(12-31-2018 11:29 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(12-31-2018 07:54 PM)NTTHOR Wrote:  

(12-31-2018 07:26 PM)MAN4UAB Wrote:  A 16 team play off that includes the 10 conference champions provides a true national champion.[/i]

gotta disagree...affirmative action doesn't belong in football, or anywhere else...just because you're part of the whole, doesn't mean you can compete adequately and should be included just because so...the best rise to the top.. no smaller conference can realistically compete with major conference champions...not sure why cusa/mac/belt/aac/mwc fans think it's possible.

yeah...cusa gets in as the last team in and loses by 40...wow...they showed them..totally belonged in the playoffs...that's crap

You’re basing this off of what is status quo. If there was a legitimate playoff where all cont champs could go then the so called “power” would dissipate in many ways. Potentially recruits would expand their horizons. The whole BCS was setup in reaction to the NCAA limiting scholarships and trying to lessen the power of these teams. They fought back. It’s been a continued evolution into what we have now but the thing to do is continue the fight not accept defeat.

I truly doubt the "power" would dissipate. Most of that power comes from two sources; TV contracts between networks and conferences, and big donors. Neither of those will change if the NCAA humors us and actually allows G5 conference champions into a playoff system. Having five G5 schools in the playoff system every year won't make the networks wanna show more G5 contests and fewer P5 contests on television because people will still wanna see the P5 games. As far as donors go, we might see a couple donors here and there step up their game for G5 teams if they know their schools have a shot at getting into a playoff system. But realistically, with even more P5 teams getting into the playoff system, there'll be more donors stepping up their game for those schools, and probably much bigger donors at that. So the gap will not get smaller and level out; it'll just continue to grow.

Let's be realistic. We can have this playoff system every year, and maybe once in a blue moon, a Boise State, UCF, or Houston might pull a shocker and get to the semifinals or finals, but I can't see one of those teams winning a national championship. More than likely, they would have to win 4 consecutive games against not only P5 competition, but the best of the P5's. Even if a G5 did miraculously manage to win a national championship against the best the P5 has to offer in such a playoff system, their coach would be poached by a P5 before the trophy even makes it back to their campus, starting their cycle all over again. In the end, nothing will really change.

(01-01-2019 01:06 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(12-31-2018 11:29 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(12-31-2018 07:54 PM)NTTHOR Wrote:  

(12-31-2018 07:26 PM)MAN4UAB Wrote:  A 16 team play off that includes the 10 conference champions provides a true national champion.[/i]

gotta disagree...affirmative action doesn't belong in football, or anywhere else...just because you're part of the whole, doesn't mean you can compete adequately and should be included just because so...the best rise to the top.. no smaller conference can realistically compete with major conference champions...not sure why cusa/mac/belt/aac/mwc fans think it's possible.

yeah...cusa gets in as the last team in and loses by 40...wow...they showed them..totally belonged in the playoffs...that's crap

You’re basing this off of what is status quo. If there was a legitimate playoff where all cont champs could go then the so called “power” would dissipate in many ways. Potentially recruits would expand their horizons. The whole BCS was setup in reaction to the NCAA limiting scholarships and trying to lessen the power of these teams. They fought back. It’s been a continued evolution into what we have now but the thing to do is continue the fight not accept defeat.

I truly doubt the "power" would dissipate. Most of that power comes from two sources; TV contracts between networks and conferences, and big donors. Neither of those will change if the NCAA humors us and actually allows G5 conference champions into a playoff system. Having five G5 schools in the playoff system every year won't make the networks wanna show more G5 contests and fewer P5 contests on television because people will still wanna see the P5 games. As far as donors go, we might see a couple donors here and there step up their game for G5 teams if they know their schools have a shot at getting into a playoff system. But realistically, with even more P5 teams getting into the playoff system, there'll be more donors stepping up their game for those schools, and probably much bigger donors at that. So the gap will not get smaller and level out; it'll just continue to grow.

Let's be realistic. We can have this playoff system every year, and maybe once in a blue moon, a Boise State, UCF, or Houston might pull a shocker and get to the semifinals or finals, but I can't see one of those teams winning a national championship. More than likely, they would have to win 4 consecutive games against not only P5 competition, but the best of the P5's. Even if a G5 did miraculously manage to win a national championship against the best the P5 has to offer in such a playoff system, their coach would be poached by a P5 before the trophy even makes it back to their campus, starting their cycle all over again. In the end, nothing will really change.

We can all speculate on what would happen with a 16 team playoff that includes conference champions; but, we will never truly know unless the change happens. At the very least, our conference champion will truly have an opportunity to play for a national championship.

They have a legit playoff at the FCS level. Why can't this happen at the FBS level? Because they don't want it so any team can win. They want it so only a Power 5 team can win! The one old guy from College football gameday made it clear earlier this season. It's all about the money!

(01-01-2019 06:51 AM)Retroview1955 Wrote:  They have a legit playoff at the FCS level. Why can't this happen at the FBS level? Because they don't want it so any team can win. They want it so only a Power 5 team can win! The one old guy from College football gameday made it clear earlier this season. It's all about the money!

1) The FCS plays a 10-game regular season schedule. That's why they have the time for their 24-team playoff.

2) In the FCS, the conference champions of the 10 participating conferences are automatic qualifiers, with the top 8 getting first-round byes. Another 14 teams, selected by a committee, get at-large byes. That works great for them because there just isn't a huge difference between the FCS conferences. In DI, the differences in resources, facilities, fan support, television contracts (basically everything under the sun) between the P5 conferences and the G5 conferences is larger than the difference between the G5 and FCS. There's an ENORMOUS gap in DI between the haves and have-nots. You treat the FCS playoff system and a potential FBS playoff system as if they're on equal footing, but they're just not; FAR from it in fact. It's apples and oranges in the truest sense of that expression.

3) In the FBS, given that giant gap between the G5 and the P5, you simply MUST consider strength of schedule as a factor in who gets into a playoff. So not only is Corso accurate in what he says, but I also see nothing wrong with it. I wouldn't be opposed to an 8-team playoff system featuring the P5 conference champions, two more at-large P5 schools, and the top G5. I just see no way to justify letting all five G5 champions into a national football tournament when you consider the schedules the P5's play and the schedules we play. We consider 3 P5 OOC games as a bruising gauntlet, and yet don't wanna acknowledge that P5's play that level of opponent in their own conference schedule every year and that it should weigh in accordingly as to who would get consideration for a playoff system?

4) We need look only at the G5's flagship school, the school that has been in more national championship run conversations over the years than anyone else in G5 by far... Boise State. Since 2003 (because that's as far back as ESPN goes) their record against G5 has been 151-17 (.899) and their record against P5 in the same time has been 26-17 (.605). There's a HUGE difference between winning 90% of your games against G5 competition and winning only 60% against P5. We would laugh our asses off at any P5 school with a .605 record being talked about as a candidate for a national championship, and yet that's exactly what Boise State's record is against P5 teams, and they're head-and-shoulders above all other G5's in terms of success against P5 competition.

3% of FBS teams play in the playoffs and half the division have less than a <1% chance of ever qualifying.

This is a broken sport.

(01-01-2019 07:12 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  3% of FBS teams play in the playoffs and half the division have less than a <1% chance of ever qualifying.

This is a broken sport.

It's not a broken sport, not even a broken system. It is however a system that continues to evolve, which is in transition right now. and I think that we're currently getting close to the point at which the P5 will eventually break off from us. They'll have their national championship, the G5 will then have our own, and FCS will continue to have theirs. I've said for a while now that that's where I think we're gonna eventually head with this.

It's inevitable, not only because of the enormous gap between G5 and P5, but also because as our population grows, the number of schools will grow, and the number of schools with football programs in our country will continue to grow as well. And as the number of football programs grow, we'll see more and more divisions with more and more conferences. There's no other way around it. It's the natural progression of things.

(01-01-2019 07:30 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:12 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  3% of FBS teams play in the playoffs and half the division have less than a <1% chance of ever qualifying.

This is a broken sport.

It's not a broken sport, not even a broken system. It is however a system that continues to evolve, and I think right now that we're getting close to the point at which the P5 will eventually break off from us. They'll have their national championship, the G5 will then have our own, and FCS will continue to have theirs. I've said for a while now that that's where I think we're gonna eventually head with this.

It's inevitable, not only because of the enormous gap between G5 and P5, but also because as our population grows, the number of schools will grow, and the number of schools with football programs in our country will continue to grow as well. And as the number of football programs grow, we'll see more and more divisions with more and more conferences. There's no other way around it. It's the natural progression of things.

clt goes the opposite way. Football will not have enough quality players to see more colleges adding programs,

(01-01-2019 07:30 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:12 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  3% of FBS teams play in the playoffs and half the division have less than a <1% chance of ever qualifying.

This is a broken sport.

It's not a broken sport, not even a broken system. It is however a system that continues to evolve, which is in transition right now. and I think that we're currently getting close to the point at which the P5 will eventually break off from us. They'll have their national championship, the G5 will then have our own, and FCS will continue to have theirs. I've said for a while now that that's where I think we're gonna eventually head with this.

It's inevitable, not only because of the enormous gap between G5 and P5, but also because as our population grows, the number of schools will grow, and the number of schools with football programs in our country will continue to grow as well. And as the number of football programs grow, we'll see more and more divisions with more and more conferences. There's no other way around it. It's the natural progression of things.

It absolutely is a broken sport and the P5 has no interest in upsetting the apple cart, I cannot understand how anyone believes the P5 wants to walk away from this system.

Without the possibility of buying 2-4 G5 games a year, the power structure and hierarchy within the P5 changes dramatically.

You think that Wake Forest/Kansas/Indiana et al of the world will vote to become the punching bags for the entire division? Or be able to be bought for paycheck games for ~$1.5M? Kansas could tell Bama to pay them $10M, play a 1-1, or pound sand.

I think if a divide comes it will be because the G5 forces the issue and tells the P5 we're tired of making up half a division and fighting for table scraps with no shot of ever even sniffing the postseason that actually means something. The G5 are FBS in name only, as long as the P5 has us under their thumb, they have no reason to breakaway.

(01-01-2019 07:36 PM)ghostofclt! Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:30 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:12 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  3% of FBS teams play in the playoffs and half the division have less than a <1% chance of ever qualifying.

This is a broken sport.

It's not a broken sport, not even a broken system. It is however a system that continues to evolve, and I think right now that we're getting close to the point at which the P5 will eventually break off from us. They'll have their national championship, the G5 will then have our own, and FCS will continue to have theirs. I've said for a while now that that's where I think we're gonna eventually head with this.

It's inevitable, not only because of the enormous gap between G5 and P5, but also because as our population grows, the number of schools will grow, and the number of schools with football programs in our country will continue to grow as well. And as the number of football programs grow, we'll see more and more divisions with more and more conferences. There's no other way around it. It's the natural progression of things.

clt goes the opposite way. Football will not have enough quality players to see more colleges adding programs,

The USA population at the turn of the century was 281,000,000 and is now over 326,000,000, so in 18 years it has increased by 45,000,000. There may not be enough quality players if the number of football programs are growing at a faster rate. But if that's the case, it's even more reason for there to be more divisions since it would mean the disparity between the quality of football being played would be even greater than it is now.

(01-01-2019 07:45 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:30 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:12 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  3% of FBS teams play in the playoffs and half the division have less than a <1% chance of ever qualifying.

This is a broken sport.

It's not a broken sport, not even a broken system. It is however a system that continues to evolve, which is in transition right now. and I think that we're currently getting close to the point at which the P5 will eventually break off from us. They'll have their national championship, the G5 will then have our own, and FCS will continue to have theirs. I've said for a while now that that's where I think we're gonna eventually head with this.

It's inevitable, not only because of the enormous gap between G5 and P5, but also because as our population grows, the number of schools will grow, and the number of schools with football programs in our country will continue to grow as well. And as the number of football programs grow, we'll see more and more divisions with more and more conferences. There's no other way around it. It's the natural progression of things.

It absolutely is a broken sport and the P5 has no interest in upsetting the apple cart, I cannot understand how anyone believes the P5 wants to walk away from this system.

Without the possibility of buying 2-4 G5 games a year, the power structure and hierarchy within the P5 changes dramatically.

You think that Wake Forest/Kansas/Indiana et al of the world will vote to become the punching bags for the entire division? Or be able to be bought for paycheck games for ~$1.5M? Kansas could tell Bama to pay them $10M, play a 1-1, or pound sand.

I think if a divide comes it will be because the G5 forces the issue and tells the P5 we're tired of making up half a division and fighting for table scraps with no shot of ever even sniffing the postseason that actually means something. The G5 are FBS in name only, as long as the P5 has us under their thumb, they have no reason to breakaway.

No one wants to be a punching bag, but there will always be punching bag programs in every football division unless those programs step up and force someone else to become the punching bags. It's just how things are, and always will be. And those that don't wanna go along with it, can't keep up, or just aren't wanted, might be forced out and left behind, much like Houston, SMU, and Rice were when the Southwest Conference disbanded and the new Big 12 was formed.

And yes, the G5 are indeed FBS in name only, which is why I think it's only a matter of time before the line between us is clearcut. We'll just agree to disagree on that.

Allow all conference champs in the playoffs and you would see a vast improvement in a number of programs at the G5 level. Right now, the depth of a P5 school is what separates them from the better G5 schools. Once you give every program a legitimate shot at a playoff, it would send more quality players. In a few years you would see top G5s legitimately competing with P5s. Too bad they will never let it happen. Nothing else is fair.

(01-01-2019 07:58 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:45 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:30 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:12 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  3% of FBS teams play in the playoffs and half the division have less than a <1% chance of ever qualifying.

This is a broken sport.

It's not a broken sport, not even a broken system. It is however a system that continues to evolve, which is in transition right now. and I think that we're currently getting close to the point at which the P5 will eventually break off from us. They'll have their national championship, the G5 will then have our own, and FCS will continue to have theirs. I've said for a while now that that's where I think we're gonna eventually head with this.

It's inevitable, not only because of the enormous gap between G5 and P5, but also because as our population grows, the number of schools will grow, and the number of schools with football programs in our country will continue to grow as well. And as the number of football programs grow, we'll see more and more divisions with more and more conferences. There's no other way around it. It's the natural progression of things.

It absolutely is a broken sport and the P5 has no interest in upsetting the apple cart, I cannot understand how anyone believes the P5 wants to walk away from this system.

Without the possibility of buying 2-4 G5 games a year, the power structure and hierarchy within the P5 changes dramatically.

You think that Wake Forest/Kansas/Indiana et al of the world will vote to become the punching bags for the entire division? Or be able to be bought for paycheck games for ~$1.5M? Kansas could tell Bama to pay them $10M, play a 1-1, or pound sand.

I think if a divide comes it will be because the G5 forces the issue and tells the P5 we're tired of making up half a division and fighting for table scraps with no shot of ever even sniffing the postseason that actually means something. The G5 are FBS in name only, as long as the P5 has us under their thumb, they have no reason to breakaway.

No one wants to be a punching bag, but there will always be punching bag programs in every football division unless those programs step up and force someone else to become the punching bags. It's just how things are, and always will be. And those that don't wanna go along with it, can't keep up, or just aren't wanted, might be forced out and left behind, much like Houston, SMU, and Rice were when the Southwest Conference disbanded and the new Big 12 was formed.

And yes, the G5 are indeed FBS in name only, which is why I think it's only a matter of time before the line between us is clearcut. We'll just agree to disagree on that.

I just do not see how anyone can believe in the logistics of this separation.

The current bottom of the P5 give up the chance of playing in bowl game, the current middle of the P5 ends up having to scrap for bowl eligibility annually and the top of the P5 will have to give up having eight home games nearly every year or fork over exponentially more money to do so.

The shark can survive without the remora, but they know how much more comfortable their life is with the remoras around.

Personally I'm tired of this broken mess and I hope the collective G5 brass starts upping their fight, the worst that can happen is speed along something you believe is inevitable anyhow.

(12-31-2018 11:31 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(12-31-2018 08:42 PM)Tintin Wrote:  I don’t let a conference champ get an automatic bid.

Pittsburgh beat Clemson in the ACC final and they should get in this season at 8-5?

This was my biggest problem under the old system.

Do away with conf championships. Regular season conf. champ. They’re just a money grab anyway.

I don’t do that either.
Every team that loses three is out.
Find good teams from the two loss teams. You lose three of 12, you don’t belong in a playoff.

(01-01-2019 09:04 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:58 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:45 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:30 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:12 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  3% of FBS teams play in the playoffs and half the division have less than a <1% chance of ever qualifying.

This is a broken sport.

It's not a broken sport, not even a broken system. It is however a system that continues to evolve, which is in transition right now. and I think that we're currently getting close to the point at which the P5 will eventually break off from us. They'll have their national championship, the G5 will then have our own, and FCS will continue to have theirs. I've said for a while now that that's where I think we're gonna eventually head with this.

It's inevitable, not only because of the enormous gap between G5 and P5, but also because as our population grows, the number of schools will grow, and the number of schools with football programs in our country will continue to grow as well. And as the number of football programs grow, we'll see more and more divisions with more and more conferences. There's no other way around it. It's the natural progression of things.

It absolutely is a broken sport and the P5 has no interest in upsetting the apple cart, I cannot understand how anyone believes the P5 wants to walk away from this system.

Without the possibility of buying 2-4 G5 games a year, the power structure and hierarchy within the P5 changes dramatically.

You think that Wake Forest/Kansas/Indiana et al of the world will vote to become the punching bags for the entire division? Or be able to be bought for paycheck games for ~$1.5M? Kansas could tell Bama to pay them $10M, play a 1-1, or pound sand.

I think if a divide comes it will be because the G5 forces the issue and tells the P5 we're tired of making up half a division and fighting for table scraps with no shot of ever even sniffing the postseason that actually means something. The G5 are FBS in name only, as long as the P5 has us under their thumb, they have no reason to breakaway.

No one wants to be a punching bag, but there will always be punching bag programs in every football division unless those programs step up and force someone else to become the punching bags. It's just how things are, and always will be. And those that don't wanna go along with it, can't keep up, or just aren't wanted, might be forced out and left behind, much like Houston, SMU, and Rice were when the Southwest Conference disbanded and the new Big 12 was formed.

And yes, the G5 are indeed FBS in name only, which is why I think it's only a matter of time before the line between us is clearcut. We'll just agree to disagree on that.

I just do not see how anyone can believe in the logistics of this separation.

The current bottom of the P5 give up the chance of playing in bowl game, the current middle of the P5 ends up having to scrap for bowl eligibility annually and the top of the P5 will have to give up having eight home games nearly every year or fork over exponentially more money to do so.

The shark can survive without the remora, but they know how much more comfortable their life is with the remoras around.

Personally I'm tired of this broken mess and I hope the collective G5 brass starts upping their fight, the worst that can happen is speed along something you believe is inevitable anyhow.

The bottom of the P5 already give up a chance to play in bowl games. Because of the exhausting number of bowl games, .500 teams typically still get in though, and there's no reason to believe that would change.

The bowl games have already been restructured to accommodate the current 4-team tournament, as the Cotton and Orange Bowls are used for the semis. So if the G5 and P5 eventually do separate, as I think they will, why couldn't other bowl games be restructured to accommodate both a G5 tournament on one hand, and a P5 tournament on the other?

As for the P5 giving up home games, tell me which P5 plays 8 home games. I don't know of any, but maybe I missed one somewhere. I know that many P5's, if not most, play 7 home games though. But if there were a separation, why couldn't the P5 still allow one win against a G5 to remain eligible for their own bowls and/or playoffs, just as we're currently still allowed one win against an FCS toward our own bowl eligibility? And why wouldn't they still be able to host that game with a big payout to one of our schools just as they do now?

As for the shark needing us to live in comfort, that's just a no. With the money from rich donors and networks coming in annually, they don't need us for ****...lol. None of that would change if the split were made, and money from bowl games, while valuable to us, is chump change to them. That's not where they get the majority of their revenue anyway, and they'd still be just as comfortable as they are now.

(01-01-2019 09:59 PM)Tintin Wrote:  

(12-31-2018 11:31 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(12-31-2018 08:42 PM)Tintin Wrote:  I don’t let a conference champ get an automatic bid.

Pittsburgh beat Clemson in the ACC final and they should get in this season at 8-5?

This was my biggest problem under the old system.

Do away with conf championships. Regular season conf. champ. They’re just a money grab anyway.

I don’t do that either.
Every team that loses three is out.
Find good teams from the two loss teams. You lose three of 12, you don’t belong in a playoff.

Hard to do away with conference championship games with conferences as large as fourteen members.

The truly fairest way of doing this would be realigning into thirteen conferences of ten, nine game conference scheduling, turn over OOC scheduling to an independent body and do away with multi year OOC series, if two schools, particularly in the case of rivalries, would like to petition to play one another OOC they can do so.

In that system you could have 13 true conference champs with no CCG and add 3 at-large(or 11) and have a real playoff.

But I have a better chance of winning the powerball the mega millions and a date with Emma Watson in the same week than ever seeing that come to fruition.

(01-01-2019 10:11 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 09:04 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:58 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:45 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:30 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  It's not a broken sport, not even a broken system. It is however a system that continues to evolve, which is in transition right now. and I think that we're currently getting close to the point at which the P5 will eventually break off from us. They'll have their national championship, the G5 will then have our own, and FCS will continue to have theirs. I've said for a while now that that's where I think we're gonna eventually head with this.

It's inevitable, not only because of the enormous gap between G5 and P5, but also because as our population grows, the number of schools will grow, and the number of schools with football programs in our country will continue to grow as well. And as the number of football programs grow, we'll see more and more divisions with more and more conferences. There's no other way around it. It's the natural progression of things.

It absolutely is a broken sport and the P5 has no interest in upsetting the apple cart, I cannot understand how anyone believes the P5 wants to walk away from this system.

Without the possibility of buying 2-4 G5 games a year, the power structure and hierarchy within the P5 changes dramatically.

You think that Wake Forest/Kansas/Indiana et al of the world will vote to become the punching bags for the entire division? Or be able to be bought for paycheck games for ~$1.5M? Kansas could tell Bama to pay them $10M, play a 1-1, or pound sand.

I think if a divide comes it will be because the G5 forces the issue and tells the P5 we're tired of making up half a division and fighting for table scraps with no shot of ever even sniffing the postseason that actually means something. The G5 are FBS in name only, as long as the P5 has us under their thumb, they have no reason to breakaway.

No one wants to be a punching bag, but there will always be punching bag programs in every football division unless those programs step up and force someone else to become the punching bags. It's just how things are, and always will be. And those that don't wanna go along with it, can't keep up, or just aren't wanted, might be forced out and left behind, much like Houston, SMU, and Rice were when the Southwest Conference disbanded and the new Big 12 was formed.

And yes, the G5 are indeed FBS in name only, which is why I think it's only a matter of time before the line between us is clearcut. We'll just agree to disagree on that.

I just do not see how anyone can believe in the logistics of this separation.

The current bottom of the P5 give up the chance of playing in bowl game, the current middle of the P5 ends up having to scrap for bowl eligibility annually and the top of the P5 will have to give up having eight home games nearly every year or fork over exponentially more money to do so.

The shark can survive without the remora, but they know how much more comfortable their life is with the remoras around.

Personally I'm tired of this broken mess and I hope the collective G5 brass starts upping their fight, the worst that can happen is speed along something you believe is inevitable anyhow.

The bottom of the P5 already give up a chance to play in bowl games. Because of the exhausting number of bowl games, .500 teams typically still get in though, and there's no reason to believe that would change.

The bowl games have already been restructured to accommodate the current 4-team tournament, as the Cotton and Orange Bowls are used for the semis. So if the G5 and P5 eventually do separate, as I think they will, why couldn't other bowl games be restructured to accommodate both a G5 tournament on one hand, and a P5 tournament on the other?

As for the P5 giving up home games, tell me which P5 plays 8 home games. I don't know of any, but maybe I missed one somewhere. I know that many P5's, if not most, play 7 home games though. But if there were a separation, why couldn't the P5 still allow one win against a G5 to remain eligible for their own bowls and/or playoffs, just as we're currently still allowed one win against an FCS toward our own bowl eligibility? And why wouldn't they still be able to host that game with a big payout to one of our schools just as they do now?

As for the shark needing us to live in comfort, that's just a no. With the money from rich donors and networks coming in annually, they don't need us for ****...lol. None of that would change if the split were made, and money from bowl games, while valuable to us, is chump change to them. That's not where they get the majority of their revenue anyway, and they'd still be just as comfortable as they are now.

There are countless P5s who got bowl eligible by scheduling 2-4 FCS/G5 programs, even still allowing one G5 game would mean the P5 programs that occassionally get bowl eligible would likely never get bowl eligible and those middle tier P5s that are perennially 6-8 wins and do it on the backs of 2-4 G5/FCS games would have a very different reality.

You aren't looking at things clearly, the remora analogy is spot on, like I said, the P5 can undoubtedly survive without us, but you don't have a clue if you don't believe we make their life dramatically more comfortable.

(01-01-2019 10:40 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 10:11 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 09:04 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:58 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 07:45 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  It absolutely is a broken sport and the P5 has no interest in upsetting the apple cart, I cannot understand how anyone believes the P5 wants to walk away from this system.

Without the possibility of buying 2-4 G5 games a year, the power structure and hierarchy within the P5 changes dramatically.

You think that Wake Forest/Kansas/Indiana et al of the world will vote to become the punching bags for the entire division? Or be able to be bought for paycheck games for ~$1.5M? Kansas could tell Bama to pay them $10M, play a 1-1, or pound sand.

I think if a divide comes it will be because the G5 forces the issue and tells the P5 we're tired of making up half a division and fighting for table scraps with no shot of ever even sniffing the postseason that actually means something. The G5 are FBS in name only, as long as the P5 has us under their thumb, they have no reason to breakaway.

No one wants to be a punching bag, but there will always be punching bag programs in every football division unless those programs step up and force someone else to become the punching bags. It's just how things are, and always will be. And those that don't wanna go along with it, can't keep up, or just aren't wanted, might be forced out and left behind, much like Houston, SMU, and Rice were when the Southwest Conference disbanded and the new Big 12 was formed.

And yes, the G5 are indeed FBS in name only, which is why I think it's only a matter of time before the line between us is clearcut. We'll just agree to disagree on that.

I just do not see how anyone can believe in the logistics of this separation.

The current bottom of the P5 give up the chance of playing in bowl game, the current middle of the P5 ends up having to scrap for bowl eligibility annually and the top of the P5 will have to give up having eight home games nearly every year or fork over exponentially more money to do so.

The shark can survive without the remora, but they know how much more comfortable their life is with the remoras around.

Personally I'm tired of this broken mess and I hope the collective G5 brass starts upping their fight, the worst that can happen is speed along something you believe is inevitable anyhow.

The bottom of the P5 already give up a chance to play in bowl games. Because of the exhausting number of bowl games, .500 teams typically still get in though, and there's no reason to believe that would change.

The bowl games have already been restructured to accommodate the current 4-team tournament, as the Cotton and Orange Bowls are used for the semis. So if the G5 and P5 eventually do separate, as I think they will, why couldn't other bowl games be restructured to accommodate both a G5 tournament on one hand, and a P5 tournament on the other?

As for the P5 giving up home games, tell me which P5 plays 8 home games. I don't know of any, but maybe I missed one somewhere. I know that many P5's, if not most, play 7 home games though. But if there were a separation, why couldn't the P5 still allow one win against a G5 to remain eligible for their own bowls and/or playoffs, just as we're currently still allowed one win against an FCS toward our own bowl eligibility? And why wouldn't they still be able to host that game with a big payout to one of our schools just as they do now?

As for the shark needing us to live in comfort, that's just a no. With the money from rich donors and networks coming in annually, they don't need us for ****...lol. None of that would change if the split were made, and money from bowl games, while valuable to us, is chump change to them. That's not where they get the majority of their revenue anyway, and they'd still be just as comfortable as they are now.

There are countless P5s who got bowl eligible by scheduling 2-4 FCS/G5 programs, even still allowing one G5 game would mean the P5 programs that occassionally get bowl eligible would likely never get bowl eligible and those middle tier P5s that are perennially 6-8 wins and do it on the backs of 2-4 G5/FCS games would have a very different reality.

You aren't looking at things clearly, the remora analogy is spot on, like I said, the P5 can undoubtedly survive without us, but you don't have a clue if you don't believe we make their life dramatically more comfortable.

Maybe I'm not making myself clear, or you're not reading all of what I'm writing, so I'll try again... P5 programs don't need bowl eligibility to make themselves feel good about who they are, or even for the revenue.

Here's what you're missing about all this... In our little G5 world, making a bowl game means the world because it means money and exposure we don't normally get. The Vanderbilts of the world get that exposure anyway, and they already get a helluva a lot more money just by virtue of their conference affiliation and their donors, not to mention, respect. Step out of your G5 bubble for a moment, and put yourself in the shoes of the P5, because your perspective isn't theirs.

You're also all over the place. You just got through saying P5's schedule G5's to pad their wins for bowl eligibility, implying our inferiority, and yet you're also trying to argue that G5 conference champions are deserving of entry into a national playoff tournament alongside those P5's just because they can beat other G5's...lol. As I said hours ago now, Boise State, the G5 flagship program, is 151-17 (.899) against G5's since 2003, and 26-17 (.605) against P5 programs. There's a HUGE difference between winning 90% of your games against G5 competition and winning only 60% against P5. We would laugh our asses off at any P5 school with a .605 record being talked about as a candidate for a national championship. And guess what... Winning 90% (and in some cases, even 100%) of your games against G5 impresses other G5, not the P5.

Jesus, can we just finally agree to disagree, because I'm not one for round-and-rounds, and have other things to do. lol

3% of the division get into the playoffs, that's nonsense.

The major MBB conferences pad their schedule with teams from lesser conferences, those conferences all get auto bids. I dont see how acknowledging the fact that G5 conferences pad win totals for P5 conferences and suggesting that the G5 be given a single conditional spot in a 8 team format is "all over the place".

If you have "other things to do" no one is forcing you to continue responding.

(01-01-2019 11:30 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  3% of the division get into the playoffs, that's nonsense.

The major MBB conferences pad their schedule with teams from lesser conferences, those conferences all get auto bids. I dont see how acknowledging the fact that G5 conferences pad win totals for P5 conferences and suggesting that the G5 be given a single conditional spot in a 8 team format is "all over the place".

If you have "other things to do" no one is forcing you to continue responding.

Congratulations. Now I know you're not reading what I'm writing, because also hours ago, I mentioned that I'd be fine with an 8-team playoff, with one spot given to the top G5. What I've been arguing against this whole time is a 16-team format featuring five G5 representatives, which is the original subject for the thread. Well, that was fun.

(01-02-2019 12:09 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(01-01-2019 11:30 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  3% of the division get into the playoffs, that's nonsense.

The major MBB conferences pad their schedule with teams from lesser conferences, those conferences all get auto bids. I dont see how acknowledging the fact that G5 conferences pad win totals for P5 conferences and suggesting that the G5 be given a single conditional spot in a 8 team format is "all over the place".

If you have "other things to do" no one is forcing you to continue responding.

Congratulations. Now I know you're not reading what I'm writing, because also hours ago, I mentioned that I'd be fine with an 8-team playoff, with one spot given to the top G5. What I've been arguing against this whole time is a 16-team format featuring five G5 representatives, which is the original subject for the thread. Well, that was fun.

Oh I want a 16 team(10+6) format, but I realize we aren't going from four to 16(if ever).

Glad to know what you're "fine" with though...