Restoring Parity to College Football

[Sooner 24]

It seems like you're arguing with yourself. He didn't say he was against decreasing scholarships at all. He said that increasing scholarships would keep the elite at the top even longer, and his reasoning is rational and sound.

GOOFA is gonna GOOFA

I almost forgot LOL

 

[wcbsas]

Actually your plan does exactly that. You have made it the major element of your plan by reducing the size of Division I FBS from the current 126 teams to 64 teams. You have reduced the conferences from 10 to 4 and you are requiring that major independents like Notre Dame, BYU and ARMY join a conference. Last but not least you are eliminating traditional rivalry games between teams that don't make the cut into a power 4 conference. Most notably would be anyone that plays a service academy or traditional regional games like Northern Iowa getting to play Iowa State every year.

Last but not least you are empowering the NCAA even more by allowing them to set rules on the conference development and scheduling. That would be the next step towards a college football TV contract whereas all TV money would be distributed equally. Do you really want your Nebraska TV money being distributed to Boston College or Vanderbilt? Nobody is in favor of the NCAA having this kind of control in College football. This is why forum posters don't make major college football decisions.

I disagree ... please provide an example of a traditional rivalry game that would be eliminated?
The current rivalry games - Minnesota/Wisconsin, Michigan/tOSU, Texas/Oklahoma, Auburn/Alabama, Georgia/Florida would all continue.

I believe that Army, Navy and Air Force could somehow get into that group of 64.

Northern Iowa and Iowa is a football rivalry? Seriously? That is not a rivalry ... not by anyone outside of Cedar Falls Iowa. Iowa's rival is ISU or Nebraska not UNI. :O O: If Nebraska-Oklahoma can go away - I see no reason why Iowa-UNI should stay! Besides getting UNI off of Iowa's schedule and forcing them to play another P5 team like Kansas or Oklahoma State would beef up their schedule and settle some of the disparities that uneven scheduling creates.

TV money is settled currently by conference ... and in my view would remain there. NU's TV money is currently going to Maryland and Indiana and Rutgers BTW. Also I could conceive of a scenario where the P5 conferences (for football) form their own governing commission in lieu of the NCAA to handle all things football.

 

[Hville]

I disagree ... please provide an example of a traditional rivalry game that would be eliminated?
The current rivalry games - Minnesota/Wisconsin, Michigan/tOSU, Texas/Oklahoma, Auburn/Alabama, Georgia/Florida would all continue. These are your opinions of rivalry games. Because Nebraska doesn't have an instate rivalry game with a non-P5 school you don't understand it. But to some schools......Northern Iowa/Iowa State. There are many other schools out there that play annual regional match up games that aren't P5 matchups.

I believe that Army, Navy and Air Force could somehow get into that group of 64. There are presently 64 teams in P5 and we need to add BYU and Notre Dame. Who do you propose kicking out of present P5 schools to let the academies in and why should they get in before Cincinnati, Memphis, UCF, USF, Boise State or any number of schools that have higher attendance averages.


TV money is settled currently by conference ... and in my view would remain there. NU's TV money is currently going to Maryland and Indiana and Rutgers BTW. Also I could conceive of a scenario where the P5 conferences (for football) form their own governing commission in lieu of the NCAA to handle all things football. Why would they separate from the NCAA? They created the NCAA to regulate them. The NCAA is not the enemy of these schools. They represent the governing body of these schools.

 

[Trapped in Iowa]

I think increasing/ decreasing is meaningless. Make all scholarships 4 years. That way teams have to live with recruiting misses instead of turning over the roster every 3 years and pushing misses out. the limit is 85 and yet teams routinely recruit 100 players or more in every 4 year cycle.

 

[wcbsas]

@Hville

I disagree ... please provide an example of a traditional rivalry game that would be eliminated?
The current rivalry games - Minnesota/Wisconsin, Michigan/tOSU, Texas/Oklahoma, Auburn/Alabama, Georgia/Florida would all continue. These are your opinions of rivalry games. Because Nebraska doesn't have an instate rivalry game with a non-P5 school you don't understand it. But to some schools......Northern Iowa/Iowa State. There are many other schools out there that play annual regional match up games that aren't P5 matchups. Honestly this response is silly ... yes sure there is a handful of people who might miss a Northern Iowa versus Iowa match-up but (1) if NU-OU can go away for the sake of greater riches/stability/whatever reason you can make up ... then in the grand scale of things UNI/UI can go bye-bye too ... or ... (2) and if this is such a big thing then allow ONE of the 3 non-conference games to be a non-P5 matchup ... there your complaint is solved!

But seriously give me a list of 10 rivalry games that are not current P5 match-ups ... I want to see the games that you think are too important to lose.

I believe that Army, Navy and Air Force could somehow get into that group of 64. There are presently 64 teams in P5 and we need to add BYU and Notre Dame. Who do you propose kicking out of present P5 schools to let the academies in and why should they get in before Cincinnati, Memphis, UCF, USF, Boise State or any number of schools that have higher attendance averages. I mis-spoke on my 4 conferences with 16 teams ... I meant to say keep the current 5 conferences (B1G, B12, PAC12, SEC and ACC) ... expand those 5 conferences to 16 teams each. That would allow for 80 teams (5 times 16) into a new P5 league. There are currently 65 teams in those 5 conferences including Notre Dame. That leaves 15 additions into this new league ... BYU, 3 service academies, Cincy, Memphis, UCF, USF, Boise, East Carolina, SDSU plus 4 others! The team with the most attendance not included in the list above would be Fresno State followed by Temple at 30300/game good for #73 overall.


TV money is settled currently by conference ... and in my view would remain there. NU's TV money is currently going to Maryland and Indiana and Rutgers BTW. Also I could conceive of a scenario where the P5 conferences (for football) form their own governing commission in lieu of the NCAA to handle all things football. Why would they separate from the NCAA? They created the NCAA to regulate them. The NCAA is not the enemy of these schools. They represent the governing body of these schools. There is already a movement afoot to separate from the NCAA because of a desire by the big schools to protect their revenues while allowing for things like replay and player compensation that non-P5 cannot afford and are resisting.

 

[Mentally Red]

I don't know why we aren't doing this as well.

I think we have, haven't we?

 

[huskermike]

Parity smarity...I just want to see the HUSKERS winning 9 or more games every season again...competing for, & winning, conference championships along with competing for, & winning, National championships.

 

[SoTexHusker]

There has never been parity in College sports.

Go back to any decade and you see some shuffling, but mainly the same 8-10 blue bloods winning.

All you can try to do is be in the blue blood and ride the train as long as you can.

Nebraska from 60's to 90's. I just hope that train gets rolling so I can live it again

 

[wcbsas]

There has never been parity in College sports.

Go back to any decade and you see some shuffling, but mainly the same 8-10 blue bloods winning.

All you can try to do is be in the blue blood and ride the train as long as you can.

Nebraska from 60's to 90's. I just hope that train gets rolling so I can live it again

Not asking for NFL-style parity where anyone can go from out of the playoffs in one year to in the playoffs the next.

But there has not ever been the extreme elite-ness that there is currently. Next years CFB playoff will be Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State and one other team (probably an SEC team). I'd be willing to bet that right now with a high probability of being right.

There has NOT ever been a 4-team playoff without Alabama or Clemson in the bracket. Alabama has been in every one except this past season when another SEC West team took their place. In the 6 year history of the 4-team playoff (24 selections) - Alabama, Clemson and Ohio State comprise 13 of those spots. Throw Oklahoma in with 4 selections ... and only 7 other teams in 6 years have played in the CFB playoff.

Attendance is down, TV viewing is down because IMO - in large part people are tired of seeing the same teams over and over and over again. And it is not due to those teams just being better it is due to uneven scheduling (8 vs 9 conference games), soft non-conference scheduling (directional universities), SEC bias ...

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

I was nodding along until you got to this part....

And it is not due to those teams just being better it is due to uneven scheduling (8 vs 9 conference games), soft non-conference scheduling (directional universities), SEC bias ...

Alabama and Clemson have clearly been at a level above everybody else for the past 5 years. Even elite teams lose games they shouldn't, and even elite teams suffer from semi-crippling injuries, so they still occasionally lose a game, but nobody else has been consistently at their level. Alabama lost its best LB before the season started, suffered some more key injuries on the defensive side, lost its Heisman-caliber QB mid-season, yet still were only a bad call (Auburn) and another couple plays (LSU) away from being undefeated yet again. LSU and Ohio State were at their level this year, but neither was last year, and LSU won't be next year. That's how I see it. Scheduling certainly helps Clemson, fwiw.

 

[HuskerNash]

I was nodding along until you got to this part....



Alabama and Clemson have clearly been at a level above everybody else for the past 5 years. Even elite teams lose games they shouldn't, and even elite teams suffer from semi-crippling injuries, so they still occasionally lose a game, but nobody else has been consistently at their level. Alabama lost its best LB before the season started, suffered some more key injuries on the defensive side, lost its Heisman-caliber QB mid-season, yet still were only a bad call (Auburn) and another couple plays (LSU) away from being undefeated yet again. LSU and Ohio State were at their level this year, but neither was last year, and LSU won't be next year. That's how I see it. Scheduling certainly helps Clemson, fwiw.

I agree with everything you are saying. Alabama and Clemson have been the best of the best during the playoff era with Ohio State and Oklahoma a distant 3rd and 4th. I can get on board with the SEC being a bit over hyped but they are generally the best conference in all of football. I think the conference was down some the last couple of years and wasn't swooning over this years bowl record like many were. If you looked at those matchups you would have figured they would have won most of them.

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

I agree with everything you are saying. Alabama and Clemson have been the best of the best during the playoff era with Ohio State and Oklahoma a distant 3rd and 4th. I can get on board with the SEC being a bit over hyped but they are generally the best conference in all of football. I think the conference was down some the last couple of years and wasn't swooning over this years bowl record like many were. If you looked at those matchups you would have figured they would have won most of them.

Agreed with all of this. The bowl records head-to-head were even less compelling as a case for the SEC because Indiana peed away a win over Tennessee, Michigan didn't show up for a 2nd half against a much better 'Bama team, and Minnesota man-handled what was supposed to be the best run defense in the SEC. If you tinkered with the match-ups, it wouldn't have been hard to create a realistic shot at the B1G having gone undefeated in their bowl games:

1. If OSU was ranked #1, they would have drilled Oklahoma and would have matched up much better against LSU in the NC game.
2. Michigan State, Illinois, and Indiana were probably the worst B1G bowl teams, so let Michigan State still beat Wake Forest, but how different is the perception if Illinois knocks off USC--with whom they would have actually matched up very well--and Indian beats Memphis, against whom they also would have matched up well.
3. Cal wasn't a good team, but they matched up well against Illinois, so let's have Michigan pummel them so that Harbaugh could finally win a bowl game.
4. Penn State would have created some problems offensively for Alabama, and I think that their defense shuts down 'Bama's offense, but this is the game that should have been the toughest matchup of my hypothetical B1G bowl games.
5. I'm leaving Wisconsin against Oregon, but let's move it to some other bowl site since the Rose Bowl is apparently kryptonite to Wisconsin.
6. Minnesota vs Auburn should not change at all.
7. Let Iowa pummel Tennessee anywhere they like, preferably in the heart of SEC country.

Those games wouldn't be slam-dunks, but the B1G would win almost all, and they'd definitely win the ones where they'd be favored to win.

 

[wcbsas]

Agreed with all of this. The bowl records head-to-head were even less compelling as a case for the SEC because Indiana peed away a win over Tennessee, Michigan didn't show up for a 2nd half against a much better 'Bama team, and Minnesota man-handled what was supposed to be the best run defense in the SEC. If you tinkered with the match-ups, it wouldn't have been hard to create a realistic shot at the B1G having gone undefeated in their bowl games:

1. If OSU was ranked #1, they would have drilled Oklahoma and would have matched up much better against LSU in the NC game.
2. Michigan State, Illinois, and Indiana were probably the worst B1G bowl teams, so let Michigan State still beat Wake Forest, but how different is the perception if Illinois knocks off USC--with whom they would have actually matched up very well--and Indian beats Memphis, against whom they also would have matched up well.
3. Cal wasn't a good team, but they matched up well against Illinois, so let's have Michigan pummel them so that Harbaugh could finally win a bowl game.
4. Penn State would have created some problems offensively for Alabama, and I think that their defense shuts down 'Bama's offense, but this is the game that should have been the toughest matchup of my hypothetical B1G bowl games.
5. I'm leaving Wisconsin against Oregon, but let's move it to some other bowl site since the Rose Bowl is apparently kryptonite to Wisconsin.
6. Minnesota vs Auburn should not change at all.
7. Let Iowa pummel Tennessee anywhere they like, preferably in the heart of SEC country.

Those games wouldn't be slam-dunks, but the B1G would win almost all, and they'd definitely win the ones where they'd be favored to win.

Bowl games are a bad barometer for conference strength … un-even matchups due to a conference getting a playoff team or two. The significant time off. A team's motivation or lack thereof. Players who don't play to protect or begin their NFL career. All factors into how conferences perform.

Comparing conferences to each other based on bowl performance can be tricky!

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

Bowl games are a bad barometer for conference strength … un-even matchups due to a conference getting a playoff team or two. The significant time off. A team's motivation or lack thereof. Players who don't play to protect or begin their NFL career. All factors into how conferences perform.

Comparing conferences to each other based on bowl performance can be tricky!

I agree that it's tricky, but it is enlightening. Wasn't it somewhat enlightening about the two conferences to see what Iowa did to USC and what Minnesota did to Auburn? We learned that the team that was clearly the best in the PAC needed a lot of turnovers and some questionable calls to beat a Wisconsin team that was clearly worse than Ohio State and (by the end of the year) very much in the mix of a whole knot of B1G teams--including Penn State, Iowa, Minnesota, and Michigan--for who should have been ranked the second best team. I think that Oregon would have struggled to beat any of those teams in the Rose Bowl.

The overall conference bowl records told us very little.