How to fix College Football?

[Wingman Ray]

Saw many (opinion) articles on this, both recently and in the past. Just wanted to create a non conflictual (hopefully) discussion on this.

Currently, as everyone knows, there is a four team playoff. Needs to stay the same, go to 8 or go to 16?

Scholarships. Currently at 85. Saw an article where reducing scholarships would spread the player to college wealth. What do you think?

Ranking. With preseason rankings and weak strength of schedule, how does this impact CFB? Many of college elite teams have for many years prospered off of starting ranked very high and then being allowed to play 1-2 challenging games a year, 3-4 average at best games and with 4-5 ho-hum games thrown in the schedule. One loss against one of their two difficult games does not push them down much in the rankings. Should SOS be the primary factor in rankings? Should preseason rankings being disallowed? If ranking, at what point in the season are rankings released?

Making admission requirements the same for athletes as it is for normal students? Argument is many of todays athletes would not be admitted to the college of attendance if it was based on their academic achievements alone.

Pay athletes? Argument is the $100k scholarship is payment enough when they arent spending their lives paying back student loans. Allowing athletes to work offseason? Would that open up more even corruption opportunity?

What are your thoughts?

 

[notredomer23]

I would be in favor of reducing scholarships to 75, but there would have to be major caveats around it that would prevent the factories from processing busts out of the program. Until that happens, I think it is pointless to expand the playoff.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

1) The CFB has eaten everything else. Expanding it might alleviate issues with G5s having access but it will absolutely kill OOC scheduling as teams increasingly look for easy Ws if running the table in their conference gets them in.

Additionally, expanding introduces the problem that highly talented teams like Alabama/Clemson/Ohio State will probably have to lose 3 games to get excluded. Which isn't going to change the problem with the same teams staying in the spotlight.

2) Scholarship contraction might spread out talent but it's a significant detriment to the students.

3) No-show jobs are coming to stay. I don't see how regulating third party income will be possible going forward.

The ways to address the problems, IMO, are:

A) Eliminate this "best teams" nonsense and change it to resume. A best teams analysis would correctly include recruiting rankings, performance in prior seasons, and a number of other factors which are helpful for predicting outcomes but exist outside a team's on-field performance in the current season. Which is what they SHOULD be judged on.

B) No conference auto-bids ever for anything. We already have powerful incentives for P5 teams to play incestuous schedules, avoid any form of risk, and exclude good G5 programs.

C) I don't really know what to do about the CFP but I think it's a failure. Perhaps killing conference championship games* and replacing them by giving every team a flex game that week? I'm open to ideas here but my goal would be to create a de facto playoff week where teams on the cusp of the top 4 look for strong matchups to plead their case. Crafting rules around this one would be tough but maybe force teams to play outside their conferences? How great would something like a PAC vs. B1G set of challenge games be?

*They're only here because conference sizes are unwieldy which is only because of the nature of TV rights.

 

[Black Irish]

I haven't paid enough attention to college ball this year to speak to much of this so I'll submit my owns questions. Has the bizarro world of playing under Covid in 2020 done anything to help highlight or spur needed changes to college football? Or will it just go back to business as usual whenever we get back to normal?

 

[NDohio]

I would like to see an eight team playoff. I would also like to see the playoff committee's role on choosing the teams be less than what it currently is. Go back to the BCS ranking system to rank the top eight teams and set the tournament in motion from there.

Also, have the first round of games be played at the top seeds home stadium. Putting those first round games on campus would be a great incentive for the regular season and the atmosphere for those games would be fantastic.

I am curious how the new Name, Image, and Likeness rules will be structured and how that will effect teams like Notre Dame.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

I haven't paid enough attention to college ball this year to speak to much of this so I'll submit my owns questions. Has the bizarro world of playing under Covid in 2020 done anything to help highlight or spur needed changes to college football? Or will it just go back to business as usual whenever we get back to normal?

There has been some outcry over Ohio State getting into the CFP on the basis of its 6-0 season while the top G5 teams couldn't get any kind of traction with the committee. It's hard to see how a G5 could ever qualify under the current system.

 

[irishfan]

One interesting idea I’ve seen thrown out there is to rank the top four playoff teams after the bowl games. The bowls would have their traditional tie-ins and would finish up on January 1. The four-team playoff field would be announced January 2. You would have ~8 teams still alive for the playoffs heading into the bowl games each year. An undefeated G5 in a New Years bowl would theoretically be able to play their way to the top four.

 

[IrishLax]

Reducing scholarships will hurt -- not help -- parity. The same concentration of 5-star players will be at the same schools, but your next tier will no longer be able to take high upside or developmental players. The schools that would benefit would be your current Tier 1 (Bama, Clemson, Ohio State) and then your Tier 4 schools (Northwestern, Arizona, etc.) who will be first to really see any tangible "trickle down". Everyone on Tier 2 and Tier 3 would have an even harder time competing with Tier 1.

Biggest immediate fix needed for CFB is an 8 team playoff to give other teams a shot of breaking up the party.

After that, your best bet at leveling the playing field is to allow direct payment of players... but this has potential to go horribly awry given how fucked the management of CFB currently is.

 

[Free Manera]

I said this in another thread recently but anyway here it is.

Scholarships are guaranteed for 4 years. When a player transfers out, he continues to count against scholarship numbers of the team he transferred from until the 4 years are up.

The result is teams can't force out lesser talented players/busts without consequences. Teams that stockpile talent are essentially taxed when players transfer out.

 

[Free Manera]

Reducing scholarships will hurt -- not help -- parity. The same concentration of 5-star players will be at the same schools, but your next tier will no longer be able to take high upside or developmental players. The schools that would benefit would be your current Tier 1 (Bama, Clemson, Ohio State) and then your Tier 4 schools (Northwestern, Arizona, etc.) who will be first to really see any tangible "trickle down". Everyone on Tier 2 and Tier 3 would have an even harder time competing with Tier 1.

Biggest immediate fix needed for CFB is an 8 team playoff to give other teams a shot of breaking up the party.

After that, your best bet at leveling the playing field is to allow direct payment of players... but this has potential to go horribly awry given how fucked the management of CFB currently is.

I don't think the 8 team playoff helps because Bama, Clemson, and Ohio State beat teams 4-8 virtually every time. This isn't regular season where sneaky upsets happen. 2 weeks to prepare, playoff game atmosphere and pressure, etc. The cream rises in these situations and upsets are really unlikely.

I actually think there was a better shot at new blood in the BCS system. Look at 2012. If Kansas State won their last game, it was a KSU - ND championship. That is impossible in the current system.

 

[BobbyMac]

3) No-show jobs are coming to stay. I don't see how regulating third party income will be possible going forward.

They've ALWAYS been here. I had them, at two different schools. I know 3 basketball players who had them at IU when Feinstein was on campus writing "Season on the Brink".

 

[Old Man Mike]

This isn't REALLY fixable, but we could play around with it a little. Crazy thoughts following:

I'd like an 8 team playoff (that's seven big bowls.) It gets ND in when we're good without the BS. It also gets maybe two non-power five schools in, but one at least.

In order to not just sacrifice the non-power five "lambs" to Clemson and Alabama, (and here is the real crazy part) the Bowl committee has the right (and usually first obligation) to create abnormal bracketing. An example would be 1 vs 6, 2 vs 5, 3 vs 8, 4 vs 7. The idea being if there were monsters at the top, the Cinderellas wouldn't have a meaningless first-and-go-home game.

This year that might mean Alabama vs "Oklahoma", Clemson vs Texas A&M, Ohio State vs Cincinnati, and Notre Dame vs Florida or some approximation of a scenario. The Big Two would have no gripes as they are playing #3, and 4 teams now, and it would be #6 and 5. The "little guy" would get an interesting shot at a big, but not a top of the heap monster.

Elsewise, I'm fine with a moderate subsidy for footballers, but it would have to be externally funded (through the NCAA via TV %s across the board). Schools like WMU couldn't come close to funding any such thing. If this wasn't done, big money schools "extra-pay" would further defeat any smaller school recruitment. Subsidies for other sports? I'm not clear on that. Football is where the money is. So Football TV is where one can find money at the needed level. I can't imagine (myself) citizens wanting government being involved with extra fundings of athletes if the country will not consider elimination of student debt.

Leave the scholarship numbers as is. Difficult to create teams and depth as it is. Transfers do a lot to bolstering smaller schools. WMU has transfers starting all the time. The transfer portal business will widen that.

Leave the ranking process as is. It does a pretty honest job now in my opinion.

 

[IrishLax]

I don't think the 8 team playoff helps because Bama, Clemson, and Ohio State beat teams 4-8 virtually every time. This isn't regular season where sneaky upsets happen. 2 weeks to prepare, playoff game atmosphere and pressure, etc. The cream rises in these situations and upsets are really unlikely.

I actually think there was a better shot at new blood in the BCS system. Look at 2012. If Kansas State won their last game, it was a KSU - ND championship. That is impossible in the current system.

The problem right now is that other teams aren't even given a fair opportunity. The same three schools account for like 70%+ of playoff appearances. You can't crash the party if they won't physically let you in.

The first step is getting more teams included, then those teams will be able to recruit better based on those appearances, then they will be able to win games, and then... it's a snowball effect. For starters, simply having a 4 vs 5 game and 3 vs 6 game will do wonders for increasing the odds of upsets and new blood in the top four. If you got to all conference champs having an autobid + highest ranked Group of 5 team + 2 at large it fixes a lot of the recruiting/parity log jam in about 2-3 years.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

They've ALWAYS been here. I had them, at two different schools. I know 3 basketball players who had them at IU when Feinstein was on campus writing "Season on the Brink".

I didn't mean to imply they were new. With the coming rule changes "we" can just stop fighting about it something impossible to enforce, that only exists as a half-assed competitive balance measure, and move on.

 

[Wingman Ray]

Would it be fair to impose a minimum SAT/ACT score and GPA nationwide for athletes? One at least in line with what a D1 school would require of non athletes?

 

[IrishSanDiego]

Would it be fair to impose a minimum SAT/ACT score and GPA nationwide for athletes? One at least in line with what a D1 school would require of non athletes?

I think this it the best answer to restore the 'integrity of the student athlete'. Far too many times schools are accepting kids that everybody knows cannot pass a college level course load.
The clearing house requirements are a joke. A full qualifier only needs to maintain a 2.3GPA and achieve an SAT score of 980. 980 is at the 36% percentile for high school test takers. I don't believe anybody concerned with the 'integrity of the student athlete' would rightfully conclude that a recruit with these low test scores could adequately handle the rigors of a normal college course load, as well as the demands of a football schedule (plus any social or work obligations).
Set the imposed minimum standards to at least the national high school averages (GPA of 3.0 and SAT of 1060). This will ensure that the recruit has the ability to maintain their responsibilities of both academic and athletic life.

Concern #1 this proposal:
Many current student athletes, and those of similar backgrounds moving forward, would not be admitted under these new guidelines.
Response #1 of this proposal:
Setting a known limit for acceptance should incentive potential student athletes at the high school level to strive for greater academic achievement. This would require parents, football coaches, and academic advisers to be alert to, and respond early to poor academic performance. The scholarship should be awarded to the best 'student athlete' not just the best 'athlete'.

Concern #2 of this proposal:
High Schools could falsify/guide the student on easier paths to ensure their GPA is at the new higher level.
Response #2 of this proposal:
Put the onus on the college to ensure that the 'student athlete' that is being admitted can meet the rigors of the curriculum. This can be ensured by linking academic achievement at the college level to scholarship numbers and money. If a school takes in too many poor students and cannot graduate them (say 60% minimum federal graduation rate, which is in line with the national average), then they are imposed hefty scholarship reductions and earned monies (this can given to charity). This would have a direct impact on the football factories known for poor graduation rates.
Concern #2a of this proposal:
Colleges continuing to push students into easy majors or 'athletic' classes.
Response #2a of this proposal:
Make the NCAA grow a pair!!! (This by itself would do wonders to restore the 'integrity' of collegiate athletics) No school or set of schools should be beyond the scope of the NCAA's authority. If a school is known to behave improperly, punish them. The sport can easily live without UNC basketball for a few years (after 20 years of fake classes). The sport can easily live without Clemson football for a few years. A new school will always come up to take its place and be one we can root for. But let's choose to root for the schools who recruit smart kids, emphasize education, and prepare their students with a degree before they meet the real world.

 

[IrishSanDiego]

In response to the other questions in this post:

Playoffs should be expanded to at least 8 as others have discussed. I sure as heck remember Boise State, the Cinderella story, beating Oklahoma on a trick play more than I do the last Clemson Ohio state game.

I'd keep the scholarship limit at 85. This allows physical growth for the younger players as they learn the system. I like the transfer portal, I think it should stay open to immediate transfers as long as the kids are in good academic standing.

In regards to rankings, I think it would be better to wait until mid-season. This is currently what they are doing with the committee, but everybody else in the world AP, coaches poll, ESPN, all declare rankings so early that its unavoidable.

I'd say no to the extra monies. I think this becomes a very slippery slope in terms of how its implemented, not only between sports, but between genders. More money to football players would mean less revenue elsewhere, potentially cutting multiple other sports (We have already seen programs getting cut due to COVID, this would just be a further slash). And how do you regulate what a player is worth. Is it based on minutes played, PFF ranking, stats? What happens if a prime player gets injured and can't play all year? Does he not get anything even though his name and likeness may still be used.
-The recruit knows what he is receiving for his commitment. Education, room and board, books, small stipends. Most people would jump at that offer. If we start paying kids, does this become part of the recruiting contract? This would only encourage the 'football factory' ideology of the top teams.
-And I know the colleges are making tons of money off these kids, I just don't see how a system can be implemented to address this appropriately

 

[NDPhilly]

CFP was a mistake. I wish they never changed from the old system. Really sad to see major bowls devalued like they have been.

 

[Free Manera]

CFP was a mistake. I wish they never changed from the old system. Really sad to see major bowls devalued like they have been.

Amen. Feels like it devalued the regular season too. The committee has a built in excuse to include teams like Ohio State even after losses because of the "eye test"

 

[RDU Irish]

Never happen but some system that drops crap programs like Illinois or Vanderbuilt from their conferences and replace them with Cincinnati and UCF for example. Boise State would have replaced some Pac12 schmuck back in the day, etc. Just admit G5 isn't getting in the show but success can graduate them to the adult table for the next year. Likewise - if you suck you have to build it back up.

I don't know if Iowa State or Indiana get stuck in G5 and are not in their current respectable position but I don't really care with Boise State, Cincinnati, UCF etc adding depth and real competition all these years to the P5. Then you also have lots on the line in G5 for winning in this situation and basement dwellers have a fire lit under their ass.

 

[Irish YJ]

CFP was a mistake. I wish they never changed from the old system. Really sad to see major bowls devalued like they have been.

So you prefer the BCS, or pre-BCS?

Amen. Feels like it devalued the regular season too. The committee has a built in excuse to include teams like Ohio State even after losses because of the "eye test"

IDK. This year, would you prefer watching OSU and Oregon in the Rose Bowl? And then a subjective group looking at all major Bowl winners to select a champion?

Not sure if you're weighing the impact of this year's Covid situation, but even in a BCS or subjective look, OSU would likely still be in the conversation. It would just likely come down to a likely undefeated Bama (who killed their bowl opponent) and OSU (who likely killed their opponent, and who know about ND because they wouldn't be in the conversation after the loss (unless all teams including Bama and OSU lost their bowl games). Cinci and Costal would be screwed regardless unless some extraordinary things happened.

In short, think about how things would look pre-CFP, or even pre-BCS for this year. It's just not attractive IMO.

 

[Sea Turtle]

Two divisions

Semi pro division

Amateur division

Cross play if teams want to to preserve rivalries

 

[ulukinatme]

Aside from opening the playoff to 8 or even 16 teams, I'd like to see something happen to break up the power structure of the major football factories. There's maybe 4-5 teams at the top and everyone else is in a different league right now. It makes for a rather boring playoff format when the same teams are in the playoff each season, or worse the same 2 in the championship. I don't know how to solve that particular problem, but at the very least opening up to 8 or 16 teams allows for more chaos to happen. You want chaos, because predictable finishes are boring as hell.

 

[Irish YJ]

My thoughts...

Limit scholarships to 75

Put a cap on schools salaries for coaches and assistants, and recruiting spend. The only unlimited spend should be on facilities.

Go to 8 team playoff (5 P5 CCs, 2 highest ranked G5, +1 highest ranked)

Partner specific P5s with specific G5s. Relegate worst teams out of P5s and elevate up G5 CCs. One team per each conference swapped per year.

Schedule wise, standardize # of conf games, OoC games (G5 and P5), and limit non-D1 games to 1 per year (in the first 2 weeks). Also standardize CC games.

Standardize non-playoff bowl games.



IMO, that would even things out, refresh the conferences consistently (relegation/elevation), give smaller schools a more equal playing field, and diminish to an extent the advantage of the FB factories.

 

[Wingman Ray]

Almost seems as if increasing GPA/SAT requirements plus adding semi pro league would be a good answer. Kids that actually care about education would go to college to further their job potential while playing the sport they love and having their school paid for them as a result. Those that place little emphasis on education their whole lives including college could just go play the game they love and get paid to do it. Then the pro teams could draft out/call up players of the semi pro teams and any college players that stand out. Much like how baseball does it.

Coaches like Saban/Stoops/Myer/Etc would coach semi pro. Just think how much college tuition may drop without having to pay a coaches $4 mil a year salary....

Also I dont recall any academic all Americans joining in on the call to have players paid. Seems that the ones that were/are fussing about how they should get paid werent the most cerebral of individuals who saw the value in what they were receiving education wise from their college of choice.

 

[pumpdog20]

I like the idea of picking playoff teams after bowl games.

10 game regular seasons with conference championship games determining major bowl games with current bowl tie-ins and at large allocations. Then a committee to pick the 8 bowl teams.

 

[AllTimeIrish]

Two divisions

Semi pro division

Amateur division

Cross play if teams want to to preserve rivalries

Ding ding. Soccer league model it, where certain amateur programs can play their way up to semi-pro if they win their league, and semi-pro can play their way down if they don't perform.

Two sets of playoffs. Each division has max ten team leagues, based on location. Playoffs like in the NFL, with a couple of wildcards for stronger leagues to send second teams. There MUST be a rebalancing of the leagues every 2-3 years to prevent top heavy leagues like the SEC. That way it's increasingly unlikely that deserving teams are left out repeatedly.

As for student/athlete compensation, do it this way:

• Insurance to pay for surgeries and injuries
• Long term disability fund for head or serious other injuries
• Percentage of sports revenues go towards regular (non-athlete), disadvantaged students to give them a chance (think inner-city school kids)
• Percentage of revenues go to trust account for each athlete, evenly distributed, for their benefit accruing to 5 years after graduating. Must graduate within that time to get access to the funds, even if they have to go back to the school after declaring for the draft. If they don't go back, the funds move back into the general pool for future athletes.
• Penalties for programs that go below a specific percentage of graduating athletes

Amend the student-athlete rules to stipulate that class attendance and performance is required, and audited by a third party on a yearly basis. Sanctions occur against offenders.

Any excess revenues are left to the schools to spend as they see fit on their programs. This would blunt some of the revenues the powerhouses get to spend yearly and redistribute it to the athletes in need, while allowing for consistently excellent programs to still benefit from their performance.

Provide a conduit for athletes that don't want to finish their education to play in a development league (like a minor league) for the NFL. That would eliminate much of the college program abuses that occur now, as athletes would play development league for 2-3 years before declaring for the NFL draft at 20 years old.

It's a hybrid model, but it would do a lot to prevent many of the abuses now.

 

[Old Man Mike]

I have an unfinished (very) novel about the near future (or a parallel reality) in which there are NO scholarship teams "owned by universities" but all such programs (maintained) are "community associated." (A tiny bit like Green Bay) The universities have transitioned their uber-facilities to their communities, who then "sponsor" the same teams which have always been there and played there. Since football is The Funding Producer everywhere but places like Louisville and Kentucky, the funding for this action should remain unchanged (TV, Alums, fanatics, tickets).

"Alabama" would still exist with the same staffs and facilities and presumably fans and TV contracts, but the athletes would be paid as semi-pros. Because the universities have nothing (other than possible facility rent) to do with a team's economics, paying athletes does not fall on their budgets.

NO eligibility situation. You come, try out, get an offer, and get paid. There would be teams called "Georgia", and "LSU", etc. Schedule them or don't. Your "alumni" could dump whatever amount of cash on the "business" that they want. If some team becomes good enough to compete in The League, then The League decides, probably on cash terms. There are no such things as National Championships other than ones made up. And there is no NCAA, probably for anything, but certainly not football.

How ND, and any other school not wanting to give up on student/athlete football would fit into this is up to further imagination. If some programs went semi-pro (ex. the whole SEC minus maybe Vanderbilt),( the whole B1G, minus maybe NW), (the whole Big12), (the whole PAC12, maybe minus Stanford), (most of the ACC) (etc) then what does ND do? One thing would be true, the best athletes ("5*s" etc) would be looking to get paid, and no sense recruiting them for any of the non-semi-pros.

 

[Luckylucci]

I said this in another thread recently but anyway here it is.

Scholarships are guaranteed for 4 years. When a player transfers out, he continues to count against scholarship numbers of the team he transferred from until the 4 years are up.

The result is teams can't force out lesser talented players/busts without consequences. Teams that stockpile talent are essentially taxed when players transfer out.

You know, I don't think this will ever get done but it's a very interesting concept that I think would have a lot of benefits.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

A couple things to keep in perspective, fellas. College football is my favorite thing in life to follow and I would hate to see it ruined in the sense of "fairness" and "equality."

1. College football has never been equal for all teams. Conferences aren't equal, schedules aren't equal, facilities aren't equal, and the quality of education isn't either. If you're obsessed with parity, go watch the NFL. Bama and Coastal Carolina don't belong on the same field.

2. With that said, Group of 5 should have their own playoff after the regular season. Give those kids something to play for.

3. Scholarship reduction looks great on paper, but most of those kids will still take a PWO from Ohio St rather than take a scholarship from an FCS school or lower level school.

4. We don't need an 8 team playoff, and this is the laziest argument people in sports media can make and continue to make. Most of the CFP semifinal games aren't close. Making the season longer isn't healthy for these kids, and it's just gonna bring us a few more 52-14 games. It's moronic. No one benefits from Clemson clobbering Cincinnati by 40.

5. So how do we bring more competition to Clemson and Bama? Easy...hire better coaches, recruit better, and develop talent better. Get your $hit together. ND has done as good as it can do. FSU, Miami, Auburn, LSU, Oklahoma, Texas, and USC...get your $hit together. All those programs have everything they need to get it done.

6. Pray that Saban retires soon.

7. Pray that Urban stays in media.

8. Let's see how dominant Dabo is when Venables and Elliot both get head coaching gigs.