Michigan Football, Team 137, 2016 Season.

[*JD*]

Out-of-state non-conference TRUE road games the last 25 years...
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, LSU = 33
Michigan, Ohio State = 36

Saw that on Twitter...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What constitutes a true road game? Playing out of conference in an opponent's stadium that's more than 150 miles from your campus? If that's the case, I'm surprised that SEC total is that high.

[AlabamAlum]

It's a silly, contrived, meaningless criteria.

[The Oracle]

Lol, no it's not. Might not be as big a deal as some make it, but it's real

[AlabamAlum]

No, it's silly. It means nothing. Bama plays a big neutral site game (not a home and home) and has won 4 of the last 7 championships. It's not a consideration in any tangible way or the SEC wouldn't have won 8 of the last 10.

And a tough neutral site (+0/-0) every year is as tough as a home and home (+3/-3).

[Cody_Russell]

That is a fair argument about out of conference, but a B10 regular season schedule can be shit.... especially if you have Purdue on it.

The SEC still has 4 out of conference games. It makes sense that they have that because it decreases the likelihood that a title contender loses to another SEC team during the regular season ($$$). Of course it makes sense that the competition in the SEC is tougher because recruiting, money, coaches.
For example: a SEC team can recruit better players because they have lower academic standards, more in-state talent, and probably more illegality. That has led to more success, more wins, and higher income. Higher income = better coaches.
Basically the same reason ($$$) they asked the NCAA for satellite camps to be outlawed, even when there are no competent reasons to outlaw it.

With that said, it makes sense that a SEC regular season schedule if tougher.

[Jeff Buchanan]

.......The SEC still has 4 out of conference games. It makes sense that they have that because it decreases the likelihood that a title contender loses to another SEC team during the regular season ($$$). Of course it makes sense that the competition in the SEC is tougher because recruiting, money, coaches.

For example: a SEC team can recruit better players because they have lower academic standards, more in-state talent, and probably more illegality. That has led to more success, more wins, and higher income. Higher income = better coaches.

Basically the same reason ($$$) they asked the NCAA for satellite camps to be outlawed, even when there are no competent reasons to outlaw it ......

Pretty accurate, pretty fair assessment if you were to ask me.

[AlabamAlum]

The academics for admission are very similar at most P5 schools for football players. Most schools hover VERY close to the Clearinghouse for football player admission - especially when programs for the 'developmentally delayed' or whatever are added by Admissions for the student body.

You have a couple each year who pass the Clearinghouse, but can't go to their first choice school (Bama, for example, has sent a number of players who passed the Clearinghouse to USF), but for the most part, every school has a player or two that makes you cringe when you hear their interview.

And I would argue that generous admissions policies are appropriate for a state school for all students. If there is a chance someone can succeed and get an education, that's a gamble I don't mind taking.


Your milage may vary.

[Jeff Buchanan]

The academics for admission are very similar at most P5 schools for football players. Most schools hover VERY close to the Clearinghouse for football player admission - especially when programs for the 'developmentally delayed' or whatever are added by Admissions for the student body......

Hmmm, I can't challenge that assessment on a comparative basis re Bama v. say, M. I know there is someone here who will know the numbers. For example, I think that M admits football payers not just on the basis of, now, the NCAA Elgibility Center rules (used to be the Clearing House), but they also have to clear the Michigan's Registrar's admission standards. I suspect that is true with all B10 Schools. A big hump for athletes wanting to enter M is not getting past the NCAA's Eligibility Center standards but rather passing muster by the Registrar on the rigorousness of the athlete's HS curriculum. That's what also trips up a good deal of non-athlete students seeking admission to M.

If my view is an accurate one, comparisons of SEC schools v. B10 schools re academic standards renders Cody's position as correct.

[AlabamAlum]

Michigan has a flexible admission policy. In other words, they do not set a required GPA or ACT/SAT - which is wise.

And football aside, I think that an inclusive admission policy is proper for state schools.

[Cody_Russell]

Morris Claiborne was offered a scholarship by LSU...

For those that don't remember, your common 2nd grader is probably smarter than Morris Claiborne.

[Jeff Buchanan]

..... And football aside, I think that an inclusive admission policy is proper for state schools.

Well, the Supremes would agree with you.

.......and it is an aside.

I'd just like to nail down objectively the differences between admission standards between SEC schools and B10 schools. That is because you are arguing, if I have it right, AA, that the recruiting advantage we in the B10 argue is owned by the SEC, in part, due to the SEC being able to admit less academically qualified athletes is not an advantage to the SEC at all.

[WM Wolverine]

Every school has slightly different rules for admissions, I know NW and Wisconsin have higher standards than the NCAA's while M has ~3 spots they can take that don't meet their admission standards. ND is the same as M in regards to they can take academic exceptions...

The big difference is the actual curriculum when you're an athlete and get to campus. What we saw at NC is allegedly the norm in terms of special classes offered to student athletes in the south. No-show classes taught by teachers who only teach classes to athletes. If an athletic department wants to keep a kid eligible, it's no trouble to do so.

[AlabamAlum]

Jeff,

Actually, what I am saying is that the differences aren't nearly as vast as you would imagine.

Anecdotal, but I have a friend whose son played for Indiana. He was a very poor student. A low 2.something GPA and middling ACT. I was shocked he didn't go JUCO.

Listen to Cal grad, Marshawn Lynch, or OSU's Maurice Clarett, or M's Les Miles(!) or watch a video of UNL's Lawrence Phillips or some lumbering B1G DT and think to yourself more warrior or poet?

The fact is there are just a handful of academic casualties at any school that pass the clearinghouse, fail to get in, but do so at another P5. Does it happen? Yeah. A lot? Nah.

Of the hundreds of kids M has offered over the last few years how many didn't get in strictly due to admissions and ended up at another P5? You'll find a few, but the numbers are not great. And M is vague on what exactly a minimum GPA/SAT combo required for admission. Allowances are made at most schools (and should be).

[AlabamAlum]

Every school has slightly different rules for admissions, I know NW and Wisconsin have higher standards than the NCAA's while M has ~3 spots they can take that don't meet their admission standards. ND is the same as M in regards to they can take academic exceptions...

The big difference is the actual curriculum when you're an athlete and get to campus. What we saw at NC is allegedly the norm in terms of special classes offered to student athletes in the south. No-show classes taught by teachers who only teach classes to athletes. If an athletic department wants to keep a kid eligible, it's no trouble to do so.

No. Do not assume that what North Carolina did happens at all schools just because of geographic proximity. And any student could register for those UNC classes. That's how they avoided crippling sanctions.

Most schools undergrad curriculum is similar by design as a result of standards set by accreditation. And when irregularities happen, the accrediting bodies sanction (see: Auburn and their socio classes).

[Jeff Buchanan]

AA, fair enough. We've gotten input on this subject fro talent before so, its not a new discussion and he'd agree with you (not as big a difference as I might imagine it is).

Still, were arguing anecdotally. I'd really like to see some objective data on this.