Interesting.

I know that Montana, when they won their last NC, actually lost $250,000. The NCAA comes in, and takes the lions share of money made on playoff games, and schools are lucky to break even on hosting the game. Couple that with the bidding system for the home playoff games, and FCS playoffs is very expensive for its participants.

(05-22-2012 10:46 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-21-2012 05:45 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  

(05-21-2012 03:08 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Hadn't really thought about that much, but a 10 year moratorium would very potentially be a death toll to the Sun Belt. Maybe that is why CUSA and the MAC have so many members now. I keep hearing about this moratorium coming, now I see it today in that CBS Sports article, maybe the MAC and CUSA people know something that we do not know.

We dont know who, if anyone, would be killed by the moratorium or expansion. Remember it was a conference considered "better" than the Belt (the WAC) in its death throws. The Big 12 is stable and in a position to grow because of the "grant of rights.". We should do the same.

These things RARELY work out as intended.

The 8 full member rule was supposed to kill the Sun Belt and in the end it sealed the WAC's fate, not the Sun Belt's.

The BCS was structured with AQ's to insure certain TV valuable schools would be in the mix. When they left their conference that AQ status helped drive who wanted to join and replace them.

When the Sun Belt was desperate for a new member and BCS money was $100,000, Western Kentucky wasn't interested, the Texas twins weren't knocking, App and Georgia Southern weren't talking about moving up. When Sun Belt BCS money topped a million WKU was interested and USA was right behind and there were other schools wanting in as well.

When the NCAA Tournament first started making decent money, there were about 100 fewer Division I schools (and Miami didn't even play basketball). Then the money got serious and everyone wanted in.

If the BCS boys want to slow things down there are some really simple steps.
1. Pick a number $1 million, $2 million whatever and cut checks in that amount to every conference no matter what and don't tie it to a percentage of income. It is a flat payment to every league for making teams available if selected.
2. Tie the rest of the money to selection. Make the field of 4 you get X for game 1 and Y for game 2 if you win.
3. You can then designate some other games "BCS" and open selection up to the schools rated 5-12 or 5-16 or 5-20. You get a designated payment for hitting the target and being in one of those games.
4. You take some amount of money in addition to the current payment to the FCS scholarship leagues and award bonuses to schools for performance in the FCS playoffs in addition to whatever little the NCAA pays. Make the round of 16, get $100,000. Make the round of 8 get another $150,000, round of 4 add another $200,000, championship another $250,000. That would cost $4.1 million, roughly 1% of what the BCS 4 team playoff is estimated to be worth. Championship appearance would be worth $700,000 in addition to the NCAA payment (which is break-even for the most part unless you overbid for home games). You make FCS more worthwhile for the better programs.
Do that and AQ is no longer a concern. The real money is in finishing in the top 4 or higher number if there are BCS bowls.

AQ screwed up realignment and you don't want too much guaranteed cash laying around. Just enough to entice a desired school to join a conference but not so much everyone is fighting to get in. You leave the big money for success, if you are having success you are less likely to want or need new members.

I like it.

(05-22-2012 10:58 AM)AtlantaJag Wrote:  I like it.

I agree but based on history, that is exactly why it will not happen

I think a moritorium could be the death of the Sun Belt if it really last 10 years and C-USA , MWC and possibly even the Big East each take a few schools. The Sun Belt won't be able to re-load unless they commit to FCS schools now to save them from future membership exits.

(05-22-2012 11:08 AM)GaSouthern Wrote:  I think a moritorium could be the death of the Sun Belt if it really last 10 years and C-USA , MWC and possibly even the Big East each take a few schools. The Sun Belt won't be able to re-load unless they commit to FCS schools now to save them from future membership exits.

I seriously doubt that a 10 year moritorium would be the death of the Sun Belt.

(05-22-2012 11:10 AM)MG61 Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:08 AM)GaSouthern Wrote:  I think a moritorium could be the death of the Sun Belt if it really last 10 years and C-USA , MWC and possibly even the Big East each take a few schools. The Sun Belt won't be able to re-load unless they commit to FCS schools now to save them from future membership exits.

I seriously doubt that a 10 year moritorium would be the death of the Sun Belt.

I honestly don't think it will either but what if the following schools get taken from the sunbelt...

FAU, GState, TxState, Ark St, MTSU, WKU

And because of the BAN there is no way to re-load with any other schools.

Then you have a few left in an idaho/NMSU situation.

(05-22-2012 11:20 AM)GaSouthern Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:10 AM)MG61 Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:08 AM)GaSouthern Wrote:  I think a moritorium could be the death of the Sun Belt if it really last 10 years and C-USA , MWC and possibly even the Big East each take a few schools. The Sun Belt won't be able to re-load unless they commit to FCS schools now to save them from future membership exits.

I seriously doubt that a 10 year moritorium would be the death of the Sun Belt.

I honestly don't think it will either but what if the following schools get taken from the sunbelt...

FAU, GState, TxState, Ark St, MTSU, WKU

And because of the BAN there is no way to re-load with any other schools.

Then you have a few left in an idaho/NMSU situation.

This is also why it will not be a 10 year moratorium.

(05-21-2012 05:13 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(05-21-2012 04:04 PM)Seven Would Be Nice Wrote:  What REALLY needs to/should/never will happen is regional tiers of conferences and a system of promotion/regulation like the English Futball system has.

Why are teams like Illinois, Vandy, Duke, Indiana, Etc in elite conferences while teams like Boise get the shaft each year for the BCS titles?

Promotion and Regulation... each tier has it's own playoff each year, similar to NCAA BBall with the NCAA/NIT/etc tournaments.

Illinois is a charter member(1896) of the Big 10. Indiana joined in 1899. Only one school has left the Big 10, the University of Chicago in 1946. Left after dropping football in 1939.

Vandy has been a member since the SEC came into existence in Dec 1932. Only 3 SEC members have left the conference. Sewanee(1940),GaTech(1964), and Tulane(1966). All three left on there own, none were kicked out of the SEC.

Duke is also a charter member of the ACC. Only one school has left the ACC, South Carolina in 1971.

The reason that each is were they are today is loyalty to each other. Like it has been stated someone inside of each of this conferences has to be the punching bag for the other school.

Teams like Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Vandy, Ole Miss, and Kentucky are very important to the Big 10 and SEC. Sure they might have a big season 2-3 times over a 20 year span, but the majority of the years they are just average or below average. They aren't perennial contenders like Ohio St, Michigan, Alabama, or LSU. There's always got to be a team at the bottom. If you want to make a NC run, you need those easy conference wins. If you have a conference w/ nothing but top 10 teams, its going to be tough to come out without 2-3 losses. Those bottom teams are able to survive by feeding off those big seasons, plus they have enough financial support to schedule 3-4 non-conference cupcakes, and if they can win a couple of conference games, then they get to go bowling.

(05-22-2012 11:22 AM)panama Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:20 AM)GaSouthern Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:10 AM)MG61 Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:08 AM)GaSouthern Wrote:  I think a moritorium could be the death of the Sun Belt if it really last 10 years and C-USA , MWC and possibly even the Big East each take a few schools. The Sun Belt won't be able to re-load unless they commit to FCS schools now to save them from future membership exits.

I seriously doubt that a 10 year moritorium would be the death of the Sun Belt.

I honestly don't think it will either but what if the following schools get taken from the sunbelt...

FAU, GState, TxState, Ark St, MTSU, WKU

And because of the BAN there is no way to re-load with any other schools.

Then you have a few left in an idaho/NMSU situation.

This is also why it will not be a 10 year moratorium.

....and waivers are always available. The NCAA doesn't want to lose a conference.

They didn't make waivers avilable last time for the four year moratorium that just ended.

Was it ever necessary?

(05-22-2012 12:58 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  They didn't make waivers avilable last time for the four year moratorium that just ended.

Some people called it waiver but anyone who had their paperwork in before the change was allowed to continue the process. That really wasn't a waiver it was simply letting anyone already following the process to complete it.

Let's do the math.

Big 10 and Pac-12 are at the point where they really can't add anyone and make the math work.

The SEC has a problem in that Mizzou is stuck in the east in football. They could go to 16 but that means only one crossover game. The SEC is going to preserve games like Bama-Auburn and Bama-Tenn, that's WHY Mizzou is in the east. They may eventually go to 16.

The Big XII I suspect is going to pick a number between 10 and 18 and get there.

If the Big XII acts, that means most likely ACC is gutted and a collection of Big East schools may be even CUSA get hauled in to keep the name alive though like the Big East today, it will share little with its former namesake.

MWC is short of potential candidates. MAC should be fairly stable. CUSA has room to give up schools without doing anything.

We are moving from what we had 10 or so years ago with 5 very wealthy conferences, 1 just below them the upper middle class, a similar gap to the middle class 2, and similar gap to the bottom 3 to something that might be more like this. 4 very wealthy leagues, 1 below them being the middle class (likely an eastern seaboard league), then a midwestern league (MAC), a western league (MWC), a southern/southeastern league stretching from the DelMarVa region to Florida to the mid-south and a southern/southwestern league stretching from the mid-south to the far southwest.

This is basically what our national economy is doing, the gap between wealthy and poor is growing in terms of individual wealth and in proportion to members in each group with an eroding middle class as some move into the wealthy category and others fall into the poor category with very few moving from poor to middle class.

The wealthiest leagues will absorb everything of value (see past 8 years of CUSA/MWC history) and what is left are the programs that weren't bringing value to their richer leagues and have a value more similar to the poorer programs they felt they were above.

We have 67 teams that have AQ status this year with 59 schools in wealthy leagues. If the Big XII were to go to 14 to mirror the SEC and Big 10/Pac-12 stay the same we have 53 schools in the wealthy category. SEC, Big XII, Pac-12, Big 10, Notre Dame. Even if Big XII and SEC go to 16 that's 57. That would only reduce the "wealthy" by two schools (three if Notre Dame were to somehow go to the Big XII). The gap between those four leagues and the next league (an ACC/Big East/CUSA survivor pool) in financial terms would not be like the gap that existed between the rest of the AQ leagues and the Big East, it would be like the gap between the top 5 AQ and MWC/CUSA when they were at their peak. There would no longer be an 8 football team league in the upper middle class, rather a 10 to 16 team league occupying what used to be the space of the MWC/CUSA when they were nationally relevant in football. That would leave everyone else scattered about in four leagues generating very little TV money.

We've watched this basic evolution for years in the west.
At one time the pecking order in the west was: Wealthy Pac-8, Middle Class WAC, Poor PCAA/Big West
Then it became Wealthy Pac-10, Middle Class MWC, Poor WAC
Now it will be Wealthy Pac-12, poor MWC. If there is a middle class it will be BYU as an independent and Boise/SDSU in a Big East/ACC combo league as long as that lasts.

(05-22-2012 02:18 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Let's do the math.

Big 10 and Pac-12 are at the point where they really can't add anyone and make the math work.

The SEC has a problem in that Mizzou is stuck in the east in football. They could go to 16 but that means only one crossover game. The SEC is going to preserve games like Bama-Auburn and Bama-Tenn, that's WHY Mizzou is in the east. They may eventually go to 16.

I did not read whole thread but there is no problem. Move Auburn to the East.

East

Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Kemtucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

East

Alabama
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Missouri
Texas A&M

(05-22-2012 03:00 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 02:18 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Let's do the math.

Big 10 and Pac-12 are at the point where they really can't add anyone and make the math work.

The SEC has a problem in that Mizzou is stuck in the east in football. They could go to 16 but that means only one crossover game. The SEC is going to preserve games like Bama-Auburn and Bama-Tenn, that's WHY Mizzou is in the east. They may eventually go to 16.

I did not read whole thread but there is no problem. Move Auburn to the East.

East

Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Kemtucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

East

Alabama
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Missouri
Texas A&M

If it were really that simple, don't you think that's what they would have done in the first place?

C'mon man, think before you post. They put Missouri in the east specifically to avoid moving Auburn to the east.

The Auburn and Alabama clearly don't want to be in opposite divisions for any sport and while for football they could still play every year by becoming one another's permanent cross over rival, the Alabama/Tennessee game is then lost and both schools consider that to be one of their biggest rivalry games.

The only other solution that I ever really saw that made sense was to shift Vandy to the west and put Alabama and Auburn to the east, but you wanna talk about loading up one division. Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia and Tennessee all in the same division...

(05-22-2012 03:00 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 02:18 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Let's do the math.

Big 10 and Pac-12 are at the point where they really can't add anyone and make the math work.

The SEC has a problem in that Mizzou is stuck in the east in football. They could go to 16 but that means only one crossover game. The SEC is going to preserve games like Bama-Auburn and Bama-Tenn, that's WHY Mizzou is in the east. They may eventually go to 16.

I did not read whole thread but there is no problem. Move Auburn to the East.

East

Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Kemtucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

East

Alabama
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Missouri
Texas A&M

Alabama also doesn't want to lose its game with TN every year. What Alabama wants is what Alabama gets.

(05-22-2012 03:32 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  The only other solution that I ever really saw that made sense was to shift Vandy to the west and put Alabama and Auburn to the east, but you wanna talk about loading up one division. Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia and Tennessee all in the same division...

I'd love that - UGA fans would be forced to face the reality of their place in the world.

(05-22-2012 03:35 PM)Panthersville Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 03:00 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 02:18 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Let's do the math.

Big 10 and Pac-12 are at the point where they really can't add anyone and make the math work.

The SEC has a problem in that Mizzou is stuck in the east in football. They could go to 16 but that means only one crossover game. The SEC is going to preserve games like Bama-Auburn and Bama-Tenn, that's WHY Mizzou is in the east. They may eventually go to 16.

I did not read whole thread but there is no problem. Move Auburn to the East.

East

Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Kemtucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

East

Alabama
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Missouri
Texas A&M

Alabama also doesn't want to lose its game with TN every year. What Alabama wants is what Alabama gets.

Might have been just a small possibility that CBS didn't want to give up Bama-Auburn or Bama-Tenn.

The idea I liked was Kentucky going West with Bama-Auburn going East. Basketball division vs. Football division. Auburn actually tried to go East and publicly said so, theory was that they knew Bama would be forced to give up the Tenn game as their permanent rival and keep Auburn as the permanent taking away a traditional national telecast for Bama.

(05-22-2012 03:32 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 03:00 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 02:18 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Let's do the math.

Big 10 and Pac-12 are at the point where they really can't add anyone and make the math work.

The SEC has a problem in that Mizzou is stuck in the east in football. They could go to 16 but that means only one crossover game. The SEC is going to preserve games like Bama-Auburn and Bama-Tenn, that's WHY Mizzou is in the east. They may eventually go to 16.

I did not read whole thread but there is no problem. Move Auburn to the East.

East

Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Kemtucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

East

Alabama
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Missouri
Texas A&M

If it were really that simple, don't you think that's what they would have done in the first place?

C'mon man, think before you post. They put Missouri in the east specifically to avoid moving Auburn to the east.

The Auburn and Alabama clearly don't want to be in opposite divisions for any sport and while for football they could still play every year by becoming one another's permanent cross over rival, the Alabama/Tennessee game is then lost and both schools consider that to be one of their biggest rivalry games.

The only other solution that I ever really saw that made sense was to shift Vandy to the west and put Alabama and Auburn to the east, but you wanna talk about loading up one division. Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia and Tennessee all in the same division...

It makes more sense to have Missouri in the same division as LSU, Arkansas, and TAMU.