Aresco has come out foursquare against the Alliance proposal for P5 autobids plus a single bid for the G5 in an expanded 12-team playoff.

I say KUDOS to Aresco!

Yes, 5+1 does give the G5 what it wants in a technical sense, a guaranteed playoff spot. But IMO at a large ideological/symbolic cost. It validates the Little 12 that took three AAC teams as a Power conference, and it formally divides the P5 and G5 in the playoffs. We should have the same thing with Top 6, where there is no distinction between P and G.

Good on Aresco.

Credit to "Kit-Kat" on the realignment board:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/...ar-AAQDza4

12 spots, give half to the highest rated conference champs. Would be better if every conference got an autobid.

will be curious how this plays out

this 5+1 with 12 teams was a compromise between the sec, big 12 & the alliance

the other g5 dont mind being labeled g5...and accept they are arent competing with the p5

push come to shove the aac will likely be only one opposed to this if its agreed on by the p5

we'll see how much influence the aac has... aresco is obviously making the "smart" move for the aac...if the sunbelt and mwc were ambitious theyd be doing the same, but that is unlikelyto happen

now we'll see if aresco has enough influence to actually oppose it, and also noting the p5 will decide the distribution of the new playoff system..so it might be unwise to create to much ire with the p5

(11-12-2021 06:25 PM)pesik Wrote:  will be curious how this plays out

this 5+1 with 12 teams was a compromise between the sec, big 12 & the alliance

the other g5 dont mind being labeled g5...and accept they are arent competing with the p5

push come to shove the aac will likely be only one opposed to this if its agreed on by the p5

we'll see how much influence the aac has... aresco is obviously making the "smart" move for the aac...if the sunbelt and mwc were ambitious theyd be doing the same, but that is unlikelyto happen

now we'll see if aresco has enough influence to actually oppose it, and also noting the p5 will decide the distribution of the new playoff system..so it might be unwise to create to much ire with the p5

Well technically, he can successfully oppose it all by himself, if we're talking about early expansion to 12. It only takes one "no" to sink that, and Aresco has a vote.

Now after 2025, things are different.

I personally say push for it. I don't think the new Little 12 should be validated as a "P", and I don't think there should be a P/G distinction. Top Six, IMO.

(11-12-2021 06:30 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 06:25 PM)pesik Wrote:  will be curious how this plays out

this 5+1 with 12 teams was a compromise between the sec, big 12 & the alliance

the other g5 dont mind being labeled g5...and accept they are arent competing with the p5

push come to shove the aac will likely be only one opposed to this if its agreed on by the p5

we'll see how much influence the aac has... aresco is obviously making the "smart" move for the aac...if the sunbelt and mwc were ambitious theyd be doing the same, but that is unlikelyto happen

now we'll see if aresco has enough influence to actually oppose it, and also noting the p5 will decide the distribution of the new playoff system..so it might be unwise to create to much ire with the p5

Well technically, he can successfully oppose it all by himself, if we're talking about early expansion to 12. It only takes one "no" to sink that, and Aresco has a vote.

Now after 2025, things are different.

I personally say push for it. I don't think the new Little 12 should be validated as a "P", and I don't think there should be a P/G distinction. Top Six, IMO.

the p5 are autonomous...they can make rules to benefit them however they want, including altering playoff deciding rules

imo i think he can stall for a little bit but i think itll be pointless.. if the g5 had true power, there'd be even playoff distribution throughout all-conference.. no one would chose to take pennies when you have the voting power to get equal shares

imo the real question is if the sec is willing to get behind this model... if they do its over...
if anything it can used as a negotiation tactic...there are other things to be decided on.. maybe the aac uses this as levarage in those things... a major aac goal is to negotiate separately than the other g5 in playoff revenue distribution (normally grouped together)

clt appreciates having an aggressive commish now.

#P6

Bad move in my opinion. Rolling the dice here. This is guaranteed access. Much better than before with NO access. The G5 are not required to be a part of anything come 2026. Sure, they can be offered a contract to sign at the time.....but this time without guaranteed access in 2026, still with P5 autobids. At that point, they are in a much worse position. If all the other G conferences are ok with this new proposal, Aresco will fold. Bank on it.

Aresco opposes everything. I think the six highest conference champions would increase parity which would increase intrigue which would increase viewership and attendance across the FBS. If everyone has an equal shot, even without equal revenues, you will see far more recruiting parity and that consolidation of power we see at the top will slowly level back out.

The P5 is opposed to this for some reason but really there are 10 programs driving this whole ship.

Ya, I know the AAC has always considered itself as being able to play with the "big boys" of the "P5", and UH has helped prove that point.

But the thing I think being forgotten here is that if this CFP expansion isn't approved by the end of the year (??) then nothing will be done and the CFP will remain at 4 teams, and we know already that the non-P5 will never get a seat in that scenario.

Is definitely rolling the dice, almost cutting off the nose to spite the face.

(11-12-2021 07:55 PM)Coog Engineer Wrote:  Ya, I know the AAC has always considered itself as being able to play with the "big boys" of the "P5", and UH has helped prove that point.

But the thing I think being forgotten here is that if this CFP expansion isn't approved by the end of the year (??) then nothing will be done and the CFP will remain at 4 teams, and we know already that the non-P5 will never get a seat in that scenario.

Is definitely rolling the dice, almost cutting off the nose to spite the face.

he is in support of the expansion... just not the model that has automatic bids for p5 champions... he wants 6 highest ranked champions regardless o conference.

the playoff expansion is happening regardless too much money on the line.. the arguments is about the setup

(11-12-2021 07:48 PM)otown Wrote:  Bad move in my opinion. Rolling the dice here. This is guaranteed access. Much better than before with NO access. The G5 are not required to be a part of anything come 2026. Sure, they can be offered a contract to sign at the time.....but this time without guaranteed access in 2026, still with P5 autobids. At that point, they are in a much worse position. If all the other G conferences are ok with this new proposal, Aresco will fold. Bank on it.

if the aac has any aspiration this is the smart move.. this will draw a hard line between the p5 and g5...and this models likely doesnt end till lik 2035 .. and will likely be the frame work for every future playoff

if you want a model where conferences can elevate, no line between the p5 and g5 publicly, you want the 6 highest ranked champion. this is THE fight.
to accept this model would mean accepting g5 status for decades with no potential of elevation

i get aresco stance, the question will be if it will make a difference

(11-12-2021 08:09 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 07:48 PM)otown Wrote:  Bad move in my opinion. Rolling the dice here. This is guaranteed access. Much better than before with NO access. The G5 are not required to be a part of anything come 2026. Sure, they can be offered a contract to sign at the time.....but this time without guaranteed access in 2026, still with P5 autobids. At that point, they are in a much worse position. If all the other G conferences are ok with this new proposal, Aresco will fold. Bank on it.

if the aac has any aspiration this is the smart move.. this will draw a hard line between the p5 and g5...and this models likely doesnt end till lik 2035 .. and will likely be the frame work for every future playoff

if you want a model where conferences can elevate, no line between the p5 and g5 publicly.. you want the 6 highest ranked champion. this is THE fight
to accept this model would mean accepting g5 status for decades with no potential of elevation

i get aresco stance, the question will be if it will make a difference

Exactly

(11-12-2021 08:09 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 07:48 PM)otown Wrote:  Bad move in my opinion. Rolling the dice here. This is guaranteed access. Much better than before with NO access. The G5 are not required to be a part of anything come 2026. Sure, they can be offered a contract to sign at the time.....but this time without guaranteed access in 2026, still with P5 autobids. At that point, they are in a much worse position. If all the other G conferences are ok with this new proposal, Aresco will fold. Bank on it.

if the aac has any aspiration this is the smart move.. this will draw a hard line between the p5 and g5...and this models likely doesnt end till lik 2035 .. and will likely be the frame work for every future playoff

if you want a model where conferences can elevate, no line between the p5 and g5 publicly.. you want the 6 highest ranked champion. this is THE fight
to accept this model would mean accepting g5 status for decades with no potential of elevation

i get aresco stance, the question will be if it will make a difference

If he can hold the other G conference together in his camp, then he has legs. If not, he folds. Simple as that.

I’m not understanding the differences in position between Aresco and everyone else.

P5 wants the champions of the official top 5 conferences, plus one more champion picked by a committee.

Aresco wants the top 6 champions picked by a committee picked by the official top 5 conferences.

I guess the first method is less controversial and generates less griping about committee selections.

But either way the same teams are getting picked.


6-7 UCLA is obviously superior to a 13-0 Liberty because SoS.

(11-12-2021 08:15 PM)otown Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 08:09 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 07:48 PM)otown Wrote:  Bad move in my opinion. Rolling the dice here. This is guaranteed access. Much better than before with NO access. The G5 are not required to be a part of anything come 2026. Sure, they can be offered a contract to sign at the time.....but this time without guaranteed access in 2026, still with P5 autobids. At that point, they are in a much worse position. If all the other G conferences are ok with this new proposal, Aresco will fold. Bank on it.

if the aac has any aspiration this is the smart move.. this will draw a hard line between the p5 and g5...and this models likely doesnt end till lik 2035 .. and will likely be the frame work for every future playoff

if you want a model where conferences can elevate, no line between the p5 and g5 publicly.. you want the 6 highest ranked champion. this is THE fight
to accept this model would mean accepting g5 status for decades with no potential of elevation

i get aresco stance, the question will be if it will make a difference

If he can hold the other G conference together in his camp, then he has legs. If not, he folds. Simple as that.

Or we play this out until the invitational contract expires in 2025, then the autonomous conferences split and make their own playoffs leaving the non-autonomous conferences to form their own revenue generating model. We have the great divide and finally put the fiction of “FBS” school equality to bed.

(11-12-2021 06:43 PM)ghostofclt! Wrote:  clt appreciates having an aggressive commish now.

#P6

I don't always agree with Aresco, but he is right about this.

(11-12-2021 08:09 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 07:48 PM)otown Wrote:  Bad move in my opinion. Rolling the dice here. This is guaranteed access. Much better than before with NO access. The G5 are not required to be a part of anything come 2026. Sure, they can be offered a contract to sign at the time.....but this time without guaranteed access in 2026, still with P5 autobids. At that point, they are in a much worse position. If all the other G conferences are ok with this new proposal, Aresco will fold. Bank on it.

if the aac has any aspiration this is the smart move.. this will draw a hard line between the p5 and g5...and this models likely doesnt end till lik 2035 .. and will likely be the frame work for every future playoff

if you want a model where conferences can elevate, no line between the p5 and g5 publicly, you want the 6 highest ranked champion. this is THE fight.
to accept this model would mean accepting g5 status for decades with no potential of elevation

i get aresco stance, the question will be if it will make a difference

Well said.

Yes, Aresco realizes that 5+1 and Top 6 both get a G5 in the playoffs, but by designating the Little 12 as a Power conference and making the P/G designation formal, it does a lot of symbolic and status damage to the G5 in general and AAC specifically.

(11-12-2021 08:34 PM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 08:15 PM)otown Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 08:09 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 07:48 PM)otown Wrote:  Bad move in my opinion. Rolling the dice here. This is guaranteed access. Much better than before with NO access. The G5 are not required to be a part of anything come 2026. Sure, they can be offered a contract to sign at the time.....but this time without guaranteed access in 2026, still with P5 autobids. At that point, they are in a much worse position. If all the other G conferences are ok with this new proposal, Aresco will fold. Bank on it.

if the aac has any aspiration this is the smart move.. this will draw a hard line between the p5 and g5...and this models likely doesnt end till lik 2035 .. and will likely be the frame work for every future playoff

if you want a model where conferences can elevate, no line between the p5 and g5 publicly.. you want the 6 highest ranked champion. this is THE fight
to accept this model would mean accepting g5 status for decades with no potential of elevation

i get aresco stance, the question will be if it will make a difference

If he can hold the other G conference together in his camp, then he has legs. If not, he folds. Simple as that.

Or we play this out until the invitational contract expires in 2025, then the autonomous conferences split and make their own playoffs leaving the non-autonomous conferences to form their own revenue generating model. We have the great divide and finally put the fiction of “FBS” school equality to bed.

I’ve been saying for years that non autonomous conferences should create our own revenue generating model. it’s just that i’ve been wording it differently

(11-12-2021 09:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 08:09 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 07:48 PM)otown Wrote:  Bad move in my opinion. Rolling the dice here. This is guaranteed access. Much better than before with NO access. The G5 are not required to be a part of anything come 2026. Sure, they can be offered a contract to sign at the time.....but this time without guaranteed access in 2026, still with P5 autobids. At that point, they are in a much worse position. If all the other G conferences are ok with this new proposal, Aresco will fold. Bank on it.

if the aac has any aspiration this is the smart move.. this will draw a hard line between the p5 and g5...and this models likely doesnt end till lik 2035 .. and will likely be the frame work for every future playoff

if you want a model where conferences can elevate, no line between the p5 and g5 publicly, you want the 6 highest ranked champion. this is THE fight.
to accept this model would mean accepting g5 status for decades with no potential of elevation

i get aresco stance, the question will be if it will make a difference

Well said.

Yes, Aresco realizes that 5+1 and Top 6 both get a G5 in the playoffs, but by designating the Little 12 as a Power conference and making the P/G designation formal, it does a lot of symbolic and status damage to the G5 in general and AAC specifically.

AAC fan now, nicknames for other conferences, Aresco fan?....... wow, you got triggered so hard when UCF went to a power conference.

(11-12-2021 08:01 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(11-12-2021 07:55 PM)Coog Engineer Wrote:  Ya, I know the AAC has always considered itself as being able to play with the "big boys" of the "P5", and UH has helped prove that point.

But the thing I think being forgotten here is that if this CFP expansion isn't approved by the end of the year (??) then nothing will be done and the CFP will remain at 4 teams, and we know already that the non-P5 will never get a seat in that scenario.

Is definitely rolling the dice, almost cutting off the nose to spite the face.

he is in support of the expansion... just not the model that has automatic bids for p5 champions... he wants 6 highest ranked champions regardless o conference.

the playoff expansion is happening regardless too much money on the line.. the arguments is about the setup

Its' interesting to me that the odds of TWO 'G5' champs being in the top 5 ranked conference champs, this meaning a P5 champ was lower... have to be astronomically small. Maybe the MWC can pull it off every now and then... Maybe the AAC champ will every now and then... but in the same year? Both ranking higher that a P5 conference champ? No way. The SOS bullcrap and arbitrary nature of the 'rankings' almost ensures the P5 are higher.

Yet... the P5 are so unsure of their rigged system, that they insist their champs get an auto bid. Hilarious really...