Used 2 B Hu
Baredevil
Maybe we're talking about different things here. What I was talking about was, by definition, SOMEbody has to be the worst team in the league, no matter how much money they spend.Not if those teams aren't spending the money on their football programs. You don't want the Oakland A's in the league, if it looks like they are going to be the cheap team in the league, that just cashes checks when the tv revenue comes in. By forcing teams to spend money and having a cap, you can create a system like the NFL. I imagine that is their goal with the idea of a new subdivision.
Let's say we have a league made up of the following teams:
Bama
Georgia
Ohio State
Michigan
Florida State
Clemson
Texas
Oklahoma
Southern Cal
Washington
If they all play each other, we're either going to have every team being 5-4, or 4-5...OR, we're going to have a couple of teams that are 7-2, and a couple who are 2-7. Nobody is going undefeated.
Is it more likely that the Georgias and Michigans of the world want to take the chance on being that 2-7 team in any given year? Or more likely that they want some tomato cans to kick around? If it's pay to play that's fine, long as everybody understands the risk of looking like a bad team on occasion. But then the league has to sell everybody on a national championship game between a couple of teams with multiple losses. We accept that in the NFL, I'm not sure college football is ready for that.