(07-18-2017 05:07 PM)MAD MACGYVER Wrote:  

(07-18-2017 04:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  I gave you tangible, factual examples of W Michigan and Houston spending more on football than low level P5 schools and you ignore it, because it doesn't suit your agenda.

I did not ignore it. Spending is NOT revenue. And overall, short term spending bursts are not surprising especially for G5 programs that have high aspirations, but they cannot and do not consistently spend more than a P5 programs, period. For instance, Colorado State just spent ~$250M for a new on-campus stadium because they want to position themselves to get into the Big12, and Houston has outspent its revenue stream for the same purpose, but they cannot and will not be able to sustain that level of spending because their revenue streams (donors, TV, ticket sales, merchandise, etc.) are much smaller in comparison to the P5. But the fact remains that REVENUE for the P5 is well above the G5, and as a result, on average, P5 coaching talent, player talent, and facilities are of superior quality than G5 programs.

Again, the disparity of these factors is what's at the heart of the debate between the P5 and G5 in regards to an extended playoff. Namely, can low resource/revenue/talent schools consistently compete with the P5 in the CFP? And according to the G5 v P5 numbers in BCS/NY6 games, it indicates that there is a good reason to consider superior G5 programs as they are 6-3 vs P5 in those games (at the time of the game).

Of course they can compete---because while money certainly helps---the 85 scholarship limit is a tremendous equalizer. The P5 get first pick--- but there is still plenty of talent to build a team---especially for teams in good recruiting areas.