(01-19-2014 07:08 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  But they also want to remain part of the NCAA D-1 FBS division and keep playing OOC games against G5 and FCS schools. Otherwise, in a P5-only football organization, they would have to play half of their games on the road, and half of them would finish each season with losing records. Their fans don't want that and neither do the TV networks.

They can play non-P5 teams all they want if they have a separate division, but the key is marketing. If the P5 is a separate division, it makes it even harder to sell your fans on those SEC vs. SBC games or to say that those games should be part of your official won-loss record. If the teams that are 3-5 in conference don't get to inflate their season record to 6-6 or 7-5, then they can't sell their season as a success.

The irony, though, is that the G5 teams are "valuable" to the P5 for this purpose only because the G5 teams lose the vast majority of those games. If those games were not a reliable source of Ws for the P5 teams, then the P5 teams would have no use for them.

(01-19-2014 09:35 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 07:08 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  But they also want to remain part of the NCAA D-1 FBS division and keep playing OOC games against G5 and FCS schools. Otherwise, in a P5-only football organization, they would have to play half of their games on the road, and half of them would finish each season with losing records. Their fans don't want that and neither do the TV networks.

They can play non-P5 teams all they want if they have a separate division, but the key is marketing. If the P5 is a separate division, it makes it even harder to sell your fans on those SEC vs. SBC games or to say that those games should be part of your official won-loss record. If the teams that are 3-5 in conference don't get to inflate their season record to 6-6 or 7-5, then they can't sell their season as a success.

I agree. The P5 don't want to leave the NCAA because they want to keep playing non-P5 teams. And as you say, they don't want to be in an officially separate D4 football division within the NCAA because it would devalue their wins against G5 opponents (it's also questionable whether they could round up the votes to get a separate D4 division approved). Hence the move to form, as I put it above, their own de facto super-division with its own rule-making authority within the NCAA D-1 FBS division.

With apologies to Orwell, they want a world where all FBS schools are equal, but some are more equal than others -- not just in terms of athletic funding (where disparities are inevitable and rightfully outside the NCAA's control), but now also with respect to the rules governing compensation of athletes. The danger from a G5 perspective is the precedent this sets for the P5 to eventually also establish their own rules for recruiting, scholarship limitations, playoff structure and playoff access. Where will the line be drawn?

So basically the Cartel is Vader and the G5 is Lando and we're just praying they don't alter the deal any further. And the deal keeps getting worse all the time!

(01-20-2014 02:57 AM)justinslot Wrote:  So basically the Cartel is Vader and the G5 is Lando and we're just praying they don't alter the deal any further. And the deal keeps getting worse all the time!

http://video.adultswim.com/robot-chicken...-time.html

(01-20-2014 03:24 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:57 AM)justinslot Wrote:  So basically the Cartel is Vader and the G5 is Lando and we're just praying they don't alter the deal any further. And the deal keeps getting worse all the time!

http://video.adultswim.com/robot-chicken...-time.html

Pressing the invisible like button.

(01-20-2014 02:39 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 09:35 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 07:08 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  But they also want to remain part of the NCAA D-1 FBS division and keep playing OOC games against G5 and FCS schools. Otherwise, in a P5-only football organization, they would have to play half of their games on the road, and half of them would finish each season with losing records. Their fans don't want that and neither do the TV networks.

They can play non-P5 teams all they want if they have a separate division, but the key is marketing. If the P5 is a separate division, it makes it even harder to sell your fans on those SEC vs. SBC games or to say that those games should be part of your official won-loss record. If the teams that are 3-5 in conference don't get to inflate their season record to 6-6 or 7-5, then they can't sell their season as a success.

I agree. The P5 don't want to leave the NCAA because they want to keep playing non-P5 teams. And as you say, they don't want to be in an officially separate D4 football division within the NCAA because it would devalue their wins against G5 opponents (it's also questionable whether they could round up the votes to get a separate D4 division approved). Hence the move to form, as I put it above, their own de facto super-division with its own rule-making authority within the NCAA D-1 FBS division.

With apologies to Orwell, they want a world where all FBS schools are equal, but some are more equal than others -- not just in terms of athletic funding (where disparities are inevitable and rightfully outside the NCAA's control), but now also with respect to the rules governing compensation of athletes. The danger from a G5 perspective is the precedent this sets for the P5 to eventually also establish their own rules for recruiting, scholarship limitations, playoff structure and playoff access. Where will the line be drawn?

Well, much like present, if the P5 truly split from the rest their games in football against the current FCS wouldn't be any different than games against the G5. And since G5 games would be more frequent, they would be more "accepted" than FCS games. I don't see this as an issue.

In basketball, again, games against non-D4 schools would become widely accepted and would not be devalued to any significant degree. It wouldn't be an issue.

And couldn't the P5 just wait until it got P5 voting power and then create a true D4? If it's all but assured the P5 are getting special voting power, what's to stop them from voting for a D4 once they have that power?

(01-20-2014 04:23 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:39 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 09:35 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 07:08 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  But they also want to remain part of the NCAA D-1 FBS division and keep playing OOC games against G5 and FCS schools. Otherwise, in a P5-only football organization, they would have to play half of their games on the road, and half of them would finish each season with losing records. Their fans don't want that and neither do the TV networks.

They can play non-P5 teams all they want if they have a separate division, but the key is marketing. If the P5 is a separate division, it makes it even harder to sell your fans on those SEC vs. SBC games or to say that those games should be part of your official won-loss record. If the teams that are 3-5 in conference don't get to inflate their season record to 6-6 or 7-5, then they can't sell their season as a success.

I agree. The P5 don't want to leave the NCAA because they want to keep playing non-P5 teams. And as you say, they don't want to be in an officially separate D4 football division within the NCAA because it would devalue their wins against G5 opponents (it's also questionable whether they could round up the votes to get a separate D4 division approved). Hence the move to form, as I put it above, their own de facto super-division with its own rule-making authority within the NCAA D-1 FBS division.

With apologies to Orwell, they want a world where all FBS schools are equal, but some are more equal than others -- not just in terms of athletic funding (where disparities are inevitable and rightfully outside the NCAA's control), but now also with respect to the rules governing compensation of athletes. The danger from a G5 perspective is the precedent this sets for the P5 to eventually also establish their own rules for recruiting, scholarship limitations, playoff structure and playoff access. Where will the line be drawn?

Well, much like present, if the P5 truly split from the rest their games in football against the current FCS wouldn't be any different than games against the G5. And since G5 games would be more frequent, they would be more "accepted" than FCS games. I don't see this as an issue.

In basketball, again, games against non-D4 schools would become widely accepted and would not be devalued to any significant degree. It wouldn't be an issue.

And couldn't the P5 just wait until it got P5 voting power and then create a true D4? If it's all but assured the P5 are getting special voting power, what's to stop them from voting for a D4 once they have that power?

They wouldn't have the authority to create a 4th division within the NCAA. However,they already effectively hold that power via the threat to break away from the NCAA altogether.

(01-19-2014 12:05 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 10:44 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I still think that once the P5 makes its adjustments to Student Welfare and the AAC/MWC follow suit that the real movement is going to occur a the MAC/SBC/CUSA level.

The possibility of forming a 16 team conference comprised of schools willing to pay for the full cost of attendance out of CUSA, SBC, MAC makes some sense. Possibly the situation could be that CUSA votes in the full cost of attendance and takes in a group of 4-6 from MAC and/or SBC where they can't get it passed.

That could be a real possibility. That would essentially whittle down to a G4 conferences.

I don't see it,. Every G5 school will pass for their programs whatever the P5 comes up with. They may have to find money in places that they didn't know they had it, but the alternative is far worse.

(01-19-2014 03:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 03:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 12:05 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 10:44 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I still think that once the P5 makes its adjustments to Student Welfare and the AAC/MWC follow suit that the real movement is going to occur a the MAC/SBC/CUSA level.

The possibility of forming a 16 team conference comprised of schools willing to pay for the full cost of attendance out of CUSA, SBC, MAC makes some sense. Possibly the situation could be that CUSA votes in the full cost of attendance and takes in a group of 4-6 from MAC and/or SBC where they can't get it passed.

That could be a real possibility. That would essentially whittle down to a G4 conferences.

I think it makes more sense for the MAC and CUSA to absorb all the promising SBC schools than for the SBC to continue to add FCS upgrades down to the bottom of the barrel possibilities.

CUSA (Ark St, ULL, USA, Georgia St)
MAC (App St, GSU, Troy)

Then you have Idaho, NMSU, ULM, Texas St all either making the decision to move back to FCS or wait until there is an opening in the G4 (the case probably of NMSU and Texas St).

I think you leave at least 8 teams behind in the Sunbelt with a gentlemans agreement that they do not add any more FCS schools. CUSA takes Arky St and LLU. MAC grabs App St. Leave the SB as a viable conference. There i s not enough to leave anyone homeless at this point. It would just cause more FCS move-ups and further dilution of the G5 product.

SBC would never go along with that. They will always add FCS...and unless CUSA picks up new money it doesn't have, a diluted 16 team CUSA will not be as interesting to SBC teams...especially if the TV contract loses money.

Its not an issue in the SBC of whether or not the cost of attendance measure passes. It passed long ago whenever our AD's voted for the original mess.

I think the actual realignment we will see will come at the MAC/CUSA/SBC level, and will be a geographic based move as teams realize that the TV money wont be there, and they will need to realign geographically to save money. You might see a group get together and actually form their own league in the end.

@chiefsfan - The MAC doesn't need to make any geographical based realignment moves. We are as compact as you can get in an FBS conference.

(01-20-2014 10:24 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  @chiefsfan - The MAC doesn't need to make any geographical based realignment moves. We are as compact as you can get in an FBS conference.

True, but they might like to pick up a school on the edge of their footprint or might have a school leave (like UMass). I don't think the MAC will sit at 13 for the long term.

(01-20-2014 09:52 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 03:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 03:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 12:05 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 10:44 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I still think that once the P5 makes its adjustments to Student Welfare and the AAC/MWC follow suit that the real movement is going to occur a the MAC/SBC/CUSA level.

The possibility of forming a 16 team conference comprised of schools willing to pay for the full cost of attendance out of CUSA, SBC, MAC makes some sense. Possibly the situation could be that CUSA votes in the full cost of attendance and takes in a group of 4-6 from MAC and/or SBC where they can't get it passed.

That could be a real possibility. That would essentially whittle down to a G4 conferences.

I think it makes more sense for the MAC and CUSA to absorb all the promising SBC schools than for the SBC to continue to add FCS upgrades down to the bottom of the barrel possibilities.

CUSA (Ark St, ULL, USA, Georgia St)
MAC (App St, GSU, Troy)

Then you have Idaho, NMSU, ULM, Texas St all either making the decision to move back to FCS or wait until there is an opening in the G4 (the case probably of NMSU and Texas St).

I think you leave at least 8 teams behind in the Sunbelt with a gentlemans agreement that they do not add any more FCS schools. CUSA takes Arky St and LLU. MAC grabs App St. Leave the SB as a viable conference. There i s not enough to leave anyone homeless at this point. It would just cause more FCS move-ups and further dilution of the G5 product.

SBC would never go along with that. They will always add FCS...and unless CUSA picks up new money it doesn't have, a diluted 16 team CUSA will not be as interesting to SBC teams...especially if the TV contract loses money.

Its not an issue in the SBC of whether or not the cost of attendance measure passes. It passed long ago whenever our AD's voted for the original mess.

I think the actual realignment we will see will come at the MAC/CUSA/SBC level, and will be a geographic based move as teams realize that the TV money wont be there, and they will need to realign geographically to save money. You might see a group get together and actually form their own league in the end.

My contention has been that should that type of large scale realignment come to the G5---it would be best handled in an organized conclave meeting of the G5. The conclave would have AD's, presidents, conference commissioners, NCAA execs, and TV representatives. All entry and exit fees would be waived. Let the schools organize in a way that is most efficient and creates the most value (however that turns out to be). The only rule of the conclave would be that anyone coming in with a conference home will leave with a conference home---everything else is free game.

There are plenty of G5 programs. There is no need to dip further into the FCS pool. A realignment of the G5 is an organizational issue---not a numbers issue. At most, the G5 should only need one FCS to balance the numbers. The G5 might not need any if Army or BYU were to decide to join a conference.

(01-20-2014 02:39 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  With apologies to Orwell, they want a world where all FBS schools are equal, but some are more equal than others -- not just in terms of athletic funding (where disparities are inevitable and rightfully outside the NCAA's control), but now also with respect to the rules governing compensation of athletes. The danger from a G5 perspective is the precedent this sets for the P5 to eventually also establish their own rules for recruiting, scholarship limitations, playoff structure and playoff access. Where will the line be drawn?

It already is a world where some are more equal than others. CFB has been that way since before any of us was born, though the list of "more equal" and "less equal" teams has shifted slightly over the years.

What rules will the P5 enact?

Recruiting, very possibly. We might see something like that proposal floated by a few SEC teams to permit teams to expand the permitted size of the football staff, to have both full-time recruiters and coaches who don't have to recruit. The same would be helpful (for those who can afford it) in basketball and baseball (who might also want another game-day coach as well) and probably other sports. When I hear Big Boys say that they ought to be able to spend the money their programs generate, hiring more people is what they mean, I think. (Because we know they don't want to pay real compensation to players, and there are already no restrictions on coaches' salaries or lavish facilities.)

Taking recruiting/rules enforcement out of the hands of the NCAA and giving it to a separate organization hired by the P5 leagues? Maybe. Inconsistent enforcement and dubious NCAA ethics have created a constituency for this, but it would take a couple of years to set up.

Increase in scholarship limits? For football, I doubt it. Apparently some in the G5 are concerned about that, but there doesn't appear to be any significant P5 push for it. Men's basketball and baseball are sports where many in the sport have wanted more scholarships for years. Also, adding 2 hoops scholarships or 5-7 baseball scholarships doesn't have the heavier Title IX impact of adding 15-20 football scholarships, so it is more feasible. That might happen in either or both sports if an influential group decides to push for it.

Playoff structure? Already outside the purview of the NCAA. Expanding the 4-team playoff and whether or not to have autobids for P5 champs is in the hands of the P5 presidents and commissioners and the TV guys who write the big checks.

The ultimate threat is to leave the NCAA, start a new basketball tournament, and use the TV money from that to fund national championships in all sports (like the NCAA does with March Madness money). My guess is that this remains a threat and doesn't happen unless the P5 believes that other D-I schools and/or the NCAA bureaucracy are blocking things that the P5 consensus wants.

(01-20-2014 12:52 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:39 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  With apologies to Orwell, they want a world where all FBS schools are equal, but some are more equal than others -- not just in terms of athletic funding (where disparities are inevitable and rightfully outside the NCAA's control), but now also with respect to the rules governing compensation of athletes. The danger from a G5 perspective is the precedent this sets for the P5 to eventually also establish their own rules for recruiting, scholarship limitations, playoff structure and playoff access. Where will the line be drawn?

It already is a world where some are more equal than others. CFB has been that way since before any of us was born, though the list of "more equal" and "less equal" teams has shifted slightly over the years.

What rules will the P5 enact?

Recruiting, very possibly. We might see something like that proposal floated by a few SEC teams to permit teams to expand the permitted size of the football staff, to have both full-time recruiters and coaches who don't have to recruit. The same would be helpful (for those who can afford it) in basketball and baseball (who might also want another game-day coach as well) and probably other sports. When I hear Big Boys say that they ought to be able to spend the money their programs generate, hiring more people is what they mean, I think. (Because we know they don't want to pay real compensation to players, and there are already no restrictions on coaches' salaries or lavish facilities.)

Taking recruiting/rules enforcement out of the hands of the NCAA and giving it to a separate organization hired by the P5 leagues? Maybe. Inconsistent enforcement and dubious NCAA ethics have created a constituency for this, but it would take a couple of years to set up.

Increase in scholarship limits? For football, I doubt it. Apparently some in the G5 are concerned about that, but there doesn't appear to be any significant P5 push for it. Men's basketball and baseball are sports where many in the sport have wanted more scholarships for years. Also, adding 2 hoops scholarships or 5-7 baseball scholarships doesn't have the heavier Title IX impact of adding 15-20 football scholarships, so it is more feasible. That might happen in either or both sports if an influential group decides to push for it.

Playoff structure? Already outside the purview of the NCAA. Expanding the 4-team playoff and whether or not to have autobids for P5 champs is in the hands of the P5 presidents and commissioners and the TV guys who write the big checks.

The ultimate threat is to leave the NCAA, start a new basketball tournament, and use the TV money from that to fund national championships in all sports (like the NCAA does with March Madness money). My guess is that this remains a threat and doesn't happen unless the P5 believes that other D-I schools and/or the NCAA bureaucracy are blocking things that the P5 consensus wants.

Interesting. Good dialogue, thanks Wedge.

(01-20-2014 09:52 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 03:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 03:20 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 12:05 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(01-19-2014 10:44 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I still think that once the P5 makes its adjustments to Student Welfare and the AAC/MWC follow suit that the real movement is going to occur a the MAC/SBC/CUSA level.

The possibility of forming a 16 team conference comprised of schools willing to pay for the full cost of attendance out of CUSA, SBC, MAC makes some sense. Possibly the situation could be that CUSA votes in the full cost of attendance and takes in a group of 4-6 from MAC and/or SBC where they can't get it passed.

That could be a real possibility. That would essentially whittle down to a G4 conferences.

I think it makes more sense for the MAC and CUSA to absorb all the promising SBC schools than for the SBC to continue to add FCS upgrades down to the bottom of the barrel possibilities.

CUSA (Ark St, ULL, USA, Georgia St)
MAC (App St, GSU, Troy)

Then you have Idaho, NMSU, ULM, Texas St all either making the decision to move back to FCS or wait until there is an opening in the G4 (the case probably of NMSU and Texas St).

I think you leave at least 8 teams behind in the Sunbelt with a gentlemans agreement that they do not add any more FCS schools. CUSA takes Arky St and LLU. MAC grabs App St. Leave the SB as a viable conference. There i s not enough to leave anyone homeless at this point. It would just cause more FCS move-ups and further dilution of the G5 product.

SBC would never go along with that. They will always add FCS...and unless CUSA picks up new money it doesn't have, a diluted 16 team CUSA will not be as interesting to SBC teams...especially if the TV contract loses money.

Its not an issue in the SBC of whether or not the cost of attendance measure passes. It passed long ago whenever our AD's voted for the original mess.

I think the actual realignment we will see will come at the MAC/CUSA/SBC level, and will be a geographic based move as teams realize that the TV money wont be there, and they will need to realign geographically to save money. You might see a group get together and actually form their own league in the end.

Texas G5 conference add a couple non Texas teams.