1) You aren't even getting the tip of the iceberg on the roster turnover. As an example, New Mexico announced 18 transfers in just yesterday, and New Mexico St signed 29 in Dec and anticipates another 25 or so next week. Complete roster turnover. Colorado St lost about 30 kids and anticipates replacing at least that many; they are following the Notre Dame lead and using the new coaching staff exemption to lose a whole bunch of guys. These are just a few examples; lower level FBS/group of 5 schools are going to have about 50% turnover each year in many cases. Guys moving up, guys moving down for playing time, guys following a coach, etc.
2) Yeah, the Stanford OL were pretty good. Nugent would have really helped us inside. Miller is a really good player.
3) Not sure what you're referring to w/r/t Colorado; they lost a ton of guys in the portal and jettisoned most of their verbal commitments.
...the info on 247 and On3 regarding Colorado. They have a list of their recruiting class (I think it was 16), but I know those jumping into the portal is incomplete. Like I said, both sites were incomplete. As to point 1, I completely agree but my post was far too long as it was and wanted to give a few specific examples. Some schools had some serious overhauls in their rosters. I am not sure how you manage such chaos. How do you get a team to gel with a whole new roster every year? I do feel bad for the Group of 5 schools. They will get their best players poached every year. On the flip side, they may be able to get some decent players "left over" in the portal when the power 5 teams are done. I will post more on "roster pruning" later. Hint - while there may be circumstances justifying it, I'm not for it.
...no argument there. For a board that rates players and then rates school's portal "classes", they do a terrible job. On3 is marginally better but still no very good. Like I said, it reminds me of the early days of internet recruiting in the early 90s. Rumors abound and ranking biased by the "pundit's" favorite school/conference in order to get people to call hotlines with the latest info. Unfortunately, with the portal, most of us are stuck with what little is out there.
yes, it is constant turnover. 50-70% roster reconstruction annually.
Truthfully, for a high school senior it is better to take an FCS offer than go to group of 5 at this point in time; you can get playing time at an FCS and determine if you can move up; if you can, those same group of 5 schools (or even power 5) are available. But some of these FCS programs are actually better; South Dakota, SDSU, North Dakota, NDSU, Sac State, etc. would win most group of 5 conferences easily.
If your goal is to play good football in a winning environment (and not necessarily on Wed night), group of 5 is not the way to go.
I would submit that the Group of 5 conferences may be better off dropping down a level. Let's face it, realistically, even with the expansion of the playoffs, schools in these conferences have little chance to make in, unless one becomes the darling of ESPN. If they drop a level, they have a chance to play for a title at that level. As things stand now, the best they can do is a lousy bowl game to fill time for ESPN. Next season, many of these teams will be forced into weekday games to fill time for ESPN. This doesn't help the players at all. They will miss two, maybe three, days of class when they travel. And I can't see where playing weekday games will help recruiting. The Power 5 teams usually use the Group of 5 teams as cannon fodder to pad their schedules. Sure, we can point to some notable upsets, but most of the time, they are easy wins foe the Power 5. Things have really changed quickly in the past few years, and I suspect there will be even more changes, only not for the better of the athlete or the sport.
Conference usa teams getting a million dollars each to play weekdays next fall. They don't give a FUCK about the student ath-huh-letes who are missing school. Not even one little teenie tiny fuck. They're not dropping down. And most wouldn't have a chance to compete for a title in the fcs. Boise state and Liberty are about it.
...I am well aware of that. My dad played at a MAC and was part of a "small college NC" team. He has long said they should drop down a level, but they stay where they are at because of the money. Back in the 80s, I thought they should stay where they were at mainly because things were different back then. They weren't playing Power 5 conference (though that ESPN speak term wasn't around back then) teams as much (once a year, sometimes not at all) and they weren't playing weekday games constantly. Now they play Power 5 teams regularly, clearly for the money, and play on weekdays regularly, clearly for the ESPN TV money. If the administration cared, they would drop down. Getting beat up by teams thar have far better talent is no fun and being forced to play on weekdays simply to fill time on ESPN is an insult. But mo ey talks. Personally, I think Power 5 teams playing Group of 5 teams should be penalized in the rankings. Instead, ESPN and those who have a say in the ranking love it when the Power 5 school runs up the score on the nearly hapless Group of 5 school. They are rewarded for their "efforts". As I said elsewhere, I hate the direction college sports are headed. I would hope some sanity will prevail down the road, but I expect it to get worse, not better. Greed is more important than anything now.
there are many FCS schools that are much more competitive than some group of 5 schools, and the administration is behind the program and supportive of the athletes.
Not the case at many group of 5 schools, where the administration sees the program and the athletes as a necessary evil or a means to an end, similar to the way a John thinks of a hooker.
...case with the MAC. Their admonistrations don't care about the players. They care about the money. But I think the MAC would benefit going to the FCS. Just my opinion. In any event, NIL money and the transfer portal definitely benefit the Power 5 schools the most. They can poach all the best players from the Group of 5 schools with NIL money and the way the transfer portal is set up makes it easier for such players to make the jump. I know you didn't like my scenario of NIL donors pulling strings on players, and I admit is was an unlikely thing to happen, but we can both think of other scenarios that can screw over the athletes. Sadly, right now, the NCAA has little power and gumption to do anything about the way things are heading.
some of those FCS schools would kill them, however. NDSU and UND are legit. Same with Montana and Montana State, and there are several others (SEMO, UT-Martin, Sac State).
Truth is, I know several kids in the 25 and 26 classes and we've talked about it already; if you want to go somewhere where you'll grow as an athlete, get good coaching, and play against good competition on Saturday (and not Tues and Wed), you're much better off in FCS. There are some real high level programs with very good coaching out there.
MAC and Conference USA are just whoring their athletes out there and don't give a fuck.
...that there are some very good FCS teams who would handle teams in the MAC and C-USA. I just think it's better than playing on weekdays and when they aren't playing such days, they are getting smoked by an SEC or B1G team. Sure, an upset occasionally happens, but that isn't the point. I think the difference in talent will widen the gulf in talent between Power 5 and Group of 5 talent as well. Now, I am not saying this will convince the powers that be in the Group of 5 conferences to make a move to the FCS, but it sure would be a legit excuse to make such a move. It's the money (TV money and money they get from the Power 5 team they are playing) that will keep the status quo.
It’s such bullshit they tweaked Thalidomide and set up patent walls to price gouge multiple myeloma patients.
I hope you are doing well Wass. You’re in my prayers.
...of all the meds I was on for chemo, the Revlamid had the least side effects. I hated being in the dex. That really beats you up. The Velcade was rough too. It gave me some seriously painful neuropathy and it was difficult to walk at times. But the Malphalan they gave me for the stem cell transplant was brutal. One dose and I was out of action for weeks.
When his light chains went up, they upped the dosage and that beat up on his kidneys.
After that, he went into the trials.
...had the same type of myeloma I have. Mine is fairly rare, in that it is caused by the kappa light chain, not the lambda light chain, which is more common and more dangerous. The heavy chains can also cause myeloma as well. I am just hoping the stem cell transplant worked (I don't want to go through that again) and I stay in remission long enough for medical advances to find another way to beat it down. My next oncology appointment is coming up and I am a bit concerned about some things that don't seem quite right.
Oh wait, we are …. ;)