Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
JMU to CUSA?
Author Message
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #61
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 01:42 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 11:44 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  An alternative, probably for football only, is four quadrants of 4 teams, with a 4 team playoff for the conference championship. This would be for additional publicity but probably not a great revenue producer.
But then you need a version of the NCAA that allows a two game playoff calender, or a selection for a CCG without playing a division round robin (eg, play cross-group by group ranking in final week of regular season, with 1v1 to qualify for CCG) ... the current D1 doesn't seem likely to go for that, even less the current D1 without the P5 conferences. And the FBS-only division would require the consensus of P5 conference to support it, and there's no clear reason they should allow it.

Two regionally coherent divisions of eight with an eight game conference schedule is quite like two 60s-80s era eight school conference with a one game scheduling agreement, except for the two "conference" champions then play for the championship of the conglomerate.

The fly in the ointment is the governance problems if the two regionally coherent divisions develop differences of opinion as to where to take the conglomerate.

I think its almost a certainty that the rest Div-1 will no longer have much to do with decisions regarding the operation of FBS. So, getting the rest of Div-1 to agree to changes in the rules governing divisional play and internal conference playoffs is irrelevant. I suspect, the P5 would give the G5 this as a throw away since it costs the P5 nothing and would be nice PR for the more powerful schools who will likely look like bullies in this process. For the G5, getting rules that would allow pod play and internal playoffs could be instrumental in allowing the G5 schools to survive through creating larger nationwide G5 conferences that might appeal to sports networks that broadcast NATIONALY while using tight regional pods to actually cut travel costs from current levels.
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2013 01:54 PM by Attackcoog.)
12-31-2013 01:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Atbjmu09 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 82
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 6
I Root For: JMU
Location:
Post: #62
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 12:19 AM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  
(12-30-2013 09:24 PM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  
(12-30-2013 08:51 PM)Atbjmu09 Wrote:  You have a higher total enrollment because you are a commuter school. The out of state enrollment shows that we are more well known and respected out of state. And we are completely different academic institutions. When students who apply to JMU and choose not to go, it's because they have gotten into an elite academic institution like UVA or W&M. ODU is the safety school of the schools that are the safety schools to JMU.

We are completely different academic institutions. Agreed. But let me get this straight. When you use enrollment numbers, it shows superiority. When an ODU alum uses enrollment numbers, it doesn't mean anything. Got it.

This. There is 0% that I'd apply to JMU. Not because of their academic reputation, but because of the programs they offer. If a student wants to major in engineering or computer science, you will find them no where near JMU, they just don't support those programs. ODU's got some of the best Engineering and CS programs in the state.

Isn't it fun to have the exact same argument every single time JMU and CUSA get mentioned in the same sentence?

JMU has engineering and computer science departments, but nice try.
12-31-2013 02:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MinerInWisconsin Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,685
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
Post: #63
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 11:44 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 11:16 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 11:02 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  I think CUSA needs to focus on becoming a tighter regional conference than being spread out all over the place.

They really cant do that as they are spread all over the place. What they can do--and have, is to further expand membership within the existing footprint to make the divisions more regional with more reasonable travel. The larger divisions not only make for even more regional travel, but it also cut out far away destinations by lowering the number of crossover games.

Its actually feasible for CUSA to go to 18--thus completely eliminating cross divisional play in football. If the conference then employed a heavy use of divisional play only for non-revenue sports, that's about as close to being "tighter and more regional" as CUSA could possibly get.

I agree. For NonBCS conferences, keeping travel costs down is a key. Having Marshall, ODU, JMU, and Charlotte grouped together not only lowers their travel costs but allows their fans to see a few away games. Play 7 division games and 2 crossover games meaning only 1 far away travel game out of 9 CUSA games. Keep Olympic sports mostly within division play.

An alternative, probably for football only, is four quadrants of 4 teams, with a 4 team playoff for the conference championship. This would be for additional publicity but probably not a great revenue producer.

I have not been on ODU's campus but everything I have read indicates this was a top notch quality add for CUSA. CUSA has been very successful in its expansion by going after IA schools.

My best friend's son attended and graduated from JMU. I have been on JMU's campus four times, going with my friend to visit his son. I can assure you that JMU would be a quality add for CUSA similar to ODU and Charlotte.

I think I got the CUSA/East division structure wrong, including WKU. It should probably be like this instead:

CUSA/EAST:
ODU/JMU
Marshall/ODU
FIU/FAU
UAB/MTU

CUSA/WEST:
WKU/Missouri State
USM/La Tech
Rice/UNT
UTEP/UTSA

You probably meant Charlotte instead of the bolded ODU above. I think if the new FBS division allows it, then Attackcoogs idea of pods and larger conferences would lead to C-USA adding Ark St and ULL and possibly Texas St as well. I also think MT and WKU would stay in the same division and/or pod.
12-31-2013 02:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #64
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 02:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 02:17 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 12:53 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(12-29-2013 11:51 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  16 makes some things work better BUT....

CUSA to go to 16 has the options of:

MAC
SBC
1aa
Schools only make lateral moves for better fit, and since there are no MAC schools that would fit CUSAv3.0 better than that MAC, that can be narrowed down to SBC & an FCS school.

CUSA to its credit is creeping slowly northward with Western Kentucky and Old Dominion. They secured the border states over the MAC, the first step to an all out MAC invasion.

The MAC offers 23 sports, a few more than CUSA which is a problem for any MAC school considering moving to CUSA, not having homes for Olympic Sports. NIU, Ohio and Buffalo have wrestling programs to find placement if they were to make a switch.

As a regional league the MAC can offer tournaments at a neutral site such as the MAC Championship in Detroit and basketball tourney in Cleveland. If you start dealing with a league like CUSA or the AAC then the basketball tourney is hosted on somebodies home court.

Once you start digging into the details CUSA doesn't sound like that good of a conference or friendly for the student athlete. More travel equates to more missed class time.

If I were the G5 one of the things I would push for at the January NCAA meetings is a reform of the rule governing divisional play in conferences. If you could get pod play approved (which probably would have little opposition in FBS) you could create larger conferences that still maintained regional travel friendly pods. If you cold get an internal conference playoff included with pod play---large national G5 conferences could be created.

The reason this is interesting is that these large national G5 conferences could conceivably house almost every existing G5 team in just 2 conferences. This could spur the creation of an 8-12 team playoff with every conference being AQ. The money commanded by massive G5 super conferences with an internal playoff might be similar to what a normal P5 conference makes (though it would be split more ways). However, even if each G5 team made half of what the P5 schools earned--they would enjoy lower travel costs due to the pod play, would enjoy national coverage, and would finally have a direct (though crowded) path to a playoff.

Excellent points. It sounds like where the G5 could be heading in the long term.
12-31-2013 03:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Murray007 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,599
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 67
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Mankato, MN
Post: #65
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 02:31 PM)Atbjmu09 Wrote:  JMU has engineering and computer science departments, but nice try.

JMU does have those departments. However, their engineering department is practically brand new. (3 years!!) Plus... I don't see any kind of specialized engineering (mechanical, electrical, etc.). Seems to be a general degree.

Actually, the JMU engineering department website answers my concern and here it what is says:
Quote:Are there engineering sub-disciplines such as mechanical or chemical as at other schools of engineering?
No, this is a broad-based engineering program that draws from many areas of engineering to train engineering versatilists who are aware of the need for sustainability in the systems and devices they design.

Is it better to have a specialized engineering degree or have a broad-based engineering degree? Hmmmm.... I know what my answer is.

Here's the actual website for more information: http://www.jmu.edu/engineering/index.html
12-31-2013 03:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,099
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #66
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 01:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think its almost a certainty that the rest Div-1 will no longer have much to do with decisions regarding the operation of FBS. So, getting the rest of Div-1 to agree to changes in the rules governing divisional play and internal conference playoffs is irrelevant.
When doing an exhaustive list of the alternatives, "almost a certainty" is not the same as "a certainty". Efforts to restructure NCAA divisions have fallen short before.

Quote: I suspect, the P5 would give the G5 this as a throw away since it costs the P5 nothing and would be nice PR for the more powerful schools who will likely look like bullies in this process.
It obviously does not necessarily "cost the P5 nothing" ~ the most direct way to do it extends the CCG period from a weekend to two weeks, delaying bowl week by a week and interfering with fan travel plans. Nor is a second way to do it, giving concession to the CUSA alone to start their season a week earlier to do their semi-finals during rivalry week, as appealing to the P5 as having CUSA have their final week of the season that week, making it easier for people other than the handful of direct fans to ignore their games and focus on the big P5 rivalry week games.

It seems like basically a concession asked by the CUSA to make it easier for them to cherry pick the Sunbelt ~ since obviously the CUSA is not going to be able to raid from the higher status American or MWC or raid laterally from the MAC. That would elicit obvious opposition from the Sunbelt and with no reason for the American, MWC or MAC to support it.

And there is no particular reason that a big, sprawling, conference of Go5 schools in the shadow of four or five P5 conferences is going to be able to build as much brand equity as is destroyed in the process of dismantling the existing Go5 conferences, so there is no particular reason to expect there to be any big pile of media cash to finance the construction of the new conference. We saw the old Big East attempt to build that "national conference", and we see the New Big East be the conference that actually got the pile of cash to build a new conference because FS1 needed the winter season inventory.
12-31-2013 04:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cleburneslim Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,551
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 25
I Root For: jax state
Location:
Post: #67
RE: JMU to CUSA?
From what I've seen, fs1 could use a lot more/better football content. As could NBC sports and CBS sports network. A large national conference especially a new one, made from upper tier g5 schools and free from previous contractual obligations, could fill this need and be worth a few dollars.
12-31-2013 06:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,099
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #68
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 06:10 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  From what I've seen, fs1 could use a lot more/better football content. As could NBC sports and CBS sports network. A large national conference especially a new one, made from upper tier g5 schools and free from previous contractual obligations, could fill this need and be worth a few dollars.
It would be worth less per school than a smaller national conference "made from upper tier g5 schools", and we saw how much money the Old Big East national experiment was able to attract from the networks. It was, indeed, FS1 that acted as if they needed the BBall more, and so put the money toward convincing the Catholic7 to break away and form their own Olympic-sports-only major BBall conference.
12-31-2013 07:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #69
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 04:33 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 01:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think its almost a certainty that the rest Div-1 will no longer have much to do with decisions regarding the operation of FBS. So, getting the rest of Div-1 to agree to changes in the rules governing divisional play and internal conference playoffs is irrelevant.
When doing an exhaustive list of the alternatives, "almost a certainty" is not the same as "a certainty". Efforts to restructure NCAA divisions have fallen short before.

Quote: I suspect, the P5 would give the G5 this as a throw away since it costs the P5 nothing and would be nice PR for the more powerful schools who will likely look like bullies in this process.
It obviously does not necessarily "cost the P5 nothing" ~ the most direct way to do it extends the CCG period from a weekend to two weeks, delaying bowl week by a week and interfering with fan travel plans. Nor is a second way to do it, giving concession to the CUSA alone to start their season a week earlier to do their semi-finals during rivalry week, as appealing to the P5 as having CUSA have their final week of the season that week, making it easier for people other than the handful of direct fans to ignore their games and focus on the big P5 rivalry week games.

It seems like basically a concession asked by the CUSA to make it easier for them to cherry pick the Sunbelt ~ since obviously the CUSA is not going to be able to raid from the higher status American or MWC or raid laterally from the MAC. That would elicit obvious opposition from the Sunbelt and with no reason for the American, MWC or MAC to support it.

And there is no particular reason that a big, sprawling, conference of Go5 schools in the shadow of four or five P5 conferences is going to be able to build as much brand equity as is destroyed in the process of dismantling the existing Go5 conferences, so there is no particular reason to expect there to be any big pile of media cash to finance the construction of the new conference. We saw the old Big East attempt to build that "national conference", and we see the New Big East be the conference that actually got the pile of cash to build a new conference because FS1 needed the winter season inventory.

In this case, removing influence of non-FBS D1 schools from exerting control over FBS is a certainty. The only question is will the P5 need to leave the NCAA to accomplish that end (which includes the question of who will be invited to come along). The status quo isn't going to stand. The P5 has made that clear.

As for a nationwide G5 conference "destroying" the value of existing G5 conferences---I'm forced to ask---Are you serious? The most well compensated G5 comferences earn a whopping 10% of what the P5 make. In 1996 the highest paid G5 conferences earned half of what the P5 earned. The current regional G5 models are a complete disaster when it comes to maximizing value. The MAC earns 100K a team from TV--The Sunbelt gets about 20K a team. There is no "value" to destroy. You mentioned that these teams would be in the shadow of the P5 where ever they are located. I agree. That condition will exist wheather the G5 are arranged regionally or nationally--thus its a non-factor in this discussion.

A national sports network televises games NATIONALLY. The perfect FBS conference for a national sports network would be a conference where any game would have some local interest in almost every portion of the nation. If there was a national conference that had teams sprinkled across the entire nation, then that conference would be able to generate some general interest for its games virtually anywhere in the country. For the G5, who are second bananas in every market, capitalizing on lots of smaller fanbases over a huge footprint is the ONLY way to produce a large audience.

Effectively, the idea is to band so many fan bases together in one national conference that the ratings are similar to what a typical P5 conference produces. Say it takes 24 G5 teams in one conference to generate similar ratings---then perhaps that conference can obtain a media contract that is similar to a power conference. Of course, it's divided more ways, but the G5 teams are then making half of what the P5 makes. That's a massive improvements.

By the way, these pod/internal playoff rules would be for any conference--not just CUSA. I would think the biggest beneficiary of such rules could be the MW or the AAC.
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2013 08:05 PM by Attackcoog.)
12-31-2013 07:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cleburneslim Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,551
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 25
I Root For: jax state
Location:
Post: #70
RE: JMU to CUSA?
The g5 should band together to sell the rights to every game including a new g5 playoffs. However each conference is obligated to current media contracts, it maybe necessary to form new conferences. With the additional sport networks now in need of programming there should be considerable interest.
I know I'm interested. G5 games would have new meaning nationally, rather than trying to make it to the nobody cares or watches bowl.
12-31-2013 08:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #71
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 08:46 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  The g5 should band together to sell the rights to every game including a new g5 playoffs. However each conference is obligated to current media contracts, it maybe necessary to form new conferences. With the additional sport networks now in need of programming there should be considerable interest.
I know I'm interested. G5 games would have new meaning nationally, rather than trying to make it to the nobody cares or watches bowl.

A G5 playoff would be the wrong way to go. That's entirely different from an internal playoff of pods within a large G5 nationwide conference.
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2013 09:43 PM by Attackcoog.)
12-31-2013 09:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cleburneslim Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,551
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 25
I Root For: jax state
Location:
Post: #72
RE: JMU to CUSA?
Individual conferences offers competition for media dollars which would lower the overall amount. All or nothing would drive the price up at the same time giving ESPN competition with fox NBC or CBS sports which would have to promote their product-g5 football, this in turn could give the g5 over time a more equal footing with the p5 over time.
12-31-2013 10:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chiefsfan Offline
No Seriously, they let me be a mod
*

Posts: 43,710
Joined: Sep 2007
Reputation: 1061
I Root For: ASU
Location:
Post: #73
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 10:14 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  Individual conferences offers competition for media dollars which would lower the overall amount. All or nothing would drive the price up at the same time giving ESPN competition with fox NBC or CBS sports which would have to promote their product-g5 football, this in turn could give the g5 over time a more equal footing with the p5 over time.

How many people do you think would watch a so called G5 championship game between say Fresno State and Houston?

My guess is not near as many who will watch UCF/Baylor tomorrow night.
12-31-2013 10:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,099
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #74
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 10:35 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  How many people do you think would watch a so called G5 championship game between say Fresno State and Houston?

My guess is not near as many who will watch UCF/Baylor tomorrow night.
Just like the numbers watching NIU on #MACtion this last November ... a substantial number if it was deciding the BCS bowl buster. Not so many if it is, in effect, just the premier of the little bowls.

(12-31-2013 09:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  A G5 playoff would be the wrong way to go. That's entirely different from an internal playoff of pods within a large G5 nationwide conference.
The difference being that in the first case, the groups are called "conferences" and in the second case, the groups are called "divisions" or "groups" (thankfully no marketers will ever allow them to actually be called "pods")?
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2013 11:09 PM by BruceMcF.)
12-31-2013 11:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Cyniclone Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,302
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 813
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #75
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 07:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 04:33 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 01:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think its almost a certainty that the rest Div-1 will no longer have much to do with decisions regarding the operation of FBS. So, getting the rest of Div-1 to agree to changes in the rules governing divisional play and internal conference playoffs is irrelevant.
When doing an exhaustive list of the alternatives, "almost a certainty" is not the same as "a certainty". Efforts to restructure NCAA divisions have fallen short before.

Quote: I suspect, the P5 would give the G5 this as a throw away since it costs the P5 nothing and would be nice PR for the more powerful schools who will likely look like bullies in this process.
It obviously does not necessarily "cost the P5 nothing" ~ the most direct way to do it extends the CCG period from a weekend to two weeks, delaying bowl week by a week and interfering with fan travel plans. Nor is a second way to do it, giving concession to the CUSA alone to start their season a week earlier to do their semi-finals during rivalry week, as appealing to the P5 as having CUSA have their final week of the season that week, making it easier for people other than the handful of direct fans to ignore their games and focus on the big P5 rivalry week games.

It seems like basically a concession asked by the CUSA to make it easier for them to cherry pick the Sunbelt ~ since obviously the CUSA is not going to be able to raid from the higher status American or MWC or raid laterally from the MAC. That would elicit obvious opposition from the Sunbelt and with no reason for the American, MWC or MAC to support it.

And there is no particular reason that a big, sprawling, conference of Go5 schools in the shadow of four or five P5 conferences is going to be able to build as much brand equity as is destroyed in the process of dismantling the existing Go5 conferences, so there is no particular reason to expect there to be any big pile of media cash to finance the construction of the new conference. We saw the old Big East attempt to build that "national conference", and we see the New Big East be the conference that actually got the pile of cash to build a new conference because FS1 needed the winter season inventory.

In this case, removing influence of non-FBS D1 schools from exerting control over FBS is a certainty. The only question is will the P5 need to leave the NCAA to accomplish that end (which includes the question of who will be invited to come along). The status quo isn't going to stand. The P5 has made that clear.

As for a nationwide G5 conference "destroying" the value of existing G5 conferences---I'm forced to ask---Are you serious? The most well compensated G5 comferences earn a whopping 10% of what the P5 make. In 1996 the highest paid G5 conferences earned half of what the P5 earned. The current regional G5 models are a complete disaster when it comes to maximizing value. The MAC earns 100K a team from TV--The Sunbelt gets about 20K a team. There is no "value" to destroy. You mentioned that these teams would be in the shadow of the P5 where ever they are located. I agree. That condition will exist wheather the G5 are arranged regionally or nationally--thus its a non-factor in this discussion.

A national sports network televises games NATIONALLY. The perfect FBS conference for a national sports network would be a conference where any game would have some local interest in almost every portion of the nation. If there was a national conference that had teams sprinkled across the entire nation, then that conference would be able to generate some general interest for its games virtually anywhere in the country. For the G5, who are second bananas in every market, capitalizing on lots of smaller fanbases over a huge footprint is the ONLY way to produce a large audience.

Effectively, the idea is to band so many fan bases together in one national conference that the ratings are similar to what a typical P5 conference produces. Say it takes 24 G5 teams in one conference to generate similar ratings---then perhaps that conference can obtain a media contract that is similar to a power conference. Of course, it's divided more ways, but the G5 teams are then making half of what the P5 makes. That's a massive improvements.

By the way, these pod/internal playoff rules would be for any conference--not just CUSA. I would think the biggest beneficiary of such rules could be the MW or the AAC.

There's a difference between a national conference and a conference that has members all around the nation. A San Diego State-Tulane or Temple-New Mexico game isn't going to sell nationally just because there's a lot of real estate between the two schools. A San Diego State-San Jose State or Tulane-Houston game has a better shot because they'll do whatever they do in their own markets, but they're close enough that they can combine to get a bit of the adjacent markets. UConn vs. Utah State doesn't do much for casual fans in the Midwest or South.

And no network is going to shell out for a 24-team G5 conference. If they were, the CUSA/MWC merger would have happened.
12-31-2013 11:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #76
RE: JMU to CUSA?
They G5 playoff managed by the Fouke Monster and his aide Sasquatch would be viable IF:
1. All five leagues went all in supporting it.
2. The five league commissioners, the coaches, the AD's and presidents would have to go all in with an AFL/pirate attitude,
3. They would have to start by challenging the P5 to join the playoff.
4. They would have to yammer incessantly about the P5 being afraid of the challenge, acting like a monopoly, denying the public the playoff they want.
5. They would have to present a united front proclaiming their champ as the champ, if they played the defending CFP champ or a CFP playoff team they would have to avoid referencing their participation as if it wasn't worth mentioning and ignore the rankings of those non-participating teams. Those not playing they'd need to call "non-participating teams" or if the mood strike "fake playoff" teams.
6. They would need one TV network to love them whether it be Fox, CBS or NBC along with their associated cable properties.
7. They would have to bundle their TV rights with that network that takes them on and sort out a revenue distribution model that recognizes the leagues/teams getting the TV exposure.
8. They would need a web/app infrastructure to insure coverage of games not selected for TV coverage.
9. The coaches would need to agree to vote their champ #1 in the final poll over the CFP champ no matter what.
10. If the big boys go hardball and defect you sue under every theory you can try without being subject to sanctions and then you play your version of hardball changing eligibility to five years to play five, you create academic outlets such as summer programs for incoming students to demonstrate academic progress to avoid being non-qualifiers, you allow free transfer from the P5, you set aside a percentage of TV rights fees and create a point system for distribution of earned money upon graduation or a percentage of earned money if you fail to graduate in six years but have used up eligibility, you permit underclassmen to work out for scouts and declare for the draft without penalty, you permit hiring agents as long as you receive no compensation.
11. You agree to comply with the same rules as the P5 if they join the playoff.

Most of those points would never get P5 approval and would be a poison pill to prevent them from matching.

There is not one single thing on that list that all five G5 leagues would agree to do therefore it is virtually certain to never happen and if it did happen without doing those things it would fail.

Unless you ready to walk around with a chip on your shoulder AFL style and declare you are better until you believe it, you can't win the heart and minds of the people who will embrace a challenge to the status quo and while there would be plenty of P5 fans sniffing and calling it outlaw football, it would improve the talent of the G5 and solidify the us against the SOB's attitude so few G5 fans embrace.
(This post was last modified: 01-01-2014 01:00 AM by arkstfan.)
01-01-2014 12:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,099
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #77
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 11:30 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  And no network is going to shell out for a 24-team G5 conference. If they were, the CUSA/MWC merger would have happened.
Exactly. The media market where a conglomerate 24-team league from Go5 schools is worth big bucks to a media partner is one where they are already offering the Mountain West and the American big bucks to expand to 16 each. So it exists in some different universe than the one we actually live in.

We already know when games involving those schools can attract some modicum of national TV interest: during the period before the big bowls and between the big bowls and the NCG when any football game can attract a certain amount of interest if its the only football on YV at that time. And since bowl games have to be between conferences, a single conglomerate "mega-Go5" conference would spoil that opening, since very few will get to go bowling with the P5, and the rest will have to go bowling against the schools from the conferences gutted to form the mega-Go5 conglomerate conference.
01-01-2014 01:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #78
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(12-31-2013 11:07 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 10:35 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  How many people do you think would watch a so called G5 championship game between say Fresno State and Houston?

My guess is not near as many who will watch UCF/Baylor tomorrow night.
Just like the numbers watching NIU on #MACtion this last November ... a substantial number if it was deciding the BCS bowl buster. Not so many if it is, in effect, just the premier of the little bowls.

(12-31-2013 09:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  A G5 playoff would be the wrong way to go. That's entirely different from an internal playoff of pods within a large G5 nationwide conference.
The difference being that in the first case, the groups are called "conferences" and in the second case, the groups are called "divisions" or "groups" (thankfully no marketers will ever allow them to actually be called "pods")?

No. The difference being in one case the conference is question is simply determining it's champion--who will then be considered for inclusion in a national championship playoff to determine the champion of the highest level of college football. In the other scenario, the winner of the G5 playoff will determine who the 65th best team in college football is.

Virtually every college football fan cares about who the best college football team in the nation is. Virtually nobody cares who comes in 65th place.
01-01-2014 03:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #79
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(01-01-2014 01:49 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 11:30 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  And no network is going to shell out for a 24-team G5 conference. If they were, the CUSA/MWC merger would have happened.
Exactly. The media market where a conglomerate 24-team league from Go5 schools is worth big bucks to a media partner is one where they are already offering the Mountain West and the American big bucks to expand to 16 each. So it exists in some different universe than the one we actually live in.

We already know when games involving those schools can attract some modicum of national TV interest: during the period before the big bowls and between the big bowls and the NCG when any football game can attract a certain amount of interest if its the only football on YV at that time. And since bowl games have to be between conferences, a single conglomerate "mega-Go5" conference would spoil that opening, since very few will get to go bowling with the P5, and the rest will have to go bowling against the schools from the conferences gutted to form the mega-Go5 conglomerate conference.

The reality is a large national G5 conference would quickly become the most well known, most recognized, most watched, and most popular G5 conference in the nation. The mega-G5 conference would simply become the most preferred G5 conference for the P5 to play in bowl games.

Look, I don't know for certain that a G5 national conference would work. However, it is the only model that offers any potential hope to the G5. The regional model has been a dismal failure at the G5 level. Effectively, there is simply nothing to lose at this point.
01-01-2014 04:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tallgrass Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,396
Joined: Nov 2002
Reputation: 91
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #80
RE: JMU to CUSA?
(01-01-2014 01:49 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(12-31-2013 11:30 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  And no network is going to shell out for a 24-team G5 conference. If they were, the CUSA/MWC merger would have happened.
Exactly. The media market where a conglomerate 24-team league from Go5 schools is worth big bucks to a media partner is one where they are already offering the Mountain West and the American big bucks to expand to 16 each. So it exists in some different universe than the one we actually live in.

We already know when games involving those schools can attract some modicum of national TV interest: during the period before the big bowls and between the big bowls and the NCG when any football game can attract a certain amount of interest if its the only football on YV at that time. And since bowl games have to be between conferences, a single conglomerate "mega-Go5" conference would spoil that opening, since very few will get to go bowling with the P5, and the rest will have to go bowling against the schools from the conferences gutted to form the mega-Go5 conglomerate conference.

Well, I don't know if MWC/CUSA "merger" or whatever one wants to call it is a failure. A full blown merger, as we know it and have seen it in other conferences, was probably never on the table. The geography, Idaho to Florida, California to Carolina, was/is to broad. But something like a 4 team playoff, pitting the champs of each division of 6 teams, plus one Crossover game was probably what was on the table....is my guess and it is, of course, just that, a guess.

As an outsider looking in without any real knowledge, MWC signed a long term tv contract, and redoing and/or breaking that contract was an issue, as I recall. There was a legal question on the table if the "merger" was in fact a device to break a legally binding MWC contract.
01-01-2014 12:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.