Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
Author Message
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #1
Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
The G5 Access spot in an NY6 bowl is billed as an improvement over the old BCS access for non-AQ because it is guaranteed rather than based on meeting criteria. But, it also has some significant drawbacks as well:

1) Less Exposure. In the CFP era, the great bulk of the New Year's spotlight is on the Playoff games. The other NY6 bowls get some shine but not like during the BCS era.

2) Lesser Bowls: The G5 champ is limited to three of the six bowls, and these are the lesser ones. The G5 team never gets to play in the higher-status Contract bowls, the Orange, Sugar, and Rose Bowls. Those three bowls have always been "major" and have the highest brand value. But the G5 rep gets stuck in the lesser-status Access bowls, with the Peach being particularly low-status as it has never been a major bowl.

In the BCS era, a non-AQ could play in any bowl. Hawaii and Utah played in the Sugar Bowl, NIU played in the Orange Bowl, TCU even played in the mighty Rose Bowl. But now, these bowls are off-limits to the G5 champ.

3) Opponent quality: Thanks to the CFP, the G5 champ will NEVER get to play a P5 Champ. The P5 Champs ALL play in either the playoff games or in a Contract bowl. This means that the G5 representative will always play some kind of P5 runner-up, which isn't as prestigious and doesn't allow the G5 a chance to prove itself.

In the BCS era, the non-AQ team that busted the BCS often got to play a P5 champ. TCU played B1G champ Wisconsin, UCF played Big 12 champ Baylor, Boise played Big 12 champ Oklahoma. NIU played ACC champ FSU. Those were real chances to prove your worth.

In contrast, Houston played the 3rd place ACC team yesterday. Not nearly as good an opportunity.

Lesser-status bowls, lesser exposure, lesser opponents = Ghetto "access".
(This post was last modified: 01-01-2016 10:31 AM by quo vadis.)
01-01-2016 10:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


MJG Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,278
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 30
I Root For: U I , UMich, SC
Location: Myrtle Beach
Post: #2
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
Your spot on and Houston is the G5 champ even before the game was played.

What other G5 played a top P5 team?

The CFP has cleared the fuzzy lines of the BCS up.
Made the division real instead of just perceived.
FCS is D2 now perception wise .

The long term effects will be interesting for the G5 and FCS.
doesn't matter if NDSU or a team like Houston are better than most of the higher division.
01-01-2016 11:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
except that in both of the 1st 2 years, Boise and Houston wouldn't have qualified for the BCS. not even really all that close.
01-01-2016 11:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Surbadger Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,391
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 112
I Root For: Marshall
Location: G-Town, WV
Post: #4
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 11:28 AM)stever20 Wrote:  except that in both of the 1st 2 years, Boise and Houston wouldn't have qualified for the BCS. not even really all that close.

That's because of the bias of the people who pick the college football rankings07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 01-01-2016 11:41 AM by Surbadger.)
01-01-2016 11:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 11:39 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:28 AM)stever20 Wrote:  except that in both of the 1st 2 years, Boise and Houston wouldn't have qualified for the BCS. not even really all that close.

That's because of the bias of the people who pick the college football rankongs07-coffee3

Not really. Boise wouldn't have been close last year and Houston only was #15 this year in the BCS proxy ratings- using the components of the BCS. So they would have been out.
01-01-2016 11:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #6
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 11:28 AM)stever20 Wrote:  except that in both of the 1st 2 years, Boise and Houston wouldn't have qualified for the BCS. not even really all that close.

No question, it is better to play in a major bowl than not play in one, and the G5 guarantee is an advantage over the old BCS.

But my point is that there is a price paid for that guarantee, namely that the G5 champ gets shunted off into one of the three lesser-status bowls, and they never get to face a P5 champ.

That's a big cost, IMO.
01-01-2016 11:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #7
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 11:28 AM)stever20 Wrote:  except that in both of the 1st 2 years, Boise and Houston wouldn't have qualified for the BCS. not even really all that close.

Quite true. Both BSU and Houston would have to had zero losses to qualify in the BCS type bowls.
With the guarantee tie-in that allows the G5 conference to play for a Major Bowl without the need of perfection.
However, even the current setup does mean that the G5 won't be playing a P5 champ. BSU could have been setup to play TCU or Baylor last year. It didn't happen with the geography of BSU and AZ ranking, but it still possible in years with the Sugar and Rose hosting.
01-01-2016 12:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #8
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 12:01 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:28 AM)stever20 Wrote:  except that in both of the 1st 2 years, Boise and Houston wouldn't have qualified for the BCS. not even really all that close.

Quite true. Both BSU and Houston would have to had zero losses to qualify in the BCS type bowls.
With the guarantee tie-in that allows the G5 conference to play for a Major Bowl without the need of perfection.
However, even the current setup does mean that the G5 won't be playing a P5 champ. BSU could have been setup to play TCU or Baylor last year. It didn't happen with the geography of BSU and AZ ranking, but it still possible in years with the Sugar and Rose hosting.

It could have happened last year because the One True Champion conference had co-champs, LOL. But now that the Big 12 has tie-breakers, it is extremely unlikely.
01-01-2016 12:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Surbadger Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,391
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 112
I Root For: Marshall
Location: G-Town, WV
Post: #9
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 11:42 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:39 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:28 AM)stever20 Wrote:  except that in both of the 1st 2 years, Boise and Houston wouldn't have qualified for the BCS. not even really all that close.

That's because of the bias of the people who pick the college football rankongs07-coffee3

Not really. Boise wouldn't have been close last year and Houston only was #15 this year in the BCS proxy ratings- using the components of the BCS. So they would have been out.

There was clearly bias when an 11-0 Marshall finally got in behind Boise in the low 20s. If this was the BCS era, they would have been top 15 by that time. The only thing holding them back was the committee of the college football rankings.
01-01-2016 12:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 12:15 PM)Surbadger Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:42 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:39 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:28 AM)stever20 Wrote:  except that in both of the 1st 2 years, Boise and Houston wouldn't have qualified for the BCS. not even really all that close.

That's because of the bias of the people who pick the college football rankongs07-coffee3

Not really. Boise wouldn't have been close last year and Houston only was #15 this year in the BCS proxy ratings- using the components of the BCS. So they would have been out.

There was clearly bias when an 11-0 Marshall finally got in behind Boise in the low 20s. If this was the BCS era, they would have been top 15 by that time. The only thing holding them back was the committee of the college football rankings.
Marshall would never have gotten in. Their computer numbers due to their putrid SOS would have killed them. Also remember they would have had to get top 12, and no way in hell that would have happened.
01-01-2016 12:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 10:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  The G5 Access spot in an NY6 bowl is billed as an improvement over the old BCS access for non-AQ because it is guaranteed rather than based on meeting criteria. But, it also has some significant drawbacks as well:

1) Less Exposure. In the CFP era, the great bulk of the New Year's spotlight is on the Playoff games. The other NY6 bowls get some shine but not like during the BCS era.

2) Lesser Bowls: The G5 champ is limited to three of the six bowls, and these are the lesser ones. The G5 team never gets to play in the higher-status Contract bowls, the Orange, Sugar, and Rose Bowls. Those three bowls have always been "major" and have the highest brand value. But the G5 rep gets stuck in the lesser-status Access bowls, with the Peach being particularly low-status as it has never been a major bowl.

In the BCS era, a non-AQ could play in any bowl. Hawaii and Utah played in the Sugar Bowl, NIU played in the Orange Bowl, TCU even played in the mighty Rose Bowl. But now, these bowls are off-limits to the G5 champ.

3) Opponent quality: Thanks to the CFP, the G5 champ will NEVER get to play a P5 Champ. The P5 Champs ALL play in either the playoff games or in a Contract bowl. This means that the G5 representative will always play some kind of P5 runner-up, which isn't as prestigious and doesn't allow the G5 a chance to prove itself.

In the BCS era, the non-AQ team that busted the BCS often got to play a P5 champ. TCU played B1G champ Wisconsin, UCF played Big 12 champ Baylor, Boise played Big 12 champ Oklahoma. NIU played ACC champ FSU. Those were real chances to prove your worth.

In contrast, Houston played the 3rd place ACC team yesterday. Not nearly as good an opportunity.

Lesser-status bowls, lesser exposure, lesser opponents = Ghetto "access".

I disagree with your analysis, but not your conclusion. The autonomy enshrines a different status in the governing structure. The BE and CUSA and WAC (pre-split) actually had the same number of votes as the P5 in the old structure. The media emphasizes the P5 even more than they did BCS. The non-BCS wanted to get rid of the label, but it has become even more pronounced.

As for the bowl, they were always shut out of the championship game. Now they are guaranteed 1 out of 6 and they get a top 12 team. And the Cotton once was a premier bowl. The Fiesta at times was viewed as the premier bowl since they had more flexibility in who they scheduled. They got Miami and FSU and Notre Dame in the late 80s when they were the dominant programs. They may not have had the viewership and prestige of the Rose, but they had better matchups. The Sugar was the weakest of the Big 4 in the 90s. They were the one that had to migrate to New Year's Eve to get ratings. The Orange was diminished in prestige after the Big 8 joined the Big 12 and the Fiesta got their champ.

Now it is true they won't get a champ that often. But Houston got the champ from two years ago and a playoff team from last year. In the BCS era, when they did get in, they often got the weakest champ and didn't always get a champ:
Boise-OU Only the ACC champ WF was lower ranked than OU
Hawaii-UGA UGA was highly ranked, but was a conference runnerup
Utah-Alabama Alabama was highly ranked but was a conference runnerup
Boise-TCU They had to take two so they paired them against each other
TCU-Wisconsin TCU got the #3 champ but they didn't have a choice. TCU was the #3 team and would have made a playoff using BCS rankings
NIU-FSU FSU was a champ, but they were only #12. Only Big 10 champ Wisconsin, who got in with an upset, was lower ranked

As for UCF, they got an automatic bid, not the non-BCS. And they still played the #5 BCS champ.

So yes, there is a bigger perception gap, but not for the reasons you stated.
01-01-2016 12:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Surbadger Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,391
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 112
I Root For: Marshall
Location: G-Town, WV
Post: #12
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 12:23 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 12:15 PM)Surbadger Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:42 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:39 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:28 AM)stever20 Wrote:  except that in both of the 1st 2 years, Boise and Houston wouldn't have qualified for the BCS. not even really all that close.

That's because of the bias of the people who pick the college football rankongs07-coffee3

Not really. Boise wouldn't have been close last year and Houston only was #15 this year in the BCS proxy ratings- using the components of the BCS. So they would have been out.

There was clearly bias when an 11-0 Marshall finally got in behind Boise in the low 20s. If this was the BCS era, they would have been top 15 by that time. The only thing holding them back was the committee of the college football rankings.
Marshall would never have gotten in. Their computer numbers due to their putrid SOS would have killed them. Also remember they would have had to get top 12, and no way in hell that would have happened.

Boise got in the Fiesta Bowl in '09 with a SOS ranked #96 and still won the bowl game.

The committee relies too much on SOS which hurts any G5 team.
(This post was last modified: 01-01-2016 12:42 PM by Surbadger.)
01-01-2016 12:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #13
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
I disagree with the premise. It's just the wrong way of looking at it. The "access" berth is not a ghetto. It's a launching pad. Look at Utah and TCU.
01-01-2016 01:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 12:40 PM)Surbadger Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 12:23 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 12:15 PM)Surbadger Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:42 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:39 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  That's because of the bias of the people who pick the college football rankongs07-coffee3

Not really. Boise wouldn't have been close last year and Houston only was #15 this year in the BCS proxy ratings- using the components of the BCS. So they would have been out.

There was clearly bias when an 11-0 Marshall finally got in behind Boise in the low 20s. If this was the BCS era, they would have been top 15 by that time. The only thing holding them back was the committee of the college football rankings.
Marshall would never have gotten in. Their computer numbers due to their putrid SOS would have killed them. Also remember they would have had to get top 12, and no way in hell that would have happened.

Boise got in the Fiesta Bowl in '09 with a SOS ranked #96 and still won the bowl game.

The committee relies too much on SOS which hurts any G5 team.

The computers didn't like Marshall at all. That would have hurt them big time.

Also SOS ranked #96 and SOS ranked like #127- is a BIG difference. The comparison would be with Hawaii in '07- but there, the season really hurt Marshall. Last year you had the top 6, but then a lot better teams in the 7-12 range. That's what hurt Marshall some as well.
01-01-2016 01:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
C2__ Offline
Caltex2
*

Posts: 23,633
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 552
I Root For: Houston, PVAMU
Location: Zamunda
Post: #15
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 11:42 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Not really. Boise wouldn't have been close last year and Houston only was #15 this year in the BCS proxy ratings- using the components of the BCS. So they would have been out.

You gotta wonder how much sway and influence the CFP standings had on everything. Houston rose to number 6 in the polls and would have climbed into the top 5 in 2011.
01-01-2016 02:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #16
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 12:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 10:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  The G5 Access spot in an NY6 bowl is billed as an improvement over the old BCS access for non-AQ because it is guaranteed rather than based on meeting criteria. But, it also has some significant drawbacks as well:

1) Less Exposure. In the CFP era, the great bulk of the New Year's spotlight is on the Playoff games. The other NY6 bowls get some shine but not like during the BCS era.

2) Lesser Bowls: The G5 champ is limited to three of the six bowls, and these are the lesser ones. The G5 team never gets to play in the higher-status Contract bowls, the Orange, Sugar, and Rose Bowls. Those three bowls have always been "major" and have the highest brand value. But the G5 rep gets stuck in the lesser-status Access bowls, with the Peach being particularly low-status as it has never been a major bowl.

In the BCS era, a non-AQ could play in any bowl. Hawaii and Utah played in the Sugar Bowl, NIU played in the Orange Bowl, TCU even played in the mighty Rose Bowl. But now, these bowls are off-limits to the G5 champ.

3) Opponent quality: Thanks to the CFP, the G5 champ will NEVER get to play a P5 Champ. The P5 Champs ALL play in either the playoff games or in a Contract bowl. This means that the G5 representative will always play some kind of P5 runner-up, which isn't as prestigious and doesn't allow the G5 a chance to prove itself.

In the BCS era, the non-AQ team that busted the BCS often got to play a P5 champ. TCU played B1G champ Wisconsin, UCF played Big 12 champ Baylor, Boise played Big 12 champ Oklahoma. NIU played ACC champ FSU. Those were real chances to prove your worth.

In contrast, Houston played the 3rd place ACC team yesterday. Not nearly as good an opportunity.

Lesser-status bowls, lesser exposure, lesser opponents = Ghetto "access".

I disagree with your analysis, but not your conclusion. The autonomy enshrines a different status in the governing structure. The BE and CUSA and WAC (pre-split) actually had the same number of votes as the P5 in the old structure. The media emphasizes the P5 even more than they did BCS. The non-BCS wanted to get rid of the label, but it has become even more pronounced.

As for the bowl, they were always shut out of the championship game. Now they are guaranteed 1 out of 6 and they get a top 12 team. And the Cotton once was a premier bowl. The Fiesta at times was viewed as the premier bowl since they had more flexibility in who they scheduled. They got Miami and FSU and Notre Dame in the late 80s when they were the dominant programs. They may not have had the viewership and prestige of the Rose, but they had better matchups. The Sugar was the weakest of the Big 4 in the 90s. They were the one that had to migrate to New Year's Eve to get ratings. The Orange was diminished in prestige after the Big 8 joined the Big 12 and the Fiesta got their champ.

Now it is true they won't get a champ that often. But Houston got the champ from two years ago and a playoff team from last year. In the BCS era, when they did get in, they often got the weakest champ and didn't always get a champ:
Boise-OU Only the ACC champ WF was lower ranked than OU
Hawaii-UGA UGA was highly ranked, but was a conference runnerup
Utah-Alabama Alabama was highly ranked but was a conference runnerup
Boise-TCU They had to take two so they paired them against each other
TCU-Wisconsin TCU got the #3 champ but they didn't have a choice. TCU was the #3 team and would have made a playoff using BCS rankings
NIU-FSU FSU was a champ, but they were only #12. Only Big 10 champ Wisconsin, who got in with an upset, was lower ranked

As for UCF, they got an automatic bid, not the non-BCS. And they still played the #5 BCS champ.

So yes, there is a bigger perception gap, but not for the reasons you stated.

You nit-pick my points but can't refute them. Yes, the Cotton was once a Major bowl and the Fiesta became one in the 1990s. But overall, the Cotton/Fiesta/Peach group clearly is not as prestigious as the Rose/Sugar/Orange group.

Heck, I was talking to my 79-year old mother in law yesterday, who I am visiting and who has never had any interest in college football whatsoever, and she asked me about all these games i was watching. When I mentioned the Peach and even Fiesta Bowls, she had never heard of them. But she knew the Rose, Sugar, and Orange Bowls.

The Contract Bowls are just more prestigious, that's why the P5 signed Contracts with them.

Also, while it is true that in the BCS era not every non-AQ who made a BCS bowl got to play an AQ champ (and i never said they did), several did, and the odds of that happening were surely a LOT higher than the odds that a G5 Access team will ever get to play a P5 champ, so again the point stands.

So while I agree with you about the media pushing the P5 label and about the governance structure now favoring the P5 as well, the reasons I gave for the G5 Access spot being marginalized are still valid, too.
(This post was last modified: 01-01-2016 03:02 PM by quo vadis.)
01-01-2016 03:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


EvilVodka Offline
stuff

Posts: 3,585
Joined: Jan 2014
I Root For: FSU LSU
Location: Houston, TX
Post: #17
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 10:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  The G5 Access spot in an NY6 bowl is billed as an improvement over the old BCS access for non-AQ because it is guaranteed rather than based on meeting criteria. But, it also has some significant drawbacks as well:

1) Less Exposure. In the CFP era, the great bulk of the New Year's spotlight is on the Playoff games. The other NY6 bowls get some shine but not like during the BCS era.

2) Lesser Bowls: The G5 champ is limited to three of the six bowls, and these are the lesser ones. The G5 team never gets to play in the higher-status Contract bowls, the Orange, Sugar, and Rose Bowls. Those three bowls have always been "major" and have the highest brand value. But the G5 rep gets stuck in the lesser-status Access bowls, with the Peach being particularly low-status as it has never been a major bowl.

In the BCS era, a non-AQ could play in any bowl. Hawaii and Utah played in the Sugar Bowl, NIU played in the Orange Bowl, TCU even played in the mighty Rose Bowl. But now, these bowls are off-limits to the G5 champ.

3) Opponent quality: Thanks to the CFP, the G5 champ will NEVER get to play a P5 Champ. The P5 Champs ALL play in either the playoff games or in a Contract bowl. This means that the G5 representative will always play some kind of P5 runner-up, which isn't as prestigious and doesn't allow the G5 a chance to prove itself.

In the BCS era, the non-AQ team that busted the BCS often got to play a P5 champ. TCU played B1G champ Wisconsin, UCF played Big 12 champ Baylor, Boise played Big 12 champ Oklahoma. NIU played ACC champ FSU. Those were real chances to prove your worth.

In contrast, Houston played the 3rd place ACC team yesterday. Not nearly as good an opportunity.

Lesser-status bowls, lesser exposure, lesser opponents = Ghetto "access".

You're kidding right?

Houston got an excellent opponent, and a good stage to showcase themselves....FSU is a top brand in college football, won the NC 2 years ago and was in the playoff last year....

Houston could have drawn Ole Miss, Oklahoma State or Iowa....meh....
01-01-2016 03:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
C2__ Offline
Caltex2
*

Posts: 23,633
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 552
I Root For: Houston, PVAMU
Location: Zamunda
Post: #18
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 11:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  No question, it is better to play in a major bowl than not play in one, and the G5 guarantee is an advantage over the old BCS.

But my point is that there is a price paid for that guarantee, namely that the G5 champ gets shunted off into one of the three lesser-status bowls, and they never get to face a P5 champ.

That's a big cost, IMO.

That's better than nothing, the fact is these bowl committees don't want to be stuck with a Kent State or even a Boise. They are forced to take teams they otherwise wouldn't want to take if it was up to them. The only exception was Boise one year because the pickings were slim.

So be thankful because it used to be that Tulane, Boise and Marshall were relegated to the Liberty, Humanitarian/Potato, Motor City Bowl. Heck it used to be that Northern Illinois, Bowling Green, et al would go to no bowl.
01-01-2016 03:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #19
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 03:10 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 11:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  No question, it is better to play in a major bowl than not play in one, and the G5 guarantee is an advantage over the old BCS.

But my point is that there is a price paid for that guarantee, namely that the G5 champ gets shunted off into one of the three lesser-status bowls, and they never get to face a P5 champ.

That's a big cost, IMO.

That's better than nothing, the fact is these bowl committees don't want to be stuck with a Kent State or even a Boise. They are forced to take teams they otherwise wouldn't want to take if it was up to them. The only exception was Boise one year because the pickings were slim.

So be thankful because it used to be that Tulane, Boise and Marshall were relegated to the Liberty, Humanitarian/Potato, Motor City Bowl. Heck it used to be that Northern Illinois, Bowling Green, et al would go to no bowl.

No question, the post-2004 BCS provided better access to top bowls for low-profile teams than anything before it. But my point was about how the new CFP system compares to the BCS system, not the pre-2004 era when the Tulanes and Marshalls went to the Potato bowls.
01-01-2016 03:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #20
RE: Is the G5 Access slot a "ghetto"?
(01-01-2016 03:08 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  
(01-01-2016 10:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  The G5 Access spot in an NY6 bowl is billed as an improvement over the old BCS access for non-AQ because it is guaranteed rather than based on meeting criteria. But, it also has some significant drawbacks as well:

1) Less Exposure. In the CFP era, the great bulk of the New Year's spotlight is on the Playoff games. The other NY6 bowls get some shine but not like during the BCS era.

2) Lesser Bowls: The G5 champ is limited to three of the six bowls, and these are the lesser ones. The G5 team never gets to play in the higher-status Contract bowls, the Orange, Sugar, and Rose Bowls. Those three bowls have always been "major" and have the highest brand value. But the G5 rep gets stuck in the lesser-status Access bowls, with the Peach being particularly low-status as it has never been a major bowl.

In the BCS era, a non-AQ could play in any bowl. Hawaii and Utah played in the Sugar Bowl, NIU played in the Orange Bowl, TCU even played in the mighty Rose Bowl. But now, these bowls are off-limits to the G5 champ.

3) Opponent quality: Thanks to the CFP, the G5 champ will NEVER get to play a P5 Champ. The P5 Champs ALL play in either the playoff games or in a Contract bowl. This means that the G5 representative will always play some kind of P5 runner-up, which isn't as prestigious and doesn't allow the G5 a chance to prove itself.

In the BCS era, the non-AQ team that busted the BCS often got to play a P5 champ. TCU played B1G champ Wisconsin, UCF played Big 12 champ Baylor, Boise played Big 12 champ Oklahoma. NIU played ACC champ FSU. Those were real chances to prove your worth.

In contrast, Houston played the 3rd place ACC team yesterday. Not nearly as good an opportunity.

Lesser-status bowls, lesser exposure, lesser opponents = Ghetto "access".

You're kidding right?

Houston got an excellent opponent, and a good stage to showcase themselves....FSU is a top brand in college football, won the NC 2 years ago and was in the playoff last year....

FSU was the 3rd-place ACC team, the Peach is not a traditional "major" bowl, and who paid attention to the game with the playoffs on tap?

At the least, they could have scheduled that game for today when there was no playoff focus.
01-01-2016 03:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


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