Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Coach Prime Named SI Sportsperson of the Year (for Going 4-8)


PleaseBlitz

Recommended Posts

@tshile

 

Go look at the current top 15 ranked programs. Then go look at the 15 schools with the largest football budgets. It’s nearly a match except Texas A&M is a disaster and 2 Pac 12 schools (who have smaller budgets since the conference is collapsing) are in the top 15 because they have 1 loss between them (because the rest of the Pac 12 is mediocre). Otherwise, it matches. 
 

I guess I’d like you to provide several examples of “schools that weren’t considered powerhouses in recruiting the previous 15ish years are getting better recruits and have higher upside as a team in the immediate future.”  The only one that comes to mind for me is Texas, which is due to it having a colossal budget. But please provide examples.  
 

And, of course, even if a medium budget school recruits a player that turns out to be awesome, the big budget schools buy them in the transfer portal. See, eg, Jordan Addison (Pitt to USC), Jordan Travis (Louisville to FSU), Dilion Gabriel (UCF to Oklahoma), Herndon Hooker (Vt to Tennessee).


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me you’re gonna hang on the idea that it was better before

 

when the money schools had was still the same, the only difference was one’s willingness to and propensity in breaking the rules. 
 

everyone knew the previous system was super corrupt and the “rules” were a joke because some people were willing to break them, and amongst those how much varied. 
 

and I wouldn’t propose you’d see the effects super quick. Long term I think allowing schools to spend their money without having to worry about breaking the rules will allow a more even playing field. 
 

but if one wishes to side with the NCAA and make an argument based on integrity of the system, 😂, have at it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reminds me of people that acted as if UNC committed some grave sin against the sanctity of college sports and student athletes, by getting caught doing the same thing every big time program was doing (finding some way to skirt the concept of requiring their star athletes to honestly meet some academic standard)

 

the level of dishonest required to even try to argument is amusing 

(Not to be confused with the people that were just enjoying the fact that UNC got in trouble and was being drug through the mud for a bit - cause **** UNC)

Edited by tshile
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, tshile said:

It seems to me you’re gonna hang on the idea that it was better before

 

when the money schools had was still the same, the only difference was one’s willingness to and propensity in breaking the rules. 
 

everyone knew the previous system was super corrupt and the “rules” were a joke because some people were willing to break them, and amongst those how much varied. 
 

and I wouldn’t propose you’d see the effects super quick. Long term I think allowing schools to spend their money without having to worry about breaking the rules will allow a more even playing field. 
 

but if one wishes to side with the NCAA and make an argument based on integrity of the system, 😂, have at it. 

 

Notwithstanding your inability to actually name some schools that actually fit your theory as I asked (SUPRISING!), I'm not saying the previous way was good (and it is ridiculous that that was your takeaway since I said zero about how it was before), but I definitely think the current way sucks. The previous way ****ed over the student athletes.  The current way ****s over all of the schools, and their fanbases, that don't have a top-20 budget and/or gigantic pool of rich boosters, which is the vast majority of them.

 

The NCAA is completely incompetent and corrupt, so of course it ****ed this up.  There is a way to both pay the athletes and do it in such a way that it doesn't make collegiate football solely about <20 programs with the biggest budget and the most well-heeled boosters.  

Edited by PleaseBlitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seemed I was saying the change created a better system than what we had 

 

you seemed to think that was wrong 

 

the implication, if the new system isn’t an improvement on the old system, would be that the old system is better than the new system 

 

it’s a market where the rules were selectively followed and selectively  enforced. It’s now a market where those abuses are allowed, and universities can decide if and how much they want to participate fairly on their own. 
 

Quote

When you can buy players, the programs with the largest budgets gain a gigantic advantage. 

Right and you could buy players before. But only if you were willing to break the rules and risk getting caught. But even then there was a gradient of risk tolerance and factors. Some schools probably used bribes or other under the table stuff and had more confidence is breaking the rules, some only wanted to break the rules a little, others didn’t give a ****; enforcement was universally considered a joke. None of that is at play any longer. 

 

the next thing to go is the academic requirement. I’m sure people will proclaim how awful it will be - that a ridiculous lie no one believes ceases being a lie. 🤷‍♂️ 

 

https://gprivate.com/684sn
 

This idea isn’t exactly novel or earth shattering. It’s pretty well explained out there. And for the most part the argument is about a long term outlook on impact so in the immediate aftermath of the change it’s about seeing smaller changes and projecting. 
 

 

Edited by tshile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fwiw I don't think any program should have to pay a million+ to keep or get (portal) a good QB. And yet that's where the NIL has put NCAA football. 

 

The portal, if you keep it, should come with a 1yr penalty to the player with the exception of the player entering due to a change in headcoach at his own team. 

 

As for the NILs, they should have capped the maximum at a reasonable amountto keep amateur status. Right now we have some college players making more than the pros. 

 

 

1 hour ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

I have sources in Morgantown that tell me the Mountaineers are attempting to lure UCLA qb Dante Moore with a package that includes a deed to an abandoned mine, a pallet of Spam, a 2008 Dodge Nitro and a Sheetz uniform signed by Kevin Pittsnogle.

 

The rich get richer…

 

You forgot to add a few cases of Natty Light and/or Iron City (aka Iron ****ty).

Edited by The Evil Genius
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...