His take on going forward for as he calls them the "Second 5...American, Mountain West, MAC, C-USA & Sunbelt"...from the article...sorry if already posted:

Asked then what he'd like C-USA and similar NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision leagues to be called moving forward, Banowsky said, "Call us the second five, and note there's 32 (conferences)."

Regardless of whatever labels and differences there are, Banowsky expects that "second five" leagues to be able to co-exist in major football like they always have with the big-money conferences -- the SEC, Big 12, Pac-12, ACC and Big Ten.

"Our five conferences and their five conferences have a lot of history together, and we've always found a way to get in a room and to be good listeners and work it out," Banowsky said Wednesday during C-USA football media day. "I also think having 60 schools together is just not enough for them to be able to have a base from which to operate. You need a bigger base."

The new College Football Playoff has the 10 FBS leagues contractually obligated for 12 years. That agreement guarantees a spot in one of the CFP's six bowl games for the highest-ranked team from among the mid-major leagues -- C-USA, the Sun Belt, MAC, Mountain West and American Athletic. That includes consideration for one of the national semifinal games.

"We are in a transition from conference realignment to system realignment," Banowsky said.

Marshall Doc Holliday and Rice David Baliff on going forward:

Rice coach David Bailiff said Conference USA has "to be No. 6. We've got to figure out how to be the best" of the other five leagues.

"We're as well off as we've ever been. We've got a seat at the table if we just take care of business," said Marshall coach Doc Holliday, whose team is the C-USA preseason favorite. "Before, in the old BCS system, we didn't have a very good shot at getting that particular deal."

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...t#comments

I like the idea of the term second five (S5). The G5 sounds too much like a separate group rather than the next 5 FBS conferences.

(07-26-2014 10:04 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I like the idea of the term second five (S5). The G5 sounds too much like a separate group rather than the next 5 FBS conferences.

The P5 and S5 can Co-Exist and make plenty of $$$...in reality all the schools plus Louisville, TCU & Utah are still in the Hgh Revenue Leagues...the old Non BCS schools for the most part will be making more $$$ then ever before and they now will have at least a guaranteed spot in a High Revenue Bowl regardless of ranking...

Unless the new rules allow the P5 schools to offer more scholarships, things are better for the G5 than they were in any previous system. There is now a guarantee that the best G5 team will get a chance to play in a BCS Bowl caliber bowl. If last year was played under the old rule (with the caveat that then, like now the AAC was not consider a power conference) UCF would not have qualified for the Fiesta Bowl. Next season if the highest rated G5 team is ranked #25 or #55 they will still get there shot to prove themselves. You can say what you want that there wasn't an explicit differentiation between the power conferences and everyone else, but it was no less real for being implicit. The only teams that can really argue that their football program is in an objectively worse place now than it was during the BCS era is USF, Cincinnati and UConn.

(07-26-2014 10:38 AM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  Unless the new rules allow the P5 schools to offer more scholarships, things are better for the G5 than they were in any previous system. There is now a guarantee that the best G5 team will get a chance to play in a BCS Bowl caliber bowl. If last year was played under the old rule (with the caveat that then, like now the AAC was not consider a power conference) UCF would not have qualified for the Fiesta Bowl. Next season if the highest rated G5 team is ranked #25 or #55 they will still get there shot to prove themselves. You can say what you want that there wasn't an explicit differentiation between the power conferences and everyone else, but it was no less real for being implicit. The only teams that can really argue that their football program is in an objectively worse place now than it was during the BCS era is USF, Cincinnati and UConn.

And really the only one of those 3 that has a grip is Cincinnati....USF didn't move up to FBS until 2001 and UConn not until 2002...both of those programs had more access to a. High Revenue league than a school like ECU...

(07-26-2014 10:38 AM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  Unless the new rules allow the P5 schools to offer more scholarships, things are better for the G5 than they were in any previous system. There is now a guarantee that the best G5 team will get a chance to play in a BCS Bowl caliber bowl. If last year was played under the old rule (with the caveat that then, like now the AAC was not consider a power conference) UCF would not have qualified for the Fiesta Bowl. Next season if the highest rated G5 team is ranked #25 or #55 they will still get there shot to prove themselves. You can say what you want that there wasn't an explicit differentiation between the power conferences and everyone else, but it was no less real for being implicit. The only teams that can really argue that their football program is in an objectively worse place now than it was during the BCS era is USF, Cincinnati and UConn.

I don't know. I think you could say in some ways the previous system at least afforded the appearance of CUSA and MWC as tweener leagues with an outside hope of elevating to a BCS conference if the performance warranted. The key driver behind the formation of CUSA and MWC was to organize for BCS inclusion.

1) AAC
2) MWC (SDSU, UNLV, UNM, AFA, WYO, CSU)
3) CUSA (Marshall, Rice, UAB, USM)

That is 22 schools out of 60 that have lost tweener advantage in the new system. 1/2 MWC, 3/4 CUSA, MAC and SBC have greatly improved their revenue, perception and potential.

(07-26-2014 11:02 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(07-26-2014 10:38 AM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  Unless the new rules allow the P5 schools to offer more scholarships, things are better for the G5 than they were in any previous system. There is now a guarantee that the best G5 team will get a chance to play in a BCS Bowl caliber bowl. If last year was played under the old rule (with the caveat that then, like now the AAC was not consider a power conference) UCF would not have qualified for the Fiesta Bowl. Next season if the highest rated G5 team is ranked #25 or #55 they will still get there shot to prove themselves. You can say what you want that there wasn't an explicit differentiation between the power conferences and everyone else, but it was no less real for being implicit. The only teams that can really argue that their football program is in an objectively worse place now than it was during the BCS era is USF, Cincinnati and UConn.

And really the only one of those 3 that has a grip is Cincinnati....USF didn't move up to FBS until 2001 and UConn not until 2002...both of those programs had more access to a. High Revenue league than a school like ECU...

2000, but thanks for playing. We've got some lovely parting gifts for you.

Still...less than 15 years...Cincinnati has been at the FBS/Division I level for over 100 years...

Doc Holliday really has done a terrific job at Marshall on the field. His players are a buncha thugs though...not in the way they play, I mean they literally are illiterate thugs. But I'm impressed at how he's stabilized that program.

(07-26-2014 12:34 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  Doc Holliday really has done a terrific job at Marshall on the field. His players are a buncha thugs though...not in the way they play, I mean they literally are illiterate thugs. But I'm impressed at how he's stabilized that program.

Marshall's winning percentage went up last year though as UCF, Houston and SMU are now in the AAC.

In the short term, the next 5 years or so they should roll in CUSA then once all the new FCS upgrades get up to speed they are in trouble.

what about the second 5, PLUS 5?

PLUS 5
BIG EAST
A 10
MISSOURI VALLEY
WEST COAST
and lets say
MAC

(07-26-2014 01:09 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Marshall's winning percentage went up last year though as UCF, Houston and SMU are now in the AAC.

I'll concede your point as to UCF, as we were 3-8 against the Knights, with 8 losses in a row.

But as to Houston and SMU, it might surprise you and others to know that we were 4-4 (2-2 and 2-2) against those teams, combined, with all wins for all teams coming at their home stadium. We certainly weren't running away from either the Cougars or the Mustangs, and I have a great deal of respect for both. Our UCF series, although decidedly in the Knights favor, produced some very memorable games. I enjoyed playing them.

(07-26-2014 12:34 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  Doc Holliday really has done a terrific job at Marshall on the field. His players are a buncha thugs though...not in the way they play, I mean they literally are illiterate thugs. But I'm impressed at how he's stabilized that program.

I think you might be shocked to hear this, but ECU probably has some "illiterate thugs" on their team as well...

Actually just looking at APR, Marshall's is 948 for 2012/2013; ECU's is 941, which can only lead to the logical conclusion that ECU recruits more "illiterate thugs" than Marshall.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/newmedia/public/...ndex5.html

Thanks for playing.

(07-26-2014 10:55 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  

(07-26-2014 12:34 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  Doc Holliday really has done a terrific job at Marshall on the field. His players are a buncha thugs though...not in the way they play, I mean they literally are illiterate thugs. But I'm impressed at how he's stabilized that program.

I think you might be shocked to hear this, but ECU probably has some "illiterate thugs" on their team as well...

Actually just looking at APR, Marshall's is 948 for 2012/2013; ECU's is 941, which can only lead to the logical conclusion that ECU recruits more "illiterate thugs" than Marshall.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/newmedia/public/...ndex5.html

Thanks for playing.

The old game of saying such and such school wins but its only due to thugs is a game that is outdated.

With all the advancements in academic support systems by universities almost every G5 team that wins consistently has thugs and non-qualifiers they've added to the program, adding them through creative means. Its not restricted to CUSA schools, MAC schools are doing it to. Bowling Green is doing it, Ohio is doing it. The APRs only indicate how good a schools academic support system is. It doesn't speak to the kind of student they are bringing into the program.

The schools that aren't bringing in the thugs like Miami Ohio simply aren't winning any football games.

(07-27-2014 08:19 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-26-2014 10:55 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  

(07-26-2014 12:34 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  Doc Holliday really has done a terrific job at Marshall on the field. His players are a buncha thugs though...not in the way they play, I mean they literally are illiterate thugs. But I'm impressed at how he's stabilized that program.

I think you might be shocked to hear this, but ECU probably has some "illiterate thugs" on their team as well...

Actually just looking at APR, Marshall's is 948 for 2012/2013; ECU's is 941, which can only lead to the logical conclusion that ECU recruits more "illiterate thugs" than Marshall.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/newmedia/public/...ndex5.html

Thanks for playing.

The old game of saying such and such school wins but its only due to thugs is a game that is outdated.

With all the advancements in academic support systems by universities almost every G5 team that wins consistently has thugs and non-qualifiers they've added to the program, adding them through creative means. Its not restricted to CUSA schools, MAC schools are doing it to. Bowling Green is doing it, Ohio is doing it. The APRs only indicate how good a schools academic support system is. It doesn't speak to the kind of student they are bringing into the program.

The schools that aren't bringing in the thugs like Miami Ohio simply aren't winning any football games.

You cannot bring in 85 high caliber athletes who can compete at a high level without taking risks on the conduct and behavior of the people you bring in.

Despite the crappy economy a high number of the kids who have the physical tools to compete at that level don't end up having the drive needed to compete because of the affluence of their family. I've watched AState for decades and I know that all things being equal, the kid from the poverty stricken Delta is far more likely to out-perform the equally talented kid from a successful community who has parents comfortably in the middle class. A kid who is for the first time in his life getting three good meals a day and in living in a dorm room and not experiencing the water or electricity being cut off from time to time is more likely to work hard to insure he doesn't lose those things than the kid who thinks the school is giving him a crappy dorm room and three tolerable meals a day.

But you end up with kids with a very different worldview that makes them likely to get wrapped up in trouble.

Part of the art of coaching is to understand the psychology of these kids and understand who you scream at and run until they wish they were someplace else and who you talk softly but firmly to and who you just need to get off the team as fast as possible.

In his latter years at Arkansas Houston Nutt had a stunning number of players involved in alcohol related incidents DWI, underage drinking, public intoxication, etc., because he was soft in discipline and the team quickly saw the consequences weren't bad.

To me there is no shame in taking a chance on a kid with a less than stellar background. The shame comes when you fail to properly address poor behavior after they are on campus and your erode the discipline of the team.

The NonBCS conferences have slipped further behind in revenue and quality bowls against BCS competition.

In Olympic sports, there is no "second" five.

(07-26-2014 11:51 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(07-26-2014 11:02 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(07-26-2014 10:38 AM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  Unless the new rules allow the P5 schools to offer more scholarships, things are better for the G5 than they were in any previous system. There is now a guarantee that the best G5 team will get a chance to play in a BCS Bowl caliber bowl. If last year was played under the old rule (with the caveat that then, like now the AAC was not consider a power conference) UCF would not have qualified for the Fiesta Bowl. Next season if the highest rated G5 team is ranked #25 or #55 they will still get there shot to prove themselves. You can say what you want that there wasn't an explicit differentiation between the power conferences and everyone else, but it was no less real for being implicit. The only teams that can really argue that their football program is in an objectively worse place now than it was during the BCS era is USF, Cincinnati and UConn.

And really the only one of those 3 that has a grip is Cincinnati....USF didn't move up to FBS until 2001 and UConn not until 2002...both of those programs had more access to a. High Revenue league than a school like ECU...

2000, but thanks for playing. We've got some lovely parting gifts for you.

Technically UConn was transitional/transitioning in 2000 and 2001; ineligible for FCS playoff and FBS bowl games (i believe).

(07-27-2014 08:19 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  The schools that aren't bringing in the thugs like Miami Ohio simply aren't winning any football games.

Still some cornerstones of academic and athletic integrity who are winning. Stanford, Vanderbilt, Duke and Rice all did very well last year. I think Notre Dame is in that group, too.

(07-26-2014 04:10 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  

(07-26-2014 01:09 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Marshall's winning percentage went up last year though as UCF, Houston and SMU are now in the AAC.

I'll concede your point as to UCF, as we were 3-8 against the Knights, with 8 losses in a row.

But as to Houston and SMU, it might surprise you and others to know that we were 4-4 (2-2 and 2-2) against those teams, combined, with all wins for all teams coming at their home stadium. We certainly weren't running away from either the Cougars or the Mustangs, and I have a great deal of respect for both. Our UCF series, although decidedly in the Knights favor, produced some very memorable games. I enjoyed playing them.

Marshall and Rice also put up big win totals in 2013 while East Carolina, Tulsa and Tulane were still full members of C-USA.

(07-26-2014 10:55 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  

(07-26-2014 12:34 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  Doc Holliday really has done a terrific job at Marshall on the field. His players are a buncha thugs though...not in the way they play, I mean they literally are illiterate thugs. But I'm impressed at how he's stabilized that program.

I think you might be shocked to hear this, but ECU probably has some "illiterate thugs" on their team as well...

Actually just looking at APR, Marshall's is 948 for 2012/2013; ECU's is 941, which can only lead to the logical conclusion that ECU recruits more "illiterate thugs" than Marshall.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/newmedia/public/...ndex5.html

Thanks for playing.

Marshall's players attend special education classes