A new and better FBS thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Professorbum

Hoping for stars to align is not a plan. Same ol' back-footed, "see how things shake out" approach to FBS as always. What we've always needed, and have always lacked, is a will to go to FBS come hell or high water because we belong there. And have a Plan A, Plan B, and Plan C to get there. And then go after each plan one by one until we are in FBS. This has never been our mentality.

---

It wasn’t our mentality because we didn’t have a president who wanted it…I don’t think that’s changed…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GCWaters

It wasn’t our mentality because we didn’t have a president who wanted it…I don’t think that’s changed…

---

Yep. I agree.

Doesn't it come down to what a school can bring to a conference in regards to media rights. If the MWC is getting $4 million per school today, NDSU has to have at least that value. What does NDSU generate today with their media package(s)? $1.5-2 million range. As a result from a pure media exposure standpoint NDSU is not a viable option.

Take Stanford and Cal. Why did they get left behind? Not competition or alumni support. But they don't have the media value. Oregon State and Washington State, same issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El_Chapo

travel for FOOTBALL is MEANINGLESS... REPEAT MEANINGLESS.

NDSU charters flights to Springfield Missouri and Youngstown Ohio. dam near the same distance as Fort Collins or UNLV or Wyoming or Boise.

and for the Non Football sports, they fly commercial Far to Den Wed play thurs and sat then fly back. big deal.

---

It's hard to imagine someone being so god damn clueless on this, but here we are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GCWaters

It wasn’t our mentality because we didn’t have a president who wanted it…I don’t think that’s changed…

---

So you're saying Cook doesn't want FBS? Doesn't really matter what the AD thinks then, does it, despite all the heat he takes here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker

So you're saying Cook doesn't want FBS? Doesn't really matter what the AD thinks then, does it, despite all the heat he takes here?

---

My interpretation of things is that Cook is more open to FBS than Bresciani ever was. I think that along with the recent FCS to FBS move ups, the response to Covid from the larger FCS and the continuing decline in fan engagement has made staying in the FCS more risky for NDSU. That is what I think is driving their more public openness to the prospect of moving to FBS. I would agree that ML doesn't deserve the entirety of criticism that he gets. It very well could be that he has been banging the FBS drum behind the scenes and has been met with opposition by higher ups. If that was the case though I would think he would have become very frustrated and likely not want to remain in a position where he feels his opinions regarding the Ath. Dept. don't carry the weight he would like. It is probably more realistic that he shared similar views to the higher ups and didn't think FBS was the right move until recently. I don't know, just speculating.

so if MWC needs one school.....the commish is gonna call larsen waaaaaay up in nodak instead of calling say UTEP?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skunkapekiller

so if MWC needs one school.....the commish is gonna call larsen waaaaaay up in nodak instead of calling say UTEP?

---

701 bro eh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skunkapekiller

so if MWC needs one school.....the commish is gonna call larsen waaaaaay up in nodak instead of calling say UTEP?

---

I'm sure NDSU is 2nd on the list of calls after he reaches out to UND first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigLakeBison

My interpretation of things is that Cook is more open to FBS than Bresciani ever was. I think that along with the recent FCS to FBS move ups, the response to Covid from the larger FCS and the continuing decline in fan engagement has made staying in the FCS more risky for NDSU. That is what I think is driving their more public openness to the prospect of moving to FBS. I would agree that ML doesn't deserve the entirety of criticism that he gets. It very well could be that he has been banging the FBS drum behind the scenes and has been met with opposition by higher ups. If that was the case though I would think he would have become very frustrated and likely not want to remain in a position where he feels his opinions regarding the Ath. Dept. don't carry the weight he would like. It is probably more realistic that he shared similar views to the higher ups and didn't think FBS was the right move until recently. I don't know, just speculating.

---

He certainly sounded that way early on, and true, the AD does sound different now

It's funny. I remember Culhane responding to Andy about this very question, saying "it depends if he wants to fight with the school up north"
Maybe Jeff had some insight. Maybe Waters has insight

The CFB landscape is a little unstable right now, so there's that, but NDSU better be sure they stay aligned with the second level of CFB
GT used to say this. Phil said this yesterday
Would take some fortitude for sure, but ...

wouldn't be surprised with everything und has done academically and athletically in the last 20 years

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker

So you're saying Cook doesn't want FBS? Doesn't really matter what the AD thinks then, does it, despite all the heat he takes here?

---

I think he's open to it, but it's not a priority. He has a number of other things on his plate right now that are more pressing and more important--I know that's not a popular thing to say here. I think he'd consider it if the opportunity were there, but I don't think it's something he's actively pursuing. I think Bresciani was pretty much a "no". And yes--the AD is doing what the president wants. Both DB and Cook have shown their willingness to fire people who don't do what they want, so the fact that ML still has a job is telling.

Another thing that struck me ... When MM interviewed Aresco, the AAC commish said "we don't talk about schools that are interested in us, and who we might be interested in too"

You suppose he got that just from Entz's media quote? He sure as hell didn't get it from Bisonville (sorry lakes). Would seem to suggest some communication had occurred

Side note but I wish tony would block the und bots. He can block me too if he wants, to make it fair, even though I always use facts instead of bs ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GCWaters

I think he's open to it, but it's not a priority. He has a number of other things on his plate right now that are more pressing and more important--I know that's not a popular thing to say here. I think he'd consider it if the opportunity were there, but I don't think it's something he's actively pursuing. I think Bresciani was pretty much a "no". And yes--the AD is doing what the president wants. Both DB and Cook have shown their willingness to fire people who don't do what they want, so the fact that ML still has a job is telling.

---

gee no kidding

what did entz say about the aac ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skunkapekiller

what did entz say about the aac ?

---

That we will be there when UND goes D2 soon.

return of the ncc 2.0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kab1one

Doesn't it come down to what a school can bring to a conference in regards to media rights. If the MWC is getting $4 million per school today, NDSU has to have at least that value. What does NDSU generate today with their media package(s)? $1.5-2 million range. As a result from a pure media exposure standpoint NDSU is not a viable option.

Take Stanford and Cal. Why did they get left behind? Not competition or alumni support. But they don't have the media value. Oregon State and Washington State, same issue.

---

Yes and no.

A conference will generally only add schools that raise the media values for everyone if they are in a stable situation.

If they are backfilling lost members and feel they "need" new members for survival, they will take the best available. Best can sometimes be defined differently by different members/schools. Some may look at media value, others the academic side, travel can be a factor, etc.

The idea that we can force our way in is dumb, we do need the right opening in a conference that wants us.

there is a reason why the Big10 only takes AAU schools (99.9% of the time...nebraska).....and it aint always because of media markets

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skunkapekiller

there is a reason why the Big10 only takes AAU schools (99.9% of the time...nebraska).....and it aint always because of media markets

---

There is also a reason Big10 hasn't added CaliStan, and it has nothing to do with academics.

4 teams for california was more than they needed..only needed 2 and took 2...they are eyeing unc and virginia next
1a ucla
1b usc
3 stan
4 cal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skunkapekiller

4 teams for california was more than they needed..only needed and took 2...they are eyeing unc and virginia next
1a ucla
1b usc
3 stan
4 cal

---

Well, if they "need" 2 teams from North Dakota, than UND is in!

either 2 or 4 of the dak4
and i think ndsu's title 9 stuff (and other stuff) puts them at 4
1.und
2. usd
3.sdsu
4.ndsu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skunkapekiller

either 2 or 4 of the dak4
and i think ndsu's title 9 stuff (and other stuff) puts them at 4
1.und
2. usd
3.sdsu
4.ndsu

---

Flip that list and you’ve got it exactly right. :rofl:

when the BSC was looking to expand which 2 schools got the invite?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skunkapekiller

either 2 or 4 of the dak4
and i think ndsu's title 9 stuff (and other stuff) puts them at 4
1.und
2. usd
3.sdsu
4.ndsu

---

nAiLeD iT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GCWaters

I think he's open to it, but it's not a priority. He has a number of other things on his plate right now that are more pressing and more important--I know that's not a popular thing to say here. I think he'd consider it if the opportunity were there, but I don't think it's something he's actively pursuing. I think Bresciani was pretty much a "no". And yes--the AD is doing what the president wants. Both DB and Cook have shown their willingness to fire people who don't do what they want, so the fact that ML still has a job is telling.

---

You mean because the ADs tone has changed wrt FBS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker

You mean because the ADs tone has changed wrt FBS

---

What I mean is that if DB or Cook wanted us to go FBS, ML would be working on it, actively--maybe not in complete El Chapo mode, but with more urgency than he has been. If not, he wouldn't have a job. His almost complete lack of attention to it during the Bresciani years reflects, to me, what Bresciani wanted. He (DB) told me once that he didn't think the value of moving up was worth the cost and his actions reflected it. The fact that ML is now paying more attention to a possible move reflects--again, to me--the idea that Cook is more open to it than Bresciani was, but that it's still not urgent or a priority.

Again, just my opinion but my interactions with both presidents reinforce it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GCWaters

What I mean is that if DB or Cook wanted us to go FBS, ML would be working on it, actively--maybe not in complete El Chapo mode, but with more urgency than he has been. If not, he wouldn't have a job. His almost complete lack of attention to it during the Bresciani years reflects, to me, what Bresciani wanted. He (DB) told me once that he didn't think the value of moving up was worth the cost and his actions reflected it. The fact that ML is now paying more attention to a possible move reflects--again, to me--the idea that Cook is more open to it than Bresciani was, but that it's still not urgent or a priority.

Again, just my opinion but my interactions with both presidents reinforce it.

---

Thanks for clarifying, and I would agree. Lots going on right now for sure
See you in the dome this fall. Looking forward to it

Why are we pretending it's as simple as wanting it?
Augustana wants Summit.
Boise St wants any P5.
Missouri St wants Sunbelt.
UCF claimed a football title and only got a P5 invite when the B12 was desperate.
MVC still thinks they're an elite BB conference despite being a 1 bid league.
HBCUs think the Celebration Bowl is a national title.
Pretty much everybody wants a B1G or SEC invite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taper

Why are we pretending it's as simple as wanting it?
Augustana wants Summit.
Boise St wants any P5.
Missouri St wants Sunbelt.
UCF claimed a football title and only got a P5 invite when the B12 was desperate.
MVC still thinks they're an elite BB conference despite being a 1 bid league.
HBCUs think the Celebration Bowl is a national title.
Pretty much everybody wants a B1G or SEC invite.

---

I don't think anybody is
But it's a big first step, and one that wasn't clear until recently

watch what you say about the mvc buddy.....

http://youtu.be/SLi7Ljcy6n8

My theme song for a move to the MW where the games people play are in the middle of the night.

Cause I don't want to stay here (FCS) no more, wasting my life away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker

I don't think anybody is
But it's a big first step, and one that wasn't clear until recently

---

There are a few "fbs now, at any costs!" types here that choose to not understand.

I think the vast majority know it is complicated, and it takes the right situation to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigHorns

There are a few "fbs now, at any costs!" types here that choose to not understand.

I think the vast majority know it is complicated, and it takes the right situation to happen.

---

I think there is (1) FBS at any cost. I think the rest have differing levels of cost that they would support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigLakeBison

I think there is (1) FBS at any cost. I think the rest have differing levels of cost that they would support.

---

Agreed.

I feel a trend of this thread going back to what it was a few months ago. FCS forever vs FBS at all cost ... blah blah blah

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TAILG8R

Agreed.

I feel a trend of this thread going back to what it was a few months ago. FCS forever vs FBS at all cost ... blah blah blah

---

Tony started this thread in 2014....it's been on an endless loop since then...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigLakeBison

I think there is (1) FBS at any cost. I think the rest have differing levels of cost that they would support.

---

Perhaps. I just don't get why a few want to harp on the non-realistic options now when the door may be opening for a good path.
Its been pretty clear, and reported what the conferences/conditions we need for a move are. I'm good with it.

Now, just have to see how this all plays out.
This was never going to happen fast enough to please everyone. We don't control the timing.

is skunk that darrel dork or the guy that's 67 with the cowboy hat that runs onto their field with the flag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GCWaters

Tony started this thread in 2014....it's been on an endless loop since then...

---

This statement is Exhibit A that the FCS crowd has been winning the argument and are still winning. Although we've had this thread for 9 years, some still view the "FBS now" crowd is nothing but unrealistic and impatient. I guess we need the nuance that some of you have to understand that even if we wait another 10 or 15 years, it is out of our control and there's nothing we can do about it because geography or something. I wasn't here for it, but I would put $100 down on the idea that there were NCC supporters saying the exact same thing at the time-- it's complicated, it's expensive, it's out of our control, it's not the right time. Apparently, it never is.