Not sure if you follow uncle lou much, but many in the sports podcast & personality world this year was extremely bearish on the BIG12 early this season. Now we are 5-0 in bowl games, and a few of these teams have significant starter %'s returning for next season, I feel comfortable rubbing their nose in it a little. UGA barely beat Cinnci, or Christmas would have came twice this year... I didnt think UF could have been more embarrassed, until I heard Mullen's post game, what a douchebag. It would be difficult for me to support a coach that would push that narrative after a loss..
Several things need to happen:
1. Increase playoffs to 8 teams.
2. Give players a small $ bonus for making a bowl game. $ = to the type/level of bowl & end of year rankings. This would entice players to not opt out, if they know they could get some cash in their pocket.. $1k(FYI bowl)-$20k(Championship) would be sufficient.
3. This one probably would not fly, but to make everything a bit more equal, more participation, I would create a new HS recruit ranking system, 1-100 ranking method, potentially combining several methods, for the most accurate skillset+talent eval possible.
1. Each team can only recruit 5 players max per class with 96-100 ranking ( or 3)
2. Each team can only recruit 5 players max per class with 91-96 ranking ( or 5)
3. Each team can only recruit 5 players max per class with 86-91 ranking ( or 8)
Unlimited recruits allowed below 86 ranking.
This would spread the talent out a bit more, make recruiting process & program+team building more interesting, and increase participation diversity. Instead of the vast majority of high end players going to the same 4-6 Universities, it would smooth the talent distribution, making quality coaching, development, & talent evaluation even more important under this structure. You could increase the # of players per category, slightly, such as 3,5,8 or 5,5,8, or, 3,4,5, etc... You could use a historical avg/ratio of the total # of recruits per yr in each ranking category to determine what scaled incremental increase would be for each ranking reduction. This would spread talent out over a much larger # of schools, so increasing the playoffs to 8 would be even more exciting, because you know the talent gap between #1 & #8 isnt as significant as it would be under current structure, where Alabama, OSU, & Clemson alone take a significant % of high-end HS recruits on a yearly basis. This probably would not fly, but it would def make NCAA more exciting, for many more people/fans.. Ultimately increasing fan participation & revenues for the NCAA as a whole.
Several things need to happen:
1. Increase playoffs to 8 teams.
2. Give players a small $ bonus for making a bowl game. $ = to the type/level of bowl & end of year rankings. This would entice players to not opt out, if they know they could get some cash in their pocket.. $1k(FYI bowl)-$20k(Championship) would be sufficient.
3. This one probably would not fly, but to make everything a bit more equal, more participation, I would create a new HS recruit ranking system, 1-100 ranking method, potentially combining several methods, for the most accurate skillset+talent eval possible.
1. Each team can only recruit 5 players max per class with 96-100 ranking ( or 3)
2. Each team can only recruit 5 players max per class with 91-96 ranking ( or 5)
3. Each team can only recruit 5 players max per class with 86-91 ranking ( or 8)
Unlimited recruits allowed below 86 ranking.
This would spread the talent out a bit more, make recruiting process & program+team building more interesting, and increase participation diversity. Instead of the vast majority of high end players going to the same 4-6 Universities, it would smooth the talent distribution, making quality coaching, development, & talent evaluation even more important under this structure. You could increase the # of players per category, slightly, such as 3,5,8 or 5,5,8, or, 3,4,5, etc... You could use a historical avg/ratio of the total # of recruits per yr in each ranking category to determine what scaled incremental increase would be for each ranking reduction. This would spread talent out over a much larger # of schools, so increasing the playoffs to 8 would be even more exciting, because you know the talent gap between #1 & #8 isnt as significant as it would be under current structure, where Alabama, OSU, & Clemson alone take a significant % of high-end HS recruits on a yearly basis. This probably would not fly, but it would def make NCAA more exciting, for many more people/fans.. Ultimately increasing fan participation & revenues for the NCAA as a whole.
