What are we playing for?

[tatedog]

If anything, this system helps us because the committee, not politics, decides who goes to NY6 games. I'm not ignorant to the fact that the committee isn't exclusive of politics, but at least it's a relatively transparent process compared to the one which routinely screwed us in the past.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

Why does a 20+ handicapper play golf?

why do people play USTA league tennis, at about any level?

That is about competition, people love to compete. Screw the Playoffs, and the pundits that say your season is over.

Otherwise, whereas NCAA Football(etc) has turned into a semi-Pro sport, and prices have gone thru the roof.
Which has now peaked. Yes it has...

Smokey seeking a portal transfer, is not out of line.

Coming from a life long Dog!

 

[RocketDawg]

Normally this is where I'd put a gif or some snarky comment but here's a serious suggestion. What if there was a limit on how much each university could put toward football? Like a salary cap, but for the football program as a whole (including coach's salary)? The salary cap mandates parity in the NFL. We haven't had a 1st time champion in College Football for 38 years (Washington 1991). And only two other schools without a title have even made it to the championship (Virginia Tech & Oregon).

In that same time frame how many teams have won their first Super Bowl? SEVEN! (Patriots, Rams, Ravens, Seahawks, Eagles, Bucs, Saints). Also SIX teams without a title have played in the game (Bills, Falcons, Panthers, Chargers, Titans & Cardinals). That's 13 of 32 teams (41%) who've had a legitimate chance to win their first title since 1991 vs. 3 of 65 (5%) Power Five schools (XII, SEC, PAC12, BIG, ACC & ND) have had the same opportunity. It's legitimately depressing.

Excellent idea. Across the board, or higher for Power 5 schools, lower for lesser conferences?

 

[RocketDawg]

Here's how I would fix it:

1. Reduce scholarships to 70. If the NFL can make it with a 53 man roster, college football can make with it with 70.

2. A hard cap of 20 signees in a calendar year. Only exception is that you can add a signee for every player that enters the transfer portal. All other loopholes(grayshirting, counting back with early enrollees, etc) closed

3. Reduce the regular season to 11 games: 9 mandated conference games for all Power 5 schools + 2 non conference games. At least 1 non conference game has to be against a Power 5.

4. Eliminate divisions in the conferences. Eliminate the conference championship games. No more bowl games.

5. Expand the playoff to 16 teams. First 2 rounds are played on campus of the higher seeded team. Final 2 rounds on neutral sites. Final 2 teams end up playing 15 total games- exact same as it is now.

6. Group of 5 schools have their own, separate playoff- so no Group of 5 schools would be eligible for the Power 5 playoff. Join a conference or compete for the Group of 5 Championship.

Not sure about reducing the number of games. It's a big money maker for schools, and you'd have some pretty fancy stadiums sitting idle at least one more weekend per year.

 

[Rezpup]

I'm fine with 70 scholarship limit, but do wonder how you start if off? Seems you end up with a mass processing of players, which would be a really bad look for the ncaa.

You scale it back incrementally over a 12-15 year period.

But this is what I don’t get....In the old system only 2 bowls at most mattered each year in determining the National Champion and now its only 3 bowls that do...so what’s this big difference everybody’s talking about? Other than sheer quantity of bowl games?

 

[philduckworth]

why do people play USTA league tennis, at about any level?

That is about competition, people love to compete. Screw the Playoffs, and the pundits that say your season is over.

Otherwise, whereas NCAA Football(etc) has turned into a semi-Pro sport, and prices have gone thru the roof.
Which has now peaked. Yes it has...

Smokey seeking a portal transfer, is not out of line.

Coming from a life long Dog!

This analogy makes zero sense. A 20 handicapper doesn't compete on the PGA Tour.

 

[patdog]

NCAA football isn't the PGA Tour. That's the NFL.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

No, people compete for the love of the game.

You have no clue.

 

[thatsbaseball]

The PGA analogy is actually pretty good. There are about as many PGA players with no chance at winning a major or "championship" as there are college football teams with no chance of being in the playoffs. The common thread is the money even the lower echelon in each sport are raking in because of TV dollars. As a fan, I guess the bottom line is if you're not entertained don't partake .

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

Reducing scholarships to 65 would effectively force for 20 players from each 'blue blood' to go elsewhere. That alone would help level the playing field a good bit. So no- a draft isnt the only way.

Or. More likely, since Alabama gets 65 Blue Chips and carries about 20 other players that would probably be reserves for any of the Top 40 programs, they will still get 65 Blue Chips, and leave the 20 reserves for the others to fight over.

There is an answer, but TV and the blue bloods will have to acquiesce to some significant changes to get it right.

An 8 team playoff is not going to help Miss. State and eliminating Mid to lower level bowls is not going to help State either.

The Bowls after the New Years 6 must get stronger sponsorship, better facilities, maybe even better locations, and finally more autonomy. The Autonomy to pick Regional opponents and the sponsorship to pay out more. More Regional matchups will give the fans shorter distances to travel and give the teams even more exposure within their Regional Foot Print. Birmingham, Memphis, St. Louis, Mobile, Oklahoma City, Kansas City, could all have nice(r)facilities for hosting bowls. Atlanta could host more than one Bowl, as does New Orleans. Those bowls need more clout, more ability to attract better teams, with better payouts. This rewards the teams, and the closer proximity rewards the fans.

 

[thekimmer]

A national draft of 17-18 yr old amateur athletes will never happen...

The only way to achieve parity in college football would be to institute a draft system like pro football uses. That is the only way to keep the blue bloods of the collegiate world from snapping up all the best available high school talent year after year and leaving the dregs and diamonds in the rough for the rest.

I don't ever envision this happening though.

That could and should only happen in the context of a minor professional league outside the purview of the NCAA. I would be OK with that too.

 

[TaleofTwoDogs]

Reducing scholarships to 65 would effectively force for 20 players from each 'blue blood' to go elsewhere. That alone would help level the playing field a good bit. So no- a draft isnt the only way.

Ok, for argument sake this is probably what happens after the new 65 scholarship rule...

Current Bama = 15 (5*) - 30 (4*) - 40 (3*) Total 85
Future Bama = 10 (5*) - 25 (4*) - 30 (3*) 65

Current MSU = 1 (5*) - 12 (4*) - 72 (3*) Total 85
Future MSU = 2 (5*) - 16 (4*) - 47 (3*) 65

The 20 players from the blue bloods (10%) will be distributed among the non-BBs (90%) but because of the dilution of talent it still does not create parity

 

[Dawgcap]

So by reducing the scholarships we hurt the big boys? Really? Like the big boys don’t work the system like was done in the past. Unfortunately unless we get rid of a governing body who protects their special teams nothing will change. College athletics are built the same as politics. The rich get richer and special interest groups are covered due to handouts. The SEC ( Alabama, Georgia and a couple others) are on top now. The winds are changing so watch as the rules change to benefit a few other big boys in other conferences. Sports and politics are the same. We are allowed to be involved to let the rich get richer. A team like us ( in any conference) starts doing well, hell is coming.

 

[Dawgcap]

That’s why we need to push baseball. Not quite as corrupt because the money isn’t as big! Basketball is still tough for a truly consistent dominant power because of the 1 year rule. Basketball still has sleepers show up because of 4 year starters at smaller schools and a huge tournament. The elite football schools don’t want that unless they can continue to keep great athletes 3 years or more

 

[Nunya.sixpack]

The women.

 

[MedDawg]

Finally a 16 team playoff--Yay, MSU makes the playoff! First round at Bama.**

nm

 

[SheltonChoked]

My Edits:

Here's how I would fix it:

1. Reduce scholarships to 70. If the NFL can make it with a 53 man roster, college football can make with it with 70.

2. A hard cap of 20 signees in a calendar year. Only exception is that you can add a signee for every player that enters the transfer portal. All other loopholes(grayshirting, counting back with early enrollees, etc) closed

3. Reduce the regular season to 10 games: 7 mandated conference games for all Power 4 schools. Remaining 3 games are Power 4.

4. Eliminate the conference championship games. Change bowl games (see Below).

5. Everyone makes the playoff (all 64 power 4). First 2 rounds are played on campus of the higher seeded team. Final 4 rounds on neutral sites (Bowl system). Final 2 teams end up playing 16 total games.

6. Everyone else can have their own, separate playoff- so no Group of 5 schools would be eligible for the Power 5 playoff. Join a conference or compete for the Group of 5 Championship.

 

[SheltonChoked]

Ok, for argument sake this is probably what happens after the new 65 scholarship rule...

Current Bama = 15 (5*) - 30 (4*) - 40 (3*) Total 85
Future Bama = 15 (5*) - 30 (4*) - 20 (3*) 65

Current MSU = 1 (5*) - 12 (4*) - 72 (3*) Total 85
Future MSU = 1 (5*) - 12 (4*) - 52 (3*) 65

The 20 players from the blue bloods (10%) (all 3 *'s) will be distributed among the non-BBs (90%) but because of the dilution of talent it still does not create parity

FIFY

Why would a blue blood take less 4*'s? They will keep the sure thing prospects and skip on the 3*'s...

 

[shotgunDawg]

I agree it’s rigged to favor blue bloods but part of that is our own fault. We should have taken football more serious back in the early years of college football like Alabama, Notre Dame, USC, etc. also, sharing a state with ole miss sucks. I believe if ole miss and MSU formed one school/team, we could compete for championships. That will obviously never happen. Expanding the playoffs to 8 teams gives us hope though.

It's not my fault
It's not your fault
It's not my fault MSU played AT LSU for 35 out of 40 years
It's not my fault that MSU played its games in Jackson

Why should the popularity of the sport be held hostage by what happened 70 years ago?

 

[shotgunDawg]

It's always been this way. The only difference is the atttitude of fans. It used to be that people could be happy with a good year even if your team didn't win the natty. Now if you don't win the natty then you are a failure even if you did have a really good year.

I think the attitude has changed as the world & other sports leagues have changed. All the pro sports leagues now have enough parity that teams believe they can win if they do things the right way & college baseball & basketball also offer that opportunity.

I think people are waking up more than anything

 

[shotgunDawg]

Talk about oversimplification. It's not about winning the whole thing. No one even has a chance to win the whole thing. 2 teams have even had a game to win their first title in 38 years. It's not fun to go 2 decades knowing that no matter how well you scout, recruit, hire, game plan, etc., you don't even have a chance. Quit trying to make it some spoiled brat garbage it isn't.

This

 

[shotgunDawg]

It's because the bowls don't matter, and rivalries have been diluted. There's no prize for 80% of the teams.

For us, it's a Sugar Bowl trophy at best, then likely losing most/all our coaching staff.

For say, USM, it's a C-USA trophy at best, some crappy bowl, then likely losing your WHOLE coaching staff.

That **** sucks.

The coaching staff point is a good point & another massive issue with the current system.

Because only 12 or so programs have a remote chance at winning a championship, everyone else can't build a program because any good coaches will attempt to go one of those 12 programs.

It's a brutal set-up that overall is contributing to the sport lessening in popularity compared to how popular it could be.

 

[shotgunDawg]

So by reducing the scholarships we hurt the big boys? Really? Like the big boys don’t work the system like was done in the past. Unfortunately unless we get rid of a governing body who protects their special teams nothing will change. College athletics are built the same as politics. The rich get richer and special interest groups are covered due to handouts. The SEC ( Alabama, Georgia and a couple others) are on top now. The winds are changing so watch as the rules change to benefit a few other big boys in other conferences. Sports and politics are the same. We are allowed to be involved to let the rich get richer. A team like us ( in any conference) starts doing well, hell is coming.

Reducing scholarships would absolutely effect the blue bloods over time. Mostly it would lessen their margin for error.

Take Alabama's LB getting hurt the other day. Under the 70% percent scholarship rule, that would be a much much larger issue than it currently is

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

No. Worse than that. 1st round at Ohio State or Washington. No way for fans to get there without selling their double wides.***

 

[maroonmania]

The college football playoff has really changed college football for me. I used to enjoy the regular season and wanted to get to a good bowl game. It meant something. You could build a program thru bowl trips and maybe win your division if things fell right. We won it once. Competed another time or two. Now, all of the bowl games are completely meaningless except for the playoffs. Top prospects are skipping bowl games and that's becoming more the norm than the exception.

Best case scenario, we go 8-4 and go to the outback bowl? Yay. And there are 120 other teams in the same boat as us.

Attendance is down. Bowl game attendance is way down. In the NFL, every team thinks they can make the playoffs. The ones that don't, think they are only a couple of moves away. In college, it's pretty hopeless for all the teams with the exception of about 12. Maybe those 12 can keep driving the revenue bus and keep the TV ratings up, I don't know.

But I think College football needs major reform or interest will continue to wane. College football needs a commissioner. Playoffs need to be expanded, scholarships need to be reduced. More teams need to at least be under the illusion(delusion) that they can contend for the CFP. Otherwise, what's the point?

There has NEVER been more than 2 or 3 bowl games that actually had an impact on who won the old mythical NC before the BCS. Those two or three games have now been replaced with playoff games so I don't really see how things have changed that much. At least now with the 4 team playoff, twice as many teams actually have a shot to win the NC than we had in the BCS era. I personally think 8 is the correct number. Every P5 champion should get a shot and then you could still add in the best G5 team plus a couple of wild cards. Any more than 8 and the regular season becomes way too meaningless. Just think that if you win your P5 conference you should get in. As far as MSU, I don't know that I've ever gone into a season thinking we had a realistic shot at a NC so the goal for us is still to have a nice season and get to an attractive bowl destination. I mean 2014 was sort of a dream start for us but we couldn't sustain it to the end. But I do think we have a much better chance to accomplish a good bowl game now than we did 30 to 40 years ago.

 

[philduckworth]

There has NEVER been more than 2 or 3 bowl games that actually had an impact on who won the old mythical NC before the BCS. Those two or three games have now been replaced with playoff games so I don't really see how things have changed that much. At least now with the 4 team playoff, twice as many teams actually have a shot to win the NC than we had in the BCS era. I personally think 8 is the correct number. Every P5 champion should get a shot and then you could still add in the best G5 team plus a couple of wild cards. Any more than 8 and the regular season becomes way too meaningless. Just think that if you win your P5 conference you should get in. As far as MSU, I don't know that I've ever gone into a season thinking we had a realistic shot at a NC so the goal for us is still to have a nice season and get to an attractive bowl destination. I mean 2014 was sort of a dream start for us but we couldn't sustain it to the end. But I do think we have a much better chance to accomplish a good bowl game now than we did 30 to 40 years ago.

Lot of things here:

1. Is the NFL season meaningless? Because 12 out of 32 teams make the playoffs 37.5%. I certainly think 16 out of 130 in college is reasonable 12%. Concerns about the regular season being meaningless? I mean the entire season is now meaningless if you aren't in the playoff discussion.

2. Correct about the old mythical national championship but it wasn't talked about as much. Each conference had their own pseudo national championship with the SEC being the Sugar, the Big 10 and Pac 10 being the Rose and so on. Getting to the best bowl game was a thing. Now the entire season focuses on the playoffs.

3. Definitely don't think a G5 team should be considered for a playoff. Their overall schedule is just not on the same planet. That's why G5 needs their own playoff.

We will basically NEVER have a shot at the 4 team playoff. A 16 team playoff would give us and nearly everyone else something to shoot for other than a trip to B'ham or Tampa.

 

[patdog]

1. Is the NFL season meaningless?

Just look at how many teams rest starters in the last week or 2 of the regular season. Also, there have been several teams that haven't even won their division that were crowned champions.

3. Definitely don't think a G5 team should be considered for a playoff.

As long as they're in the same division as the P5 schools, they need access to the playoff. 1 guaranteed spot out of the 8 (usually at the #1 seed) he is proposing isn't too much.

 

[VegasDawg13]

Talk about oversimplification. It's not about winning the whole thing. No one even has a chance to win the whole thing. 2 teams have even had a game to win their first title in 38 years. It's not fun to go 2 decades knowing that no matter how well you scout, recruit, hire, game plan, etc., you don't even have a chance. Quit trying to make it some spoiled brat garbage it isn't.

I agree with L4Dawg, but I don't think that implies thinking people are spoiled brats. I'm not that old, but there has been a dramatic shift in my lifetime of the general sports fan public caring more about the ultimate prize (whatever that happens to be for that sport) at the expense of lesser accomplishments.

People used to care about conference tournaments in basketball. Now most fans (and even some coaches) say the NCAAT is all that matters. NBA teams start tanking once it's established they aren't good enough to win it all with their current core, and fans are usually okay with it. Tiger Woods came along and made his sole career focus about winning majors, and that's now all anyone cares about. John McEnroe almost has as many doubles titles as Roger Federer does doubles wins because everyone decided doubles is irrelevant.

 

[VegasDawg13]

We will basically NEVER have a shot at the 4 team playoff. A 16 team playoff would give us and nearly everyone else something to shoot for other than a trip to B'ham or Tampa.

I don't understand how anyone can say this when we were essentially 1 TD away just five years ago.

 

[maroonmania]

Lot of things here:

1. Is the NFL season meaningless? Because 12 out of 32 teams make the playoffs 37.5%. I certainly think 16 out of 130 in college is reasonable 12%. Concerns about the regular season being meaningless? I mean the entire season is now meaningless if you aren't in the playoff discussion.

2. Correct about the old mythical national championship but it wasn't talked about as much. Each conference had their own pseudo national championship with the SEC being the Sugar, the Big 10 and Pac 10 being the Rose and so on. Getting to the best bowl game was a thing. Now the entire season focuses on the playoffs.

3. Definitely don't think a G5 team should be considered for a playoff. Their overall schedule is just not on the same planet. That's why G5 needs their own playoff.

We will basically NEVER have a shot at the 4 team playoff. A 16 team playoff would give us and nearly everyone else something to shoot for other than a trip to B'ham or Tampa.

Obviously its not meaningless, but watered down certainly. The thing about college football is that, unlike other sports with more games, the regular season is a bit of an elimination round but if you start letting in a ton of wild cards then it becomes sort of like the NFL where its mostly about who is hot at the end of the season. My biggest deal is that EVERY P5 team should have a shot of winning the NC through winning their conference and we don't have that right now. Most years not even 4 of the P5 conferences gets a representative. So I think going to 8 still gets you all the P5 champions plus a few 'wild card' teams that are perhaps deserving (since a 5 team playoff doesn't work). I personally though don't like teams like Alabama that win the NC without winning their conference, and they've done it twice recently I believe.

 

[philduckworth]

Just look at how many teams rest starters in the last week or 2 of the regular season. Also, there have been several teams that haven't even won their division that were crowned champions.

As long as they're in the same division as the P5 schools, they need access to the playoff. 1 guaranteed spot out of the 8 (usually at the #1 seed) he is proposing isn't too much.

As you know, the NFL plays 16 regular season games compared to the 11 that I propose. Even at 12, you know that's a huge difference. And kudos to the teams that had a good enough regular season to be able to rest their players. The regular season matters.

As for the G5. There is a clear separation now between the Power 5 and the Group of 5. I think it should be separated. But if they wanted a spot in a 16 team playoff, that would be fine.

 

[philduckworth]

My biggest deal is that EVERY P5 team should have a shot of winning the NC through winning their conference and we don't have that right now.

The whole point of my original post is that almost no one has a chance currently of winning the national title except for about 10n schools. So I guess, you basically agree with me.