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

[batchaps4me]

The HAVE and HAVE NOTS in college football keeps increasing. The playoffs in 6 years has featured only 2 PAC teams, 1 Big12 team w/ OU x5 years in a row, 2 B1G teams w/ OSU 3x, 2 ACC teams w/ Clemson 4x, and 3 SEC teams w/ Alabama 5x.

Preseason playoff predictions mostly featured Oklahoma, Ohio State, Clemson, and Alabama. We were 75% right before the season even played out. Last year was 75% as well since Ohio State was the 4th team predicted but didn't make it by a slim margin, just like Alabama this year.

I was listening to how wildly unpredictable the preseason AP Top 5 used to be compared to the final Top 5. It's almost becoming a formality of which teams are going to get into the playoffs now. Recruiting is becoming more and more national for the top tier cherry picking their 4 and 5* across the country. The rest of the talent gets disproportionately spread across the remaining 120+ FBS schools.

We'll just keep seeing more of the same, next year's playoff favorites once again will feature the usual Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, Oklahoma. 3/4 will most likely make it again.

Seems like we need to drop the G5 and realign the ranks again so that more talent will get equally distributed to make things more competitive. But the more money the sport makes the rich keep getting richer at the top and I don't see that changing.

I don't see an issue as far as recruiting and stockpiling talent in the current system. But were you to want to equalize out the talent, IMHO the best bet would be to do something like this:
Each team can currently have 85 scholarship players. Instead of allowing 25 signings a year cap each teams running 4 year total scholarships to say 85-90 with the caveat that grads don't count against this number. It would be a disaster and kill some of the academic/character challenged that wouldn't get a chance. It would shut down the portal a bit as well except for the grad transfers.

 

[Deep Creek]

Stanford probably would have if Harbaugh had stayed, and Wisconsin has gotten very close, being top 10 for 3 of the last 4 years.

I could see Stanford since both Oregon and Washington made it since he left.

It sure is looking like the best formula for getting into the CFP is for one of two (or just one) "big dog(s)" and a bunch of pups in the conference and that "big dog" run the table. Or get damn close to running it.

Personally, I wish we had all conference races that were so close the two teams playing in all CCGs had two conference losses! Those would be great conference races IMHO.

 

[fishinabarrel]

It has as much to do with the mentality of the kids being recruited as well. The super team mentality is strong. 20+ years ago kids looked forward to playing against the other talented kids they knew. Now they want to go to a place like IMG and play together. This plays right into the hands of the big time college football names as well

 

[Olyduck]

Stanford probably would have if Harbaugh had stayed, and Wisconsin has gotten very close, being top 10 for 3 of the last 4 years.

Harbaugh everyones favorite coach that has never won a major conference championship.

 

[FSU rules]

Oregon will get there before USC

they might get there once before USC but not consistently. Oregon has always been good when USC was not. Relying on another team to suck is not a good longterm plan for success.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Only very few programs have even the potential to change that consistently.

SEC: UF
ACC: FSU
Pac12: USC
Big 12: Texas

That's about it. Just like how UGA rose these programs will rise sooner or later to the absolute elite again (in UF's case they are already good again) and replace 1 or 2 teams of the mentioned above.

But overall you will always talk about the same 8-10 programs in the playoff discussion with a couple programs going up and a couple down depending on coach and circumstances.

CFB has always been really predictable and will always be that way. Location of the program and conference plays simply a way too significant role for it not to be.

Add:

Miami
Texas A&M
Washington
Michigan
Penn State
Tennessee

All are teams that have pretty much been out of the "real" discussion for quite sometime but have a chance at the playoffs in the future.

I think Nebraska is done and I'd be shocked if they win the B1G in the next decade.

 

[Deep Creek]

Add:

Miami
Texas A&M
Washington
Michigan
Penn State
Tennessee

All are teams that have pretty much been out of the "real" discussion for quite sometime but have a chance at the playoffs in the future.

I think Nebraska is done and I'd be shocked if they win the B1G in the next decade.

You think Miami can make it back?

 

[Wild Turkey]

Yea. agree with all that.

What year was it that the NCAA equalized a little more with the number of scholarship players or something? can't remember the details. early to mid 80s?

About the ACC, that conference is a total joke.

I'm trying to imagine the B1G with this change. Take out PSU, Wisconsin, MSU, iowa, and michigan. replace those teams with 5 teams on the level of indiana, rutgers, & Illinois...........

Must. Be. Nice................

Cakewalk to the B1G champ game and the CFB playoffs.........

IMHO, they need to give strength of schedule a stronger factor in the calculations to figuring out who's in and out........

Big 12 isn't much better with Texas down. Oklahoma keeps racking up meaningless conference championships.

 

[Wild Turkey]

You think Miami can make it back?

They have an incredible recruiting base and just need a coach and some serious cash for facility upgrades. No reason they couldn't get back all the ingredients are there plus the ACC has a low bar to the championship game. Hell Duke has played in it this decade and Virginia just did.

 

[Olyduck]

they might get there once before USC but not consistently. Oregon has always been good when USC was not. Relying on another team to suck is not a good longterm plan for success.

depends how you wanna define it.

05, 08, 09, 11, 13, 14, were all season where both were 9 wins and above at the same time

00, 01, oregon was good USC down
02, 04, 16 USC good Oregon down

10, 12, 18 oregon good usc mid
03, 06, 17 usc good oregon mid

07 was a weird season with Oregon leading before finishing the season with 5th string QB. both still finished 9 or more win.

15 9 wins O and 8 wins SC both mid pretty even
18 9 wins O 5 SC

 

[Deep Creek]

They have an incredible recruiting base and just need a coach and some serious cash for facility upgrades. No reason they couldn't get back all the ingredients are there plus the ACC has a low bar to the championship game. Hell Duke has played in it this decade and Virginia just did.

Think they'd let go of it? In terms of attracting the recruits nowadays, the facility arms race is a HUGE factor from what I'm hearing.

 

[sooner4life130]

Big 12 isn't much better with Texas down. Oklahoma keeps racking up meaningless conference championships.

This is sad but true. It’s amazing how quality conferences can be at the top for a few years then be a dumpster fire for the next.

 

[Deep Creek]

Big 12 isn't much better with Texas down. Oklahoma keeps racking up meaningless conference championships.

Unless the conference starts recruiting better, I don't think it will change much. I say this because the conference seems to have a pretty damn good stable of coaches from top to bottom.

 

[gotigersgo]

Top 10 recruiting classes: Sadly for Oklahoma, not included. 6 for the SEC (imagine that), 2 for the B1G (Ohio State and Michigan), Clemson (#1), and Texas (who will do nothing with it). The truth still remains. No one outside of Ohio State, Clemson, or the top 5 in the SEC will ever win the NC.

Sorry Oklahoma.

22 of the 33 5-star recruits are going to either Clemson, Ohio St., Georgia, Aalbama or Florida.

 

[Olyduck]

Big 12 isn't much better with Texas down. Oklahoma keeps racking up meaningless conference championships.

I guess. 1996 to 2019 Texas has 3 conference titles and only played for 3 more.
Oklahoma has 13.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

Unless the conference starts recruiting better, I don't think it will change much. I say this because the conference seems to have a pretty damn good stable of coaches from top to bottom.

Exactly right. The Big 12 is what it is at this point. It doesn't really matter if Texas gets back to competing or not. We aren't going to rival the other conferences from a talent standpoint any time soon. The conference is limited by proximity to top talent and that isn't going to change. Some of the schools will just have to continue to develop unheralded players and identify top coaching that isn't on everyone's radar yet. The only school not really playing up to its potential outside Texas is West Virginia. They have proximity to some decent recruiting grounds outside of Texas. Most of the others don't. I guess Kansas will get better under Miles but I'm not really sure if their ceiling is anything more than Iowa St, Kansas St, etc.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

I guess. 1996 to 2019 Texas has 3 conference titles and only played for 3 more.
Oklahoma has 13.

That's because Oklahoma has had better coaching the entire era you just named. While having similar talent. Bob Stoops/Lincoln Riley better than Mack Brown/Charlie Strong/Tom Herman. It's a very similar reason Ohio St has been so much better than Michigan despite similar recruiting. Coaching matters when you are talking championships. Recruiting can only get you so far. Honestly, you have to have both.

 

[Olyduck]

That's because Oklahoma has had better coaching the entire era you just named. While having similar talent. Bob Stoops/Lincoln Riley better than Mack Brown/Charlie Strong/Tom Herman. It's a very similar reason Ohio St has been so much better than Michigan despite similar recruiting. Coaching matters when you are talking championships. Recruiting can only get you so far. Honestly, you have to have both.

the era of the entire history of the Big 12? ok

 

[TheDayMan]

I'm not arguing that an 8 team playoff is necessary or that it is not up to teams to win their games and they will get in the top 4. I'm only suggesting the possibility that a larger playoff might do a better job of spreading talent around leading to more parity and more turnover among playoff teams.

That makes no sense...

 

[CJH9972]

That makes no sense...

Got more?