Mid Major schools should have their own division

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

With nationally televised games, sports networks, football on 7+ channels all day, and more than 3 stations, I would argue it’s easier than ever to make a name for yourself.

Easier for people to know your team, harder to bust into a major conference.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

So then, which team that UCF has had on their schedule the last 2 seasons looked good when they made them and is garbage now? Maryland?

You have no proof. None. At all.

I gave you a list of teams, less than 10 years ago (so not 50 years back as you claimed with 4d20) that got ranked high after playing still weak, but schedules with SOME meat on it. UCF hasn't played a good team outside of Auburn since this streak started and Auburn was after the last ranking last season.

Next.

I'm not arguing UCF should make the P5 playoff. I'm arguing that they will never play a good enough schedule to be good enough to make the top 4 over P5 teams; because of the exact position you've laid out.

 

[7Samurai13]

Easier for people to know your team, harder to bust into a major conference.

Utah, TCU, West Virginia, Syracuse, Rutgers, Louisville all beg to differ.

 

[4down20]

You're comparing the early days of CFB to modern times; with an established football elite. It's much harder to make a name for yourself than it was 50+ years ago.

What? It took Alabama over a week of traveling time to make it to the ball game, and they had NO TV back then so nobody ever watched the games.

Meanwhile, these days you have ever game televised and teams like UCF get an automatic birth into the NY6 bowls.

It's like much easier - unless you don't belong in the first place.

In recent history we've seen Utah and TCU climb the ladder using these same exact things.

Don't know what the fuck you think you are talking about.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Utah, TCU, West Virginia, Syracuse, Rutgers, Louisville all beg to differ.

Which happened during a major conference restructuring across CFb. That could happen again, but unless it does it's extremely hard to get in.

 

[ericd7633]

Easier for people to know your team, harder to bust into a major conference.

I disagree with this. USF started football in 1997, a decade later they were ranked #2 in the country.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

What? It took Alabama over a week of traveling time to make it to the ball game, and they had NO TV back then so nobody ever watched the games.

Meanwhile, these days you have ever game televised and teams like UCF get an automatic birth into the NY6 bowls.

It's like much easier - unless you don't belong in the first place.

In recent history we've seen Utah and TCU climb the ladder using these same exact things.

Don't know what the fuck you think you are talking about.

As Samurai said, we've had 5 recently. 5 in what the last 20 years? Out of 60-ish or more programs? It's fucking hard. And it takes being in the right place at the right time in the right region. Rutgers wasn't bumped because of their performance on the field, they were bumped because of TV markets. Something tells me Florida is already saturated enough.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I disagree with this. USF started football in 1997, a decade later they were ranked #2 in the country.

But not when it mattered.

 

[WizardHawk]

I'm not arguing UCF should make the P5 playoff. I'm arguing that they will never play a good enough schedule to be good enough to make the top 4 over P5 teams; because of the exact position you've laid out.

THEY PLAY STANFORD AT HOME NEXT SEASON.

They CAN play tougher teams if they want. They simply choose most seasons not to.

Future schedules for Boise State?
Oregon State
Washington State
Oregon
Florida State
Oklahoma State
Michigan State

But you are right, no P5's will play decent mid majors.

 

[4down20]

As Samurai said, we've had 5 recently. 5 in what the last 20 years? Out of 60-ish or more programs? It's fucking hard. And it takes being in the right place at the right time in the right region. Rutgers wasn't bumped because of their performance on the field, they were bumped because of TV markets. Something tells me Florida is already saturated enough.

Once again you fail to understand the goals of teams are different.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

THEY PLAY STANFORD AT HOME NEXT SEASON.

They CAN play tougher teams if they want. They simply choose most seasons not to.

Future schedules for Boise State?
Oregon State
Washington State
Oregon
Florida State
Oklahoma State
Michigan State

But you are right, no P5's will play decent mid majors.

It still won't matter. 1-2 of these teams per year means MAYBE they'll play a ranked team. Maybe not. If UCF had a win over 1 ranked team right now, would you be putting them in the top 4?

 

[7Samurai13]

Which happened during a major conference restructuring across CFb. That could happen again, but unless it does it's extremely hard to get in.

If only there was a conference that recently lost 4 teams that could use a couple more relevant teams to expand.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

If only there was a conference that recently lost 4 teams that could use a couple more relevant teams to expand.

We're really focusing on UCF here....

but let's get back to the reality, there are 60-ish teams in the G5. Undefeated seasons are rare, and if any of them have one (like WMU a couple years ago) it means nothing. They deserve a playoff in which if they go undefeated in their conference, they can compete for a title.

 

[ericd7633]

But not when it mattered.

You said it was "much harder for teams to make a name for yourself". It took USF a decade to make a name for themselves. That cripples your argument.

 

[WizardHawk]

It still won't matter. 1-2 of these teams per year means MAYBE they'll play a ranked team. Maybe not. If UCF had a win over 1 ranked team right now, would you be putting them in the top 4?

Have you watched ANY college football this year? Any at all?

There isn't a worthy #2-#4. If there was any type of year where one would find it easier to get in, this is it. Now the actual team/ranking does matter so it's a bit blanket to say any, but say a top 15ish team? The only questionable thing on their resume so far was a close call against an uninspiring Memphis team that wouldn't hurt them if they had a ranked win.

 

[Ickey Shuffle]

All of this UCF talk is pointless because they will lose in 3 more weeks.

 

[WizardHawk]

Undefeated seasons are rare, and if any of them have one (like WMU a couple years ago) it means nothing.

And for some reason the obvious answer escapes your ability to comprehend here. You have both elements needed to piece it together in the above and yet simply cannot.

Undefeated seasons are rare, even on the backs of G5 scheduling, they are rare. The years one does run the table, such as WMU in '16 you feel they are kept down. It can't possibly have anything to do with the fact WMU didn't play a single team within 10 of the top 25, more or less an actual ranked team. They were ranked 13th going into bowl season on the backs of a simply horrible schedule. They then lost to #8 Wisconsin.

Clue: Most of the times a G5 does run the table it's because they didn't have any good teams on their schedule. Most of the time they do they don't run the table.

 

[7Samurai13]

All of this UCF talk is pointless because they will lose in 3 more weeks.

Is that when they play Temple?

 

[Ickey Shuffle]

Is that when they play Temple?

I see what you did there.

You'll see.

 

[Rolltide94]

The MAC does, in fact, get 1/4 the money the B10 does for TV rights every year. This isn't an opinion, this is contractual fact.

The reality is, there's 4 spots for 5 P5 conferences. Under no circumstance does a G5 team get in over that.

You sir are too stupid to continue arguing with. The ESPN deal pays the MAC 10 million per year from 2017 through 2027. That works out to $833,000 per school per year. Michigan alone gets 3 times what all the MAC schools get combined. Which makes sense, because Michigan as a brand brings in 3 times the ratings of all the MAC schools combined. Let me put it in perspective for you. On any given week there are 25-40 games that get more than 200,000 viewers and about 10-15 that get over a million. The only time a MAC team gets either category is when they are playing a P5 team. The highest rated MAC game of the year so far was 425k viewers for CMU vs Michigan State back in week 5. By contrast, the B1G had 5 games over 700K last week with the high of 6.2 million for OSU vs Purdue. 17 million people watched the top 5 B1G games last week, meanwhile the MAC had no games with more than 200K viewers. Every MAC game combined last week wouldn't equal the 700k viewers for Maryland-Iowa.

GTFO with your "The MAC makes 1/4 of what the BIG does". I am not even sure how you are walking around if you truly believe that to be the case, your brain would have to spend most of it's resources just reminding you to breathe.

Furthermore, when it expires in 2027, they are going to get less not more. Almost very other G5 conference that negotiated their deal after the 2014 MAC deal got significantly less money than they previously did. Take a look at Conference USA's new deal. Only the AAC and the MWC have a hope in hell of keeping things the same. There is a reason ESPN is laying off people left and right.