FBS/FCS Debate

[GP1]

This University is rightfully committed to be a prime player in college sports. There is strong evidence to support this

claim. Does the 2010 National Championship in men's soccer not indicate this commitment? Does the ten year

contract to keep Coach Dambrot here not indicate the commitment to Div. I-A sports?

Gerry Faust was brought in to take the program to the big boy level. That he succeeded (not failed) with the crap facilities

and limited resources is a testament to his personal love of football. This University and its fans are indebted to him.

Forget the morons who continually bash Coach Faust. Their own inabilities overwhelm their sorry views. Gerry was a

success. He got the ball rolling. He had a plan and the right contacts.

Going backwards is rarely the answer. List for me all the battles and wars won by retreating. In the US Civil War General

George McClelland nearly retreated the Army of the Potomac into a complete defeat. You would be speaking with a

Southern accent and eating tons of fried chicken today if Lincoln had not replaced him.

The direction is to stay the course. Terry Bowden has the helm and he deserves our support. If you look up you can see

a bright light. It is a new day. I love silly cliches. So, don't be a whiny twit; grow some nads and support the Zips.

Thank you General Pickett for your spirited defense of a bad plan.

Where to begin. Winning in college soccer at a high level is easier for a school like Akron than winning at the highest level in football. Is signing KD a commitment to taking the basketball program to another level beyond where they are now? We will see in the next couple of months. Maybe that contract extension was given too soon.

You have an odd view of success vs. failure. Faust never once finished higher than third in the Mac. In three years, they went from third to fifth to ninth. The guy was terrible, contacts and all. Brook hart was a disaster in your view? He won a Mac championship and took us to a bowl game. To say JD had no coaching experience of any kind is a flat out lie. JD was one of the big name offensive coordinators during his time at Pitt. Odd view of what makes success.

[Spin]

I am not quite sure of just what you think you are talking about.

My point in an earlier post was that the complainer was one of a number of people who have a distorted notion that Akron

can not compete in the big boy world of Division I-A sports. Or, at least not in football. So, they continually whine

that Akron should drop down to a lower level of competition where they might be more successful in the number

of wins total.

AND a shot at the national title, something we will N E V E R have in the I-A boys club.

This University is rightfully committed to be a prime player in college sports. There is strong evidence to support this

claim. Does the 2010 National Championship in men's soccer not indicate this commitment? Does the ten year

contract to keep Coach Dambrot here not indicate the commitment to Div. I-A sports?

Soccer and basktball don't have I-A and I-AA genius. There's several reasons they have them in football, reasons you should take a close look at our program.

And you're comparing apples to oranges. There are schools (one a few miles to the north) that have made runs in the NCAA tournament and did not have I-A football (or any football at all). Football is a much much more expensive.

I realize that you and many others lack vision or the drive to compete. Well, football is no nanny state. We have to

invest in success.

Agree completely, and we understand HOW MUCH you need to invest to play with the big boys...

The reality of the Akron football program was that it was repeatedly put in the hands of "dreamers". That is, men who

talked a good game, but had no clue as how to accomplish the goal of being a winner.

...nor the resources.

The direction is to stay the course. Terry Bowden has the helm and he deserves our support. If you look up you can see

a bright light. It is a new day. I love silly cliches. So, don't be a whiny twit; grow some nads and support the Zips.

I can also see schools better heeled than us struggling to be relevant in I-A, and the way the NCAA boys club is set up.

So save your rah rah bullshit for someone else. If you REALLY want to be more than an antagonist in this discussion, explain to us the University's plan to fund such a huge upgrade. Where is this money going to come from?

How are the Zips going to enter into the boys club that is I-A football, when 90% of the programs out there (including Boise and TCU) can't. And if not, how is winning the Bob's Bail Bonds Bowl going to be as much fun, and as much money and exposure as winning a national championship?

How are we going to entice 5 star recruits to play for Akron?

Take a look at the REAL issues we are. Just once???

[ctmjbowes@sbcglobal.net]

How appropriate that you bring everybody's favorite little Giant Killer into the discussion. You also mentioned resourcing. Both great topics for discussion.

First, Boise State just re-joined the MWC as the Big East implodes. Two things about this are interesting. First, with all of the success of the Boise program in recent years, plus all of the investment made by that school in their program, they STILL are a little team looking in at the big boys at the end of the day. They struggle to get home and home, struggle to get the big boys to play them at all, and their placing in the polls is consistently skewed by their perceived "place" in the college football universe. They pay Petersen 2,000,000 bucks each year to coach that team, and I assume their other programmatic investments are similar in scale, which means they likely spend 5X as much on that program as MAC programs do. And yet, they are still left on the outside looking in when it comes to elite-level football.

(An aside about the Big East, which is becoming the Big Least, or possibly soon to become defunct. As they lost Boise State this week, it was reported that the conference had contacted Fresno State and UNLV about joining for football. Now, what does it say about the MAC that we never hear reports of MAC schools, excepting Temple, being considered for invitation to other conferences? The MAC is so strong that UNLV and Freson State are more logical choices for membership in the BIG EAST than any current MAC schools?)

Second, resourcing. Look at MAC coaching salaries compared to every other conference in the US. The only conference that pays so meagerly as the MAC is the WAC, which has all of 5 members. UA may have spent money on indoor facilities and the Info, but they sure as hell haven't made a strong commitment to paying their football coaches in any way that lends credence to the notion that UA intends to credibly compete at the FBS level. In fact, it becomes painfully obvious with a quick glance at the USA TODAY coaching salary database that the entire MAC has separated itself, when it comes to putting up or shutting up, from genuine FBS football.

More support for the obvious truth that MAC football is in no way, shape or form, genuine FBS football. And by extension, Akron has been unable to compete at a competitive MAC level, and is truly an FCS program in ALL ways that matter.

[Dave in Green]

@SeeTeeZip and @Spin, I think you're both good Zips fans who are frustrated from years of losing in football, and that you're honestly looking for a viable alternative. I understand that your proposal for UA to drop down from FBS to FCS is based on your thinking that the Zips could be more competitive at the second highest level of college football (FCS). But there is a growing body of thought that as more and more FCS teams move up to FBS that it's almost inevitable that FBS will be split into two subdivisions, one for the big boys and one for the wannabes. That was prominently mentioned in the NYT article among other places. There's no doubt that UA and the rest of the MAC teams would end up in the Wannabe Division and not the Big Boys Division. Thus the Wannabe Division would become the second highest level of college football, while FCS would be relegated to third level.

My specific question to you is whether you believe that UA belongs in the second or third highest level of college football? Because if UA were to follow your advice and immediately drop down to level two, there's a good chance that level two will become level three before long. Considering that, do you think it might be wise to wait at least a couple of years and see whether the FBS split gains traction, and UA ends up being moved to level two along with all the other teams that have no realistic chance of ever playing for the national championship in the top level of college football?

[ctmjbowes@sbcglobal.net]

@SeeTeeZip and @Spin, I think you're both good Zips fans who are frustrated from years of losing in football, and that you're honestly looking for a viable alternative. I understand that your proposal for UA to drop down from FBS to FCS is based on your thinking that the Zips could be more competitive at the second highest level of college football (FCS). But there is a growing body of thought that as more and more FCS teams move up to FBS that it's almost inevitable that FBS will be split into two subdivisions, one for the big boys and one for the wannabes. That was prominently mentioned in the NYT article among other places. There's no doubt that UA and the rest of the MAC teams would end up in the Wannabe Division and not the Big Boys Division. Thus the Wannabe Division would become the second highest level of college football, while FCS would be relegated to third level.

My specific question to you is whether you believe that UA belongs in the second or third highest level of college football? Because if UA were to follow your advice and immediately drop down to level two, there's a good chance that level two will become level three before long. Considering that, do you think it might be wise to wait at least a couple of years and see whether the FBS split gains traction, and UA ends up being moved to level two along with all the other teams that have no realistic chance of ever playing for the national championship in the top level of college football?

First, I'm answering while I watch NIU in the Orange Bowl, which I fully understand can happen once each century. Putting aside this year, during which the MAC has greatly overachieved and only through a fluke did NIU make it into this bowl, the MAC does not belong in that second tier, if we're talking about football. Look at resources committed by universities, look at historical results, look at television markets, look at coaching salaries, look at attendance, look at record against the other conferences, look at recruits, I could go on and on. The MAC is much more of a super FCS conference than it is a second tier FBS conference. Beyond discussions of the MAC though, Akron has never shown that it can compete in the MAC, so it deserves "special recognition" even beyond our discussion of the MAC.

Ask yourself this question: if you took any MAC program and placed it into the Big East, MVC, Sunbelt, or C-USA, would you have a consistent winner in that conference? The answer, as we all know, is no you wouldn't. The Thundering Herd found out the hard way that domination of the MAC means little when moving to pretty much any other conference. Ditto Temple. MAC programs are hugely under-resourced compared to almost any other FBS programs, and as a result they aren't as good. Their attendance is terrible compared to most other FBS programs. IMO, the entire MAC belongs at the top of the heap in FCS, and in fact the MAC is an odd tweener, essentially alone in the football universe. They're slightly better funded and resourced than FCS programs at large, but far below other FBS conferences. If they compete in what is going to be the second tier of FBS, the MAC will perform poorly. If the MAC dropped, lock, stock and barrel to FCS, they would dominate FCS.

Let's get back to NIU. NIU has been a very good MAC program at least since I've paid attention to the MAC. Dave Doeren made 420K as the HC at NIU. His starting contract base at NC State, hardly the greatest program ever, will be 1.8 million dollars. You pay head coaches four times less than an NC State and you intend to compete with FBS? No damn way, no damn how. DIG, I assume that you're good at what you do. If I tell you that a competing firm pays their employees 25% of what your firm pays, tell me, what does that make you think of that other firm? The MAC is a joke at the FBS level. Look at the data and you'll see that if anything, the MAC should be in a third tier with the Sunbelt and the WAC, along with premier FCS programs. You build THAT and bing, bing, bing, we have a winner.

Lastly, looking only at the available data, if you were really looking to stratify the programs, here's how they stack up:

1) MEGA LEGACY PREMIER MAJOR BIG BOY NFL FEEDER LEAGUE

1A) The rest of the historically very good and well-resourced programs from the conferences that produced the MEGA conference above

3) Second Tier = Big East, C-USA, MVC, and equivalents

4) Third Tier = Sunbelt, WAC, MAC <<<Akron is at the bottom of this pile, or...

5) Top level FCS <<<Akron is at the top of this pile

At the very end, as I've learned more and more through this argument/discussion, it has become glaringly obvious that when you come right down to it, as they say, money talks and bullshit walks. The MAC isn't a player because the MAC is small money, tiny money, compared to the major conferences. Based on commitment of resources alone, the MAC absolutely doesn't belong in the discussion with the power conferences.

[Dave in Green]

@SeeTeeZip, there may be a direct answer to my specific question somewhere in your response, but I started getting a headache trying to find it. Statements like "Akron has never shown that it can compete in the MAC" caused me to shake my head hard enough to induce dizziness, as I was at Ford Field when the Zips won the MAC championship a few years ago. While some MAC schools may have a history of doing consistently better than others, the simple truth is that any MAC school can compete in the MAC as long as they do all the right things to put together a proper program.

Anyway, I'm still looking for a clear and direct answer to the specific question: Would it be smart for UA to wait at least a couple of years to see what the big boys at the top of FBS do, as that is likely to move the Zips and the rest of the MAC out of the top division of college football regardless of what anyone wants?

[GP1]

Anyway, I'm still looking for a clear and direct answer to the specific question: Would it be smart for UA to wait at least a couple of years to see what the big boys at the top of FBS do, as that is likely to move the Zips and the rest of the MAC out of the top division of college football regardless of what anyone wants?

Absolutely it is the smart thing to do and not just because it matches my thought.

Right now, it is important for a school to have a home. Strength in numbers. People shook their heads at WVU joining the Big 12, but they needed a home at least for a few years so they joined the first conference they could get in to. Of all the movement, WVU probably made the smartest move that will pay off long term. If they don't do what they did, they are Cincy and Connecticut right now.

If only 25+ years ago now, our AD would have listened to the words of Yoda, we wouldn't have this problem. "Ready are you? What know you of ready? For eight hundred years have I trained Jedi. My own counsel will I keep on who is to be trained. A Jedi must have the deepest commitment, the most serious mind. This one a long time have I watched. All his life has he looked away... to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was. Hmm? What he was doing. Hmph. Adventure. Heh. Excitement. Heh. A Jedi craves not these things. You are reckless. " We acted recklessly without taking a serious look at what it really took to be D1A. We need to be patient with our next move, not reckless just so we can make a move.

[PB1719]

I will not further validate this thread by giving an explanation of how moving down would be foolish.

[ctmjbowes@sbcglobal.net]

@SeeTeeZip, there may be a direct answer to my specific question somewhere in your response, but I started getting a headache trying to find it. Statements like "Akron has never shown that it can compete in the MAC" caused me to shake my head hard enough to induce dizziness, as I was at Ford Field when the Zips won the MAC championship a few years ago. While some MAC schools may have a history of doing consistently better than others, the simple truth is that any MAC school can compete in the MAC as long as they do all the right things to put together a proper program.

Anyway, I'm still looking for a clear and direct answer to the specific question: Would it be smart for UA to wait at least a couple of years to see what the big boys at the top of FBS do, as that is likely to move the Zips and the rest of the MAC out of the top division of college football regardless of what anyone wants?

Thanks for being too bored to read and consider my posts DIG! That 2005 team was barely above .500 and only through a miracle or two did it make it to the MACC. That was a 7 win team, with 6 losses. That's the absolute pinnacle for UA, 7 wins, so you and I define competing in the MAC very differently DIG. I define competing in the MAC as, at least occasionally, dominating the conference the way every other program occasionally has. In its very best years, UA scrapes by at barely above .500, and that has happened only a few times in 25+ years. So, no, I do not consider UA to be a competitive program in the MAC. Yes, any MAC school CAN compete in the MAC, but Akron hasn't.

I believe that Akron should take control of its own destiny and become an FCS Independent, for now. As I explained in the post that was apparently too well considered and cogent for you to fully read, Akron has already positioned itself in an essential Tier that includes the lowest-level Sunbelt, WAC and highest-level FCS teams. Akron should be seeking a spot somewhere in a universe that would include those teams. As the large conferences are consolidating and growing, or imploding, there is no reason to think that the same won't happen to the lower-level conferences. So, to use GP1's point, do you want to be WVU, or do you want to be Cincinnati, left holding the bag when it blows up? There are certainly FCS programs that would love to seek a level slightly higher, and programs like UA's that should recognize the futility of chasing the big boys, or even the MAC. So, you're telling me we must wait for the goliaths to position and re-position themselves to crush the rest of the universities out there in the world of collegiate football, but the small players shouldn't be making considered, prudent moves to find their optimal spot as well? As the shuffle has moved forward, the aggressive programs are the ones controlling their destinies. Where do you think Akron, with Tom Wistrcill as the AD, will be if they sit and wait to see where the football gods think Akron fits? Hell, clearly the football gods hate Akron football, and left to their own devices they'll kill the program entirely.

[ctmjbowes@sbcglobal.net]

Absolutely it is the smart thing to do and not just because it matches my thought.

Right now, it is important for a school to have a home. Strength in numbers. People shook their heads at WVU joining the Big 12, but they needed a home at least for a few years so they joined the first conference they could get in to. Of all the movement, WVU probably made the smartest move that will pay off long term. If they don't do what they did, they are Cincy and Connecticut right now.

If only 25+ years ago now, our AD would have listened to the words of Yoda, we wouldn't have this problem. "Ready are you? What know you of ready? For eight hundred years have I trained Jedi. My own counsel will I keep on who is to be trained. A Jedi must have the deepest commitment, the most serious mind. This one a long time have I watched. All his life has he looked away... to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was. Hmm? What he was doing. Hmph. Adventure. Heh. Excitement. Heh. A Jedi craves not these things. You are reckless. " We acted recklessly without taking a serious look at what it really took to be D1A. We need to be patient with our next move, not reckless just so we can make a move.

Yeah, but that same Jedi apprentice was the one who saved the entire rebel alliance, so in the case you cite, not only was Yoda flat wrong, but Luke's aggressiveness and recklessness caused the destruction of the Death Star. So....

[GP1]

Yeah, but that same Jedi apprentice was the one who saved the entire rebel alliance, so in the case you cite, not only was Yoda flat wrong, but Luke's aggressiveness and recklessness caused the destruction of the Death Star. So....

The destruction of the Death Star in a battle you call a victory? Not until Luke learned to control his recklessness did he defeat the entire Empire and brought balance to the Force.

[Dave in Green]

@SeeTeeZip, a simple yes or no would have been just fine.

[GP1]

I believe that Akron should take control of its own destiny and become an FCS Independent, for now.

Your spirited debate has some good points, but this is a terrible idea and terrible reasoning. When we jumped in 1987, there was no conference that wanted to come near us for a lot of reasons. Finally, the MAC held its nose and let us in. To make another move on our own would be a disaster. Right or wrong, we are in the MAC. As the MAC goes when the non-BCS teams have their own division, so will we go.

[Spin]

@SeeTeeZip and @Spin, I think you're both good Zips fans who are frustrated from years of losing in football, and that you're honestly looking for a viable alternative. I understand that your proposal for UA to drop down from FBS to FCS is based on your thinking that the Zips could be more competitive at the second highest level of college football (FCS). But there is a growing body of thought that as more and more FCS teams move up to FBS that it's almost inevitable that FBS will be split into two subdivisions, one for the big boys and one for the wannabes. That was prominently mentioned in the NYT article among other places. There's no doubt that UA and the rest of the MAC teams would end up in the Wannabe Division and not the Big Boys Division. Thus the Wannabe Division would become the second highest level of college football, while FCS would be relegated to third level.

My specific question to you is whether you believe that UA belongs in the second or third highest level of college football? Because if UA were to follow your advice and immediately drop down to level two, there's a good chance that level two will become level three before long. Considering that, do you think it might be wise to wait at least a couple of years and see whether the FBS split gains traction, and UA ends up being moved to level two along with all the other teams that have no realistic chance of ever playing for the national championship in the top level of college football?

I took a couple days to think this over, while waiting for a new keyboard.

So how would the split work, would they take apart the conferences and put, say, the top 64 in the top tier and the rest in the next tier? Meaning the Minnesotas, Iowas, and Indianas would drop down. Or would they keep the elitist conferences (and the crappy teams in them) and boot the rest into the second tier? Say, the B12, SEC, B10, Pac12, and ACC/Lil East? That would leave the MAC, WAC, CUSA, Sunbelt, and MW.

In the first scenario you're looking at a conference with Toledo, BG, Indiana, OU, Purdue, Illinois, Iowa, BallSt, Minn, the directionals, and let's face it, without HAzell, Can't State.

In the second scenario you're butting heads with the UCF's, Tulsas, Ark States, Utah States, SJStates, LaTechs. at the top of the heap.

Either way, we STILL have to step up our budget, our recruiting, and everything else I talked about. Otherwise we're going to be in the same shitter we are now.

There's two hypotheticals here, #1 that this fantasy comes true, and #2 that Akron steps up its program big time. Two humongous IF's in my book. I'm less than convinced either of those will come true, let alone both.

But I don't make that decision, so y'all shouldn't be threatened that I'm not convinced yet.

[Dave in Green]

@Spin, I appreciate your thoughtful and coherent response. There are obviously lots of questions about what's going to happen in college football. The changes that have happened over just the last couple of years have been pretty dramatic, and they're ongoing. All of the trends indicate that further dramatic change is not a fantasy, but simply more of what's already happened. You are dead right that none of us really knows what's going to happen. We're all just making our best guesses. And when you try to make an intelligent move when you don't really know what's going to happen, there's a good chance you might get it wrong. That's why I'm with GP1 and others who believe the best course of action right now is to try to stay on top of what's happening and be prepared to make the right move at just the right time.

You are not alone in your skepticism about UA being able to make the right move at the right time, based on the lack of success in the Zips football program to date. But judgment errors are almost always compounded when made in a state of panic. Now is the time to look at the big picture in a really cold and unemotional manner and not let past failures create a loser mentality that virtually guarantees losing no matter what route is taken.

[Z.I.P.]

Your spirited debate has some good points, but this is a terrible idea and terrible reasoning. When we jumped in 1987, there was no conference that wanted to come near us for a lot of reasons. Finally, the MAC held its nose and let us in. To make another move on our own would be a disaster. Right or wrong, we are in the MAC. As the MAC goes when the non-BCS teams have their own division, so will we go.

Hmmmmm...I happened across this thread, perhaps by happenstance, perhaps by fate, not sure. Anyway, frankly, I happen to share GP1's stance, which is framed by Akron's athletic history. Akron is quite fortunate to be a member of the MAC, rather than the OVC, or Horizon League.

However, I was taken rather aback by GP1's last sentence. I have not read anything suggesting that the BCS Division schools will "secede", with all other conferences (MWC, CUSA, MAC, SB, etc. (maybe BE) left in "another division. Would like to see such conjecture, if it comes from serious reporters.

[zippy5]

Where was NIU 5 years ago? (Don't say DeKalb )

[ctmjbowes@sbcglobal.net]

@SeeTeeZip, a simple yes or no would have been just fine.

Hey DIG, news flash. You are not Einstein. How about you answer the points made, without the pointless and spiteful little jabs? I put much thought into my posts. They can run long. Read them and answer, or be a lazy jackass and answer in a passive-aggressive manner. I have no problem with you disagreeing with my arguments, but you are neither a moderator nor are you the ZN arbiter of reasonableness, even though you clearly think you are.

[ctmjbowes@sbcglobal.net]

@Spin, I appreciate your thoughtful and coherent response. There are obviously lots of questions about what's going to happen in college football. The changes that have happened over just the last couple of years have been pretty dramatic, and they're ongoing. All of the trends indicate that further dramatic change is not a fantasy, but simply more of what's already happened. You are dead right that none of us really knows what's going to happen. We're all just making our best guesses. And when you try to make an intelligent move when you don't really know what's going to happen, there's a good chance you might get it wrong. That's why I'm with GP1 and others who believe the best course of action right now is to try to stay on top of what's happening and be prepared to make the right move at just the right time.

You are not alone in your skepticism about UA being able to make the right move at the right time, based on the lack of success in the Zips football program to date. But judgment errors are almost always compounded when made in a state of panic. Now is the time to look at the big picture in a really cold and unemotional manner and not let past failures create a loser mentality that virtually guarantees losing no matter what route is taken.

@DIG, you are saying, and advocating for, nothing. Of course, the easiest thing to do is to sit on your hands and wait. The power brokers in college football are striking out and creating the world they want to dominate. Akron is nothing more than the dirt under their shoes, as long as Akron, and other programs in similar situations, allow themselves to be so. The winners are aggressive, as is normally the case in life, and the losers, the "contemplators (yes I made that word up)," hoping that Akron will somehow not end up in the big pile of shit that remains when the larger programs are done doing their business, are going to get the shaft. This is not a time to be cerebral. It's time to go get ours.

[GP1]

However, I was taken rather aback by GP1's last sentence. I have not read anything suggesting that the BCS Division schools will "secede", with all other conferences (MWC, CUSA, MAC, SB, etc. (maybe BE) left in "another division. Would like to see such conjecture, if it comes from serious reporters.

I don't have the link, but I saw it discussed on television and a couple of business journals as well. It isn't a new idea. 6-7 years ago, I was pretty close with a guy from the Athletic Department, and he was the first to bring this idea up to me. It isn't a new idea and has been kicked around in those circles for a number of years. I think the changes we are seeing in conferences now are those ideas that were kicked around 6-7 years ago slowly coming to life.

As a die hard fan of Zips soccer, you should be very worried. There are some very good midwest hockey programs that are now going to suffer because the Big Ten now has enough teams to have a hockey league. Typically, schools like OSU and Michigan have played in the CCHA, which is a very good hockey league. Without those schools, it could hurt the Miami/BG/Ferris States of the world. The same could happen to soccer as well but slightly difference. The Big Ten currently has seven schools playing soccer based upon me looking at the Big Ten website. With the Big Ten Network and bringing in other schools that have soccer, there would be less of a need to play schools like Akron. Those larger schools could draw more attention to themselves and create a recruiting advantage with the opportunity to play on national television a few times a year. It doesn't happen overnight, but slowly it does happen. Once, San Francisco, Holy Cross and Loyola Chicago won national championships in basketball only to be swallowed up by the finances of big time college athletics. Don't think it cannot happen to Zips soccer.

[Dave in Green]

@SeeTeeZip, I owe you an apology for not having clearly stated an important point about my position on this hot debate. I thought I had made it clear in a previous post where I stood on this, but looking back I see now that while I was thinking it, I didn't actually state the following:

I'm not interested in getting into an extended, painstaking, point-by-point internet forum debate on this subject. I just wanted to understand everyone's basic position and state my own position. That's why I was looking for a simple yes or no. I'm not trying to talk anyone out of their beliefs nor trying to push my opinion on anyone else.

The only other point I would add is that you obviously misunderstood me to say I advocate doing "nothing." Staying on top of what's happening and being prepared to make the right move at just the right time requires a lot of attention, work and thoughtfulness. That's all I have to say. I'll continue to follow the thread to see if anyone has anything new to add that might cause me to reconsider my position.

[Wally B]

@DIG, you are saying, and advocating for, nothing. Of course, the easiest thing to do is to sit on your hands and wait. The power brokers in college football are striking out and creating the world they want to dominate. Akron is nothing more than the dirt under their shoes, as long as Akron, and other programs in similar situations, allow themselves to be so. The winners are aggressive, as is normally the case in life, and the losers, the "contemplators (yes I made that word up)," hoping that Akron will somehow not end up in the big pile of shit that remains when the larger programs are done doing their business, are going to get the shaft. This is not a time to be cerebral. It's time to go get ours.

"You are an unbelievably stupid man aren't you?" P. Morgan

You seem to be intent on insisting that we're unable to compete d1a. But your core argument seems to ride on the likes of: OSU, UM, USC, LSU, Alabama, etc. That's fine, but they hardly represent all of d1a as Florida found out the other night. The point is, and will remain to be, the so called upper crust of d1a is and will continue to consist of a number of teams that will never compete for a championship either. Seriously, Vandy? Duke? Ole Miss? Indiana? Kansas? Of course, let's not forget Cincinnati right! Clearly they've dominated us forever

My point is this. Are we able to compete against The elite's year in and year out? Answer: no Are we, or will we be able to compete with the rest of d1a (bcs or not) year in and year out. Answer: yes if we make the right decisions For the record, after the 2005 MCBowl Memphis fell harder and faster than we did, and regularly ranked below us every year until this one. Yet they were still invited to the old new BE before the loss of their AQ (not their BCS) status. So ability to compete has nothing to do with it.

To directly answer your question. Has all the movement between the WAC, nBE, MWC, Cusa amounted to anything at this point? Answer: Yes, it's made the MAC stronger.

Finally, and this is the BIG ONE here. If and when the AQ conferences (not programs or schools) decide to split from the non-AQ conferences (again not programs or schools) how would our relegation to a new second tier (with the likes of Can't, Marshall, Hawai'i, Uconn, USF, Wyoming, etc) be "getting the shaft" compared to your idea of moving ourselves to what inevitably becomes the new third tier (with the likes of Morgan St., Morehead, Elon, UT-Martin). If you can properly and comprehensively answer this larger question you'll find that most of the Znation (for whom I do not purport to speak) will support your claims. The problem is, you haven't been able to do that yet, and it's highly doubtful you will.

God help you though, you keep tryin!

[Lee Adams]

The people who think that all programs that declare they are playing at the DI level are actually capable of realistically competing at the DI level are obviously deluding themselves. The MAC teams can't hope to win or even 'compete' at the level of teams like Alabama,LSU,Ohio State etc,etc. year in and year out. The MAC,Sunbelt level teams etc,etc need to get into their own level of competition and compete for championships there. Hell,the Big 10 can't compete against the big boys in bowl games on a regular basis.

Akron will never compete on the level of the power conferences. Never have. Lets get to a level where the program is annually competetive.

[ZachTheZip]

Lets get to a level where the program is annually competetive.

What makes you think that changing levels or divisions would make us any more competitive. I'm still waiting for an explanation from somebody.

[Dave in Green]

Here's the way I see the big picture: There are two major factors at work here -- resources and how effectively those resources are used. Generally speaking, the programs that have significantly more resources will outperform those with significantly less resources. Within groups of programs with comparable resources, it's how effectively the resources are used that makes the difference between winners and losers. Occasionally a team with significantly less resources that are optimized can beat a team with significantly more resources that are not optimized. That's the premise behind the underdog concept. Ideally you'd want to group athletic teams into divisions where most of the programs have comparable resources. Then the teams that best optimize their resources should rise to the top in their respective divisions.

There seems to be a consensus here that MAC-level programs do not have the resources to compete with the top programs in FBS, and never will. The very best MAC-level team that makes the very best use of its resources might occasionally rise to the level of qualifying for a BCS bowl game, as NIU did this year. But at that level they are likely to face a team with much greater resources that is in the BCS bowl game because it has optimized its resources better than other top FBS programs with maximum resources. Under those circumstances, the team with less resources is almost always likely to be crushed.

With more and more teams moving up from FCS to FBS, the imbalance is exacerbated. The FCS teams moving up typically have MAC-level resources, so FBS is being expanded from the bottom, creating more competition at the bottom for marginal FBS players. The top programs still get the best players and coaches to go along with their greater resources while the programs at the bottom are further diluted, and the gap between the haves and the have nots is increased. Again, as John Lombardi, who has experienced both ends of the spectrum as a former president of UMass at the bottom and Florida and LSU at the top, said in the NYT article:

“The number of F.B.S.-level football teams is already too large to be sustainable,” he said. “And the teams at the top are a very strong, organized group. As more schools join at the bottom, it’s going to force the N.C.A.A. to restructure. They’ll have to start putting F.B.S. teams into categories. So there will be a second tier again, and that’s certainly not what a lot of these people joining now had in mind. What happens then?”