Re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic: 12 team playoff

[Michchamp]

they are all free to do whatever they want. If they don't want to go to a school that "railroads" them into a degree that they don't want, they are free to go somewhere else. Hell, they are free to just go to school and pay their tuition like the rest of us did.

I think you and I are getting closer to agreeing on this, except I'd add "free to do whatever they want except negotiate compensation for working 20-30 hours - or more - a week, taking the classes the coach tells them to, and risking broken bones and torn ligaments & scrambled brains for their athletic department revenue and their coach's salary."

 

[Mitchrapp]

I'm on the side you get free schooling to play a game. That should be compensation enough.

Even if they did pay these fellows how do determine what they get paid? Do some player's get paid more than others, will there be holdouts? If you get hurt do they still get paid, are there agents? Will HS players go to a school who pays more? That happens now I suppose. you want money to play football then pay for your schooling.

 

[Michchamp]

I'm on the side you get free schooling to play a game. That should be compensation enough.

Even if they did pay these fellows how do determine what they get paid? Do some player's get paid more than others, will there be holdouts? If you get hurt do they still get paid, are there agents? Will HS players go to a school who pays more? That happens now I suppose. you want money to play football then pay for your schooling.

what he said in the book makes sense: we've let the coaches and administrators negotiate their salaries and opened up the sport to TV money and advertising for their benefit. Let the players do the same.

star players are already getting more money than others... just not "above board"... all "under the table."

Bring it out into the open... can't possibly be worse than what they're doing now.

The LSUs, Ohio States, Alabamas and Clemsons will lose their advantages real quick once everyone can openly do what they do ... but maybe we'll start to see watchable football again?

 

[Mitchrapp]

what he said in the book makes sense: we've let the coaches and administrators negotiate their salaries and opened up the sport to TV money and advertising for their benefit. Let the players do the same.

star players are already getting more money than others... just not "above board"... all "under the table."

Bring it out into the open... can't possibly be worse than what they're doing now.

The LSUs, Ohio States, Alabamas and Clemsons will lose their advantages real quick once everyone can openly do what they do ... but maybe we'll start to see watchable football again?

Imo this is another way to make school less relevant. If coaches are tell players what classes they can take it will make it worse with them getting paid. And then college basketball will want it, what's next the bowling teams or volleyball? I just think it's a bad idea.

What they should do is fix the situation now that players get paid under the table and allow them to take whatever class they want. This just adds fire to an already bad position. I would watch less of college ball than what I already do if they changed that.

 

[tomdalton22]

I think you and I are getting closer to agreeing on this, except I'd add "free to do whatever they want except negotiate compensation for working 20-30 hours - or more - a week, taking the classes the coach tells them to, and risking broken bones and torn ligaments & scrambled brains for their athletic department revenue and their coach's salary."

the letter of intent is a essentially a contract. They are agreeing to the compensation of a free education, free room and board, and a stipend. They are free to do whatever they want prior to signing that contract. They can just go to school and pay tuition if they want.

99% of scholarship athletes are getting a great deal. The ones that aren't are typically the ones that make it to the professional level and they end up being one of those top 1%ers that you hate anyway.

 

[Michchamp]

Imo this is another way to make school less relevant. If coaches are tell players what classes they can take it will make it worse with them getting paid. And then college basketball will want it, what's next the bowling teams or volleyball? I just think it's a bad idea.

What they should do is fix the situation now that players get paid under the table and allow them to take whatever class they want. This just adds fire to an already bad position. I would watch less of college ball than what I already do if they changed that.

Well I'll politely disagree then.

I keep thinking of the novel Frankenstein though; as in Walter Byers' created a monster in the NCAA, and wrote the book to warn us it's out of control.

I take him at his word, because he really had no incentive to lie about how dirty the sport had gotten, and how unfair it was that the players got paid. His remarks only reflect poorly on himself, since he was the one who helped make it that way.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Well I'll politely disagree then.

I keep thinking of the novel Frankenstein though; as in Walter Byers' created a monster in the NCAA, and wrote the book to warn us it's out of control.

I take him at his word, because he really had no incentive to lie about how dirty the sport had gotten, and how unfair it was that the players got paid. His remarks only reflect poorly on himself, since he was the one who helped make it that way.

You politely disagree is like a win for me.. :cheers:

 

[Spartanmack]

I'm not sure exactly how the number of bowls changed over time, but this article from 2014 reports that there were 38 bowls that year, 39 counting the national title game. It says in 1984 there were only 16. edit, I can't find the article now, but there's a wikipedia page that tracks them.

The BCS started in 1998, when there were only 22 bowl games.

At 22, 44 teams qualify, or about a third of all FBS teams. at 38, that number jumps to 76, more than half of all FBS teams. seems to me the sheer number of games meant more shitty teams in the mix, and cheapened the value of going to a bowl, more than the BCS.

I think I remember there being a post here about one of the Florida bowls, and how they pay a handful of local big wigs a pile of money to basically host an exhibition football game once a year. they claimed they gave a lot of money to charity, but didn't have receipts.

Like everything else in college football, it's clear the number of Bowl games could be curtailed by just fucking paying the players. You wouldn't have local in-bred southern "aristocracy" making $1,000,000 for 2 weeks of work a year hosting the "KY Lube Anal Sex Bowl" tinsel spoke of if they had to pay the players to show up.

Fuck em all. Burn it all down.

I'm not defending those extra bowl games and I agree it was too much. My point is that the BCS and the playoff did way more to destroy the tradition of the big bowl games than all the garbage bowls ever did. I doubt many people tuned out from watching the Orange, Rose, Fiesta or even the 2nd tier Jan 1 games like Citrus or Holiday bowl because they had enough watching teams like Tulsa and Central Florida play games between December 15th thru the 27th. I don't think I've ever watched any MSU Bowl game that wasn't Citrus or better and I didn't bother going to watch them play in the Pinstripe Bowl that was practically in my backyard. Sure, more teams were "in the mix" for a postseason game, but like I said before, those bowls were largely ignored by everyone.

 

[Spartanmack]

There were some epic bowl games before the BCS fouled the air. Maybe it?s a bit nostalgic to reflect on them, but I still believe this. There were some duds, too. I remember Nebraska steamrolling Alabama and ND in successive Orange Bowls in 72-73.

that's another problem the playoff hasn't solved - there have been some real duds in the brief history of the playoff too. MSU got steamrolled in one and ND has taken it on the chin twice.

 

[Michchamp]

You politely disagree is like a win for me.. :cheers:

maybe I can be a bit of a total asshole sometimes.

 

[Mitchrapp]

maybe I can be a bit of a total asshole sometimes.

Who isn't.

:yay:

 

[Michchamp]

I'm not defending those extra bowl games and I agree it was too much. My point is that the BCS and the playoff did way more to destroy the tradition of the big bowl games than all the garbage bowls ever did. I doubt many people tuned out from watching the Orange, Rose, Fiesta or even the 2nd tier Jan 1 games like Citrus or Holiday bowl because they had enough watching teams like Tulsa and Central Florida play games between December 15th thru the 27th. I don't think I've ever watched any MSU Bowl game that wasn't Citrus or better and I didn't bother going to watch them play in the Pinstripe Bowl that was practically in my backyard. Sure, more teams were "in the mix" for a postseason game, but like I said before, those bowls were largely ignored by everyone.

I mean, yeah, after the BCS it was no longer a crap shoot who the best team was if 1 never played 2 at the end of the season, so if you were ranked 1-4 (maybe) you had an incentive to play really well in your bowl game, in hopes of garnering votes.

But the BCS started in 1998, and I know I still gave a shit about how Michigan played in their bowl until much more recently

espn and fans caring about their conference and schools "BCS record" which included all 4 BCS games each year... so the big bowls still mattered even if you weren't in 1 v 2. Maybe not to you, but I seem to remember ohio state and wisconsin fans bragging about their "BCS record" in 2005-2009ish

 

[Michchamp]

Who isn't.

:yay:

I blame tinsel for some of my behavior. he eggs me on, cause he likes to see other people get mad and argue with eachother

 

[Mitchrapp]

I blame tinsel for some of my behavior. he eggs me on, cause he likes to see other people get mad and argue with eachother

Yeah, damn Tinsel.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Yeah, damn Tinsel.

I know, right?

 

[zyxt9]

Crazy idea, why accept a scholarship and its restrictions? A smart option would be for a potential recruit to tell a recruiter, "I do not care to communicate with you. Have booster call me with a job offer. If they offer me the best possible opportunity, I will be a Walk-on. This way, I get paid more than your scholarship would provide, acquire employment/job history in an a field I desire should my football career becomes a bust, and all of this is above board because I am not under the restrictions of a scholarship and NCAA oversight. I get income to cover all my s hool, room, board, and more expenses. So, while I want to play on your team, I only want to do so as a Walk-on! So...what job might I get at a business near your school?"

We all know businesses can / do have employees who do nothing anyway, so this would be another employee who is on the books but does no actual work during the times when football is operational. For the few weeks they are not involved in football, may e they can actually acquire a little understanding of the business world which most will be involved with after college as opposed to playing in the NFL, thereby opening potential "real" job opportunities too.

This would be a Win-Win IMO...and help kids who fail to get into the NFL improve their chances at having a successful life.

 

[Michchamp]

Crazy idea, why accept a scholarship and its restrictions? A smart option would be for a potential recruit to tell a recruiter, "I do not care to communicate with you. Have booster call me with a job offer. If they offer me the best possible opportunity, I will be a Walk-on. This way, I get paid more than your scholarship would provide, acquire employment/job history in an a field I desire should my football career becomes a bust, and all of this is above board because I am not under the restrictions of a scholarship and NCAA oversight. I get income to cover all my s hool, room, board, and more expenses. So, while I want to play on your team, I only want to do so as a Walk-on! So...what job might I get at a business near your school?"

We all know businesses can / do have employees who do nothing anyway, so this would be another employee who is on the books but does no actual work during the times when football is operational. For the few weeks they are not involved in football, may e they can actually acquire a little understanding of the business world which most will be involved with after college as opposed to playing in the NFL, thereby opening potential "real" job opportunities too.

This would be a Win-Win IMO...and help kids who fail to get into the NFL improve their chances at having a successful life.

the restrictions aren't tied to the scholarship. kids are not permitted, under NCAA regulations, to do what you're proposing. The schools would be sanctioned, mainly because it would set the bad precedent of paying kids fairly what they're worth...

 

[Spartanmack]

I mean, yeah, after the BCS it was no longer a crap shoot who the best team was if 1 never played 2 at the end of the season, so if you were ranked 1-4 (maybe) you had an incentive to play really well in your bowl game, in hopes of garnering votes.

But the BCS started in 1998, and I know I still gave a shit about how Michigan played in their bowl until much more recently

espn and fans caring about their conference and schools "BCS record" which included all 4 BCS games each year... so the big bowls still mattered even if you weren't in 1 v 2. Maybe not to you, but I seem to remember ohio state and wisconsin fans bragging about their "BCS record" in 2005-2009ish

There were 5 BCS games each year, the Rose, Fiesta, Orange and Sugar plus the NC game played at one of those 4 venues. during the BCS era, those non-NC big games still mattered - never said they didn't - but it was the beginning of the end and that's what destroyed the tradition of the bowl system. If your team was "shafted" out of the BCS Championship game, you had no shot at the NC so while they were still important for other reasons, the value of even the other BCS games was diminished. The BCS pulling either the PAC12 or B1G champ out of the Rose Bowl did way more to erode the tradition than all the garbage bowls combined. What I've been saying all along is that the garbage bowls weren't the downfall of the bowl system. The BCS had way more impact than games like Meineke Car Care Bowl or the Quick Lane Bowl ever did and it did nothing to alleviate the controversy over who the National Champion was. But it was probably necessary for the powers that be to get us to the playoff system. They could point to the BCS and say 'we tried, the only thing to do now is a playoff...'

 

[Spartanmack]

Crazy idea, why accept a scholarship and its restrictions? A smart option would be for a potential recruit to tell a recruiter, "I do not care to communicate with you. Have booster call me with a job offer. If they offer me the best possible opportunity, I will be a Walk-on. This way, I get paid more than your scholarship would provide, acquire employment/job history in an a field I desire should my football career becomes a bust, and all of this is above board because I am not under the restrictions of a scholarship and NCAA oversight. I get income to cover all my s hool, room, board, and more expenses. So, while I want to play on your team, I only want to do so as a Walk-on! So...what job might I get at a business near your school?"

We all know businesses can / do have employees who do nothing anyway, so this would be another employee who is on the books but does no actual work during the times when football is operational. For the few weeks they are not involved in football, may e they can actually acquire a little understanding of the business world which most will be involved with after college as opposed to playing in the NFL, thereby opening potential "real" job opportunities too.

This would be a Win-Win IMO...and help kids who fail to get into the NFL improve their chances at having a successful life.

this is going WAY back but when Greg Anthony was at UNLV, he had his own business that he started with a friend (I think it was a t-shirt screen printing business) that the NCAA made him divest even though he had given back his scholarship and was paying his own way at UNLV.

 

[zyxt9]

I still prefer the idea of 8 conferences each with 2 divisions with 9 teams each. Play the teams in your division, winner of divisions (let each conference determine their preferred tie breaker method) play in Conf CG (9th game) which then seeds into an 8 team playoff. The teams not involved in the Conf CG and each successive playoff round could play additional cross conference games to seed the Ass Wipe Bowl Games to get those teams up to 11 or 12 games on the season. The NC would result in max of 12 games for the last 2 contenders. (CONF CG / Elite 8 / Final 4 / NC adds only 4 games after Regular Season).

This preserves most of the Major Rivalries, and those not played during Regular Season or Playoffs could be arranged in the Side Shitshow games to make them more competitive, entertaining, desirable, and lucrative. And with the losers of each round in Playoffs being added back into the Loser Bowls, they would still get their 11 or 12 games in.

Begin the season after Labor Day weekend, NO BYE WEEKS, Season ends so Conf CGs are played over Thanksgiving, Playoffs during December, NC on New Years.

144 schools are in this scenario, which will push some out of the...well, whatever College Football Division name they decide to apply to this grouping.

Too logical to do this, I guess...but the beauty is in the simplicity, IMO.