I only gave one data point which in itself isn't a strong counter argument but I'm arguing against the entire statement.
The reality is that players receive instruction and development their entire life. He was the top QB in college football when he left and was under Coach Bro's tutelage for years. The only reason he didn't win the Heisman was because of the shit stain that was TTU as a whole. He didn't get to the league at zero percent and then just all of the sudden become great sitting for a year behind Alex Smith. That ability was already there, Reid or not.
Not so sure on that 100%.
Mahones led the Chiefs to the AFC champ game in his 2nd year in the league (and first year as a starter), where they lost in OT to the eventual SB champions.
They should have some type of digital instruction sign that shows cars merging like a zipper.
For the cars that don't do it, it should change to a penis caught in a zipper
Well, the FCS has been thinned out quite a bit. KSU took klieman 5 years ago. klieman's replacement did a pretty good job himself and went to USC as LB coach this offseason.
Cignetti, who moved up to FBS with James Madison and did a great job (in both FCS and FBS) there, was poached by Indiana this offseason.
Speaking of Cignetti..
Outside of FSU, I don't think any of them move the TV revenue needle much. Why would the SEC invite those schools you listed? They won't increase TV contract value. Landing us + blou was a coup. Outside of maybe ND and FSU, there is no one else worth while for the SEC to add unless they are poaching the Big 10 or something.
If the two highest value ACC programs bolt, I think the majority of the remaining 15 stick together vs splintering across the country. I guess time will tell. I hope for ACC fans, they don't splinter.
I'm not seeing this. Yeah, they may lose their best football members at some point (FSU and Clemson), but I think they added Cal, Stanford and SMU to bolster their member numbers in case Clemson and FSU bolt.
If FSU and Clemson bolt, the ACC still has 15 football programs and can go poach G5's if needed.
They'll remain the #4 of the 4 main conferences.
If football players ever get a share of TV revenue, you can be sure that the framework in that future will be a lot different than it is now and Title IX will have no say in the matter.
Having to re-recruit your best players each year has to be the biggest pain in the ass. Would be better to pay players from TV revenue and sign them to multi year deals and finally move away from the bullshit amateur label.
If the playoff was based on division / league standing, teams could line up big time OOC opponents because the risk of loss and falling out of favor with a committee wouldn't matter.
Or, teams would still just line up pansies for warm up / practice until the season starts.
I'm not a fan of comparing players across different eras because the game changes. Rules change, players are asked to do different things etc.
For example - they pussified the league around 2003 or so and removed the hand check and cut down on physical play. It's pointless to try and compare guys whose careers have come after those rule changes to players who played prior to those changes. Each era is different. My favorite era was when guys would rather knock down an opponent than give out hugs and high fives and become friends with the people they are supposed to beat.