Here Is How I would Fix Football:

[BigRedAvenger]

You are missing this because you are looking at it wrong. First there are no built in advantages. There are 10 conferences and the standard conference schedule had been at 8 games for many years. A few years back.....three of the 10 conferences, by their own choosing, decided to switch to 9 game schedules. Its not the responsibility of the NCAA to tell the other 7 conferences they need to do it also. Even if the NCAA decided 9 would be the standard that doesn't prevent any conference from exceeding it and going to 10 like the did the last time. Does that mean that all the other conferences have to go to 10?

There are absolutely built in advantages. The number of conference games is not one of them, nor are the recruiting rules of various conferences. Those are artificial advantages created by each conference that has lead college football to the issues it is now facing.

 

[Hville]

There are absolutely built in advantages. The number of conference games is not one of them, nor are the recruiting rules of various conferences. Those are artificial advantages created by each conference that has lead college football to the issues it is now facing.

I disagree that it is built in advantages. It is built in disadvantages that they have done to themselves. You cannot blame the other 7 conferences for what these conferences have done to themselves. It is not he SEC's fault that the B1G is handing out 4 year scholarships when most of the conferences are doing yearly as required by the NCAA. Its built in disadvantages that those conferences have done to themselves.

 

[utsker]

8 team playoff. Conference champs get auto bids. You can't get into the playoffs if you don't belong to a conference or you lose your conference title game. If you play a lower division team after 1 october you are automatically barred from post season play.

 

[BigRedAvenger]

I disagree that it is built in advantages. It is built in disadvantages that they have done to themselves. You cannot blame the other 7 conferences for what these conferences have done to themselves. It is not he SEC's fault that the B1G is handing out 4 year scholarships when most of the conferences are doing yearly as required by the NCAA. Its built in disadvantages that those conferences have done to themselves.

The built in advantages that they enjoy have to do with their proximity to the best recruits in the country. Their respective conferences employ rules to enhance that built in advantage.

 

[Rednu]

I’m pretty sure fixing football put us in a place where football needs fixed.

 

[Hville]

The built in advantages that they enjoy have to do with their proximity to the best recruits in the country. Their respective conferences employ rules to enhance that built in advantage.

First of all geographical location is not a built in advantage. It is a consequence of where the talent exists. As far as conference rules enhancing that advantage please explain. Id like to know which NCAA rules conferences are choosing to break that gives them an advantage?

 

[BigRedAvenger]

First of all geographical location is not a built in advantage. It is a consequence of where the talent exists. As far as conference rules enhancing that advantage please explain. Id like to know which NCAA rules conferences are choosing to break that gives them an advantage?

Consequence of where talent exists = built in advantage.

As far as what rules they are breaking, they are not. They have different recruiting rules that allow them to take more recruits each year than other conferences. This has been covered multiple times on this site.

If they were breaking g rules we would be talking about a need for rule enforcement, not standardization.

 

[Hville]

Consequence of where talent exists = built in advantage.

As far as what rules they are breaking, they are not. They have different recruiting rules that allow them to take more recruits each year than other conferences. This has been covered multiple times on this site.

If they were breaking g rules we would be talking about a need for rule enforcement, not standardization.

built in refers to something that has humanly been put into the process. NCAA geographic advantages for recruiting have not been designed around the south. It just happens to be where they are. As for the recruiting rules. They don't have recruiting rules that allow them to take more recruits each year. Other conferences have recruiting rules that prevent it. That is not an NCAA problem if they are within the rules.

This standardization that you are speaking of is conferences choosing to go above the minimum rules. If the B1G chooses to require 4 year scholarships that is them creating an uneven playing field for their conference. That is on them. We can't choose to have stricter rules and then cry foul.

 

[BigRedAvenger]

built in refers to something that has humanly been put into the process. NCAA geographic advantages for recruiting have not been designed around the south. It just happens to be where they are. As for the recruiting rules. They don't have recruiting rules that allow them to take more recruits each year. Other conferences have recruiting rules that prevent it. That is not an NCAA problem if they are within the rules.

This standardization that you are speaking of is conferences choosing to go above the minimum rules. If the B1G chooses to require 4 year scholarships that is them creating an uneven playing field for their conference. That is on them. We can't choose to have stricter rules and then cry foul.

Built in is typically synonymous with inherent. Just pretend I used that term here so we can move on.

As for anyone crying foul, everyone is beging to cry foul at Alabama/Clemson part 17. Tomorrow nights ratings will be worse than last years; and they probably won’t get any better next year for Alabama/Clemson part 18.

 

[Hville]

Built in is typically synonymous with inherent. Just pretend I used that term here so we can move on.

As for anyone crying foul, everyone is beging to cry foul at Alabama/Clemson part 17. Tomorrow nights ratings will be worse than last years; and they probably won’t get any better next year for Alabama/Clemson part 18.

ratings might be down and they might be down next year but until someone steps up and beats them there isn't much anyone can do. It seems there are a lot of people wanting to change the system because of who is in. Right now it is probably as fair as it can get...…..the only way to keep those two out is to unfairly do it.

 

[BigRedAvenger]

ratings might be down and they might be down next year but until someone steps up and beats them there isn't much anyone can do. It seems there are a lot of people wanting to change the system because of who is in. Right now it is probably as fair as it can get...…..the only way to keep those two out is to unfairly do it.

It’s not because of who is in, it’s because of who is always in and why they are always in.

If you consider forcing everyone to play by the same rules as being unfair, I just don’t know what to tell you

 

[Hville]

It’s not because of who is in, it’s because of who is always in and why they are always in.

If you consider forcing everyone to play by the same rules as being unfair, I just don’t know what to tell you

Ok well this is just whining now with no substance. I have explained this to you many times. They are playing by the same rules. It is 2-3 conferences that choose to initiate rules within themselves that are stricter. That is by THEIR choice. Be mad at Delaney if you think it is unfair that we are playing 9 conference games or have to give 4 year scholarships. Just because some conferences initiate tougher standards does not mean the NCAA automatically has to make everyone do it. That would like being a business owner in town and you start paying $20 an hour when the competition only pays $10 an hour. And then whining that its unfair and you can't be as successful.

 

[BigRedAvenger]

Ok well this is just whining now with no substance. I have explained this to you many times. They are playing by the same rules. It is 2-3 conferences that choose to initiate rules within themselves that are stricter. That is by THEIR choice. Be mad at Delaney if you think it is unfair that we are playing 9 conference games or have to give 4 year scholarships. Just because some conferences initiate tougher standards does not mean the NCAA automatically has to make everyone do it. That would like being a business owner in town and you start paying $20 an hour when the competition only pays $10 an hour. And then whining that its unfair and you can't be as successful.

Or it would be like the NCAA limiting scholarships to 85 to level the field. Oh wait.

 

[anotherdumbprediction]

Too inbred if you are almost only playing conference games. There isn't enough out of conference play to find out which conferences are good and which aren't. Plus you give no opportunity for the G5 teams to create a better schedule. They only get to play one team against P5 and that is assuming P5 teams would even play them if they have historical rivalries like Iowa and Iowa State. Forcing teams into conferences wouldn't work. There is no reason they should have to join one of the messed up issues with college football. If everyone wants divisions do it like Nebraska high school football where districts and a point system are set up separately from conferences.

I either didn’t explain it clearly or you misread it. You start with conference games or one non-conference and then conference games. By that point, you have a good idea who the contenders are. There were only a handful or so P5 teams that went undefeated in conference or had one loss. You then create a Top 16 bracket and regional brackets for the latter part of the season (details in my initial post). The Top16 and regional brackets would have non P5 teams mixed with P5. If those non P5 teams win, they move up and play another good team. They would get their chance and if they won, they’d get another chance. You’d find out how good everyone is.

 

[Hville]

I either didn’t explain it clearly or you misread it. You start with conference games or one non-conference and then conference games. By that point, you have a good idea who the contenders are. There were only a handful or so P5 teams that went undefeated in conference or had one loss. You then create a Top 16 bracket and regional brackets for the latter part of the season (details in my initial post). The Top16 and regional brackets would have non P5 teams mixed with P5. If those non P5 teams win, they move up and play another good team. They would get their chance and if they won, they’d get another chance. You’d find out how good everyone is.

Ok well first of all you are proposing a lot of controversial things to get to the same position.
1. Starting with conference games isn't what most are going to like. Why would a non-conference game automatically mean more in November than it does in September?

2. Another big detractor is the number of games. You are now pushing the season out to 17 games for the top two teams. Up to 15 and 16 for many others. And you are proposing many of the games to be going during finals at school. That just isn't going to happen.

3. How would the regions be determined? Who would be assigned to them and how would that be determined? A selection committee? If geographical is it fair to have more top rated teams in a regional playoff in the Southeast rather than the Northwest or Southwest?

4. Would it really matter? At the end of the day its still Clemson and Alabama in there and people will be trying to create more scenarios to change that.

5. Travel. Yes they do do it in Basketball. But they are traveling to an event on short notice that lets them watch 3 different games instead of a single game.

6. Forcing teams into conferences. There is no reason teams should have to be in a conference. NCAA doesn't regulate conferences and any playoff or rules governing getting into a playoff should never be included in the selection process because the conferences aren't set up equally.

Sorry but the system is working as perfect as it can right now. Every scenario will have its issues but robbing Peter to pay Paul will still create the same issues with the same results.