(12-20-2016 11:43 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 11:25 AM)JHS55 Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 10:57 AM)ken d Wrote:  Why would the G5 conferences want to split from the FBS? And who thinks they actually do want to? Those conferences are more concerned that the P5 will split from them than the other way around.

The FBS hasn't continued to grow, at the expense of the FCS, because schools want to leave it. They grow because schools want to be part of it, each for their own reasons. They want to be a part of it despite the disparity in strength and resources between them and the P5 conferences. That disparity isn't new, and it hasn't kept anybody from wanting to move up from FCS.

There may be some fans who want to see a split. But not many schools that do.

I was not talking about an FBS split
Iam only saying that p5 has a playoff and G5 doesn't, why not ?
College football has been on the fast track of change for awhile now, so my be its time G5 conferences to step it up and do this
The powers to be in college football do not want to see a real split
As long as the p5 can keep the G5 in their fold they can keep the G5 conferences down
" keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer "
This is the MO for the p5, it keeps the recruiting all theirs and keeps tv money down, fans , viewers and all that stuff

There is no P5 playoff separate from the CFP, of which all FBS conferences are members. Every FBS team - including independents - is eligible for selection as one of the four semifinalists in the country. If the G5 conferences want to try to get a playoff of their own, they would first have to withdraw from the CFP and give up the money they get from that. Which G5 conferences would be willing to do that? And what would they gain that is better than where they currently are?

Lets be real here, there is no way in hell a G5 team will ever get selected for the playoff unless it expands large enough that a G5 membership is forced.

Any G5 champ could go undefeated with 3 Top 10 OOC wins, and the Committee would still find a way to leave them out.

(12-20-2016 11:52 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 11:30 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 09:21 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Assuming there's some type of actual breakaway within the next decade (who knows), both groups could still refer to their champion as a national champion. FCS refers to their winners as national champions, but no one sees them as THE actual national champion.

Only if the "breakaway" you describe includes all sports. The P5 breaks away from everyone in basketball who isn't P5. That would include the Big East. Good idea right? I didn't think so.
Cheers!

The Big East is still is receiving a magnitude higher compensation than the other "g" conferences. Clearly, they would be in the same Division as the other Power conferences. So...yeah...if a "Split" were to happen they would go with the rest of the "Haves." Without a doubt.

UCONN won the tournament a few years ago. Would they be included in the "haves" UCF won the Fiesta 3 years ago. Boise 2 years ago and Houston won Sugar 1 year ago. All 4 are "haves"...right?
Cheers!

(12-20-2016 05:18 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 11:52 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 11:30 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 09:21 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Assuming there's some type of actual breakaway within the next decade (who knows), both groups could still refer to their champion as a national champion. FCS refers to their winners as national champions, but no one sees them as THE actual national champion.

Only if the "breakaway" you describe includes all sports. The P5 breaks away from everyone in basketball who isn't P5. That would include the Big East. Good idea right? I didn't think so.
Cheers!

The Big East is still is receiving a magnitude higher compensation than the other "g" conferences. Clearly, they would be in the same Division as the other Power conferences. So...yeah...if a "Split" were to happen they would go with the rest of the "Haves." Without a doubt.

UCONN won the tournament a few years ago. Would they be included in the "haves" UCF won the Fiesta 3 years ago. Boise 2 years ago and Houston won Sugar 1 year ago. All 4 are "haves"...right?
Cheers!

Nope.

UConn, UCF, and even Houston this year are still living off the larghse of a world that is gone. How, for example, will any of these programs retain a quality, winning coach? (See, for example, Tom Herman.) How will these programs recruit and retain competent assistants and coordinators when they cannot afford salaries for support staffs now resemble what HC salaries used to? How will these programs compete with infrastructure and practice facilities and the like when they're getting so much fewer resources and have tightening budgets.

We are all dinosaurs living in a post-messosoic world. You can sing the requiem now or later...it really doesn't matter.

(12-20-2016 06:19 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 05:18 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 11:52 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 11:30 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 09:21 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Assuming there's some type of actual breakaway within the next decade (who knows), both groups could still refer to their champion as a national champion. FCS refers to their winners as national champions, but no one sees them as THE actual national champion.

Only if the "breakaway" you describe includes all sports. The P5 breaks away from everyone in basketball who isn't P5. That would include the Big East. Good idea right? I didn't think so.
Cheers!

The Big East is still is receiving a magnitude higher compensation than the other "g" conferences. Clearly, they would be in the same Division as the other Power conferences. So...yeah...if a "Split" were to happen they would go with the rest of the "Haves." Without a doubt.

UCONN won the tournament a few years ago. Would they be included in the "haves" UCF won the Fiesta 3 years ago. Boise 2 years ago and Houston won Sugar 1 year ago. All 4 are "haves"...right?
Cheers!

Nope.

UConn, UCF, and even Houston this year are still living off the larghse of a world that is gone. How, for example, will any of these programs retain a quality, winning coach? (See, for example, Tom Herman.) How will these programs recruit and retain competent assistants and coordinators when they cannot afford salaries for support staffs now resemble what HC salaries used to? How will these programs compete with infrastructure and practice facilities and the like when they're getting so much fewer resources and have tightening budgets.

We are all dinosaurs living in a post-messosoic world. You can sing the requiem now or later...it really doesn't matter.

The tighter budgets are something everyone is dealing with P5 and G5 alike. States just don't have the money to subsidize these programs anymore. The most subsidized program in the P5 is Rutgers. The least subsidized G5 school is New Mexico. Take away the subsidies and these schools have similar athletic budgets. Take away the TV money and New Mexico continues on and Rutgers is FCS. When this tv money bubble bursts some G5 schools will rise, some P5 schools will be in trouble. Cincy will survive unless theirs a huge debt for the Nippert expansion? IDK. Some schools without OCS's are doomed as it's unlikely they'll ever get the money needed to build them now. A case by case situation.
Cheers!

(12-20-2016 04:38 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Well Iam thinking that a G5 playoff would generate more fan interest over a short period of time, and would help get more recruites to sign with G5 teams
Also Amazon prime is looking for college sport content, so this might be just what their looking for, just my guess

You think that Houston playing against another G5 team last year would generate more fan interest than Houston rolling over Florida State did? Why would you think that?

Do you think recruits will be more inclined to sign with Western Michigan if they play Western Kentucky than if they play Wisconsin?

Do more recruits sign with FCS teams than G5 teams because the FCS has a playoff?

Your key phrase is/was "Take away the TV money."

That is my whole point. You cannot compare the two BECAUSE the "Power" division HAS the money and the "g" division does NOT.

I see the 40K per game average attendance mark for a conference as a major inflection point. If a G5 conference gets there, it becomes simply to big for the networks to ignore (mainly because someone without a P5 deal is going to pick them up and make them into a viable college football centerpiece for thier network). A conference like that will generate enough fans and enough money to survive in a P5 world.

(12-20-2016 06:33 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  Your key phrase is/was "Take away the TV money."

That is my whole point. You cannot compare the two BECAUSE the "Power" division HAS the money and the "g" division does NOT.

The tv money bubble is going to burst. When it does the blue bloods will be fine and so will the G5 programs that already have decent athletic budgets, 40k OCS's and nice sized basketball arenas and aren't heavily subsidized. In trouble: schools without those things. Won't matter if their P5 or G5.
Cheers!

You know ken I think I would try, it would take some time.
The way things are now and so unfair I think some real change is needed
Being told what you can and can't do by half FBS schools and ESPN and ncaa is not going to last much longer
The amount of tv money the G5 gets is not enough to be treated like this
The G5 tv money really is just hush money, but I think it's not enough to keep this going on for much longer
If an FBS school wants to spend mega bucks to upgrade sports and that school is called rice university who are p5 or ESPN to tell rice that that's ok but you will never be in our p5 playoffs
Rice has more cash than 95% of p5 schools but why would they spend that much if they know they have no chance at a big dance
College football is a growing bubble of some kind and it just seems to me that it will burst and what happens after that ?
ESPN and fox and p5 ADs , presidents are steering this ship in an ego minded money grab, not much different than UT Austin has been doing for even longer
ESPN and FOX are cutting off their noses dispite their faces when they want to cultivate only the existing fan base of p5 and at the same time are not allowing G5 fan bases a chance to grow and Iam guessing mybe doubling the current fan base

(12-20-2016 07:06 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 06:33 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  Your key phrase is/was "Take away the TV money."

That is my whole point. You cannot compare the two BECAUSE the "Power" division HAS the money and the "g" division does NOT.

The tv money bubble is going to burst. When it does the blue bloods will be fine and so will the G5 programs that already have decent athletic budgets, 40k OCS's and nice sized basketball arenas and aren't heavily subsidized. In trouble: schools without those things. Won't matter if their P5 or G5.
Cheers!

Things will cool off a lot (due to technology, demographics, and more efficient markets), but I don't think that there will be a "burst."

For a "burst," there has to be a bubble, and for a bubble, there has to be speculative investing. I'm not sure there are enough buyers to have speculative investing. It's really hard to think that you're going to sell an asset to a bigger fool if the only other realistic buyer is the guy selling it to you.

The remification of this not being a bubble is that there might not be a great equalizing for a long time, if ever - at least not from a TV payout perspective. That is unless you have a loose definition of "great equalizing."

Whether or not there is a tv bubble subject to bursting at some point fails to take into account history. Yes, in the very recent past, P5 conferences have reaped a windfall that expanded the already huge financial gulf that existed before ESPN started shelling out the big bucks for content.

But long before that, there was still a big financial gap between the top P5 schools and everybody else. And there was still a big talent gap. And the major bowls still preferred those big name schools. That has been true for decades, even before tv ever existed. And, I believe, it will still be true if the tv bubble bursts. There is a reason the top teams of the last 50 years are largely the same as the top teams of the 50 years before that. There will be an occasional interloper to crash the party, but old money still carries the day.

(12-22-2016 12:38 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 07:06 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 06:33 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  Your key phrase is/was "Take away the TV money."

That is my whole point. You cannot compare the two BECAUSE the "Power" division HAS the money and the "g" division does NOT.

The tv money bubble is going to burst. When it does the blue bloods will be fine and so will the G5 programs that already have decent athletic budgets, 40k OCS's and nice sized basketball arenas and aren't heavily subsidized. In trouble: schools without those things. Won't matter if their P5 or G5.
Cheers!

Things will cool off a lot (due to technology, demographics, and more efficient markets), but I don't think that there will be a "burst."

For a "burst," there has to be a bubble, and for a bubble, there has to be speculative investing. I'm not sure there are enough buyers to have speculative investing. It's really hard to think that you're going to sell an asset to a bigger fool if the only other realistic buyer is the guy selling it to you.

The remification of this not being a bubble is that there might not be a great equalizing for a long time, if ever - at least not from a TV payout perspective. That is unless you have a loose definition of "great equalizing."

Right. There wont be a 'bubble bust". The demand for content is RISING---not declining. Everywhere you go people have their heads down looking at their phones, tablets, or computers. They are literally absorbing content all the time.

What's coming is more of a "model burst" than a 'bubble burst". The subscriber based cable bundle model that has ruled TV since the late 70's is going to change. Content will still have value and you'll still pay for that content. That's not changing. How you are billed and how its delivered WILL change.

Frankly, I think the cable model will end up fighting back with skinny bundles and eventually al a carte pricing that will allow everyone to customize their "bundle" to fit their own individual price point. Content providers, realizing streaming is now a much bigger part of the business, will begin raising the prices of their content deals with the Netflix, Hulu's, and Amazons of the world. Streaming services will no longer be nearly as cheap as they are now.

Conferences will split their digital rights from their cable network rights--and they may find they are of equal value in the future. In fact, they may find that creating their own network via a digital over the top model is the most profitable way to go as it eliminates the middle man. They will still want some games on TV in order to keep the mass audience interested and to hook new generations of future subscribers to their conference digital network.

I wouldn't be surprised if at least one arm of ESPN's new business model is a production company that these conference networks use to hire out production crews. Effectively, the conferences will keep most of their rights, eliminate the middle man, and basically contract out most of the production chores to a company like ESPN. That will be part of ESPNs future revenue model once they begin to lose some major rights packages.

The way things are going, I can see the G5 & P5 separating into two divisions... while making D1AA/FCS lose a lot of teams due to financing, since P5 Division wouldn't play them for money raising any more.

I wouldn't mind it, as long as:
- They made P5s play 1.5 G5s a year in a 3-team OOC schedule; 2 G5s in a year with a 4-team OOC
- Non-Playoff Bowl matchups could still intermix

That way, they'd be intertwined to some degree still. The G5 wouldn't be left off in the distance.

Problem with this concept is: You'd lose the Cinderella effect in D1 football. People want that.

In the not too distant future, there's going to be a Real playoff (12+ teams). Not including a Top G5 (12 teams) or two (16 teams) -- you lose that Cinderella effect. But including them in, you never have a real G5 National Champion, either (even with their own playoff, as the best would go elsewhere).

(12-20-2016 04:53 AM)JHS55 Wrote:  Who gets to call their champion " NATIONAL champion " ? If there are two divisions in FBS who has the leagal right to use this name...?

Right now, the defending NCAA Division I Football Champion is NORTH DAKOTA STATE.

Until there is a full fledged playoff with auto-bids for all conferences, there is no "Official" National Champion in FBS

(12-22-2016 05:56 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 04:53 AM)JHS55 Wrote:  Who gets to call their champion " NATIONAL champion " ? If there are two divisions in FBS who has the leagal right to use this name...?

Right now, the defending NCAA Division I Football Champion is NORTH DAKOTA STATE.

Until there is a full fledged playoff with auto-bids for all conferences, there is no "Official" National Champion in FBS

That's just it. There is a full FBS playoff in place. It just kinda sucks and is rigged in a way that virtually insures no non-power conference team will ever play in it. I mean---at least make it where ALL 10 conferences are represented on the selection committee. At least give the APPEARANCE that there is a chance a deserving non-power team could get in. At least give the appearance of fairness. Right now, there is literally no one in that committee selection room to make the case for a non-power team. Its a power conference echo chamber in there---decidedly hostile territory for any non-power candidate.

(12-23-2016 02:00 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 05:56 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 04:53 AM)JHS55 Wrote:  Who gets to call their champion " NATIONAL champion " ? If there are two divisions in FBS who has the leagal right to use this name...?

Right now, the defending NCAA Division I Football Champion is NORTH DAKOTA STATE.

Until there is a full fledged playoff with auto-bids for all conferences, there is no "Official" National Champion in FBS

That's just it. There is a full FBS playoff in place. It just kinda sucks and is rigged in a way that virtually insures no non-power conference team will ever play in it. I mean---at least make it where ALL 10 conferences are represented on the selection committee. At least give the APPEARANCE that there is a chance a deserving non-power team could get in. At least give the appearance of fairness. Right now, there is literally no one in that committee selection room to make the case for a non-power team. Its a power conference echo chamber in there---decidedly hostile territory for any non-power candidate.

I see no need for this unless more G5's are willing to step their game up in OOC.

Schedule and win 4 OOC games against quality competition, then run the table in your conference.

Houston was the first chance at this (granted they scheduled and beat 2 quality teams OOC), but they dropped the ball. But for a time, the conversation of them breaking into the playoff was there.

I'm not seeing a lot of G5's taking this path; typically they are just scheduling 1 quality team as a "money" game.

And before anyone says you can't know which teams will be good when you schedule so far ahead of time...rubbish. Historically, the same teams are good year over year with only the occasional bad season.

If a G5 schedules at least 4 of those historical quality teams, at least 2 of them will be having a solid season.

If you're scheduling Illinois and Northwestern (W. Michigan) or Illinois and Vanderbilt (W. Kentucky next season; potential G5 rep), you're not trying to seriously be considered for the playoff.

The system is not rigged; a school that really wants consideration knows what they need to do. You have to beat the best to be the best...step up in OOC.

That's how the BCS got "busted" to begin with.

Wleakr you are blind as a bat
Let that sink in...

(12-23-2016 09:47 AM)JHS55 Wrote:  Wleakr you are blind as a bat
Let that sink in...

I will take that as someone unwilling to step their game up...lol!

(12-20-2016 04:38 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Well Iam thinking that a G5 playoff would generate more fan interest over a short period of time, and would help get more recruites to sign with G5 teams
Also Amazon prime is looking for college sport content, so this might be just what their looking for, just my guess

Reality, it would not do any of that.

No one would care about watching games like WKU vs SDSU. And here is what would happen this even tried to happen.

CUSA and the SBC would probably be on board with this. The MAC, AAC, and MWC would be like "haha look at those losers! That's why we are above them".

If anything Amazon would try and work with a single team and get a Texas style deal.

Currently, the only college football divisions are FBS (Division I-A), FCS (Division I-AA), Division II.,and Division III. Both The P5 and The G5 are in the FBS (Division I-A). So are you suggesting The G5 form a new Division? Wouldn't this make your teams be even less than the P5? Just sayin'.