(06-01-2015 10:24 AM)stever20 Wrote:  The basketball dollars are pretty close though. If ACC was at 120 units and all 4 other P5 were at 60 units... and say units worth 300k....
ACC- 36 million- 2.4 per
B10/SEC- 18 million- 1.29 per
P12- 18 million 1.5 per
B12- 18 million 1.8 per

That's an extreme best case for the ACC- it'll never happen. ACC will be lucky to get 2 million per(or about 100 units). Big 12 to match that would just need to have 67 units.

And I would say the Big Ten had been leaving the SEC in the dust with their network- they were making a good 4-5 million more per year. That's changing. Also, that didn't hurt the SEC as much as it's hurting the ACC because those SEC schools aren't in direct competition with the Big Ten, while SEC schools are in direct competition with the ACC...

I think it's getting pretty close to saying that the ACC has to get a network to be anywhere near viable. It's their only chance to really slice into the SEC money advantage.

We will have to wait and see about the Basketball dollars and the 48M from the CFP...not saying you are wrong, but time will show who gets what and from where...

I am not sure about the viable comment, however I do agree that the ACC needs a network and thus why they are working on a 2016/2017 launch with ESPN.

(06-01-2015 07:48 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-31-2015 07:05 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  An 80/20 split between the P5 and G5 seems fair, we don't want half of a sports laegue getting all uppity by getting an equal portion. by only giving the G5 20% it drives home the point that they aren't in FBS to "be competitive" and "win championships", heck no, they're in FBS to pad the win totals of the P5 teams. 20% seems like a reasonable fee for being used. Besides, I don't want to live in a country where the P5 doesn't have all the chips stacked in their favor, its the way God and Ben Franklin intended. 'Murica!

Face it, none of those bowls nor even the next couple of tiers below want anything to do with the G5. If you want it totally market driven the G5 would get 0. Heck the AAC champ couldn't even hold on to liberty bowl over a low ranking B12.

why would anyone want to deal with half of a sports league that is relegated to being systemically discriminated against? that's my whole point.

(06-01-2015 11:26 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:48 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-31-2015 07:05 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  An 80/20 split between the P5 and G5 seems fair, we don't want half of a sports laegue getting all uppity by getting an equal portion. by only giving the G5 20% it drives home the point that they aren't in FBS to "be competitive" and "win championships", heck no, they're in FBS to pad the win totals of the P5 teams. 20% seems like a reasonable fee for being used. Besides, I don't want to live in a country where the P5 doesn't have all the chips stacked in their favor, its the way God and Ben Franklin intended. 'Murica!

Face it, none of those bowls nor even the next couple of tiers below want anything to do with the G5. If you want it totally market driven the G5 would get 0. Heck the AAC champ couldn't even hold on to liberty bowl over a low ranking B12.

why would anyone want to deal with half of a sports league that is relegated to being systemically discriminated against? that's my whole point.

Alumni, friends and family of student athletes at those schools....Lets be real the G5 school also got an increase in revenue... And most G5 schools outside of Boise State and the BYUs....(NEW MEXICO, UTEP, WYO, TROY,) live in reality and understand that if they ever made it to an access bowl that would be a historic feat for their program...heck half of them only make it to bowls once every five or ten years.......

(06-01-2015 09:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:48 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-31-2015 07:05 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  An 80/20 split between the P5 and G5 seems fair, we don't want half of a sports laegue getting all uppity by getting an equal portion. by only giving the G5 20% it drives home the point that they aren't in FBS to "be competitive" and "win championships", heck no, they're in FBS to pad the win totals of the P5 teams. 20% seems like a reasonable fee for being used. Besides, I don't want to live in a country where the P5 doesn't have all the chips stacked in their favor, its the way God and Ben Franklin intended. 'Murica!

Face it, none of those bowls nor even the next couple of tiers below want anything to do with the G5. If you want it totally market driven the G5 would get 0. Heck the AAC champ couldn't even hold on to liberty bowl over a low ranking B12.

Which is why I believe the only way for a G5 conference to have a decent bowl is to create it themselves and to fund it with a high enough pay out to attract a good P5 opponent. If the G5 want good bowls, they will need to build them and pay for them. On the up side, they will also receive all the ticket sales and TV rights money, so it should actually make money for any G5 conference willing to do that heavy lifting.

I think some of the P5 bowl games take place in cities of G5 schools.

(06-01-2015 01:10 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 11:26 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:48 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-31-2015 07:05 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  An 80/20 split between the P5 and G5 seems fair, we don't want half of a sports laegue getting all uppity by getting an equal portion. by only giving the G5 20% it drives home the point that they aren't in FBS to "be competitive" and "win championships", heck no, they're in FBS to pad the win totals of the P5 teams. 20% seems like a reasonable fee for being used. Besides, I don't want to live in a country where the P5 doesn't have all the chips stacked in their favor, its the way God and Ben Franklin intended. 'Murica!

Face it, none of those bowls nor even the next couple of tiers below want anything to do with the G5. If you want it totally market driven the G5 would get 0. Heck the AAC champ couldn't even hold on to liberty bowl over a low ranking B12.

why would anyone want to deal with half of a sports league that is relegated to being systemically discriminated against? that's my whole point.

Alumni, friends and family of student athletes at those schools....Lets be real the G5 school also got an increase in revenue... And most G5 schools outside of Boise State and the BYUs....(NEW MEXICO, UTEP, WYO, TROY,) live in reality and understand that if they ever made it to an access bowl that would be a historic feat for their program...heck half of them only make it to bowls once every five or ten years.......

in the last year of the BCS the 5 power conferences got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. In the first year of the CFP the P5 got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. Sure the G5 got a little more in total but the percentage didn't change at all. It's smoke and mirrors.

(06-01-2015 03:19 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 01:10 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 11:26 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:48 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-31-2015 07:05 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  An 80/20 split between the P5 and G5 seems fair, we don't want half of a sports laegue getting all uppity by getting an equal portion. by only giving the G5 20% it drives home the point that they aren't in FBS to "be competitive" and "win championships", heck no, they're in FBS to pad the win totals of the P5 teams. 20% seems like a reasonable fee for being used. Besides, I don't want to live in a country where the P5 doesn't have all the chips stacked in their favor, its the way God and Ben Franklin intended. 'Murica!

Face it, none of those bowls nor even the next couple of tiers below want anything to do with the G5. If you want it totally market driven the G5 would get 0. Heck the AAC champ couldn't even hold on to liberty bowl over a low ranking B12.

why would anyone want to deal with half of a sports league that is relegated to being systemically discriminated against? that's my whole point.

Alumni, friends and family of student athletes at those schools....Lets be real the G5 school also got an increase in revenue... And most G5 schools outside of Boise State and the BYUs....(NEW MEXICO, UTEP, WYO, TROY,) live in reality and understand that if they ever made it to an access bowl that would be a historic feat for their program...heck half of them only make it to bowls once every five or ten years.......

in the last year of the BCS the 5 power conferences got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. In the first year of the CFP the P5 got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. Sure the G5 got a little more in total but the percentage didn't change at all. It's smoke and mirrors.

I think Boise State got an added boast with the ratings for their bowl game so high. It was the best showing of any G5 school in a very long time. There is some promise that The PAC 12 will invite them in if they keep getting those numbers.

(06-01-2015 03:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:19 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 01:10 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 11:26 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:48 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Face it, none of those bowls nor even the next couple of tiers below want anything to do with the G5. If you want it totally market driven the G5 would get 0. Heck the AAC champ couldn't even hold on to liberty bowl over a low ranking B12.

why would anyone want to deal with half of a sports league that is relegated to being systemically discriminated against? that's my whole point.

Alumni, friends and family of student athletes at those schools....Lets be real the G5 school also got an increase in revenue... And most G5 schools outside of Boise State and the BYUs....(NEW MEXICO, UTEP, WYO, TROY,) live in reality and understand that if they ever made it to an access bowl that would be a historic feat for their program...heck half of them only make it to bowls once every five or ten years.......

in the last year of the BCS the 5 power conferences got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. In the first year of the CFP the P5 got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. Sure the G5 got a little more in total but the percentage didn't change at all. It's smoke and mirrors.

I think Boise State got an added boast with the ratings for their bowl game so high. It was the best showing of any G5 school in a very long time. There is some promise that The PAC 12 will invite them in if they keep getting those numbers.

Not unless they become a high research university in which they are about 20 years away from that classification.

(06-01-2015 03:37 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:19 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 01:10 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 11:26 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  why would anyone want to deal with half of a sports league that is relegated to being systemically discriminated against? that's my whole point.

Alumni, friends and family of student athletes at those schools....Lets be real the G5 school also got an increase in revenue... And most G5 schools outside of Boise State and the BYUs....(NEW MEXICO, UTEP, WYO, TROY,) live in reality and understand that if they ever made it to an access bowl that would be a historic feat for their program...heck half of them only make it to bowls once every five or ten years.......

in the last year of the BCS the 5 power conferences got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. In the first year of the CFP the P5 got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. Sure the G5 got a little more in total but the percentage didn't change at all. It's smoke and mirrors.

I think Boise State got an added boast with the ratings for their bowl game so high. It was the best showing of any G5 school in a very long time. There is some promise that The PAC 12 will invite them in if they keep getting those numbers.

Not unless they become a high research university in which they are about 20 years away from that classification.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...12s-radar/

Quote:But which team(s) would the Pac-12 potentially target? Boise State and San Diego State are possibilities. The two programs are currently in the Mountain West but slated to begin competing in the really new-look Big East next season.

“When we expanded in the past we looked at them because they are prominent schools in the West, with very strong athletics programs, in markets we are not in,” Scott said. “There’s a lot of criteria that we looked at last time, that I’m sure we’d look at again.

“If we were to look at expanding again, I’m sure both those schools would be on the list. But, we don’t have any plans.”

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreview...rsity-1616

Boise State is ranked number 63 as a research school in the west, and growing.

http://research.boisestate.edu/areas-of-...niversity/

Seems they are working in research with the Air Force and NASA, and getting research funding for their research program.

http://www.forbes.com/colleges/boise-state-university/

Forbes ranked them as a fastest growing research school. They have a list of what is being done there. Idaho was up there, but lost ground to Boise State. Boise is growing their research to be able to try and match the PAC 12.

(06-01-2015 04:04 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:37 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:19 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 01:10 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  Alumni, friends and family of student athletes at those schools....Lets be real the G5 school also got an increase in revenue... And most G5 schools outside of Boise State and the BYUs....(NEW MEXICO, UTEP, WYO, TROY,) live in reality and understand that if they ever made it to an access bowl that would be a historic feat for their program...heck half of them only make it to bowls once every five or ten years.......

in the last year of the BCS the 5 power conferences got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. In the first year of the CFP the P5 got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. Sure the G5 got a little more in total but the percentage didn't change at all. It's smoke and mirrors.

I think Boise State got an added boast with the ratings for their bowl game so high. It was the best showing of any G5 school in a very long time. There is some promise that The PAC 12 will invite them in if they keep getting those numbers.

Not unless they become a high research university in which they are about 20 years away from that classification.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...12s-radar/

Quote:But which team(s) would the Pac-12 potentially target? Boise State and San Diego State are possibilities. The two programs are currently in the Mountain West but slated to begin competing in the really new-look Big East next season.

“When we expanded in the past we looked at them because they are prominent schools in the West, with very strong athletics programs, in markets we are not in,” Scott said. “There’s a lot of criteria that we looked at last time, that I’m sure we’d look at again.

“If we were to look at expanding again, I’m sure both those schools would be on the list. But, we don’t have any plans.”

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreview...rsity-1616

Boise State is ranked number 63 as a research school in the west, and growing.

http://research.boisestate.edu/areas-of-...niversity/

Seems they are working in research with the Air Force and NASA, and getting research funding for their research program.

http://www.forbes.com/colleges/boise-state-university/

Forbes ranked them as a fastest growing research school. They have a list of what is being done there. Idaho was up there, but lost ground to Boise State. Boise is growing their research to be able to try and match the PAC 12.

It was going under the Carnegie Classification that is use widely. BSU is a Master's College. They are making progress, but progress to add PHD programs is slow.

(06-01-2015 04:09 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 04:04 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:37 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:19 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  in the last year of the BCS the 5 power conferences got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. In the first year of the CFP the P5 got 80% of the revenue and everyone else split 20%. Sure the G5 got a little more in total but the percentage didn't change at all. It's smoke and mirrors.

I think Boise State got an added boast with the ratings for their bowl game so high. It was the best showing of any G5 school in a very long time. There is some promise that The PAC 12 will invite them in if they keep getting those numbers.

Not unless they become a high research university in which they are about 20 years away from that classification.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...12s-radar/

Quote:But which team(s) would the Pac-12 potentially target? Boise State and San Diego State are possibilities. The two programs are currently in the Mountain West but slated to begin competing in the really new-look Big East next season.

“When we expanded in the past we looked at them because they are prominent schools in the West, with very strong athletics programs, in markets we are not in,” Scott said. “There’s a lot of criteria that we looked at last time, that I’m sure we’d look at again.

“If we were to look at expanding again, I’m sure both those schools would be on the list. But, we don’t have any plans.”

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreview...rsity-1616

Boise State is ranked number 63 as a research school in the west, and growing.

http://research.boisestate.edu/areas-of-...niversity/

Seems they are working in research with the Air Force and NASA, and getting research funding for their research program.

http://www.forbes.com/colleges/boise-state-university/

Forbes ranked them as a fastest growing research school. They have a list of what is being done there. Idaho was up there, but lost ground to Boise State. Boise is growing their research to be able to try and match the PAC 12.

It was going under the Carnegie Classification that is use widely. BSU is a Master's College. They are making progress, but progress to add PHD programs is slow.

I read somewhere that the PAC 12 were impressed at how far Boise State coming from a Junior College in the 1960's to where they are at today. Some schools who are a 4 year school longer than Boise State have not grown that fast. This is a school on the rise and should be watched.

since joining FBS in 1996 Boise State is 189-53, an average 9.95 wins and 2.79 losses a season for 19 straight years. By comparison, over that same time period Duke was 55-165, but because Duke is in the ACC they get 5X the revenue share from a CFP contract that runs from 2014-2026.

Nothing about the revenue sharing of FBS has anything to with who "earned it" or who "deserves it". It's a corrupt good ol'boys network.

(06-01-2015 07:04 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  since joining FBS in 1996 Boise State is 189-53, an average 9.95 wins and 2.79 losses a season for 19 straight years. By comparison, over that same time period Duke was 55-165, but because Duke is in the ACC they get 5X the revenue share from a CFP contract that runs from 2014-2026.

Nothing about the revenue sharing of FBS has anything to with who "earned it" or who "deserves it". It's a corrupt good ol'boys network.

Not sure anyone is disagreeing with you..... If you want BIG BOY dollars you need to get into a BIG Boy Conf..... I think Boise State knows that and tried...However the BIG EAST deal fell apart before they could join....

(06-01-2015 07:04 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  since joining FBS in 1996 Boise State is 189-53, an average 9.95 wins and 2.79 losses a season for 19 straight years. By comparison, over that same time period Duke was 55-165, but because Duke is in the ACC they get 5X the revenue share from a CFP contract that runs from 2014-2026.

Nothing about the revenue sharing of FBS has anything to with who "earned it" or who "deserves it". It's a corrupt good ol'boys network.

good post

which brings me to my next point:

Promotion/Relegation

It would give schools from the G5 who've earned it, a chance to compete at a new level and it also would make the leeches of the P5 (Wash St., Vandy, Northwestern, etc.) crap or get off the pot.

The G5 and FCS are more than welcome to have a relegation system.

(06-02-2015 06:05 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:04 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  since joining FBS in 1996 Boise State is 189-53, an average 9.95 wins and 2.79 losses a season for 19 straight years. By comparison, over that same time period Duke was 55-165, but because Duke is in the ACC they get 5X the revenue share from a CFP contract that runs from 2014-2026.

Nothing about the revenue sharing of FBS has anything to with who "earned it" or who "deserves it". It's a corrupt good ol'boys network.

good post

which brings me to my next point:

Promotion/Relegation

It would give schools from the G5 who've earned it, a chance to compete at a new level and it also would make the leeches of the P5 (Wash St., Vandy, Northwestern, etc.) crap or get off the pot.

Isn't that what BYU has tried to do via going INDY... while some could argue they should have done it sooner in the BCS era, not sure if in the CFP it is viable

(06-02-2015 06:05 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:04 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  since joining FBS in 1996 Boise State is 189-53, an average 9.95 wins and 2.79 losses a season for 19 straight years. By comparison, over that same time period Duke was 55-165, but because Duke is in the ACC they get 5X the revenue share from a CFP contract that runs from 2014-2026.

Nothing about the revenue sharing of FBS has anything to with who "earned it" or who "deserves it". It's a corrupt good ol'boys network.

good post

which brings me to my next point:

Promotion/Relegation

It would give schools from the G5 who've earned it, a chance to compete at a new level and it also would make the leeches of the P5 (Wash St., Vandy, Northwestern, etc.) crap or get off the pot.

I like it in theory but it would be awfully complicated in practice, the simpler solution would be to make these changes-

1. Create a direct path to a national championship for every team.
2. Share League money equally, not 80/20.
3. Salary cap coaching staffs.

Not having a direct path to a championship is an unacceptable construct for a sports league, especially an amateur one. If FCS can do it, FBS can do it too. Putting revenue parameters in place increases competitiveness and does nothing to prevent earning revenue at a conference and team level.

http://www.statisticbrain.com/college-bo...e-payouts/

For the MW: $ 3,893,750 for the base bowls.
Las Vegas: $1,350,000
Hawaii: $650,000
Poinsettia: $612,500
New Orleans: $500,000
New Mexico: $456,250
Potato: $325,000

Adding $4 million for the Access bowl gives a total of $7,893,750. Or $5,893,750 given the 50/50 split the MW has for the team to goes tot he Access bowl.
I left out the extra $2 million because that is for expenses that goes direct to the school.

(06-04-2015 09:34 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  http://www.statisticbrain.com/college-bo...e-payouts/

For the MW: $ 3,893,750 for the base bowls.
Las Vegas: $1,350,000
Hawaii: $650,000
Poinsettia: $612,500
New Orleans: $500,000
New Mexico: $456,250
Potato: $325,000

Adding $4 million for the Access bowl gives a total of $7,893,750. Or $5,893,750 given the 50/50 split the MW has for the team to goes tot he Access bowl.
I left out the extra $2 million because that is for expenses that goes direct to the school.

The five smaller conferences in the Group of Five collective – American Athletic, Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West and Sun Belt conferences – split a total of $75 million..... You might need to add that in, because the MTN west took home a total16M...So under the new CFP you are stating the 3.8M from Base bowls on top of that the MTN West took home an additional 12.2M...

Aren't most of those "earnings" numbers just bowl payouts? Some bowls require much lower expenditures on the part of the schools. So you might break even or even make a little money on the Potato Bowl, but lose money on a bowl with a higher payout.

(06-04-2015 11:24 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  Aren't most of those "earnings" numbers just bowl payouts? Some bowls require much lower expenditures on the part of the schools. So you might break even or even make a little money on the Potato Bowl, but lose money on a bowl with a higher payout.

What a G5 school/Conf needs to ask themselves is this..

2013 what was the money made in the BCS.... to 2014 CFP...MAC made 12M....Not sure how that was divided amongest the MAC, but I am almost certain that the MAC never made 12M in the BCS era...