(04-19-2014 06:03 AM)CajunExpress Wrote:  Well Idaho's vote may or may not be equal to an Alabama vote. The P5 already dominate the football rules by a large margin.

By your failed logic one would think that only McNeese type FCS schools voted not to give stipends to football players in the vote last year. The fact is almost all SBC schools agreed with the P5, additionally there were more than a couple of P5 members who voted no to that two thousand dollar stipend. I know Louisiana voted yes, ULM even voted yes. Louisiana Tech at Ruston I do not recall for sure, probably yes.

The P5 sees a billion dollar pay day and simply are afraid that they will have to give more than a few million to the NCAA. It has zero to do with what Idaho votes, or LTU At Ruston votes for that matter.

I agree. I don't see this as anything new. I don't see G5 schools as equivalent to FCS schools. The G5 schools get more revenue from football and have an access that FCS schools don't. They will pay the stipend.

I do think the P5 schools would like to make it more difficult for schools to move up to FBS and even D1 competition. The NCAA now requires a $1.4 million application fee to move up from D2. That helps to discourage some schools from moving up to D1.

JMU may not have wanted to spend the money to move up. Liberty will not have that problem. EKU will be challenged to afford a move up. I think FBS expansion is coming to a close soon. I think that will make all FBS schools happy.