This is how college football should be run

[Bryoming]

We've run like this in our NCAA Football PS3 for years now, and it makes perfect sense to run college football this way. No more conference realignment, no more bitching about bowl tie-ins, and only the best teams will be playing for the national title. If you're dead weight you get relegated. If you're playing well you move up.

If the NCAA would sack up and change up the rules to reflect this life would get exponentially better for all college football fans and players.

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/5/17/3025459/college-football-relegation-in-action-2012

 

[zappinpoke]

Would never work. Why you ask? One word: budgets

 

[Bryoming]

I would argue that this would level the playing field. Budgets would fluctuate based on which tier you were in. For instance, if USC had a bad year they would drop down a tier, get less TV/bowl money, and have to adjust their budget accordingly. On the flip side, Boise State would be flush with cash after moving up and be able to better their program.

 

[zappinpoke]

I would argue that this would level the playing field. Budgets would fluctuate based on which tier you were in. For instance, if USC had a bad year they would drop down a tier, get less TV/bowl money, and have to adjust their budget accordingly. On the flip side, Boise State would be flush with cash after moving up and be able to better their program.

Do you think USC HC and staff are going to take pay cuts? No. You will have coaches jumping around every year and players transferring in and out of programs. It won't be just TV/bowl money in constant flux but also ticket prices going up and down. Almost impossible to budget. This whole deal would be a nightmare. And if the team I support with my money were to drop a couple of levels so would my donations. It might work in a video game world but not the real world.

 

[Bryoming]

I would argue that this would level the playing field. Budgets would fluctuate based on which tier you were in. For instance, if USC had a bad year they would drop down a tier, get less TV/bowl money, and have to adjust their budget accordingly. On the flip side, Boise State would be flush with cash after moving up and be able to better their program.

Do you think USC HC and staff are going to take pay cuts? No. You will have coaches jumping around every year and players transferring in and out of programs. It won't be just TV/bowl money in constant flux but also ticket prices going up and down. Almost impossible to budget. This whole deal would be a nightmare. And if the team I support with my money were to drop a couple of levels so would my donations. It might work in a video game world but not the real world.

It already does work in the real world. The Euro soccer leagues have been running this way for a long time. Seems to work alright for them. I realize that professional soccer and college football are two different worlds, but the gap isn't so big that the system couldn't be retrofitted to work in the NCAA.

 

[Wyo2dal]

It would work fine, I think the word people are trying to find that would stop it from working is GREED.

 

[snowsailor]

College football head coaches ego's are way too big for this to ever work.

 

[WestWYOPoke]

College football head coaches ego's are way too big for this to ever work.

How do you figure? It's pretty straight forward, you have to put up or shut up.

 

[fromolwyoming]

College football head coaches ego's are way too big for this to ever work.

How do you figure? It's pretty straight forward, you have to put up or shut up.

You think Texas or Florida would agree to this? Despite all their advantages, they would be put into FCS or Div 2 with their recent records.

 

[WestWYOPoke]

College football head coaches ego's are way too big for this to ever work.

How do you figure? It's pretty straight forward, you have to put up or shut up.

You think Texas or Florida would agree to this? Despite all their advantages, they would be put into FCS or Div 2 with their recent records.

No, they would hate it, but too bad; if the majority vote for it that is how it would be. And I have to think a lot of BCS programs would like this...until they fell down a level.

 

[BackHarlowRoad]

Notice Wyoming is grouped with Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, etc.

I'm surprised so many are saying they'd want it this way.

 

[Wyo2dal]

Notice Wyoming is grouped with Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, etc.

I'm surprised so many are saying they'd want it this way.

Last time we reached the AP Polls was 1996 when we hit 22. We're 94-120 since 1996, I mean I see through Brown and Gold glasses as often as any fan but even I'm not so caught up that I wouldn't admit that is where we deserve to be based off performance alone.

 

[BackHarlowRoad]

Notice Wyoming is grouped with Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, etc.

I'm surprised so many are saying they'd want it this way.

Last time we reached the AP Polls was 1996 when we hit 22. We're 94-120 since 1996, I mean I see through Brown and Gold glasses as often as any fan but even I'm not so caught up that I wouldn't admit that is where we deserve to be based off performance alone.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be grouped with them. We absolutely should based on performance.

I'm saying I'm surprised so many would be ok with that.

Especially when I see the responses SDpoke(?) gets when he mentions going Big Sky. He gets torn to pieces.

 

[Wyo2dal]

Notice Wyoming is grouped with Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, etc.

I'm surprised so many are saying they'd want it this way.

Last time we reached the AP Polls was 1996 when we hit 22. We're 94-120 since 1996, I mean I see through Brown and Gold glasses as often as any fan but even I'm not so caught up that I wouldn't admit that is where we deserve to be based off performance alone.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be grouped with them. We absolutely should.

I'm saying I'm surprised so many would be ok with that.

Especially when I see the responses SDpoke gets when he mentions going Big Sky.

I agree with you to a point, I think knowing that the playing field is level is an easier way to accept that if you get better you can go somewhere. Because as it is now IF huge IF we went undefeated two years in a row and knocked off top 5 opponents during that undefeated streak we would still go nowhere.

Looking at it from a standpoint of knowing that if we did that and we could actually move makes you feel better about accepting where you rank.

 

[BackHarlowRoad]

Notice Wyoming is grouped with Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, etc.

I'm surprised so many are saying they'd want it this way.

Last time we reached the AP Polls was 1996 when we hit 22. We're 94-120 since 1996, I mean I see through Brown and Gold glasses as often as any fan but even I'm not so caught up that I wouldn't admit that is where we deserve to be based off performance alone.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be grouped with them. We absolutely should.

I'm saying I'm surprised so many would be ok with that.

Especially when I see the responses SDpoke gets when he mentions going Big Sky.

I agree with you to a point, I think knowing that the playing field is level is an easier way to accept that if you get better you can go somewhere. Because as it is now IF huge IF we went undefeated two years in a row and knocked off top 5 opponents during that undefeated streak we would still go nowhere.

Looking at it from a standpoint of knowing that if we did that and we could actually move makes you feel better about accepting where you rank.

I'm not sure what you're agreeing with, I'm not even arguing. Just saying I'm surprised

But yeah, I guess knowing you can dig yourself out of the hole makes a big difference in mindset.

 

[Wyo2dal]

I'm not arguing just saying why I can see people agreeing with it this is what happens when you are writing posts in multiple forums and you put part of one in the other haha. I can see your confusion that was my fault!

 

[J-Rod]

Seems like the top tier of FCS is facing a tough decision.....a gamble almost. Leave, like App State, GA Southern, etc. have.....and join FBS in hope that this divide everyone is projecting happens, making the formerly known as "non-AQ" conference the new Division II...meaning they got in the door right before it closes. Don't do it, like NDSU...and you face the possibility of being stuck in a watered down FCS.

If this divide does happen (and many think its just a matter of time), and the Big 5-6 leave the others (including the MW) behind.....I guess it depends on your perspective. Some might see that as a good thing for Wyoming. The roof for championships (real ones) gets much much lower.....and there is a possibility in the future that the Big 5-6 begin to transition into minor league programs. If pay-to-play happens, don't be surprised if the NFL closes that gap and begins to tier the payment process (pros, minor league) like the majors do.

In that case...."college football" in its traditional format may only exist with the so-called small schools.

Just thinking out loud really.....but its hard to project the future of college football, but clearly things are changing. Where Wyoming falls I do not know....and where they do fall, there will be different interpretations as to whether its a good thing or not.