(05-04-2017 10:44 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(05-04-2017 06:59 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(05-04-2017 04:13 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  No. $5 million per year is equivalent to $25 million per year for basketball and football (~80% of the ACC's contract is football-driven, and the ACC is a close comp).

So yes, the BE is very much effectively in the $20-30 mm range, and the AAC isn't. That's the difference. If the AAC made $20-30 million, it would be a Power Conference.

And FWIW, "Power Conference" was a BCS-era term that applied to bowl contracts, but it died w/ the BCS. Instead, "Group" was briefly used to describe conferences w/ a huge media deal and "Gang" was used to describe those that didn't. But those terms were too similar, especially in football, so the "Power Conference" nomenclature was resurrected to replace the term "Group."

To further prove the distinction, the AAC was a Power Conference in the last year of the BCS, but it's never been referred to as a "Power Conference" under the current setup.

you have this backwards

the "power" does not come from the bowl tie in even if that pays a lot of money

1. the bowl tie in pats 2 out of 3 years not every year

2. the ACC gets $27.5 million for their bowl tie in and the SEC SEC SEC or Big 10 get a chance to put another team in that bowl for a second tie in in addition to the Rose or Sugar

the Big 10, SEC SEC SEC, Big 12 and PAC 12 all get $40 million for their bowl tie in

so the ACC gets less for their single tie in than the Big 12 or PAC 12 get for their single tie in and the ACC gets less than the Big 10 or SEC SEC SEC for their primary time in and the SEC SEC SEC or Big 10 get the same as the ACC for the secondary tie in

so that does not have "equality" or similarity in it yet all of those conferences are "P5" conferences

3. all of the P5 conferences get $50 million per year simply for the playoffs existing

4. the P5 conferences have more influence in the NCAA than the rest

5. "AQ" is the BCS era term that went away back when there were six BCS AQ conferences based on those conferences being in the BCS and agreeing to shift their conference winners away from historic bowl tie ins to make the #1 and #2 teams meet for the MNC and having a high paying bowl tie in without regard to the rank or record of their conference winner

6. when the BCS went away and "AQ" went away and the Big East went away is when the P5 conferences came to be

again based on getting the $50 million per year for the playoffs existing and then based on getting 2 votes with the NCAA instead of one

7. so AQ conferences went away and there were P5s left

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut...story.html

Read that article (or at least ctrl + F for "Power Conference") and look at the article's date. Next, compare that date to the end of the BCS. Then re-evaluate your position.

The term "Power Conference" was a BCS-era term.

just because something is in a news paper especially in these days and times that does not make it factual

the vast majority of people called them either BCS conferences or AQ conferences

and that does not change the fact that as of today what makes a P5 conference is not the bowl bid to a NY6 bowl it is getting paid $50 million a year based on the playoffs existing and it is getting to have two votes Vs 1 vote with the NCAA

that is what makes a "power conference" today and in the past before the playoffs there was no $50 million per year for simply being one of the BCS/AQ conferences, there was no two votes to one vote and the BCS bowls paid different amounts not close to what they pay out today much less the playoff payout (the $50 million a year automatically)

"power conference" is the term used NOW so the fact that you are trying to point to an article from the past to say "well it was used then so it died off when the BCS/AQ died off " pretty much flies in the face of the argument that "P5" and "Power Conference" is from the past and not relevant to today...because BCS/AQ is in fact what is not relevant TODAY and what DIED OFF

"power conference" and "P5" is used pretty much exclusively NOW so trying to say it went away back during what YOU called the BCS Era is refuting your own argument

no one uses "gang of 5" and "group of 5" TOGETHER especially when trying to use those terms to differentiate between the two

they would use "group of 5" for the G5 and P5 or "power conferences" for the P5

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spor...story.html

as shown by your same "source"

College football is increasingly a story of haves (the Power Five conferences) and have-nots (the Group of Five conferences). We know which one SDSU has always been.

even if that source used "power conference" in the past that would be much more rare Vs someone using AQ or BCS conference......and as the quote above says INCREASINGLY a story of haves which again means the term "power 5" or "P5" is more relevant today than ever and certainly did not die out with the end of the BCS/AQ era it in fact became much more common specifically because BCS and AQ were NOT relevant any longer with the end of the BCS Era