-
So MSU Can Play @ UGA Tomorrow with 54 Players But CFB Needs 85 Man Rosters?
Yeah, I'm calling BS on that.
So, it's ok for MSU to play at UGA with 54 but we need 31 more while hurting the sport?
Completely ridiculous
And what's even odder is that not a single media member will touch this topic
and BTW, I will fight this until I die or the rule changes. It's possibly the absolute worst rule in all of sports. Not kidding. Followed closely by the touchback on a fumble in the endzone, ejection for targeting, & penalty kicks in soccer when someone flops in the box.
Last edited by ShotgunDawg; 11-20-2020 at 09:21 AM.
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Yep. I’ve been saying for years that scholarship limits on football need to be cut by 10-20. Give some of those to baseball and the women’s sports. There would be far more parity in college football if they did this.
-
Unless something changed overnight we have 55 for tomorrow. Powers Warren doesn't count against the numbers. He's been injured since Week 3
-
Originally Posted by
ShotgunDawg
Yeah, I'm calling BS on that.
So, it's ok for MSU to play at UGA with 54 but we need 31 more while hurting the sport?
Completely ridiculous
And what's even odder is that not a single media member will touch this topic
and BTW, I will fight this until I die or the rule changes. It's possibly the absolute worst rule in all of sports. Not kidding. Followed closely by the touchback on a fumble in the endzone, ejection for targeting, & penalty kicks in soccer when someone flops in the box.
Well, you will be fighting until you die most likely. No way you are going to take 10 scholarships from a sport that makes money and where the players are relatively unaffluent and give those 10 scholarships to sports that lose money and where the players are relatively affluent.
You could maybe do that outside of the P5 on the basis that those football programs lose money and are sucking up too many resources. But the P5 isn't going to allow G5 schools to have more scholarships than them in any sport and still compete with them so realistically all it would allow G5 schools to do is offer more sports than the otherwise would, or I guess offer the minimum scholarship sports they have to for their conference rules and just save $140k-300k a year on scholarship costs depending on how expensive their school is.
-
UGA has 9 LBs rated 92 or better. 9.... They only play 3-4.
Think about that. College basketball can only have 13 players on scholarship. That means that even though KY, Duke, & Kansas are by far the most talented teams in the country, they can't have 10 4 & 5 point guards. It's also why the NCAA tournament is fun & small market teams make runs
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Originally Posted by
Johnson85
Well, you will be fighting until you die most likely. No way you are going to take 10 scholarships from a sport that makes money and where the players are relatively unaffluent and give those 10 scholarships to sports that lose money and where the players are relatively affluent.
You could maybe do that outside of the P5 on the basis that those football programs lose money and are sucking up too many resources. But the P5 isn't going to allow G5 schools to have more scholarships than them in any sport and still compete with them so realistically all it would allow G5 schools to do is offer more sports than the otherwise would, or I guess offer the minimum scholarship sports they have to for their conference rules and just save $140k-300k a year on scholarship costs depending on how expensive their school is.
Then I'll keep fighting. It's the worst rule in sports & it must be fought against.
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Yep. They could easily drop 10 scholies from football and redistribute.
Speaking of parity..... I'm laughing at all this OHSt v Indiana talk. OHSt leads the series 75-12. 24 straight wins over IU.
Indiana has won twice in Columbus in the last 70 years. 87 and 51.
-
Originally Posted by
Johnson85
No way you are going to take 10 scholarships from a sport that makes money and where the players are relatively unaffluent and give those 10 scholarships to sports that lose money and where the players are relatively affluent.
l is.
Yep. Given the current political climate in this country too..... no way in hell the NCAA takes scholarships away from "minorities".
-
Originally Posted by
Maroonthirteen
Yep. They could easily drop 10 scholies from football and redistribute.
Speaking of parity..... I'm laughing at all this OHSt v Indiana talk. OHSt leads the series 75-12. 24 straight wins over IU.
Indiana has won twice in Columbus in the last 70 years. 87 and 51.
Oh yeah. It's just building up a fake game. Ohio State will beat them by 30. The rosters are out of whack. Which sucks because schools like Indiana that do things the right way, build the team the right way, & have their best team in years, should be able to compete just like the Kansas City Royals can compete when they do the same thing. The fact that this system doesn't allow a team like Indiana to compete due to an 85 scholarship rule that makes no sense, is absolutely Ludacris & a terrible system
Ohio State got a commitment from the #1 QB in the 2022 class last night & will have 6 QBs on the roster in 2022 that are rated 95 or better. Think about that
Last edited by ShotgunDawg; 11-20-2020 at 09:46 AM.
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Originally Posted by
Maroonthirteen
Yep. Given the current political climate in this country too..... no way in hell the NCAA takes scholarships away from "minorities".
Then take them away from the white kids on the team. LOL.
What's hilarious is that the same people that will get pissed about scholarships potentially being taken away from minorities, are the same ones that fight tooth & nail for financial redistribution with the economy. So they'll be in a pickle.
Additionally, add scholarships to baseball & create a diversity quota % for the sport if you want. Either way, it would make both sports better.
Last edited by ShotgunDawg; 11-20-2020 at 09:49 AM.
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
I've thought about it a lot since 2014. I did really enjoy our game v Alabama. I didn't even get excited or nervous or expect a win in 2017. I knew the outcome at kickoff.
-
Originally Posted by
Maroonthirteen
I've thought about it a lot since 2014. I did really enjoy our game v Alabama. I didn't even get excited or nervous or expect a win in 2017. I knew the outcome at kickoff.
In 2014, we had 6 pro bowlers on the team & still were out talented at the majority of the positions on the field. That's crazy & just a bad system as evidenced by the same teams in the playoffs every year & only 6 teams winning the SEC title in the last 50 years.
It's just a bad system. If you're ok with a bad system, then cool, but it's a bad system nonetheless.
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
ESPN drives the narrative and drives change. I've never heard them touch this topic.
Just b/c you reduce football scholarships doesn't mean you have to redistribute them to another sport.
The 25/85 rule is crazy. With redshirts you can sign 125 players over a 5 year cycle meaning Saban and Smart can "process" up to 40 mis-evaluations like Lashley and Nigel Knott ensuring their roster stays strong. Those programs are fool proof even against early NFL entries negating some of the advantage of having a veteran team.
-
Originally Posted by
HoopsDawg
ESPN drives the narrative and drives change. I've never heard them touch this topic.
Just b/c you reduce football scholarships doesn't mean you have to redistribute them to another sport.
The 25/85 rule is crazy. With redshirts you can sign 125 players over a 5 year cycle meaning Saban and Smart can "process" up to 40 mis-evaluations like Lashley and Nigel Knott ensuring their roster stays strong. Those programs are fool proof even against early NFL entries negating some of the advantage of having a veteran team.
100% dead nuts on correct
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Originally Posted by
ShotgunDawg
In 2014, we had 6 pro bowlers on the team & still were out talented at the majority of the positions on the field. That's crazy & just a bad system as evidenced by the same teams in the playoffs every year & only 6 teams winning the SEC title in the last 50 years.
It's just a bad system. If you're ok with a bad system, then cool, but it's a bad system nonetheless.
It don't know that it's necessarily a "bad" system. It's definitely an imperfect one and it causes schools like State, OM, UK, and USCe to having really good talent evaluators and not have recruiting misses. It's why we were so successful under Dan because of the value he was able to find in underrecruited guys like a BMac, Gabe Jackson, Slay, and Preston Smith. That allowed him to maybe miss with a 4 star like Dee Arrington or a 5 star like Quay Evans. It's almost a Moneyball like approach where you're replacing a 5 star's potential production with 3 or 4 3 stars production. We've basically got to be the Oakland A's of the SEC. We'll always have a few high rated players, but our wins have to come on the backs of those underrecruited players
Now Bama and UGA are able to miss with 5 stars because they can recruit more 5 stars. So numbers don't really ever catch up with them like they do us. Just like the Yankees and Red Sox can just pay over their mistakes, the blue bloods can recruit over their mistakes. So it's definitely slanted to always favor blue bloods, but there's a way to circumvent it and beat them at their own game every few years. This is why something like the transfer portal could be an amazing tool for us. It just takes great recruiters. You have to find the Billy Beane and Paul De Podesta of recruiting.
-
Originally Posted by
StarkVegasSteve
It don't know that it's necessarily a "bad" system. It's definitely an imperfect one and it causes schools like State, OM, UK, and USCe to having really good talent evaluators and not have recruiting misses. It's why we were so successful under Dan because of the value he was able to find in underrecruited guys like a BMac, Gabe Jackson, Slay, and Preston Smith. That allowed him to maybe miss with a 4 star like Dee Arrington or a 5 star like Quay Evans. It's almost a Moneyball like approach where you're replacing a 5 star's potential production with 3 or 4 3 stars production. We've basically got to be the Oakland A's of the SEC. We'll always have a few high rated players, but our wins have to come on the backs of those underrecruited players
Now Bama and UGA are able to miss with 5 stars because they can recruit more 5 stars. So numbers don't really ever catch up with them like they do us. Just like the Yankees and Red Sox can just pay over their mistakes, the blue bloods can recruit over their mistakes. So it's definitely slanted to always favor blue bloods, but there's a way to circumvent it and beat them at their own game every few years. This is why something like the transfer portal could be an amazing tool for us. It just takes great recruiters. You have to find the Billy Beane and Paul De Podesta of recruiting.
All good points, but it's a terrible system.
The problem is that it's an unclimbable mountain. Agree with the money ball stuff, but even if you do all that correctly, you can only win 10 games. That's the problem. There is no path
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Before the transfer portal you needed more. You could probably argue now about dropping it.
-
Originally Posted by
ShotgunDawg
All good points, but it's a terrible system.
The problem is that it's an unclimbable mountain. Agree with the money ball stuff, but even if you do all that correctly, you can only win 10 games. That's the problem. There is no path
I think the path is there. Hell, if Mullen doesn't clam up in the 1st half at Bama in 14 and De'Runnya isn't tackled in the damn endzone we win that game. But I do agree that in most seasons your ceiling would be 10 wins. We're the runts of the litter in an imperfect system.
-
Originally Posted by
StarkVegasSteve
I think the path is there. Hell, if Mullen doesn't clam up in the 1st half at Bama in 14 and De'Runnya isn't tackled in the damn endzone we win that game. But I do agree that in most seasons your ceiling would be 10 wins. We're the runts of the litter in an imperfect system.
There's no reasonable path. If there were a reasonable path, more than 6 different schools would've won the SEC title in the past 50 years. The odds of only 6 teams winning in the past 50 years is almost perfect evidence that there is no path.
It's a terrible system if you like good games, drama, & intrigue.
College football has only ever run at about 70% capacity of what it's popularity could be
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Originally Posted by
ShotgunDawg
There's no reasonable path. If there were a reasonable path, more than 6 different schools would've won the SEC title in the past 50 years. The odds of only 6 teams winning in the past 50 years is almost perfect evidence that there is no path.
It's a terrible system if you like good games, drama, & intrigue.
College football has only ever run at about 70% capacity of what it's popularity could be
Oh you're absolutely right on that. Something needs to be done about the competitiveness of the game. I mean Bama blowing everyone out isn't interesting football if you're not a Bama fan, but I don't know what the exact fix is. I don't know that's it's only a recruiting issue. I do agree that is probably the biggest part of the problem, but it's also a problem when a team like UGA spends basically 1 mil in recruiting and we're not even sniffing that amount. And that's not because we don't have the money to do it.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
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.