How to change the landscape of college football.

[tech_wreck47]

So, I’ve been thinking about how big of a difference there is in college football from one program to the next. You have your blue bloods, then your mid level, and then the bottom feeders. Blue bloods are constantly in the top 10, while the mid level schools will make the top 25 some and can end up having big years when the stars align. The bottom feeders are just that, bottom feeders. I will say, you could argue there is a level between the blue bloods and the mid level, those are teams who make the top 25 consistently but can’t teally compete with the blue bloods on a consistent basis. The question now becomes, how does college football become more competitive and even across the board? (Which I don’t think will happen) however I’d like to see some ideas on what could be done.

I personally know people who don’t watch college football anymore because it’s just not as fun and competitive as the NFL across the board. My brother in law (Bama fan) doesn’t even watch all Bama games because it’s not fun for them to beat up on everyone to him. The sad thing is, this could be changed with a few new rules imo, but probably will never happen.

So, here we go. First I’d like to see a cap on the size of support staff, this is huge imo and majorly divides the levels listed above. I’d say 15 or so is an amount that is fair. All schools might not be able to do that, but it levels it out some. I’d also like to see “investigators” in different regions who can randomly stop by schools (and would) that can make sure programs don’t have extra staff coaching in practice, making sure kids are going to class ect. These “investigators” would also make sure that money is not given to recruits from these programs, might not completely work but would possibly scare some programs a little with the possibility of a BIG pentalty.

Second, I’d like to see a cap on funds that can be spent per year for each program as far as recruiting, facilities, ect. There is such a major difference In facilities that also divide the levels listed above. Now, I’m not saying all should be made equally, but when a school spends 10 million compared to 3 million of another school, they should make it somewhere in the middle. I would say for big projects there could be exceptions.

Third, and the most important, there should not only be a gpa requirement (which there is) but a requirement for graduation rate. 80 percent should be the minimum or you would get penalized. It’s sad, imo some are more worried about the success of the football programs over the success of the student athletes outside of football.

Fourth, and this would definitely not happen, but would MAJORLY even things out. Have a point system in recruiting, stars would count as points, and you couldn’t go over your allowed amount of points, or average star ranking since you might not always sign 25. Let’s say 3.4 or 3.5 is the limit of star ranking.

What would y’all like to see?

 

[Ash]

The support staff arms race is out of control. Having an entire separate coaching staff just dedicated to breaking down film and putting together game plans never seemed like football to me.

 

[smokey_wasp]

I think it would be hard to implement most of your suggestions. Schools would balk at being told how they are allowed to spend their money, how many people they can hire, who they can choose to give a scholarship to, etc. They would probably take the NCAA to court.

I am going to give this some thought, but honestly, short of dividing FBS into the haves and have-nots, I don't see how you will get more parity.

 

[gtg970g]

I think it would be hard to implement most of your suggestions. Schools would balk at being told how they are allowed to spend their money, how many people they can hire, who they can choose to give a scholarship to, etc. They would probably take the NCAA to court.

I am going to give this some thought, but honestly, short of dividing FBS into the haves and have-nots, I don't see how you will get more parity.

They already limit the number of assistant coaches and graduate assistants so I don't think it's unreasonable to have a comprehensive staffing limitation including recruiting staff and "consultants". It would also be nice to have mandated statistics provided to all recruits on the post-graduate careers/salaries of former scholarship athletes.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Step one would be that could only sign 60 players in a four year time frame period.
If they leave, drop out, get arrested, quit, tough stuff.
Step two is to raise the minimum requirements with no exceptions.

That would make a more level playing field.

 

[Spalding Jacket]

Longshot, here goes. Every team that makes the playoff has a reduction of 10 scholarships next year and every year they continue to make it maxing out at a 30 scholarship reduction. Giving them an NFL roster size, and they can regain 10 scholarships every year they do not make the playoffs till they are back at 85.

 

[GTJake]

I agree with 1, 2 and 3 ... putting a cap on spending and staff and somehow tying it together with academics would even the playing field.
4 I don't necessarily agree with and as you said would never happen anyway.
IMO, college football is going to be forced to do "something", because the disparity is already out-of-hand and will continue to grow.
Eventually, it will start costing $$$, because the interest in watching Alabama play Clemson every year (and IMO, this will happen again this year) will drop ...

 

[Vespidae]

There's a simple way to reshape the landscape of college football. Implement weight standards. Max weight of an incoming freshman to be no more than 200 lbs. Max weight of a senior to be no more than 260 lbs. That puts the premium on development and not on recruiting. Add in a graduation progress rate ... and ... revenue sharing on merchandising and you've leveled the playing field. The only difference then is ... ticket sales.

 

[Scubapro]

[QUOTE=" ... revenue sharing on merchandising and you've leveled the playing field. The only difference then is ... ticket sales.[/QUOTE]

This is be best idea so far IMO...big programs always find ways to game the system...APR is the worst offense...need to progress to a major? Lets make easy/fake majors. See UNC (AA Studies), Clemson (Parks and Rec), Ugag (Consumer Economics)
I don't care about the success or failure of other programs but what I do care about is how the SEC, or most factory schools, are semi pro with fake majors. In essence they use these kids for their abilities and give them a useless major in return. Its no wonder they feel they should get paid.
I dont feel the NCAA can regulate things to fairness. That being said...Giving STEM schools (Like Tech) additional scholarships would help us tremendously. They could also place a provision, for liberal arts schools, like uga and unc, stating that the kids on scholarship must mirror the student body in percentage in majors.

Note, in order to be considered a STEM school greater than 55% of undergraduate degrees each year must be STEM.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[stech81]

Ok here goes most on here will think I'm dumb ( no big deal my wife does already)

You get 22 scholarships per year no more no less. Only if a player is injured and cannot complete 4 years of football or graduates early can he be replaced. That is 88 scholarships in 4 years live with it.

Ok here is the part that will piss off most. Everyone wanted the playoff system throw it out and go back like it was before in the 80's and 90's . all I have seen it do is make a few teams sell their souls to make the playoffs ( Alabama uga Ohio state and a few others)

Make a conference out of the top 15 and they can only schedule those teams.

Last make it where you can't plan hedges around at football field.

 

[a5ehren]

Ok here goes most on here will think I'm dumb ( no big deal my wife does already)

You get 22 scholarships per year no more no less. Only if a player is injured and cannot complete 4 years of football or graduates early can he be replaced. That is 88 scholarships in 4 years live with it.

Ok here is the part that will piss off most. Everyone wanted the playoff system throw it out and go back like it was before in the 80's and 90's . all I have seen it do is make a few teams sell their souls to make the playoffs ( Alabama uga Ohio state and a few others)

Make a conference out of the top 15 and they can only schedule those teams.

Last make it where you can't plan hedges around at football field.

1) Eh, sure.
2) Yes, because no one sold their souls for some wins in the 80s.
3) This is what is going to happen eventually. If ESPN is nice about it, there may even be soccer-style pro/rel to keep membership in the top league "open" in the most generic sense of the term.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Here’s some ideas:
A. Adopt an NFL scheduling approach. #1 Team from the previous year gets the hardest schedule & hardest road games. Worst team gets the easiest. You play in your conference just like now, but your out of conference schedule and locations are based on your previous year’s record. Maybe Bammer needs to go play on the road at Oh St & Oklahoma after they win a national championship for example? At home they get GT and La Monroe the SEC’s annual out of conference rival of choice.
B. Modify recruiting to make it like the draft. Top team from previous year gets a reduced number of new scholarship recruits that start school in that year only. If you lose due to academics or injury or go to the NFL or go to work for IBM you just have less guys from that year that can play. Give the teams with the worst records more scholarships for that year.
C. Have all the scholarship athletes take an academic SAT like test every year in math, sciences, literature, business, etc. Senior year tests are the hardest of course because by then you have been fully educated. Do above average, get more scholarships. Do worse than average, have scholarships taken away.
D. FCS Teams can have a 16 team playoff & they finish way before FBS. No reason why there can’t be a 32 team playoff. Each of the P5 conferences plus AAC gets 4 and the rest are at large with no more than 6 from any one conference, max of 3 in the home field bracket & 3 in the road warrior bracket. They could roll in the bowls & use those locations as neutral field venues in order to prevent upsetting the apple cart. That’s only 5 weeks to get thru the whole process.

Just some thoughts that will never happen because like the DC swamp, those with the money & power will hold onto what they got with every ounce of their energy regardless of how bad it is for anyone else.

 

[gtg936g]

My solution

Up player scholarships to 100.

Cap salaries to $10m per team for the entire football staff.

Deduct scholarships for the top 10 finishers each year for 2 years to balance the recruiting. Ex - team finishing #1 loses 20 scholarships/year for two years. Team finishing #2 loses 19... etc.

 

[wvGT11]

Great post, completely agree.
It seems like the most competitive games happen in the middle area that you mention. When I look at schools like Alabama , Clemson etc how is that even fun when every school you face on your schedule is almost like a cupcake team year after year. UGA is almost at that point now too. Play 12 games, one maybe hard one

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[Wreckaholic]

I'll play.

First- limit the number of staff. On field, recruiting, and support.

Second- fixed number of recruits you can sign. If player is suspended, arrested, etc they still count against the total scholarships in that time frame (ex 125 over 5 years). The only way a spot opens up is if a player goes Pro in good academic standing.

Third- if a player transfers then the scholarship can not be filled until the player is allowed to play in the new program. Cap number of transfers in given time frame that can still be used. Anything over the transfer cap can not be filled.

Fourth- Set an target spending amount, say average or median of all Power 5 conference schools. Programs that spend over this amount are subject to a "luxury tax" that is divided up among programs a certain percentage under the cap. This will include coaches & staff salaries, buildings, etc. Schools may receive an exception for a major renovation 1x per sport per X years.

Fifth- Implement a education standards test. Similar to ACT, etc. but will test on where Student Athletes are in their academic progress. If a SA doesnt meet the standard for their school year, then the school is required to keep them (as long as passing) on scholarship, but the player is not eligible to play until they have passed the test.

Sixth- Blow up the NCAA and make it a worthwhile organization.

 

[bobongo]

I'll play.

First- limit the number of staff. On field, recruiting, and support.

Second- fixed number of recruits you can sign. If player is suspended, arrested, etc they still count against the total scholarships in that time frame (ex 125 over 5 years). The only way a spot opens up is if a player goes Pro in good academic standing.

Third- if a player transfers then the scholarship can not be filled until the player is allowed to play in the new program. Cap number of transfers in given time frame that can still be used. Anything over the transfer cap can not be filled.

Fourth- Set an target spending amount, say average or median of all Power 5 conference schools. Programs that spend over this amount are subject to a "luxury tax" that is divided up among programs a certain percentage under the cap. This will include coaches & staff salaries, buildings, etc. Schools may receive an exception for a major renovation 1x per sport per X years.

Fifth- Implement a education standards test. Similar to ACT, etc. but will test on where Student Athletes are in their academic progress. If a SA doesnt meet the standard for their school year, then the school is required to keep them (as long as passing) on scholarship, but the player is not eligible to play until they have passed the test.

Sixth- Blow up the NCAA and make it a worthwhile organization.

Number six should come first. Without that numbers 1-5 aren't going to happen.

 

[Vespidae]

I agree that the NCAA is largely ... worthless. But the spread is getting wider and wider ... if they don't do something soon, it's going to be the same 8 teams every year.

 

[stech81]

Do what ESPN wants take the top 72 teams make them D 1 put them in 8 conferences with 12 teams each. must play each team. All other teams play D2 football. At the end of the year take the bottom 10 teams in D1 move them down the next year and take the top 10 D2 teams and move them to D1.
How would you decide the conferences by a draw every year. All Revenue divided equally.

 

[year_of_the_swarm]

Not seeing any talk of league alignments... Is it just impossible to go independent unless you are a huge national brand like BYU or Notre Dame? Seems to me like you could flip off the Alabamas, Ohio States, Floridas, and Oklahomas of the world by not playing by their rules. It has long been rumored that the conference leaders favor these programs over the less important ones. Whether that is true or not is not known to me. If I were your run of the mill program, I just wouldn't play them. Vanderbilt has lost their last 2 games against Alabama 100-0. Doesn't do your fans, your school, your coaches, etc any good for that to happen. I understand they are a great team, but they don't play by the same rules Vanderbilt does. Just like Clemson doesn't play by the same rules as Wake Forest or Georgia Tech.

College football "changed" in the late 90's, really 99 or 2000... And from there the current era began. This is when the Nebraska dynasty died, the BCS was created, and everyone started implementing the spread offense, and it has continued to morph from there.

8 teams have won it in the past 18 years.

1. Oklahoma
2. Miami
3. Ohio State
4. LSU
5. USC
6. Texas
7. Florida
8. LSU
9. Florida
10. Alabama
11. Auburn
12. Alabama
13. Alabama
14. Florida State
15. Ohio State
16. Alabama
17. Clemson
18. Alabama

When you look at the matchups for national championships since the BCS came around in 1998... you pretty much only see these teams. There is little to no others in there. Peyton Manning/Tennessee in 1998, Oregon played for one... but thats it.

So you have all these players.... all these programs.... all these fans... communities... money... etc. All seemingly in support of providing some sort of practice or different challenges in one way or another to these blue bloods on their way to the big game. For everyone else, they are trying to get to a bowl, hopefully win their division or something..

*Side Note* - What was Jimbo Fisher thinking leaving FSU for A&M. FSU is clearly a blue blood and A&M is not.

 

[GT_05]

Number of scholarships a school is able to offer is based off last year’s end-of-season ranking or, possibly, a moving average of the last four year’s end-of-season ranking.

For example, GT and all other unranked...85 scholarships. Bama ranked number 1...85-25=60 scholarships. Clemson ranked number 2...85-24=61 scholarships. UGA ranked number 3...85-23=62 scholarships, etc.

Of course, the formula could be somewhat different. The idea would be similar to the idea of draft order in the NFL draft, worst teams get more help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk