(12-30-2016 02:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-30-2016 01:35 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(12-30-2016 01:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-30-2016 12:41 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  The chance of a G5 making the CFP becomes more remote every season.
Under the current system, only in 2010 would a non P5 (Boise) have made the playoffs.

Under an 8 team format, 2010 would have featured Boise and TCU (now P5). Boise would have made it again in 2011 under an 8 team format.

Based on history before 2010 and after 2011 those seasons were anomalous. We may never see that again.
This season we have an undefeated WMU which would not make it even in an 8 team format. Marshall two years ago still wouldn't be close.

Pro sports, which by design are supposed to promote parity, with such things as a draft and player and coach movement compensation, are still struggling to maintain that parity, forcing such things as salary caps.
The NCAA, with no restrictions on operating and capital expenditures, there can be nothing even remotely resembling equity, and since realignment and COAs, that is likely to perpetuate exponentially.

Everything changed with realignment.
With the implementation of the GoRs, the P5 now have a tremendous and almost exclusive revenue stream; along with exposure.

Historically (going back to the 1990s), the G5 might have put a team in the CFP every decade or so with an 8 team format.
The way things are now, it will take a 16 team format to even "sniff" the playoffs every ten years. This year we have an unusually strong candidate in undefeated WMU, and yet it would only make the playoffs under a 16 team format.


I don't know whether a G5 playoff is a viable answer or not, but there is no way in hell that the ACC, SEC, and B1G are going to approve of an 8 team playoff with a mandatory G5 entry at the expense of one of their "super" teams [missing out].

It would seem then that only a 16 team format would allow for a G5 at all, and that would still be rare indeed.
Good luck with that, as the season would become longer, and the lesser bowls would become almost irrelevant; killing the G5 during years that we didn't have a CFP entry.

To be fair---an 8 team playoff wouldn't result in one of their "super teams" being left out. Even with a guaranteed G5 slot, an 8-team playoff would result in 3 P5 "super teams" getting INTO the playoff that would be LEFT OUT under the current 4-team playoff system.

And don't think for a minute that Michigan, PSU, OU, and even USC vehemently believe they deserve a shot this season. It is difficult for me to believe that as much angst as there likely is today, that they would vote to expand the playoffs and make mandatory a spot for a team that is just as likely not even to be in the top 25 most seasons. Just my opinion.

Not an unreasonable position---but frankly, sometimes due to upsets or happenstance, the league winner to any P5 could suck in any given year. Treating half of FBS as a single conference and taking the best team from it is a reasonable compromise. It should also be noted that the G5 representative has been fairly consistently under rated by polling and the selection committee. Thus far, despite never having been rated anywhere near the top 10---a team from the current G5 has beaten a top 10 P5 school in the last 3 BCS/access bowl opportunities. There is little reason to believe the very best team in the G5 would not be competitive in the playoff. Furthermore--once recruits understand a G5 team has real legit chance to make the national playoff, its likely the quality of the G5 representative will do nothing but improve over timed due to improved recruiting.

Assuming that the P5 would even go for this, how would you choose the G5 representative, a playoff? I am reasonably sure that WKU feels it could beat WMU, as likely does USF and others.

QUOTE
"Historically (going back to the 1990s), the G5 might have put a team in the CFP every decade or so with an 8 team format.
The way things are now, it will take a 16 team format to even "sniff" the playoffs every ten years. This year we have an unusually strong candidate in undefeated WMU, and yet it would only make the playoffs under a 16 team format."

No in that scenario the Committee would rank them 17th

You have to get to Auto bids and a committee for at large bids only.

Go ahead and create a G5 playoff, just know that neither the AAC or MWC will cooperate with the MAC, CUSA and Sun Belts desire to do this.

(12-30-2016 06:47 PM)Red Dragon Coog Wrote:  Go ahead and create a G5 playoff, just know that neither the AAC or MWC will cooperate with the MAC, CUSA and Sun Belts desire to do this.

No self-respecting G5 program wants this. Except NIU apparently.

(12-30-2016 07:03 PM)techdawg28 Wrote:  

(12-30-2016 06:47 PM)Red Dragon Coog Wrote:  Go ahead and create a G5 playoff, just know that neither the AAC or MWC will cooperate with the MAC, CUSA and Sun Belts desire to do this.

No self-respecting G5 program wants this. Except NIU apparently.

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/searc...tion=click

The P-5 are trying to sell us magic grits.

What the P5 are actually trying to do is the My Cousin Vinny Jail house clip

The MAC and MWC are perfectly fine as they are and quite happy. The AAC, C-USA, and the Sunbelt are NOT fine.

Increasing revenues in the face of plummeting TV dollar$ is crucial, or at least bringing down expenses. I'm still liking the idea of combining the 3 in some fashion.

G5 bowl games are already over (save one). So, play the bowl games a then the top two ranked teams after the G5 bowls are complete play a bragging rights game the first week in January.

What a G5 playoff might look like.

Guy on sports center this morning. "Here is your final 4 playoff, from a field of 60 something down to these 4".... not 128. They want a split.

Posted from mobile device. Hopefully it's coherent.

(12-31-2016 12:29 AM)BeagleUSM Wrote:  What a G5 playoff might look like.

So G5 Champion and runner up play 16 games in one season ?
Who is willing to give up OOC games which in many cases are the money earners for G5 schools playing P5 schools ? To get buy in with this idea the season would have to be reduced to 10 games which is not even worth discussing because no Conference looking to grow or that believes it has Top 25 caliber Football programs is going to sign up for this playoff.
As I said on the AAC thread, I would prefer to wait to see how the playoff works when it goes to 8 teams and as a last ditch effort simply Lawyer up and sue the P5 but if the AAC and the G5 voluntarily separated themselves from the P5 that would be the greatest gift we could ever give them.

The ripple effects of such a split would be killer for many G5 schools. As you say they rely on the paydays to even continue to play FBS. G5 teams that can't play P5 ooc would be stretching the dollar in many cases and it would force a shuffle of the entire G5 to a regional based structure. It would almost have to happen.

The fact that any of us are actually discussing this is exactly what ESPN wanted when they pushed this "story". How easy we are to be manipulated.

(12-31-2016 10:37 AM)Artifice Wrote:  The fact that any of us are actually discussing this is exactly what ESPN wanted when they pushed this "story". How easy we are to be manipulated.

I wonder if you are overstating the importance of message boards a wee bit?

In any event, since realignment and the implementation (and re-implementation with the ACC) of the GoRs, there is a growing disparity between the G5 and P5 as far as exposure and media revenues are concerned.

That inequity is likely to increase as viewership, in large part due to saturation, continues to decrease.

The question then becomes, is the status quo sustainable?
If not, then this discussion is inevitable, whether ESPN or anyone else instigates it.

I see a lot of "NO" re: the playoffs, but I see few realistic proposed alternatives.

-Expansion of the existing College Football Playoff:
Great, but how do we get a mandatory (autobid) for the G5 past the P5? How would that alone really benefit the group of five as a whole from a standpoint of overall revenues?
-Realign the G5 conferences into more geographically friendly entities:
That doesn't address the primary issues of decreasing media dollars but certainly would reduce costs. I am not sure how easily the logistical and legal aspects of this, including NCAA proscriptions, could be overcome.

This was mentioned above, and there is a lot of merit to it
-Reduce the number of FBS programs:
After determining whether the criteria would be based on "butts in the seats" or "tickets sold" this would be a simple matter of enforcing existing NCAA rules.
Not only would it dramatically reduce the number of FBS programs, and thus far fewer pieces of the same pie, it would have the additional benefit of less dilution of talent from a standpoint of perceived FBS vs FCS recruiting; thus a higher quality and closer to P5 product.

It is even possible that more than a few FBS school admins would love to move down due to overwhelming costs, and would jump at the chance to be able to blame it on NCAA rules to their ADs and Donors.

That is pointless. In essence, they are talking about a play-off to be the 53rd (or something similar) best team in the nation? I have no interest in that crap.

(12-29-2016 08:51 AM)GreenSteve Wrote:  http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...er-5-teams

Roy Kramer & Co. continue to laugh at all of us and laugh harder until they cry at anyone who would support this.