In 2 weeks at the conference meetings I suspect you will hear the "We have decided to stay at 11 for this year" speech by Benson.

Benson probably has a stack of cards with speeches on them.
My favorite one is your school can be another Boise State.

LOL. In some ways I wish we would go ahead and invite a 12th football school, but I understand that the choices right now are such that I have doubts as to whether any of them can get the required 9 votes for membership.

(05-05-2014 08:24 PM)JSUFan Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 07:24 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  For June 1st, 2014 they are not an option.

And how do you know that?

Logic.

I'd bet a 12 month ban from posting on this board.

(05-05-2014 09:05 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 08:24 PM)JSUFan Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 07:24 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  For June 1st, 2014 they are not an option.

And how do you know that?

Logic.

I'd bet a 12 month ban from posting on this board.

Let me guess, you weren't welcome here a couple years ago, right?

schedules are set for 2014, that's why even if a FCS school or UMass was invited in May after the meeting the earliest any of them could join is 2015.

(05-06-2014 12:37 AM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  schedules are set for 2014, that's why even if a FCS school or UMass was invited in May after the meeting the earliest any of them could join is 2015.

But we already know that for FCS schools, because an FCS school plays in the FCS with higher scholarship limits but without eligibility for the championship in the first year of the transition, and is first allowed to play in the FBS (but without bowl eligibility) in the second year of the transition.

So up until June 1, the earliest an FCS school could join the Sunbelt would be 2015. After June 1, the earliest an FCS school could join the Sunbelt would be 2016 (though that is an application date, not an announcement date).

I haven't seen the contract so don't know about after July 1 of this year, but UMass could certainly be announced for 2015 anytime before July 1 2014 and face a $250,000 exit fee rather than a $500,000 fee for an immediate exit. UMass could also wait until 2016 to join for no exit fee, if it is determined that getting the best value out of the CCG would require more than a year lead time.

(05-06-2014 03:39 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  But we already know that for FCS schools, because an FCS school plays in the FCS with higher scholarship limits but without eligibility for the championship in the first year of the transition, and is first allowed to play in the FBS (but without bowl eligibility) in the second year of the transition.
So up until June 1, the earliest an FCS school could join the Sunbelt would be 2015. After June 1, the earliest an FCS school could join the Sunbelt would be 2016 (though that is an application date, not an announcement date).
I haven't seen the contract so don't know about after July 1 of this year, but UMass could certainly be announced for 2015 anytime before July 1 2014 and face a $250,000 exit fee rather than a $500,000 fee for an immediate exit. UMass could also wait until 2016 to join for no exit fee, if it is determined that getting the best value out of the CCG would require more than a year lead time.

If UMass is in the Sun Belt plans, I don't think either side would want to wait until 2016 to finalize an agreement. If this move is a solution for both institutions there really is no reason to wait.

The nominative $250k to the MAC for an early exit is also in no way punitive but only administrative. Conferences are made up of their member schools and $20k/school from this fee would only go to help offset some cosmetic changes.

(05-05-2014 11:30 PM)jsualumnus Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 09:05 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 08:24 PM)JSUFan Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 07:24 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  For June 1st, 2014 they are not an option.

And how do you know that?

Logic.

I'd bet a 12 month ban from posting on this board.

Let me guess, you weren't welcome here a couple years ago, right?

Nope I used logic back then too. App was in a position that we were one of the best options.

I'd bet pretty much anything JSU isn't invited this year is the point.

Am thinking UMass doesn't want to wait a year to wrap up an invitation so are probably pushing
this as hard as they can. No use in taking chances, and being an independent when money is an
issue for football improvements is not an attractive alternative.

The GaSo AD interview pretty much ended speculation that it would be UMASS, he said they are going to add a travel partner for App, that means an all sports add, that takes UMASS off the table.

The question now is, do the schools vote for Liberty, or do they wait a few years on someone they may be more in favor of?

(05-06-2014 11:37 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Am thinking UMass doesn't want to wait a year to wrap up an invitation so are probably pushing
this as hard as they can. No use in taking chances, and being an independent when money is an
issue for football improvements is not an attractive alternative.

Even if UMass is pushing for an invite this year, why would they want a "Idaho deal" where later years can be voided?

They need a long-term home and I seriously doubt that the Sun Belt would give them that. Their best bet is to improve their football product and hope that the AAC expands soon.

(05-06-2014 11:53 AM)Liberty22 Wrote:  The GaSo AD interview pretty much ended speculation that it would be UMASS, he said they are going to add a travel partner for App, that means an all sports add, that takes UMASS off the table.

The question now is, do the schools vote for Liberty, or do they wait a few years on someone they may be more in favor of?

You guys kill me. The preference has been to add an all sports team to the east division. The fact that JMU took themselves out, MSU said they have not been contacted and are still making football enhancements, and the EKU president publicly saying that the SBC is not interested in them, and the conference is looking towards existing FBS members doesn't phase you.

Then, when the GSU AD pretty much said there are no members of the FCS ready to make the move, you somehow just let that slip by as well.

If you can't piece this all together and see that the only option that is most likely is UMASS or to do nothing. I can't help you. Your thread has fallen silent because it is over.

(05-06-2014 11:58 AM)LUcanesfan Wrote:  

(05-06-2014 11:37 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Am thinking UMass doesn't want to wait a year to wrap up an invitation so are probably pushing
this as hard as they can. No use in taking chances, and being an independent when money is an
issue for football improvements is not an attractive alternative.

Even if UMass is pushing for an invite this year, why would they want a "Idaho deal" where later years can be voided?

They need a long-term home and I seriously doubt that the Sun Belt would give them that. Their best bet is to improve their football product and hope that the AAC expands soon.

Actually, UMass needs a temporary refuge if they can't find a permanent home.

(05-06-2014 12:21 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  Your thread has fallen silent because it is over.

Is that so? It certainly will not be over until one of three things happens -

1. The SBC announces a UMass move
2. Liberty announces they are no longer in the running
3. June 1 passes with no announcement

As none of the above have happened, consider it far from over.

(05-06-2014 11:53 AM)Liberty22 Wrote:  The GaSo AD interview pretty much ended speculation that it would be UMASS, he said they are going to add a travel partner for App, that means an all sports add, that takes UMASS off the table.

The question now is, do the schools vote for Liberty, or do they wait a few years on someone they may be more in favor of?

His comments are 100% speculation, just like EKU's president. The only word that matters is that of Liberty's beat writer. I'll wait to hear what he says before listening to someone like a school president or AD.

(05-06-2014 12:31 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:  

(05-06-2014 12:21 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  Your thread has fallen silent because it is over.

Is that so? It certainly will not be over until one of three things happens -

1. The SBC announces a UMass move
2. Liberty announces they are no longer in the running
3. June 1 passes with no announcement

As none of the above have happened, consider it far from over.

Ok, I respect the moxie, but take your rose colored glasses off, take a deep breath, and listen to the latest tidbit of information from the GSU AD without bias. What he said is that in light of JMU deciding to stay in FCS... while there are FCS schools out there that could fit the travel partner goal, and are located in the east division, there could be even more that would fit better in the conference if we waited for those schools to develop. In short: what he said is there are no FCS schools available currently the members want to invite.

Liberty's candidacy has ended in favor of waiting to see how several other schools that are a better fit develop. Knowing that if June 1 comes and goes without an FCS move up announcement, that means that the absolute earliest we could have a FCS move up join the league is 2016. Enter UMASS. They offer a division format a year earlier, need a home for football only, and are already FBS. They also need a semi-permanent set-up that they could escape if a more appealing option comes... Likely in the next 3-4 years or so. That timetable works for the SBC because the schools that we are truly interested in could develop and emerge as permanent replacements for Idaho and UMASS.

GSU's AD had more to say about the current state of available FCS schools than he ever had to say about UMASS... And it couldn't have been worse news for Liberty.

(05-06-2014 11:58 AM)LUcanesfan Wrote:  

(05-06-2014 11:37 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Am thinking UMass doesn't want to wait a year to wrap up an invitation so are probably pushing
this as hard as they can. No use in taking chances, and being an independent when money is an
issue for football improvements is not an attractive alternative.

Even if UMass is pushing for an invite this year, why would they want a "Idaho deal" where later years can be voided?

They need a long-term home and I seriously doubt that the Sun Belt would give them that. Their best bet is to improve their football product and hope that the AAC expands soon.

They just want help in remaining FBS. Would be very hard to become an independent for very long. Alternative of going back to FCS is not attractive to them. No one would expect UMass to be in the Sun Belt for twenty years. Not sure the SBC presidents will look favorably on throwing them a lifeline. We know Benson has had the proclivity to do that in the past though.
So will they do nothing, try a short time fix, or go for the fences with a permanent member. Going to be interesting. Grab your popcorn.

(05-06-2014 12:31 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:  

(05-06-2014 12:21 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  Your thread has fallen silent because it is over.

Is that so? It certainly will not be over until one of three things happens -

1. The SBC announces a UMass move
2. Liberty announces they are no longer in the running
3. June 1 passes with no announcement

As none of the above have happened, consider it far from over.

Why did JMU apply to join the SBC and then pull back their application? Kind of weird, no? You seem to have quality insider information, not quite as much as THE Sun Belt Insider, but I'm interested to see what you've heard regarding JMU's withdrawn application...

(05-06-2014 12:58 PM)ASUMountaineer Wrote:  

(05-06-2014 12:31 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:  

(05-06-2014 12:21 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  Your thread has fallen silent because it is over.

Is that so? It certainly will not be over until one of three things happens -

1. The SBC announces a UMass move
2. Liberty announces they are no longer in the running
3. June 1 passes with no announcement

As none of the above have happened, consider it far from over.

Why did JMU apply to join the SBC and then pull back their application? Kind of weird, no? You seem to have quality insider information, not quite as much as THE Sun Belt Insider, but I'm interested to see what you've heard regarding JMU's withdrawn application...

I replied in detail on the conference realignment thread. While I can't tell you that JMU actually "applied", I can tell you that the administration was talking to the SBC about membership. They were interested enough to bring the idea before the BOV (like AppState's BOT) but it didn't survive the vote. It is believed that cost was the underlying issue.... They know full well they are out of the race until the next round as a result of the BOV decision.

My guess is that their name will come up again in a few years when this starts up again, as it is very unlikely CUSA and MAC have any interest in taking on an FCS move-up.