Gismo Posted September 18, 2017 Group: Member Topic Count: 417 Content Count: 9,688 Reputation: 1,237 Days Won: 8 Joined: 09/24/2009 Share Posted September 18, 2017 Uconn, Cincy and USF got booted from the table. P6 doesn't really mean anything without the money, bowl games or the benefit of scheduleing more games against the SEC, ACC, Big10, Pac12 and Big12. The American conference will never be on the same footing until we get paid enough to keep coaches from leaving. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mama_Bull Posted September 18, 2017 Group: Member Topic Count: 1,207 Content Count: 18,470 Reputation: 899 Days Won: 44 Joined: 10/14/2003 Author Share Posted September 18, 2017 20 minutes ago, Gismo said: Uconn, Cincy and USF got booted from the table. P6 doesn't really mean anything without the money, bowl games or the benefit of scheduleing more games against the SEC, ACC, Big10, Pac12 and Big12. The American conference will never be on the same footing until we get paid enough to keep coaches from leaving. No doubt. The AAC is pushing the P6 mantra in order to separate itself, as far as possible, away from the lower tier conferences, with the hope of landing much better TV money and Bowl games in the future. How successful they are over the next few years in doing that is yet to be determined. I do believe that the AAC is pursuing a correct path, with this approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SANJAY Posted September 19, 2017 Group: Member Topic Count: 300 Content Count: 7,993 Reputation: 968 Days Won: 21 Joined: 10/31/2005 Share Posted September 19, 2017 2 hours ago, Triple B said: At the risk of getting SANJAY's dander up again, I'm thinking the lawyers would never allow what happened to Temple happen again ... especially with the longer tenured P5 potential bootees. Lawyers doing deals are not decision makers. They can explain pros and cons and legal issues but ultimately clients make decisions. Unless in house counsel has been given authority to make decisions the lawyers are just doing what the clients (conference, teams or individuals) want to do. No dander up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charsibb Posted September 19, 2017 Group: Member Topic Count: 653 Content Count: 31,049 Reputation: 2,487 Days Won: 172 Joined: 08/30/2011 Share Posted September 19, 2017 4 hours ago, SANJAY said: The big teams don't want to obtain such an exemption. They've had 33 years since the Supreme Court decided that. If it went to a straight-up vote, they'd lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SANJAY Posted September 19, 2017 Group: Member Topic Count: 300 Content Count: 7,993 Reputation: 968 Days Won: 21 Joined: 10/31/2005 Share Posted September 19, 2017 44 minutes ago, charsibb said: If it went to a straight-up vote, they'd lose. But it never would. If it for some reason did the real power schools would take their ball and break away from the balance. Look at the way the votes for full cost of attendance went. The majority could have stopped it but they didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinRicky Posted September 19, 2017 Group: TBP Subscriber III Topic Count: 583 Content Count: 22,718 Reputation: 5,859 Days Won: 109 Joined: 09/13/2007 Share Posted September 19, 2017 3 hours ago, Mama_Bull said: I'm somewhat surprised that the P5 conferences have not booted out deadwood football schools to make room for potentially more attractive teams, such as USF. I don't know all the facts surrounding the Big East dumping Temple, but something like that probably needs to happen for USF to break into the P5. A conference needs to calculate the long term benefits involved in doing such a thing. If it makes sense dollarwise, I can see it happening. Because everyone wants to watch USF Men's Basketball. Do you toss Kansas because football isn't so good yet they have great hoops? I'm sure there are some teams that aren't very good in either sport but Kansas just jumped into my mostly empty head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bull Matrix Posted September 19, 2017 Group: Member Topic Count: 604 Content Count: 16,483 Reputation: 2,938 Days Won: 43 Joined: 01/04/2003 Share Posted September 19, 2017 4 minutes ago, Bourbon Bull said: Because everyone wants to watch USF Men's Basketball. Do you toss Kansas because football isn't so good yet they have great hoops? I'm sure there are some teams that aren't very good in either sport but Kansas just jumped into my mostly empty head. Baylor comes to mind. They actually fought and threaten legal actions if the big 12 fell apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gismo Posted September 19, 2017 Group: Member Topic Count: 417 Content Count: 9,688 Reputation: 1,237 Days Won: 8 Joined: 09/24/2009 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Baylor should be booted. Top to bottom from president to athlete, no ethics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bull Matrix Posted September 19, 2017 Group: Member Topic Count: 604 Content Count: 16,483 Reputation: 2,938 Days Won: 43 Joined: 01/04/2003 Share Posted September 19, 2017 9 minutes ago, Gismo said: Baylor should be booted. Top to bottom from president to athlete, no ethics. And don't forget Baylor was really bad before they got good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTrue Posted September 19, 2017 Group: Member Topic Count: 152 Content Count: 19,395 Reputation: 6,097 Days Won: 233 Joined: 01/13/2011 Share Posted September 19, 2017 5 hours ago, Mama_Bull said: I'm somewhat surprised that the P5 conferences have not booted out deadwood football schools to make room for potentially more attractive teams, such as USF. I don't know all the facts surrounding the Big East dumping Temple, but something like that probably needs to happen for USF to break into the P5. A conference needs to calculate the long term benefits involved in doing such a thing. If it makes sense dollarwise, I can see it happening. I think the biggest reason they couldn't get away with it is the amount of money they're under contract for. A lot of schools already have that P5 money spent on campus, and not just for athletics, and if it was pulled out from under them it would be an absolute **** storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now