Conference realignment benefitting us

[Globetrotter]

I am not sure I would have considered going to bowling green if it was Division 2 in football.

[Class of 61]

As the "senior citizen" of this group, I can tell you that we were DAMN excited when BG beat Delaware (then #1) and ultimately won the 1959 "SMALL COLLEGE" national championship...the next year, we were close to repeating but OU knocked us off and THEY became the NATIONAL Champs.

As Mike said, those guys, many of whom graduated with me in '61, were proud of their accomplishments, and rightfully so. BTW, I didn't pick BG because we were a "small college" team then (today's equiv. to D-1AA, FBS whatever).

[hammb]

I do not want to drop from I-A either. But I have to admit that I am disheartened by the "conditional" support for OUR Falcons. I would hope that if (and that's a big if) we dropped to I-AA (just as we did in 1982) that all of us would still stand behind OUR team.

In my travels, when I begin to speak of my alma mater, I am constantly asked two things:

1. Is that in Kentucky?
2. Are you guys Division I?

The luster of Div I is a bit lost on the MAC. Outside of MAC/Big Ten country, very few people know who any of the teams are, let alone our D-I status.

I don't want to drop, but will remain in a "Frenzy" if we do.

It seems odd to be having this conversation on the day I did just renew my season tickets, but it doesn't change my feelings on the subject.

I will always root for BG. I will always adamantly root for their football program. I'd probably still come to a game or two a year and of course still talk about them on this message board if they dropped down a level. But my support would not be at the same level it is now. I wouldn't be buying season tickets every year and be super excited for it.

The bottom line is that if BG were to drop to 1AA I would probably rather sit at home and watch 1A football on TV than 1AA football live. Sounds shitty to say, but that's where I'm at. Hopefully I won't ever have to worry about making that decision.

[Dayons_Den]

For arguments sake, hammb, I think a pretty strong case could be made that we are in Division-I FBS in name only. Realistically, until an all inclusive tournament is implemented, we can never have a George Mason or Butler in Division I football. We'll always play for second tier bowls, even with a stacked team we'll be lucky to make the Independence Bowl like Miami did with Big Ben. We'll play for GMAC Bowls and MAC Championships and hope for the occasional upset at Northwestern or Missouri in the same way Appalachian State or Georgia Southern plays for Southern Conference titles, the chance to upset South Carolina or LSU but at the end of their year they can host playoff games and advance in a tourney.

[hammb]

For arguments sake, hammb, I think a pretty strong case could be made that we are in Division-I FBS in name only. Realistically, until an all inclusive tournament is implemented, we can never have a George Mason or Butler in Division I football. We'll always play for second tier bowls, even with a stacked team we'll be lucky to make the Independence Bowl like Miami did with Big Ben. We'll play for GMAC Bowls and MAC Championships and hope for the occasional upset at Northwestern or Missouri in the same way Appalachian State or Georgia Southern plays for Southern Conference titles, the chance to upset South Carolina or LSU but at the end of their year they can host playoff games and advance in a tourney.

I suppose, but that name means a lot, IMO.

For starters the name dictates how many scholarships we're allowed to award. So we should always have better depth than any 1AA team.

Beyond that, we are consistently winning recruiting battles against lower tier BCS teams, and I cannot think of anytime we've ever lost a recruit to a 1AA school. We recruit on a different plane than any of the 1AA schools do.

The result is that our team is a better on the field product than any 1AA team is. We should consistently be better than the best 1AA teams in the country, and I think that we pretty much always are.

Moreover, the name that we are playing D1A does still make us eligible for a BCS bid. Yeah, we are mostly playing for conference titles and midlevel bowl games, but the fact does remain that we are eligible to be included in the BCS. Yes, we'd need to put together a better team than we've ever done in the past. Yes, we'd need to have an undefeated season against a more difficult OOC schedule than we generally play. Still, we could conceivably play in a BCS bowl game...something that would never happen if we dropped to 1AA (or a new mythical mid-tier division). That chance still means something to me...actually it means more than something to me.

[Falconfreak90]

Well, I watch all levels of college football...just love the sport no matter what level.

Let's get the ball teed up!

[SB-50]

Well, I watch all levels of college football...just love the sport no matter what level.

Let's get the ball teed up!

FALCON-A-RIGHT !!!!!







.

[MACMAN]

Who knows. We may all be in a merged super conference of unwanted D1 teams by 2012.

I'm more curious how we may lose a Big Ten game here and there, if that league expands enough.

you can guarantee that we loose those games, those OCC games for them will be played in one of the other 3 BCS conferences. Honestly this move needed to happen for multiple reasons, one of the largest drivers is a play off, the other keeping it all in the family. I would hope the MAC comish is speaking with other soon to be left out conferences so that our MACC can play for a National title against other Conference Champs.
I know some will be upset by this, and others may disagree, but honestly, while it was fun playing those team, we were never going to be allowed to play for any kind of title other than the MAC. I think a move like this that separates the big schools off, will help make MAC football more interesting and better attended in the end.
LAstly I would wager to bet that you see for the newly formed big 4 conferences a rather large change on the horizon. That being a large increase in the number of scholarship a school may offer.

[FalconTurf]

The 4 Mega conferences may happen but I don't think those schools will want to step into conference play without a couple of scrimmages against the MAC and such. Currently expansion means the BigTen only needs 5 division games and could schedule more non-conf. games. Probably 3 cross-over games will be included and therefore nothing in the scheduling really changes except no more mid-season non-conf. games.

The big boys already have the money to provide more scholarships but they won't because they already have difficulty balancing the female-to-male ratio on scholarships.

It would make more sense to me if you would suggest they may pay their "Mega-Athletes" than have more of them.

[Flipper]

You'd have difficulty paying athletes for the same reason you'd have difficulty adding scholarships...Title IX.
You can't circumvent Title IX by only paying athletes from revenue sports...no one has ever successfully challenged Title IX using revenue generation as a criteria... and you can't circumvent it by creating an orginization outside of the NCAA because Title IX is a Federal mandate...it doesn't fall under the purview of the NCAA.

You'd have to move college football to Mexico or Bermuda or some other place in Asia to do that...

[h2oville rocket]

You'd have difficulty paying athletes for the same reason you'd have difficulty adding scholarships...Title IX.
You can't circumvent Title IX by only paying athletes from revenue sports...no one has ever successfully challenged Title IX using revenue generation as a criteria... and you can't circumvent it by creating an orginization outside of the NCAA because Title IX is a Federal mandate...it doesn't fall under the purview of the NCAA.

You'd have to move college football to Mexico or Bermuda or some other place in Asia to do that...

I ran track in Hamilton Stadium- way too small for even a BG-UT game. They had trouble stuffing a few thousand in for the cricket.

[MACMAN]

Exactly why they would play thier OCC schedule against non(big4) opponents, they will have no need to contest with MAC schools
and as far as increasing scholarships title 9 is no issue for them. They add say 20 football rides, they can easily add 20 women s scholarships in other women sports and maintain full compliance. The restriction in scholarships came about in part to title 9 and in it consideration for the bottom D1 football schools and to help the bottom gain some better athletes. When this change takes effect I fully expect to see nearly all players in those conferences on full rides and the criteria for entering those conferences very, prohibitive creating the much needed separation we lack now, and maintaining it well into the foreseeable future.

[FalconTurf]

Exactly why they would play thier OCC schedule against non(big4) opponents, they will have no need to contest with MAC schools

They need to add wins to the Big4 resume. They need wins to save coaches and maintain alumni relations. At the same time there may be debate on whether the best of the rest could beat the bottom of the Big4 if they never actually played also harming the reputation and income potential of the total Big4.

BG makes Ohio State the same money with no return trip and less likely to be beat. 1 or 2 big non-conf. games sure. Not all 4 because then they will only have 6 home games which also could result in losses on the road along with lost income.

Does not make sense in the least for the top 50 teams to beat each other up every week unless 16 of them make the playoffs like the NFL.

College football is like short track bicycle racing - no need to ride the whole race full speed.

[MACMAN]

Once the realignment takes hold I seriously doubt they will play MAC schools. They will likely have each conference paired off with another ie North and North and south and south and the teams in the North will play occ games against the south as an example of teams they other wise would not play, they will not need nor will they want to play MAc schools. It will be better, we will play schools that we would other wise not play that are at the same competitive level. It will make for better football as a whole.

[daspollak]

Once the realignment takes hold I seriously doubt they will play MAC schools. They will likely have each conference paired off with another ie North and North and south and south and the teams in the North will play occ games against the south as an example of teams they other wise would not play, they will not need nor will they want to play MAc schools. It will be better, we will play schools that we would other wise not play that are at the same competitive level. It will make for better football as a whole.

I disagree, with super conferences a team no longer needs to schedule an elite OOC game. They will claim they get those in their conference. They will want to tune up against MAC, Sun Belt, and C-USA teams. This allows us to collect a paycheck game. I hope if realignment does occur our champion will get the opportunity to play a BCS member team in a fun yet exciting bowl game. Bowl season needs to be more meaningful, but that is a discussion for another thread.