Page 1 of 2
FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:22 am
by LeadBolt
There has been a lot of discussion on here about jumping to FBS. While my school is not particularly well positioned for that at less than 6,000 undergraduate students, I still see the CAA where we are now as a better conference for the sports I follow (Basketball and Football) than several of the FBS conferences, (ie. SunBelt, MAC, WAC, Conf. USA, etc.).
While the top 6 FBS conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Big East, Pac 10, & SEC) are all desirable places to aspire to be, would you want your school to go to FBS if they could not be in a top 6 conference or had no chance to transition to a top 6 conference?
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:41 am
by 89Hen
I would be shocked if anyone voted yes, with the exception of Montana fans and the WAC.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:49 am
by dbackjon
Unless it is a Big 6, no.
Only exception I might make for NAU would be a not-going-to-happen invite to the MWC, only because it is a much better geographical fit.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:49 am
by Appaholic
No.
...and the fact that ACC still has a seat at the BCS table while Mountain West does not removes the last shreds of credibility regarding "fairness" the NCAA is always promoting....
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:50 am
by clenz
The CAA, Big Sky, MVFC, and SoCon are just as good, if not better, than some of the weeker conferences we'd get invited too.
That, and as a UNI fan I do not want to leave the MVC for basketball, especially for the f*cking MAC or some shitty conference.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:03 am
by lakesbison
No one cares about FCS, get real . FBS is where its at.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:07 am
by LeadBolt
clenz wrote:The CAA, Big Sky, MVFC, and SoCon are just as good, if not better, than some of the weeker conferences we'd get invited too.
That, and as a UNI fan I do not want to leave the MVC for basketball, especially for the f*cking MAC or some shitty conference.
That is a big part of my viewpoint. The top FCS conferences are better, imo, than the bottom FBS conferences. The bottom FBS conferences are where most of the invites will come from, with a very few exceptions, such as Montana or Villanova. I perceive most of the "let's move up to FBS" talk coming from fans of schools that won't get an invite from from a top 6 conference and will be faced with this choice, which is really not much of a choice at all.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:28 am
by 89Hen
Appaholic wrote:No.
...and the fact that BIG EAST still has a seat at the BCS table while Mountain West does not removes the last shreds of credibility regarding "fairness" the NCAA is always promoting....
FIFY
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:14 am
by LastMinuteman
If we could freeze the FCS the way it is now, with no more teams moving or dropping the sport and a large playoff held in a neutral city and broadcast on national television, then that would be fine forever.
But I do not trust the NCAA, ESPN, Frisco/Chattanooga, the FCS Committee, the media who wants to ban FBS vs. FCS games, the elements who want to reduce FCS scholarships, the economy, our conference's TV partner, other conferences, the teams in other conferences, the teams in the southern half of our own conference, the teams in the northern half of our own conference, or our own university to allow things to remain the same.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:14 am
by SuperHornet
Up until the departure of Fresno State and Nevada, Sac State fans (those on SacBuzz, anyway) were all in a WAC frenzy. That enthusiasm died away REAL fast when those two departed. The thinking was that they are close potential geographic rivals. With them gone, all Sac really had in the WAC to hang it's hat on was the fact that Sac is already a WAC associate member for baseball and gymnastics and the potential continuation of their budding rivalry with Montana, which wasn't really enough to justify the increased travel costs, particularly those associated with LA Tech and Hawai'i.
Fans seem perfectly happy to stay in the Sky for now, though, at least for football. The presence of UND (and SUU to a lesser degree) has caused fans to desire the bulk of Sac sports to jump to the Cali Bus League.
As many know, I'm a bit independent on things like this, but such a move, should the Sky allow it, would save travel costs associated with non-football sports at the expense of the greater regional coverage associated with the Big Sky.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:21 pm
by LeadBolt
lakesbison wrote:No one cares about FCS, get real . FBS is where its at.
So why are you on a FCS chat board?
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:38 pm
by dbackjon
lakesbison wrote:No one cares about FCS, get real . FBS is where its at.
And no one would care about whatever FBS league NDSU could get into, either...
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:28 pm
by ArmyOfDarkness
lakesbison wrote:No one cares about FCS, get real . FBS is where its at.
I care about FCS
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:06 pm
by SDHornet
I put yes only because I see Sac State dropping its football program 20 years down the road if there is no effort made to constantly strive for improvement. If there was more geographic rivals (such as the WAC was pre-MWC raid) I would be for it. Now…meh. Pretty much with what SH said minus the UM “rivalry” stuff he included as I don’t feel that’s true.
If Sac State has no ambition to go to the FBS (for one reason or another), they need to become associate BSC member for football only and find a way into the Big West. No point in wasting the money playing schools no one cares about in sports that no one cares about.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:10 pm
by JConnolly
Appaholic wrote:No.
...and the fact that ACC and Big East still have a seat at the BCS table while Mountain West does not removes the last shreds of credibility regarding "fairness" the NCAA is always promoting....
Fixed it. Big East doesn't even have a team in the Top 25 of ANY Poll, yet they get a BCS game.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:55 pm
by AppMan
Appsolutely! Please do not take what I am about to write as a slam on anyone. The FCS is a shadow of division I-AA from 20 years ago. Many of the better programs moved on and when the NCAA began requiring all D-I basketball programs play D-I football the division really took a hit. With a few exceptions FCS has become a small school division. A quick look at stadium sizes and average attendance verifies this. Villanova wins a national championship, yet averages less than 9,000 per game in a 12,000 seat facility. Richmond wins a national championship and builds a 8,700 seat stadium. Of the 116 schools in FCS only 23 on campus stadiums seat 20,000 or more and 17 of those are in 4 conferences (the Ivy, SWAC, MEAC, & Southern). Out of 116 FCS schools only 4 average 20,000+ per game, while 68% average less than 10,000 (so far in 2010). These are the facts, so there is no need for anyone to get all emotional and start ripping away at me. Most hard core FCS fans hang their hat on the playoffs. While I appreciate the fact a champion is settled on the field the quality of regular season games means a lot to me. I attended ASU back when we played East Carolina and enjoyed our annual wars with Marshall and Wake Forest. I miss those types of games badly. Our conference games and weak non conference games with teams like Jacksonville, NC Central, Presbyterian, and Gardner Webb just doesn't do much for me. Hate to say this but I only get juiced for one conference game on our schedule, GSU. While I enjoy the other games the level of excitement just isn't there. Our games with Montana, JMU and Delaware were great and would love to play them on a regular basis. Other than those I can think of only a few FCS teams I would get excited to play.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:00 pm
by clenz
Well thought post, but seriously you would be to the FBS what you are bitching about the FCS schools about.
You would be the podunk school playing for the NobodyGivesAShitBowl.com. The highlight of your season would be the chance to knock off the big boy that is using you as a pay day...then playing in a 80K stadium in front of less people than you would in the FCS title game. The money for MAC. Sun Belt, CUSA, etc... teams isn't any better than it is for the FCS. The fact is outside of the BCS bowls struggle like crazy to make money
If you, or anyone, thinks playing in the Sun Belt, CUSA, WAC, etc... gets you more "respect" from the BCS schools, admin, and fans you are wrong.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 7:35 am
by 89Hen
AppMan wrote:Appsolutely! Please do not take what I am about to write as a slam on anyone. The FCS is a shadow of division I-AA from 20 years ago. Many of the better programs moved on and when the NCAA began requiring all D-I basketball programs play D-I football the division really took a hit. With a few exceptions FCS has become a small school division. A quick look at stadium sizes and average attendance verifies this. Villanova wins a national championship, yet averages less than 9,000 per game in a 12,000 seat facility. Richmond wins a national championship and builds a 8,700 seat stadium. Of the 116 schools in FCS only 23 on campus stadiums seat 20,000 or more and 17 of those are in 4 conferences (the Ivy, SWAC, MEAC, & Southern). Out of 116 FCS schools only 4 average 20,000+ per game, while 68% average less than 10,000 (so far in 2010). These are the facts, so there is no need for anyone to get all emotional and start ripping away at me. Most hard core FCS fans hang their hat on the playoffs. While I appreciate the fact a champion is settled on the field the quality of regular season games means a lot to me. I attended ASU back when we played East Carolina and enjoyed our annual wars with Marshall and Wake Forest. I miss those types of games badly. Our conference games and weak non conference games with teams like Jacksonville, NC Central, Presbyterian, and Gardner Webb just doesn't do much for me. Hate to say this but I only get juiced for one conference game on our schedule, GSU. While I enjoy the other games the level of excitement just isn't there. Our games with Montana, JMU and Delaware were great and would love to play them on a regular basis. Other than those I can think of only a few FCS teams I would get excited to play.
Wow. I don't think I could disagree more. I-AA today is
FAR superior to 20 years ago. Yes, teams like Marshall, Boise and UConn (who was never anything in I-AA) went on to greater things, but that's about it. Arkansas State, Troy, WKU, Idaho, etc... really aren't missed in I-AA and they aren't doing anything in I-A. The tiny void they left have been more than filled by the likes of JMU, Cal Poly, NDSU, SDSU, ODU, JSU, etc... Schools like Montana have grown their attendance from 18k to 25k in the last 10 years. Your AppSt has gone from 18k to 27k.
Think about these attendance figures, where the schools are now and how many of them have either built, are building or have plans for new stadiums/renovations...
1999
JMU = 11,880
SIU = 7,220
Cal Poly = 6,025
SUU = 5,091
UNH = 4,377
20 years ago, we didn't see much in the way of stadium improvements. Schools are acutally spending money on facilities now. 20 years ago (5 years ago) a I-AA had never beaten a Top 25 I-A. It's happened twice in the last 4 years. I think I-AA today is a lot more competitive.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 7:52 am
by Theee Catrabbit
lakesbison wrote:No one cares about FCS, get real . FBS is where its at.
Ignore lakes, he's kind of like a cat chasing a laser light, it's shiny, it moves really fast and he's all excited. But will never know what to do once he catches it.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:13 am
by TribeFanInNC
AppMan wrote:With a few exceptions FCS has become a small school division. A quick look at stadium sizes and average attendance verifies this.
Isn't that why the FCS was created? Let's be honest, there is no way a school that draws 10,000 to 20,000 to games can compete with the mega schools that average 75,000+. Ticket revenue and concessions alone make the playing field anything but level, and we haven't even gotten to the TV and booster money. For those of us who cherish playing against our peers (and enjoy the occasional opportunity to test ourselves against the next level), FCS is an absolute godsend. Give me winning seasons with the chance to play for a national championship over twice yearly Tuesday night ESPN games.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:24 am
by clenz
TribeFanInNC wrote:AppMan wrote:With a few exceptions FCS has become a small school division. A quick look at stadium sizes and average attendance verifies this.
Isn't that why the FCS was created? Let's be honest, there is no way a school that draws 10,000 to 20,000 to games can compete with the mega schools that average 75,000+. Ticket revenue and concessions alone make the playing field anything but level, and we haven't even gotten to the TV and booster money. For those of us who cherish playing against our peers (and enjoy the occasional opportunity to test ourselves against the next level), FCS is an absolute godsend. Give me winning seasons with the chance to play for a national championship over twice yearly Tuesday night ESPN games.
Again Boise State and TCU appear to be the exception. BSU only draws baout 32K per game, but they could easily draw more with a bigger stadium, though I'm not sure about a 70 or 80k stadium.
TCU draws well for haivng to share the state with about 1000000 other schools with football. Do they sell out Amon G? I know it seats about 44k, but don't know if they sell it out.
Outside of those two there isn't many who can compete without being able to sell out a 50k+, and seemingly now 70k+ stadiums. Even teams who can do that aren't competetive sometimes.
People keep trying to tell me Nova's fan base will jump to 40 or 50 K per game if they go Big East, and I have a hard time believing it will jump like that.
The same arguement was made on Panthernation awhile back about UNI. Some thought that moving to the FBS we would be able to draw about 30-50K. There is no way that will happen. Maybe if there was only us and one other school...not named the University of Iowa... There are 2 BCS schools that draw 75k and about 50k each week respectively, plus all the peopl ewho go just to tailgate.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:30 am
by JayJ79
clenz wrote:TCU draws well for haivng to share the state with about 1000000 other schools with football. Do they sell out Amon G? I know it seats about 44k, but don't know if they sell it out.
TCU averages 94.28% of capacity (41821/game), according to the NCAA attendance stats as of this week.
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2010/Internet/ ... dance.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:36 am
by clenz
JayJ79 wrote:clenz wrote:TCU draws well for haivng to share the state with about 1000000 other schools with football. Do they sell out Amon G? I know it seats about 44k, but don't know if they sell it out.
TCU averages 94.28% of capacity (41821/game), according to the NCAA attendance stats as of this week.
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2010/Internet/ ... dance.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I don't know if they'd draw "that" much more if they had a new stadium.
I don't know what AGC Stadium is like in person, but I like the look of it. Being in the area they are, they could easily draw more, but having to fight with the other schools in the state like Texas, Tech, A&M, and even the *lesser* schools could mean the cap for TCU is about 41-45K.
EDIT: After doing some Wiki searching it looks like 50K might be the lid for the Horned Frogs
Today, with seating modifications and removals, the stadium seats 44,008 spectators.
In 2002, the David E. Bloxom Sr. Foundation helped install a new scoreboard and videoboard. In addition, TCU recently completed its expansion of the John Justin Athletic Center, which is attached to the stadium complex. Bids are under review to 3/4-bowl the stadium; some estimate this would bring the stadium to a seating capacity of nearly 50,000.
Panorama of the stadium, taken during the 2007 Armed Forces BowlAmon G. Carter Stadium most recently sold out for the October 24th, 2010 TCU vs. Air Force game; the announced attendance was 47,593. The previous sell-outs occurred on September 25, 2010 against Baylor, the Utah Utes in 2009, and then on September 16, 2006 when TCU defeated Texas Tech 12–3, and prior to that was on November 17, 1984, when the 12th-ranked TCU fell to 10th-ranked Texas in a regionally televised contest on ABC. The attendance at the '84 Texas game was listed as 47,280. That was the record until the '09 Utah game, which was played before 50,307.[1] TCU's 2010 attendance average through two games is 43,630.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:49 am
by S F State Gaters
Great thread with a couple of different points being raised. I think i am prone to agreeing with those who suggest that FCS ball is greatly improved over the past 20 years, and echo the sentiments of those who argue that the top conferences in FCS are proximate to the lower echelons of FBS. The gap between the two has narrowed and become less of a clear division and more of a continuum with the top of FBS on one end and the bottom of FCS on the other.
Were there to be no formalized difference between the two- that is, if they weren't divided and just treated as one big Division I with 300 some schools- the top FCS conferences would likely rank well ahead of several of the FBS conferences, particularly now with the realignments that have swept through the WAC.
Re: FCS vs. FBS
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:33 pm
by Mike Johnson
LeadBolt wrote:I still see the CAA where we are now as a better conference for the sports I follow (Basketball and Football) than several of the FBS conferences, (ie. SunBelt, MAC, WAC, Conf. USA, etc.).
While the top 6 FBS conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Big East, Pac 10, & SEC) are all desirable places to aspire to be, would you want your school to go to FBS if they could not be in a top 6 conference or had no chance to transition to a top 6 conference?
As one of the more objective ways of measuring these, Sagarin ranks the division I conferences in football and basketball (last year) as follows:
CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS WIN50%
1 PAC-10 (A) = 81.95 81.84 ( 1) 10 81.90 ( 1)
2 BIG 12 (A) = 79.78 79.07 ( 2) 12 79.33 ( 2)
3 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 78.78 78.23 ( 3) 12 78.39 ( 3)
4 BIG TEN (A) = 75.62 74.77 ( 4) 11 75.07 ( 4)
5 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 73.37 72.75 ( 5) 12 72.85 ( 5)
6 I-A INDEPENDENTS (A) = 71.20 70.80 ( 6) 3 70.81 ( 6)
7 BIG EAST (A) = 70.59 70.74 ( 7) 8 70.73 ( 7)
8 MOUNTAIN WEST (A) = 69.21 69.90 ( 8) 9 69.40 ( 8)
9 WESTERN ATHLETIC (A) = 68.03 68.63 ( 9) 9 68.34 ( 9)
10 CONFERENCE USA (A) = 64.21 64.12 ( 10) 12 64.17 ( 10)
11 COLONIAL (AA)= 62.95 62.30 ( 11) 10 62.64 ( 11)
12 BIG SKY (AA)= 60.25 59.16 ( 13) 9 59.44 ( 13)
13 MID-AMERICAN (A) = 59.54 59.37 ( 12) 13 59.56 ( 12)
14 SOUTHERN (AA)= 59.24 58.24 ( 15) 9 58.62 ( 14)
15 MISSOURI VALLEY (AA)= 58.09 58.30 ( 14) 9 58.29 ( 15)
16 GREAT WEST (AA)= 55.05 55.21 ( 16) 5 55.20 ( 16)
17 SUN BELT (A) = 54.28 54.57 ( 17) 9 54.55 ( 17)
18 SOUTHLAND (AA)= 53.99 54.06 ( 18) 8 54.00 ( 18)
19 NORTHEAST (AA)= 49.82 49.45 ( 19) 9 49.51 ( 19)
20 OHIO VALLEY (AA)= 49.06 48.92 ( 20) 9 48.95 ( 20)
21 IVY LEAGUE (AA)= 47.11 46.71 ( 21) 8 46.82 ( 21)
22 PATRIOT LEAGUE (AA)= 44.51 44.32 ( 22) 7 44.35 ( 22)
23 I-AA INDEPENDENTS (AA)= 43.71 43.66 ( 23) 6 43.75 ( 23)
24 SOUTHWESTERN (AA)= 41.24 40.37 ( 25) 10 40.63 ( 25)
25 BIG SOUTH (AA)= 40.40 41.40 ( 24) 7 41.17 ( 24)
26 PIONEER (AA)= 39.28 40.12 ( 26) 10 39.94 ( 26)
27 MID-EASTERN (AA)= 32.80 33.11 ( 27) 9 32.99 ( 27)
28 ***UNRATED*** (**)= -90.00 -90.00 ( 28) 1 -90.00 ( 28)
CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS WIN50%
1 BIG 12 = 84.42 84.27 ( 2) 12 84.26 ( 2)
2 ATLANTIC COAST = 84.15 84.54 ( 1) 12 84.47 ( 1)
3 BIG EAST = 83.60 83.07 ( 3) 16 83.17 ( 3)
4 BIG TEN = 82.73 82.52 ( 4) 11 82.54 ( 4)
5 PACIFIC-10 = 81.57 81.27 ( 6) 10 81.31 ( 6)
6 SOUTHEASTERN = 81.31 81.56 ( 5) 12 81.53 ( 5)
7 MOUNTAIN WEST = 77.65 77.61 ( 7) 9 77.61 ( 7)
8 MISSOURI VALLEY = 77.22 77.02 ( 9) 10 77.04 ( 9)
9 ATLANTIC 10 = 77.02 77.16 ( 8) 14 77.21 ( 8)
10 CONFERENCE USA = 75.71 75.77 ( 10) 12 75.73 ( 10)
11 HORIZON = 73.85 74.48 ( 11) 10 74.27 ( 11)
12 WESTERN ATHLETIC = 73.60 74.13 ( 12) 9 74.05 ( 12)
13 COLONIAL = 72.88 73.21 ( 14) 12 73.14 ( 14)
14 WEST COAST = 72.83 73.68 ( 13) 8 73.35 ( 13)
15 MID-AMERICAN = 71.92 71.82 ( 15) 12 71.84 ( 15)
16 METRO ATLANTIC = 71.25 71.49 ( 16) 10 71.44 ( 16)
17 BIG WEST = 70.24 70.44 ( 17) 9 70.42 ( 17)
18 BIG SKY = 69.67 69.42 ( 20) 9 69.47 ( 20)
19 SUN BELT = 69.49 69.58 ( 18) 12 69.56 ( 18)
20 SOUTHERN = 69.15 69.55 ( 19) 12 69.50 ( 19)
21 SUMMIT LEAGUE = 68.14 68.44 ( 21) 10 68.39 ( 21)
22 SOUTHLAND = 67.88 68.07 ( 22) 12 68.04 ( 22)
23 OHIO VALLEY = 67.80 68.06 ( 23) 10 67.99 ( 23)
24 IVY LEAGUE = 66.97 67.51 ( 24) 8 67.34 ( 24)
25 AMERICA EAST = 66.96 67.25 ( 25) 9 67.21 ( 25)
26 ATLANTIC SUN = 66.90 67.11 ( 26) 11 67.09 ( 26)
27 PATRIOT = 66.42 66.47 ( 27) 8 66.47 ( 27)
28 BIG SOUTH = 64.84 64.97 ( 28) 10 64.96 ( 28)
29 NORTHEAST = 63.64 63.81 ( 29) 12 63.81 ( 29)
30 INDEPENDENTS = 63.03 63.50 ( 30) 4 63.38 ( 30)
31 MID-EASTERN = 62.05 62.26 ( 31) 13 62.21 ( 31)
32 GREAT WEST = 60.40 60.53 ( 32) 7 60.53 ( 32)
33 SOUTHWESTERN = 59.13 58.93 ( 33) 10 58.97 ( 33)
The Colonial Athletic Association is better than both the MAC and the Sun Belt in both football and basketball, although the case vs. C-USA and WAC is harder to make, although the WAC is going to drop in football with Boise State leaving next year and Nevada and Fresno State the next. Basketball takes a hit with Nevada leaving, but Utah State and New Mexico State are still the best basketball teams in the conference.