UH is better than the best from ACC and B12, unfortunately they are not the best in AAC west . :0)

(11-17-2016 06:07 PM)MAD MACGYVER Wrote:  I think all these pissing contests prove numerous things. First, the transitive property is a very fallacious standard to go by as one could prove an FCS school or even a DII school is the best in all of NCAA football because X beat X who beat X. Secondly, I think the solid strength of the top mid-majors necessitates an expanded CFP with a clear and sensible path the post season. Such as conference champs get an auto-bid and the CFP committee chooses seeding and at-large berths.

I think it undignified and sad that 65 teams have to stand hat-in-hand begging for table scraps, all the while back-biting each other. I'd prefer this to be settled on the playing field amongst all FBS conference champs with analytics playing only a supporting role in seeding or for selecting at-large berths (those are the ones who really should be begging).

8 conferences of 16 teams = 128 teams

Winners of the conferences go into an 8 team playoff that's seeded by rankings.

Now that would be big money TV. And the conference play be super important.

(11-17-2016 11:01 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 09:59 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Ummm, I think that we can all agree that the CFP poll is complete bull$hit and that Houston is clearly the best G5 team. Actually it is not even close. Houston looks like a top 5 program.

Eh... They may have the highest ceiling of any G5 team... But they've had plenty of bad halves this season. They're not as consistent as a few other teams in the country. How do you tell a Navy fan that Houston is best G5 team in the nation?

Injuries have been the reason for a lot of their inconsistency. When healthy, they are a legit CFP contender, but they won't have a post season NY6 opportunity unless Navy loses 2. Navy should be ranked along with Houston and possiblyTemple along with USF, because this is a balanced, tough league. Were this the SEC all those mentioned would be solidly in the top 25. A 2 loss AAC champ would be more deserving of the NY6 game than a one loss MAC or MWAC champ. The committee won't agree, but the AAC champ has a much tougher conference road. Just a fact.

(11-18-2016 09:06 AM)ultraviolet Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 11:01 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 09:59 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Ummm, I think that we can all agree that the CFP poll is complete bull$hit and that Houston is clearly the best G5 team. Actually it is not even close. Houston looks like a top 5 program.

Eh... They may have the highest ceiling of any G5 team... But they've had plenty of bad halves this season. They're not as consistent as a few other teams in the country. How do you tell a Navy fan that Houston is best G5 team in the nation?

Injuries have been the reason for a lot of their inconsistency. When healthy, they are a legit CFP contender, but they won't have a post season NY6 opportunity unless Navy loses 2. Navy should be ranked along with Houston and possiblyTemple along with USF, because this is a balanced, tough league. Were this the SEC all those mentioned would be solidly in the top 25. A 2 loss AAC champ would be more deserving of the NY6 game than a one loss MAC or MWAC champ. The committee won't agree, but the AAC champ has a much tougher conference road. Just a fact.

No team (G5 or P5) other than Houston has 2 wins over top 5 opponents this year. Despite that, expect this biased rigged illogical committee to have both Louisville and Oklahoma ranked ahead of Houston despite having the same record and losing head-to-head to Houston. The selection committee will prove thier lack of integrity, thier Flawed "brand bias", and thier lack of a consistent point of emphasis as they use circular vague logic to get the predetermined result they want.

The CFP selection committee is a biased rigged flawed system that makes the BCS look like a virtual temple of logic and integrity. We all know what these clowns are going to do---I just hope the press publically ridicules this group of idiots. This group of bafoons is doing nothing but counting wins ihen they compare G5s. It's idiocy that not single AAC team is ranked.

(11-18-2016 09:06 AM)ultraviolet Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 11:01 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 09:59 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Ummm, I think that we can all agree that the CFP poll is complete bull$hit and that Houston is clearly the best G5 team. Actually it is not even close. Houston looks like a top 5 program.

Eh... They may have the highest ceiling of any G5 team... But they've had plenty of bad halves this season. They're not as consistent as a few other teams in the country. How do you tell a Navy fan that Houston is best G5 team in the nation?

Injuries have been the reason for a lot of their inconsistency. When healthy, they are a legit CFP contender, but they won't have a post season NY6 opportunity unless Navy loses 2. Navy should be ranked along with Houston and possiblyTemple along with USF, because this is a balanced, tough league. Were this the SEC all those mentioned would be solidly in the top 25. A 2 loss AAC champ would be more deserving of the NY6 game than a one loss MAC or MWAC champ. The committee won't agree, but the AAC champ has a much tougher conference road. Just a fact.

This. For the first time in ages we are fielding most of the defense that started the season. The OL is still banged up and missing starters. We G5 teams just aren't that deep.

(11-18-2016 09:06 AM)ultraviolet Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 11:01 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 09:59 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Ummm, I think that we can all agree that the CFP poll is complete bull$hit and that Houston is clearly the best G5 team. Actually it is not even close. Houston looks like a top 5 program.

Eh... They may have the highest ceiling of any G5 team... But they've had plenty of bad halves this season. They're not as consistent as a few other teams in the country. How do you tell a Navy fan that Houston is best G5 team in the nation?

Injuries have been the reason for a lot of their inconsistency. When healthy, they are a legit CFP contender, but they won't have a post season NY6 opportunity unless Navy loses 2. Navy should be ranked along with Houston and possiblyTemple along with USF, because this is a balanced, tough league. Were this the SEC all those mentioned would be solidly in the top 25. A 2 loss AAC champ would be more deserving of the NY6 game than a one loss MAC or MWAC champ. The committee won't agree, but the AAC champ has a much tougher conference road. Just a fact.

Also, I almost left out Tulsa, who is playing as well as anyone and except for some questionable officiating might be leading the conference.

My next wish list item for tomorrow, a Clemson loss to deny the perennially overrated ACC a CFP spot.

(11-18-2016 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-18-2016 09:06 AM)ultraviolet Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 11:01 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 09:59 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Ummm, I think that we can all agree that the CFP poll is complete bull$hit and that Houston is clearly the best G5 team. Actually it is not even close. Houston looks like a top 5 program.

Eh... They may have the highest ceiling of any G5 team... But they've had plenty of bad halves this season. They're not as consistent as a few other teams in the country. How do you tell a Navy fan that Houston is best G5 team in the nation?

Injuries have been the reason for a lot of their inconsistency. When healthy, they are a legit CFP contender, but they won't have a post season NY6 opportunity unless Navy loses 2. Navy should be ranked along with Houston and possiblyTemple along with USF, because this is a balanced, tough league. Were this the SEC all those mentioned would be solidly in the top 25. A 2 loss AAC champ would be more deserving of the NY6 game than a one loss MAC or MWAC champ. The committee won't agree, but the AAC champ has a much tougher conference road. Just a fact.

No team (G5 or P5) other than Houston has 2 wins over top 5 opponents this year. Despite that, expect this biased rigged illogical committee to have both Louisville and Oklahoma ranked ahead of Houston despite having the same record and losing head-to-head to Houston. The selection committee will prove thier lack of integrity, thier Flawed "brand bias", and thier lack of a consistent point of emphasis as they use circular vague logic to get the predetermined result they want.

The CFP selection committee is a biased rigged flawed system that makes the BCS look like a virtual temple of logic and integrity. We all know what these clowns are going to do---I just hope the press publically ridicules this group of idiots. This group of bafoons is doing nothing but counting wins ihen they compare G5s. It's idiocy that not single AAC team is ranked.

One of the difficulties for UH was created by the AAC and Media. When a team plays 4 games in 22 days, players are tired, injured, and beat up. That is shown by the losses coming in October. UH played well in September and is playing well now that some injured players are back. Few teams have the depth to handle that schedule.

(11-17-2016 09:59 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Ummm, I think that we can all agree that the CFP poll is complete bull$hit and that Houston is clearly the best G5 team. Actually it is not even close. Houston looks like a top 5 program.

Program? Team, yes. Program? They've got a few years of stringing things like this together to get THERE.

(11-18-2016 02:14 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  One of the difficulties for UH was created by the AAC and Media. When a team plays 4 games in 22 days, players are tired, injured, and beat up. That is shown by the losses coming in October. UH played well in September and is playing well now that some injured players are back. Few teams have the depth to handle that schedule.

Few G5 schools have the resources and revenue that a school in a large city like Houston has. Houston pays their coach 3,000,000 dollars... No G5 should compete... I'd expect my school to get run over by Houston when my first year coach only makes 700,000?

I agree that at their best Houston is the best G5. They're also the only G5 to even get 2 top 10 teams on their schedule? Right? And sadly for Houston Oklahoma and Louisville may not end up top10 teams.

I'm not dumping on Houston. I'm simply stating they have two losses. One to a terrific Navy team (3rd best team on Houston schedule), the other to an average SMU squad. Just as bad as a loss to Air Force or Ohio or Eastern Michigan or MTSU or whoever is around their #77 massey composite ranking. Houston will move to the 3rd best G5 in the massey composites this weekend likely jumping, SDSU, and USF. And even if the Houston TEAM is the best TEAM, their resume has blemishes pushing them a little bit down the list. Do we expext these computer rankings to now forget October? if you don't like the composites, choose a ranking system that puts Houston highest... I'm sure there is one out there. I'm sure that has flaws as well. There are 80 to choose from.

And the schedule sucks for lots of teams. Toledo, Ohio, and Akron pkayed 3 games in 13 days. Saturday- Thursday- Wednesday... Then another Wednesday for us so 4 games in 19 days actually.

(11-18-2016 02:39 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 09:59 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Ummm, I think that we can all agree that the CFP poll is complete bull$hit and that Houston is clearly the best G5 team. Actually it is not even close. Houston looks like a top 5 program.

Program? Team, yes. Program? They've got a few years of stringing things like this together to get THERE.

They were pretty good last year too. They were also very good under Sumlin too. I remember them being number 7 in the Country at some point under him. Even if you say that they are not top 5, which is reasonable; I still think that they are pretty high up there and they are proving it year in and year out.

(11-18-2016 08:45 AM)AeroCat Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 06:07 PM)MAD MACGYVER Wrote:  I think all these pissing contests prove numerous things. First, the transitive property is a very fallacious standard to go by as one could prove an FCS school or even a DII school is the best in all of NCAA football because X beat X who beat X. Secondly, I think the solid strength of the top mid-majors necessitates an expanded CFP with a clear and sensible path the post season. Such as conference champs get an auto-bid and the CFP committee chooses seeding and at-large berths.

I think it undignified and sad that 65 teams have to stand hat-in-hand begging for table scraps, all the while back-biting each other. I'd prefer this to be settled on the playing field amongst all FBS conference champs with analytics playing only a supporting role in seeding or for selecting at-large berths (those are the ones who really should be begging).

8 conferences of 16 teams = 128 teams

Winners of the conferences go into an 8 team playoff that's seeded by rankings.

Now that would be big money TV. And the conference play be super important.

How many crickets will watch 6 and 4 Arkansas State play as winner of the Sun Belt conference? Even with number 1 seed Alabama playing them, no one will watch. Not all conferences are equal.

(11-15-2016 05:58 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(11-10-2016 10:15 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(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

We all know that but the more it keeps getting mentioned and the more the league separates itself from the G5 label the more likely it will be seeing and paid as a tweener league not P5 and not G5 that's the goal right now. Aim for the moon and you might land in the stars.

again- where is this extra money coming from? you can't cut a pie and have the pieces add up to more than 100% of the pie. to be paid as a tweener you either have to take some from the rest of the G5 (not going to happen), or you have to take it from the P5 (not going to happen).

"where is this extra money coming from?"

It will come from the media. TV and streaming revenues are not zero-sum.

AAC schools are providing greater TV viewer-ship than any G5 schools and many P5 schools.

See: Louisville-Houston setting Thursday night record.

(11-19-2016 02:32 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  "where is this extra money coming from?"

It will come from the media. TV and streaming revenues are not zero-sum.

AAC schools are providing greater TV viewer-ship than any G5 schools and many P5 schools.

See: Louisville-Houston setting Thursday night record.

#5 teams with the Heisman runaway rarely play on Thursdays for one...
And Houston doesn't represent the entire AAC... Tulane, SMU, UC etc doesnt draw like that. Just like you can't group the entire Big10 sccools as giant media hogs (Purdue and Rutgers donmt draw squat), the same goes for the AAC. Houston and maybe a couple other programs are more like P5 programs than the entire conference.

(11-19-2016 02:18 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(11-15-2016 05:58 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(11-10-2016 10:15 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(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

We all know that but the more it keeps getting mentioned and the more the league separates itself from the G5 label the more likely it will be seeing and paid as a tweener league not P5 and not G5 that's the goal right now. Aim for the moon and you might land in the stars.

again- where is this extra money coming from? you can't cut a pie and have the pieces add up to more than 100% of the pie. to be paid as a tweener you either have to take some from the rest of the G5 (not going to happen), or you have to take it from the P5 (not going to happen).

This is like 17th century economic thinking.

There's such a thing as growth. The market is not static.

(11-19-2016 02:40 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(11-19-2016 02:18 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(11-15-2016 05:58 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(11-10-2016 10:15 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(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

We all know that but the more it keeps getting mentioned and the more the league separates itself from the G5 label the more likely it will be seeing and paid as a tweener league not P5 and not G5 that's the goal right now. Aim for the moon and you might land in the stars.

again- where is this extra money coming from? you can't cut a pie and have the pieces add up to more than 100% of the pie. to be paid as a tweener you either have to take some from the rest of the G5 (not going to happen), or you have to take it from the P5 (not going to happen).

This is like 17th century economic thinking.

There's such a thing as growth. The market is not static.

no, this is like ECON101 for non majors thinking- Revenue is distributed to conferences based on PERCENTAGES. Of course there is growth, of course the market is not static, but that only increases your total payout amount, not the PERCENTAGE of the total revenue you are paid relative to the P5.

(11-19-2016 08:48 AM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(11-18-2016 08:45 AM)AeroCat Wrote:  

(11-17-2016 06:07 PM)MAD MACGYVER Wrote:  I think all these pissing contests prove numerous things. First, the transitive property is a very fallacious standard to go by as one could prove an FCS school or even a DII school is the best in all of NCAA football because X beat X who beat X. Secondly, I think the solid strength of the top mid-majors necessitates an expanded CFP with a clear and sensible path the post season. Such as conference champs get an auto-bid and the CFP committee chooses seeding and at-large berths.

I think it undignified and sad that 65 teams have to stand hat-in-hand begging for table scraps, all the while back-biting each other. I'd prefer this to be settled on the playing field amongst all FBS conference champs with analytics playing only a supporting role in seeding or for selecting at-large berths (those are the ones who really should be begging).

8 conferences of 16 teams = 128 teams

Winners of the conferences go into an 8 team playoff that's seeded by rankings.

Now that would be big money TV. And the conference play be super important.

How many crickets will watch 6 and 4 Arkansas State play as winner of the Sun Belt conference? Even with number 1 seed Alabama playing them, no one will watch. Not all conferences are equal.

I never said that all conferences were equal, that is what seeding is for. But FBS is ONE division of football, and all in the division should have the same road to the playoffs. If an 8-4 Arkansas St wins the SBC, one can surmise that they'd probably get a low seed, ensuring an easy game for the higher seed. That is a reward to the higher seed for having a better year; that is the very purpose of seeding.

While you're right that Arkansas St may not move the needle in terms of TV viewers, but upsets do move the needle and get people's juices flowing...and to say that can't happen, take a look at what SMU did to Houston this year. Upsets happen and that's why games should be played on the field, not on some ******* spread sheet.

(11-19-2016 04:44 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(11-19-2016 02:40 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(11-19-2016 02:18 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(11-15-2016 05:58 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(11-10-2016 10:15 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  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

We all know that but the more it keeps getting mentioned and the more the league separates itself from the G5 label the more likely it will be seeing and paid as a tweener league not P5 and not G5 that's the goal right now. Aim for the moon and you might land in the stars.

again- where is this extra money coming from? you can't cut a pie and have the pieces add up to more than 100% of the pie. to be paid as a tweener you either have to take some from the rest of the G5 (not going to happen), or you have to take it from the P5 (not going to happen).

This is like 17th century economic thinking.

There's such a thing as growth. The market is not static.

no, this is like ECON101 for non majors thinking- Revenue is distributed to conferences based on PERCENTAGES. Of course there is growth, of course the market is not static, but that only increases your total payout amount, not the PERCENTAGE of the total revenue you are paid relative to the P5.

The revenue from playoffs is not the big money maker for conferences. The first step for the AAC to separate itself from the others not P5 will be in tv contract money. The playoff money or bowl games won't change until next contract