The World of College Football

[GP1]

1 hour ago, exit322 said:

UCLA and Virginia Tech decided today keeping their failed head coaches was more costly than getting rid of them.  So I guess it's doable even when UCLA's stadium was 80% empty.  Wild.

Schools like this have much more in their calculations. Akron just has money. Either they can afford to fire Joe, or not. 

[Dr Z]

On 9/9/2025 at 5:52 PM, kreed5120 said:

...Ohio is good enough to lose by only 28 instead of 33...

Nice call. 😎

[MangoZip]

Spring transfer portal removed

 

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ncaa-approves-single-transfer-portal-window-how-the-new-rule-will-impact-college-football/#

[GP1]

9 hours ago, MangoZip said:

Spring transfer portal removed

 

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ncaa-approves-single-transfer-portal-window-how-the-new-rule-will-impact-college-football/#

This is a good step. Next step should be reducing scholarships to 65. College football is now a professional minor league. If 53 players per roster is good enough for the NFL, college can do the same thing. It will make coaches really think about who and who does not get a scholarship. One half of all kids in the TP never play football again. It will also accelerate them out of the sport and move them to things they can do on life where they can be more successful.  

Edited September 18 by GP1

[kreed5120]

21 minutes ago, GP1 said:

This is a good step. Next step should be reducing scholarships to 65. College football is now a professional minor league. If 53 players per roster is good enough for the NFL, college can do the same thing. It will make coaches really think about who and who does not get a scholarship. One half of all kids in the TP never play football again. It will also accelerate them out of the spirit and move them to things they can do on life where they can be more successful.  

 

My complaint with the transfer portal is that it's open during the CFP. They should move the window to early February IMO. Trimming it down to 1 window was a big improvement.

 

I feel a little bit more study needs to be done to determine proper roster size. NFL teams have roster size of 53, but they have an additional 17 player taxi squad, who they have on hand to step in when needed. Plus they can sign FA mid-season. An NFL team uses much more than 53 individual players over the course of the season when you factor in injuries. I would think 70-75 players would be adequate and accomplish some of the goals you stated.

[MangoZip]

25 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

My complaint with the transfer portal is that it's open during the CFP. They should move the window to early February IMO. Trimming it down to 1 window was a big improvement.

 

I feel a little bit more study needs to be done to determine proper roster size. NFL teams have roster size of 53, but they have an additional 17 player taxi squad, who they have on hand to step in when needed. Plus they can sign FA mid-season. An NFL team uses much more than 53 individual players over the course of the season when you factor in injuries. I would think 70-75 players would be adequate and accomplish some of the goals you stated.

I would agree it makes more sense for football but the problem is classes. Most schools start 2nd semester until early to mid January so kids needs to be enrolled. If they aren’t enrolled for 2nd semester then they can’t participate in spring practice. 

Edited September 18 by MangoZip

[GP1]

29 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

My complaint with the transfer portal is that it's open during the CFP. They should move the window to early February IMO. Trimming it down to 1 window was a big improvement.

 

I feel a little bit more study needs to be done to determine proper roster size. NFL teams have roster size of 53, but they have an additional 17 player taxi squad, who they have on hand to step in when needed. Plus they can sign FA mid-season. An NFL team uses much more than 53 individual players over the course of the season when you factor in injuries. I would think 70-75 players would be adequate and accomplish some of the goals you stated.

70 is probably a better number than my original. They could have 53 scholarships and 17 walk ons. 

 

It wouldn't take much time. They could chart the number of plays per player on every roster. Some players may only play a handful of plays in a season. I believe those players are unnecessary to give scholarships. 

 

A lot of NFL players are brought in n mid season to replace IR players or guys who aren't cutting it. Injuries are part of sports. Teams will need to deal with those problems with their available roster. Life isn't fair. 

[ZippyRulz]

4 hours ago, GP1 said:

This is a good step. Next step should be reducing scholarships to 65. College football is now a professional minor league. If 53 players per roster is good enough for the NFL, college can do the same thing. It will make coaches really think about who and who does not get a scholarship. One half of all kids in the TP never play football again. It will also accelerate them out of the sport and move them to things they can do on life where they can be more successful.  

 

Scholarship limits and roster limits are 2 different things. Limiting scholarships would have no bearing on the P4.

 

[GP1]

17 minutes ago, ZippyRulz said:

 

Scholarship limits and roster limits are 2 different things. Limiting scholarships would have no bearing on the P4.

 

Good point. Limit them anyhow. Let private money pay for it. 

[Hilltopper]

Somebody else posted this on Facebook. I agree with all.the conclusions.

 

Akron Football: When Exposure Becomes an Auction Block

For decades, the Mid-American Conference (MAC) built its football brand on one thing: exposure. Midweek “MACtion” meant that on Tuesday and Wednesday nights in November, when most of college football was idle, the MAC had the national stage. Even if stadiums were half empty, Akron, Kent State, and their peers could say: “We’re on ESPN.”

That pitch worked for a while. Players got national airtime, coaches got recruiting leverage, and universities got their names mentioned on broadcasts that reached millions of households.

But in the Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) era, exposure has flipped from asset to liability.

Exposure, Then and Now

Before 2021, a Tuesday night breakout could put a MAC athlete on the NFL radar. Coaches could sell recruits on the guarantee of national TV games. For universities like Akron, whose football profile lagged far behind Ohio State, the ESPN window was a rare equalizer.

Now? That same highlight package on ESPN is an advertisement for Power 4 programs to swoop in and recruit Akron’s best players away—with six-figure NIL packages.

The math is brutal:
 • MAC collectives average roughly $0.5 million annually. Akron’s is closer to $341,000.¹
 • Power 4 schools now routinely spend millions per year per athlete.
 • A MAC player who shines on national TV is no longer a point of pride—it’s a scouting reel for someone else’s roster.

Exposure without the financial power to retain talent just accelerates the talent drain.

The Optics Problem

Even when players shine, the pictures ESPN broadcasts are damaging. Attendance across the MAC collapses for midweek games: Saturday contests averaged 16,738 fans in 2018, while midweek games averaged just 12,255—a 27% drop.²

At Akron, the numbers are even worse. In 2022, fewer than 3,000 fans attended a sunny, 80-degree home game against Miami (OH). For context, in 2005—a Thanksgiving morning blizzard game with –6° wind chill—more than 7,000 showed up.

What ESPN cameras show now isn’t “passionate fans” or “hidden gems.” It’s empty stands, lifeless atmospheres, and lopsided scores from overloaded buy games. That hurts Akron’s brand far more than it helps.

The Enrollment Squeeze

Akron’s enrollment collapse compounds the problem. In 2011, the university had 25,190 students.³ By 2024, it had dropped nearly 40% to 14,813.⁴

That decline affects everything: tuition revenue, student fees that help fund athletics, and the size of the potential fan base. With fewer students and shrinking resources, Akron can’t afford to prop up an FBS football program at the level the system demands.

A Conference in Decline

The larger MAC picture isn’t rosy either. The league’s national perception has declined sharply since the early 2000s, when it produced NFL names like Ben Roethlisberger, Julian Edelman, Charlie Frye, and Josh Cribbs. In the past 20 years, the quarterback output has been thin:
 • Keith Wenning (Ball State, 2014) — limited to practice squads
 • Dan LeFevour (Central Michigan, 2010) — never started in an NFL game
 • Kurtis Rourke (Ohio → Indiana, 2025) — drafted but unproven

The league that once marketed itself as a talent incubator now serves as a farm system for wealthier schools.

The Core Problem: Exposure Without Retention

For Akron, the ESPN window no longer sells. National visibility doesn’t build fan support, it doesn’t stabilize enrollment, and it doesn’t retain talent.

Instead, it broadcasts the program’s weakness: low crowds, heavy losses, and players destined to leave once they succeed. The very tool meant to elevate the MAC now underscores its irrelevance.

Exposure without retention is brand erosion.

The Path Forward

Akron faces a stark choice. Staying in the FBS MAC means continuing to cash the occasional $1 million “buy game” check and enjoying ESPN visibility—while enduring blowout losses, talent drain, and empty seats. Dropping to the FCS would lower costs and restore competitive balance, but at the expense of national profile and big payouts.

Neither option is glamorous. But pretending that exposure alone is still a benefit in 2025 is self-deception. The NIL era has changed the rules. Without new resources or a strategic reset, Akron’s midweek ESPN appearances don’t build the brand—they auction it off.

⸻

Sources
 1. NIL reporting: MAC collectives average ~$536,000 annually; Akron’s closer to $341,000.
 2. The Ringer: 2018 MAC attendance — 16,738 (Saturday) vs. 12,255 (midweek), –26.8%.
 3. University of Akron Institutional Research: enrollment peaked at ~25,190 in 2011.
 4. Ideastream: Akron’s fall 2024 enrollment at 14,813.

[egregiousbob]

Sorry, but if you think Power 4 programs don't already know about MAC stars, you're wrong. They don't need ESPN broadcasts, and in fact can see very little vs. sending a scout.  If you'd like to eliminate that part of the MAC package, please return the approx. $1MM each team receives.

 

Akron's exposure/enrollment/retention problem cannot be extended to all other schools.  Miami and Ohio are strong - Ohio has set freshman enrollment records for four straight years. BGSU is holding strong. Kent is doing okay.  Toledo and Akron, admittedly, are not, but is that the fault of the MAC and/or ESPN night games? 

 

I do agree that Akron faces some tough decisions.  The one-year 3.4% increase in enrollment is the first small step in a long, hard recovery. In basketball, John Groce has benefitted greatly from Bud Wentz's largess, but even that success isn't selling out the JAR.  If I were a board member, I would seriously question the logic and value of continuing to support a football program, especially in light of the continued budget reductions that destroy the program's competitiveness. In BBall, Akron would be a great addition to the A10.  What to do about the white elephant stadium? Convert the tower into academic and administrative space and spend some money to enlarge the field for soccer.

 

      

[clarkwgriswold]

33 minutes ago, egregiousbob said:

Sorry, but if you think Power 4 programs don't already know about MAC stars, you're wrong. They don't need ESPN broadcasts, and in fact can see very little vs. sending a scout.       

 

Nor has or does the NFL need the broadcasts.  Their system finds the top players whether they are in Tuscaloosa or Hiram.

 

There are many good points in that post.

Edited 2 hours ago by clarkwgriswold

[kreed5120]

I was a little surprised that NIL in the MAC averaged around $500K. I would have guessed programs like Toledo or OU would be spending in the neighborhood of $1 million for their rosters.

 

Below is an article on how MTSU slashed $650K+ in expenses by eliminating alternate jerseys and helmets. They have instead directed that money to NIL. Identifying the waste and redirecting that money to NIL will be what we would need to do in order to be competitive. Like I said before, we need to find ways of making our dollars stretch further.

 

https://frontofficesports.com/middle-tennessee-state-uniform-cuts-nil/

[GP1]

3 hours ago, Hilltopper said:

Somebody else posted this on Facebook. I agree with all.the conclusions.

 

Akron Football: When Exposure Becomes an Auction Block

For decades, the Mid-American Conference (MAC) built its football brand on one thing: exposure. Midweek “MACtion” meant that on Tuesday and Wednesday nights in November, when most of college football was idle, the MAC had the national stage. Even if stadiums were half empty, Akron, Kent State, and their peers could say: “We’re on ESPN.”

That pitch worked for a while. Players got national airtime, coaches got recruiting leverage, and universities got their names mentioned on broadcasts that reached millions of households.

But in the Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) era, exposure has flipped from asset to liability.

Exposure, Then and Now

Before 2021, a Tuesday night breakout could put a MAC athlete on the NFL radar. Coaches could sell recruits on the guarantee of national TV games. For universities like Akron, whose football profile lagged far behind Ohio State, the ESPN window was a rare equalizer.

Now? That same highlight package on ESPN is an advertisement for Power 4 programs to swoop in and recruit Akron’s best players away—with six-figure NIL packages.

The math is brutal:
 • MAC collectives average roughly $0.5 million annually. Akron’s is closer to $341,000.¹
 • Power 4 schools now routinely spend millions per year per athlete.
 • A MAC player who shines on national TV is no longer a point of pride—it’s a scouting reel for someone else’s roster.

Exposure without the financial power to retain talent just accelerates the talent drain.

The Optics Problem

Even when players shine, the pictures ESPN broadcasts are damaging. Attendance across the MAC collapses for midweek games: Saturday contests averaged 16,738 fans in 2018, while midweek games averaged just 12,255—a 27% drop.²

At Akron, the numbers are even worse. In 2022, fewer than 3,000 fans attended a sunny, 80-degree home game against Miami (OH). For context, in 2005—a Thanksgiving morning blizzard game with –6° wind chill—more than 7,000 showed up.

What ESPN cameras show now isn’t “passionate fans” or “hidden gems.” It’s empty stands, lifeless atmospheres, and lopsided scores from overloaded buy games. That hurts Akron’s brand far more than it helps.

The Enrollment Squeeze

Akron’s enrollment collapse compounds the problem. In 2011, the university had 25,190 students.³ By 2024, it had dropped nearly 40% to 14,813.⁴

That decline affects everything: tuition revenue, student fees that help fund athletics, and the size of the potential fan base. With fewer students and shrinking resources, Akron can’t afford to prop up an FBS football program at the level the system demands.

A Conference in Decline

The larger MAC picture isn’t rosy either. The league’s national perception has declined sharply since the early 2000s, when it produced NFL names like Ben Roethlisberger, Julian Edelman, Charlie Frye, and Josh Cribbs. In the past 20 years, the quarterback output has been thin:
 • Keith Wenning (Ball State, 2014) — limited to practice squads
 • Dan LeFevour (Central Michigan, 2010) — never started in an NFL game
 • Kurtis Rourke (Ohio → Indiana, 2025) — drafted but unproven

The league that once marketed itself as a talent incubator now serves as a farm system for wealthier schools.

The Core Problem: Exposure Without Retention

For Akron, the ESPN window no longer sells. National visibility doesn’t build fan support, it doesn’t stabilize enrollment, and it doesn’t retain talent.

Instead, it broadcasts the program’s weakness: low crowds, heavy losses, and players destined to leave once they succeed. The very tool meant to elevate the MAC now underscores its irrelevance.

Exposure without retention is brand erosion.

The Path Forward

Akron faces a stark choice. Staying in the FBS MAC means continuing to cash the occasional $1 million “buy game” check and enjoying ESPN visibility—while enduring blowout losses, talent drain, and empty seats. Dropping to the FCS would lower costs and restore competitive balance, but at the expense of national profile and big payouts.

Neither option is glamorous. But pretending that exposure alone is still a benefit in 2025 is self-deception. The NIL era has changed the rules. Without new resources or a strategic reset, Akron’s midweek ESPN appearances don’t build the brand—they auction it off.

⸻

Sources
 1. NIL reporting: MAC collectives average ~$536,000 annually; Akron’s closer to $341,000.
 2. The Ringer: 2018 MAC attendance — 16,738 (Saturday) vs. 12,255 (midweek), –26.8%.
 3. University of Akron Institutional Research: enrollment peaked at ~25,190 in 2011.
 4. Ideastream: Akron’s fall 2024 enrollment at 14,813.

Everyone knows who wrote it. I wish he would have put it citations for all of my ideas I have been posting for years. I've been saying most of this for years.