FBS conference realignment

[texasstud28]

This may have been discussed but, assuming Lamar would join the FBS in the next few years, and UTSA's intentions, what are the chances of a new FBS conference made up of teams from our region?  Texas State, UTSA, Sam Houston State , Lamar, et al'.  There will definitely be some changes regardless of what other schools decide to do.

[badndn]

1. Lamar

2. UTSA

3. UNT

4. TSU

5. Ark St

6. ULM

7. ULL

8. LT

Not sure if you could get two others??

TCU, Rice, UH, SMU, UTEP would never leave their conferences because they could get BCS bids if undefeated seasons and in CUSA or MWC.

[texasstud28]

1. Lamar

2. UTSA

3. UNT

4. TSU

5. Ark St

6. ULM

7. ULL

8. LT

Not sure if you could get two others??

TCU, Rice, UH, SMU, UTEP would never leave their conferences because they could get BCS bids if undefeated seasons and in CUSA or MWC.

But would UNT, ArkSt, ULM, ULL, and LaTech leave their conferences? It may or may not be economically feasible.

[TexasTerror]

La Tech talks smack of ULL and ULM all the time. Their AD has even gone as far. There's no chance ULM and ULL leave their current situation to have any part of La Tech. This whole Independence Bowl has taken it to a whole new level.

Secondly, of the non-current FBS schools, UTSA is the most attractive. More so than TXST and Lamar. Their commitment to facilities is very intriguing, they are in a major city (which hurts TXST, who is squeezed between UTSA and Texas), they have a connection to a bowl game (home games at the Alamodome - home of the Alamo Bowl) and unlike the other two schools, have hosted NCAA championship events in basketball and volleyball. That does not hurt, from what I am told.

Someone on the TXST board brought up a good point, "I hate to say it, but I think that UTSA has a very similar situation to U of South Florida. USF got a football program that was starving for a football team in a way similar to San Antonio's current situation. Back when USF started their program several years ago, they immidiately had crowds averaging around 25,000. If this is what happens in San Antonio, they (UTSA) will be come a viable option for CUSA."

Third, SHSU's President has told the "inner circle" that there's no way SHSU would not join TXST and LU in a join up if those schools went that direction.

[texasstud28]

La Tech talks smack of ULL and ULM all the time. Their AD has even gone as far. There's no chance ULM and ULL leave their current situation to have any part of La Tech. This whole Independence Bowl has taken it to a whole new level.

Secondly, of the non-current FBS schools, UTSA is the most attractive. More so than TXST and Lamar. Their commitment to facilities is very intriguing, they are in a major city (which hurts TXST, who is squeezed between UTSA and Texas), they have a connection to a bowl game (home games at the Alamodome - home of the Alamo Bowl) and unlike the other two schools, have hosted NCAA championship events in basketball and volleyball. That does not hurt, from what I am told.

Someone on the TXST board brought up a good point, "I hate to say it, but I think that UTSA has a very similar situation to U of South Florida. USF got a football program that was starving for a football team in a way similar to San Antonio's current situation. Back when USF started their program several years ago, they immidiately had crowds averaging around 25,000. If this is what happens in San Antonio, they (UTSA) will be come a viable option for CUSA."

Third, SHSU's President has told the "inner circle" that there's no way SHSU would not join TXST and LU in a join up if those schools went that direction.

If SHSU isn't ready for FBS, Lamar isn't, either. This is kind of a moot point but an interesting topic.

[UNLV]

La Tech talks smack of ULL and ULM all the time. Their AD has even gone as far. There's no chance ULM and ULL leave their current situation to have any part of La Tech. This whole Independence Bowl has taken it to a whole new level.

Secondly, of the non-current FBS schools, UTSA is the most attractive. More so than TXST and Lamar. Their commitment to facilities is very intriguing, they are in a major city (which hurts TXST, who is squeezed between UTSA and Texas), they have a connection to a bowl game (home games at the Alamodome - home of the Alamo Bowl) and unlike the other two schools, have hosted NCAA championship events in basketball and volleyball. That does not hurt, from what I am told.

Someone on the TXST board brought up a good point, "I hate to say it, but I think that UTSA has a very similar situation to U of South Florida. USF got a football program that was starving for a football team in a way similar to San Antonio's current situation. Back when USF started their program several years ago, they immidiately had crowds averaging around 25,000. If this is what happens in San Antonio, they (UTSA) will be come a viable option for CUSA."

Third, SHSU's President has told the "inner circle" that there's no way SHSU would not join TXST and LU in a join up if those schools went that direction.

If SHSU isn't ready for FBS, Lamar isn't, either. This is kind of a moot point but an interesting topic.

There is no link bretween the schools. Lamar is ready when it is ready. Sam is ready when it is ready.

[Guest coachacola]

I think we've talked about the different scenarios many times, and with UTSA still a couple of years from playing football, we won't know what will happen for at least 3 or 4 years from now at the earliest.

[badndn]

1. Lamar

2. UTSA

3. UNT

4. TSU

5. Ark St

6. ULM

7. ULL

8. LT

Not sure if you could get two others??

TCU, Rice, UH, SMU, UTEP would never leave their conferences because they could get BCS bids if undefeated seasons and in CUSA or MWC.

But would UNT, ArkSt, ULM, ULL, and LaTech leave their conferences? It may or may not be economically feasible.

Yes, but with the exception of LT they are in a conference that wouldn't be any different than the new conference. They would actually benefit with the travel. If a WAC, CUSA or MWC team went undefeated they would have a serious shot at a big money BCS game. If a Sunbelt team goes undefeated, they get to go to the New Orleans bowl (no shot at a BCS game).

I agree 100% that UTSA is most attractive as a FBS school. I can see big things from a football starved (and crazed) big market town like UTSA.

[TexasTerror]

There is no link bretween the schools. Lamar is ready when it is ready. Sam is ready when it is ready.

There is a link. SHSU compares itself to the other schools in the Texas State University System. Of the schools, SHSU has been most open about not having a flagship and has even taken the steps to protect their name. Lamar doesn't care as much as SHSU has shown, but the Huntsville school is very protective about it's university and it's standing amongst peer institutions.

You may recall in the 1980s, that all the schools that are comparable (outside of Lamar, who was at a different level at the time) moved together up the collegiate athletic ladder (SWT, SHSU, SFA). I really believe that the schools would do that again if it came to it with TXST possibly having a head start, but to soon be joined.

[Green Menace]

If a Sunbelt team goes undefeated, they get to go to the New Orleans bowl (no shot at a BCS game).

That's wrong.  It would be a long shot and it depends on a Sunbelt teams strength of schedule, and how badly they beat all of their opponents, but they could go to a higher ranked bowl or possibly a BCS bowl.  True, the stars would have to align perfectly, but it can happen.  It happened to Boise State. 

As to Louisiana Tech joining this proposed "new conference", NO WAY!  They are in the WAC and the WAC is a solid conference, although somewhat top heavy.

[texasstud28]

La Tech talks smack of ULL and ULM all the time. Their AD has even gone as far. There's no chance ULM and ULL leave their current situation to have any part of La Tech. This whole Independence Bowl has taken it to a whole new level.

Secondly, of the non-current FBS schools, UTSA is the most attractive. More so than TXST and Lamar. Their commitment to facilities is very intriguing, they are in a major city (which hurts TXST, who is squeezed between UTSA and Texas), they have a connection to a bowl game (home games at the Alamodome - home of the Alamo Bowl) and unlike the other two schools, have hosted NCAA championship events in basketball and volleyball. That does not hurt, from what I am told.

Someone on the TXST board brought up a good point, "I hate to say it, but I think that UTSA has a very similar situation to U of South Florida. USF got a football program that was starving for a football team in a way similar to San Antonio's current situation. Back when USF started their program several years ago, they immidiately had crowds averaging around 25,000. If this is what happens in San Antonio, they (UTSA) will be come a viable option for CUSA."

Third, SHSU's President has told the "inner circle" that there's no way SHSU would not join TXST and LU in a join up if those schools went that direction.

If SHSU isn't ready for FBS, Lamar isn't, either. This is kind of a moot point but an interesting topic.

There is no link bretween the schools. Lamar is ready when it is ready. Sam is ready when it is ready.

I never insinuated that there was a link.  The two schools are very similar since they're both 80 miles from Houston. (close to 80)

[UNLV]

If a Sunbelt team goes undefeated, they get to go to the New Orleans bowl (no shot at a BCS game).

That's wrong.  It would be a long shot and it depends on a Sunbelt teams strength of schedule, and how badly they beat all of their opponents, but they could go to a higher ranked bowl or possibly a BCS bowl.  True, the stars would have to align perfectly, but it can happen.  It happened to Boise State. 

As to Louisiana Tech joining this proposed "new conference", NO WAY!  They are in the WAC and the WAC is a solid conference, although somewhat top heavy.

I wonder how long can Tech afford to be in the WAC. Tech is smaller than Lamar and in a small town and sharing a media market with ULM and Grambling...

[Guest coachacola]

I think La Tech can afford to stay in the WAC as long as Boise State, Fresno State and Hawaii stay in the WAC, which brings them good TV money, plus those teams have been able to play in a BCS bowl game a few times which brings in extra money.  La Tech can only afford the WAC because of the TV money.

[Green Menace]

I think La Tech can afford to stay in the WAC as long as Boise State, Fresno State and Hawaii stay in the WAC, which brings them good TV money, plus those teams have been able to play in a BCS bowl game a few times which brings in extra money.  La Tech can only afford the WAC because of the TV money.

You're correct.  I've always wondered how long La Tech would last in the WAC, but they just keep hanging on to the coat tails of the three money makers you mentioned.

[UNLV]

I think La Tech can afford to stay in the WAC as long as Boise State, Fresno State and Hawaii stay in the WAC, which brings them good TV money, plus those teams have been able to play in a BCS bowl game a few times which brings in extra money.  La Tech can only afford the WAC because of the TV money.

If that is the case, Lamar can do the samething by joining the WAC and becoming Tech travel partner.

[TexasTerror]

If that is the case, Lamar can do the samething by joining the WAC and becoming Tech travel partner.

Too bad Lamar does not have much to supply to attract the WAC.

Figure the more Western members would not have much interest in letting the Cards in.

Only reason La Tech got in was to replace TCU in the 'Eastern' side of the WAC so they could play UTEP, Rice, SMU and Tulsa and "balance" the conference between West and East. Of course, that did not last long.

WAC would probably dump La Tech if they could. If UTEP ever left C-USA for the MWC, perhaps La Tech would take their spot. I really see UTEP, Fresno State and Boise as the top contenders for a spot in the MWC. If the Pac-10 goes 12, this gets very interesting.

[Guest coachacola]

Lamar joining the WAC doesn't make sense long term, but it's not going to happen anyways.  I still think another FBS conference is coming soon with schools like UTSA, Georgia State, Texas State, probably Lamar and others jumping up to FBS.  The moratorium ends in 2011, at which time Lamar will have played 2 seasons at the FCS level, so they can be involved in all this if they choose to.

[UNLV]

WAC schools would save tons of money by having a Tech travel partner.

Coach, LU in the WAC makes perfect sense. Lamar can gain a legitimacy lost by rejoining the SLC.

Any new conference will look at the SLC last for members and I am sure all spots will be filled long before

the SLC gets the look.

[Green Menace]

WAC schools would save tons of money by having a Tech travel partner.

Coach, LU in the WAC makes perfect sense. Lamar can gain a legitimacy lost by rejoining the SLC.

Any new conference will look at the SLC last for members and I am sure all spots will be filled long before

the SLC gets the look.

Before you drool over joining the WAC, you better pay attention to travel costs for your "non-revenue" producing sports teams that have to be flown all over the West.  Basketball, Womens Soccer, Baseball, etc.  That costs losts of moola.  UNT has turned down the WAC because of travel costs.

[Guest coachacola]

WAC schools would save tons of money by having a Tech travel partner.

Coach, LU in the WAC makes perfect sense. Lamar can gain a legitimacy lost by rejoining the SLC.

Any new conference will look at the SLC last for members and I am sure all spots will be filled long before

the SLC gets the look.

Before you drool over joining the WAC, you better pay attention to travel costs for your "non-revenue" producing sports teams that have to be flown all over the West.  Basketball, Womens Soccer, Baseball, etc.  That costs losts of moola.  UNT has turned down the WAC because of travel costs.

I agree.  And if Boise State leaves (they are actively trying to get into the MWC) and/or Fresno State leave, then that will kill their TV contract and then there's no way to pay for those travel costs.  And all that travelling out west can't be good on the athletes so it makes it even harder to compete and win consistently.

[UNLV]

WAC schools would save tons of money by having a Tech travel partner.

Coach, LU in the WAC makes perfect sense. Lamar can gain a legitimacy lost by rejoining the SLC.

Any new conference will look at the SLC last for members and I am sure all spots will be filled long before

the SLC gets the look.

Before you drool over joining the WAC, you better pay attention to travel costs for your "non-revenue" producing sports teams that have to be flown all over the West.  Basketball, Womens Soccer, Baseball, etc.  That costs losts of moola.  UNT has turned down the WAC because of travel costs.

If UNT decides to jump off a cliff, that doesn't mean LU should follow. Being in the WAC puts Lamar near the front of the line for any new conference.

[Green Menace]

WAC schools would save tons of money by having a Tech travel partner.

Coach, LU in the WAC makes perfect sense. Lamar can gain a legitimacy lost by rejoining the SLC.

Any new conference will look at the SLC last for members and I am sure all spots will be filled long before

the SLC gets the look.

Before you drool over joining the WAC, you better pay attention to travel costs for your "non-revenue" producing sports teams that have to be flown all over the West.  Basketball, Womens Soccer, Baseball, etc.  That costs losts of moola.  UNT has turned down the WAC because of travel costs.

If UNT decides to jump off a cliff, that doesn't mean LU should follow. Being in the WAC puts Lamar near the front of the line for any new conference.

Hey, go for it!  Now that Lamar has all of this new found wealth, by all means, do it.  The WAC will be chomping at the bits to add Lamar to the conference so La Tech will have a travel partner.

[Guest coachacola]

I ran across this blog post about Georgia Southern and what it would take for them to go FBS.  They have a 18K stadium and a $9.5 million budget, and this guy talks about how they could increase their budget to compete in the Sunbelt.  Here's how they could increase their budget:

To reach the next level of funding for our Eagles, there are several methods of increasing revenues that will have to take place to increase our current $9.115M budget to a competitive level in a FBS conference. Here is my scenario of how we can accomplish this.

Student Fee Increases - $1.875M

Based on 15,000 undergraduates averaging 2.5 semesters each year (7,500 enrolled during summer), an increase of $50 per semester in the student athletic fee would net $1,875,000 per year.

Southern Boosters Increased Giving - $1M

Adding 2,000 new contributors at $500 cash for each contributor would net a $1,000,000 per year. This will take a lot of work to reach our alumni and fans, but it can be done. This figure will rise above $1M over the years.

Football Season Ticket Increases - $600K

The 2,000 new contributors to Boosters will buy 2.5 season tickets per account (average family size) at a cost of $120 per season ticket. This would net $600,000 per year. The question is, “where will 5,000 new $500 seats be located?â€

Football Single Game Ticket Increases - $240K

With all the added interest in FBS football, we can expect more walk-up ticket sales on game days. 2,000 additional fans buying single game tickets would net $240,000 per year. Again the question arises, “where will these newly-converted Eagles fans sit?â€

Auxiliary Services Absorbs Fees - $2.5M

As in the case with many schools, meals and rooms are absorbed by the university. Being that AuxServices does not operate with “state money†and is not restricted by state laws that say “no state tax dollars for athleticsâ€, our University could have AuxServices absorb the costs currently being paid by Athletics for meals and rooms for our student-athletes. This could be done now if our President decided to take the initiative and simply “do itâ€! Freeing the athletic budget from these costs would net around $2,500,000 per year.

Playing One Football “Money Game†Per Season - $750K

Once we are a FBS member, we will be able to receive a minimum of $750,000 per game for playing a BSC team at their home stadium. These prices have escalated dramatically over the past five years with some SBC, CUSA & WAC programs receiving over $900K for a guarantee. One of these games would net a minimum of $750,000 per year.

Increased Marketing Sponsorships - $250K

With increased exposure in FCS, a higher-profile conference, more butts in seats for home games, and more regional/national exposure on television, we will have additional opportunities for corporate sponsorships. Taking advantage of these opportunities would net us a minimum of $250,000 per year.

That's a little over $7 million more a year this guy's talking about.  How does this apply to Lamar, especially since we don't have football yet?  Here's how I think Lamar's budget will grow from the current $6.5 million to over $12 million in 2 or 3 years before they go FBS:

1.  Lamar will raise student fees which will bring in an extra $2 million a year.

2.  Boosters will give more money to Lamar because of football.  I say $500,000 more a year.

3.  Season ticket sales should bring in at least $500,000 a year.  I think LU basketball ticket sales are normally over $200,000 or $300,000 a year so football should double that.

4.  The new suites at the stadium will bring in $100,000 (just a wild guess).

5.  Increase sponsorships and more merchandise sales could bring Lamar $200,000 more a year.

6.  One money game a year will bring maybe $200,000.

Add these up and Lamar's athletic budget is now at around $10 million a year at the FCS level.  Now let's say they join a FBS conference.  They'll need to increase their budget even more.  They won't be able to add another $7 million that easily, but with increased enrollment, higher paying "guarantee" games, better attendance, etc., they can probably get their budget to the $14 million level.  That's still low for FBS schools, but not unreasonable.

http://www.southernfacts.org/?p=631

[texasstud28]

I ran across this blog post about Georgia Southern and what it would take for them to go FBS.  They have a 18K stadium and a $9.5 million budget, and this guy talks about how they could increase their budget to compete in the Sunbelt.  Here's how they could increase their budget:

To reach the next level of funding for our Eagles, there are several methods of increasing revenues that will have to take place to increase our current $9.115M budget to a competitive level in a FBS conference. Here is my scenario of how we can accomplish this.

Student Fee Increases - $1.875M

Based on 15,000 undergraduates averaging 2.5 semesters each year (7,500 enrolled during summer), an increase of $50 per semester in the student athletic fee would net $1,875,000 per year.

Southern Boosters Increased Giving - $1M

Adding 2,000 new contributors at $500 cash for each contributor would net a $1,000,000 per year. This will take a lot of work to reach our alumni and fans, but it can be done. This figure will rise above $1M over the years.

Football Season Ticket Increases - $600K

The 2,000 new contributors to Boosters will buy 2.5 season tickets per account (average family size) at a cost of $120 per season ticket. This would net $600,000 per year. The question is, where will 5,000 new $500 seats be located?

Football Single Game Ticket Increases - $240K

With all the added interest in FBS football, we can expect more walk-up ticket sales on game days. 2,000 additional fans buying single game tickets would net $240,000 per year. Again the question arises, where will these newly-converted Eagles fans sit?

Auxiliary Services Absorbs Fees - $2.5M

As in the case with many schools, meals and rooms are absorbed by the university. Being that AuxServices does not operate with state money and is not restricted by state laws that say no state tax dollars for athletics, our University could have AuxServices absorb the costs currently being paid by Athletics for meals and rooms for our student-athletes. This could be done now if our President decided to take the initiative and simply do it! Freeing the athletic budget from these costs would net around $2,500,000 per year.

Playing One Football Money Game Per Season - $750K

Once we are a FBS member, we will be able to receive a minimum of $750,000 per game for playing a BSC team at their home stadium. These prices have escalated dramatically over the past five years with some SBC, CUSA & WAC programs receiving over $900K for a guarantee. One of these games would net a minimum of $750,000 per year.

Increased Marketing Sponsorships - $250K

With increased exposure in FCS, a higher-profile conference, more butts in seats for home games, and more regional/national exposure on television, we will have additional opportunities for corporate sponsorships. Taking advantage of these opportunities would net us a minimum of $250,000 per year.

That's a little over $7 million more a year this guy's talking about.  How does this apply to Lamar, especially since we don't have football yet?  Here's how I think Lamar's budget will grow from the current $6.5 million to over $12 million in 2 or 3 years before they go FBS:

1.  Lamar will raise student fees which will bring in an extra $2 million a year.

2.  Boosters will give more money to Lamar because of football.  I say $500,000 more a year.

3.  Season ticket sales should bring in at least $500,000 a year.  I think LU basketball ticket sales are normally over $200,000 or $300,000 a year so football should double that.

4.  The new suites at the stadium will bring in $100,000 (just a wild guess).

5.  Increase sponsorships and more merchandise sales could bring Lamar $200,000 more a year.

6.  One money game a year will bring maybe $200,000.

Add these up and Lamar's athletic budget is now at around $10 million a year at the FCS level.  Now let's say they join a FBS conference.  They'll need to increase their budget even more.  They won't be able to add another $7 million that easily, but with increased enrollment, higher paying "guarantee" games, better attendance, etc., they can probably get their budget to the $14 million level.  That's still low for FBS schools, but not unreasonable.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

I'm seriously thinking about this for a thesis.  Thanks for the web page.

[TexasTerror]

$14M for FBS? Are you kidding me?!?

$14M in three years won't even rank in the top three as far as SLC budgets go. UTSA, TXST and SFA will all top that mark and there'll probably be one other to do so as well.