(08-02-2020 08:38 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote: (08-02-2020 05:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote: (08-02-2020 01:17 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote: (08-02-2020 10:07 AM)quo vadis Wrote: I think it's also a warning shot to the G5, not to support any such moves in NCAA councils, as it would be catastrophic for the G5 to be left out.
But if the popular thought is the G-5 will eventually be left out then it really doesn't matter if they support the NCAA or not. Again, it's like to P-5 saying to the G-5, "if you wanna to continue sucking our tits a little longer than you better do what we say!"
I don't think it would be catastrophic for the entire G-5 but it would definitely weed out the schools that can survive from those who can't. At some point the G-5 is going to have to figure out how to survive on its own without the 1 to 2 million dollars hand me down from P-5 schools. It's long been time for the G-5 to cut the umbilical cord from the P-5.
Well, the popular thought could very well be wrong - absent a compelling event I don't think the P5 is going to leave the NCAA any time soon - so why do something to provoke something that could induce it? I mean, if your life depends on sucking a hind tit, then yes, it makes sense to do what the tit-holder wants, LOL.
IMO, the P5 separating from the G5 is a entire net negative to the G5. Do not see how that could possibly be helpful. Basically, national interest in college football is driven by the high-value P5 teams. Separate from them and what would the G5 have left?
I don't think the G5 life depends on it. And what does the G5 has now? A P5 tit they can take away at anytime.
G5 is never going to make P5 money but it can find another way to make the money they currently get now and maybe even a little more. People that say something can't get done are followers. G5 need leaders; not wait to see when the P5 says it's time for you to die.
I agree that it is possible for G5 football to survive, and even thrive, in the absence of the P5 and that the G5 should be proactive in trying to become better off.
But right now, the whole G5 model is based on being associated, via the CFP and FBS, with the P5. There are deep imbrication's. For example:
1) G5 cost structures, from facilities to salaries, are deeply influenced by the P5. Why does a school like Akron build a white-elephant football stadium? To present a certain "big time" image of themselves that is derived from P5 standards.
2) Even more importantly, in the aspirational sense, G5 programs exist because there is the fundamental hope/belief that if we (our school) stick with this, we will become P5. There isn't a single G5 program that is happy being G5, all envision themselves as being P5, meaning having the resources and national visibility and stature of the top P5 programs. That's what drives the willingness to soak students for $25 million in subsidies each year. The notion that we are building toward that P5 goal. As crazy as it sounds, in Florida schools like USF and FAU and UCF see themselves rubbing elbows as full equals with Florida and FSU. In Texas schools like North Texas and Texas State see the same with Texas and Texas AM, and i bet in Alabama, strivers like UAB and USA have a vision of one day competing home and home with Alabama and Auburn. That's what funds the new stadiums, the coaches salaries, the $25m operating losses.
If you take that away, then some other kind of over-arching motive force for the enterprise will be needed to take its place, and I'm not sure what that would be.
So I'm not convinced there really is a "G5 space", as you call it, independent of the P5. To me, the G5 is kind of like a limbo, a purgatory. Take the P5 away and maybe FCS is the only stable space for current G5 schools.