So, as it seems more imminent that the Power5 are going to "break off" in some way, my mind again goes to how the Group of 5 will survive. There are too many great schools and histories and minds running those organizations for them to perish.

I wrote this two years ago when expansion was still a front-burner issue...and it's certainly missed many minor predictions along the way...but I thought of this forum when I just re-read this "group of 5" playoff scenario. (I call the Group of 5 and all the small D1 basketball schools the NCAA, since I think they can keep that title probably...)

Interested to hear what my Group of 5 neighbors think..

I can only think of Nancy Reagans drug slogan. Just say no. We already have this "NIT" to the big boys "BCS". Its called FCS. Its unwatched and virtually worthless to television. The American public cares a great deal about identifying the number one team in the nation. The public knows that the best team will come from the top division. Thus, the top division is interesting to the general public---even the very worst bowls draw 5 to 10 times the viewers of the FCS playoff games. Why? Because the bottom bowls are still winning teams from the TOP division of football whereas FCS playoffs are a bunch of guys from lower division ball that nobody knows or cares about. The public perception is the same as MLB to Minor league single "A" ball. One is is of very significant interest. The other? Not so much.

People could care less about FCS and D3. The vast majority of all self-identified college football fans have no idea who won the championship for D3 or FCS. They just don't care. Im not trying to be insulting---its not fair that this level is widely ignored. The most true form of collegiate sports is D3----but nobody cares or watches that stuff. It is what it is.

Within 5 years of a separation from the P5, the G5 would be struggling with disappearing media money, plummeting ticket sales, and drastic drops in donation revenue. They would simply become the new FCS. Trust me, no true G5 fan wants that fate. By the way, a split would not do the P5 any favors either. A large hunk of G5 viewers would cease to be interested in P5 football because they no longer have a dog in that hunt. I frankly don't think the networks are the least bit interested in the this option coming to fruition.

there is no such thing as a group of 5. There is only the FBS. The G5 is just a term used to justify screwing half of the Football Sub Division out of a fair share of revenue and championship opportunities. You don't confront discrimination by appeasing the discriminators.

(05-24-2014 02:09 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  there is no such thing as a group of 5. There is only the FBS. The G5 is just a term used to justify screwing half of the Football Sub Division out of a fair share of revenue and championship opportunities. You don't confront discrimination by appeasing the discriminators.

That concept is highly charged. You feel like G5 schools are being screwed out of money/opportunities that are rightfully theirs. I'm sure many P5 schools feel like they are being robbed to pay lesser schools that don't pull their weight. Yes, yes I know the next argument from G5 schools will be about how the Minnesota's, Wake Forest's and Wash State's of the P5 are getting welfare from the upper level P5 schools, so why not G5 too. Bottom line, it's all about relationships. These lesser P5 schools that look a lot like top tier G5 schools have a higher perceived value to the OSU's, USC's, UT's of the P5. I know it makes G5 fans angry to hear this, but it's what these upper level schools believe. Otherwise, UT would try to reform the Big 12 to kick out ISU in favor of UH, OSU would try to boot Minnesota for Cincy, etc. But that will not happen.

(05-24-2014 01:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I can only think of Nancy Reagans drug slogan. Just say no. We already have this "NIT" to the big boys "BCS". Its called FCS. Its unwatched and virtually worthless to television. The American public cares a great deal about identifying the number one team in the nation. The public knows that the best team will come from the top division. Thus, the top division is interesting to the general public---even the very worst bowls draw 5 to 10 times the viewers of the FCS playoff games. Why? Because the bottom bowls are still winning teams from the TOP division of football whereas FCS playoffs are a bunch of guys from lower division ball that nobody knows or cares about. The public perception is the same as MLB to Minor league single "A" ball. One is is of very significant interest. The other? Not so much.

People could care less about FCS and D3. The vast majority of all self-identified college football fans have no idea who won the championship for D3 or FCS. They just don't care. Im not trying to be insulting---its not fair that this level is widely ignored. The most true form of collegiate sports is D3----but nobody cares or watches that stuff. It is what it is.

Within 5 years of a separation from the P5, the G5 would be struggling with disappearing media money, plummeting ticket sales, and drastic drops in donation revenue. They would simply become the new FCS. Trust me, no true G5 fan wants that fate. By the way, a split would not do the P5 any favors either. A large hunk of G5 viewers would cease to be interested in P5 football because they no longer have a dog in that hunt. I frankly don't think the networks are the least bit interested in the this option coming to fruition.

If you allow a split to be just another FCS/FBS split then yes, this is what you get.

But if you insist on a total split in governance and in all sports and competition then you have a different matter. You have two competing leagues that have no interest whatsoever in bowing to the other.

Yes, one starts out with a distinct disadvantage. They'll have to change their rules to compete. They'll have to market their league better. They'll have to make deals that are advantageous. They'll have to promote themselves and carve out their own niche.

They don't have to beat the P5. All they have to do is carve out more money and attention than they are allowed to get now.

As two separate leagues it will be a lot harder legally for the P5 to behave in a monopolistic manner toward the other and try to exclude them from the market.

Is any of that any fun for anybody? Does anyone want that? No, but it would be a lot better than voting to permanently emasculate yourself and become defacto FCS again.

(05-24-2014 02:25 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-24-2014 02:09 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  there is no such thing as a group of 5. There is only the FBS. The G5 is just a term used to justify screwing half of the Football Sub Division out of a fair share of revenue and championship opportunities. You don't confront discrimination by appeasing the discriminators.

That concept is highly charged. You feel like G5 schools are being screwed out of money/opportunities that are rightfully theirs. I'm sure many P5 schools feel like they are being robbed to pay lesser schools that don't pull their weight. Yes, yes I know the next argument from G5 schools will be about how the Minnesota's, Wake Forest's and Wash State's of the P5 are getting welfare from the upper level P5 schools, so why not G5 too. Bottom line, it's all about relationships. These lesser P5 schools that look a lot like top tier G5 schools have a higher perceived value to the OSU's, USC's, UT's of the P5. I know it makes G5 fans angry to hear this, but it's what these upper level schools believe. Otherwise, UT would try to reform the Big 12 to kick out ISU in favor of UH, OSU would try to boot Minnesota for Cincy, etc. But that will not happen.

I don't expect equality between all schools and leagues. I do expect the legitimate opportunity for every school and league to climb the ladder based on success in sports competitions. This is, after all, supposed to be sports.

We know that is not the case now, or in any plan currently being considered.

We know that no matter what Boise or NIU do, when they show up at the Orange Bowl party they will be treated as interlopers.

We know that it will be decided in the conference room and not on the field. It will be decided by subjective pollsters and committees stuffed with P5 reps who will make "judgments" about who is and who isn't worthy. That isn't sports competition, its good old boys protecting the status quo.

Even the most wildly popular and profitable sport in the world....soccer. They will not hesitate to relegate a big boy right out of the premier league if they do not perform on the field and instead give someone else a chance. I am sure that is costly and embarassing....but it is sports.

(05-24-2014 03:04 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-24-2014 01:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I can only think of Nancy Reagans drug slogan. Just say no. We already have this "NIT" to the big boys "BCS". Its called FCS. Its unwatched and virtually worthless to television. The American public cares a great deal about identifying the number one team in the nation. The public knows that the best team will come from the top division. Thus, the top division is interesting to the general public---even the very worst bowls draw 5 to 10 times the viewers of the FCS playoff games. Why? Because the bottom bowls are still winning teams from the TOP division of football whereas FCS playoffs are a bunch of guys from lower division ball that nobody knows or cares about. The public perception is the same as MLB to Minor league single "A" ball. One is is of very significant interest. The other? Not so much.

People could care less about FCS and D3. The vast majority of all self-identified college football fans have no idea who won the championship for D3 or FCS. They just don't care. Im not trying to be insulting---its not fair that this level is widely ignored. The most true form of collegiate sports is D3----but nobody cares or watches that stuff. It is what it is.

Within 5 years of a separation from the P5, the G5 would be struggling with disappearing media money, plummeting ticket sales, and drastic drops in donation revenue. They would simply become the new FCS. Trust me, no true G5 fan wants that fate. By the way, a split would not do the P5 any favors either. A large hunk of G5 viewers would cease to be interested in P5 football because they no longer have a dog in that hunt. I frankly don't think the networks are the least bit interested in the this option coming to fruition.

If you allow a split to be just another FCS/FBS split then yes, this is what you get.

But if you insist on a total split in governance and in all sports and competition then you have a different matter. You have two competing leagues that have no interest whatsoever in bowing to the other.

Yes, one starts out with a distinct disadvantage. They'll have to change their rules to compete. They'll have to market their league better. They'll have to make deals that are advantageous. They'll have to promote themselves and carve out their own niche.

They don't have to beat the P5. All they have to do is carve out more money and attention than they are allowed to get now.

As two separate leagues it will be a lot harder legally for the P5 to behave in a monopolistic manner toward the other and try to exclude them from the market.

Is any of that any fun for anybody? Does anyone want that? No, but it would be a lot better than voting to permanently emasculate yourself and become defacto FCS again.

Good points by both of you. I agree with Attackcoog that it would be a mistake for the G5 to create its own second-tier playoff, for all the reasons he cites.

But if the P5 grants itself too many advantages, the G5 schools may ultimately have to at least consider the "nuclear option" -- a complete breakaway of their own, where they only compete among themselves in football, not just in the playoffs but in the regular season. In effect they would be setting themselves up as a 21st-century version of the AFL, trying to break the NFL's monopoly. And like the AFL, the key to attaining credibility would be refusing to go head-to-head with the competing brand except at the championship level, in the process denying the P5 the ability to claim with certainty that its own playoff winner is the "true" national champion.

It would only be feasible if the G5 could line up a TV network partner with a desire to compete head-to-head with ESPN and deep enough pockets to sponsor a G5 tournament that paid the G5 schools an amount comparable to the cut of CFP money they now get. Right now I don't see a network out there that would even think about taking such a risk. But down the road, who knows. Some media mogul with a huge ego and/or a BYU degree might emerge to take on the challenge.

(05-24-2014 02:25 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-24-2014 02:09 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  there is no such thing as a group of 5. There is only the FBS. The G5 is just a term used to justify screwing half of the Football Sub Division out of a fair share of revenue and championship opportunities. You don't confront discrimination by appeasing the discriminators.

That concept is highly charged. You feel like G5 schools are being screwed out of money/opportunities that are rightfully theirs. I'm sure many P5 schools feel like they are being robbed to pay lesser schools that don't pull their weight. Yes, yes I know the next argument from G5 schools will be about how the Minnesota's, Wake Forest's and Wash State's of the P5 are getting welfare from the upper level P5 schools, so why not G5 too. Bottom line, it's all about relationships. These lesser P5 schools that look a lot like top tier G5 schools have a higher perceived value to the OSU's, USC's, UT's of the P5. I know it makes G5 fans angry to hear this, but it's what these upper level schools believe. Otherwise, UT would try to reform the Big 12 to kick out ISU in favor of UH, OSU would try to boot Minnesota for Cincy, etc. But that will not happen.

Stop pretending that there isn't this thing called the Football Bowl Subdivision that contains 128 college football teams. ESPN signed a 12 year contract with the FBS, all of it, not half of it. And yet half of those teams will get $75m a year MORE than the other half.

So why doesn't the P5 just break away and keep all the money? Because 1/3 of their schedule is padded with teams that they can buy off for home only games and that are outgunned in every aspect because of the financial imbalance.

Its Jim Crow.

(05-24-2014 03:34 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  It would only be feasible if the G5 could line up a TV network partner with a desire to compete head-to-head with ESPN and deep enough pockets to sponsor a G5 tournament that paid the G5 schools an amount comparable to the cut of CFP money they now get. Right now I don't see a network out there that would even think about taking such a risk. But down the road, who knows. Some media mogul with a huge ego and/or a BYU degree might emerge to take on the challenge.

And, in the end...it might be ESPN. As time goes by the P5 conferences are going to see that partnering with the middleman ESPN is costing them money. If they own the SEC Network and are able to distribute it themselves, why have ESPN taking a cut at all?

That might be the point that ESPN takes more of an interest in promoting those leagues that don't have the distribution capabilities.

I don't know much about the tv business, but if I'm ESPN I want a credible threat of having other content to turn to when negotiating with the P5...otherwise, I'm going to get bent over.

Other sports networks that get shut out of P5 content might look to a split off G5 as something worth promoting and building up.

(05-24-2014 03:25 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-24-2014 02:25 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-24-2014 02:09 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  there is no such thing as a group of 5. There is only the FBS. The G5 is just a term used to justify screwing half of the Football Sub Division out of a fair share of revenue and championship opportunities. You don't confront discrimination by appeasing the discriminators.

That concept is highly charged. You feel like G5 schools are being screwed out of money/opportunities that are rightfully theirs. I'm sure many P5 schools feel like they are being robbed to pay lesser schools that don't pull their weight. Yes, yes I know the next argument from G5 schools will be about how the Minnesota's, Wake Forest's and Wash State's of the P5 are getting welfare from the upper level P5 schools, so why not G5 too. Bottom line, it's all about relationships. These lesser P5 schools that look a lot like top tier G5 schools have a higher perceived value to the OSU's, USC's, UT's of the P5. I know it makes G5 fans angry to hear this, but it's what these upper level schools believe. Otherwise, UT would try to reform the Big 12 to kick out ISU in favor of UH, OSU would try to boot Minnesota for Cincy, etc. But that will not happen.

I don't expect equality between all schools and leagues. I do expect the legitimate opportunity for every school and league to climb the ladder based on success in sports competitions. This is, after all, supposed to be sports.

We know that is not the case now, or in any plan currently being considered.

We know that no matter what Boise or NIU do, when they show up at the Orange Bowl party they will be treated as interlopers.

We know that it will be decided in the conference room and not on the field. It will be decided by subjective pollsters and committees stuffed with P5 reps who will make "judgments" about who is and who isn't worthy. That isn't sports competition, its good old boys protecting the status quo.

Even the most wildly popular and profitable sport in the world....soccer. They will not hesitate to relegate a big boy right out of the premier league if they do not perform on the field and instead give someone else a chance. I am sure that is costly and embarassing....but it is sports.

Yes a lot of soccer leagues do use regulation, but the flip side of that argument is that no team that is not in the American or National League has any chance (even theoretical) of winning the World Series. The same is true of the Super Bowl with AFC/NFC etc.

No school/conference is forced to affiliate with any other. The power 5 could form their own national alliance without any others involved at all. So could just the top 30 teams in the country (if say, they don't want the Wake Forests and Baylors on board). So could the non-power 5 conferences.

The thing is that nothing would be morally wrong with any of those senarios. If anyone wants to be a sports set-up with or without any of the others they should be free to pursue those goals. The reason that we have what we have is that a) the power 5 don't want to seperate from the others, b) the top programs don't want to seperate from the smaller ones in their own leagues, and c) the non-power conference teams don't want to seperate from the power 5. The resulting compromise is what we have.

Now if you mandated a 16 team playoff with more equal revenue sharing in that, that would change the calculations and you probably would make it so that the power teams would be better off in a smaller national division (inside of outside of the NCAA) and that point, they would seperate from the Group of 5 completely.

(05-24-2014 04:00 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(05-24-2014 03:25 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-24-2014 02:25 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-24-2014 02:09 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  there is no such thing as a group of 5. There is only the FBS. The G5 is just a term used to justify screwing half of the Football Sub Division out of a fair share of revenue and championship opportunities. You don't confront discrimination by appeasing the discriminators.

That concept is highly charged. You feel like G5 schools are being screwed out of money/opportunities that are rightfully theirs. I'm sure many P5 schools feel like they are being robbed to pay lesser schools that don't pull their weight. Yes, yes I know the next argument from G5 schools will be about how the Minnesota's, Wake Forest's and Wash State's of the P5 are getting welfare from the upper level P5 schools, so why not G5 too. Bottom line, it's all about relationships. These lesser P5 schools that look a lot like top tier G5 schools have a higher perceived value to the OSU's, USC's, UT's of the P5. I know it makes G5 fans angry to hear this, but it's what these upper level schools believe. Otherwise, UT would try to reform the Big 12 to kick out ISU in favor of UH, OSU would try to boot Minnesota for Cincy, etc. But that will not happen.

I don't expect equality between all schools and leagues. I do expect the legitimate opportunity for every school and league to climb the ladder based on success in sports competitions. This is, after all, supposed to be sports.

We know that is not the case now, or in any plan currently being considered.

We know that no matter what Boise or NIU do, when they show up at the Orange Bowl party they will be treated as interlopers.

We know that it will be decided in the conference room and not on the field. It will be decided by subjective pollsters and committees stuffed with P5 reps who will make "judgments" about who is and who isn't worthy. That isn't sports competition, its good old boys protecting the status quo.

Even the most wildly popular and profitable sport in the world....soccer. They will not hesitate to relegate a big boy right out of the premier league if they do not perform on the field and instead give someone else a chance. I am sure that is costly and embarassing....but it is sports.

Yes a lot of soccer leagues do use regulation, but the flip side of that argument is that no team that is not in the American or National League has any chance (even theoretical) of winning the World Series. The same is true of the Super Bowl with AFC/NFC etc.

No school/conference is forced to affiliate with any other. The power 5 could form their own national alliance without any others involved at all. So could just the top 30 teams in the country (if say, they don't want the Wake Forests and Baylors on board). So could the non-power 5 conferences.

The thing is that nothing would be morally wrong with any of those senarios. If anyone wants to be a sports set-up with or without any of the others they should be free to pursue those goals. The reason that we have what we have is that a) the power 5 don't want to seperate from the others, b) the top programs don't want to seperate from the smaller ones in their own leagues, and c) the non-power conference teams don't want to seperate from the power 5. The resulting compromise is what we have.

Now if you mandated a 16 team playoff with more equal revenue sharing in that, that would change the calculations and you probably would make it so that the power teams would be better off in a smaller national division (inside of outside of the NCAA) and that point, they would seperate from the Group of 5 completely.

That's all true. But it works the other way also. At what point does it become better for the G5 to separate completely. The changes are not to create 16-team playoff and revenue sharing....the changes are to give the P5 autonomy to control FBS football without worrying about what the G5 want or need.

(05-24-2014 01:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I can only think of Nancy Reagans drug slogan. Just say no. We already have this "NIT" to the big boys "BCS". Its called FCS. Its unwatched and virtually worthless to television. The American public cares a great deal about identifying the number one team in the nation. The public knows that the best team will come from the top division. Thus, the top division is interesting to the general public---even the very worst bowls draw 5 to 10 times the viewers of the FCS playoff games. Why? Because the bottom bowls are still winning teams from the TOP division of football whereas FCS playoffs are a bunch of guys from lower division ball that nobody knows or cares about. The public perception is the same as MLB to Minor league single "A" ball. One is is of very significant interest. The other? Not so much.

People could care less about FCS and D3. The vast majority of all self-identified college football fans have no idea who won the championship for D3 or FCS. They just don't care. Im not trying to be insulting---its not fair that this level is widely ignored. The most true form of collegiate sports is D3----but nobody cares or watches that stuff. It is what it is.

Within 5 years of a separation from the P5, the G5 would be struggling with disappearing media money, plummeting ticket sales, and drastic drops in donation revenue. They would simply become the new FCS. Trust me, no true G5 fan wants that fate. By the way, a split would not do the P5 any favors either. A large hunk of G5 viewers would cease to be interested in P5 football because they no longer have a dog in that hunt. I frankly don't think the networks are the least bit interested in the this option coming to fruition.

While I agree with you that we shouldn't split, the G5 isn't really comparable to FCS.

FCS was such a league of haves and have nots. You had huge state schools with large budgets and large followings playing against schools with a couple thousand students, different levels of scholarships, and high school quality stadiums.

Everyone in the G5 has better facilities than all by maybe 2 or 3 FCS level programs.

Interest in a G5 playoff would be considerably higher than it was for FCS. Look at the big schools that dominated FCS. Their fans were very interested in the playoffs. In the G5, all schools are similar in profile (or better) than those schools. Television viewers would be several times higher than the FCS playoffs were.

The money would definitely dry up though. Even being peons with the power conferences is more lucrative than what a G5 playoff would receive.

(05-24-2014 05:26 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(05-24-2014 01:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I can only think of Nancy Reagans drug slogan. Just say no. We already have this "NIT" to the big boys "BCS". Its called FCS. Its unwatched and virtually worthless to television. The American public cares a great deal about identifying the number one team in the nation. The public knows that the best team will come from the top division. Thus, the top division is interesting to the general public---even the very worst bowls draw 5 to 10 times the viewers of the FCS playoff games. Why? Because the bottom bowls are still winning teams from the TOP division of football whereas FCS playoffs are a bunch of guys from lower division ball that nobody knows or cares about. The public perception is the same as MLB to Minor league single "A" ball. One is is of very significant interest. The other? Not so much.

People could care less about FCS and D3. The vast majority of all self-identified college football fans have no idea who won the championship for D3 or FCS. They just don't care. Im not trying to be insulting---its not fair that this level is widely ignored. The most true form of collegiate sports is D3----but nobody cares or watches that stuff. It is what it is.

Within 5 years of a separation from the P5, the G5 would be struggling with disappearing media money, plummeting ticket sales, and drastic drops in donation revenue. They would simply become the new FCS. Trust me, no true G5 fan wants that fate. By the way, a split would not do the P5 any favors either. A large hunk of G5 viewers would cease to be interested in P5 football because they no longer have a dog in that hunt. I frankly don't think the networks are the least bit interested in the this option coming to fruition.

While I agree with you that we shouldn't split, the G5 isn't really comparable to FCS.

FCS was such a league of haves and have nots. You had huge state schools with large budgets and large followings playing against schools with a couple thousand students, different levels of scholarships, and high school quality stadiums.

Everyone in the G5 has better facilities than all by maybe 2 or 3 FCS level programs.

Interest in a G5 playoff would be considerably higher than it was for FCS. Look at the big schools that dominated FCS. Their fans were very interested in the playoffs. In the G5, all schools are similar in profile (or better) than those schools. Television viewers would be several times higher than the FCS playoffs were.

The money would definitely dry up though. Even being peons with the power conferences is more lucrative than what a G5 playoff would receive.

I know interest among Houston fans plummeted upon the end of the SWC and entering CUSA. Recruiting dived as well and we entered the single worst performance decade of our history. My guess a G5 only playoff would be met with similar enthusiasm. I know that personally, I'd be done with college football for the most part. I'd attend a few home games---but no season tickets and certainly no traveling. If a pretty rabid fan feels this way, I imagine that a G5 only league/playoff would damage a solid percentage of sales at most G5's.

My guess is a handful of easily excitable fan bases would get fired up about being included in a real live playoff. The more established schools would see immediate and significant falls in revenue. After a few years of seeing how irrelevant the playoff really was, all schools G5 schools would slide to FCS levels of interest and support. The problem is, you can call it whatever you want, but if its not important, nobody will care--even rabid fans of a given school.

There are plenty D1 NCAA championships where few fans show up. If its not considered a big deal---it wont be. A G5 championship, to determine the 66th best team in the country isn't going to be very important to the American public or TV.

The only option I see that might have some value is to never play the P5 and compete as a separate league. Call our champ the COLLEGE football national champion. Call their league "semi-pro" and compete as "real" college football. It probably wont work, but you might be able to carve out a niche among college football purists. Or go the other way and sign a deal with the NFL to allow 10 HS players who cant qualify for college, but are great pro prospects, play for each G5 team. Each G5 team would get 10 of these non-qualifiers and they could be drafted just like the pros. They are paid by the NFL, and the NFL plays the G5 league to allow the players who otherwise would have no avenue into the NFL to be groomed in the G5 college system. These non-qualifier players would be required to attend special curriculum designed to deliver a Jr College style Associates degree in a viable field where the player can make a decent living if the pro dream doesn't pan out. The class curriculum would be designed by the business that the graduates would be hired by. A school might offer 3 or 4 such degrees to give each player some choice. Under such a system, the G5 national champ might have better talent than the P5 champ---thus, the G5 champ might actually be the best football team in college football. This uncertainly would create a NFL-AFL dynamic.

(05-24-2014 05:26 PM)Niner National Wrote:  Interest in a G5 playoff would be considerably higher than it was for FCS. Look at the big schools that dominated FCS. Their fans were very interested in the playoffs. In the G5, all schools are similar in profile (or better) than those schools. Television viewers would be several times higher than the FCS playoffs were.

The money would definitely dry up though. Even being peons with the power conferences is more lucrative than what a G5 playoff would receive.

Imagine for a moment that a split actually occurred. What sorts of things can the G5 do?

Wild idea...All the G5 schools can't out-stipend the P5. But could the G5 as a whole offer every Top 100 ranked recruit in the US $100,000 signing day bonus if they sign with a G5 school? That's only $10 million a year if ALL of the Top 100 signed with G5 schools. The P5 would certainly have to react to that. Wouldn't that be strange...the P5 having to shell out cash to react to a G5 move instead of the G5 having to shell out cash to keep up with the P5? They don't want that.

I'm not saying its a good idea. I'm saying that it is the sort of thing competitors do to each other to stir things up and grab attention, interest, and ultimately gain some market share.

I don't think the P5 want college football programs under a different umbrella that they have no control over whatsoever because weird stuff can happen.

(05-24-2014 04:17 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  That's all true. But it works the other way also. At what point does it become better for the G5 to separate completely. The changes are not to create 16-team playoff and revenue sharing....the changes are to give the P5 autonomy to control FBS football without worrying about what the G5 want or need.

Very true that the opposite way has to be looked at too. I remember all those message board posts talking about how the Big East football schools had to separate from the basketball ones and at the end of the day, it ended up being the complete opposite (admittedly after a lot of football defections).

With that said, I think most those outside the power 5 benefit as much or more from the current affiliation with the power 5 than vice versa. Think about what happens to both after a split:

1. Power programs: If either the top programs or top conferences as a whole left to form their own independent institution, they'd have a few issues.
a) A complete break would force many to lose a home game many schools now count on (everyone can't have a 7-5 schedule). Even if we assume
that some allowances were allowed to play teams left behind, those games would start to be looked at like FCS games now.
b) While most the fanbases of the G5 are much smaller than their own, they do get a lot of people into college football especially if it's in an area that otherwise doesn't traditionally follow.

2. Non-Power: If the Group of 5 got fed up and left the current system, these are the issues I'd see:
a) As already talked about, no one would see them as the top collegiate level and that would greatly limit interest.
b) Many programs need to see a buy game as much as the power 5 conference teams needs them.
c) Being at the top level (and even more so, a few wins here and there) has led to far greater recognition which is valuable in ways far beyond athletics. Ask yourself to think of schools across the country. I bet most are FBS schools or stronger basketball ones. Think about how many programs have moved up to I-A in the past couple of decades and how few have gone down. Even when everything else seems to suggest you'd be a better fit at FCS, schools stay because they see tremendous value.
d) While any of the bowl games could theoretically go with the non-power conferences, none of the top or even mid-tier would likely follow if they had a choice.

Now for all those reasons, both the power and non-power schools (or whatever terms are best) value a relationship with each other. I think the value placed on it by the non-power schools is actually a lot more though and that as a whole (outside the few who are closest to a power 5 invite), the Group of 5 presidents are satisfied as the power 5 really could have restricted things a lot more if they had actually been gunning for them (imagine a CFP where the bowls outside the playoff were free to choose whomever they wanted in the top 25 and where 95 scholarships became the norm).

I know this unchartered waters and is highly speculative...but I agree and disagree that G5 would become like the FCS or the NIT.

Agree in the sense that they wouldn't be definitively lumped together with the big boys. Houston and Hawaii and East Carolina and the likes all THINK themselves comparable right now. They play P5 schools every season...and sometimes in bowls...and they occasionally beat P5 schools. But they have never been...nor will they be able to keep up once hundreds of mandatory stipends to players (costing millions of dollars per year) are the new "entrance fee" for playing in the P5. So, they will become their own niche, their own level.

I DISAGREE that this level will be a disgusting and ignorable level of football. We have NFL, we have CFB FBS, we have CFB FCS, and we have HS football right now. Each has its own level of popularity. There are reasons that each level has fans. I believe that FOOTBALL AS A SPORT can withstand and welcome another level. At first it might turn off fans of the G5, but I think their passions (just as my passion for PSU is so irrational and deep-seated) for their teams will QUICKLY allow them to turn their interest into being the G5 champion. And for the P5 fans, I think it might even allow them to make "secondary allegiances" with schools that are completely in another tier. How many of us have secretly rooted for a followed (for example) Boise State over the past decade? But since Boise State competes in the same league as my Penn State and your Alabama and your Texas, I'd never buy a shirt or go out of my way to find a game on TV. That would change though if #1 Boise State (in the G5) had a Saturday matchup on FOX against #4 Cincinnati.

From the P5 perspective, the day is coming when they need to join together and brand their product together to get the most money. But TV networks aren't going to pay "NFL-type money" for Penn State vs. Coastal Carolina, Alabama vs. Georgia State, and Texas vs. North Texas. I know the big boys need their 7 home games, but if they all limit their amount of G5 and especially FCS-level games, the overall desirability of the product will jump tenfold.

The Big Ten and Pac-12 (surprise, surprise, the two leagues with their own independent networks) get this and are increasing the competition level.

(05-25-2014 12:04 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  From the P5 perspective, the day is coming when they need to join together and brand their product together to get the most money. But TV networks aren't going to pay "NFL-type money" for Penn State vs. Coastal Carolina, Alabama vs. Georgia State, and Texas vs. North Texas. I know the big boys need their 7 home games, but if they all limit their amount of G5 and especially FCS-level games, the overall desirability of the product will jump tenfold.

The Big Ten and Pac-12 (surprise, surprise, the two leagues with their own independent networks) get this and are increasing the competition level.

The P5 is running a scam and they have to have the G5 and FCS to pull it off. Every September the P5 schools schedule 4 non conference games, most of which are home games vs teams that they utterly destroy in regards to financial resources. This gives these P5 teams every advantage possible to start the season 4-0, or at worst 3-1. Now you've got all of these fanbases geared up because they think THIS is the year they go undefeated and win it all.

But what happens when you replace buyout games against teams you are advantaged over with 1-1 series vs programs with similar financial resources? Suddenly there are a whole lot less 4-0/3-1 teams and excitement for these programs is dampened. That's bad for those P5 teams and its bad for ESPN. Remember when Penn Stated hosted Ohio in their 2012 opener? After Ohio pulled of the upset the ESPN crew ran out on the field and interviewed the losing coach. Ohio messed up their narrative and they were not happy about it.

What happens when Ohio State, who plays 7 of 8 OOC games at home in a 2yr stretch, and 6 of those 8 games are against G5 or FCS, what happens when they star losing 1 or 2 games in Sept? They've got 7 other FBS teams within 150 miles of their campus, maybe some of their bandwagon fans start to ride another instate bandwagon. They can't allow that to happen. OSU will never replace a 2yr cycle of 6 buy out games vs G5 and FCS and 1 home/away series against a low level P5, with a straight up 4 home, 4 away vs P5. The will lose fan support, media coverage, and millions of dollars.

If the P5 could live without the G5 they would have already left them behind. But why do that when you can offer them $75m LESS PER YEAR from a TV contract for the whole league and keep them perpetually weak and easy to buyout and beat? Its a scam.

(05-25-2014 12:52 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(05-25-2014 12:04 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  From the P5 perspective, the day is coming when they need to join together and brand their product together to get the most money. But TV networks aren't going to pay "NFL-type money" for Penn State vs. Coastal Carolina, Alabama vs. Georgia State, and Texas vs. North Texas. I know the big boys need their 7 home games, but if they all limit their amount of G5 and especially FCS-level games, the overall desirability of the product will jump tenfold.

The Big Ten and Pac-12 (surprise, surprise, the two leagues with their own independent networks) get this and are increasing the competition level.

The P5 is running a scam and they have to have the G5 and FCS to pull it off. Every September the P5 schools schedule 4 non conference games, most of which are home games vs teams that they utterly destroy in regards to financial resources. This gives these P5 teams every advantage possible to start the season 4-0, or at worst 3-1. Now you've got all of these fanbases geared up because they think THIS is the year they go undefeated and win it all.

But what happens when you replace buyout games against teams you are advantaged over with 1-1 series vs programs with similar financial resources? Suddenly there are a whole lot less 4-0/3-1 teams and excitement for these programs is dampened. That's bad for those P5 teams and its bad for ESPN. Remember when Penn Stated hosted Ohio in their 2012 opener? After Ohio pulled of the upset the ESPN crew ran out on the field and interviewed the losing coach. Ohio messed up their narrative and they were not happy about it.

What happens when Ohio State, who plays 7 of 8 OOC games at home in a 2yr stretch, and 6 of those 8 games are against G5 or FCS, what happens when they star losing 1 or 2 games in Sept? They've got 7 other FBS teams within 150 miles of their campus, maybe some of their bandwagon fans start to ride another instate bandwagon. They can't allow that to happen. OSU will never replace a 2yr cycle of 6 buy out games vs G5 and FCS and 1 home/away series against a low level P5, with a straight up 4 home, 4 away vs P5. The will lose fan support, media coverage, and millions of dollars.

If the P5 could live without the G5 they would have already left them behind. But why do that when you can offer them $75m LESS PER YEAR from a TV contract for the whole league and keep them perpetually weak and easy to buyout and beat? Its a scam.

are your freaking shitting me here???????

of all the examples you could of used you picked the one where the p5 team was coming off the worst NCAA sanctions in history, with a walk-on QB and walk on kicker who were first time starters in the first game of the season.

the narrative heading into that game was: "will PSU ever be competitive in the next decade?" and they chased down the PSU coach cuz he was the center of attention on the issue ever since the sanctions were announced.

The narrative of the Ohio game was "Will mighty PSU ever win again?" The losing coach was part of the pathos and the answer (especially after losing AGAIN to UVA the next way) was "NO! PSU will never win again."

Who says the P5 doesn't want SOME games with the G5? And the G5 will be happy to oblige with whatever the P5 offers. This is the math we SHOULD be looking it in the future.

9 conference games.
In years when it's 5 home/4 away, you play another P5 team on the road.
Then, your final two OOC games are home against G5.

In years when it's 5 away/4 home conference games, you play another P5 team at home.
Then, your final two OOC games are home against G5.

The P5 teams all get 7 home games in both scenarios (if they want/need it).

The SEC and ACC haven't quite gotten the memo yet...but the others have.