Expansion Rumors…

JoltinJacket said:
Arizona is a couple decades overdue for a punch to the face for stealing games from us in '94 and '95. Had 'em beat both years.
Click to expand...
I can't believe I actually remember that 95 game. What was it, like 21-20?
 
SMU still to be treated as a G5 for playoff funds? Didn't happen to the G5's which had joined prior. Apparently, the BIG10 and SEC are beginning to flex more power over P4/P5 schools and SMU will be an example.

Have no doubts, though, if SMU had joined the SEC or BIG10, they'd get a full distribution

sports.yahoo.com

Sources: CFP may withhold added revenue from SMU despite Power Five move

Southern Methodist University, the latest Group of Five program to elevate to the Power Five next year with its jump to the ACC, is at the heart of a CFP money fight.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com

College football ded as we knew it
 
JJacket said:
SMU still to be treated as a G5 for playoff funds? Didn't happen to the G5's which had joined prior. Apparently, the BIG10 and SEC are beginning to flex more power over P4/P5 schools and SMU will be an example.

Have no doubts, though, if SMU had joined the SEC or BIG10, they'd get a full distribution

sports.yahoo.com

Sources: CFP may withhold added revenue from SMU despite Power Five move

Southern Methodist University, the latest Group of Five program to elevate to the Power Five next year with its jump to the ACC, is at the heart of a CFP money fight.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com

College football ded as we knew it
Click to expand...
The ACC tried to game the system, let SMU pay a massive amount to cover media payouts so that other ACC teams get a bump from their inclusion and don’t share it with SMU for years. Why should any other P5/P4 conference be required to share a piece of their pie with SMU?
 
GTFLETCH said:
The ACC tried to game the system, let SMU pay a massive amount to cover media payouts so that other ACC teams get a bump from their inclusion and don’t share it with SMU for years. Why should any other P5/P4 conference be required to share a piece of their pie with SMU?
Click to expand...
Cause why is it the CFP's business at all how a conference deals with its' member schools? SMU is in the ACC now, why should the CFP treat them any differently than any other ACC school? If SMU has money ready to afford this partical arrangement with their conference, why does it require CFP intervention? The CFP didn't care about other teams changing conferences with different payouts before, why is this such a good reason for them to care now? It all seems rather petty and discriminatory.

Edit: to go back and not answer your question with a question, it really is because SMU will be a membery of the ACC for the relevant years of the CFP involved and a team moving from G5 to P4 and getting different payout was already approved before the CFP. The CFP will need a good reason (provable in court I hope if this actually goes through) as to why any difference in how a team is interacting with their conference is important to the CFP revenue sharing and requires distinction on their part.
 
GTLiebs said:
Cause why is it the CFP's business at all how a conference deals with its' member schools? SMU is in the ACC now, why should the CFP treat them any differently than any other ACC school? If SMU has money ready to afford this partical arrangement with their conference, why does it require CFP intervention? The CFP didn't care about other teams changing conferences with different payouts before, why is this such a good reason for them to care now? It all seems rather petty and discriminatory.

Edit: to go back and not answer your question with a question, it really is because SMU will be a membery of the ACC for the relevant years of the CFP involved and a team moving from G5 to P4 and getting different payout was already approved before the CFP. The CFP will need a good reason (provable in court I hope if this actually goes through) as to why any difference in how a team is interacting with their conference is important to the CFP revenue sharing and requires distinction on their part.
Click to expand...
The G5 schools that were called up to save the Big12 (BYU, UCF, Houston, Cincy) all had to pass the vote. SMU has to pass the vote. I think the questions becomes will SMU pas the vote or not?
 
GTFLETCH said:
The G5 schools that were called up to save the Big12 (BYU, UCF, Houston, Cincy) all had to pass the vote. SMU has to pass the vote. I think the questions becomes will SMU pas the vote or not?
Click to expand...
but if precedence has been set that called up G5 teams should pass the vote, why would SMU now not pass the vote?
 
When SMU joins the ACC next year, I would definitely put them in the top half of the ACC Power Rankings. That coach is legit.
 
JJacket said:
Because the goal is to kill the ACC.
Click to expand...
Not just the ACC. Big Twelve too. Watch they will say SEC and Big Ten get bigger share of revenue because ACC and Big 12 aren’t as good and have former G5 teams in them. 50-40-10 or similar.
 
GTCrew4b said:
Not just the ACC. Big Twelve too. Watch they will say SEC and Big Ten get bigger share of revenue because ACC and Big 12 aren’t as good and have former G5 teams in them. 50-40-10 or similar.
Click to expand...
So, what's the leverage the SEC/B1G are holding to win these types of votes? That they will hold their own playoff? I don't get why that's worse than letting them dictate the changes we're seeing. It seems like they'd be equally hurt if the other conferences refuse to schedule them and they have to their schedule with the other conference or with FCS teams. Where's the backbone from the "lesser" conferences?
 
GTLiebs said:
Doesn't really answer it though unless you mean, they are bribing the people who vote on the stuff.
Click to expand...
Don't need to bribe. The folks that make these decisions know that they can be handed their hats and shown the door if they go against the SEC and BIG10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top