What's the next realignment domino to fall?

[MoValley John]

No, you guys seem to think that is our only goal. We've said repeatedly on that, even if it's in 50 years, to get to the top level you have to start somewhere. You think by winning at the FCS level we'd get to where we want to go? Then why didn't WKU and App State translate it into something bigger than the Sun Belt? Why isn't NDSU breaking down the doors?

It's about setting ourselves up. In reality, we should take it as a compliment that everyone seems to be looking out for us. But that is a choice we get to make. Springfield, SW MO, and Missouri in general have a lot to offer and could use a second FBS team to rally behind.

But you're right, 40-50 years ago I'm sure the PAC 8 was eyeing Utah as a member one day. We should just never try.

Sigh.... I'll try to explain it in a non-condensing manner.

For almost any team trying to step up to FBS football, the Sun Belt offers nothing more than a death sentence. Well, not a death sentence but purgatory. Teams like App State are moving up trying to be a part of the FBS game. They hope purgatory in the Sun Belt is short. Unfortunately, it will likely be long, painful and probably permanent. Besides being a winner at the FCS level, App State doesn't bring much to the table. On the other hand, the Texas and Florida teams that have moved right up and through the Sun Belt bring things to the table that conferences want. More than just a winning tradition, they bring large sized schools, TV markets, money and most of all, lots and lots of talent to the conference. The Sun Belt is glad to have Florida Atlantic type schools as long as they can. But other conferences want the FAU's. Florida Atlantic is in a recruiting hotbed, is a school of over 30,000 students and has huge TV markets. Then again, FAU only made a quick pit stop in the Sun Belt. All along, FAU had the sealed envelope to C-USA that Casey thought the Bears had.

For the FAU's of the world, a pit stop in the Sun Belt probably makes sense. Those schools can use the Sun Belt to demonstrate success at the FBS level (even though it's not much higher than many FCS leagues) all the while, the football universe learns about everything else they bring to the table. Can Missouri State do any of this? I doubt it. Your school has an anemic endowment, a small budget, no sustained success in any sport, offer no advanced degrees and is essentially a teachers college in an area lacking abundant wealth. And while Missouri has a relatively large population, most of the people are in St Louis and KC and are not Bears fans. In my opinion, a short stop in the Sun Belt for Missouri State is more than likely permanent. Your new permanent conference is a step down in every sport except maybe football. And while it's a step down, your expenses will rise. That is the bottom line. With the changes in the football landscape, jumping to the Sun Belt seems more like a move of desperation, that this is the last and only opportunity MSU might get to go FBS, not a temporary move to improve your long term situation. Desperation moves rarely work out.

[uniftw]

No, you guys seem to think that is our only goal. We've said repeatedly on that, even if it's in 50 years, to get to the top level you have to start somewhere. You think by winning at the FCS level we'd get to where we want to go? Then why didn't WKU and App State translate it into something bigger than the Sun Belt? Why isn't NDSU breaking down the doors?

It's about setting ourselves up. In reality, we should take it as a compliment that everyone seems to be looking out for us. But that is a choice we get to make. Springfield, SW MO, and Missouri in general have a lot to offer and could use a second FBS team to rally behind.

But you're right, 40-50 years ago I'm sure the PAC 8 was eyeing Utah as a member one day. We should just never try.

Dude...MSU is a dog crap program, don't let this years good start cloud what the program really is.

Since Terry Allen became your coach in 2006 you are 33-55
MSU hasn't been to the FCS playoffs since 1990
Since the last playoff appearance MSU has just 8 winning seasons, and never more than 7 wins (and5 of those winning seasons came before 2001...and both 7 win seasons in the early 90s)...these are your losing season since 1990 94, 95 97, 98, 99, 00, 02, 03, 05, 06, 08, 10, 11, 12, 13
Skipping 1990 and 1989 (the only 2 playoff appearances in MSU history) MSU has also been .500 or lower in 88, 87, 86, 82, 81...The FCS (as we know it) was formed in 1981

Western Kentucky is now a CUSA member
App State and Georgia Southern are likely CUSA members in the relatively near future.
You are closer to Texas State (seriously, look at their shitty history) than anyone else that's made the move. The Sun Belt IS their max level...period. That was/is a step up from them going from the Southland.

Why isn't NDSU knocking doors down? Well, because they are in freaking Fargo...seriously. NDSU anywhere in the lower half of South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Wyoming, Colorado, Indiana, etc... is likely FBS right now. They have a lot of money, and more support than you can dream of.

If the P12 could do it over, they wouldn't take Utah, I can promise you that. Utah, and Colorado (also Utah isn't taken without Colorado), were knee jerk movements to the lack of a move from Texas and OU. If Boise State had any sort of academic integrity they would have been the choice.



To answer the question about a SBC move for UNI, I would not support that. I, and almost every other UNI fan that supports a move at some point, have said that if we are going to move it is MAC or higher or nothing...period. We all have also said we won't move football if it negatively impacts our other sports.


What's going to happen, at some point, is the P5 take off, and the G5 and a couple FCS conferences (MVFC, Big Sky, CAA, and some select Southland/SoCon/Big South teams) will "realign" and create a "new FCS" so to speak.

[MoValley John]

No, you guys seem to think that is our only goal. We've said repeatedly on that, even if it's in 50 years, to get to the top level you have to start somewhere. You think by winning at the FCS level we'd get to where we want to go? Then why didn't WKU and App State translate it into something bigger than the Sun Belt? Why isn't NDSU breaking down the doors?

It's about setting ourselves up. In reality, we should take it as a compliment that everyone seems to be looking out for us. But that is a choice we get to make. Springfield, SW MO, and Missouri in general have a lot to offer and could use a second FBS team to rally behind.

But you're right, 40-50 years ago I'm sure the PAC 8 was eyeing Utah as a member one day. We should just never try.

Dude...MSU is a dog crap program, don't let this years good start cloud what the program really is.

Since Terry Allen became your coach in 2006 you are 33-55
MSU hasn't been to the FCS playoffs since 1990
Since the last playoff appearance MSU has just 8 winning seasons, and never more than 7 wins (and5 of those winning seasons came before 2001...and both 7 win seasons in the early 90s)...these are your losing season since 1990 94, 95 97, 98, 99, 00, 02, 03, 05, 06, 08, 10, 11, 12, 13
Skipping 1990 and 1989 (the only 2 playoff appearances in MSU history) MSU has also been .500 or lower in 88, 87, 86, 82, 81...The FCS (as we know it) was formed in 1981

Western Kentucky is now a CUSA member
App State and Georgia Southern are likely CUSA members in the relatively near future.
You are closer to Texas State (seriously, look at their shitty history) than anyone else that's made the move. The Sun Belt IS their max level...period. That was/is a step up from them going from the Southland.

Why isn't NDSU knocking doors down? Well, because they are in freaking Fargo...seriously. NDSU anywhere in the lower half of South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Wyoming, Colorado, Indiana, etc... is likely FBS right now. They have a lot of money, and more support than you can dream of.

If the P12 could do it over, they wouldn't take Utah, I can promise you that. Utah, and Colorado (also Utah isn't taken without Colorado), were knee jerk movements to the lack of a move from Texas and OU. If Boise State had any sort of academic integrity they would have been the choice.



To answer the question about a SBC move for UNI, I would not support that. I, and almost every other UNI fan that supports a move at some point, have said that if we are going to move it is MAC or higher or nothing...period. We all have also said we won't move football if it negatively impacts our other sports.


What's going to happen, at some point, is the P5 take off, and the G5 and a couple FCS conferences (MVFC, Big Sky, CAA, and some select Southland/SoCon/Big South teams) will "realign" and create a "new FCS" so to speak.

Mostly agree with your assessment, especially why NDSU isn't in a real conference yet. If NDSU was closer to Des Moines than Calgary, they wouldn't be FCS and possibly a last one in to a P-5 slot. Unfortunately for them, they are in freaking no man's land and can't change it. I'm also glad to see a UNI fan state that they absolutely would not support a move to the Sun Belt. If UNI had a shot at the MAC, they should take it, but Sun Belt, that would be suicide.

Where I disagree is App State. They aren't going anywhere. Sure, they had a run a few years ago, but that's about it. They are the sixth FBS school in North Carolina. Yep, sixth. You have North Carolina, North Carolina State, Duke, Wake Forest and East Carolina all in front of them. East Carolina, deserved or not, took App State's place at anything higher than the Sun Belt. App State has a budget that fits nicely among Missouri Valley teams and is subsidized at close to 60%. They might become a Sun Belt powerhouse but they aren't going anywhere.

[TheAsianSensation]

I think the Sun Belt's taking a gambit on on-field production. I'm guessing they hope they will be the best G5 conference. It's closer than you think, because the other G5 conferences are saturated with fat right now, but I highly doubt it'll work.

The Sun Belt is filled with teams who just want to be a level above the other smaller schools. If the P5 break away, that advantage likely goes away. But for the teams in the 'Belt, it's a chance worth taking.

Why isn't NDSU knocking doors down? Well, because they are in freaking Fargo...seriously. NDSU anywhere in the lower half of South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Wyoming, Colorado, Indiana, etc... is likely FBS right now. They have a lot of money, and more support than you can dream of.

What's even worse for them is the death of the WAC. If that thing still existed, they'd at least have a path. Right now there's nothing, given the MWC is stuffed.

If the P12 could do it over, they wouldn't take Utah, I can promise you that. Utah, and Colorado (also Utah isn't taken without Colorado), were knee jerk movements to the lack of a move from Texas and OU. If Boise State had any sort of academic integrity they would have been the choice.

Actually I think that's debatable. They wanted Colorado at any cost. And I think they were fully willing to take Utah in order to get Colorado. Otherwise, Colorado was at risk of being trapped by a Big 12 GOR.

[MoValley John]

Actually I think that's debatable. They wanted Colorado at any cost. And I think they were fully willing to take Utah in order to get Colorado. Otherwise, Colorado was at risk of being trapped by a Big 12 GOR.

"At any cost"is probably far from accurate. The PAC was intrigued by Colorado, Colorado is a school loaded with West Coast students and Colorado has always wanted in the PAC, but the PAC didn't want Colorado at any cost, far from it. The PAC wanted Texas and Oklahoma, in that order. Period. The PAC didn't want anything to do with Texas Tech, Baylor or Oklahoma State. Period. Texas was shoving a deal down the PAC throat that included schools the PAC didn't want at all costs. The PAC admitted Colorado first, and then Utah, which broke up the Texas plan, now Texas could only bring Oklahoma with them. A&M was never solidly on board and with the Politics in Texas as they are, Texas could not move without helping out the other Texas schools and the deal was dead.

The biggest loser in this whole deal has been Texas. Texas is the richest school in the country, and yet lost all of its bargaining power in the debacle. They have lost their competitive edge, are being out recruited by other instate schools and we're quickly passed up by A&M. They have the Longhorn Network that pays them well, but will be dumped at the end of the contract, plus nobody trusts them. Everything in this ordeal backfired.

Biggest winners are Mizzou and A&M.

[TheAsianSensation]

Actually I think that's debatable. They wanted Colorado at any cost. And I think they were fully willing to take Utah in order to get Colorado. Otherwise, Colorado was at risk of being trapped by a Big 12 GOR.

"At any cost"is probably far from accurate. The PAC was intrigued by Colorado, Colorado is a school loaded with West Coast students and Colorado has always wanted in the PAC, but the PAC didn't want Colorado at any cost, far from it. The PAC wanted Texas and Oklahoma, in that order. Period. The PAC didn't want anything to do with Texas Tech, Baylor or Oklahoma State. Period. Texas was shoving a deal down the PAC throat that included schools the PAC didn't want at all costs. The PAC admitted Colorado first, and then Utah, which broke up the Texas plan, now Texas could only bring Oklahoma with them. A&M was never solidly on board and with the Politics in Texas as they are, Texas could not move without helping out the other Texas schools and the deal was dead.

The biggest loser in this whole deal has been Texas. Texas is the richest school in the country, and yet lost all of its bargaining power in the debacle. They have lost their competitive edge, are being out recruited by other instate schools and we're quickly passed up by A&M. They have the Longhorn Network that pays them well, but will be dumped at the end of the contract, plus nobody trusts them. Everything in this ordeal backfired.

Biggest winners are Mizzou and A&M.

Well Texas and Oklahoma were the prizes, but I think even if those 2 were never on the table, I'd bet Colorado was eventually getting added anyways. The only thing stopping it was the stability of the Big 12...which broke down.

I'd argue more, but it's veering off topic to the main point, which is that Missouri State can't quite afford to move up in class. If they can build up a bigtime FCS team first, then there's a chance.

[MoValley John]

Actually I think that's debatable. They wanted Colorado at any cost. And I think they were fully willing to take Utah in order to get Colorado. Otherwise, Colorado was at risk of being trapped by a Big 12 GOR.

"At any cost"is probably far from accurate. The PAC was intrigued by Colorado, Colorado is a school loaded with West Coast students and Colorado has always wanted in the PAC, but the PAC didn't want Colorado at any cost, far from it. The PAC wanted Texas and Oklahoma, in that order. Period. The PAC didn't want anything to do with Texas Tech, Baylor or Oklahoma State. Period. Texas was shoving a deal down the PAC throat that included schools the PAC didn't want at all costs. The PAC admitted Colorado first, and then Utah, which broke up the Texas plan, now Texas could only bring Oklahoma with them. A&M was never solidly on board and with the Politics in Texas as they are, Texas could not move without helping out the other Texas schools and the deal was dead.

The biggest loser in this whole deal has been Texas. Texas is the richest school in the country, and yet lost all of its bargaining power in the debacle. They have lost their competitive edge, are being out recruited by other instate schools and we're quickly passed up by A&M. They have the Longhorn Network that pays them well, but will be dumped at the end of the contract, plus nobody trusts them. Everything in this ordeal backfired.

Biggest winners are Mizzou and A&M.

Well Texas and Oklahoma were the prizes, but I think even if those 2 were never on the table, I'd bet Colorado was eventually getting added anyways. The only thing stopping it was the stability of the Big 12...which broke down.

I'd argue more, but it's veering off topic to the main point, which is that Missouri State can't quite afford to move up in class. If they can build up a bigtime FCS team first, then there's a chance.

To really get a perspective of what happened, reading archives from Chip Brown is a great start. Chip was somewhat informed but was also leaking stuff that he wanted to happen. Chip was the guy with all the unnamed sources and Chip was a little media whore through the whole ordeal. Chip, not unlike Casey, was usually wrong. Here is his first report, a great read. Funny how he had Nebraska as having no options and Missouri with one foot already in the B1G. That said, he knew of ATM's desire for the SEC, but also had OU as an SEC candidate.
https://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1090747

Chip Brown is an idiot.

[MVCfans]

Sounds like UAB might drop football entirely. You have to wonder if other low level football schools won't eventually follow suit and what impact that might ultimately have on conference affiliation.

UAB athletic director Brian Mackin is reportedly out and the football program could be shut down as soon as this week, according to multiple media reports.

USA Today's Dan Wolken and Sports Illustrated are reporting that Mackin, the Blazers athletic director since 2007, will be fired as part of major changes to the athletic department that will include shutting down the football program. UAB will become the first Football Bowl Subdivision/Division I-A school to drop football since Pacific in 1995.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... -this-week?

[unipanther99]

They've only had football for like 25 years, and they've really never had any success. I think this is probably a more unique situation where lack of tradition plus financial considerations makes this a move that is probably for the best.

I saw someone suggest they would make a good addition to the Valley. I don't think they'd be a good fit.

[rlh04d]

They've only had football for like 25 years, and they've really never had any success. I think this is probably a more unique situation where lack of tradition plus financial considerations makes this a move that is probably for the best.

I saw someone suggest they would make a good addition to the Valley. I don't think they'd be a good fit.

UAB's a unique situation because of the power the University of Alabama has over them.