What would you do to change the NCAA

1. Remove redshirts with the exception of medical redshirts. If you break your leg week 1 of your senior year for example
2. No more full-school punishments. Most of the kids playing didnt do anything wrong, no reason to punish them, only those accountable
3. Scholarship retooling. Coaches get paid millions of dollars across the board, there should be a way to not pay players but further compensate them through their college careers with meals, books, and other school stuff
4. Any player with suspicion of breaking NCAA rules, they will suspended until proven innocent, what ever games missed will be tacked on to an extra year.
5. Players who leave school early to play professional sports will need to repay their scholarship in full within 1 year of leaving
6. Coaches who break recruiting rules (Head coach or other) will be suspended and docked pay dependent upon the violation
7. Boosters who break recruiting rules will be forced to forgo any further school donations
8. No more inter-divisional games. If you are D-1a (FBS) no playing D-1aa (FCS)
9. Complete financial clarity with athletic, academic funds
10. Limit bowl games to 20 - Institute a 4 or 8 team play off system

How about making a GPA 3.0 instead of 2.4 to stop people abusing thei scholarships?

It's a point you brought up in another thread.

1. Remove redshirts with the exception of medical redshirts. If you break your leg week 1 of your senior year for example Not sure about that one, redshirts can be used as good things
2. No more full-school punishments. Most of the kids playing didnt do anything wrong, no reason to punish them, only those accountable Agree
3. Scholarship retooling. Coaches get paid millions of dollars across the board, there should be a way to not pay players but further compensate them through their college careers with meals, books, and other school stuff Agree completely
4. Any player with suspicion of breaking NCAA rules, they will suspended until proven innocent, what ever games missed will be tacked on to an extra year. Agree to an extent
5. Players who leave school early to play professional sports will need to repay their scholarship in full within 1 year of leaving I'm not for leaving school early but there are some justifiable cases for it
6. Coaches who break recruiting rules (Head coach or other) will be suspended and docked pay dependent upon the violation Agree
7. Boosters who break recruiting rules will be forced to forgo any further school donations Agree
8. No more inter-divisional games. If you are D-1a (FBS) no playing D-1aa (FCS) It can help the FCS teams financially but I see where you're going
9. Complete financial clarity with athletic, academic funds Yep
10. Limit bowl games to 20 - Institute a 4 or 8 team play off system Agree, could use top 7 bowls for the playoff

Then again you actually play and know a lot more about it

[quote="EpicxPlatypus69"]

1. Remove redshirts with the exception of medical redshirts. If you break your leg week 1 of your senior year for example Why? It would take a way a lot of oppertunities for guys to play Football?
2. No more full-school punishments. Most of the kids playing didnt do anything wrong, no reason to punish them, only those accountable AGREED COMPLETELY
3. Scholarship retooling. Coaches get paid millions of dollars across the board, there should be a way to not pay players but further compensate them through their college careers with meals, books, and other school stuff Agreed as well. I hate all of this talk of "paying players" but I do like your ideas very much so.
4. Any player with suspicion of breaking NCAA rules, they will suspended until proven innocent, what ever games missed will be tacked on to an extra year. Yes
5. Players who leave school early to play professional sports will need to repay their scholarship in full within 1 year of leaving Ehh... I don't see the need to do that.
6. Coaches who break recruiting rules (Head coach or other) will be suspended and docked pay dependent upon the violation. Agreed very much so
7. Boosters who break recruiting rules will be forced to forgo any further school donations Of course
8. No more inter-divisional games. If you are D-1a (FBS) no playing D-1aa (FCS) This I disagree very very much so. A. This allows FCS Teams to see how they stack up. It fills their pockets heavily, gives the FCS players something to look forward too, and very much pumps them up. It makes FBS teams stay on their feet. And of course, it allows FCS teams to move up into the FBS world.
9. Complete financial clarity with athletic, academic funds yes
10. Limit bowl games to 20 - Institute a 4 or 8 team play off system As much as I love the Bowl System, it is defenitely time for a Bowl game system. It can be as simple as just taking the Conference Champs from every bowl. Only problem is, there would have to be a big adoption of FBS teams. Plus, you would see the SEC runner-up being sent to a bowl game, when a MAC champ gets a shot at the Title.

Here's an idea. Why the hell is there 10 Texas FBS teams? There's going to be 12 by next year! I mean, there is a huge market in Texas but, it is just pathetic. They gave Texas State and UTSA an FBS offer because they're in Texas. What about Montana? Delaware? Eastern Washington? As much as I hate to say it, Jacksonville Sta..te. Yuck! But really...

Mutant wrote:How about making a GPA 3.0 instead of 2.4 to stop people abusing thei scholarships?

It's a point you brought up in another thread.

at least to a 2.7 or 2.8. a grade where players are actually paying attention in class

[quote="Soarindude02"]

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:

1. Remove redshirts with the exception of medical redshirts. If you break your leg week 1 of your senior year for example Why? It would take a way a lot of oppertunities for guys to play Football?
2. No more full-school punishments. Most of the kids playing didnt do anything wrong, no reason to punish them, only those accountable AGREED COMPLETELY
3. Scholarship retooling. Coaches get paid millions of dollars across the board, there should be a way to not pay players but further compensate them through their college careers with meals, books, and other school stuff Agreed as well. I hate all of this talk of "paying players" but I do like your ideas very much so.
4. Any player with suspicion of breaking NCAA rules, they will suspended until proven innocent, what ever games missed will be tacked on to an extra year. Yes
5. Players who leave school early to play professional sports will need to repay their scholarship in full within 1 year of leaving Ehh... I don't see the need to do that.
6. Coaches who break recruiting rules (Head coach or other) will be suspended and docked pay dependent upon the violation. Agreed very much so
7. Boosters who break recruiting rules will be forced to forgo any further school donations Of course
8. No more inter-divisional games. If you are D-1a (FBS) no playing D-1aa (FCS) This I disagree very very much so. A. This allows FCS Teams to see how they stack up. It fills their pockets heavily, gives the FCS players something to look forward too, and very much pumps them up. It makes FBS teams stay on their feet. And of course, it allows FCS teams to move up into the FBS world.
9. Complete financial clarity with athletic, academic funds yes
10. Limit bowl games to 20 - Institute a 4 or 8 team play off system As much as I love the Bowl System, it is defenitely time for a Bowl game system. It can be as simple as just taking the Conference Champs from every bowl. Only problem is, there would have to be a big adoption of FBS teams. Plus, you would see the SEC runner-up being sent to a bowl game, when a MAC champ gets a shot at the Title.

Here's an idea. Why the hell is there 10 Texas FBS teams? There's going to be 12 by next year! I mean, there is a huge market in Texas but, it is just pathetic. They gave Texas State and UTSA an FBS offer because they're in Texas. What about Montana? Delaware? Eastern Washington? As much as I hate to say it, Jacksonville Sta..te. Yuck! But really...

I watched the championship game (some sort of championship game) between these two teams and it was very good for an FCS team. I dont think they can currently satnd up to an SEC team but I think they could definetly defeat EMU

It is stupid when a FCS team is scheduled to be cannon fodder for a FBS school

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:It is stupid when a FCS team is scheduled to be cannon fodder for a FBS school

Michigan vs Appalachian State anyone?

Soarindude02 wrote:

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:It is stupid when a FCS team is scheduled to be cannon fodder for a FBS school

Michigan vs Appalachian State anyone?

i know, they happen every year occasionally. for the most part they are made to be victims. the difference between D1 and D1aa is the budgets and scholarship money pretty much

interesting theory i heard on violations

instead of vacating past wins, vacate future wins

if a team does something bad like ohio state or oregon or what ever really, bad enough. vacate 4 future wins from the next 1 or 2 seasons that way if they go 8-4, they are technically 4-4 making them bowl ineligible. or if they do go 10-2 or 12-0 they would go to a lesser bowl game

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:interesting theory i heard on violations

instead of vacating past wins, vacate future wins

if a team does something bad like ohio state or oregon or what ever really, bad enough. vacate 4 future wins from the next 1 or 2 seasons that way if they go 8-4, they are technically 4-4 making them bowl ineligible. or if they do go 10-2 or 12-0 they would go to a lesser bowl game

I like the loss of scholarships. Loss of scholarships means less talent, which means worse record, which means worse bowl game or no bowl game at all.

MaddMatt wrote:

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:interesting theory i heard on violations

instead of vacating past wins, vacate future wins

if a team does something bad like ohio state or oregon or what ever really, bad enough. vacate 4 future wins from the next 1 or 2 seasons that way if they go 8-4, they are technically 4-4 making them bowl ineligible. or if they do go 10-2 or 12-0 they would go to a lesser bowl game

I like the loss of scholarships. Loss of scholarships means less talent, which means worse record, which means worse bowl game or no bowl game at all.

You like it now, because you want Ohio State to suck!! If it happened to Michigan, you would throw a window.

If a Non-BCS team beats a BCS team in the regular season and the BCS team goes on to have a worse overall record than the Non-BCS team, the BCS team should not go to a BCS bowl over the Non-BCS team.

bonus points if you know the two teams i'm talking about from last season.

at23steelers wrote:

MaddMatt wrote:

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:interesting theory i heard on violations

instead of vacating past wins, vacate future wins

if a team does something bad like ohio state or oregon or what ever really, bad enough. vacate 4 future wins from the next 1 or 2 seasons that way if they go 8-4, they are technically 4-4 making them bowl ineligible. or if they do go 10-2 or 12-0 they would go to a lesser bowl game

I like the loss of scholarships. Loss of scholarships means less talent, which means worse record, which means worse bowl game or no bowl game at all.

You like it now, because you want Ohio State to suck!! If it happened to Michigan, you would throw a window.

does not mean talent would drop. they have ways of getting players on scholarship without athletic scholarships

reduction in scholarships and vacate future wins would be good things to do because it affect dolla dolla billz yall

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:

does not mean talent would drop. they have ways of getting players on scholarship without athletic scholarships

reduction in scholarships and vacate future wins would be good things to do because it affect dolla dolla billz yall

If you vacate future wins, then why even play? It's almost like the death penalty.

MaddMatt wrote:

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:

does not mean talent would drop. they have ways of getting players on scholarship without athletic scholarships

reduction in scholarships and vacate future wins would be good things to do because it affect dolla dolla billz yall

If you vacate future wins, then why even play? It's almost like the death penalty.

it isnt telling them they cant make a bowl game. if they want to make a bowl game, they better play their balls off. if they do make a bowl they will make less money.

the whole issue with vacating past wins is the school keeps all the money from the bowl games and stuff. if you make the team vacate future wins, it prevents them from going to a BCS or big bowl that is a large amount of money

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:

MaddMatt wrote:

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:

does not mean talent would drop. they have ways of getting players on scholarship without athletic scholarships

reduction in scholarships and vacate future wins would be good things to do because it affect dolla dolla billz yall

If you vacate future wins, then why even play? It's almost like the death penalty.

it isnt telling them they cant make a bowl game. if they want to make a bowl game, they better play their balls off. if they do make a bowl they will make less money.

the whole issue with vacating past wins is the school keeps all the money from the bowl games and stuff. if you make the team vacate future wins, it prevents them from going to a BCS or big bowl that is a large amount of money

But you're only looking at one side of it.

What if a Boise State loses to Alabama 24-23, but Alabama had to "vacate" the win, because of the "vacate future wins." How in any way would that help Boise get to the BCS? And even if they did say that Boise won, the voters would still look at it as Alabama beating Boise. I just think it's way to flawed.

Besides Matts poor grammar, I agree with him on this issue! A rarity I know!!

MaddMatt wrote:

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:

MaddMatt wrote:

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:

does not mean talent would drop. they have ways of getting players on scholarship without athletic scholarships

reduction in scholarships and vacate future wins would be good things to do because it affect dolla dolla billz yall

If you vacate future wins, then why even play? It's almost like the death penalty.

it isnt telling them they cant make a bowl game. if they want to make a bowl game, they better play their balls off. if they do make a bowl they will make less money.

the whole issue with vacating past wins is the school keeps all the money from the bowl games and stuff. if you make the team vacate future wins, it prevents them from going to a BCS or big bowl that is a large amount of money

But you're only looking at one side of it.

What if a Boise State loses to Alabama 24-23, but Alabama had to "vacate" the win, because of the "vacate future wins." How in any way would that help Boise get to the BCS? And even if they did say that Boise won, the voters would still look at it as Alabama beating Boise. I just think it's way to flawed.

no dude i am talking about bowl eligibility. their record would still be 12-0 or 11-1 but to a bowl committee you would have only 6 or 7 wins placing them in the east bumble fuck stag bowl.

this way, games count, stats count, wins count but only for the stats. they would not be able to go to a bcs game or conference championship game. they can go and be as good as they want but they are screwed for when they are bowling in the offseason

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:
no dude i am talking about bowl eligibility. their record would still be 12-0 or 11-1 but to a bowl committee you would have only 6 or 7 wins placing them in the east bumble fuck stag bowl.

this way, games count, stats count, wins count but only for the stats. they would not be able to go to a bcs game or conference championship game. they can go and be as good as they want but they are screwed for when they are bowling in the offseason

The voters cant even get it right now. What makes you think they'll get it right under this type of system?

MaddMatt wrote:

EpicxPlatypus69 wrote:
no dude i am talking about bowl eligibility. their record would still be 12-0 or 11-1 but to a bowl committee you would have only 6 or 7 wins placing them in the east bumble fuck stag bowl.

this way, games count, stats count, wins count but only for the stats. they would not be able to go to a bcs game or conference championship game. they can go and be as good as they want but they are screwed for when they are bowling in the offseason

The voters cant even get it right now. What makes you think they'll get it right under this type of system?

because its simple?