(04-22-2014 01:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 10:41 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 10:28 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 10:16 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 09:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Wishful thinking. We have already been relegated to non-AQ status with regard to bowls, and now when this proposal passes, our inferior status...

Dude, I have you on ignore, but occasionally view one out of morbid curiosity. I didn't even read this post past the bolded line... No one is buying your anti-AAC stuff. 'Our inferior status'??
Our 'new' conference had a tremendous first year. I realize your a Big East guy and it's killing you... but seriously. Jumping the shark again.

To be fair, how is our status NOT inferior?

It depends on the metric you wish to use.

On any meaningful metric, the dust has already settled and cleared: The P5 are AQ with respect to the big bowls, and we are not. That means our status is inferior.

Ha. Like, this is true just because you say so? The 'meaningful metric' of the scoreboard disagrees with you. That's the metric I and many others prefer... it's why we actually buy tickets.

(04-22-2014 01:24 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 10:28 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 10:16 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 09:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 09:33 AM)Bull Wrote:  I still say this won't really work in the long term, you simply can't relegate the teams of the American to the status of the SBC/cUSA/MAC. Schools too big, too successful. If we end up 'tweener', get appropriate $$$, shots at BCS bowls, I can live with that. But no way are we completely relegated to the bottom. Aresco is crowing a bit, because this year really gave him significant ammo.

Wishful thinking. We have already been relegated to non-AQ status with regard to bowls, and now when this proposal passes, our inferior status...

Dude, I have you on ignore, but occasionally view one out of morbid curiosity. I didn't even read this post past the bolded line... No one is buying your anti-AAC stuff. 'Our inferior status'??
Our 'new' conference had a tremendous first year. I realize your a Big East guy and it's killing you... but seriously. Jumping the shark again.

To be fair, how is our status NOT inferior?

Yes, Bull has truly gone off the end.

Hum. I thought you kept your posts intellectual and didn't resort to name calling. Oh well.

(04-22-2014 09:16 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If another conference began earning the kind of money the P5 makes they might would be included. However, thus far, no conference has shown that's even possible to do. Whenever a conference began to improve its performance, it's best members are absorbed by the current P5 conferences. So essentially, the past has shown that individual schools can move to the P5, but an entire conference has never been able to make the jump from outside of the power conference group to inside the power conference group.

The only way is by lawsuit. The AAC and the Mtn West will sue if they are left out. We may not make as much from TV contracts but the group is willing to do what it takes to compete at the highest level.

If the P5 try to shut out conferences who are willing to pay to be equal there will be a long legal fight. Why do the bottom and middle levels teams of the P5 get to benefit while the teams in the AAC and MW who could compete evenly or even best these teams regularly in football be denied.

The BCS was monopolistic and would not have stood up to a legal battle so they changed it before a lawsuit was filed. Same deal with this crap. Get ready for a fight.

(04-22-2014 02:30 PM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 01:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 12:56 PM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 11:55 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  I don't understand why Aresco and the AAC presidents/AD's aren't fighting this non stop and railing against this at the top of their lungs. It clearly negatively affects the AAC permanently.

I just don't get it. Silence is all we get.

WHY? At least say SOMETHING, rather than sit idly by as this is rammed through.

Please tell me what I am missing. Why are the powers than be in AAC not screaming at the top of their lungs.

I'll tell you what's missing....Aresco is not following many fans and media's "sky is falling" mentality.

And he shouldn't, IMO...the change in the governance structure is basically the P5 saying to the rest that they are playing or planning to play at a different level. Aresco has clearly stated that the American will play at whatever level the P5 plays at. If they increase scholly's, the American will do it to.

Two problems with this. First, a change such as this will cost a lot more money, and the P5 schools have it while many of us simply do not.

Second, the reason that the P5 can't increase their schollies to 105 right now is because NCAA regulations forbid it. But with autonomy, they will be able to do it.

But despite Aresco's vow, we won't, at least not unilaterally, because the G5 will still be governed by the existing regime which limits schollies to 85, and that would include us. The autonomy would be for the P5, not us. We'd have to convince the rest of the G5 and NCAA to allow us to do what the P5 is doing, and good luck with that.

Wow...you clearly don't understand the changes in governance structure. The changes will not just apply to P5, they would apply to FBS.

Thanks for the correction on that point, though the proposal does seem to make a distinction between 'permissible' and 'actionable' changes made by the P5. The former can then be implemented by all FBS schools/conferences unilaterally, but the latter must be approved by the rest of FBS:

"Actionable legislation would still have to pass a 27-conference voting majority before it applies to the smaller conferences. As John Infante explains, "actionable legislation would be where the five conference want to limit themselves and include personnel limits, time demands on athletes, transfer rules, financial aid cancellation, recruiting contact, and pre-enrollment support for prospects."

(04-22-2014 03:48 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 01:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 10:41 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 10:28 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 10:16 AM)Bull Wrote:  Dude, I have you on ignore, but occasionally view one out of morbid curiosity. I didn't even read this post past the bolded line... No one is buying your anti-AAC stuff. 'Our inferior status'??
Our 'new' conference had a tremendous first year. I realize your a Big East guy and it's killing you... but seriously. Jumping the shark again.

To be fair, how is our status NOT inferior?

It depends on the metric you wish to use.

On any meaningful metric, the dust has already settled and cleared: The P5 are AQ with respect to the big bowls, and we are not. That means our status is inferior.

Ha. Like, this is true just because you say so? The 'meaningful metric' of the scoreboard disagrees with you.

Because I say so?

I don't "say" that the P5 is AQ and we are not, that's a fact, and it marks us as inferior.

I don't "say" that the P5 have the huge media deals while ours is peanuts, that's a fact, and it marks us as inferior.

Those facts are obviously the meaningful ones in reflecting status, while 'scoreboard' is not. Why? Because if 'scoreboard' was meaningful, the AAC, with a basketball national title and all your alleged success on the field**, would be P5, while the B1G, which hasn't won a basketball or football national title in over a decade, would be regarded as G5.

But that's not the case. The B1G, along with the SEC, is regarded as the highest-status conference in college sports, while the AAC is regarded as ... G5. That is an undeniable Fact.

So keep waving that UConn national title t-shirt if it makes you feel better. Though I think a national title t-shirt with UConn on it looks silly on an alleged Bulls fan. I've seen a number of those shirts, and none of them say "AAC" on them.


** and really, not all that much. We were #7 RPI basketball conference and in football, we were absolutely dreadful, way below the level of the last year of Big East football, but whatever floats your boat.

(04-22-2014 02:09 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 01:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Because Aresco understands what you do not. He understands that being part of the top level of football along with the P5 is vastly superior to any other possible option that the AAC could muster. The way for the AAC to survive and thrive is to stay connectd with the P5 (even if we are treated as the annoying little brother thier mom makes them play with) and continue to grow our programs. When the AAC has an average attendance of 40K-50K a game---we will be a player and there will be a 6th power conference added. We just have to organically grow a power conference. Its the only viable option.

Where, in any of these proposals, do you find ideas to help strengthen the G5? Where are the goals and incentives to help the non-P5 schools improve their lot. These proposals, as usual, are extremely one-sided. A fair process would include incentives for all participants (of the NCAA); I just don't see them. To me, the NCAA is looking out for the best interest of the P5 schools, under the guise of helping the student athlete.

Do you really think they will add a 6th conference? Given the history, they will invite away the stronger programs until you are sucking for air again, on the verge of collapse, and then proffer ever more debilitating legislation to consolidate their power. You say that the only way is to create the next power conference; what if that doesn't work. It didn't work for the MWC when they were argueably a 'BCS' conference; the P5 just changed the rules. Are we really supposed to just be that gullible?

I should have been more clear. Yes, they could cram additional schools into the existing conferences. That said, none seem to want to expand with the existing G5 schools. More over, the possible elimination of the current rules governing divisional play and championship games may render habits like expanding in pairs and of expanding to 12 to get a CCG things of the past. Right now, the GOR's appear to have slowed realignment to the point that there could be none until those GOR's expire in 13 years. Could that change---absolutely. Change is always lurking.

My point was really that growing a power conference MIGHT be possible if you have a climate where realignment doesn't pick it apart as it's schools become P5 worthy. All I was trying to point out is that we may very well be in a stable enough period that we could maybe see a conference grow to the point that it became valuable because the vast majority of its members had grown to the point that they were all P5 worthy.

(04-22-2014 04:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 02:09 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 01:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Because Aresco understands what you do not. He understands that being part of the top level of football along with the P5 is vastly superior to any other possible option that the AAC could muster. The way for the AAC to survive and thrive is to stay connectd with the P5 (even if we are treated as the annoying little brother thier mom makes them play with) and continue to grow our programs. When the AAC has an average attendance of 40K-50K a game---we will be a player and there will be a 6th power conference added. We just have to organically grow a power conference. Its the only viable option.

Where, in any of these proposals, do you find ideas to help strengthen the G5? Where are the goals and incentives to help the non-P5 schools improve their lot. These proposals, as usual, are extremely one-sided. A fair process would include incentives for all participants (of the NCAA); I just don't see them. To me, the NCAA is looking out for the best interest of the P5 schools, under the guise of helping the student athlete.

Do you really think they will add a 6th conference? Given the history, they will invite away the stronger programs until you are sucking for air again, on the verge of collapse, and then proffer ever more debilitating legislation to consolidate their power. You say that the only way is to create the next power conference; what if that doesn't work. It didn't work for the MWC when they were argueably a 'BCS' conference; the P5 just changed the rules. Are we really supposed to just be that gullible?

I should have been more clear. Yes, they could cram additional schools into the existing conferences. That said, none want to expand with the existing P5 schools. More over, the possible elimination of the current rules governing divisional play and championship games may render habits like expanding in pairs and of expanding to 12 to get a CCG things of the past. Right now, the GOR's appear to have slowed realignment to the point that there could be none until those GOR's expire in 13 years. Could that change---absolutely. Change is always lurking.

My point was really that growing a power conference MIGHT be possible if you have a climate where realignment doesn't pick it apart as it's schools become P5 worthy. All I was trying to point out is that we may very well be in a stable enough period that we could maybe see a conference grow to the point that it became valuable because the vast majority of its members had grown to the point that they were all P5 worthy.

This had better be the route the whole G5 takes. The P5 is not going to expand infinitely. Build your own houses. Things do change.

(04-22-2014 09:21 AM)MechaKnight Wrote:  Even if the AAC matched the P5 in accomplishments, attendance, rating, and every other metric, we still wouldn't get in because the club is by invitation only and they have no interest in sharing their wealth and power.

They don't have any empathy for each other either. How quickly was the Big East destroyed in it's moment of weakness? Don't be surprised if in 15 years we see UT and OU get poached, and the B12 gets demoted, and the P5 becomes the P4. And then the ACC better start watching it's back because it will occupying the same territory as the more powerful SEC and B1G.

Eventually there will be three powers. Oceania (Pac 12), SouthEastAmerica (SEC), and NorthEastAmerica (B1G). They will control all (college sports) thought, and will stamp out all dissent. The Outer Party (G7) will still think they have it good because they can still look down on the Proles (FCS).

Is this Sea Quest?!?!

Posted from my BlackBerry Z10 using the CSNbbs app

Why are people arguing with Quo about who is "AQ" and who isn't? This is very clear cut...the new "BCS" conferences are the P5. The AAC is on the outside looking in. Our tv contract, bowl line up, and everything else is second class vs the P5 conferences. Folks we are in the G5...

(04-22-2014 10:15 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  No surprise. Just win and keep the pressure on them.

PS. Champion League semi finals begin today.

Boise won a heck of a lot of games and what did that do for them?

(04-22-2014 05:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Why are people arguing with Quo about who is "AQ" and who isn't? This is very clear cut...the new "BCS" conferences are the P5. The AAC is on the outside looking in. Our tv contract, bowl line up, and everything else is second class vs the P5 conferences. Folks we are in the G5...

I hate to agree with you but you are correct.

The easiest way to understand the challenge we face is to simply look at the TV dollars. Every P5 conference makes at least 10 times more money than we do from their TV deal. I don't care how well you manage your program it's going to be impossible to compete with P5 teams over the long haul. The money is simply not going to be there.

IMO, the final death knell could be if the P5 increases the number of scholarships/team to 120 to 130 per team. That not only would significantly increase our costs if we try to match but would also decrease our talent pool. You know that schools like Florida, FSU, Texas, etc could easily take 30 to 40 kids per year....kids that would otherwise consider most of our universities. Most of us survive and excel b/c we take advantage of kids the 'big schools' ignore. However, the 'big schools' no longer have to choose and can just take them all. This directly impacts the quality of play on the field and by extension the attractiveness of our product to TV and ability to earn a better contract.

IMO, there will be some schools that will have the intangibles to back-fill the remaining slots in the the P5 but for most of the G5 it will be entering a new era if and when the autonomy measures are passed/pushed through. Short of government\legal intervention I don't see how this DOESN'T happen.

(04-22-2014 06:17 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 05:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Why are people arguing with Quo about who is "AQ" and who isn't? This is very clear cut...the new "BCS" conferences are the P5. The AAC is on the outside looking in. Our tv contract, bowl line up, and everything else is second class vs the P5 conferences. Folks we are in the G5...

I hate to agree with you but you are correct.

The easiest way to understand the challenge we face is to simply look at the TV dollars. Every P5 conference makes at least 10 times more money than we do from their TV deal. I don't care how well you manage your program it's going to be impossible to compete with P5 teams over the long haul. The money is simply not going to be there.

IMO, the final death knell could be if the P5 increases the number of scholarships/team to 120 to 130 per team. That not only would significantly increase our costs if we try to match but would also decrease our talent pool. You know that schools like Florida, FSU, Texas, etc could easily take 30 to 40 kids per year....kids that would otherwise consider most of our universities. Most of us survive and excel b/c we take advantage of kids the 'big schools' ignore. However, the 'big schools' no longer have to choose and can just take them all. This directly impacts the quality of play on the field and by extension the attractiveness of our product to TV and ability to earn a better contract.

IMO, there will be some schools that will have the intangibles to back-fill the remaining slots in the the P5 but for most of the G5 it will be entering a new era if and when the autonomy measures are passed/pushed through. Short of government\legal intervention I don't see how this DOESN'T happen.

yup...you get it

(04-22-2014 02:30 PM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 01:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 12:56 PM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 11:55 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  I don't understand why Aresco and the AAC presidents/AD's aren't fighting this non stop and railing against this at the top of their lungs. It clearly negatively affects the AAC permanently.

I just don't get it. Silence is all we get.

WHY? At least say SOMETHING, rather than sit idly by as this is rammed through.

Please tell me what I am missing. Why are the powers than be in AAC not screaming at the top of their lungs.

I'll tell you what's missing....Aresco is not following many fans and media's "sky is falling" mentality.

And he shouldn't, IMO...the change in the governance structure is basically the P5 saying to the rest that they are playing or planning to play at a different level. Aresco has clearly stated that the American will play at whatever level the P5 plays at. If they increase scholly's, the American will do it to.

Two problems with this. First, a change such as this will cost a lot more money, and the P5 schools have it while many of us simply do not.

Second, the reason that the P5 can't increase their schollies to 105 right now is because NCAA regulations forbid it. But with autonomy, they will be able to do it.

But despite Aresco's vow, we won't, at least not unilaterally, because the G5 will still be governed by the existing regime which limits schollies to 85, and that would include us. The autonomy would be for the P5, not us. We'd have to convince the rest of the G5 and NCAA to allow us to do what the P5 is doing, and good luck with that.

Wow...you clearly don't understand the changes in governance structure. The changes will not just apply to P5, they would apply to FBS. Slive and other P5 commishes have clearly stated that there is no D4 type proposal.

Again, I am constantly amazed at the sky is falling crowd....they just make stuff up and throw it against the wall to see what sticks...its somewhat the media's fault, because they do the same thing...inserting idiotic opinions or wild accusations into a relatively mild topic.

BTW, I have yet to see where the Big East will fit into this scenario....what's their take?

Didn't Hitler clearly state that Germany wouldn't invade Poland?

(04-22-2014 06:17 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 05:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Why are people arguing with Quo about who is "AQ" and who isn't? This is very clear cut...the new "BCS" conferences are the P5. The AAC is on the outside looking in. Our tv contract, bowl line up, and everything else is second class vs the P5 conferences. Folks we are in the G5...

I hate to agree with you but you are correct.

The easiest way to understand the challenge we face is to simply look at the TV dollars. Every P5 conference makes at least 10 times more money than we do from their TV deal. I don't care how well you manage your program it's going to be impossible to compete with P5 teams over the long haul. The money is simply not going to be there.

IMO, the final death knell could be if the P5 increases the number of scholarships/team to 120 to 130 per team. That not only would significantly increase our costs if we try to match but would also decrease our talent pool. You know that schools like Florida, FSU, Texas, etc could easily take 30 to 40 kids per year....kids that would otherwise consider most of our universities. Most of us survive and excel b/c we take advantage of kids the 'big schools' ignore. However, the 'big schools' no longer have to choose and can just take them all. This directly impacts the quality of play on the field and by extension the attractiveness of our product to TV and ability to earn a better contract.

IMO, there will be some schools that will have the intangibles to back-fill the remaining slots in the the P5 but for most of the G5 it will be entering a new era if and when the autonomy measures are passed/pushed through. Short of government\legal intervention I don't see how this DOESN'T happen.

Im not sure that's a big threat to occur. Yes, it would destroy the G5 and Alabama and Texas would be all for it---but what about Texas Tech and Washington St? Essentially, the top 20 P5 schools will be taking the top 900 athletes right off the rosters of the 45 remaining P5 schools. Alabama and Texas are not going to take their new recruits from Boise, Houston, and UCF. They will take them from Texas Tech, Indiana, and Washington St. My guess is everyone in the P5 other than the top 10-20 schools would be against that type of expansion.

I don't think the days of 120 FB scholarships are coming back.

I could see 100 though. And coupled with pay...WHICH THE TTU's AND WSU's COULD AND WILL DO...that would be enough to seriously damage the poorer G5 programs.

(04-22-2014 06:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 06:17 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 05:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Why are people arguing with Quo about who is "AQ" and who isn't? This is very clear cut...the new "BCS" conferences are the P5. The AAC is on the outside looking in. Our tv contract, bowl line up, and everything else is second class vs the P5 conferences. Folks we are in the G5...

I hate to agree with you but you are correct.

The easiest way to understand the challenge we face is to simply look at the TV dollars. Every P5 conference makes at least 10 times more money than we do from their TV deal. I don't care how well you manage your program it's going to be impossible to compete with P5 teams over the long haul. The money is simply not going to be there.

IMO, the final death knell could be if the P5 increases the number of scholarships/team to 120 to 130 per team. That not only would significantly increase our costs if we try to match but would also decrease our talent pool. You know that schools like Florida, FSU, Texas, etc could easily take 30 to 40 kids per year....kids that would otherwise consider most of our universities. Most of us survive and excel b/c we take advantage of kids the 'big schools' ignore. However, the 'big schools' no longer have to choose and can just take them all. This directly impacts the quality of play on the field and by extension the attractiveness of our product to TV and ability to earn a better contract.

IMO, there will be some schools that will have the intangibles to back-fill the remaining slots in the the P5 but for most of the G5 it will be entering a new era if and when the autonomy measures are passed/pushed through. Short of government\legal intervention I don't see how this DOESN'T happen.

Im not sure that's a big threat to occur. Yes, it would destroy the G5 and Alabama and Texas would be all for it---but what about Texas Tech and Washington St? Essentially, the top 20 P5 schools will be taking the top 900 athletes right off the rosters of the 45 remaining P5 schools. Alabama and Texas are not going to take their new recruits from Boise, Houston, and UCF. They will take them from Texas Tech, Indiana, and Washington St. My guess is everyone in the P5 other than the top 10-20 schools would be against that type of expansion.

ultimately......they will still get their check in the mail and will smile cashing it. i think the P5 will be lock step with whatever they decide in the future.

(04-22-2014 05:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Why are people arguing with Quo about who is "AQ" and who isn't? This is very clear cut...the new "BCS" conferences are the P5. The AAC is on the outside looking in. Our tv contract, bowl line up, and everything else is second class vs the P5 conferences. Folks we are in the G5...

It sucks, but true.

(04-22-2014 06:03 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 10:15 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  No surprise. Just win and keep the pressure on them.

PS. Champion League semi finals begin today.

Boise won a heck of a lot of games and what did that do for them?

Winning never hurts, and we could never end up in the P5, but why not fight for it? I think most schools, if not all, in the AAC have higher ceilings then Boise.

As a conference, we need to all step up and try to act like a major conference. Over time, if we routinely beat P5 schools then who knows. At least be the top dog in the G5.

(04-22-2014 01:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 11:57 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Why do I hear Slive every time I turn around on this topic, but I have yet to hear Aresco.

COME ON ARESCO. SPEAK OUT MAN.

Because Aresco understands what you do not. He understands that being part of the top level of football along with the P5 is vastly superior to any other possible option that the AAC could muster. The way for the AAC to survive and thrive is to stay connectd with the P5 (even if we are treated as the annoying little brother thier mom makes them play with) and continue to grow our programs. When the AAC has an average attendance of 40K-50K a game---we will be a player and there will be a 6th power conference added. We just have to organically grow a power conference. Its the only viable option.

Hahaha!!!! Yeah, the AAC will be added to the cartel in exactly the way the MWC was added when they clearly matched up with the 6 BCS conferences somewhere in the mid-2000's! Oh what? Wait, that didn't happen. Nevermind.

(04-22-2014 02:30 PM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 01:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 12:56 PM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 11:55 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  I don't understand why Aresco and the AAC presidents/AD's aren't fighting this non stop and railing against this at the top of their lungs. It clearly negatively affects the AAC permanently.

I just don't get it. Silence is all we get.

WHY? At least say SOMETHING, rather than sit idly by as this is rammed through.

Please tell me what I am missing. Why are the powers than be in AAC not screaming at the top of their lungs.

I'll tell you what's missing....Aresco is not following many fans and media's "sky is falling" mentality.

And he shouldn't, IMO...the change in the governance structure is basically the P5 saying to the rest that they are playing or planning to play at a different level. Aresco has clearly stated that the American will play at whatever level the P5 plays at. If they increase scholly's, the American will do it to.

Two problems with this. First, a change such as this will cost a lot more money, and the P5 schools have it while many of us simply do not.

Second, the reason that the P5 can't increase their schollies to 105 right now is because NCAA regulations forbid it. But with autonomy, they will be able to do it.

But despite Aresco's vow, we won't, at least not unilaterally, because the G5 will still be governed by the existing regime which limits schollies to 85, and that would include us. The autonomy would be for the P5, not us. We'd have to convince the rest of the G5 and NCAA to allow us to do what the P5 is doing, and good luck with that.

Wow...you clearly don't understand the changes in governance structure. The changes will not just apply to P5, they would apply to FBS. Slive and other P5 commishes have clearly stated that there is no D4 type proposal.

Again, I am constantly amazed at the sky is falling crowd....they just make stuff up and throw it against the wall to see what sticks...its somewhat the media's fault, because they do the same thing...inserting idiotic opinions or wild accusations into a relatively mild topic.

BTW, I have yet to see where the Big East will fit into this scenario....what's their take?

There's a difference between permissive and actionable legislation. The AAC can adopt any actionable legislation but it will rely on the votes of 27 other conferences to adopt the same actionable legislation as the P5 (and that relates to scholarship limits, transfer rules, and a whole hosts of other subjects). If the other G5 conferences decide not to allow the AAC to adopt the actionable changes endorsed by the P5, then what do you do?

This was an odd 8 page thread that only on page 7 mentioned the only logical response to what the P5 is doing, and that's a lawsuit (first-mate's post). The P5 have proposed a tiered arrangement which smacks of cartel/monopolistic power plays.

They simply cannot do this unless they allow some metric by which teams and/or conferences can enter the P5. It can be athletic budget, winning games, stadium size, tickets sold, etc., but whatever it is, this system cannot be exclusive as it is currently proposed. If they attempt to force this through without the agreement of the AAC and others who desire to play at the high levels, then they are opening themselves to a big lawsuit.