Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
Comments
You must be a Big 12 fan
30 is more reasonable in the SEC
I get the issues #2 causes, but if coaches can leave in the night (or worse, the day after the kid signs his LOI) for another school, then we have to let players do the same.
The drawbacks are inconveniences. Byproducts we have to get over that result from doing the right thing. Ethics are square one, and from there we can finagle with smaller steps to ensure recruiting between programs doesn’t become a thing.
Plus, I think folks overestimate how eager players are to transfer. The vast majority of these guys build relationships and will not be looking to jump ship that soon.
NCAA is trying to do their best with some competing interests. Fans love seeing more games. The season gets longer and longer. But the college football season wasn’t designed to go that long. Just like basketball and baseball when compared to the pro game.
Something needs to be done with the schedule. Dawgs played 15 games this year. Almost an NFL schedule. More than a handful of teams played 14 games. And we have many people advocating for a longer season by going to an 8 or 16 team playoff. So add 2 more games for a handful of teams.
If the NCAA doesn’t do anything about the schedule, the redshirt rule could help out with all the additional games many schools seem to be playing.
I would prefer the number of games to be 3 for a RS to keep status. 2 games during the regular season at the team’s discretion and the other game being the bowl game.
I believe most Power 5 teams would play these guys against the cupcakes during the season to get the RS players some game experience and give the regulars a chance to rest during the season.
It was Kindley and he got a waiver due to being injured.
1 time transfer before they play maybe but would you want to be re-recruiting Fromm or Fields, Ledbetter or someone else that we had invested a lot of time or Chubb after he came back from injury that UGA "paid" for. Bama would be cherry picking the stars based on NC record EVERY year.
I like rule number 1 since kids think it’s okay to sit out Bowl games then why not allow a kid who worked hard all year to play in the bowl game and replace the guys who want to sit out and abandon his teammates. This also helps with injury bug that effects teams. Almost like how the pros bring a practice squad kid up for a week or two while someone is out. That redshirt year could be long for a kid who is just sitting. It would be a nice reward to maybe get to see the field for a couple games but I think 2 games instead of 4 would be perfect.
I agree with your position. another way would be to allow 95 on scholarship as and idea. This would give thousands more kids a chance to play college ball and get a education.
2 would be the end of college football as we know it. Every freshman who doesn’t start immediately will leave the following year. There will be no more depth and players will essentially become guns for hire.
To review every play for penalties missed would make a 3 hour game last about as long as a 3 hour tour on the USS Minnow (Gilligan reference).
As for publicly reprimanding officials, I'm just going to assume that you have never called a football game in your life. As an official who has call High School football for over 10 years, I have no doubt that I have missed calls. If anyone out there thinks that they wouldn't either, you're a fool. Even with the experience I have (which includes Super 6 finals), I couldn't begin to imagine the speed at the college level.
Lastly, at for the transfer rule, as long as the losing school still had the opportunity to limit the locations that the player could go to, I see no problem with it. Coaches leave all the time.
Once a recruit signs a LOI. Coaches at opposong schools can only congratulate. Any thing else would be a recruiting sanction. It also allows talented players the right to play immediately. Like Eason or Manac.
I like the RS idea. Its basically turning normal RS to medical redshirts. Also lets you use players in our FCS games to see how they are evolving. Lets tape develop on guys to nuture them better.
The two go hand in hand. I could see Kirby playing a kid vs GT and then the kid transferring out after showing impressive skills.
I’m okay with rule number one as long as a kid is either limited by the school of where he can go. Or the kid is not allowed to compete against the school they left no matter if the game is regular season, playoff or championship game. I believe that actually makes it fair for the team who would lose a kid. This would allow a kid to leave freely and go where but not spurn the school he was originally at.
1) 4 games is too much, 2 would be perfect
2) This rule would be the worse thing to happen to college football. It pretty much makes you a free agent if you're not happy with not getting playing time or other factors with your team. Recruiting would never end for a kid.
The first rule is fine and will only help everyone..
The second rule should not be allowed unless something drastic happens at your school. Example Ole Miss. The school puts in a lot of time and money to have you on their team and when you sign a contract you should have to stand by that deal or pay a penalty to get out of it.
Exactly. The free agent description comes close to nailing it. Since scholarships are given out on an annual basis (have to be renewed each year) why not let the student-athlete have the right to "change jobs" on an annual basis. Only seems fair to me. If a school wants a kid for 4 or 5 years, let them sign a contract for that amount of time. Seems to me that student-athletes might have fewer "rights" than a "regular" person in this area. I'm all for fairness. Really, would you want to give up your right to change jobs if you found something better for you and your family? There may be something wrong in my analysis, I know. But the university/student relationship seems one-sided in this case. With good grades, any student can transfer if he/she wishes, right? Seems like student-athletes don't have the same rights. Any thoughts?