(03-24-2014 05:08 PM)statefanatic Wrote:  This is what will happen. JMU will be the 12th member this year. It doesn't stop there. In 2015 MSU will join full membership along with NMSU oly sports.

Take it or leave it! That is what I've heard. Liberty is backup to the backup plan.

(03-24-2014 05:24 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  So I guess that means a 6 team eastern division and a 7 team western division?????

(03-24-2014 09:16 AM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:06 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 08:29 AM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 12:34 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  You guys take basketball seriously. You don't take football seriously. Your head football coach makes $108,000, has one year remaining on his deal and they didn't fire him last year because they would have to pay him.

We kept Davalos around an extra year because if we fired him, we'd have to pay him.

I think you are believing Texas State is so much further along than we really are.

We are not a basketball school. Davalos made $120,000. We did fire Brad Wright with two years left on his contract.

This is not about Texas State since we are already FBS. Schools that want to move up to FBS usually do an FBS feasibility study, are upgrading their football facility if required and raising money to prepare for the expense and possibly asking students to pay additional money for FBS football.

We did that and we have a $26 million athletic budget and a 30,000 seat stadium. We still have a lot of work to do.

Missouri State is not prepared. The biggest issue in moving up is the money. Moving up to FBS football is a cash drain. I think JMU has everything in place and I see Missouri State as a board dream, but not a reality.

You are in a minority.

Missouri State also would be the second FBS program from Missouri and the excitement moving up to their fan base would be huge.

A few years ago...what you are saying about Missouri State is what was being said about Texas State. There were many doubters that Texas State could pull this off.

(03-24-2014 10:18 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:16 AM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:06 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 08:29 AM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  [quote='SoCalBobcat78' pid='10590686' dateline='1395639289']You guys take basketball seriously. You don't take football seriously. Your head football coach makes $108,000, has one year remaining on his deal and they didn't fire him last year because they would have to pay him.

We kept Davalos around an extra year because if we fired him, we'd have to pay him.

I think you are believing Texas State is so much further along than we really are.
[/quot

We are not a basketball school. Davalos made $120,000. We did fire Brad Wright with two years left on his contract.

This is not about Texas State since we are already FBS. Schools that want to move up to FBS usually do an FBS feasibility study, are upgrading their football facility if required and raising money to prepare for the expense and possibly asking students to pay additional money for FBS football.

We did that and we have a $26 million athletic budget and a 30,000 seat stadium. We still have a lot of work to do.

Missouri State is not prepared. The biggest issue in moving up is the money. Moving up to FBS football is a cash drain. I think JMU has everything in place and I see Missouri State as a board dream, but not a reality.

You are in a minority.

Missouri State also would be the second FBS program from Missouri and the excitement moving up to their fan base would be huge.

A few years ago...what you are saying about Missouri State is what was being said about Texas State. There were many doubters that Texas State could pull this off.

The reason we are FBS is because we planned and prepared for it. We were raising money. We were very public about our goal to go FBS. We worked on "The Drive To FBS" and it culminated in an invite to the WAC. We got lucky when the WAC needed schools.

Missouri State could have been there with us, but they were doing nothing on the football side to prepare for FBS. Now we are in 2014 and they are still doing nothing. You cannot put yourself in a position to get lucky like we did if you are doing nothing to prepare for FBS Football.

Being in the minority is not going to effect my point of view. Being in the majority does not give your point of view any validity.

(03-24-2014 05:57 PM)GSU Eagle Wrote:  Yes please!

WEST:

- Arkansas State

- Louisiana

- Missouri State

- New Mexico State

- Texas State

- ULM



EAST:

- Appalachian State

- Georgia Southern

- Georgia State

- James Madison

- South Alabama

- Troy

(03-24-2014 10:39 PM)ChooChoo Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 05:57 PM)GSU Eagle Wrote:  Yes please!

WEST:

- Arkansas State

- Louisiana

- Missouri State

- New Mexico State

- Texas State

- ULM



EAST:

- Appalachian State

- Georgia Southern

- Georgia State

- James Madison

- South Alabama

- Troy

Should this conference, with these schools, stay intact for a decade, it would be a force to reckoned with. Nothing but upside with every state these schools are in growing. This league can be exceptional. The goal should be to stay together and take Southern Miss (our geographic missing link) and a Florida school.

(03-24-2014 10:01 AM)MO State Alum Wrote:  Obviously MO State has a lot of work to do when it comes to football facilities/product on the field, but the one thing we will have is a ready-to-go package when it comes to all other sports.

Sure...we could spend millions more on an expansion of our football field right now, but we'd be bogged down by needing to upgrade aging facilities for many of our olympic sports. We've got a blueprint for our athletic goals and are doing it the way we feel is the best way to offer the entire package. We have a plan in place to compete at the highest level in all sports - not just football.

It's no secret that MO State wants to be part of an FBS conference. We've been considering it for years, but we had a lot to take care of to bring other sports up to snuff. It's in our best interest to provide all sports the best facilities we can while committing to football in several different ways: creating a football-only stadium, rebuilding the entire east side of the complex, modifying the layout to provide for future expansion, and increasing game day atmosphere. Once this FIRST PHASE is completed, Plaster Stadium will be able to hold around 17,000 people. Is it huge? Not by any means...but it will be ready to go - and so will our other sports.

So I ask you in all seriousness: Would you rather have a school with a huge football stadium and a slim chance at competing in other sports? Or would you rather have a school with a nice-sized, expandable football stadium that can bring all its sports to your conference under one umbrella and be competitive right out of the gate, with the potential to field a competitive football program?

(03-24-2014 10:18 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:16 AM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:06 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 08:29 AM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 12:34 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  You guys take basketball seriously. You don't take football seriously. Your head football coach makes $108,000, has one year remaining on his deal and they didn't fire him last year because they would have to pay him.

We kept Davalos around an extra year because if we fired him, we'd have to pay him.

I think you are believing Texas State is so much further along than we really are.

We are not a basketball school. Davalos made $120,000. We did fire Brad Wright with two years left on his contract.

This is not about Texas State since we are already FBS. Schools that want to move up to FBS usually do an FBS feasibility study, are upgrading their football facility if required and raising money to prepare for the expense and possibly asking students to pay additional money for FBS football.

We did that and we have a $26 million athletic budget and a 30,000 seat stadium. We still have a lot of work to do.

Missouri State is not prepared. The biggest issue in moving up is the money. Moving up to FBS football is a cash drain. I think JMU has everything in place and I see Missouri State as a board dream, but not a reality.

You are in a minority.

Missouri State also would be the second FBS program from Missouri and the excitement moving up to their fan base would be huge.

A few years ago...what you are saying about Missouri State is what was being said about Texas State. There were many doubters that Texas State could pull this off.

The reason we are FBS is because we planned and prepared for it. We were raising money. We were very public about our goal to go FBS. We worked on "The Drive To FBS" and it culminated in an invite to the WAC. We got lucky when the WAC needed schools.

Missouri State could have been there with us, but they were doing nothing on the football side to prepare for FBS. Now we are in 2014 and they are still doing nothing. You cannot put yourself in a position to get lucky like we did if you are doing nothing to prepare for FBS Football.

Being in the minority is not going to effect my point of view. Being in the majority does not give your point of view any validity.

(03-24-2014 10:47 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 10:39 PM)ChooChoo Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 05:57 PM)GSU Eagle Wrote:  Yes please!

WEST:

- Arkansas State

- Louisiana

- Missouri State

- New Mexico State

- Texas State

- ULM



EAST:

- Appalachian State

- Georgia Southern

- Georgia State

- James Madison

- South Alabama

- Troy

Should this conference, with these schools, stay intact for a decade, it would be a force to reckoned with. Nothing but upside with every state these schools are in growing. This league can be exceptional. The goal should be to stay together and take Southern Miss (our geographic missing link) and a Florida school.

Better yet...Southern Miss and UAB!

(03-24-2014 10:01 AM)MO State Alum Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 06:09 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 04:53 PM)msu_bears Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 12:10 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 10:29 AM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  I actually wonder if at this point, Missouri State would be considered a shock.

I know they've drug their feet for years already, but it seems like in the past year, they are prepping for the move.

The only thing Missouri State is doing is a renovation on an old stadium. As their President said six months ago, "The ugliest place on campus is the student bleachers at Plaster Stadium. Having a half a high school stadium is no longer aceptable for the kind of university that we are." So they are replacing the old student bleachers, removing the track, building new restrooms and concessions. These are FCS renovations, not FBS renovations.

Missouri State has been playing money games in recent years to make up their athletic budget deficit. As their head coach stated, "We need the money." Their attendance is not good, the play on the field has been poor and their losing money. They need to fix their problems at the FCS level before they could even consider spending millions of additional dollars for a move to FBS. That is why the Missouri State President and AD never talk about moving to FBS. They need to make FCS football work first.

The making FCS work is a dumb excuse. Your school was a nobody at FCS. The team should be looked at as a start up, just like UCONN or Georgia St because FCS and FBS aren't comparable, they might as well be different sports. The area fans don't support FCS, they would support FBS bigtime.

1) Its a lot more than just a simple remodel like you are making it out to be, its turning a track stadium into a football specific stadium that is designed to be quickly expanded if needed.
2) brand new field hockey stadium under construction
3) brand new track/soccer stadium under construction
4) brand new volleyball court under construction
5) $4 million new basketball locker rooms opened this january

What does field hockey, track, soccer, volleyball and basketball have to do with FBS football? I never hear where the money is coming from for this move up? Texas State spent years preparing, planning and raising money for a move up. We took our 16,000 seat football stadium to 30,000 seats at a cost of $33 million. Can Missouri State do the same?

Georgia State is located in the 8th largest TV market and they play in a pro stadium. They prepared and planned for a move up. They have a much larger athletic budget. Missouri State is not comparable to Georgia State.

So you are saying that the area fans don't support FCS football, but they would support FBS football? I hope that is not a selling point for a move to FBS football.

Missouri State does not have the money for a move up. You are not a start up. You don't have the facilities or the market to pull that off.

To answer your question regarding field hockey, track, soccer, volleyball and basketball, these are all sports that require funding in some way, shape or form. These facilities - along with our very nice baseball stadium, softball complex, and cross country facility - are all built/being built, allowing our athletic department to shift its focus to football.

Obviously MO State has a lot of work to do when it comes to football facilities/product on the field, but the one thing we will have is a ready-to-go package when it comes to all other sports.

Sure...we could spend millions more on an expansion of our football field right now, but we'd be bogged down by needing to upgrade aging facilities for many of our olympic sports. We've got a blueprint for our athletic goals and are doing it the way we feel is the best way to offer the entire package. We have a plan in place to compete at the highest level in all sports - not just football.

It's no secret that MO State wants to be part of an FBS conference. We've been considering it for years, but we had a lot to take care of to bring other sports up to snuff. It's in our best interest to provide all sports the best facilities we can while committing to football in several different ways: creating a football-only stadium, rebuilding the entire east side of the complex, modifying the layout to provide for future expansion, and increasing game day atmosphere. Once this FIRST PHASE is completed, Plaster Stadium will be able to hold around 17,000 people. Is it huge? Not by any means...but it will be ready to go - and so will our other sports.

So I ask you in all seriousness: Would you rather have a school with a huge football stadium and a slim chance at competing in other sports? Or would you rather have a school with a nice-sized, expandable football stadium that can bring all its sports to your conference under one umbrella and be competitive right out of the gate, with the potential to field a competitive football program?

(03-24-2014 05:08 PM)statefanatic Wrote:  This is what will happen. JMU will be the 12th member this year. It doesn't stop there. In 2015 MSU will join full membership along with NMSU oly sports.

Take it or leave it! That is what I've heard. Liberty is backup to the backup plan.

(03-24-2014 11:09 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  I understand the draw backs/money divides when going over 12 at this time. This is an idea/targets long term - anticipating potential changes in $ distributions & potential market pickups that could help TV contracts. - so lets please not spend 4 pages arguing over not exceeding 12.

(03-25-2014 08:39 AM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 11:09 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  I understand the draw backs/money divides when going over 12 at this time. This is an idea/targets long term - anticipating potential changes in $ distributions & potential market pickups that could help TV contracts. - so lets please not spend 4 pages arguing over not exceeding 12.

Dude, this is the message board that spent 160+ pages on a tweet by a guy who isn't an insider.

The same message board that argues over who is the champ in basketball (conference/tourney).

The same message board that argues over names (ULL-Louisiana, ULM - Hoax, etc).

We can exceed 4 pages on which way is up!

(03-24-2014 05:08 PM)statefanatic Wrote:  This is what will happen. JMU will be the 12th member this year. It doesn't stop there. In 2015 MSU will join full membership along with NMSU oly sports.

Take it or leave it! That is what I've heard. Liberty is backup to the backup plan.

(03-25-2014 08:43 AM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  Question if you are standing on the South Pole which is up your head or your feet.

If north is up your feet would be up, but then again if the sky is up then your head is up so which way is really up.

(03-25-2014 08:43 AM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 08:39 AM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 11:09 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  I understand the draw backs/money divides when going over 12 at this time. This is an idea/targets long term - anticipating potential changes in $ distributions & potential market pickups that could help TV contracts. - so lets please not spend 4 pages arguing over not exceeding 12.

Dude, this is the message board that spent 160+ pages on a tweet by a guy who isn't an insider.

The same message board that argues over who is the champ in basketball (conference/tourney).

The same message board that argues over names (ULL-Louisiana, ULM - Hoax, etc).

We can exceed 4 pages on which way is up!

Question if you are standing on the South Pole which is up your head or your feet.

If north is up your feet would be up, but then again if the sky is up then your head is up so which way is really up.

(03-24-2014 11:05 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  Answer this question for me. Why are so many MSU supporters unhappy with the MVC? It is a very good basketball conference. It is easy travel for olympic sports.