(01-11-2021 12:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 11:11 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 10:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 01:42 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(01-09-2021 01:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Again, I go back to this option with the 5-1-2 model: The G5 team must meet certain criteria to make the playoff. Otherwise, there will no G5 team for that season and three at-large participants instead of two. Simple.

Now, and admittedly, what those criterion would be ...

Why does there have to be criterion only for the G5 entry? Is there criterion for each of the 5 P5 auto bids? Who says all 5 P5 champs would be in the top 8 each year? You could theoretically have a 3 or 4 loss champ.

I think the CFP needs to include the best G5 team to avoid an eventual anti-trust lawsuit, if they don't do it. Right now, at 4 slots, they can hide behind the fact that they don't allow all P5 champs in, either. At 8, they wouldn't have that cover.

Problem with 5/1/2 is that who the "best" G5 team is will be totally subjective, chosen by a committee and thus prone to the same biases that many claim mar the selection of the current CFP teams. Look at this year - on paper, Coastal was at least as impressive as Cincy, but Coastal was always ranked well behind them, because Cincy is a higher profile program. Cincy had the same bias working against Coastal that Ohio State had working against Cincy. That's likely the way the G5 autobid would work - higher profile programs like Cincy, UCF, Memphis, Houston and Boise would have a brand recognition advantage over teams from the MAC, CUSA and Sun Belt.

Also, I think 5/1/2 is more prone to anti-trust than straight 8, because with straight 8, like the CFP and BCS, no conference has an autobid. With 5/1/2, each P5 would but each G5 would not, that's a formal distinction that could cause legal trouble.

I absolutely agree with this.

You've mentioned earlier that the biggest beneficiary of the P5+ 1 G5 + 2 option would be the AAC. There is a huge gap between the perception of Memphis, Houston, UCF, Cincy, Boise, etc and the perception any Sun Belt team. It's probably a bigger gap than the gap between UCF and the competitors for 2nd place in the SEC.

I'm laughing at all of this because Quo won't call it what it is. The bias is market size and viewer base. UCF doesn't compete with 6th place in the SEC when it comes to national draw. Records and how good you may be aren't relevant. Cincinnati's advantage over Coastal Carolina is not in ability, but in market size for an event which is televised for profit.

I get totally bumfuzzled listening to the mental gymnastics of denial on this board. Notre Dame got in over A&M because of national draw. Ohio State got in over Baylor and TCU in the past because of national draw. The CFP is a for profit enterprise to which ESPN holds the rights. The selection committee functions as a thin veil to cover the fact that the 4 participants are only initially considered on record but finally selected for advertising profits.

The AAC is no better than the Sun Belt and was second to them in performance this year among the G5. But the AAC was created for niche media purposes to reach cities within the top 100 demographics where the P5 didn't actually have a school. Memphis, Philadelphia, Houston, Cincinnati, Orlando, Tampa/St. Petersburg, New Orleans, Tulsa, etc. the few that don't fall into that category are schools which have competed well with solid attendance.

Name me the Sun Belt schools located in markets of this size???

So drop the genital measuring from a competitive standpoint and call it what it is, business! Why are the SEC and Big 10 stronger than the Big 12 which is stronger than the ACC or PAC? Viewers!

What has realignment been about? Shaping market reach to maximize profits before technology allowed for accurate viewer counts. Now it's about total viewers which is why realignment is still going on.

It is not, and has not been about, who has better football teams and who has better basketball teams. Only the deluded and imbecilic cling to those notions because they don't want to believe or admit that what they love so dearly isn't about who has the best team. It's about who has the best team that draws the biggest viewership. And as long as corporate America through the networks they own makes a profit by broadcasting the games it will remain this way.

This is why the propaganda is against 4 champs or even 8 champs playing it off. Without selection committees to maximize the national reach by the inclusion of schools that reach the demographics that the frontrunners don't reach the networks would fail to cover expenditures or meet revenue projections.

The NCAA tourney included so many small schools and then seeds them against the goliaths because those kinds of mismatches are appealing to the public and perfect cover for a system that usually only has one true Cinderella in the sweet sixteen and then that school is usually a P5 or solid basketball school with an established brand. The ratings for the tourney are much higher and advertising more profitable from the Sweet 16 through the Final Flour so who gives a flip at the Networks what happens in the first couple of rounds. That's where the gamblers and small school fans get their interest invested.

If you could play a football game every 2 days maybe the CFP would be larger. You can't so it will never be the NCAA tourney. Maybe we go to 8 games but the CCG money isn't split between all conferences so the Big 10 and SEC have no incentive.

Again it's business and its all about money and has nothing to do with fan fantasies and I sincerely doubt the Networks have an interest in losing the safety net of the selection committees as much as all of us hate them. They exist to maximize ad revenue. Never forget that and you won't be so pissed at the wrong people when your small market school doesn't get the recognition it deserves and is passed over not only for the CFP but for the Big Bowls, which are also about money.

As a moderator what pisses me off are the number of angry fans of smaller schools that ignorantly think all P5 fans and people from larger conferences in the G5 are out to get them. We fans have no voice and almost all of us want a fairer system. But it isn't about sports, who is the best, or who had the most outstanding year. It's about profits. If you are pissed aim your frustration at ESPN and FOX. But please quit speculating a myriad of BS reasons it is like it is when there is only truly one answer, profits.

The Sun Belt has Atlanta which is one of the best in the South and the AAC does not.

In all seriousness when college football became about money that is when the sport took a bad turn. A good team is a good team regardless of their market but since money drives the bus the larger market teams win out. The teams that are smaller missed the big time bus way back in the day for whatever reason and are really suffering the consequences of that time period now.

I think we know that not ALL are but some are. The attitude that says the name on your chest automatically makes you better when that isn't true in reality. Vanderbilt, Rutgers, Kansas, probably couldn't even win the AAC or even Sun Belt most years, in football. However they wear the coveted SEC, Big 10, or Big XII on their chest so that makes them "better". I think G5 fans just want respect for what they are working hard to accomplish but the avg. Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, or Ohio State fan craps on them all the time for not being them. I remember growing up and being lucky to see Alabama win 6 games and never get air time on ESPN. Now some fans feel so entitled it's ridiculous.

You're right though, money is the root of the issues within college athletics.

(01-11-2021 12:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 11:11 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 10:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 01:42 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(01-09-2021 01:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Again, I go back to this option with the 5-1-2 model: The G5 team must meet certain criteria to make the playoff. Otherwise, there will no G5 team for that season and three at-large participants instead of two. Simple.

Now, and admittedly, what those criterion would be ...

Why does there have to be criterion only for the G5 entry? Is there criterion for each of the 5 P5 auto bids? Who says all 5 P5 champs would be in the top 8 each year? You could theoretically have a 3 or 4 loss champ.

I think the CFP needs to include the best G5 team to avoid an eventual anti-trust lawsuit, if they don't do it. Right now, at 4 slots, they can hide behind the fact that they don't allow all P5 champs in, either. At 8, they wouldn't have that cover.

Problem with 5/1/2 is that who the "best" G5 team is will be totally subjective, chosen by a committee and thus prone to the same biases that many claim mar the selection of the current CFP teams. Look at this year - on paper, Coastal was at least as impressive as Cincy, but Coastal was always ranked well behind them, because Cincy is a higher profile program. Cincy had the same bias working against Coastal that Ohio State had working against Cincy. That's likely the way the G5 autobid would work - higher profile programs like Cincy, UCF, Memphis, Houston and Boise would have a brand recognition advantage over teams from the MAC, CUSA and Sun Belt.

Also, I think 5/1/2 is more prone to anti-trust than straight 8, because with straight 8, like the CFP and BCS, no conference has an autobid. With 5/1/2, each P5 would but each G5 would not, that's a formal distinction that could cause legal trouble.

I absolutely agree with this.

You've mentioned earlier that the biggest beneficiary of the P5+ 1 G5 + 2 option would be the AAC. There is a huge gap between the perception of Memphis, Houston, UCF, Cincy, Boise, etc and the perception any Sun Belt team. It's probably a bigger gap than the gap between UCF and the competitors for 2nd place in the SEC.

I'm laughing at all of this because Quo won't call it what it is. The bias is market size and viewer base. UCF doesn't compete with 6th place in the SEC when it comes to national draw. Records and how good you may be aren't relevant. Cincinnati's advantage over Coastal Carolina is not in ability, but in market size for an event which is televised for profit.

I get totally bumfuzzled listening to the mental gymnastics of denial on this board. Notre Dame got in over A&M because of national draw. Ohio State got in over Baylor and TCU in the past because of national draw. The CFP is a for profit enterprise to which ESPN holds the rights. The selection committee functions as a thin veil to cover the fact that the 4 participants are only initially considered on record but finally selected for advertising profits.

The AAC is no better than the Sun Belt and was second to them in performance this year among the G5. But the AAC was created for niche media purposes to reach cities within the top 100 demographics where the P5 didn't actually have a school. Memphis, Philadelphia, Houston, Cincinnati, Orlando, Tampa/St. Petersburg, New Orleans, Tulsa, etc. the few that don't fall into that category are schools which have competed well with solid attendance.

Name me the Sun Belt schools located in markets of this size???

So drop the genital measuring from a competitive standpoint and call it what it is, business! Why are the SEC and Big 10 stronger than the Big 12 which is stronger than the ACC or PAC? Viewers!

What has realignment been about? Shaping market reach to maximize profits before technology allowed for accurate viewer counts. Now it's about total viewers which is why realignment is still going on.

It is not, and has not been about, who has better football teams and who has better basketball teams. Only the deluded and imbecilic cling to those notions because they don't want to believe or admit that what they love so dearly isn't about who has the best team. It's about who has the best team that draws the biggest viewership. And as long as corporate America through the networks they own makes a profit by broadcasting the games it will remain this way.

This is why the propaganda is against 4 champs or even 8 champs playing it off. Without selection committees to maximize the national reach by the inclusion of schools that reach the demographics that the frontrunners don't reach the networks would fail to cover expenditures or meet revenue projections.

The NCAA tourney included so many small schools and then seeds them against the goliaths because those kinds of mismatches are appealing to the public and perfect cover for a system that usually only has one true Cinderella in the sweet sixteen and then that school is usually a P5 or solid basketball school with an established brand. The ratings for the tourney are much higher and advertising more profitable from the Sweet 16 through the Final Flour so who gives a flip at the Networks what happens in the first couple of rounds. That's where the gamblers and small school fans get their interest invested.

If you could play a football game every 2 days maybe the CFP would be larger. You can't so it will never be the NCAA tourney. Maybe we go to 8 games but the CCG money isn't split between all conferences so the Big 10 and SEC have no incentive.

Again it's business and its all about money and has nothing to do with fan fantasies and I sincerely doubt the Networks have an interest in losing the safety net of the selection committees as much as all of us hate them. They exist to maximize ad revenue. Never forget that and you won't be so pissed at the wrong people when your small market school doesn't get the recognition it deserves and is passed over not only for the CFP but for the Big Bowls, which are also about money.

As a moderator what pisses me off are the number of angry fans of smaller schools that ignorantly think all P5 fans and people from larger conferences in the G5 are out to get them. We fans have no voice and almost all of us want a fairer system. But it isn't about sports, who is the best, or who had the most outstanding year. It's about profits. If you are pissed aim your frustration at ESPN and FOX. But please quit speculating a myriad of BS reasons it is like it is when there is only truly one answer, profits.

After reading this, I put down my Beyond Meat vegan sausage dressed with Daiya cheese (which is derived from cassava and arrowroot), smiled and said to myself, "That posting was the work of a master."

Well done, JRsec.

(01-11-2021 01:48 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  After reading this, I put down my Beyond Meat vegan sausage dressed with Daiya cheese (which is derived from cassava and arrowroot), smiled and said to myself, "That posting was the work of a master."

Well done, JRsec.

I don't have any idea what you're eating.

(01-11-2021 12:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 11:11 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 10:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 01:42 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(01-09-2021 01:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Again, I go back to this option with the 5-1-2 model: The G5 team must meet certain criteria to make the playoff. Otherwise, there will no G5 team for that season and three at-large participants instead of two. Simple.

Now, and admittedly, what those criterion would be ...

Why does there have to be criterion only for the G5 entry? Is there criterion for each of the 5 P5 auto bids? Who says all 5 P5 champs would be in the top 8 each year? You could theoretically have a 3 or 4 loss champ.

I think the CFP needs to include the best G5 team to avoid an eventual anti-trust lawsuit, if they don't do it. Right now, at 4 slots, they can hide behind the fact that they don't allow all P5 champs in, either. At 8, they wouldn't have that cover.

Problem with 5/1/2 is that who the "best" G5 team is will be totally subjective, chosen by a committee and thus prone to the same biases that many claim mar the selection of the current CFP teams. Look at this year - on paper, Coastal was at least as impressive as Cincy, but Coastal was always ranked well behind them, because Cincy is a higher profile program. Cincy had the same bias working against Coastal that Ohio State had working against Cincy. That's likely the way the G5 autobid would work - higher profile programs like Cincy, UCF, Memphis, Houston and Boise would have a brand recognition advantage over teams from the MAC, CUSA and Sun Belt.

Also, I think 5/1/2 is more prone to anti-trust than straight 8, because with straight 8, like the CFP and BCS, no conference has an autobid. With 5/1/2, each P5 would but each G5 would not, that's a formal distinction that could cause legal trouble.

I absolutely agree with this.

You've mentioned earlier that the biggest beneficiary of the P5+ 1 G5 + 2 option would be the AAC. There is a huge gap between the perception of Memphis, Houston, UCF, Cincy, Boise, etc and the perception any Sun Belt team. It's probably a bigger gap than the gap between UCF and the competitors for 2nd place in the SEC.

I'm laughing at all of this because Quo won't call it what it is. The bias is market size and viewer base. UCF doesn't compete with 6th place in the SEC when it comes to national draw. Records and how good you may be aren't relevant. Cincinnati's advantage over Coastal Carolina is not in ability, but in market size for an event which is televised for profit.

I get totally bumfuzzled listening to the mental gymnastics of denial on this board. Notre Dame got in over A&M because of national draw. Ohio State got in over Baylor and TCU in the past because of national draw. The CFP is a for profit enterprise to which ESPN holds the rights. The selection committee functions as a thin veil to cover the fact that the 4 participants are only initially considered on record but finally selected for advertising profits.

The AAC is no better than the Sun Belt and was second to them in performance this year among the G5. But the AAC was created for niche media purposes to reach cities within the top 100 demographics where the P5 didn't actually have a school. Memphis, Philadelphia, Houston, Cincinnati, Orlando, Tampa/St. Petersburg, New Orleans, Tulsa, etc. the few that don't fall into that category are schools which have competed well with solid attendance.

Name me the Sun Belt schools located in markets of this size???

So drop the genital measuring from a competitive standpoint and call it what it is, business! Why are the SEC and Big 10 stronger than the Big 12 which is stronger than the ACC or PAC? Viewers!

What has realignment been about? Shaping market reach to maximize profits before technology allowed for accurate viewer counts. Now it's about total viewers which is why realignment is still going on.

It is not, and has not been about, who has better football teams and who has better basketball teams. Only the deluded and imbecilic cling to those notions because they don't want to believe or admit that what they love so dearly isn't about who has the best team. It's about who has the best team that draws the biggest viewership. And as long as corporate America through the networks they own makes a profit by broadcasting the games it will remain this way.

This is why the propaganda is against 4 champs or even 8 champs playing it off. Without selection committees to maximize the national reach by the inclusion of schools that reach the demographics that the frontrunners don't reach the networks would fail to cover expenditures or meet revenue projections.

The NCAA tourney included so many small schools and then seeds them against the goliaths because those kinds of mismatches are appealing to the public and perfect cover for a system that usually only has one true Cinderella in the sweet sixteen and then that school is usually a P5 or solid basketball school with an established brand. The ratings for the tourney are much higher and advertising more profitable from the Sweet 16 through the Final Flour so who gives a flip at the Networks what happens in the first couple of rounds. That's where the gamblers and small school fans get their interest invested.

If you could play a football game every 2 days maybe the CFP would be larger. You can't so it will never be the NCAA tourney. Maybe we go to 8 games but the CCG money isn't split between all conferences so the Big 10 and SEC have no incentive.

Again it's business and its all about money and has nothing to do with fan fantasies and I sincerely doubt the Networks have an interest in losing the safety net of the selection committees as much as all of us hate them. They exist to maximize ad revenue. Never forget that and you won't be so pissed at the wrong people when your small market school doesn't get the recognition it deserves and is passed over not only for the CFP but for the Big Bowls, which are also about money.

As a moderator what pisses me off are the number of angry fans of smaller schools that ignorantly think all P5 fans and people from larger conferences in the G5 are out to get them. We fans have no voice and almost all of us want a fairer system. But it isn't about sports, who is the best, or who had the most outstanding year. It's about profits. If you are pissed aim your frustration at ESPN and FOX. But please quit speculating a myriad of BS reasons it is like it is when there is only truly one answer, profits.

I don't think anyone here would disagree with you as far as the current state of affairs. What I'd argue is whether it needs to stay that way. The NFL is more successful from a ratings perspective while being formatted toward competition and parity. You can say correlation isn't causation, but a fan of any NFL team can start the year wondering if this is their year. If all the AFC fans had to say nope from day 1, the NFL might not be so successful.

(01-11-2021 12:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 11:11 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 10:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 01:42 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(01-09-2021 01:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Again, I go back to this option with the 5-1-2 model: The G5 team must meet certain criteria to make the playoff. Otherwise, there will no G5 team for that season and three at-large participants instead of two. Simple.

Now, and admittedly, what those criterion would be ...

Why does there have to be criterion only for the G5 entry? Is there criterion for each of the 5 P5 auto bids? Who says all 5 P5 champs would be in the top 8 each year? You could theoretically have a 3 or 4 loss champ.

I think the CFP needs to include the best G5 team to avoid an eventual anti-trust lawsuit, if they don't do it. Right now, at 4 slots, they can hide behind the fact that they don't allow all P5 champs in, either. At 8, they wouldn't have that cover.

Problem with 5/1/2 is that who the "best" G5 team is will be totally subjective, chosen by a committee and thus prone to the same biases that many claim mar the selection of the current CFP teams. Look at this year - on paper, Coastal was at least as impressive as Cincy, but Coastal was always ranked well behind them, because Cincy is a higher profile program. Cincy had the same bias working against Coastal that Ohio State had working against Cincy. That's likely the way the G5 autobid would work - higher profile programs like Cincy, UCF, Memphis, Houston and Boise would have a brand recognition advantage over teams from the MAC, CUSA and Sun Belt.

Also, I think 5/1/2 is more prone to anti-trust than straight 8, because with straight 8, like the CFP and BCS, no conference has an autobid. With 5/1/2, each P5 would but each G5 would not, that's a formal distinction that could cause legal trouble.

I absolutely agree with this.

You've mentioned earlier that the biggest beneficiary of the P5+ 1 G5 + 2 option would be the AAC. There is a huge gap between the perception of Memphis, Houston, UCF, Cincy, Boise, etc and the perception any Sun Belt team. It's probably a bigger gap than the gap between UCF and the competitors for 2nd place in the SEC.

I'm laughing at all of this because Quo won't call it what it is. The bias is market size and viewer base. UCF doesn't compete with 6th place in the SEC when it comes to national draw. Records and how good you may be aren't relevant. Cincinnati's advantage over Coastal Carolina is not in ability, but in market size for an event which is televised for profit.

I get totally bumfuzzled listening to the mental gymnastics of denial on this board. Notre Dame got in over A&M because of national draw. Ohio State got in over Baylor and TCU in the past because of national draw. The CFP is a for profit enterprise to which ESPN holds the rights.

I would be last person to argue that money does not matter when it comes to anything, and for the most part I agree with you.

I'm just not sure brand value is as deterministic as you seem to think it is. E.g., in 2014, I would have voted for Ohio State to make the playoffs over Baylor and TCU, even though I didn't stand to make a dollar off of it. I thought that given the respective seasons, Ohio State had the best case. The simulated BCS formula, with voters and computers that didn't have a stake, said Ohio State belonged over them too.

And brand value is not all that closely related to media market size. Florida is in Gainesville, much smaller than Tampa, where USF is, but Florida is a far bigger brand name. Among the G5, Georgia State is in Atlanta, a bigger market than Memphis or Cincy, but Memphis and Cincy have bigger brand names. Market size and brand name are not all that closely linked.

(01-11-2021 03:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 12:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 11:11 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 10:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 01:42 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Why does there have to be criterion only for the G5 entry? Is there criterion for each of the 5 P5 auto bids? Who says all 5 P5 champs would be in the top 8 each year? You could theoretically have a 3 or 4 loss champ.

I think the CFP needs to include the best G5 team to avoid an eventual anti-trust lawsuit, if they don't do it. Right now, at 4 slots, they can hide behind the fact that they don't allow all P5 champs in, either. At 8, they wouldn't have that cover.

Problem with 5/1/2 is that who the "best" G5 team is will be totally subjective, chosen by a committee and thus prone to the same biases that many claim mar the selection of the current CFP teams. Look at this year - on paper, Coastal was at least as impressive as Cincy, but Coastal was always ranked well behind them, because Cincy is a higher profile program. Cincy had the same bias working against Coastal that Ohio State had working against Cincy. That's likely the way the G5 autobid would work - higher profile programs like Cincy, UCF, Memphis, Houston and Boise would have a brand recognition advantage over teams from the MAC, CUSA and Sun Belt.

Also, I think 5/1/2 is more prone to anti-trust than straight 8, because with straight 8, like the CFP and BCS, no conference has an autobid. With 5/1/2, each P5 would but each G5 would not, that's a formal distinction that could cause legal trouble.

I absolutely agree with this.

You've mentioned earlier that the biggest beneficiary of the P5+ 1 G5 + 2 option would be the AAC. There is a huge gap between the perception of Memphis, Houston, UCF, Cincy, Boise, etc and the perception any Sun Belt team. It's probably a bigger gap than the gap between UCF and the competitors for 2nd place in the SEC.

I'm laughing at all of this because Quo won't call it what it is. The bias is market size and viewer base. UCF doesn't compete with 6th place in the SEC when it comes to national draw. Records and how good you may be aren't relevant. Cincinnati's advantage over Coastal Carolina is not in ability, but in market size for an event which is televised for profit.

I get totally bumfuzzled listening to the mental gymnastics of denial on this board. Notre Dame got in over A&M because of national draw. Ohio State got in over Baylor and TCU in the past because of national draw. The CFP is a for profit enterprise to which ESPN holds the rights.

I would be last person to argue that money does not matter when it comes to anything, and for the most part I agree with you.

I'm just not sure brand value is as deterministic as you seem to think it is. E.g., in 2014, I would have voted for Ohio State to make the playoffs over Baylor and TCU, even though I didn't stand to make a dollar off of it. I thought that given the respective seasons, Ohio State had the best case. The simulated BCS formula, with voters and computers that didn't have a stake, said Ohio State belonged over them too.

And brand value is not all that closely related to media market size. Florida is in Gainesville, much smaller than Tampa, where USF is, but Florida is a far bigger brand name. Among the G5, Georgia State is in Atlanta, a bigger market than Memphis or Cincy, but Memphis and Cincy have bigger brand names. Market size and brand name are not all that closely linked.

You confuse the justifications of the networks with reason. Florida may be in Gainesville but they have alumni all over the state and have been pumping them out a lot longer than has South Florida. They have a national draw capability, though not that of an Alabama or Ohio State.

And you didn't read carefully. Actual ability to attract viewers has eclipsed just market considerations. The demographic (market) illustration for what separated the AAC from the other G5's including the Sunbelt which while it has a school in Atlanta so too does the ACC with Georgia Tech. The AAC was assembled for access to large city markets where there were no present P5 schools. DFW is large enough that having SMU counts.

There is always a quasi rational reason given by the committees for their decisions. I gave up swallowing tripe a long time ago. It is what it is and tonight two of the largest national draws will face off for a championship. As an Auburn fan it is galling that perhaps our best team since 1957 was snubbed in 2004 for U.S.C.. We had a number of first round and few few round draft picks that year and were unbeaten. But we hardly had the draw of U.S.C.. Funny how those things always work out in the favor of the network, especially since they decide and the teams don't have to earn it on the field. When we moved from the AP and UPI polls to determine a champion to the BCS and now to the CFP all we did is try three bowls of porridge. It was a beauty pageant with the polls with the majority of the sportswriters on the West Coast and in the Northeast, it was a beauty pageant with the BCS even at 2 schools, and now all we've done is settle on the bowl that wasn't too hot or too cold. The polls left people cold, the BCS committee pissed them off, and the 4 team committee selected playoffs has more or less placated them. But through it all the networks have helped to shape the results and in the last two iterations who gets to play for it. It is a for profit entertainment business and the big dollar media contracts is a bribe to keep the Athletic Departments from minding so much. Ah, but a bribe now couched in the rationale of who gets the most eyeballs. A reason always alleviates the guilt. There will always be as many explanations couched in some form of reason as are needed to convince the public that there is no smoke filled room though we see one weekly at the end of the season when they make the smoke filled room must see TV for the fans. But hey, nobody ever gets screwed by a panel of dignitaries right?

When we have a champs only playoff model, only then will I believe in reasonable fairness to the competitors.

(01-11-2021 02:38 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 01:48 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  After reading this, I put down my Beyond Meat vegan sausage dressed with Daiya cheese (which is derived from cassava and arrowroot), smiled and said to myself, "That posting was the work of a master."

Well done, JRsec.

I don't have any idea what you're eating.

Lol!!! I'm with you.

(01-11-2021 03:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 03:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 12:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 11:11 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-10-2021 10:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Problem with 5/1/2 is that who the "best" G5 team is will be totally subjective, chosen by a committee and thus prone to the same biases that many claim mar the selection of the current CFP teams. Look at this year - on paper, Coastal was at least as impressive as Cincy, but Coastal was always ranked well behind them, because Cincy is a higher profile program. Cincy had the same bias working against Coastal that Ohio State had working against Cincy. That's likely the way the G5 autobid would work - higher profile programs like Cincy, UCF, Memphis, Houston and Boise would have a brand recognition advantage over teams from the MAC, CUSA and Sun Belt.

Also, I think 5/1/2 is more prone to anti-trust than straight 8, because with straight 8, like the CFP and BCS, no conference has an autobid. With 5/1/2, each P5 would but each G5 would not, that's a formal distinction that could cause legal trouble.

I absolutely agree with this.

You've mentioned earlier that the biggest beneficiary of the P5+ 1 G5 + 2 option would be the AAC. There is a huge gap between the perception of Memphis, Houston, UCF, Cincy, Boise, etc and the perception any Sun Belt team. It's probably a bigger gap than the gap between UCF and the competitors for 2nd place in the SEC.

I'm laughing at all of this because Quo won't call it what it is. The bias is market size and viewer base. UCF doesn't compete with 6th place in the SEC when it comes to national draw. Records and how good you may be aren't relevant. Cincinnati's advantage over Coastal Carolina is not in ability, but in market size for an event which is televised for profit.

I get totally bumfuzzled listening to the mental gymnastics of denial on this board. Notre Dame got in over A&M because of national draw. Ohio State got in over Baylor and TCU in the past because of national draw. The CFP is a for profit enterprise to which ESPN holds the rights.

I would be last person to argue that money does not matter when it comes to anything, and for the most part I agree with you.

I'm just not sure brand value is as deterministic as you seem to think it is. E.g., in 2014, I would have voted for Ohio State to make the playoffs over Baylor and TCU, even though I didn't stand to make a dollar off of it. I thought that given the respective seasons, Ohio State had the best case. The simulated BCS formula, with voters and computers that didn't have a stake, said Ohio State belonged over them too.

And brand value is not all that closely related to media market size. Florida is in Gainesville, much smaller than Tampa, where USF is, but Florida is a far bigger brand name. Among the G5, Georgia State is in Atlanta, a bigger market than Memphis or Cincy, but Memphis and Cincy have bigger brand names. Market size and brand name are not all that closely linked.

You confuse the justifications of the networks with reason. Florida may be in Gainesville but they have alumni all over the state and have been pumping them out a lot longer than has South Florida. They have a national draw capability, though not that of an Alabama or Ohio State.

And you didn't read carefully. Actual ability to attract viewers has eclipsed just market considerations. The demographic (market) illustration for what separated the AAC from the other G5's including the Sunbelt which while it has a school in Atlanta so too does the ACC with Georgia Tech. The AAC was assembled for access to large city markets where there were no present P5 schools. DFW is large enough that having SMU counts.

There is always a quasi rational reason given by the committees for their decisions. I gave up swallowing tripe a long time ago. It is what it is and tonight two of the largest national draws will face off for a championship. As an Auburn fan it is galling that perhaps our best team since 1957 was snubbed in 2004 for U.S.C.. We had a number of first round and few few round draft picks that year and were unbeaten. But we hardly had the draw of U.S.C.. Funny how those things always work out in the favor of the network, especially since they decide and the teams don't have to earn it on the field. When we moved from the AP and UPI polls to determine a champion to the BCS and now to the CFP all we did is try three bowls of porridge. It was a beauty pageant with the polls with the majority of the sportswriters on the West Coast and in the Northeast, it was a beauty pageant with the BCS even at 2 schools, and now all we've done is settle on the bowl that wasn't too hot or too cold. The polls left people cold, the BCS committee pissed them off, and the 4 team committee selected playoffs has more or less placated them. But through it all the networks have helped to shape the results and in the last two iterations who gets to play for it. It is a for profit entertainment business and the big dollar media contracts is a bribe to keep the Athletic Departments from minding so much. Ah, but a bribe now couched in the rationale of who gets the most eyeballs. A reason always alleviates the guilt. There will always be as many explanations couched in some form of reason as are needed to convince the public that there is no smoke filled room though we see one weekly at the end of the season when they make the smoke filled room must see TV for the fans. But hey, nobody ever gets screwed by a panel of dignitaries right?

When we have a champs only playoff model, only then will I believe in reasonable fairness to the competitors.

It's one of the reasons 8 is better than 4.

In any given year, will all the blue bloods be 12-0 or 11-1? Or at least 8 of them? Not likely. The more you expand the field, the greater opportunity you provide for teams that are having great years and don't have the highest brand recognition.

The networks will be happy to make extra money from more games regardless of who is in them.

There will always be an element of the beauty content, but give the networks monetary incentive and you can mitigate it.

(01-11-2021 02:38 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 01:48 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  After reading this, I put down my Beyond Meat vegan sausage dressed with Daiya cheese (which is derived from cassava and arrowroot), smiled and said to myself, "That posting was the work of a master."

Well done, JRsec.

I don't have any idea what you're eating.

Suffice to say my diet is well suited for an eccentric, pretentious and chinless middle-aged gentleman who delights the ladies with limericks and enjoys college sports as much for the place-making elements of university campuses as he does for the games themselves.

(01-11-2021 06:45 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:38 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 01:48 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  After reading this, I put down my Beyond Meat vegan sausage dressed with Daiya cheese (which is derived from cassava and arrowroot), smiled and said to myself, "That posting was the work of a master."

Well done, JRsec.

I don't have any idea what you're eating.

Suffice to say my diet is well suited for an eccentric, pretentious and chinless middle-aged gentleman who delights the ladies with limericks and enjoys college sports as much for the place-making elements of university campuses as he does for the games themselves.

Thanks from a BYND shareholder, God bless you with the rest.

(01-11-2021 02:38 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 01:48 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  After reading this, I put down my Beyond Meat vegan sausage dressed with Daiya cheese (which is derived from cassava and arrowroot), smiled and said to myself, "That posting was the work of a master."

Well done, JRsec.

I don't have any idea what you're eating.

Well, for one thing it ain't sausage.

(01-11-2021 08:29 PM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 06:45 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:38 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 01:48 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  After reading this, I put down my Beyond Meat vegan sausage dressed with Daiya cheese (which is derived from cassava and arrowroot), smiled and said to myself, "That posting was the work of a master."

Well done, JRsec.

I don't have any idea what you're eating.

Suffice to say my diet is well suited for an eccentric, pretentious and chinless middle-aged gentleman who delights the ladies with limericks and enjoys college sports as much for the place-making elements of university campuses as he does for the games themselves.

Thanks from a BYND shareholder, God bless you with the rest.