Thanks FSU and the College Football Committee

[GoBulls84]

1 hour ago, puc86 said:

The agreement to have it this way is only for two years, they tried to modify it already and believe they will after the first time it takes place. The most it will last is two years but even that is very unlikely. The cap on the risk and loss on a NY6 game vs a spot in the playoffs is marginal vs exponential, no one is going to stay giving that up especially when it is so simple as they can just let it lapse and not give it again.

They tried to modify to 5+7 when it looked like the Pac12 was going to die for good and they didn't want the G5 to inherit an extra playoff spot. As long as the Pac is still alive and taking a P_ slot, there will always be at least 1 spot for the highest ranked G_ champ, if for no other reason than giving up 1 out of 12 slots to the poors is a good way to avoid being sued into oblivion.

[puc86]

2 minutes ago, CousinRicky said:

Thanks for keeping it to 5 paragraphs instead of 7 

I mean they were newspaper paragraphs, which really don't count

[CousinRicky]

3 hours ago, puc86 said:

You will not get it until it happens for the first time which is why we agreed to move on until the first G5 team actually makes it into the playoff in the name of fairness which will be immediately followed by a necessary rules change and the last G5 team making it into the playoff in the name of fairness. It was deemed necessary to get to that number concessions had to be made, once the number is set it will then be necessary to remove the concessions. I cannot explain it to you because you do not want to understand it, so we will wait for you to be shocked which I imagine happens fairly regularly.

Didn't Cinci do that last year?

[puc86]

3 minutes ago, GoBulls84 said:

They tried to modify to 5+7 when it looked like the Pac12 was going to die for good and they didn't want the G5 to inherit an extra playoff spot. As long as the Pac is still alive and taking a P_ slot, there will always be at least 1 spot for the highest ranked G_ champ, if for no other reason than giving up 1 out of 12 slots to the poors is a good way to avoid being sued into oblivion.

Yes robbing the people you just robbed is a much stickier wicket, stop giving the g5 as much charity not so much

[CousinRicky]

2 hours ago, Sellular1 said:

I already watched all of that.  Finished the whole innernet last year.

This made me laugh out loud. I needed a good laugh since I had to go out a buy a suit today, one of my least favorite things to do (any clothes shopping actually). Retired 19 years ago and this is possibly the first time I had to do it.

[puc86]

Just now, CousinRicky said:

Didn't Cinci do that last year?

Kind of but this expansion solves for that problem, the next vote solves for why would a barely top 20 team that no one knows exist leapfrog 7 of our teams for no reason. The illusion of access is good, actual access becomes a problem that needs fixed because at the end of the day you don't make things much harder for yourself to then give away a chance to someone you see as having a ridiculously easier path when there is no compelling reason for you to do so.

[CousinRicky]

2 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Didn't Cinci do that last year?

 

2 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Kind of but

So Cinci wasn't in the playoffs?  I'm just having fun with you and I'm not even drinking yet. 

[Bull94]

21 minutes ago, puc86 said:

you honestly don't have a clue.

Yes I have not clue where your thought process is coming from

the 2nd article stated sec commissioner wanted to go to top 12 ranked . he said nobody agreed with him.

The part where it says this at best expected to last two years. Care to bet how a new vote would go or one after someone gets left out so that a G5 team could get blown out?

heck they couldn't even get it changed to top 5 instead of top 6 conference champs for next 2 years.

That had more to do with PAC mess than anything else

you do realize the rules are made by the management committee which includes ALL of the g5 commissioners,right?

Yes, they bring no value and no one cares if they have to reorganize to get rid of their votes when they voted somehow it didnt end up every conference champion plus 2 and many people had to vote against what would theoretically be their own self interest, why?

there are now 10 voting members. 5 of those are from g5 conferences. we are no longer part of the minority.

They already werent the minority, no one cared when it was 5 to 5 and they wont care at any voting distribution because only certain people matter

the rules aren't made by sec and big 10 commissioners alone.

For the most part they absolutely will as a go forward

at this point I honestly believe you are just trolling. you can't be this oblivious.

You seem to be confused about there being a P6 and a G5 (and not that it was actually P5 and G5) by being the only person on earth that bought that marketing but noted

 

 

you still don't seem to get it.

they will never have the votes to exclude the g5. it's as simple as that.

the only thing big 10 and sec can do is walk away.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Bull94

[puc86]

Just now, CousinRicky said:

 

So Cinci wasn't in the playoffs?  I'm just having fun with you and I'm not even drinking yet. 

Yes they were. 

Them taking one of four spots isnt an issue when there is no longer 4 spots

People think they are good people and they would be fine sharing if they just had more

Then it they get more and recognize they need it and the other people arent doing enough to get the shared amount so it isnt about gaining 7 spots its about losing 1 to the underserving under achieving little **** moochers

 

[puc86]

1 minute ago, Bull94 said:

you still don't seem to get it.

they will never have the votes to exclude the g5. it's as simple as that.

the only thing big 10 and sec can do is walk away.

They already didnt have the votes and they already got an unequitable share, the P4 is making it abundantly clear that they have no issue walking away from the G5 and I am sure if anyone would not like to move with the B10 and the SEC they would be more than happy to go on without them and leave them to die with the rest of the left behinds while taking the only portions of value from them. It really is quite simple and if anyone is pretending to not get it or to think the G5 holds any power it would have to be anyone coming from your perspective.