2017-2018 NCAA Football Season Thread [Archived] Football • Page 16

Fresno is going to be bad until 2019 probably. Tedford will get them back up and running strong by then.

 

UW at 8 which is about where I expected. Think they'll be at 5 or better by mid-season unless they completely shit their pants.

 

Why? They don't do that now, why would they then? UConn and Buffalo still get recruits knowing full well that 4 wins is a luxury. Putting them in a better field of competition, giving them a better chance, is going to hurt them?

Yeah, I'm aware of that. You're talking about these teams being taken out resulting in scholarships leaving. Aside from the fact that I'm not saying take teams away, there are teams that can be taken away, such as the Ivy League schools.

How? I don't see how that would result in that. I'm not expanding rosters. There are still the same amount of spots. The sport as a whole would be more competitive and exciting. I hardly see that as hurting.

 

We just completely disagree. College sports are always better when they're more inclusive. I think you're DRAMATICALLY overestimating the difference in schedule strength across the board in your system versus reality now. Win probabilities for the top teams would drop maybe 1-2% for their non conference games because they won't schedule anyone hard. Therefore you're just going to hurt the middle of the pack teams who now have to cannibalize each other because there is no incentive for a team like Alabama to play the 35th best team in the country, let alone another top 25 team outside of their conference. NCAA football is not, and should not, be run like minor league football.

Promotion to that league means absolutely nothing, too. The teams that get move up into the top 64 are the same teams that will just move back down the next year. The bottom will just have this revolving door effect that does not impact. You're version of this is just reshuffling the entire landscape of college football to really cater to only 10 or 20 schools in the country and that isn't right. The major bluebloods in the sport should not get to dictate what happens to college football because what they experience is way outside of the norms for the majority of the schools and their fans.

 

The small schools would not be nearly as appealing to a lot of lesser recruited players. They will hop on with bigger programs as backups.

They won't necessarily get a shot to play the teams that overlooked them. They won't get as many chances to play on TV.

It hurts the competition level of smaller schools by taking away their ability to appeal to recruits in more ways.

 

How is cutting the amount of teams an FBS school can schedule in half not making any difference? You say they'll just schedule the weakest teams as if they don't already do that. It's just now they schedule UMass instead of North Carolina.

If it means nothing then what does the current system mean? Less than nothing?

I agree, the major bluebloods should not dictate what happens in college football and yet you're defending how its set up, not me.

Why would they do that if they don't do that now? What incentive does it give them? A lot of these guys want to go into the NFL and that would cripple their chances.

The FCS as it is needs to get shown more, I agree with that. So let's say that changes with this system.

I still don't see how it actually hurts recruits.

 

Your system would be changing the entire system around the bluebloods and trying to get them better games while willfully ignoring and casting aside mid-major college football for simple fact that they don't have the resources of the P5 schools. "Hey, thanks for trying and your brand of football is cute and all but you don't deserve to be on the same field with teams that happen to have boosters pouring money into a program to relive their golden years vicariously through unpaid labor of 18-22 players."

 

He says App State is an underdog story. You're telling me they are a blueblood. Which is it?

 

Nah, I didn't say that.

 

It hurts the recruiting at smaller programs and if you don't see that, I have no idea if you ever will.

 

You just keep saying that without actually giving reasons as to why. They'd have a shot to play on a bigger stage more often, the "level of competition" argument would not exist nearly as much.

 

Popping in to interrupt this hearty debate but boys, I've done it. I've found the worst Top 25 ballot.

Pat Dooley at College Poll Tracker

 

That might be the worst preseason Top 25 poll ever created.

 

I can't figure out what is more criminal....Washington at 16, Ok St at 2 or Kentucky anywhere in the Top 25 picture.

 

...Kentucky?!

 

Kentucky could be a sneaky team but they have not proven they should be anywhere near this conversation lol.

Also, the biggest joke is Clemson.

 

Someone put Wisconsin THIRD!?

 

You are fucking wrong, sir.

Mitch Vingle at College Poll Tracker

Behold.

 

Notre Dame hahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

College football polls are still so dumb. It's insane that some of these people get to vote.

 

any other Auburn fans here? SEC fans who wanna talk some trash?

 

paging doo doo bird

 

@Fucking Dustin is an Auburn fan. Quite a few other SEC guys in here.

As for me? Go Vols (sigh)

 

dang man, sorry for your loss.

 

LSU, yo.