(11-30-2017 03:23 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 10:01 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  b]because the TV execs aren't shelling out top dollar for a game that people won't watch [/b]so don't count on a "guaranteed" G5 spot.

I agree. That said, every indication we have says that not only would the general public watch such a game, it will likely outdraw some games that conventional wisdom says is shouldnt.

Well let UH join MWC and G4 do a playoff.

(11-30-2017 01:25 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 12:48 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 12:34 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  Interesting idea Kitton, curious how that would work out on this seasons results...but how about 0 points for a close loss to anybody? F*ck rewarding losses.

The idea behind giving 3 points to a close loss against a winning team would be to commend a quality effort against quality competition.

Say if two teams were playing, its toward the end of the season...one is 8-2 the other is 7-3. The 8-2 team wins by a FG. The 7-3 team would still get credit by the announcers for having competed. There would also be incentive to compete and make it close to get the 3 points. The 8-2 team then would have incentive to put more points on the board instead of letting the clock run out because they would get 5 points for a dominant victory.

3 points for a close loss would also encourage programs to schedule up because if they can keep it close against an FBS team with a winning record they get 3 points. But if you get killed you don't get anything for it.

I understand the idea behind it, I just don't agree with it. I mean why not negative points for catching a beat down? Society hands enough participation trophies out as it is, no need to carry that mentality into an otherwise good idea.

1) It encourages stronger scheduling rather than avoiding losses.

2) It encourages recruits to flock to programs playing stronger schedules.

You want the face of NY4 to be Boise, SDSU, Houston, UCF, Toledo and NIU consistently. You want these teams playing and taking out Oklahoma, Penn State, Florida ect. to de-legitimize the P5. You want these teams earning national awards and getting massive publicity.

Next move would be to play the G5 season in the spring...

(11-29-2017 02:02 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Except there is a gulf between AAC and MWC with the other three. Plus, the P5 considers several of the teams as P5 schools.

If there was such a wide gulf between the AAC and MAC, how has the MAC conference earned 2 Big 6 bowl bids.

What sports network would be interested in paying for the TV rights to such a tournament, because without the TV $ it won't happen

(11-30-2017 11:10 AM)Policiious Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 02:02 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Except there is a gulf between AAC and MWC with the other three. Plus, the P5 considers several of the teams as P5 schools.

If there was such a wide gulf between the AAC and MAC, how has the MAC conference earned 2 Big 6 bowl bids.

What sports network would be interested in paying for the TV rights to such a tournament, because without the TV $ it won't happen

Same way Boise St. and Hawaii earned BCS bowls in the WAC.

Was there any question that the old MWC (with TCU, BYU, Utah) was better than the WAC, despite the Boise and Hawaii BCS bowls?

(11-30-2017 08:13 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 03:23 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 10:01 PM)SDHornet Wrote:  b]because the TV execs aren't shelling out top dollar for a game that people won't watch [/b]so don't count on a "guaranteed" G5 spot.

I agree. That said, every indication we have says that not only would the general public watch such a game, it will likely outdraw some games that conventional wisdom says is shouldnt.

Well let UH join MWC and G4 do a playoff.

I think you misunderstood. My statement was saying that I think the general public would watch a CFP Playoff game where the top G5 champ was an automatic qualifier to an 8-team playoff. I have interest in that. I have zero interest in a G5 playoff and don’t think it would make more money than we currently make as part of the CFP.

In fact, nobody has ever answered this question. Right now, the 4 G5’s that don’t make the access bowl could sign on to have their teams play one another in a series of “champions” bowl games. These are essentially the same games we would theoretically see in a G5 playoff. If these games would be potentially worth a 100-150 million in a playoff—why isn’t any network throwing big money at the G5 to get these pairings committed to bowls.

I’ll answer that. Its because a G5 playoff wouldn’t be worth anything even close to 100 million a year. If it were, these G5 champ vs G5 champ bowl games would exist and would pay big money.

(11-29-2017 02:16 PM)micahandme Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 11:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 09:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 08:50 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Or we could just go to an 8 team playoff with a guaranteed G5 slot

Do you not think a playoff should include the best teams?

I don't think 14 Boise St, 15 Houston, 16 Western Michigan, or 17 UCF would have been reaches in an 8 team playoff.

If there is a bad matchup one year then it's only one game and the number one team gets a reward for an outstanding season. It would also be compelling TV

That's my ideal scenario as P5 fan. (However, I still think it stinks for G5...66 of you fighting for one spot...and even then, you're forced to play on the #1 seed's home turf in the first round?!?! I'd prefer the playoff...)

Most G5 reps would be solid opponents and I bet we'd even see an 8 over 1 upset every blue moon or so. App St over Mich in 06...Toledo over PSU in 01...Troy over LSU in 17...etc, etc.

Hahahaha! Love it! If you are truly serious about your affection for the G5 schools, then you would scuttle this plan completely and would instead support a method to integrate the best of the G5 into the existing P5 conferences. Most P5 fans who may show sympathy to G5 fans would make every excuse for why G5 schools should not be integrated into P5 conferences. I bet a lot of people feel angst and pity for the plight of inner city minorities...until they end up moving into the upscale neighborhood en masse...

I trolled with this topic several years ago. You're too late and unoriginal.

No one watches the FCS playoffs. It gets less coverage than MAC football, as it's shuttled to ESPN3.

Slightly more people are going to want to watch a G5 playoff. Maybe it will get as much coverage as MAC football. No one in any g5 conference (except NIU's AD last year) would think this is a good idea.

(11-30-2017 12:56 PM)bronconick Wrote:  No one watches the FCS playoffs. It gets less coverage than MAC football, as it's shuttled to ESPN3.

Slightly more people are going to want to watch a G5 playoff. Maybe it will get as much coverage as MAC football. No one in any g5 conference (except NIU's AD last year) would think this is a good idea.

Bingo! Dumb thread. The CFP should expand to 8 and allow the 5 conference champions from the Power 5 to get bids, the highest ranked Group of 5 conference champion will get the 6th bid (bid, not seed) and then you'll have your two at-large bids. Every single year you'll get 7 Power 5s and 1 Group of 5 and every conference champion from the 10 FBS conferences has a shot. This year would allow Bama to compete as an at-large assuming things don't blow up this weekend.

(11-30-2017 08:19 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 01:25 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  

1) It encourages stronger scheduling rather than avoiding losses.

2) It encourages recruits to flock to programs playing stronger schedules.

You want the face of NY4 to be Boise, SDSU, Houston, UCF, Toledo and NIU consistently. You want these teams playing and taking out Oklahoma, Penn State, Florida ect. to de-legitimize the P5. You want these teams earning national awards and getting massive publicity.

Just like 1aa they will win national awards and titles while no one pays attention. It will be like playing in the NIT.

Mike Leach said it best:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_nuMEtwUW4

Somehow, FBS is the ONLY entity that can't figure it out.

(12-01-2017 09:42 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  Mike Leach said it best:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_nuMEtwUW4

Somehow, FBS is the ONLY entity that can't figure it out.

Yup. FCS is up to a 32 team playoff.

(11-29-2017 01:52 AM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  Why don't you merge with the existing D-I FCS Tournament and call it good? Because the gulf between the G5 and FCS is less than the G5 and the P5! That's reality!

The gulf between the top and bottom halves of P5 are just as great. If it wasn't for TV money 50% of P5 programs would essentially be no better off than the top half of G5.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using CSNbbs mobile app