Ideas to break up the bama monopoly

#51
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
14,716
Likes
11,872
#51
I should be clear: the services should not rank up a player based on where he signs, but they absolutely should based on his offer list.

Using your example, if Alabama didn't offer Recruit A then even if the services scouts viewed Recruit A as a better prospect, the fact that Alabama didn't offer should given them pause. And you can replace "Alabama" with any one of Georgia, LSU, Clemson, Ohio State, or Oklahoma.
That's such a weenie thing to do though, because at that point you aren't doing your own analysis/evaluation. You're just assuming that since a good program offered a kid, then he must be a great player, and you'll shoot him up the ranking even though you might have had him lower. Someone with no connections and doing no evaluations sitting in their mom's basement can do that.

It seems like both an offer list and where the player signs should be irrelevant, assuming that the point is to rank the best players. If the point of the rankings is to rank players based on the college careers they are projected to have, then that's totally a different thing and offer lists/where they sign should be an obvious factor.
 
#52

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
22,014
Likes
11,170
#52
That's such a weenie thing to do though, because at that point you aren't doing your own analysis/evaluation. You're just assuming that since a good program offered a kid, then he must be a great player, and you'll shoot him up the ranking even though you might have had him lower. Someone with no connections and doing no evaluations sitting in their mom's basement can do that.

It seems like both an offer list and where the player signs should be irrelevant, assuming that the point is to rank the best players. If the point of the rankings is to rank players based on the college careers they are projected to have, then that's totally a different thing and offer lists/where they sign should be an obvious factor.
I can't really speak to the mentality of the recruiting sites. What I can say is that there really if you aren't ranking them based on how you project they'll perform in college, then what exactly is are you ranking? A ranking based simply on high school performance is not terribly meaningful.
 
#53
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
14,716
Likes
11,872
#53
I can't really speak to the mentality of the recruiting sites. What I can say is that there really if you aren't ranking them based on how you project they'll perform in college, then what exactly is are you ranking? A ranking based simply on high school performance is not terribly meaningful.
I think they should be ranked based on attributes that will project well to college, regardless of the offer list or where they sign. A great player is a great player, regardless of whether they go to Alabama or Eastern Michigan. It seems like how you rank them should be done in a vacuum, without any consideration for who has offered them or where they've signed.

If you rank a recruit lower than you otherwise would have because you don't think they'll get developed at a particular school, then that doesn't have anything to do with the player in question. You either think a player has attributes that will project well to college, or they don't. Where they end up going, or whether or not you think their college choice will get that out of them, seems irrelevant.
 
#54

rjd970

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Messages
19,735
Likes
13,278
#54
Alabama's Win over Ohio State Drew Lowest National Championship Game TV Ratings Ever

I posted this in another thread.

I'm sure COVID had some to do with it, but I think there is real fatigue watching the same teams every year. For every non Bama, OSU, UGA, ND, Clemson fanbase out there the excitement just seems to be dwindling. The monopoly is bigger than one team. Anecdotally, I quit watching after half-time, as did a lot of people I talk to. The wife is a Bama fan, even she was on her computer working while watching most of the game.

Cycling just isn't happening anymore. Will Nebraska, USC, FSU, Miami, etc ever be relevant again? It doesn't look like it. Will Bama, OSU, Clemson ever cycle down again? It sure doesn't look like it.

This is what college football has become.
 
#55

BigOrangeMojo

The Member in Miss December
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
7,307
Likes
21,840
#55
I do not agree there are special rules for Alabama. That’s just losers griping. If you have credible information supporting your opinion, please
Provide it.
Bama lost to Ole Miss in back to back years and the NCAA investigators/supervisor assigned to the Ole Miss case were Bama grads. I think if Bama was being investigated, there's no chance in hell you'd have multiple Auburn grads on the investigation.

Yes, Bama is cheating. But so is every other team in the SEC. Bama gets better players, they develop them, and they coach them better. Bama isn't where they are currently because they are cheating; it's because they invested in their football program and hired the best guy they could hire.
 
Likes: VolFreakJosh
#56
Joined
Dec 1, 2017
Messages
10,509
Likes
9,824
#56
Bama lost to Ole Miss in back to back years and the NCAA investigators/supervisor assigned to the Ole Miss case were Bama grads. I think if Bama was being investigated, there's no chance in hell you'd have multiple Auburn grads on the investigation.

Yes, Bama is cheating. But so is every other team in the SEC. Bama gets better players, they develop them, and they coach them better. Bama isn't where they are currently because they are cheating; it's because they invested in their football program and hired the best guy they could hire.
Exactly my point. All teams are cheating.
 
#58
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
14,716
Likes
11,872
#58
Alabama's Win over Ohio State Drew Lowest National Championship Game TV Ratings Ever

I posted this in another thread.

I'm sure COVID had some to do with it, but I think there is real fatigue watching the same teams every year. For every non Bama, OSU, UGA, ND, Clemson fanbase out there the excitement just seems to be dwindling. The monopoly is bigger than one team. Anecdotally, I quit watching after half-time, as did a lot of people I talk to. The wife is a Bama fan, even she was on her computer working while watching most of the game.

Cycling just isn't happening anymore. Will Nebraska, USC, FSU, Miami, etc ever be relevant again? It doesn't look like it. Will Bama, OSU, Clemson ever cycle down again? It sure doesn't look like it.

This is what college football has become.
College football is not and never has been a sport with a lot of parity. It isn't designed for it. The game is dominated now by Alabama and Clemson, with some blend of Ohio St/ND/Oklahoma trailing behind.

Was the 1990s all that different? Nebraska and Florida St were really good, with some blend of a few other teams (Florida, Michigan, Tennessee) mixed in. It wasn't like you had a different team come out of nowhere every year. Only 3 teams won the SEC from 1992 (advent of the SECCG) to 2000: Florida (5x), Alabama (2x), and Tennessee (2x). That's really no different than today. 4 teams have won it since 2012: Alabama (6x), Auburn (1x), Georgia (1x), LSU (1x).

Of course Alabama, Clemson, and the like will down cycle at some point. I'm sure in the mid-90s people were asking "Will Nebraska ever down cycle?" The man who makes it all go around is going to retire at some point.
 
Likes: Volatility
#59

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
22,014
Likes
11,170
#59
I think they should be ranked based on attributes that will project well to college, regardless of the offer list or where they sign. A great player is a great player, regardless of whether they go to Alabama or Eastern Michigan. It seems like how you rank them should be done in a vacuum, without any consideration for who has offered them or where they've signed.
But there's the rub. A great player that goes to EMU probably isn't as great as a great player that goes to Alabama. If you run one of these sites and don't give credence to the best recruiters in the game then you aren't going to be in business for too long.

If you rank a recruit lower than you otherwise would have because you don't think they'll get developed at a particular school, then that doesn't have anything to do with the player in question. You either think a player has attributes that will project well to college, or they don't. Where they end up going, or whether or not you think their college choice will get that out of them, seems irrelevant.
I disagree. What could be more relevant?
 
#60
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
14,716
Likes
11,872
#60
I disagree. What could be more relevant?
It's incredibly relevant if the point of the rankings is to be a prediction of how good of a college player they are supposed to be. Which maybe that is the point of them, I don't know.

Maybe it's just a colloquialism, but the #1 overall ranked player in those rankings is often described as "the best high school player in the country." That is a statement that is totally independent of their next level prospects. "Best high school player in the country" is different than "the high school player that will do the best in college."

Basically, I guess what I'm wondering is if recruiting rankings are done with a Heisman Trophy voting philosophy (i.e., give it to the best player at the college level, regardless of next level potential) or with an NFL draft philosophy (i.e., the "best players" in the draft are determined by their next level potential, not necessarily the best college player).
 
#61

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
22,014
Likes
11,170
#61
Alabama's Win over Ohio State Drew Lowest National Championship Game TV Ratings Ever

I posted this in another thread.

I'm sure COVID had some to do with it, but I think there is real fatigue watching the same teams every year. For every non Bama, OSU, UGA, ND, Clemson fanbase out there the excitement just seems to be dwindling. The monopoly is bigger than one team.
Some of it was absolutely fatigue. Can't deny that. But all sports have taken a hit this year. CFB's ratings dropped a bit, but they didn't crater the way the NBA, MLB, and NHL did.

Some of it is also the huge news cycle going on at the moment. Whenever huge events are happening, casual viewers turn away from sports. It happens time and time again.

Anecdotally, I quit watching after half-time, as did a lot of people I talk to. The wife is a Bama fan, even she was on her computer working while watching most of the game.


You are not alone. I haven't looked at the quarterlies, but I've heard from several that have. The game was trending to be about the middle of the pack as far as ratings until Bama went up 35-17. The nail in the coffin was Smitty getting hurt, because the only interesting part of the game after halftime was seeing what crazy totals he'd put up in the second half. After Bama went up 45-24, the numbers slipped to about 10 million, which is absolutely dreadful.
 
#62

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
22,014
Likes
11,170
#62
Basically, I guess what I'm wondering is if recruiting rankings are done with a Heisman Trophy voting philosophy (i.e., give it to the best player at the college level, regardless of next level potential) or with an NFL draft philosophy (i.e., the "best players" in the draft are determined by their next level potential, not necessarily the best college player).
Again, I can't speak for anyone. But given that recruiting rankings seek to predict the order in which players would go similar to a mock draft, I would think it should be based on potential and not production. Especially when you're looking at the vast differences between levels of competition in high school, it's really dangerous to try and look at production and say "that guy is the best player in the country."
 
#63
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
62,366
Likes
30,880
#63
Alabama's Win over Ohio State Drew Lowest National Championship Game TV Ratings Ever

I posted this in another thread.

I'm sure COVID had some to do with it, but I think there is real fatigue watching the same teams every year. For every non Bama, OSU, UGA, ND, Clemson fanbase out there the excitement just seems to be dwindling. The monopoly is bigger than one team. Anecdotally, I quit watching after half-time, as did a lot of people I talk to. The wife is a Bama fan, even she was on her computer working while watching most of the game.

Cycling just isn't happening anymore. Will Nebraska, USC, FSU, Miami, etc ever be relevant again? It doesn't look like it. Will Bama, OSU, Clemson ever cycle down again? It sure doesn't look like it.

This is what college football has become.
Sports ratings across the board have been down and in some cases extremely. For a variety of reasons but a major one is Covid screwed up a lot of things. NBA's ratings tanked, the Stanely Cup ratings were some of the lowest ever, the World Series' ratings were some of the lowest in history, the US Open I think had their lowest ever, even stuff like the Kentucky Derby's ratings were terrible.

Personally, I think for some the long break without sports made some people realize they really didn't miss it that much. Also I actually know suprisingly several people including family members that actually said watching the games with no fans made it seem like it wasn't "real", like we were watching a practice or something. And I have to admit there is a little of that in me. Like say the Cleveland Browns win the Super Bowl. I mean that's great and it counts but at the same time it would be kind of like.....well yeah you won it....in the Covid year.
 
#64

PandamoniumReigns

Gator Chomping with Balled Up Fists
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
3,010
Likes
1,845
#64
Why aren't they getting the Top 25 guys every year? Or at least the top ranked guy at every position of need? I mean, at the very least, Bama's 25 should be made up of nothing but Top 100 players.
Surely you aren't taking his statement literally. It's more likely you are just wanting to argue/troll.

It's more of a generality. If Bammers want someone, they can generally get one of their top 2-3 targets at each position. And fairly certain you know why they aren't getting the top 25 guys every year. You recruit to your need, for the most part.
 
Likes: rjd970
#66
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
14,716
Likes
11,872
#66
Sports ratings across the board have been down and in some cases extremely. For a variety of reasons but a major one is Covid screwed up a lot of things. NBA's ratings tanked, the Stanely Cup ratings were some of the lowest ever, the World Series' ratings were some of the lowest in history, the US Open I think had their lowest ever, even stuff like the Kentucky Derby's ratings were terrible.

Personally, I think for some the long break without sports made some people realize they really didn't miss it that much. Also I actually know suprisingly several people including family members that actually said watching the games with no fans made it seem like it wasn't "real", like we were watching a practice or something. And I have to admit there is a little of that in me. Like say the Cleveland Browns win the Super Bowl. I mean that's great and it counts but at the same time it would be kind of like.....well yeah you won it....in the Covid year.
I am surprised as how much of an impact fans had on the experience of watching it on TV. It is still really weird to me seeing the wide shots of stadiums during games with no or limited attendance. It does kind of feel like a practice or a scrimmage game.
 
#67
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
1
Likes
0
#67
As far as the NCAA goes they do have a one up on EVERYONE else, they will receive inside info on up coming potential investigations / violations on their part so it can be swept away properly . Just look at the "big guy " of the NCAA , just happens to be the man that brought Saban to LSU from the Dolphins he was the Chancellor at LSU
 
#68

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
22,014
Likes
11,170
#68
As far as the NCAA goes they do have a one up on EVERYONE else, they will receive inside info on up coming potential investigations / violations on their part so it can be swept away properly . Just look at the "big guy " of the NCAA , just happens to be the man that brought Saban to LSU from the Dolphins he was the Chancellor at LSU
You might want to check your timeline.
 
#69

GreveHaller

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
8,548
Likes
4,612
#69
As far as the NCAA goes they do have a one up on EVERYONE else, they will receive inside info on up coming potential investigations / violations on their part so it can be swept away properly . Just look at the "big guy " of the NCAA , just happens to be the man that brought Saban to LSU from the Dolphins he was the Chancellor at LSU
1610592129766.png
 
#71
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
62,366
Likes
30,880
#71
I am surprised as how much of an impact fans had on the experience of watching it on TV. It is still really weird to me seeing the wide shots of stadiums during games with no or limited attendance. It does kind of feel like a practice or a scrimmage game.
I definitely think it's had an impact on some games. For instance when the Eagles pulled what they did against Washington in their last game, even with them elminated I can only imagine the rain of boos that would have happened when Hurts was pulled. And not saying the Browns still wouldn't have won but beating Pittsburgh on the road in front of an empty stadium is easier than beating them in front of a packed house.

The piped in crowd noise combined with the empty seats is also weird. At least they didn't try what they did with MLB and tried to use video game fans in the stands.
 

VN Store




Sponsors
 

Top