Doogs still hate facts (deserves own thread)
The simple math:
125 schools * 85 scholarships = 10,625 FBS scholarship players now, while 104 schools * 95 scholarships = 9,880 I-A scholarship players in 1983.
Comments
-
I really hate that fucktarded argument. It's been proven false and just needs to go away.
-
He_Needs_More_Time said:
I really hate that fucktarded argument. It's been proven false and Irish Doog just needs to go away.
-
RaceBannon said:
I really hate that fucktarded argument. It's been proven false and Irish Doog just needs to jump off the Aurora Bridge while ablaze and wearing nothing but cement shoes.
-
I am not sure what point that argument is trying to make, but assuming a relatively constant fraction of the population being college-age males then there is some validity to that since the population has grown almost 35% since then (as opposed to 8% scholarship increase).
My question is why does this matter at all? -
IrishDoogFuckingStupid is trying to claim that the FCS teams now have just as much talent as the mid-major I-A schools did 30 years ago.Mad_Son said:I am not sure what point that argument is trying to make, but assuming a relatively constant fraction of the population being college-age males then there is some validity to that since the population has grown almost 35% since then (as opposed to 8% scholarship increase).
My question is why does this matter at all?
-
IrishDoogFuckingStupid has SURPASSED IMALOSER territory in every thread.
-
Texas St, UT-SA, U Mass, and South Alabama approve this post.
We should schedule them instead. -
We'd probably lose to USA
-
North Dakota St would beat Pacific.
Fact. -
I think it's time to put IrishDoogFS to sleep. This experiment has ran its course.
-
Pacific doesn't play football anymore. Try to keep up
-
Fact: we beat the crap out of the Pacific Tigers in '92
-
bullshit back dummy. 85 scollies makes a huge difference. You fucks weren't around then?He_Needs_More_Time said:I really hate that fucktarded argument. It's been proven false and just needs to go away.
-
They had Nigel Burton
-
So given a constant talent level over the past 30 years that would mean there are currently 13338 players of equivalent quality to the top 9880 players in 1983. For the purpose of this exercise we are assuming all of the best talent is identified and signed. Thus if the top 10625 players go to FBS teams then that leaves 2713 players of 1983 D1 talent for the FCS. Given 63 scholarships on an FCS team, 43 teams can max out their allotment of scholarships on 1983-level talent. Of course these teams have lesser depth due to fewer scholarships and assuredly get the lower end of the 13338 players who meet/exceed the 1983 9880th player threshold.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
IrishDoogFuckingStupid is trying to claim that the FCS teams now have just as much talent as the mid-major I-A schools did 30 years ago.Mad_Son said:I am not sure what point that argument is trying to make, but assuming a relatively constant fraction of the population being college-age males then there is some validity to that since the population has grown almost 35% since then (as opposed to 8% scholarship increase).
My question is why does this matter at all?
-
Puppylove_Sugarsteel has reached IrishdawgFS territory in this thread.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
bullshit back dummy. 85 scollies makes a huge difference. You fucks weren't around then?He_Needs_More_Time said:I really hate that fucktarded argument. It's been proven false and just needs to go away.
-
Yeah, but still
-
Interesting side note: Nigel Burton was on the Pacific team.unfrozencaveman said:Fact: we beat the crap out of the Pacific Tigers in '92
-
Fuck you and your 543 seconds.RaceBannon said:They had Nigel Burton
-
I also like to be IrishDoogFuckingStupid and pretend that FCS teams with 63 scholarships are generally just as competitive as Sun Belt/MAC/C-USA teams with 85 scholarships.
I do that. -
Southern "Fucking" Utah approves this post.TierbsHsotBoobs said:I also like to be IrishDoogFuckingStupid and pretend that FCS teams with 63 scholarships are generally just as competitive as Sun Belt/MAC/C-USA teams with 85 scholarships.
I do that.
They like to do that. -
ND State would hold their own in the fucking Sun Belt.
Fact... -
Again you use one example rather than the total data.IrishDawg22 said:
Southern "Fucking" Utah approves this post.TierbsHsotBoobs said:I also like to be IrishDoogFuckingStupid and pretend that FCS teams with 63 scholarships are generally just as competitive as Sun Belt/MAC/C-USA teams with 85 scholarships.
I do that.
They like to do that.
Doogs love to cherry pick like that. -
-
What the fuck did you just say Hodges?Mad_Son said:
So given a constant talent level over the past 30 years that would mean there are currently 13338 players of equivalent quality to the top 9880 players in 1983. For the purpose of this exercise we are assuming all of the best talent is identified and signed. Thus if the top 10625 players go to FBS teams then that leaves 2713 players of 1983 D1 talent for the FCS. Given 63 scholarships on an FCS team, 43 teams can max out their allotment of scholarships on 1983-level talent. Of course these teams have lesser depth due to fewer scholarships and assuredly get the lower end of the 13338 players who meet/exceed the 1983 9880th player threshold.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
IrishDoogFuckingStupid is trying to claim that the FCS teams now have just as much talent as the mid-major I-A schools did 30 years ago.Mad_Son said:I am not sure what point that argument is trying to make, but assuming a relatively constant fraction of the population being college-age males then there is some validity to that since the population has grown almost 35% since then (as opposed to 8% scholarship increase).
My question is why does this matter at all? -
Pumpchumps!
-
Grow the hell up and learn the difference between memes and Photoshops.IrishDawg22 said: -
By it's purest definition, how can you claim a Coog was actually using a meme?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Grow the hell up and learn the difference between memes and Photoshops.IrishDawg22 said:
Interesting theory... -
not on the '92 Pacific squad he wasn'tMikeDamone said:
Interesting side note: Nigel Burton was on the Pacific team.unfrozencaveman said:Fact: we beat the crap out of the Pacific Tigers in '92
-
Found a new picture to put at the top of the page I see. Well done!monroecougdad said:
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
