The Regionalization of College Football

[The-Hack]

I started watching college football in the early 70s and they were always national televised games.

Some, yes, but damn few.

UK went from 1959 (Georgia Tech) until 1975 (Maryland) without a nationally televised game.

Check the UK media guide; they list them all.

 

[vhcat70]

For what? Being successful? Think about that before you suggest it.

Yes, for being overly successful to create a more balanced & thus more interesting product. More interesting = more $$$. I mean that's what the NFL does with their drafting rules. Seems to work well for them. What's the problem?

 

[Glenn's take]

Do people realize that almost 80% of the population of the United States live in the eastern or central time zones? Add to that, the larger west coast cities actually look down on college sports and of course it's regional and the west coast teams will suck.

 

[vhcat70]

Do people realize that almost 80% of the population of the United States live in the eastern or central time zones? Add to that, the larger west coast cities actually look down on college sports and of course it's regional and the west coast teams will suck.

Maybe/maybe not, but true. BUT, there's only one BCS team from NYC east, another 10% of people too.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Yes, for being overly successful to create a more balanced & thus more interesting product. More interesting = more $$$. I mean that's what the NFL does with their drafting rules. Seems to work well for them. What's the problem?

Yeah, that worked great, kept the Patriots who drafted last out of contention for years, and put teams like the Bengals who drafted very early in the Super Bowl. Good programs find ways to win, in the professional leagues it's trades and free agency. In college it will be the transfer portal and immediate playing time.

Early signing day was suppose to reduce flipping, help teams that don't recruit at an elite level and hurt those do. It didn't do much for the flipping or change the top 10 recruiting teams. Personally I don't want it to change, I want to be one of them.

 

[UKWinsAgainYep]

This wouldn't fix, but I'd
- prohibit players from transferring to a school with a better record if that record was over 500 the previous UNLESS said player sat out a year & lost that year as eligibility.
- prohibit JC players from attending top 10 school unless they sat out a year.

These should reduce stockpiling to a degree.

Another thing would be to reduce scholarships for the very top teams. Win the national championship as AL did & reduce total scholarships by 2 for following season and 1 the second year. If you made playoffs, reduce total scholarship by one for following season.

So I'm punishing success? YES, for a few schools to the benefit of the whole.

Very good idea. Would absolutely create parity like the NFL does with draft picks.