Those of us who are fans of FCS teams seeking a FBS conference are filled with talk, theories, thoughts, rumors, and ideas by posters here and elsewhere for answers. Imagination and dreams of what we hope to happen seem to have as much or more merit as the limited details and facts that have been announced. The time requirements of conference sustainability (WAC), dictated by time requirements stated by NCAA bylaws, will hopefully move the WAC, Hurd and others to create an East Wing WAC as a home for the FBS wannabees since no other conference has provided invites. If not, what then?

In past post, I have stated I believe Liberty could take legal action to challenge the NCAA FBS membership system if they have no FBS conference to go to now, or any hope of one in the future. One has to believe they are considering that action if no conference accepts them and if no window or opportunity exists now or in the near future.

An even larger stretch is what about starting a new conference made up of FCS schools and inviting FBS schools that could be lured by closer geographical footprint, reduced travel cost, a cost effective home for olympic sports, input in designing potential conference revenue sharing and more. This is pure theory as I am unaware of the start up requirements of a new conferences in the NCAA bylaws. I am unaware if that opportunity exists. Even if it did, there are many reasons to dismiss new conference discussion. It is a radical and highly unlikely scenario, but it seems those FCS to FBS AD's and school presidents need to think outside the box and not limit themselves to past actions of how membership was achieved in the past. Could existing FBS schools supplement a core group of 5 or 6 transitional FCS school in a southeast geographical area near App State, Liberty, JMU. As far reaching as this sounds, what other options would the transition schools have. It would all revolve around money, costs saved by travel, and monies earned elsewhere for the FBS schools. Would any SB, CUSA, or MAC schools benefit from the move? I expect some fans from those conferences to be irate at this suggestion. They likely will feel it beneath them to consider such an action. There may a higher upside to this scenario for those schools. Could it happen?

(08-02-2012 11:10 AM)Newetimes Wrote:  Those of us who are fans of FCS teams seeking a FBS conference are filled with talk, theories, thoughts, rumors, and ideas by posters here and elsewhere for answers. Imagination and dreams of what we hope to happen seem to have as much or more merit as the limited details and facts that have been announced. The time requirements of conference sustainability (WAC), dictated by time requirements stated by NCAA bylaws, will hopefully move the WAC, Hurd and others to create an East Wing WAC as a home for the FBS wannabees since no other conference has provided invites. If not, what then?

In past post, I have stated I believe Liberty could take legal action to challenge the NCAA FBS membership system if they have no FBS conference to go to now, or any hope of one in the future. One has to believe they are considering that action if no conference accepts them and if no window or opportunity exists now or in the near future.

An even larger stretch is what about starting a new conference made up of FCS schools and inviting FBS schools that could be lured by closer geographical footprint, reduced travel cost, a cost effective home for olympic sports, input in designing potential conference revenue sharing and more. This is pure theory as I am unaware of the start up requirements of a new conferences in the NCAA bylaws. I am unaware if that opportunity exists. Even if it did, there are many reasons to dismiss new conference discussion. It is a radical and highly unlikely scenario, but it seems those FCS to FBS AD's and school presidents need to think outside the box and not limit themselves to past actions of how membership was achieved in the past. Could existing FBS schools supplement a core group of 5 or 6 transitional FCS school in a southeast geographical area near App State, Liberty, JMU. As far reaching as this sounds, what other options would the transition schools have. It would all revolve around money, costs saved by travel, and monies earned elsewhere for the FBS schools. Would any SB, CUSA, or MAC schools benefit from the move? I expect some fans from those conferences to be irate at this suggestion. They likely will feel it beneath them to consider such an action. There may a higher upside to this scenario for those schools. Could it happen?

Oops.. See Dale v Boy Scouts. Private organizations, like the NCAA, can set their membership as they see fit. I'd love for Liberty to sue and get slammed based upon that ruling...

Furthermore, its not like Liberty is being singled out because it is a 'religious' school. Plenty of them in FBS.

Its not like the NCAA doesn't have competitors, like the NAIA.

From at least my perspective, the Sun Belt would be very opposed to massive move ups for a few reasons. They are:

1) Diminishes the value of Sun Belt membership. The Sun Belt has a 'golden ticket', which is the ability to upgrade FCS programs. We EARNED that ticket by basically destroying our basketball product to keep our football together at great reputational cost.

2) Increases the likelihood of a new split in FBS if too many newbies get called up.

If you'd like FBS inclusion, there is a conference you can attempt to join...the WAC. Work on that. Or you can try to make yourselves more acceptable to the Sun Belt, the MAC, or CUSA. Work on that.

I beg to differ. Liberty has deep pockets. Recent article in the Richmond Times states assets soon to be $1 billion (http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/state...r-2078306/) and need to spend that money as a non profit.

With an active law school at LU, and their past actions with litigation, and being a school (Falwell, Sr., deceased, not his son Jr. who is a very wise business person/attorney (UVA law school grad) and current chancellor) who has alienated many in the past, I would not dismiss that.

(08-02-2012 11:28 AM)Newetimes Wrote:  I beg to differ. Liberty has deep pockets. Recent article in the Richmond Times states assets soon to be $1 billion (http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/state...r-2078306/) and need to spend that money as a non profit.

With an active law school at LU, and their past actions with litigation, and being a school (Falwell, Sr., deceased, not his son Jr. who is a very wise business person/attorney (UVA law school grad) and current chancellor) who has alienated many in the past, I would not dismiss that.

Yes, your law school is quite active, with Matt Barber and Mat Staver.

On Monday, it was reported that the friggin dean of your Law School, Mat Staver (also the head of Liberty Counsel) said that Abortion caused the Colorado Movie Theater Massacre.

With regards to your new Chancellor, I have to repeat the question that others have already asked....What kind of respectable academic institution has dynastic succession? Is Liberty a University or some family's private property?

If you think that Liberty Counsel/Liberty Law School/same thing is going to force Liberty into FBS, you're drinking kool aid. Not going to happen.

Relax, take a breath, have some decaf. This is a thread about a new conference. Not about Liberty. I will not and do not need to defend LU as I share many of the concerns and actions you mention. I am a fan of college sports and condemn most all of the stupid things Falwell, Sr. has said and done in the past. I am on the same page with you.

I hope you can move on about LU and make comments about the post. Bash me if you choose about my idea of a new conference or a FBS team moving to a new predominate FCS start up. I grew up and lived in Lynchburg for 35 years. I know about the Falwells, the school. Now about the post................

(08-02-2012 11:51 AM)Newetimes Wrote:  Relax, take a breath, have some decaf. This is a thread about a new conference. Not about Liberty. I will not and do not need to defend LU as I share many of the concerns and actions you mention. I am a fan of college sports and condemn most all of the stupid things Falwell, Sr. has said and done in the past. I am on the same page with you.

I hope you can move on about LU and make comments about the post. Bash me if you choose about my idea of a new conference or a FBS team moving to a new predominate FCS start up. I grew up and lived in Lynchburg for 35 years. I know about the Falwells, the school. Now about the post................

The lawsuit will go nowhere. You are free to try though. Most likely it will hurt your chances to get picked up by a FBS conference (I wouldn't want a school in my conference that was overly litigious).

Here's where I see the schools standing on the WAC.

First hurdle...the existing WAC schools

1) Non-football WAC schools...terrified about travel costs. Remember that NCAA FBS rules require a certain number of members to participate in a minimum number of sports. So, either some of the Western schools need to compete in some of these sports in the East....OR...the Western schools need to find other places to play sports (!) which isn't so easy in the West. They could form a non-football conference, but then there would be no NCAA bids for years, etc. My guess is that some of the schools in the WAC, who struggled for decades to either find a place to play NCAA D1 sports or to have a home that makes geographic sense, are really apprehensive about this new plan.

2) NMSU. I think they're just waiting for the Big East to raid the MWC, at which point they will have to be taken by them. And its only a matter of time. At this point, I'm not sure that they are on board.

3) Idaho. I don't know what they are doing. My guess is that they would be willing to try it, but they are the only one that is a given at this point.

Now you have the FCS schools.

1) Liberty - would go. Not getting a Belt or a MAC bid anytime soon.
2) Appy - probably would go. But since they know they are next pick from the Sun Belt, might choose to wait it out.
3) Georgia Southern. See Appy. Second pick from the Belt.
4) JMU - might say no. Hoping on a MAC or a Belt bid.
5) Jacksonville State - probably would go.
6) Lamar - probably wants to, but must raise tons of money for a new stadium and is resource constrained.
7) Sam Houston - same thing as Lamar.
8) Delaware - most likely waiting on the MAC.

I don't see this happening.

As far a creating a new FBS conference, there is a NCAA rule against it. And even if Liberty sued, the case would take about 5 or six years (during which time any of the schools signed on to the lawsuit would likely be blackballed from any upgrade from an existing conference or from any payday games at FBS members - which for some of them would be a serious disincentive into entering into litigation). And the NCAA would probably prevail.

But in order to get standing to sue, there would probably need to be an 6 team conference already in place (or at least 6 teams that have announced their intention to do so - and thus face the aforementioned issues with scheduling/potential conference upgrades). I don't see that happening.

But I suppose, Liberty could sue to force the NCAA to allow them to upgrade without conference affiliation. They would face the potential disapproval from existing conferences (which for Liberty is not really a loss - as they aren't getting any interest from any existing conferences) and the loss of FBS payday games (likely). But even then, HOW would such a ruling be implemented? My guess is what Liberty would be suing for would be the right for ANY school to simply show up and announce...."We're FBS". Total chaos. I don't see Liberty's stand alone lawsuit as being successful.

I guess they could sue claiming that the NCAA rule prohibiting stand alone football conferences is somehow illegal. That, if somehow successful - doubtful, would cause utter chaos in all NCAA sports as you'd see massive shifting in basketball conferences. Massive chaos is what you'd be seeing. Massive.

Again, you guys are likely screwed. Your biggest hurdle isn't the Sun Belt or even your toxic politics...but its the non-football members of the WAC.

With regards to enticing existing FBS schools to form a new conference with mainly FCS schools...That isn't going to happen. Jacksonville State, Lamar, and SHSU are the only ones that are clearly inside the footprint of an existing FBS conference. Neither of them are going to draw away existing FBS members.

(08-02-2012 12:29 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-02-2012 11:51 AM)Newetimes Wrote:  Relax, take a breath, have some decaf. This is a thread about a new conference. Not about Liberty. I will not and do not need to defend LU as I share many of the concerns and actions you mention. I am a fan of college sports and condemn most all of the stupid things Falwell, Sr. has said and done in the past. I am on the same page with you.

I hope you can move on about LU and make comments about the post. Bash me if you choose about my idea of a new conference or a FBS team moving to a new predominate FCS start up. I grew up and lived in Lynchburg for 35 years. I know about the Falwells, the school. Now about the post................

The lawsuit will go nowhere. You are free to try though. Most likely it will hurt your chances to get picked up by a FBS conference (I wouldn't want a school in my conference that was overly litigious).

Here's where I see the schools standing on the WAC.

First hurdle...the existing WAC schools

1) Non-football WAC schools...terrified about travel costs. Remember that NCAA FBS rules require a certain number of members to participate in a minimum number of sports. So, either some of the Western schools need to compete in some of these sports in the East....OR...the Western schools need to find other places to play sports (!) which isn't so easy in the West. They could form a non-football conference, but then there would be no NCAA bids for years, etc. My guess is that some of the schools in the WAC, who struggled for decades to either find a place to play NCAA D1 sports or to have a home that makes geographic sense, are really apprehensive about this new plan.

2) NMSU. I think they're just waiting for the Big East to raid the MWC, at which point they will have to be taken by them. And its only a matter of time. At this point, I'm not sure that they are on board.

3) Idaho. I don't know what they are doing. My guess is that they would be willing to try it, but they are the only one that is a given at this point.

Now you have the FCS schools.

1) Liberty - would go. Not getting a Belt or a MAC bid anytime soon.
2) Appy - probably would go. But since they know they are next pick from the Sun Belt, might choose to wait it out.
3) Georgia Southern. See Appy. Second pick from the Belt.
4) JMU - might say no. Hoping on a MAC or a Belt bid.
5) Jacksonville State - probably would go.
6) Lamar - probably wants to, but must raise tons of money for a new stadium and is resource constrained.
7) Sam Houston - same thing as Lamar.
8) Delaware - most likely waiting on the MAC.

I don't see this happening.

As far a creating a new FBS conference, there is a NCAA rule against it. And even if Liberty sued, the case would take about 5 or six years (during which time any of the schools signed on to the lawsuit would likely be blackballed from any upgrade from an existing conference or from any payday games at FBS members - which for some of them would be a serious disincentive into entering into litigation). And the NCAA would probably prevail.

But in order to get standing to sue, there would probably need to be an 6 team conference already in place (or at least 6 teams that have announced their intention to do so - and thus face the aforementioned issues with scheduling/potential conference upgrades). I don't see that happening.

But I suppose, Liberty could sue to force the NCAA to allow them to upgrade without conference affiliation. They would face the potential disapproval from existing conferences (which for Liberty is not really a loss - as they aren't getting any interest from any existing conferences) and the loss of FBS payday games (likely). But even then, HOW would such a ruling be implemented? My guess is what Liberty would be suing for would be the right for ANY school to simply show up and announce...."We're FBS". Total chaos. I don't see Liberty's stand alone lawsuit as being successful.

I guess they could sue claiming that the NCAA rule prohibiting stand alone football conferences is somehow illegal. That, if somehow successful - doubtful, would cause utter chaos in all NCAA sports as you'd see massive shifting in basketball conferences. Massive chaos is what you'd be seeing. Massive.

Again, you guys are likely screwed. Your biggest hurdle isn't the Sun Belt or even your toxic politics...but its the non-football members of the WAC.

Your comments were well stated and thoughtful. I agree with many of your points. You mentioned the NCAA did not allow for a new conference . For me to agree to your point I would need more than a passing statement. As my post had disclaimers that I was unaware of bylaws/rules for or against a new conference, it would seem that step would one a group could take if they met stipulations.

I could have appreciated your response more if it again was free of biased and slanted statements .."Again, you guys are likely screwed. Your biggest hurdle isn't the Sun Belt or even your toxic politics...but its the non-football members of the WAC."....Statements like this, that seem to be the mantle and personal judgement you are hanging your hat on, make this a Liberty and not a new conference post.

I am a fan of the "U", the University of Miami and Liberty, LU. If I followed your values, as dictated in this post, I would not see games or support most of the schools that have had infractions (pick one of the many UofM, OU, USC...), made dumb remarks (LU) because of their political stand, religious views, or schools involved in scandals (PS).

If LU did choose to sue, it would not be simply because they announced "We're FBS". It would be because they exhausted all their opportunities and none existed. I am sure they would have several schools that would join them, IF that ever happened.

The prejudice and value judgement in your post is clear. LU simply stimulates an intense feel inside which you are likely representative of for many others. Believe it or not, this is one of the best cases of why LU would be a good addition to the SB or MAC. They would be a lightning rod in any conference. The better that they became, the more that interest that your express would develop. The upside to LU is greater than most any other university seeking FBS recognition. Their special interest, not yours or mine, would be a very powerful representative for fans nationally.

One can voice their intense disapproval of LU's politics and justify, on moral, political and social grounds why they should not belong and forever banished from your conference. I just want to watch good football and basketball play.

(08-02-2012 02:23 PM)Newetimes Wrote:  

(08-02-2012 12:29 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-02-2012 11:51 AM)Newetimes Wrote:  Relax, take a breath, have some decaf. This is a thread about a new conference. Not about Liberty. I will not and do not need to defend LU as I share many of the concerns and actions you mention. I am a fan of college sports and condemn most all of the stupid things Falwell, Sr. has said and done in the past. I am on the same page with you.

I hope you can move on about LU and make comments about the post. Bash me if you choose about my idea of a new conference or a FBS team moving to a new predominate FCS start up. I grew up and lived in Lynchburg for 35 years. I know about the Falwells, the school. Now about the post................

The lawsuit will go nowhere. You are free to try though. Most likely it will hurt your chances to get picked up by a FBS conference (I wouldn't want a school in my conference that was overly litigious).

Here's where I see the schools standing on the WAC.

First hurdle...the existing WAC schools

1) Non-football WAC schools...terrified about travel costs. Remember that NCAA FBS rules require a certain number of members to participate in a minimum number of sports. So, either some of the Western schools need to compete in some of these sports in the East....OR...the Western schools need to find other places to play sports (!) which isn't so easy in the West. They could form a non-football conference, but then there would be no NCAA bids for years, etc. My guess is that some of the schools in the WAC, who struggled for decades to either find a place to play NCAA D1 sports or to have a home that makes geographic sense, are really apprehensive about this new plan.

2) NMSU. I think they're just waiting for the Big East to raid the MWC, at which point they will have to be taken by them. And its only a matter of time. At this point, I'm not sure that they are on board.

3) Idaho. I don't know what they are doing. My guess is that they would be willing to try it, but they are the only one that is a given at this point.

Now you have the FCS schools.

1) Liberty - would go. Not getting a Belt or a MAC bid anytime soon.
2) Appy - probably would go. But since they know they are next pick from the Sun Belt, might choose to wait it out.
3) Georgia Southern. See Appy. Second pick from the Belt.
4) JMU - might say no. Hoping on a MAC or a Belt bid.
5) Jacksonville State - probably would go.
6) Lamar - probably wants to, but must raise tons of money for a new stadium and is resource constrained.
7) Sam Houston - same thing as Lamar.
8) Delaware - most likely waiting on the MAC.

I don't see this happening.

As far a creating a new FBS conference, there is a NCAA rule against it. And even if Liberty sued, the case would take about 5 or six years (during which time any of the schools signed on to the lawsuit would likely be blackballed from any upgrade from an existing conference or from any payday games at FBS members - which for some of them would be a serious disincentive into entering into litigation). And the NCAA would probably prevail.

But in order to get standing to sue, there would probably need to be an 6 team conference already in place (or at least 6 teams that have announced their intention to do so - and thus face the aforementioned issues with scheduling/potential conference upgrades). I don't see that happening.

But I suppose, Liberty could sue to force the NCAA to allow them to upgrade without conference affiliation. They would face the potential disapproval from existing conferences (which for Liberty is not really a loss - as they aren't getting any interest from any existing conferences) and the loss of FBS payday games (likely). But even then, HOW would such a ruling be implemented? My guess is what Liberty would be suing for would be the right for ANY school to simply show up and announce...."We're FBS". Total chaos. I don't see Liberty's stand alone lawsuit as being successful.

I guess they could sue claiming that the NCAA rule prohibiting stand alone football conferences is somehow illegal. That, if somehow successful - doubtful, would cause utter chaos in all NCAA sports as you'd see massive shifting in basketball conferences. Massive chaos is what you'd be seeing. Massive.

Again, you guys are likely screwed. Your biggest hurdle isn't the Sun Belt or even your toxic politics...but its the non-football members of the WAC.

Your comments were well stated and thoughtful. I agree with many of your points. You mentioned the NCAA did not allow for a new conference . For me to agree to your point I would need more than a passing statement. As my post had disclaimers that I was unaware of bylaws/rules for or against a new conference, it would seem that step would one a group could take if they met stipulations.

I could have appreciated your response more if it again was free of biased and slanted statements .."Again, you guys are likely screwed. Your biggest hurdle isn't the Sun Belt or even your toxic politics...but its the non-football members of the WAC."....Statements like this, that seem to be the mantle and personal judgement you are hanging your hat on, make this a Liberty and not a new conference post.

I am a fan of the "U", the University of Miami and Liberty, LU. If I followed your values, as dictated in this post, I would not see games or support most of the schools that have had infractions (pick one of the many UofM, OU, USC...), made dumb remarks (LU) because of their political stand, religious views, or schools involved in scandals (PS).

If LU did choose to sue, it would not be simply because they announced "We're FBS". It would be because they exhausted all their opportunities and none existed. I am sure they would have several schools that would join them, IF that ever happened.

The prejudice and value judgement in your post is clear. LU simply stimulates an intense feel inside which you are likely representative of for many others. Believe it or not, this is one of the best cases of why LU would be a good addition to the SB or MAC. They would be a lightning rod in any conference. The better that they became, the more that interest that your express would develop. The upside to LU is greater than most any other university seeking FBS recognition. Their special interest, not yours or mine, would be a very powerful representative for fans nationally.

One can voice their intense disapproval of LU's politics and justify, on moral, political and social grounds why they should not belong and forever banished from your conference. I just want to watch good football and basketball play.

The problem with Liberty is that they make no effort to separate their athletics from their politics. Their public announcement of intention to attempt to attain FBS status was performed at an anti-Gay political speech (at Mitt Romney's commencement ceremony). And the "Champions for Christ" tagline of your athletic program. Claiming to represent Christianity to the exclusion of others is really offensive to many.

Liberty continues to do everything they can to emphasize their political stance, and to tie that to their athletic program. Work on that before criticizing others for simply not buying what Liberty is selling (anti-Gay, right-wing politics, and exclusionary Christianity tied to your athletic program). Don't ask me to ignore that. We won't.

At every single Sun Belt school, evangelists, Gays, athiests, non-Christians, everyone can contribute to the conference as students, athletes, teachers, and administrators. That just isn't possible at Liberty. You have nice facilities. We can build stadiums. Its much harder to build a conference community with one member who continuously insults and demeans valued members of the Sun Belt community. By the way, the Sun Belt swings conservative. And there is very little support for Liberty, even here. Because we've seen how you guys operate. You may not think Liberty is being offensive, sanctimonious, and obnoxious. But they are.

If Liberty's supposed massive level of support and rivalries would be such a draw in the Sun Belt (or elsewhere), then why hasn't it worked out like that for your current conference (the Big South)?

Here's why Liberty ranks near the bottom, even before the political/discrimination issues, of FBS aspiring programs.

1) You are private. When was the last private school upgrade? Hint - its been a long time. The intro conferences are either completely public (the Belt, the MAC, the football WAC) or mostly public (CUSA). Private schools generally cannot generate the same 'hometown' support as public (even commuter schools) can.

2) You are geographically challenged. You are not inside any conference's footprint that is currently accepting moveups. You aren't in a big city either (I don't care about combining Lynchburg with 20 other counties to get a 'big' media market). Only ONE purely rural school managed to get a call up last time, Texas State. But that school is 45 minutes from a metro area of 1.7 million and an hour away from another metro area of 2.3 million. Lynchburg has neither.

3) Your school has not been particularly successful on the football field. Never won a FCS playoff game. Your new coach is a loser IMHO. You haven't transformed the Big South into some great conference.

But its really irrelevant. You aren't getting into a FBS conference unless some WAC 2.0 gets put together.

As I mention, this post is about a new conference. As it is only you and I responding, it seems best not to have a continual dialogue when obvious differences of opinion are so wide and the mentions are pointless. If I had made a mention of LU's possible legal action, I doubt this post would have engendered your response. With the LU mention, the posts are more moralistic, social and justifications of an opinion. The charge you have, about the moral issues of which you write, are give one the opportunity to personally review the vigor of the comments and posts. I mentioned several times the heading of my post, about a new conference, and each time a diatribe came about why LU should not be a FBS team, should not be in a FBS, and the like. At this juncture, I respect the passion of which you express your views. It seems we should agree that we disagree. Time will prove who has the clearer perception of where the school is heading. For the record, on the "your school" mention. LU is not my school, I have not attended their school, not joined or attended their church, or endorsed their actions. I have been embarrassed many times, as a former Lynchburg resident, of past actions and statements made. The difference for us seems that I accept that as their mission without endorsing it. You've tried to paint me into the corner of being a follower of their "Champions for Christ" branding and that is out of bounds. That is your uncomfortableness with their expression. I too think that expression is way over the top but I keep that comment inside. Who are you, or I to say the merit of it's validity. It seems with that logic that anyone who supports any university is a clone of their statement. Is it possible within your realm to believe that someone, who has watched a program progress from it's infancy, and who now sees the potential to have it become FBS, could follow a program purely for their athletic enjoyment and not be an ardent or blind supporter of their vision. The passion of sports sometimes blends beyond the lines of competition into personal attacks due to one's believe. What is ironic here is that I am defending Liberty. I do not defend the crazy things associated with the school and church. All I am trying to stimulate is discussion of how FBS membership can be achieved.

Rather than continue this dialogue, let's just agree that we disagree. Time will show who is right. I agree with you on many points you have made on the inappropriateness of past actions and comments of the school, and even recent comments as you so noted. But save the moralistic judgments as a personal issue for yourself. Maybe the real question here is why one would have such a passion as you have stated. I would have much rather had others join in and voice their thoughts on the pro and cons of a new conference. That seems to have gotten lost in the moral judgement of should or should not LU be a FBS program.

I offer you the last response and comment. At least this has been a spirited and civil conversation. I will not reply again to another thread and hope you and I will have the opportunity to agree and disagree on other threads. Oh, and go So Alabama and GWU.

(08-02-2012 03:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Here's why Liberty ranks near the bottom, even before the political/discrimination issues, of FBS aspiring programs.

1) You are private. When was the last private school upgrade? Hint - its been a long time. The intro conferences are either completely public (the Belt, the MAC, the football WAC) or mostly public (CUSA). Private schools generally cannot generate the same 'hometown' support as public (even commuter schools) can.

2) You are geographically challenged. You are not inside any conference's footprint that is currently accepting moveups. You aren't in a big city either (I don't care about combining Lynchburg with 20 other counties to get a 'big' media market). Only ONE purely rural school managed to get a call up last time, Texas State. But that school is 45 minutes from a metro area of 1.7 million and an hour away from another metro area of 2.3 million. Lynchburg has neither.

3) Your school has not been particularly successful on the football field. Never won a FCS playoff game. Your new coach is a loser IMHO. You haven't transformed the Big South into some great conference.

a couple of things from my perspective...

1) I don't think referencing the last time a private school moved up is relevant. If it is, equally important would be what are the percentages of private schools in D-I? It's a very small percentage of the market so it would make sense that they move up less often.

2) You are correct, they don't fit in any conference very well except for a WAC-E format, in that situation they are dead center of the conference. Especially if Delaware could be enticed to join.

3) I completely think they need a new coach if they want a shot at making a splash in a new FBS conference. Liberty has a TON of cash so if anyone can get a new big coaching name in short order I think they would be it.

(08-03-2012 07:19 AM)GaSouthern Wrote:  

(08-02-2012 03:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Here's why Liberty ranks near the bottom, even before the political/discrimination issues, of FBS aspiring programs.

1) You are private. When was the last private school upgrade? Hint - its been a long time. The intro conferences are either completely public (the Belt, the MAC, the football WAC) or mostly public (CUSA). Private schools generally cannot generate the same 'hometown' support as public (even commuter schools) can.

2) You are geographically challenged. You are not inside any conference's footprint that is currently accepting moveups. You aren't in a big city either (I don't care about combining Lynchburg with 20 other counties to get a 'big' media market). Only ONE purely rural school managed to get a call up last time, Texas State. But that school is 45 minutes from a metro area of 1.7 million and an hour away from another metro area of 2.3 million. Lynchburg has neither.

3) Your school has not been particularly successful on the football field. Never won a FCS playoff game. Your new coach is a loser IMHO. You haven't transformed the Big South into some great conference.

a couple of things from my perspective...

1) I don't think referencing the last time a private school moved up is relevant. If it is, equally important would be what are the percentages of private schools in D-I? It's a very small percentage of the market so it would make sense that they move up less often.

2) You are correct, they don't fit in any conference very well except for a WAC-E format, in that situation they are dead center of the conference. Especially if Delaware could be enticed to join.

3) I completely think they need a new coach if they want a shot at making a splash in a new FBS conference. Liberty has a TON of cash so if anyone can get a new big coaching name in short order I think they would be it.

If Liberty was out of the mix and had not been mentioned in my thread, what about GS, ASU, LU, JMU and others combining to start a new FBS conference which was the intent of my post?

(08-03-2012 08:18 AM)Newetimes Wrote:  

(08-03-2012 07:19 AM)GaSouthern Wrote:  

(08-02-2012 03:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Here's why Liberty ranks near the bottom, even before the political/discrimination issues, of FBS aspiring programs.

1) You are private. When was the last private school upgrade? Hint - its been a long time. The intro conferences are either completely public (the Belt, the MAC, the football WAC) or mostly public (CUSA). Private schools generally cannot generate the same 'hometown' support as public (even commuter schools) can.

2) You are geographically challenged. You are not inside any conference's footprint that is currently accepting moveups. You aren't in a big city either (I don't care about combining Lynchburg with 20 other counties to get a 'big' media market). Only ONE purely rural school managed to get a call up last time, Texas State. But that school is 45 minutes from a metro area of 1.7 million and an hour away from another metro area of 2.3 million. Lynchburg has neither.

3) Your school has not been particularly successful on the football field. Never won a FCS playoff game. Your new coach is a loser IMHO. You haven't transformed the Big South into some great conference.

a couple of things from my perspective...

1) I don't think referencing the last time a private school moved up is relevant. If it is, equally important would be what are the percentages of private schools in D-I? It's a very small percentage of the market so it would make sense that they move up less often.

2) You are correct, they don't fit in any conference very well except for a WAC-E format, in that situation they are dead center of the conference. Especially if Delaware could be enticed to join.

3) I completely think they need a new coach if they want a shot at making a splash in a new FBS conference. Liberty has a TON of cash so if anyone can get a new big coaching name in short order I think they would be it.

If Liberty was out of the mix and had not been mentioned in my thread, what about GS, ASU, LU, JMU and others combining to start a new FBS conference which was the intent of my post?

We have a better chance in joining the Big East than we do in starting a new from scratch conference. The WAC-E is a way to start a new conference and get around all of the rules that the NCAA would slam down on a new conference.

(08-03-2012 08:18 AM)Newetimes Wrote:  If Liberty was out of the mix and had not been mentioned in my thread, what about GS, ASU, LU, JMU and others combining to start a new FBS conference which was the intent of my post?

I'll give my reply.

Personally I don't think the NCAA would put up a fight if a new FBS conference were to be formed from existing DI FCS schools that already meet all other requirements. The benefit (or lack there of) from excluding these teams from FBS doesn't outweigh the cost.

First, I don't believe the NCAA really cares how many teams are in FBS. The conference invite rule was originally intended to slow the influx of DII to DI moveups simply trying to gain access to the NCAA basketball tourney money while languishing as independents. The DII to DI rush has been slowed. The portion covering FCS to FBS was presented by some FCS conferences to stabilize FCS conference membership. It failed. As soon as the moratorium ended the flood gate was opened.

Second, the teams we're talking about are already DI members. The NCAA doesn't have it's hands in the FBS post season so why should it care about a few DI teams trying to move from FCS to FBS. Don't give me that mess about watering down the FBS product. We just saw a bunch of recent start-ups and schools that haven't even played a down yet become FBS members - That is where the water is coming from, not from the schools that have paid their dues yet aren't being selected simply due to tv markets.

Going on last years regular season attendance, a conference with Delaware, JMU, App St, Ga Southern, Jacksonville St and Liberty would have averaged over 20,800. That's more than the averages of this years membership of the MAC, Sun Belt and WAC. This group has years of football history including 10 FCS national championships. I know this does not equal FBS success but it's a much better resume than any team that has moved up in the recent expansion frenzy.

So does the NCAA really want to spend the money on defending itself in the courtroom and the political arena by standing firm on the existing FBS conference invite rule? When the FCS members trying to move have the resumes they do while knowing the rule structure in place has allowed the teams to move up that are essentally start-ups (other than Texas St)? When the NCAA has no financial interest in the said division? Is it really worth the fight, negative publicity, and discontent among its membership?

According to some JMU fans, their school suppossedly received another inquiry from the MAC about joining them. Not sure that it is true, probably @ 50% probability. However, if so, they would probably do that instead of going along with the WAC-East idea or forming a new FBS conference. MAC already established, has bowl games set up already, many members, long time members mainly, not too far out of the MAC current footprint; just much easier for JMU than worrying about other options, including the fact that the NCAA specifically said that an FCS team moving up had to join an existing FBS conference, with no abilities to start a new one.

Still think that a group of Liberty University fans need to convince their administration to approach this WAC-East potential scientifically because it is probably the only way they are going to get into the FBS. Not knocking on Liberty in any way, but you guys see the barriers that even some fans of other schools are throwing up to your joining their conferences. Whether real or imagined, accurate or false, they present a pervasive attitude that probably is incorporated into what conference commissioners and school presidents may very well reason as reasons to keep LU out of their conferences.
LU administrators should appoint a hard core group of their people to analize every aspect of the WAC-East potential, get to know each person involved: commissioner, office staff, WAC AD's and Presidents, etc. to logically ascertain a way to make that work, without any doubts, and obtain leverage points, or emphasis points to utilize in making the WAC-East happen.
Other option would be what? Suing the NCAA? No offense, probably mainly a fan reaction that would not get too much credance from your school attorneys and even if it did would take years if LU wanted to litigate against the NCAA. By then things might have changed so much it might not matter, but that would be years away.
What other good option does LU have? Here again, just trying to be honest and see things as they appear to be, not trying to step on anyone's toes.

(08-03-2012 12:04 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  According to some JMU fans, their school suppossedly received another inquiry from the MAC about joining them. Not sure that it is true, probably @ 50% probability. However, if so, they would probably do that instead of going along with the WAC-East idea or forming a new FBS conference. MAC already established, has bowl games set up already, many members, long time members mainly, not too far out of the MAC current footprint; just much easier for JMU than worrying about other options, including the fact that the NCAA specifically said that an FCS team moving up had to join an existing FBS conference, with no abilities to start a new one.

please enlighten me, as this is news to me unless you're referring to contact prior to July 1st when our new president came on.
I think the MAC contacted us sometime between March-May and we told them no thanks.
Is this more recent contact?

I read this just a couple of days ago. Not sure exactly where since I am like the "Wide World of Sports" when I go around the message boards, but it was from at least one JMU fan. Course could have been a poser suppossedly knowing much more than they actually do, or just making it up. Will try to keep my eyes open and advise you where I read that within the next couple of days. Sorry, took it as being true at the time, and had no reason to doubt it since it seemed pretty logical.

(08-03-2012 09:50 AM)97App Wrote:  

(08-03-2012 08:18 AM)Newetimes Wrote:  If Liberty was out of the mix and had not been mentioned in my thread, what about GS, ASU, LU, JMU and others combining to start a new FBS conference which was the intent of my post?

I'll give my reply.

Personally I don't think the NCAA would put up a fight if a new FBS conference were to be formed from existing DI FCS schools that already meet all other requirements. The benefit (or lack there of) from excluding these teams from FBS doesn't outweigh the cost.

First, I don't believe the NCAA really cares how many teams are in FBS. The conference invite rule was originally intended to slow the influx of DII to DI moveups simply trying to gain access to the NCAA basketball tourney money while languishing as independents. The DII to DI rush has been slowed. The portion covering FCS to FBS was presented by some FCS conferences to stabilize FCS conference membership. It failed. As soon as the moratorium ended the flood gate was opened.

Second, the teams we're talking about are already DI members. The NCAA doesn't have it's hands in the FBS post season so why should it care about a few DI teams trying to move from FCS to FBS. Don't give me that mess about watering down the FBS product. We just saw a bunch of recent start-ups and schools that haven't even played a down yet become FBS members - That is where the water is coming from, not from the schools that have paid their dues yet aren't being selected simply due to tv markets.

Going on last years regular season attendance, a conference with Delaware, JMU, App St, Ga Southern, Jacksonville St and Liberty would have averaged over 20,800. That's more than the averages of this years membership of the MAC, Sun Belt and WAC. This group has years of football history including 10 FCS national championships. I know this does not equal FBS success but it's a much better resume than any team that has moved up in the recent expansion frenzy.

So does the NCAA really want to spend the money on defending itself in the courtroom and the political arena by standing firm on the existing FBS conference invite rule? When the FCS members trying to move have the resumes they do while knowing the rule structure in place has allowed the teams to move up that are essentally start-ups (other than Texas St)? When the NCAA has no financial interest in the said division? Is it really worth the fight, negative publicity, and discontent among its membership?

97App, great points. I agree. Your mention of the average attendance is a strong indication of the potential success of a new conference. The geographic footprint would be easy travel for teams and traveling fans. Existing rivalries with those nearby teams would jump the attendance as you stated when conference wins and loss have a greater importance. I too believe the NCAA would support this idea. As money is the most important factor, if the monies are there, then maybe this choice maybe the one most valid, certainly for LU. ASU and JMU and others are more appealing to the SB, MAC and CUSA. But with the recent actions of those conferences, confidence in a future invite could be shakey. BTW, I am an ASU grad, 1975.

(08-03-2012 12:35 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Still think that a group of Liberty University fans need to convince their administration to approach this WAC-East potential scientifically because it is probably the only way they are going to get into the FBS. Not knocking on Liberty in any way, but you guys see the barriers that even some fans of other schools are throwing up to your joining their conferences. Whether real or imagined, accurate or false, they present a pervasive attitude that probably is incorporated into what conference commissioners and school presidents may very well reason as reasons to keep LU out of their conferences.
LU administrators should appoint a hard core group of their people to analize every aspect of the WAC-East potential, get to know each person involved: commissioner, office staff, WAC AD's and Presidents, etc. to logically ascertain a way to make that work, without any doubts, and obtain leverage points, or emphasis points to utilize in making the WAC-East happen.
Other option would be what? Suing the NCAA? No offense, probably mainly a fan reaction that would not get too much credance from your school attorneys and even if it did would take years if LU wanted to litigate against the NCAA. By then things might have changed so much it might not matter, but that would be years away.
What other good option does LU have? Here again, just trying to be honest and see things as they appear to be, not trying to step on anyone's toes.

Not quite sure if LU fans need to convince the AD & Prez to take this action. My bet is they are leading the charge behind the scenes as they know their position as the overt school with the checkered past and recent gaffs. This impetus is coming from the Prez & AD. They are being very aggressive and overt with their intention. As you say, this is likely their best opportunity to get into the big show. BTW, I'm ASU grad, class of 75.