End of FBS v FCS?

[JackJD]

The Big Ten Commissioner was on Sports Center this morning, participating in a discussion about the FBS playoff system. One point he brought up was lack of consistency on how the FBS Conferences scheduled games, determine conference championships etc. He pointed out how the Big Ten will only schedule FBS non-conference opponents while other conferences have one or more FCS games on schedules (example given was NC State playing two FCS games). The panel seemed to agree there was merit to trying to get some consistency in how conferences schedule etc. The B1G Commissioner said the playoff selection committee was sending a clear signal that non-conference games mattered--scheduling a school with fewer scholarships hurts a school's chances in playoff selection.

The end of FBS v FCS is on the horizon.

If the MVFC moved up to FBS, that would require the money for 22 additional scholarships (don't forget to add COA). Divide a $500,000 payoff by 22. Lots of additional costs over just scholarships. If MVFC stayed FCS and gets locked out of FBS games, the 350,000 to 500,000 pay days end. So schools depending on getting a money game each season have big budget challenges.

I think a natural consequence of the FBS playoff selection process will be what the B1G has done: end FBS v FCS games. FCS athletic administrations have some heavy-thinking ahead. Fortunately for SDSU we have football facilities that give us a chance at increasing revenue which will be critical no matter where we go in the future. I wouldn't want to have just a 10,000 seat facility right now.

[West-River_Jack]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

Will all FBS schools stop playing and paying FCS schools, or only the ones that think they have an outside chance of getting the attention of the playoff committee? There may be a number of the others that remain willing to pay in order to play at home.

[TK22867]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

The end of FBS v FCS is on the horizon.

Why? Because the B1G Commissioner said so? I disagree. Here's why:

Fact: Three (3) of the four (4) teams that made the CFP last year had an FCS win, with the exclusion being Ohio State.
Fact: Each of the four (4) teams currently slated for the CFP each have an FCS win. This includes a B1G Iowa.

IMO, in the eyes of the CFP committee, one (1) FCS win does not matter as long as you take care of business against everyone else. See bullet points above that backup my claim.

UNC has two (2) FCS wins his year. If they beat Clemson tonight, they are the ACC champs. What happens if they throttle Clemson?

If UNC are the ACC champs and are selected for the CFP playoff tomorrow with two (2) FCS wins I think we can officially close those door on the "end of FBS vs. FCS" discussion.

[JACKGUYII]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

Not at the same level of payout.

[JackJD]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

I agree with JackguyII--pay days are going to shrink. In my opinion the FBS games are going to get harder to find and those FBS schools wanting to schedule FCS will not be willing to pay big bucks. The low-end FBS schools who may be willing to schedule FCS are likely the schools who will take over those spots on power conference schools' schedules that formerly were filled with FCS games. The power conf. schools will have to take a little more risk --at least in theory -- in playing low end FBS schools in order to have an all-FBS schedule.

[TK22867]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

I agree with JackguyII--pay days are going to shrink. In my opinion the FBS games are going to get harder to find and those FBS schools wanting to schedule FCS will not be willing to pay big bucks. The low-end FBS schools who may be willing to schedule FCS are likely the schools who will take over those spots on power conference schools' schedules that formerly were filled with FCS games. The power conf. schools will have to take a little more risk --at least in theory -- in playing low end FBS schools in order to have an all-FBS schedule.

I don't understand your position here. Why do you think FBS schools will no longer schedule FCS schools? Why would the pay days shrink?

Unless teams are eliminated from the CFP because they schedule FCS schools (which I showed you has not happened yet) I'm struggling to understand your reasoning.

[goon]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

I think there is a balance that needs to get figured out. Sort of like market adjustments. Some teams in the power conferences might need the easy wins to keep undefeated and get the extra home game. Some might need to play all fbs to streghten their schedule. Others will do what's finacially best for the school unless the conference steps in.

[Nidaros]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

I think FCS game(s) give the big boys one or more extra home games. Teams like UNL who draw a full house no matter who they play, are going to have to set their revenue projects lower if they say absolutely no FCS games. UNL is now in the Big 10 and no doubt will have conversations with the Commish.

[SturgisJeff]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

the power conferences may quit FCS games so get used to the MAC conference type FBS teams

[Theee Catrabbit]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

The Big Ten Commissioner was on Sports Center this morning, participating in a discussion about the FBS playoff system.

ugh, I'm proud that you were able to power thru watching that. I could barely stand seeing and listening to him during the trophy presentation last night. Of course I was hoping the Hawkeyes would have won so maybe I was sour.......

[jack power]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

ugh, I'm proud that you were able to power thru watching that. I could barely stand seeing and listening to him during the trophy presentation last night. Of course I was hoping the Hawkeyes would have won so maybe I was sour.......

That trophy presentation was painful to watch. Delaney should have stopped drinking in the 3rd. qtr. Amateur

[jackmd]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

FBS is going to go away. The "power 5" already run the playoff. Soon enough we will be seeing a different league of football. I'm not sure how they will fill their schedules or involve the NCAA but it won't be like it is now. There will be payouts but not to current FCS programs. At least I don't think so.

Will the no "power 5" absorb the top FCS conferences and the rest move back to a DII designation? I don't know but I think its likely. MVFC schools will be in the second level forever and ever and ever.

[da_coach]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

Agree with jackmd.

However... expansion is possible as these Conferences can get bigger.
SEC, ACC, and Big 10 have 14 members.

Pac 12, has 12. And the Big 12 - has 10.

So, theoretically, there could be a few more schools added...but they would have to join a Power 5 conference.

Also, Independents... BYU and Notre Dame (also Army...but they could be move 'down') need to be accounted for someway.

[rabidrabbit]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

FCS games for FBS schools is the ultimate "pay to play" guaranteed home game. The "G-5" will start demanding either a higher $$, or some home/home or 2-1 deals + $$. Therefore, there will always be a market for FCS teams to play FBS. The problem is getting to be that consistent FCS play-off teams can't get the lesser FBS schools to schedule them because FCS schools beat the lesser FBS teams. Right now, NDSU has a top 5 FBS win streak (currently 5-0 vs FBS). Portland St may have trouble getting FBS teams to play after 2 FBS wins.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: End of FBS v FCS?

IMO, FCS games have zero impact on the FBS national championship in its current format. If Iowa (5) had beaten a G5 or even a P5 instead of Illinois State, they would still be out of the playoff.

For P5 schools this is what matters:

1-Make and win your conference championship game.
2-Go undeafeated or have 1 loss to a reputable program early in the season.

Do those 2 things and playing FCS doesn't matter. You will be in the field of 4.

If the playoff field is expanded, playing an FCS could make the difference between being in or out. Eventual playoff field expansion is what the Big 10 is concerned about with their attitude toward FCS.

A nightmare scenario in a hypothetically expanded playoff field actually happened in the Big 10 this year. Rutgers played an FCS (Norfolk State) and 2 teams that lost to an FCS (Washington State and Kansas). Then proceeded to spread that leprosy throughout league play. The difference in computer rankings could mean Northwestern (13) and Michigan (14) getting into a 12 team playoff field. It could mean the difference between the Big10 getting 3 or 5 teams in the field of 12.

And the Big10 was lucky Rutgers sucked in conference play.

The Pac12 (left out of the field of 4) felt the sting of 6 wins Washington State dealt out through conference play after losing to Portland State. It would be very, very interesting to see where Stanford (6) would have ended in the final polls without Washington's loss to an FCS dragging everyone's computer rankings down. I'm guessing all P5 conferences are doing or have done analysis in that regard.

In an expanded playoff field, all conferences would definitely push schools to drop FCS games.