(03-20-2015 02:42 PM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  The reality is that it'll only be a select few independents with P5 approval - Notre Dame, BYU, Army, and Boise if we do the smart thing and dump the MWC - getting the nod to move to the new league when the P5 breaks away. They're not going to add a whole conference.

Boise State would have to go the BYU route....can you get your own contract with ESPN?

I don't think they would "add" a best of the rest of the conference necessarily.....

What that conference would have to do is figure out how to dominate the Access Bowl bid, possibly cannabalizing the other G5 conferences....Also, I think the P5 conferences would be fine declaring a "Best of the Rest" conference as P5 for their own scheduling requirements.....it would be up to that conference to find a way to dominate the Access Bowl.

A lot of people think UConn, Cincinnati, and a few others are P5 ready

This is all just fallout from the initial CFP results.
1) BigXII decided to institute a tie breaker to reduce the risk of being left out again.
2) ACC looks like the most likely conference to be left out in the future due to concerns about weak SOS. A statement that each school will play a P5 OOC opponent bolsters the appearance of stronger scheduling, and counting BYU (who has a lot of open dates) toward that requirement helps the ACC meet that requirement more rapidly (and without really taking a step up in scheduling). Saying they require 1 P5 OOC opponent is a nice bullet point for public perception, and by counting BYU, the ACC doesn't really have to change its current scheduling practice wherein the majority of teams already play an SEC team or ND annually. Good news for BYU, bad news for similarly talented upper tier Go5 teams who are as strong as BYU but don't count toward the requirement.
3) Same for the SEC except their concern is more about the diminished prospects for getting two teams in. They can also lay claim to the mandated 1 P5 opponent OOC requirement, drop Army or BYU in for teams without an ACC or other P5 matchup, and make the claim of improved scheduling without really improving their scheduling.

We'll see how the CFP selection and outcomes turn out this year to see if this minor appeasement to improved scheduling does the trick.

(03-24-2015 11:01 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  This is all just fallout from the initial CFP results.
1) BigXII decided to institute a tie breaker to reduce the risk of being left out again.
2) ACC looks like the most likely conference to be left out in the future due to concerns about weak SOS. A statement that each school will play a P5 OOC opponent bolsters the appearance of stronger scheduling, and counting BYU (who has a lot of open dates) toward that requirement helps the ACC meet that requirement more rapidly (and without really taking a step up in scheduling). Saying they require 1 P5 OOC opponent is a nice bullet point for public perception, and by counting BYU, the ACC doesn't really have to change its current scheduling practice wherein the majority of teams already play an SEC team or ND annually. Good news for BYU, bad news for similarly talented upper tier Go5 teams who are as strong as BYU but don't count toward the requirement.
3) Same for the SEC except their concern is more about the diminished prospects for getting two teams in. They can also lay claim to the mandated 1 P5 opponent OOC requirement, drop Army or BYU in for teams without an ACC or other P5 matchup, and make the claim of improved scheduling without really improving their scheduling.

We'll see how the CFP selection and outcomes turn out this year to see if this minor appeasement to improved scheduling does the trick.

IMO it's all lip service which will change little.

(03-24-2015 11:01 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  ...ACC... Saying they require 1 P5 OOC opponent is a nice bullet point for public perception, and by counting BYU, the ACC doesn't really have to change its current scheduling practice wherein the majority of teams already play an SEC team or ND annually. Good news for BYU, bad news for similarly talented upper tier Go5 teams who are as strong as BYU but don't count toward the requirement...

Exactly how many G5 teams are "as strong as BYU" anyway? Not very many! I'm going to say Boise State, Utah State, Nevada, UCF, Memphis, and maybe Cincinnati, NIU and East Carolina. Am I missing anyone? I might have said Colorado State but now I'm not sure with a new coach.

Point is, if BYU isn't the strongest of the "next" group, they are top 10 at least.

(03-24-2015 01:23 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-24-2015 11:01 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  ...ACC... Saying they require 1 P5 OOC opponent is a nice bullet point for public perception, and by counting BYU, the ACC doesn't really have to change its current scheduling practice wherein the majority of teams already play an SEC team or ND annually. Good news for BYU, bad news for similarly talented upper tier Go5 teams who are as strong as BYU but don't count toward the requirement...

Exactly how many G5 teams are "as strong as BYU" anyway? Not very many! I'm going to say Boise State, Utah State, Nevada, UCF, Memphis, and maybe Cincinnati, NIU and East Carolina. Am I missing anyone? I might have said Colorado State but now I'm not sure with a new coach.

Point is, if BYU isn't the strongest of the "next" group, they are top 10 at least.

oh? NIU in that group?

*blushes*

(03-24-2015 01:23 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Exactly how many G5 teams are "as strong as BYU" anyway? Not very many!

The other difference is BYU's schedule includes more other P5 schools, than any other G5 school. Meaning their affect on SOS will be better, even if the team isn't. Case in point, next year they play 4 P5 teams (Nebraska, UCLA, Michigan, and Mizzou), and 6 more in that next group (Boise St, UConn, ECU, Cincinnati, San Jose St, Fresno St, and Utah St). No G5 school has a schedule that looks like that - which would require all four OOC teams to be P5, and play a high combo of the better teams from the AAC and MWC, and few of the dregs. That is a big difference in their SOS, the main reason they want teams playing other P5's, even if that P5 team is not as good as a G5 team. The opponent SOS factor.

(03-19-2015 01:33 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  As I said in a former thread, BYU is a P5 school without the need to play in a conference large payout.

FIFY

This year the P5 will receive approx. $250 million for their share of the College Football Playoff revenue to divide amongst 64 teams. The average payout then would be $3,906,250 per P5 team.

By comparison, Army, Navy and BYU share a total of $922,658, or an average of $307,553.

avg. P5 payout = $3,906,250
BYU payout = $307,553

This year BYU (and Army and Navy) earned less than 8% of the revenue given to an average P5 team. You can say the Indys are the same as P5, doesn't make it true.

In addition, the 61 G5 schools shared $75m which comes out to an average of $1,229,508 per G5 team. That's 4X BYU's payout. So when it comes to money, and money is THE factor in determining a P5/G5 classification, not only is BYU not a P5 school, its not even a G5 school.


http://businessofcollegesports.com/2014/...r-2014-15/

(03-24-2015 01:23 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Exactly how many G5 teams are "as strong as BYU" anyway? Not very many! I'm going to say Boise State, Utah State, Nevada, UCF, Memphis, and maybe Cincinnati, NIU and East Carolina. Am I missing anyone? I might have said Colorado State but now I'm not sure with a new coach.

Point is, if BYU isn't the strongest of the "next" group, they are top 10 at least.

Those would be the schools as it includes most of the Go5 schools that have beat independent BYU (left out San Jose State).

This is a really good excuse to further marginalize the best of the Go5. The SEC/ACC essentially can beat the Go5 by proxy by first declaring BYU a "P5" equivalent, a program categorically ahead of the best of the rest, then beating BYU in a series of Home and Lopsided Neutral contests (eg Missouri in KC as neutral). If other Go5 schools decide to follow the BYU route for the privilege of playing a series of road exhibition games, the P5 will be more than ready to lap up forfeited portions of the CFP pot.

It seems like a lot of Go5 fans read this as an incremental step toward recognizing on-field achievement resulting in merit-based inclusion in the "P5" when it's really the reverse.

(03-24-2015 02:18 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 01:33 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  As I said in a former thread, BYU is a P5 school without the need to play in a conference large payout.

FIFY

This year the P5 will receive approx. $250 million for their share of the College Football Playoff revenue to divide amongst 64 teams. The average payout then would be $3,906,250 per P5 team.

By comparison, Army, Navy and BYU share a total of $922,658, or an average of $307,553.

avg. P5 payout = $3,906,250
BYU payout = $307,553

This year BYU (and Army and Navy) earned less than 8% of the revenue given to an average P5 team. You can say the Indys are the same as P5, doesn't make it true.

In addition, the 61 G5 schools shared $75m which comes out to an average of $1,229,508 per G5 team. That's 4X BYU's payout. So when it comes to money, and money is THE factor in determining a P5/G5 classification, not only is BYU not a P5 school, its not even a G5 school.


http://businessofcollegesports.com/2014/...r-2014-15/

You're focused only on the CFP money. BYU makes $8-10 million per year on its TV deal and keeps all bowl game proceeds. That's about 30-40% of P5 team payouts but 4 or 5 times more than G5 team payouts.

(03-24-2015 10:34 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(03-20-2015 02:42 PM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  The reality is that it'll only be a select few independents with P5 approval - Notre Dame, BYU, Army, and Boise if we do the smart thing and dump the MWC - getting the nod to move to the new league when the P5 breaks away. They're not going to add a whole conference.

Boise State would have to go the BYU route....can you get your own contract with ESPN?

We already have our own contract with ESPN.

http://news.boisestate.edu/update/2013/0...all-games/

(03-24-2015 03:03 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The SEC/ACC essentially can beat the Go5 by proxy by first declaring BYU a "P5" equivalent, a program categorically ahead of the best of the rest, then beating BYU in a series of Home and Lopsided Neutral contests (eg Missouri in KC as neutral). If other Go5 schools decide to follow the BYU route for the privilege of playing a series of road exhibition games, the P5 will be more than ready to lap up forfeited portions of the CFP pot.

BYU actually plays Missouri in KC INSTEAD OF Columbia. The road game in the series is at the "neutral" site. Missouri plays BYU in Provo a few years later. If anything, that favors BYU - but I think Missouri wanted a game in KC and BYU was willing to play.

BYU currently has announced true home-home series with Michigan St., Mississippi St., Virginia, and about 70% of the PAC 12.

LSU in Houston and West Virginia in Landover are the current not-so-neutral site games on the schedule.

Other lopsided games include USC, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Nebraska. All those series were announced early in BYU's independence and involve elite programs. Except for the weird change to the Arizona series (now 5-game deal, with neutral site games in Phoenix and Las Vegas), the more recent announcements are on the P5 home-home trend.

Despite BYU's new found status as an independent P5 team, they still want to join a P5 conference:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/86562...ments.html

From the link:

Quote:Mendenhall has expressed a desire for BYU to join a Power 5 conference in the future and, while being happy with recent developments, hasn't wavered from that desire.

“It’s nice to be recognized, and it’s nice to have that acknowledgement, but as far as I’m concerned I’d still like to head in that direction,” Mendenhall said when asked about his hopes of one day joining a Power 5 conference.

They have a TV contract with ESPN and can now schedule great games yet still want to join a p5 conference. I wonder why?

(03-26-2015 11:37 AM)Dasville Wrote:  Despite BYU's new found status as an independent P5 team, they still want to join a P5 conference:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/86562...ments.html

From the link:

Quote:Mendenhall has expressed a desire for BYU to join a Power 5 conference in the future and, while being happy with recent developments, hasn't wavered from that desire.

“It’s nice to be recognized, and it’s nice to have that acknowledgement, but as far as I’m concerned I’d still like to head in that direction,” Mendenhall said when asked about his hopes of one day joining a Power 5 conference.

They have a TV contract with ESPN and can now schedule great games yet still want to join a p5 conference. I wonder why?

$$$$$...and better home games, better bowl games, and at least potential access to the CFP.

As Independent BYU gets far less money. Maybe 1-2 million from ESPN. Join a P5 it goes closer to 20 million. My opinion, it would make great sense for the B12 to offer BYU and Boise football only. Offer them 5 million and let them keep Broadcast rights to their home games until the next CFP negotiation. What it would cost each school to give up 1 million dollars and I imagine they could get at least half that back if not more with offering a Championship Game. Have a decision made by all parties two years prior to the new CFP deal if the teams join full, stay status quo or B12 wants to go east. Seems like a no brainer, B12 get CCG. Bosie and BYU make more money than they do today.

(03-26-2015 12:00 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  As Independent BYU gets far less money. Maybe 1-2 million from ESPN. Join a P5 it goes closer to 20 million. My opinion, it would make great sense for the B12 to offer BYU and Boise football only. Offer them 5 million and let them keep Broadcast rights to their home games until the next CFP negotiation. What it would cost each school to give up 1 million dollars and I imagine they could get at least half that back if not more with offering a Championship Game. Have a decision made by all parties two years prior to the new CFP deal if the teams join full, stay status quo or B12 wants to go east. Seems like a no brainer, B12 get CCG. Bosie and BYU make more money than they do today.

How many times must the B-12 say it---they are expanding east. There are no people to speak of between Texas and Cali. It makes the B-12 zero dollars to expand into a population void. If or when, the B-12 expands, the new schools will be located east of Texas.

I think BYU's best bet is to create their own conference when the CFP comes up for renegotiation. Assuming stability until that time, if BYU uses 6 teams from any single conference the resulting conference will have an NCAA auto-bid. By building the conference when the CFP negotiations have begun, the conference can be immediately part of the new CFP agreement. Because BYU will be the founder and anchor of he conference, the conference will be comprised of EXACTLY who they want and will provide BYU with EXACTLY the play schedule and media rights they want. BYU is the one school that could probably make a best of the rest happen.

AC, did you notice I prefaced the the start to "My opinion". Not that it was happening, just what I thought would make the most sense during the current CFP cycle.

(03-26-2015 12:00 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  As Independent BYU gets far less money. Maybe 1-2 million from ESPN. Join a P5 it goes closer to 20 million. My opinion, it would make great sense for the B12 to offer BYU and Boise football only. Offer them 5 million and let them keep Broadcast rights to their home games until the next CFP negotiation. What it would cost each school to give up 1 million dollars and I imagine they could get at least half that back if not more with offering a Championship Game. Have a decision made by all parties two years prior to the new CFP deal if the teams join full, stay status quo or B12 wants to go east. Seems like a no brainer, B12 get CCG. Bosie and BYU make more money than they do today.

BYU makes between $800k and 1.2 mil per game. That's already $5-7 mil per football season - based on 2010 dollars. Plus, they make another $1 mil or so from the WCC TV deal and NCAA units.

I'm pretty sure Boise St. makes more than $2 million right now from their current MWC/ESPN deal.

When BYU's current TV deal is up for renewal or replacement - in 2018 or 2019 - BYU will likely command closer to $10 mil per year just on inflation, but likely more with home lineups that will include much better opponents than what BYU has had to date - ie, USC, Michigan St., Missouri, and likely many more PAC 12, SEC, ACC, and Big Ten opponents and fewer MWC, Sun Belt, and MAC opponents.

SO, if a BYU-Boise St. football only tandem did make sense, the Big 12 would likely offer something in the $10-12-plus million range per year per school.

To the point about looking East, I would agree, if the Big 12 is looking for all sports members. For football only, the Big 12 would be foolish not to look at Boise St.-BYU. These two programs consistently attain the best TV ratings of the available candidates. The "market" analysis in college football has a lot more to do with TV ratings and the digital footprint than the geographic footprint or population data - especially when you don't have a Big 12 network involved.

(03-26-2015 12:42 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 12:00 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  As Independent BYU gets far less money. Maybe 1-2 million from ESPN. Join a P5 it goes closer to 20 million. My opinion, it would make great sense for the B12 to offer BYU and Boise football only. Offer them 5 million and let them keep Broadcast rights to their home games until the next CFP negotiation. What it would cost each school to give up 1 million dollars and I imagine they could get at least half that back if not more with offering a Championship Game. Have a decision made by all parties two years prior to the new CFP deal if the teams join full, stay status quo or B12 wants to go east. Seems like a no brainer, B12 get CCG. Bosie and BYU make more money than they do today.

BYU makes between $800k and 1.2 mil per game. That's already $5-7 mil per football season - based on 2010 dollars. Plus, they make another $1 mil or so from the WCC TV deal and NCAA units.

I'm pretty sure Boise St. makes more than $2 million right now from their current MWC/ESPN deal.

When BYU's current TV deal is up for renewal or replacement - in 2018 or 2019 - BYU will likely command closer to $10 mil per year just on inflation, but likely more with home lineups that will include much better opponents than what BYU has had to date - ie, USC, Michigan St., Missouri, and likely many more PAC 12, SEC, ACC, and Big Ten opponents and fewer MWC, Sun Belt, and MAC opponents.

SO, if a BYU-Boise St. football only tandem did make sense, the Big 12 would likely offer something in the $10-12-plus million range per year per school.

To the point about looking East, I would agree, if the Big 12 is looking for all sports members. For football only, the Big 12 would be foolish not to look at Boise St.-BYU. These two programs consistently attain the best TV ratings of the available candidates. The "market" analysis in college football has a lot more to do with TV ratings and the digital footprint than the geographic footprint or population data - especially when you don't have a Big 12 network involved.

Did not realize their TV deal was that good. Puts the G5 ones to shame.