Questions Heading Into The 2025 Season

On this episode, Sam and Zach discuss some questions heading into the season.
-In alphabetical order, these were the first 4 teams left out of the 2024 FCS playoff bracket - Chattanooga, Southeastern Louisiana University, Southern Utah, Stony Brook. Which of these teams is most likely to make the 2025 playoff bracket?
-In alphabetical order, these were the last 4 teams selected into the 2024 FCS playoff bracket - Eastern Kentucky, Northern Arizona, Tennessee State, UT Martin. Which of these teams is LEAST likely to make the 2025 playoff bracket?
-What is South Dakota State's most likely record after its first 2 games?
-Will the House settlement era (schools revenue-sharing with players, in-house NIL, no scholarship limits unless conferences individually set them) create more parity in the FCS nationally, or will it widen the gap even more?
-Which FCS conference will see the next team move to the FBS?
-What are your expectations for the Ivy League champion and their FCS playoff debut this season?
The podcast is presented by HERO Sports and BetMGM. Visit Hero Sports for FCS coverage and BetMGM for online betting odds.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:15):
All right, Welcome in FCS tackle football fans to another
episode of the FCS Football Talk podcast. We are presented
by hero Sports and bet MGM. I'm your host, Sam
Herder of hero Sports, and I'm joined by my co host,
Zach McKinnell with FCS Football Central and the blue Bloods.
We are going to dive into some questions ahead of

(00:39):
this upcoming football season about six questions that I posed
on social media on Twitter. I did some Twitter polls
and got a lot of good responses on there. So
we're gonna expand on these six questions and talk about
them a little bit more. But before we go into that, Zach,
how are you doing good?

Speaker 2 (01:00):
Man?

Speaker 3 (01:01):
I feel like we're almost there. Sam, what We only
got really one more show until we get to week zero,
so a pump for that, and we got a load
of week zero slate, man, So I'm excited.

Speaker 1 (01:12):
Yeah, next week we'll be able to talk about some games,
so that'll be exciting. But you know, one more week
of really a lot of hypotheticals. A lot of these
questions are are certainly hypotheticals, most of them on the field,
a couple of them off the field. But we'll start
with two questions surrounding the playoff bubble from last year.

(01:33):
And when you look at the first four teams that
were left out of the twenty twenty four team or
the twenty twenty four FCS playoff bracket, that was Chattanooga,
Southeastern Louisiana, Southern Utah, and Stony Brook.

Speaker 2 (01:49):
And when I.

Speaker 1 (01:50):
Pose this question on social media, thirty seven percent of
the voters said Chattanooga, Southern Utah got twenty four point
seven percent, he Brooke got twenty two point four percent,
and then Southeastern got fifteen point nine percent. So I'll
kick it to you to start here. Of these four
teams that were left out of last year's playoff bracket,

(02:14):
who do you think is most likely to make this
year's playoff bracket.

Speaker 4 (02:19):
I'll be honest him.

Speaker 3 (02:20):
I was a little bit surprised by the result of
the poll when I saw it, just because of the
turnover that Chattanooga had where they don't have a I mean, Luke,
I believe that schroan Berg started a handful of games,
but he was a bit up and down as a
young quarterback, and they lost everybody at wide receiver. They
lost their starting running back to Alcorn multiple starters don't

(02:43):
come back on the offensive line, they have to replace
most of the starting defensive line, and they got holds
from the secondary. I think the voting for Chattanooga is
more of a respect to Rusty Wright and what he
built there because he's such a good coach man, and
I mean he's won what six or more games I
think every single year has been there since COVID. I
think when I look at the question, the two that

(03:03):
stick out to me are Southeast in Louisiana in Southern Utah.
And I think for Southeast and Louisiana it's because they
don't have the death throw of a schedule that they
had last year and out of conference play that really
hurt them. But every year they performed really well in
conference play. But if I had to pick one, I'm
gonna go Southern Utah. This is a team under Fitzgerald
that has been right there on the custom and it

(03:25):
feels like they've been at the precipice of finally kind
of breaking through that glass ceiling and you look at.

Speaker 4 (03:30):
Everything they have.

Speaker 3 (03:30):
I think defensively they needed to take a step forward,
but they got better throughout the year.

Speaker 4 (03:36):
Went six and two in UAC play.

Speaker 3 (03:38):
And I think they've just returned a lot of the
key pieces from that defense while also raising the floor
of that unit through the transfer portal. I really like
Sebastian Adamsinski from Drake It linebacker was an All Pioneer selection,
Blake Stillwell was a key rotational guy from Montana State
and safety. They had a safety from air Force who
was a starter for air Force a lot of the

(04:00):
time last year, and then a linebacker and Matt Witcomb
from Montana Tech who was an All American level guy
from a sub D one level, and same for Jacobe
Spence from Sterling College at corner. And then you look offensively,
I think Shane carrt wide receivers super explosive. You have
Edward Riley heading a pretty experienced offensive line unit. Sam
I look at the UAC and outside of Tarlton, a

(04:22):
lot of those teams behind Tarlton have big question marks.
You look at Abolene Christian having to replace a ton
on the offenside of the ball, including five starting offensive lineman.
Central Arkansas has to replace a lot as well, And
I think you look at Southern Utah's that team that
can maybe push into that number two role and be
that second bid for the UAC.

Speaker 1 (04:43):
Yeah, I mean the results are interesting and it's definitely
not scientific because some of these I mean, it could
have just been simply you know, a fan base, you know,
getting a hold of it and voting for for their team.
But these results, I would have win the complete opposite,
as I think Chattanooga is probably the least likely. You know,

(05:06):
you mentioned the offensive losses, but also defensively, they only
returned two of their top thirteen tacklers.

Speaker 2 (05:11):
And it is.

Speaker 1 (05:12):
Interesting too that they what finished seconds in the Silicon
preseason poll and they even got a couple of first
place votes and so maybe it is just a respect thing.
But you know, I know, also brought in some FCS
transfers that can make an impact. But that was definitely
a surprise to me.

Speaker 3 (05:30):
It was funny because Rusty Wright I asked them at
SOCOM Media Day Sam about that, and he said that
that the other coaches must be setting them up for
failure because he was like, there's no way, because i mean, Sam,
look at the schedule. Tarlton stayed on the road at
Tennessee Tech at Memphis are three of your first four games.

(05:51):
All of those teams Tarlton and Tennessee Tech were both
predicted to win their conference, and then you have an
fps game in Memphis.

Speaker 4 (05:58):
You're looking at maybe one in three.

Speaker 3 (06:00):
And that doesn't include at Mercer, Western Carolina, etsu at Stamford,
who's always tough. I mean, they got a brutal schedule.
So I just think with all the turnover in the schedule,
it's really really hard for me to see Chattanooga making
that jump into the postseason.

Speaker 1 (06:17):
Yeah, and thinking back really to last year's playoff bracket announcements,
and you know, we always talk about what are some
head scratchers, what are the things we disagree with. Honestly,
one of the top things was not even the bracket itself.
It was the bubble because I was questioning why Chattanooga
was on this list of first four left out in
Western Carolina. Wasn't because they had the same record in

(06:38):
Western Carolina that had to head win and so if anything,
maybe this would be a bit different if Western Carolina
was on that list instead of Chattanooga, because I know
we're both pretty high on the Catamouts. As far as
the team that I would have voted for, I was
leaning either Southeastern Louisiana or Stonybrook just because I like
what stony Brook is building. But I went with Southeastern

(07:01):
Louisiana just because I really thought they were playing well
at the end of last year. You know, they return,
you know, a good chunk of starters. I believe it's
around sixteen starters from last year. Their their schedule is
pretty tough. They have two FBS opponents in their first
four games, although going to Louisiana Tech, you know, that
is one I circled as a potential FCS over FBS win.

(07:24):
So I went with the Lions on this one.

Speaker 2 (07:27):
We'll see.

Speaker 1 (07:28):
If you look at the south Land, uiw Is is
going to be really good. We're both really high on
SFAs as well, and so could the Southland get a
third team in We'll see. I mean the Big South
OBC was able to do so last year, and so
I think there is potential there. I mean, I'm pretty
sure Southeastern Louisiana avoids SFA unless I'm mistaken, and so

(07:49):
they did. Yeah, they did get you know a bit
of a scheduling jolt there by by not having one
of those top two teams, so to kind of flip
it to the other side. Here the last four teams
that were selected into the FCS playoff bracket last year,
Eastern Kentucky, Northern Arizona, Tennessee State, and UT Martin. Of

(08:10):
these four teams that just made it in last year,
who do you think is least likely to make the
twenty twenty five playoff bracket?

Speaker 3 (08:18):
I thought that this one, Sam, I'll be honest, that
there was ever a poll on Twitter that could get
to one hundred percent, it could have been this one
in my opinion.

Speaker 1 (08:27):
I'll break down the voting here, because Tennessee State got
nearly fifty percent of the votes, and then UT Martin
twenty one percent, Northern Arizona close to fourteen percent, and
then Eastern Kentucky was right ahead of Northern Arizona. Ek,
you got fifteen percent. But yeah, more than or nearly
half of these voters went to Tennessee State, which which
I would certainly agree with with with their losses, yes,

(08:50):
that they've had it.

Speaker 4 (08:52):
I don't even know if it's like you said, it's
a debate.

Speaker 3 (08:55):
I think when you look at everything they lost now,
I do want to say this, I think they hired
a staff, Sam. I love what Reggie Barlowbrodon and they
have one of the most experienced, well known staffs just
just by name, recognition and experience in the FCS. But
I think it's going to take a year, and with
how late they came in and how much roster turnover

(09:15):
they had, I just don't Maybe they're better than people expect.
Maybe they're better than eighth in the Big South or
in the OVC Big South, and they were voted in
the preseason, but when you only have two significant contributors
coming back offensively, five or four defensively, and those are
players that played over two hundred snaps, really really hard
for me to pick them.

Speaker 4 (09:36):
Now.

Speaker 3 (09:37):
I have been hearing really good things Sam about I
believe it's Carson Palmer's son in fall camp, and I
heard he's dealing right now, so maybe he brings a
bit of upside. But I think it was an odd year.
Adding the obvious to the playoff as well shrunk the bubble.
And I just don't see how the OVC Big South
gets two three teams inconsistently. And I think with how

(09:59):
high I am on ten See Tech, I find it
very hard that Tennessee State's going to find their way
into the postseason, even if they exceed expectations from where
they are right now.

Speaker 1 (10:07):
Yep, I'm with you there. And you know, two of
the other ones Eastern Kentucky U T. Martin are you know,
it seems like they've there. They are both the type
of programs where you know they'll they'll be in the
playoffs or they'll be in the playoff hunts. But then
they you know, they dip out of the preseason top
twenty five, but as the season progresses, they're just right
back there, you know, at least in the mix. And

(10:28):
so those are two programs that you know, certainly have
shown the ability to maintain you know, how good they
are and always be in that playoff mix. And then
Northern Arizona to me, makes sense as far as getting
the least amount of votes here because I think the
Jacks have a really good shot to be back in
in the playoffs after you know, a breakout year from

(10:48):
last year. I mean, they return eight of their top
fifteen tacklers. You know, starting quarterback is coming back in
Ty Pennington, who's one of the more you know, experience
returning quarterbacks in the FC, and a pretty experienced offensive line,
you know, top two running backs are coming back, and
so I think Northern Arizona, you know, certainly is primed
to be to be back in in the playoffs this year.

(11:10):
All right, go into more of an individual question here.
This one got maybe the most votes, you.

Speaker 2 (11:17):
Know, the playoff bubble polls.

Speaker 1 (11:20):
Those got one hundred and sixty to one hundred and
seventy votes. This one got close to fourteen hundred votes.
And it's about South Dakota State, and it includes two
other pretty passionate fan bases. I asked, what is South
Dakota State's most likely most likely record after its first
two games? The Jacks host Sacramento State and then they
go to Montana State. The most votes was one in

(11:44):
one fifty seven point six percent. The next most votes
was two and zero thirty one point eight percent of votes,
and then zero to two got ten point six percent
of votes. So I'll ask you what you think stsu's
most likely record is after the first two weeks.

Speaker 3 (12:02):
If I had to put money on it, Sam, I'm
gonna go one in one. I think they should in
my opinion right now, I would pick them to beat
Sack State, and I would probably slightly favor Montana State.

Speaker 4 (12:16):
Right now.

Speaker 3 (12:17):
And I don't think it's because of you know, obviously
they both have question marks at quarterback and we don't
really know who Montana State's quarterback is gonna be, but
Chase Mason still has to prove himself as a full
time starter. It's I do like the I think there's
more continuity everywhere else from Montana State the South Dakota
State right now. Plus Bozeman's a tough place to go

(12:38):
and play, and that crowd is going to be electric
that that. I mean, neither team's gonna overlook that. And
I just think Montana State right now is a little
bit better position. And I just for me, I don't
see oh and two, Sam. If if they go oh
and two.

Speaker 4 (12:52):
I'll be one. Sam.

Speaker 3 (12:54):
I don't know if me or you have enough power
to stop the Sack State hype train that will be
rolling down the FCS tracks if they find a way
to win in Brookings in week one. But two, I
just I mean, you look at the schedule for South
Dakota State. You still got North Dakota State, you still
got South Dakota. I mean, are we looking at a
four lost South Dakota State team potentially? And that's not

(13:18):
even including I don't know if they play Illinois State,
but they're gonna be pretty good. Southern Illinois got some
preseason hype. Is there a chance we could get a
five loss team? So I think zero to two would
set them up really not in a great spot going
into Valley play, but I think one in one as
long as you find a way to split those if
you're Dan Jackson the jack Rabbits, you'll be fine. Like

(13:38):
I said, we've kind of broken down the team a
little bit. I love their offensive line. They're gonna be
able to run the football as long as Chase Mason
can protect the football and be somewhat efficient pushing the
football down the field, not allowing the teams to load
the box. I think they have enough talent defensively to
hang with almost anybody in the FCS.

Speaker 1 (13:55):
Yeah, I'm right there with you. I think one in
one is most likely. If I had to pick the
second most likely, you know it would be too and zero,
and then the least likely is oh and two. But
even with that said, I wouldn't be blown away shocked
if the Jacks do lose these two opening games, because
of course, going to Bozeman is an incredible challenge. And

(14:16):
you know, I think Montana State is is really loaded
on the offensive a defensive line. You could also say
the same thing about South Kota State. In fact, I'm
doing some offensive line unit rankings, and at least on paper,
to me, Montana State has the best offensive line coming
back in the FCS and South Kota State has the
second best offensive line coming back this year. And so

(14:38):
that's gonna be a battle in Bozeman. And we just
don't know what we're going to get with with Sacramento States.
The more I can't remember if I've said this on
the podcast, the more I dove into SAX States, I
bought the hype a little bit less, but I'm still
buying the hype enough for them to be just inside
my top ten with preseason rankings, just just with the

(15:01):
you know, the level of talent they have at wide receiver,
absolutely loaded at running back led by Jamar Curtis, but
they have two other FBS transfers who saw a decent
amount of the experience at their previous schools. Jane Roshada,
you know, at quarterback. He's a well known name, and
so I think the talent level is certainly there. For
Sacramento State, I'm just not sure if they did enough

(15:22):
to address the offensive line and the defensive line. And
they returned three starters on the O line. And Sacramento
State's really going back to twenty eighteen, twenty nineteen, They've
always had pretty good offensive lines. But as I've said,
you can't, you know, a pretty good offensive line isn't
going to get it done against Montana State or South
Kota State. In their D line last year, you know,

(15:44):
I definitely thought had it struggles. I don't know if
they did enough to address that as well. So I
we can break down this matchup in a couple of weeks.
But it once surprise me at all to see Sacramento
State jump up early on South Kota State and Twitter's
freaking out. You'll have you know, casual FBS fans and
you know, jumping in on and be like a Sacramento

(16:04):
State Sacramento State. But then as both teams adjust and
the offensive and defensive line start to take over the game,
I could see South Goda State maybe mounting to a
comeback after falling down you know early, and that.

Speaker 3 (16:17):
If Sex State funds a way to win the game
and Obviously we'll break down the exits and o's in
the coming weeks. Do you move them into that, Like
if they pull it off in Brookings, regardless of having
a look for a close game, obviously a blowout.

Speaker 4 (16:29):
I know the answer to this.

Speaker 3 (16:30):
Let's just say it's a three point games, they have
seven point game, game winning touchdown. Do you do you
move them into national title contender conversations?

Speaker 1 (16:39):
Yeah, I think you have to, you know, for for
the time being. Now, if South Goota State the next
week goes to Montana State and loses, you know, by
twenty one points, then you go, okay, well, you know,
South Goota State is maybe not as good as we thought.
And so it's kind of the you and I do
this both. It's a week to week adjustment, especially early on.
Yes in the season, if SEC Crimental State beat South

(17:01):
Dakota State, I think you jumped them into your top five,
if not top four, and you put them in that
national title discussion. And then if South Kota State beats
Montana State, all of a sudden, okay, well SAX State
beats Southcota State. South got State here Montana State, maybe
SAX State's the number two team. Right now, you know
behind NDSU, and so I think it really does fluctuate.

(17:23):
But I base things off of what I've seen so
far this season. So I do think if Sacramento State
gets that Week one win, to me, I definitely think
they get that bump right away into being in that
elite discussion.

Speaker 4 (17:36):
I agree.

Speaker 3 (17:37):
I just had to ask because I mean, I know
there's been so much conversation about can they make that jump,
And like you said, I still got questions about the
especially the interior defensive line, because I'll look at sax
State a little bit. They're built kind of like Incardinate
Ward was Sam where they have the explosiveness to beat
some of those teams. Like let's say they get to
the playoffs and they got enough talent to win first

(18:01):
second round, maybe even pulling upside in the quarters. But
when they go up against these top teams in the country,
do they have what it takes to win in the trenches,
especially on the interior, because that's where when you saw
Incardinate Word win some of these games. When they ran
into South Dakota State both times, they really lost the
battle inside in the trenches, and that's where I worry
especially defensively for sax State where they were replacing I

(18:22):
want to say almost their entire defensive line.

Speaker 2 (18:25):
Yep.

Speaker 1 (18:25):
By the way, I do have an off the wall
Sack State question to end the podcast that's not on
our list, but we will get to that one at
the end of the podcast. Here, I want to make sure
we get through these ones first, all right, another off
the field here and off the field one here will
the house settlement era, which will include revenue sharing with

(18:47):
players in house nil. There's no scholarship limits in the
FCS anymore unless the conference individually sets them, and so
the solcon in the Big Sky both kept their scholarship
limit or their amounts you can offer is still at
sixty three, which is kind of status quo. I can

(19:07):
see them not having that in future seasons. Meanwhile, other
conferences like the CIA in the Southland Swack Missouri Valley
Football Conference, they did not set any caps, and so schools,
if they can afford it, they can go to seventy
seventy five eighty five scholarships one hundred and five football scholarships.
That's a lot of money, so not likely. But the

(19:28):
question is with this revenue sharing in house nil no
scholarship limits. Is that going to create more parody in
the FCS nationally or will it widen the gap even more?
And I probably should have put a third option here
where you know it's just gonna stay the same, but
I only put two options, and that's either widen the

(19:49):
gap or close the gap. This got nearly two hundred votes,
and eighty eight percent of voters said it's going to
widen the gap, which leaves twelve percent of the voters
think it's going to close the gap a little bit more.
You know, I did a story on this last week,
I believe, talking to Missouri Valley football conferences where I
asked them this question, and none of them really said, oh,

(20:11):
it's definitely going to widen the gap, because you know,
I don't know if any any one of them really
wanted to say that. You can definitely tell, and if
you watch you know, if you watch the Zoom, you
can you could definitely I'm not speaking out of turn here,
you could definitely tell that Tim Polisike wanted to say
it's going to the wide in the gap, but you know,
you know, politically you probably didn't want to didn't want
to say that, but there are some coaches that said, oh, yeah,

(20:33):
I think it could close the gap a little bit.
I definitely think it's going to widen the gap. And
there are two two arguments on both sides of this,
and one is that the FCS rich will just get richer. Right,
if you can now directly revenue share with players, you
can move nil deals in house, you can fund more

(20:55):
scholarships if you want to. You can offer higher cost
of attendance or alson payments, which I guess it's pretty
much the same as revenue sharing. Like the NBSUS and
Montana States of the world, they're just gonna.

Speaker 2 (21:06):
Thrive in this.

Speaker 1 (21:08):
Meanwhile, the other teams that you know struggle for external
support and donations and you know their athletic departments. You know,
maybe they put a little bit more focus on baseball
or the basketball teams, or they have tight budgets, Like
how are they going to thrive in this new era
where there is revenue sharing? And so the one argument
is that the FCS rich will get richer. Now the

(21:30):
counter argument, and again I don't necessarily agree with this,
the counter argument on why it could create more parody
is it could be easier for second tier teams to
catch the top tier teams. An example of that is
pretty much paying players is really important now even in
the FCS, especially for player retention, and are FCS or

(21:54):
even G five school is going to be able to
outbid quote unquote outbid power for you know, money and
the offers, whether it is through nil or or revenue sharing.

Speaker 2 (22:04):
No.

Speaker 1 (22:04):
But if you're a player and you get offered one
hundred thousand dollars to leave your FCS school to go
to a power for school and you're getting zero dollars
from your FCS school, you might be saying, I really
really like this school that I'm at, and you know,
I really love it here, but it's one hundred thousand dollars,
Like I got to take that. But if you're let's
say you get twenty thousand dollars from your FCS school, Yeah,

(22:26):
one hundred thousand dollars is a lot more than twenty thousand,
but twenty thousand is still a lot of money for
a college student, and if you really like it there,
you go, yeah, like I'm going to stay here at
twenty thousand dollars is more than enough for me. So
being able to pay your players even if it's a
little bit, it's definitely beneficial for player retention. And with
this new revenue sharing model for schools that really had

(22:47):
trouble getting supports and donations into their third party NIL collectives,
they were falling behind when it came to trying to
retain their players. Now by opting into the settlements, one,
you can move money or rounds within your athletic budget
to be able to directly pay these players. And two,
there are a lot of donors out there that didn't

(23:07):
feel comfortable donating to third party collectives because they're like,
I don't really know what this is. We don't get
tax breaks, like what is this? They're going to be
more comfortable donating right to their school because that they're
already doing. So, you know, as boosters, they're gonna feel
more comfortable donating to the school for this revenue sharing
slash nil pots, plus you get tax deductions for donating

(23:28):
right to schools, and so that is the argument for
schools that maybe weren't where they wanted to be in
the nile of collective. Now they're saying, well, we can
move this in house now. Now we're gonna be able
to pay our players. Similar to what you know NDSUS
collective was able to do. So that that's the counter
argument and why it potentially could close the gap a
little bit in the FCS.

Speaker 3 (23:51):
There's so many layers to this conversation, and I mean
we probably have a whole episode on it.

Speaker 4 (23:58):
I think.

Speaker 3 (24:01):
For me, sim I think it it's gonna widen the
gap in the FCS, but overall have a net positive
in the FCS, if that makes sense.

Speaker 4 (24:11):
So I think it wide is the gap, like you.

Speaker 3 (24:13):
Said, between those programs that have the resources to set
up and to have some sort of nil initiative initiatives
are collective it has. I think it helps the programs
that have that fan support, the donor base, the attendance
because you can be and I think you wrote about this,
you can be super creative with how you maybe can
can raise some of these funds and and have have

(24:37):
extra resources. I think the net positive for the FCS
so is, like you said, if everything we've been told
about this new model is true, where these p fours
cannot just come in and just throw money around with
with no cap, with no limit and and and just
bring as many player as they want in. I do

(24:59):
think it helps the in terms of retaining player talent,
especially if you're a top twenty five program that has
to resources, that has some sort of NIL backing. So
I think it overall helps the FCS a little bit
in that regard in terms of not as much roster
turnover every single year, which you're still going to see

(25:19):
that where if you have a breakout freshman all Americans Sam,
I mean, there's nothing you could do to keep them
at the end of the day. And maybe it's a
thing like you saw like Schamar Brown with North Dakota State,
where you win the Jay Rice Award and then Miami
comes calling. How do you turn that opportunity down? But
I think what it does is helped some of these
top FCS programs compete with some of these lower tier

(25:41):
G five schools that we've seen players transfer to. Like
at the end of the day, I mean, what's really
the difference between Colorado State and North Dakota State, or
Colorado or Utah State and Idaho. I don't think the
difference between those type of programs is that big, And
I think it helps bring the FCS a little bit
closer there. But I don't think this model is going

(26:02):
to take a team SAM that right now is the
sixty f best team in the FCS and bring them
up to where if they just throw a bunch of
money around, they could be competitive. Because those type of
programs that are not competing in this model probably do not,
outside of maybe a few outliers or exceptions, have the
money and resources just to make that jump. Because if
they had the money and resources, Sam, they'd already be

(26:25):
investing in their program. So I don't think you're going
to see a program just make a complete one to
eighty and become a national power in this new model.

Speaker 1 (26:33):
Yeah, I definitely think there are positives certainly, and you
know with the house settlement, there is the new nil
clearing house where you need to have, you know, business
reasons and reasonable market value when it comes to anil
because nil collectors are still going to be a thing.
Right if you're Alabama and you can revenue share twenty

(26:55):
and a half million dollars per year across the athletic department,
you know.

Speaker 2 (27:00):
It'll be helpful.

Speaker 1 (27:01):
This still have that thirty party third party collective for
you know, add on money to that. But no longer
can you pay an offensive lineman two hundred and fifty
thousand dollars and all that offensive Lineman is doing is
you know, two meet and greets a semester. Like the
Nile Clearinghouse is going to look at that and be like, no,
that that doesn't add up. And we've seen I think,

(27:24):
and we've talked about this before with the Spring Portal window,
the amount of NIL deals and offers being thrown out
there was just eye watering or it was just ludicrous
amounts of money because these Power for Nil collectives said
we need to get these deals signed and out there
before this clearinghouse which launched in you know, I want

(27:46):
to say June. And there are a lot of examples
of FCS guys that you know, they got an NIL
offer and they said, yeah, no, like I'm thanks, panel thanks,
you know, I'm good. But then they come back and say, okay,
what if we double it? And then then then these
players are going, well when you put it that way,
like this money is getting too big to turn down.
And I think there are a lot of examples of that,

(28:07):
and now I think there's gonna be fewer examples of
that just because yeah, there's gonna be a lot of
money still thrown out there with the with the revenue sharing,
but these crazy NIL deals are no longer going to
be happening, So that too, is gonna help with FCS
teams retain. And I think it's probably not gonna close
the gap, but it could potentially help the Tier one

(28:30):
grow a little bit. I mean, if a team like
Tarlton State, who has gobs of money, you know, eventually
they're gonna they're gonna be in the FBS, that's probably
a safe gas. But in the meantime, like if they
want to say, you know what, let's just go all
in on this FCS thing, Let's let's get eighty five
scholarships out, you know, let's let's offer eighty five football scholarships.
Like that's gonna help them catch in North Dakota State,

(28:53):
who is maybe playing with seventy football scholarships. And the
thing too is, you know, I think I feel comfortable
saying that, Like, I don't think South Dakota and South
Kota State's NIL collective was where they wanted it to be.
You know, I just think they really generated much momentum
there and so being able to move that in house,

(29:13):
you know, I think is going to be able to
help them pretty much quote unquote pay their football players
at the same level of NBSU or Montana State, who
had pretty healthy collectives going to my knowledge, so do
I definitely do think there are benefits with this. I
just don't think we're ever going to see an FCS
where there's ten twelve teams good enough to win a

(29:35):
national title unless we really see some big realignment happening
sometime down the road.

Speaker 3 (29:40):
Yeah, And let's be honest, sim and no one wants
to be honest about this. There's never been equality or
equity in college sports, yeah, ever, and I just think
it's unfair to hold the new model to the standard
that has never been there in college football, if that
makes sense. I mean, at the end of the same,
look at every level from P four to G five

(30:03):
to FCS, T D two to D three to NAI.
They are the haves and the have nots at the
end of the day, and everybody has a different level
of funding, a different level of resources. And if you
track who's winning outside of a handful of exceptions every year, Sam,
I think the resources and the teams that have the
most money typically like that correlation is there between wins

(30:26):
and national championships and who's spending the most money, regardless
of the model. And I don't think that will ever
go away at the end of the day, regardless of
any institable a bylaws.

Speaker 4 (30:35):
And new rules, new models.

Speaker 3 (30:38):
If you want to win, you have to spend the
money to win. And I don't think that's ever going
to change in college sports.

Speaker 1 (30:44):
Yeah, and that's pretty much what brocks Back said. You know,
the veteran, the grizzled veteran head coach of Illinois State.
You pretty much said, Look, at the end of the day,
if you're gonna be a good football program, you need
to have the resources. Doesn't matter what level you're at.
You know, it's just going to come back to do
you have the resources, the money and all that. So, yeah,
I'm with you. There two more questions here, one off

(31:08):
the field and another one will be on the field.
I asked which FCS conference will see the next team
moved to the FBS. This got This is actually our
most popular poll that I did. This got over fourteen
hundred votes. Thirty nine percent said the Big Sky, thirty
eight percent said the Missouri Valley Football Conference, twelve percent

(31:28):
said the South Wind, and then ten a little more
than ten percent said.

Speaker 2 (31:34):
The UAC.

Speaker 1 (31:36):
To me, I I can understand the Big Sky one
because you could look at it it's maybe Montana and
Montana State fans, you know, kind of taking over this pole.
You know, that could definitely be a part of it.
But I definitely think like you could see a scenario
where we haven't really heard much from sax State honestly

(31:58):
lately about their FBS push. I had their pla by
a play guy on the podcast a couple of weeks ago,
and he, you know, pretty much said like, hey, I'm
not really sure what the plan is, but there's no
doubt still a push to go to the FBS.

Speaker 2 (32:10):
And you know they did.

Speaker 1 (32:12):
Sax State did hire a well known sports attorney, Jeffrey Kessler.
I don't haven't seen anything as far as they filed
the lawsuit or anything like that, but certainly you can
see a scenario where sax State sues its way into
the FBS. So that could be why part of the
reason why the Big Skuy got the most votes. I
also think there's the UC Davis part I'm out there
as well, where they did join the Mountain West for

(32:34):
all sports but football. I mean, there is a clause
in the agreement where if the Mountain West were to
consider adding an FCS team or teams, UC Davis would
be I can't remember what the wording is, I have
it on my Twitter, but the UC Davis would have
the right to apply first, but the Mountain West is.

Speaker 2 (32:53):
Not obligated to actually invite them.

Speaker 1 (32:56):
And so a part of me views that as well,
that clause is kind of worthless because you are pretty
much saying, yeah, you can apply, but we don't have
to invite you. At the same time, like it would
be a pretty natural fit for the Mountain West to
eventually invite UC Davis football because they do have the
highest budget in the FCS the last I checked at
least for public schools where we where we can see

(33:17):
that those type of figures, location is ideal. I think
UC Davis has nice facilities, you know, football stadium that
has the ability to expand. So I do think, you know,
UC Davis would be a natural fit. And that is
also why the Big Sky got the most votes, the
Missouri Valley Football Conference being right there as well with
thirty eight percent of the votes. I really just think

(33:38):
that was NYSU fans just voting with their their hearts
more than their heads. What's interesting is the UAC got
the least amount of votes, the least amount of votes,
and I think if you actually put odds on this,
you know, on the sports book, the UAC would probably
have the best odds because when it comes to like
actual reporting that's out there and not speculation and hypotheticals,

(34:02):
the next FCS to FBS team, you know, is most
likely going to be Tarlton State. I believe it was
Pete Thamil. I also believe the Athletic reported on it
as well when news was breaking that hey, Louisiana Tech
is probably going to join the Sun Belt and if
Conference USA wants to add in their place, Tarleton State
is the number one candidate. So there's actually reporting out

(34:23):
there compared to there's no I mean, there's speculation, but
I don't even know if I would call it smoke about.
I mean, there's no reporting out there that the Mountain
West is targeting Sack State, UC Davis, Northcota State, the
Montana schools, and so that I would flip this around,
and my vote definitely would have went to the to
the United Athletic Conference.

Speaker 3 (34:45):
Those are the only two in my opinion, that makes
it like I don't even know, like where the voters
confused on which conference Tarlton was in. Is that how
the Southland got vote?

Speaker 1 (34:54):
Yeah, I mean the south And I included the Southland
because McNeese has been floated out there as well for
a conference USA invite.

Speaker 2 (35:02):
Down the road.

Speaker 4 (35:03):
But I mean that would be insane.

Speaker 3 (35:05):
If mcne makes the jump before North Dakota State, I
think the city is gonna burn.

Speaker 1 (35:10):
Yeah, I mean, they they want it that they're they've
they've been. They're not as publicly outspoken as like a
Sacramento state, but you know they've said, yeah, you know,
we envisioned ourselves and are hoping to go to FBS.
And so that's that's why I included the Southland. You know,
the CIA, I didn't really see a team there, so
kind of didn't see a team there, like maybe Western
Carolina gets thrown into the mix sometime down the road

(35:32):
for the sun Belt. But that's why I included the
big Sky Valley Southland in the Ucay.

Speaker 4 (35:37):
Yeah, I just outside of mctnice.

Speaker 3 (35:39):
Like nobody in the Southland has the resources to make
the jump at all.

Speaker 4 (35:43):
In my opinion, I.

Speaker 3 (35:44):
Think McNeice is if we're really stretching the definition of FBS,
McNeice like barely makes it in my opinion. And I
think in the UAC, I think Charlton's probably the only one.

Speaker 2 (35:56):
I know.

Speaker 3 (35:56):
Eastern Kentucky was floated there for a while, but from
what I'm hearing, I don't know if you're hearing the
same thing, Sam, Western Kentucky's not letting them come like
they're going to vote against that every single time. And
kind of the same with Central Arkansas and Arkansas State
where they don't want another in state school, you know
what I mean, They already are kind of like the
G five school of the state. Why would you want
another one? And so there's there's politics behind all these.

Speaker 4 (36:20):
Moves as well.

Speaker 3 (36:21):
And I just don't see anyone like even like you mentioned,
like OVC, Big South. Maybe I know there was a
little bit of a rumors a while back about Chattanooga.
I think that's kind of died down song with you.
I think it's the UAC and or the Big Sky.
I just can't see. I know North Dakota State fans
are going to hate this, Sam, But at the end
of the day, like I just I want to say

(36:43):
it was at the Missouri State ad that said that
they got like the laugh the last lifeboat or lifeline
to the FBS. I think that was like last week.
He said that it almost kind of feels like the
door is not concrete it up, but like the door's
locked for right now until everything settles down and outside

(37:05):
of the Sack state, who might try to force their
way as an independent and or Charlton go into the CUSA.
I just don't know if there's a route realistically right
now that I see North Dakota State making that jump
unless this is an independent and I don't think their
administration wants to do that.

Speaker 2 (37:23):
Yeah, I was just pulling this up.

Speaker 1 (37:25):
This is from last week, I believe, and I know
this kind of got some social media reaction, you know
to it. Some folks that cover the Mountain West and
also some some FCS fans that you know kind of
jumped on this and said, you know, this is this
is the the news we've been waiting for, and this
could this could really open the floodgates. And that is

(37:45):
with the new Division one governance structure, which we don't
need to dive into into all that, but it pretty
much creates weighted voting power for the A four the
power four conferences to pass rules that they want to
pass without having to rely on the votes of the
G five or the FCS. But as part of this
new governance, there was a notes in there, or you know,

(38:10):
a resolution in there that said the board also adopted
a resolution which specifies that for a five year period,
no changes can be made to membership requirements for existing
Division one schools and conferences. And some people took that
as all this is going to this is going to
open the door for fcs to FBS move ups. To me,
it doesn't open the door. It just doesn't slam the

(38:31):
door shut. It just keeps things status quo. Because there
was a concern that with this A four voting power,
what were they going to do with it? Were they
going to take away autobids? Were they going to take
away you know, distribution money for the NCAA tournaments, which
another resolution says they won't be allowed to do that.
But another concern was we all know or if you

(38:54):
don't know, there definitely is political pushback the FBS growing.
You know, the powers that be in the FBS don't
want a ton of more FCS schools coming in and
so the thought was, well, once they get this voting power,
what's stopping these A four conferences from saying if you
have to, if you transition to the FBS, your transition

(39:15):
fee is now ten million dollars. It's not five million dollars,
it's ten million dollars. Or you need to get your
scholarships up to this amount right away. There's no more
two year transition. Or they could have said to be
an FBS institution, you need to revenue share at least
twelve million dollars, and that would actually force some FBS
teams to go FCS because they can afford that. But

(39:36):
with this five year period, they can't pass those sort
of rules. Now in twenty thirty twenty thirty one, could
they pass some of these rules that really puts a
roadblock on FCS to FBS movement, or they make it
so difficult to maintain FBS status that it forces some
mid level G five teams to come down to the FCS.
Those are all possibilities, but those possibilities won't hits for

(40:01):
at least another five years. And so to me, this
doesn't really change anything. The challenges still exist for the
NBSUS of the world to go to the FBS. But
now at least we know that door isn't going to
be completely slam shut with new rules that the A
four is going to pass. That one happened for at
least five years.

Speaker 3 (40:18):
Yeah, I didn't take that rule as the floodgates opening personally,
Like I'm with you to me, I think the biggest
roadblock is a because there's rules on the books, but
there's also back room rules that you have to fit.
And Sam, I think the biggest thing no one talks
about in these moves is if you remember, there was
that report I want to say it was Stable that

(40:39):
came out. It was one of the big reporters that
said there was a threat against some of the G
five conferences that if they add too many FCS schools
are going to get cut out of the CFP payments. Yep,
that's the biggest block because those conferences cannot afford to
lose that money because as good as their TV deals
may be, it's still not enough. And so if you
add an FC school that doesn't bring a ton of

(41:01):
television revenue and help you get to TV. Because the
biggest thing people also forget is Sam, let's say we
have sixteen teams, if we add a seventeenth and they
don't add enough revenue to keep our yearly payout from
the TV deal the same, we're losing money by adding you.
And so if we add you, you don't increase the

(41:23):
television revenue and we lose money from the CFB payout.
How in the world is that a good thing? So
I think this five year rule, like you said, doesn't
slam the door shut, but there's still the elephant in
the room that nobody wants to address.

Speaker 4 (41:36):
And at the end of the day, I think the.

Speaker 3 (41:38):
Conversation about FBS, especially G five, being oversaturated is a thing.
There's a ton of programs at that level saying that
me and you know would be way more competitive at
the FCS level than they'll ever be at the FBS level.
And they only just want to be there for FBS
by name and the little in the increase in TV
revenue and opportunity to play in a bowl game, that's it.

Speaker 4 (42:00):
They they're there for the money.

Speaker 3 (42:01):
But there's nothing about the program that screams FBS exactly yep.

Speaker 1 (42:06):
And I mean there's when you add FCS teams, I mean,
does it, does it grow the overall revenue pie or
do you just have to slice it into more pieces.
And if you have to slice it into more pieces,
I mean, the Mountain West presidents aren't gonna say, yeah,
we'll we'll take five hundred thousand dollars or a million
dollars less in our TV deals so we can add NDSU.

Speaker 2 (42:27):
And so that's just not going to happen.

Speaker 1 (42:28):
And plus they're there's there's just the overall like there's
the the political pushback in the aspect of the A
four putting pressure on you know, the group of five,
group of six to not add anymore unless they absolutely
have to. But there's also just the political pressure from
these presidents because you know, these these presidents are way
smarter than than I am. But they also probably don't

(42:49):
know ball, you know, very well, and they view FCS,
you know, they kind of put their nose up in
the air when it comes to the FCS. And so
while a team like NDSU or the Montana's would would
actually make the Mountain West stronger in terms of football,
these presidents just see the letters f CS and just
go like, let's let's let's let's not do that. Let's

(43:11):
let's go after a group of fives. You know, I
heard that the Mountain West Presidence even brought up Louisiana Tech,
you know, as far as a potential team to add
if they couldn't get Northern Illinois, you know, adding Louisiana
Tech ahead of a team like nd SU or an
FCS program. So that just goes to show that, yeah,
that that that FCS label, you know, really hurts you

(43:32):
when it comes to these discussions. And plus two, the
the Mountain West has or is going to have ten
members next year, I believe Conference USA will be at
ten members. You know, the MAC and the sun Belter set,
the American is set. And so unless more dominoes fall, no,
G five Conference really has to add teams if they
if they really don't want.

Speaker 3 (43:53):
To, no, and also to and I think the okay
hear me, and I've talked about this on my show
a few times.

Speaker 4 (44:01):
I know we got to move on after this.

Speaker 3 (44:02):
But North Dakota States success actually probably hurts them more
than it helps them. And I know that sounds counterintuitive
to fans, but Sam, you mentioned it. The TV market
in Fargo is not a great television market. You increase
your travel as well for the conference for most of
these conferences, which I guess that doesn't matter in the
long run now because they're so wild. But Sam, if

(44:24):
you're an ad right, I come to pitch you. We're
going to add this I don't even think you call
it mid level TV market. We're going to add this
team to the conference. That's going to increase the travel.
We got to go to North Dakota now, and Sam,
we add them day one. They're probably going to beat
your school every year for the first five years because
they're that good on the field. Are you signing off

(44:46):
on that team joining?

Speaker 1 (44:49):
Yeah, I mean, I definitely think that is part of
the pushback too, is yeah, we want to add strong memories.
We also don't want to add an FCS team that
is going to come in here and compete at the
top right away.

Speaker 3 (45:00):
Because you saw the social media chatter, people were not
happy that James Madison came in and immediately started winning. Yeah,
it takes away Bowl opportunities, which at the end of
the day is money in the pockets of those schools
because a lot of these teams in the G five
are same or what six and six, seven and five,
So one loss could be the difference between a higher
bowl payout or no bow payout YEP.

Speaker 1 (45:23):
In Bowl games, I mean, yeah, it's money, but it's
also contract extensions for the head coach and the AD
and its bonuses and so yeah, the difference between six
and five and seven and five is.

Speaker 2 (45:33):
Really important for your job security as well.

Speaker 1 (45:36):
All right to the final question here when it comes
to these Twitter polls, what are your expectations for the
IVY League champion and their FCS playoff debut this season?
First round exit got the most votes with fifty five percent.
Second round exit got the second most votes thirty five

(45:56):
and a half percent, quarter final appearents five percent, semi
final appearance two point nine percent.

Speaker 2 (46:03):
So I, I.

Speaker 1 (46:06):
Mean the quarterfinal and semi final aren't really surprised. I
would have guessed, and well, I would have voted second
round exit and I would have guessed that would have
gotten the most amount of votes, which this poll got
six hundred and twenty two votes on it.

Speaker 2 (46:22):
To me, the IVY League.

Speaker 1 (46:24):
Is going to be interesting this year because whoever the
IVY League champion is is most likely going to be
eight and two or nine and one overall probably doesn't
have a ranked win on the resume, and so to me,
I doubt they're going to be a top eight seed.
But will they be a nine through sixteen seed? I
would say probably, which means they get you know, first

(46:47):
round home game, and they'll probably get paired up with
the NEC champ or the fourth place team you know
in the CAAA, and you would favor the IVY League
there now in the second round, if they go to
you know, Richmond, or they go to Rhode Island, like
maybe maybe you favor them there and they can sneak
into the quarterfinals. But if they get sense you know,

(47:08):
on the road in the second round, just depending on
you know, maybe they're the sixteen seed, so then they
get sent on the road to Montana State or North
Gota State, that's probably not going to go well, you know,
in the second round. But I do believe they have
a chance to win a game in the FCS playoffs.
I just don't think they're quite ready yet to make
much more noise than that.

Speaker 3 (47:29):
I mean, this polls approsed me and I cannot. I'll
be a little honest here, Sam, I like them, we
can be honest on the show. I think it was
a little bit of some people being a hater. Yeah,
Lodi for this, because there's a lot of people who
don't like the IVY League talk. They beg them to
join the playoffs or so many years, Sam, and now
that they joined and they're getting a little bit of
high there's a few fan bases that are not happy

(47:51):
about it. From what I've seen, we get a lot
of pushback on our show talking about it. So a
little bit of a hater mentality here in this poll.
If I had to guess, but you can't tell me, Sam,
you wouldn't that someone that really watches the game and
saw how good a Harvard or Dartmouth was last year
and especially how good I think Harvard could be this year,
that they can't win a first round game, especially with

(48:15):
because I do think they're going to be good enough
to not be one of the last four in Obviously,
I think they're going to get a good draw. They're
not going to be like Tennessee State last year and
have to go to Montana first round. They should get,
like you said, the third or fourth place CAAA team,
maybe the number two or three, so contem potentially an
OVC Big South team, maybe Central sneaks in for the

(48:37):
miak if they go ten to two. But I think
they're going to get a team that they match up
really well against. And I really do think, like just
think of the teams, and I'm thinking the teams in
my head, Sam that I think could be top eight
seeds if they don't draw like a North Dakota State,
if they don't draw a Montana State to South Dakota
South Dakota State, I think they match up really well
with everybody else that kind of falls in that through

(49:00):
eight seed range. There's no doubt in my mind. Like
you said that they can go beat the CEA champion,
who we saw got beat last year really.

Speaker 2 (49:11):
Early by the Patriarly champion, Right.

Speaker 3 (49:13):
Yeah, So you can't tell me that Harvard can't win
one or two games. I think if I voted, I
would have said second round or quarterfinals.

Speaker 4 (49:20):
I think those are the two.

Speaker 3 (49:21):
And for me, I always tell people, especially people who
are new to the fcspace, if you're predicting playoffs, the
first two rounds are super easy to predict. Once you
get to the quarter the quarters, all bets are off,
unless like you're in North Dakota State, right anything, It
just all depends on the matchup. It's really really hard
to predict past the second round, so that's where I
would have voted. But I look at a team like

(49:42):
harvard Man. They've returned a lot of talent Sam and
I've loved Jading Craig at quarterback, who's the NFL prospect.
They return their starting running back as well. And the
one thing I think the ivys offer that some of
the other teams in those Southern conferences that haven't been
able to make that push yet do. They're always really
good in the trenches, and it goes back to being
able to retain talent, right. They don't have to worry

(50:04):
about the transfer portal until that grad year when the
guys have to leave and transfer up for one year
before they go off to the NFL. I wonder, and
I've heard some talks and that there's a lot of
push behind the scenes for these ivs to offer that
grad year. And we saw like the team like what
was it the Citadel make that change recently where now
they're able to take grad transfers. If that ever happens,

(50:27):
I'm very curious to see what type of teams these
IVS could build. But I think they're going to be
really solid in the trenches. Sam, there's no reason that
the IVY League champion should not be able to win
at least one game in the postseason each year, if
not too.

Speaker 1 (50:39):
Yeah, I was going to mention the trenches too, because
they are strong typically on the offensive and defensive lines,
and that'll win you games once you hit November and
December and you have that grad transfer rule. If they
could change that, that would be so huge for the
IVY League because they are And I had Harvard's head
coach on the podcast and Tim if they if you

(51:00):
felt they were, you know, protected from the transfer portal
a little bit just because of the value obviously of
getting to a degree from an IVY League school, And
you know, he said, yes, that they really don't see
undergrads transferring out a whole lot. And I always think
it's it's important to note when you go through the
list of FCS two FBS transfers. I mean, there are

(51:21):
so many IVY League guys that are going to power
for schools, but a lot of them had to transfer
if they want to keep on playing college football because
they were graduate students. And so if they can change,
you know, that rule, you know somehow that would you know,
come down I assume to the President's Council.

Speaker 2 (51:38):
I think that would be massive for the IVY League.
And I did see.

Speaker 1 (51:43):
I couldn't find it, but there was a response to
the poll or maybe another one of my tweets where
it's like all of these future future lawyers and politicians
are going to find out how real football is played
in these flyover states. And you know, so it was
a Montana or Dakota fan, you know, one of those.
But you know, I will say, you know, they do
bring in good recruits, they do send guys, you know,

(52:04):
to the NFL.

Speaker 2 (52:05):
So so the talent is there.

Speaker 1 (52:06):
The depth of that talent, you know, I think is
what could probably fairly be questions that if they have
the overall depth to hang with the Tier one.

Speaker 3 (52:14):
Yeah, let me ask you this because I got asked this.
So I went to SOCOM Media Day and I actually
talked to the commissioner, Michael Cross about this and he
asked me my opinion.

Speaker 4 (52:24):
Now I was really torn on it. Sam.

Speaker 3 (52:25):
I want to ask you, just off off the cuff,
do you think the IVY has any chance to get
two bids with only playing ten games, or do you
think that could be something in the future. They have
to change if they really want two bids and they're
going to have to play more than ten games.

Speaker 2 (52:41):
Yeah, I think they.

Speaker 1 (52:44):
I would doubt it this year just because you know,
I don't think they're going to have the resumes to
to get a play a second team in I was
just pulling up some of their best non conference games.
You know, Brown plays Rhode Island, Columbia plays Lehigh, Harvard
plays holy Cross, although holy Cross you know isn't isn't ranked.

(53:07):
Penn Lehigh, Princeton, Mercer, that's a good non conference game.
Yale plays lee High, so so there is there's not
I mean if Princeton, let's just say Harvard wins, Harvard
wins the IVY League and then Princeton is right behind
them at eight and two, and Princeton has a win

(53:28):
over Mercer and Mercer finishes second in the SoCon like,
then I think something like that would be like okay, well, yeah,
I think Princeton definitely deserves to to to have, you know,
to get in that large bid into the postseason. But
if if it's another team you know that has a
good record but no ranked wins, like I don't necessarily

(53:51):
see them having an argument to get that second bid
into the postseason this year.

Speaker 3 (53:57):
Yeah, I think the only time that can be interesting
is I don't think an eight and two team probably
gets in with the new twelve game schedule, right because
I mean, you're probably the bubbles gonna be too tight.
But I think the only time he gets interesting, Sam,
if they stick at ten games is there was a
year before this, but I think the most recent I
could think of off the top of my head was
twenty fifteen, Sam, if you remember, Dartmouth and Harvard both

(54:18):
finished nine and one that year, each had one loss
in conference. I do wonder if, like, is there any
way you can keep a one loss team out of
the playoffs?

Speaker 1 (54:28):
Yeah, I mean there, I don't know. I mean the
nine and two McNees got left out one year. I
think this was in the twenty tens, So there has
been there is past precedent of teams having really good records,
but if they lack ranked wins, that could definitely keep
them out.

Speaker 3 (54:46):
Yeah, because like Dartmouth, I want to say low, they tied,
but Dartmouth's only loss was a one point loss to Harvard,
and then Harvard got upset by Penn, who finished seven and.

Speaker 4 (54:57):
Three that year.

Speaker 3 (54:57):
Okay, so I would have been that that would be
I think the committee's worst case scenario because somebody would
have a real problem with that if two IVY leagues
got in, because they would screen the ten game thing,
because then if you're leaving a team out, you're obviously
taking a team away from another conference. And I don't
think they're going to take away anybody from the big
Scott Valley, which means that the other Southern conferences, the Southland,

(55:19):
the SoCon, maybe that MEAC team that's in the conversation,
a CAAA team, that team's going to be on the
outside looking in, and that's going to calls. We saw
what chaos it was last year when NAU got in.
Imagine if IVY League team got in with only ten games.

Speaker 2 (55:33):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (55:34):
If you look at some of the recent final top
twenty five media polls, twenty eighteen, Princeton finished number eleven,
Dartmouth was number eighteen. Two teams finished in the final
top twenty five and twenty nineteen, Yale was number twenty five,
Dartmouth number twenty two. About then you get to the
twenty twenties, twenty twenty one, Princeton finished number twenty four,

(55:54):
Dartmouth finished number twenty and then there was a gap
and there were twenty two to twenty three. No team
is finished within the top twenty five. And then last
year Harvard finished number twenty five in the final media poll.
And so we'll see, if you know, they could, they're
kind of going up against it when it comes to
just trying to get uh, you know, their reputation, because

(56:16):
as you know, sometimes your overall conference reputation can go
a long way and how you get set up when
it comes to the playoff committee. And so they'll I
think they'll be battling that to battling to improve their
overall reputation among just the overall national view of their
conference to set themselves up well for a playoff seed.

Speaker 4 (56:34):
No doubt.

Speaker 2 (56:34):
Man.

Speaker 4 (56:35):
So what's this off the wall SAX State question matter?
I was just going to end it on here.

Speaker 1 (56:38):
Yeah, So my question is, hypothetically Sacramento State wins the
national championship this season. Would that be good for the
FCS or bad for the FCS?

Speaker 2 (56:49):
Oh?

Speaker 4 (56:49):
Sign me up, Yeah, sign me up. Sam.

Speaker 3 (56:52):
I will wear a cowboy hat like Brendan Mary in
the entire season on every show I'm on. If they
find a way to do that that, I think that
would be a amazing for the FCS. And I don't
and I'm one of the people that I don't think
the dynasty with North Dakota State it's a bad thing.

Speaker 4 (57:06):
Really.

Speaker 3 (57:07):
I think fans like dynasties, and I know this will
get someone, This will get probably more pushed back than
anything I've said on here. I think North Dakota State's
dynasty has brought more attention to the FCS than if
they didn't go on that run, because everybody wanted to
talk about North Dakota State and how they did it,
and just average college football fans love that story. And

(57:28):
so I think North Dakota States run has done more
good for the FCS and it has bad, But man,
how amazing would it be Sam with all the media
attention that SAX State's gardnered throughout this run to flip
the roster year one under Brendan Marion, who's a super
likable head coach, one of the more respected head coaches
in the in college football. He's been one of the
best assistants in the country to come in sign the

(57:51):
transfer portal class they did have all law season. Everybody
tell him you can't do it year one like that,
you can't build a roster at the FCS level by
flipping it through the portal. If they get it done
and beat a North Dakota State in the National Championship
in Nashville, man, I think that would be amazing for
the FCS, And it would get so much media attention
because of Brendan Marian, because of Jaden Weshota and some

(58:13):
of those FBS former FCS stars that were recruits and
four stars and highly tality guys he got at the portal.

Speaker 4 (58:20):
Plus his staff is very well known.

Speaker 3 (58:21):
Man, I think the FCS would It would be great
for the media attention of the FCS, and it would
change a way change the way some schools approached coaching
hires and how other coaches in the FCS might try
to approach roster building.

Speaker 1 (58:35):
Yep, I agree one hundred percent. I think it'd be
great for the FCS. You know, of course, the the
if someone were to say why it would be bad
for the FCS, it would just be you know, you know,
Sacks State would be unbearable, you know online, you know
that we don't even want to be here and we
still want you know, you're a national championship or getting
out here as soon as we can anyway, So in
that sense, it, I guess you could that would be

(58:57):
the argument on why it'd be bad, But now I'm
one hundred percent agree that it'd be good for the FCS.
Just anyone outside of the Midwest winning the national title
just creates more storyline, something different, gives the FCS a
bit of a different feel. But then you add on
all of the off the field hype around Sack State
and you would get you know, other outlets talking about it.

(59:19):
You know, it's obviously a good market, you know as well,
and so you know, if the community engagement is there,
you know, they would travel super well to Nashville. So yeah,
I definitely think it would be a great thing for
the FCS. How likely that is, you know, I don't know,
you know, probably yeah, probably not the most likely, but
at the same time, like they might have the most
talented roster in the FCS. We'll just have to see,

(59:41):
and we'll probably find out pretty quickly on just how
good Sacramento State is. So we'll wrap it up there.
I think we're we're right at the hour mark, but
I will let you have any final words.

Speaker 2 (59:52):
On this episode.

Speaker 3 (59:53):
Yeah, then there'll be a lot of green in Nashville
if that happens. I'll just say that a great, great episode. Man, listen,
I can't wait for next week. We acts you get
to talk some football and I think this is the
best Week zero slate we've had in a while, and
I'm really really excited for it.

Speaker 1 (01:00:07):
Yeah, and multiple multiple games on national TV as well,
so that's always good to see. So we will wrap
it up there, Thank you everyone for listening, and we'll
catch you guys on the Flippity Flip