Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Here is the Problem with College Football

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,277
    vCash
    3700

    Here is the Problem with College Football

    We focus a lot on Alabama, for obvious reasons, but today let's take a look at what Ohio State has going on and how absurd this is when considering that most people would like to watch a competitive product on TV.

    Last night the #1 player in 2022 class 5 star QB Quinn Ewers decommitted from Texas and immediately got a bunch of crystal balls to Ohio State.

    Then this morning, the media celebrates that with ESPN's Adam Rittenberg writing this article that is likely a copy and paste from the same article that has been written for 10 straight years



    Lastly, if Ewers commits to Ohio State, this would be there QB room. This is what a monopoly on winning looks like.

    Quinn Ewers- 2022 - .9994 5 star
    https://247sports.com/Player/Quinn-Ewers-45572600/
    Kyle McCord - 2021 - .9883 5 star https://247sports.com/Player/Kyle-McCord-46047962/
    CJ Stroud - 2020 - .9780 4 star https://247sports.com/Player/CJ-Stroud-46038118/
    Jack Miller 2020 - .8951 4 star https://247sports.com/Player/Jack-Miller-46037839/

    What are we doing?

    This is hoarding at it's finest and directly hurts college football.
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    835
    vCash
    3000
    I don't get your post. 2 4 stars and 2 5 stars committed over 3 years. This is any big program? Up until this week we had 2 4 stars and 1 5 star on our roster at QB. You can only play 1 QB at a time, one of these 4 will transfer out at some point anyway. I think what Alabama does is more hoarding of having multiple 5 stars at positions that can have 2+ on the field at once. I wish we'd just cut down on roster size and be done with it. Most the MS players that Alabama, LSU, Auburn, etc. take from us arent option one, that would greatly benefit us.

  3. #3
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,277
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by DEDawg View Post
    I don't get your post. 2 4 stars and 2 5 stars committed over 3 years. This is any big program? Up until this week we had 2 4 stars and 1 5 star on our roster at QB. You can only play 1 QB at a time, one of these 4 will transfer out at some point anyway. I think what Alabama does is more hoarding of having multiple 5 stars at positions that can have 2+ on the field at once. I wish we'd just cut down on roster size and be done with it. Most the MS players that Alabama, LSU, Auburn, etc. take from us arent option one, that would greatly benefit us.
    The point is that 5 stars are choosing to go compete for playing time vs other 5 stars instead of going to another school, where they're needed more, can get on the field quickly, & play the same schedule as the blue blood.
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  4. #4
    Senior Member StarkVegasSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    6,671
    vCash
    98074
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    The point is that 5 stars are choosing to go compete for playing time vs other 5 stars instead of going to another school, where they're needed more, can get on the field quickly, & play the same schedule as the blue blood.
    But that's their choice. They're going to choose that school whether the roster size is 85 or 70. These kids are choosing to go places that have a history of putting kids in the league. We're starting to get that with the D Line but places like OSU put people in the league at every position not just 1. I'd do the same thing. All these kids are supremely confident in their skills and want the chance to play and compete against the best.

  5. #5
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,277
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve View Post
    But that's their choice. They're going to choose that school whether the roster size is 85 or 70. These kids are choosing to go places that have a history of putting kids in the league. We're starting to get that with the D Line but places like OSU put people in the league at every position not just 1. I'd do the same thing. All these kids are supremely confident in their skills and want the chance to play and compete against the best.
    But they only put guys in the league because they get all the best players.

    It's a completely self fulfilling prophecy. Everyone gets why they go there. It's not a mystery. But for the good of the game, there needs to be rules put on place that encourages players to spread the 17 out
    Last edited by ShotgunDawg; 10-29-2020 at 11:57 AM.
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Covington, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,311
    vCash
    700722589
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    The point is that 5 stars are choosing to go compete for playing time vs other 5 stars instead of going to another school, where they're needed more, can get on the field quickly, & play the same schedule as the blue blood.
    Because of two things, exposure and the chance to win a national championship.

  7. #7
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,277
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Offshore Dawg View Post
    Because of two things, exposure and the chance to win a national championship.
    Which is a self fulfilling prophecy. I totally get why they go there, but there should be ways to entice the talent to spread out for the good of the game. Once that happens, everyone will be producing NFL talent
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  8. #8
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    7,225
    vCash
    52060
    Make a NY6 bowl? You can only bring in 22 next year.
    Make the CFP? You can only bring in 19 next year.
    Win the CFP? You can only bring in 19 for the next 3 years.

    These teams will still be very talented, but they won't be able to build dynasties by stockpiling so much quality depth. And this way you don't take away hundreds of opportunities nationwide by cutting everyone's scholarships.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    8,713
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaoarsking View Post
    Make a NY6 bowl? You can only bring in 22 next year.
    Make the CFP? You can only bring in 19 next year.
    Win the CFP? You can only bring in 19 for the next 3 years.

    These teams will still be very talented, but they won't be able to build dynasties by stockpiling so much quality depth. And this way you don't take away hundreds of opportunities nationwide by cutting everyone's scholarships.
    Great idea. Best thought I've seen on dealing with the dynasties. Pro sports do similar.

  10. #10
    Senior Member StarkVegasSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    6,671
    vCash
    98074
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaoarsking View Post
    Make a NY6 bowl? You can only bring in 22 next year.
    Make the CFP? You can only bring in 19 next year.
    Win the CFP? You can only bring in 19 for the next 3 years.

    These teams will still be very talented, but they won't be able to build dynasties by stockpiling so much quality depth. And this way you don't take away hundreds of opportunities nationwide by cutting everyone's scholarships.
    I don't hate this idea at all. This is way to curb dynasties without the problems that lowering the scholarship limits would bring. You'd really be able to see who the true talent evaluators were. Also, Florida would constantly be good because 1) Dan is a HELL of a talent evaluator and 2) Winning more would mean he'd have to recruit less. He'd be begging for the 19 limit at the NY6 level.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    13,374
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaoarsking View Post
    Make a NY6 bowl? You can only bring in 22 next year.
    Make the CFP? You can only bring in 19 next year.
    Win the CFP? You can only bring in 19 for the next 3 years.

    These teams will still be very talented, but they won't be able to build dynasties by stockpiling so much quality depth. And this way you don't take away hundreds of opportunities nationwide by cutting everyone's scholarships.
    That goes hand in hand w socialism. No thanks.

  12. #12
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,277
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Homedawg View Post
    That goes hand in hand w socialism. No thanks.
    Sports and entertainment aren't the economy.

    Capitalism works because it encourages innovation, but the current system doesn't encourage anything but cheating
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    8,713
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    Sports and entertainment aren't the economy.

    Capitalism works because it encourages innovation, but the current system doesn't encourage anything but cheating
    Agree, gun. Leveling the playing field in sports is what all the rules have done. Even capitalism has protections like monopolies of business. Capitalism works because it rewards those that work hard and does not take away from those that earn it and give to those who don't. That is also different than charity.

    85 scholarships was a move to limit teams (Bama being one) from hoarding all the talent. More corrections are needed today but just minor ones.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    1,590
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    Sports and entertainment aren't the economy.

    Capitalism works because it encourages innovation, but the current system doesn't encourage anything but cheating
    Ummm. . . . capitalism encourages hoarding similar to what you are talking about with college football.

  15. #15
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,277
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawg2003 View Post
    Ummm. . . . capitalism encourages hoarding similar to what you are talking about with college football.
    Agree. That’s why the United States doesn’t have a purely capitalistic economy. Government regulations counters it. College football needs more government regulation. That’s our point.
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    13,374
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    Sports and entertainment aren't the economy.

    Capitalism works because it encourages innovation, but the current system doesn't encourage anything but cheating
    Look you can have your opinion and I'll have mine. It's aight. I think that way is bs. Of that happened to us in baseball you'd think the same way. Sorry. So we may never be big time. But a bunch of bs rules punishing the best is just bs.... and we still wouldn't win it all so there's that.

  17. #17
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,277
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Homedawg View Post
    Look you can have your opinion and I'll have mine. It's aight. I think that way is bs. Of that happened to us in baseball you'd think the same way. Sorry. So we may never be big time. But a bunch of bs rules punishing the best is just bs.... and we still wouldn't win it all so there's that.
    I actually like how baseball talent is distributed. Just wish it were full schollies

    Mighty impressive that you enjoy the same 3-5 team having A chance to win each. Better man than me.
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  18. #18
    Bennie Brown Know-It-All
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    3,922
    vCash
    3138
    Quote Originally Posted by Homedawg View Post
    That goes hand in hand w socialism. No thanks.
    That goes hand in hand with what basically every pro sports league does with a draft. You can’t force a kid to choose a certain school so this is the next best thing besides scholarship limitations to encourage parity in the sport.

  19. #19
    Senior Member maroonmania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    19,292
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Homedawg View Post
    That goes hand in hand w socialism. No thanks.
    Do you hate the NFL? Its essentially socialism that the worst team gets the first pick in every round of the draft the next year (they don't even snake it). Really doesn't matter anyway though, the NCAA will never go for a plan that actually penalizes a school for winning a championship. They will always have every school following the same guidelines apart from sanctions. Only way to try and improve things is to reduce total scholarships across the board so the Alabamas and Ohio States can only hoard maybe 20 or 22 players per year rather than 25. The more players the top 10 schools in the country can sign, the less talent that is left for everyone else to sign. But heck, even on this board, we got lots of MSU fans against supporting that so even that probably has no chance to pass. I guess these type fans were against the original legislation taking unlimited scholarships down to 85 total as well. Seems we are stuck with this crappy system I guess.

  20. #20
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,277
    vCash
    3700
    Question:

    100 years from now, do the same 5 teams or so still dominate college football?

    Without rule changes, I would say basically yes. It?ll fluctuate a hair, but not too much.
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.