Talk:College football

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.

The spoken word version of this article is part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, an attempt to produce recordings of Wikipedia articles. To participate, visit the project page.

	College football is part of WikiProject College football, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to college football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Top	This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.

This article is part of WikiProject American football, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to American football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

	To-do list for College football:	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
Here are some tasks you can do: Other: Archive talk page

Contents 1 Cleanup 2 Rename 3 Polls 4 Wikiportal 5 Structural Changes 6 military academies 7 Teams that have three jerseys 8 where popular 9 WikiProject College football 10 Network for College Football Sports Information Departments 11 Possible POV 12 WP:CFCM October Article 13 Disambiguate "NCAA Football" 14 Awards changes 15 Bowl Games 16 Maps 17 Rules -- Two Minute Warning 18 MORE MAPS 19 Colorado State versus Air Force?!? 20 Rutgers game of 1869 should be a footnote

[edit] Cleanup

"As the score would indicate, the game bore little resemblance to the game of today" -- Probably though not necessarily: 6 could equal a touchdown without an extra point or two field goals; 4 could equal two safeties. Perhaps this sentence should not appear. --user:Daniel C. Boyer

[edit] Rename

The phrase "College American football" is used by no one. Try American College football or College football (U.S.). --Jiang/talk 03:38, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I agree, but there are lots of links. RickK 04:41, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Redirects are fine; time will lead them to be changed, so we don't need to worry about that. --Jiang/talk 04:47, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Do other countries have "College football"? If not, this belongs there. --Jiang 06:50, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Canada has college football.--RLent 18:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Polls

It would be nice to decribe the polls. How they work, who votes, and how they affect the BCS, etc.

 -I think so too

[edit] Wikiportal

How about a Wikiportal for College football? -- Fingers-of-Pyrex 01:38, 2005 May 16 (UTC)

OK.--J3wishVulcan 16:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Proposed: Wikipedia:Portal/Proposals#Portal:College_Football --Mecu 18:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Structural Changes

I'm considering making some fairly significant changes to this page, so I thought I'd ask for opinions before I proceed. My main objection is with the lists that make up the second half of the article.

• Right now there are three separate listings of the current bowl schedule. I suggest we keep the infographic at the bottom of the page as a reference to this year's schedule. One of the things I'm working on is a complete list of both current and defunct bowls. I'm not sure that the defunct bowls need to be listed on the main page. I'd like to just provide a link to the list.
• There some other sections that I think could be better served with separate list pages. Conferences that formerly sponsored football, Division I colleges that no longer play football, and Division I colleges that have never sponsored football are all sections that I find too specific to have on a page like this.
• The history section is the most important part of the page, but right now it's rather paltry. I think that by cutting down on the extraneous lists we'll have more room to expand it. Right now we have a history section so general it doesn't even mention Walter Camp.

If no one voices any objections I'll probably make these changes in the next week. --djrobgordon 20:52, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] military academies

I changed this sentence College football is American football played by teams of students fielded by American universities and colleges, including United States military academies. by removing the word 'some'. With the exception of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (a medical school) all of the US military academies have college football. The Coast Guard and Merchant Marine adacemies play D-III football.--RLent 19:28, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Teams that have three jerseys

This section only lists teams, without giving any explanations. As I understand, usually teams use a colored home-shirt and a white away-shirt? What is the third jersey in these cases? --Matthead 17:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand the encyclopedic value of this section. Why is it notable that some teams have used a 3rd jersey style? Doesn't seem like crucial information for someone looking to learn about college football. --mtz206 22:18, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Continuing, seems now all Div I teams are listed with some kind of "(2+U)" designation if they have more than 2 jerseys. Two problems here:

1. I dont' see why all Div I teams should be listed in this article. Instead, there should be a sub-article of Colleges and Universities with Division 1 Football Programs, or the like;
2. The (2+U) is awkward, and no argument has been made why the designation is notable in the first place. --mtz206 03:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I concur, since this section was introduced it's gotten worse and worse, applying no new information of value? How long until we can remove the ugliness? ;) Peter J. Mello, Jr. 17:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

In the spirit of List of Division I schools that have never sponsored football and List of defunct Division I football teams, I have created List of NCAA Division I-A Football Programs, and removed the list from this article. --mtz206 12:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] where popular

A lack of a pro franchise is not necessarily an indicator of where the college game is most successful; for example, in California, Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania, and Florida -- states which all have multiple NFL franchises -- there are universities that also rank in the upper financial echelons of the college football.

Hmm...seems to me this is kind of true, but kind of misleading. In Ohio, there is one major college football school, Ohio State, which is in Columbus. The two NFL teams are in Cleveland and Cincinnati. The big football schools in Texas are in Austin and College Station, the professional teams are in Houston and Dallas (although I suppose College Station is not that far from Houston - but Dallas is, in any event, the big NFL city in Texas, and is quite far from both). In Pennsylvania, Penn State is also quite far from any NFL team (although Pitt, obviously, is not), as are Florida and Florida State in Florida (but not Miami). In California, the biggest football school is USC in LA, which notoriously does not have an NFL team. In terms of BCS schools, only a few are in the immediate vicinity of NFL teams - Boston College, Maryland, Georgia Tech, Miami, Pittsburgh, Cincy, South Florida, Arizona State, California, Stanford, Washington and Vanderbilt. Of those, only Miami is really in the top ranks of college football, and Cincinnati and South Florida are pretty minor football schools. Maryland and Pitt are probably bigger basketball than football schools. I think it would be fairly fair to say that there really are very few major college programs in places with NFL franchises. We shouldn't think on a statewide basis - a state like Texas or Florida is enormous, and the fact that both the University of Texas and the Dallas Cowboys are in Texas, or that the Raiders and USC both are in California seems like a pretty silly point. john k 15:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject College football

Hey guys ... I have created a WikiProject for college football - I think it's passed time that we had one. (Please see the NFL project for an example of the utility of a WikiProject.) I know that there are a number of people who are making efforts at improving various college football articles and this project gives us a place to coordinate those efforts and ask for help.

Please join the project if you are interested, add items to the to-do list, tag articles with {{WikiProject College football}}, invite other pockets of football fans to join, or do anything else to help support articles about the best sport in all the land. BigDT 01:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Network for College Football Sports Information Departments

I am trying to submit a new online network Elite Football Network to the "External Links" section. EFN enables college football SI departments from every football conference and division to publish their game summaries, news and press releases. The goal of EFN is to help college SI writers compete for online traffic with the large sports networks that typically cover only the high profile D-1A schools and not typically link back to the school's football URL. It has been deleted a couple of times which may be due to improper submitting on my part. I am new to Wikipedia and would appreciate any assistance. Thank you. Bbowenjr 13:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not for "submitting links". Please see WP:NOT and WP:EL. If you want your link listed somewhere, please consider submitting it to a link directory like DMOZ instead. Thanks. Haakon 21:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment: studysphere.com and other links have been campaign-spammed to Wikipedia; see 29 November 2006 discussion at WT:WPSPAM. Bbowenjr added them to a wide range of articles from Dental implants to Military robots. There's been a misconception among some spamdexers that if they get a link deleted they can question the deletion on the talk page and still get the page rank benefit; this is wrong since all Wikipedia talk and user page links are automatically coded with the html tag rel="nofollow"; search engine bots don't follow these links. --A. B. 23:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible POV

"College football remains extremely popular today among students, alumni, and other fans of the sport, particularly in the Southern and Midwestern parts of the country."

Is there a citation for this? Many northwest fans would take exception to not being included, as attendance numbers and television ratings rival those in the south. PDXblazers

Not only the northwest, but every other area of the states with major programs. Its an unecessary and exclusive phrase.

I've put unreferenced and cite requested tags in these locations, as well as on the parent article where it was probably taken from History of American football#College football in the 21st century. --MECU≈talk 13:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:CFCM October Article

The current College football Collaboration of the Month is College football. Every month a different College football-related topic, stub or non-existent article is picked. Please read the nomination text and improve the article any way you can.

See featured article nomination for items to work on. --MECU≈talk 18:54, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Since the FA nomination is generally vague, other than most don't like the long lists of items (I don't either), I've got a few other ideas for subtopics: Recruiting, polls, bowl games, rivalries and conferences (with BCS conference sub of that). I think most of the lists could/should be reduced to just the link to the main item that covers that topic. So, for conferences, just the link to Division I-A conferences. Perhaps even make a list of those conferences as a seperate "article" and then link to it there as a main or seealso. Anyone else have some input? --MECU≈talk 19:34, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I just read the comments and objections, and I have to agree with most of them. It really desparately needs citations and references. The intro needs work too. It really should be a lot more than just a few sentances. Expand what's here and get rid of the lists, though, and I think we'll be well on the way to passing an FA nom. z4ns4tsu\^talk 22:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

We're going to need more images too. Off the top of my head, I think a picture of one of the larger stadiums would be nice...maybe the Big House in Ann Arbor or OMU in Norman. It would also be nice to have a short discussion of how strategy is different in college football than pro. I'm reading over the "how to write a featured article" pages and brainstorming still, but I expect to get started actually editing in the next few days. How do you want to break this up so that we don't overlap in our efforts? I can take the intro and history without problem. We're going to need to move and then link to all the lists that make up the bottom half of the page too. z4ns4tsu\^talk 19:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguate "NCAA Football"

I typed NCAA Football into the search looking for NCAA Football series, but I got to College Football. Should there maybe be a disambiguate page for NCAA Football? Cbuhl79 01:46, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Someone has changed the redirect from NCAA Football to now go to NCAA Football series with a line at the top that refers to the sport College Football. This it probably the best way to handle this. --MECU≈talk 12:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

It looks like someone re-directed NCAA Football back here, which makes sense to me, I'm guessing most people who type in "NCAA football" want to know about the real sport, not the video games. I just added a disambig note to the top of THIS page to solve this ;-) Cbuhl79 18:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter much to me either way as long as we give the reader an easy way to get where they are going if we send them to the worng place. However, I would suspect that if they capitalize the "f" (NCAA Football) they want the video game series and if they don't (NCAA football) they want the sport. Just my guess. Johntex\^talk 18:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Awards changes

I don't see the reason for splitting up the awards (as an anonymous user just did), but assuming good faith, I don't want to just revert it out of hand. So, what do we think? Should all awards be listed together in alphabetical order (the old way) or should the Division I-AA, II, and III awards be separated from the Division I-A ones (the new way)?

I don't like either way. I don't think it should be just a list. Perhaps just including the template that shows all of them would be a nice visual presentation. But there should be a general description about the awards, especially the Heisman. This template: {{College Football Awards}} --MECU≈talk 00:26, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I like that template. I guess we should put it at the bottom of the article...probably before the current season bowl games. I also agree that a short (like 3-4 sentence) description of the major awards would be good. Heisman, Maxwell, and Nagurski should cover it, don't you think? z4ns4tsu\^talk 14:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Along a similar vein, I've just created the {{NCAA DI-A Conferences}} template. Take a look at it and let me know what you think. The only thing I'm not sure about with it is that I put the Independents in the right place. If it looks good, I can make up one for each division and we can use them to replace the lists on this article. z4ns4tsu\^talk 15:59, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I like it. Good work. --MECU≈talk 16:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

All of the conference templates have been added to the page. I took off the long, nasty-looking lists. z4ns4tsu\^talk 19:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bowl Games

Is this right?

For the 2006 season, there are 32 bowl games plus a separate national championship game, so 64 of the 119 Division I-A teams will be invited to play at a bowl and two teams will play in two bowls.

I thought so when I put it in, but reading the next section about the BCS National Championship game, I'm not so sure any more. Does anyone know? z4ns4tsu\^talk 18:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

What two teams will play in two bowl games? There should either be 31 + NC game or 32. I say for the sake of introducing the topic to a beginner, it should just be 32. The NC game isn't a real bowl, but it's post-season so it is but it's almost a meta-bowl game. Not that such a thing exists either. --MECU≈talk 20:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

What I thought I'd heard earlier was that the main bowl games would get to pick who they wanted and then the BCS would take the top two for another game. I think I just got confused, because typing it out now it doesn't make any sense. I'll go fix that. z4ns4tsu\^talk 20:40, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The BCS first takes the #1 and #2 rated teams into the new championship game. Then, each BCS conference winner is placed into their game with their tie-in (ie, Big 12 Champion, if not #1 or #2 goes to Fiesta Bowl). Then the at-large selections which the BCS picks at their leisure really, probably mostly money driven. Then all the other bowls that have their tie-ins get them and then when there are open slots, they select teams at their leisure, also probably mostly money driven. Teams like Navy that have a contract with a bowl and no chance at the BCS level games just "accept" their bid as soon as they can (partly contract driven). Looking at the tie-ins page is probably the most informative. Once we go through this new BCS style a season, it'll make more sense. I remember when it came out everyone was confused (and most probably still are). --MECU≈talk 20:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maps

Hey quick question and comment about the maps on this page. Who set them up they are really sweet? and two, could they do something similar for the NCAA Basketball Tourniment page on Wikipedia also, though it would be more crowded with all of the teams and programs. Still it would be good and it is really a great addition to the College Football page. --Intrepidsfsu 14:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

If you look at the image page (:Image:2006_Bowls-USA-states.PNG) you can see you created the image. You can also see that the image was derived from a blank map which is linked as well.--NMajdan•talk 14:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

You may also want to take a look here and make a request.--NMajdan•talk 14:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rules -- Two Minute Warning

except in cases where the scoreboard clock has malfunctioned

Does anyone have a source for this quote? I have never heard of the two-minute warning being used at all in college football, though I'm sure there have been times when the clock has been re-set to two minutes after a malfunction. Maybe that is what the editor who added this saw? z4ns4tsu\^talk 15:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

NCAA Rulebook, Rule 3-3-8-b: "Unless a visual game clock is the official timepiece, the referee also shall inform each field captain and head coach when approximately two minutes of playing time remain in each half. He may order the clock stopped for that purpose....(b) The clock starts on the snap after the two-minute notification."

[edit] MORE MAPS

The first map has Arkansas State situated in Little Rock. This is wrong. Arkansas State is in the NE corner of the state. Whoever made the map needs to change it, or bring it down.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 160.91.212.26 (talk • contribs).

I have notified an editor of the image of the issue. Hopefully, he can make the change when he gets time. Thank you for bringing that to our attention.↔NMajdan•talk 21:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Colorado State versus Air Force?!?

Who cares 68.5.171.77 08:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I think this is referring to the images used in this article. We use these images because they are free because they are taken by the armed forces, which can't copyright their images. If you have good quality football images that you would like to license for free use, please upload them and we'll talk. Contact me if you need help with this: --MECU≈talk 13:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rutgers game of 1869 should be a footnote

I've attempted to distinguish the 1869 Princeton-Rutgers soccer game of from college football, which is the topic of this article. The 1869 game was an evolutionary dead-end and belongs in the prehistory of American college soccer, not here. It is not related to college football and did not influence it, other than to delay some schools switching from the soccer rules to those of football. The 19th-century use of the word "football" seems to be what's causing the confusion. Just because players back then called it "football" (and could use their hands in some situations, as all soccer players then could do) does not mean it belongs in this article. It's a distraction and should be eliminated or reduced to a footnote. --Patent law 22:35, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Totally disagree. The 6-4 game was played under rules that would not be recognizable today as soccer or football, and was the starting point for the development toward rugby style rules, then toward the rules we know today. This game is considered the first college football game by just about every source. *Mishatx*-In\Out 23:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

So cite a source BQZip01 06:22, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Anatomy of a Game, David M Nelson, 1994, University of Delaware press. *Mishatx*-In\Out 06:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Got a link to that? Any other sources? If so, just put them in the main article. Kinda hard to refute it otherwise. BQZip01 05:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)