Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
I know there have been a few random posts elsewhere on this but I think it deserves it's own thread.
http://www.espn.com/college-football...-power-5-teams
THOUGHTS??
Personally I like the idea. It may help get rid of all the meaningless Bowl Games and give the P5 a reason to go to a full fledged playoff. I think you could even see some teams decline Bowl Games. If you're Boise, would you rather play Baylor or compete for a Championship?? What about Wyoming or BYU?
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Thing that gets me, a quote on G5 playoffs being junior varsity... Umm doesn't P5 already treat them as junior varsity anyway? Seems to me that anyone in the G5 thinks they're in the same level as P5 is just plain ignorant to the situation they're in. Boise was about the only team that came close but that was only for a couple years, now they've fallen back to the top of the G5 stack again. Wish they'd just wake up and realize they could have something watchable and probably would be a decent money maker especially if the direction allows them to bring in some of the top FCS teams. Just accept who you are and be content with it.... Not that hard.
Sent from Win8 phone on a bullet train from Hillsboro.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
1998braves64
Thing that gets me, a quote on G5 playoffs being junior varsity... Umm doesn't P5 already treat them as junior varsity anyway? Seems to me that anyone in the G5 thinks they're in the same level as P5 is just plain ignorant to the situation they're in. Boise was about the only team that came close but that was only for a couple years, now they've fallen back to the top of the G5 stack again. Wish they'd just wake up and realize they could have something watchable and probably would be a decent money maker especially if the direction allows them to bring in some of the top FCS teams. Just accept who you are and be content with it.... Not that hard.
Sent from Win8 phone on a bullet train from Hillsboro.
I was listening to The Brake down today and he has a great opening segment on the topic. He thinks they should move down to the FCS. Have a listen
https://soundcloud.com/user-74421198...29th-full-show
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
Yeah, that makes more sense to me too. Not sure that is a good sign though.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
I think eventually you will see the P5 separate with 5 16 team conferences and probably expand their PO to 6 or 8. I think the G5 will eventually get something similar going. Wouldn't be surprised to see scholarship changes as well. Probably an increase for P5 to like 100. Some of the bottom G5 teams will probably say eff it at that time and move down and some of the top tier FCS schools will do what's necessary to get into that second tier. Who knows how long it will take since this has been discussed for eons already.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bisonator98
I think eventually you will see the P5 separate with 5 16 team conferences and probably expand their PO to 6 or 8. I think the G5 will eventually get something similar going. Wouldn't be surprised to see scholarship changes as well. Probably an increase for P5 to like 100. Some of the bottom G5 teams will probably say eff it at that time and move down and some of the top tier FCS schools will do what's necessary to get into that second tier. Who knows how long it will take since this has been discussed for eons already.
It would really dilute the talent if P5 schools went to 100 scholarships. Not only is it 15 more full rides, it's 15 more full cost of attendance and the Title 9 implications
Personally I would like to see FCS give the option to jump to 85 but not require it. (and call it something different) That way the teams that are committed will do it and the non committed won't. Would boost the level of football and make the decison much easier for the G5 schools. Would give them a short term advantage unless FCS gets a year to ramp it up... but that's alright
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
It would really dilute the talent if P5 schools went to 100 scholarships. Not only is it 15 more full rides, it's 15 more full cost of attendance and the Title 9 implications
Personally I would like to see FCS give the option to jump to 85 but not require it. (and call it something different) That way the teams that are committed will do it and the non committed won't. Would boost the level of football and make the decison much easier for the G5 schools. Would give them a short term advantage unless FCS gets a year to ramp it up... but that's alright
That'll never happen. There are too many FCS schools now who don't even give schollies. We need some way to combine the G5 and the top FCS programs because those are the ones who are committed to FB. The Ivies, MEAC, SWAC, PFL, PIL are not and are dragging down the FCS level.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
I doubt scholarships will rise in any subdivision. Schools like Minnesota/K-State/Colorado don't want the power schools to horde even more talent.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
I think the G5 will drop to the FCS when their TV money runs out. I was thinking that the bottom feeders in the FCS would drop to D-II but they will probably stay. It's not like it matters if you can't compete with the top half of the FCS now. :)
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hammerhead
I think the G5 will drop to the FCS when their TV money runs out. I was thinking that the bottom feeders in the FCS would drop to D-II but they will probably stay. It's not like it matters if you can't compete with the top half of the FCS now. :)
The problem with FCS is having the requirement football has to be D1 for other sports to be D1. So for 50% of FCS, it is the hobby subdivision. They don't want to invest a single dime into football more than they have to but want to have football. It has to be D1, so there we have FCS. The G5 conference schools want football, want to fund football, and are somewhat serious about putting a decent product out there or they would have gone to FCS a long time ago. The middle ground is to disconnect football from the D1 requirement for the other sports, let the scholarship capable mid-majors have their own division of football which would be a mix of the top tier of FCS and the G5 conferences, and let the schools who don't want to offer scholarships for football or reduce scholarships, play at lower divisions.
It won't work unless the G5 conferences fully realize they are not at the big boy table. It also won't work if the G5 thinks they are a super subdivision who can play alongside the big boys with premium budgets. I have said it before, but I think the future of G5 and the top schools in FCS is someplace in the middle of the two where they are not trying to match the P5 conferences dollar wise and create their own brand. Maybe it is 75 scholarships split between the 85 on the roster to save some costs. I don't know. But it will have to be a little leaner. I don't think it would drop all the way to the FCS level because too many schools would complain about what happened to Richmond and NDSU when they started getting some injuries. More Richmond, but NDSU hurt, as well. There was an issue with experienced depth or talent that a few more scholarships would have helped mitigate from the FCS level. 10 scholarships with COA and doubling it because of Title IX is somewhere in the range of $300k+.
I have also said before the G5 conferences are sitting in no man's land right now. One school gets to compete in a big boy bowl. That school isn't necessarily the best program, but the best combination of schedule and talent. You have to be good, but if you are in a weaker conference and go undefeated because you carefully selected your OOC schools, you are golden. Western Michigan had an easier schedule than NDSU this season. It isn't W.Michigan's fault two of the B10 schools they scheduled sucked really bad this year, but it goes to show you the right schedule is as important as the quality of your football team. The rest of the G5 gets the really moldy cheese regardless if they are possibly better than the Broncos.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
td577
The problem with FCS is having the requirement football has to be D1 for other sports to be D1. So for 50% of FCS, it is the hobby subdivision. They don't want to invest a single dime into football more than they have to but want to have football. It has to be D1, so there we have FCS. The G5 conference schools want football, want to fund football, and are somewhat serious about putting a decent product out there or they would have gone to FCS a long time ago. The middle ground is to disconnect football from the D1 requirement for the other sports, let the scholarship capable mid-majors have their own division of football which would be a mix of the top tier of FCS and the G5 conferences, and let the schools who don't want to offer scholarships for football or reduce scholarships, play at lower divisions.
It won't work unless the G5 conferences fully realize they are not at the big boy table. It also won't work if the G5 thinks they are a super subdivision who can play alongside the big boys with premium budgets. I have said it before, but I think the future of G5 and the top schools in FCS is someplace in the middle of the two where they are not trying to match the P5 conferences dollar wise and create their own brand. Maybe it is 75 scholarships split between the 85 on the roster to save some costs. I don't know. But it will have to be a little leaner. I don't think it would drop all the way to the FCS level because too many schools would complain about what happened to Richmond and NDSU when they started getting some injuries. More Richmond, but NDSU hurt, as well. There was an issue with experienced depth or talent that a few more scholarships would have helped mitigate from the FCS level. 10 scholarships with COA and doubling it because of Title IX is somewhere in the range of $300k+.
I have also said before the G5 conferences are sitting in no man's land right now. One school gets to compete in a big boy bowl. That school isn't necessarily the best program, but the best combination of schedule and talent. You have to be good, but if you are in a weaker conference and go undefeated because you carefully selected your OOC schools, you are golden. Western Michigan had an easier schedule than NDSU this season. It isn't W.Michigan's fault two of the B10 schools they scheduled sucked really bad this year, but it goes to show you the right schedule is as important as the quality of your football team. The rest of the G5 gets the really moldy cheese regardless if they are possibly better than the Broncos.
The MAC hasn't won a bowl game yet this year 0-5, W Mich is going to get destroyed imo..
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
td577
The problem with FCS is having the requirement football has to be D1 for other sports to be D1. So for 50% of FCS, it is the hobby subdivision. They don't want to invest a single dime into football more than they have to but want to have football. It has to be D1, so there we have FCS. The G5 conference schools want football, want to fund football, and are somewhat serious about putting a decent product out there or they would have gone to FCS a long time ago. The middle ground is to disconnect football from the D1 requirement for the other sports, let the scholarship capable mid-majors have their own division of football which would be a mix of the top tier of FCS and the G5 conferences, and let the schools who don't want to offer scholarships for football or reduce scholarships, play at lower divisions.
It won't work unless the G5 conferences fully realize they are not at the big boy table. It also won't work if the G5 thinks they are a super subdivision who can play alongside the big boys with premium budgets. I have said it before, but I think the future of G5 and the top schools in FCS is someplace in the middle of the two where they are not trying to match the P5 conferences dollar wise and create their own brand. Maybe it is 75 scholarships split between the 85 on the roster to save some costs. I don't know. But it will have to be a little leaner. I don't think it would drop all the way to the FCS level because too many schools would complain about what happened to Richmond and NDSU when they started getting some injuries. More Richmond, but NDSU hurt, as well. There was an issue with experienced depth or talent that a few more scholarships would have helped mitigate from the FCS level. 10 scholarships with COA and doubling it because of Title IX is somewhere in the range of $300k+.
I have also said before the G5 conferences are sitting in no man's land right now. One school gets to compete in a big boy bowl. That school isn't necessarily the best program, but the best combination of schedule and talent. You have to be good, but if you are in a weaker conference and go undefeated because you carefully selected your OOC schools, you are golden. Western Michigan had an easier schedule than NDSU this season. It isn't W.Michigan's fault two of the B10 schools they scheduled sucked really bad this year, but it goes to show you the right schedule is as important as the quality of your football team. The rest of the G5 gets the really moldy cheese regardless if they are possibly better than the Broncos.
Well said.. I think the only reason the G5 is hanging on is their conference tie ins to the crappy bowl games with an outside chance of a new years day game. Plus the play off TV money.
99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 999999999 to the 100th power percent of the time they have no chance at the big boy playoffs..
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Obviously, I think we would all enjoy a higher level of competition, and I think we all have at least SOME understanding that "moving up" is a very complicated, and unlikely as well (even if some would like to move up). As soon as the G5 stops pretending they're not football-illiterate compared to the P5, I think they, as well as us can have everything we desire- More competitive football with more regional teams and/or rivalries, with a meaningful playoff system.
But all of this relies on the G5 not being idiots..... I wouldn't hold my breath.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MankatoBison
Obviously, I think we would all enjoy a higher level of competition, and I think we all have at least SOME understanding that "moving up" is a very complicated, and unlikely as well (even if some would like to move up). As soon as the G5 stops pretending they're not football-illiterate compared to the P5, I think they, as well as us can have everything we desire- More competitive football with more regional teams and/or rivalries, with a meaningful playoff system.
But all of this relies on the G5 not being idiots..... I wouldn't hold my breath.
If the other G5 officials are anything like the Mountain West officials I spoke to last Summer, we could be waiting for awhile for them to wisen up. I predict that happens around the time they get the short end of the stick in regards to TV contracts.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
The P5 is having their cake and eating it too. They have the G5 around for OOC games to bolster their records. Why does anything need to change for the P5? They are taking 95% of the money. Do they need 100%?
It's the G5 that will bring the change if it ever comes. They will someday realize that they are getting crumbs, and deserve better. Or they'll realize that the investment is too high for what they receive. However, their will always be regular season games featuring P5 vs. G5, unless some P5 schools will be satisfied with regular 2 win seasons. G5 games = wins for the P5.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Herd
The P5 is having their cake and eating it too. They have the G5 around for OOC games to bolster their records. Why does anything need to change for the P5? They are taking 95% of the money. Do they need 100%?
It's the G5 that will bring the change if it ever comes. They will someday realize that they are getting crumbs, and deserve better. Or they'll realize that the investment is too high for what they receive. However, their will always be regular season games featuring P5 vs. G5, unless some P5 schools will be satisfied with regular 2 win seasons. G5 games = wins for the P5.
I think they realize it now; it is just that until the money runs out, the crumbs are still pretty lucrative.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
td577
I think they realize it now; it is just that until the money runs out, the crumbs are still pretty lucrative.
You're right. However when the P5 tv contracts re-up, I think the advirtisiers will realize how bum of a deal they got investing in FunBelt, CUSA, MAC football etc. I am no TV exec but there is no way those conferences TV rights were nearly as valuable as they were purchased for. When those get cut in HALF... I'd imagine the G5 may have to recount their pennies and look for a new strategy.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MankatoBison
You're right. However when the P5 tv contracts re-up, I think the advirtisiers will realize how bum of a deal they got investing in FunBelt, CUSA, MAC football etc. I am no TV exec but there is no way those conferences TV rights were nearly as valuable as they were purchased for. When those get cut in HALF... I'd imagine the G5 may have to recount their pennies and look for a new strategy.
This is the same reason there may not always be G5vP5 games. TV drives he bus and advertisers want premium matchups.
Re: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
https://www.sbnation.com/a/college-f...sioner/pro-rel
I like this quote – “In that latest article’s 2005-2015 simulation, FCS dynasty North Dakota State has risen all the way into the Big Ten’s Tier I, and it’ll stay there until it finishes last in the conference. (Since NDSU beat Iowa in the real 2016, that’ll probably be a while.)”
