An idea that has been running through my head about this D4/P5 stuff is would this have happened or been looked into if the tv deals for college sports hadn't ballooned like they have? In other words, are the universities able to do this without all these mega tv deals filling their coffers?
What happens if say, the market goes the way of full on streaming versus needing cable/satellite to get those tv channels to watch your games when basically any university with a decent server could put their stuff up online.
Internet-centered delivery is many years away, as a primary option, and if there's no "net neutrality", just imagine how much your "friends" at Comcast or TWC will charge you to stream a 3.5-hour football game at a fast speed.
Hasn't the NCAA split into divisions before? And then split Division I into A and AA?
A few million here or there in tv rights wasn't a big deal to the traditional football powers, so there wasn't much incentive to abandon their supposed primary mission, or throw other programs under the bus. With mega millions now at stake, the knives are out.
(01-18-2014 10:46 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]Internet-centered delivery is many years away, as a primary option, and if there's no "net neutrality", just imagine how much your "friends" at Comcast or TWC will charge you to stream a 3.5-hour football game at a fast speed.
Also, imagine how much the school will charge.
The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
(01-18-2014 10:47 PM)Marge Schott Wrote: [ -> ]Hasn't the NCAA split into divisions before? And then split Division I into A and AA?
Yes. It usually happens every time the top level of football exceeds 100 schools. We are at 126 right now, so it is overdue. That said, I don't remember it ever being reduced so dramatically. That's why I don't think that a 65 team D4 is in the best interst of the sport or something television wants. My guess is the sweet spot is around 80-90 schools.
will there be a minimum number of sports required? 20+, I mean??
(01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
They may try but that's where I think the G5 will draw the line. It's noteworthy that the MWC commissioner's response to the proposed governance change was to point out the scholarship limit is staying the same. If the P5 tries to gain a further competitive advantage by jacking up the scholarship limit, the G5 may opt for the nuclear response: outright refusal to play the P5 in football, coupled with establishment of its own NCAA-sanctioned playoff and legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship of college football.
(01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
This. In the past decade schools like Cincinnati, Louisville, UCF, USF, Boise, TCU and Utah have been beating P5 schools on a consistent basis. Moreover those schools started taking recruits from mid-tier to lower tier schools in the P5. They decided it was time to pull the rug on those schools. In order to do so they did have to take Louisville, TCU and Utah but in their minds it was well worth it to shut the other schools and those emerging from doing it in the future.
(01-19-2014 05:36 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
They may try but that's where I think the G5 will draw the line. It's noteworthy that the MWC commissioner's response to the proposed governance change was to point out the scholarship limit is staying the same. If the P5 tries to gain a further competitive advantage by jacking up the scholarship limit, the G5 may opt for the nuclear response: outright refusal to play the P5 in football, coupled with establishment of its own NCAA-sanctioned playoff and legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship of college football.
Why on Earth would the P5 be scared of any of that? "Refusal to play the P5 in football?" That's like handing the P5 everything it wants on a silver platter. That would be a crazy kamikaze response from the G5. Don't you get it that the P5 actually *wants* the separation?!
"Legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship?" The P5 could give two craps about that, *especially* if it means that they can play the CFP championship (or whatever you want to call it) without having to share any access or money whatsoever with the G5.
The G5 has absolutely no leverage in that scenario. If the G5 leagues actually want to *voluntarily* take steps to separate themselves from the P5, then the P5 will gladly hand them the rope (and grab all of the money while avoiding all of the legal heartburn as a result of the G5 voluntarily self-inflicting their own wounds in the process). There's zero time for puffery from the G5 about what they may delusionally believe about their power position - they are basically being kept because college presidents even within the power conferences still like incremental as opposed to radical change. Why the G5 would actually make it *easier* for the P5 to walk away is beyond me. The only tools that the G5 really have at their disposal are (1) sympathy from other college presidents and (2) legal actions. The G5 have absolutely no free market economic power to survive on their own (which is why the P5 is bothered by the existence by the G5 in the first place).
(01-20-2014 11:52 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 05:36 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
They may try but that's where I think the G5 will draw the line. It's noteworthy that the MWC commissioner's response to the proposed governance change was to point out the scholarship limit is staying the same. If the P5 tries to gain a further competitive advantage by jacking up the scholarship limit, the G5 may opt for the nuclear response: outright refusal to play the P5 in football, coupled with establishment of its own NCAA-sanctioned playoff and legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship of college football.
Why on Earth would the P5 be scared of any of that? "Refusal to play the P5 in football?" That's like handing the P5 everything it wants on a silver platter. That would be a crazy kamikaze response from the G5. Don't you get it that the P5 actually *wants* the separation?!
"Legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship?" The P5 could give two craps about that, *especially* if it means that they can play the CFP championship (or whatever you want to call it) without having to share any access or money whatsoever with the G5.
The G5 has absolutely no leverage in that scenario. If the G5 leagues actually want to *voluntarily* take steps to separate themselves from the P5, then the P5 will gladly hand them the rope (and grab all of the money while avoiding all of the legal heartburn as a result of the G5 voluntarily self-inflicting their own wounds in the process). There's zero time for puffery from the G5 about what they may delusionally believe about their power position - they are basically being kept because college presidents even within the power conferences still like incremental as opposed to radical change. Why the G5 would actually make it *easier* for the P5 to walk away is beyond me. The only tools that the G5 really have at their disposal are (1) sympathy from other college presidents and (2) legal actions. The G5 have absolutely no free market economic power to survive on their own (which is why the P5 is bothered by the existence by the G5 in the first place).
My Lunchtime Thoughts:
Another solution for the G5 would be to find ways of improving their own economic viability WITHOUT acting as a leech. There are some interesting brands and histories among the G5 - as well as a few schools with serious money. These brands are very raw, and if they are given resources to allow for their refinement they could become significantly more valuable.
There are about 30 or so G5 schools that could realistically take a short-term loss and build a program that will generate enough visibility and quality to be appreciated by the TV networks/fanbase in the long-term. It takes money to make money - and I believe that any G5 school with the capability to do so ought to take a heavy risk here and establish their profile.
If you just stand there as a leech, then the P5 will have no other choice than to try to pick you off. Time to crap or get off of the pot.
(01-20-2014 11:52 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 05:36 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
They may try but that's where I think the G5 will draw the line. It's noteworthy that the MWC commissioner's response to the proposed governance change was to point out the scholarship limit is staying the same. If the P5 tries to gain a further competitive advantage by jacking up the scholarship limit, the G5 may opt for the nuclear response: outright refusal to play the P5 in football, coupled with establishment of its own NCAA-sanctioned playoff and legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship of college football.
Why on Earth would the P5 be scared of any of that? "Refusal to play the P5 in football?" That's like handing the P5 everything it wants on a silver platter. That would be a crazy kamikaze response from the G5. Don't you get it that the P5 actually *wants* the separation?!
"Legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship?" The P5 could give two craps about that, *especially* if it means that they can play the CFP championship (or whatever you want to call it) without having to share any access or money whatsoever with the G5.
The G5 has absolutely no leverage in that scenario. If the G5 leagues actually want to *voluntarily* take steps to separate themselves from the P5, then the P5 will gladly hand them the rope (and grab all of the money while avoiding all of the legal heartburn as a result of the G5 voluntarily self-inflicting their own wounds in the process). There's zero time for puffery from the G5 about what they may delusionally believe about their power position - they are basically being kept because college presidents even within the power conferences still like incremental as opposed to radical change. Why the G5 would actually make it *easier* for the P5 to walk away is beyond me. The only tools that the G5 really have at their disposal are (1) sympathy from other college presidents and (2) legal actions. The G5 have absolutely no free market economic power to survive on their own (which is why the P5 is bothered by the existence by the G5 in the first place).
While I basically agree with you, Im not so sure the lower 2/3's of the P5 really wants a split. They are the schools that would become the lower class of the top level of football---never competing for the conference championship and rarely appearing in bowls. For schools used to competing yearly for a bowl---I don't know that this is a great fate---and its exactly what their fate would be with a breakaway P5 where the NCAA didn't allow cross competition. Yes, its obviously a better fate than being stuck in the G5, but I think they would prefer to be in a P5 that coexists with the G5. That's having their cake and eating it too---always a better alternative.
(01-20-2014 12:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2014 11:52 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 05:36 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
They may try but that's where I think the G5 will draw the line. It's noteworthy that the MWC commissioner's response to the proposed governance change was to point out the scholarship limit is staying the same. If the P5 tries to gain a further competitive advantage by jacking up the scholarship limit, the G5 may opt for the nuclear response: outright refusal to play the P5 in football, coupled with establishment of its own NCAA-sanctioned playoff and legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship of college football.
Why on Earth would the P5 be scared of any of that? "Refusal to play the P5 in football?" That's like handing the P5 everything it wants on a silver platter. That would be a crazy kamikaze response from the G5. Don't you get it that the P5 actually *wants* the separation?!
"Legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship?" The P5 could give two craps about that, *especially* if it means that they can play the CFP championship (or whatever you want to call it) without having to share any access or money whatsoever with the G5.
The G5 has absolutely no leverage in that scenario. If the G5 leagues actually want to *voluntarily* take steps to separate themselves from the P5, then the P5 will gladly hand them the rope (and grab all of the money while avoiding all of the legal heartburn as a result of the G5 voluntarily self-inflicting their own wounds in the process). There's zero time for puffery from the G5 about what they may delusionally believe about their power position - they are basically being kept because college presidents even within the power conferences still like incremental as opposed to radical change. Why the G5 would actually make it *easier* for the P5 to walk away is beyond me. The only tools that the G5 really have at their disposal are (1) sympathy from other college presidents and (2) legal actions. The G5 have absolutely no free market economic power to survive on their own (which is why the P5 is bothered by the existence by the G5 in the first place).
While I basically agree with you, Im not so sure the lower 2/3's of the P5 really wants a split. They are the schools that would become the lower class of the top level of football---never competing for the conference championship and rarely appearing in bowls. For schools used to competing yearly for a bowl---I don't know that this is a great fate---and its exactly what their fate would be with a breakaway P5 where the NCAA didn't allow cross competition. Yes, its obviously a better fate than being stuck in the G5, but I think they would prefer to be in a P5 that coexists with the G5. That's having their cake and eating it too---always a better alternative.
That might be the case, but the thing is if there's a split that the old NCAA rules don't apply. 14 game regular season? Everyone gets to go to a bowl? Allow everyone to play multiple FCS schools without negative schedule impact? Playoff system with auto-bids that make non-conference losses less relevant? Those are all rules that a P5-only league could put into place.
Now, I think that you're correct that I don't think there's a *huge* desire to split even at the top level of the P5, but the point is that IF there was a consideration of a split, then whole idea is that the NCAA rules would be thrown out the window. (Isn't that what this entire argument about autonomy is all about?) That would include the artificial restraints on scheduling, bowls and revenue generation that the NCAA places on the P5 right now. Fans know how to adjust expectations - right now, not being undefeated essentially means that you can't control your own destiny in college football, but that doesn't have to be the case with different scheduling and playoff formats (just as there's no expectation that you need to go undefeated or even be limited to only 1 or 2 losses to have a successful season in the NFL).
(01-20-2014 12:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2014 11:52 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 05:36 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
They may try but that's where I think the G5 will draw the line. It's noteworthy that the MWC commissioner's response to the proposed governance change was to point out the scholarship limit is staying the same. If the P5 tries to gain a further competitive advantage by jacking up the scholarship limit, the G5 may opt for the nuclear response: outright refusal to play the P5 in football, coupled with establishment of its own NCAA-sanctioned playoff and legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship of college football.
Why on Earth would the P5 be scared of any of that? "Refusal to play the P5 in football?" That's like handing the P5 everything it wants on a silver platter. That would be a crazy kamikaze response from the G5. Don't you get it that the P5 actually *wants* the separation?!
"Legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship?" The P5 could give two craps about that, *especially* if it means that they can play the CFP championship (or whatever you want to call it) without having to share any access or money whatsoever with the G5.
The G5 has absolutely no leverage in that scenario. If the G5 leagues actually want to *voluntarily* take steps to separate themselves from the P5, then the P5 will gladly hand them the rope (and grab all of the money while avoiding all of the legal heartburn as a result of the G5 voluntarily self-inflicting their own wounds in the process). There's zero time for puffery from the G5 about what they may delusionally believe about their power position - they are basically being kept because college presidents even within the power conferences still like incremental as opposed to radical change. Why the G5 would actually make it *easier* for the P5 to walk away is beyond me. The only tools that the G5 really have at their disposal are (1) sympathy from other college presidents and (2) legal actions. The G5 have absolutely no free market economic power to survive on their own (which is why the P5 is bothered by the existence by the G5 in the first place).
While I basically agree with you, Im not so sure the lower 2/3's of the P5 really wants a split. They are the schools that would become the lower class of the top level of football---never competing for the conference championship and rarely appearing in bowls. For schools used to competing yearly for a bowl---I don't know that this is a great fate---and its exactly what their fate would be with a breakaway P5 where the NCAA didn't allow cross competition. Yes, its obviously a better fate than being stuck in the G5, but I think they would prefer to be in a P5 that coexists with the G5. That's having their cake and eating it too---always a better alternative.
I think you're right in that those lower tier P5 schools aren't going to want the split, but ultimately its those top 20 blueblood P5 schools that are going to call all the shots. Texas, Alabama, Stanford, Mich St, etc are going to dictate what they want and force it on the Wake Forests, Northwesterns, Utahs, Miss States.
(01-20-2014 11:52 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 05:36 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
They may try but that's where I think the G5 will draw the line. It's noteworthy that the MWC commissioner's response to the proposed governance change was to point out the scholarship limit is staying the same. If the P5 tries to gain a further competitive advantage by jacking up the scholarship limit, the G5 may opt for the nuclear response: outright refusal to play the P5 in football, coupled with establishment of its own NCAA-sanctioned playoff and legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship of college football.
Why on Earth would the P5 be scared of any of that? "Refusal to play the P5 in football?" That's like handing the P5 everything it wants on a silver platter. That would be a crazy kamikaze response from the G5. Don't you get it that the P5 actually *wants* the separation?!
"Legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship?" The P5 could give two craps about that, *especially* if it means that they can play the CFP championship (or whatever you want to call it) without having to share any access or money whatsoever with the G5.
The G5 has absolutely no leverage in that scenario. If the G5 leagues actually want to *voluntarily* take steps to separate themselves from the P5, then the P5 will gladly hand them the rope (and grab all of the money while avoiding all of the legal heartburn as a result of the G5 voluntarily self-inflicting their own wounds in the process). There's zero time for puffery from the G5 about what they may delusionally believe about their power position - they are basically being kept because college presidents even within the power conferences still like incremental as opposed to radical change. Why the G5 would actually make it *easier* for the P5 to walk away is beyond me. The only tools that the G5 really have at their disposal are (1) sympathy from other college presidents and (2) legal actions. The G5 have absolutely no free market economic power to survive on their own (which is why the P5 is bothered by the existence by the G5 in the first place).
Absolutely right. The G5 will agree to the changes and say, "whatever you want as long as we can tang along, get to play P5 games and have access." The P5 likely will not completely separate from the G5 because they like the easier wins and would need the G5 to come with them if they take their basketball and leave so they would have enough teams for a large tournament, probably still 64 in number.
(01-20-2014 02:31 PM)Lurker Above Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2014 11:52 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 05:36 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
They may try but that's where I think the G5 will draw the line. It's noteworthy that the MWC commissioner's response to the proposed governance change was to point out the scholarship limit is staying the same. If the P5 tries to gain a further competitive advantage by jacking up the scholarship limit, the G5 may opt for the nuclear response: outright refusal to play the P5 in football, coupled with establishment of its own NCAA-sanctioned playoff and legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship of college football.
Why on Earth would the P5 be scared of any of that? "Refusal to play the P5 in football?" That's like handing the P5 everything it wants on a silver platter. That would be a crazy kamikaze response from the G5. Don't you get it that the P5 actually *wants* the separation?!
"Legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship?" The P5 could give two craps about that, *especially* if it means that they can play the CFP championship (or whatever you want to call it) without having to share any access or money whatsoever with the G5.
The G5 has absolutely no leverage in that scenario. If the G5 leagues actually want to *voluntarily* take steps to separate themselves from the P5, then the P5 will gladly hand them the rope (and grab all of the money while avoiding all of the legal heartburn as a result of the G5 voluntarily self-inflicting their own wounds in the process). There's zero time for puffery from the G5 about what they may delusionally believe about their power position - they are basically being kept because college presidents even within the power conferences still like incremental as opposed to radical change. Why the G5 would actually make it *easier* for the P5 to walk away is beyond me. The only tools that the G5 really have at their disposal are (1) sympathy from other college presidents and (2) legal actions. The G5 have absolutely no free market economic power to survive on their own (which is why the P5 is bothered by the existence by the G5 in the first place).
Absolutely right. The G5 will agree to the changes and say, "whatever you want as long as we can tang along, get to play P5 games and have access." The P5 likely will not completely separate from the G5 because they like the easier wins and would need the G5 to come with them if they take their basketball and leave so they would have enough teams for a large tournament, probably still 64 in number.
That's why I think another division might be the answer. Just split FBS into its own division, and I think the P5 would basically get what it wants. The NCAA still would have its 64 team tournament---its just the field would come from the 126 teams of FBS. There could even be 5-6 slots reserved for the top teams that remain in the old D-1, that way the best of the old D-1 still has some access to the tournament (it would be at large access rather than AQ and this access would be in addition to their own playoff tournament).
(01-20-2014 03:47 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ]That's why I think another division might be the answer. Just split FBS into its own division, and I think the P5 would basically get what it wants. The NCAA still would have its 64 team tournament---its just the field would come from the 126 teams of FBS. There could even be 5-6 slots reserved for the top teams that remain in the old D-1, that way the best of the old D-1 still has some access to the tournament (it would be at large access rather than AQ and this access would be in addition to their own playoff tournament).
Well, I don't think that really addresses what the P5 wants, though. I actually used to think that just splitting FBS off would be enough, but all of these articles clearly point to the P5 wanting more than that. They don't want anyone else, whether they're G5 FBS, FCS or non-football-playing Division I schools, to have *any* say in football issues as applied to the P5. That doesn't mean that the G5 would be prevented to implementing the same measures on their own, but the point is that the P5 can set their own rules and then everyone else can choose to either live by them or ignore them. Splitting off FBS doesn't achieve that and, frankly, the streamlined NCAA Tournament format isn't that much of a help. The only real benefit from a basketball perspective is completely separating into a P5-only Division 4 - otherwise, they'd just as soon keep all of the rest of Division I in the tournament. The P5 don't have any closer relationship with the Sun Belt or MAC schools than they do with, say, the Big East or Atlantic 10.
(01-20-2014 11:52 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 05:36 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ] (01-19-2014 11:02 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]The Gang schools have been beating them more often, The stipend is about financially making it hard on Gang, but the big killer is they will add scholarships as well. Thus removing 500 to 1000 of the top kids now going to the gang. It is about $$$ and re enlarging the gulf between the 2.
They may try but that's where I think the G5 will draw the line. It's noteworthy that the MWC commissioner's response to the proposed governance change was to point out the scholarship limit is staying the same. If the P5 tries to gain a further competitive advantage by jacking up the scholarship limit, the G5 may opt for the nuclear response: outright refusal to play the P5 in football, coupled with establishment of its own NCAA-sanctioned playoff and legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship of college football.
Why on Earth would the P5 be scared of any of that? "Refusal to play the P5 in football?" That's like handing the P5 everything it wants on a silver platter. That would be a crazy kamikaze response from the G5. Don't you get it that the P5 actually *wants* the separation?!
"Legal action to bar the CFP from being labeled the national championship?" The P5 could give two craps about that, *especially* if it means that they can play the CFP championship (or whatever you want to call it) without having to share any access or money whatsoever with the G5.
The G5 has absolutely no leverage in that scenario. If the G5 leagues actually want to *voluntarily* take steps to separate themselves from the P5, then the P5 will gladly hand them the rope (and grab all of the money while avoiding all of the legal heartburn as a result of the G5 voluntarily self-inflicting their own wounds in the process). There's zero time for puffery from the G5 about what they may delusionally believe about their power position - they are basically being kept because college presidents even within the power conferences still like incremental as opposed to radical change. Why the G5 would actually make it *easier* for the P5 to walk away is beyond me. The only tools that the G5 really have at their disposal are (1) sympathy from other college presidents and (2) legal actions. The G5 have absolutely no free market economic power to survive on their own (which is why the P5 is bothered by the existence by the G5 in the first place).
I agree with you on most things Frank. On this, I don't. If there was no genuine economic advantage to playing the G5 in football, the P5 would have stopped already. And they surely wouldn't be handing the G5 conferences 27% of CFP revenue. I don't believe that has anything to do with sympathy or a preference for incremental change.
The simple reality is that the P5 need the G5 to have someone to beat (most of the time) that ostensibly is playing at the same level.
It's a classic symbiotic relationship. By playing G5 opponents, the P5 schools are able to schedule 7 or even 8 home games per season, post "legitimate" winning records much more than half the time, and go to bowl games much more than half the time. Far more of them can sustain their reputations as winning programs than if they only played each other, and that keeps their fan bases intact and the big bucks rolling in. In exchange the G5 get enough CFP cash and body bag game cash to keep their athletic programs solvent, a single berth in a big-time bowl, and the very slim hope of someday putting a team in a CFP game.
The existence of a mutually-beneficial relationship means that either party's threat to withdraw from the relationship can harm the other. So I don't ascribe to the view that the G5 have absolutely no leverage. The P5's relative power to call the shots is derived from the fact that under current arrangements a P5-G5 split would hurt the G5 more than the P5. But if the P5 go too far in altering the deal to their own advantage -- giving themselves such an overwhelming competitive edge that G5 fan bases, TV appeal and program viability begin to crumble -- they may induce the G5 to threaten total separation, putting the P5's golden goose at risk.
At that point I strongly doubt the P5 would tell the G5 so long and good riddance. It would be more in their interest to ease off and make a few concessions. But until that point is reached, I expect the P5 to do the economically rational thing -- push for as much of an advantage as they can get away with.
(01-20-2014 03:56 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2014 03:47 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ]That's why I think another division might be the answer. Just split FBS into its own division, and I think the P5 would basically get what it wants. The NCAA still would have its 64 team tournament---its just the field would come from the 126 teams of FBS. There could even be 5-6 slots reserved for the top teams that remain in the old D-1, that way the best of the old D-1 still has some access to the tournament (it would be at large access rather than AQ and this access would be in addition to their own playoff tournament).
Well, I don't think that really addresses what the P5 wants, though. I actually used to think that just splitting FBS off would be enough, but all of these articles clearly point to the P5 wanting more than that. They don't want anyone else, whether they're G5 FBS, FCS or non-football-playing Division I schools, to have *any* say in football issues as applied to the P5. That doesn't mean that the G5 would be prevented to implementing the same measures on their own, but the point is that the P5 can set their own rules and then everyone else can choose to either live by them or ignore them. Splitting off FBS doesn't achieve that and, frankly, the streamlined NCAA Tournament format isn't that much of a help. The only real benefit from a basketball perspective is completely separating into a P5-only Division 4 - otherwise, they'd just as soon keep all of the rest of Division I in the tournament. The P5 don't have any closer relationship with the Sun Belt or MAC schools than they do with, say, the Big East or Atlantic 10.
If you read this article, I think you come away with the feeling that FBS is basically on the same page---the rest of D1 isn't. The truth is, there is a frightening lack of detail available. Im not convinced the P5 are in agreement either by conference or even within conferences. What I do see is a clear and widening divide between FBS and the rest of D1. Yes, there is a divide between the P5 and G5---but its financial and not philosophical. Those parties can work together to bridge issues.
Im not so sure that a small 64 team division makes much sense for TV or the schools. Yes, P5 fanbases are big---but they pale in comparison to NFL fan bases. There is a reason the sport seems to stay quite healthy with around 80-100 schools at its top level. I think that's the critical mass to keep the nation invested.