The Bobcat Nation

As a fan of science fiction, I'm often preoccupied with the question of "what if...". Indeed that is how many sci-fi stories begin. They just ask what if something were to happen and what the reaction of that would be. Hence my thoughts about the Big Sky and San Diego. Now I'm not saying that any of this is happening or that there are any kinds of rumors, I just have this question of "what if" to help explore other questions I have regarding conference realignment as a whole and the admission to conferences.

When I look at a map of FCS programs in the US, the only program in the west that is not part of the Big Sky is San Diego. Why? The last time realignment hit the Big Sky was when North Dakota, Southern Utah, Cal Poly, and UC Davis all joined. The latter two football only, and we almost got South Dakota. Yet, San Diego was not in that conversation, and no where have I seen any kind of discussion about San Diego in the Big Sky. Currently, they are in the Pioneer League. A league that is centralized in the Midwest and Southeast, with San Diego as the lone outlier. Indeed, the geographic fit for San Diego is rather confusing, much in the same way West Virgina is for the Big 12 or San Diego State was going to be, had they gone to the Big East with Boise State. So why is San Diego in the Pioneer and not the Big Sky? A couple of reasons I can think of have to do with the school it self. First, the school is a private Catholic institution. All current Big Sky institutions are public (with the exception of Hartford, which is only a golf member). I suppose that if the PAC-12 will never take BYU because it's a private Mormon school, there may be a similar reason to not take San Diego. And second, San Diego does not offer scholarships for players, just as all the other Pioneer League schools don't. But, honestly, I don't find those compelling reason to not have San Diego in the conference.

Consider that if San Diego was in the Big Sky, we would be at an even 14 teams for football, have another school in California, and have a recruiting hotbed more accessible to all schools. I really don't see a reason not to. Then that leads me to the Big Sky wanting them. It would be about what they have to offer to the conference as a whole. Again, better access to Southern California recruiting and a massive TV market. As far as the benefits for San Diego, they could easily cut a lot of travel costs by leaving the Pioneer for a better geographical fit. Again, back to West Virginia, they've been hit hard by all the traveling they've had to do.

And the fact of the matter is that one day, soon I think, the PAC-12 will expand and become the PAC-14/16. They may go for Texas and Oklahoma like before, but I'm 99% sure that if they don't get a school east of New Mexico, they will turn to the Mountain West. Schools like Boise State and Hawaii will be prime targets. But no matter what schools they take, it will reduce the number of Mountain West schools to under 12, meaning that the Mountain West can't have a conference championship game. And we know they want to keep one because of the extra money it brings into the conference. Idaho and New Mexico State are logical fits for expansion in that regard, but eventually they will look to poach the Big Sky. Schools like Eastern Washington, Montana, and Montana State are likely to exit if such an opportunity presents itself. I would find it unlikely that the Big Sky wouldn't want to expand, even if it loses only two schools. So where does the Big Sky go to replenish it's teams? North Dakota State? South Dakota? D2? It seems that San Diego would be a logical choice.

So why is San Diego not in the Big Sky? If the Big Sky should expand, should they go for San Diego? And, what is preventing San Diego from leaving the Pioneer?

I know this is a lot to digest, but I really think that this one school, coupled with realignment, opens up a lot of questions. And it's just fun to think about these things. Conference realignment always has me feeling excited!

I could see Central Washington moving up, before San Diego goes the scholarship route.

allcat wrote:I could see Central Washington moving up, before San Diego goes the scholarship route.

So you're saying that San Diego would have to have scholarships to be in the Big Sky? If that is true, then why is that a requirement?

How is a non-scholarship school going to seriously compete in a scholarship conference?
Unless they added scholarships, we'd simply be adding another bottom-feeder to our conference.

91catAlum wrote:How is a non-scholarship school going to seriously compete in a scholarship conference?
Unless they added scholarships, we'd simply be adding another bottom-feeder to our conference.

Plus DII already offer partials, so not as big a step.

91catAlum wrote:How is a non-scholarship school going to seriously compete in a scholarship conference?
Unless they added scholarships, we'd simply be adding another bottom-feeder to our conference.

If that is true, then why give the Pioneer League an automatic bid to the playoffs? I'm not disagreeing with you, I just don't understand.

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:

91catAlum wrote:How is a non-scholarship school going to seriously compete in a scholarship conference?
Unless they added scholarships, we'd simply be adding another bottom-feeder to our conference.

If that is true, then why give the Pioneer League an automatic bid to the playoffs? I'm not disagreeing with you, I just don't understand.

Who knows why, to be PC maybe? Nobody understands why the pioneer conference gets a AQ.

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:

91catAlum wrote:How is a non-scholarship school going to seriously compete in a scholarship conference?
Unless they added scholarships, we'd simply be adding another bottom-feeder to our conference.

If that is true, then why give the Pioneer League an automatic bid to the playoffs? I'm not disagreeing with you, I just don't understand.

Good question, I don't know. Last season was the first time the pioneer league started getting an autobid, and I'm not sure what the reasoning was for it. San Diego got it last year, and proceeded to go into Missoula and get destroyed by a very mediocre griz team.
I didn't pay enough attention to see who got it this season, but I'll bet they didn't win.

It's also a private school so it really doesn't mesh with the BSC.

91catAlum wrote:

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:

91catAlum wrote:How is a non-scholarship school going to seriously compete in a scholarship conference?
Unless they added scholarships, we'd simply be adding another bottom-feeder to our conference.

If that is true, then why give the Pioneer League an automatic bid to the playoffs? I'm not disagreeing with you, I just don't understand.

Good question, I don't know. Last season was the first time the pioneer league started getting an autobid, and I'm not sure what the reasoning was for it. San Diego got it last year, and proceeded to go into Missoula and get destroyed by a very mediocre griz team.
I didn't pay enough attention to see who got it this season, but I'll bet they didn't win.

For me, I think one of the benefits of the FCS post season is the fact that everyone who wants to go to the playoffs gets to go. What I mean is that every conference who wants to be in the playoffs has an AQ. The Ivy, SWAC, and MEAC choose not to go, and I have no issue with that. I don't think you should exclude a conference because of perceived weakness. That's why I hated the BCS and why I dislike the CFP. I'm glad the Pioneer has an AQ spot. And if the Ivy, SWAC, and MEAC change their minds, then they should get AQ status.

Let me boil it down this way. Every year there are about 129 FBS teams, but only 30 actually have a chance of getting into the playoff, maybe less. In FCS, any team can win the national championship with the structure we have. Put another way, if the CFP was used in the NFL, only about 8 teams would have a chance to be in the playoff, as opposed to all 32. Maybe that's over simplifying the problem, but that's how I see it. Any system that is designed to prevent certain teams from going to the playoff based on predetermined bias, is a system that should be taken apart.

Sorry about the tangent.

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:As a fan of science fiction, I'm often preoccupied with the question of "what if...". Indeed that is how many sci-fi stories begin. They just ask what if something were to happen and what the reaction of that would be. Hence my thoughts about the Big Sky and San Diego. Now I'm not saying that any of this is happening or that there are any kinds of rumors, I just have this question of "what if" to help explore other questions I have regarding conference realignment as a whole and the admission to conferences.

When I look at a map of FCS programs in the US, the only program in the west that is not part of the Big Sky is San Diego. Why? The last time realignment hit the Big Sky was when North Dakota, Southern Utah, Cal Poly, and UC Davis all joined. The latter two football only, and we almost got South Dakota. Yet, San Diego was not in that conversation, and no where have I seen any kind of discussion about San Diego in the Big Sky. Currently, they are in the Pioneer League. A league that is centralized in the Midwest and Southeast, with San Diego as the lone outlier. Indeed, the geographic fit for San Diego is rather confusing, much in the same way West Virgina is for the Big 12 or San Diego State was going to be, had they gone to the Big East with Boise State. So why is San Diego in the Pioneer and not the Big Sky? A couple of reasons I can think of have to do with the school it self. First, the school is a private Catholic institution. All current Big Sky institutions are public (with the exception of Hartford, which is only a golf member). I suppose that if the PAC-12 will never take BYU because it's a private Mormon school, there may be a similar reason to not take San Diego. And second, San Diego does not offer scholarships for players, just as all the other Pioneer League schools don't. But, honestly, I don't find those compelling reason to not have San Diego in the conference.

Consider that if San Diego was in the Big Sky, we would be at an even 14 teams for football, have another school in California, and have a recruiting hotbed more accessible to all schools. I really don't see a reason not to. Then that leads me to the Big Sky wanting them. It would be about what they have to offer to the conference as a whole. Again, better access to Southern California recruiting and a massive TV market. As far as the benefits for San Diego, they could easily cut a lot of travel costs by leaving the Pioneer for a better geographical fit. Again, back to West Virginia, they've been hit hard by all the traveling they've had to do.

And the fact of the matter is that one day, soon I think, the PAC-12 will expand and become the PAC-14/16. They may go for Texas and Oklahoma like before, but I'm 99% sure that if they don't get a school east of New Mexico, they will turn to the Mountain West. Schools like Boise State and Hawaii will be prime targets. But no matter what schools they take, it will reduce the number of Mountain West schools to under 12, meaning that the Mountain West can't have a conference championship game. And we know they want to keep one because of the extra money it brings into the conference. Idaho and New Mexico State are logical fits for expansion in that regard, but eventually they will look to poach the Big Sky. Schools like Eastern Washington, Montana, and Montana State are likely to exit if such an opportunity presents itself. I would find it unlikely that the Big Sky wouldn't want to expand, even if it loses only two schools. So where does the Big Sky go to replenish it's teams? North Dakota State? South Dakota? D2? It seems that San Diego would be a logical choice.

So why is San Diego not in the Big Sky? If the Big Sky should expand, should they go for San Diego? And, what is preventing San Diego from leaving the Pioneer?

I know this is a lot to digest, but I really think that this one school, coupled with realignment, opens up a lot of questions. And it's just fun to think about these things. Conference realignment always has me feeling excited!

See bold! That's why and because of that I would not want them in the Big Sky Conference.

gtapp wrote:

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:As a fan of science fiction, I'm often preoccupied with the question of "what if...". Indeed that is how many sci-fi stories begin. They just ask what if something were to happen and what the reaction of that would be. Hence my thoughts about the Big Sky and San Diego. Now I'm not saying that any of this is happening or that there are any kinds of rumors, I just have this question of "what if" to help explore other questions I have regarding conference realignment as a whole and the admission to conferences.

When I look at a map of FCS programs in the US, the only program in the west that is not part of the Big Sky is San Diego. Why? The last time realignment hit the Big Sky was when North Dakota, Southern Utah, Cal Poly, and UC Davis all joined. The latter two football only, and we almost got South Dakota. Yet, San Diego was not in that conversation, and no where have I seen any kind of discussion about San Diego in the Big Sky. Currently, they are in the Pioneer League. A league that is centralized in the Midwest and Southeast, with San Diego as the lone outlier. Indeed, the geographic fit for San Diego is rather confusing, much in the same way West Virgina is for the Big 12 or San Diego State was going to be, had they gone to the Big East with Boise State. So why is San Diego in the Pioneer and not the Big Sky? A couple of reasons I can think of have to do with the school it self. First, the school is a private Catholic institution. All current Big Sky institutions are public (with the exception of Hartford, which is only a golf member). I suppose that if the PAC-12 will never take BYU because it's a private Mormon school, there may be a similar reason to not take San Diego. And second, San Diego does not offer scholarships for players, just as all the other Pioneer League schools don't. But, honestly, I don't find those compelling reason to not have San Diego in the conference.

Consider that if San Diego was in the Big Sky, we would be at an even 14 teams for football, have another school in California, and have a recruiting hotbed more accessible to all schools. I really don't see a reason not to. Then that leads me to the Big Sky wanting them. It would be about what they have to offer to the conference as a whole. Again, better access to Southern California recruiting and a massive TV market. As far as the benefits for San Diego, they could easily cut a lot of travel costs by leaving the Pioneer for a better geographical fit. Again, back to West Virginia, they've been hit hard by all the traveling they've had to do.

And the fact of the matter is that one day, soon I think, the PAC-12 will expand and become the PAC-14/16. They may go for Texas and Oklahoma like before, but I'm 99% sure that if they don't get a school east of New Mexico, they will turn to the Mountain West. Schools like Boise State and Hawaii will be prime targets. But no matter what schools they take, it will reduce the number of Mountain West schools to under 12, meaning that the Mountain West can't have a conference championship game. And we know they want to keep one because of the extra money it brings into the conference. Idaho and New Mexico State are logical fits for expansion in that regard, but eventually they will look to poach the Big Sky. Schools like Eastern Washington, Montana, and Montana State are likely to exit if such an opportunity presents itself. I would find it unlikely that the Big Sky wouldn't want to expand, even if it loses only two schools. So where does the Big Sky go to replenish it's teams? North Dakota State? South Dakota? D2? It seems that San Diego would be a logical choice.

So why is San Diego not in the Big Sky? If the Big Sky should expand, should they go for San Diego? And, what is preventing San Diego from leaving the Pioneer?

I know this is a lot to digest, but I really think that this one school, coupled with realignment, opens up a lot of questions. And it's just fun to think about these things. Conference realignment always has me feeling excited!

See bold! That's why and because of that I would not want them in the Big Sky Conference.

So what I'm hearing is that because they don't offer scholarships to their players, they don't belong. Why?

Where to start......
San Diego state will not.be a BSC team without scholarships. When they do, if ever or when Cal State Norhridge brings back football, we are not getting them to move up. Other schools in California have been discussed as better move up options for the BSC IF we add more football only programs in the future.

Idaho will be relegated to FCS at the end of the 2017 seaon when Coastal Carolina becomes a football member of the Sun Belt. The will cry, beg, and posture to NCAA and Mountain West (PAC 12/14 won't even have a meeting with them) for relief but alas, crying gets you nothing. They will be forced to humbly request BSC to take them back and we will. They will bottom feed for a decade before being a serious football member in the BSC.

Mountain West for UM and MSU ? Not unless both schools get a whole new level of Boosters. Say about $10m more year in financial support. Not likely. So until the NCAA figure out a better revenue sharing plan (never will happen) for the mid majors or truly splits out a mid majors tier, drop the thought of moving out of FCS.

PAC 12 expansion? No one from Mountain West or BWC will be asked to move up. Move on to next discussion. BYU will get asked to join and will to get into the money mix for playoffs. The only reason they haven't entertained it before is they don't need the PAC 12 for TV money, they are a financial money maker. They rejected the PAC 12 overtures a few years ago because the 12 wanted to be a share of their revenue.

Dental Washington, maybe. A couple of other schools have been wanting to make the jump to FCS and the BSC and I am sure someone will correctly recall the better candidates than I can.

The BSC also has to watch out for getting to big and alienating some of our member institutions. We could go the way of the WAC if we get to many teams and they perceive that a North and South division should just be two separate conferences. Getting San Diego to move up could lead to the four California teams telling the.Montana schools (and EWU) it's to damn cold to play in Montana in November.

As for the automatic tourney bids, the non scholarship schools rarely will ever make it past the first round but let's face it, the whole reason for the expanded playoff schedule wasn't to let the Pioneer league play a game but to get more revenue from the playoffs for the NCAA. They could care less who plays, just that they play. That is why the two traditionally non competitive non scholarship conferences chose to opt out of the automatic bids and to play each other for a $1m purse for their conferences that the NCAA playoffs would never get them in a million years.

So don't forget New Mexico State may try to come back after the fall of Idaho fro grace and lets just let this topic die in piece for about 4 more years until the next idiot brings up the option to join the PAC 12.

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:

gtapp wrote:

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:As a fan of science fiction, I'm often preoccupied with the question of "what if...". Indeed that is how many sci-fi stories begin. They just ask what if something were to happen and what the reaction of that would be. Hence my thoughts about the Big Sky and San Diego. Now I'm not saying that any of this is happening or that there are any kinds of rumors, I just have this question of "what if" to help explore other questions I have regarding conference realignment as a whole and the admission to conferences.

When I look at a map of FCS programs in the US, the only program in the west that is not part of the Big Sky is San Diego. Why? The last time realignment hit the Big Sky was when North Dakota, Southern Utah, Cal Poly, and UC Davis all joined. The latter two football only, and we almost got South Dakota. Yet, San Diego was not in that conversation, and no where have I seen any kind of discussion about San Diego in the Big Sky. Currently, they are in the Pioneer League. A league that is centralized in the Midwest and Southeast, with San Diego as the lone outlier. Indeed, the geographic fit for San Diego is rather confusing, much in the same way West Virgina is for the Big 12 or San Diego State was going to be, had they gone to the Big East with Boise State. So why is San Diego in the Pioneer and not the Big Sky? A couple of reasons I can think of have to do with the school it self. First, the school is a private Catholic institution. All current Big Sky institutions are public (with the exception of Hartford, which is only a golf member). I suppose that if the PAC-12 will never take BYU because it's a private Mormon school, there may be a similar reason to not take San Diego. And second, San Diego does not offer scholarships for players, just as all the other Pioneer League schools don't. But, honestly, I don't find those compelling reason to not have San Diego in the conference.

Consider that if San Diego was in the Big Sky, we would be at an even 14 teams for football, have another school in California, and have a recruiting hotbed more accessible to all schools. I really don't see a reason not to. Then that leads me to the Big Sky wanting them. It would be about what they have to offer to the conference as a whole. Again, better access to Southern California recruiting and a massive TV market. As far as the benefits for San Diego, they could easily cut a lot of travel costs by leaving the Pioneer for a better geographical fit. Again, back to West Virginia, they've been hit hard by all the traveling they've had to do.

And the fact of the matter is that one day, soon I think, the PAC-12 will expand and become the PAC-14/16. They may go for Texas and Oklahoma like before, but I'm 99% sure that if they don't get a school east of New Mexico, they will turn to the Mountain West. Schools like Boise State and Hawaii will be prime targets. But no matter what schools they take, it will reduce the number of Mountain West schools to under 12, meaning that the Mountain West can't have a conference championship game. And we know they want to keep one because of the extra money it brings into the conference. Idaho and New Mexico State are logical fits for expansion in that regard, but eventually they will look to poach the Big Sky. Schools like Eastern Washington, Montana, and Montana State are likely to exit if such an opportunity presents itself. I would find it unlikely that the Big Sky wouldn't want to expand, even if it loses only two schools. So where does the Big Sky go to replenish it's teams? North Dakota State? South Dakota? D2? It seems that San Diego would be a logical choice.

So why is San Diego not in the Big Sky? If the Big Sky should expand, should they go for San Diego? And, what is preventing San Diego from leaving the Pioneer?

I know this is a lot to digest, but I really think that this one school, coupled with realignment, opens up a lot of questions. And it's just fun to think about these things. Conference realignment always has me feeling excited!

See bold! That's why and because of that I would not want them in the Big Sky Conference.

So what I'm hearing is that because they don't offer scholarships to their players, they don't belong. Why?

Because you can't bring in the same level of talent as a school that offers scholarships. Thus you can't compete.

Occasionally a talented kid will slip through the cracks, but by and large, a non-scholly school has to wait until a kid has been passed over by FBS, FCS, and even D2 schools before that kid goes to a school he has to pay for out of pocket.
So their talent level won't be able to compete in the Big Sky.

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:

gtapp wrote:

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:As a fan of science fiction, I'm often preoccupied with the question of "what if...". Indeed that is how many sci-fi stories begin. They just ask what if something were to happen and what the reaction of that would be. Hence my thoughts about the Big Sky and San Diego. Now I'm not saying that any of this is happening or that there are any kinds of rumors, I just have this question of "what if" to help explore other questions I have regarding conference realignment as a whole and the admission to conferences.

When I look at a map of FCS programs in the US, the only program in the west that is not part of the Big Sky is San Diego. Why? The last time realignment hit the Big Sky was when North Dakota, Southern Utah, Cal Poly, and UC Davis all joined. The latter two football only, and we almost got South Dakota. Yet, San Diego was not in that conversation, and no where have I seen any kind of discussion about San Diego in the Big Sky. Currently, they are in the Pioneer League. A league that is centralized in the Midwest and Southeast, with San Diego as the lone outlier. Indeed, the geographic fit for San Diego is rather confusing, much in the same way West Virgina is for the Big 12 or San Diego State was going to be, had they gone to the Big East with Boise State. So why is San Diego in the Pioneer and not the Big Sky? A couple of reasons I can think of have to do with the school it self. First, the school is a private Catholic institution. All current Big Sky institutions are public (with the exception of Hartford, which is only a golf member). I suppose that if the PAC-12 will never take BYU because it's a private Mormon school, there may be a similar reason to not take San Diego. And second, San Diego does not offer scholarships for players, just as all the other Pioneer League schools don't. But, honestly, I don't find those compelling reason to not have San Diego in the conference.

Consider that if San Diego was in the Big Sky, we would be at an even 14 teams for football, have another school in California, and have a recruiting hotbed more accessible to all schools. I really don't see a reason not to. Then that leads me to the Big Sky wanting them. It would be about what they have to offer to the conference as a whole. Again, better access to Southern California recruiting and a massive TV market. As far as the benefits for San Diego, they could easily cut a lot of travel costs by leaving the Pioneer for a better geographical fit. Again, back to West Virginia, they've been hit hard by all the traveling they've had to do.

And the fact of the matter is that one day, soon I think, the PAC-12 will expand and become the PAC-14/16. They may go for Texas and Oklahoma like before, but I'm 99% sure that if they don't get a school east of New Mexico, they will turn to the Mountain West. Schools like Boise State and Hawaii will be prime targets. But no matter what schools they take, it will reduce the number of Mountain West schools to under 12, meaning that the Mountain West can't have a conference championship game. And we know they want to keep one because of the extra money it brings into the conference. Idaho and New Mexico State are logical fits for expansion in that regard, but eventually they will look to poach the Big Sky. Schools like Eastern Washington, Montana, and Montana State are likely to exit if such an opportunity presents itself. I would find it unlikely that the Big Sky wouldn't want to expand, even if it loses only two schools. So where does the Big Sky go to replenish it's teams? North Dakota State? South Dakota? D2? It seems that San Diego would be a logical choice.

So why is San Diego not in the Big Sky? If the Big Sky should expand, should they go for San Diego? And, what is preventing San Diego from leaving the Pioneer?

I know this is a lot to digest, but I really think that this one school, coupled with realignment, opens up a lot of questions. And it's just fun to think about these things. Conference realignment always has me feeling excited!

See bold! That's why and because of that I would not want them in the Big Sky Conference.

So what I'm hearing is that because they don't offer scholarships to their players, they don't belong. Why?

Did you miss what 91 said? You are never going to get the same type of guys without the scholarships. Just look at the pioneer record when they step out of conference. They can't compete.

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:So what I'm hearing is that because they don't offer scholarships to their players, they don't belong. Why?

The playoff field was increased from 16 to 20 to 24 in order to allow the "weaker" conferences (i.e. the Pioneer) an auto-berth so that they can participate in the playoffs. They basically never got to be in the playoffs as they weren't (aren't) competitive with the full scholarship conferences. If I remember correctly San Diego went undefeated one year when Harbaugh was their coach, before the playoff field expanded and they still didn't get an invite because their strength of schedule was considered bad.

Look at their conference champ - Dayton - in the playoffs last weekend: not ranked in the polls, beaten 24-7 by unranked, 6-5 Western Illinois (3rd place in a 3 way tie in the MVFC) at home with an official attendance of 997. Fairly typical for the top non-scholarship teams. I'm not sure, but wouldn't be surprised to find that the Pioneer has never won a playoff game.

To generalize, non-scholarship teams want a football team but don't want to put much priority/resources into it. Since they have to play football at D1 if they want their other sports at D1 level (typically basketball), they go to FCS rather than FBS. Then they cut their costs further by not offering scholarships.

catbooster wrote:

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:So what I'm hearing is that because they don't offer scholarships to their players, they don't belong. Why?

The playoff field was increased from 16 to 20 to 24 in order to allow the "weaker" conferences (i.e. the Pioneer) an auto-berth so that they can participate in the playoffs. They basically never got to be in the playoffs as they weren't (aren't) competitive with the full scholarship conferences. If I remember correctly San Diego went undefeated one year when Harbaugh was their coach, before the playoff field expanded and they still didn't get an invite because their strength of schedule was considered bad.

Look at their conference champ - Dayton - in the playoffs last weekend: not ranked in the polls, beaten 24-7 by unranked, 6-5 Western Illinois (3rd place in a 3 way tie in the MVFC) at home with an official attendance of 997. Fairly typical for the top non-scholarship teams. I'm not sure, but wouldn't be surprised to find that the Pioneer has never won a playoff game.

To generalize, non-scholarship teams want a football team but don't want to put much priority/resources into it. Since they have to play football at D1 if they want their other sports at D1 level (typically basketball), they go to FCS rather than FBS. Then they cut their costs further by not offering scholarships.

Virtually this entire post is how the Power 5 schools and their fanbase view the Plus 5 and all the small college teams. Most of the small college teams have stadiums similar to a Texas High School with the exception of a few in the Ivy League. The HBCU schools have their post season bowl game that some years have had more in attendance in that one game than all the small college playoff games combined (actual seats filled.)

Cat Grad wrote:

catbooster wrote:

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:So what I'm hearing is that because they don't offer scholarships to their players, they don't belong. Why?

The playoff field was increased from 16 to 20 to 24 in order to allow the "weaker" conferences (i.e. the Pioneer) an auto-berth so that they can participate in the playoffs. They basically never got to be in the playoffs as they weren't (aren't) competitive with the full scholarship conferences. If I remember correctly San Diego went undefeated one year when Harbaugh was their coach, before the playoff field expanded and they still didn't get an invite because their strength of schedule was considered bad.

Look at their conference champ - Dayton - in the playoffs last weekend: not ranked in the polls, beaten 24-7 by unranked, 6-5 Western Illinois (3rd place in a 3 way tie in the MVFC) at home with an official attendance of 997. Fairly typical for the top non-scholarship teams. I'm not sure, but wouldn't be surprised to find that the Pioneer has never won a playoff game.

To generalize, non-scholarship teams want a football team but don't want to put much priority/resources into it. Since they have to play football at D1 if they want their other sports at D1 level (typically basketball), they go to FCS rather than FBS. Then they cut their costs further by not offering scholarships.

Virtually this entire post is how the Power 5 schools and their fanbase view the Plus 5 and all the small college teams. Most of the small college teams have stadiums similar to a Texas High School with the exception of a few in the Ivy League. The HBCU schools have their post season bowl game that some years have had more in attendance in that one game than all the small college playoff games combined (actual seats filled.)

Not exactly. The power 5 and all the other FBS conferences have 85 scholarship players, so it's a fair playing field from that perspective.

91catAlum wrote:

Cat Grad wrote:

catbooster wrote:

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:So what I'm hearing is that because they don't offer scholarships to their players, they don't belong. Why?

The playoff field was increased from 16 to 20 to 24 in order to allow the "weaker" conferences (i.e. the Pioneer) an auto-berth so that they can participate in the playoffs. They basically never got to be in the playoffs as they weren't (aren't) competitive with the full scholarship conferences. If I remember correctly San Diego went undefeated one year when Harbaugh was their coach, before the playoff field expanded and they still didn't get an invite because their strength of schedule was considered bad.

Look at their conference champ - Dayton - in the playoffs last weekend: not ranked in the polls, beaten 24-7 by unranked, 6-5 Western Illinois (3rd place in a 3 way tie in the MVFC) at home with an official attendance of 997. Fairly typical for the top non-scholarship teams. I'm not sure, but wouldn't be surprised to find that the Pioneer has never won a playoff game.

To generalize, non-scholarship teams want a football team but don't want to put much priority/resources into it. Since they have to play football at D1 if they want their other sports at D1 level (typically basketball), they go to FCS rather than FBS. Then they cut their costs further by not offering scholarships.

Virtually this entire post is how the Power 5 schools and their fanbase view the Plus 5 and all the small college teams. Most of the small college teams have stadiums similar to a Texas High School with the exception of a few in the Ivy League. The HBCU schools have their post season bowl game that some years have had more in attendance in that one game than all the small college playoff games combined (actual seats filled.)

Not exactly. The power 5 and all the other FBS conferences have 85 scholarship players, so it's a fair playing field from that perspective.

Really? You seriously believe that? Check the strength and conditioning data from a Power 5 school second and third on the depth chart players. Say the running backs in those schools and bounce it off our defensive linemen for example. The only variable is once in a while you'll have a certain religion dominating the rosters of some schools whereby grown men are playing against 17-23 year old kids. Danny Kannell was 28 freaken years old his senior year of college, but that was not the point of my statement. Hell, the Ivy League doesn't offer scholarships and they do okay against the Patriot and that other northeast conference. I simply wished to show the disparity and show the irony in the statement to the effect they only want a team. Most of my former colleagues would argue if you're not interested in competing at the highest level you are simply participating.

Cat Grad wrote:

91catAlum wrote:

Cat Grad wrote:

catbooster wrote:

GoldenBobcat86 wrote:So what I'm hearing is that because they don't offer scholarships to their players, they don't belong. Why?

The playoff field was increased from 16 to 20 to 24 in order to allow the "weaker" conferences (i.e. the Pioneer) an auto-berth so that they can participate in the playoffs. They basically never got to be in the playoffs as they weren't (aren't) competitive with the full scholarship conferences. If I remember correctly San Diego went undefeated one year when Harbaugh was their coach, before the playoff field expanded and they still didn't get an invite because their strength of schedule was considered bad.

Look at their conference champ - Dayton - in the playoffs last weekend: not ranked in the polls, beaten 24-7 by unranked, 6-5 Western Illinois (3rd place in a 3 way tie in the MVFC) at home with an official attendance of 997. Fairly typical for the top non-scholarship teams. I'm not sure, but wouldn't be surprised to find that the Pioneer has never won a playoff game.

To generalize, non-scholarship teams want a football team but don't want to put much priority/resources into it. Since they have to play football at D1 if they want their other sports at D1 level (typically basketball), they go to FCS rather than FBS. Then they cut their costs further by not offering scholarships.

Virtually this entire post is how the Power 5 schools and their fanbase view the Plus 5 and all the small college teams. Most of the small college teams have stadiums similar to a Texas High School with the exception of a few in the Ivy League. The HBCU schools have their post season bowl game that some years have had more in attendance in that one game than all the small college playoff games combined (actual seats filled.)

Not exactly. The power 5 and all the other FBS conferences have 85 scholarship players, so it's a fair playing field from that perspective.

Really? You seriously believe that? Check the strength and conditioning data from a Power 5 school second and third on the depth chart players. Say the running backs in those schools and bounce it off our defensive linemen for example. The only variable is once in a while you'll have a certain religion dominating the rosters of some schools whereby grown men are playing against 17-23 year old kids. Danny Kannell was 28 freaken years old his senior year of college, but that was not the point of my statement. Hell, the Ivy League doesn't offer scholarships and they do okay against the Patriot and that other northeast conference. I simply wished to show the disparity and show the irony in the statement to the effect they only want a team. Most of my former colleagues would argue if you're not interested in competing at the highest level you are simply participating.

So, did you get the ribbon or a trophy?