reasons. First, a G Playoff has essentially created a "second class" within DI-FBS that won't be that much different than what we currently see between DI-FBS and DI-FCS. How often do people refer to DI-FCS as "DII?" Once the G Playoff is in place, then I don't think it would take people very long to make the same mistake with the Gs. Do you know the reason the NCAA Committee decided to rename DI-A and DI-AA to DI-FBS and DI-FCS? The same problem that influenced the NCAA Committee to rename the DI subdivisions will be manifested by the existence of 2 FBS tournaments. At some point, people will start to ask "Why are the Gs even in DI-FBS if they can't compete for THE FBS National Championship?" Basically people will never see the G Playoffs as anything more than the NIT or CollegeInsider.com Postseason Tournament (CIT) which teams from the mid-major conferences are the only ones eligible to compete in. DI-FCS schools are allowed to compete against DI-FBS schools now, but they don't have to be in the same subdivision to do it. Why can't the same thing happen to the G conferences? Some people may even take it one step further and suggest the G conferences should be "forced" to combine with DI-FCS which would still solve the "problem." The problem with how people view the "problem" (aka ways to get the Gs out of the FBS Playoffs) is it will only be a matter of time before the "new problem" becomes ways to get rid of the ACC, Big XII, and maybe Pac-12 of the FBS Playoffs so it is just the P2s participating in it. Second, how likely will someone want to sponsor the G FBS Playoff? It is a valid question to ask because there is a very good chance G FBS Playoff games will go head-to-head with P FBS Playoff games and even NFL regular season games. How do the ratings for the NCAA DI Playoffs compare to the FBS Playoff games? The Montana-Montana State semi-final game was on ABC and went head-to-head with at least 1 of the FBS Playoff games on Saturday, but it may have overlapped 2 games. The Illinois State-Villanova semi-final game may have overlapped 2 games too because it competed against the tail end of the late afternoon game. If not, then it pretty much went head-to-head against the Oregon-JMU game. If the ratings aren't there, then the sponsors may not be there and most definitely the money won't be there. At least to the level they are currently making now as a co-owner. If the Gs can't make just as much or more money than they currently are now, then why would they agree to the change?