(09-09-2022 10:12 AM)hburg Wrote:  Labels are meant to hold you down. A prospect hears g5 and p5. They choose p5 because itvis perceived as better than any g5 school or conference.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

Which is why the expanded playoffs is huge for our league and any "non power" league in general.

A recruit could pick a top "G5" with a legitimate chance to make the playoffs over a middling to low end "P5" who has little to no shot year in and out.

Of course NIL is still and will always be a factor going forward but believe it or not some kids still want to go to schools that win. Having a realistic shot at the CFP could influence some better recruits, in an addition to some lucrative NIL deals. (Take Grayson McCall for example)

(09-09-2022 09:43 AM)Dukes94 Wrote:  

(09-09-2022 07:16 AM)KJ Eagle Wrote:  

(09-08-2022 08:49 PM)Dukes94 Wrote:  There'd really be no need for any groupings if the playoff were a logical 10+6 (10 conference champs plus the six next highest ranked teams).

I would LOVE that, but it will never happen because the ones that make the rules don't think anyone other than the ones in their little club deserve to be in the playoffs. I'll take the top 6 conf champs ONLY because that is the best we are gonna get. It gives us an opportunity to have two G5's in if there are more than one that have great years and it's not subjective unless they start to manipulate the polls to keep us down.

I agree. The only thing in our favor is that the trend has been toward expanding the playoffs. I mean, there was no playoff, and then they created the BCS, so we had two teams in the title game. Then people saw the value in four and created the CFP. Now they see the value in a 12-team playoff. I'm hoping that team #13 complains loud enough each year to expand it further.

I get what you're saying, but team #13 will be a P5 not a G5 so the expansion will just include more P5's. P5 governance will never allow all conference champs access.

(09-09-2022 07:16 AM)KJ Eagle Wrote:  I would LOVE that, but it will never happen because the ones that make the rules don't think anyone other than the ones in their little club deserve to be in the playoffs. I'll take the top 6 conf champs ONLY because that is the best we are gonna get. It gives us an opportunity to have two G5's in if there are more than one that have great years and it's not subjective unless they start to manipulate the polls to keep us down.

That's going to happen. There's no doubt about that. We've already seen that in the basketball tournament. Too many outsiders were posting RPIs higher than the blue bloods' also-rans, so they just tossed RPI in favor of something weighted more in the latter's favor.

(09-09-2022 12:52 PM)KJ Eagle Wrote:  

(09-09-2022 09:43 AM)Dukes94 Wrote:  

(09-09-2022 07:16 AM)KJ Eagle Wrote:  

(09-08-2022 08:49 PM)Dukes94 Wrote:  There'd really be no need for any groupings if the playoff were a logical 10+6 (10 conference champs plus the six next highest ranked teams).

I would LOVE that, but it will never happen because the ones that make the rules don't think anyone other than the ones in their little club deserve to be in the playoffs. I'll take the top 6 conf champs ONLY because that is the best we are gonna get. It gives us an opportunity to have two G5's in if there are more than one that have great years and it's not subjective unless they start to manipulate the polls to keep us down.

I agree. The only thing in our favor is that the trend has been toward expanding the playoffs. I mean, there was no playoff, and then they created the BCS, so we had two teams in the title game. Then people saw the value in four and created the CFP. Now they see the value in a 12-team playoff. I'm hoping that team #13 complains loud enough each year to expand it further.

I get what you're saying, but team #13 will be a P5 not a G5 so the expansion will just include more P5's. P5 governance will never allow all conference champs access.

If it expands further though then it likely adds more G5 bids as well. 10+6 probably won't happen, but 8+8 seems likely if they go to 16.

(09-08-2022 08:50 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(09-08-2022 08:31 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  I like Vannini but this take pisses me off. We don't need a second class citizen name.

Since those people love labels so much, let’s have “power reporters” and “mid-major reporters.”

(09-09-2022 11:44 AM)Cruhawk Wrote:  Mid major makes inherent sense right off the bat just from context clues alone. Plus people already have familiarity with it from basketball.

Think P5/G5/FCS should be replaced with the designations of "High-Major", "Mid-Major" and "Low-Major"

Where does that put Rutgers?