Only 6 teams have ever won a college football playoff game...

[HoopsDawg]

1. Bama
2. Ohio State
3. UGA
4. LSU
5. Clemson
6. Oregon

Top 6 recruiting classes:

1. Bama
2. Ohio State
3. UGA
4. LSU
5. Clemson
6. Oregon

Nothing to see here. Everything's fine.

[ShotgunDawg]

As Herbstreit said "The system is broken"

HUDL, recruiting sites, recruit combines, etc have created an industry where the best players are more well known commodities, get to know kids from other parts of the country, & ultimately increases the chances that blue bloods know who the best players are & the players themselves know each other & want to play together.

When a sport can tell you who the final 3-4 for next year's playoff will be before the current season is over, you have a huge problem.

That's not a sport. That's Wrestling with a script

[Matt3467]

We could've been in that number had Mullen not slept the end of '14 away.

[HoopsDawg]

As Herbstreit said "The system is broken"

HUDL, recruiting sites, recruit combines, etc have created an industry where the best players are more well known commodities, get to know kids from other parts of the country, & ultimately increases the chances that blue bloods know who the best players are & the players themselves know each other & want to play together.

When a sport can tell you who the final 3-4 for next year's playoff will be before the current season is over, you have a huge problem.

That's not a sport. That's Wrestling with a script

Need to move to a hard cap of 20 signees per year ASAP. Allow rosters to stay at 85 for a few years as we transtion down to 70.

[Irondawg]

Oregon is a great example of what hiring the right coach who stays for a while combined with a single massive booster can do.

They are in a remote part of the US with almost no local football talent in state to pull from. USC and UCLA to the south and and Washington had some success before them.

Now they are a top 8 recruiter annually with 25-40% of their classes coming from outside their footprint. They’ve taken some MS and AL kids the past few years that have hurt us directly or indirectly.

Clemson is another good example as nobody expected Dabo to be an elite coach.

I think our biggest problem is that even with the right coach our booster base is never going to be expansive enough to break through. The current big boys in our backyard will never allow it. Ole Miss tried and proved it can work but also proved the other SEC powers won’t let it happen

[ShotgunDawg]

Need to move to a hard cap of 20 signees per year ASAP. Allow rosters to stay at 85 for a few years as we transtion down to 70.

Yup. It's the only logical way to improve this. Narrow the gap based on on numbers & you'll see more competitive games, which will equal more volatility

[ShotgunDawg]

Oregon is a great example of what hiring the right coach who stays for a while combined with a single massive booster can do.

They are in a remote part of the US with almost no local football talent in state to pull from. USC and UCLA to the south and and Washington had some success before them.

Now they are a top 8 recruiter annually with 25-40% of their classes coming from outside their footprint. They’ve taken some MS and AL kids the past few years that have hurt us directly or indirectly.

Clemson is another good example as nobody expected Dabo to be an elite coach.

I think our biggest problem is that even with the right coach our booster base is never going to be expansive enough to break through. The current big boys in our backyard will never allow it. Ole Miss tried and proved it can work but also proved the other SEC powers won’t let it happen

No, the problem is that Oregon is the #6 recruiter & doesn't have a chance in Hell of winning in the playoff.

That's the problem. The fact that the #6 recruiter still doesn't have near enough talent to compete.

[Captain Falcon]

Clemson and Ohio State becoming pretty much unbeatable in their own conferences is what changed things for the worse, in my opinion. LSU, Georgia, and Oregon are what they've been for a long time, occasionally great and consistently good to very good.

College football can survive with one dominant team, because then you have a clear villain that everybody wants to see lose and anybody who challenges them becomes the sentimental favorite. But when you have 2 or 3 dominant teams that are always there at the end every single year, it's hard for most people to get excited about that.

[ShotgunDawg]

Here's a thought:

LSU is a blue blood that recruits at an elite level & caught lightening in a bottle last year with one of the best teams & offenses in NCAA history.

The beat Bama by only 5 points

[ShotgunDawg]

Clemson and Ohio State becoming pretty much unbeatable in their own conferences is what changed things for the worse, in my opinion. LSU, Georgia, and Oregon are what they've been for a long time, occasionally great and consistently good to very good.

College football can survive with one dominant team, because then you have a clear villain that everybody wants to see lose and anybody who challenges them becomes the sentimental favorite. But when you have 2 or 3 dominant teams that are always there at the end every single year, it's hard for most people to get excited about that.

I can agree with this.

The way to solve that though is to reduce scholarships, which would narrow the gap to the point where Clemson, OSU, Bama, etc would at least have to show up & play well to win games.

[Bdawg]

Yeah I agree with a lot of this. I love me some football, but seeing the same teams every year has really started to lower my interest in the playoffs. Never though that would happen, but it has. It's definitely not right that we know before the season starts basically who will be the last 4. That's a BS system were no one can hardly climb the ladder.

And that also hurts in recruiting where kids know there are only a handful of schools that will get you to a title game.

[StarkVegasSteve]

Every one of those teams outside of LSU has instilled a great culture and that's what has created the long term success. I mean I don't think Dabo is a great playcaller, but he's a great motivator and CEO coach who, after a few years, learned what worked and what would create long term success. With Cristobal, Kirby, and Day they learned from the best. They learned how to build and run a programs from two of the best to ever do it at the college level.

Oregon is going to get there if Cristobal stays and there is a way to break into that echelon once every few years. The difference is that those teams are going to be in the mix every year. That's why we, along with the other second tier P5 programs can't worry about stacking top 10 classes on each other. You have to try to break into the Top 15 once every 4 years and make sure the rest of your classes are between 15-22. Talent evaluation is the most important thing at programs like ours. It's what made Dan's staff so damn good. They were able to find the Moneyball type players that no one else saw value in. I think Leach has a chance to do that. I'm not saying it'll happen but our offense is the type that if you can put enough overlooked playmakers together with stud receivers then that once every 4 years type season is possible.

Having said all that, I agree that the system is broken. I never thought 4 was the right idea. I'd have gone with 16 and moved the regular season back to 10 games. That gives all P5 champs a spot and then gives 11 spots for at large P5 and conference champs from the G5. I think that's the best way to do it and it would actually make the regular season interesting again. The regular season isn't very fun when you already know who's going to be in the playoff by June.

[msstate7]

Need to move to a hard cap of 20 signees per year ASAP. Allow rosters to stay at 85 for a few years as we transtion down to 70.

I'm all for it. Don't think it will happen though. If it does happen, that competitive balance would work against us too though... all-the-sudden, I think the OOC games become much more competitive. I'm all for that too.

[ShotgunDawg]

I'm all for it. Don't think it will happen though. If it does happen, that competitive balance would work against us too though... all-the-sudden, I think the OOC games become much more competitive. I'm all for that too.

Absolutely. Troy and USM would get better, but that's fine with me. That makes for many more good games & a more healthy sport. It would be great for those programs as well, which is good for Hattiesburg, Memphis, Troy, etc. The sport would basically be a lot like college basketball in terms of who can beat who.

I think that would be great. You'd see few coaches leaving 2nd tier schools as well because they'd know they could win at their current school.

[Maroonthirteen]

While I agree college football could use more parity. I'm surprised State fans don't look at Clemson and see a similar program that has been built into a national power under the current system.

Clemson has a better win % than State over the years. However I see two rural schools, the other school in their own state, surround by other national powers and with similar resources. Clemson has revenues less than S.Car and Arkansas but out produces those schools. Clemson is 22 nationally and State is 30 nationally in revenue.

State just needs to get better at hiring ADs and HCs.

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

While I agree college football could use more parity. I'm surprised State fans don't look at Clemson and see a similar program that has been built into a national power under the current system.

Clemson has a better win % than State over the years. However I see two rural schools, the other school in their own state, surround by other national powers and with similar resources. Clemson has revenues less than S.Car and Arkansas but out produces those schools. Clemson is 22 nationally and State is 30 nationally in revenue.

State just needs to get better at hiring ADs and HCs.

I think this is a really really bad take. Clemson has MASSIVE booster support. Therea a reason they can win recruiting battles with Bama and UGA, and its money. They have facilities that blow ours out ofthe water. They pay more for theor staff than wed be able to muster if it was 100% certain wed win a natty by doing it. They arent "surround" by powers, they have UGA to the south and thats it, and Georgia produces far more talent than UGA could hope to sign so thats relatively easy pickings. Lastly, theor coordinators dont leave. This is huge key. Venables could have been a p5 Hc 5 years ago bit doesnt want it. Elliot should have been an HC 2 seasons ago. Weve never had assistants stay at all, much less turn down P5 HC jobs to stay

The only similarities are A) small town, and B) 2 P5s in a small state. But they have so much more money and far less recruiting competition surrounding them.

[StarkVegasSteve]

While I agree college football could use more parity. I'm surprised State fans don't look at Clemson and see a similar program that has been built into a national power under the current system.

Clemson has a better win % than State over the years. However I see two rural schools, the other school in their own state, surround by other national powers and with similar resources. Clemson has revenues less than S.Car and Arkansas but out produces those schools. Clemson is 22 nationally and State is 30 nationally in revenue.

State just needs to get better at hiring ADs and HCs.

Clemson would be a great model if they were in the SEC. A better team to look at would probably be USCe under Spurrier. They were a doormat until he, and I guess a little of Holtz, got there. Now Spurrier is obviously a HELL of a coach and a HELL of a personality, but what he did there was pretty simple and he built them into a national power while he was there. He DOMINATED in state recruiting, he beat his rival I believe 7 straight years, he gave the fan base an offense to be excited about, and he made players want to come play for his program.

[FISHDAWG]

Only 6 teams have ever won a college football playoff game...But only one team was the inaugural #1 ranking of the College Football Playoff Committee... Oh well - we wouldn't have beat Bama even with another shot at them that year ... But what might have been

[MetEdDawg]

You'll get an expansion of the playoffs before any scholarship changes. That's the standard response to parody. Add more teams in the mix for a championship by just adding more teams.

The truth is college football doesn't want parody. They want money and ratings. And the biggest teams bring the most fans and the largest viewership. Which equals money. Teams like us don't make them the money they want. And it's why there was no way in hell, in the most chaotic year of college football in 2 generations, that they would expand. Too many uncontrollable variables that might knock the status quo. Keep it small and hope the blue bloods make it through the riff raff, which they all have so far.

[ShotgunDawg]

You'll get an expansion of the playoffs before any scholarship changes. That's the standard response to parody. Add more teams in the mix for a championship by just adding more teams.

The truth is college football doesn't want parody. They want money and ratings. And the biggest teams bring the most fans and the largest viewership. Which equals money. Teams like us don't make them the money they want. And it's why there was no way in hell, in the most chaotic year of college football in 2 generations, that they would expand. Too many uncontrollable variables that might knock the status quo. Keep it small and hope the blue bloods make it through the riff raff, which they all have so far.

That's a good way to destroy a sport over time