This could also impact the bowls down the road. It's going to be a lot harder for the lower half of these P5 conferences to win 6 games if they're playing 10 P5's. If every conference follows this model half the teams just added 1 loss to their schedule.

MAC schools and other G5 will continue to buy FCS games(at least for now).FCS will decline-but it will be somewhat gradual IMO.

(08-01-2015 08:44 PM)JTApps1 Wrote:  This could also impact the bowls down the road. It's going to be a lot harder for the lower half of these P5 conferences to win 6 games if they're playing 10 P5's. If every conference follows this model half the teams just added 1 loss to their schedule.

Excellent point and one I hadn't considered. There are at least a few P5's each year who get a bowl game by the skin of their teeth. Under this scenario, they're likely not going to be eligible......and that's a good thing for the G5'ers.

(08-02-2015 06:57 AM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(08-01-2015 08:44 PM)JTApps1 Wrote:  This could also impact the bowls down the road. It's going to be a lot harder for the lower half of these P5 conferences to win 6 games if they're playing 10 P5's. If every conference follows this model half the teams just added 1 loss to their schedule.

Excellent point and one I hadn't considered. There are at least a few P5's each year who get a bowl game by the skin of their teeth. Under this scenario, they're likely not going to be eligible......and that's a good thing for the G5'ers.

By my count there were 11 P5 teams that went to a bowl last year with 6 wins. So that's 5 or 6 possible bowls slots up for grabs.

Don't worry if the P5 's lose bowl slots they will change it to 5 wins to go bowling

(08-01-2015 02:56 PM)moehler Wrote:  I have been saying for years that the FCS is a broken model, with very little revenue streams left, you take away one of their last major sources of revenue, the play for pay game, than I think a high percentage of programs are finished and might give stronger consideration to move down to division 2. Right now, programs such as Montana, JMU, NDSU had better find a home soon in the FBS, time is running out for them.

These FCS programs are not going to disappear, they just have a difficult time growing their revenue. Montana and NDSU are not playing an FBS money game this year. Montana made a profit of $2 million from football last year. JMU is at SMU and they are getting $425,000. The $425,000 helps, but their football budget is $8 million. So about 5% of their budget.

Not that much will change. If you are FCS, you have a ceiling on your revenue. But you also don't have to add scholarships and pay the full cost of attendance and any other expense associated with moving up to FBS, Besides, there is only one FBS opening.

Tony Barnhart article:
Should the SEC keep scheduling FCS teams?
http://www.tonybarnhart.com/college-foot...fcs-teams/

The lower half of the P5 just wet themselves. This is big for the G5 now the leeches of the P5 will not be able to hide as much. Payouts should go up as well if this catches on as it is just basic supply and demand. The lower half of the G5 is going to be in huge demand by the pretenders in the P5. This is just nothing but good for the G5 if this catches on. As far as the FCS our gain is their pain, it will further separate us from them and start to kill the myth of that their is some huge void between the top of the G5 and most of the P5. The lower end of the P5 just became sacrificial lambs for their top tier conference mates. ESPN for its own self interests and the Big10 supporters will hammer teams that continue to play FCS teams. At only four teams getting in this will be a big deal if they go to eight it will die down some but still be an issue.

(07-31-2015 04:17 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  There's been some talk that the FCS could challenge the Big 10's rule in court as collusion. I'm curious to see if other P5's follow that route and if people in FCS do challenge it.

I think they have a pretty good case. Economic boycott isn't generally well liked in the law and it wouldn't take a geek 10 minutes to compile a list of FCS with better schedule quality than bottom G5 schools.

For the record.

I don't believe the Big Ten policy is about the playoff, I think it is about the upcoming TV negotiation.

Gentlemen, before you bid, just be aware our package will not include the usual 10 FCS opponents playing at our place.

(08-04-2015 09:50 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  For the record.

I don't believe the Big Ten policy is about the playoff, I think it is about the upcoming TV negotiation.

Gentlemen, before you bid, just be aware our package will not include the usual 10 FCS opponents playing at our place.

Good point, this is why ESPN and all the talking heads bash the FCS games fairly or not. NDSU can win all it wants but ESPN will still hammer playing them for its own self interest. The G5 will be in high demand and we can offer FCS peanuts as they will be scrambling for any type of payout. Hate it for top teams in the FCS as they really try but the FCS has been flooded with so many schools just trying to be DIV I in name only and mainly for basketball reasons.

All of the reasons stated is why we are headed for another reclassification of D1 football.

Beside the B1G FCS rule isn't a mandate or rule, just a suggestion from the league office. That should keep them out of some of the trouble. Besides, show me where in a free enterprise that I must do business with another entity. Where you may see some changes made are on the state level, where the state of Ohio legislation requires state school Ohio State to play state school Youngstown State.

(08-04-2015 10:09 AM)Usajags Wrote:  All of the reasons stated is why we are headed for another reclassification of D1 football.

Beside the B1G FCS rule isn't a mandate or rule, just a suggestion from the league office. That should keep them out of some of the trouble. Besides, show me where in a free enterprise that I must do business with another entity. Where you may see some changes made are on the state level, where the state of Ohio legislation requires state school Ohio State to play state school Youngstown State.

I don't see a reclassification as really this will bring the G5 actually closer to the P5. It will bring in tons more cash, more home and homes and exposing of the pretenders like Wake Forest in the P5. I really do not see a downside for the G5 in this. ESPN has contracts with G5 conferences they want us to make them money as well. Is ESPN going to bash the Sun Belt then turn around and show a promo of our games on ESPN?

If the SBC can secure home and home games with this new format, should make our TV contract more valuable as well.

Of course that is for all G5 conferences, not just ours.

(08-04-2015 10:22 AM)Usajags Wrote:  If the SBC can secure home and home games with this new format, should make our TV contract more valuable as well.

Of course that is for all G5 conferences, not just ours.

"P5" teams like Wake do not have leverage they can't pay us what the Alabama's can or will and they can not give us many tickets as their stadiums are way smaller than the elite P5's. The lower tier P5's will be almost forced to submit to home and homes or the payout will likely be a wash at best for them.

If there is a downside of the FCS being shunned by the P5's for the G5 I am not seeing right now.

(08-01-2015 11:55 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  The only teams in that league that would ever even considering traveling to a G5 stadium will be the teams that no one really wants to see anyways. Illinois, Indiana and Purdue at best. And no one will really even care if you beat those teams because they generally suck anyway.

I disagree to this.

Rutgers has been willing to travel and play home and home games to the likes of Tulane, FIU and Fresno State in the past few years.

I think there are more schools willing to travel then you would expect. Miami is going to stAte, we have had Miss St and NC state coming this year. Troy has had Mizzou, Southern Miss has had Nebraska. Besides, are you telling me your fans would rather see Kent St or F_U over Indiana, Cal, Wake, Vandy or Iowa???

May not be the biggest names, but they are P5 schools and the casual fan knows the name and the helmet. And that is what matters when it comes to filling our stadiums.

(08-04-2015 12:10 PM)NewJersey GATA Wrote:  

(08-01-2015 11:55 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  The only teams in that league that would ever even considering traveling to a G5 stadium will be the teams that no one really wants to see anyways. Illinois, Indiana and Purdue at best. And no one will really even care if you beat those teams because they generally suck anyway.

I disagree to this.

Rutgers has been willing to travel and play home and home games to the likes of Tulane, FIU and Fresno State in the past few years.

I also think that is not true. UCLA has home-and-home future games scheduled with UNLV, Memphis, Cincinnati, San Diego State and BYU. Every PAC-12 school has at least one future road game scheduled at a G5 school.

What seems to be more important is quality of conference, quality of opponent, stadium size and to some extent the location. A school in a bigger market might be more attractive to fans looking for things to do and may have some advantages for recruiting.