(06-12-2013 02:52 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  If the P5 conferences had been formed within the last 10 years without consideration of the past or who was a founding member of those P5 conferences, you are correct. Many, many schools would not be included. There would be less inclusion, not more. Based on the numbers, there is a drop off at about team #48 in terms of revenue. That hits at about $70 million revenue (Kansas State, Purdue territory). It then drops down pretty quickly to $45 million about team 70 (Ole Miss, Wake Forest territory). Under this scenario, we are probably looking at a 48 to 60 team P5, not the current amount with arguments about adding more.

Maybe even less than 48. Look at the major U.S. pro team sports. 30 MLB teams, 30 NBA teams, 32 NFL teams. If someone was starting a super CFB organization today, it might shake out the same way -- cover nearly all of the major population centers and keep the total number of franchises relatively small so that you divide the pie into fewer (and larger) slices.

(06-12-2013 02:55 PM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 12:25 PM)goofus Wrote:  Argument #2
If states like Iowa, Mississippi, Kansas, Oregon, Oklahoma all get 2 P5 schools, then Colorado deserves a 2nd school and Nevada, New Mexico, Idaho and hawaii all deserve at least 1. North Carolina deserves to have 3 teams at best in the P5. Those 3 schools are North Carolina, NC-State and Duke. Wake Forest does not belong either.

The sad part about this is Ohio is the 7th most populous state and there is only one major school. The monopoly that Columbus has over Ohio's Department of Education is sickening...here is the University of Cincinnati's president Santa Ono on the matter following Gordon Gee's comments.

Quote: Strategic investment in NC State as well as UNC was pivotal to the success of the Research Triangle Park economic engine for the state of North Carolina.

North Carolina could have focused funding on Chapel Hill alone, but it reasoned that this would not benefit the state as a profoundly as investment in both UNC and NC State. It is an excellent example of how strategic investment in multiple campuses has a more profound impact on the state than the antiquated flagship model.

The third anchor for North Carolina is of course Duke University.

All three universities (UNC, NC State and Duke), compete in the ACC. The intrastate rivalry within the conference is fabulous for the state. And as much as each school wants to win when they face each other on the athletic field, they would not think of a scenario where they would not be in the same conference. They all know how valuable that in state, intraconference rivalry is for the state and for each school.

We have taken baby steps toward a triangle model in Ohio with OSU, UC and Case as anchors. It would serve us well if this concept would be fully embraced.

Ohio State is actively trying to maintain complete control over the entire state of Ohio despite the negative economic repercussions of such monopoly.

Just astounds me that the legislature lets this continue to happen, there would be such an enormous economic impact throughout the state if more schools were allowed to be involved. With 88 counties in Ohio, you would think a majority of state congressman and senators would join forces and force this to happen, if not only for the economic impact.

(06-12-2013 12:25 PM)goofus Wrote:  argument #1
I thought it was pretty obvious where ECU stood in the pecking order. The Big East chose Uconn, Cincy, USF, UCF, Houston, SMU, Memphis, Temple, Navy, and Tulane all before ECU. Tulsa is the only one in AAC below ECU in the pecking order.

You mean politics? Pecking order has nothing to do with it. What, you actually think USF was Big East material back in 2003 when it had D1 football for like six years total?

(06-12-2013 04:09 PM)CincyBro Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 02:55 PM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 12:25 PM)goofus Wrote:  Argument #2
If states like Iowa, Mississippi, Kansas, Oregon, Oklahoma all get 2 P5 schools, then Colorado deserves a 2nd school and Nevada, New Mexico, Idaho and hawaii all deserve at least 1. North Carolina deserves to have 3 teams at best in the P5. Those 3 schools are North Carolina, NC-State and Duke. Wake Forest does not belong either.

The sad part about this is Ohio is the 7th most populous state and there is only one major school. The monopoly that Columbus has over Ohio's Department of Education is sickening...here is the University of Cincinnati's president Santa Ono on the matter following Gordon Gee's comments.

Quote: Strategic investment in NC State as well as UNC was pivotal to the success of the Research Triangle Park economic engine for the state of North Carolina.

North Carolina could have focused funding on Chapel Hill alone, but it reasoned that this would not benefit the state as a profoundly as investment in both UNC and NC State. It is an excellent example of how strategic investment in multiple campuses has a more profound impact on the state than the antiquated flagship model.

The third anchor for North Carolina is of course Duke University.

All three universities (UNC, NC State and Duke), compete in the ACC. The intrastate rivalry within the conference is fabulous for the state. And as much as each school wants to win when they face each other on the athletic field, they would not think of a scenario where they would not be in the same conference. They all know how valuable that in state, intraconference rivalry is for the state and for each school.

We have taken baby steps toward a triangle model in Ohio with OSU, UC and Case as anchors. It would serve us well if this concept would be fully embraced.

Ohio State is actively trying to maintain complete control over the entire state of Ohio despite the negative economic repercussions of such monopoly.

Just astounds me that the legislature lets this continue to happen, there would be such an enormous economic impact throughout the state if more schools were allowed to be involved. With 88 counties in Ohio, you would think a majority of state congressman and senators would join forces and force this to happen, if not only for the economic impact.

Ohio has 8 FBS schools, but 7 are in non power conferences. No state but Texas even has 7 FBS schools total, and of Texas's 12 only 6 are in non power conferences.

There is ZERO reason why the state of Ohio cannot support more than 1 power conference program.

(06-12-2013 04:10 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 12:25 PM)goofus Wrote:  argument #1
I thought it was pretty obvious where ECU stood in the pecking order. The Big East chose Uconn, Cincy, USF, UCF, Houston, SMU, Memphis, Temple, Navy, and Tulane all before ECU. Tulsa is the only one in AAC below ECU in the pecking order.

You mean politics? Pecking order has nothing to do with it. What, you actually think USF was Big East material back in 2003 when it had D1 football for like six years total?

well, the big east obviously thought USF was big east material.

Unfortunately USF squandered their golden opportunity given to them 10 years ago. Ironically the main reason USF got an invite to the big east , that they are located in florida, is now the same reason that the SEC and ACC does not want them now. so i am confused why you are so bitter towards USF. Looks like they are in same boat as ECU now. Screwed because you are not even in the top 3 in your own state.

Still looking at state populations, California, texas, and Florida all deserve to have 5 schools. which is one reason, not the only reason, I put SDSU, Houston, USF and UCF on the belong list.

(06-12-2013 04:09 PM)CincyBro Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 02:55 PM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 12:25 PM)goofus Wrote:  Argument #2
If states like Iowa, Mississippi, Kansas, Oregon, Oklahoma all get 2 P5 schools, then Colorado deserves a 2nd school and Nevada, New Mexico, Idaho and hawaii all deserve at least 1. North Carolina deserves to have 3 teams at best in the P5. Those 3 schools are North Carolina, NC-State and Duke. Wake Forest does not belong either.

The sad part about this is Ohio is the 7th most populous state and there is only one major school. The monopoly that Columbus has over Ohio's Department of Education is sickening...here is the University of Cincinnati's president Santa Ono on the matter following Gordon Gee's comments.

Quote: Strategic investment in NC State as well as UNC was pivotal to the success of the Research Triangle Park economic engine for the state of North Carolina.

North Carolina could have focused funding on Chapel Hill alone, but it reasoned that this would not benefit the state as a profoundly as investment in both UNC and NC State. It is an excellent example of how strategic investment in multiple campuses has a more profound impact on the state than the antiquated flagship model.

The third anchor for North Carolina is of course Duke University.

All three universities (UNC, NC State and Duke), compete in the ACC. The intrastate rivalry within the conference is fabulous for the state. And as much as each school wants to win when they face each other on the athletic field, they would not think of a scenario where they would not be in the same conference. They all know how valuable that in state, intraconference rivalry is for the state and for each school.

We have taken baby steps toward a triangle model in Ohio with OSU, UC and Case as anchors. It would serve us well if this concept would be fully embraced.

Ohio State is actively trying to maintain complete control over the entire state of Ohio despite the negative economic repercussions of such monopoly.

Just astounds me that the legislature lets this continue to happen, there would be such an enormous economic impact throughout the state if more schools were allowed to be involved. With 88 counties in Ohio, you would think a majority of state congressman and senators would join forces and force this to happen, if not only for the economic impact.

California's legislature is no better. The only doctoral degree the Cal State's can confer is a Phd Edu. because education grads make no money so the UC doesn't care.

A bill was introduced to allow the Cal State system to offer degrees in applied sciences but the legislature killed it despite and economy increasingly focused on generating IP. This has hurt the Central Valley badly and prevented Fresno and SDSU from joining any BCS conference.

(06-12-2013 04:38 PM)goofus Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 04:10 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 12:25 PM)goofus Wrote:  argument #1
I thought it was pretty obvious where ECU stood in the pecking order. The Big East chose Uconn, Cincy, USF, UCF, Houston, SMU, Memphis, Temple, Navy, and Tulane all before ECU. Tulsa is the only one in AAC below ECU in the pecking order.

You mean politics? Pecking order has nothing to do with it. What, you actually think USF was Big East material back in 2003 when it had D1 football for like six years total?

well, the big east obviously thought USF was big east material.

Unfortunately USF squandered their golden opportunity given to them 10 years ago. Ironically the main reason USF got an invite to the big east , that they are located in florida, is now the same reason that the SEC and ACC does not want them now. so i am confused why you are so bitter towards USF. Looks like they are in same boat as ECU now. Screwed because you are not even in the top 3 in your own state.

Still looking at state populations, California, texas, and Florida all deserve to have 5 schools. which is one reason, not the only reason, I put SDSU, Houston, USF and UCF on the belong list.

at 38M people CA is double the size of Florida 19M. By your measure CA should have six especially since the central valley also doesn't have the corporate infrastructure for a Pro team. Their is no BCS or Pro team within 3 hours drive of Fresno.

(06-12-2013 04:04 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 02:52 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  If the P5 conferences had been formed within the last 10 years without consideration of the past or who was a founding member of those P5 conferences, you are correct. Many, many schools would not be included. There would be less inclusion, not more. Based on the numbers, there is a drop off at about team #48 in terms of revenue. That hits at about $70 million revenue (Kansas State, Purdue territory). It then drops down pretty quickly to $45 million about team 70 (Ole Miss, Wake Forest territory). Under this scenario, we are probably looking at a 48 to 60 team P5, not the current amount with arguments about adding more.

Maybe even less than 48. Look at the major U.S. pro team sports. 30 MLB teams, 30 NBA teams, 32 NFL teams. If someone was starting a super CFB organization today, it might shake out the same way -- cover nearly all of the major population centers and keep the total number of franchises relatively small so that you divide the pie into fewer (and larger) slices.

The attraction of college is it is not the pro's. I have no doubt the people at Cal will push for this model but it will only end up killing college football and many would be done with the sport.

(06-12-2013 01:36 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 12:47 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  If budget size is an issues to NCAA presidents, could a new super division make a requirement that all schools need at least a 40 million dollar athletic budget?

That total would be low enough that the Iowa State's and Miss State's of the world are covered but would also allow entrance of many G5 schools like those in the AAC and BYU + Boise State.

There are some others that may try to see if they can make the cut like Marshall, ODU, Ohio, Buffalo, UMass, Rice but most of the CUSA/SBC/MAC would buckle at the 40 million dollar requirement.

The top level of college football would then be down to 90 schools plus under new governance.

Here is who would make the 40 million cutoff among the G5:

West
Boise State
Hawaii
BYU
San Diego St
New Mexico
UNLV
Air Force
Colorado State (maybe)
Wyoming (maybe)
Fresno State (maybe)

Fresno has a much lower level of student fees than most of the schools on this list an no alternative entertainment. Fresno would make it for sure. If you look at their non-fee revenue Fresno is actually behind only Hawaii, New Mexico and BYU and that is in down years.

(06-12-2013 01:39 PM)Poliicious Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 04:34 PM)UNLVFan90 Wrote:  If the Power 5 do breakaway from the other conferences the Mountain West and AAC need to come with them. We should not be stuck in the same breath as the Conference USA, MAC, and Sun Belt. We have much more in common with the P5 conferences than the 3 conferences listed above. Discuss.

Baseball: 2012 Kent State makes the CWS

Any MWC teams make the CWS in the last 5 years, I don't believe so.

Did you set the years to just barely exclude Fresno's national championship on purpose? how many National Championships do you have we have 2: Baseball and Softball.

(06-11-2013 04:55 PM)goofus Wrote:  Well, some belong with the Power 5 and some don't

Don't Belong
Utah State
San Jose State
Fresno State
Wyoming
Nevada
Air Force
Navy
SMU
Memphis
ECU
Tulane
Temple
Tulsa

Now this just ain't right...lol

How exactly is the state of Ohio going to get Cincy into a power conference?

What authority do they have to tell a private club like the B1G or ACC that they HAVE to take UC?

The G5 fans on this board get so hung up on this fantasy of government stepping in and forcing the P5 to give out membership to schools they do not want to associate with that they are missing the bigger point:

The NCAA is a voluntary club. It is not the US Department of College Athletics. There is no such thing. It is a private club made up of several private clubs called athletic conferences. This idea that the government can MAKE your school a member of someone else's private club is a fantasy.

(06-12-2013 04:01 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 02:55 PM)UCbball21 Wrote:  Ohio State is actively trying to maintain complete control over the entire state of Ohio despite the negative economic repercussions of such monopoly.

One of the disadvantages of having THE state university in the state capital...

Regarding two points in this thread:

1) Ohio University should change its name to The University of Ohio. That would get Ohio State's panties in a twist.

2) UConn belongs in the P5 based on:

a) academics
b) market
c) on-field and on-court competence/success
d) athletic budget

Not many other G5 schools can say that.

(06-12-2013 07:18 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  How exactly is the state of Ohio going to get Cincy into a power conference?

What authority do they have to tell a private club like the B1G or ACC that they HAVE to take UC?

The G5 fans on this board get so hung up on this fantasy of government stepping in and forcing the P5 to give out membership to schools they do not want to associate with that they are missing the bigger point:

The NCAA is a voluntary club. It is not the US Department of College Athletics. There is no such thing. It is a private club made up of several private clubs called athletic conferences. This idea that the government can MAKE your school a member of someone else's private club is a fantasy.

It's also a fantasy that college football is non-profit.

Absolutely...but let's also not pretend that every single NCAA member doesn't benefit from that tax exempt status

(06-12-2013 07:26 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  It's also a fantasy that college football is non-profit.

Nonprofit doesn't mean it's not about big money. The NFL is chartered as a nonprofit. So is pretty much every Chamber of Commerce, labor union, and trade association.

Get rid of your service academies. Then you may come to the dark side.

American
East
Cincinnati
Connecticut
East Carolina
South Florida
Temple
UCF
West
Houston
Memphis
SMU
Southern Miss
Tulane
Tulsa

MWC
Mountain
Boise State
Colorado State
New Mexico
Utah State
UTEP
Wyoming
West
Fresno State
Hawaii
Nevada
San Diego State
San Jose State
UNLV

P5 Bottom Feeders/Don't Belong.... On D-1 CFB Football Field... FOOTBALLLLLLL!!!!

ACC

WF
Duke
Boston College
Virginia

PAC

Arizona
Cal
Washington State
UCLA

B1G

Illinois
Indiana
Minnesota
Penn State
Purdue

Big 12

Baylor
Kansas

SEC

Auburn
Kentucky
Miss State
Vandy

And if conferences were football only, you might have a point

(06-12-2013 07:45 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 07:26 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  It's also a fantasy that college football is non-profit.

Nonprofit doesn't mean it's not about big money. The NFL is chartered as a nonprofit. So is pretty much every Chamber of Commerce, labor union, and trade association.

The league may be the clubs I would doubt.