My Plan to Fix CFB Parity

[Dwight89]

CFB parity is one of my greatest frustrations with CFB. I have a plan to fix it. A CFB Draft, folks. Here’s the rough sketch of how it would work:

A month before the draft recruits have to submit a top ten list of schools they are willing to play for. Teams can only draft players that put them in their top ten. All 130 FBS teams are in the draft. Draft order is determined by conference strength and then conference record (so the worst team in the worst conference picks first, then the worst team in the second worst conference picks second, and so on). 

What if halfway through the draft there aren’t any players left available to you to draft from? You then draft recruits from the pool of recruits who didn’t get drafted by anyone in their top ten. Player has the option to not sign with the team, though. Draft continues on until all schools have filled their scholarship slots. Those left undrafted can go play FCS or Junior College. 

How would transfers work in this scenario? I dunno, that’s probably one of the weaknesses of this plan.

This would help fix CFB parity, but would still keep an emphasis on recruiting. Alright, go ahead and tear this thing apart. Thoughts?

 

 

[UTE98]

Between your post and mine, heads are going to explode. Nicely done.

[Utahute72]

The only problem is that BYU would insist on going first in each draft because they are the chosen.

[Dwight89]

Oh, did I mention you must either be Notre Dame or in a conference to be elligble for the draft? Sorry TDS. 

[Itacoatiara22]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Ute_tastic]

What happens to that athlete that qualifies for a Stanford education and is good enough for the full ride scholarship there but then ends up getting drafted to Boise State?

[Dwight89]

If he is that smart and athletic he wouldn’t have put Boise State in his top ten. So, in your hypothetical I would say too bad for him. 

Being serious though, this is definitely a flaw to my plan. 

[DataUte]

But, but, what if their preferred major isn’t offered at that school 🙂 Do you want more parity or less parity – not very clear. A lot is led by tradition, but remember Alabama before Saban? It was a hole for years. What if no players put the ‘lower’ schools on their top 10 list? 

[Dwight89]

I believe we need more parity, not less. To your first point, don’t put a school in your top ten that doesn’t offer your major. 

[UtMtBiker]

Yuck man.  This sounds terrible in every way.  Why do we need parity in CFB?  I guess that is the part I’m missing.  

Wasn’t Nebraska an unbeatable powerhouse for years, then it was FSU, USC, Texas.  There is enough movement for me.  

 

[GameForAnyFuss]

Hot take: I don’t want to increase parity in CFB. We’re one of the “haves” now. We’re at the big kids’ table. Why would I want to share what we’ve earned with others? Yeah, it’s a selfish attitude – sue me. College sports (the business of it, I mean) is about money and pride…it’s not a charity.

I’m not sure why people want parity. Do you really want the Utah/BYU-P series to become competitive again?

[UTE98]

I’m not going to rip you for answering a question, however the more I think about this plan the less likely I think it works.

Student athletes aren’t going to go play for a school they don’t want to be at. It’s already bad enough parents hover over their kids. Jayden Daniels and Jake Heaps? This is doomed from the start. The players aren’t going to buy in which would be required to make it work.

Schools aren’t going to buy in either, do you think Alabama or Clemson will sign onto this? In fact Vanderbilt, Kansas, Duke, Wake Forest, Oregon State aren’t signing up for this.