|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Sept 5, 2024 7:22:28 GMT -8
I get the bay area tv thing, but San Jose St sucks Eh, they just need the consistent support. They have flirted with being good. never quite really gotten there. They have a lot of things going for it, one would think it shouldn't be that hard to get a little momentum going for it. but alas, they never really do. The school itself needs to diversify. It is a tech darling for sure, but you gotta be more than a one trick pony. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Sept 5, 2024 7:59:49 GMT -8
I would probably get to 10 in any instance, so you can put on a Conference Championship Game. I also think that several on here underrate Colorado State. Air Force can also be a big draw. If we are P5 and have auto berth then championship game is good, if we are G6 and fighting for the 1 g6 spot, then I would not be as interested in a championship game, it would be another opportunity for your highest ranked team to take a loss, and not much upside on a win. I could not agree with this sentiment more. It follows along with St. Dennis' "we need a tougher schedule like we need a hole in the head" mantra - there's little to gain and lots to lose. We need more teams vying for better bowls and playoff spots, not less. Exception is if the conference is large enough to fully separate into two divisions that have schedules that do not create rematches in the conference championship game. The thing about college football that is compelling over other sports is that EVERY GAME is crucial. The body of work that got you into the post season is the performance in-season. If the conference championship game was simply the two best teams in the conference that would be the most ideal to prevent the most compelling matchup but principally my point is that a CCG with only 12 members is stupid, and serves to diminish the profile of the conference. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Sept 5, 2024 8:01:32 GMT -8
I get the bay area tv thing, but San Jose St sucks Eh, they just need the consistent support. They have flirted with being good. never quite really gotten there. They have a lot of things going for it, one would think it shouldn't be that hard to get a little momentum going for it. but alas, they never really do. The school itself needs to diversify. It is a tech darling for sure, but you gotta be more than a one trick pony. Money from a better conference would most assuredly improve their collective fortune with athletics, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Sept 5, 2024 9:04:04 GMT -8
If we are P5 and have auto berth then championship game is good, if we are G6 and fighting for the 1 g6 spot, then I would not be as interested in a championship game, it would be another opportunity for your highest ranked team to take a loss, and not much upside on a win. I could not agree with this sentiment more. It follows along with St. Dennis' "we need a tougher schedule like we need a hole in the head" mantra - there's little to gain and lots to lose. We need more teams vying for better bowls and playoff spots, not less. Exception is if the conference is large enough to fully separate into two divisions that have schedules that do not create rematches in the conference championship game. The thing about college football that is compelling over other sports is that EVERY GAME is crucial. The body of work that got you into the post season is the performance in-season. If the conference championship game was simply the two best teams in the conference that would be the most ideal to prevent the most compelling matchup but principally my point is that a CCG with only 12 members is stupid, and serves to diminish the profile of the conference. Yes. you need to stop putting in road blocks if you are on the outside looking in. There is more than one "G6" (G7 now? s%#t who knows...) Just let the regular season winner be the top ranked winner. and let the season rankings stand. A strong G6 conference winner stands a good chance of landing in the national top 12 if they are undefeated or close to it. 12-0 team for certain. 11-1 team, probably 85% chance of being there. 10-2 team, probably at least 70% chance of sneaking into that top 12, if the OOC schedule was good and the losses were "quality". but a 10-3 team that lost a conference championship game just has zero chance in my mind. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 5, 2024 10:14:37 GMT -8
It's the Group of Five (G5).
Made up of the MWC, AAC, MAC, Sun Belt and Conference USA.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 5, 2024 10:36:02 GMT -8
To clarify, the Pac-12 is not a G5 (G6) conference, nor is it a power conference (even though Barnes refuses to acknowledge that).
The Pac-12 was stripped of autonomous legislative powers, dropping it out of power status. But it has no real status as far as G5. The Pac-12 will not have a conference champion and its teams are not eligible for the CFP G5 berth.
For all practical purposes, OSU and WSU are really just independents in football with a one-season scheduling agreement with the MWC and ownership of the Pac-12 brand.
The 2025 schedule will most likely reinforce that status.
|
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Sept 5, 2024 10:48:53 GMT -8
The only deadline that truly matters is the CFP media deal expiration. It will be renegotiated in the coming months and that one aspect will determine the landscape of college football and further realignment. That deal will determine will help determine OSU's fate. At this time, Barnes and the AD are trying to best position themselves to be flexible when that time comes.
Will there be a G5 or P4? Is there a reason to rebuild the Pac12? Will there be a super conference of ?? teams? Will the CFP be 16 teams established solely for a new super conference or ?? divisions? Will there be a football only conference/divisions and a realignment of previous conferences for other sports? Will the new NIL legislation optional buy in help shape new conferences based on the "haves" and "have nots"?
There are so many unknowns and variables OSU has to basically keep itself in a position of neutrality and flexibility so it can make a decision that best fits the university. What is known, the "haves" (conferences and media partners) will determine the future landscape and the rest will be left to accept terms or create their own entities.
|
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Sept 5, 2024 11:13:56 GMT -8
The only deadline that truly matters is the CFP media deal expiration. It will be renegotiated in the coming months and that one aspect will determine the landscape of college football and further realignment. That deal will determine will help determine OSU's fate. At this time, Barnes and the AD are trying to best position themselves to be flexible when that time comes. Will there be a G5 or P4? Is there a reason to rebuild the Pac12? Will there be a super conference of ?? teams? Will the CFP be 16 teams established solely for a new super conference or ?? divisions? Will there be a football only conference/divisions and a realignment of previous conferences for other sports? Will the new NIL legislation optional buy in help shape new conferences based on the "haves" and "have nots"? There are so many unknowns and variables OSU has to basically keep itself in a position of neutrality and flexibility so it can make a decision that best fits the university. What is known, the "haves" (conferences and media partners) will determine the future landscape and the rest will be left to accept terms or create their own entities. There is definitely a reason to rebuild the Pac12, it's just a question of whether there will be an opportunity to, in my opinion - which you allude to in your last paragraph. We are all just sitting around crossing our fingers right now. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 5, 2024 11:17:34 GMT -8
The only deadline that truly matters is the CFP media deal expiration. It will be renegotiated in the coming months and that one aspect will determine the landscape of college football and further realignment. That deal will determine will help determine OSU's fate. At this time, Barnes and the AD are trying to best position themselves to be flexible when that time comes. Will there be a G5 or P4? Is there a reason to rebuild the Pac12? Will there be a super conference of ?? teams? Will the CFP be 16 teams established solely for a new super conference or ?? divisions? Will there be a football only conference/divisions and a realignment of previous conferences for other sports? Will the new NIL legislation optional buy in help shape new conferences based on the "haves" and "have nots"? There are so many unknowns and variables OSU has to basically keep itself in a position of neutrality and flexibility so it can make a decision that best fits the university. What is known, the "haves" (conferences and media partners) will determine the future landscape and the rest will be left to accept terms or create their own entities. Not sure what you are referencing here. A new 6-year, $7.8 billion deal was just signed in the spring. It runs to 2031-32. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 5, 2024 11:29:34 GMT -8
The only deadline that truly matters is the CFP media deal expiration. It will be renegotiated in the coming months and that one aspect will determine the landscape of college football and further realignment. That deal will determine will help determine OSU's fate. At this time, Barnes and the AD are trying to best position themselves to be flexible when that time comes. Will there be a G5 or P4? Is there a reason to rebuild the Pac12? Will there be a super conference of ?? teams? Will the CFP be 16 teams established solely for a new super conference or ?? divisions? Will there be a football only conference/divisions and a realignment of previous conferences for other sports? Will the new NIL legislation optional buy in help shape new conferences based on the "haves" and "have nots"? There are so many unknowns and variables OSU has to basically keep itself in a position of neutrality and flexibility so it can make a decision that best fits the university. What is known, the "haves" (conferences and media partners) will determine the future landscape and the rest will be left to accept terms or create their own entities. There is definitely a reason to rebuild the Pac12, it's just a question of whether there will be an opportunity to, in my opinion - which you allude to in your last paragraph. We are all just sitting around crossing our fingers right now. Well, Barnes said he thinks there will be a football superconference of as many as 50-60 programs. He said everything is headed in that direction already, so he's looking at it as a when it will happen, not if it will happen. If the superconference is 50-60 programs, there's little chance OSU and WSU will be left out. OSU is probably safe down to the 40-48 range. Anything less than that and it becomes iffier, IMO. So in the meantime, getting into a power conference in football at the least would be the preference (more money, ease of transition, higher probability of getting into the superconference). But rebuilding the Pac-12 remains a solid option because you would probably be able to attract programs willing to be a part of a best of the rest conference and the media deal would be better than what you would get as a member of an established G5 conference. And it most likely would not hurt the chances of getting into the superconference as much. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Sept 5, 2024 11:39:29 GMT -8
The only deadline that truly matters is the CFP media deal expiration. It will be renegotiated in the coming months and that one aspect will determine the landscape of college football and further realignment. That deal will determine will help determine OSU's fate. At this time, Barnes and the AD are trying to best position themselves to be flexible when that time comes. Will there be a G5 or P4? Is there a reason to rebuild the Pac12? Will there be a super conference of ?? teams? Will the CFP be 16 teams established solely for a new super conference or ?? divisions? Will there be a football only conference/divisions and a realignment of previous conferences for other sports? Will the new NIL legislation optional buy in help shape new conferences based on the "haves" and "have nots"? There are so many unknowns and variables OSU has to basically keep itself in a position of neutrality and flexibility so it can make a decision that best fits the university. What is known, the "haves" (conferences and media partners) will determine the future landscape and the rest will be left to accept terms or create their own entities. Not sure what you are referencing here. A new 6-year, $7.8 billion deal was just signed in the spring. It runs to 2031-32. That deal is wide open to future adjustments per the SEC & B10 requests. Size, qualifications, etc and leaves no stipulations to how realignment can occur once the 12-team contract ends. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 5, 2024 12:05:00 GMT -8
I would probably get to 10 in any instance, so you can put on a Conference Championship Game. I also think that several on here underrate Colorado State. Air Force can also be a big draw. If we are P5 and have auto berth then championship game is good, if we are G6 and fighting for the 1 g6 spot, then I would not be as interested in a championship game, it would be another opportunity for your highest ranked team to take a loss, and not much upside on a win. I was thinking for the money. The only reason that the numbers to add Colorado and Utah worked out was because the Pac-12 Championship Game money put the deal over the top. The Mountain West Championship Game drew 1.26 million viewers, even though it was directly going up against the SEC Championship Game (17.52 million viewers). 9.25 million watched Washington and Oregon in the Pac-12 Championship Game. The ACC (7.03 million) and Big Ten (10.02 million) Championship Games went up against each other. The Big-12 Championship Game drew 7.89 million. Plus, historically, the Committee has hammered conferences without Championship Games. But, yeah, Championship Games tend to be worth a lot more money than your average game. If we could play a Championship Game with eight, though, I would be on board for eight, assuming we could get the nonconference opponents lined up. Money is the upside, though. Lots of money. Conferences with a Championship Game are worth a lot more than conferences without a championship game, which is why every single conference held a Championship Game last year and have held a Championship Game every season since 2018. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 5, 2024 12:32:30 GMT -8
To clarify, the Pac-12 is not a G5 (G6) conference, nor is it a power conference (even though Barnes refuses to acknowledge that). The Pac-12 was stripped of autonomous legislative powers, dropping it out of power status. But it has no real status as far as G5. The Pac-12 will not have a conference champion and its teams are not eligible for the CFP G5 berth. For all practical purposes, OSU and WSU are really just independents in football with a one-season scheduling agreement with the MWC and ownership of the Pac-12 brand. The 2025 schedule will most likely reinforce that status. From what I'm reading, the Pac 12 is in a 2 year "grace period" and has been stripped of autonomous power due to not meeting membership numbers. Many assume that that stripping of autonomous powers is permanant, but I haven't seen anything from the NCAA that says it is or what will happen with autonomous power if the Pac 12 reconstitutes with new teams before the grace period ends. That info may or may not be out there, there's so much blogger/vlogger/podcast/media noise out there it's tough to find any definitive factual material on the web. If Barnes "refuses to acknowledge that", he's probably got a heck of a lot more accurate information available to him than any of us. For now the Pac 12 doesn't have autonomous rights, could that change? He'd know better than we. I'd bet there could be multiple routes to power status, including rebuilding the conference. Depending on the outcome of the ACC lawsuits and potential settlements, college football could look quite different in 2026. I'm sure Barnes is doing his best to navigate this mess. Keeping OSU in "power" status would be a feather in his cap, keeping the Pac 12 in power status would be a bigger feather. He's apparently well regarded in the AD word, and if he wanted an easier way out I'd bet that option was quietly available to him. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 5, 2024 12:51:00 GMT -8
To clarify, the Pac-12 is not a G5 (G6) conference, nor is it a power conference (even though Barnes refuses to acknowledge that). The Pac-12 was stripped of autonomous legislative powers, dropping it out of power status. But it has no real status as far as G5. The Pac-12 will not have a conference champion and its teams are not eligible for the CFP G5 berth. For all practical purposes, OSU and WSU are really just independents in football with a one-season scheduling agreement with the MWC and ownership of the Pac-12 brand. The 2025 schedule will most likely reinforce that status. From what I'm reading, the Pac 12 is in a 2 year "grace period" and has been stripped of autonomous power due to not meeting membership numbers. Many assume that that stripping of autonomous powers is permanent, but I haven't seen anything from the NCAA that says it is or what will happen with autonomous power if the Pac 12 reconstitutes with new teams before the grace period ends. That info may or may not be out there, there's so much blogger/vlogger/podcast/media noise out there it's tough to find any definitive factual material on the web. If Barnes "refuses to acknowledge that", he's probably got a heck of a lot more accurate information available to him than any of us. For now the Pac 12 doesn't have autonomous rights, could that change? He'd know better than we. I'd bet there could be multiple routes to power status, including rebuilding the conference. Depending on the outcome of the ACC lawsuits and potential settlements, college football could look quite different in 2026. I'm sure Barnes is doing his best to navigate this mess. Keeping OSU in "power" status would be a feather in his cap, keeping the Pac 12 in power status would be a bigger feather. He's apparently well regarded in the AD word, and if he wanted an easier way out I'd bet that option was quietly available to him. I am still confused about what benefit there is to being "autonomous" or "power." |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 5, 2024 12:56:42 GMT -8
To clarify, the Pac-12 is not a G5 (G6) conference, nor is it a power conference (even though Barnes refuses to acknowledge that). The Pac-12 was stripped of autonomous legislative powers, dropping it out of power status. But it has no real status as far as G5. The Pac-12 will not have a conference champion and its teams are not eligible for the CFP G5 berth. For all practical purposes, OSU and WSU are really just independents in football with a one-season scheduling agreement with the MWC and ownership of the Pac-12 brand. The 2025 schedule will most likely reinforce that status. From what I'm reading, the Pac 12 is in a 2 year "grace period" and has been stripped of autonomous power due to not meeting membership numbers. Many assume that that stripping of autonomous powers is permanant, but I haven't seen anything from the NCAA that says it is or what will happen with autonomous power if the Pac 12 reconstitutes with new teams before the grace period ends. That info may or may not be out there, there's so much blogger/vlogger/podcast/media noise out there it's tough to find any definitive factual material on the web. If Barnes "refuses to acknowledge that", he's probably got a heck of a lot more accurate information available to him than any of us. For now the Pac 12 doesn't have autonomous rights, could that change? He'd know better than we. I'd bet there could be multiple routes to power status, including rebuilding the conference. Depending on the outcome of the ACC lawsuits and potential settlements, college football could look quite different in 2026. I'm sure Barnes is doing his best to navigate this mess. Keeping OSU in "power" status would be a feather in his cap, keeping the Pac 12 in power status would be a bigger feather. He's apparently well regarded in the AD word, and if he wanted an easier way out I'd bet that option was quietly available to him. My comment about Barnes was meant as somewhat of a jest due to his comments in the Canzano-Wilner podcast that I posted. I'm sure his pushing the Pac-12 as part of the P5 is more about perception, i.e. wanting OSU and WSU to continue to be seen as power conference level schools. I'm pretty sure they just didn't want a two-team conference having the same level of autonomous legislative powers as the P4 conferences. I think they can regain that status but IMO it would be doubtful that a best of the rest Pac-12 rebuild would be a P5 conference. Yes, OSU and WSU have a grace period to either rebuild the Pac-12 or move on to another conference or conferences. |
|
