(11-07-2016 07:26 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  Right, but it was compared to the bad P5 divisions, not the good ones. As a whole the P5's leagues are better because they have better divisions bringing them up. And as a whole the AAC is worse because it has a worse division bringing it down.

The AAC is closer to the Big12 than the AAC is to the MWC... yes. But comparing the best G5 division to the lesser of each P5 league is the logic that makes P5ers laugh at the G5.

Nobody around here would likely ever accuse me of being a hype man for the G5 in general or the AAC in particular, and yet I think it is pretty obviously noteworthy that one of the AAC divisions is performing on the field at the same level as a few of the P5 divisions.

It's not the whole world, but it's something.

(11-07-2016 07:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:26 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  Right, but it was compared to the bad P5 divisions, not the good ones. As a whole the P5's leagues are better because they have better divisions bringing them up. And as a whole the AAC is worse because it has a worse division bringing it down.

The AAC is closer to the Big12 than the AAC is to the MWC... yes. But comparing the best G5 division to the lesser of each P5 league is the logic that makes P5ers laugh at the G5.

Nobody around here would likely ever accuse me of being a hype man for the G5 in general or the AAC in particular, and yet I think it is pretty obviously noteworthy that one of the AAC divisions is performing on the field at the same level as a few of the P5 divisions.

It's not the whole world, but it's something.

This is the information that Aresco should be hollering as loud as possible to ESPN'S talking heads because unfortunately most pollsters get most of their sports analysis from them just like the casual fan does. The AAC west top 4 teams combined only lost 3 ooc games and those were to Ole Miss, AFA,and Ohio state. That's impressive no matter what division of what conference it is.

(11-07-2016 07:26 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:12 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  It's the SEC West of G5.

Right, but it was compared to the bad P5 divisions, not the good ones.

Um, wake me up the next time a MAC division has an average Massey rank that sniffs ANY P5 division.

PS Your best division (MAC West = 70.7) is no better than our worst division (American East = 70.2). LMAO.

HERE IS THE FULL FBS MASSEY COMPOSITE COMPARISON



[LINK TO FULL-SIZED IMAGE]

[LINK TO SMALLER-SIZED IMAGE]

WE MUST GO DEEPER. FCS NEXT

Sent from my SM-G930T using CSNbbs mobile app

(11-07-2016 11:28 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  WE MUST GO DEEPER. FCS NEXT

Sent from my SM-G930T using CSNbbs mobile app

I leave that to you

(11-07-2016 11:18 PM)MAD MACGYVER Wrote:  HERE IS THE FULL FBS MASSEY COMPOSITE COMPARISON



[LINK TO FULL-SIZED IMAGE]

[LINK TO SMALLER-SIZED IMAGE]

The bottom of the AAC isn't really much worse than the P5. We just lack the 2 or 3 blue-chips at the top to carry the conference.

(11-07-2016 08:02 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:26 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:12 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  It's the SEC West of G5.

Right, but it was compared to the bad P5 divisions, not the good ones.

Um, wake me up the next time a MAC division has an average Massey rank that sniffs ANY P5 division.

PS Your best division (MAC West = 70.7) is no better than our worst division (American East = 70.2). LMAO.

Your other division is still good! Temple and USF are good teams!
I have a G5 podcast called "the Great 5." Why would my hiney be hurt that the AAC is better than the MAC? I want all to succeed? BUT Selecting bad P5 divisions to compare to one good G5 division is exactly what P5 fans see as a poor lobbying attempt to be like them. That's my only comment.

I like all of the little fellas... The tall little fellas and the short little fellas. No that's not my analogy of the G5... but to most of the country we are all grouped together. Whether it's CMU, or Fresno State or ECU, or SMU, or Idaho, or Army, or MTSU... It doesn't matter. Iowa State, Purdue, Oregon State, Rutgers etc. ( all TERRIBLE P5 teams ) still carry more weight than those schools I just mentioned from the G5. Not to me but to the average college football fan.

Plus my specific team is still among the best G5's and has been stable and competing heavy for years? I could care less if the MAC West was the best or the worst. I'm currently happy that we can get all teams bowl eligible. More likely 5 of 6 or 4 of 6, but still. For EMU and WMU this year has been huge progress. All progress is welcome in the G5.

(11-08-2016 12:49 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 08:02 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:26 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:12 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  It's the SEC West of G5.

Right, but it was compared to the bad P5 divisions, not the good ones.

Um, wake me up the next time a MAC division has an average Massey rank that sniffs ANY P5 division.

PS Your best division (MAC West = 70.7) is no better than our worst division (American East = 70.2). LMAO.

Your other division is still good! Temple and USF are good teams!
I have a G5 podcast called "the Great 5." Why would my hiney be hurt that the AAC is better than the MAC? I want all to succeed? BUT Selecting bad P5 divisions to compare to one good G5 division is exactly what P5 fans see as a poor lobbying attempt to be like them. That's my only comment.

I like all of the little fellas... The tall little fellas and the short little fellas. No that's not my analogy of the G5... but to most of the country we are all grouped together. Whether it's CMU, or Fresno State or ECU, or SMU, or Idaho, or Army, or MTSU... It doesn't matter. Iowa State, Purdue, Oregon State, Rutgers etc. ( all TERRIBLE P5 teams ) still carry more weight than those schools I just mentioned from the G5. Not to me but to the average college football fan.

Plus my specific team is still among the best G5's and has been stable and competing heavy for years? I could care less if the MAC West was the best or the worst. I'm currently happy that we can get all teams bowl eligible. More likely 5 of 6 or 4 of 6, but still. For EMU and WMU this year has been huge progress. All progress is welcome in the G5.

The "average college football fan" doesn't follow anyone beyond their immediate conference/team, little fella. Good luck with your podcast but I don't think the average AAC fan goes to a MAC fans podcast to hear about the AAC.

(11-08-2016 03:23 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 12:49 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 08:02 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:26 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:12 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  It's the SEC West of G5.

Right, but it was compared to the bad P5 divisions, not the good ones.

Um, wake me up the next time a MAC division has an average Massey rank that sniffs ANY P5 division.

PS Your best division (MAC West = 70.7) is no better than our worst division (American East = 70.2). LMAO.

Your other division is still good! Temple and USF are good teams!
I have a G5 podcast called "the Great 5." Why would my hiney be hurt that the AAC is better than the MAC? I want all to succeed? BUT Selecting bad P5 divisions to compare to one good G5 division is exactly what P5 fans see as a poor lobbying attempt to be like them. That's my only comment.

I like all of the little fellas... The tall little fellas and the short little fellas. No that's not my analogy of the G5... but to most of the country we are all grouped together. Whether it's CMU, or Fresno State or ECU, or SMU, or Idaho, or Army, or MTSU... It doesn't matter. Iowa State, Purdue, Oregon State, Rutgers etc. ( all TERRIBLE P5 teams ) still carry more weight than those schools I just mentioned from the G5. Not to me but to the average college football fan.

Plus my specific team is still among the best G5's and has been stable and competing heavy for years? I could care less if the MAC West was the best or the worst. I'm currently happy that we can get all teams bowl eligible. More likely 5 of 6 or 4 of 6, but still. For EMU and WMU this year has been huge progress. All progress is welcome in the G5.

The "average college football fan" doesn't follow anyone beyond their immediate conference/team, little fella. Good luck with your podcast but I don't think the average AAC fan goes to a MAC fans podcast to hear about the AAC.

Exactly... so most schools with directions in front of them are all grouped together. And okay haha. I didnt know you were so against point of views from other places outside of your county...

And why am I a MAC fan? I like the Green Bay Packers but that doesn't make me an NFC North fan? I root for Toledo and the G5.

(11-08-2016 12:21 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 03:23 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 12:49 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 08:02 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:26 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  Right, but it was compared to the bad P5 divisions, not the good ones.

Um, wake me up the next time a MAC division has an average Massey rank that sniffs ANY P5 division.

PS Your best division (MAC West = 70.7) is no better than our worst division (American East = 70.2). LMAO.

Your other division is still good! Temple and USF are good teams!
I have a G5 podcast called "the Great 5." Why would my hiney be hurt that the AAC is better than the MAC? I want all to succeed? BUT Selecting bad P5 divisions to compare to one good G5 division is exactly what P5 fans see as a poor lobbying attempt to be like them. That's my only comment.

I like all of the little fellas... The tall little fellas and the short little fellas. No that's not my analogy of the G5... but to most of the country we are all grouped together. Whether it's CMU, or Fresno State or ECU, or SMU, or Idaho, or Army, or MTSU... It doesn't matter. Iowa State, Purdue, Oregon State, Rutgers etc. ( all TERRIBLE P5 teams ) still carry more weight than those schools I just mentioned from the G5. Not to me but to the average college football fan.

Plus my specific team is still among the best G5's and has been stable and competing heavy for years? I could care less if the MAC West was the best or the worst. I'm currently happy that we can get all teams bowl eligible. More likely 5 of 6 or 4 of 6, but still. For EMU and WMU this year has been huge progress. All progress is welcome in the G5.

The "average college football fan" doesn't follow anyone beyond their immediate conference/team, little fella. Good luck with your podcast but I don't think the average AAC fan goes to a MAC fans podcast to hear about the AAC.

Exactly... so most schools with directions in front of them are all grouped together. And okay haha. I didnt know you were so against point of views from other places outside of your county...

And why am I a MAC fan? I like the Green Bay Packers but that doesn't make me an NFC North fan? I root for Toledo and the G5.

It's not you, but we've had some very abrasive fans of other g4 conferences come over here and "try to set us straight " about what we discuss on our board about our conference. Go figure,,,

(11-08-2016 03:23 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(11-08-2016 12:49 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 08:02 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:26 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 07:12 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  It's the SEC West of G5.

Right, but it was compared to the bad P5 divisions, not the good ones.

Um, wake me up the next time a MAC division has an average Massey rank that sniffs ANY P5 division.

PS Your best division (MAC West = 70.7) is no better than our worst division (American East = 70.2). LMAO.

Your other division is still good! Temple and USF are good teams!
I have a G5 podcast called "the Great 5." Why would my hiney be hurt that the AAC is better than the MAC? I want all to succeed? BUT Selecting bad P5 divisions to compare to one good G5 division is exactly what P5 fans see as a poor lobbying attempt to be like them. That's my only comment.

I like all of the little fellas... The tall little fellas and the short little fellas. No that's not my analogy of the G5... but to most of the country we are all grouped together. Whether it's CMU, or Fresno State or ECU, or SMU, or Idaho, or Army, or MTSU... It doesn't matter. Iowa State, Purdue, Oregon State, Rutgers etc. ( all TERRIBLE P5 teams ) still carry more weight than those schools I just mentioned from the G5. Not to me but to the average college football fan.

Plus my specific team is still among the best G5's and has been stable and competing heavy for years? I could care less if the MAC West was the best or the worst. I'm currently happy that we can get all teams bowl eligible. More likely 5 of 6 or 4 of 6, but still. For EMU and WMU this year has been huge progress. All progress is welcome in the G5.

The "average college football fan" doesn't follow anyone beyond their immediate conference/team, little fella. Good luck with your podcast but I don't think the average AAC fan goes to a MAC fans podcast to hear about the AAC.

That right there.... you just stated exactly why no one outside the aac thinks we are any different from the rest of the g5.

2014-'15 CFP Conference Payouts:

$69,328,611- Pac12
$65,598,710- SEC
$64,700,801- BigXII
$63,978,927- B1G
$58,260,659- ACC

$23,465,188- MWC
$16,339,754- CUSA
$15,214,320- AAC
$14,088,886- MAC
$11,963,453- SBC

The ONLY reason the labels P5 and G5 exist is to justify CFP revenue distribution. Spin it any way you want, but until the AAC is getting a CFP payout that's on par with the P5, they are not part of a "P6".

(11-08-2016 06:48 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  2014-'15 CFP Conference Payouts:

$69,328,611- Pac12
$65,598,710- SEC
$64,700,801- BigXII
$63,978,927- B1G
$58,260,659- ACC

$23,465,188- MWC
$16,339,754- CUSA
$15,214,320- AAC
$14,088,886- MAC
$11,963,453- SBC

The ONLY reason the labels P5 and G5 exist is to justify CFP revenue distribution. Spin it any way you want, but until the AAC is getting a CFP payout that's on par with the P5, they are not part of a "P6".

Oh wow thanks! Nothing on the AAC board made any sense to me until you decided to leave your sunbelt or Mac or whatever board and come over here and educate us

Look G4 we hate to do this, but we want to break up. It's not you. It's us. We're just not good enough for you. It's not that there's anyone else in the picture. We want you to be free to find someone who will embrace and care about you. We really just want you to be happy. It's been great and we loved all the time we've spent together. We'll always cherish that time. We hope that you'll soon be over the hurt and find true happiness. Uh, we're unfriending you and changing our phone number, but only to ease the transition for you because we care about you as a person.

(11-10-2016 11:37 AM)ultraviolet Wrote:  Look G4 we hate to do this, but we want to break up. It's not you. It's us. We're just not good enough for you. It's not that there's anyone else in the picture. We want you to be free to find someone who will embrace and care about you. We really just want you to be happy. It's been great and we loved all the time we've spent together. We'll always cherish that time. We hope that you'll soon be over the hurt and find true happiness. Uh, we're unfriending you and changing our phone number, but only to ease the transition for you because we care about you as a person.

Does our buddy at ESPN know that we've broke up with the G4 yet? Does the P5 know we are marrying them now?
Cheers!

(11-10-2016 11:37 AM)ultraviolet Wrote:  Look G4 we hate to do this, but we want to break up. It's not you. It's us. We're just not good enough for you. It's not that there's anyone else in the picture. We want you to be free to find someone who will embrace and care about you. We really just want you to be happy. It's been great and we loved all the time we've spent together. We'll always cherish that time. We hope that you'll soon be over the hurt and find true happiness. Uh, we're unfriending you and changing our phone number, but only to ease the transition for you because we care about you as a person.

you're like Elaine in The Bizarro Jerry episode of Seinfeld. Elaine ditches Jerry George and Kramer because she thinks she's too good for them and goes with Kevin, Gene and Feldman, the bizarro versions of the guys. But in the end Elaine gets ditched by the bizarro trio because she's not good enough for them.

so good luck with all that.

(11-08-2016 06:48 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  2014-'15 CFP Conference Payouts:

$69,328,611- Pac12
$65,598,710- SEC
$64,700,801- BigXII
$63,978,927- B1G
$58,260,659- ACC

$23,465,188- MWC
$16,339,754- CUSA
$15,214,320- AAC
$14,088,886- MAC
$11,963,453- SBC

The ONLY reason the labels P5 and G5 exist is to justify CFP revenue distribution. Spin it any way you want, but until the AAC is getting a CFP payout that's on par with the P5, they are not part of a "P6".

spot on

but most folks around here don't want to hear this...they think the AAC is p6 lol

ps: NEVER come in here with facts, stats, and objective data again

MASSEY COMPOSITE FOR 14 NOV 2016


[LINK TO FULL-SIZED IMAGE]

Updated through November 12, 2016:

1. SEC 40.67
2. Pac12 42.96
3. ACC 46.78
4. Big 10 48.72
5. Big 12 55.67
6. AAC 63.97
7. FBS Indep 78.38
8. MWC 79.67
9 MAC 84.89
10 Sun Belt 88.78
11 CUSA 95.85

http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm