• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

What Parity?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
plum diamonds buckeye planet
Sort by date Sort by votes
I like it! Good article, and he makes some good points. I've often thought that the limited scholarships have made little impact in the overall scheme of things. It seems that the 70-0 blowouts are less frequent, but instead, the favorite still ends up winning 45-14. Same basic result, but maybe the game was interesting for a quarter.
 
Upvote 0
Interesting read, but not even remotely accurate.

If he wants to base it solely on championships (which he shouldn't) the teams that he mentioned as being the only "new" teams to win a championship, along with the Florida schools, which can't be discounted just because he says so, have won 16 championships. That's 16 since 1973, when the rule was enacted. If my math is correct, and even if it isn't, about half of the championships have gone to schools that hadn't won before the rule was put in place.

Championships can't be the only measure of parity in a world with over one hundred teams. Being able to compete is huge. The little guy isn't going to build a program and win consistently due to money and exposure. Players and coaches want to go where the money is. A small program wins for a couple years, and the coach gets hired away. The big guys may not be getting all of the players, but they're still getting the best players. Teams in the MAC cannot get the big-time recruits in the quantity needed to win a championship, because of coaching turnover, not as nice of facilities, and nowhere near the exposure that players want, in order to make it to the NFL. With the 85 scholarship limit the little schools are able to play higher quality football, with the chance of occasionally upsetting a bigger school. The higher quality that they're able to play increases the interest in the smaller schools conference games, and increases attendance which increases revenue.
 
Upvote 0
IronBuckI said:
Interesting read, but not even remotely accurate.

If he wants to base it solely on championships (which he shouldn't) the teams that he mentioned as being the only "new" teams to win a championship, along with the Florida schools, which can't be discounted just because he says so, have won 16 championships. That's 16 since 1973, when the rule was enacted. If my math is correct, and even if it isn't, about half of the championships have gone to schools that hadn't won before the rule was put in place.

Championships can't be the only measure of parity in a world with over one hundred teams. Being able to compete is huge. The little guy isn't going to build a program and win consistently due to money and exposure. Players and coaches want to go where the money is. A small program wins for a couple years, and the coach gets hired away. The big guys may not be getting all of the players, but they're still getting the best players. Teams in the MAC cannot get the big-time recruits in the quantity needed to win a championship, because of coaching turnover, not as nice of facilities, and nowhere near the exposure that players want, in order to make it to the NFL. With the 85 scholarship limit the little schools are able to play higher quality football, with the chance of occasionally upsetting a bigger school. The higher quality that they're able to play increases the interest in the smaller schools conference games, and increases attendance which increases revenue.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Look at OSU in the early 70s...there is no way we could be THAT dominant today, not allowing more than 1 TD game after game after game...
 
Upvote 0
Maybe I misinterpretted his message, but I kind of thought that was his point. The little schools still can't compete on a year-in and year-out basis. They can get "lucky" and land a good coach with a solid recruiting class (such as Utah) and make some serious noise for a year or two, but the long-term success still goes to the big boys.

Personally, I think it's perfect the way it is. I really don't want to see the NCAA lose any more of it's parity. Granted, part of the reason is the Bucks are on the positive side of the parity, but the other reason is that some of the tradition will be lost with a more even playing field.

Let's forget about OSU and Michigan for a minute. I watch Oklahoma/Texas, or USC/UCLA, or Florida St/Florida, or Alabama/Auburn, or any of the "big Rivalry" games every year. Why? Because those are the big boys with big time traditions playing for bragging rights. For the most part, I really don't care who wins those games (ignoring the potential for the Bucks to move up in the polls with a timely loss by one of these teams). I watch because I grew up understanding that these teams are the elite of college football, and if you're going to be a serious fan, you get into big time games like this. If the parity was gone, the big games wouldn't be nearly as big. My son wouldn't grow up with the understanding that USC/Notre Dame is supposed to be a serious game with a lot on the line. And that would be kind of disappointing.

The way things are right now, the top teams are still relatively strong for most seasons, but there are more of the Utahs or Lousivilles or Miami (Oh) that can put together a one loss season, make a few major upsets, and win a serious bowl game. That's perfect in my mind.
 
Upvote 0
Thanks for the replies, guys!

I think if we weren't OSU fans this article would be WAY different. We like how the NCAA is because we have a very succesful school-- but that's a give me.

This past season was pretty dead on-- big schools in the top spots. Only surprise was TCU at the 11 spot.

I remember a few years back when Auburn did really well. It was cool to see but I'd like to see them with a tougher schedule.

Well, as long as OSU keeps doing great, then I don't really care about the other teams.:biggrin:
 
Upvote 0
I didn't know we pulled Schmidt from TCU (I guess we had to get him from somewhere). I know we failed to hire Fielding Yost. But had we there probably would not be the tOSU-UM rivalry, so I'm ok with it.:biggrin:
 
Upvote 0
GregOden50 said:
Thanks for the replies, guys!

I think if we weren't OSU fans this article would be WAY different. We like how the NCAA is because we have a very succesful school-- but that's a give me.

This past season was pretty dead on-- big schools in the top spots. Only surprise was TCU at the 11 spot.

I remember a few years back when Auburn did really well. It was cool to see but I'd like to see them with a tougher schedule.

Well, as long as OSU keeps doing great, then I don't really care about the other teams.:biggrin:
Click to expand...
I'm afraid I would have to disagree with that. Auburn plays in the toughest conference. Spare me the arguments: year in and year out they have the most title conteders. Sure they don't play much out of conference but those are some tough SEC teams to get through plus a conference Championship game.
 
Upvote 0
t_BuckeyeScott said:
I'm afraid I would have to disagree with that. Auburn plays in the toughest conference. Spare me the arguments: year in and year out they have the most title conteders. Sure they don't play much out of conference but those are some tough SEC teams to get through plus a conference Championship game.
Click to expand...

Eh, after further review-- you were right. I'm wrong.

My question is- How did they have such a great season, but just for one year. They obviously had a strong team, how ocme it didn't carry over to the next year?
 
Upvote 0
Well, Losing 3 out of your backfield to the NFL draft in the first round: 2 in the first 5 picks. That may cause to you to go 9-3 which isn't bad. Auburn's a favorite this year behind tOSU, ND, OU, UT, and some others. I'm not sure they are really behind these schools too much.
 
Upvote 0
Ah, I forgot Carnell Williams went to Auburn. Yeah, that makes sense. So have they filled the void at RB? I don't know much about Auburn.

What 'small' schools do you think will make some noise this year?
 
Upvote 0
In terms of new teams that don't already have National Champioships West Virginia and to a lesser extent Louisville will have very good records and if all of the top 5 BCS conferences' top teams slip they could very well have a chance at the title game.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top