Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non-P5 Football NIT"
Author Message
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,542
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-27-2020 11:18 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  that’s what iam hoping
but once that’s in place, it is about individual teams
ok let’s talk individual teams “ temple “
Temple will be able to silence the “ stadium stompers “ and build a on campus stadium, imagine that !

Pathetic little low-budget campus stadium with scarce parking, no true tailgating, a few food trucks, fewer dining options, and horrendous traffic jams instead of Temple's state of the art NFL stadium with bargain basement tickets, excellent dining, outstanding sight-lines, jumbo screens, refreshments, facilities, EZin/EZout, and tail-gating, You must be kidding!

If you had ever seen the proposed "lego-" stadium sketches, you will realize how much worse-off the program would have been had that stadium been built.

Fortunately, the Phila. City Council put that notion out of its misery a long time ago, and it ain't comin' back!

You can try to mock the stompers, but they had legitimate grievances. Their neighborhood would have been ripped apart, and the City Council rejected the plan due to legitimate public safety concerns and major doubts about whether police, fire, and ambulances would have been able to get through the congested streets in the event of an emergency.

Beyond all that, Temple's FB program is in serious need of a reboot under a new Head Coach. Their admin made a seriously foolish decision when they hired the current HC, didn't do their due diligence, and allowed him to appoint an unqualified co-OC with an abysmal record to be the teams OC (whom the team is still saddled with!), and to fire the team's outstanding special teams coach.

Don't get me started!!!
12-27-2020 11:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-27-2020 09:35 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  omg, i didn’t read all that... gosh
i think if the G conferences split from the A conferences it would be seen as a move to have our own real playoffs because we were not allowed in their playoffs, simple as that
OH and it would be seen as an FBS playoffs
it would start out with lots of fan fair but lower audience but rapidly grow into big time tv ratings
hear me now believe me later...

Pretty much what the 1A teams told the 1AA teams back in the 1978 split of the top level of football. "Sure 1-AA, You'll be on TV just as much---and there will be a REAL playoff---and it will be huge and capture the nations attention like the NCAA Tournament." Yeah....we all know how that one ended.

By the way---I thought this article from 1978 was really interesting for a couple of reasons. It argues that dropping those teams to "Division 1AA" would not make those teams second class citizens with repsect to the Division 1A teams. As it turned out---thats exactly what it did. More striking to me was the article exact issues and arguments that spurred the split in 1978 according to the article are strikingly similar to the same issues and arguments we see today. That said, I think the biggest difference today is P5 autonomy. That autonomy may be what prevents another split since the P5 can pretty much do what they need on most issues without the approval or consent of the rest of D1.

https://vault.si.com/vault/1978/01/23/th...s-decision
(This post was last modified: 12-28-2020 03:06 AM by Attackcoog.)
12-28-2020 03:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CenterSquarEd Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 514
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 32
I Root For: Siena
Location: Albany, NY
Post: #23
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non-P5 Football NIT"
If not an entire tournament, a College Football National Invitational Game could use a “+1 model” and invite the top two conference champions that also won their bowl games but didn’t qualify for the College Football Playoff. I’m not sure if it would be G5 only or if it could be all the conferences. If P5 too, Oklahoma and Cincinnati would be the favorites for this year’s game. Coastal Carolina would have been waiting in the wings (they ended up losing their bowl game, but maybe they wouldn’t have if they had something more to play for) followed by Oregon.
12-28-2020 08:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #24
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 03:02 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  That said, I think the biggest difference today is P5 autonomy. That autonomy may be what prevents another split since the P5 can pretty much do what they need on most issues without the approval or consent of the rest of D1.

I agree with this. What the P5 really wants is to govern itself while still gaining the benefits of having the G5 around. Autonomy allows for that and has basically quelled the P5 split rumblings.

It's surprising to me how many "P5 is going to split" posts we get around here given that there is basically zero rumblings or inklings of that, and this is basically because Autonomy has worked.
12-28-2020 09:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,388
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 948
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #25
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non-P5 Football NIT"
The G5 would be foolish to split from the P5. Stay the course, G5, and continue to improve collectively.
(This post was last modified: 12-28-2020 09:14 AM by bill dazzle.)
12-28-2020 09:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #26
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-27-2020 09:54 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  it’s simple, we can have much more college football to watch if :
there are TWO fbs leagues
1) Autonomous 5, with little growth potential, especially with their committee
2) the Great 5 conferences with a real playoffs decided on the gridiron, being decided on the football field will be much more exciting and will be the catalyst for hugh fan growth
of course if this is successful then a collegiate “ super bowl “ will be in demand

The 'victimization' argument as presented is undermined since G5 don't want to do anything that creates a clear delineation between them and the P5.

Ultimately, the solution is CFP expansion to 8. It won't stop OU, 'Bama, Clemson and tOSU from being in the final 4, but as long as there is a guaranteed G5 spot, the access question will be put to bed.
12-28-2020 09:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #27
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 09:14 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  The G5 would be foolish to split from the P5. Stay the course, G5, and continue to improve collectively.

Yes, it's ironic that there is so much G5 agitation for MORE - more playoff access, more bowl access, more CFP money etc - when the reality is the G5 have never had more than they have right now. Compared to say 1995, schools like San Jose State and UCF have far more access to bowls and money and TV. Far more. I am very thankful that USF started a football program in 1997, just on the cusp of when these big improvements for the G5-level schools were going to develop. Had we started twenty years earlier, say in 1975, we probably would have played in utter obscurity for 25 years.

Then again, maybe it isn't ironic. IIRC, historically, most revolutions occur not when the masses are at their most downtrodden and worse off, but just the opposite, when things are actually improving for the masses. Russian peasants and workers were better off in 1915 than 1815, French shopkeepers were better off in 1789 than 1689, etc. Revolutions occur when the masses get a taste of the honey, and then question why they can't have the whole jar or at least a whole lot more.

"Give an inch and they will take a yard" seems to be the operative principle.

07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 12-28-2020 09:42 AM by quo vadis.)
12-28-2020 09:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #28
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-27-2020 11:12 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(12-27-2020 10:24 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(12-27-2020 09:59 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(12-27-2020 09:35 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  omg, i didn’t read all that... gosh
i think if the G conferences split from the A conferences it would be seen as a move to have our own real playoffs because we were not allowed in their playoffs, simple as that
OH and it would be seen as an FBS playoffs
it would start out with lots of fan fair but lower audience but rapidly grow into big time tv ratings
hear me now believe me later...

It's hard to know how "it would be seen," after it is explained to the public as nothing more than a competitive entertainment event designed to feature some good non-P5 teams.

Yes, the P5s might publicly attempt to portray it, derisively, it as a rival championship series. However, that could easily be nipped in the bud with a short but sweet "cease and desist" notification.

The use of a "rotational" selection procedure, which would intentionally eliminate some of the top 20-ranked G5 teams from the tournament and replace them with one or two less highly-ranked G5 conference champions would make it obvious that it wouldn't purport to be a championship series of any kind.


To make it even clearer that it's not considered a championship series but an entertainment event, the series could be marketed cleverly as an low-hype, "wild west" kind of event with comic elements designed under the pretense that the series is supposed to appeal mainly to bikers and party animals more than to serious sports fans.


Another strategy would be to play the game under a modified set of rules, perhaps borrowed from Canadian Football, or mandating the use of unorthodox offensive formations to loosen things up.

In addition, for those who didn't read through the details of the proposal:

In addition, the adoption of THE PREFERRED FORMAT - - WHICH WOULD BE FOR THREE TEAMS TO PLAY TWO GAMES APIECE IN A ROUND ROBIN FORMAT - - WOULD ALSO BE DESIGNED TO PREVENT THE TOURNAMENT FROM BEING VIEWED AS A CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES, SINCE MANY OF THE ANNUAL TOURNAMENTS WOULD END UP IN 3-WAY TIES, WITH EACH TEAM FINISHING WITH A 1-1 RECORD!

To further gin-up the rowdiness of the atmosphere, each game would feature a "battle of the bands" segment in their halftime festivities.

Game 1: Wildly costumed heavy metal bands

Game 2: Hard core thrash/grunge bands

Game 3: Scantily clad all-female hard rock bands

During each "battle of the bands", there would be a live demolition derby, a wrestlemania event featuring female wrestlers, daredevil events, a b**b-flashing contest, or rodeo bucking bronco's.

It's pretty clear that this thread isn't meant as any kind of serious proposal. But April 1st is still more than 3 months away, so what exactly is the point of the thread? Is it to be wacky just for the sake of wackiness?

I am not a "P5 fan". I am a college football fan. This isn't college football.
12-28-2020 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 21,880
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1171
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non-P5 Football NIT"
When I read these calls for a split I always have to chuckle and question people’s motivations. I understand it if:

1) You are a fan of an FCS school who wants to see their program associated with some FBS schools, also you are hoping for more revenue and exposure
2). You are a fan of a lowly funded FBS schools, with no history of long-term success, no brand strength and/or struggle to get 15-20,000 people on game day (you know who you are).

What I don’t get are the fans of higher tier non-autonomous schools who want this? Also, why is it that the P5 fan boys are always begging for this— what skin is it on your nose that there is such a thing as the AAC, the MAC, the SBC, the MW and CUSA playing at the FBS level? What do you seek to gain by vanquishing those schools to another division?
12-28-2020 09:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eichorst Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 501
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Nebraska
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
I like the idea of an NIT, but it should be open to all: FCS, G5, and P5. The tourney should work on a revenue structure that is attractive to all 3 "tiers".

I think with the neutral-site craze of the last few years, many programs might be interested in a tourney format that allows for more home games, and if you can get a TV payout at least on par with the upper tier of bowl games, there's probably enough value there to get 1 or 2 P5 conferences to commit.

It's all about creating a product that will draw audiences. I'm sure there's room for this with a bit of creativity.
12-28-2020 10:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 09:29 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(12-27-2020 09:54 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  it’s simple, we can have much more college football to watch if :
there are TWO fbs leagues
1) Autonomous 5, with little growth potential, especially with their committee
2) the Great 5 conferences with a real playoffs decided on the gridiron, being decided on the football field will be much more exciting and will be the catalyst for hugh fan growth
of course if this is successful then a collegiate “ super bowl “ will be in demand

The 'victimization' argument as presented is undermined since G5 don't want to do anything that creates a clear delineation between them and the P5.

Ultimately, the solution is CFP expansion to 8. It won't stop OU, 'Bama, Clemson and tOSU from being in the final 4, but as long as there is a guaranteed G5 spot, the access question will be put to bed.

Yup. Its really the only gripe I have with the current set up. I dont begrudge the P5 making more money. Thats just a reflection of the actual economics of the situation. As long as we end up with a system where my G5 team has an actual legit path to the playoff at the start of each season---Im good. Thats all you can ask for.
12-28-2020 12:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,388
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 948
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #32
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 09:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(12-28-2020 09:14 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  The G5 would be foolish to split from the P5. Stay the course, G5, and continue to improve collectively.

Yes, it's ironic that there is so much G5 agitation for MORE - more playoff access, more bowl access, more CFP money etc - when the reality is the G5 have never had more than they have right now. Compared to say 1995, schools like San Jose State and UCF have far more access to bowls and money and TV. Far more. I am very thankful that USF started a football program in 1997, just on the cusp of when these big improvements for the G5-level schools were going to develop. Had we started twenty years earlier, say in 1975, we probably would have played in utter obscurity for 25 years.

Then again, maybe it isn't ironic. IIRC, historically, most revolutions occur not when the masses are at their most downtrodden and worse off, but just the opposite, when things are actually improving for the masses. Russian peasants and workers were better off in 1915 than 1815, French shopkeepers were better off in 1789 than 1689, etc. Revolutions occur when the masses get a taste of the honey, and then question why they can't have the whole jar or at least a whole lot more.

"Give an inch and they will take a yard" seems to be the operative principle.

07-coffee3


I suppose it's human nature to want more — the more you are given.

I likely am guilty of this sometimes, too, on this board. Memphis and Cincinnati have been playing DI football for many years, and both schools have been associated with high-profile universities (with big-time football, hoops or both) in the past via the Metro Conference, C-USA and the Big East.

As such, I would argue Memphis and Cincinnati are more "deserving" of a seat at the big boy table more so than most other athletic programs that are part of the G5. That's probably a bit arrogant of me, I admit. But I do rather feel that way.

Conversely, Middle Tennessee State, my alma mater, is "newish" to DI-A football (now FBS) and "not as deserving" as Memphis and Cincy. And I say that with respect for the Blue Raiders (I cheer for them too).

Agree fully that the G5 have never had more than they do now. Excellent point.
(This post was last modified: 12-28-2020 12:41 PM by bill dazzle.)
12-28-2020 12:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
YNot Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,671
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 298
I Root For: BYU
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non-P5 Football NIT"
2020 proved that there is a great market for FBS college football between the normal CCG weekend and Christmas. Still huge TV viewership on 12/12 and 12/18 & 12/19 this year.

A post-season NIT-type college football event could fill the void between the CCGs and the good post-Christmas bowl games.

But, no need to over complicate it with automatic bid rotations and rules. Just take the best teams that will accept an invite, whether a conference champion or not and whether G5, P5 or independent.

You're definitely not getting any of the teams in the NY6 bowls and most teams in other post-Christmas bowl games.
12-28-2020 01:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 01:43 PM)YNot Wrote:  2020 proved that there is a great market for FBS college football between the normal CCG weekend and Christmas. Still huge TV viewership on 12/12 and 12/18 & 12/19 this year.

A post-season NIT-type college football event could fill the void between the CCGs and the good post-Christmas bowl games.

But, no need to over complicate it with automatic bid rotations and rules. Just take the best teams that will accept an invite, whether a conference champion or not and whether G5, P5 or independent.

You're definitely not getting any of the teams in the NY6 bowls and most teams in other post-Christmas bowl games.

The NIT gives auto bids to regular season champs not in the NCAA Tournament and then invites the best of whats left to fill in the bracket. So, using similar logic, you take the 4 G5 champs not going to the access bowl and the top teams NOT going to a CFP sponsored bowl. Thats the simplest way to do it if you wanted to pull off something that kinda mirrors the NIT.
12-28-2020 01:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #35
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 01:48 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(12-28-2020 01:43 PM)YNot Wrote:  2020 proved that there is a great market for FBS college football between the normal CCG weekend and Christmas. Still huge TV viewership on 12/12 and 12/18 & 12/19 this year.

A post-season NIT-type college football event could fill the void between the CCGs and the good post-Christmas bowl games.

But, no need to over complicate it with automatic bid rotations and rules. Just take the best teams that will accept an invite, whether a conference champion or not and whether G5, P5 or independent.

You're definitely not getting any of the teams in the NY6 bowls and most teams in other post-Christmas bowl games.

The NIT gives auto bids to regular season champs not in the NCAA Tournament and then invites the best of whats left to fill in the bracket. So, using similar logic, you take the 4 G5 champs not going to the access bowl and the top teams NOT going to a CFP sponsored bowl. Thats the simplest way to do it if you wanted to pull off something that kinda mirrors the NIT.

I don't get the allure of mirroring something that has become synonymous with mediocrity.
12-28-2020 01:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #36
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
I see no purpose in this. I like Bowl Season, with 30 bowls to go along with the small playoffs. Much less complicated.
12-28-2020 01:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bobcat2013 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,202
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 179
I Root For: Texas State
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 09:47 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  When I read these calls for a split I always have to chuckle and question people’s motivations. I understand it if:

1) You are a fan of an FCS school who wants to see their program associated with some FBS schools, also you are hoping for more revenue and exposure
2). You are a fan of a lowly funded FBS schools, with no history of long-term success, no brand strength and/or struggle to get 15-20,000 people on game day (you know who you are).

What I don’t get are the fans of higher tier non-autonomous schools who want this? Also, why is it that the P5 fan boys are always begging for this— what skin is it on your nose that there is such a thing as the AAC, the MAC, the SBC, the MW and CUSA playing at the FBS level? What do you seek to gain by vanquishing those schools to another division?

As a fan of a school in group 2 I'll say that I would never want the separation for the exact opposite reason as the schools in group 1. We invested a lot to move up to FBS and get away from FCS schools. I'd hate to see us lumped back in with then. Being a bad FBS team is 100x better than being in the FCS.
12-28-2020 02:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 01:54 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(12-28-2020 01:48 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(12-28-2020 01:43 PM)YNot Wrote:  2020 proved that there is a great market for FBS college football between the normal CCG weekend and Christmas. Still huge TV viewership on 12/12 and 12/18 & 12/19 this year.

A post-season NIT-type college football event could fill the void between the CCGs and the good post-Christmas bowl games.

But, no need to over complicate it with automatic bid rotations and rules. Just take the best teams that will accept an invite, whether a conference champion or not and whether G5, P5 or independent.

You're definitely not getting any of the teams in the NY6 bowls and most teams in other post-Christmas bowl games.

The NIT gives auto bids to regular season champs not in the NCAA Tournament and then invites the best of whats left to fill in the bracket. So, using similar logic, you take the 4 G5 champs not going to the access bowl and the top teams NOT going to a CFP sponsored bowl. Thats the simplest way to do it if you wanted to pull off something that kinda mirrors the NIT.

I don't get the allure of mirroring something that has become synonymous with mediocrity.

I am not personally a big proponent of the idea. However, the reason to do it would be it’s better than the postseason you currently have and fits within the parameters of the existing CFP agreement. In other words, you’re not separating from the P5. I would be against anything that separates from the P5. My preference would be a series of three high-level bowls against high quality P5 opponents rather than an NIT.
12-28-2020 02:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JHS55 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,407
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 173
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #39
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 09:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(12-28-2020 09:14 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  The G5 would be foolish to split from the P5. Stay the course, G5, and continue to improve collectively.

Yes, it's ironic that there is so much G5 agitation for MORE - more playoff access, more bowl access, more CFP money etc - when the reality is the G5 have never had more than they have right now. Compared to say 1995, schools like San Jose State and UCF have far more access to bowls and money and TV. Far more. I am very thankful that USF started a football program in 1997, just on the cusp of when these big improvements for the G5-level schools were going to develop. Had we started twenty years earlier, say in 1975, we probably would have played in utter obscurity for 25 years.

Then again, maybe it isn't ironic. IIRC, historically, most revolutions occur not when the masses are at their most downtrodden and worse off, but just the opposite, when things are actually improving for the masses. Russian peasants and workers were better off in 1915 than 1815, French shopkeepers were better off in 1789 than 1689, etc. Revolutions occur when the masses get a taste of the honey, and then question why they can't have the whole jar or at least a whole lot more.

"Give an inch and they will take a yard" seems to be the operative principle.

07-coffee3
i think your dead wrong if you think my school Houston is better off by not having a n opportunity to win a national championship ever anymore when we used to, and i’ll just keep it polite...
12-28-2020 03:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #40
RE: Self-Empowerment 101: No to a "G5 Championship," but yes to a "Non...
(12-28-2020 02:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I am not personally a big proponent of the idea. However, the reason to do it would be it’s better than the postseason you currently have and fits within the parameters of the existing CFP agreement. In other words, you’re not separating from the P5. I would be against anything that separates from the P5. My preference would be a series of three high-level bowls against high quality P5 opponents rather than an NIT.

I guess my question is why does it need to be G5 v. P5? Regardless, I think we are starting to see one of the main fears of the playoff being realized; marginalization of the bowl season. As more players/teams choose to opt out, the bowls with cache and money with further tie themselves to P5 conferences in order to ensure their continued existence.
12-28-2020 03:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.