[LUOrange]

I hope I'm wrong/ I just don't see us doing that. I think we're going to choose pounding NMSU again over playing USC. I'd love to see McCaw and Freeze make that move though. The more P5's and brand name schools we play the better.

[tyndal23]

I hope I'm wrong/ I just don't see us doing that. I think we're going to choose pounding NMSU again over playing USC. I'd love to see McCaw and Freeze make that move though. The more P5's and brand name schools we play the better.

I imagine HF hates our 22 schedule for his resume, but sort of loves it for recruiting. Ian has to think long term, HF doesn’t. Even HF has to scratch his head at 23/24 from a recruiting aspect...

[Ill flame]

USC prefers to play west coast G5 schools so I think they would look to the MWC before us. I'm not saying it can't happen but we would be low on their list. Of course this is where being an independent and not being locked into 8-9 games a season helps.

[tyndal23]

USC prefers to play west coast G5 schools so I think they would look to the MWC before us. I'm not saying it can't happen but we would be low on their list. Of course this is where being an independent and not being locked into 8-9 games a season helps.

That is a tough week to get any conference team to fill. Perfect opportunity if we want it.

[tyndal23]

2023 - what games should we drop? Assuming we are making $ on the P5 games, would guess we get rid of all the MAC games and schedule a conference game or two in September ?

https://www.aseaofred.com/2020-2030-schedules/

[jbock13]

We should drop all of our P5 games. I'm not sure we'd be able to compete against those sort of teams.

[ballcoach15]

We need to keep ALL of our P5 games.

[Cider Jim]

We need to keep ALL of our P5 games.

Even the ones against UVa?

[willflop]

Based on HF's last press conference, he consults with Ian on scheduling and he is not a fan of more than 1 P5 a year.

[ballcoach15]

We need to keep ALL of our P5 games.

Even the ones against UVa?

Yes, we need to beat them

[tyndal23]

Actually, if we lose each P5 & BYU next year by 28 or more, I will feel much better about CUSA and being a basketball school for the next decade...

[cruzan_flame13]

From what I've collected from Freeze's pressure conference, he would prefer 1 P5/2 G5's/1 FCS. Nonetheless he realizes that they will be season with 2 P5's and he's fine with that. This could mean that we may have more seasons with 2, and if we continue to recruit hard and well,can change the schedule to 3 P5's and a FCS just for a easier win. I'm sure Freeze would love winning championships, but after awhile the idea of moving up will come into play. With that being said, the idea of 1 P5 will be out the window. We already give a little budget that we can play along a few P5's and even looked decent(even though the team shot themselves in the foot a few times) against a top SEC school. I'm hoping that we present ourselves nationally in the playoffs for a few years by growing the brand and going hard on recruiting in our pipelines.

[tyndal23]

From what I've collected from Freeze's pressure conference, he would prefer 1 P5/2 G5's/1 FCS. Nonetheless he realizes that they will be season with 2 P5's and he's fine with that. This could mean that we may have more seasons with 2, and if we continue to recruit hard and well,can change the schedule to 3 P5's and a FCS just for a easier win. I'm sure Freeze would love winning championships, but after awhile the idea of moving up will come into play. With that being said, the idea of 1 P5 will be out the window. We already give a little budget that we can play along a few P5's and even looked decent(even though the team shot themselves in the foot a few times) against a top SEC school. I'm hoping that we present ourselves nationally in the playoffs for a few years by growing the brand and going hard on recruiting in our pipelines.

IF playoffs expand, CUSA SOS won’t cut it, must have luck with top G5 and P5 SOS decent enough to matter. Again, each year may vary drastically and way too hard to predict 5 years out. More than 2 P5’s makes no sense if your going the G5 Conference champ route. ( UVA and VT are a stretch year in and year out with CUSA recruiting - Duke may be more our speed and I would say only 1 P5, no more. App St, Coastal, Marshall types work fine, just have to hope to beat them the year they are Conference Champs and LU is undefeated. I would say no MAC ever, try and schedule top 3 AAC and Sunbelt ( currently) and hope they are good 5 years out. Go for the chest beating SOS and as many wins as possible and hope the Twitter Warriors carry the day with Playoff Committee on those special years when AAC,WAC, Sunbelt have 2 loss Champions.

[Ill flame]

Now that the AAC lost 3 very good programs and replaced them with 6 mostly mediocre teams. The sunbelt added 1 solid team, 2 bad teams and a fcs school the G5s are very watered down so I'm not super worried about SOS. We could play a joke of a schedule like coastal and be the highest ranked G5 champion as long as we win our games. I think this is where Freezes head is at. Even if another team with a tougher schedule somehow finishes with an equal record it would create debate which the media loves and gets us positive exposure.

I personally would like to see us honor our currently scheduled P5 games to the best of our abilities. The only exception being 2027 when we have 3 scheduled.

[ballcoach15]

With crooked selection committee, we will need an automatic bid, to make playoffs.

[Ill flame]

Commissioners are back to the original plan of having a 12 team playoff. The only difference being the P5 Champs and top G5 champ are guaranteed spots instead of the top 6 conference champions. In practice this really doesn't change anything 90% of the time but with this change a 12 team playoff seems much more likely to happen. It's only a question of when it should be implemented.

https://www.si.com/college/2021/11/11/c ... reddit.com

[ballcoach15]

Why a 12 team playoff and not 16 team playoff.

[flamehunter]

So the top 4 can get a bye in the first round. That's fair right?

[ballcoach15]

So the top 4 can get a bye in the first round. That's fair right?

H.... no. No one deserves a bye. Playing field should be level. No team should have unfair advantage.

[Sly Fox]

The original 12-team proposal was devloped by SEC, Big XII commissioners along with the AD from Notre Dame. A bit has happened that has changed the XII perspective to where they went from being the presumptive #4 conference every year to being #5 or #6 with the departure of the Horns & Sooners. So essentially the only P5 conference not demanding an auto bid at this stage is the SEC. This is the compromise I think most of us expected and likely will be approved:

Auto Bids (6)
SEC Champion
B1G Champion
ACC Champion
Pac 12 Champion
Big XII Champion
Top G5 Champion

At Large (6)
Team 1 (Conference/Indy)
Team 2 (Conference/Indy)
Team 3 (Conference/Indy)
Team 4 (Conference/Indy)
Team 5 (Conference/Indy)
Team 6 (Conference/Indy)

You may be thinking, if we had stayed Indy look at all of those at large possibilities. You would be foolish to believe that would be a possibility. Notre Dame battlied for that Indy inclusion recognizing that they would be the presumptive top Indy nearly every year. And even if they weren't, they would be the only one with enough strength of schedule and sway with the selection committee to be chosen.

In essence, the Pac 12 & Big XII get the security of having at least one team in the field every year which they likely would have had already. But this guarantees the situation. Assuming we are the CUSA champion, we would then in essence be battling just the four other G5 champions for that one slot. Under the prior proposal it was possible while highly unlikely that two G5s could have theoretically snared auto bids. It narrows our window but only slightly. We will likely be battling AAC, MWC or Belt champs for the golden ticket with the occassional MAC team making some noise.

It has been suggested in other forums that while the G5 will never get a first round bye, the new proposal will likely give all the auto bids a guaranteed first round home game so they are rewarded in a small way. Of course that is just a suggestion and the bowls have some sway in this process as well that could change that arrangement.

[alabama24]

Sly - Your list needed some amendment:

Auto Bids (6)
SEC Champion
B1G Champion
ACC Champion
Pac 12 Champion
Big XII Champion
Top G5 Champion

At Large (6)
Team 1 (SEC #2)
Team 2 (SEC #3)
Team 3 (SEC #4)
Team 4 (SEC #5)
Team 5 (BIG 10 #2)
Team 6 (Notre Dame)

[rtb72]

The original 12-team proposal was devloped by SEC, Big XII commissioners along with the AD from Notre Dame. A bit has happened that has changed the XII perspective to where they went from being the presumptive #4 conference every year to being #5 or #6 with the departure of the Horns & Sooners. So essentially the only P5 conference not demanding an auto bid at this stage is the SEC. This is the compromise I think most of us expected and likely will be approved:

Auto Bids (6)
SEC Champion
B1G Champion
ACC Champion
Pac 12 Champion
Big XII Champion
Top G5 Champion

At Large (6)
Team 1 (Conference/Indy)
Team 2 (Conference/Indy)
Team 3 (Conference/Indy)
Team 4 (Conference/Indy)
Team 5 (Conference/Indy)
Team 6 (Conference/Indy)

You may be thinking, if we had stayed Indy look at all of those at large possibilities. You would be foolish to believe that would be a possibility. Notre Dame battlied for that Indy inclusion recognizing that they would be the presumptive top Indy nearly every year. And even if they weren't, they would be the only one with enough strength of schedule and sway with the selection committee to be chosen.

In essence, the Pac 12 & Big XII get the security of having at least one team in the field every year which they likely would have had already. But this guarantees the situation. Assuming we are the CUSA champion, we would then in essence be battling just the four other G5 champions for that one slot. Under the prior proposal it was possible while highly unlikely that two G5s could have theoretically snared auto bids. It narrows our window but only slightly. We will likely be battling AAC, MWC or Belt champs for the golden ticket with the occassional MAC team making some noise.

It has been suggested in other forums that while the G5 will never get a first round bye, the new proposal will likely give all the auto bids a guaranteed first round home game so they are rewarded in a small way. Of course that is just a suggestion and the bowls have some sway in this process as well that could change that arrangement.

So would an extra game, "G5 Wild Card" game added to the schedule for G5 conference champs be practical? I don't know if that would be a consideration since it would take the "power" away from the committee, but a little extra football wouldn't hurt my feelings.

[Ill flame]

Sly - Your list needed some amendment:

Auto Bids (6)
SEC Champion
B1G Champion
ACC Champion
Pac 12 Champion
Big XII Champion
Top G5 Champion

At Large (6)
Team 1 (SEC #2)
Team 2 (SEC #3)
Team 3 (SEC #4)
Team 4 (SEC #5)
Team 5 (BIG 10 #2)
Team 6 (Notre Dame)

I've seen stuff like this thrown around a lot online and can't tell if it's a meme or if people genuinely believe the SEC will be that good from adding Oklahoma and a middling Texas. The big ten usually has as many top 12 teams as the sec. With the new conference alignment it would look something like this based on current standings/cfp rankings.

Auto Bids (6)
Georgia- SEC Champion
Ohio St- B1G Champion
Wake Forest- ACC Champion
Oregon- Pac 12 Champion
Cincinatti- Big XII Champion
SDSU- Top G5 Champion

At Large (6)
Alabama (SEC #2)
Michigan (B1G #2)
Michigan St (B1G #3)
Oklahoma (SEC #3)
Notre Dame (independent)
Oklahoma St (Big 12 #2)

[JK37]

If the Big10 ever played anybody good ooc, @alabama24’s list would be realistic.

[Sly Fox]

They are trying. They have passed a 'No FCS' standard. But then again, MAC schools in general that the B1G eats for breakfast are barely above FCS level in most cases.