A new and better FBS thread

[The_Sicatoka]

The P5 generally has all the leverage.

Correct.
And the remnants of a P5, who are not P5 without the PAC history, who have been riding coat tails, are trying to pretend to be P5 and trying to rebuild a P5 with G5 components. It's completely transparent. Their end game isn't "promo/releg" but "Denver Airport Meeting 2.0"' where there's a split and some are overboarded. And we know who's at risk of that.

USU, UNM, UWyo, should be voting "hard no" on anything but a pure "add" of the two 2PAC teams to the MWC.
Anything else they risk losing exit fees they should be owed, but even then still risk "Denver Airport Meeting 2.0".

[tjamz]

Alright... just for fun, I thought I'd ask ChatGPT 4.0 what it's thoughts are on how to do this and make it equitable for everyone while incentivizing top performers in the conferences. Here is what it came up with:

### **Updated Collegiate Football Relegation Conference (CFRC) Proposal**


**Introduction:**
The CFRC aims to infuse new energy into collegiate football, introducing a relegation and promotion system that combines competitive integrity, fan engagement, and financial equity. This updated proposal outlines a revised mechanism for team movements between tiers.


**Member Schools:**
1. Oregon State
2. Washington State
3. Montana State
4. Montana
5. North Dakota State
6. South Dakota State
7. Hawaii
8. Boise State
9. San Jose State
10. Colorado State
11. Wyoming
12. New Mexico
13. Air Force
14. Nevada
15. Utah State
16. Fresno State
17. UNLV
18. San Diego State


**Conference Structure:**


1. **Tier 1 - Collegiate Premier Division (CPD):**
- Includes top-ranked teams: Oregon State, Washington State, Boise State, San Jose State, Air Force, San Diego State, Nevada, Fresno State, and Utah State.
- The last-place team is automatically relegated, and the second-last place team enters a play-in match.


2. **Tier 2 - Collegiate Championship Division (CCD):**
- Consists of the remaining teams: Montana State, Montana, North Dakota State, South Dakota State, Hawaii, Colorado State, Wyoming, New Mexico, and UNLV.
- The second-place team competes in the play-in match against the second-last team of Tier 1.


**Revised Relegation and Promotion Mechanism:**


- **Automatic Relegation:** The last-place team in CPD (e.g., Utah State) is automatically relegated to CCD.
- **Play-In Match:** The second-last team in CPD (e.g., Fresno State) faces the second-place team in CCD (e.g., Montana State) to determine who plays in Tier 1 the following season.


**Financial Structure:**


1. **Equal Revenue Sharing:**
- All 18 teams share the conference’s total revenue equally, ensuring financial stability.
- Promotes competitive balance across both tiers.


2. **Performance Bonuses:**
- Teams securing a spot in bowl games or the College Football Playoff receive financial bonuses, incentivizing top performance.


**Benefits of the Revised Model:**


- **Enhanced Drama:** The updated relegation and promotion mechanism adds intrigue to the end-of-season matches.
- **Fair Competition:** The play-in match offers a fair chance for teams to prove their worth for a spot in the top tier.
- **Fan Engagement:** The revised structure promises heightened excitement, especially towards the season’s end.


**Conclusion:**
The updated CFRC model promises an exhilarating future for collegiate football. Every team, from powerhouse Boise State to emerging contenders like Montana State, is offered a platform to compete, evolve, and excel, ensuring every match is a spectacle, and every season is unforgettable.

[BigLakeBison]

Correct.
And the remnants of a P5, who are not P5 without the PAC history, who have been riding coat tails, are trying to pretend to be P5 and trying to rebuild a P5 with G5 components. It's completely transparent. Their end game isn't "promo/releg" but "Denver Airport Meeting 2.0"' where there's a split and some are overboarded. And we know who's at risk of that.

USU, UNM, UWyo, should be voting "hard no" on anything but a pure "add" of the two 2PAC teams to the MWC.
Anything else they risk losing exit fees they should be owed, but even then still risk "Denver Airport Meeting 2.0".

If they don't have the votes to oust those teams now, how would they suddenly get the votes to oust those teams at a later date when part of the ideas I've seen offered up have them adding teams to the bottom tier which would give those (3) teams you reference additional teams who would likely vote with them. Again, I'm not saying that this will happen. I just see benefits to all parties here that make this type of idea at least a possibility on its face. The top tier gives up some revenue for stability and the existing MWC teams that would be in the bottom tier initially give up some "prestige" for the possibility of increased revenue and a chance to move up based on performance.

[NDSUguy]

Alright... just for fun, I thought I'd ask ChatGPT 4.0 what it's thoughts are on how to do this and make it equitable for everyone while incentivizing top performers in the conferences. Here is what it came up with:

In theory this makes sense with the big issue being media rights and the money it generates. This would have to be football only, as NDSU and Hawaii would now be in the same conference!

[Hammersmith]

It could double the value of a normal MW game but that still doesn't make it valuable in the big picture. The only people who are interested in the MW reside west of the Rockies have been long time fans of the members. Adding OSU/WSU is not going to change that even if it is under relegation system under the Pac name.

To be fair, if you and your SDSU are added, it would increase interest in the Dakotas and that is not small thing. But the rest of the country tends to yawn when it comes to the MW.

I would argue that the Boise proposal would give you at least four games a year that would get viewing numbers way beyond any bowl game between comparable-level teams. The proposal is that the upper and middle 6/7 teams would have a game where the loser is relegated, and the middle and lower 2/3 teams would have a game where the winner is promoted. Those games would be far more entertaining to the general audience than two mid-level generic teams in a no-name bowl game. Clearly not as entertaining as a major bowl game or a CFP game, but still way better than a typical mid/low-level bowl game.

I don't know if that's enough to move the needle much for the decision makers at the MWC schools, but it's at least worth consideration.

[Professorbum]

Its crazy that after all the realignment drama that went on the past year and continues to unfold, we now find ourselves pinning our hopes of FBS on relegation (which of course will never happen). We missed an obvious opportunity in CUSA. We don't have the balls to go independent. The Bison are FCS forever (like many of the fans).

[El_Chapo]

what's this

- The College Football Playoff management committee shelved any talk of format changes to the expanded 12-team field that will begin next season

[El_Chapo]

Its crazy that after all the realignment drama that went on the past year and continues to unfold, we now find ourselves pinning our hopes of FBS on relegation (which of course will never happen). We missed an obvious opportunity in CUSA. We don't have the balls to go independent. The Bison are FCS forever (like many of the fans).

sooooooo depressing

[MWC]

Its crazy that after all the realignment drama that went on the past year and continues to unfold, we now find ourselves pinning our hopes of FBS on relegation (which of course will never happen). We missed an obvious opportunity in CUSA. We don't have the balls to go independent. The Bison are FCS forever (like many of the fans).

If the original relegation plan presented by the Boise Deputy AD were to go into effect, it would mean 3 conferences of 8 schools each. It would be 24 school divided into three separate levels. You would have 8 in the Pac, tier 2 would have 8 in the MW and tier 3 would be 8 in ...CUSA. That would be the conference you would likely start out in.

Define Irony..

[reformedUNDfan]

http://https://www.espn.com/college-...ball-look-like

Bill C goes out of his way to point out that SDSU and NDSU are top mid majors and repeatedly mentions both schools as top potential programs for a PAC/MWC relegation league