(02-28-2018 12:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  A small state school simply is what it is. It is an entity that while important is not as important budget wise as other entities in a state, including larger older state schools. The state helped to create it, sustains it, and is accountable to the taxpayers for it. It may be special to its alumni, but it is not special to the state from a business standpoint and unless its presence generates copious revenue it will be treated either as an educational necessity or any other state endeavor. Nobody in Ohio gets up in the morning and questions the viability of the Ohio State University to the State of Ohio's economy. Ohio State makes a lot of money for the state tangentially, about 1.6 billion dollars worth annually. If Toledo doesn't get treated as well as Ohio State it's because it doesn't impact the state's economy as positively.

You're making a generalization about G5 schools which isn't always true. Not all G5 are "small state schools". If we define national schools as religious or military institutions, state flagships, or schools otherwise in the top half of FBS by academic rank: 91% of P5 are national schools, this makes sense, but 31% of G5 (20 schools) are also national schools. If we include land grants 97% of P5 are national schools (everyone but Louisville and Texas Tech), but 34% of G5 (22 schools) are also national schools. I'll refer you to my post here on the specific cases of Massachusetts and Connecticut.

(02-26-2018 11:19 PM)McKinney Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 04:32 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 09:05 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 03:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 02:38 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  There's a serious level of butthurt here over really benign terms.

It's always a conspiracy theory!

That's easier to handle than facing reality--which is harsh.

That is the world we live in now......

Verucca Salk had it - I want it now, I want it all, and I want it handed to me, I don't want to work for it.


It is much easier to tell everyone it was stolen from you rather putting in the work and earning it.

It is not ESPN that is keeping them down, it is their inability to earn an invitation to a P5 conference. In this regard the deck is stacked against them. A quick review of the profile of schools that are in P5 conferences demonstrates why.

First, aside from Texas, there is no state with more than two public universities that are members of P5 conferences. These are primarily the state flagship university and, if it is a different school, the Land Grant university for the state. This is not a coincidence. Such schools have large statewide alumni bases and community contacts. In addition, these schools have generated many of the business leaders within their states, creating a strong pool of potential donors and season ticket holders. In states where the Land Grant and Flagship are the same (California, Florida, and Pennsylvania for example) the second highest ranked public research university can grab the second slot (UCLA, Florida State, Pittsburgh, for example). Only in hugely populated, football crazy Texas is there a third P5 public university - Texas Tech.

The private universities are all academically excellent - all are at a minimum top 100 in the USNWR rankings. Many fill a niche that is not fully covered by the public universities in their states - Syracuse and BC are in states without a public P5 school, Vandy and Northwestern are in large cities in states with only one public P5 school. Notre Dame is a national Catholic university.

Finally, all P5 universities have been playing at a high national level for a very long time. Syracuse committed to competing in athletics at the highest level when it decided to build Archbold Stadium in 1905 and has never wavered in its commitment.

ECU is not a flagship and is not land grant university. It is located in a state that has separate flagship and land grant schools. In addition, there are two other P5 schools in the state, which further dilutes the potential fanbase and recruiting pool. It has been competing at the Division 1 level only since 1966, which may seem like a long time, but it is less than half of almost every school in P5 conferences. Finally, its academics are not exceptional, currently being ranked outside the top 200 by USNWR. Earning a P5 invite with a Texas Tech type "exception" therefore seems very unlikely.

Like many schools, there is actually very little that ECU can do to change the status quo. It should continue to focus on improving is academics and research - try to reach the top 100 in USNWR and achieve Doctoral Universities: Highest Research Activity classification from Carnegie. Winning is also important. TCU pretty much knocked the P5 door down by earning multiple BCS bids. However, they also had strong academics (USNWR #76), a long history of playing at the highest level (1938 AP National Champions), and a large local market.

Having said this, the American Conference offers a great opportunity to compete. It gives ECU access to the Texas and Florida recruiting markets. ECU appears to have a strong fanbase capable of supporting a successful ECU program. The American is the strongest non-P5 conference, and its champion should be able to earn an NY6 bid every other year on average. That bid could be ECU's on a consistent basis if it uses its already existing resources effectively.

UMass and UCONN are both state flagships and land grants, they're also both in the USNWR top 100, Carnegie R1 universities, and striving for AAU membership. Both have large alumni bases in top television markets (UCONN - NYC, UMass - Boston) in addition to alumni all around the country. Both have also been playing football for a long time. UMass is the 4th oldest program currently in FBS (1879), but neither has played at the highest level for very long. UConn has a number of years on UMass, but both have spent the vast majority of their time in the College Division, DII, and D1-AA. Consider that UMass has as many seasons at the highest level (20 according to sports-reference.com) as UAB which started football 112 years after us (according to wikipedia).

It's also worth noting that the lone exception, Texas Tech, is only a P5 member at all because of a fluke of politics and history with realignment happening while one of its grads was in the states most powerful office. Otherwise they and Baylor would be in the MWC or American too because the original B12 never wanted either of them.

(02-28-2018 01:42 PM)McKinney Wrote:  

(02-28-2018 12:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  A small state school simply is what it is. It is an entity that while important is not as important budget wise as other entities in a state, including larger older state schools. The state helped to create it, sustains it, and is accountable to the taxpayers for it. It may be special to its alumni, but it is not special to the state from a business standpoint and unless its presence generates copious revenue it will be treated either as an educational necessity or any other state endeavor. Nobody in Ohio gets up in the morning and questions the viability of the Ohio State University to the State of Ohio's economy. Ohio State makes a lot of money for the state tangentially, about 1.6 billion dollars worth annually. If Toledo doesn't get treated as well as Ohio State it's because it doesn't impact the state's economy as positively.

You're making a generalization about G5 schools which isn't always true. Not all G5 are "small state schools". If we define national schools as religious or military institutions, state flagships, or schools otherwise in the top half of FBS by academic rank: 91% of P5 are national schools, this makes sense, but 31% of G5 (20 schools) are also national schools. If we include land grants 97% of P5 are national schools (everyone but Louisville and Texas Tech), but 34% of G5 (22 schools) are also national schools. I'll refer you to my post here on the specific cases of Massachusetts and Connecticut.

(02-26-2018 11:19 PM)McKinney Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 04:32 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 09:05 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 03:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  It's always a conspiracy theory!

That's easier to handle than facing reality--which is harsh.

That is the world we live in now......

Verucca Salk had it - I want it now, I want it all, and I want it handed to me, I don't want to work for it.


It is much easier to tell everyone it was stolen from you rather putting in the work and earning it.

It is not ESPN that is keeping them down, it is their inability to earn an invitation to a P5 conference. In this regard the deck is stacked against them. A quick review of the profile of schools that are in P5 conferences demonstrates why.

First, aside from Texas, there is no state with more than two public universities that are members of P5 conferences. These are primarily the state flagship university and, if it is a different school, the Land Grant university for the state. This is not a coincidence. Such schools have large statewide alumni bases and community contacts. In addition, these schools have generated many of the business leaders within their states, creating a strong pool of potential donors and season ticket holders. In states where the Land Grant and Flagship are the same (California, Florida, and Pennsylvania for example) the second highest ranked public research university can grab the second slot (UCLA, Florida State, Pittsburgh, for example). Only in hugely populated, football crazy Texas is there a third P5 public university - Texas Tech.

The private universities are all academically excellent - all are at a minimum top 100 in the USNWR rankings. Many fill a niche that is not fully covered by the public universities in their states - Syracuse and BC are in states without a public P5 school, Vandy and Northwestern are in large cities in states with only one public P5 school. Notre Dame is a national Catholic university.

Finally, all P5 universities have been playing at a high national level for a very long time. Syracuse committed to competing in athletics at the highest level when it decided to build Archbold Stadium in 1905 and has never wavered in its commitment.

ECU is not a flagship and is not land grant university. It is located in a state that has separate flagship and land grant schools. In addition, there are two other P5 schools in the state, which further dilutes the potential fanbase and recruiting pool. It has been competing at the Division 1 level only since 1966, which may seem like a long time, but it is less than half of almost every school in P5 conferences. Finally, its academics are not exceptional, currently being ranked outside the top 200 by USNWR. Earning a P5 invite with a Texas Tech type "exception" therefore seems very unlikely.

Like many schools, there is actually very little that ECU can do to change the status quo. It should continue to focus on improving is academics and research - try to reach the top 100 in USNWR and achieve Doctoral Universities: Highest Research Activity classification from Carnegie. Winning is also important. TCU pretty much knocked the P5 door down by earning multiple BCS bids. However, they also had strong academics (USNWR #76), a long history of playing at the highest level (1938 AP National Champions), and a large local market.

Having said this, the American Conference offers a great opportunity to compete. It gives ECU access to the Texas and Florida recruiting markets. ECU appears to have a strong fanbase capable of supporting a successful ECU program. The American is the strongest non-P5 conference, and its champion should be able to earn an NY6 bid every other year on average. That bid could be ECU's on a consistent basis if it uses its already existing resources effectively.

UMass and UCONN are both state flagships and land grants, they're also both in the USNWR top 100, Carnegie R1 universities, and striving for AAU membership. Both have large alumni bases in top television markets (UCONN - NYC, UMass - Boston) in addition to alumni all around the country. Both have also been playing football for a long time. UMass is the 4th oldest program currently in FBS (1879), but neither has played at the highest level for very long. UConn has a number of years on UMass, but both have spent the vast majority of their time in the College Division, DII, and D1-AA. Consider that UMass has as many seasons at the highest level (20 according to sports-reference.com) as UAB which started football 112 years after us (according to wikipedia).

No, I didn't really make a generalization. I made a comment about the relationship of the FBS to the Bowl System as opposed to Division III having a playoff run by the NCAA.

The point I made is that the FBS is subject to the profit motive of the bowl cities, networks, and their playoff which is comprised of, and run by, both the commercial interests of the bowls and the networks.

The only reason I gave the illustration of the state school is because state schools are a matter of business for the state. That Ohio State generates more revenue for the state of Ohio than does Toledo (just an example) is a fact. So in state appropriations of course Ohio State would be more protected.

I left privates out because there is no such relationship as they are a business entity unto themselves.

I chose to use larger schools because they have larger alumni bases and generally deliver more economic impact to a bowl city than a smaller school would.

Of course there are large alumni bases at some schools not in the P5 and of course with the number of bowls we presently have those schools factor in.

But this isn't a P5 vs G5 issue. It's a school with a large alumni base vs a school with a smaller alumni base issue. However lager schools need to be able to demonstrate the consistent ability to muster a throng of fans in a distant city if they wish to continue receiving invitations. And it's a nationally recognized brand vs a local or regional brand issue to a certain extent.

My point was that anyone claiming a grieved status or victimization over this issue is wasting their and our time. It is not a playoff decided by fair access. It is a business seeking to maximize its profits and ancillary to that is who they invite to decide by play "their" national champion. It is in other words, entertainment. If you were entertained by it then it accomplished its mission. Nobody is promised anything other than that.

If we want a true national championship then the FBS needs to be under the organization of the NCAA. It is not.

Did the Associated Press, or the United Press International, actually declare legitimately selected national champions? No. They were just selling newspapers.

So claiming to be victimized by a for profit exhibition is an insult to all truly victimized people, a waste of time, and a total miscomprehension of what actually is transpiring, which is simply for profit business.