I've been thinking about this a lot lately. In college football there's some 250 programs that compete in Division I Football. Then it's divided into FCS and FBS football, and further divided into P5 and G5.

I don't watch much basketball or baseball, but from I can gather there's far less hard lines drawn between haves and the have nots. Meaning, it's far easier for programs without much notoriety to go on a tear and make some national noise than it is in college football. I believe all 250+ Division I baseball and basketball programs can compete for a national title, where only 130 or so can in college football, with most having very little chance of actually getting to a playoff.

Why is college football so much more segmented than the other two major sports? And why is there such an ongoing desire to further split the P5 from the G5? Is it just power hungry blue bloods that want to take their ball and play by their rules and make the most money possible, or is there something else at play? Talent difference greater between college football divisions, less parity than with the other major sports?

(06-22-2022 12:08 PM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  I've been thinking about this a lot lately. In college football there's some 250 programs that compete in Division I Football. Then it's divided into FCS and FBS football, and further divided into P5 and G5.

I don't watch much basketball or baseball, but from I can gather there's far less hard lines drawn between haves and the have nots. Meaning, it's far easier for programs without much notoriety to go on a tear and make some national noise than it is in college football. I believe all 250+ in baseball and basketball programs can compete for a national title.

Why is college football so much more segmented than the other two major sports? And why is there such an ongoing desire to further split the P5 from the G5? Is it just power hungry blue bloods that want to take their ball and play by their rules and make the most money possible, or is there something else at play? Talent difference greater between college football divisions, less parity than with the other major sports?

You must have too many concussions if you think 250 schools can win the basketball tournament

(06-22-2022 12:25 PM)constance Wrote:  

(06-22-2022 12:08 PM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  I've been thinking about this a lot lately. In college football there's some 250 programs that compete in Division I Football. Then it's divided into FCS and FBS football, and further divided into P5 and G5.

I don't watch much basketball or baseball, but from I can gather there's far less hard lines drawn between haves and the have nots. Meaning, it's far easier for programs without much notoriety to go on a tear and make some national noise than it is in college football. I believe all 250+ in baseball and basketball programs can compete for a national title.

Why is college football so much more segmented than the other two major sports? And why is there such an ongoing desire to further split the P5 from the G5? Is it just power hungry blue bloods that want to take their ball and play by their rules and make the most money possible, or is there something else at play? Talent difference greater between college football divisions, less parity than with the other major sports?

You must have too many concussions if you think 250 schools can win the basketball tournament

Compete does not equal win. They have a "shot", however mythical that is, to get to a playoff, where in college football the FCS subdivision cannot, despite being Division 1. Not saying it's right or wrong, just pointing it out.

It's fundamental to the nature of the sports.

Football costs more, requires more players.

(06-22-2022 01:24 PM)inutech Wrote:  It's fundamental to the nature of the sports.

Football costs more, requires more players.

Correct, which means that the structural advantages that the top football programs have (e.g. Ohio State, Alabama, Notre Dame, etc.) are much more entrenched compared to other sports.

Even if a school can get one of top 10 QB recruits in the country, it's largely meaningless unless that same school can also get blue chip offensive linemen, wide receivers and other players to maximize the value of that QB recruit.

In contrast, getting one of the top 10 basketball recruits in the country can instantly make a team into an NCAA Tournament team at a minimum (if not a Final Four contender).

Don't get me wrong: getting a home run recruit in basketball can be every bit as hard for schools as getting a home run recruit in football. Those home run hoops recruits still gravitate toward Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, etc. However, the smaller roster sizes of basketball and the greater ability/desire for freshman players to make an immediate impact means that those home run recruits are still spread around to more schools more compared to football AND a school doesn't need multiple home run recruits to make a huge impact on the team compared to football. Hence, there's generally a wider range of basketball schools that have a viable change to at least make the Final Four in any given year compared to the range of teams that can realistically make it to the 4-team playoff in football. (Note that ultimately winning a national championship itself in basketball generally DOES take multiple home run recruits and the NCAA Tournament format introduces a lot more randomness in who wins or loses, so that isn't necessarily any easier in basketball compared to football.)