(02-06-2014 05:17 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(02-06-2014 04:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Then the G5 should just cut costs and drop their programs to FCS. There will be zero value in being a codified D1AA program. Zero media value. Massive drop in ticket sales. Massive drop in donations. Sure, it wont happen immediately, it will take 5 years or so, but it will happen just as it happended to all the schools that dropped out of the top level of football in late seventies. Once media revenue, ticket sales, and donations drop to FCS levels---things will then level out for the left behind schools. But the reality is, FBS football budgets cant be supported by FCS revenue streams.

All true, and I think it will happen over the course of the next 15-20 years or so.

There is a legitimate chance -- no better than 50/50, IMHO, but still a legitimate chance -- that the AAC and the MWC or some combination of its richest members will be able to participate in the "HRG" group.

But MAC, Sun Belt and C-USA… I'd be very surprised if they can sustain FBS-level programs for more than 20 years unless some dramatic financial windfall comes their way.

I thought FCS scholarship football would be mostly going away for some time, but its growing. Most of the non-scholarship or low scholarship schools are adding scholarships.

Its going to take more realignment to drive schools out. Idaho probably gives it up soon, but if Eastern Michigan hangs on, I can't see others not being able to. Now if more of the western schools get stranded or Sun Belt schools get stranded, those 3-5 stranded schools might move down.

(02-06-2014 06:41 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-06-2014 06:23 PM)prp Wrote:  It's been a 3-tier system since the start of the BCS in the 90s when certain conferences/teams were effectively locked out and the difference in money made it near impossible for them to compete. There's been very little movement between tier 1 and tier 2 since then; 3 teams have been promoted, 1 has been relegated and a few former Big East teams got to spend a few years in the bigtime before being kicked to the curb again. As long as the top level continues to make obscene money and has no incentive to share, don't expect anything to change. A bunch of AAC or MWC teams aren't about to be just invited in.

Yes but in the 90's a second tier within FBS was still in a nebulous stage.

In the Bowl Alliance days the SWC was part of that which included some current AAC schools and the WAC had the Copper Bowl. The WAC was a tweener league in that system at the time.

The new BCS system completely cut the WAC out and 1/2 the SWC through the formation of the B12. The BYU rule was passed giving an AQ to a school in the Top 6 of the of the standings from outside the BCS conferences.

In the late 90's while cut out the BCS the group of schools in CUSA and the MWC strengthened their positions hopefully to land and AQ. Today there is no hope for CUSA or MWC after multiple raids and restructuring.

The SWC was never 2nd tier. They just had a few years where their champ, like the Big 10 and ACC in some recent years, wasn't competitive with the top teams nationally.

The interesting thing will be seeing how the TV money changes impact things. Before the last contract, WSU was only getting $2.5 million from the TV contract, not that much more than MWC or CUSA teams. Even USC was only getting $7.5 million. Now all the P5 will be making at least 10 times the media money the G5 teams are making. Maybe Boise can get up to $5 million with their deal, but it will take a good year. The rest of the schools will be in that $1-$2 million range. And many years Boise may be as well.

(02-07-2014 09:37 AM)bullet Wrote:  The SWC was never 2nd tier. They just had a few years where their champ, like the Big 10 and ACC in some recent years, wasn't competitive with the top teams nationally.

This.

(02-06-2014 05:36 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I also suspect the middle and bottom of the P5 don't really want to be qualifying for bowls once every 5 or 6 years, which is what will happen if they play 12 P5 opponents a year. So they don't want a 65 team division.

Like I have said before, I think the better number is between 80-100 in that top level.

You assume that P5 schools would be forced to play each other exclusively if a new division was formed. I'm not sure that's the case.

Even if your analysis is correct and the middle/bottom of the P5 want a buffer zone of teams below them so they can win more games, by definition they have no interest in those teams being strong. Or having a level playing field.

So even in your 80-100 team model, the bottom 15-35 are going to be fighting uphill battles. It won't be some financial panacea for schools in the American.

(02-07-2014 10:19 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(02-06-2014 05:36 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I also suspect the middle and bottom of the P5 don't really want to be qualifying for bowls once every 5 or 6 years, which is what will happen if they play 12 P5 opponents a year. So they don't want a 65 team division.

Like I have said before, I think the better number is between 80-100 in that top level.

You assume that P5 schools would be forced to play each other exclusively if a new division was formed. I'm not sure that's the case.

Even if your analysis is correct and the middle/bottom of the P5 want a buffer zone of teams below them so they can win more games, by definition they have no interest in those teams being strong. Or having a level playing field.

So even in your 80-100 team model, the bottom 15-35 are going to be fighting uphill battles. It won't be some financial panacea for schools in the American.

I think CougarRed is right on this, but there's a very complex process at work here, IMHO. The middleweight/lightweight P5 programs obviously "need" OOC schedules where they can go 3-1 or 4-0 on a regular basis. Yet if they wind up having to play some variant of Elon, Presbyterian College or Gardner-Webb University (Wake Forest has played all of them in the last 5 years) four times each season, is that really helpful to their program? I think that's an open question that programs like Wake Forest need to ask themselves. Because if G5 teams really are going to be reduced to an FCS-level of (ir)relevance and obscurity, then that is what will happen.

The second element here is the media. If the de-facto version of "Division I-A" is going to be chopped down to just 65 schools (Far less than what it's ever been before), does that provide enough content for ABC/ESPN and for CBS and for FOX and for NBC and for other regional platforms? I admit I don't know the answer to that question, but just offhand I think that would be slicing the bread very, very thin.

The initial premise of this thread was that there would be a formal split of D-I football into three distinct tiers. That's a prediction for the future, and we can debate whether it will actually happen. There seems to be a presumption by some that the current arrangement regarding access to playoffs and bowls wouldn't change much if it did happen. I tend to disagree. I think a formal split will lock everybody not in the top tier out of any participation in postseason play with the big boys.

If there is no split, and the only major change in the status quo is to deny FCS schools any say in the rules governing the FBS, then the G5, plus any more FCS schools that want to join them, will develop survival strategies that allow them to reach their ultimate goal. Frankly, if any of those schools consider winning a national championship to be their goal, I think they're nuts. If their goal is to qualify for the lone slot in an access bowl, beefing up their schedules ain't gonna git 'er dun.

If poll watching has taught us anything over the years, it's that the single biggest factor in voter's minds is number of losses. An undefeated MAC champ will have a better chance of getting access than a superior MWC or AAC team with one loss, unless that one loss is a close one against a top ten team.

I believe the true goal of the G5 schools is to insure a stable, financially healthy athletic program. The occasional conference championship will be a nice bonus. Maybe, for a mere handful of schools, a call up to the majors might still happen. But by and large, membership in that club is pretty nearly closed, and I don't see any school voluntarily opting out of it.

(02-07-2014 10:19 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(02-06-2014 05:36 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I also suspect the middle and bottom of the P5 don't really want to be qualifying for bowls once every 5 or 6 years, which is what will happen if they play 12 P5 opponents a year. So they don't want a 65 team division.

Like I have said before, I think the better number is between 80-100 in that top level.

You assume that P5 schools would be forced to play each other exclusively if a new division was formed. I'm not sure that's the case.

Even if your analysis is correct and the middle/bottom of the P5 want a buffer zone of teams below them so they can win more games, by definition they have no interest in those teams being strong. Or having a level playing field.

So even in your 80-100 team model, the bottom 15-35 are going to be fighting uphill battles. It won't be some financial panacea for schools in the American.

True--but we have that now. However, if the there are only 15-35 non-AQ schools in the top level, the supply and demand equation works in our favor and would likely end in a raise. By reducing the number of top level schools, any top level sxhool becomes more valueable. So you would see P5 earning 20 million a school for media while the G5 at the top level make 5-10 a team. Not great--but actually better than the current situation.

(02-07-2014 10:40 AM)ken d Wrote:  The initial premise of this thread was that there would be a formal split of D-I football into three distinct tiers. That's a prediction for the future, and we can debate whether it will actually happen. There seems to be a presumption by some that the current arrangement regarding access to playoffs and bowls wouldn't change much if it did happen. I tend to disagree. I think a formal split will lock everybody not in the top tier out of any participation in postseason play with the big boys.

No the initial premise of this thread was that its a true de facto 3 tier system now with the G5 firmly grouped together in a revenue sharing plan and effectively shut out of a playoff spot. There are no tweeners anymore like the Big East a tweener inside the system or the MWC a tweener outside the system.

If the HRG decided to expand the playoff and give the top rated G5 a bid to the playoff they would be giving the G5 ground. Any expansion to 8 with the playoff would ultimately favor the G5s chances in landing a team in there one more reason not to go to 12 teams.

what if somehow AAC & MWC merge ... doesn't this create the separation needed from the other G5's setting up a potentially strong tweener that would have to be dealt with by the P5 either on the field or in the courthouse? ... I think that this is best hope for these schools in the long run or am I

(02-08-2014 06:11 PM)PIRATE TERP Wrote:  what if somehow AAC & MWC merge ... doesn't this create the separation needed from the other G5's setting up a potentially strong tweener that would have to be dealt with by the P5 either on the field or in the courthouse? ... I think that this is best hope for these schools in the long run or am I

A merger MAY be able to boost TV money and even land a contract bowl but it doesn't do anything with regard to playoff access.

The MWC is somewhere between the MAC and AAC in football strength meaning its not going to help out the AAC by adding the 12 MWC schools and placing it under its banner.

I'm not sure there is anything the AAC can do but to become a multiple Top 25 team conference with solid recruiting throughout the league.

(02-07-2014 09:24 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-06-2014 05:17 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(02-06-2014 04:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Then the G5 should just cut costs and drop their programs to FCS. There will be zero value in being a codified D1AA program. Zero media value. Massive drop in ticket sales. Massive drop in donations. Sure, it wont happen immediately, it will take 5 years or so, but it will happen just as it happended to all the schools that dropped out of the top level of football in late seventies. Once media revenue, ticket sales, and donations drop to FCS levels---things will then level out for the left behind schools. But the reality is, FBS football budgets cant be supported by FCS revenue streams.

All true, and I think it will happen over the course of the next 15-20 years or so.

There is a legitimate chance -- no better than 50/50, IMHO, but still a legitimate chance -- that the AAC and the MWC or some combination of its richest members will be able to participate in the "HRG" group.

But MAC, Sun Belt and C-USA… I'd be very surprised if they can sustain FBS-level programs for more than 20 years unless some dramatic financial windfall comes their way.

I thought FCS scholarship football would be mostly going away for some time, but its growing. Most of the non-scholarship or low scholarship schools are adding scholarships.

Its going to take more realignment to drive schools out. Idaho probably gives it up soon, but if Eastern Michigan hangs on, I can't see others not being able to. Now if more of the western schools get stranded or Sun Belt schools get stranded, those 3-5 stranded schools might move down.

Idaho has absolutely no motivation to move down. Moving to the Big Sky would destroy our athletic department financially.

(02-06-2014 06:14 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  And I also think if Louisville can improve academics to the point of cracking the ACC that Boise State could do it with the PAC in 10 years if they continue to move the school and football program forward. If Rutgers could move from the AAC to the B1G its not inconceivable that Buffalo could move from the MAC to the B1G. Build up your program and all things are possible but the reality is the G5 is firmly in the second tier.

I've been laughing at a lot of the suggestions in this thread, but parts of this post had me shaking my head... Do you not get it?

Louisville is a major market with NO competition. Their basketball program is the nation's biggest revenue generator, their football plays at a high level and in a large money making stadium -- all that money is then reinvested into sports AND academics, something Boise can't do!

Rutgers is in the suburbs of New York City - thus the #1 tv market in America and IS the state flagship of New Jersey. They open millions of homes to the B1G Network. Not to mention Rutgers has also been part of the "good ole boys football club" for generations, even if they've played poorly - no one who was in the club when the BCS was created has been left behind. Buffalo is in New York State, but is basically as far away from NYC as you can get in the state. It also isn't the state's flagship, despite trying to market itself as it. Their support and attendance is brutal for most sports, their budget is small and revenues non-existent. Plus, it only joined the FBS in 1999, despite a long history of having and suspending its football program. There is a lot of upside to UB, but a jump to the B1G isn't happening anytime soon - I think they'd have to jump to the AAC and prove themselves there first, and even then I think plenty of other schools are ahead of them on the P5 radar.

(02-08-2014 06:11 PM)PIRATE TERP Wrote:  what if somehow AAC & MWC merge ... doesn't this create the separation needed from the other G5's setting up a potentially strong tweener that would have to be dealt with by the P5 either on the field or in the courthouse? ... I think that this is best hope for these schools in the long run or am I

The MWC and the AAC already have some separation from the other G5 conferences. By merging, you just have one conference that is clearly ahead of the other three instead of two. But there's really no added value. The marketplace has put a value on them, and it's about $1.5 million per school from tv and less from the bowl system. Putting the two together won't increase the per school value. It will just create a bigger pie that is cut into slices just as big as the two smaller pies had to begin with.

(02-12-2014 01:42 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-08-2014 06:11 PM)PIRATE TERP Wrote:  what if somehow AAC & MWC merge ... doesn't this create the separation needed from the other G5's setting up a potentially strong tweener that would have to be dealt with by the P5 either on the field or in the courthouse? ... I think that this is best hope for these schools in the long run or am I

The MWC and the AAC already have some separation from the other G5 conferences. By merging, you just have one conference that is clearly ahead of the other three instead of two. But there's really no added value. The marketplace has put a value on them, and it's about $1.5 million per school from tv and less from the bowl system. Putting the two together won't increase the per school value. It will just create a bigger pie that is cut into slices just as big as the two smaller pies had to begin with.

It would tend to create a defacto 6th AQ conference and it would create a national conference that is the most well known, most followed, and most watched G5 conference. Over time, that has significant value and will allow the conference to do two things---

1) Pull away from the other G5 conferences with respect to media value.

2) Bolster the case for the only G5 super conference to be included in any eventual P5 breakaway or new division.

It would tend to create a defacto 6th AQ conference and it would create a national conference that is the most well known, most followed, and most watched G5 conference. Over time, that has significant value and will allow the conference to do two things---

1) Pull away from the other G5 conferences with respect to media value.

2) Bolster the case for the only G5 super conference to be included in any eventual P5 breakaway or new division.
[/quote]

I still think a selective 12 team conference from the best AAC and MWC programs could garner more revenue than what is currently alottled to both the MWC and the AAC combined. You simply dilute the value of the good teams by pairing them with very poor teams. Boise vs Houston is a better draw than Boise versus Wyoming and Houston versus Temple combined. If you have UCF, USF, ECU, Cinci, UCONN, Memphis, Houston, SMU, BSU, SDSU, UNLV, UNM you basically have a much higher proportion of interesting games to crapfests, and therefore should get a higher media payout.

(02-12-2014 12:45 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  

(02-06-2014 06:14 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  And I also think if Louisville can improve academics to the point of cracking the ACC that Boise State could do it with the PAC in 10 years if they continue to move the school and football program forward. If Rutgers could move from the AAC to the B1G its not inconceivable that Buffalo could move from the MAC to the B1G. Build up your program and all things are possible but the reality is the G5 is firmly in the second tier.

I've been laughing at a lot of the suggestions in this thread, but parts of this post had me shaking my head... Do you not get it?

Louisville is a major market with NO competition. Their basketball program is the nation's biggest revenue generator, their football plays at a high level and in a large money making stadium -- all that money is then reinvested into sports AND academics, something Boise can't do!

Rutgers is in the suburbs of New York City - thus the #1 tv market in America and IS the state flagship of New Jersey. They open millions of homes to the B1G Network. Not to mention Rutgers has also been part of the "good ole boys football club" for generations, even if they've played poorly - no one who was in the club when the BCS was created has been left behind. Buffalo is in New York State, but is basically as far away from NYC as you can get in the state. It also isn't the state's flagship, despite trying to market itself as it. Their support and attendance is brutal for most sports, their budget is small and revenues non-existent. Plus, it only joined the FBS in 1999, despite a long history of having and suspending its football program. There is a lot of upside to UB, but a jump to the B1G isn't happening anytime soon - I think they'd have to jump to the AAC and prove themselves there first, and even then I think plenty of other schools are ahead of them on the P5 radar.

No you don't understand where I am coming from.

I've heard it a MILLION times why such and such school pulled off a move to a power conference and how a Boise State can't do it because its not a land grant school of certain reputation.

I'm going against the grain of conventional wisdom by saying its not impossible for low performing academic G5 schools to pull it together given enough time. Long term having a new market to offer an HRG wins out over short term crappy attendance/academics, IMO.