The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(09-09-2019 04:09 PM)converrl Wrote:  A couple of points on that:

1. We are no longer in a BCS conference and never will be.
2. "P5 Talent" means 4 and 5 star athletes...we see those rarely.
3. Winning a weak BEAST is not the same as being P5-ready...where are those BEAST teams in the P5 now? Most are at the bottom.
4. Add to this that the P5 is NOT going to grow, but SHRINK in the coming decades as they will only want low-subsidy programs to make up the bulk of their club in order not to drain profits--making the picture bleaker for the rest of the CFB landscape.

Now..if you want to talk about a separate "championship" for those locked out of the P5...then you might have something. But a NC? No way.

1. There is no more bcs so that is true.
2. P5 talent means talent recruited by p5 teams. You are narrowing the definition to fit your narrative. UC has put guys in the nfl and compared favorably to much of the p5. They have not had top of the p5 talent.
3. I've posted this many times but over a 4 year span when uc was at its peak the big east finished 2nd, 5th, 4th and 2nd in conference strength according to sagarin. (Second to the sec both times). But sure let's just take your word on big east not being p5 ready.
4. You have no clue on this and neither do i.

(09-10-2019 06:29 AM)Romell Shorter Wrote:  I am an instructor at UC, but I don't hate athletics...I hate pursuing impossible scenarios that are a waste of $$$.

********************

Classic post. If you hate wasting $$$, you should have chosen a different profession. Higher education is nothing but wasteful.

I wouldn't say that about the Medical School, or the Engineering Department, or the Chemistry Department, or the Business College.

I could do without some aspects of the Bio department.

How do you feel about the Law School?

(09-10-2019 07:34 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(09-09-2019 04:09 PM)converrl Wrote:  A couple of points on that:

1. We are no longer in a BCS conference and never will be.
2. "P5 Talent" means 4 and 5 star athletes...we see those rarely.
3. Winning a weak BEAST is not the same as being P5-ready...where are those BEAST teams in the P5 now? Most are at the bottom.
4. Add to this that the P5 is NOT going to grow, but SHRINK in the coming decades as they will only want low-subsidy programs to make up the bulk of their club in order not to drain profits--making the picture bleaker for the rest of the CFB landscape.

Now..if you want to talk about a separate "championship" for those locked out of the P5...then you might have something. But a NC? No way.

1. There is no more bcs so that is true.
2. P5 talent means talent recruited by p5 teams. You are narrowing the definition to fit your narrative. UC has put guys in the nfl and compared favorably to much of the p5. They have not had top of the p5 talent.
3. I've posted this many times but over a 4 year span when uc was at its peak the big east finished 2nd, 5th, 4th and 2nd in conference strength according to sagarin. (Second to the sec both times). But sure let's just take your word on big east not being p5 ready.
4. You have no clue on this and neither do i.

As to point #3...where are those BEAST programs now that they are P5? They are the bottom of the P5 pile!

(09-09-2019 10:47 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(09-09-2019 08:13 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote:  

(09-09-2019 04:09 PM)converrl Wrote:  A couple of points on that:

1. We are no longer in a BCS conference and never will be.
2. "P5 Talent" means 4 and 5 star athletes...we see those rarely.
3. Winning a weak BEAST is not the same as being P5-ready...where are those BEAST teams in the P5 now? Most are at the bottom.
4. Add to this that the P5 is NOT going to grow, but SHRINK in the coming decades as they will only want low-subsidy programs to make up the bulk of their club in order not to drain profits--making the picture bleaker for the rest of the CFB landscape.

Now..if you want to talk about a separate "championship" for those locked out of the P5...then you might have something. But a NC? No way.

Not with that attitude

No offense, but "attitude" has really nothing to do with it...especially on a message board. These decisions are well and truly out of our hands.

Can we get a sarcasm font or something

(09-10-2019 06:14 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 05:13 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  So a program that’s consistently in the top 25 is a waste of time? Pffft.

Based on his standards CFB would be a 12-15 team league

If your goal is a NC...then yes.

(09-10-2019 08:20 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 07:34 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(09-09-2019 04:09 PM)converrl Wrote:  A couple of points on that:

1. We are no longer in a BCS conference and never will be.
2. "P5 Talent" means 4 and 5 star athletes...we see those rarely.
3. Winning a weak BEAST is not the same as being P5-ready...where are those BEAST teams in the P5 now? Most are at the bottom.
4. Add to this that the P5 is NOT going to grow, but SHRINK in the coming decades as they will only want low-subsidy programs to make up the bulk of their club in order not to drain profits--making the picture bleaker for the rest of the CFB landscape.

Now..if you want to talk about a separate "championship" for those locked out of the P5...then you might have something. But a NC? No way.

1. There is no more bcs so that is true.
2. P5 talent means talent recruited by p5 teams. You are narrowing the definition to fit your narrative. UC has put guys in the nfl and compared favorably to much of the p5. They have not had top of the p5 talent.
3. I've posted this many times but over a 4 year span when uc was at its peak the big east finished 2nd, 5th, 4th and 2nd in conference strength according to sagarin. (Second to the sec both times). But sure let's just take your word on big east not being p5 ready.
4. You have no clue on this and neither do i.

As to point #3...where are those BEAST programs now that they are P5? They are the bottom of the P5 pile!

Louisville and WVU have both fielded top 10 teams over multiple seasons and either won a Heisman or had players in serious contention for it.

Pitt, Syracuse, and Rutgers haven't been great but the Orange are currently in the top 25.

All give programs were solid while in the Big East. The conference was actually really respectable during our 2009 run and a few seasons before. The issue was that we never had an elite program to anchor the conference during off years and that led to 8-4 Uconn getting a freaking BCS bid one year.

(09-10-2019 07:34 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(09-09-2019 04:09 PM)converrl Wrote:  A couple of points on that:

1. We are no longer in a BCS conference and never will be.
2. "P5 Talent" means 4 and 5 star athletes...we see those rarely.
3. Winning a weak BEAST is not the same as being P5-ready...where are those BEAST teams in the P5 now? Most are at the bottom.
4. Add to this that the P5 is NOT going to grow, but SHRINK in the coming decades as they will only want low-subsidy programs to make up the bulk of their club in order not to drain profits--making the picture bleaker for the rest of the CFB landscape.

Now..if you want to talk about a separate "championship" for those locked out of the P5...then you might have something. But a NC? No way.

1. There is no more bcs so that is true.
2. P5 talent means talent recruited by p5 teams. You are narrowing the definition to fit your narrative. UC has put guys in the nfl and compared favorably to much of the p5. They have not had top of the p5 talent.
3. I've posted this many times but over a 4 year span when uc was at its peak the big east finished 2nd, 5th, 4th and 2nd in conference strength according to sagarin. (Second to the sec both times). But sure let's just take your word on big east not being p5 ready.
4. You have no clue on this and neither do i.

a good chunk of our roster is made up of P5 talent. The difference is most of the P5 and the kids we have are not top tier elite-level talent. That is something most p5 schools don't have either. Getting our doors blown off by a team full of NFL players which should make the CFP sure has soured peoples outlook on the program.

(09-10-2019 05:13 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  So a program that’s consistently in the top 25 is a waste of time? Pffft.

If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

(09-10-2019 08:30 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 05:13 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  So a program that’s consistently in the top 25 is a waste of time? Pffft.

If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

I could not disagree more about a non-p5 championship. They need an 8 team playoff, for sure, with a non-p5 place in the playoff. But to compete at a lower level then you might as well close up UC athletics because basketball would be forced down a level as well. The P5 is already taking the most of the at large positions in their history.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

(09-10-2019 08:33 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:30 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 05:13 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  So a program that’s consistently in the top 25 is a waste of time? Pffft.

If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

I could not disagree more about a non-p5 championship. They need an 8 team playoff, for sure, with a non-p5 place in the playoff. But to compete at a lower level then you might as well close up UC athletics because basketball would be forced down a level as well. The P5 is already taking the most of the at large positions in their history.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Yup. The emergence of the SEC recently as well as other Big Ten and Big 12 teams who have historically been so-so seems to be the upcoming college basketball theme for the foreseen future. Taking that football money and putting some actual focus on basketball. Just look at the coaching hires.

(09-10-2019 08:33 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:30 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 05:13 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  So a program that’s consistently in the top 25 is a waste of time? Pffft.

If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

I could not disagree more about a non-p5 championship. They need an 8 team playoff, for sure, with a non-p5 place in the playoff. But to compete at a lower level then you might as well close up UC athletics because basketball would be forced down a level as well. The P5 is already taking the most of the at large positions in their history.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Why would the BB be forced down?..the proposal here is FCS FB only--BB would still have the potential to make the field of 68 annually...just as all the non P5 DI conferences do now.

(09-10-2019 10:32 AM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:33 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:30 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 05:13 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  So a program that’s consistently in the top 25 is a waste of time? Pffft.

If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

I could not disagree more about a non-p5 championship. They need an 8 team playoff, for sure, with a non-p5 place in the playoff. But to compete at a lower level then you might as well close up UC athletics because basketball would be forced down a level as well. The P5 is already taking the most of the at large positions in their history.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Yup. The emergence of the SEC recently as well as other Big Ten and Big 12 teams who have historically been so-so seems to be the upcoming college basketball theme for the foreseen future. Taking that football money and putting some actual focus on basketball. Just look at the coaching hires.

Then how did Villanova win?
How did Loyola make a deep run?
How did UD get to the Final 4?
How did Butler get to the NC twice?

If a school funnels all AD resources to one sport, it can compete in MBB because the program requires fewer $$$ to maintain.

In addition, you only need a handful of players and an effective coach.

Blue chippers will take up a lot of those positions, but the fact that the tourney has annual Cinderella stories works against that assumption.

(09-10-2019 10:47 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 10:32 AM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:33 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:30 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 05:13 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  So a program that’s consistently in the top 25 is a waste of time? Pffft.

If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

I could not disagree more about a non-p5 championship. They need an 8 team playoff, for sure, with a non-p5 place in the playoff. But to compete at a lower level then you might as well close up UC athletics because basketball would be forced down a level as well. The P5 is already taking the most of the at large positions in their history.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Yup. The emergence of the SEC recently as well as other Big Ten and Big 12 teams who have historically been so-so seems to be the upcoming college basketball theme for the foreseen future. Taking that football money and putting some actual focus on basketball. Just look at the coaching hires.

Then how did Villanova win?
How did Loyola make a deep run?
How did UD get to the Final 4?
How did Butler get to the NC twice?

If a school funnels all AD resources to one sport, it can compete in MBB because the program requires fewer $$$ to maintain.

In addition, you only need a handful of players and an effective coach.

Blue chippers will take up a lot of those positions, but the fact that the tourney has annual Cinderella stories works against that assumption.

How many of those have maintained those levels?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

(09-10-2019 10:47 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 10:32 AM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:33 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:30 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 05:13 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  So a program that’s consistently in the top 25 is a waste of time? Pffft.

If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

I could not disagree more about a non-p5 championship. They need an 8 team playoff, for sure, with a non-p5 place in the playoff. But to compete at a lower level then you might as well close up UC athletics because basketball would be forced down a level as well. The P5 is already taking the most of the at large positions in their history.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Yup. The emergence of the SEC recently as well as other Big Ten and Big 12 teams who have historically been so-so seems to be the upcoming college basketball theme for the foreseen future. Taking that football money and putting some actual focus on basketball. Just look at the coaching hires.

Then how did Villanova win?
How did Loyola make a deep run?
How did UD get to the Final 4?
How did Butler get to the NC twice?

If a school funnels all AD resources to one sport, it can compete in MBB because the program requires fewer $$$ to maintain.

In addition, you only need a handful of players and an effective coach.

Blue chippers will take up a lot of those positions, but the fact that the tourney has annual Cinderella stories works against that assumption.

Just stop. UC is a comprehensive athletic department that actually wants to compete in all sports. Loyola was lucky that UC and UVA blew it that year. Dayton made an elite 8.

Villanova and Gonzaga have the coaches the keep themselves in title hunt. The others either lost their head coach or were basically a one year wonder.

If Brannen becomes “the man” it won’t matte that UC is in the American, plays football, and is an UA school.

(09-10-2019 08:20 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 07:34 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(09-09-2019 04:09 PM)converrl Wrote:  A couple of points on that:

1. We are no longer in a BCS conference and never will be.
2. "P5 Talent" means 4 and 5 star athletes...we see those rarely.
3. Winning a weak BEAST is not the same as being P5-ready...where are those BEAST teams in the P5 now? Most are at the bottom.
4. Add to this that the P5 is NOT going to grow, but SHRINK in the coming decades as they will only want low-subsidy programs to make up the bulk of their club in order not to drain profits--making the picture bleaker for the rest of the CFB landscape.

Now..if you want to talk about a separate "championship" for those locked out of the P5...then you might have something. But a NC? No way.

1. There is no more bcs so that is true.
2. P5 talent means talent recruited by p5 teams. You are narrowing the definition to fit your narrative. UC has put guys in the nfl and compared favorably to much of the p5. They have not had top of the p5 talent.
3. I've posted this many times but over a 4 year span when uc was at its peak the big east finished 2nd, 5th, 4th and 2nd in conference strength according to sagarin. (Second to the sec both times). But sure let's just take your word on big east not being p5 ready.
4. You have no clue on this and neither do i.

As to point #3...where are those BEAST programs now that they are P5? They are the bottom of the P5 pile!

Far be it for me to defend WVU or Loserville, but...

Isn't everyone not named Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma or Georgia P5 garbage???

(09-10-2019 08:20 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 07:34 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(09-09-2019 04:09 PM)converrl Wrote:  A couple of points on that:

1. We are no longer in a BCS conference and never will be.
2. "P5 Talent" means 4 and 5 star athletes...we see those rarely.
3. Winning a weak BEAST is not the same as being P5-ready...where are those BEAST teams in the P5 now? Most are at the bottom.
4. Add to this that the P5 is NOT going to grow, but SHRINK in the coming decades as they will only want low-subsidy programs to make up the bulk of their club in order not to drain profits--making the picture bleaker for the rest of the CFB landscape.

Now..if you want to talk about a separate "championship" for those locked out of the P5...then you might have something. But a NC? No way.

1. There is no more bcs so that is true.
2. P5 talent means talent recruited by p5 teams. You are narrowing the definition to fit your narrative. UC has put guys in the nfl and compared favorably to much of the p5. They have not had top of the p5 talent.
3. I've posted this many times but over a 4 year span when uc was at its peak the big east finished 2nd, 5th, 4th and 2nd in conference strength according to sagarin. (Second to the sec both times). But sure let's just take your word on big east not being p5 ready.
4. You have no clue on this and neither do i.

As to point #3...where are those BEAST programs now that they are P5? They are the bottom of the P5 pile!

WVU hasn't been as good as when it was smacking Clemson and Oklahoma in BCS games, but they finished 3rd in the Big 12 last year, 4th the year before and 3rd the year before that.

Louisville was a disaster last year, but as recently as 2016 they finished tied with Clemson in the ACC Atlantic (going 7-1 in the ACC). They were .500 two seasons ago in the ACC.

Syracuse finished second in the ACC Atlantic (behind Clemson) just last season.

Pitt was in the ACC Championship just last season.

Yea Rutgers has become a disaster, no one is denying that.

The bottom line is you definition "bottom of the P5 pile" is basically any team that isn't Ohio State, Clemson or Bama.

(09-10-2019 10:47 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 10:32 AM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:33 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:30 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 05:13 AM)Dannyboy Wrote:  So a program that’s consistently in the top 25 is a waste of time? Pffft.

If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

I could not disagree more about a non-p5 championship. They need an 8 team playoff, for sure, with a non-p5 place in the playoff. But to compete at a lower level then you might as well close up UC athletics because basketball would be forced down a level as well. The P5 is already taking the most of the at large positions in their history.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Yup. The emergence of the SEC recently as well as other Big Ten and Big 12 teams who have historically been so-so seems to be the upcoming college basketball theme for the foreseen future. Taking that football money and putting some actual focus on basketball. Just look at the coaching hires.

Then how did Villanova win?
How did Loyola make a deep run?
How did UD get to the Final 4?
How did Butler get to the NC twice?

If a school funnels all AD resources to one sport, it can compete in MBB because the program requires fewer $$$ to maintain.

In addition, you only need a handful of players and an effective coach.

Blue chippers will take up a lot of those positions, but the fact that the tourney has annual Cinderella stories works against that assumption.

There are always going to be outliers.
Villanova-As much as I hate the Big East they are considered a power in b-ball and so is the American.
Loyola- So your going to play 100+ years of b-ball just because of one final four appearance? Seems like a waste of money!
Butler- Great coach that led them to a power b-ball conference. Ala Utah (Urban) and TCU (Patterson) in football.
UD-Same as Loyola. They were close to being a Xavier though. Just like I would say we were close to being a Pitt, Louisville, etc.


Ever heard of Boise, Houston, UCF, Western Michigan...imo making a New Year’s Day bowl as a G5 school has the same prestige as those one off basketball final fours if not more. Wonder how many will remember Loyola ever making a final four in 30 years.

(09-10-2019 10:55 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 10:47 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 10:32 AM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:33 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:30 AM)converrl Wrote:  If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

I could not disagree more about a non-p5 championship. They need an 8 team playoff, for sure, with a non-p5 place in the playoff. But to compete at a lower level then you might as well close up UC athletics because basketball would be forced down a level as well. The P5 is already taking the most of the at large positions in their history.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Yup. The emergence of the SEC recently as well as other Big Ten and Big 12 teams who have historically been so-so seems to be the upcoming college basketball theme for the foreseen future. Taking that football money and putting some actual focus on basketball. Just look at the coaching hires.

Then how did Villanova win?
How did Loyola make a deep run?
How did UD get to the Final 4?
How did Butler get to the NC twice?

If a school funnels all AD resources to one sport, it can compete in MBB because the program requires fewer $$$ to maintain.

In addition, you only need a handful of players and an effective coach.

Blue chippers will take up a lot of those positions, but the fact that the tourney has annual Cinderella stories works against that assumption.

How many of those have maintained those levels?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Nova and the Zags, but the way you set it up, Cinderellas would never be possible...and they happen every year.

(09-10-2019 11:35 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:20 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 07:34 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(09-09-2019 04:09 PM)converrl Wrote:  A couple of points on that:

1. We are no longer in a BCS conference and never will be.
2. "P5 Talent" means 4 and 5 star athletes...we see those rarely.
3. Winning a weak BEAST is not the same as being P5-ready...where are those BEAST teams in the P5 now? Most are at the bottom.
4. Add to this that the P5 is NOT going to grow, but SHRINK in the coming decades as they will only want low-subsidy programs to make up the bulk of their club in order not to drain profits--making the picture bleaker for the rest of the CFB landscape.

Now..if you want to talk about a separate "championship" for those locked out of the P5...then you might have something. But a NC? No way.

1. There is no more bcs so that is true.
2. P5 talent means talent recruited by p5 teams. You are narrowing the definition to fit your narrative. UC has put guys in the nfl and compared favorably to much of the p5. They have not had top of the p5 talent.
3. I've posted this many times but over a 4 year span when uc was at its peak the big east finished 2nd, 5th, 4th and 2nd in conference strength according to sagarin. (Second to the sec both times). But sure let's just take your word on big east not being p5 ready.
4. You have no clue on this and neither do i.

As to point #3...where are those BEAST programs now that they are P5? They are the bottom of the P5 pile!

WVU hasn't been as good as when it was smacking Clemson and Oklahoma in BCS games, but they finished 3rd in the Big 12 last year, 4th the year before and 3rd the year before that.

Louisville was a disaster last year, but as recently as 2016 they finished tied with Clemson in the ACC Atlantic (going 7-1 in the ACC). They were .500 two seasons ago in the ACC.

Syracuse finished second in the ACC Atlantic (behind Clemson) just last season.

Pitt was in the ACC Championship just last season.

Yea Rutgers has become a disaster, no one is denying that.

The bottom line is you definition "bottom of the P5 pile" is basically any team that isn't Ohio State, Clemson or Bama.

As far as the NC is concerned, this is true...is it not?

(09-10-2019 11:45 AM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 10:47 AM)converrl Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 10:32 AM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:33 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-10-2019 08:30 AM)converrl Wrote:  If your goal is a NC then you HAVE to be top 10 most likely. Now...if your goal is NOT a NC...then we are talking a completely different set of expectations.

If you want to define success as winning a bowl game...ANY bowl game, then fine, have at it....but to do that you don't have to spend like you think you have a shot at a NC.

I've got no problem with a separate "championship" for the non-P5 group--in fact, it would probably drum up more interest around the country for CFB...but the purse and the level of $$$ for those programs will be a fraction of what P5 spends.

If you want that, I say go for it--it might be exciting!

I could not disagree more about a non-p5 championship. They need an 8 team playoff, for sure, with a non-p5 place in the playoff. But to compete at a lower level then you might as well close up UC athletics because basketball would be forced down a level as well. The P5 is already taking the most of the at large positions in their history.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Yup. The emergence of the SEC recently as well as other Big Ten and Big 12 teams who have historically been so-so seems to be the upcoming college basketball theme for the foreseen future. Taking that football money and putting some actual focus on basketball. Just look at the coaching hires.

Then how did Villanova win?
How did Loyola make a deep run?
How did UD get to the Final 4?
How did Butler get to the NC twice?

If a school funnels all AD resources to one sport, it can compete in MBB because the program requires fewer $$$ to maintain.

In addition, you only need a handful of players and an effective coach.

Blue chippers will take up a lot of those positions, but the fact that the tourney has annual Cinderella stories works against that assumption.

There are always going to be outliers.
Villanova-As much as I hate the Big East they are considered a power in b-ball and so is the American.
Loyola- So your going to play 100+ years of b-ball just because of one final four appearance? Seems like a waste of money!
Butler- Great coach that led them to a power b-ball conference. Ala Utah (Urban) and TCU (Patterson) in football.
UD-Same as Loyola. They were close to being a Xavier though. Just like I would say we were close to being a Pitt, Louisville, etc.


Ever heard of Boise, Houston, UCF, Western Michigan...imo making a New Year’s Day bowl as a G5 school has the same prestige as those one off basketball final fours if not more. Wonder how many will remember Loyola ever making a final four in 30 years.

Why not go one step further and have those FCS schools that win their bowl games enter a playoff for an FCS National Championship? What about that would be detrimental to CFB or the FCS?