Not Sure How to Feel About This....

[RocketDawg]

I don't have the data in front of me, but I'd guess that Bammmer loses more players to transfer than they receive...

That's because they have a whole cadre of 5* players that never get on the field. **

[RocketDawg]

I'll consider this stuff above board when every transfer stops ending up at 1 of about 5 schools.

We just got a couple of top women basketball players as transfers. Do you think hanky panky was involved, or was it because we have one of the Top 5 programs in the country, and probably the nicest and best to play for coaches? I can see a football player wanting to play at Alabama.

[ShotgunDawg]

You didn't answer my question, nor have you provided any substance that these "blue bloods" are being given a competitive advantage. You already have your mind made up that the system is rigged. You don't acknowledge other schools that have achieved success, instead only reinforce your belief that "blue bloods" are cheating the system without any repercussions.

While you are excellent at facilitating discussion within threads (which I'm pretty confident is your intent), rarely do you acknowledge when you've missed the mark by allowing your homerism to cloud your judgement.

You're kind of demanding and I don't have to answer your question.

That being said, there is no built in competitive advantage that they have. It's just the result that almost all of these guys, grad transfers included, end up at one of 5 schools.

[ShotgunDawg]

We just got a couple of top women basketball players as transfers. Do you think hanky panky was involved, or was it because we have one of the Top 5 programs in the country, and probably the nicest and best to play for coaches? I can see a football player wanting to play at Alabama.

I'm sure nobody is paying for women's basketball players. Would you have said the player was getting paid if he transferred to OM?

[TUSK]

You're kind of demanding and I don't have to answer your question.

That being said, there is no built in competitive advantage that they have. It's just the result that almost all of these guys, grad transfers included, end up at one of 5 schools.

1. Who are the “5 schools” and what percentage of transfers go to them?
2. Do you believe that Bammers transfers (out) are high and help other programs (& the Nola saints)?

[Gutter Cobreh]

Not exactly whining & crying. More discussing & questioning.

Do you not think these types of things should be discussed & questioned?

You're kind of demanding and I don't have to answer your question.

That being said, there is no built in competitive advantage that they have. It's just the result that almost all of these guys, grad transfers included, end up at one of 5 schools.

I hereby nominate Shotgun for greatest troll to ever grace this board... claims he wants discussion, but only "answers" questions that reinforce his juvenile mind.

I'm sure he won't see this reply because his daddy (C34) posted a new thread regarding the upcoming football season, so his attention has shifted to defending his honor.***

[Schultzy]

I've long been a proponent of a group of schools breaking off from the NCAA and self regulating...

What are y'all's thoughts on that?

By definition, the NCAA is the self regulating arm of the schools. So you?re really just creating a 2nd NCAA, which will always rely for its income on the schools it is policing.

This is why you get such tough rhetoric and perplexing rulings from them.

Also, the blue bloods need the lower tier programs, or they wouldn?t be blue bloods anymore.

[Dawg2003]

You didn't answer my question, nor have you provided any substance that these "blue bloods" are being given a competitive advantage. You already have your mind made up that the system is rigged. You don't acknowledge other schools that have achieved success, instead only reinforce your belief that "blue bloods" are cheating the system without any repercussions.

While you are excellent at facilitating discussion within threads (which I'm pretty confident is your intent), rarely do you acknowledge when you've missed the mark by allowing your homerism to cloud your judgement.

No one here can offer hard evidence recruits are payed. But you'd have to just be willfully blind not to know it happens. If OM was in as deep as they were, do you really think they were the only ones? If they could nearly pull off the apparatus they had, what do you think blue bloods could do? Football and men's basketball are what they are. I don't think it's whining. It's just stating the obvious.

[Pit Bull]

Seems like Florida or Auburn just recently got a big time transfer starter at LB from another P5 school. Within the last few days I believe. Think it was the Gators.

[sandwolf]

IMO the best thing that can happen is to limit scholarships to 70.

And hard cap recruiting classes at 20-22 signees. This would help a lot, but I doubt it ever happens.

[Gutter Cobreh]

No one here can offer hard evidence recruits are payed. But you'd have to just be willfully blind not to know it happens. If OM was in as deep as they were, do you really think they were the only ones? If they could nearly pull off the apparatus they had, what do you think blue bloods could do? Football and men's basketball are what they are. I don't think it's whining. It's just stating the obvious.

I'm not ignorant; I know it happens. My issue with this thread is the envy that the playing field in unfair and since a kid didn't choose us then we might as well forfeit the season. We've been beaten by Bama the last 10 years and they absolutely own the history between us (81-18), so when we have posters crying that things are unfair because they got a 5* transfer - my sympathy level is extremely low.

If we win on the field consistently over quite a few years, we can change the trajectory and discussion. Until that happens we shouldn't compare our recruiting to Bama. We're better comparing ourselves to UT, Ark, USCe. Not LSU, Bama, or UGA.

[ShotgunDawg]

I'm not ignorant; I know it happens. My issue with this thread is the envy that the playing field in unfair and since a kid didn't choose us then we might as well forfeit the season. We've been beaten by Bama the last 10 years and they absolutely own the history between us (81-18), so when we have posters crying that things are unfair because they got a 5* transfer - my sympathy level is extremely low.

If we win on the field consistently over quite a few years, we can change the trajectory and discussion. Until that happens we shouldn't compare our recruiting to Bama. We're better comparing ourselves to UT, Ark, USCe. Not LSU, Bama, or UGA.

Haven't they owned us because the rules allow them to hoard players that would start for other teams, not just including us?

Are you cool with those rules, or do you think college football would be better with just a hair of reform?

Not asking for handouts, but every sport in history has gradually evolved over time so that more teams, that are making an investment to win, actually have a reasonable chance within the rules to win, so long as they do things the right way. Should college football be different?

I mean, today a publication predicted Bama to win every game on their schedule by double digits. In what sports universe is that a good thing for the sport?

[Gutter Cobreh]

Haven't they owned us because the rules allow them to hoard players that would start for other teams, not just including us?

Are you cool with those rules, or do you think college football would be better with just a hair of reform?

Not asking for handouts, but every sport in history has gradually evolved over time so that more teams, that are making an investment to win, actually have a reasonable chance within the rules to win, so long as they do things the right way. Should college football be different?

I mean, today a publication predicted Bama to win every game on their schedule by double digits. In what sports universe is that a good thing for the sport?

Between 1958 - 1995 - they beat us 36 times and we beat them once!!! (One game they had to forfeit afterwards that isn't counted)

Have they been cheating that long, or were we simply not that good?

I don't care that they "hoard" players that could start elsewhere. Last time I checked, a kid could attend any school he chooses. Instead of worrying about the system, how about we try and figure out a better way to get kids to choose our school. I think we've done this over the last few years and shared revenue has helped us grow.

You don't want to acknowledge our cut of revenue we get from Bama when they make the playoff (which helps us tremendously), instead focusing on being jealous of where they are today. I want the SEC team to kick ass in every non-conference game they play in. Why - because the better bowl they attend the bigger the shared pot grows and the more money that comes back to us to continue to grow.

If those kids riding the pine at Bama we're starting for an ACC school, the better chance they have of improving their conference as a whole. The better another conference gets, the less total dollars the SEC teams share.

[ShotgunDawg]

Between 1958 - 1995 - they beat us 36 times and we beat them once!!! (One game they had to forfeit afterwards that isn't counted)

Have they been cheating that long, or were we simply not that good?

I don't care that they "hoard" players that could start elsewhere. Last time I checked, a kid could attend any school he chooses. Instead of worrying about the system, how about we try and figure out a better way to get kids to choose our school. I think we've done this over the last few years and shared revenue has helped us grow.

You don't want to acknowledge our cut of revenue we get from Bama when they make the playoff (which helps us tremendously), instead focusing on being jealous of where they are today. I want the SEC team to kick ass in every non-conference game they play in. Why - because the better bowl they attend the bigger the shared pot grows and the more money that comes back to us to continue to grow.

If those kids riding the pine at Bama we're starting for an ACC school, the better chance they have of improving their conference as a whole. The better another conference gets, the less total dollars the SEC teams share.

You make some good points about the financial side. Although I disagree with some of the other stuff, i respect that you have a solid opinion.

[BB30]

You make some good points about the financial side. Although I disagree with some of the other stuff, i respect that you have a solid opinion.

Bama is literally the only team that is heads and tails above the others. It does look like UGA is going to make that transition as well. Literally every other team has had up and down seasons and I suspect Bama will go back to being a team that will still compete for championships but not at the level they currently have been once Saban is gone. LSU has not been very good and they have as many if not more built in advantages as Bama. There is still a bunch of parody in the NCAA.

It seems like every thread you start you are asking/ stating that things aren't "fair". Why? Clemson has been extremely competitive and they historically haven't been a blue blood. Oregon had a run and they haven't always been a perennial power. It is possible for teams like state to make a jump. So I don't really see an issue with the way things are. It is just part of it. We aren't a blue blood but that doesn't mean we can't be competitive.

Again, it isn't the NCAA's job to make sure Mississippi State has a shot at a national title. And no organization owes "us" anything. Just enjoy the good years and get over the fact that Bama is going to get more blue chips than we are and they probably always will because as of now they are the more attractive option. Have you ever thought that maybe just maybe playing in front of 100,000 people and using facilities that are top 3 in the country might play a role in a kid wanting to transfer/sign there?

[Token Bammer]

Between 1958 - 1995 - they beat us 36 times and we beat them once!!! (One game they had to forfeit afterwards that isn't counted)

Have they been cheating that long, or were we simply not that good?

I don't care that they "hoard" players that could start elsewhere. Last time I checked, a kid could attend any school he chooses. Instead of worrying about the system, how about we try and figure out a better way to get kids to choose our school. I think we've done this over the last few years and shared revenue has helped us grow.

You don't want to acknowledge our cut of revenue we get from Bama when they make the playoff (which helps us tremendously), instead focusing on being jealous of where they are today. I want the SEC team to kick ass in every non-conference game they play in. Why - because the better bowl they attend the bigger the shared pot grows and the more money that comes back to us to continue to grow.

If those kids riding the pine at Bama we're starting for an ACC school, the better chance they have of improving their conference as a whole. The better another conference gets, the less total dollars the SEC teams share.

This....

Bama is literally the only team that is heads and tails above the others. It does look like UGA is going to make that transition as well. Literally every other team has had up and down seasons and I suspect Bama will go back to being a team that will still compete for championships but not at the level they currently have been once Saban is gone. LSU has not been very good and they have as many if not more built in advantages as Bama. There is still a bunch of parody in the NCAA.

It seems like every thread you start you are asking/ stating that things aren't "fair". Why? Clemson has been extremely competitive and they historically haven't been a blue blood. Oregon had a run and they haven't always been a perennial power. It is possible for teams like state to make a jump. So I don't really see an issue with the way things are. It is just part of it. We aren't a blue blood but that doesn't mean we can't be competitive.

Again, it isn't the NCAA's job to make sure Mississippi State has a shot at a national title. And no organization owes "us" anything. Just enjoy the good years and get over the fact that Bama is going to get more blue chips than we are and they probably always will because as of now they are the more attractive option. Have you ever thought that maybe just maybe playing in front of 100,000 people and using facilities that are top 3 in the country might play a role in a kid wanting to transfer/sign there?

And this.

Or, let's just socialize college football. That'll be fun.

[Ezsoil]

I wonder why is dad moved to Alabama?******

I believe he got a job at a Mercedes dealership.....owned by..........guess who

[TUSK]

I believe he got a job at a Mercedes dealership.....owned by..........guess who

"If you have facts about a violation, email compliance@Illuminati.REC. If not, please don't slander the young men."

[RocketDawg]

I'd like to see 5-6 12 team conferences and let that be it for the big boys. MSU included in that group. Self-regulating would be good for college baseball because it would do away with the 11.7 rule.

It wouldn't do away with Title IX though, which I suspect has some input to the 11.7 limitation.

[RocketDawg]

I believe he got a job at a Mercedes dealership.....owned by..........guess who

He's the new general manager. **