Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 48

Thread: As a 100 % conservative I vote for socialism in College Football

  1. #21
    Senior Member Maverick91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    2,090
    vCash
    3000
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    The critics will argue that's 2000 (131 x 15) kids that don't get a scholarship that would have. Not saying I agree, but that's what that they will say.

    I still think you let less transfer. If you sign a kid, it's a 4-year commitment. If he leaves, you lose that scholarship.
    No what this would do is raise all boats. Those kids will find out that D1, D2, NAIA, D3 are all really good competition and the ones that will be bumped down to those levels will still get scholarships.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,015
    vCash
    3200
    Quote Originally Posted by KOdawg1 View Post
    Lower scholarships from 85 to 70.

    This is an easy fix that'll make a huge difference
    I believe 65 would be a better number

  3. #23
    Senior Member LC Dawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    5,741
    vCash
    4938
    Quote Originally Posted by Percho View Post
    I believe 65 would be a better number
    We could just skip the farce that these kids are signing up to play SEC football because they want an education and eliminate scholarships and set roster limits.
    It'll happen eventually.

  4. #24
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    7,074
    vCash
    52060
    Also ban walk-ons from getting NIL. Currently schools are stockpiling more than 85 scholarship-quality players.

    If they want NIL, they can go to a school that has a scholarship offer for them.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    594
    vCash
    3650
    The genie is out of the bottle. Most of these ideas to create parity would die a quick judicial death. I'm sure that Georgia and Bama would sponsor the lawsuits for some deprived, low 4-star.

  6. #26
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    7,074
    vCash
    52060
    Quote Originally Posted by PendingTransaction View Post
    The genie is out of the bottle. Most of these ideas to create parity would die a quick judicial death. I'm sure that Georgia and Bama would sponsor the lawsuits for some deprived, low 4-star.
    We'll need a college football players union to agree to the terms and it should all be fine.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Coursesuper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    4,336
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaoarsking View Post
    Pass a rule that says every NIL dollar has to be routed through the school's official NIL fund and enforce it harshly, both by the NCAA and the IRS.

    Install an MLB-style "luxury tax" that transfers some NIL funds from the higher $ schools in a conference to the lower $ in a conference. Not in-between conferences transfers, just moving money around within the conferences, to make each conference more competitive.

    Allow transfers without sitting out a year only when transferring from a school to a lower NIL cap. Talent should trickle down, not up. If you transfer to a school with a higher NIL cap, you have to sit out a year.

    Those 3 things would help a lot and make the product on the field more interesting without totally overthrowing the social order.
    This is the ticket.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    3,796
    vCash
    3100
    With NIL, I'm not sure scholarships matter.

    You can give every player past the scholarship limit a 35k a year NIL deal and that's effectively a scholarship.

    What we need is hard roster limits of say 70

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    594
    vCash
    3650
    Quote Originally Posted by the_real_MSU_is_us View Post
    With NIL, I'm not sure scholarships matter.

    You can give every player past the scholarship limit a 35k a year NIL deal and that's effectively a scholarship.

    What we need is hard roster limits of say 70
    Limit the scholarships, the price of 4 & 5 stars will triple and you can predict which 8 teams would get them. There's no easy fix with the portal and NIL.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Really Clark?'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    12,666
    vCash
    3100
    When you pull a player from the portal, you have reimburse the previous school the total amount of NIL the previous school has given that player. If you pull inside your conference an additional penalty and/or limits of some sort.
    Last edited by Really Clark?; 01-10-2023 at 09:27 AM.

  11. #31
    Senior Member Lord McBuckethead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    12,980
    vCash
    3086
    Quote Originally Posted by KOdawg1 View Post
    Lower scholarships from 85 to 70.

    This is an easy fix that'll make a huge difference
    Scholarships matter little when boosters can pay a player anything they want. Hell, teams like Bama and Texas could have zero scholarships and still field a better team than half of hte SEC.
    Downvotes_Hype

  12. #32
    Senior Member Lord McBuckethead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    12,980
    vCash
    3086
    Quote Originally Posted by Really Clark? View Post
    When you pull a player from the portal, you have reimburse the previous school the total amount of NIL the previous school has given that player. If you pull inside your conference an additional penalty and/or limits of some sort.
    That would help.
    Downvotes_Hype

  13. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    594
    vCash
    3650
    Quote Originally Posted by Really Clark? View Post
    When you pull a player from the portal, you have reimburse the previous school the total amount of NIL the previous school has given that player. If you pull inside your conference an additional penalty and/or limits of some sort.
    Schools can't give NIL deals to players. We're in this mess bc schools avoided the player-compensation issue like the plague. Now it's a free market function.

  14. #34
    Senior Member Really Clark?'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    12,666
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by PendingTransaction View Post
    Schools can't give NIL deals to players. We're in this mess bc schools avoided the player-compensation issue like the plague. Now it's a free market function.
    I said school for simplicity, but you are right reimburse the cooperative is more accurate.

    There are a few schools who link straight to a NIL fund for each player when you visit their athletics page. It's already dancing on the edge.
    Last edited by Really Clark?; 01-10-2023 at 09:49 AM.

  15. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Posts
    515
    vCash
    3000
    This NCG had nothing to do with NIL. Georgia/bama/Ohio state and Clemson have dominated since the playoff began. Sprinkle in LSU here or there. Nothing different this year. Unfortunately college has generally been this way.. you had different eras of Miami, USC and Florida. I'll believe NIL has a negative impact when Texas and A&M rise from the ashes. They will spend more than most.

    To be honest, when TCU lost to K State they shouldn't have been in the conversation. This just reinforces that. I doubt they make this mistake again.. what a terrible finale.

  16. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,830
    vCash
    3400
    Quote Originally Posted by PendingTransaction View Post
    The genie is out of the bottle. Most of these ideas to create parity would die a quick judicial death. I'm sure that Georgia and Bama would sponsor the lawsuits for some deprived, low 4-star.
    Not really. While it's pretty clear where Kavanaugh will vote, the actual majority opinion was much narrower than people are claiming.

    But if they wanted to further strengthen their legal position, the P5 conferences could just break away from the SEC to set rules. At that point, you have competition for college athletes and any plaintiff would have to argue that the market is for major college athletics. Still a potentially winnable case for college athletes but harder.

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,830
    vCash
    3400
    Quote Originally Posted by HoopsDawg View Post
    They cut from 105 to 85. So it's been done before.
    Different political environment then. Not saying it can't happen, and I think the availability of NIL makes it a much easier sell, but still not the same.

  18. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    10,866
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    The critics will argue that's 2000 (131 x 15) kids that don't get a scholarship that would have. Not saying I agree, but that's what that they will say.

    I still think you let less transfer. If you sign a kid, it's a 4-year commitment. If he leaves, you lose that scholarship.
    Just reallocate those 15 to other sports.

  19. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Pittsburgh PA
    Posts
    2,076
    vCash
    3000
    This game just shows how far ahead UGA was from other teams. When they were 100 percent dialed in this year against Oregon, Tennessee and TCU it clearly shows how much better they are. There were a lot of games though including OSU game they just didn’t show up. Missouri and UK were some other ones and they still won by going through the motions. That UGA team was so good they would have even beat Bama by 3 or 4 TDS because they would have been dialed in for that one. When they beat Oregon 49-3 I figured they would win the whole thing unless they slipped up because they got bored.

  20. #40
    Senior Member BoomBoom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Coast
    Posts
    11,421
    vCash
    3200
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnson85 View Post
    Not really. While it's pretty clear where Kavanaugh will vote, the actual majority opinion was much narrower than people are claiming.

    But if they wanted to further strengthen their legal position, the P5 conferences could just break away from the SEC to set rules. At that point, you have competition for college athletes and any plaintiff would have to argue that the market is for major college athletics. Still a potentially winnable case for college athletes but harder.
    Just pass something out of Congress. I doubt any SC would declare a constitutional right to play CFB for whichever team you want.

    Or just sever CFB from "student-athletes". Let the schools offer scollys to players, but not require players be student athletes. Boom, no more legal problem, NCAA go do what you want.

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.