(09-22-2020 02:27 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 01:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The problem with some of these distinctions is that there is a ton of overlap. If you took a half dozen of the worst P5 schools and paired them against the top 6 G5 I’m doubtful that the P5 walk away with a winning record; they might not even come away with a win.

If the P5 were truly their own tier even their worst should be able to beat the best of the G5.

It all comes down to tent poles. The only thing separating the top 10 G5 programs and probably the bottom 25 of the P5 is that somewhere along the road the P programs hitched themselves to 2-3 real blue bloods.

Several years back Purdue came to Nippert and got smashed by UC 42-7. The Bearcats were bigger, stronger and faster at nearly every position group. If you were someone who knew nothing about college sports and you were told the school in red/black was only getting paid a few million a year on their TV contract and the other was in a prestigious conference getting $50M/year you would not believe it.

This past bowl season UC looked like men against boys against BC. Same as above. Playing in the AAC I can tell you UCF, Memphis and Houston has some hosses that a lot of these P5 schools wish they had.

Very good points, C-Ave.

In many respects (notwithstanding money and perception), it's better to be a top-notch G5 football program than a, say, "lower-half" P5 program. As a follower of Vandy, North Carolina and Indiana on the P5 hand and of Cincy and Memphis on the G5 other ... I know this quite well.

(09-22-2020 09:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2020 10:01 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(09-21-2020 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2020 09:19 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(09-21-2020 08:30 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  It’s interesting to me people will argue that schools like Cincinnati and a Memphis are nobodies in football, yet at the same time they do not get the same “under dog” cred that an Appy State or Boise gets. Either they are a nobody who should get rooted for when they do well, or their are actually somebody which prevents them from getting the same affection those other schools receive.

That is because anyway you argue it the AAC is a major football conference. Salaries and TV exposure, fan support just isn't mid major.

Well, unless the "way you argue it" is that the P5 are major and the G5 are mid-major.

Which I think happens to be the way about 98.6% of all college football fans would argue it.

That's not the way the folks I talk to see it, Quo — and most of these are "SEC people" who can be a bit playfully arrogant at times. They classify DI programs as either "power" (essentially those schools in the P5) or "major (essentially those in the G5).

"Mid-major" to them is FCS.

So the average Tennessee fan I talk to would have your USF football program and my Cincy and Memphis programs as "major" and, as I noted, Alabama as "power" (or "high-major").

No fair-minded, reasonable and knowledgable college football fan/media member I discuss this with in Nashville would classify Memphis or Cincinnati football as "mid-major." As they see it (and I do too), if you are DI, you are essentially major. Now within that "major" grouping ... yes, there are "tiers," if you will.

If I might use my two favorite programs: Vanderbilt and Memphis. Only a buffoon would classify Vanderbilt as a "major program" more than Memphis in every single metric. Vanderbilt is "more major" than Memphis primarily (and perhaps overwhelmingly) in league affiliation/schedule. In terms of history (modest for both), attendance, players sent to the NFL, number of winning seasons, name recognition of coaches, etc., it's essentially a toss-up at this point. Clearly, Memphis has the more "major" program currently in terms of success.

Vanderbilt unfairly benefits from being in the SEC and Memphis is unfairly penalized for being in the AAC.

Bill, I guess we have different experiences. E.g. here in Louisiana, nobody regards anyone but LSU as a "major" football programs. All of the various FBS programs, the ULLs and USLs and LA-Techs and ULMs etc. are mid-major programs.

Likewise in hoops, the major programs are the P6, while the non-P6 are mid-majors, though there are programmatic exceptions (e.g., Cincy, Gonzaga and Memphis are major programs in mid-major conferences).

It didn't used to be this way - e.g., these days, Vanderbilt is a Power program by definition, because it's in a P5 conference. Ditto for Rutgers, as awful as they are. They are an Awful Power Program, LOL.

But 30 years ago, conference membership alone didn't guarantee major/power designation. When people called the Big 8 the "big two and little six", they were labeling the Kansases and Iowa States of the Big 8 mid-major programs.

I'm not familiar with that appellation. I always thought of the Big 8 as "Nebraska and the Seven Dwarves."

(09-22-2020 03:01 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 02:27 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 01:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The problem with some of these distinctions is that there is a ton of overlap. If you took a half dozen of the worst P5 schools and paired them against the top 6 G5 I’m doubtful that the P5 walk away with a winning record; they might not even come away with a win.

If the P5 were truly their own tier even their worst should be able to beat the best of the G5.

It all comes down to tent poles. The only thing separating the top 10 G5 programs and probably the bottom 25 of the P5 is that somewhere along the road the P programs hitched themselves to 2-3 real blue bloods.

Several years back Purdue came to Nippert and got smashed by UC 42-7. The Bearcats were bigger, stronger and faster at nearly every position group. If you were someone who knew nothing about college sports and you were told the school in red/black was only getting paid a few million a year on their TV contract and the other was in a prestigious conference getting $50M/year you would not believe it.

This past bowl season UC looked like men against boys against BC. Same as above. Playing in the AAC I can tell you UCF, Memphis and Houston has some hosses that a lot of these P5 schools wish they had.

Very good points, C-Ave.

In many respects (notwithstanding money and perception), it's better to be a top-notch G5 football program than a, say, "lower-half" P5 program. As a follower of Vandy, North Carolina and Indiana on the P5 hand and of Cincy and Memphis on the G5 other ... I know this quite well.

Except that it will be nigh on impossible to keep a successful coach (due to budgetary restraints), extremely difficult to buy-out an unsuccessful coach (again, due to tight budgets), build support infrastructure (like practice facilities, team locker rooms, etc...), afford dedicated position analysts, afford private planes for recruiting junkets, and stuff like that... But other than those incidental items, it's "better" to be a "g" program than a "P" program.

Oh, and, if I'm right, as the increasing cost of FBS football (with FCoA and "Pay-for-Name-and-Likeness" and the like) with the tightening of State Support and reduced numbers of tuition, I think there is NO circumstance that I'd argue that "It's better to be a top-notch g program than a lower-level P member." Vandy, North Carolina, Indiana, Wake Forrest, Iowa State, and any other "lower level P" program will still be there in 10 years. I cannot, with any confidence, say the same about Memphis, Cincinnati, or Boise State.

Now, I "hope" UC is still around...IN A POWER CONFERENCE...in 10 years, but I cannot say with any certainty that they will be in FBS 10 years from now.

(09-22-2020 11:52 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 09:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2020 10:01 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(09-21-2020 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2020 09:19 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  That is because anyway you argue it the AAC is a major football conference. Salaries and TV exposure, fan support just isn't mid major.

Well, unless the "way you argue it" is that the P5 are major and the G5 are mid-major.

Which I think happens to be the way about 98.6% of all college football fans would argue it.

That's not the way the folks I talk to see it, Quo — and most of these are "SEC people" who can be a bit playfully arrogant at times. They classify DI programs as either "power" (essentially those schools in the P5) or "major (essentially those in the G5).

"Mid-major" to them is FCS.

So the average Tennessee fan I talk to would have your USF football program and my Cincy and Memphis programs as "major" and, as I noted, Alabama as "power" (or "high-major").

No fair-minded, reasonable and knowledgable college football fan/media member I discuss this with in Nashville would classify Memphis or Cincinnati football as "mid-major." As they see it (and I do too), if you are DI, you are essentially major. Now within that "major" grouping ... yes, there are "tiers," if you will.

If I might use my two favorite programs: Vanderbilt and Memphis. Only a buffoon would classify Vanderbilt as a "major program" more than Memphis in every single metric. Vanderbilt is "more major" than Memphis primarily (and perhaps overwhelmingly) in league affiliation/schedule. In terms of history (modest for both), attendance, players sent to the NFL, number of winning seasons, name recognition of coaches, etc., it's essentially a toss-up at this point. Clearly, Memphis has the more "major" program currently in terms of success.

Vanderbilt unfairly benefits from being in the SEC and Memphis is unfairly penalized for being in the AAC.

Bill, I guess we have different experiences. E.g. here in Louisiana, nobody regards anyone but LSU as a "major" football programs. All of the various FBS programs, the ULLs and USLs and LA-Techs and ULMs etc. are mid-major programs.

Likewise in hoops, the major programs are the P6, while the non-P6 are mid-majors, though there are programmatic exceptions (e.g., Cincy, Gonzaga and Memphis are major programs in mid-major conferences).

It didn't used to be this way - e.g., these days, Vanderbilt is a Power program by definition, because it's in a P5 conference. Ditto for Rutgers, as awful as they are. They are an Awful Power Program, LOL.

But 30 years ago, conference membership alone didn't guarantee major/power designation. When people called the Big 8 the "big two and little six", they were labeling the Kansases and Iowa States of the Big 8 mid-major programs.

There clearly are lots of folks who agree with you, Quo. However, there are many others who take the approach I outlined previously. I suppose it can be rather subjective.

I simply make (and some others do, too) a distinction between a high-major/power program like Alabama and, to use your Bulls, a "major" program like USF, which can draw up to 40,000 per home game during a good season and pay its coach $2 million or more annually. That is "sufficiently major" in my book. The "mid-majors" are those that are lucky to draw 20,000 and pay their coaches $1M or less. Some of the G5 programs are like that and all of FCS (I-AA) is such.

As to hoops, I agree with you. There are upwards of 15 programs not in the P6 but that are considered major to high-major.

Remember, my entry in this discussion was the claim (Kit-Kat maybe?) that "any way" you argue it the AAC is a major football conference. So I presented a way that denies that, and one that I think is pretty common - the P5 are major, the G5 are not.

So my point wasn't that everyone agrees with me, or even that a majority does, it was that enough agree with me to render the claim that there is no way to say the AAC isn't a major conference untenable.

(09-22-2020 03:01 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 02:27 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 01:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The problem with some of these distinctions is that there is a ton of overlap. If you took a half dozen of the worst P5 schools and paired them against the top 6 G5 I’m doubtful that the P5 walk away with a winning record; they might not even come away with a win.

If the P5 were truly their own tier even their worst should be able to beat the best of the G5.

It all comes down to tent poles. The only thing separating the top 10 G5 programs and probably the bottom 25 of the P5 is that somewhere along the road the P programs hitched themselves to 2-3 real blue bloods.

Several years back Purdue came to Nippert and got smashed by UC 42-7. The Bearcats were bigger, stronger and faster at nearly every position group. If you were someone who knew nothing about college sports and you were told the school in red/black was only getting paid a few million a year on their TV contract and the other was in a prestigious conference getting $50M/year you would not believe it.

This past bowl season UC looked like men against boys against BC. Same as above. Playing in the AAC I can tell you UCF, Memphis and Houston has some hosses that a lot of these P5 schools wish they had.

Very good points, C-Ave.

In many respects (notwithstanding money and perception), it's better to be a top-notch G5 football program than a, say, "lower-half" P5 program. As a follower of Vandy, North Carolina and Indiana on the P5 hand and of Cincy and Memphis on the G5 other ... I know this quite well.

There have been times when USF was a successful G5 football program. At no point during those times have I thought it was better to be us than to be Vandy or Indiana or Oregon State. The prestige and money of being in a "P" league just overwhelms all other considerations to me.

E.g., if you told me (a) USF could be invited to the SEC, but (b) for the first 10 years we'd finish last in football in the conference, with no guarantees of how we'd finish after that, and it was up to me to decide on whether to take that or not, I would © TAKE THAT faster than most 4 year olds can take the thumb out of their mouths to bite in to an ice cream cone.

(09-22-2020 05:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 03:01 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 02:27 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 01:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The problem with some of these distinctions is that there is a ton of overlap. If you took a half dozen of the worst P5 schools and paired them against the top 6 G5 I’m doubtful that the P5 walk away with a winning record; they might not even come away with a win.

If the P5 were truly their own tier even their worst should be able to beat the best of the G5.

It all comes down to tent poles. The only thing separating the top 10 G5 programs and probably the bottom 25 of the P5 is that somewhere along the road the P programs hitched themselves to 2-3 real blue bloods.

Several years back Purdue came to Nippert and got smashed by UC 42-7. The Bearcats were bigger, stronger and faster at nearly every position group. If you were someone who knew nothing about college sports and you were told the school in red/black was only getting paid a few million a year on their TV contract and the other was in a prestigious conference getting $50M/year you would not believe it.

This past bowl season UC looked like men against boys against BC. Same as above. Playing in the AAC I can tell you UCF, Memphis and Houston has some hosses that a lot of these P5 schools wish they had.

Very good points, C-Ave.

In many respects (notwithstanding money and perception), it's better to be a top-notch G5 football program than a, say, "lower-half" P5 program. As a follower of Vandy, North Carolina and Indiana on the P5 hand and of Cincy and Memphis on the G5 other ... I know this quite well.

There have been times when USF was a successful G5 football program. At no point during those times have I thought it was better to be us than to be Vandy or Indiana or Oregon State. The prestige and money of being in a "P" league just overwhelms all other considerations to me.

E.g., if you told me (a) USF could be invited to the SEC, but (b) for the first 10 years we'd finish last in football in the conference, with no guarantees of how we'd finish after that, and it was up to me to decide on whether to take that or not, I would © TAKE THAT faster than most 4 year olds can take the thumb out of their mouths to bite in to an ice cream cone.

IDK Quo, I would rather be a USF fan than Vandy or Indiana. Vandy has had 3 above .500 seasons in the past 20 years. Yeah you get to rub shoulders with Alabama, LSU, Auburn and the boys, but most years you are only winning 2-4 games tops. At USF you've had 12 seasons with a winning record. I don't care what conference you are in, it is no fun as a fun watching your team get throttled every weekend.

(09-22-2020 05:12 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  IDK Quo, I would rather be a USF fan than Vandy or Indiana. Vandy has had 3 above .500 seasons in the past 20 years. Yeah you get to rub shoulders with Alabama, LSU, Auburn and the boys, but most years you are only winning 2-4 games tops. At USF you've had 12 seasons with a winning record. I don't care what conference you are in, it is no fun as a fun watching your team get throttled every weekend.

It's still the SEC and far more interesting on a Saturday afternoon than playing before 10,000 actual attendees at SMU or a similar size at Tulsa.

Without the SEC, Vanderbilt would be drawing Rice-sized crowds.

(09-22-2020 05:32 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 05:12 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  IDK Quo, I would rather be a USF fan than Vandy or Indiana. Vandy has had 3 above .500 seasons in the past 20 years. Yeah you get to rub shoulders with Alabama, LSU, Auburn and the boys, but most years you are only winning 2-4 games tops. At USF you've had 12 seasons with a winning record. I don't care what conference you are in, it is no fun as a fun watching your team get throttled every weekend.

It's still the SEC and far more interesting on a Saturday afternoon than playing before 10,000 actual attendees at SMU or a similar size at Tulsa.

Without the SEC, Vanderbilt would be drawing Rice-sized crowds.

You mean like this? With the exception of when certain opponents come in town the butts in the seat are not as far off from SMU as you might think

(09-22-2020 04:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 11:52 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 09:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2020 10:01 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(09-21-2020 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Well, unless the "way you argue it" is that the P5 are major and the G5 are mid-major.

Which I think happens to be the way about 98.6% of all college football fans would argue it.

That's not the way the folks I talk to see it, Quo — and most of these are "SEC people" who can be a bit playfully arrogant at times. They classify DI programs as either "power" (essentially those schools in the P5) or "major (essentially those in the G5).

"Mid-major" to them is FCS.

So the average Tennessee fan I talk to would have your USF football program and my Cincy and Memphis programs as "major" and, as I noted, Alabama as "power" (or "high-major").

No fair-minded, reasonable and knowledgable college football fan/media member I discuss this with in Nashville would classify Memphis or Cincinnati football as "mid-major." As they see it (and I do too), if you are DI, you are essentially major. Now within that "major" grouping ... yes, there are "tiers," if you will.

If I might use my two favorite programs: Vanderbilt and Memphis. Only a buffoon would classify Vanderbilt as a "major program" more than Memphis in every single metric. Vanderbilt is "more major" than Memphis primarily (and perhaps overwhelmingly) in league affiliation/schedule. In terms of history (modest for both), attendance, players sent to the NFL, number of winning seasons, name recognition of coaches, etc., it's essentially a toss-up at this point. Clearly, Memphis has the more "major" program currently in terms of success.

Vanderbilt unfairly benefits from being in the SEC and Memphis is unfairly penalized for being in the AAC.

Bill, I guess we have different experiences. E.g. here in Louisiana, nobody regards anyone but LSU as a "major" football programs. All of the various FBS programs, the ULLs and USLs and LA-Techs and ULMs etc. are mid-major programs.

Likewise in hoops, the major programs are the P6, while the non-P6 are mid-majors, though there are programmatic exceptions (e.g., Cincy, Gonzaga and Memphis are major programs in mid-major conferences).

It didn't used to be this way - e.g., these days, Vanderbilt is a Power program by definition, because it's in a P5 conference. Ditto for Rutgers, as awful as they are. They are an Awful Power Program, LOL.

But 30 years ago, conference membership alone didn't guarantee major/power designation. When people called the Big 8 the "big two and little six", they were labeling the Kansases and Iowa States of the Big 8 mid-major programs.

There clearly are lots of folks who agree with you, Quo. However, there are many others who take the approach I outlined previously. I suppose it can be rather subjective.

I simply make (and some others do, too) a distinction between a high-major/power program like Alabama and, to use your Bulls, a "major" program like USF, which can draw up to 40,000 per home game during a good season and pay its coach $2 million or more annually. That is "sufficiently major" in my book. The "mid-majors" are those that are lucky to draw 20,000 and pay their coaches $1M or less. Some of the G5 programs are like that and all of FCS (I-AA) is such.

As to hoops, I agree with you. There are upwards of 15 programs not in the P6 but that are considered major to high-major.

Remember, my entry in this discussion was the claim (Kit-Kat maybe?) that "any way" you argue it the AAC is a major football conference. So I presented a way that denies that, and one that I think is pretty common - the P5 are major, the G5 are not.

So my point wasn't that everyone agrees with me, or even that a majority does, it was that enough agree with me to render the claim that there is no way to say the AAC isn't a major conference untenable.

Excellent distinction and I agree with you fully.

(09-22-2020 05:37 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 05:32 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 05:12 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  IDK Quo, I would rather be a USF fan than Vandy or Indiana. Vandy has had 3 above .500 seasons in the past 20 years. Yeah you get to rub shoulders with Alabama, LSU, Auburn and the boys, but most years you are only winning 2-4 games tops. At USF you've had 12 seasons with a winning record. I don't care what conference you are in, it is no fun as a fun watching your team get throttled every weekend.

It's still the SEC and far more interesting on a Saturday afternoon than playing before 10,000 actual attendees at SMU or a similar size at Tulsa.

Without the SEC, Vanderbilt would be drawing Rice-sized crowds.

You mean like this? With the exception of when certain opponents come in town the butts in the seat are not as far off from SMU as you might think

I'm the one in the photo with his shirt off and "Anchor Down" painted on my man torso. Not a good look, I admit.

(09-22-2020 05:32 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 05:12 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  IDK Quo, I would rather be a USF fan than Vandy or Indiana. Vandy has had 3 above .500 seasons in the past 20 years. Yeah you get to rub shoulders with Alabama, LSU, Auburn and the boys, but most years you are only winning 2-4 games tops. At USF you've had 12 seasons with a winning record. I don't care what conference you are in, it is no fun as a fun watching your team get throttled every weekend.

It's still the SEC and far more interesting on a Saturday afternoon than playing before 10,000 actual attendees at SMU or a similar size at Tulsa.

Without the SEC, Vanderbilt would be drawing Rice-sized crowds.

We draw Rice-esque crowds if you subtract the traveling SEC fans.

(09-22-2020 05:12 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 05:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 03:01 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 02:27 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 01:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The problem with some of these distinctions is that there is a ton of overlap. If you took a half dozen of the worst P5 schools and paired them against the top 6 G5 I’m doubtful that the P5 walk away with a winning record; they might not even come away with a win.

If the P5 were truly their own tier even their worst should be able to beat the best of the G5.

It all comes down to tent poles. The only thing separating the top 10 G5 programs and probably the bottom 25 of the P5 is that somewhere along the road the P programs hitched themselves to 2-3 real blue bloods.

Several years back Purdue came to Nippert and got smashed by UC 42-7. The Bearcats were bigger, stronger and faster at nearly every position group. If you were someone who knew nothing about college sports and you were told the school in red/black was only getting paid a few million a year on their TV contract and the other was in a prestigious conference getting $50M/year you would not believe it.

This past bowl season UC looked like men against boys against BC. Same as above. Playing in the AAC I can tell you UCF, Memphis and Houston has some hosses that a lot of these P5 schools wish they had.

Very good points, C-Ave.

In many respects (notwithstanding money and perception), it's better to be a top-notch G5 football program than a, say, "lower-half" P5 program. As a follower of Vandy, North Carolina and Indiana on the P5 hand and of Cincy and Memphis on the G5 other ... I know this quite well.

There have been times when USF was a successful G5 football program. At no point during those times have I thought it was better to be us than to be Vandy or Indiana or Oregon State. The prestige and money of being in a "P" league just overwhelms all other considerations to me.

E.g., if you told me (a) USF could be invited to the SEC, but (b) for the first 10 years we'd finish last in football in the conference, with no guarantees of how we'd finish after that, and it was up to me to decide on whether to take that or not, I would © TAKE THAT faster than most 4 year olds can take the thumb out of their mouths to bite in to an ice cream cone.

IDK Quo, I would rather be a USF fan than Vandy or Indiana. Vandy has had 3 above .500 seasons in the past 20 years. Yeah you get to rub shoulders with Alabama, LSU, Auburn and the boys, but most years you are only winning 2-4 games tops. At USF you've had 12 seasons with a winning record. I don't care what conference you are in, it is no fun as a fun watching your team get throttled every weekend.

Good points. For all the benefits of being in the SEC, our football team often has to suffer.

(09-22-2020 05:37 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 05:32 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 05:12 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  IDK Quo, I would rather be a USF fan than Vandy or Indiana. Vandy has had 3 above .500 seasons in the past 20 years. Yeah you get to rub shoulders with Alabama, LSU, Auburn and the boys, but most years you are only winning 2-4 games tops. At USF you've had 12 seasons with a winning record. I don't care what conference you are in, it is no fun as a fun watching your team get throttled every weekend.

It's still the SEC and far more interesting on a Saturday afternoon than playing before 10,000 actual attendees at SMU or a similar size at Tulsa.

Without the SEC, Vanderbilt would be drawing Rice-sized crowds.

You mean like this? With the exception of when certain opponents come in town the butts in the seat are not as far off from SMU as you might think

Vanderbilt is a null comparison. They are in the SEC in passing, they are an elite school, essentially Ivy-level, focused on academics. Fans in the stands of a football game mean nothing to them.

Now to my USF? Membership in the SEC would be titanic, massive, hugely enormous to us. Apples to Oranges.

22,212
20,271
18,741
26,288
23,633
26,999
25,811

Those are the home game attendance averages of, in no particular order: Duke, Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, Vanderbilt, and Wake Forest.

Looks to me like those teams belong in a league together far more so than a league that has members averaging over 100,000.

(09-22-2020 07:35 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  22,212
20,271
18,741
26,288
23,633
26,999
25,811

Those are the home game attendance averages of, in no particular order: Duke, Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, Vanderbilt, and Wake Forest.

Looks to me like those teams belong in a league together far more so than a league that has members averaging over 100,000.

In an odd way, I kind of hope Vanderbilt is the 18,741 figure.

(09-18-2020 01:00 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  .

The G5 has been a focus of many recent threads about teams that might switch conferences at some point, but the overall future of the G5 hasn't been discussed as much on this board.

It would be of interest, in this thread, to gauge readers' opinions about the future of the G5, in areas such as the potential for increased incomes, viewership, and national rankings.

Topics of interest would include:

1) Will the gap between the top G5 conferences and the P5 conferences with respect to income and viewership increase, decrease, or remain the same over the next 20 years?

2) Will all five G5 conferences (AAC, C-USA, MAC, MWC, and Sun Belt) continue to exist 20 years from now?


For now, I will say yes, but that could change in the future.




[color=#696969][b]4) If all five conferences continue to exist in 20 years, will they still be described "G5" conferences?

5) At some point in the next 50 years, is it possible that any of the current G5 conferences will generate such high viewership that a major network will push elevation to "Power" and NCAA "Autonomous" status?

I do believe it is possible. It will take a lot of G5 presidents pushing the issue though. But encouraging signs are there. The SEC did not get to its current position overnight. It had to have exposure on both ABC/ESPN & CBS to get there. Basically, any conference wanting to be in the P5 needs a nationwide presence, and for the right reasons, not the wrong ones. And when I say nationwide presence, I am referring to conference games getting nationwide appearances week after week after week. OOC doesn't count. In-conference does.

- - If so, is the upper limit on the # of conferences that could do so 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5?
At least three, but theoretically, you could have 5.

- - Which conference(s) might be able to make the jump?
The AAC, for sure, as well as the MWC. C-USA, the Sunbelt, and the MAC are in a dogfight for number three.

6) Will there still be a total of 10 FBS conferences in 20 years?

- - If not, why not?

- - If not, how many FBS conferences will there be in 2040?

See above answers in quoted material

Also, G5 athletic departments need to be very close to self sustaining, if not self sustaining to be in the P5 group.

This just me, but I think you will see a huge split in basketball and Olympic sports before you will see that in football. I see some conferences like the A10 joining the G5s, but I think you will be seeing a new Division 1 and a Division 1B which will probably morph into a new D2 as time goes on.

(09-18-2020 06:26 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  Illinois' lower tier schools had their reckoning earlier than the rest of the country because of a budget crisis. But rest assured, it is coming, and it will separate the well-run schools from the poorly run schools. Schools like Bowling Green, Wyoming, and University of South Alabama are already down 10% or more from 2015-2019.

https://www.sent-trib.com/community/bgsu...0e934.html

Bowling Green fall enrollment was 19,172 in 2015 and 19,905 in fall 2019, a 3.8% increase.

Speaking of well-run universities: The University of Cincinnati once hired Ray Tensing.

(09-23-2020 08:58 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  referred to this quote:

"Basically, any conference wanting to be in the P5 needs a nationwide presence, and for the right reasons, not the wrong ones. And when I say nationwide presence, I am referring to conference games getting nationwide appearances week after week after week. OOC doesn't count. In-conference does."

Ok - - how long before the AAC can have prime-time quality games with nationwide audiences " every week throughout the conference schedule?"

These 6 games could probably generate 2 million viewers apiece this season:

1) Memphis vs. UCF

2) Memphis vs. Cincy

3) Memphis vs. Navy

4) UCF vs. Cincy

5) UCF vs. Navy

6) Cincy vs. Navy

In addition, these 4 games might be able to generate similar numbers if SMU becomes a top 25 to top 30 team:

7) Memphis vs. SMU (or whichever team is #5 in the AAC)

8) Cincy vs. SMU (or whichever team is #5 in the AAC)

9) UCF vs. SMU (or whichever team is #5 in the AAC)

10) Navy vs. SMU (or whichever team is #5 in the AAC)

.

Now that we've covered 8 to 10 weeks of conference play, here are some non-conference games with non-P5 teams that would be practically guaranteed to generate 2 million+ viewers.

11) Memphis or UCF or Cincy or Navy vs. BYU

12) Memphis or UCF or Cincy or Navy vs. Boise State

13) Memphis or UCF or Cincy or Navy vs. Army

14) Memphis or UCF or Cincy or Navy vs. other top-30 non-P5 teams(Louisiana, App. St., Marshall, Air Force, etc.)

.

Of course, there could also be AAC vs. P5 games in the remaining weeks:

11) Memphis vs. Auburn

12) UCF vs. Florida

13) Cincy vs. LSU

14) Navy vs. Notre Dame

.

Those 14 weeks of games would stack up pretty well against 14 weeks of ACC, Big 12, or PAC 12 games.

.

Perhaps the AAC isn't quite as far away as some may think.