http://www.si.com/college-football/2014/...mid-majors

Quick answer, go undefeated two years in a row.

I agree. You'll need a couple years of undefeated or a 1-loss season for a G5 candidate to be ranked high enough and being put in a higher pre-season ranking (although not consider by the board...it'll play some role).

A 1 year stunt isn't going to cut it for a G5 team as a P5 could......just how it is.

(07-08-2014 12:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Quick answer, go undefeated two years in a row.

Agree, and that's with at least two nationally ranked P5 victories in each season.

(07-08-2014 12:17 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 12:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Quick answer, go undefeated two years in a row.

Agree, and that's with at least two nationally ranked P5 victories in each season.

Both of those sound about right. Bottom line, it will be a rare event, if ever.

Define "mid major". Is it the same thing in football, as in basketball. In basketball the Big East, AAC, A10, and 1 or 2 others would not be considered mid major. I thought this was a basketball term.

(07-08-2014 12:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Define "mid major". Is it the same thing in football, as in basketball. In basketball the Big East, AAC, A10, and 1 or 2 others would not be considered mid major. I thought this was a basketball term.

You're right, it is a basketball term that has crossed over to represent G5 programs. It's not all together accurate.

If UCF (might start the season ranked), SMU, CINCI, or ECU can go undefeated, I think one of those schools could get a shot because of their OOC. It would also take multiple losses by ranked P5 schools. Unfortunately, not having a CCG game might hurt us this year because a lower ranked P5 school that wins its CCG would get selected over an undefeated American school in my opinion.

(07-08-2014 01:03 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 12:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Define "mid major". Is it the same thing in football, as in basketball. In basketball the Big East, AAC, A10, and 1 or 2 others would not be considered mid major. I thought this was a basketball term.

You're right, it is a basketball term that has crossed over to represent G5 programs. It's not all together accurate.

By whom. I rarely hear this term in football. And even if it had crossed over, how can a basketball power conf (where the term originated) be considered a mid major in another sport where the term doesn't even apply to begin with

(07-08-2014 01:17 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 01:03 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 12:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Define "mid major". Is it the same thing in football, as in basketball. In basketball the Big East, AAC, A10, and 1 or 2 others would not be considered mid major. I thought this was a basketball term.

You're right, it is a basketball term that has crossed over to represent G5 programs. It's not all together accurate.

By whom. I rarely hear this term in football. And even if it had crossed over, how can a basketball power conf (where the term originated) be considered a mid major in another sport where the term doesn't even apply to begin with

Don't ask me to explain it. It's not a term I use, but it's been used by television and print media more and more over the past few months. I never said the term was ubiquitous, just a term that seems to be getting used more often. Agree or disagree, that's just been my experience.

He's not wrong unfortunately.

(07-08-2014 01:03 PM)Underdog Wrote:  If UCF (might start the season ranked), SMU, CINCI, or ECU can go undefeated, I think one of those schools could get a shot because of their OOC. It would also take multiple losses by ranked P5 schools. Unfortunately, not having a CCG game might hurt us this year because a lower ranked P5 school that wins its CCG would get selected over an undefeated American school in my opinion.

Actually I would argue that UCF and Cincinnati are the only two that would be picked.

It will be hard for them to keep out an undefeated UCF team that beats Penn State and Mizzou and has won 22 games in the last 2 years and is coming off a Fiesta Bowl win. Same goes for a UC team that beats Ohio State and Miami (FL) both on the road and has won 19 games in the last 2 years.

ECU and SMU have difficult schedules (3 P5 teams each) but they haven't been successful enough in the last few years to be taken seriously. If either of them wins it will be perceived as weakness in the AAC rather than the strength of ECU/SMU. Although ECU might get some respect because they had decent seasons the last few years in C-USA, winning 18 games in C-USA over the past 2 years is very different than the same win total in the AAC/Big East.

If there were to be a repeat of the situation from 2012 then no G5 team would deserve to be in that mix.

(07-08-2014 12:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Define "mid major". Is it the same thing in football, as in basketball. In basketball the Big East, AAC, A10, and 1 or 2 others would not be considered mid major. I thought this was a basketball term.

"Mid-major" has never had a rigorous definition.

It's pretty clear here that "midmajor" refers to the "Group of Five" FBS conferences. No, it's not the same in football as basketball (AAC elite basketball conference, football midmajor.)

The term is being imported from basketball, largely because it has recognition and is vaguely similar--the conferences and schools not in the traditional elite, etc. With the BCS and AQ gone, terms like "BCS buster" and "non-AQ", together with "BCS conferences" and "non-BCS conferences" are due to be replaced, and I think "midmajor" is a likelier term to catch on broadly than G5/P5.

A few weeks ago, there was some article with a comment section that revealed that the ESPN commenting populace used "G5" and "P5" nearly interchangeably to mean the five Contract Bowl conferences.

(07-08-2014 01:52 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  If there were to be a repeat of the situation from 2012 then no G5 team would deserve to be in that mix.

Explain please.

(07-08-2014 01:53 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 01:52 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  If there were to be a repeat of the situation from 2012 then no G5 team would deserve to be in that mix.

Explain please.

It's pretty simple. What justfication is there to put any of the following in the 4 team playoff had it been in place for the 2012 season?

12-1 Northern Illinois- Ranked #16 in the BCS standings with a loss to 4-8 Iowa and a low SOS.

11-2 WAC Champ Utah State- Finished #22 in the BCS and lost to Wisconsin and BYU.

Boise, SDSU, or Fresno who all tied for the MWC title with a league loss. BSU also lost to Michigan State, SDSU lost to UW and SJSU, and Fresno also lost Oregon and Tulsa.

CUSA Champ Tulsa who lost to ISU, SMU, and Arkansas.

Sun Belt Champ Arkansas State who went 10-3 and lost by blowout to Oregon and Nebraska. Lost to WKU as well.

Big East champ Louisville who lost twice to UConn and Syracuse.


The only ones with any hope of an argument are UL and NIU and neither has the SOS to really win that argument.


How can any of them deserve a spot over unbeaten ND or any of 1 loss Bama, KSU, Oregon, or Florida who all played a better schedule and have better resumes. Especially when KSU and Bama are conference champs.

If a situation like this arises where there isn't one clear cut elite team among the G5 and all of their champions have worse resumes than some deserving P5 teams it's not rocket science.

(07-08-2014 12:17 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 12:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Quick answer, go undefeated two years in a row.

Agree, and that's with at least two nationally ranked P5 victories in each season.

I don't think the hurdle is quite that high. IMO it takes all of the following:

(1) The non-P5 team must be undefeated.

(2) There must be no more than three undefeated P5 teams.

(3) The undefeated non-P5 team's strength of schedule must be "good enough", which can't be defined precisely and may not be entirely fair. 2014 schedule that is "good enough": Fresno State (including non-con games at USC, at Utah, Nebraska). 2014 schedule that is not "good enough": Marshall (non-con opponents are at Miami-Ohio, Rhode Island, Ohio, and at Akron).

(07-08-2014 01:53 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 12:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Define "mid major". Is it the same thing in football, as in basketball. In basketball the Big East, AAC, A10, and 1 or 2 others would not be considered mid major. I thought this was a basketball term.

"Mid-major" has never had a rigorous definition.

It's pretty clear here that "midmajor" refers to the "Group of Five" FBS conferences. No, it's not the same in football as basketball (AAC elite basketball conference, football midmajor.)

The term is being imported from basketball, largely because it has recognition and is vaguely similar--the conferences and schools not in the traditional elite, etc. With the BCS and AQ gone, terms like "BCS buster" and "non-AQ", together with "BCS conferences" and "non-BCS conferences" are due to be replaced, and I think "midmajor" is a likelier term to catch on broadly than G5/P5.

A few weeks ago, there was some article with a comment section that revealed that the ESPN commenting populace used "G5" and "P5" nearly interchangeably to mean the five Contract Bowl conferences.

Mid-major spans the gamut from a "fight the man" mentality to profanity. I see it as the latter (as any Big East fan would know).

Mandel did fail to mention or glossed over that there might be years where P5 teams beat each other up
in conference play, best teams have 2 losses. I will say this, it is difficult to go undefeated. Besides the AAC teams,
if BYU went 12-0 not sure their SOS would be good enough this year.

Some P5 teams are increasing their OOC SOS, others are decreasing it.

(07-08-2014 01:53 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 12:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Define "mid major". Is it the same thing in football, as in basketball. In basketball the Big East, AAC, A10, and 1 or 2 others would not be considered mid major. I thought this was a basketball term.

"Mid-major" has never had a rigorous definition.

It's pretty clear here that "midmajor" refers to the "Group of Five" FBS conferences. No, it's not the same in football as basketball (AAC elite basketball conference, football midmajor.)

The term is being imported from basketball, largely because it has recognition and is vaguely similar--the conferences and schools not in the traditional elite, etc. With the BCS and AQ gone, terms like "BCS buster" and "non-AQ", together with "BCS conferences" and "non-BCS conferences" are due to be replaced, and I think "midmajor" is a likelier term to catch on broadly than G5/P5.

A few weeks ago, there was some article with a comment section that revealed that the ESPN commenting populace used "G5" and "P5" nearly interchangeably to mean the five Contract Bowl conferences.

Good explanation, I guess. I don't know why some are trying to import it over from basketball, but oh well. Also, how can a conf. be a mid major in one sport and not another. Either you is or you ain't. Group of 5 (a term I dislike anyway) seems to have gained the most traction, so stick with that for now. I dislike labels anyway. They are made up terms, coined by a few, to pigeonhole the masses into slots where they belong, rather than letting actual performances speak for themselves.