(08-01-2018 02:54 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The G5 are in a very bad spot but its more to do with the classification than anything.

We need to add another rung between FBS and FCS.

It’s already there all but officially. Which is why I think the G5 should be happy with what we have/get and try and spice up our own situation amongst ourselves by:

1). Getting rid of G5 CCGs...and instead...

2a). Start our regular season 1 week early.
2b). Have the top 4 G5 division winners play a 4-team/2-round play-in Tournament with the champ of this tournament going to our G5 NYD Access Bowl slot instead of a committee deciding which G5 team is better...determine it on the field instead.

Last season the semi finals would have been...

#4seed Fresno or Florida Atlantic or Toledo @ #1seed UCF
#3seed Boise @ #2seed Memphis

Winners of semis play at highest remaining seed’s house to determine who goes to NYD Access Bowl.

I’d think this would generate more tv revenue and excitement than the current CCGs. Also have the remaining 6 G5 division winners play each other but not as a tournament, just have 3 inter-conference games on CCG weekend for the sake of G5 bragging rights....we might demand sunbelt go to 12 for football tho. Wouldn’t be fair they get 2 out of 10 teams in this. CUSA’s 2 out of 14 was of there own making so no sympathy for CUSA.

Gotta start regular season one week early so the G5 CCG doesn’t fall on army/Navy game weekend and so the time for the fans of G5 champ to not have 1 week less to make Access Bowl plans/flights/hotels/etc.

PS: This would have beefed up UCF’s resume and ranked them higher in the final CFP Poll.

(08-05-2018 01:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  Somewhere along the way, some people began to think that college football should be fair. I'm not sure where they got that crazy notion. We don't think that all artists - not just the most popular - should get an equal chance to perform at the Super Bowl. College football is, at its core, part of the entertainment industry. Fairness has nothing to do with it.

An equally crazy notion is that all schools play football for one main reason - to compete for a "National Championship". And here I bought into the idea that having a football team was a marketing tool - the proverbial "front porch" to the university. That it's part of a well-rounded college experience.

Never mind that a majority of the current makeup of the G5 pointedly eswchewed the chance to play for a championship when they opted to play in the FBS instead. They knew when they made that decision that there wasn't more than a snowball's chance in hell that they would ever be recognized as a National Champion. But they did it anyway. And so did most of the P5 schools, who will never sniff a championship either.

So, you can complain all you want, and fantasize all you want. But the system is what it is, for reasons that evolved over more than a century. Nobody is entitled to anything from that system. And if you are expecting whatever your idea of "fairness" is, you are going to be disappointed.

There is a lot of truth in that. Frankly, there is a lot of truth in that entire post. That said---the same people who are most likely to feel like that are the same ones who will blow a blood vessel over the fact that UCF claims a 2017 national championship. If there is no need to observe the rules of basic fairness--people cant whine when that that same type of reasoning is used by the downtrodden.

Frankly, I think we will see expansion of the playoff as well as a legitimate playoff path for the G5. I believe this for multiple reasons---but the biggest is growth. The blue blood schools with 100K stadiums are tapped out and are pretty much as big as they are going to be. Future growth in the sport is going to come from the fan bases of the schools that have been stunted because of the way the sport has been run. I mean---think about it. Would Michigan have ever reached its current size if they were told at the start of every season--no matter how many games you win---you can never be invited to a major bowl or win a national championship. The fact that 20-40K regularly show up for G5 games despite this glass ceiling suggests there might be quite a bit of growth potential for the sport at that end of the spectrum.

(08-05-2018 08:14 PM)fresnofanatic Wrote:  

(08-01-2018 02:54 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The G5 are in a very bad spot but its more to do with the classification than anything.

We need to add another rung between FBS and FCS.

It’s already there all but officially. Which is why I think the G5 should be happy with what we have/get and try and spice up our own situation amongst ourselves by:

1). Getting rid of G5 CCGs...and instead...

2a). Start our regular season 1 week early.
2b). Have the top 4 G5 division winners play a 4-team/2-round play-in Tournament with the champ of this tournament going to our G5 NYD Access Bowl slot instead of a committee deciding which G5 team is better...determine it on the field instead.

Last season the semi finals would have been...

#4seed Fresno or Florida Atlantic or Toledo @ #1seed UCF
#3seed Boise @ #2seed Memphis

Winners of semis play at highest remaining seed’s house to determine who goes to NYD Access Bowl.

I’d think this would generate more tv revenue and excitement than the current CCGs. Also have the remaining 6 G5 division winners play each other but not as a tournament, just have 3 inter-conference games on CCG weekend for the sake of G5 bragging rights....we might demand sunbelt go to 12 for football tho. Wouldn’t be fair they get 2 out of 10 teams in this. CUSA’s 2 out of 14 was of there own making so no sympathy for CUSA.

Gotta start regular season one week early so the G5 CCG doesn’t fall on army/Navy game weekend and so the time for the fans of G5 champ to not have 1 week less to make Access Bowl plans/flights/hotels/etc.

PS: This would have beefed up UCF’s resume and ranked them higher in the final CFP Poll.

This sounds interesting

(08-05-2018 08:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 01:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  Somewhere along the way, some people began to think that college football should be fair. I'm not sure where they got that crazy notion. We don't think that all artists - not just the most popular - should get an equal chance to perform at the Super Bowl. College football is, at its core, part of the entertainment industry. Fairness has nothing to do with it.

An equally crazy notion is that all schools play football for one main reason - to compete for a "National Championship". And here I bought into the idea that having a football team was a marketing tool - the proverbial "front porch" to the university. That it's part of a well-rounded college experience.

Never mind that a majority of the current makeup of the G5 pointedly eswchewed the chance to play for a championship when they opted to play in the FBS instead. They knew when they made that decision that there wasn't more than a snowball's chance in hell that they would ever be recognized as a National Champion. But they did it anyway. And so did most of the P5 schools, who will never sniff a championship either.

So, you can complain all you want, and fantasize all you want. But the system is what it is, for reasons that evolved over more than a century. Nobody is entitled to anything from that system. And if you are expecting whatever your idea of "fairness" is, you are going to be disappointed.

There is a lot of truth in that. Frankly, there is a lot of truth in that entire post. That said---the same people who are most likely to feel like that are the same ones who will blow a blood vessel over the fact that UCF claims a 2017 national championship. If there is no need to observe the rules of basic fairness--people cant whine when that that same type of reasoning is used by the downtrodden.

Frankly, I think we will see expansion of the playoff as well as a legitimate playoff path for the G5. I believe this for multiple reasons---but the biggest is growth. The blue blood schools with 100K stadiums are tapped out and are pretty much as big as they are going to be. Future growth in the sport is going to come from the fan bases of the schools that have been stunted because of the way the sport has been run. I mean---think about it. Would Michigan have ever reached its current size if they were told at the start of every season--no matter how many games you win---you can never be invited to a major bowl or win a national championship. The fact that 20-40K regularly show up for G5 games despite this glass ceiling suggests there might be quite a bit of growth potential for the sport at that end of the spectrum.

TV money for conference TV deals appears to be tapped out.

Expanding the playoffs is one way to add more coin to everyone's pockets.

(08-05-2018 11:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 08:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 01:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  Somewhere along the way, some people began to think that college football should be fair. I'm not sure where they got that crazy notion. We don't think that all artists - not just the most popular - should get an equal chance to perform at the Super Bowl. College football is, at its core, part of the entertainment industry. Fairness has nothing to do with it.

An equally crazy notion is that all schools play football for one main reason - to compete for a "National Championship". And here I bought into the idea that having a football team was a marketing tool - the proverbial "front porch" to the university. That it's part of a well-rounded college experience.

Never mind that a majority of the current makeup of the G5 pointedly eswchewed the chance to play for a championship when they opted to play in the FBS instead. They knew when they made that decision that there wasn't more than a snowball's chance in hell that they would ever be recognized as a National Champion. But they did it anyway. And so did most of the P5 schools, who will never sniff a championship either.

So, you can complain all you want, and fantasize all you want. But the system is what it is, for reasons that evolved over more than a century. Nobody is entitled to anything from that system. And if you are expecting whatever your idea of "fairness" is, you are going to be disappointed.

There is a lot of truth in that. Frankly, there is a lot of truth in that entire post. That said---the same people who are most likely to feel like that are the same ones who will blow a blood vessel over the fact that UCF claims a 2017 national championship. If there is no need to observe the rules of basic fairness--people cant whine when that that same type of reasoning is used by the downtrodden.

Frankly, I think we will see expansion of the playoff as well as a legitimate playoff path for the G5. I believe this for multiple reasons---but the biggest is growth. The blue blood schools with 100K stadiums are tapped out and are pretty much as big as they are going to be. Future growth in the sport is going to come from the fan bases of the schools that have been stunted because of the way the sport has been run. I mean---think about it. Would Michigan have ever reached its current size if they were told at the start of every season--no matter how many games you win---you can never be invited to a major bowl or win a national championship. The fact that 20-40K regularly show up for G5 games despite this glass ceiling suggests there might be quite a bit of growth potential for the sport at that end of the spectrum.

TV money for conference TV deals appears to be tapped out.

Expanding the playoffs is one way to add more coin to everyone's pockets.

Another way is expanding the conference championship tournaments from one game to three by adding semifinals (just like the CFP did versus the BCS). In that way, the conferences that already draw the most eyeballs will get and keep for themselves the biggest cash windfall.

Which of the two do you think is more likely?

You have to take out the schools that have been labeled as a P5 opponent by the P5 conferences. Once those schools got labeled that? You can not take that away from them, and they deserved to be in a P5 conference.

(08-06-2018 06:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 11:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 08:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 01:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  Somewhere along the way, some people began to think that college football should be fair. I'm not sure where they got that crazy notion. We don't think that all artists - not just the most popular - should get an equal chance to perform at the Super Bowl. College football is, at its core, part of the entertainment industry. Fairness has nothing to do with it.

An equally crazy notion is that all schools play football for one main reason - to compete for a "National Championship". And here I bought into the idea that having a football team was a marketing tool - the proverbial "front porch" to the university. That it's part of a well-rounded college experience.

Never mind that a majority of the current makeup of the G5 pointedly eswchewed the chance to play for a championship when they opted to play in the FBS instead. They knew when they made that decision that there wasn't more than a snowball's chance in hell that they would ever be recognized as a National Champion. But they did it anyway. And so did most of the P5 schools, who will never sniff a championship either.

So, you can complain all you want, and fantasize all you want. But the system is what it is, for reasons that evolved over more than a century. Nobody is entitled to anything from that system. And if you are expecting whatever your idea of "fairness" is, you are going to be disappointed.

There is a lot of truth in that. Frankly, there is a lot of truth in that entire post. That said---the same people who are most likely to feel like that are the same ones who will blow a blood vessel over the fact that UCF claims a 2017 national championship. If there is no need to observe the rules of basic fairness--people cant whine when that that same type of reasoning is used by the downtrodden.

Frankly, I think we will see expansion of the playoff as well as a legitimate playoff path for the G5. I believe this for multiple reasons---but the biggest is growth. The blue blood schools with 100K stadiums are tapped out and are pretty much as big as they are going to be. Future growth in the sport is going to come from the fan bases of the schools that have been stunted because of the way the sport has been run. I mean---think about it. Would Michigan have ever reached its current size if they were told at the start of every season--no matter how many games you win---you can never be invited to a major bowl or win a national championship. The fact that 20-40K regularly show up for G5 games despite this glass ceiling suggests there might be quite a bit of growth potential for the sport at that end of the spectrum.

TV money for conference TV deals appears to be tapped out.

Expanding the playoffs is one way to add more coin to everyone's pockets.

Another way is expanding the conference championship tournaments from one game to three by adding semifinals (just like the CFP did versus the BCS). In that way, the conferences that already draw the most eyeballs will get and keep for themselves the biggest cash windfall.

Which of the two do you think is more likely?

I'm sure you like the fantasy that NC State could win the ACC even though you guys haven't since 6 years before I was born and I'm 33. So you're kind of like us in the G5 just wishing for the best but just happy to be there like here.

UMass won a FCS National Championship and nobody cared. UMass in the NCAA tournament (basketball) took over the sports world in the state.

(08-06-2018 07:21 AM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 06:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 11:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 08:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 01:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  Somewhere along the way, some people began to think that college football should be fair. I'm not sure where they got that crazy notion. We don't think that all artists - not just the most popular - should get an equal chance to perform at the Super Bowl. College football is, at its core, part of the entertainment industry. Fairness has nothing to do with it.

An equally crazy notion is that all schools play football for one main reason - to compete for a "National Championship". And here I bought into the idea that having a football team was a marketing tool - the proverbial "front porch" to the university. That it's part of a well-rounded college experience.

Never mind that a majority of the current makeup of the G5 pointedly eswchewed the chance to play for a championship when they opted to play in the FBS instead. They knew when they made that decision that there wasn't more than a snowball's chance in hell that they would ever be recognized as a National Champion. But they did it anyway. And so did most of the P5 schools, who will never sniff a championship either.

So, you can complain all you want, and fantasize all you want. But the system is what it is, for reasons that evolved over more than a century. Nobody is entitled to anything from that system. And if you are expecting whatever your idea of "fairness" is, you are going to be disappointed.

There is a lot of truth in that. Frankly, there is a lot of truth in that entire post. That said---the same people who are most likely to feel like that are the same ones who will blow a blood vessel over the fact that UCF claims a 2017 national championship. If there is no need to observe the rules of basic fairness--people cant whine when that that same type of reasoning is used by the downtrodden.

Frankly, I think we will see expansion of the playoff as well as a legitimate playoff path for the G5. I believe this for multiple reasons---but the biggest is growth. The blue blood schools with 100K stadiums are tapped out and are pretty much as big as they are going to be. Future growth in the sport is going to come from the fan bases of the schools that have been stunted because of the way the sport has been run. I mean---think about it. Would Michigan have ever reached its current size if they were told at the start of every season--no matter how many games you win---you can never be invited to a major bowl or win a national championship. The fact that 20-40K regularly show up for G5 games despite this glass ceiling suggests there might be quite a bit of growth potential for the sport at that end of the spectrum.

TV money for conference TV deals appears to be tapped out.

Expanding the playoffs is one way to add more coin to everyone's pockets.

Another way is expanding the conference championship tournaments from one game to three by adding semifinals (just like the CFP did versus the BCS). In that way, the conferences that already draw the most eyeballs will get and keep for themselves the biggest cash windfall.

Which of the two do you think is more likely?

I'm sure you like the fantasy that NC State could win the ACC even though you guys haven't since 6 years before I was born and I'm 33. So you're kind of like us in the G5 just wishing for the best but just happy to be there like here.

UMass won a FCS National Championship and nobody cared. UMass in the NCAA tournament (basketball) took over the sports world in the state.

I would like to see a sugar daddy to give UMass. a very large donation to build all their facilities up including a 100,000 seat football stadium. Then get an AAU status, and get invited to the Big 10. UMass. belongs there.

(08-06-2018 07:21 AM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 06:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 11:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 08:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 01:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  Somewhere along the way, some people began to think that college football should be fair. I'm not sure where they got that crazy notion. We don't think that all artists - not just the most popular - should get an equal chance to perform at the Super Bowl. College football is, at its core, part of the entertainment industry. Fairness has nothing to do with it.

An equally crazy notion is that all schools play football for one main reason - to compete for a "National Championship". And here I bought into the idea that having a football team was a marketing tool - the proverbial "front porch" to the university. That it's part of a well-rounded college experience.

Never mind that a majority of the current makeup of the G5 pointedly eswchewed the chance to play for a championship when they opted to play in the FBS instead. They knew when they made that decision that there wasn't more than a snowball's chance in hell that they would ever be recognized as a National Champion. But they did it anyway. And so did most of the P5 schools, who will never sniff a championship either.

So, you can complain all you want, and fantasize all you want. But the system is what it is, for reasons that evolved over more than a century. Nobody is entitled to anything from that system. And if you are expecting whatever your idea of "fairness" is, you are going to be disappointed.

There is a lot of truth in that. Frankly, there is a lot of truth in that entire post. That said---the same people who are most likely to feel like that are the same ones who will blow a blood vessel over the fact that UCF claims a 2017 national championship. If there is no need to observe the rules of basic fairness--people cant whine when that that same type of reasoning is used by the downtrodden.

Frankly, I think we will see expansion of the playoff as well as a legitimate playoff path for the G5. I believe this for multiple reasons---but the biggest is growth. The blue blood schools with 100K stadiums are tapped out and are pretty much as big as they are going to be. Future growth in the sport is going to come from the fan bases of the schools that have been stunted because of the way the sport has been run. I mean---think about it. Would Michigan have ever reached its current size if they were told at the start of every season--no matter how many games you win---you can never be invited to a major bowl or win a national championship. The fact that 20-40K regularly show up for G5 games despite this glass ceiling suggests there might be quite a bit of growth potential for the sport at that end of the spectrum.

TV money for conference TV deals appears to be tapped out.

Expanding the playoffs is one way to add more coin to everyone's pockets.

Another way is expanding the conference championship tournaments from one game to three by adding semifinals (just like the CFP did versus the BCS). In that way, the conferences that already draw the most eyeballs will get and keep for themselves the biggest cash windfall.

Which of the two do you think is more likely?

I'm sure you like the fantasy that NC State could win the ACC even though you guys haven't since 6 years before I was born and I'm 33. So you're kind of like us in the G5 just wishing for the best but just happy to be there like here.

UMass won a FCS National Championship and nobody cared. UMass in the NCAA tournament (basketball) took over the sports world in the state.

Why would you think I would like that? Or why would you think that I would think that?

If conference semifinals were allowed, the SEC would benefit most, and probably the B1G second. If the CFP is expanded, those conferences would get about the same share of any additional money as the other P5 conferences do. If instead they expand their own tournament, they get to keep it all.

While conference semifinals would mean that virtually every team with the slightest chance of winning the CFP would get to play their way in, this isn't about access. It's about staging games that millions of college football fans want to see, not just the fans of a particular school. That's where the money is.

(08-05-2018 11:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  TV money for conference TV deals appears to be tapped out.

Expanding the playoffs is one way to add more coin to everyone's pockets.

If expanding the playoffs does indeed result in a substantial boost in money, it will happen in 2025, just like the BCS and CFP happened.

If it doesn't, it won't.

(08-06-2018 07:44 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 11:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  TV money for conference TV deals appears to be tapped out.

Expanding the playoffs is one way to add more coin to everyone's pockets.

If expanding the playoffs does indeed result in a substantial boost in money, it will happen in 2025, just like the BCS and CFP happened.

If it doesn't, it won't.

True.

I feel like there might be some desperation plays by the A5 to keep/enhance revenue streams.

One of those I've talked about is the PAC aligning with the G5 in voting in a scholarship reduction to 75. That would trim some costs. Also FBS schools could be able to compete at the D1 minimum number of sports (14) instead of 16.

So it may not be realignment we see as much as measures for the competitive balance of the sport.

(08-06-2018 07:35 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 07:21 AM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 06:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 11:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 08:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  There is a lot of truth in that. Frankly, there is a lot of truth in that entire post. That said---the same people who are most likely to feel like that are the same ones who will blow a blood vessel over the fact that UCF claims a 2017 national championship. If there is no need to observe the rules of basic fairness--people cant whine when that that same type of reasoning is used by the downtrodden.

Frankly, I think we will see expansion of the playoff as well as a legitimate playoff path for the G5. I believe this for multiple reasons---but the biggest is growth. The blue blood schools with 100K stadiums are tapped out and are pretty much as big as they are going to be. Future growth in the sport is going to come from the fan bases of the schools that have been stunted because of the way the sport has been run. I mean---think about it. Would Michigan have ever reached its current size if they were told at the start of every season--no matter how many games you win---you can never be invited to a major bowl or win a national championship. The fact that 20-40K regularly show up for G5 games despite this glass ceiling suggests there might be quite a bit of growth potential for the sport at that end of the spectrum.

TV money for conference TV deals appears to be tapped out.

Expanding the playoffs is one way to add more coin to everyone's pockets.

Another way is expanding the conference championship tournaments from one game to three by adding semifinals (just like the CFP did versus the BCS). In that way, the conferences that already draw the most eyeballs will get and keep for themselves the biggest cash windfall.

Which of the two do you think is more likely?

I'm sure you like the fantasy that NC State could win the ACC even though you guys haven't since 6 years before I was born and I'm 33. So you're kind of like us in the G5 just wishing for the best but just happy to be there like here.

UMass won a FCS National Championship and nobody cared. UMass in the NCAA tournament (basketball) took over the sports world in the state.

Why would you think I would like that? Or why would you think that I would think that?

If conference semifinals were allowed, the SEC would benefit most, and probably the B1G second. If the CFP is expanded, those conferences would get about the same share of any additional money as the other P5 conferences do. If instead they expand their own tournament, they get to keep it all.

While conference semifinals would mean that virtually every team with the slightest chance of winning the CFP would get to play their way in, this isn't about access. It's about staging games that millions of college football fans want to see, not just the fans of a particular school. That's where the money is.

Thought you were an NC State guy. You don't list it so it's hard to know.

This is what conference semifinals would have looked like in 2017. I assumed that the format would be for the winner of one division to host the runnerup in the other division in the first round. Rankings are from the Coaches' Poll (which has an equal number of P5 and G5 coaches on its panel).

AAC:
NR Houston @ #11 UCF
#23 USF @ #14 Memphis

ACC:
#21 Virginia Tech @ #1 Clemson
NR NC State @ #7 Miami

B1G:
#19 Michigan State @ #3 Wisconsin
#20 Northwestern @ #7 Ohio State

MWC:
#25 San Diego State @ NR Boise State
NR Wyoming @ NR Fresno State

PAC:
#13 Washington @ #9 USC
NR Arizona State @ #15 Stanford

SEC:
#5 Alabama @ #6 Georgia
NR South Carolina @ #4 Auburn

I assumed that the Big 12 wouldn't be allowed to stage a semifinal with only 10 members. Their CCG would pit #2 Oklahoma vs #12 TCU.

The following teams ranked in the Top 25 by the coaches would have been excluded from the playoffs. To demonstrate how biased the selection committee is, I include their ranking in parentheses for each team.

Penn State #10 (9)
LSU #16 (17)
Notre Dame #17 (15)
Oklahoma St. #18 (19)
Washington St #22 (18)
Mississippi St #24 (23)

Notre Dame, of course, was omitted because they don't play in a conference. Penn State lost the head to head tiebreaker with Michigan State.