Author
Topic: The CFP Era so far
(Read 12857 times)

Entropy · « **Reply #252 on:** January 22, 2020, 01:57:50 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on January 22, 2020, 12:08:24 PM

This is a big deal to me and it is one of the things that makes me hesitate to even think about including Clemson among the helmets. When you look at the true "helmet" programs they all have a number of coaches that have achieved a high degree of success. These two and Clemson have basically two each. Can they succeed without those guys? It is an open question. I also think that this matters a LOT. When you look at the "helmet" programs and compare to the list posted earlier of states with the most players on NFL rosters, nearly all of them are located in or near one of the top states:
Bama: Alabama is 7th.
Florida: Florida is 1st.
Florida State: Florida is 1st.
Miami: Florida is 1st.
Michigan: Michigan is 12th.
Notre Dame: Notre Dame is an unusual case but they are near Ohio (5th), Michigan (12th), and Illinois (14th)
Ohio State: Ohio is 5th.
Oklahoma: Texas is next door and 3rd.
Penn State: Pennsylvania is 6th.
Texas: Texas is 3rd.
USC: California is 2nd.
LSU: Louisiana is 8th.
Clemson: South Carolina is 10th.
Nebraska: ? ? ?
Tennessee: ? ? ?

For most of these schools, if they have a series of coaching hire failures and fall on hard times they know that they WILL eventually get their coaching hire right and when they do, that next great coach will inherit a recruiting machine. That just isn't true at Tennessee and Nebraska. That makes me less confident in their ability to get back to the top.

regarding Nebraska.. they've also had only 1 OC for all 5 NC's. that probably adds to your arguement...

FearlessF · « **Reply #253 on:** January 22, 2020, 04:54:12 PM »

ya but, that OC is still alive and available for advice to Coach Frost

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #254 on:** January 22, 2020, 06:23:57 PM »

Quote from: FearlessF on January 22, 2020, 12:18:58 PM

it's also much tougher to attract the next great coach, becuase ALL coaches know their success will be based on the talent they will be able to recruit.

This is why I thought it was a massive mistake for Nebraska to ditch the option (ie hire a non-option HC after Solich). At that moment, their national identity was gone, and without the built-in backup schools in talent-rich areas have.
.
Back before that, a kid in SoCal or a kid in FL could imagine himself running the option with a red N on his helmet...but after, why in the hell would they go to Lincoln (no offense)? There was no longer something to dream on.

FearlessF · « **Reply #255 on:** January 22, 2020, 06:37:23 PM »

it's true that any great team or program develops an identity

hopefully, Frost can bring that with his offense

Billy C. couldn't get it done

Gigem · « **Reply #256 on:** January 22, 2020, 08:36:20 PM »

Great discussion. Interesting that you would put Clemson and Nebraska in the same boat since they’ve only won with two coaches. Didn’t Texas essentially do the same thing with Darryl Royal and Mack Brown? I mean sure Texas has won a lot of games with other coaches but only Royal and Brown have won national titles. Texas has 4 in ~60 years, Clemson has 3 in 40 years. One of those titles is dubious too like MN because it was awarded before the bowl game. Not much difference if you ask me in results between the helmet school and Baron.

ND may be a helmet school but I think time and competition has passed them by. As long as any program has the resources and the ability to recruit there is not much difference between a true helmet school and the so called Barons.

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #257 on:** January 22, 2020, 08:59:33 PM »

I don't consider NCs awarded before bowl games as dubious at all. That's how it was back then. The bowl was an exhibition. But I'm silly and believe teams play differently when it's for all the marbles vs just an exhibition.
.
I've been assured I'm wrong many a time here.
.
Now, losing your bowl back then didn't look good, but they had already accomplished their goal. The bowl was a reward, some fancy food, and pretty girls wearing bikinis in a warm climate.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #258 on:** January 22, 2020, 09:35:02 PM »

Quote from: Gigem on January 22, 2020, 08:36:20 PM

Great discussion. Interesting that you would put Clemson and Nebraska in the same boat since they’ve only won with two coaches. Didn’t Texas essentially do the same thing with Darryl Royal and Mack Brown? I mean sure Texas has won a lot of games with other coaches but only Royal and Brown have won national titles. Texas has 4 in ~60 years, Clemson has 3 in 40 years. One of those titles is dubious too like MN because it was awarded before the bowl game. Not much difference if you ask me in results between the helmet school and Baron.

Well Texas may have the same limit on NC coaches as Clemson but I disagree with your assertion that there is not much difference between a helmet and those below them. On an average per season basis the difference is not large but over decades and decades it is substantial.
This is coming from someone who absolutely detests Notre Dame, but the Irish are not merely a helmet, they are the helmet. Almost nobody is ambivalent about Notre Dame, most everyone either loves or hates them.

I'll give you an example, I have tons of Ohio State shirts but only a few commemorating individual game wins. The shirts I have commemorating individual wins are for BCSNC or CFP wins except for four. Those four are for Ohio State's four wins over ND in my lifetime.

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #259 on:** January 22, 2020, 09:49:26 PM »

ND is a helmet as long as they have their NBC deal. It's dumb. I hate it. They stink, even when they're undefeated, lol. But it's still true. EXPOSURE. HISTORY. They're #1 in certain metrics like that.

bayareabadger · « **Reply #260 on:** January 23, 2020, 06:20:08 AM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on January 22, 2020, 09:49:26 PM

ND is a helmet as long as they have their NBC deal. It's dumb. I hate it. They stink, even when they're undefeated, lol. But it's still true. EXPOSURE. HISTORY. They're #1 in certain metrics like that.

I mean, Notre Dame is also the kind of place where you can win 71.3 percent of your games, deliver two undefeated regular seasons and everyone wants to fit you with a dunce cap. That seams helmet-y (shoot, this might make UGA a helmet)

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #261 on:** January 23, 2020, 08:24:28 AM »

Georgia needs to win a NC because everyone around them has won it. Since UGA's last NC (1980):
Clemson has 2
Florida has 3
FSU has 3
Auburn has 1
Alabama has 27
Tennessee has 1
.
They're literally surrounded by champions. Hell, if GT or USCe somehow wins one before UGA, Dawgs fans' heads would explode, literally.
.
.
.
Literally.

bayareabadger · « **Reply #262 on:** January 23, 2020, 08:30:23 AM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on January 23, 2020, 08:24:28 AM

Georgia needs to win a NC because everyone around them has won it. Since UGA's last NC (1980):
Clemson has 2
Florida has 3
FSU has 3
Auburn has 1
Alabama has 27
Tennessee has 1
.
They're literally surrounded by champions. Hell, if GT or USCe somehow wins one before UGA, Dawgs fans' heads would explode, literally.
.
.
.
Literally.

GT has half of one

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #263 on:** January 23, 2020, 11:27:44 AM »

Quote from: Gigem on January 22, 2020, 08:36:20 PM

As long as any program has the resources and the ability to recruit there is not much difference between a true helmet school and the so called Barons.

I want to explain what I meant by this:

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on January 22, 2020, 09:35:02 PM

I disagree with your assertion that there is not much difference between a helmet and those below them. On an average per season basis the difference is not large but over decades and decades it is substantial.

Clemson is a good example. They are number 14 in all-time wins with 758. The last two top-10 "helmets" by @utee94 's definition are Tennessee with 846 and USC with 847 so Clemson is down by about 90 wins. We have been playing this game for a lot more than 90 years so the difference, per year, is REALLY small. It is less than one game per year. However, when you look at it the other way the difference is quite large. Clemson did very well this year, finishing 14-1. Tennessee and USC did much worse, both finishing 8-5. Thus, Clemson gained on them by six in total wins. Even if Clemson can maintain that margin indefinitely it would take them 15 years just to catch the bottom of the "helmet" top-10. For the rest of the top-10:

#8 Penn State has 898 wins, 140 more than Clemson and won 11 games this season. At that rate it would take Clemson nearly 50 years to catch Penn State.
#7 Nebraska has 902 wins, 144 more than Clemson and won five game this season. At that rate it would take Clemson 16 years to catch Nebraska.
#5/6 Notre Dame has 908 wins, 150 more than Clemson and won 11 game this season. At that rate it would take Clemson 50 years to catch Notre Dame.
#5/6 Oklahoma has 908 wins, 150 more than Clemson and won 12 games this season. At that rate it would take Clemson 75 years to catch Oklahoma.
#3/4 Texas has 916 wins, 158 more than Clemson and won eight games this season. At that rate it would take Clemson more than 26 years to catch Texas.
#3/4 Bama has 916 wins, 158 more than Clemson and won 11 games this season. At that rate it would take Clemson nearly 53 years to catch Bama.
#2 Ohio State has 924 wins, 166 more than Clemson and won 13 games this season. At that rate it would take Clemson 166 years to catch Ohio State.
#1 Michigan has 962 wins, 204 more than Clemson and won nine games this season. At that rate it would take Clemson 40 years to catch Michigan.

Putting that into order, at the rate that they gained in 2019 it would take Clemson:

15 years to catch Tennessee
15 years to catch USC
16 years to catch Nebraska
26 years to catch Texas
40 years to catch Michigan
50 years to catch Penn State
50 years to catch Notre Dame
53 years to catch Bama
75 years to catch Oklahoma
166 years to catch Ohio State

FearlessF · « **Reply #264 on:** January 23, 2020, 11:52:30 AM »

will Dabo still be there 15 years from now?

Entropy · « **Reply #265 on:** January 23, 2020, 12:54:12 PM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on January 22, 2020, 06:23:57 PM

This is why I thought it was a massive mistake for Nebraska to ditch the option (ie hire a non-option HC after Solich). At that moment, their national identity was gone, and without the built-in backup schools in talent-rich areas have.
.
Back before that, a kid in SoCal or a kid in FL could imagine himself running the option with a red N on his helmet...but after, why in the hell would they go to Lincoln (no offense)? There was no longer something to dream on.

The AD was trying to turn UNL into everyone else and as you said, what is the selling point then? Hiring a completely diffferent style offense broke UNL's identity and basically put the program on probation as you flipped the roster... and UNL did the same thing with the next 3 HC's. Since Solich, I'd argue UNL put themselves on probation 4 times

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

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: The CFP Era so far

Entropy

Re: The CFP Era so far

FearlessF

Re: The CFP Era so far

OrangeAfroMan

Re: The CFP Era so far

FearlessF

Re: The CFP Era so far

Gigem

Re: The CFP Era so far

OrangeAfroMan

Re: The CFP Era so far

medinabuckeye1

Re: The CFP Era so far

OrangeAfroMan

Re: The CFP Era so far

bayareabadger

Re: The CFP Era so far

OrangeAfroMan

Re: The CFP Era so far

bayareabadger

Re: The CFP Era so far

medinabuckeye1

Re: The CFP Era so far

FearlessF

Re: The CFP Era so far

Entropy

Re: The CFP Era so far