Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Within another thread @Mdot21 posted a link to a College Football Nerds tOSU preview. 

What I want to address here is a discussion they had that relates to all the helmets, not just Ohio State. 

Their assertion was that in the current era with NIL and the portal the major "helmet" teams should really never have a position or position group that is flat awful. 

In the old days (ya know, like four years ago) there was always the possibility that even a helmet would just whiff on recruiting for a given position. Maybe three years worth of Michigan's linebacker recruits just didn't pan out or three years worth of Ohio State's tailback recruits just sucked. In those old days the examples above would have meant that Michigan's linebackers or Ohio State's tailbacks would likely have been flat awful and a MAJOR position of weakness. 

In today's environment their (CFB Nerds) argument was that if the above happened Harbaugh/Day would be able to hit the portal and pick up at least a serviceable LB/TB.

I think that Tyler Buchner to Bama at QB iss a decent example of this. I don't think any of us expect Buchner to be Bama's version of Burrow but I do think that he is a serviceable QB. 

I titled this thread the way I did because I see this as problematic for the non-helmets because it makes it less likely that they'll be able to keep up. There is an ever decreasing chance that Purdue will get to play an Ohio State with crappy TB's or that Minnesota will get to play a Michigan with crappy linebackers. Thus, there are less ways for PU/MN to take out tOSU/M. 

As a fan of a helmet I could just celebrate this and in the short-term, I do. Ohio State had a perceived weakness on Oline going into 2023 and plucked a transfer to help shore that up, Yay go Bucks! 

Taking a longer/larger view, however, I see this as problematic for the health of the sport as a whole. Purdue was always at a disadvantage relative to tOSU/M but in the old days they had at least a chance. They won the league and went to the RoseBowl in the 2000 season. Sure that was 20+ years ago and the Buckeyes (11) and Wolverines (4) have each won multiple league titles since then, but for Purdue there was always a chance, slim as it may have been, that next year would be their year again.

  @betarhoalphadelta has recounted his story of traveling to Pasadena for Purdue's appearance in the 2001 Rose Bowl and I think that the (slim) chance that Purdue might make it back eventually helped to keep him around. 

As a fan of a rich team, these rich-get-richer changes are good for me in a way, but I am increasingly convinced that the people running college athletics have their hands wrapped firmly around the neck of the goose and they don't seem to understand that if they kill the goose the golden eggs will stop.

yup, I don't like all the changes to college football, but.........

this probably gives Nebraska a better chance to shine up the old helmet

Taking a longer/larger view, however, I see this as problematic for the health of the sport as a whole. Purdue was always at a disadvantage relative to tOSU/M but in the old days they had at least a chance. They won the league and went to the RoseBowl in the 2000 season. Sure that was 20+ years ago and the Buckeyes (11) and Wolverines (4) have each won multiple league titles since then, but for Purdue there was always a chance, slim as it may have been, that next year would be their year again.

  @betarhoalphadelta has recounted his story of traveling to Pasadena for Purdue's appearance in the 2001 Rose Bowl and I think that the (slim) chance that Purdue might make it back eventually helped to keep him around.

As a fan of a rich team, these rich-get-richer changes are good for me in a way, but I am increasingly convinced that the people running college athletics have their hands wrapped firmly around the neck of the goose and they don't seem to understand that if they kill the goose the golden eggs will stop.

Exactly. 2022 was an outlier in that Purdue won a terrible B1G West and then got skewered when playing in the CCG, as expected. So basically Purdue is already eliminated from winning the conference because they're going to face a juggernaut in the CCG. The chances that the best team out of UM/OSU/PSU is bad enough to be vulnerable to Purdue are minimal. 

2000 was a generational talent and likely the best QB in school history for a school like Purdue, and an innovative coach who was ahead of the curve for Big Ten style of play. And even then it took winning a 3-way tiebreaker with two conference losses to get to Pasadena. 

Before that it was 1966. And at the time you could argue he was another generational talent for a school like Purdue at QB. 

But in the 18-team league, the CCG world, the NIL world, the transfer portal world? I don't believe Purdue can, much less will, ever have a chance at winning the conference again. 

The only way it could happen is if the idea @Mdot21 mentioned in another thread--embrace NIL in a 24+24 team (48 total) superconference that breaks away from the NCAA. THEN, reduce roster limits and enforce a salary cap so that there is actually enforced parity across the system. But I don't believe that will ever happen, because the helmets aren't going to want parity, even if it is good for the health of the sport. 

Which is one of the reasons I'm out. The other, of course, is a history of heartbreaking Purdue underperformance on banana peels in March. 

Is Miami a Helmet School?  UCLA?  Nebraska?  Auburn?  Florida? 

Well, now you've done it

I'd argue those teams currently are at a significant talent/roster disadvantage.  Maybe they recover, some of them almost surely will.

Yeah the portal has created free agency similar to the NFL, but without the multi-year contracts and salary caps that serve to balance and restrict the rate of flow of the talent.  It would take major structural and procedural changes, to make a difference in the current expected outcomes.

It'll be interesting to see in a few years, how the Portal Bust Rate, compares to the Recruiting Bust Rate.

I feel like the portal was meant to appease players to try and get them to back down on the payment thing.

You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube, but if you could keep NIL, and get rid of the portal (keep grad transfers) I think that would be ideal.  You want to use your funds on a 17 year old, god bless.  You want to use it as a reward for existing players to either show future recruits how you take care of your own, or to keep borderline guys from jumping to the NFL, I'm totally fine with that

It'll be interesting to see in a few years, how the Portal Bust Rate, compares to the Recruiting Bust Rate.

The portal bust rate will almost certainly be lower because when you are looking at a portal transfer you've actually seen him compete against other CFB players in a CFB system. 

Some HS studs just never learn to adjust to playing against equals and that alone explains a significant portion of the recruiting busts.