Possible Plan of Idaho if kicked out of SunBelt

[luvyosef]

All of those examples prove my point that it's not about being an FCS flagship but an inferiority complex with Boise State.

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

THIS is all it is. They can blame Boise or they can accept the fact that their administration never cared about FBS, swallow their pride and go dominate the Big Sky. Easy choice if I'm that school president.

[AppGrad78]

From Twitter:

NCAA ‏@NCAA
DI Council approves proposal allowing FBS conferences without 12 members to hold conference championship football games.

[T-Dog]

However, there was a compromise in that leagues with less than 12 members will have to play a full round-robin schedule in order to have a conference championship game. No divisions needed.

So if the Sun Belt drops Idaho and NMSU, Coastal would make 10 and the league would have to play 9 conference games, which I don't see happening.

[bigCasu]

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle. ... M_ID=10410

i) A game between division champions of a member conference that is divided into two divisions (as equally balanced as possible), each of which conducts round-robin, regular-season competition among the members of that division;

Key words: among the members of that division.

[ASUGoose]

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle. ... M_ID=10410

i) A game between division champions of a member conference that is divided into two divisions (as equally balanced as possible), each of which conducts round-robin, regular-season competition among the members of that division;

Key words: among the members of that division.

So based on this does this put the final nail in Idaho's coffin for the Sun Belt for this season? New Mexico State next on the chopping block after season unless Sun Belt adds another school once Coastal joins to get the league to 12 teams divided into 2 divisions?

[JTApps1]

Both teams will be here through 2017 according to their contract. The leagje will vote on whether or not to extend them beyond that.

With the requirements to have 12 or play a round robin now out there is really no reason to not drop them after 2017. We could have two 5 team divisions, and we would play 4 teams from each division. That allows you to play almost every team, and keep the 4 OOC games most want to have.

Another option would be to drop Idaho, make NMSU a full memeber, and add a new team in the east. I'm not a huge fan of that as there isn't a sure fire team to add.

[EastHallApp]

So, thinking more immediately, I suppose it would be wishful thinking to hope the Sun Belt might be agile enough to get a championship game in place for 2016?

[AppDawg]

So, thinking more immediately, I suppose it would be wishful thinking to hope the Sun Belt might be agile enough to get a championship game in place for 2016?

I wouldn't say wishful. Still have winter meetings where a vote could occur. I am just not 100% confident certain "legacy" members of the SBC (stAte and LaLa) are on-board.

Personally, I think they are skeered.

[EastHallApp]

So, thinking more immediately, I suppose it would be wishful thinking to hope the Sun Belt might be agile enough to get a championship game in place for 2016?

I wouldn't say wishful. Still have winter meetings where a vote could occur. I am just not 100% confident certain "legacy" members of the SBC (stAte and LaLa) are on-board.

Personally, I think they are skeered.

I was just thinking that they'd have to scramble to set up divisions and probably come up with a new schedule based on that. And of course the divisions would be uneven.

[AppDawg]

So, thinking more immediately, I suppose it would be wishful thinking to hope the Sun Belt might be agile enough to get a championship game in place for 2016?

I wouldn't say wishful. Still have winter meetings where a vote could occur. I am just not 100% confident certain "legacy" members of the SBC (stAte and LaLa) are on-board.

Personally, I think they are skeered.

I was just thinking that they'd have to scramble to set up divisions and probably come up with a new schedule based on that. And of course the divisions would be uneven.

I think this would be the year to do it as it is the 1st of opponent rotations - meaning we have already played everyone on our schedules home and away. If you wait until 2017 we would be in the middle of a rotatio - hypothetically you could end up in a situation where we travel to NMSU this year then do not get a return trip from them in '17.

[ASUGoose]

Both teams will be here through 2017 according to their contract. The leagje will vote on whether or not to extend them beyond that.

I could be wrong but I think the last two years on their contracts are options for the conference. If true, the conference has to decide this offseason and next whether to keep both schools.

[Saint3333]

Both teams will be here through 2017 according to their contract. The leagje will vote on whether or not to extend them beyond that.

With the requirements to have 12 or play a round robin now out there is really no reason to not drop them after 2017. We could have two 5 team divisions, and we would play 4 teams from each division. That allows you to play almost every team, and keep the 4 OOC games most want to have.

Another option would be to drop Idaho, make NMSU a full memeber, and add a new team in the east. I'm not a huge fan of that as there isn't a sure fire team to add.

I can think of a couple reasons to keep them around.

- I doubt the SBC gets 5 bowl games at 10 teams, we would beat each other up too much
- Numbers should we lose a couple members
- Stay at 12 until a couple more teams are ready to move to FBS

The downside to extending them two years is one more long trip and them potentially dragging down OOC play for G5 revenue sharing purposes.

I say extend them until 2019. But by App voting that way we ask for a couple of concessions, #1 divisions in both football and basketball, #2 a 16 conference game basketball schedule.

[JTApps1]

Both teams will be here through 2017 according to their contract. The leagje will vote on whether or not to extend them beyond that.

With the requirements to have 12 or play a round robin now out there is really no reason to not drop them after 2017. We could have two 5 team divisions, and we would play 4 teams from each division. That allows you to play almost every team, and keep the 4 OOC games most want to have.

Another option would be to drop Idaho, make NMSU a full member, and add a new team in the east. I'm not a huge fan of that as there isn't a sure fire team to add.

I can think of a couple reasons to keep them around.

- I doubt the SBC gets 5 bowl games at 10 teams, we would beat each other up too much

- Numbers should we lose a couple members
- Stay at 12 until a couple more teams are ready to move to FBS

The downside to extending them two years is one more long trip and them potentially dragging down OOC play for G5 revenue sharing purposes.

I say extend them until 2019. But by App voting that way we ask for a couple of concessions, #1 divisions in both football and basketball, #2 a 16 conference game basketball schedule.

Bowls- We only have 4 direct tie-ins now (I know the one in Charleston is coming but the SB hasn't been locked in yet) and there will be a lot of leagues without enough tams with 1 bowls. I expect a few bowls to go away before long.

Numbers- With deregulation there is no need for anyone above us to make a big move at this point. I know the MWC talked about taking Rice and NMSU, but with CUSA having 14 teams I don't seem them replacing them if they leave especially with the big loss in TV revenue CUSA is facing.

As you pointed out they are both hurting the Sun Belt with their poor play especially in OOC games. It may be a win for most teams, but it hurts our SOS as a conference. I'd rather play Ark. State or USA in place of those two. Pushing it back to 2019 only delays the inevitable of them leaving, and for Idaho they are just delaying a move back to the Big Sky.

Like most others I still believe there will be a huge shake up of teams to become more regional, and I truly believe we won't be in the SBC for very long. Until that happens though we need to make the SBC as strong as possible (not in numbers but performance), and neither of those teams has helped the cause.

[Saint3333]

Only having 4 tie ins will hopefully be a problem soon. Having 12 teams makes it easier to fill 5.

There isn't a "need" for anyone to make a move, but if I've learned anything about conference realignment it's that logic doesn't matter when it comes to those moves.

Keeping them through 2019 is protection until a couple of others are ready. If we had two teams ready and willing to join I'd be all for dropping them, but dropping them now is a move that doesn't have to be made.

You have more faith in Marshall, UNCC, La Tech, MTSU, etc. swallowing their pride and combining CUSA and the SBC than I. Marshall and UNCC don't want to be in a conference with App and LA Tech doesn't want to be in a conference with ULL and ULM.

My prediction on the vote is neither of us get our wish and we extend NMSU only through 2019. The western members really want NMSU all sports in the future. At which point we'll need JMU, EKU, or Mo. St. to step up to even back out to 12 for football.

[JTApps1]

Only having 4 tie ins will hopefully be a problem soon. Having 12 teams makes it easier to fill 5.

There isn't a "need" for anyone to make a move, but if I've learned anything about conference realignment it's that logic doesn't matter when it comes to those moves.

Keeping them through 2019 is protection until a couple of others are ready. If we had two teams ready and willing to join I'd be all for dropping them, but dropping them now is a move that doesn't have to be made.

You have more faith in Marshall, UNCC, La Tech, MTSU, etc. swallowing their pride and combining CUSA and the SBC than I. Marshall and UNCC don't want to be in a conference with App and LA Tech doesn't want to be in a conference with ULL and ULM.

My prediction on the vote is neither of us get our wish and we extend NMSU only through 2019. The western members really want NMSU all sports in the future. At which point we'll need JMU, EKU, or Mo. St. to step up to even back out to 12 for football.

I would be fine with keeping NMSU all sports if we had a team in the east to take Idaho's place.

Let's say we drop them both in 2017 then in 2018 we get raided and somehow App is left in a 7 team SBC. The NCAA would give the SBC one year (maybe two considering the transition period) to get at least 1 team to join and give us the minimum of 8. We could add 2 more as well to get us to 10 teams. In the end if the SBC was raided we would have 10 football playing schools starting in 2019, and the replacement teams will likely be the same in 2018 as they would in 2019. The only difference is we would all have to find one more OOC game in 2018.

Maybe I'm looking at it wrong???

[bigdaddyg]

is there a reverse transition process when going from FBS to FCS? Does a program begin eliminating scholarships? If a program knows that it will drop down in a year or two how does it work with having 85 scholarships?

[appchicago]

Marshall and UNCC don't want to be in a conference with App

Is that the prevailing sentiment at those two schools? I honestly wasn't aware. I knew we weren't getting much love from CUSA, but I had always assumed that was more from the crowd that was less familiar with us, not a neighbor and a former rival.

(And for the record, I'm not actually optimistic about a SBC/CUSA realignment happening either)

[McLeansvilleAppFan]

is there a reverse transition process when going from FBS to FCS? Does a program begin eliminating scholarships? If a program knows that it will drop down in a year or two how does it work with having 85 scholarships?

I don't think there is an official process as this has not happened since 1981 and the forced moves of the SoCon, Ivey, Southland and maybe OVC. And I am not sure if the scholly numbers were the same then.

[Saint3333]

Marshall and UNCC don't want to be in a conference with App

Is that the prevailing sentiment at those two schools? I honestly wasn't aware. I knew we weren't getting much love from CUSA, but I had always assumed that was more from the crowd that was less familiar with us, not a neighbor and a former rival.

(And for the record, I'm not actually optimistic about a SBC/CUSA realignment happening either)

UNCC leadership and most fans yes. Marshall is likely more from a fan perspective, but that can influence leadership. Marshall fans remember traveling to a much different Boone in the early 90's and to some if we were in the same conference it would be like stepping back into the SoCon.

And the relationship between some of the western SBC members and LA Tech is much worse. Just too much pride.

[JTApps1]

Marshall and UNCC don't want to be in a conference with App

Is that the prevailing sentiment at those two schools? I honestly wasn't aware. I knew we weren't getting much love from CUSA, but I had always assumed that was more from the crowd that was less familiar with us, not a neighbor and a former rival.

(And for the record, I'm not actually optimistic about a SBC/CUSA realignment happening either)

UNCC leadership and most fans yes. Marshall is likely more from a fan perspective, but that can influence leadership. Marshall fans remember traveling to a much different Boone in the early 90's and to some if we were in the same conference it would be like stepping back into the SoCon.

And the relationship between some of the western SBC members and LA Tech is much worse. Just too much pride.

Just looking at the CUSA board it seems some of the Marshall fans are starting to advocate being in a conference with us and GS. This TV deal has really brought them down to earth. Pretty surprising to see their reaction.