College football talent gap keep increasing, that's a problem

[gotigersgo]

I wonder how many players got ranking bumps for being recruited by the bigger schools

You don't have to wonder. None.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

You don't have to wonder. None.

 

[Olyduck]

You don't have to wonder. None.

i dont think you understand how recruiting rankings work

 

[BamaDude]

Why do you say that? There have been more different teams winning national titles in college football than in college basketball since 2000.

The perception doesn’t make it a reality. If more teams could win the championship, why isn’t it happening? (At least since 2000)

If you go back to 1998 - the first year of the BCS (1998-99 for basketball) - there have been exactly 12 different nation champions in football & 12 different national champions in basketball (11 for each if you take away USC's vacated 2005 FB title & Louisville's 2013 basketball title).

The basketball side was dominated mostly by UConn (4 titles), Duke & North Carolina (3 titles each). Florida & Villanova had two titles each, while Kentucky, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan St., Syracuse, Virginia, and the afore-mentioned Louisville grabbed one championship apiece.

For football, it was Alabama with 5 titles; Clemson, Florida, Florida St., LSU & Ohio St. with two titles each; followed by Auburn, Miami, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and previously mentioned USC with one title each.

During the first five years of the college football playoffs, only Alabama (2), Clemson (2), and Ohio St. (1) have reached the peak in football; while Villanova (2), North Carolina (1), Duke (1), and Virginia (1) have done so in basketball.

 

[Kaplony]

If you go back to 1998 - the first year of the BCS (1998-99 for basketball) - there have been exactly 12 different nation champions in football & 12 different national champions in basketball (11 for each if you take away USC's vacated 2005 FB title & Louisville's 2013 basketball title).

The basketball side was dominated mostly by UConn (4 titles), Duke & North Carolina (3 titles each). Florida & Villanova had two titles each, while Kentucky, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan St., Syracuse, Virginia, and the afore-mentioned Louisville grabbed one championship apiece.

For football, it was Alabama with 5 titles; Clemson, Florida, Florida St., LSU & Ohio St. with two titles each; followed by Auburn, Miami, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and previously mentioned USC with one title each.

During the first five years of the college football playoffs, only Alabama (2), Clemson (2), and Ohio St. (1) have reached the peak in football; while Villanova (2), North Carolina (1), Duke (1), and Virginia (1) have done so in basketball.

How dare you muddy the waters of this discussion with something as worthless as facts!

 

[gotigersgo]

If you go back to 1998 - the first year of the BCS (1998-99 for basketball) - there have been exactly 12 different nation champions in football & 12 different national champions in basketball (11 for each if you take away USC's vacated 2005 FB title & Louisville's 2013 basketball title).

The basketball side was dominated mostly by UConn (4 titles), Duke & North Carolina (3 titles each). Florida & Villanova had two titles each, while Kentucky, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan St., Syracuse, Virginia, and the afore-mentioned Louisville grabbed one championship apiece.

For football, it was Alabama with 5 titles; Clemson, Florida, Florida St., LSU & Ohio St. with two titles each; followed by Auburn, Miami, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and previously mentioned USC with one title each.

During the first five years of the college football playoffs, only Alabama (2), Clemson (2), and Ohio St. (1) have reached the peak in football; while Villanova (2), North Carolina (1), Duke (1), and Virginia (1) have done so in basketball.

You weren't going back to 1998. You said 2000. You also said more teams, not the same number of teams. Nice facts.

Also, now many of those NC's in basketball came from outside the power 5? I count 7 since 2000. Add in Final Four appearances from non power 5's like George Mason, Butler, Gonzaga, VCU and Memphis.

Do you still want to claim more parity in cfb?

 

[NolePride]

If college football success was 100% predicated on recruiting stars, you'd have a point. There are two problems though:

1. Several of these highly rated kids go to schools that have shit for coaching, so it doesn't matter. Coaching >> recruiting stars.
2. Recruiting stars are FAR from an exact science. There are loads of superstar NFL players who were no-name recruits coming out of high school, just like there are loads of former top 25-50 overall recruits that didn't amount to shit.

I've become an intellectual giant on shit coaching.

Between 2015-2018 We have recruited 62 4 and 5 star players. Clemson has recruited 46. I do not believe we
pass the eye test though.

Let me play devil's advocate:
According to Rivals, in the last decade Alabama has dominated the recruiting scene with an average finish of 2.2. Auburn's average finish is 9.2 with rankings including 14,12 and 13. Alabama signed 27 five stars in a four class span from 2013-2017. Coach Saban is still 4-3 against Auburn w/Malzahn. You can beat the best program, with the GOAT Coach, regularly with really good but statistically inferior recruits.

But that's a different subject. The same teams grab a bunch of elite players every year. Now whether the HC can
coach or not is irrelevant. They don't know that, plus they will be fired anyway. A new guy will walk in and they
will get their share of elite players.

Without question there are coaches that do more with less and vice versa.

But the top teams remain the top teams for a reason. "It ain't about the X's and O's it's about the Jimmies
and Joes."

 

[belcherboy]

If you go back to 1998 - the first year of the BCS (1998-99 for basketball) - there have been exactly 12 different nation champions in football & 12 different national champions in basketball (11 for each if you take away USC's vacated 2005 FB title & Louisville's 2013 basketball title).

The basketball side was dominated mostly by UConn (4 titles), Duke & North Carolina (3 titles each). Florida & Villanova had two titles each, while Kentucky, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan St., Syracuse, Virginia, and the afore-mentioned Louisville grabbed one championship apiece.

For football, it was Alabama with 5 titles; Clemson, Florida, Florida St., LSU & Ohio St. with two titles each; followed by Auburn, Miami, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and previously mentioned USC with one title each.

During the first five years of the college football playoffs, only Alabama (2), Clemson (2), and Ohio St. (1) have reached the peak in football; while Villanova (2), North Carolina (1), Duke (1), and Virginia (1) have done so in basketball.

GREAT call! It's all smoke and mirrors when comparing the diversity of champion in each sport (the whole purpose of having a tournament isn't for who gets to the sweet 16 or final four, but to determine a champion). So far, since 1998, they've both been equal in determining a variety of champions.

So the NCAA basketball has had a 64 team (68 now) team tournament since 1998, and football has had a 4 team tournament for 5 of those years, and they've achieved the same goal in diversity of champion.

If they want to expand the tournament to have more meaningful games, then I can understand that, but since 1998 having a tournament has not created more variety of champions in basketball than it has in football.

 

[BamaDude]

You weren't going back to 1998. You said 2000. You also said more teams, not the same number of teams. Nice facts.

Also, now many of those NC's in basketball came from outside the power 5? I count 7 since 2000. Add in Final Four appearances from non power 5's like George Mason, Butler, Gonzaga, VCU and Memphis.

Do you still want to claim more parity in cfb?

You need to learn to identify who posts what. I'm not the one that used the year 2000 as an example. That was @belcherboy. The figures I used from 1998 were correct. The Big East was long considered a power conference in basketball. All but one of UConn's titles came while they were a member of this conference. So did the one by Syracuse, and those by Villanova.

I never claimed that there was more parity in football, just that the same number of teams had won national titles in each sport over the last 21 years.

 

[outofyourmind]

Nobody remember the 1960's and 1970's when the best programs stockpiled talent just so they wouldn't go anywhere else. And how those players that were riding the bench would start anywhere else in the country.


Something like that kind of talent gap???.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

Nobody remember the 1960's and 1970's when the best programs stockpiled talent just so they wouldn't go anywhere else. And how those players that were riding the bench would start anywhere else in the country.


Something like that kind of talent gap???.

The transfer portal has changed that game.

 

[BamaDude]

Nobody remember the 1960's and 1970's when the best programs stockpiled talent just so they wouldn't go anywhere else. And how those players that were riding the bench would start anywhere else in the country.


Something like that kind of talent gap???.

I remember those days. At least, the final few years of them. And, if I remember correctly, when scholarship limitations were first instituted, I think they were set at 105 total/35 per year; then dropped to 95/30; and now stands at 85/25. I don't remember what year they started or which years the reductions came into being.

 

[gotigersgo]

Ok, do the last ten years. 5 different champs in football, with Clemson or Alabama winning the last 4 and 7 out of 10 and 3 conferences. In cbb, 7 different champions, with 3 teams winning 2 each and 5 conferences, with half from either the Big East or the AAC.

 

[BamaDude]

Ok, do the last ten years. 5 different champs in football, with Clemson or Alabama winning the last 4 and 7 out of 10 and 3 conferences. In cbb, 7 different champions, with 3 teams winning 2 each and 5 conferences, with half from either the Big East or the AAC.

You are correct on the football side, but off on the basketball numbers. Yes, there were 7 different champions, but only 4 conferences represented. 8 of the titles were by ACC & Big East schools, with UConn - a former Big East school - claiming a championship after moving to the AAC - and now about to move back to the Big East. The only other champion was Kentucky (SEC).

 

[Stakesarehigh]

There is significantly more parity in cbb than CFB.

 

[belcherboy]

There is significantly more parity in cbb than CFB.

Except when it comes to national champions. Basketball even gives 68 teams a chance to win the tournament every year, yet the results are the same when it comes to having different national title winners compared to college football. At least since 1998.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Except when it comes to national champions. Basketball even gives 68 teams a chance to win the tournament every year, yet the results are the same when it comes to having different national title winners compared to college football. At least since 1998.

Thats fine but let's compare how many different final four teams there has been just in the five years of playoffs

 

[belcherboy]

Thats fine but let's compare how many different final four teams there has been just in the five years of playoffs

So the goal of an expanded playoffs is to find more of a variety of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place teams? I thought it was to get more parity of champions. Maybe that isn’t the goal.

Basketball to created a tournament of 68 teams to create that parity in the final four. Maybe football should do the same.

 

[dtgold88]

So the goal of an expanded playoffs is to find more of a variety of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place teams? I thought it was to get more parity of champions. Maybe that isn’t the goal.

Basketball to created a tournament of 68 teams to create that parity in the final four. Maybe football should do the same.

I would say the goal is give more teams a chance. Zero chance if you don't get in. I do agree, there have probably only been a few teams who did not get into the CFP with a decent chance to win, but crazier things have happened in sports.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

So the goal of an expanded playoffs is to find more of a variety of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place teams? I thought it was to get more parity of champions. Maybe that isn’t the goal.

Basketball to created a tournament of 68 teams to create that parity in the final four. Maybe football should do the same.

The goal is opportunity