(07-25-2018 08:01 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 05:51 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 11:38 AM)Fthechips Wrote:  Unless the G5 gets a designated auto-bid slot for the CFP they will always be ousted by other P5 teams.

Nick Saban does not want any G5 teams in the CFP period. He says they all are cupcakes. I would like to remind him that they lost to some G5 schools in the past. He suffered a lost to one as well. Utah, Northern Illinois and one of the Louisiana schools beat Alabama in the past 15 to 20 years.

College football as a whole doesn't want them in the CFP because they are weaker as a group, they aren't as compelling, and they aren't worth much money.

That's common knowledge.

UCF, Boise State, utah and TCU proved you wrong.

(07-26-2018 05:02 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 08:01 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 05:51 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 11:38 AM)Fthechips Wrote:  Unless the G5 gets a designated auto-bid slot for the CFP they will always be ousted by other P5 teams.

Nick Saban does not want any G5 teams in the CFP period. He says they all are cupcakes. I would like to remind him that they lost to some G5 schools in the past. He suffered a lost to one as well. Utah, Northern Illinois and one of the Louisiana schools beat Alabama in the past 15 to 20 years.

College football as a whole doesn't want them in the CFP because they are weaker as a group, they aren't as compelling, and they aren't worth much money.

That's common knowledge.

UCF, Boise State, utah and TCU proved you wrong.

No. They have not.

We have to differentiate between what may have changed your mind, the minds of a handful of fans, the minds of the majority of fans, the minds of all college football fans, the minds of the leadership of some athletic leadership, the minds of the majority of athletic leadership, the minds of all athletic leadership, the minds of some of the holds of economic interest, most of the holders of economic interest, and so forth and so on.

On the spectrum of a handful of fans to the holders of the keys at the top you have reach the first level, the minds of a handful of fans.

No conversation on this topic ever addresses the central issues the G5 have with moving forward and being included. Instead, it often degenerates into a butthurt session and the throwing around of bombastic statements about keeping people down.

(07-26-2018 08:04 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 05:02 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 08:01 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 05:51 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 11:38 AM)Fthechips Wrote:  Unless the G5 gets a designated auto-bid slot for the CFP they will always be ousted by other P5 teams.

Nick Saban does not want any G5 teams in the CFP period. He says they all are cupcakes. I would like to remind him that they lost to some G5 schools in the past. He suffered a lost to one as well. Utah, Northern Illinois and one of the Louisiana schools beat Alabama in the past 15 to 20 years.

College football as a whole doesn't want them in the CFP because they are weaker as a group, they aren't as compelling, and they aren't worth much money.

That's common knowledge.

UCF, Boise State, utah and TCU proved you wrong.

No. They have not.

We have to differentiate between what may have changed your mind, the minds of a handful of fans, the minds of the majority of fans, the minds of all college football fans, the minds of the leadership of some athletic leadership, the minds of the majority of athletic leadership, the minds of all athletic leadership, the minds of some of the holds of economic interest, most of the holders of economic interest, and so forth and so on.

On the spectrum of a handful of fans to the holders of the keys at the top you have reach the first level, the minds of a handful of fans.

No conversation on this topic ever addresses the central issues the G5 have with moving forward and being included. Instead, it often degenerates into a butthurt session and the throwing around of bombastic statements about keeping people down.

Excellent point. Just because an event - like a G5 beating a P5 in a NY6 game - convinces YOU that the playoff structure needs to change doesn't mean it's "proven" to anyone else that it does.

Bottom line is there is no and never has been any groundswell of clamoring among the vast majority of fans to give G5 conferences a direct path to a playoffs. Not ever, up to this very moment.

And FWIW, that's true of the P5 as well, as no P5 conference has a direct path either. And no, that's not simply a formal distinction without a real difference - every single year, at least one P5 conference will be left out of the playoffs. Last year, it was two.

(07-25-2018 08:01 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 05:51 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 11:38 AM)Fthechips Wrote:  Unless the G5 gets a designated auto-bid slot for the CFP they will always be ousted by other P5 teams.

Nick Saban does not want any G5 teams in the CFP period. He says they all are cupcakes. I would like to remind him that they lost to some G5 schools in the past. He suffered a lost to one as well. Utah, Northern Illinois and one of the Louisiana schools beat Alabama in the past 15 to 20 years.

College football as a whole doesn't want them in the CFP because they are weaker as a group, they aren't as compelling, and they aren't worth much money.

That's common knowledge.

You mean the networks.

(07-25-2018 03:37 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:37 AM)andy98 Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 05:33 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 10:52 AM)andy98 Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 10:30 AM)ken d Wrote:  If you must go to 8, why not just pick who you think are the 8 best teams out there, regardless of conference or championship status? Chances are you would still get most P5 champions a high percentage of the time. And so what if you don't?

Because then winning a conference championship wouldn't be as meaningful, and the undefeated G5 teams would probably still get screwed out of the playoffs.

Are you saying that conference championships aren't meaningful now, nor have they ever been meaningful?

And I prefer to say that G5 teams are "left" out of the playoffs, rather than "screwed" out of them.

If you read my comment you will see that it says "winning a conference championship wouldn't be AS meaningful." I never said that they AREN'T meaningful, or never have been meaningful. If the playoff expands to 8 teams then the majority of people would like to see the top champions pitted against each other, and then adding 2 at-large teams would guarantee that the top 2 teams in the nation will always be included, even if they somehow didn't win their conference championship.

And when only 1 out of 130 teams goes undefeated, but they don't get any consideration to participate in the playoff, then yes, they are being totally screwed. There is no need to sugarcoat it by saying "left out." FBS football is the only sport where a team can have a perfect season and still not compete in the playoff. Any sport that allows that to happen is a broken sport.

Nonsense. College football is unique in the sense that it allows schools to participate without regard to their ability to actually compete. Lots of them. Simply being undefeated is meaningless without considering how often a team was exposed to a realistic possibility of losing. Just because you can beat the equivalent of the Little Sisters of the Poor 12 times doesn't mean you have any business expecting an automatic bid to play Alabama or Oklahoma in a playoff.

The only way you can fix what is "broken" about college football is to relegate about 50 schools to a lower division, not by giving one of them a participation trophy.

Another fix would be to revise the rule that allows FBS teams to play easy lower-level FCS opponents at home, at least as part of the regular season. That's like the New York Yankees playing 13 home games (or FOUR 3-4 game home series) against the Albuquerque Isotopes to pad their win-loss record and stats.

Change the rule to allow an exhibition game against an FCS opponent - preferably pre-season. The game wouldn't count towards the 12-game regular season and wouldn't count for the win-loss record, stats, or player eligibility. Especially if held pre-season, the FCS exhibition games would still generate money for the FCS programs - and the FBS hosts. The games would still attract great crowds after a long offseason, give the teams a chance to iron out some wrinkles in live action, plus give fans the chance to see on-field action from new recruits and underclassmen waiting their turn on the depth chart.

This change would force FBS teams to play each other more out of conference, which would substantially increase the number of cross-conference games (duh) and the number of precious data points to compare teams and conferences within the rankings and CFP selection committee systems.

Another result would be the likely reduction of bowl eligible teams, because teams wouldn't be able to propel themselves/hide behind an easy FCS win to 6 wins. I would argue that this is a benefit as it would increase the scarcity -and thus the value - of bowl-eligibility and win-loss records.

(07-27-2018 02:16 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 03:37 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:37 AM)andy98 Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 05:33 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 10:52 AM)andy98 Wrote:  Because then winning a conference championship wouldn't be as meaningful, and the undefeated G5 teams would probably still get screwed out of the playoffs.

Are you saying that conference championships aren't meaningful now, nor have they ever been meaningful?

And I prefer to say that G5 teams are "left" out of the playoffs, rather than "screwed" out of them.

If you read my comment you will see that it says "winning a conference championship wouldn't be AS meaningful." I never said that they AREN'T meaningful, or never have been meaningful. If the playoff expands to 8 teams then the majority of people would like to see the top champions pitted against each other, and then adding 2 at-large teams would guarantee that the top 2 teams in the nation will always be included, even if they somehow didn't win their conference championship.

And when only 1 out of 130 teams goes undefeated, but they don't get any consideration to participate in the playoff, then yes, they are being totally screwed. There is no need to sugarcoat it by saying "left out." FBS football is the only sport where a team can have a perfect season and still not compete in the playoff. Any sport that allows that to happen is a broken sport.

Nonsense. College football is unique in the sense that it allows schools to participate without regard to their ability to actually compete. Lots of them. Simply being undefeated is meaningless without considering how often a team was exposed to a realistic possibility of losing. Just because you can beat the equivalent of the Little Sisters of the Poor 12 times doesn't mean you have any business expecting an automatic bid to play Alabama or Oklahoma in a playoff.

The only way you can fix what is "broken" about college football is to relegate about 50 schools to a lower division, not by giving one of them a participation trophy.

Another fix would be to revise the rule that allows FBS teams to play easy lower-level FCS opponents at home, at least as part of the regular season. That's like the New York Yankees playing 13 home games (or FOUR 3-4 game home series) against the Albuquerque Isotopes to pad their win-loss record and stats.

Change the rule to allow an exhibition game against an FCS opponent - preferably pre-season. The game wouldn't count towards the 12-game regular season and wouldn't count for the win-loss record, stats, or player eligibility. Especially if held pre-season, the FCS exhibition games would still generate money for the FCS programs - and the FBS hosts. The games would still attract great crowds after a long offseason, give the teams a chance to iron out some wrinkles in live action, plus give fans the chance to see on-field action from new recruits and underclassmen waiting their turn on the depth chart.

This change would force FBS teams to play each other more out of conference, which would substantially increase the number of cross-conference games (duh) and the number of precious data points to compare teams and conferences within the rankings and CFP selection committee systems.

Another result would be the likely reduction of bowl eligible teams, because teams wouldn't be able to propel themselves/hide behind an easy FCS win to 6 wins. I would argue that this is a benefit as it would increase the scarcity -and thus the value - of bowl-eligibility and win-loss records.

We have to change the rules to allow conferences like MVFC as a whole move up since they have known to beat FBS teams including P5 schools.

As for the G5? Utah laid the smack down on Alabama in a bowl game. Baylor also got their butts handed to them to an AAC team. Last year, UCF sent Auburn home crying who beat Alabama in the regular season. I heard from a lot of P5 fans that the top G5 schools bring excitement and nailbiting games. They rather want to see a Boise State play their team than a team called the Kansas Jayhawks. Which team would bring their A- Game to the game?

Want to see more FBS home-and-homes? This rule change will do it: require all teams to play the same number of home and away games, +/- 1. Neutral site games also allowed. Voila: no more buy games!

Another way to do this is simply give road games a lot more weight in the ratings formula.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(07-29-2018 04:06 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Want to see more FBS home-and-homes? This rule change will do it: require all teams to play the same number of home and away games, +/- 1. Neutral site games also allowed. Voila: no more buy games!

How do you propose paying for the lost revenue, because there are exactly zero college presidents who are going to support this without compensation for the lost home gate.

All this hoopla talk about the A5 and g5 and the g5 being left out of the A5 playoffs is making the g5 schools really want to compete more and imo many G5’s will be successful in upping there level of play on the field
It’s called the rise of the g5 as some of these schools will establish themselves as flagship football schools
I don’t know about y’all, but I can see it plain as day