A new and better FBS thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heffray

Prepare theyself for a more disappointing thread…

---

NDSU and SDSU to the MAC.

Pump. It. Up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DePereBisonFan

NDSU and SDSU to the MAC.

Pump. It. Up.

---

Teh woman all be pregnant in hoople eh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DePereBisonFan

NDSU and SDSU to the MAC.

Pump. It. Up.

---

How funny would it be if NDSU got invited to the PAC and got to beat Jimmy all the time again…

Would be great! Sadly our time has/is run out I fear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heffray

How funny would it be if NDSU got invited to the PAC and got to beat Jimmy all the time again…

---

u been drinking that lakes koolaid bro?

slumming it with the weirdos at BISONFORUM.COM?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 23Bison

Would be great! Sadly our time has/is run out I fear.

---

You are correct. Northern Illinois decided this afternoon to join the Mountain West conference for football only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 23Bison

Would be great! Sadly our time has/is run out I fear.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kevin

u been drinking that lakes koolaid bro?

slumming it with the weirdos at BISONFORUM.COM?

---

I’m not saying it would happen. I’m just saying it would be funny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SDbison

You are correct. Northern Illinois decided this afternoon to join the Mountain West conference for football only.

---

Technically, NIU accepted the MW offer prior to today. It just became official today because their board had to approve the $2m MW entry fee.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heffray

How funny would it be if NDSU got invited to the PAC and got to beat Jimmy all the time again…

---

Would be great, but honestly hell will freeze over first.
PAC is targeting schools like Memphis and Tulane, with UTSA and Texas St being fallback choices. They won't touch FCS.

Our only path at the moment would be if MAC decides to expand to 14. Haven't seen any news either way on MAC's intentions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigHorns

Would be great, but honestly hell will freeze over first.
PAC is targeting schools like Memphis and Tulane, with UTSA and Texas St being fallback choices. They won't touch FCS.

Our only path at the moment would be if MAC decides to expand to 14. Haven't seen any news either way on MAC's intentions.

---

Too many people are taking my comment as sincere. I didn’t even think MW was going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heffray

Too many people are taking my comment as sincere. I didn’t even think MW was going to happen.

---

Gotcha. I think we may have to wait until the inevitable split between P2/4 and G6 happens. At that point, things will reorganize.

MAC might decide to expand, but there are also a few rumors floating that MAC has considered dropping back to FCS, and that is part of why NIU bolted. It could be bunk, but FBS is about to get a whole lot more expensive and MAC has a small media deal.

Well, this is one way to go about moving from FCS to FBS (complete opposite of how NDSU admin has handled it): https://x.com/JakeGadon_TV/status/1877127976623427780

We'll see how it works...

https://sports.yahoo.com/doc-power-c...232802449.html

The P4 want to take over the NCAA it appears. Of note:

'The proposal from the power conferences does not signal the long-discussed breakaway from the national association, Sankey and other commissioners say, and there remains a commitment to continue to grant broad access to postseason events.'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker

https://sports.yahoo.com/doc-power-c...232802449.html

The P4 want to take over the NCAA it appears. Of note:

'The proposal from the power conferences does not signal the long-discussed breakaway from the national association, Sankey and other commissioners say, and there remains a commitment to continue to grant broad access to postseason events.'

---

This part's really interesting:

"The proposal was described by one as an “aggressive solution” that has “real legs,” but by another as having little to no chance to pass in its current iteration. If the power leagues don’t get consensus in a full membership vote, they could withdraw from the association.

However, that presents another problem: The power leagues and NCAA entered into a 10-year agreement as part of the House settlement, binding the entities together through 2035."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GCWaters

This part's really interesting:

"The proposal was described by one as an “aggressive solution” that has “real legs,” but by another as having little to no chance to pass in its current iteration. If the power leagues don’t get consensus in a full membership vote, they could withdraw from the association.

However, that presents another problem: The power leagues and NCAA entered into a 10-year agreement as part of the House settlement, binding the entities together through 2035."

---

Great - if they want to take their ball and run they can take their House settlement with it since the rest of us are helping to pay their bill on that one.

Sure, we have all the control, set the rules, format, access and distributions, but don’t worry, we are committed to maintaining “broad access”.

Watch what they do not what they say.

PAC 12 is looking again.

MWC and AAC are obviously afraid to ADD NDSU at this point, Its clearly obvious they don't want little ol NDSU to walk in and Dominate on DAY 1.

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

PAC 12. NDSU GOES ALL IN. YOU CALL PAC 12 and say

"WE WANT IN THE PAC 12, ALL SPORTS WE WILL FORGO THE 1st 3 years of Media $$$ payout if you ALLOW NDSU to keep its local/regional media deal"

However, NDSU keeps all money from the BOWL GAMES we make it to in the first 6 years!


Negotiate This or Whatever else needs to be done, OFFER to pay for their Charter Flights and Hotels. TIME FOR NDSU and FARGO TO GROW UP!!!!!


(if we need to build a on campus stadium or down at the Civic Center and make it a riverfront stadium plaza for business development so be it!!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bisonaudit

Sure, we have all the control, set the rules, format, access and distributions, but don’t worry, we are committed to maintaining “broad access”.

Watch what they do not what they say.

---

“I need to be dictator so that I can make sure it’s fair for everyone” is one of the funniest tricks in the book

I’d like to see a direct quote of Sankey and his NDSU exception to their FCS embargo. Anyone have a link? Third party through McFeely doesn’t count. The only quote I’ve seen from him is 'no more FCS callups', which only happened once NDSU was on the clock. Maybe I missed it ..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Professor Chaos

Great - if they want to take their ball and run they can take their House settlement with it since the rest of us are helping to pay their bill on that one.

---

Yep, P2/4 are trying to find a way to structure/dump that debt, while keeping lion share of profits and spreading a few crumbs around elsewhere.

Its also becoming clear they view both the G6 and FCS as nothing more than a farm/feeder system. Once a player shows some potential, they will take them.

MSU RB's already grabbing P2/4 offers: https://www.si.com/college/westvirgi...virginia-offer

We're now a farm league for the semi-pros. Deion Sanders outright said it.

Perhaps I've missed it....but is there a thread talking about NDSU opting out of the House settlement? I haven't noticed one and I really don't understand what's going on and how people can just decide to 'opt out'. What if everyone opted out?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gully

Perhaps I've missed it....but is there a thread talking about NDSU opting out of the House settlement? I haven't noticed one and I really don't understand what's going on and how people can just decide to 'opt out'. What if everyone opted out?

---

In a very small nutshell, House over-ruled parts of the NCAA's bylaws, but since only the NCAA and the 5 power conferences were named plaintiffs in the lawsuit, the rest of us aren't covered. Until/unless the NCAA changes their bylaws, there are effectively two mutually exclusive paths for scholarships, roster sizes, and player payments. The P5 have to follow the new path. Everyone else can choose which(for now), but not mix and match.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taper

In a very small nutshell, House over-ruled parts of the NCAA's bylaws, but since only the NCAA and the 5 power conferences were named plaintiffs in the lawsuit, the rest of us aren't covered. Until/unless the NCAA changes their bylaws, there are effectively two mutually exclusive paths for scholarships, roster sizes, and player payments. The P5 have to follow the new path. Everyone else can choose which(for now), but not mix and match.

---

Thank you, that is helpful. Interestingly, it sounds like Montana State is opting in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gully

Thank you, that is helpful. Interestingly, it sounds like Montana State is opting in.

---

I think you can spin it as being the "virtuous" move in either case. Montana St says they're opting in so they can be more fair to their student-athletes and share revenue with them. NDSU says they're most likely opting out because the roster caps would mean they would have to cut ~65 student athletes altogether and that they can still take care of them financially through FCOA, Alston payments, and the collective.

As far as I understand it the real benefit of opting in is being able to have up to 105 players on (at least partial) scholarship whereas the benefit of opting out is you can go above the 105 player limit (so your walk-on program doesn't have to take a hit). The downside is the opposite - opting in means you can only have 105 players on your football roster whereas opting out means you can still only have 85 scholarship players to diivy up your 63 full rides to at the FCS level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Professor Chaos

I think you can spin it as being the "virtuous" move in either case. Montana St says they're opting in so they can be more fair to their student-athletes and share revenue with them. NDSU says they're most likely opting out because the roster caps would mean they would have to cut ~65 student athletes altogether and that they can still take care of them financially through FCOA, Alston payments, and the collective.

As far as I understand it the real benefit of opting in is being able to have up to 105 players on (at least partial) scholarship whereas the benefit of opting out is you can go above the 105 player limit (so your walk-on program doesn't have to take a hit). The downside is the opposite - opting in means you can only have 105 players on your football roster whereas opting out means you can still only have 85 scholarship players to diivy up your 63 full rides to at the FCS level.

---

I don't know how big our roster is in the spring, but our regular season rosters range from 108 to 114. And you can't travel with all of them

So realistically we only lose 3-9 players

Opting in allows more scholarships, but you run into the risk of the weak teams getting pissed at the scholarship disparity and setting a hard limit. I could only think of 5 FCS teams willing to fund 105 scholarships

Revenue sharing is meaningless because none of us are going to have the budget to make a big impact. Leave it to the collective. Although it might be more practical to budget for a million bucks. Split it between men's and women's BB for title IX. A half million for each team would be transformative, especially for WBB

Splitting a million bucks between 30 players is 33k a year for each. That's impactful. Or maybe you pay it to the top 20 and pay 50k each. That could build some strong programs and make WBB a borderline revenue sport

But splitting a million between 105 football players, plus 105 womens to match is less than 5k per athlete. Don't get me wrong that's a lot for a broke ass college student, but not enough to regularly keep elite talent but it will make partial scholarships full and walk ons partial

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HerdBot

I don't know how big our roster is in the spring, but our regular season rosters range from 108 to 114. And you can't travel with all of them

So realistically we only lose 3-9 players

Opting in allows more scholarships, but you run into the risk of the weak teams getting pissed at the scholarship disparity and setting a hard limit. I could only think of 5 FCS teams willing to fund 105 scholarships

Revenue sharing is meaningless because none of us are going to have the budget to make a big impact. Leave it to the collective. Although it might be more practical to budget for a million bucks. Split it between men's and women's BB for title IX. A half million for each team would be transformative, especially for WBB

Splitting a million bucks between 30 players is 33k a year for each. That's impactful. Or maybe you pay it to the top 20 and pay 50k each. That could build some strong programs and make WBB a borderline revenue sport

But splitting a million between 105 football players, plus 105 womens to match is less than 5k per athlete. Don't get me wrong that's a lot for a broke ass college student, but not enough to regularly keep elite talent but it will make partial scholarships full and walk ons partial

---

The collective is already doing that. They can take a guy who's not on scholarship and give him 5k from the collective instead of a partial scholarship. I think the opt-in vs opt-out decision is mainly an accounting thing for mid-major schools with an established collective like NDSU has. Do they want to handle payments to players in house or handle it through the collective? I'm guessing NDSU's logic to opt out is that the athletic department doesn't have excess money to share with the players right now that they wouldn't raise through increased ticket prices/donations/etc and they can do that just as well through the collective and the same people pay those bills regardless (which would be us fans) so might as well use the option that wouldn't cap rosters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Professor Chaos

The collective is already doing that. They can take a guy who's not on scholarship and give him 5k from the collective instead of a partial scholarship. I think the opt-in vs opt-out decision is mainly an accounting thing for mid-major schools with an established collective like NDSU has. Do they want to handle payments to players in house or handle it through the collective? I'm guessing NDSU's logic to opt out is that the athletic department doesn't have excess money to share with the players right now that they wouldn't raise through increased ticket prices/donations/etc and they can do that just as well through the collective and the same people pay those bills regardless (which would be us fans) so might as well use the option that wouldn't cap rosters.

---

That makes sense in our case. I think for many schools, opting in also gives them more direct control and coordination with NIL. Per the letter of ncaa rules, outside collectives are supposed to operate at arms length. I've also seen some concern IRS will soon target outside collectives for tax enforcement. They consider it to be paid wages/earnings and not charitable for tax purposes. Not sure how that will play out in court or politically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Professor Chaos

The collective is already doing that. They can take a guy who's not on scholarship and give him 5k from the collective instead of a partial scholarship. I think the opt-in vs opt-out decision is mainly an accounting thing for mid-major schools with an established collective like NDSU has. Do they want to handle payments to players in house or handle it through the collective? I'm guessing NDSU's logic to opt out is that the athletic department doesn't have excess money to share with the players right now that they wouldn't raise through increased ticket prices/donations/etc and they can do that just as well through the collective and the same people pay those bills regardless (which would be us fans) so might as well use the option that wouldn't cap rosters.

---

Also may be some big boosters that don’t want to see their money going towards NIL…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Professor Chaos

The collective is already doing that. They can take a guy who's not on scholarship and give him 5k from the collective instead of a partial scholarship. I think the opt-in vs opt-out decision is mainly an accounting thing for mid-major schools with an established collective like NDSU has. Do they want to handle payments to players in house or handle it through the collective? I'm guessing NDSU's logic to opt out is that the athletic department doesn't have excess money to share with the players right now that they wouldn't raise through increased ticket prices/donations/etc and they can do that just as well through the collective and the same people pay those bills regardless (which would be us fans) so might as well use the option that wouldn't cap rosters.

---

Opt in means roster caps means 65 tuition paying students cut from NDSU rosters (per Forum / Matt Larson).

That potential loss is especially unfavorable in light of:
"With anticipated declines in funding due to decreased enrollment, we are carefully navigating how to balance our resources while positioning NDSU for future growth." - excerpted from email from Dr Cook to the NDSU campus last week

Isn't it also true that a school can "opt-out" one year, then "opt-in" the following year. Seems like a smart move; see how it works opting out.......if it doesn't work to NDSU's advantage, change course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by southcliffbison

Isn't it also true that a school can "opt-out" one year, then "opt-in" the following year. Seems like a smart move; see how it works opting out.......if it doesn't work to NDSU's advantage, change course.

---

This is correct. People making a big deal out of this are reaching for a reason to suggest that NDSU can’t move up, because they don’t personally like the idea. For whatever reason, such people tend to be 'loud' on social media. The next 2-3 months will reveal the truth ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker

This is correct. People making a big deal out of this are reaching for a reason to suggest that NDSU can’t move up, because they don’t personally like the idea. For whatever reason, such people tend to be 'loud' on social media. The next 2-3 months will reveal the truth ...

---

At the moment, there's absolutely zero connection between opting in/out and a move to fbs. Some G6 schools may opt out as well.

Only P4 are required to opt in, and is tbd whether it turns out to be an advantage or disadvantage. A few schools like Nebraska are unhappy with the 105 roster limit it imposes.

People fretting over this are getting worked up over a nothing burger imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker

This is correct. People making a big deal out of this are reaching for a reason to suggest that NDSU can’t move up, because they don’t personally like the idea. For whatever reason, such people tend to be 'loud' on social media. The next 2-3 months will reveal the truth ...

---

They are loud because they know it's not true and people will comment. More comments boost the algorithm. Every keeps talking about how rich Tarleton State is... but they opted out yet nobody even mentioned it
It's called trolling

The right decision is unique to each school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigHorns

At the moment, there's absolutely zero connection between opting in/out and a move to fbs. Some G6 schools may opt out as well.

Only P4 are required to opt in, and is tbd whether it turns out to be an advantage or disadvantage. A few schools like Nebraska are unhappy with the 105 roster limit it imposes.

People fretting over this are getting worked up over a nothing burger imo.

---

Case in point
Nothing screams 'FBS' like the current CAA lol

https://x.com/CAASports/status/1884692999734485343?mx=2

too many stupid people on twitter for me to bother

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/612...ne-g5-mailbag/

Not sure who wrote this but it’s the classic 'this is what I think should happen' take, as opposed to reading the signs as what’s likely to happen

In what universe is 'NDSU FB strives to play at the highest possible level' (while actively trying to get into the MWC) compatible with being happy in an overpriced version of NCC 2.0?

In which solar system is the MWC adding NIU compatible with 'G5s wanting small regional footprints'?

Sorry but this guy has it wrong

https://news3lv.com/news/local/grant...da-realignment
With some all too rare real reporting, a journalist got the full text of the MWC Grant of Rights through an open records request. Looks pretty solid and virtually guarantees the PAC won't poach any more for their 8th. A line I thought was interesting:

Quote:

---

THIS GRANT OF RIGHTS AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), effective on the Effective Date as defined below in paragraph 6, is by and among the Mountain West Conference...and (ii) any entities that have announced plans to terminate their membership in the Conference but subsequently decide to remain in the Conference

---

Looks like they're planning for the event the PAC can't find an 8th member and some old friends come back with tucked tails.

I thought this was an interesting clause, too.

According to the agreement, the term of the new Grant of Rights begins on July 1, 2026, and ends on June 30, 2032, but the "effective date" for schools is when the agreement is signed. UNLV President Keith Whitfield's signature is dated Dec. 9, 2024.

I am not sure how this works? Maybe the next deal will come as an extension of the tv deal with the current providers. I am not sure they would have all signed this GOR with an earlier effective date unless they had had a pretty good handle on what the next deal entails.

Haven’t listened yet but SDSU AD interviewed on prospects of FBS move in this recent podcast

https://www.siouxfallslive.com/podca...h-john-gaskins

Tommy Tuberville was on a political podcast today. Spoke on the difficulties of legislating NIL/portal stuff. He thinks it'll break out into three tiers of D1, about 100 teams each.