HUNTSVILLE — It isn’t very often that college football dominates the headlines at the beginning of the summer. Things are normally quite until the end of July rolls around as student-athletes prepare to report for the upcoming season.

That changed with the Pac-10 and Big Ten expanding and the Big 12’s  journey from life support to the recovery room. College football has been at the center of attention recently and hopefully things will begin to get back to normal in the coming weeks.

But even though the Big 12 ultimately survived, it doesn’t mean that college football isn’t going to undergo a major overhaul down the road. The Pac-10 and Big Ten will more than likely expand to 16 teams at some point, and the Southeastern Conference and possibly the Atlantic Coastal Conference, Big East and Mountain West will follow suit.

Things are going to change and it will effect everyone involved in college football, the big fish as well as the small ones. So the best course of action that universities can take is to follow the old Boy Scout motto, “Always be prepared.”

About a month ago, before all the crazy expansion stuff went down, Sam Houston State came up with a survey for alumni, students, fans and facility and staff to serve as a tool to help determine the feasibility of strengthening the entire athletic department and the possibility of moving up to the Football Bowl Subdivision.

This doesn’t mean that the Bearkats are planning on making the move anytime soon, but the athletic department would like to get a feel of what it might need to do to position Sam Houston State for the jump if indeed it comes to that down the road.

With the big boys stealing the spotlight, it has kind of flown under the radar outside of Louisiana that the state’s public universities are in trouble and eight of the 14 institutions might get shut down to reduce state funding. Three of those eight universities — Nicholls, McNeese State and Northwestern State — are currently members of the Southland Conference.

Now, closing the doors on these universities is a worst-case scenario that Louisiana is trying to avoid, but it’s something that has to be taken into consideration.

There are 12 universities currently in the SLC and only nine compete in football, including Lamar which is a start-up program and will not play a full league schedule until 2011. UTSA has also added football, but the Roadrunners will more than likely not play in the SLC and make the jump to the FBS.

Texas State is currently competing in the SLC, but the Bobcats have let it be known for a while that they plan to move up to the FBS as well.

So, if McNeese State, Nicholls and Northwestern State are closed or forced to move down to Division II or III and with UTSA and Texas State possibly moving on, the SLC would be left with just five universities competing in football unless Texas-Arlington and Texas A&M-Corpus Christi decide to add football, which would take some time.

While the bigger picture concerning the Louisiana schools isn’t football, but the fact that thousands of people might lose their jobs, the rest of the universities in the SLC still have to figure out the next move.

Would it be easier to go out and try to lure Division II schools like the SLC did with Central Arkansas a few years ago to join the league, or would it be easier for SHSU, Stephen F. Austin, Lamar, Southeastern Louisiana and Central Arkansas to join the FBS?

All of these different scenarios floating around is a reason why Sam Houston State put out the survey so the athletic department could explore every option. The Item recently sat down with Bearkats athletic director Bobby Williams to ask some questions about the survey and how likely a move to the FBS would be.



What got the ball rolling on SHSU studying the potential move to the FBS?

BW: I think the biggest thing was when we started having discussions about it three years ago, we had just won three Commissioner’s Cups and we were looking at ways to get more consistent in football. We were consistent in basketball and baseball was starting to go to the NCAA tournament. All of our other sports were doing well and we were a broad-based department.

It really stemmed from how we could get better as a whole. We wanted to reach as high a level as we could, not from just an NCAA standpoint, but just our program. How do we get our teams to be more consistent?

We looked at how we could get better with our facilities and our budget. Part of that was the national landscape and what was going to happen.



How much did UTSA and Texas State’s plans to move to the FBS have an impact on this study?

BW: Some of it had to do with San Antonio and Texas State and what they were doing. They were out there pushing the FBS and things like that. What they were doing was on our radar, but it didn’t really drive us to look into it.

The way we looked at it was that if they could do it, then why can’t we? One of the byproducts from the feasibility study was the survey we put out there. We wanted to see what our fans, students and everybody thinks of it.

The way we have viewed it is that we want to make our current situation as good as it can be, see what options there are out there for us and position ourselves for (moving to the FBS) if it came about so we would be prepared to do that.

It comes down to making our program as attractive as it can be. Our university is growing and we are preparing for that. But our goal right now is to be as competitive as we can in the Southland Conference.



What has been the response to the survey?

BW: I haven’t gotten the final one yet. It should be back, hopefully, next week sometime. We are waiting for the draft to kind of see what the report might be and kind of go from there.



Just from talking with people about the survey, have you gotten any positive or negative feedback?

BW: I think people are positive about it. I think the key thing is that we do it the right way. When we moved up from NAIA to Division II and Division II to Division I in the 1980s, that was a good move, but I’m not sure the university and the university community really embraced it at that time. I think because of that, we are very protective.

We aren’t against moving up, we just want to make sure it is done the right way, that the funding is there and the support is there because that is critical to being successful. You have to have that support system to move up to make sure it is successful. That is what we want to do. You don’t want to be behind if you move up.



How does everything that is going on in the FBS concerning expansion and the possibility of super conferences forming have an impact on SHSU moving up?

BW: When you are just changing out teams between conferences, I don’t think it creates movement or opportunities at the next level. But if they start absorbing 16-team conferences, then that creates a lot of openings and you have to fill them from somewhere, so you have to be prepared to be in that situation.

The way NCAA requirements are now, it will be harder to reach down to Division II, getting schools like Central Arkansas to come in is going to be more difficult for the (Football Championship Subdivision). You see on the other end that FCS schools will be wanting to go to the FBS, so where are you going to get your teams? There will be some interesting decisions people are going to have to make.



Some of the Southland’s Louisiana universities are battling budget issues. Did you take into consideration that these schools might close down, leaving the SLC with only five football programs if UTSA and Texas State move on, during the study?

BW: It hasn’t been an issue the way you just described it. There has been a widening gap in funding between the Louisiana schools and the Texas schools because of what has been happening in Louisiana economically. They have been hit harder than we have.

That has been part of conversations, but not the issue that they might be dropped. Some of that might be Louisiana political posturing, but every indication from athletic directors and administrators is that isn’t going to happen. If it does, we will have to respond, but that hasn’t been driving what we have been doing.

We aren’t concerned about the Southland because as a whole, the Southland is stable right now. It is probably the most stable it has been. Even with us doing a feasibility study and Texas State and San Antonio doing what they are doing, it is pretty stable.