-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
I think both the Pac media deal and the MW media deal will announced this month. If the lawsuits do indeed go to trial that will take a couple of years, at least, but it doesn't really prevent either conference from adding if they wish to.
If those lawsuits really do hang around, it could create a bit of a stalemate/stand off for a while. I could see PAC waiting a while to figure out what their options are. They don’t have any urgency to add now imo. They could also announce a move with AAC/MW team(s) and let them give 2 year notice to reduce exit fees.
Also get the sense that a lot of G6 are holding their breath to see what other shoe drops with the P4 in charge of governance now. P4 have enough leverage to basically dictate terms to everyone else.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
If those lawsuits really do hang around, it could create a bit of a stalemate/stand off for a while. I could see PAC waiting a while to figure out what their options are. They don’t have any urgency to add now imo. They could also announce a move with AAC/MW team(s) and let them give 2 year notice to reduce exit fees.
Also get the sense that a lot of G6 are holding their breath to see what other shoe drops with the P4 in charge of governance now. P4 have enough leverage to basically dictate terms to everyone else.
I think it is quite prudent for both conferences to sit tight with what they have. Neither league needs to do anything. If they wish to add a MW school or two, they would need to get right on that soon. Starting next July 1st the MW will have a GOR in place. Does UNLV or any other MW school want to give up their signing bonus and pay exit fees to join the Pac? I would say them leaving is not a slam dunk.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
I think both the Pac media deal and the MW media deal will announced this month. If the lawsuits do indeed go to trial that will take a couple of years, at least, but it doesn't really prevent either conference from adding if they wish to.
Now that the Governence stuff is cleared up, maybe the TV deal is enough to finalize the conference.
Strength of schedule should be very important for both conferences because an undefeated record in conference play won't guarantee a playoff bid. Especially for the MW without Boise and some top teams
Check out Sagarin ratings last year and it makes a case any top FCS program would increase the PAC and MWs strength of schedule, including UC Davis
sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm
2024 final sagarin ratings
31 Boise
37 South Dakota State (odd since NDSU won twice)
40 North Dakota State (in 2013, we finished #17)
45 Montana State
48 UNLV
68 South Dakota
69 Texas State
70 James Madison
73 Washington State
91 - UC Davis (best season in school history)
92 - Fresno State
94 Northern Illinois
97 Colorado State
99 Air Force
100 San Jose State
101 Oregon State
103 Utah State
109 Wyoming
112 Montana
115 Hawai'i
116 New Mexico
121 Missouri State
123 Nevada
125 Tarleton State
126 Illinois State
132 San Diego State
140 North Dakota (the shitty ND)
166 UTEP
176 Sacramento State
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
Now that the Governence stuff is cleared up, maybe the TV deal is enough to finalize the conference.
Strength of schedule should be very important for both conferences because an undefeated record in conference play won't guarantee a playoff bid, without Boise and some top teams
Check out Sagarin ratings last year and it makes a case any too FCS program would increase the P12 and MWs strength of schedule, including UC Davis
sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm
2024 final sagarin ratings
31 Boise
37 South Dakota State (odd since NDSU won twice)
40 North Dakota State (in 2013, we finished #17)
45 Montana State
48 UNLV
68 South Dakota
69 Texas State
70 James Madison
73 Washington State
91 - UC Davis (best season in school history)
92 - Fresno State
94 Northern Illinois
97 Colorado State
99 Air Force
100 San Jose State
101 Oregon State
103 Utah State
109 Wyoming
112 Montana
115 Hawai'i
116 New Mexico
121 Missouri State
123 Nevada
125 Tarleton State
126 Illinois State
132 San Diego State
140 North Dakota (the shitty ND)
166 UTEP
176 Sacramento State
No debate from me on that point. There are quite a few schools in FCS that would increase strength of schedule. It is why I support NDSU football only to the MW. I don't have a say and I really don't know what criteria is most important to the folks who do vote. I would say, that last season's Sagarin numbers is probably not a major factor. I do think a commitment to spending to improve is very important. NDSU offers that.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
No debate from me on that point. There are quite a few schools in FCS that would increase strength of schedule. It is why I support NDSU football only to the MW. I don't have a say and I really don't know what criteria is most important to the folks who do vote. I would say, that last season's Sagarin numbers is probably not a major factor. I do think a commitment to spending to improve is very important. NDSU offers that.
Officially Sagarin has no impact. Unofficially it's the premier rankings seen every week in the USA Today since the mid 80s. Everyone sees it and it influences voters
In 2 years, the American will be guaranteed to get that spot. It's not even close. That's why the PAC is targeting American teams.
It's all going to compound when UNLV is no longer playing Boise and their biggest win is #94 NIU and #99 Air Force. The same is true of Boise who won't play UNLV or Air Force
The big winner besides Attorneys is the American.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
Officially Sagarin has no impact. Unofficially it's the premier rankings seen every week in the USA Today since the mid 80s. Everyone sees it and it influences voters
In 2 years, the American will be guaranteed to get that spot. It's not even close. That's why the PAC is targeting American teams.
It's all going to compound when UNLV is no longer playing Boise and their biggest win is #94 NIU and #99 Air Force. The same is true of Boise who won't play UNLV or Air Force
The big winner besides Attorneys is the American.
The American has been hammered with defections of their own. I know you want to be FBS and that is a worthy goal but G6 is not glamorous. It is a slog no matter which conference you are in.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
The American was once a hell of a league but at the end of the day, it's still the best G5 in 2 years. I know it's not glamorous but since FBS teams stopping playing us, we really have no other choice. The only reason we got Colorado last year is we scheduled it like 6 years early. I love those games, even the ones we lost.
The FCS playoffs is incredible when when you play great teams. Unfortunately the first 2 rounds are all cupcakes and you have 6 days to sell tickets
The FCS conference season has a few great games but it's the road trips to Indiana State and Murray State that really bore fans. The non conference games vs Drake or North Carolina A&T are rarely competitive. I don't think we've lost a regular season non conference home game since 1998 and we're like 45-1 in home playoff games
Can you see why fans don't get pumped up like they used to?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
I don't question your desire for FBS..I hope you get there.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
The American has been hammered with defections of their own. I know you want to be FBS and that is a worthy goal but G6 is not glamorous. It is a slog no matter which conference you are in.
PAC and AAC are clearly at the top and arm wrestling for supremacy in G6.
Right now, it looks to me like one of them will land the CFP bid a good 8 out of 10 years.
The other two out of 10 may go to either MW or SBC.
PAC is close to being the top G6 if they can poach a couple AAC and/or MW teams, and that is why they will try.
Locking up the top G6 slot and CFP can make a conference a quasi P5. For everyone else, it is indeed a slog.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
PAC and AAC are clearly at the top and arm wrestling for supremacy in G6.
Right now, it looks to me like one of them will land the CFP bid a good 8 out of 10 years.
The other two out of 10 may go to either MW or SBC.
PAC is close to being the top G6 if they can poach a couple AAC and/or MW teams, and that is why they will try.
Locking up the top G6 slot and CFP can make a conference a quasi P5. For everyone else, it is indeed a slog.
This makes me wonder why anybody here wants any part of the MW. You are very football centric. You guys believe you would run roughshod over all those crappy MW teams. How, exactly does that put you in the CFP?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
This makes me wonder why anybody here wants any part of the MW. You are very football centric.
Because have you seen what's left of the FCS?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
EC8CH
Because have you seen what's left of the FCS?
I understand wanting to move to FBS but why the MW. It seems to me that many of you don't think it is much of a conference.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
NDSU used to be in the Great West Football Conference with UC Davis when we both moved up to D1 together so I'm more familiar with them than the average Joe. Even made a trip out there in our early D1 days. We played some good games
I don't think UC Davis has any extra money to move up or build a new stadium. People see their huge budget and think they are loaded. Reality is they are so tight on money, they basically only recruit in state kids.
Why? Because 1 out of state recruit costs nearly $75k per year. That would wipe out their athletic budget and endowment. Even recruiting in state kids still costs 45k a year. Basically donations don't go very far because boosters use their money to pay scholarships
Just to add 44 more in state scholarships to be Title 9 compliant would cost them 2 million bucks a year
Their funding for athletic department is complicated being in California
Up until this year, they couldnt even pay for lights for their baseball and soccer field which seems absurd. It wasn't surprising to me they opted out of the House settlement
I don't see why they needed lights....they didn't even play games at night.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
I understand wanting to move to FBS but why the MW. It seems to me that many of you don't think it is much of a conference.
It's better than the FCS and still compelling from my POV. Yes, the losses hurt but I think most NDSU fans would be much more interested in the new MW than Indiana State, etc. I really don't see CFP happening.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gully
I don't see why they needed lights....they didn't even play games at night.
Extreme daytime heat kept everyone away, including opponents
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gully
I don't see why they needed lights....they didn't even play games at night.
When the bar closes, sometimes going home with the fat chick is the only option
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gully
It's better than the FCS and still compelling from my POV. Yes, the losses hurt but I think most NDSU fans would be much more interested in the new MW than Indiana State, etc. I really don't see CFP happening.
Wow, 'it's better than FCS" is a ringing endorsement of the MW. I have seen folks describe the MW as weak. I have seen a poster here hoping the MW gets hosed by the Pac lawsuits and loses members. I have seen posters here ridicule some MW members. I don't see anybody here have anything good to say about the MW or the members. I ask again, why the MW?
Better than FCS is not the answer. You should actually want to play the schools in any new conference you join but I suspect you would all be holding your nose if you got stuck with the MW. I think it is a fun conference with good rivalries and great road trips.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
I understand wanting to move to FBS but why the MW. It seems to me that many of you don't think it is much of a conference.
Today with Boise and the current lineup it's arguably the best G5. That's why Boise made the playoff. In 2 years after the defections, it's lost some strength that knocks it down a notch. That's undeniable and not a criticism of the MW. It is what it is
It needs to make the right moves so it can stay competitive. NIU was a good start. UTEP was a market decision. Not a bad addition but nothing that moves the needle either. Top notch FCS programs actually make the conference better
Would we roll through the conference? Probably not immediately because we currently have 22 less scholarships so late season depth could take it's tolll and we are a developmental program who rarely takes transfers or plays freshman. I think within 3 years we have the potential to dominate
The only examples I can think of was Marshall dominating the MAC immediately. James Madison has been successful immediately, winning the Sunbelt east.
Bison fans just want good games and going FBS makes that happen. But we also don't want to go to CUSA and play on Tuesday either for a smaller payout
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
Wow, 'it's better than FCS" is a ringing endorsement of the MW. I have seen folks describe the MW as weak. I have seen a poster here hoping the MW gets hosed by the Pac lawsuits and loses members. I have seen posters here ridicule some MW members. I don't see anybody here have anything good to say about the MW or the members. I ask again, why the MW?
Better than FCS is not the answer. You should actually want to play the schools in any new conference you join but I suspect you would all be holding your nose if you got stuck with the MW. I think it is a fun conference with good rivalries and great road trips.
You misunderstand.
I do actually want NDSU to play schools in the MW and I think the road trips would be great. Much better than what we have in the FCS / Valley.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
Extreme daytime heat kept everyone away, including opponents
Umm, I was making a joke.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
Would we roll through the conference? Probably not immediately because we currently have 22 less scholarships so late season depth could take it's tolll and we are a developmental program who rarely takes transfers or plays freshman. I think within 3 years we have the potential to dominate
NDSU opted in. Any lack of scholarships is a choice, not due to any rules
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
NDSU opted in. Any lack of scholarships is a choice, not due to any rules
Your reading comprehension matches your all red profile. Deficienct
I said adding 22 new scholarships would not immediately improve a Bison team because they would go to true freshman, who rarely if ever play for a year or 2. They need time to develop and learn the systems.
You could bring in a bunch of transfers but that is a guaranteed disaster for most teams, which is why we don't do more than a handful every year
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
If the G6 could get that many invites, I might change my tune on a bad conference
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
NDSU football would destroy the MWC book it! Still wouldn’t mind being in that conference to show the rest of the FBS we mean business.
*Sent from my iPhone where autocorrect is definitely not my friend*
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
Today with Boise and the current lineup it's arguably the best G5. That's why Boise made the playoff. In 2 years after the defections, it's lost some strength that knocks it down a notch. That's undeniable and not a criticism of the MW. It is what it is
It needs to make the right moves so it can stay competitive. NIU was a good start. UTEP was a market decision. Not a bad addition but nothing that moves the needle either. Top notch FCS programs actually make the conference better
Would we roll through the conference? Probably not immediately because we currently have 22 less scholarships so late season depth could take it's tolll and we are a developmental program who rarely takes transfers or plays freshman. I think within 3 years we have the potential to dominate
The only examples I can think of was Marshall dominating the MAC immediately. James Madison has been successful immediately, winning the Sunbelt east.
Bison fans just want good games and going FBS makes that happen. But we also don't want to go to CUSA and play on Tuesday either for a smaller payout
Nevada dominated the Big West when they moved up but that was many years ago.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
Wow, 'it's better than FCS" is a ringing endorsement of the MW. I have seen folks describe the MW as weak. I have seen a poster here hoping the MW gets hosed by the Pac lawsuits and loses members. I have seen posters here ridicule some MW members. I don't see anybody here have anything good to say about the MW or the members. I ask again, why the MW?
Better than FCS is not the answer. You should actually want to play the schools in any new conference you join but I suspect you would all be holding your nose if you got stuck with the MW. I think it is a fun conference with good rivalries and great road trips.
Don't let a few posters get to you. I personally would LOVE to play Wyoming, UNLV, NIU and Air Force. Talk about the best home games in Bison history. Those would be my favorites. The road games of pretty much every game would be fun and upgrade. UTEP hasn't been very good but I love their stadium. A trip to Albuquerque would be worth it, just to do the Breaking Bad tour lol. Hawaii every so often? That's cool AF
Right now we travel to places like Indiana State and Murray State with very few fans in the stands. Youngstown Ohio isn't exactly a great trip either, although they actually have fans
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
Nevada dominated the Big West when they moved up but that was many years ago.
What's up with Nevada? The Wolfpack on paper should be a good team but they've been really mediocre for a long time now. I remember them being a good program when I was a kid
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
What's up with Nevada? The Wolfpack on paper should be a good team but they've been really mediocre for a long time now. I remember them being a good program when I was a kid
Just the last 3 seasons. They lost Norvell to CSU and made a horrible hire to replace him. They seem to be on the road to recovery with a coach who ironically made his bones at the FCS level, Jeff Choate, Montana State. I think they will bounce back this season and go to a bowl but next year they will be very competitive. They will have their field house finished by next summer and they are putting more premium boxes and more loge seating in Mackay for next fall. The school has pledged 50 million bucks totally towards football over the next 10 years. All of the money they get from a settlement or trial will go to that fund.
They have spent the last 10 years mostly on facilities for other sports and increasing the basketball budget by a bunch. There is a 400 million dollar privately funded basketball arena coming in 2027. Nevada is on a really nice flight path at the moment so that is cool.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
If the G6 could get that many invites, I might change my tune on a bad conference
In practice, it would mean 2 bids going to PAC and AAC most years, as things stand now. CFP committee is stacked for P4.
Even this is unlikely, most believe this is a stalking horse type thing, meant to make a 16 bid proposal, with 12-14 autobids for P4, and 1 for G6 look "reasonable." Under the new CFP contract, the P4 conferences have voting power to decide the outcome of structure.
Even if it passed, 24 permanent autobids for P4 is ludicrous. All of this is meant to marginalize G6 imo, prior to an eventual split.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
In practice, it would mean 2 bids going to PAC and AAC most years, as things stand now. CFP committee is stacked for P4.
Even this is unlikely, most believe this is a stalking horse type thing, meant to make a 16 bid proposal, with 12-14 autobids for P4, and 1 for G6 look "reasonable." Under the new CFP contract, the P4 conferences have voting power to decide the outcome of structure.
Even if it passed, 24 permanent autobids for P4 is ludicrous. All of this is meant to marginalize G6 imo, prior to an eventual split.
Most years it would be the American but the Pac/MW would split if the MW can bolster the conference
I wish they would just give everyone an auto bid and give al
the p4 all the at large bids
Have a 1st round playoff where the G6 plays each other, mix and match
mac plays the pac
American plays the Sunbelt
MW plays CUSA
First round games are more competitive. Give the P4 a bye. Then we're down to 3 G6 schools in round 2 where they get tougher
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
KSBisonFan
Feels like some within the MW are ready to slowly start putting nuggets out regarding FCS "callups", maybe intentionally to warm the waters or maybe just because they are all internally starting to have more discussions of it being a real possibility, so those topics start to make their way into interviews.
Also, his comments were around this phantom split that some think is coming sooner than others.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
It's a foregone conclusion that UNLV is going to leave the MWC as they have publicly stated their desire to get into a P4 league. It ain't happening though so getting into the PAC is the most likely backup plan once they and AFA collect their blood money. The point is it makes sense for the leftovers to start planning now and grooming the XDSU's and Montana schools makes the most sense.
.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
In order to receive their percentage of the exit and poaching fees all the MW schools had to sign a grant of media rights through 2032. If a MW school is invited to a P4 conference the league will waive the GOR for that particular school. The GOR would still be in effect if they chose to leave for the Pac or any other G6 conference before July of 32.
The GOR begins July 1 2026. If say UNLV decides to leave before then, they would forfeit 24.5 percent of whatever money the MW receives from the exit and poaching fees. Plus they would be on the hook for exit fees themselves. It seems unlikely that any school will leave for another G6. I don't anticipate any school getting an invite from a P4. I expect the the membership that is in place by June 30, 2026 will remain the same until July 1 2032.
I agree that the MW should and is already planning and grooming for possible future members. At this time, it seems to hinge on what the media providers are offering and if they are willing to pay for any additions as well.
The MW should know sometime soon as they are fixing to announce their new media deals anytime now. I do not think the MW is against adding but money talks. No school in the conference will want to reduce their own share of the pie to get more members.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TAILG8R
Feels like some within the MW are ready to slowly start putting nuggets out regarding FCS "callups", maybe intentionally to warm the waters or maybe just because they are all internally starting to have more discussions of it being a real possibility, so those topics start to make their way into interviews.
Also, his comments were around this phantom split that some think is coming sooner than others.
I wonder if the Wyoming AD just sees the writing on the wall with some of the recent P4 scheduling announcements and CFP revising the strength of schedule criteria. With the SEC and AAC moving to a nine-game conference schedule and the SEC heightening its OOC requirements, G6 access to P4 games is going to dry up, along with the payouts that go with those games. If media rights payouts weren't enough of a phantom split, conference-driven scheduling requirements will surely add to the phantom split perception.
Wyoming is also probably the biggest loser in the PAC | MWC breakup. They care about football, have good fan support, and at some point are going to get left in a conference without UNLV and Air Force while losing all their regional rivalries in the process. I would be looking at the FCS Big 4 too; it's their best case for a conference that somewhat resembles what they had pre-divorce.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
By far the biggest losers in Pac/MW breakup is Oregon State and Washington State. The drop down from the Pac 12 to just another G6 is massive. I think the Pac and the MW will remain stable for the next 5 or 6 years because none of these schools are even on the radar for a P4 invitation.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
I wasn't counting OSU and WSU. I see them as victims of the PAC breakup not the MWC breakup, but agree they got it worse than anyone. Also agree it will be a few years before UNLV and Air Force exit, but they won't go P4. UNLV will get Pac-12 invite Air Force could get an AC invite.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
