3% 56.4% 43.6%
Financial Aid 61.8% 38.2% 56.5% 43.5%
And just don't believe me; ask your Athletics SWA who oversees these things.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
This guy knows what he's talking about. Their university cut women's hockey remember.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Sicatoka brings a lot to the discussion IMO. No use disparaging anyone who can have a civil conversation.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
daddy daycare
Sicatoka brings a lot to the discussion IMO. No use disparaging anyone who can have a civil conversation.
Title IX prongs are a favorite topic of discussion on the hostile and abusive sports forum.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
EC8CH
This guy knows what he's talking about. Their university cut women's hockey remember.
For the moment anyways
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
Our outgoing president and current AD have been on the record saying the money to go FBS actually works out quite well - it's not the money at this point (except for the CUSA). At least not from NDSU's point of view...
The same outgoing president who's on record saying this?
Quote:
“In a city of a quarter of a million people (including the entire Fargo-Moorhead metro area) you can only raise so much money and I think we’re probably getting closer to that point, so it’s not as simple as, ‘Okay. ‘If you are FBS you will raise more money.’ I don’t know if this is the case,” Bresciani said.
“That’s a lot to ask. But as for NDSU, we don’t believe we have enough resources to get into a situation that will require a lot of new resources.”
His commentary specifically stated a move would make sense if it "doesn’t require a lot of new resources". That's quite different than saying "the money to go FBS works out quite well".
Everyone's buddy McFeely wrote an article about it not all that point ago.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
The same outgoing president who's on record saying this?
His commentary specifically stated a move would make sense if it "doesn’t require a lot of new resources". That's quite different than saying "the money to go FBS works out quite well".
Everyone's buddy McFeely wrote an article about it not all that point ago.
Bresciani got the hots for a west coast gal & was ready to be done. good for him combined with an east coast AD that is just happy to coast with his lucky horseshoe of a job
there's a LOT of money that is being held back BECAUSE NDSU ISNT FBS.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
The same outgoing president who's on record saying this?
His commentary specifically stated a move would make sense if it "doesn’t require a lot of new resources". That's quite different than saying "the money to go FBS works out quite well".
Everyone's buddy McFeely wrote an article about it not all that point ago.
Yeah, we've talked about it on here when our other resident UNDer made the same point. We just raised $586M dollars in 6 years. I would've guessed the giving was tapped out after that too. FBS or no FBS.
But you're missing the point. NDSU can absolutely make the budgets work with the increase in media $ and postseason $ disbursements by the conference, in the right conference. That much is pretty clear. We're talking something of the order of $5M increase on Day 1. No glaring need to increase the level of giving that is already taking place. Although there certainly are folks who are sitting on the sideline waiting for a reason to give again.
He may have been talking about the CUSA, where there is no media $ and about to be essentially no postseason $ disbursements. Hard to tell, they've chosen to be incredibly vague, non-committal and coy about everything once FBS gets brought up.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
holding out money because NDSU isn’t FBS….that’s similar to a UND fan saying they won’t support their program because the Sioux nickname.
if someone is too petty to support the kids and program as they are so be it.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El_Chapo
Bresciani got the hots for a west coast gal ...
You mean the NDSU Architecture grad with her own major firm who was serving on the NDSU Alumni Association Board? That "gal"?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
EC8CH
This guy knows what he's talking about. Their university cut women's hockey remember.
True.
Cutting WIH actually brought UND closer to "first prong" compliance by bringing scholarship dollars and percentages closer to alignment to the campus population percentages (athlete and general). See the data from previous post on topic.
Another interesting number? NDSU spends over $1.2 million dollars more annually on player scholarships for men's sports: $3.186M vs $1.972M. That's 62/38 when campus is 53/47.
Source of this and previous data: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/
Should NDSU get an FBS offer and look to add 22 men's scholarships to the above numbers, all the funding, ratios, and compliance will get a review. Like I said before, I'd get someone who seems very knowledgeable and skilled (Hammersmith?) pondering now, if not already complete and tucked in a "some day" folder.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
Ha!! They sound like some of the folks on the MWC board. Long way from ND to Nevada, true
But NDSU is the only school of the four that the MWC has publicly mentioned as a target, and I don't think the Montana schools are ready yet
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
the fact that CFP ANNOUNCED 12 TEAM PLAYOFF WITH 1 G5 GUARANTEED TEAM A MONTH AGO & MATT LARSON/COOK DIDNT RELEASE A STATEMENT SAYING NDSU WANTS IN IS THE SADDEST THING IVE EVER SEEN
bring on the competition...yea right... its a joke
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
daddy daycare
holding out money because NDSU isn’t FBS….that’s similar to a UND fan saying they won’t support their program because the Sioux nickname.
if someone is too petty to support the kids and program as they are so be it.
I seem to recall you stating that you have no interest in attending games currently because you don't find it to be worth the money or time you spend. Interesting that you are calling out others as petty that are making similar choices. You do you though.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
daddy daycare
holding out money because NDSU isn’t FBS….that’s similar to a UND fan saying they won’t support their program because the Sioux nickname.
if someone is too petty to support the kids and program as they are so be it.
It’s not remotely close to the same thing and you know it. Nice try.
I don’t donate more than I already do (which is a substantial amount considering it’s not going towards season tickets or any other membership perks, FYI), similar to many others, because I don’t see how my donation is helping anything. If we’re just stuck in FCS and we can never do any better than go toe to toe with teachers colleges, sdsu and the Montanas then so be it. I have a long career ahead of me and would like to retire early. That’s more important to me than hanging up a couple extra touchdowns in Frisco against Montana state. There are quite a few young professionals in the MSP that feel the same way that I do.
This of course would all change if we had a publicly stated vision or goal for moving onto something greater. But we don’t have that we have an AD who makes snide remarks about us not selling out doesn’t help us get an FBS invite.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
... and I don't think the Montana schools are ready yet
Correct.
As I noted from the DI manual, it's 16 sports to be FBS. The Montanas are each at 15. NDSU is at 16 (8/8); UND is at 17 (8/9).
UMt (6/9) and MtSU (7/8) would each have to add a sport. (They list M/W "Rodeo" on their Athletics pages but it is not NCAA sanctioned.)
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El_Chapo
the fact that CFP ANNOUNCED 12 TEAM PLAYOFF WITH 1 G5 GUARANTEED TEAM A MONTH AGO & MATT LARSON/COOK DIDNT RELEASE A STATEMENT SAYING NDSU WANTS IN IS THE SADDEST THING IVE EVER SEEN
bring on the competition...yea right... its a joke
And the fact that you used THE CAPS LOCK REALLY GOT YOUR POINT ACROSS A LOT BETTER EH.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El_Chapo
... MATT LARSON/COOK ...
Do the NDSU President and the NDSU AD know things you don't know?
As I'm told here, your leadership is more than competent. Trust them.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
scottietohottie
And the fact that you used THE CAPS LOCK REALLY GOT YOUR POINT ACROSS A LOT BETTER EH.
He was thinking really loud when he was typing too.
