I would love for this to be the gold standard in NCAA football rules.

Every school should be guaranteed two 5* players, 1 on offense and 1 on defense and the school decides what position they want. Next, each school gets four 4* guys with 2 on offense and 2 on defense and they get to choose the positions the 4* guys play. Then you finish the team out with two * and 3* guys and your success really comes down to coaching, player evaluation and development. Injuries as they do now would play a huge roll because of depth. Dan Mullen would be hard to beat. But parity would be great and really fun. Your thoughts? I know there aren't enough 5* and 4* players to go around. No I wasn't trying to practice socialism. I just thought how it might be fun and I was really trying to add to the strength of what Dan is doing. I know, too much time on my hands but I'm totally disabled and I have a little time to sit around and come up with crazy thoughts like this. Wasn't trying to do anything but getting others idea of mine, and I got it! thanks.

arent there only about 40 or so 5-star players per year?

There aren?t 260 5-stars.

I hate the idea of kids getting drafted or whatever. Every kid should be free to choose their own school as long as that school will have them

ETA... if rosters were all equal though, Mullen would be hell

parity gets coaches fired. Ask Butch Jones, Kevin Sumlin, and Les Miles

In the middle of one of our better seasons we have posters on multiple boards asking for college football socialism to help us compete. Newsflash we’re on the road to competing on our own merit and do not need upward college football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bodaski

Every school should be guaranteed two 5* players, 1 on offense and 1 on defense and the school decides what position they want. Next, each school gets four 4* guys with 2 on offense and 2 on defense and they get to choose the positions the 4* guys play. Then you finish the team out with two * and 3* guys and your success really comes down to coaching, player evaluation and development. Injuries as they do now would play a huge roll because of depth. Dan Mullen would be hard to beat. But parity would be great and really fun. Your thoughts?

---

You serious? Who would enforce these rules? You're basically taking away the recruit's ability to choose where he wants to go to school. This is borderline dumb.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bodaski

Every school should be guaranteed two 5* players, 1 on offense and 1 on defense and the school decides what position they want. Next, each school gets four 4* guys with 2 on offense and 2 on defense and they get to choose the positions the 4* guys play. Then you finish the team out with two * and 3* guys and your success really comes down to coaching, player evaluation and development. Injuries as they do now would play a huge roll because of depth. Dan Mullen would be hard to beat. But parity would be great and really fun. Your thoughts?

---

I think it would certainly increase parity, however:
1) there are a finite # of 5 stars ea yr (50, I think).
2) we (currently) live in a (mostly) non-socialists/communist country.

Then you would have the rating services being paid under the table to down grade this 5-star to a 4-star so he won't count against someone's quota.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadDawg

Then you would have the rating services being paid under the table to down grade this 5-star to a 4-star so he won't count against someone's quota.

---

The only redeeming part of this thread is the slight chuckle at thinking about the recruiting services flipping, where all the sudden committing to Bama results in reducing your stars and committing to MSU bumps your stars up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnson85

The only redeeming part of this thread is the slight chuckle at thinking about the recruiting services flipping, where all the sudden committing to Bama results in reducing your stars and committing to MSU bumps your stars up.

---

“Bama plunges to 128th - 27 signees & 32 points, overall “

Someone on this thread is teetering close to socialism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shake 'n Bake

In the middle of one of our better seasons we have posters on multiple boards asking for college football socialism to help us compete. Newsflash we’re on the road to competing on our own merit and do not need upward college football.

---

Yep. When you already are upping your recruiting profile and THEN you give Bama all they want for four quarters that tends to bring in some recruits.

Our recruiting woes for a SEC school are about to be eased for a few years.

Every team gets $1 mil a year to spend on their recruiting class. (This number could fluctuate)

Spend it how you want.

If U Memphis wants to pay a 5 star 700K & only have 300k left for their other 24 players, then so be it.

That's an average of 40K per player in a 25 man recruiting class. If you feel the player is more important than 40K, offer him more.

This would create a salary cap situation & create parity without having to have a draft or have an independent service rate players. Problem solved

Does everyone get a trophy too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reason2succeed

Someone on this thread is teetering close to socialism.

---

I disagree with all out socialism, but I do think the sport would benefit by there being more good games & a reasonable path for well run programs & schools to build championship caliber programs without cheating or the all out threat of their coach leaving. I mean, Alabama hasn't lost an SEC football game in over 2 years. Regardless of how good your coach is or program is, that reeks of a non-competitive format, which is bad for the sport.

I don't have an issue with Bama & the same other teams winning most years, but I do think by creating somewhat of a ceiling & floor of power 5 talent levels, the actual games would be more competitive & compelling to go along with different story lines each year.

I have no issue with Bama having the best starting lineup in the college football. They have earned that. What I do think could be adjusted is that they shouldn't have so much talent that they have 4 & 5 star players sitting the bench & not playing. It would be better for the sport if that wasn't the case & also better for those players.

I think where this argument typically goes to hell, is that people try to make it an all-out socialism vs completely free market structure. However, I truly believe there are answers somewhere in the middle that can allow the most committed to schools to have the best chance of winning while also offering hope to those that are committed but don't have the tradition to get over the hump.

This thread is beyond ridiculous. So I guess we should share our baseball studs too? Just stupid. Life isn't fair. Put your big boy pants on, deal w it or don't ****ing play. Bunch of wusses or socialist. Either way this is for losers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homedawg

This thread is beyond ridiculous. So I guess we should share our baseball studs too? Just stupid. Life isn't fair. Put your big boy pants on, deal w it or don't ****ing play. Bunch of wusses or socialist. Either way this is for losers.

---

Baseball is actually already shared. It's how Coastal Carolina can win a natty.

The 11.7 + the MLB absolutely levels out baseball.

I’m sure Coastal Carolina was loaded with 5 Stars. Where’s my trophy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

parity gets coaches fired. Ask Butch Jones, Kevin Sumlin, and Les Miles

---

I think poor coaching gets you fired. Having success with parity requires excellent coaching. What's the ole saying, great players make great coaches and great coaches make average players better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg

I’m sure Coastal Carolina was loaded with 5 Stars. Where’s my trophy?

---

I wish baseball was uneven like football.

MSU would easily have a couple of nattys by now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg

I wish baseball was uneven like football.

MSU would easily have a couple of nattys by now

---

It isn’t. It’s just different teams than in football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg

It isn’t. It’s just different teams than in football.

---

That's not true.

Coastal Carolina, Fresno State, Cal State Fullerton, etc have all won national titles in recent times. Sure Florida, Vandy, LSU, etc have advantages & are usually better than those teams that have won it, but baseball offers most teams at least a punchers chance if they care about the sport.

The same isn't true in football.

Maybe at the end of the year, the NCAA could retroactively make everyone's record 6-6?*

Sounds like you just defined a professional football league to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleepy dawg

Sounds like you just defined a professional football league to me.

---

Pro leagues are too socialistic for me.

I like upsets, under dogs, & evil empires. I don't want socialism. I just want competitive games in which the SEC team on the other side has a realistic chance of winning. I don't want monopolies &, currently, a few schools in the country have a practical monopoly over the high 4 star & 5 star recruiting market

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg

Pro leagues are too socialistic for me.

I like upsets, under dogs, & evil empires. I don't want socialism. I just want competitive games in which the SEC team on the other side has a realistic chance of winning. I don't want monopolies &, currently, a few schools in the country have a practical monopoly over the high 4 star & 5 star recruiting market

---

I'm all in for that... About 4 years after MDL retires...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bodaski

Every school should be guaranteed two 5* players, 1 on offense and 1 on defense and the school decides what position they want. Next, each school gets four 4* guys with 2 on offense and 2 on defense and they get to choose the positions the 4* guys play. Then you finish the team out with two * and 3* guys and your success really comes down to coaching, player evaluation and development. Injuries as they do now would play a huge roll because of depth. Dan Mullen would be hard to beat. But parity would be great and really fun. Your thoughts? I know there aren't enough 5* and 4* players to go around. No I wasn't trying to practice socialism. I just thought how it might be fun and I was really trying to add to the strength of what Dan is doing. I know, too much time on my hands but I'm totally disabled and I have a little time to sit around and come up with crazy thoughts like this. Wasn't trying to do anything but getting others idea of mine, and I got it! thanks.

---

Who decides which are 5 stars? Plus that's nothing but plain and simple old fashioned communism.

Happens every time them dancers start poon tanging around with those show folk fags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bodaski

Every school should be guaranteed two 5* players, 1 on offense and 1 on defense and the school decides what position they want. Next, each school gets four 4* guys with 2 on offense and 2 on defense and they get to choose the positions the 4* guys play. Then you finish the team out with two * and 3* guys and your success really comes down to coaching, player evaluation and development. Injuries as they do now would play a huge roll because of depth. Dan Mullen would be hard to beat. But parity would be great and really fun. Your thoughts? I know there aren't enough 5* and 4* players to go around. No I wasn't trying to practice socialism. I just thought how it might be fun and I was really trying to add to the strength of what Dan is doing. I know, too much time on my hands but I'm totally disabled and I have a little time to sit around and come up with crazy thoughts like this. Wasn't trying to do anything but getting others idea of mine, and I got it! thanks.

---

There are better fixes.

Bottom line, no system depending on enforcement will work in a league that already won't call basic penalties on Alabama.

Work for better reffing (I suggest by embarrassing the league after every badly reffed game. If I were Mullen I'd put a play in the playbook called the Ridley where a WR runs out of bounds, behind all the players, then back in bounds fown the field where he's wide open. When asked, shrug and say it worked for Bama so I figured I'd try it. Golly gee, I camt explain why it's illegal when I do it.)
Work for better rules in recruiting. Such as the transfer allowance for bench riders discussed on here lately.
And so on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg

Baseball is actually already shared. It's how Coastal Carolina can win a natty.

The 11.7 + the MLB absolutely levels out baseball.

---

No. Not the same comparison. Pitching levels out baseball. How many "5" stars did costal have? Zip would be my guess. 4 star? Again zero. What you want is stupid. And more of everyone gets a trophy socialism pansy ass let's make it all equal bs. Everything isn't equal not should it be. Work for it. Still might not be equal but tough luck. No freebies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg

That's not true.

Coastal Carolina, Fresno State, Cal State Fullerton, etc have all won national titles in recent times. Sure Florida, Vandy, LSU, etc have advantages & are usually better than those teams that have won it, but baseball offers most teams at least a punchers chance if they care about the sport.

The same isn't true in football.

---

Fullerton is a baseball power.

Pinko

Board?????????????????????????????????

I'd like to see fair and qualified football officials that aren't tied to the conferences. That would be my first step and would help with parity some I think.

This may be the dumbest shit I?ve ever read. Ever heard of Communism?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I'd like to see fair and qualified football officials that aren't tied to the conferences. That would be my first step and would help with parity some I think.

---

excellent point. HUGE conflict of interest to let the conferences employ their own officials. hand it off to the NCAA and let them rotate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maddawg90

You serious? Who would enforce these rules? You're basically taking away the recruit's ability to choose where he wants to go to school. This is borderline dumb.

---

This ain't borderline.

This entire thread is dumb.

To achieve your proposal without socialism, every school could pay players a market established number of dollars. Everybody gets $2M to spend as a football salary on however number of players that could buy. The players need not go to school. They could play at OM and go to school in Scooba

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I'd like to see fair and qualified football officials that aren't tied to the conferences. That would be my first step and would help with parity some I think.

---

You are basically saying College football needs a commissioner & I agree.

They need someone that is looking out for the good of the game without bias. Each power 5 conference could nominate a candidate & we could have a vote by power 5 presidents.

The commish would oversee:

Rule changes
officiating
scheduling
etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoomBoom

There are better fixes.

Bottom line, no system depending on enforcement will work in a league that already won't call basic penalties on Alabama.

Work for better reffing (I suggest by embarrassing the league after every badly reffed game. If I were Mullen I'd put a play in the playbook called the Ridley where a WR runs out of bounds, behind all the players, then back in bounds fown the field where he's wide open. When asked, shrug and say it worked for Bama so I figured I'd try it. Golly gee, I camt explain why it's illegal when I do it.)
Work for better rules in recruiting. Such as the transfer allowance for bench riders discussed on here lately.
And so on.

---

REC doin' work.