OT: CFB is so rigged that it's a joke

[RutgersRaRa]

By the way, the OP has never responded in one of his own threads.

Zappaa bringing the truth bombs up in here.

 

[SkilletHead2]

What's so surprising about the same teams being in the finals two times in a row? It's either going to happen or it isn't. It's 50/50.

 

[huskersalways]

Another one could be a cap on coaching salaries. It's gotten to the absurd point. Coaches can still move around, but everyone would have a crack at them. That would level the playing field some.

I would find that very difficult to not only get a rule made for it not to mention enforcing it. You would have to be able to monitor donor donations as some schools only pay part of their coaches salaries. Part of the money comes out of the schools foundations. The NCAA would be better off trying to enforce the salary cap on the players. Ha. I don't want anybody telling me how much money I'm allowed to make and I doubt it would stand up in court if somebody wanted to test it. I thought the US was a capitalistic society where that is the object, to make as much as you can in as short a period of time as possible. I have been going about things all wrong maybe.

Everybody always looks for a way to knock down the successful people, schools, or whatever instead of doing more to raise themselves. It fits in the everybody gets a trophy crowd. The world would be one boring place if everybody got, had, or was entitled to the same stuff.

 

[koleszar]

I would find that very difficult to not only get a rule made for it not to mention enforcing it. You would have to be able to monitor donor donations as some schools only pay part of their coaches salaries. Part of the money comes out of the schools foundations. The NCAA would be better off trying to enforce the salary cap on the players. Ha. I don't want anybody telling me how much money I'm allowed to make and I doubt it would stand up in court if somebody wanted to test it. I thought the US was a capitalistic society where that is the object, to make as much as you can in as short a period of time as possible. I have been going about things all wrong maybe.

Everybody always looks for a way to knock down the successful people, schools, or whatever instead of doing more to raise themselves. It fits in the everybody gets a trophy crowd. The world would be one boring place if everybody got, had, or was entitled to the same stuff.

Yes I rethought my position on that idea, as I thought it to be a little communist and deleted it just before you posted. Not a good idea at all. But salaries have gotten way out of control. Really we're screwed on so many fronts here at RU in athletics I think most of us are just grasping at straws.

Even when we get our full share it still remains to be seen where the money will actually go. Rutgers seems to treat athletics as a separate entity from the University itself. Meaning if they want a road paved at one of their athletic facilities, that falls on athletics not maintenance. The RAC still has potholes while just across the street there's a brand new business school and dorms.

 

[huskersalways]

Yes I rethought my position on that idea, as I thought it to be a little communist and deleted it just before you posted. Not a good idea at all. But salaries have gotten way out of control.

You won't get any argument out of me about the salaries. Ha. I want a job I can suck at and get paid a couple mil a year, then get fired and the employer has to pay me millions more.

 

[TonyLieske]

A few teams DO dominate the field of play in the NFL:

The Steelers (6), Cowboys (5), 49ers (5), Giants (4), Pats (4), and Packers (4), have combined to win 28 of the 50 SB's played thus far. Throw in The Raiders, Redskins, an Broncos - at 3 each - and 37 of 50 games have been won by the same 9 teams.

I understand what you are saying, but keeping in mind there are only 32 NFL teams (and there used to be even fewer) you are saying ~28% of the teams have won 74% of the games. That is a tight distribution, but nothing like CFB. 9 NFL teams would be the equivalent of ~34-35 college teams.

Also keep in mind that the salary caps are relatively recent. Again keeping in mind expansion teams that haven't been around 50 years, only 13 teams have never WON the superbowl. Only two teams (Texans and Jaquars, both relatively recent expansions) have never appeared in a Superbowl. Also keep in mind the NFL itself is relatively new compared to College Football and for most of its Historical the CFB "championship" was mythical (in that it was just a matter of getting more votes, not actual playing on the field). I think if you look at the BCS and Playoff era only you get a better feel for distribution. In order to capture 74% of the championships you only need 7 teams (or about 5-6% of FBS schools). You only need 11 teams (all from the "Power 5 Conferences"), or less than 10% of FBS teams, in total to account for 100% of the championships.

 

[RU848789]

Oddly enough its the NFL's "rigging" (via the draft, salary caps, smaller rosters, etc...) that makes things on the field more competitive. If NFL teams had unlimited salaries with twice the roster and could sign kids right out of college (rather than forcing the kids to certain teams via a draft) I suspect you would see something similar to the NCAA where a few teams tend to dominate the field of play.

Yep, the only thing that ends (or at least reduces) the cesspool that major college sports has become is the friggin' university presidents actually standing up and doing their jobs. They need to start acting like the NFL with revenue sharing, scholarship limits and much more aggressive policing (self and by the NCAA) to ensure a level playing field. They could do it, but they choose not to.

 

[huskersalways]

Yep, the only thing that ends (or at least reduces) the cesspool that major college sports has become is the friggin' university presidents actually standing up and doing their jobs. They need to start acting like the NFL with revenue sharing, scholarship limits and much more aggressive policing (self and by the NCAA) to ensure a level playing field. They could do it, but they choose not to.

Revenue sharing is done by the conferences. How would you feel if you didn't get a split of the bowl revenue(when you are full share) like the other teams because you didn't make a bowl? Is that going to help you improve as a program? Years ago the schools kept all the bowl money from their bowl. They didn't have to share any of it.

There are scholarship limits now, 85. You are getting the exact same amount as every other school. Now the change that could be made would be the rules about over signing and whether or not all schools should have guaranteed 4 year scholarships like the Big 10 requires now. The ability to "roster manage" is big to gaining depth. Coaches are correct(IMO) in saying you can't drop that number without bringing more harm to the players themselves.

This is something that should/could have been done since college football started. I had a friend that played for Bud Wilkenson and was on Barry Switzers staff(he is dead now). we used to sit around in the evenings and he would tell stories about how corrupt the game was when he played and coached. He said it was way worse than it is now. Could it be a lot better? Absolutely. But unless the NCAA gets more aggressive and/or they are granted subpoena power I don't see much changing. Like I kind of said in an earlier post, you aren't going to bring the elite schools back, a school will have to up their game to match them or be left behind.

 

[brgRC90]

Tilted playing field, not quite the same as rigged but bad nonetheless.