UCAFANS.COM | GO UCA BEARS!

Be sure and check out Action Item J below.
Entire agenda here



Um, seriously? Someone must be out to get Coach Conque...

Do they not realize that we MAKE money on these games?

Our gate exceeds the payout and we are able to have a home game to offset the away "guaranteed" pay-day game we have versus a D-IA.

Surely calmer heads will prevail........

I don't know who came up this stupid idea, but they are crazy! I sure hope the board votes it down!

I would say there's your answer.

Let's get real...we will not get another home game in lieu of so we lose that revenue ..... also, it puts you in a bad position in negotiating other D1 money games as they know you cannot sub a home D2 game..other schools are not idiots.....

Furthermore, we give up the morale high ground in ever playing A-State again....this just gives them a rather legit excuse.....

It sure goes a long way in making your head coaching position one of the least desirable in the entire FCS if it goes through. Just about everywhere else, coaches can schedule an "easy" game against a lower-level opponent to give you a chance to, ideally...

1. Get a win
2. Gain confidence for your players
3. Get to work a lot of players in full-speed game scenario
4. Try some different things offensively, defensively and in special teams
5. Get a bit of a breather so you're not pounding away against equal or upper-level competition every week.

It would make it so much tougher to get home games. Those weeks you're trying to schedule an FCS opponent to come to you, the vast majority are busy playing home games or off playing FBS teams for a big paycheck. And when you do find one, they're going to be more expensive - and you're not going to draw THAT many more folks to the game for the gate to make up the difference.

Imagine if everybody, FBS and FCS schools alike, instituted a similar rule. The well would run dry and FCS budgets would suffer. Without the financial windfall from playing FBS schools, the FCS schools' budgets take a hit. And now, in the absence of those big paydays, you'd like to ease the sting on the budget by paying less to smaller schools ... but that's outlawed. So now you have to pay more to bring in FCS opponents, but you don't have the FBS-aided budget to do so. Bringing in less but spending more – not a sound economic model.

So obviously not everybody is going to do this, and it puts you at a competitive disadvantage on a number of fronts. It sort of seems like somebody thinks it's in the best interest of the program to whore our team out to every FBS team available, try to get two "money" games a year and end up with a battered, depleted roster and a lousy record and a coach on the next train out of town and none with any sense looking to step in to replace him.

Actually, now that I look at it ... maybe I've got it all wrong.

The language of the resolution is limited strictly to D-II teams. It doesn't speak to D3s or NAIAs or whatever else. I guess we'd be free to schedule those all we want?

That would lead us to believe at least one of the following...

1. D2s are too expensive and, for the sake of the budget, we need to schedule only D3s, NAIAs and so forth.

2. D2s aren't necessarily too expensive, but we don't want to line the pockets of our in-state competition ... thus making us just like those that we've come to abhor through the years.

3. Somebody is scared of playing D2s, specifically, for fear of embarrassing defeat (which conveys exactly zero confidence in your coaching staff and student-athletes). Also makes us just like those we've come to abhor.

4. It was intended to exclude all lower-level competition but the genius who drafted it up wasn't brilliant enough to figure out that there are more sub-Division I levels than D2.


Absolutely unreal that this is even an issue.

Of your four reasons, the only one that makes the slightest sense is #4. And that leads me to sticking with my initial prediction that someone is mad at Conque and this is their shot at him.

Well, I hope the fans of the other in-state teams don't see this as something the fans want...at least not me. I enjoy playing those teams and hope this thing doesn't pass.

From a personal wish list...I hope we get ATU back on the schedule sometime. What a crowd that would draw!

This fan certainly does not favor this...the whole system works because schools are willing to play down one level....FBS money to FCS and FCS to D2....we get it that athletic bottom line has to improve, esp as to reducing use of ancillary revenues....I would trust that BOT members will pay full price for their tickets to all events plus travel with official party while money is so tight....

I can't see where this makes any sense at all. The facts listed prior to the recommendation run counter to the actual recommendation. If the Board is going to do something like this I hope it at least states some rational basis for it. If Trey's right and this is personal ... well, maybe not so much has changed.

I hope the Board has the good sense to vote this proposal down.

It makes no sense.

This is one guy (who has no business being on the board in the first place) with a personal vendetta.

We have some fine board members, just not this one.

Is this guy the Obama of the BoT? Hopefully his proposition goes down in a ball of flames.

my comments will be made friday

Just my guess, but this probably stems from pressure from within the university. Other departments are having to cut budgets and they don't think the athletic department should be paying for games when they can go on the road and make more money.

ASU fans think we dropped the FCS game this year to have money to buy out the coach but truth is that budgets around the state and nation are suffering and some want to see athletics cut or forced to forfeit wins for cash. Academia always lash out at sports when things get tight. It's like clockwork.

I am just guessing, but that's my two cents.

No doubt a lot of truth to that statement. That being the case, universities should be putting pressure on the NCAA to allow the schools to drop the least revenue making sports to get close to budget. I'm sure there are 2-3 sports, probably more, at every school that are nothing but a ball and chain around the neck of their athletic departments.