(12-17-2019 09:22 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 10:39 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  People have predicted a big school breakaway for 65 years, it and flying cars probably happen eventually

I don't see it happening. The P5 had one issue with the G5, the NCAA voting issue, and that was resolved 5-6 years ago.

What many who think a breakaway will happen fail to realize is that the P5 likes having the G5 'around' in the same division. Nick Saban may want P5 to play only other P5 but that's an extreme minority opinion.

University Presidents, ADs, and coaches all know that even though P5 fans grouse about Eastern Kentucky and UT-San Antonio on the schedule, what they really want is to see their team win, and for most P5 schools, more P5 games will mean more losses, which is bad for these decision-makers.

Look at the ACC this year: 4-9 vs other P5, 15-4 vs G5. That's a big difference.

That's why we still see FCS being scheduled even though everyone is on the record as being against it, etc.

The ACC was 4-14 against what where officially other P5 programs. Notre Dame is still independent in football and merely has a scheduling arrangement of 5 games with the ACC. And two of those 4 wins belong to Clemson.

The change will come with the TV contracts when the networks want more conference or P5 games. So the motivation will be the oldest and truest in the world, money.

(12-17-2019 02:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 09:22 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 10:39 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  People have predicted a big school breakaway for 65 years, it and flying cars probably happen eventually

I don't see it happening. The P5 had one issue with the G5, the NCAA voting issue, and that was resolved 5-6 years ago.

What many who think a breakaway will happen fail to realize is that the P5 likes having the G5 'around' in the same division. Nick Saban may want P5 to play only other P5 but that's an extreme minority opinion.

University Presidents, ADs, and coaches all know that even though P5 fans grouse about Eastern Kentucky and UT-San Antonio on the schedule, what they really want is to see their team win, and for most P5 schools, more P5 games will mean more losses, which is bad for these decision-makers.

Look at the ACC this year: 4-9 vs other P5, 15-4 vs G5. That's a big difference.

That's why we still see FCS being scheduled even though everyone is on the record as being against it, etc.

The ACC was 4-14 against what where officially other P5 programs. Notre Dame is still independent in football and merely has a scheduling arrangement of 5 games with the ACC. And two of those 4 wins belong to Clemson.

The change will come with the TV contracts when the networks want more conference or P5 games. So the motivation will be the oldest and truest in the world, money.

The ND/ACC scheduling agreement has not been kind to the ACC's out of conference schedule results.

ND was 5-0 vs. the ACC this year and is 14-1 the last three regular seasons (14-2 counting last year's playoff loss to Clemson) versus the ACC..

(12-17-2019 02:24 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 02:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 09:22 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 10:39 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  People have predicted a big school breakaway for 65 years, it and flying cars probably happen eventually

I don't see it happening. The P5 had one issue with the G5, the NCAA voting issue, and that was resolved 5-6 years ago.

What many who think a breakaway will happen fail to realize is that the P5 likes having the G5 'around' in the same division. Nick Saban may want P5 to play only other P5 but that's an extreme minority opinion.

University Presidents, ADs, and coaches all know that even though P5 fans grouse about Eastern Kentucky and UT-San Antonio on the schedule, what they really want is to see their team win, and for most P5 schools, more P5 games will mean more losses, which is bad for these decision-makers.

Look at the ACC this year: 4-9 vs other P5, 15-4 vs G5. That's a big difference.

That's why we still see FCS being scheduled even though everyone is on the record as being against it, etc.

The ACC was 4-14 against what where officially other P5 programs. Notre Dame is still independent in football and merely has a scheduling arrangement of 5 games with the ACC. And two of those 4 wins belong to Clemson.

The change will come with the TV contracts when the networks want more conference or P5 games. So the motivation will be the oldest and truest in the world, money.

The ND/ACC scheduling agreement has not been kind to the ACC's out of conference schedule results.

ND was 5-0 vs. the ACC this year and is 14-1 the last three regular seasons (14-2 counting last year's playoff loss to Clemson) versus the ACC..

Helps with SOS though.

(12-17-2019 02:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 02:24 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 02:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 09:22 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 10:39 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  People have predicted a big school breakaway for 65 years, it and flying cars probably happen eventually

I don't see it happening. The P5 had one issue with the G5, the NCAA voting issue, and that was resolved 5-6 years ago.

What many who think a breakaway will happen fail to realize is that the P5 likes having the G5 'around' in the same division. Nick Saban may want P5 to play only other P5 but that's an extreme minority opinion.

University Presidents, ADs, and coaches all know that even though P5 fans grouse about Eastern Kentucky and UT-San Antonio on the schedule, what they really want is to see their team win, and for most P5 schools, more P5 games will mean more losses, which is bad for these decision-makers.

Look at the ACC this year: 4-9 vs other P5, 15-4 vs G5. That's a big difference.

That's why we still see FCS being scheduled even though everyone is on the record as being against it, etc.

The ACC was 4-14 against what where officially other P5 programs. Notre Dame is still independent in football and merely has a scheduling arrangement of 5 games with the ACC. And two of those 4 wins belong to Clemson.

The change will come with the TV contracts when the networks want more conference or P5 games. So the motivation will be the oldest and truest in the world, money.

The ND/ACC scheduling agreement has not been kind to the ACC's out of conference schedule results.

ND was 5-0 vs. the ACC this year and is 14-1 the last three regular seasons (14-2 counting last year's playoff loss to Clemson) versus the ACC..

Helps with SOS though.

Ah but it isn't helping Notre Dame's SOS unless they play Clemson.

(12-17-2019 09:22 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 10:39 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  People have predicted a big school breakaway for 65 years, it and flying cars probably happen eventually

I don't see it happening. The P5 had one issue with the G5, the NCAA voting issue, and that was resolved 5-6 years ago.

What many who think a breakaway will happen fail to realize is that the P5 likes having the G5 'around' in the same division. Nick Saban may want P5 to play only other P5 but that's an extreme minority opinion.

University Presidents, ADs, and coaches all know that even though P5 fans grouse about Eastern Kentucky and UT-San Antonio on the schedule, what they really want is to see their team win, and for most P5 schools, more P5 games will mean more losses, which is bad for these decision-makers.

Look at the ACC this year: 4-9 vs other P5, 15-4 vs G5. That's a big difference.

That's why we still see FCS being scheduled even though everyone is on the record as being against it, etc.

University presidents do not approach issues of athletics from the same viewpoint as fans or ADs.

People forget that the Management Council by wide margins TWICE passed legislation that would have held FBS schools to a very strict, outside audited attendance figures with other twists.

First time, the presidents got it, they tabled it until it died of old age.

The second time presidents get it in their hot little hands and understand that the rule will kick some schools out of the club and they amended the legislation to take all teeth out of it. They amended it to be weaker than the legislation it replaced.

People horribly over-estimate the willingness of presidents to kick people out of the room.

The last time the NCAA adopted legislation booting people? Faculty athletic reps did the voting.

The current NCAA revenue is worth about $14 million per if the P5 breakaway, the NCAA passes through roughly 60% with the bulk landing in P5 coffers so very optimistically, we are talking a gain of $8 million per school which sounds like something but it's less than a 20% increase in conference revenue less than 8% total revenue increase for most P5 athletic departments.

Not a hill folks likely line up to die because what good does it do Florida to bump revenue $8 million if Florida State and Miami also bump $8 million.

(12-17-2019 05:07 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 09:22 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 10:39 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  People have predicted a big school breakaway for 65 years, it and flying cars probably happen eventually

I don't see it happening. The P5 had one issue with the G5, the NCAA voting issue, and that was resolved 5-6 years ago.

What many who think a breakaway will happen fail to realize is that the P5 likes having the G5 'around' in the same division. Nick Saban may want P5 to play only other P5 but that's an extreme minority opinion.

University Presidents, ADs, and coaches all know that even though P5 fans grouse about Eastern Kentucky and UT-San Antonio on the schedule, what they really want is to see their team win, and for most P5 schools, more P5 games will mean more losses, which is bad for these decision-makers.

Look at the ACC this year: 4-9 vs other P5, 15-4 vs G5. That's a big difference.

That's why we still see FCS being scheduled even though everyone is on the record as being against it, etc.

University presidents do not approach issues of athletics from the same viewpoint as fans or ADs.

People forget that the Management Council by wide margins TWICE passed legislation that would have held FBS schools to a very strict, outside audited attendance figures with other twists.

First time, the presidents got it, they tabled it until it died of old age.

The second time presidents get it in their hot little hands and understand that the rule will kick some schools out of the club and they amended the legislation to take all teeth out of it. They amended it to be weaker than the legislation it replaced.

People horribly over-estimate the willingness of presidents to kick people out of the room.

The last time the NCAA adopted legislation booting people? Faculty athletic reps did the voting.

The current NCAA revenue is worth about $14 million per if the P5 breakaway, the NCAA passes through roughly 60% with the bulk landing in P5 coffers so very optimistically, we are talking a gain of $8 million per school which sounds like something but it's less than a 20% increase in conference revenue less than 8% total revenue increase for most P5 athletic departments.

Not a hill folks likely line up to die because what good does it do Florida to bump revenue $8 million if Florida State and Miami also bump $8 million.

The bump would be closer to 14 million with a slightly smaller tournament and with the funds withheld by the NCAA. The did get 1 billion for last year's tournament and the shares are still paltry and it takes 6 years to get all of the money. Meanwhile the NCAA adds to their endowment in excess of 70 million a year just from the tournament.

The money to be made is not in tourney credits, but in being able to market the tournament by a breakaway group and to disperse all of the proceeds among themselves. Calculate that!

(12-16-2019 12:06 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I don’t think the system I proposed can be gamed so easily. There would be no financial incentive to do it.

I am still wondering what the financial incentive for the P5 would be to divide playoff/bowl revenue equally with the G5?

Since "P" status vs. "G" status is a media invention, and the actual divide between "G" teams and "P" teams has nothing to do with prowess on the field and everything to do with perception and money, why not go to the source of the money? Why not pit the networks against one another in some kind of contest -- maybe comparing net annual revenues, the amount of dividends paid to stockholders, or the size of top executives' golden parachutes? A panel of notoriously crooked coaches could serve as judges to ensure that nobody cooks the books or cheats in any other way, and though some executive egos might be bruised, the complete absence of schools' participation in post-season playoff games would preclude the chances of additional injury to college athletes.

(12-18-2019 11:12 AM)colohank Wrote:  Since "P" status vs. "G" status is a media invention, and the actual divide between "G" teams and "P" teams has nothing to do with prowess on the field and everything to do with perception and money, why not go to the source of the money?

You might as well say the same thing about the "actual divide" between G5 and FCS, between FCS and Division II, and between D2 and D3 and NAIA.

The truth is, "FBS" is an invention as well, invented by the NCAA. It was never meant as a competitive league in the sense of everyone on the same level competing for the same title. It was actually formed as an "anti-league", it was for those schools and conferences that did not want to participate in an organized playoff system.

So there's nothing "natural" about FBS such that it is right and proper that Alabama should compete with Arkansas State. Nobody at Alabama has ever thought of themselves as competing with Arkansas State for anything.

And if you want to worship NCAA designations as definitive in spite of that history, then you have to recognize that there is an NCAA-sanctioned split, between "Autonomy" and "non-Autonomy" conferences.

So while the "P" and "G" nomenclature is wrong, that doesn't mean there isn't an actual formal divide, there is. It is "A" and "nA".

If the divide is real then the playoff committee should come out and say that the 4 team, 8 team, 16 team playoff is only for the so called “Power” conferences. You can correct me if I am wrong, but is not the reason that an 8 team playoff is even considered is to include G5 schools?

(12-18-2019 11:54 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  If the divide is real then the playoff committee should come out and say that the 4 team, 8 team, 16 team playoff is only for the so called “Power” conferences. You can correct me if I am wrong, but is not the reason that an 8 team playoff is even considered is to include G5 schools?

Nothing much is ever done in order to include G5 schools. The P5 run the show, and if they decide to expand to 8 teams, it will be because they think it will benefit themselves, and if the G5 get a team in as a result, it will be as a bone thrown by the P5.

But what the G5 want and get certainly won't be the motivation for a B1G or PAC or any other P conference to expand the playoffs.

The playoff committee includes the G5 schools in their ranking, so they are at least trying to appear inclusive to those schools or it’s all a show. If it’s a show then they should say so or try to devise a more fairer system to give all schools at the FBS level a chance at the playoffs.

(12-17-2019 03:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 02:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 02:24 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 02:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 09:22 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't see it happening. The P5 had one issue with the G5, the NCAA voting issue, and that was resolved 5-6 years ago.

What many who think a breakaway will happen fail to realize is that the P5 likes having the G5 'around' in the same division. Nick Saban may want P5 to play only other P5 but that's an extreme minority opinion.

University Presidents, ADs, and coaches all know that even though P5 fans grouse about Eastern Kentucky and UT-San Antonio on the schedule, what they really want is to see their team win, and for most P5 schools, more P5 games will mean more losses, which is bad for these decision-makers.

Look at the ACC this year: 4-9 vs other P5, 15-4 vs G5. That's a big difference.

That's why we still see FCS being scheduled even though everyone is on the record as being against it, etc.

The ACC was 4-14 against what where officially other P5 programs. Notre Dame is still independent in football and merely has a scheduling arrangement of 5 games with the ACC. And two of those 4 wins belong to Clemson.

The change will come with the TV contracts when the networks want more conference or P5 games. So the motivation will be the oldest and truest in the world, money.

The ND/ACC scheduling agreement has not been kind to the ACC's out of conference schedule results.

ND was 5-0 vs. the ACC this year and is 14-1 the last three regular seasons (14-2 counting last year's playoff loss to Clemson) versus the ACC..

Helps with SOS though.

Ah but it isn't helping Notre Dame's 2019 SOS unless they play Clemson.

FIFY