I have been a member of the boards for a few years. Recently a group of us started a blog "ODU Fan Forum", We have incorporated a G5 section and if any would like to contribute to that section in the future, PM us. Here is a link to a blog posted today. If you have interest, check it out. Remember these are old people blogging.

Link .... http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-8h

Oldimer

Nice job on the blog. Good points made in the future of G5 conferences.

Here is the new listing for The Gridirons Great G5’s of 2014 (TOP 25) Introducing # 24 ...... http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-aw

(Each of the following will only be represented if we have a contributor from that conference)

• G5 “Featured game of the week” (Football. Basketball or Baseball) AAC, CUSA, MWC, MAC and SBC (Starts football season)
• Defensive and Offensive player of the week – each conference. (Starts football season)
• G5 “In the news weekly feature” AAC, CUSA, MWC, MAC and SBC . The top story that best recognizes an achievement from the conference. (Starting in August)
• Selections for a 1st, 2nd and 3rd team All- Conference selection column. (Mid August)
• Ranking the Top 3 QB’s in Conference. (August)
• Possible weekly Top 25 - G5 poll??? *Two Pollsters from each conference. The voters will need to be contributors to the “G5 Blog on ODU Fan Forum” and a member of CSNbbs board. This will enable us to send ballots to be tabulated and returned by a specific date. (Set up prior to Monday Aug 4, 2014) Wee plan to have a pre-top 25 posted before the start of the season. First Pre Poll will debut Tuesday Aug 19, 2014 and we will post a new Top 25-G5 each week on Tuesdays.

Thanks for reading.

The following recommendations have been submitted from other members, any suggests are welcome. You can post or PM us.

* We may have more pollsters, we would like to have equal numbers from each G5 conference.

Thanks Oldtimer

Let me preface by first saying I apologize for the novel below. But it's necessary...

Allow me to touch on #1 in the article for just a moment. First let me say that the proposed merger between C-USA and MWC was a bad idea from the get go. Putting aside the money that would have been left on the table, why create such a huge mega conference where each of your sports are going to get one automatic bid across the multitude of NCAA sports. I like the vision to think outside the box, but the application in that instance would have proven a failure for any non-power conference that tried that. I mention that, because the benefits behind the concept were pretty obvious aside from just survival and trying attain AQ status (which was another failed presumption to not see how close the end of AQ status and the BCS were).

All that said, the benefits behind uniting for TV purposes are clear and obvious and likely one of the drivers (again aside from survival) to the idea. And there is a very clear way to still achieve these objectives though I suspect would be difficult now since the AAC (unwisely I might add) signed such a long term TV deal. Again lack of vision to see that there is going to be more content need than there has ever been in the next couple of years. New networks, increased sports channels, etc all illustrate that these networks are going to need more content which drives supply and demand. More demand for content with less supply (i.e. # of conferences - WAC) gives us G5 all an opportunity to increase media revenues. Now, is that going to translate into more money for C-USA in the next negotiation? Maybe, but it's not a slam dunk and there are reasons why I won't get into here.

But here's the thing. Pooling our supply resources to the networks could have (and maybe they will but I doubt it) offered all of us far more TV revenues than we would get individually as conferences, even the American. The concept is pretty simple to current arrangements (i.e. Tier 1 and 2) with one caveat -- selling Tier 3 rights instead of retaining them as a school. I like your reference to the MWC, C-USA, and AAC being the big three of the G5, but I would also include the MAC, because let's face it. Even though they have terrible teams the top-heavy element of their conference is good for TV if those are the teams being shown. What hurts the MAC in their TV negotiations is the possibility ESPN gets locked into EMU vs. WMU in a season they are both going to combine for 20 losses. That said here's what it would look like:

The AAC, C-USA, MAC, and MWC (sorry Sun Belt) would sign a mutual agreement to pool all Tier 1, 2, and 3 rights and supply best possible matchups to TV networks with the rolling eight or nine-day notice (as necessary). Number of games televised would be guaranteed as part of the agreement.

Needing content you would likely see, ESPN, Fox, and NBC all bid for Tier 1 and 2 rights. High bid or preferred selection gets Tier 1. Runner up gets Tier 2. For example, let's assume ESPN wins Tier 1 and Fox Tier 2. ESPN could pre-select games they wanted to show before the season as they currently do or take advantage of the eight day window where they see fit. Let's assume we require that three ESPN, ESPN 2 or ABC games are required on any date from Thursday to Saturday with a fourth available to be shown on ESPNU. Fox would be require to show at least two on FS1. The ESPN execs could then pick the best matchup from any of the conferences they wanted. Why do this? Because giving the networks the options to pick up the best games among all four conferences would force them to pay a premium which would be split among the conferences and I can almost guarantee you it would be more than it is now for all of us.

There are so many ways it could be structured. ESPN gets first selection. Fox then gets the second as the Tier 2 holder and then ESPN gets the next until they exhaust their need for content. The four league's would also waive Tier 3 rights and hold a second bidding process to allow other networks to pick up x number of games from those not selected by ESPN and Fox. So, presumably this would be CBS and NBC in this example and again they would be allowed to pick any games from those left not picked up in the Tier 1 and Tier 2. Rather than pinning them down to a single conference they would benefit from having a better selection of teams to choose from.

Legally, this might be difficult at current with all the league's at varying places in their contracts, but I know it would work if it could be pulled off. BTW, the numbers I used above are hypothetical. Haven't taken the time to figure out how many games in each network we would want collectively to ensure each conference got enough exposure. Just threw them out there, but given the need for content I don't think that would be an issue to get enough games to satisfy all four conferences.

(05-13-2014 03:21 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Let me preface by first saying I apologize for the novel below. But it's necessary...

Allow me to touch on #1 in the article for just a moment. First let me say that the proposed merger between C-USA and MWC was a bad idea from the get go. Putting aside the money that would have been left on the table, why create such a huge mega conference where each of your sports are going to get one automatic bid across the multitude of NCAA sports. I like the vision to think outside the box, but the application in that instance would have proven a failure for any non-power conference that tried that. I mention that, because the benefits behind the concept were pretty obvious aside from just survival and trying attain AQ status (which was another failed presumption to not see how close the end of AQ status and the BCS were).

All that said, the benefits behind uniting for TV purposes are clear and obvious and likely one of the drivers (again aside from survival) to the idea. And there is a very clear way to still achieve these objectives though I suspect would be difficult now since the AAC (unwisely I might add) signed such a long term TV deal. Again lack of vision to see that there is going to be more content need than there has ever been in the next couple of years. New networks, increased sports channels, etc all illustrate that these networks are going to need more content which drives supply and demand. More demand for content with less supply (i.e. # of conferences - WAC) gives us G5 all an opportunity to increase media revenues. Now, is that going to translate into more money for C-USA in the next negotiation? Maybe, but it's not a slam dunk and there are reasons why I won't get into here.

But here's the thing. Pooling our supply resources to the networks could have (and maybe they will but I doubt it) offered all of us far more TV revenues than we would get individually as conferences, even the American. The concept is pretty simple to current arrangements (i.e. Tier 1 and 2) with one caveat -- selling Tier 3 rights instead of retaining them as a school. I like your reference to the MWC, C-USA, and AAC being the big three of the G5, but I would also include the MAC, because let's face it. Even though they have terrible teams the top-heavy element of their conference is good for TV if those are the teams being shown. What hurts the MAC in their TV negotiations is the possibility ESPN gets locked into EMU vs. WMU in a season they are both going to combine for 20 losses. That said here's what it would look like:

The AAC, C-USA, MAC, and MWC (sorry Sun Belt) would sign a mutual agreement to pool all Tier 1, 2, and 3 rights and supply best possible matchups to TV networks with the rolling eight or nine-day notice (as necessary). Number of games televised would be guaranteed as part of the agreement.

Needing content you would likely see, ESPN, Fox, and NBC all bid for Tier 1 and 2 rights. High bid or preferred selection gets Tier 1. Runner up gets Tier 2. For example, let's assume ESPN wins Tier 1 and Fox Tier 2. ESPN could pre-select games they wanted to show before the season as they currently do or take advantage of the eight day window where they see fit. Let's assume we require that three ESPN, ESPN 2 or ABC games are required on any date from Thursday to Saturday with a fourth available to be shown on ESPNU. Fox would be require to show at least two on FS1. The ESPN execs could then pick the best matchup from any of the conferences they wanted. Why do this? Because giving the networks the options to pick up the best games among all four conferences would force them to pay a premium which would be split among the conferences and I can almost guarantee you it would be more than it is now for all of us.

There are so many ways it could be structured. ESPN gets first selection. Fox then gets the second as the Tier 2 holder and then ESPN gets the next until they exhaust their need for content. The four league's would also waive Tier 3 rights and hold a second bidding process to allow other networks to pick up x number of games from those not selected by ESPN and Fox. So, presumably this would be CBS and NBC in this example and again they would be allowed to pick any games from those left not picked up in the Tier 1 and Tier 2. Rather than pinning them down to a single conference they would benefit from having a better selection of teams to choose from.

Legally, this might be difficult at current with all the league's at varying places in their contracts, but I know it would work if it could be pulled off. BTW, the numbers I used above are hypothetical. Haven't taken the time to figure out how many games in each network we would want collectively to ensure each conference got enough exposure. Just threw them out there, but given the need for content I don't think that would be an issue to get enough games to satisfy all four conferences.

Good points, I enjoyed the information. I am not sure of the feasibility. At this point the AAC, would never agree with any such proposal.

Thanks for the post

(05-13-2014 03:21 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Let me preface by first saying I apologize for the novel below. But it's necessary...

Allow me to touch on #1 in the article for just a moment. First let me say that the proposed merger between C-USA and MWC was a bad idea from the get go. Putting aside the money that would have been left on the table, why create such a huge mega conference where each of your sports are going to get one automatic bid across the multitude of NCAA sports. I like the vision to think outside the box, but the application in that instance would have proven a failure for any non-power conference that tried that. I mention that, because the benefits behind the concept were pretty obvious aside from just survival and trying attain AQ status (which was another failed presumption to not see how close the end of AQ status and the BCS were).

All that said, the benefits behind uniting for TV purposes are clear and obvious and likely one of the drivers (again aside from survival) to the idea. And there is a very clear way to still achieve these objectives though I suspect would be difficult now since the AAC (unwisely I might add) signed such a long term TV deal. Again lack of vision to see that there is going to be more content need than there has ever been in the next couple of years. New networks, increased sports channels, etc all illustrate that these networks are going to need more content which drives supply and demand. More demand for content with less supply (i.e. # of conferences - WAC) gives us G5 all an opportunity to increase media revenues. Now, is that going to translate into more money for C-USA in the next negotiation? Maybe, but it's not a slam dunk and there are reasons why I won't get into here.

But here's the thing. Pooling our supply resources to the networks could have (and maybe they will but I doubt it) offered all of us far more TV revenues than we would get individually as conferences, even the American. The concept is pretty simple to current arrangements (i.e. Tier 1 and 2) with one caveat -- selling Tier 3 rights instead of retaining them as a school. I like your reference to the MWC, C-USA, and AAC being the big three of the G5, but I would also include the MAC, because let's face it. Even though they have terrible teams the top-heavy element of their conference is good for TV if those are the teams being shown. What hurts the MAC in their TV negotiations is the possibility ESPN gets locked into EMU vs. WMU in a season they are both going to combine for 20 losses. That said here's what it would look like:

The AAC, C-USA, MAC, and MWC (sorry Sun Belt) would sign a mutual agreement to pool all Tier 1, 2, and 3 rights and supply best possible matchups to TV networks with the rolling eight or nine-day notice (as necessary). Number of games televised would be guaranteed as part of the agreement.

Needing content you would likely see, ESPN, Fox, and NBC all bid for Tier 1 and 2 rights. High bid or preferred selection gets Tier 1. Runner up gets Tier 2. For example, let's assume ESPN wins Tier 1 and Fox Tier 2. ESPN could pre-select games they wanted to show before the season as they currently do or take advantage of the eight day window where they see fit. Let's assume we require that three ESPN, ESPN 2 or ABC games are required on any date from Thursday to Saturday with a fourth available to be shown on ESPNU. Fox would be require to show at least two on FS1. The ESPN execs could then pick the best matchup from any of the conferences they wanted. Why do this? Because giving the networks the options to pick up the best games among all four conferences would force them to pay a premium which would be split among the conferences and I can almost guarantee you it would be more than it is now for all of us.

There are so many ways it could be structured. ESPN gets first selection. Fox then gets the second as the Tier 2 holder and then ESPN gets the next until they exhaust their need for content. The four league's would also waive Tier 3 rights and hold a second bidding process to allow other networks to pick up x number of games from those not selected by ESPN and Fox. So, presumably this would be CBS and NBC in this example and again they would be allowed to pick any games from those left not picked up in the Tier 1 and Tier 2. Rather than pinning them down to a single conference they would benefit from having a better selection of teams to choose from.

Legally, this might be difficult at current with all the league's at varying places in their contracts, but I know it would work if it could be pulled off. BTW, the numbers I used above are hypothetical. Haven't taken the time to figure out how many games in each network we would want collectively to ensure each conference got enough exposure. Just threw them out there, but given the need for content I don't think that would be an issue to get enough games to satisfy all four conferences.

Can you expand on that?

(05-13-2014 05:56 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  Can you expand on that?

LOL.

The AAC reaction to this blog is hilarious.

(05-14-2014 01:19 AM)FAUAEPi Wrote:  The AAC reaction to this blog is hilarious.

Agreed. Man some of them are so delusional. They keep professing their greatness, but this last season the newly joined members all lost to teams still in this conference. Yeah, your not G5, your "Tweeners" (their word), lost somewhere between delusion and reality.

I got to give it up to the older conference schools. I particularly liked the SouthPark underpants gnome reference and the Shah of Iran comment. Funny stuff!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we're better than the AAC. But I find it hilarious that they call themselves"tweeners" and put the MWC into this "G4" when a couple of MWC programs turned down their offer to join. Granted, they originally accepted, but that was with Rutgers and company still in the conference.
The thing that they don't get I that ESPN, and these other companies that now run college football doesn't care what you call yourself if you're not an AQ program. They don't care about ULL's name situation, FAU's gorgeous new stadium, or how the AAC perceives themselves. I do think they're in a middle ground, but the media doesn't care, therefore nobody else but us mid major fans will care.

(05-14-2014 01:19 AM)FAUAEPi Wrote:  The AAC reaction to this blog is hilarious.

Yep. I'm afraid that whereas I always used to root for a G5 team over a P5, I've gotten to where it now goes G5>P5>AAC.

Granted, they had a great first year, but man they are annoying.

At the present time, I have several conference members of different boards that have expressed interest to become a voter for the upcoming weekly Top 25 G5 poll (football season). I hope I made it clear to those interested, to become a pollster he/she will need to be a contributor to the blog as well, even if his post are short and only once a month. I have an AAC csnbbs member, for lack of a better way to describe contributors, so, in the future I will refer to them as "Pollsters". He/she asked that he remain anonymous. I have assured him and others that we will not reveal members screen names and they can use a different pen name for blogs (not their csnbbs posting name.

My original thoughts were to have two voters from each G5 conference. I currently have larger numbers from some and 1 from a few. One person recommended that the more pollsters I allow to vote the more accurate the results will be. His/her statement was, even If they skew their vote to elevate their team, they will still be submitting 25 teams and it will force the results to be more accurate. Anyway, if anyone has an interested PM me so we can add you to the list. (read post #4)
Thanks for reading.

Oldtimer

Here are the two post from today ....

The Gridirons Great G5’s of 2014 (TOP 25) Introducing # 23 http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-aG

Ranking the AAC in May…. my way! Introducing #09 http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-9L

If anyone on the CUSA board would be interest. We plan to start a backwards countdown of CUSA schools with a predicted win and loss evaluation of each team on their schedule they play in 2014. After a comparison and evaluation of the results we will rank the projected order of finish. (East/ West). The planned date for this to start is Monday June 23, 2014. PM me and we will start the dialogue.

Thanks for reading.

East Division
• 2014 FIU Football Schedule
• 2014 Florida Atlantic Football Schedule
• 2014 Marshall Football Schedule
• 2014 Middle Tennessee Football Schedule
• 2014 Old Dominion Football Schedule
• 2014 UAB Football Schedule
• 2014 Western Kentucky Football Schedule

West Division
• 2014 Louisiana Tech Football Schedule
• 2014 North Texas Football Schedule
• 2014 Rice Football Schedule
• 2014 Southern Miss Football Schedule
• 2014 UTEP Football Schedule
• 2014 UTSA Football Schedule

If anyone is interested here is today’s post.

The Gridirons Great G5’s of 2014 (TOP 25) Introducing # 22 http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-aR

Ranking the AAC in May…. my way! Introducing # 08 http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-bn

For anyone interested there are 4 new post this morning, here are two links:

Ranking the AAC in May…. my way! Introducing #07 http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-bX

The Gridirons Great G5’s of 2014 (TOP 25) Introducing # 21 http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-c9

Thanks for reading

Keep em' coming!

i dont think i have seen one cusa post on the aac board unless it was started by faueiou or some other cusa poster. yall post about us all the time though and then come post on our board along with mac and mwc fans.

does that tell you guys anything



our conference has won 2 national titles and a bcs bowl over the b12 champion in year one. doesnt that bug yall a little bit

(05-17-2014 12:58 AM)shere khan Wrote:  i dont think i have seen one cusa post on the aac board unless it was started by faueiou or some other cusa poster. yall post about us all the time though and then come post on our board along with mac and mwc fans.

does that tell you guys anything



our conference has won 2 national titles and a bcs bowl over the b12 champion in year one. doesnt that bug yall a little bit

1. Yes it tells me you have horrible grammer skills.
2. It also tells me that you don't notice that I post on the ACC, AAC, CUSA, SBC, and conference realignment boards; but I wouldn't expect you to. I would at least expect you to attempt to ascertain all information before posting/making judgements
3. And considering that FAU kicked Memphis' ass last time we played (New Orleans Bowl)... No, that doesn't bug me one bit.

(05-17-2014 09:51 AM)FAUAEPi Wrote:  1. Yes it tells me you have horrible grammer skills.
2. It also tells me that you don't notice that I post on the ACC, AAC, CUSA, SBC, and conference realignment boards; but I wouldn't expect you to. I would at least expect you to attempt to ascertain all information before posting/making judgements
3. And considering that FAU kicked Memphis' ass last time we played (New Orleans Bowl)... No, that doesn't bug me one bit.

You spelled grammar wrong. As for Khan, why you trolling a CUSA board if y'all are so much better?

For any that may be interested here is today’s post.

Thanks for reading.

The Gridirons Great G5’s of 2014 (TOP 25) Introducing # 20 http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-di

Ranking the AAC in May…. my way! Introducing # 06 http://wp.me/p4wbqJ-dv