FB: American Southwest Conference

Started by admin, August 16, 2005, 05:08:10 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

TLU02SA and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Riley Zayas

Quote from: Ron Boerger on June 05, 2023, 09:18:54 PM
The ASC removed Amy Carlton from its staff page, and they're now a week behind announcing a replacement; when they announced she was "stepping away by June 30" the timeline to announce the new commissioner was by May 31st.

Fairly concerning...unsure how much longer the ASC will last. Probably an understatement to say that things aren't looking good.
Proverbs 21:31. D3hoops.com WBB Top 25 voter. On the UMHB beat as the managing editor of TrueToTheCru.com, covering everything in CRU athletics. Read my blog, The Scoop on D3 Women's Hoops. Find it on the D3hoops.com Daily Dose.

SagatagSam

You'd think it might be worth the NCAA setting up the football championship so that the format can withstand some volatility over the next decade or more. We've discussed the enrollment cliff that is bearing down on schools. Closures, mergers, shutting down football programs, and other changes--for schools and conferences--will be coming faster and more furious in the coming years.

I had proposed this as a topic for discussion in the fall.

Quote from: SagatagSam on November 03, 2022, 03:22:38 PM
Here's my proposal:

Conferences with eight or more members get an automatic bid (Pool A).
Under the current arrangement there would be 18 Pool A bids.

Conferences with seven or fewer members would be placed in Pool B. There are currently nine conferences that fall into the Pool B category. The top 6 conference champions from Pool B as determined by the committee get a bid to the Tournament.

The remaining at-large bids (Pool C) would be determined by the committee consistent with the current practice.

So, under my proposal there would be:
18 conferences with Pool A automatic bids
6 Pool B bids selected from nine conference champions, and
8 At-large Pool C bids.

Note: I'm somewhat flexible on the size of Pool B and would be open to debate on that point. Could it be seven bids? Sure. I just think you would want to cap Pool B bids around 75% of the number of Pool B conferences.

That way if a conference with nine football members endures a closure, maybe a merger or two, and several teams dropping football, they aren't all thrust into the maw of pool C right away.

It might also be worth adding a minimum number for conferences, so you don't have three schools getting together and calling themselves a conference for the purposes of obtaining pool B status.
Sing us a song, you're the piano man
Sing us a song tonight
Well, we're all in the mood for a melody
And you've got us feelin' alright.

BSCpanthers

I posted this on another forum about conference and division expansion, felt it fit here too.


I'm going to post this, knowing the NCAA is currently powerless and has zero control over anything that is going on.

There probably needs to be some reclassification, dependent on school enrollment, athletic facilities, sports offered, athletic budget and athletic attendance. I'm not sure how you weigh all that out, but something can surely be done. But like I said, the NCAA is not in control, so it will continue to be the Wild West with NIL, COA and conference and division expansion.

Ron Boerger

The problem is you propose dramatic changes to both the Pool B and Pool C structures that impact the entire division unless the presidents agreed to carve out a special exception for football (which they already have in some respects, true).  I think everyone here is onboard with 6 teams being a stupid low number for AQs, but that's what they voted in just a couple years back, and the landscape while changing hasn't changed dramatically enough for there to be a groundswell of those demanding something different. 

And you probably get better discussion with this in a more visible part of the board (a new topic in the General Football board might be a good place to start).  There are maybe half a dozen people who will contribute here, at most.


crufootball

In a bit of a bummer news for HSU fans, HSU posted their football schedule for next year and it only features 9 games. They said they are still looking for a 10th game but due to popular demand they posted what they do have which features a home game against Albright, a road game at UW - La Croose, followed by 2 open weeks and then their conference slate.

Have to wonder how this affect their mindset when dealing with the ASC shake up as well.

https://twitter.com/HSUAthletics/status/1666922308168982528?s=20

Riley Zayas

Quote from: crufootball on June 08, 2023, 07:54:56 PM
In a bit of a bummer news for HSU fans, HSU posted their football schedule for next year and it only features 9 games. They said they are still looking for a 10th game but due to popular demand they posted what they do have which features a home game against Albright, a road game at UW - La Croose, followed by 2 open weeks and then their conference slate.

Have to wonder how this affect their mindset when dealing with the ASC shake up as well.

https://twitter.com/HSUAthletics/status/1666922308168982528?s=20

To be honest, a move up to D2 would really help HSU solve this entire scheduling problem. The LSC schedule features more conference games than a post-2023 ASC schedule will, and the football programs in the RMAC would gladly agree to home-and-home arrangements, thus solving this ongoing scheduling problem.

Because it can't be fun to only have a nine-game schedule...and more than likely, that 10th opponent will end up being non-D3 unless another D3 has some kind of cancellation. At this point, maybe you can get an NAIA opponent on the schedule?

Also noticed that TLU likely ran into the same problem with D3 opponents...one of their non-conf games will be against Ave Maria (NAIA).
Proverbs 21:31. D3hoops.com WBB Top 25 voter. On the UMHB beat as the managing editor of TrueToTheCru.com, covering everything in CRU athletics. Read my blog, The Scoop on D3 Women's Hoops. Find it on the D3hoops.com Daily Dose.

TheChucker

My main question for the D2 financial model is if there are roster size limits? Both HSU and UMHB field well over 150 players for football. If there are roster limits, that would be a double whammy of fewer student athletes to pay tuition and not being able to charge tuition for the 140-150 scholarships if fully funded. There would probably be a modest revenue increase going D2 to help offset the scholarship costs (let's face it, most UMHB & HSU games are boringly lopsided) though not likely enough to offset the cost. Maybe a modest amount of extra exposure (marketing) at D2?

As for D3/NAIA games, it's not that uncommon. There were 20 games last year. TX, MN, WI, and IA probably comprise at least half of those.

jknezek

Quote from: TheChucker on June 11, 2023, 10:53:55 PM
My main question for the D2 financial model is if there are roster size limits? Both HSU and UMHB field well over 150 players for football. If there are roster limits, that would be a double whammy of fewer student athletes to pay tuition and not being able to charge tuition for the 140-150 scholarships if fully funded. There would probably be a modest revenue increase going D2 to help offset the scholarship costs (let's face it, most UMHB & HSU games are boringly lopsided) though not likely enough to offset the cost. Maybe a modest amount of extra exposure (marketing) at D2?

As for D3/NAIA games, it's not that uncommon. There were 20 games last year. TX, MN, WI, and IA probably comprise at least half of those.

In D2 you cannot fully fund the scholarships. You get 36 to spread across the team. You can have as many on the roster as you like in D2 unless the conference has a limit.

Ron Boerger

And then you have to offer scholarships (to be competitive) in the other sports:  M/W basketball 10 each, baseball 9, softball 7.2, soccer 9(m)/9.9(w), volleyball 8, M/W t&f/xc 12.6 (total) each, golf 3.6/5.4. 

TheChucker

#24969
Quote from: jknezek on June 12, 2023, 08:43:05 AM
Quote from: TheChucker on June 11, 2023, 10:53:55 PM
My main question for the D2 financial model is if there are roster size limits? Both HSU and UMHB field well over 150 players for football. If there are roster limits, that would be a double whammy of fewer student athletes to pay tuition and not being able to charge tuition for the 140-150 scholarships if fully funded. There would probably be a modest revenue increase going D2 to help offset the scholarship costs (let's face it, most UMHB & HSU games are boringly lopsided) though not likely enough to offset the cost. Maybe a modest amount of extra exposure (marketing) at D2?

As for D3/NAIA games, it's not that uncommon. There were 20 games last year. TX, MN, WI, and IA probably comprise at least half of those.

In D2 you cannot fully fund the scholarships. You get 36 to spread across the team. You can have as many on the roster as you like in D2 unless the conference has a limit.

Thanks for the response. If the LSC has roster size limits, the limit could be a a tough pill to swallow for schools like UMHB and HSU. If that's the case (I don't know if it is) figuring out some answer in D3 could be much more attractive.

What I meant by fully funding scholarships is funding them up to the D2 limit. Yeah, I realize that D2 and NAIA typically spread available schollies across multiple student athletes and some schools don't fund up to the maximum allowed.

TheChucker

Quote from: Ron Boerger on June 12, 2023, 09:07:10 AM
And then you have to offer scholarships (to be competitive) in the other sports:  M/W basketball 10 each, baseball 9, softball 7.2, soccer 9(m)/9.9(w), volleyball 8, M/W t&f/xc 12.6 (total) each, golf 3.6/5.4.

This is a similar discussion that was made on the MIAC thread leading up to St. Thomas getting expelled. One of the main discussions was how much incremental cost there really is for athletic scholarships when many student athletes already receive significant financial aid in D3? We don't know that as outsiders. Oh to be a fly on the wall in the school administrations.

CruFrenzy

Some notable news on the transfer front:

Former Killeen Ellison QB and district MVP Breezion Spiller has announced his transfer from Tarleton State to UMHB on twitter.

Looking at his spring film highlights at Tarleton he played some QB and some WR and looked blazing fast and talented at both positions. Listed at 6 foot 180 and 4.3/4.4 speed on his Tarleton bio. Could be a weapon for the Cru and according to his updated twitter bio he intends to play QB at UMHB, not WR. But we'll see what happens, promising addition either way.
2016, 2018 & 2021 National Champions :)

UMHB03

Quote from: CruFrenzy on June 13, 2023, 02:38:53 PM
Some notable news on the transfer front:

Former Killeen Ellison QB and district MVP Breezion Spiller has announced his transfer from Tarleton State to UMHB on twitter.

Looking at his spring film highlights at Tarleton he played some QB and some WR and looked blazing fast and talented at both positions. Listed at 6 foot 180 and 4.3/4.4 speed on his Tarleton bio. Could be a weapon for the Cru and according to his updated twitter bio he intends to play QB at UMHB, not WR. But we'll see what happens, promising addition either way.
That's blazing speed for D3. He can definitely contribute somewhere, and considering that King is gone and I'm not aware of any high quality candidates to replace him, there's no reason Spiller can't be in the mix at QB.
2016, 2018, and 2021 D3 Football National Champions

CruFrenzy

Yep definitely a big time athlete. I think Tingler (Spring Ball QB1) certainly has some arm talent and other skills so I don't want to discredit him. But you're right there is no proven starter at this point, so QB job is fairly open. Maybe we see a two QB approach for a while? Gonna be interesting!
2016, 2018 & 2021 National Champions :)

UMHB03

I could definitely go for a version of the Jase Hammack/DeNerian Thomas rotation from 2018.
2016, 2018, and 2021 D3 Football National Champions