It was a fascinating topic and since RN's son is on the Broncos golf team, they gave a lot of attention to the Broncos, Childers even said that we were a P5 team in a G5 conference. He said that teams like Kansas and Vandy don't invest a dime in their teams and are just riding the coattails of their conference while teams like Boise, UCF, Cinci, etc invest heavily into their programs. Anyway, their idea was tied into what's going on in European soccer currently and they proposed pairing up the Sun Belt with the SEC, AAC with ACC, CUSA with Big 12, MAC with Big10 and MWC with PAC and the idea was that the top 3 in the G5 would join their respective P5 conference for the following year and conversely the bottom 3 P5's would be relegated to their respective G5 partners. They said that interest would skyrocket and give a more equitable shot for over 100 teams instead of the same 4 or 5 every year. I had to go into the office for work but it was a really good listen.

If you are going to do relegation then it should be by district, not by conference.

(04-21-2021 11:04 AM)mustangxc Wrote:  If you are going to do relegation then it should be by district, not by conference.

Well, if you look at their proposal, it kind of is. There's just a lot of apathy and malaise setting in because it's literally the same 3 or 4, maybe 5 teams every single year. Why do teams like Vandy, Kansas, Illinois, etc. continue to suckle off of the teat of their conference without having to do a thing to improve their program? Because they have no repercussions, relegation would compel them to actually make a concerted effort to improve their respective programs and at the same time increase interest in other teams that could move up.

(04-21-2021 11:16 AM)thespywhozaggedme Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 11:04 AM)mustangxc Wrote:  If you are going to do relegation then it should be by district, not by conference.

Well, if you look at their proposal, it kind of is. There's just a lot of apathy and malaise setting in because it's literally the same 3 or 4, maybe 5 teams every single year. Why do teams like Vandy, Kansas, Illinois, etc. continue to suckle off of the teat of their conference without having to do a thing to improve their program? Because they have no repercussions, relegation would compel them to actually make a concerted effort to improve their respective programs and at the same time increase interest in other teams that could move up.

He's talking about from his perspective. He is in Dallas. What you are discussing would have his Ponies advance or relegate to and from the ACC instead of the much closer BigXII.

(04-21-2021 11:24 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 11:16 AM)thespywhozaggedme Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 11:04 AM)mustangxc Wrote:  If you are going to do relegation then it should be by district, not by conference.

Well, if you look at their proposal, it kind of is. There's just a lot of apathy and malaise setting in because it's literally the same 3 or 4, maybe 5 teams every single year. Why do teams like Vandy, Kansas, Illinois, etc. continue to suckle off of the teat of their conference without having to do a thing to improve their program? Because they have no repercussions, relegation would compel them to actually make a concerted effort to improve their respective programs and at the same time increase interest in other teams that could move up.

He's talking about from his perspective. He is in Dallas. What you are discussing would have his Ponies advance or relegate to and from the ACC instead of the much closer BigXII.

Ah, I gotcha. Unfortunately there will be some outliers, but I'm not getting his complaint, the AAC already has a footprint that is quite similar to the ACC, plus the extra millions of dollars would surely offset the inconvenience of an extra hour flight.

Would a G5's promotion to P5 carry with it a commensurate raise in pay, and relegation of a P5 to G5 a loss of benefits? If so, then it's likely that the elevation of those once-hungry G5s to P5 status would be permanent. If Kansas and other perennial bottom feeders lack the motivation and the means to excel now, imagine how they'd fare on a G5 starvation diet.

Getting promoted then eventually regulated back down would be a death sentence for a G team. The moral hit to the fans would be huge.

If the G5 conferences started relegation among themselves would that get the ball rolling? Relegation might be more appealing to G5 conferences.

(04-21-2021 10:22 AM)thespywhozaggedme Wrote:  It was a fascinating topic and since RN's son is on the Broncos golf team, they gave a lot of attention to the Broncos, Childers even said that we were a P5 team in a G5 conference. He said that teams like Kansas and Vandy don't invest a dime in their teams and are just riding the coattails of their conference while teams like Boise, UCF, Cinci, etc invest heavily into their programs. Anyway, their idea was tied into what's going on in European soccer currently and they proposed pairing up the Sun Belt with the SEC, AAC with ACC, CUSA with Big 12, MAC with Big10 and MWC with PAC and the idea was that the top 3 in the G5 would join their respective P5 conference for the following year and conversely the bottom 3 P5's would be relegated to their respective G5 partners. They said that interest would skyrocket and give a more equitable shot for over 100 teams instead of the same 4 or 5 every year. I had to go into the office for work but it was a really good listen.

+2

That's an outstanding thread topic. Thank you for starting it up.

The P5/G5 structure is already dilapidated, stagnant, and rotten to the core. It has made a mess out of the post-season bowl series and has made a mockery of the NCAA tournament, now that 75% of the at-large bids are going to the P5 conferences (and rising).

This idea that Childers and Neuheisel has proposed is very thoughtful and very workable. It would give everybody a chance and it would create some fascinating matchups. Overall, it would breathe new life into college football and NCAA basketball.

Having been educated in the mid-atlantic region, I love the idea of a AAC-ACC pairing. Temple fans would be thrilled to play familiar regional rivals, such as Pitt, Syracuse, BC, and VT, and UVA is well within driving distace. ECU fans would be delighted to pair up with UNC & NC State. USF and UCF fans would love to play Miami and FSU. Cincy and Memphis could rekindle their regional rivalries with Louisville.

.

What a cool idea!

.

(04-21-2021 11:55 AM)colohank Wrote:  Would a G5's promotion to P5 carry with it a commensurate raise in pay, and relegation of a P5 to G5 a loss of benefits? If so, then it's likely that the elevation of those once-hungry G5s to P5 status would be permanent. If Kansas and other perennial bottom feeders lack the motivation and the means to excel now, imagine how they'd fare on a G5 starvation diet.

Yes, that is correct. That was their entire point. They were piggybacking off of what was going on in Europe with the new proposed super league. Childers were saying why should he was like Vanderbilt and Kansas, etc. continue to reap the benefits of the conference when they make no effort what’s the weather to improve their program when teams like UCF, Boise, Cincinnati, even liberty, etc. I tried so hard to continue Slee improve and there are constant artificial road blocks in front of them. Imagine the interest and excitement and college football if everyone knew that there was potential to be promoted or relegated every year. Because right now I think that apathy is sitting in because it’s just the top four or five teams every single year.

(04-21-2021 11:56 AM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  Getting promoted then eventually regulated back down would be a death sentence for a G team. The moral hit to the fans would be huge.

How so? And as the previous poster mentioned, if you’re promoted, you have a lot more money in the coffers and it is incumbent upon you to stay there. Conversely if a P5 team was relegated, maybe it will give them a kick in the pants that they need. It has worked in European soccer for years.

(04-21-2021 12:29 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  If the G5 conferences started relegation among themselves would that get the ball rolling? Relegation might be more appealing to G5 conferences.

Not sure that I am following, what do you mean? What is G5 relegation? Right now there is a two tiered system, P5 and G5. Relegation and promotion would be the great equalizer.

(04-21-2021 12:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 10:22 AM)thespywhozaggedme Wrote:  It was a fascinating topic and since RN's son is on the Broncos golf team, they gave a lot of attention to the Broncos, Childers even said that we were a P5 team in a G5 conference. He said that teams like Kansas and Vandy don't invest a dime in their teams and are just riding the coattails of their conference while teams like Boise, UCF, Cinci, etc invest heavily into their programs. Anyway, their idea was tied into what's going on in European soccer currently and they proposed pairing up the Sun Belt with the SEC, AAC with ACC, CUSA with Big 12, MAC with Big10 and MWC with PAC and the idea was that the top 3 in the G5 would join their respective P5 conference for the following year and conversely the bottom 3 P5's would be relegated to their respective G5 partners. They said that interest would skyrocket and give a more equitable shot for over 100 teams instead of the same 4 or 5 every year. I had to go into the office for work but it was a really good listen.

+2

That's an outstanding thread topic. Thank you for starting it up.

The P5/G5 structure is already dilapidated, stagnant, and rotten to the core. It has made a mess out of the post-season bowl series and has made a mockery of the NCAA tournament, now that 75% of the at-large bids are going to the P5 conferences (and rising).

This idea that Childers and Neuheisel has proposed is very thoughtful and very workable. It would give everybody a chance and it would create some fascinating matchups. Overall, it would breathe new life into college football and NCAA basketball.

Having been educated in the mid-atlantic region, I love the idea of a AAC-ACC pairing. Temple fans would be thrilled to play familiar regional rivals, such as Pitt, Syracuse, BC, and VT, and UVA is well within driving distace. ECU fans would be delighted to pair up with UNC & NC State. USF and UCF fans would love to play Miami and FSU. Cincy and Memphis could rekindle their regional rivalries with Louisville.

.

What a cool idea!

.

You’re welcome. It was a great topic to listen to. Just to be clear though, this is only for football, not basketball. Because college basketball, like virtually every other team sport in the world, actually allows all of its participants the chance to play for the championship game.

(04-21-2021 11:55 AM)colohank Wrote:  Would a G5's promotion to P5 carry with it a commensurate raise in pay, and relegation of a P5 to G5 a loss of benefits? If so, then it's likely that the elevation of those once-hungry G5s to P5 status would be permanent. If Kansas and other perennial bottom feeders lack the motivation and the means to excel now, imagine how they'd fare on a G5 starvation diet.

It wouldn't have to be a "zero-sum game" (i.e., with permanent winners and losers), which your question suggests. It might be the exact opposite - a "win-win game." Everybody benefits - - the tide rises and lifts all the boats.

Essentially, it would create more bang for the buck for the college sports fan, with twice as many teams per conference to follow, and intruiging possibilities.

There would be some refinements to work out, to prevent the system from reverting into stagnation. The system would have to have some design features to boost opportunities for the lesser programs.

However, maybe the way relegation works, in part, is that the upper tier division of the mega-conference is much more competitive, and so naturally, it will be harder for the upper-division teams to win.

Meanwhile, with some tweaks, such as an 8-team CFP and expansion of NCAA/NIT to 128 teams, top athletes wouldn't be quite as likely as they are now to want to play for the top 4 or 5 teams.

We have something resembling a de facto relegation type of system or a periodic "changing of the guard" in college basketball, already, with UNC, Duke, Indiana, and Kentucky not even making the NCAA tournament in 2021.

By design, the relegation component would function to prevent stagnation, by giving the lower tier programs an extra incentive to move up. Less stagnation means more excitement and more viewership.

Perhaps an extra tweak would be required to make it harder for the same schools to dominate a sport. An example would be to do as the Big Ten used to do when two FB teams were tied for first place - - the team that hadn't played in a Rose Bowl game for the longest period would represent the Big Ten in the Rose Bowl that season.

.

(04-21-2021 12:44 PM)thespywhozaggedme Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 12:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 10:22 AM)thespywhozaggedme Wrote:  It was a fascinating topic and since RN's son is on the Broncos golf team, they gave a lot of attention to the Broncos, Childers even said that we were a P5 team in a G5 conference. He said that teams like Kansas and Vandy don't invest a dime in their teams and are just riding the coattails of their conference while teams like Boise, UCF, Cinci, etc invest heavily into their programs. Anyway, their idea was tied into what's going on in European soccer currently and they proposed pairing up the Sun Belt with the SEC, AAC with ACC, CUSA with Big 12, MAC with Big10 and MWC with PAC and the idea was that the top 3 in the G5 would join their respective P5 conference for the following year and conversely the bottom 3 P5's would be relegated to their respective G5 partners. They said that interest would skyrocket and give a more equitable shot for over 100 teams instead of the same 4 or 5 every year. I had to go into the office for work but it was a really good listen.

+2

That's an outstanding thread topic. Thank you for starting it up.

The P5/G5 structure is already dilapidated, stagnant, and rotten to the core. It has made a mess out of the post-season bowl series and has made a mockery of the NCAA tournament, now that 75% of the at-large bids are going to the P5 conferences (and rising).

This idea that Childers and Neuheisel has proposed is very thoughtful and very workable. It would give everybody a chance and it would create some fascinating matchups. Overall, it would breathe new life into college sports.

Having been educated in the mid-atlantic region, I love the idea of a AAC-ACC pairing. Temple fans would be thrilled to play familiar regional rivals, such as Pitt, Syracuse, BC, and VT, and UVA is well within driving distace. ECU fans would be delighted to pair up with UNC & NC State. USF and UCF fans would love to play Miami and FSU. Cincy and Memphis could rekindle their regional rivalries with Louisville.

.

What a cool idea!

.

You’re welcome. It was a great topic to listen to. Just to be clear though, this is only for football, not basketball. Because college basketball, like virtually every other team sport in the world, actually allows all of its participants the chance to play for the championship game.

Ok. Cool.

Just the same, though, since people like to have free-wheeling conversations around here, there's nothing to prevent the idea of doing something similar for the other sports from being considered or at least talked about.

.

(04-21-2021 12:44 PM)thespywhozaggedme Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 12:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 10:22 AM)thespywhozaggedme Wrote:  It was a fascinating topic and since RN's son is on the Broncos golf team, they gave a lot of attention to the Broncos, Childers even said that we were a P5 team in a G5 conference. He said that teams like Kansas and Vandy don't invest a dime in their teams and are just riding the coattails of their conference while teams like Boise, UCF, Cinci, etc invest heavily into their programs. Anyway, their idea was tied into what's going on in European soccer currently and they proposed pairing up the Sun Belt with the SEC, AAC with ACC, CUSA with Big 12, MAC with Big10 and MWC with PAC and the idea was that the top 3 in the G5 would join their respective P5 conference for the following year and conversely the bottom 3 P5's would be relegated to their respective G5 partners. They said that interest would skyrocket and give a more equitable shot for over 100 teams instead of the same 4 or 5 every year. I had to go into the office for work but it was a really good listen.

+2

That's an outstanding thread topic. Thank you for starting it up.

The P5/G5 structure is already dilapidated, stagnant, and rotten to the core. It has made a mess out of the post-season bowl series and has made a mockery of the NCAA tournament, now that 75% of the at-large bids are going to the P5 conferences (and rising).

This idea that Childers and Neuheisel has proposed is very thoughtful and very workable. It would give everybody a chance and it would create some fascinating matchups. Overall, it would breathe new life into college football and NCAA basketball.

Having been educated in the mid-atlantic region, I love the idea of a AAC-ACC pairing. Temple fans would be thrilled to play familiar regional rivals, such as Pitt, Syracuse, BC, and VT, and UVA is well within driving distace. ECU fans would be delighted to pair up with UNC & NC State. USF and UCF fans would love to play Miami and FSU. Cincy and Memphis could rekindle their regional rivalries with Louisville.

.

What a cool idea!

.

You’re welcome. It was a great topic to listen to. Just to be clear though, this is only for football, not basketball. Because college basketball, like virtually every other team sport in the world, actually allows all of its participants the chance to play for the championship game.

I would pay good money just to see Old Miss get relegated. They’d sack the governor.

That said, innovation is not driving the P5. Greed is.

I can just see teams like Vandy and Auld Mess going along with being relegated. Nice discussion, but in the real world, it ain’t happening.

As an example of relegation between G5 conferences assume CUSA and AAC had an agreement. The top three CUSA schools would start playing in the AAC and the bottom three AAC schools would start playing in CUSA.

Please add Wake Forest to the schools that have been living off BCS/Power welfare for their entire existence.

This is a European soccer concept that simply doesn’t translate well to college football.