(02-26-2015 10:38 AM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  Guys I'm getting together a huge mass suicide probably right at the end of july before fall practice starts and the world ends as we know it. PM if you are interested I'll let you know when and where, I would post the info but I don't want some a hole trying to stop us... It's over, we are done so just soon get it over with on our own terms.

Will there be punch?

(02-26-2015 11:11 AM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 10:38 AM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  Guys I'm getting together a huge mass suicide probably right at the end of july before fall practice starts and the world ends as we know it. PM if you are interested I'll let you know when and where, I would post the info but I don't want some a hole trying to stop us... It's over, we are done so just soon get it over with on our own terms.

Will there be punch?

First Panama using an exaggeration of anothers argument is one method of negating its points and can be useful if what you seek is the approval of lesser minds.

While its true the g5 got a little payoff money its not enough to cover all the changes coming. Also it is true the g5 did get more say however the agreement weakend the say of all the rest and gave the p5 much greater say. All said and done while the g5 has a little more say. The basketball schools and fcs have very little say anymore. And the p5 have the greatest say on most issues, all the say on some, and a path to get move issues from the most group to the all group.
As for money when it comes time to move an issue to the autonomous side the needed group will get another infusion of needed money.

(02-26-2015 11:11 AM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 10:38 AM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  Guys I'm getting together a huge mass suicide probably right at the end of july before fall practice starts and the world ends as we know it. PM if you are interested I'll let you know when and where, I would post the info but I don't want some a hole trying to stop us... It's over, we are done so just soon get it over with on our own terms.

Will there be punch?

It could be held in guyana also.

(02-25-2015 07:36 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  I think we can all agree the fcs competes on a different level. If you believe the gap between the g5 and p5 is not widening then yes you are naive.

Well not all P5's as some are just limited no matter how much cash they have IE Vandy / Wake / NW etc. Also, what more can AL, UT or Ohio State build at this point? They going to put gold toilets in? There is a point where there is nothing more they can do to advance the good ole law of diminishing returns. Also not all G5's are static a good portion of us are very young FBS programs far from hitting the ceiling. The door is all about shut on the FBS really only about at most three or four more spots left so the drag on the G5 from the flood young programs like GaSt over the last two decades will only get better as time goes on. You don't need a Texas or Ohio State budget or your roster to be full of four and five star kids to compete or even be top ten. Plenty of teams do it with half the budget and rosters full of three star kids.

(02-24-2015 05:36 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 05:08 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 04:01 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 03:59 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  I'd like to know how they calculate cost of living.

If it includes off hours dining and like a discretionary stipend (that is cost of living adjusted to account for gas/food/etc prices that vary from region to region), it makes sense.

If it includes the ability for players to afford to live off campus, then I am not in favor. They are given full room cost in their scholarship already. Giving off campus living stipends would really be showing preferential treatment.

Players get off campus living stipends already. If they don't live on campus, they get a rent check.

I think that's a shame.

Its not that big a deal.

Me either, what is the difference in giving them rent over paying for a dorm? Probably a little shenanigans going on but nothing big.

A dividing line? Already existed. You can give it a name but it has always been there. Extra money? Did not have to be included but it was and it more than pays for the new costs for the G5 and will only increase over time.

Transfer rules? You won't see open transfer rules because that kills half of the P5. USC would go and get the best sophomores on Oregon State's roster and so on. That won't happen.

What will happen is there will be far fewer transfers to FCS schools and the few kids that pick and FCS school over a G5 school will be FAR less inclined to do so now. Would kids consider staying closer to home to play for an FCS program since it might be easier on mom and dad financially due to the extra expenses if they can get an extra $5,000 a year at a G5 program? They won't stay. This is where you will see transfers change if FCS programs do not implement stipends.

My guess is that you will see basketball stipends but not FCS football. Those schools HAVE to keep up in basketball since they all play and recruit in the same pool.

Anyone that truly believes there was a decision to split, slowly or otherwise, FBS is not paying attention to the timing. It was not a coincidence that there was no movement on any of these issues until the lawsuits started being filed.

(02-24-2015 03:48 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 03:40 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  Are you saying its cheaper to attend vandy?
tuition at vandy is around 42,000
while tuition at auburn is near 5,000
how can cost of attendance be cheaper at vandy than auburn?

No, Im saying the cost of living is different from cost of attendance. Don't assume all schools located in big cities will have higher COA just because cost of living is usually higher in big cities. 2 different things.

True somethings actually get more expensive as you get further away from a big city.

(02-26-2015 11:39 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  A dividing line? Already existed. You can give it a name but it has always been there. Extra money? Did not have to be included but it was and it more than pays for the new costs for the G5 and will only increase over time.

Transfer rules? You won't see open transfer rules because that kills half of the P5. USC would go and get the best sophomores on Oregon State's roster and so on. That won't happen.

What will happen is there will be far fewer transfers to FCS schools and the few kids that pick and FCS school over a G5 school will be FAR less inclined to do so now. Would kids consider staying closer to home to play for an FCS program since it might be easier on mom and dad financially due to the extra expenses if they can get an extra $5,000 a year at a G5 program? They won't stay. This is where you will see transfers change if FCS programs do not implement stipends.

My guess is that you will see basketball stipends but not FCS football. Those schools HAVE to keep up in basketball since they all play and recruit in the same pool.

Anyone that truly believes there was a decision to split, slowly or otherwise, FBS is not paying attention to the timing. It was not a coincidence that there was no movement on any of these issues until the lawsuits started being filed.

Stipends are not budget shattering for anyone in the FBS, it will just hurt some in the G5 more than others. So if we are all under the same rules and scholarships are limited at 85 we will be able to offer the same stipends as anyone else. Actually the money G5's receives from TV, CFB over the BCS and money games has only gone up from what I have seen the last decade. I see this more as a bigger deal in terms of the G5 separating even further from the FCS. We are debating whether some G5 conferences will be all in. What chances do you think there are to get a majority of FCS schools in a conference to allow it for football? The FBS market will adjust fine with this. This could be a blessing in disguise in the long run for the G5. Like someone else said this is going to make the decision for that tweener FCS/FBS kid a whole lot easier in a lot of cases. That three or good two star kid that turned down the FBS school to stay at his position will likely be learning a new position at the FBS school now. I am pretty sure game payouts are about to get a lot higher.

Stipend was the norm until 1973 and it was uniform. It was only eliminated because the economy sucked and schools were having to add women's athletics to comply with Title IX. It was a cost saving measure and probably should have been restored by 1985 or so but instead the money went to the facility and coach salary arms race.

I agree G5 schools may get a few "sleeper" recruits that may have gone to fcs.Most of these will red shirt and by the time they are fifth year seniors may develop into very good players.The overall impact may be small but at a few schools will be enough to make a significant impact.


You also may get a couple more "diamonds in the rough" who develop into GREAT players.

(02-26-2015 11:11 AM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 10:38 AM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  Guys I'm getting together a huge mass suicide probably right at the end of july before fall practice starts and the world ends as we know it. PM if you are interested I'll let you know when and where, I would post the info but I don't want some a hole trying to stop us... It's over, we are done so just soon get it over with on our own terms.

Will there be punch?

Lots of punch

(02-26-2015 12:54 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  I agree G5 schools may get a few "sleeper" recruits that may have gone to fcs.Most of these will red shirt and by the time they are fifth year seniors may develop into very good players.The overall impact may be small but at a few schools will be enough to make a significant impact.


You also may get a couple more "diamonds in the rough" who develop into GREAT players.

I think the real impact will be more players electing to transfer within FBS even if they have to sit out a year rather than transfer to FCS and play immediately. Any kid with a redshirt year to burn would likely elect to sit and take the money.

Kids with a redshirt to burn do this anyway. Fbs transfers are usually jrs or sr. And often go to a team that is near their home.

(02-26-2015 09:52 AM)cleburneslim Wrote:  No bobcat i dont suggest that. I believe ive said enough controversal stuff. I dont need you to add stuff i didnt say.
what the g5 should do is act proactively rather than try to spend as much as the p5. Its time for them to act in a concerted manner in order to build a product that the public wants rather try to be the p5 minor league. Do i have the answers or a plan to specifically lay out a plan? No of course not. But giving the p5 autonomy was a mistake and trying to spend alongside the p5 will never work. The g5 needs to act as though they are a seperate group and plan and act on their own behalf rather than mimicking big brother.

the fcs has the same problem none work together for the good of the group they each pretend they are better than the rest and act greedily thus diminishing the whole product and in essence their product.

You are saying that you don't know what to do, but that that the G5 needs to do something. Then you are saying that the G5 "needs to act as though they are a seperate group" and basically stop trying to keep up with the P5 schools. I still don't get what you want?

This is real basic. A G5 school will almost never beat a P5 school spending more. But they can beat them on the field or the court. Let's take the ACC. Each ACC school gets $18 million per year for their TV contract. They start with a huge advantage over a G5 school. Yet ULM has back-to back wins over Wake Forest. East Carolina has back-to back blow out wins over North Carolina. They also beat Virginia Tech in 2014. Colorado State beat Boston College in 2014. BYU beat Virginia and Pittsburgh lost to Houston. Georgia Southern had both NC State and Georgia Tech, but lost both games in the last minute.

So I don't get what you are asking for? A G5 school is getting a chance to compete with a P5 school and often times they are getting paid quite well to do it. Plus, the games are on national TV. The college football playoff split is 75% of the revenue going to P5 schools, 25% going to G5 schools under a 12 year contract. If that is not good enough, then what is your alternative?

Are you saying that the g5 is on a lower level and on occassion beats a better team? If so you are correct there is no need to do anything. I was under the misgiving that the g5 played on the same level with the p5 at least that has been stated on here ad nauseum.

(02-26-2015 08:28 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  Are you saying that the g5 is on a lower level and on occassion beats a better team? If so you are correct there is no need to do anything. I was under the misgiving that the g5 played on the same level with the p5 at least that has been stated on here ad nauseum.

P5 and G5 schools are FBS schools. FBS schools can provide up to 85 scholarships in football. We go to bowl games. In theory, any FBS school could win a national championship. On the field or court there is an opportunity for equality, to be better.

P5 and G5 schools are not equal financially. Never have been and never will be. As a G5 school, you have to do more with less. It is not easy, but it can be done.

Which comes back to you. What do you want G5 schools to do differently than what they are doing today?

This all started because i suggested the p5 has an agenda which involves eliminating the g5 as competition. Financially and competitively. Not because i said listen up i know exactly what the g5 should do.
However i would suggest that the g5 should act as though this agenda exists and not the current path it has taken in which each conference or team acts as though they are trying to eliminate the other. ie... the mwc is better than the cusa so we should do our best to hinder them and everyone else or cusa is better than the sbc so we should try our best to hinder them. Rather we are the g5 and should act in a manner that is good for the g5, view and vote on issues as a block and not as individuals this is the only strength theyll have.

so to sum up I believe an agenda exists, you i assume do not.
Its ok if we dont agree.

(02-26-2015 12:54 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  I agree G5 schools may get a few "sleeper" recruits that may have gone to fcs.Most of these will red shirt and by the time they are fifth year seniors may develop into very good players.The overall impact may be small but at a few schools will be enough to make a significant impact.


You also may get a couple more "diamonds in the rough" who develop into GREAT players.

There are a lot more three star and good two star kids with FBS offers choosing FCS schools than you probably think. 99.9% of our roster of FCS recruits just went 8-0 in a G5 conference and took two P5's to the last minute of the game. That is more than just sleepers and diamonds in the rough. I would like to have some of the three and two star kids that WKU made offers to but choose a FCS school instead.

JCGSU, you misunderstood my post.My overall point was G5 schools WILL now get some of the talent that may have gone to fcs.COA will force the hand of many who may have chosen fcs (for various reasons in the past) to take ANY, ANY FBS offer. This will increase the talent level(mostly in G5) . The results should start to show in the next 3-5 years.I agree with you.

This will be an underrated benefit of COA mostly to the G5.
Meanwhile, talent levels will reduce 20-30% over time at the fcs level IMHO.