Vannini: The gap between the best CFB teams and the middle-tier teams hasn't been this small in at least a decade and it makes every week a wild ride.

[upnorthkid]

Well, since you said it, can you name those years? Maybe 2007? Otherwise, I think for most of this century it's been pretty obvious who was at the top after Thanksgiving weekend.

I will say though that for many of those years, there would be people in October blabbing about how there are so many good teams and not enough spots, like a few years ago when Michigan and Iowa were both ranked top 5. But it almost always seemed to settle itself out by the end of the season, except for one or two seasons.

I'll gladly take college football seasons where once every 10-20 years one team (#3) doesn't get to compete for the National Championship even though they might be a legit contender for it, versus every season having about 8 teams invited to compete that have no business being there.

can't wait for the uproar from whoever finishes 13th this year. you know it's coming

 

[Wally]

College football has always been a true week by week sport, more so before playoff expansion. It was the only true week by week sport, not sure why people like it trying to replicate the NFL.

I want the NFLs parity replicated. It's more fun when you have a chance every year.

I refuse to watch baseball because what's the point when the field is so tilted to the wealthy teams.

 

[GopherTheJugular]

I want the NFLs parity replicated. It's more fun when you have a chance every year.

I refuse to watch baseball because what's the point when the field is so tilted to the wealthy teams.

I think the crux is that we have different definitions of "fun". I had a TON of fun watching college football with a "2 team" playoff even though I was fairly certain we'd never be in it.

Also, expanding the playoffs doesn't really give more schools a chance to win it all. It just gives more schools and chance to end their season being pummeled by a top team versus maybe winning a bowl game. Earlier this year there was talk of UNLV making the playoff if they stay undefeated. That might give some people the warm and fuzzy feeling, but they're just gonna get smoked if they get in. (I suppose they could play a string of teams that all lose their starting QBs on the first play, but that seems unlikely.)

As for the NFL, do all teams really have a chance "every year" as you stated? Didn't the Lions go like 30 years without a playoff win? The vikings haven't even been to a super bowl in my lifetime. I'm not saying the parity is as bad as baseball, but the Patriot dynasty and Alabama's dynasty did kinda overlap lol.

I think a better way to reference the NFL is that their system gives fans the "offseason hope" that their team can do it this year, but after about week 3 I could list many teams that have zero chance at the Super Bowl.

 

[Word]

I think the crux is that we have different definitions of "fun". I had a TON of fun watching college football with a "2 team" playoff even though I was fairly certain we'd never be in it.

Also, expanding the playoffs doesn't really give more schools a chance to win it all. It just gives more schools and chance to end their season being pummeled by a top team versus maybe winning a bowl game. Earlier this year there was talk of UNLV making the playoff if they stay undefeated. That might give some people the warm and fuzzy feeling, but they're just gonna get smoked if they get in. (I suppose they could play a string of teams that all lose their starting QBs on the first play, but that seems unlikely.)

As for the NFL, do all teams really have a chance "every year" as you stated? Didn't the Lions go like 30 years without a playoff win? The vikings haven't even been to a super bowl in my lifetime. I'm not saying the parity is as bad as baseball, but the Patriot dynasty and Alabama's dynasty did kinda overlap lol.

I think a better way to reference the NFL is that their system gives fans the "offseason hope" that their team can do it this year, but after about week 3 I could list many teams that have zero chance at the Super Bowl.

I think 6 different teams have won the Super Bowl in the last 10 years. That's a fair number of different teams. Vikings have been oh so close to Super Bowl appearances in the last 25 years. They have had their chances, but just had a couple plays not go their way. They have had legit chances though - just comes down to making plays.

 

[Gophers1992]

I want the NFLs parity replicated. It's more fun when you have a chance every year.

I refuse to watch baseball because what's the point when the field is so tilted to the wealthy teams.

MLB has more parity than the NFL, and has for a long time. People need to stop spreading this myth.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Having a committee of people choose teams, some possibly less qualified than GopherHole posters, is not fun.

While sometimes the “best” team gets knocked out of the NFL playoffs the end result has always been more meritocratic and satisfying than the CFB poll or title game winner.

 

[GopherRock]

Well, since you said it, can you name those years? Maybe 2007? Otherwise, I think for most of this century it's been pretty obvious who was at the top after Thanksgiving weekend.

I will say though that for many of those years, there would be people in October blabbing about how there are so many good teams and not enough spots, like a few years ago when Michigan and Iowa were both ranked top 5. But it almost always seemed to settle itself out by the end of the season, except for one or two seasons.

I'll gladly take college football seasons where once every 10-20 years one team (#3) doesn't get to compete for the National Championship even though they might be a legit contender for it, versus every season having about 8 teams invited to compete that have no business being there.

2007 is exactly the year. Or 2001, where both were true. Miami was heads and shoulders better than everyone else, but the #2 spot changed hands 4 or 5 times between 2:30 pm on Black Friday and the end of Championship Saturday.

 

[upnorthkid]

MLB has more parity than the NFL, and has for a long time. People need to stop spreading this myth.

Apparently 9 teams winning it in 10 years isn’t very good parity

By contrast, the chiefs and pats have won 6/10

 

[btowngopher]

I want the NFLs parity replicated. It's more fun when you have a chance every year.

I refuse to watch baseball because what's the point when the field is so tilted to the wealthy teams.

You can’t replicate that with over 100 teams. Plus how many NFL teams really have a shot each year? How often do teams come out of no where to win the Super Bowl?

 

[btowngopher]

Having a committee of people choose teams, some possibly less qualified than GopherHole posters, is not fun.

While sometimes the “best” team gets knocked out of the NFL playoffs the end result has always been more meritocratic and satisfying than the CFB poll or title game winner.

Why isn’t that fun? I think it’s pretty fun to debate. Split champs don’t bother me.

 

[MGGopher]

I dunno. I was actually thinking the other day that it seems like the gap at the very top is the same as always. OSU and Oregon seem head and shoulders above everyone else in the B1G, just like OSU and Mich were last year. Texas seems at another level in the SEC, much like they were in the B12 last year and GA/Bama were in the SEC.

What DOES seem different is the middle being tighter now. I’d probably put Iowa and PSU in a tier behind OSU/Oregon, but after that in the B1G it’s TIGHT imo. That next tier probably has 10+ teams in it.

 

[fmlizard]

NIL and Portal means Minnesota will have worse recruiting classes and somewhat better teams

Portal is our best friend. NIL not so much.

 

[fmlizard]

MLB has more parity than the NFL, and has for a long time. People need to stop spreading this myth.

MLB's spending rules are more tilted to the top teams than the NFL, but the nature of the sport provides the parity. Baseball is the only sport where the worst team can beat the best team and it barely merits a mention.

 

[Wally]

You can’t replicate that with over 100 teams. Plus how many NFL teams really have a shot each year? How often do teams come out of no where to win the Super Bowl?

The NFL is skewed by a few elite freak players and coaches. You miss on your draft and you're done. But it's pretty hard to come up with a much better system of parity than the NFL.

 

[Gophers1992]

The NFL is skewed by a few elite freak players and coaches. You miss on your draft and you're done. But it's pretty hard to come up with a much better system of parity than the NFL.

The NFL is basically a group of haves vs have nots based on whether or not you have a QB. It may be the most “fair” but it’s certainly not the most competitive league.

 

[maroonfive]

I don't think this applies to the Friday night game of Oregon at Purdue. That could be brutal.

 

[SeaBee_Gopher]

The gap between elite teams and middle tier teams is definitely closer in my opinion. Elite teams are still better, but not by as much because they can't stack 4 & 5-star players anymore. Every team has less depth because if a player isn't getting playing time at elite P4, they transfer down a level to mid-P4, if a mid-P4 player isn't getting playing time, he transfers down to non-P4 FBS or FCS. We've seen that on our own team. In addition, P4 teams are attracting the best players from non-P4 FBS and FCS. Those guys want to get into a P4 school because they still have a dream they could get noticed by the NFL playing at the highest college level - Max Brosmer and Jack Henderson are examples of this.

I think a good example this year of talent spreading out at the P4 level is most pronounced at quarterback. I never remember seeing so many good quarterbacks playing in the B1G. Maybe you say it's a one year blip, but I don't think so. Kansas State had two very good quarterbacks last year, their starter, Will Howard, and their high 4-star, 2023 in-state QB recruit, Avery Johnson. In the past without the portal, Will Howard and Avery Johnson would have battled it out to start at quarterback this year and the loser would watch from the bench. Not anymore. Will Howard could feel the heat and was looking for greener pastures and found Ohio State. Ohio State's quarterback, Kyle McCord, could also feel the heat and bailed for Syracuse giving them the best QB they've had in years. Now, three schools have good QBs and Kansas State lost its once in a lifetime depth.

Same thing for Oklahoma. Dillon Gabriel is feeling heat from 5-star recruit, Jackson Arnold, so takes a bag to go to Oregon. There goes Oklahoma's stacked QB room. Now, Jackson Arnold has bombed so far this year for Oklahoma, but it's still an example of not being able to stack good players two and three deep at a traditional blue blood. Think of how much better Oklahoma is this year if Dillon Gabriel is still there? They were forced to roll the dice on the young guy and lost.

We even saw that with AK going to Rutgers. Rutgers starting QB was worse than AK last year and AK beat him out for the starting job. AK hasn't looked good for them this year, but Rutgers did increase the depth and competition in a very bad QB room. We backfilled by grabbing one of the best QBs from FCS. Without Max Brosmer, we don't have the QB chops to beat USC and almost come back to beat Michigan, two lower level blue bloods.

Indiana's stud starting QB, Kurtis Rourke, is a portal transfer from non-P4 Ohio University. Indiana could beat Michigan this year, but not if they didn't have him, and they might have a punchers chance against Ohio State if they catch them on an off day. This is only because they have an excellent player at the sport's most important position, QB, and they did NOT recruit him out of high school. Oh, and let's talk about Michigan's disaster of a QB room. Cade McNamara bailed on Michigan in 2023 to join Iowa because he knew he couldn't beat out JJ McCarthy. In years past, he would have just been depth for Michigan and would have been their starter this year. He is not a great QB, but he is decent which is a huge upgrade for Iowa this year and a huge loss for Michigan. Do we come as close to beating Michigan this year with Cade McNamara as their QB? I don't think so. Not being two and three deep hurts because recruiting mistakes and injuries are magnified!

Dang, look at Utah! They go from upper tier P4 to lower tier P4 by losing just one guy, their stud QB, Cam Rising. Now, just about everyone is in their boat, no stud QB depth.

A lot of articles have speculated that's part of the reason Nick Saban retired from Alabama. A lot of his depth was bailing to his P4 competition, parity was increasing, and it would be a while before Alabama's spoiled fan base accepted that fact and his life would be hell in the meantime. He figured I'm too old for this crap and got out when the getting was good! A few injuries, recruiting errors and/or defections stack up for the top teams and they will fall right down into the middle of the now much more competitive P4 scrum. They aren't used to that!

And lastly, don't bring up Ohio State to me. They loaded up for a one year run at the national title just like Michigan did last year. Even they admit having a team like this year's is not sustainable.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Why isn’t that fun? I think it’s pretty fun to debate. Split champs don’t bother me.

I enjoy settling things on the field. Nobody knows who’s better or who will win until they play the game. This doesn’t require a 64 team playoff. Conference champs are fine.

Pundits and talking heads and CFP chairs are like ear herpes. I don’t give AF what they think. Just play the games.