Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams

[UNT90]

40 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

So how is it giving up if the Power Leagues won't allow you to play them or join their club? Do you just play as an independent and hope that Power League teams will still schedule you?

Nope, you file a class action anti-trust suit seeking DAMAGES for limiting competition. They want to leave? Make them. And make them pay you on their way out the door.,

[Army of Dad]

6 minutes ago, oldguystudent said:

Separate playoff and championship for FCS, G5 and P5, but implement a promotion/relegation system like British soccer.  This would provide motivation for everyone involved and make things waaaaay more interesting come December. 

That system would be the most fair.

It would generate tremendous fan interest.

It would lead to a major increase in funding from ticket sales and media fees.

 

It will never happen.

[GTWT]

9 minutes ago, oldguystudent said:

Separate playoff and championship for FCS, G5 and P5, but implement a promotion/relegation system like British soccer.  This would provide motivation for everyone involved and make things waaaaay more interesting come December. 

I love the idea of instituting the British soccer promotion/demotion system but unfortunately it will never happen.  Can you imagine Vandy, Northwestern, Texas Tech, or others like them voting for such a system?  There are a lot more of the usually bad teams around than there are Alabamas & Ohio States.

Too bad, it would be a lot of fun.

[emmitt01]

26 minutes ago, MeanGreen22 said:

I feel like 90 doesn't post much anymore, but when he does, he comes guns blazing. And I love it. 

 

Under no circumstances would I want a G5 playoff. Doesn't make sense on multiple levels. You would never get the time of day from good recruits bc they'll all want to play for P5s and that shot at the championship. Teams like us would never get to offer that dream. 

If we're honest, we don't offer that dream now.  

Nor does SMU...or Houston...or Boise...or BYU

[TreeFiddy]

Don't look now but the P5 has already relegated the G5 conferences as the next FCS. 

At some point the G5 teams need to grow a pair and stop being satisfied with carrying around the P5's piss bucket. 

And to be clear, all we are talking about is football.  The rest of the sports are already integrated.

 

[PRAK]

I'd rather my team play in irrelevant bowl games, than an irrelevant league. I hope this doesn't happen. 

I'd rather my team play in irrelevant bowl games, than an irrelevant league. I hope this doesn't happen. 

[Mean Green Matt]

I think you could solve a lot of the controversy and appease almost everyone by amending the current system to a 6-team playoff. Every conference champion from the P5 gets in. If you're Ohio State and don't win your conference, get over it, you're out. The highest ranked champion from the G5 is in. All the committee does is pick the G5 team and seed the teams 1-6. 1 and 2 get a bye into the New Years Six semifinals. 3 hosts 6 and 4 hosts 5 on campus the week before. 

[UTSA Fan]

8 minutes ago, Mean Green Matt said:

I think you could solve a lot of the controversy and appease almost everyone by amending the current system to a 6-team playoff. Every conference champion from the P5 gets in. If you're Ohio State and don't win your conference, get over it, you're out. The highest ranked champion from the G5 is in. All the committee does is pick the G5 team and seed the teams 1-6. 1 and 2 get a bye into the New Years Six semifinals. 3 hosts 6 and 4 hosts 5 on campus the week before. 

No way in hell is SEC #2-5, B1G #2-5, etc. signing off on that. Ever. Never.

[Wag Tag]

2 hours ago, wizade said:

Not a fan of the idea ... I'd rather see the current playoff expanded to always include the G5 conference champions or at least 2 of the highest ranked G5 conference champs.  All the G5's are spending and working to become big time or they wouldn't be in FBS ... this change would permanently and quickly relegate all G5's to irrelevance (see FCS).  In today's world, it's not optimal with respect to the national championship chances for a G5, but at least a G5 can make a lot of noise and get to a top bowl  (Boise or Houston as an example). The FCS national championship game has been in Frisco for several years and 98/100 people you ask in DFW would have no idea it's being played in our back yard.

Yea FCS probably doesn't make any money with the playoffs? That is why they do it! That is why the P5 do it!  It is all about money and exposure! 

[Mean Green Matt]

5 minutes ago, UTSA Fan said:

No way in hell is SEC #2-5, B1G #2-5, etc. signing off on that. Ever. Never.

They don't get in anyway...

[greenminer]

This will only reinforce the P5's notion of separation.

Good idea if you don't give a flip about the P5.
Bad idea if you like the idea of playing them, especially postseason.

[UNT90]

54 minutes ago, greenminer said:

This will only reinforce the P5's notion of separation.

Good idea if you don't give a flip about the P5.
Bad idea if you like the idea of playing them, especially postseason.

Good idea if you were fine with RV as AD.

Good idea if you think this was a sensational year of football for UNT. 

Good idea if you never ever want to try to do the difficult tasks in life. 

Good idea if you unwittingly want the death of UNT athletics. 

Bad idea if you think UNT football can be a lot more than it is currently. 

Edited December 30, 2016 by UNT90

[ADLER]

I have always been a proponent of 'fight fire with fire' in this situation'. Hit them where it hurts, and then keep hitting them.

If the P5 schools want separation, let them have it.

But i'd create a rule in the Group of Five schools that the G5 teams could each pay 20 players $50,000 each per season, and even recruit from P5 leagues. Sure some star players would still go P5, but many of the marquee players will accept the option of getting paid during college.

And, if the P5 matches that for all it's players, the G5 can continue to raise the pay scale for it's 20 per school.

[DeepGreen]

No to a G5 playoff!  What's next, ESPN waving a few hundred thousand dollars at each team in a "winner take all"  matchup between the G5 champ vs the FCS champ?  Crowning the winner "king of turd hill".

no thanks.

[Rudy]

This is EXACTLY what the P5 wants. Us to take our toys and go home. This would be the new FCS. Terrible idea!!

[UTSA Fan]

3 hours ago, Mean Green Matt said:

They don't get in anyway...

They have a say in what the conference approves. D.O.A.

[tmjerm]

No no no no never never never no no

90 is right on this one...I've heard rumblings of this from other fans in recent months (perhaps brought on by idaho's decision).  I will be irate if we take that approach and we can kiss all sorts of funding goodbye (including my humble contributions).  I believe our university's leadership has always wanted relevance (we just haven't always been competent enough to do so) so I trust that direction won't be on the table.  It would mean we represent the opposite of everything I thought was great about us.  Staring down giants without fear and proving we belong with that middle class chip on our shoulder is what this mission has always been about for me.  Going for something like this would be forfeiture.  It'd be us saying "mercy".  It'd be like Tony Romo deciding to play in the Arena League next year.  All the pieces are there for success, we just need the right leaders to start winning and ignite this incredibly large & uninterested alumni base into being an incredibly large & moderately interested alumni base.  I believe those leaders are here and in the midst of creating that. 

Edited December 30, 2016 by tmjerm

[CMJ]

I can't believe so many people actually think this is a good idea.

[UNT90]

11 minutes ago, CMJ said:

I can't believe so many people actually think this is a good idea.

I actually think it's a troll by TFLF...

Edited December 30, 2016 by UNT90

[UTSA Fan]

7 hours ago, UNT90 said:

Say goodbye to ever funding a baseball program. 

Is a baseball program a P5 perquisite?

[Mean Green Matt]

30 minutes ago, UTSA Fan said:

They have a say in what the conference approves. D.O.A.

Did I say they didn't? I just said the 2nd best team from P5 conferences are typically not getting in the playoff anyway. 

[Monkeypox]

2 minutes ago, Mean Green Matt said:

Did I say they didn't? I just said the 2nd best team from P5 conferences are typically not getting in the playoff anyway. 

They would be if it expanded beyond 4 teams. 

"Dear Penn State, Michigan, OU, Wisconsin, etc.

We've decided to expand the playoffs to 6 teams. The two teams we're adding are Western Michigan and Temple. But congrats on a great year!"

[Mean Green Matt]

7 minutes ago, Monkeypox said:

They would be if it expanded beyond 4 teams. 

"Dear Penn State, Michigan, OU, Wisconsin, etc.

We've decided to expand the playoffs to 6 teams. The two teams we're adding are Western Michigan and Temple. But congrats on a great year!"

The two teams added in my scenario would be Oklahoma and Western Michigan. (And Penn State in place of Ohio State). 

Edit: Dont win your conference? Don't complain. 

Edited December 30, 2016 by Mean Green Matt

[Monkeypox]

And that's why they're not going to go for it.

Any expansion that doesn't help the P5 isn't going to be voted on by the P5. The fact remains that, while it generally doesn't happen, it DOES happen that the #2 teams in conferences like the Big Ten and SEC make the playoff. In any expansion scenario, they're not giving the MAC or even a weaker P5 conference a seat at the table. 

[Mean Green Matt]

2 minutes ago, Monkeypox said:

And that's why they're not going to go for it.

Any expansion that doesn't help the P5 isn't going to be voted on by the P5. The fact remains that, while it generally doesn't happen, it DOES happen that the #2 teams in conferences like the Big Ten and SEC make the playoff. In any expansion scenario, they're not giving the MAC or even a weaker P5 conference a seat at the table. 

Forget it then, let's just drop down to FCS.