[SuperJon]

Probably.

[PAmedic]

angry Chanticleers

http://www.coastalfans.com/forum/index. ... ic=58156.0

[thepostman]

They are better than us, simple as that. Our athletic department is very strong and nothing to be ashamed of but at this point they are better. The big 2/3 hold way more weight whether we like it or not.

With that said that thread you link medic just oozes with insecurity and jealousy. If CCU was doing it they would be doing flips and loving it.

[Rooster Cogburn]

I'm going to be that guy. what if this signals that there is ongoing discussions with a conference and we are simply getting in line with where they are going? if so, then who cares what the BSC thinks or does. Or maybe our AD has talked to some or most BSC ADs and knows how they might vote. Who knows? No inside info, simple interesting speculation.

[Rooster Cogburn]

Funny that the CCU fans are bashing is rather than saying their admin should follow suit.

[alabama24]

I think this is good... but it could also hurt our chances to move up. What if a conference <might> have considered us, but some/most/all of their members aren't ready/able to make this commitment?

[SuperJon]

I think this is good... but it could also hurt our chances to move up. What if a conference <might> have considered us, but some/most/all of their members aren't ready/able to make this commitment?

Most FBS conferences are going to add COA.

[PAmedic]

I think this is good... but it could also hurt our chances to move up. What if a conference <might> have considered us, but some/most/all of their members aren't ready/able to make this commitment?

Most FBS conferences are going to add COA.

yeah I'd think ANY conf we are seriously interested in pursuing would be going that route

[alabama24]

yeah I'd think ANY conf we are seriously interested in pursuing would be going that route

Most FBS conferences are going to add COA.

Really? I haven't been following this too closely (much more than most, much less than y'all lol), but I keep reading about various schools / conferences complaining about not being able to keep up with "the big guys." There were already schools like UAB, but how many more UAB's will there be if they have to fork over $2 mill each year for players.

[From the class of 09]

Excuse my ignorance but how will this affect sports outside the big 3? Do you have to provide this assistance accross the board? I assume at a minimum there are some title 9 rules?

Do we know if Lib plans to provide this benefit across the board to all athletes?

[Rooster Cogburn]

http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnf ... ?id=816523

[SuperJon]

yeah I'd think ANY conf we are seriously interested in pursuing would be going that route

Most FBS conferences are going to add COA.

Really? I haven't been following this too closely (much more than most, much less than y'all I chortle audibly.), but I keep reading about various schools / conferences complaining about not being able to keep up with "the big guys." There were already schools like UAB, but how many more UAB's will there be if they have to fork over $2 mill each year for players.

I know C-USA and the MAC are adding. I think the Sun Belt is looking to do it as well.

[SuperJon]

Excuse my ignorance but how will this affect sports outside the big 3? Do you have to provide this assistance accross the board? I assume at a minimum there are some title 9 rules?

Do we know if Lib plans to provide this benefit across the board to all athletes?

Across the board to all Division I scholarship athletes is my understanding.

[bluejacket]

The Big South hasn't ruled one way or another yet. Liberty is basically forcing their hand by saying we are doing this regardless of what you say. The Big South has three options:

1) Require COA for all schools.
2) Allow individual schools to decide what they want to do.
3) Declare COA illegal in the conference.

Number 1 isn't happening.
Number 3 could happen but they'd put themselves in a position to have to boot Liberty from the league. Would they do that?
Number 2 is most likely. Number 3 is most intriguing.

For the most part, I agree. Choice #1 is never going to happen in the Big South and choice #2 will destroy conferences, especially the Big South. I think that eventually choice #3 comes into effect in the Big South. How that effects Liberty remains to be seen.

[Humble_Opinion]

This isn't surprising and has obviously been in the works for a while. M0TIAW on the Coastal boards is absolutely right about this just being more window-dressing for potential FBS conferences. I think LU feels as though the move by FBS conferences to cover full COA opens up even more possible landing spots for LU.

Up to this point, we have been told that the SBC/CUSA have been adding programs that are academically aligned with the other member institutions and have an established tradition of success on the field. The COA movement will now force these conferences to reevaluate the qualities that a candidate must have, to include a proven ability of the institution to financially support its athletics program.

That having been said, while I support Jerry Jr., some of his statements that SJ mentions in the thread over on Coastal's boards (if quoted accurately and in context) are inappropriate. If you think LU has all the money it will ever need and can simply continue to spend the way it has over the past 5 years into the future, you are wrong.

[Chris Lang]

I'm talking with Jeff about this tomorrow, but when we spoke informally in February about it, I tweeted that this was likely coming. Also, the most likely Big South scenario is that it will mandate COA in both men's and women's basketball but leave other sports up to the individual schools. Those meetings aren't until May. Other small conferences are picking a couple of sports and dealing with COA in similar fashion. Horizon League just did both basketballs, IIRC.

[JakeP50]

If the Big South does decide to go with COA in men's and women's basketball does the membership shuffle around any? Like members dropping down to DII?

[Chris Lang]

I don't think so. The added cost for 26-28 scholarship athletes isn't going to sink anyone's athletics department.

[PAmedic]

official confirmation

http://www.liberty.edu/flames/index.cfm ... 76&TeamID=

Liberty Athletics to Cover Full Cost of Attendance in 2015-16
April 14, 2015
Lynchburg, Va.

Liberty University has announced beginning with the 2015-16 academic year its commitment to cover the full cost of attendance for all of its student-athletes in each of its 20 NCAA Division I athletics programs.

Based upon new NCAA regulations governing athletically related financial aid, Liberty will begin to cover tuition, fees, room, board, books, supplies, personal miscellaneous expenses and transportation as a part of a full scholarship, and partial scholarships will pay for a percentage of their educational costs.

[ballcoach15]

It does look as if Coastal Carolina is crying.

I think BSC will try to tell LU they cannot do full cost of attendance.

As for schools doing it for basketball, that would not be a good idea, in that it will make conference look like a basketball conference, instead of an all sports conference.

The quicker LU gets out of BSC, the better.

[Liberty22]

As for schools doing it for basketball, that would not be a good idea, in that it will make conference look like a basketball conference, instead of an all sports conference.

That's not true. Most FCS conferences are going to do a mandatory basketball push to keep it in Title IX compliance and because it's cheaper. The SoCon is going to make it mandatory for Basketball as well.

[Kiwon]

Given reality and the state of things in the NCAA and "amateur athletics," it's a smart move by Jerry Jr. and JB.

[SuperJon]

Barber declined to reveal the budget impact of adding cost of attendance across the board, but Liberty fully funds its maximum 237.5 scholarships. According to numbers reported to the U.S. Department of Education, Liberty's full cost of attendance gap is $3,312 for 2013-14, which would in theory mean an additional $786,600 per year investment.

"We started considering it and talking about it back in January when it was voted through," Barber said. "Our conference (the Big South) has made a commitment to do that for men's and women's basketball, so we were going to be doing that anyway, but the decision was made because our goal is to be a major FBS program one day and this was a necessary step to take to not only show our commitment but show our desire to do that."

For all of Liberty's ambition, in reality there has been resistance to add the Flames to a league at the presidential level. There are plenty of theories for that. Part of it could be the school's Evangelical bent and some politically-charged controversies in its past. Another element is the school's massive online enrollment, which could be off-putting to presidents of more traditional universities. There's also a financial element: Some schools, particularly in a league like the Sun Belt, don't want a competitor coming in with a budget that blows everybody out of the water. In that respect, Liberty may be too financially sound.

Link

[Kiwon]

"too financially sound..."

I wish I was "too financially sound."

Bottom line.....it's amazing to consider that a secular writer would put the terms "Liberty" and "too financially sound" in the same sentence. Praise God for His provision after decades of struggle. Great is His faithfulness!

[LUOrange]

I think it is ironic for Liberty. When I arrived at LU in 1994, we couldn't get into the CAA or the Southern Conference largely/mostly due to our financial insecurities. Sure, Doc was more politically active and that probably, maybe obviously, was a factor. But it was primarily due our financial stability back then. We weren't too far removed to the take over of the PTL fiasco that almost bankrupted us, and the visiting teams to the Bill had to walk across the street from the Hancock and then hang out in an oversized Lowes garden shed in the cold. We were fortunate that the Big South started football.

Now here we are where we are probably one of the most financially sound schools, and the main reason we can't get into the Sun Belt- the Big South of 1-A football, is because we have too much money. All of the the reasons given by the more "tolerant" SBC board posters given about our faith, politics, diploma mill, academics, ability to recruit, competiveness, etc. Are in my opinion, probably inconsequential to the SBC school administrators. The USA Today story hit the nail on the head, it's because we're a wealthy private school that has proven it can compete with them with a huge potential to dominate their conference. I'm not sure if it's sad or funny.