(07-23-2013 02:49 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 02:39 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 02:32 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Here is your answer right here and if you read between the lines the 7 or 8 conferences that he is talking about in addition to the 5 BCS leagues. That is 12 conferences and that would clearly include the AAC, BE, MWC; and I am assuming WCC, CUSA, MAC and probably the SBC. When you read what the guy said it sounds like they want to demote some conferences...

Sounds more like 2 or 3 conferences in addition to the P5 --

Agreed. He said seven to eight conferences including the P5 (which means P5+2-3).

His actual statement was

"I think that's particularly felt by seven or eight conferences and the five major conferences in particular... ."

I read that as 7 or 8 and then 5; but I can see how you might arrive at 5+2 or 3, because it would seem that he was pointing out that the 5 were a part of the 7 or 8. I can only figure that that he must have been referring to the AAC, MWC and CUSA or the AAC, MWC and the BE as the other 2 or 3.

(07-23-2013 02:56 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 02:49 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 02:39 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 02:32 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Here is your answer right here and if you read between the lines the 7 or 8 conferences that he is talking about in addition to the 5 BCS leagues. That is 12 conferences and that would clearly include the AAC, BE, MWC; and I am assuming WCC, CUSA, MAC and probably the SBC. When you read what the guy said it sounds like they want to demote some conferences...

Sounds more like 2 or 3 conferences in addition to the P5 --

Agreed. He said seven to eight conferences including the P5 (which means P5+2-3).

His actual statement was

"I think that's particularly felt by seven or eight conferences and the five major conferences in particular... ."

I read that as 7 or 8 and then 5; but I can see how you might arrive at 5+2 or 3, because it would seem that he was pointing out that the 5 were a part of the 7 or 8. I can only figure that that he must have been referring to the AAC, MWC and CUSA or the AAC, MWC and the BE as the other 2 or 3.

Its definitely 8 tops

(07-23-2013 02:48 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 02:39 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 02:32 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Here is your answer right here and if you read between the lines the 7 or 8 conferences that he is talking about in addition to the 5 BCS leagues. That is 12 conferences and that would clearly include the AAC, BE, MWC; and I am assuming WCC, CUSA, MAC and probably the SBC. When you read what the guy said it sounds like they want to demote some conferences...

Sounds more like 2 or 3 conferences in addition to the P5 --

I read it to be as many as 12, but it could be just 7 or 8 like you suggest.

Based on the wording there, he is definitely saying 7 or 8 conferences, then singling out the Power 5 conferences as a stronger voice within that subgroup.

There are only 10 FBS Conferences to begin with

I think when you look at the memberships, 7 is about as far as it could go. Not everyone, if any at all, in CUSA can afford the demands they're going to make, and I'm not sure everyone in the MWC can.

(07-23-2013 03:08 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  There are only 10 FBS Conferences to begin with

Then maybe they are lopping off or demoting the bottom 3 conferences (CUSA, MAC and Sun Belt). I don't know.

I would love for the P5 to come up with a particular monetary figure for stipends, cost of tuition, whatever you want to call it. That sets the bar - either you pay that amount to your FB scholarship players (and maybe female athletes too if Title 9 dictates such), or you don't get to play with the big boys.

Simple. If football is that important to your university, you will pay it - no matter what it is - in order to keep the status quo. Otherwise, you get relegated to FCS type status.

Done.

You guys keep talking about conferences in general not being able to afford stipend, but keep forgetting that the Sun Belt was one of the conferences that voted for stipends. I don't know what position the MAC took on this issue.

If this is strictly about meeting stipends requirements, I doubt any of the FBS conferences go away.

(07-23-2013 04:16 PM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  You guys keep talking about conferences in general not being able to afford stipend, but keep forgetting that the Sun Belt was one of the conferences that voted for stipends. I don't know what position the MAC took on this issue.

If this is strictly about meeting stipends requirements, I doubt any of the FBS conferences go away.

Its not.

Still thinking you're miles ahead of C-USA.

We shall see soon enough.

(07-23-2013 05:01 PM)Noodles Wrote:  Still thinking you're miles ahead of C-USA.

We shall see soon enough.

Lol. Yeah

(07-23-2013 05:01 PM)Noodles Wrote:  Still thinking you're miles ahead of C-USA.

We shall see soon enough.

Well we all know USM can't afford the stipends.

(07-23-2013 03:12 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 03:08 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  There are only 10 FBS Conferences to begin with

Then maybe they are lopping off or demoting the bottom 3 conferences (CUSA, MAC and Sun Belt). I don't know.

...or, based on the comment yesterday about "too easy to join D1 and too easy to remain a member", perhaps some conference has specific members that have recently moved up or are in the process of moving up that are causing discomfort among the aristocrats. I hope that it would be difficult to lop off universities that have been playing at legitimate D1 levels for 4 or 5 decades. Who knows what evil lurks........

Fighting to stay at the top will be like trying to get on the last helicopter out of Saigon.

(07-23-2013 06:43 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 03:12 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 03:08 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  There are only 10 FBS Conferences to begin with

Then maybe they are lopping off or demoting the bottom 3 conferences (CUSA, MAC and Sun Belt). I don't know.

...or, based on the comment yesterday about "too easy to join D1 and too easy to remain a member", perhaps some conference has specific members that have recently moved up or are in the process of moving up that are causing discomfort among the aristocrats. I hope that it would be difficult to lop off universities that have been playing at legitimate D1 levels for 4 or 5 decades. Who knows what evil lurks........

Yeah, hard to argue how a few MAC members who have been playing at the top level for 75 years all of a sudden get pushed out against their will. Same with a few AAC, CUSA, and MWC members. They tries this in the 70's and even a year in the 80's and it didn't work. I don't know how half the AAC could make it in just based on conference affiliation if they average attendance in the teens (Tulane) or the low 20's (SMU, Temple, Memphis, etc) or even UC (29,000 in 2012)

You can't force schools out just based on conference affiliation. I think a line will be drawn with rules, stipends, facilities, etc and then the schools will be given a choice to pony-up (UL-Lafayette, Ark St, Ohio, Toledo, Miami, UNLV, Nevada, Memphis, etc) and others will decide it just is too much of a burden (Idaho, Eastern Mich, NMSU, San Jose, UL-Monroe, UAB, etc). Then a few new conference mergers may form between those who pony-up and those who drop back. No way is there some BCS Commitee that says OK - AAC, MAC, you're in, but SBC/CUSA we decide you are out. Won't happen.

I'm willing to bet that the AAC schools will meet the requirements to stay in that level not so sure I can say the same about all the schools in the other G5 conferences.

(07-23-2013 07:47 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I'm willing to bet that the AAC schools will meet the requirements to stay in that level not so sure I can say the same about all the schools in the other G5 conferences.

I'm pretty sure all of the MWC could, too. The others, not so much.

Like I said, most schools will be given the choice to stay or not. They will get together and implement rules at a level that they know will make it hard for many to stick around but wont force anybody out. They know all the revenue, expenses, budgets etc and what even an Indiana or Wake Forest can afford on their $20 million TV money vs $1-$2 million for most G5 and then they will set the rules, scholarshipa, stipends that will make it prohibitive for some. Lets say $5,000 stipend, Min. Travel Accomodations, Facilities, etc. it will be a calculated, deliberate, invisible line intended to make some have to drop without "forcing" them out.

Then give the choice. Any school willing to spend big money will be let in (assuming they can sustain the spending). However many schools already facing budget problems and tax-payer anger will elect to band together at a more cost effective level similar to how FCS was formed in the beginning. Nobody was forced to go to FCS just many only wanted to spend 63 scholarships. This some will and some won't will cause new conference mergers and lower FBS from 129 to like 90-100 where it was in the late 80's early 90's.

(07-23-2013 07:48 PM)UNLVFan90 Wrote:  

(07-23-2013 07:47 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I'm willing to bet that the AAC schools will meet the requirements to stay in that level not so sure I can say the same about all the schools in the other G5 conferences.

I'm pretty sure all of the MWC could, too. The others, not so much.

Yeah, I wasn't referring to either the AAC or MWC in my comments regarding programs that would probably be targets for non-inclusion. The Miami fan had an unusual slant on my comments that are way off.

Can any MAC school potentially afford stipend and afford to get their facilities expanded to meet potential standards considering that almost every AAC school has at least a 40k stadium. (This could mean trouble for SMU, Tulsa and Tulane since they are the only 3 under 40k unless hey decide to pony up, no pun intended or go to NFL venues)