How Many More Titles Can Bama Win Before The NCAA Makes Rule Changes?

[ShotgunDawg]

Well, they've already changed the post season from the 2 team BCS format to a 4 team playoff. It's my opinion that was done to prevent an All-SEC final. When "they" went to 4 teams bc of all the crying, I was steadily smiling. All that was going to do was INCREASE the odds of an All-SEC final. And if/when "they" go to 8 teams (bc of all the crying), I will smile even bigger and then retroactively claim the 2010 NC.

The dynasty will die, they all do... will it be 3 years? 5? I dunno, but it will croak.

Scholarship Reductions? That would help, but it probably wouldn't mitigate much of the disparity between the current Ohio States, Alabamas, Clemsons, etc and the others. Those schools would probably see their actual "average recruit ranking" increase, but depth would be negatively impacted. I don't think Bammer would have stood a snowball's chance in hell of going 13-1 this past season with all the injuries if the scholarship numbers were drastically lower. Conversely, non "blue blood" programs would have almost zero margin of error, as well. Adding MORE playoff teams would help bigtime programs, IMO.

Ncaa HS player draft? No.

Now, what would be effective?

1) Have ONLY conference champs eligible for the playoffs. And, as soon as that happens, an MSU, USCe, or Iowa (historical type team) will go 11-1 in the regular season with a decent SOS and victory margin only to lose on a blocked punt for a TD as time expires to their eventual conference champ. Then, the aforementioned team (prolly ranked in the Top 5), would get supplanted in the playoffs by a #18 UCF (12-0) with an SOS of 854...

2) Put a quota on the number of times one can go to the playoffs. Yeah, unless I see the modern day equivalent of a Soviet T-72 Tank rolling down my driveway, that ain't happenin'...

3) Create a separate "league". Perhaps with an NFL affiliation (I dunno). Just spitballin', here:

SEC - Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Tennessee?
PAC - USC, Oregon
B1G - OSU, Michigan, PSU, Wisky?
B12 - Oklahoma, Texas, TCU?
ACC - Miami, Clemson, FSU, VT?
Ind - ND

4) Or, we can just wait.

Sorry for the atypically long winded post... I ain't goin' outside today, so yall are stuck with me allllllll day...

None of your answers help MSU in any way. Sorry try again

I?ll stick with my idea about players getting a 1 time immediately eligible transfer if they don?t play 35% or greater snaps after their 2nd or 3rd year on campus

My issue with Bama has never been the starters. It’s the 4 & 5 star guys on the bench that don’t play that could be starting or in the 2 deep for 2nd tier schools that bother me.

Allow a redistribution of the talent and I think you see a more even playing field even though Bama would technically still be the best team.

[TUSK]

None of your answers help MSU in any way. Sorry try again

I?ll stick with my idea about players getting a 1 time immediately eligible transfer if they don?t play 35% or greater snaps after their 2nd or 3rd year on campus

My issue with Bama has never been the starters. It’s the 4 & 5 star guys on the bench that don’t play that could be starting or in the 2 deep for 2nd tier schools that bother me.

Allow a redistribution of the talent and I think you see a more even playing field even though Bama would technically still be the best team.

That would work. What do you think would be the best method?

Post signing period, MSU could pick 1 recruit each off of Ohio State, Bama, etc? Also, would the players be allowed to be redistributed a 2nd or 3rd time in order to be fair to 3rd tier teams? e.g. MSU gets Shavers from Alabama because they need a WR; Can USM take Shavers from USM bc they need a WR? Or can USM grab Simmons from MSU because they want a DL?

Additionally, Bammer has guys that could start most anywhere, immediately, but are willing to wait a year or two (and, sometimes, 3)... should the athlete's desires be taken into account, or should he be forced to be "redistributed" against his will?

I think a more fair thing would be to just reduce scholarship limits for the Alabama's and the Ohio State's while increasing limits for others... not that that's "fair"...

As far as transfer go, I'm cool with them goin' anywhere they like and NOT sitting out... Players transferring out actually helps Bama, IMO...

[Tbonewannabe]

That would work. What do you think would be the best method?

Post signing period, MSU could pick 1 recruit each off of Ohio State, Bama, etc? Also, would the players be allowed to be redistributed a 2nd or 3rd time in order to be fair to 3rd tier teams? e.g. MSU gets Shavers from Alabama because they need a WR; Can USM take Shavers from USM bc they need a WR? Or can USM grab Simmons from MSU because they want a DL?

Additionally, Bammer has guys that could start most anywhere, immediately, but are willing to wait a year or two (and, sometimes, 3)... should the athlete's desires be taken into account, or should he be forced to be "redistributed" against his will?

I think a more fair thing would be to just reduce scholarship limits for the Alabama's and the Ohio State's while increasing limits for others... not that that's "fair"...

As far as transfer go, I'm cool with them goin' anywhere they like and NOT sitting out... Players transferring out actually helps Bama, IMO...

The only way to "redistribute" athletes is to maybe allow transfers without sitting out from any team that made the playoff or in the top ten. It gives someone like Jalen Hurts the ability to go somewhere else without losing a year. It also gives Bama the ability to sign 25 every year without having to put guys on "medical waiver" so they can still pursue a football career.

At the end of the day, Saban will eventually retire and Bama will take a step back. The only real rule I would like to see is the support staff get limited. Even Bama having former players on their scout team should count as support staff the same way as Boobie Dixon should count for us. I don't blame Saban for doing all of this because there isn't a rule against it.

[ShotgunDawg]

That would work. What do you think would be the best method?

Post signing period, MSU could pick 1 recruit each off of Ohio State, Bama, etc? Also, would the players be allowed to be redistributed a 2nd or 3rd time in order to be fair to 3rd tier teams? e.g. MSU gets Shavers from Alabama because they need a WR; Can USM take Shavers from USM bc they need a WR? Or can USM grab Simmons from MSU because they want a DL?

Additionally, Bammer has guys that could start most anywhere, immediately, but are willing to wait a year or two (and, sometimes, 3)... should the athlete's desires be taken into account, or should he be forced to be "redistributed" against his will?

I think a more fair thing would be to just reduce scholarship limits for the Alabama's and the Ohio State's while increasing limits for others... not that that's "fair"...

As far as transfer go, I'm cool with them goin' anywhere they like and NOT sitting out... Players transferring out actually helps Bama, IMO...

It’s up to the players if they want to transfer. Schools don’t get to pick anyone.

I used the 35% of snaps qualifier to ensure that players are transferring to better their career and not to chase a ring. Then it would be their decision if they want to transfer. A player that plays 5 snaps all year doesn’t have to go anywhere. He can stay at Bama but would have the option of immediate transfer if he wanted.

I don’t see why Bama fans would be against this. The only players that would be leaving aren’t ones that are actually playing for them?

Your response made it seem like my idea was joke or as if you didn’t understand it. Does this proposal scare you? Again, none of the players that actually play a significantly amount of snaps for you would be eligible transfer.

It’s a win/win. What’s the issue?

[Tbonewannabe]

It’s up to the players if they want to transfer. Schools don’t get to pick anyone.

I used the 35% of snaps qualifier to ensure that players are transferring to better their career and not to chase a ring. Then it would be their decision if they want to transfer. A player that plays 5 snaps all year doesn’t have to go anywhere. He can stay at Bama but would have the option of immediate transfer if he wanted.

I don’t see why Bama fans would be against this. The only players that would be leaving aren’t ones that are actually playing for them?

Your response made it seem like my idea was joke or as if you didn’t understand it. Does this proposal scare you? Again, none of the players that actually play a significantly amount of snaps for you would be eligible transfer.

It’s a win/win. What’s the issue?

This is probably the best I have seen as far as transferring goes. It would have to be enough to prevent losing the 2nd string depth that plays a good amount of snaps. I think you hit upon a good idea.

[TUSK]

It’s up to the players if they want to transfer. Schools don’t get to pick anyone.

I used the 35% of snaps qualifier to ensure that players are transferring to better their career and not to chase a ring. Then it would be their decision if they want to transfer. A player that plays 5 snaps all year doesn’t have to go anywhere. He can stay at Bama but would have the option of immediate transfer if he wanted.

I don’t see why Bama fans would be against this. The only players that would be leaving aren’t ones that are actually playing for them?

Your response made it seem like my idea was joke or as if you didn’t understand it. Does this proposal scare you? Again, none of the players that actually play a significantly amount of snaps for you would be eligible transfer.

It’s a win/win. What’s the issue?

Not at all... In fact, I'd love to free up scholarships by culling players that aren't good enough to contribute... It happens a BUNCH, now... I'm all for anything that makes that easier, and, in turn, makes Bammer better.

[ShotgunDawg]

Not at all... In fact, I'd love to free up scholarships by culling players that aren't good enough to contribute... It happens a BUNCH, now... I'm all for anything that makes that easier, and, in turn, makes Bammer better.

Deal then. It’s a win/win for everyone.

Let’s call the NCAA and get this done.

[TUSK]

Deal then. It’s a win/win for everyone.

Let’s call the NCAA and get this done.

I'll talk to my people at the REC.... We're building a Nick Saban snowman later today.*

[Token Bammer]

None of your answers help MSU in any way. Sorry try again

I?ll stick with my idea about players getting a 1 time immediately eligible transfer if they don?t play 35% or greater snaps after their 2nd or 3rd year on campus

My issue with Bama has never been the starters. It?s the 4 & 5 star guys on the bench that don?t play that could be starting or in the 2 deep for 2nd tier schools that bother me.

Allow a redistribution of the talent and I think you see a more even playing field even though Bama would technically still be the best team.

So your issue with BAMA is their freedom to recruit good players, and those good players freedom to come in and compete for a job with other good players, but likely having to wait their turn? Your proposal doesn't sound anything like college football, or even America.

Welcome to the dictatorship of ShotgonDawg. Now stand in line for a week for your single roll of toilet paper and moldy bread.

When players come to BAMA they know what they are getting. They get a chance to play for a championship, a chance to compete for playing time, and the best program in college football for putting players in the league. A chance...that's all they get at BAMA. The rest is up to them.

Again, players like Knott and Lashley know what they are getting themselves into when they sign with BAMA. Over the last 10 years, many players have waited until their junior or senior years to be full time starters at BAMA and been drafted in the first two rounds. It's part of it. Neither Lashley nor Knott's career at Alabama is over, but likely rather just beginning.

[TUSK]

So your issue with BAMA is their freedom to recruit good players, and those good players freedom to come in and compete for a job with other good players, but likely having to wait their turn? Your proposal doesn't sound anything like college football, or even America.

Welcome to the dictatorship of ShotgonDawg. Now stand in line for a week for your single roll of toilet paper and moldy bread.

When players come to BAMA they know what they are getting. They get a chance to play for a championship, a chance to compete for playing time, and the best program in college football for putting players in the league. A chance...that's all they get at BAMA. The rest is up to them.

Again, players like Knott and Lashley know what they are getting themselves into when they sign with BAMA. Over the last 10 years, many players have waited until their junior or senior years to be full time starters at BAMA and been drafted in the first two rounds. It's part of it. Neither Lashley nor Knott's career at Alabama is over, but likely rather just beginning.

You betta be careful, Comrade... You might get sent off for "reeducation"...