This piece looks at things much wider-spread than C-USA - it is the new perspective for Boise State and TCU football from a few years ago and what each C-USA, MAC, MW team will face in the future.

Marshall and Colorado State show us the future of college football - the little guys are going to get screwed

great article. Though I disagree with his comment about the MAC. I much prefer CUSA and think its stronger than the MAC. Heck, CUSA is stronger than the AAC this year as proven by all of the wins over their teams. I'd rate the G5 this season as MW, CUSA, AAC, MAC, SB.

said it too many times since realignment started....until the g5 bands together, getting screwed is the least of the problem...in isolation it's a given

honestly, I don't understand the point of discussing the current situation now....in no way should this come as a surprise....

I guess if one likes to biatch about things, that would be a reason....

The G-5 is irrelevant. The problem is that many of us have not accepted that as fact. Many fans of G-5 programs prefer to hang on the nuts of the P-5 rather than band together a forge a future together that could be financially beneficial and rewarding. Folks are scared to venture into the unknown and rather grasp onto to something they know is there.

If this committee has shown one thing is that they don't hold G-5 programs in high regards. No G-5 program will ever have a shot at winning a National Championship and that is a reality now.

It's year 1 and things evolve. But nobody thought G5 teams were going to be a part of the playoff discussion so that's not really surprising. This year has been particularly difficult in the way results have shaken out. It won't always be this way because athletics are cyclical.

The thing the G5 need to do is band together over a common purpose:
No playoff expansion without access.

No amount of money (they could realistically offer) will make the G5/cartel situation better but guaranteed access to the playoff could be a game changer. If the G5 allow themselves to be bought off things won't ever really change.

the g5 hardly asked for these scenarios regardless of what they currently are and will become....

let's backtrack to the cusa defection and how that was the glory path...what a buncha dopes other than those that saw the pittance that was tossed their way....yeah, right....

it's disgusting that educated people that control universities and conferences have sat on their arse w/o attempting to be proactive (excluding the attempted mwc/cusa merger)

I reckon I just don't understand how things work in today's world.....oops, ref the "idiocracy" portion of my sig....

welcome to juco boys.....this one's gonna get really ugly by the time she plays out....

edit: it's not like the g5 is ruled by the bammer board of fukbag regents.....just jfc

(11-19-2014 04:24 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  The G-5 is irrelevant. The problem is that many of us have not accepted that as fact. Many fans of G-5 programs prefer to hang on the nuts of the P-5 rather than band together a forge a future together that could be financially beneficial and rewarding. Folks are scared to venture into the unknown and rather grasp onto to something they know is there.

If this committee has shown one thing is that they don't hold G-5 programs in high regards. No G-5 program will ever have a shot at winning a National Championship and that is a reality now.

I don't expect "us" to do anything. My expectation of the people who run USM is that they will continue to strive to get into the best conference possible, and to expand and improve the capital facilities, faculty, and staff of the university. We've stalled in that respect, and the people whose fault that is aren't in Tuscaloosa or Athens. They're in Hattiesburg. Beyond that, I'd posit that USM has gotten as much economic value out of its relationship with Bama as it has from the whole of CUSA combined. So I treat any call for G5 solidarity with great skepticism. USF probably said that crap 10 years ago, and it's unfortunate that anyone at USM bought into it.

(11-19-2014 07:51 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 04:24 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  The G-5 is irrelevant. The problem is that many of us have not accepted that as fact. Many fans of G-5 programs prefer to hang on the nuts of the P-5 rather than band together a forge a future together that could be financially beneficial and rewarding. Folks are scared to venture into the unknown and rather grasp onto to something they know is there.

If this committee has shown one thing is that they don't hold G-5 programs in high regards. No G-5 program will ever have a shot at winning a National Championship and that is a reality now.

I don't expect "us" to do anything. My expectation of the people who run USM is that they will continue to strive to get into the best conference possible, and to expand and improve the capital facilities, faculty, and staff of the university. We've stalled in that respect, and the people whose fault that is aren't in Tuscaloosa or Athens. They're in Hattiesburg. Beyond that, I'd posit that USM has gotten as much economic value out of its relationship with Bama as it has from the whole of CUSA combined. So I treat any call for G5 solidarity with great skepticism. USF probably said that crap 10 years ago, and it's unfortunate that anyone at USM bought into it.

I'll posit this....

g5 operating individually (current) = fail
g5 incorporated (for lack of a better term) but in isolation (new d-whatever) = fail
g5 incorporated with p5 inclusion = clout to the highest level of allowability (yeah, I made that word up) that will ensue behind closed doors.....at least that would be shat at something worth giving a shat about....