James Madison to go to Sun Belt

[Cats2506]

If you really think that then you are an idiot, The only way the NCAA forces anybody to reduce scholarships is through penalties and then it is for a limited time period or until the problem is fixed (APR)

For all the BS that the NCAA is and does, they are still in the business of promoting as many athletic scholarships and possible. If they were to force a group of teams to reduce scholarships is would be contrary to their basic mission statement. Absolutely NO ONE besides a few griztards have even suggested tha the NCAA would force schools to reduce schollarships

It took about 30 seconds to find a link that showed teh NCAA has in teh past reduced scholarships, and considered it again last year:

Criticism has greeted reduced football scholarships over the decades. When scholarships were cut from 105 to 95 in 1978, then-USC coach John McCay said it was "a day of ruin for college football" and predicted the sport would go downhill.

As scholarships were cut from 95 to 85 between 1992 and 1994, then-Florida State coach Bobby Bowden argued the measure would "water down" college football into an inferior product until it can't compete with the NFL for attention and dollars.

The NCAA Division I Board of Directors will consider reducing scholarships in football and women's basketball after hearing today from a subcommittee making the recommendation.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/01/ncaa_considers_cutting_footbal.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Apples and oranges, try again, the cuts you mention were done because at the top level there were almost no limits, they set limits first before these cuts where instituted. the reason they were done was because the "rich" schools were buying up all the talent, in effect, and this was done solely for competitive reasons, if you were on scholarship to one of these schools then you were not available to be recruited by other competitive schools. These limits were pretty much universally seen as necessary for the health of the sport.

What you are talking about here is the wholesale reduction of mid level scholarships solely for the reasoning of creating separation between the that level and the top level. The idea that schools will be FORCED to drop to a lowered level against their will is just plain dumb. If they were realistically looking at this they a more likely scenery would be to have the lower level of the FBS drop to the FCS level, but that isnt happening either.

The short version of the point I am making is that whatever changes happen in the future, I will pretty much guarantee that there will be an NCAA scholarship level that is between the USC's and the Fort Lewis's of the college football world, and that level will be very close to where it is right now.

 

[billings_poke]

Apples and oranges, try again, the cuts you mention were done because at the top level there were almost no limits, they set limits first before these cuts where instituted. the reason they were done was because the "rich" schools were buying up all the talent, in effect, and this was done solely for competitive reasons, if you were on scholarship to one of these schools then you were not available to be recruited by other competitive schools. These limits were pretty much universally seen as necessary for the health of the sport.

What you are talking about here is the wholesale reduction of mid level scholarships solely for the reasoning of creating separation between the that level and the top level. The idea that schools will be FORCED to drop to a lowered level against their will is just plain dumb. If they were realistically looking at this they a more likely scenery would be to have the lower level of the FBS drop to the FCS level, but that isnt happening either.

The short version of the point I am making is that whatever changes happen in the future, I will pretty much guarantee that there will be an NCAA scholarship level that is between the USC's and the Fort Lewis's of the college football world, and that level will be very close to where it is right now.

I think you are living in the past. FCS is fun football and I go to games often. But cost is in play here and changes are coming. FBS TV and NCAA Basketball is basically funding much of FCS now. Even if scholarship numbers are not formally reduced more and more FCS schools will offer fewer and fewer scholarships to cut costs to keep programs alive and balance the books as FBS teams reduce the number of FCS games they play.

Hell MSU had to go to SMU for a big Paycheck in order to afford a 6th home game this year. Without that FBS paycheck you only play 5 home games this year or another D2 team. FCS finances are unsustainable for 90% of current members who offer full scholarships.

From a practical standpoint I think your right there will be a level between FBS and D2 but it might not look like it does today or so many top FCS programs would not be dialing up the friggin sunblet.

 

[druhag]

I am glad other people on here are talking about this. With some FBS conferences ending the practice of scheduling FCS schools, I think it will be harder to maintain the scholarship level at 63. What Big Sky school besides the Griz don't schedule a FBS school every year? How many schedule two?
Reducing scholarships due to cost has been talked about before, not just in the last few years. Back in the old DI-AA days, there was talk of reducing the scholarship number to 45.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...DE-IF-FOOTBALL-KEEPS-SCHOLARSHIPS.html?pg=all

I don't see why this discussion couldn't happen again.

 

[Purple Reign]

When GMU just announced that they were leaving the CAA , I think that may have been the last straw for staying at the 1AA level. That only leaves two Virginia schools in the CAA. All of our natural rivals have left.Throw in a news story in the UNCW Seahawk newspaper that UNCW is thinking about dropping all sports.They have the lowest sports budget in the CAA AT $ 10.3 million. Towson has just dropped men`s soccer immediately and baseball after this season.The baseball team has chosen to wear black tape over the Towson logo on their uniforms as a sign of displeasure over the schools decision, according to USA Today.I think the general fear is being left behind in a CAA that is no longer competitive.Plus App St , Ga So , ODU and GaST (for what GaSt may be worth) leaving 1AA , it may become watered down.Montana , NDST and a Delaware move would further weaken 1AA. I would like to stay in 1AA , but I think a move is going to happen. I can drive to Villanova in 4 hrs , Richmond in 2 hrs, W&M in 3 hr , Towson in 3hrs and ODU in under 4hrs. I am going to miss that ! Moving up , my first choice would be the MAC, CUSA THEN THE Sun Belt. Recent comments form the JMU administration suggest that we are now serious about moving up. Before , the AD caught hell for "Monitoring the situation". Whatever you guys decide to do , I hope it works out for you all. I hate seeing all of this tradition may be coming to an end. But , Times are changing. Go Dukes !

 

[kemajic]

In my view there is a greater risk of BSC presidents voting to reduce schollies within the conf. than there is an NCAA mandate. There are already sub-63 and non-schollie conferences in FCS and it has happened in the BSC before, as posted by GrizBeer in another thread. In 1993 the BSC presidents, led by Montana's George Dennison, voted 7 to 1 to reduce schollies in stages to 45, in effect, the DII level (They did not follow through once it became public.). This is what drove BSU and Idaho to follow Nevada to the Big West. The cheap conf. did not want them as they were willing to invest in program growth and keep a high competitive bar. Just as they did not want NDSU and SDSU ten years later, instead later welcoming UNC and SUU. With the exception of Cruzado at MSU, I doubt the BSC president support for fb has changed much in 20 years.

http://tinyurl.com/cozpmjv" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[BigSkyBears]

In my view there is a greater risk of BSC presidents voting to reduce schollies within the conf. than there is an NCAA mandate. There are already sub-63 and non-schollie conferences in FCS and it has happened in the BSC before, as posted by GrizBeer in another thread. In 1993 the BSC presidents, led by Montana's George Dennison, voted 7 to 1 to reduce schollies in stages to 45, in effect, the DII level (They did not follow through once it became public.). This is what drove BSU and Idaho to follow Nevada to the Big West. The cheap conf. did not want them as they were willing to invest in program growth and keep a high competitive bar. Just as they did not want NDSU and SDSU ten years later, instead later welcoming UNC and SUU. With the exception of Cruzado at MSU, I doubt the BSC president support for fb has changed much in 20 years.

http://tinyurl.com/cozpmjv" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why wouldn't they take UNC? When we made the jump from D2 to D1, UNC has been better than the Bunnies and the Bison for a decade prior. I'll admit the transition for football hasn't been great, but last season we played our best football at the end of the season, while finishing above the Griz, all the while doing this without our two all-Americans, both of whom will return this season.

 

[kemajic]

In my view there is a greater risk of BSC presidents voting to reduce schollies within the conf. than there is an NCAA mandate. There are already sub-63 and non-schollie conferences in FCS and it has happened in the BSC before, as posted by GrizBeer in another thread. In 1993 the BSC presidents, led by Montana's George Dennison, voted 7 to 1 to reduce schollies in stages to 45, in effect, the DII level (They did not follow through once it became public.). This is what drove BSU and Idaho to follow Nevada to the Big West. The cheap conf. did not want them as they were willing to invest in program growth and keep a high competitive bar. Just as they did not want NDSU and SDSU ten years later, instead later welcoming UNC and SUU. With the exception of Cruzado at MSU, I doubt the BSC president support for fb has changed much in 20 years.

http://tinyurl.com/cozpmjv" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why wouldn't they take UNC? When we made the jump from D2 to D1, UNC has been better than the Bunnies and the Bison for a decade prior. I'll admit the transition for football hasn't been great, but last season we played our best football at the end of the season, while finishing above the Griz, all the while doing this without our two all-Americans, both of whom will return this season.

Good point. UNC really raises the bar. High school stadium, 3500 usual attendance and a BSC record of 9-47. Regarding finishing ahead of Montana in Montana's worst season in 27 years, UNC homecoming crowd of 4700 on 10/6/2012; Montana 40, UNC 17. UNC has provided just what the BSC presidents were looking for.

 

[BigSkyBears]

In my view there is a greater risk of BSC presidents voting to reduce schollies within the conf. than there is an NCAA mandate. There are already sub-63 and non-schollie conferences in FCS and it has happened in the BSC before, as posted by GrizBeer in another thread. In 1993 the BSC presidents, led by Montana's George Dennison, voted 7 to 1 to reduce schollies in stages to 45, in effect, the DII level (They did not follow through once it became public.). This is what drove BSU and Idaho to follow Nevada to the Big West. The cheap conf. did not want them as they were willing to invest in program growth and keep a high competitive bar. Just as they did not want NDSU and SDSU ten years later, instead later welcoming UNC and SUU. With the exception of Cruzado at MSU, I doubt the BSC president support for fb has changed much in 20 years.

http://tinyurl.com/cozpmjv" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why wouldn't they take UNC? When we made the jump from D2 to D1, UNC has been better than the Bunnies and the Bison for a decade prior. I'll admit the transition for football hasn't been great, but last season we played our best football at the end of the season, while finishing above the Griz, all the while doing this without our two all-Americans, both of whom will return this season.

Good point. UNC really raises the bar. High school stadium, 3500 usual attendance and a BSC record of 9-47. Regarding finishing ahead of Montana in Montana's worst season in 27 years, UNC homecoming crowd of 4700 on 10/6/2012; Montana 40, UNC 17. UNC has provided just what the BSC presidents were looking for.

You truly are stupid

 

[get'em_griz]

In my view there is a greater risk of BSC presidents voting to reduce schollies within the conf. than there is an NCAA mandate. There are already sub-63 and non-schollie conferences in FCS and it has happened in the BSC before, as posted by GrizBeer in another thread. In 1993 the BSC presidents, led by Montana's George Dennison, voted 7 to 1 to reduce schollies in stages to 45, in effect, the DII level (They did not follow through once it became public.). This is what drove BSU and Idaho to follow Nevada to the Big West. The cheap conf. did not want them as they were willing to invest in program growth and keep a high competitive bar. Just as they did not want NDSU and SDSU ten years later, instead later welcoming UNC and SUU. With the exception of Cruzado at MSU, I doubt the BSC president support for fb has changed much in 20 years.

http://tinyurl.com/cozpmjv" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why wouldn't they take UNC? When we made the jump from D2 to D1, UNC has been better than the Bunnies and the Bison for a decade prior. I'll admit the transition for football hasn't been great, but last season we played our best football at the end of the season, while finishing above the Griz, all the while doing this without our two all-Americans, both of whom will return this season.

Good point. UNC really raises the bar. High school stadium, 3500 usual attendance and a BSC record of 9-47. Regarding finishing ahead of Montana in Montana's worst season in 27 years, UNC homecoming crowd of 4700 on 10/6/2012; Montana 40, UNC 17. UNC has provided just what the BSC presidents were looking for.

You truly are stupid

Look in the mirror. :roll:

 

[retiredfan]

Before I get accused of being a troll or out of my mind, I've got to ask...why would you really want the Griz to move up? The days of competing for National Championships would be over and the national respect for the program would slowly likely dwindle. Would you really want to trade 8-9-10 wins per season and playoff games for 4-5-6 wins per season and the occasional toilet bowl appearance? While I understand the money making possibilities, I don't think that's better than success. Maybe you do...

I don't think App State and GA Southern are making the right decision either, but I guess only time will tell. Without sounding like a arrogant a**hole...I don't think people realize what a small fish in the big pond UM really is in the grand scheme of college football. Yes, great success with a large alumni base around the United States, but not even touchable to the power 6 conference schools. Even Boise State who's seen some successful years doesn't get much respect at the highest levels. If they were in a bigger conference, they'd be a 4-5 win team. If the time comes that FCS schools are forced to move up, then great. Move up with the other Big Sky schools like MSU, EWU, Cal Poly, UC Davis, etc. But now? I don't see the point...

I can't agree with you more. At this point in time I feel we should stay put. There is plenty of competition at this level, and a few rivalries which only makes the competition better. I know there is more money in the fbs, but is money the only thing that matters?

 

[grizindabox]

Before I get accused of being a troll or out of my mind, I've got to ask...why would you really want the Griz to move up? The days of competing for National Championships would be over and the national respect for the program would slowly likely dwindle. Would you really want to trade 8-9-10 wins per season and playoff games for 4-5-6 wins per season and the occasional toilet bowl appearance? While I understand the money making possibilities, I don't think that's better than success. Maybe you do...

I don't think App State and GA Southern are making the right decision either, but I guess only time will tell. Without sounding like a arrogant a**hole...I don't think people realize what a small fish in the big pond UM really is in the grand scheme of college football. Yes, great success with a large alumni base around the United States, but not even touchable to the power 6 conference schools. Even Boise State who's seen some successful years doesn't get much respect at the highest levels. If they were in a bigger conference, they'd be a 4-5 win team. If the time comes that FCS schools are forced to move up, then great. Move up with the other Big Sky schools like MSU, EWU, Cal Poly, UC Davis, etc. But now? I don't see the point...

I can't agree with you more. At this point in time I feel we should stay put. There is plenty of competition at this level, and a few rivalries which only makes the competition better. I know there is more money in the fbs, but is money the only thing that matters?

I will tell you that wins and loses are not the reason...it is all about the $$$$. If they deem the finances are acceptable, they will move.

 

[GlassOnion]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/21989105/sun-belt-commish-karl-benson-western-kentuckys-exit-not-a-surprise" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"If James Madison and/or Liberty join the FBS ranks, it would be a sign of the growing distance between the FBS and FCS levels of play. The Big Ten has already considered eliminating FCS opponents from the schedule, and other schools are considering similar -- though less formal -- practices in order to boost strength of schedule.

If the value of the FCS product is dropping, it might be more beneficial for these perennial powers like Appalachian State and James Madison to make the jump and hope to replicate that success within their new conference. Handing in national title contention for a long shot chance at one access bowl spot -- awarded to the highest ranked team from the old-Big East, Mountain West, MAC, Conference USA and Sun Belt -- is a tough decision for fans to understand. But when the new conference offers an arguably brighter future than the devalued FCS, it's hard to blame the smaller schools for taking the risky move."

 

[EverettGriz]

Patterson clearly gets it.

 

[billings_poke]

https://twitter.com/brentthibodeaux/status/318788334400970752" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


more smoke on JMU

 

[marceagfan5]

Before I get accused of being a troll or out of my mind, I've got to ask...why would you really want the Griz to move up? The days of competing for National Championships would be over and the national respect for the program would slowly likely dwindle. Would you really want to trade 8-9-10 wins per season and playoff games for 4-5-6 wins per season and the occasional toilet bowl appearance? While I understand the money making possibilities, I don't think that's better than success. Maybe you do...

I don't think App State and GA Southern are making the right decision either, but I guess only time will tell. Without sounding like a arrogant a**hole...I don't think people realize what a small fish in the big pond UM really is in the grand scheme of college football. Yes, great success with a large alumni base around the United States, but not even touchable to the power 6 conference schools. Even Boise State who's seen some successful years doesn't get much respect at the highest levels. If they were in a bigger conference, they'd be a 4-5 win team. If the time comes that FCS schools are forced to move up, then great. Move up with the other Big Sky schools like MSU, EWU, Cal Poly, UC Davis, etc. But now? I don't see the point...

Gotta disagree here. I think its just a matter of time before the power 5 or 6 conferences in the FBS separate and leave the other FBS conferences, and some larger FCS programs, to form their own division. App State and GA Southern leaving as well as ODU, JMU, and I'm sure NDSU in the near future are not good for the FCS. Some of the premier FCS programs are leaving, obviously they feel the positives far outweigh the negatives on moving up to the FBS. Winning a FCS national championship is one thing, but if your playing Western Oregon and Panhandle State to do it, is it really worth it?

I would love to see EWU make the jump down the road if given the opportunity and judging by our gateway project we are at least putting ourselves in the position to think about it if given the opportunity.

I think the Griz should make the jump if given a good opportunity, but its just my opinion...

 

[fencer24]

Marshall, Nevada Reno, Idaho, Troy, and how many others made the jump to obscurity? Only Boise State seems to have succeeded, and even their success is limited by their conference. So success at the next level is problematic at best.
Couple that with most of us having the experience of walking through an airport anywhere in the country and sometimes overseas while wearing our Griz gear, and getting a response of "Go Griz" from a fellow fan. How much longer would that last without having the chance at being the National Champion?
Maybe we should move the whole Big Sky Conf to FBS. Scheduling would be interesting as we became the body bag game of the week for the first few weeks every season and then we could go back to conference only games as other teams work on their strength of schedule.
One major change that would help is to take out the restriction against FBS playing FCS counting toward the BCS. That is what is starving FCS conferences. If they had the opportunity to earn some money and survive the game they could grow until they didn't have to play those games anymore.

 

[kemajic]

Marshall, Nevada Reno, Idaho, Troy, and how many others made the jump to obscurity? Only Boise State seems to have succeeded, and even their success is limited by their conference. So success at the next level is problematic at best.
Couple that with most of us having the experience of walking through an airport anywhere in the country and sometimes overseas while wearing our Griz gear, and getting a response of "Go Griz" from a fellow fan. How much longer would that last without having the chance at being the National Champion?
Maybe we should move the whole Big Sky Conf to FBS. Scheduling would be interesting as we became the body bag game of the week for the first few weeks every season and then we could go back to conference only games as other teams work on their strength of schedule.
One major change that would help is to take out the restriction against FBS playing FCS counting toward the BCS. That is what is starving FCS conferences. If they had the opportunity to earn some money and survive the game they could grow until they didn't have to play those games anymore.

Dreamers should turn in their keyboards, too.

 

[fencer24]

Not so much dreaming as realizing that there are no good options out of this. Stay in FCS and watch it die. Go FBS and watch the program die, or just give up.

None of the above are very satisfactory.

 

[Cujo]

EWU, MSU, and UND will move up before UM does.

 

[narly]

Before I get accused of being a troll or out of my mind, I've got to ask...why would you really want the Griz to move up? The days of competing for National Championships would be over and the national respect for the program would slowly likely dwindle. Would you really want to trade 8-9-10 wins per season and playoff games for 4-5-6 wins per season and the occasional toilet bowl appearance? While I understand the money making possibilities, I don't think that's better than success. Maybe you do...

I don't think App State and GA Southern are making the right decision either, but I guess only time will tell. Without sounding like a arrogant a**hole...I don't think people realize what a small fish in the big pond UM really is in the grand scheme of college football. Yes, great success with a large alumni base around the United States, but not even touchable to the power 6 conference schools. Even Boise State who's seen some successful years doesn't get much respect at the highest levels. If they were in a bigger conference, they'd be a 4-5 win team. If the time comes that FCS schools are forced to move up, then great. Move up with the other Big Sky schools like MSU, EWU, Cal Poly, UC Davis, etc. But now? I don't see the point...

I think the biggest frustration is, seeing our contemporaries having caught us, and many of them passing us. Hell, with all the work being put into EWU's program, you too may pass us, then leave us in the dust. To some, many other programs are moving forward, meanwhile, we are spinning our wheels, stuck in the mud, or worse yet going in reverse.

I see both sides to this never ending debate. I don't fault either side in it. To me, it does seem we have been shitting on the pot forever. When are we going to get off it? If we do not make a decision soon, we are going to flushed into oblivion.

There is no way EWU passes us in football, providing we purge the current head coach, and hire somebody in here capable of leading this talented crew.