(01-08-2018 12:43 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-teams-now
G5 commissioners, including Benson, unanimously supported the current 4 team playoff system. Wtf. Fire these puppets of the P5 oligarchy
There's obviously something else there. My guess is that this playoff proposal was combined with a massive cut in playoff money for the G5.
(01-08-2018 12:47 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 12:43 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-teams-now
G5 commissioners, including Benson, unanimously supported the current 4 team playoff system. Wtf. Fire these puppets of the P5 oligarchy
There's obviously something else there. My guess is that this playoff proposal was combined with a massive cut in playoff money for the G5.
Kinda what I guess as well. The ol' "You want 8 team playoff? Well you're going to take a 50% hit to your CFP payout"
(01-08-2018 12:49 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 12:47 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 12:43 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-teams-now
G5 commissioners, including Benson, unanimously supported the current 4 team playoff system. Wtf. Fire these puppets of the P5 oligarchy
There's obviously something else there. My guess is that this playoff proposal was combined with a massive cut in playoff money for the G5.
Kinda what I guess as well. The ol' "You want 8 team playoff? Well you're going to take a 50% hit to your CFP payout"
So G5 are being "paid off" basically? To hell with that I say. Our schools can generate enough funds ourselves. Any $$ from the league is a bonus. I rather have a legit chance for G5 teams to join the playoff. Otherwise, how can G5 conferences improve their perceptions and respectability?
Well, it's just a guess that happened in that way. Who knows really why they voted the way they did until they let us know
Its hard to kill an entrenched cartel.
Many of these conference execs and Presidents do not want to rock the boat because they also dream of becoming Greg Sankey someday and wish to remain viable.
Also, being a remora means that you get tidbits of food with no danger of becoming food.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk
Benson's logic makes no sense because no one is suggesting *less* access when they discuss an expanded playoff. No one is suggesting going back to the old BCS system. He actually contradicts himself because his first statement implies that if we were to change again, it would be good, yet he doesnt support "changing" by expanding the playoff.
(01-08-2018 12:43 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-teams-now
G5 commissioners, including Benson, unanimously supported the current 4 team playoff system. Wtf. Fire these puppets of the P5 oligarchy
This is the key...
Quote:"I really believe in this system, that if you play the right schedule, that you're going to have an opportunity to be in the discussion," said MWC commissioner Craig Thompson. "Will you be a semifinalist? Very challenging. But you will be in the conversation."
Are we entirely sure that the idea of an expanded playoff was 8 teams including the G5 rep, or just the 8 best teams?
Because if it was the 8 best teams. we'd be absolutely foolish to accept that format because it would just be the status quo.
(01-08-2018 01:38 PM)chiefsfan Wrote: [ -> ]Are we entirely sure that the idea of an expanded playoff was 8 teams including the G5 rep, or just the 8 best teams?
Because if it was the 8 best teams. we'd be absolutely foolish to accept that format because it would just be the status quo.
Yes and no. G5 is much more likely to get a top 8 ranking than a top 4. Houston would have been in a top 8 scenario had they gone undefeated a couple years ago.
(01-08-2018 01:03 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 12:49 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 12:47 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 12:43 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-teams-now
G5 commissioners, including Benson, unanimously supported the current 4 team playoff system. Wtf. Fire these puppets of the P5 oligarchy
There's obviously something else there. My guess is that this playoff proposal was combined with a massive cut in playoff money for the G5.
Kinda what I guess as well. The ol' "You want 8 team playoff? Well you're going to take a 50% hit to your CFP payout"
So G5 are being "paid off" basically? To hell with that I say. Our schools can generate enough funds ourselves. Any $$ from the league is a bonus. I rather have a legit chance for G5 teams to join the playoff. Otherwise, how can G5 conferences improve their perceptions and respectability?
...or play and beat two non cellar dwelling P5's, go undefeated and see what happens.
(01-08-2018 01:40 PM)Tiguar Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 01:38 PM)chiefsfan Wrote: [ -> ]Are we entirely sure that the idea of an expanded playoff was 8 teams including the G5 rep, or just the 8 best teams?
Because if it was the 8 best teams. we'd be absolutely foolish to accept that format because it would just be the status quo.
Yes and no. G5 is much more likely to get a top 8 ranking than a top 4. Houston would have been in a top 8 scenario had they gone undefeated a couple years ago.
Maybe
In all likelihood we know what will happen, the committee will just ensure that the particular G5 rep doesn't finish in the top 8, using the same tired excuses they give now.
We're not getting a spot unless its forced.
(01-08-2018 01:41 PM)panama Wrote: [ -> ]...or play and beat two non cellar dwelling P5's, go undefeated and see what happens.
Zero chance an undefeated G5 with two decent P5 wins would have gotten in this year, extrapolating the logic used to get bama in over OSU. And this year had enough chaos for it to be feasible.
Unless there is a spot for the G5 member don't expand.
(01-08-2018 01:41 PM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 01:03 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 12:49 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 12:47 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 12:43 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-teams-now
G5 commissioners, including Benson, unanimously supported the current 4 team playoff system. Wtf. Fire these puppets of the P5 oligarchy
There's obviously something else there. My guess is that this playoff proposal was combined with a massive cut in playoff money for the G5.
Kinda what I guess as well. The ol' "You want 8 team playoff? Well you're going to take a 50% hit to your CFP payout"
So G5 are being "paid off" basically? To hell with that I say. Our schools can generate enough funds ourselves. Any $$ from the league is a bonus. I rather have a legit chance for G5 teams to join the playoff. Otherwise, how can G5 conferences improve their perceptions and respectability?
...or play and beat two non cellar dwelling P5's, go undefeated and see what happens.
WMU did that last year.
What were they ranked?
(01-08-2018 01:38 PM)chiefsfan Wrote: [ -> ]Are we entirely sure that the idea of an expanded playoff was 8 teams including the G5 rep, or just the 8 best teams?
Because if it was the 8 best teams. we'd be absolutely foolish to accept that format because it would just be the status quo.
More of the same.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk
(01-08-2018 01:43 PM)chiefsfan Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 01:40 PM)Tiguar Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2018 01:38 PM)chiefsfan Wrote: [ -> ]Are we entirely sure that the idea of an expanded playoff was 8 teams including the G5 rep, or just the 8 best teams?
Because if it was the 8 best teams. we'd be absolutely foolish to accept that format because it would just be the status quo.
Yes and no. G5 is much more likely to get a top 8 ranking than a top 4. Houston would have been in a top 8 scenario had they gone undefeated a couple years ago.
Maybe
In all likelihood we know what will happen, the committee will just ensure that the particular G5 rep doesn't finish in the top 8, using the same tired excuses they give now.
We're not getting a spot unless its forced.
perhaps, but in the hypothetical undefeated houston scenario, it would have been egregiously obvious to everyone what was happening.
The committee was probably very happy they lost even with only 4 spots available.
I think this new proposal was simply an increase to 8 teams. If there is no guarantee a G5 team will be represented, it wouldn't make a difference if we increased it to 32, they would still find a way to screw the G5.
With that being said, when the AAC commissioner votes against fixing something he's been very openly critical about, there is something shady going on.
Karl Benson isn't speaking his own mind necessarily, his job is to speak on behalf of the conference's presidents - period - or get fired.