CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Four => Big Ten => Topic started by: OrangeAfroMan on December 07, 2025, 12:32:59 PM
-
8 - Oklahoma
9 - Alabama.................winner vs 1 - Indiana
5 - Oregon
12 - James Madison......winner vs 4 - Texas Tech
7 - Texas A&M
10 - Miami...................winner vs 2 - OSU
6 - Ole Miss
11 - Tulane..................winner vs 3 - Georgia
-
Is this more ND win h2h or ND join a conference?
-
First 2 out: ND and BYU
-
Photo of everyone who feels bad for the Irish:
(https://i.imgur.com/X9KmMD4.jpeg)
-
flashbacks of Lou Holtz lobbying for the MNC 'we beat the big 8 champ, we beat the big ten champ....' (also that season, he omitted 'we lost to Miami').
-
Also, ranking the teams AND having the playoff seedings is stupid. Don't do that. Don't tell everyone the 20th and 24th-ranked teams are in the 12-team playoff.
Wouldn't we all prefer a playoff with Bama, Miami, and ND, and BYU in? You know, teams that might actually win some games?
We're admittedly putting in special Olympians in the actual Olympics here. I know that's a crass metaphor, but it fits.
-
flashbacks of Lou Holtz lobbying for the MNC 'we beat the big 8 champ, we beat the big ten champ....' (also that season, he omitted 'we lost to Miami').
Sufferin' succotash!!!
-
Amazing how it takes ESPN jimmying things to make people actually feel bad for ND
-
We have a 2-loss G5 team in the playoff. What are we doing?
-
I like that they have no one actually take the side of the G5 in these shows. $$$$$$ talking points.
"We all just want the best teams in." No we f'ng don't. We want the teams that earned a spot.
-
We have a 2-loss G5 team in the playoff. What are we doing?
yeah maybe we should just go back to the 4 team playoff. that is f’ing ridiculous.
Call me crazy but Notre Dame and Texas should be in over James Madison and Tulane.
does anybody honestly think otherwise?
-
I guess a 2-loss American champ who lost to UTSA by 22 points earned it.
-
I guess a 2-loss American champ who lost to UTSA by 22 points earned it.
It's right there in the name - "champ." I know having poindexters pick the prettiest losers makes more money, though.
-
If the Hawgs had the exact same resume as Bama, they wouldn't get in.
-
It's right there in the name - "champ." I know having poindexters pick the prettiest losers makes more money, though.
Alright, put some money down on Tulane to win.
They're not ranked behind 3-loss Texas, USC, Arizona, Michigan, and even Virginia for no reason. They're champions of an inferior conference and played one big-boy team and got boat-raced.
Get 'em in the playoff!!!!
-
Another problem we can all agree on: the committee is tasked with creating 4 first round games.....2 REMATCHES!!!
What in the actual fuck?
-
Alright, put some money down on Tulane to win.
They're not ranked behind 3-loss Texas, USC, Arizona, Michigan, and even Virginia for no reason. They're champions of an inferior conference and played one big-boy team and got boat-raced.
Get 'em in the playoff!!!!
"It's not fair to the teams that lose that the teams that win get ahead of them."
-
Another problem we can all agree on: the committee is tasked with creating 4 first round games.....2 REMATCHES!!!
What in the actual fuck?
I thought that was weird too. It would have been totally fine to flip those games.
-
BYU was punished for losing a conference title game.
Animal Farm.
-
yeah maybe we should just go back to the 4 team playoff. that is f’ing ridiculous.
I'd like 6 maybe 8 but any more than that is nonsense. But instead we get :welcome:
-
Bracing for the incoming rash of editorials decrying Notre Dame's exclusion from the playoff. Because it's a TWELVE team playoff, the drama is being kicked up over who's finishing roughly 9th through 14th. Watch this create a demand for an expanded 16 team playoff. I miss the BCS days when the heated discourse was more consequentially over who finished 1st and 2nd and who might've been left out at 3rd and 4th.
NO, it is NOT time for a new process.
It's time to point out to Notre Dame the two games they lost and make it clear that those games were their fair shot at the playoffs. Losing those games deservedly put Notre Dame at risk for missing the playoffs. A misfortune nobody should bemoan now that there are TWELVE chances to make the playoffs!
(https://i.imgur.com/8QGNSCz.png)
-
Herbstreit was told by his AI overlords to mention a 16-team playoff every time he spoke.
-
What's the halftime point spread of JMU @ Oregon??? Asking for a friend.
-
It's time to point out to Notre Dame the two games they lost and make it clear that those games were their fair shot at the playoffs. Losing those games deservedly put Notre Dame at risk for missing the playoffs.
Good Bama can go have a seat next them
-
https://twitter.com/btoppmeyer/status/1997729707534823607?s=46
-
The unspoken answer is the Big XII sucks.
It lost Texas and OU and replaced them with Houston, UCF, Cincinnati, and....wait for it....BYU.
This isn't rocket science.
-
The unspoken answer is the Big XII sucks.
It lost Texas and OU and replaced them with Houston, UCF, Cincinnati, and....wait for it....BYU.
This isn't rocket science.
Well sure, but you either get punished for losing a CCG, or you don’t.
Some do, some don’t.
-
Bama's only good wins are Vanderbilt and Georgia, and Georgia just blew their doors off.
-
Bama's only good wins are Vanderbilt and Georgia, and Georgia just blew their doors off.
Right.
They're 1-1 vs Georgia.
-
Here's a fun idea...in their seeded order, just let teams 5-8 pick who they want to play.
Then North Texas gets to be in the playoff!
-
The unspoken answer is the Big XII sucks.
Perhaps but Bama lost to 5-7 FSU by 2 TDs & at home to the Sooners and by 3 TDs in the CCG.Just how many provisions do they get ?
:welcome:
-
Right.
They're 1-1 vs Georgia.
(https://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/large_435162_j54iyj4vvxyqhlipmn0454mep.jpg)
-
Alright, put some money down on Tulane to win.
They're not ranked behind 3-loss Texas, USC, Arizona, Michigan, and even Virginia for no reason. They're champions of an inferior conference and played one big-boy team and got boat-raced.
Get 'em in the playoff!!!!
OK, then petition Florida to move to the AAC.
-
Perhaps but Bama lost to 5-7 FSU by 2 TDs & at home to the Sooners and by 3 TDs in the CCG.Just how many provisions do they get ?
:welcome:
BYU's best win was.......at home vs Utah, by 3 points.
BYU's OOC schedule: Portland State, Stanford, East Carolina
Alabama's best win was......at Georgia, by 3 points
Alabama's OOC schedule: FSU, Wisconsin, 2 FCS teams
-
Does anyone actually think Tulane is better than Notre Dame?
I assume not.
But if you are arguing against Tulane, you are arguing against the regular season.
I'd rather the games have some stakes at the end. And I'd also rather see the #5 and #6 seeds get rewarded this way. I don't want to see the #5 team have to play a better team who underachieved. I'm glad the CCGs were fun, and that Oregon and Ole Miss get a home game like this.
-
(https://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/large_435162_j54iyj4vvxyqhlipmn0454mep.jpg)
This is cute. I don't like Alabama. I like teams with good resumes. I don't like giving the sisters of the poor a seat at a table they will never sit at the head of. It's less ethical than excluding them. They don't even get to imagine what could be. They get a seat, immediately squashed, case-closed.
-
Does anyone actually think Tulane is better than Notre Dame?
I assume not.
But if you are arguing against Tulane, you are arguing against the regular season.
I'd rather the games have some stakes at the end. And I'd also rather see the #5 and #6 seeds get rewarded this way. I don't want to see the #5 team have to play a better team who underachieved. I'm glad the CCGs were fun, and that Oregon and Ole Miss get a home game like this.
I think it's awesome Autzen is hosting a playoff game. I'm not stoked that it'll be an early-Septemberish blowout kind of game.
The tallest midget is still a midget. We're rewarding mediocrity.
-
And again, if they insist on letting G5 teams in, STOP RANKING ALL THE TEAMS!!! Don't acknowledge the 24th-ranked team is in the 12-team playoff.
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!!!
-
BYU's best win was.......at home vs Utah, by 3 points.
BYU's OOC schedule: Portland State, Stanford, East Carolina
Alabama's best win was......at Georgia, by 3 points
Alabama's OOC schedule: FSU, Wisconsin, 2 FCS teams
Texas lost to Georgia and tOSU on the road and they both(Bama) lost to FSU so that's a wash. So good to see the Horns get a seat at the Big Boy table
-
I think it's awesome Autzen is hosting a playoff game. I'm not stoked that it'll be an early-Septemberish blowout kind of game.
The tallest midget is still a midget. We're rewarding mediocrity.
No, we are rewarding Oregon, while making the end of the season more entertaining
And again, if teams would prefer the easy playoff path, I assume the AAC would accept any SEC applicant on the spot
-
Texas lost to Georgia and tOSU on the road and they both lost to FSU so that's a wash. So good to see the Horns get a seat at the Big Boy table
lol
FSU missed a bowl by losing to Florida.
Texas missed the CFP by losing to Florida.
GO GATORS! THE SWAMP.....ONLY GATORS GET OUT ALIVE!!! (and Volunteers, this time)
-
more entertaining
This.
I fear the balance between competition and entertainment is lost forever.
-
lol
FSU missed a bowl by losing to Florida.
Texas missed the CFP by losing to Florida.
GO GATORS! THE SWAMP.....ONLY GATORS GET OUT ALIVE!!! (and Volunteers, this time)
Texas took down No3 A&M and No6 Dirt Burglars Hook'em
-
I fear the balance between competition and entertainment is lost forever.
Good Post I except your surrender :111:
-
Well sure, but you either get punished for losing a CCG, or you don’t.
Some do, some don’t.
I disagree. BYU didn't actually lose anything. They were out at #11 before the CG, got blown out, and are out at #12 now. I get your point in that dropping from 11 to 12 is technically a "punishment" but it was a meaningless punishment because both 11 and 12 are out and first team out vs second team out is a distinction without a difference.
-
Is this more ND win h2h or ND join a conference?
H2H as you assumed - it's simple
because ND's total resume is much stronger
-
flashbacks of Lou Holtz lobbying for the MNC 'we beat the big 8 champ, we beat the big ten champ....' (also that season, he omitted 'we lost to Miami').
hah, boo hoo Lou in his neck brace
-
I think it's awesome Autzen is hosting a playoff game. I'm not stoked that it'll be an early-Septemberish blowout kind of game.
The tallest midget is still a midget. We're rewarding mediocrity.
On this subject I agree with you completely but that said consider two things that may help you accept it as I have:
- The teams left out aren't great. They have two or three losses so it isn't like they are blameless.
- I think that basically everyone assumes that if they didn't give the G5 some chances they'd open themselves up to either Congressional oversight or an anti-trust suit. Either of those could and probably would lead to a result far worse than what we have now.
-
We have a 2-loss G5 team in the playoff. What are we doing?
similar to a 3-loss P4 team - foolishness
-
I disagree. BYU didn't actually lose anything. They were out at #11 before the CG, got blown out, and are out at #12 now. I get your point in that dropping from 11 to 12 is technically a "punishment" but it was a meaningless punishment because both 11 and 12 are out and first team out vs second team out is a distinction without a difference.
Rankings before the CCG’s — week 14.
Miami behind BYU, but now in the playoff. Idle Miami moved up 2 spots. BYU punished and put behind Miami.
(https://i.imgur.com/UinQbik.png)
-
Good Post I except your surrender :111:
accept :88:
-
This.
I fear the balance between competition and entertainment is lost forever.
Depends on where you value the entertainment. You want "better" first round games to allow more P4 teams to get 4th chances
-
I guess a 2-loss American champ who lost to UTSA by 22 points earned it.
they have lawyers and the G5 has threatened a HUGE lawsuit
EARNED it
-
Here's all we need to know about this stupid inclusive system:
Two of the playoff games have a 17.5 point spread and a 21.5 point spread.
WHAT ARE WE DOING!?!?
-
Another problem we can all agree on: the committee is tasked with creating 4 first round games.....2 REMATCHES!!!
What in the actual fuck?
Bama "earned" theirs with their performance yesterday
-
Depends on where you value the entertainment. You want "better" first round games to allow more P4 teams to get 4th chances
Actually, I want fewer teams in the playoff.
-
14 teams.
Big Ten and SEC champs are the 1 and 2 seeds.
Big XII and ACC champs are guaranteed somewhere between 3-12.
The remaining 3-12 are the 10 at larges.
The 4 best G5 champs play each other for the #13 and #14 spots.
-
Actually, I want fewer teams in the playoff.
I think we all do, but that ship has sailed, and the devaluation of bowl games doesn't make me actually love it as much as I did a decade ago
-
OK, then petition Florida to move to the AAC.
Notre Dame would be in if they were in the AAC
-
I think we all do, but that ship has sailed, and the devaluation of bowl games doesn't make me actually love it as much as I did a decade ago
Iowa State and Kansas State just accepted $500,000 fines from the Big XII to skip a bowl game
-
Alabama's OOC schedule: FSU, Wisconsin, 2 FCS teams
Jesus
-
Jesus
Yeah...yet better than BYU's, lol.
-
I'd rather the committee simply meet once, after the CCGs
the only thing that matters is that final meeting - why the build up and bullshit???
Yes, I know.... because it sells and makes $$$
-
I'd rather the committee simply meet once, after the CCGs
the only thing that matters is that final meeting - why the build up and bullshit???
Yes, I know.... because it sells and makes $$$
I was perusing college football youtube videos and AI video-creation and such.....and oh dear god, the sheer volume of "what will the final CFP rankings be?" videos was substantial. Hell, it's obnoxious. An obnoxious amount.
So yeah.
-
An obnoxious amount of interest = An obnoxious amount of $$$
great! I just want a cut
-
Notre Dame would be in if they were in the AAC
Correct, so they made their choice
-
Ed Zachery
lie in the bed you made
-
accept :88:
'scuse me I tried banging out another post before you came up with topper - that hasn't surfaced BTW because it can't. We are attempting to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Bama's a better fit for this years discards outside the office door,it's prolly gonna all come down to the Dawgs and Cignetti's surly Cinderellas.
CFB is turning into a case study of killing the goose that laid the golden egg
-
from ex-husker Adam Carriker - FB hero
Here’s my take on the final College Football Playoff rankings, for whatever it’s worth:
1- Notre Dame, join a conference, you’re not above everyone else. Your easy path, bit you in the butt.
2- Texas, don’t lose 3 games.
3- BYU, of course Alabama got in and not you, they’re in the SEC.
4- Vanderbilt, burn the whole system down.
-
Amazing how it takes ESPN jimmying things to make people actually feel bad for ND
AND after the ESPN talking heads have spent the last month pumping up Miami over Notre Dame, it's a remarkable turnaround.
-
it's all just drama to peak interest
otherwise know as bullshit
-
yeah maybe we should just go back to the 4 team playoff. that is f’ing ridiculous.
Call me crazy but Notre Dame and Texas should be in over James Madison and Tulane.
does anybody honestly think otherwise?
I disagree. I don't have strong feelings about it but I disagree.
The purpose of the 12-team CFP is to get both the 8 best teams in the playoffs and also get the 5 best conference champions in the playoffs. If you want to be in the playoffs, then either finish in the top 8 overall or win your conference.
This goes back to my claim that most years, there really are only 6 to 10 teams that have legitimately "deserve" a shot to play for the national championship. So if the goal was to only have the best teams, you should limit the CFP to 10 teams. But if you want to make sure there are at least 5 conferences represented, you need to have at least 14 teams. You could add 2 more teams just in case and 16 is probably the perfect number in my opinion.
-
Here's all we need to know about this stupid inclusive system:
Two of the playoff games have a 17.5 point spread and a 21.5 point spread.
WHAT ARE WE DOING!?!?
Think of it this way:
The top four get byes.
The next two get de-facto byes.
-
it's all just drama to peak interest
otherwise know as bullshit
Hence this thread, lol.
-
Think of it this way:
The top four get byes.
The next two get de-facto byes.
It's 12 teams, why all the byes?!?!? How is there ANY pushback against the idea a playoff should be strong team vs strong team?!?!!
Byes, de-facto byes?!? WTF?
-
It's 12 teams, why all the byes?!?!? How is there ANY pushback against the idea a playoff should be strong team vs strong team?!?!!
Byes, de-facto byes?!? WTF?
They are strong teams. Why do you want more losers in the playoffs? That it what the season was for! To separate the winners and losers.
-
It's 12 teams, why all the byes?!?!?
dude,
P4 conferences and helmets
titled playing field - as per usual
you don't like the idea of JMU or Tulane getting in???? This is how we make SURE they have NO chance
so, you should love it
-
Bro, if the conferences were anything resembling even footing, sure, you'd have a point. But the uneven quality of each conference is so utterly substantial, that you don't have a foot to stand on. And you know this.
The SEC and Big Ten are above all others. By far. The Big XII and ACC are a rung or three lower. And then the others are a big step down from them. In every way.
And you want to pretend they're not. You're better than that, right?
-
dude,
P4 conferences and helmets
titled playing field - as per usual
you don't like the idea of JMU or Tulane getting in???? This is how we make SURE they have NO chance
so, you should love it
They have an equally zero chance while being included. It's just a public execution instead of being left out. It's kinder to omit them.
-
yes, but the courts won't allow that.
Blame Trump
-
Bro, if the conferences were anything resembling even footing, sure, you'd have a point. But the uneven quality of each conference is so utterly substantial, that you don't have a foot to stand on. And you know this.
The SEC and Big Ten are above all others. By far. The Big XII and ACC are a rung or three lower. And then the others are a big step down from them. In every way.
And you want to pretend they're not. You're better than that, right?
This isn't my problem. I don't care. I don't see why anyone would care. We have conferences in college football. The winners should get to play on. That's the whole point of a playoff system. Not to give us the same teams playing each other over and over. That's boring and ruins the whole point of the playoffs. Why anyone would support boring loser football is beyond me. You have to better than this, right?
-
Mmmm, see the classic offended for the sake of being offended take has the usual suspect offended.
Notre Dame thing mostly makes sense. They had the weakest case and weakest structural question. I can see the argument against Bama, but the having to play more football penalty is a tricky one.
Ironically a team ended up unpenalized for a non-conference loss, but it ended up being a bad one.
-
Ironically a team ended up unpenalized for a non-conference loss, but it ended up being a bad one.
Ironic that its the SEC SEC SEC??? no
they are above other conferences
it's also why they didn't want to play 9 conference games - too tough for them
instead of losing to non-con FSU, they lose to Florida - that would be a CFP killer - ask Texas
-
I'm pretty excited about playing Miami at home in a couple of weeks. I haven't watched a ton of them this year, but I think it will be a good match. Plus, we've never beaten them in CFB (I think, maybe way back when) so it would be nice to get a W, but if we don't then nothing to be ashamed of.
Speaking of never notched a win...Ohio State. Should we be fortunate enough to sneak past Miami, we'll get a chance of beating OSU. We've never beaten them, in about 4 tries, and we get them in the Cotton Bowl. Should we get that far it could be a great game.
I would be super pissed if we were still under the old playoff and Texas Tech got in with 1 loss in the Big 12 and we did not with 1 loss in the SEC.
-
yeah maybe we should just go back to the 4 team playoff. that is f’ing ridiculous. . . .
Four would be fine with me.
I was fine with two, and did not want the expansion to four because I was sure that it would soon expand to more and more teams. And at each step, noisy advocates for further expansion would dominate the discussion.
-
a blessed season for the Aggies, can only get better from here
but yes, losing to the Canes, especially this year is something to be ashamed of
-
Four would be fine with me.
I was fine with two, and did not want the expansion to four because I was sure that it would soon expand to more and more teams. And at each step, noisy advocates for further expansion would dominate the discussion.
ED Zachery!!!
if you want a true national regular season champion - match the two best teams after the season.
if you want a tournament champion - see basketball
-
Iowa State and Kansas State just accepted $500,000 fines from the Big XII to skip a bowl game
That's sad.
How many times have I heard that the rationale for having eleventy-umpteen bowls is that teams get those priceless pre-bowl practice sessions?
-
ND decides not to accept any bowl invites. Good for them.
-
Wow. Notre Dame taking their marbles and going home in a tantrum. Refusing to go to a Bowl.
-
ND decides not to accept any bowl invites. Good for them.
Why good?
Seem like that, along with ISU KSU bowing out of bowl games, that would start a process of wrecking the bowl games.
Maybe I'm missing something. It wouldn't be the first time.
-
Why good?
Seem like that, along with ISU KSU bowing out of bowl games, that would start a process of wrecking the bowl games.
Maybe I'm missing something. It wouldn't be the first time.
Opt outs already killed the bowl games. Too many bowl games killed the bowl games.
-
Remember, ND traditionally did not accept bowl bids up until the 70’s. I see it as strategic, since they know they would be a big draw TV wise. James Madison and Tulane will not be highly watched. Why should ESPN get their cake and it it too?
Watch them decline all regular bowl games from here on out. As they should. And I don’t like them, but I respect them.
-
perhaps he shall man up next season - instead of being the joke
(https://i.imgur.com/Hi5I0mF.png)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/l6S0lEV.png)
-
So they can pay a giant fine for turning down a bowl game?
-
ok buy me
big money jackets using an event to avoid taxes and buy influence can suck it!
-
Yeah I don't really get why ND would go to a bowl game. Seems pointless.
-
The games in September matter, sorry/not sorry.
-
The games in September matter, sorry/not sorry.
Sort of. Bammer got lucky that FSU was so bad that they couldn't be compared head to head.
-
Not everyone can be like Georgia and get a mulligan.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/qZEewzf.png)
-
Not everyone can be like Georgia and get a mulligan.
SEC gets that opportunity. Remember Bama getting one against LSU?
Another question, why was OU such a lock for the playoff? They got rolled at the State Fair. For argument sake, ND lost by what, 4 points combined to 2 teams in the playoff, and then won 10 straight.
I guess it's the same as it always was.
Pitchers and catchers report in <3 months, I suspect.
Maybe I'll talk myself into having some interest, since I used to love college football. But I'm trying to remember why.
-
it's the same as it ever was
Wild Bill Snyder and curt are swimming upstream
-
There was no right answer.
-
it's the same as it ever was
Wild Bill Snyder and curt are swimming upstream
Nice to at least hear St. Bill mentioned today on the reveal show, "all due respect" in comparing the turnaround in programs those 2 engineered.
-
There was no right answer.
that's for sure
same as it ever was
-
Anybody know why Texas Tech got sent to the Orange Bowl instead of the Cotton Bowl?
-
Anybody know why Texas Tech got sent to the Orange Bowl instead of the Cotton Bowl?
I think they said they didn't want a possible Miami-OSU game to be a home game for Miami
-
SEC gets that opportunity. Remember Bama getting one against LSU?
Another question, why was OU such a lock for the playoff? They got rolled at the State Fair. For argument sake, ND lost by what, 4 points combined to 2 teams in the playoff, and then won 10 straight.
Probably because ND's best win is USC and OU has 2 wins as good or better (UM, Bama)?
When your best outcome is a loss (ND, Texas), I get it, but the 7 year-olds who rank the teams aren't going to give you the benefit of the doubt.
With too many teams for too few slots, someone is going to be left out.
Instead of whining about this group of teams with similar resumes, I'd rather get the system to change. Purposely including teams the committee itself ranks 20th and 24th in a 12-team playoff is asinine.
Inclusion is for little league baseball or some other no-stakes enterprise. Not for determining the national champion.
Like shit, in the CFP, the SUN BELT champ is in because the ACC sucks ass. It's not because JMU matters or can win anything, it's because the ACC is so shitty. And seeded above them, we're including a 2-loss G5 team who had to outlast NORTH TEXAS to "earn" their way in, while ND, Texas, Vanderbilt and ten other BETTER teams sit home or play in the Irrelevant Bowl.
I"ve said it from the beginning, and this is what we get.
-
With too many teams for too few slots, someone is going to be left out.
there aren't too many teams
there are too many teams expecting or hoping to get in
OU. ND, Texas, Miami, Tulane, Texas Tech, Bama can look back at their losses and SUCK it.
-
"ND, Texas, Vanderbilt"
I would push back on this. We saw Texas v OSU and Georgia. We saw Bama against FSU and Georgia. We saw Vanderbilt against Bama. They sucked. They weren't any better than JMU. But for some reason we need to exclude JMU to see them lose again?
ND at least we saw be competitive, so I think they got a little screwed. But saying Texas or Vanderbilt are somehow way better than JMU? Nope. They had the chance to prove it and they failed. Stop rewarding failure.
-
not rewarding failure, just wanting a good game vs Oregon
hopefully JMU can provide that
-
(https://i.imgur.com/OX6MOKi.png)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/rvJNhRF.png)
-
[img width=361.238 height=437]https://i.imgur.com/rvJNhRF.png[/img]
I dont think anyone is pretending otherwise. The ESPN Invitational is alive and well
-
"ND, Texas, Vanderbilt"
I would push back on this. We saw Texas v OSU and Georgia. We saw Bama against FSU and Georgia. We saw Vanderbilt against Bama. They sucked. They weren't any better than JMU. But for some reason we need to exclude JMU to see them lose again?
ND at least we saw be competitive, so I think they got a little screwed. But saying Texas or Vanderbilt are somehow way better than JMU? Nope. They had the chance to prove it and they failed. Stop rewarding failure.
This.
And if they get toasted, fine. Then that was a good reward for the #5 team. Seems like the best way to keep a meaningful regular season. Give champs a shot, and if they dont deserve it, you benefit the best teams who didnt get a bye with a de facto bye.
The only reason to hate it is because you actually dislike the regular season and want the teams with the starz to get a 4th chance to prove it
-
last time ND misses out of playoff like this...
https://twitter.com/RossDellenger/status/1997763809914528210?s=20
-
so, next year the committee keeps ND at #13 or #14
awesome
-
last time ND misses out of playoff like this...
https://twitter.com/RossDellenger/status/1997763809914528210?s=20
F Notre Dame and their special treatment.
-
and F Bama and their special treatment.
-
not rewarding failure, just wanting a good game vs Oregon
hopefully JMU can provide that
Hope is not a strategy. 21.5 point dog. It's all broken.
-
"ND, Texas, Vanderbilt"
I would push back on this. We saw Texas v OSU and Georgia. We saw Bama against FSU and Georgia. We saw Vanderbilt against Bama. They sucked. They weren't any better than JMU. But for some reason we need to exclude JMU to see them lose again?
ND at least we saw be competitive, so I think they got a little screwed. But saying Texas or Vanderbilt are somehow way better than JMU? Nope. They had the chance to prove it and they failed. Stop rewarding failure.
Our brains are very different.
What is JMU's best win? I'll hang up and listen.
-
Im Not upset about JMU. I think the overall essence is that there are legal complications if they don’t let these guys in the playoffs. Nobody seriously thinks they can win. The only one with a snowballs chance is Tulane but OM already stomped them earlier this season.
-
It's like letting a 10 year old play high school football because he might sue you. Okay, you let him play, but if he gets in a game (the playoff), he's going to get hurt.
I get wanting a seat at the table. But an annual ass-kicking with the world watching maybe isn't such a great plan.
And for these programs to get 2 in - NOT BASED ON ANYTHING REMARKABLE THEY'VE DONE (NEITHER IS UNDEFEATED OR BEAT A BIG-BOY TEAM) - but solely because the ACC is a dumpster fire, is a broken system.
People want to pretend winning a conference title means anything, with 16-20 teams in a conference, where nobody plays anybody else is also broken.
And the decision-makers seem to be literally stupid. Dull. This board could come together and hash out far superior ideas, despite our differences. Hell, chatGPT could, and it's college football depth of knowledge is near zero.
Where are the impressive people involved? Not ESPN, not former ADs, not blubbering idiots set in front of a camera to defend the indefensible. The adults. Where?!? I mean Jesus Christ.
-
Ed Zachery, Tulane and JMU are a necessary evil
blame the judges and lawyers, not the committee
ESPN doesn't want them in the playoff
the SEC and/or the Big don't want to share with them
-
I'm just still very confused that anyone who wants a smaller playoff is upset about this. It seems like it is essentially a 10-team playoff. isn't that what you want? You made a couple games more interesting, to still essentially get a 10-team playoff.
-
I get wanting a seat at the table. But an annual ass-kicking with the world watching maybe isn't such a great plan.
And for these programs to get 2 in - NOT BASED ON ANYTHING REMARKABLE THEY'VE DONE (NEITHER IS UNDEFEATED OR BEAT A BIG-BOY TEAM) - but solely because the ACC is a dumpster fire, is a broken system.
.
Come on now.
Tulane knocked off the ACC champion.
JMU's mascot is the ACC champion.
-
Idk guys, we went from having an undefeated G5 team maybe get a shot in a BCS bowl to now having a 2-loss G5 team in the playoff to determine the national champion.
That doesn't seem odd to anyone?
-
"College" football sucks.
I want my Rose Bowl back.
-
I get wanting a seat at the table. But an annual ass-kicking with the world watching maybe isn't such a great plan.
And for these programs to get 2 in - NOT BASED ON ANYTHING REMARKABLE THEY'VE DONE (NEITHER IS UNDEFEATED OR BEAT A BIG-BOY TEAM)
so, they each get a chance to beat a big boy team. So what?
and if either of them get lucky, .. does anyone care if the 5 or 6 seed is knocked off? Hell no.
no more meaningless than the bowl game any of those 4 teams would be playing in.
-
Division III uses a metric called the NCAA Power Index (NPI) as the sole criterion for selection and seeding. Here's how the CFP bracket might look using NPI:
(https://i.imgur.com/5v4aWmH.png)
better???
-
fND.
-
Idk guys, we went from having an undefeated G5 team maybe get a shot in a BCS bowl to now having a 2-loss G5 team in the playoff to determine the national champion.
That doesn't seem odd to anyone?
Not weirder than excluding 70 percent of the teams from the postseason before the season starts
-
LoL
-
That's sad.
How many times have I heard that the rationale for having eleventy-umpteen bowls is that teams get those priceless pre-bowl practice sessions?
It was the rationale.
But now any players who can, opt out.
I know, that means "we can give the young guys more practice!"
Nah. Any of them who show out in the bowl become outgoing transfers for more $$$, and any who don't show out in the bowl will be buried next year on the depth chart behind incoming transfers.
-
Lots of people used to say bowls were meaningless.
Now, they really are.
A big thank you to all the pencil neck "pay the players" and "we want playoffs" people.
Not.
-
Lots of people used to say bowls were meaningless.
Now, they really are.
A big thank you to all the pencil neck "pay the players" and "we want playoffs" people.
Not.
I've always said the bowls were meaningless, outside of the select few that might involve a MNC matchup, and then the Bowl Alliance, and then the BCS.
It doesn't mean they weren't still fun to watch, but they were meaningless.
Too many variables change from the regular season to the bowls. The long layoffs, the awards banquet circuit and holidays interrupting proper nutrition and training, the opt-outs (which have increased recently but have been an issue for decades). And then there are plenty of coaches who've always treated it like practice for next year's squad, with very little actual game prep for the bowl opponent.
Mack Brown was famous for not giving a shit about the bowls and spending all of his time working on next year's team, outside of the Rose Bowls with MNC implications of course. It's pretty funny that he actually had a pretty good bowl record, because he did not care at all about the bowl games. It was always all about getting the younger players work for next season.
-
Also, ranking the teams AND having the playoff seedings is stupid. Don't do that. Don't tell everyone the 20th and 24th-ranked teams are in the 12-team playoff.
Wouldn't we all prefer a playoff with Bama, Miami, and ND, and BYU in? You know, teams that might actually win some games?
We're admittedly putting in special Olympians in the actual Olympics here. I know that's a crass metaphor, but it fits.
DEI!
-
To me, the bigger issue is that bowls used to be, on the whole, much more fun for fans, regardless of the layoffs and the difference in how coaches approached them. And now the rampant opt-outs and the utter irrelevance of "finishing the season on a high note" or the absence of the idea of "a good bowl" materially changes the perspective of the fan. At least this fan.
In the "old days," I'd rather be in the BCS title game or a BCS bowl game, sure, but, for example, getting the Capital One (Citrus) bowl against Penn St. was fun, something to look forward to, and, still kinda heart-breaking to lose. Now, I'd just assume all our players--and PSU'--who can opt out, will opt out, and I wouldn't particularly care about the outcome, since, as @betarhoalphadelta (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=19) puts it, the CFP sucks all the air out of the room.
-
To me, the bigger issue is that bowls used to be, on the whole, much more fun for fans, regardless of the layoffs and the difference in how coaches approached them. And now the rampant opt-outs and the utter irrelevance of "finishing the season on a high note" or the absence of the idea of "a good bowl" materially changes the perspective of the fan. At least this fan.
In the "old days," I'd rather be in the BCS title game or a BCS bowl game, sure, but, for example, getting the Capital One (Citrus) bowl against Penn St. was fun, something to look forward to, and, still kinda heart-breaking to lose. Now, I'd just assume all our players--and PSU'--who can opt out, will opt out, and I wouldn't particularly care about the outcome, since, as @betarhoalphadelta (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=19) puts it, the CFP sucks all the air out of the room.
Yeah for sure. Like I said, they've always been meaningless, but it doesn't mean you can't enjoy them.
I went to the (second) 1995 Sugar Bowl when Texas played Virginia Tech. It was a meaningless exhibition but we still had a great time going to the game. Horns lost that one pretty badly but it was irrelevant.
-
I went to the 2001 (season) Sugar Bowl w/ LSU vs. Illinois. Had a great time. Outside of learning that LSU fans in New Orleans, in the 'Dome are a much different breed of asshole than the fans at Death Valley home games.
-
Notre Dame signed up with the ACC and dropped some of its Big Ten opponents in order to be more relevant.
-
Yeah for sure. Like I said, they've always been meaningless, but it doesn't mean you can't enjoy them.
I went to the (second) 1995 Sugar Bowl when Texas played Virginia Tech. It was a meaningless exhibition but we still had a great time going to the game. Horns lost that one pretty badly but it was irrelevant.
The Coaches Poll officially moved to releasing its final rankings after the bowl games starting with the 1974 season (results announced in January 1975). This change came after several controversial split championships, including in 1970 and 1973, where the UPI Coaches Poll champion lost its bowl game, prompting the coaches to align with the Associated Press (AP) in voting post-bowl to acknowledge bowl outcomes.
-
The Coaches Poll officially moved to releasing its final rankings after the bowl games starting with the 1974 season (results announced in January 1975). This change came after several controversial split championships, including in 1970 and 1973, where the UPI Coaches Poll champion lost its bowl game, prompting the coaches to align with the Associated Press (AP) in voting post-bowl to acknowledge bowl outcomes.
Yup, and aside from bowls with MNC implications, they were still just meaningless exhibitions.
-
Here's how the BCS formula would rank and seed a top 16 playoff.
(https://media.surlyhorns.com/monthly_2025_12/IMG_7474.thumb.jpeg.cc0b2f9c74b3541012df2ae851018cc2.jpeg)
(I assume it's using the AP poll instead of the no-longer-existent "Harris Poll.")
-
Here's how the BCS formula would rank and seed a top 16 playoff.
(I assume it's using the AP poll instead of the no-longer-existent "Harris Poll.")
I wonder if this is the last iteration.
It changed every year as well. For example, in 1998, a team lost a heartbreaker in double overtime in their CCG, and fell not only out of the BCS Championship game, but to the 4th tier bowl game for their conference.
5 years later, when that school defeated the #1 team 35-7 in the CCG, the loser remained in the top 2 and played for the MNC.
But anyway, I like the matchups better in this deal. Especially the 3 Big XII teams getting in over the paltry 1 that ESPN has presently allowed.
-
Yup, and aside from bowls with MNC implications, they were still just meaningless exhibitions.
yup, unless your name is Medina and you're worried about top 10 and/or top 5 finishes in the polls
;)
-
Robert Griffin III
There is no way the CFP committee can justify putting Alabama in the Playoff with 3 loses and 1 coming against a 5-7 Florida State team.
He left out the part about getting embarrassed in the last game they played, so out-physically played that they had MINUS 3 yards rushing.
He's simply not aware of the special rule. It's Alabama.
</out>
-
Although Alabama might have kept some other more deserving team out, I'm 50% okay with their inclusion. Watching them crap the bed again against a legit team somewhere in the playoffs will make me happier than watching them win some scrub bowl game.
The 50% of me that's not okay with it would be happy with watching their meltdown over not being in the playoff.
I view this all as a win/win.
-
Yeah for sure. Like I said, they've always been meaningless, but it doesn't mean you can't enjoy them.
I went to the (second) 1995 Sugar Bowl when Texas played Virginia Tech. It was a meaningless exhibition but we still had a great time going to the game. Horns lost that one pretty badly but it was irrelevant.
I think there's a difference between having no impact on the NC and being irrelevent.
They never used to feel irrelevent.
I think that changed with two things. Players opting out, and the conferences redoing their contracts to avoid repeat trips.
I know the OBC made fun of the fact that you can't spell Citrus without UT, but making a NYD bowl game meant something. I believe if MSU hadn't blown a 3 score lead against Indiana in 2022, they would have gone to the Citrus Bowl based on the Big Ten's contract of not repeating in 6 years or some such. That the best MD team that didn't reach a BCS bowl, the 10-2 team in 2017, went to the Holiday Bowl, because they hadn't been there in the prior 6 years, and a 6-6 team in 2022 would have been in a NYD bowl. There was no tiering to the bowl games anymore, and IMO that made them sort of whatever
-
Looking at the bracket made it clear that the Badgers had a very tough schedule. They played 4 teams out of those 12.
-
I think there's a difference between having no impact on the NC and being irrelevent.
They never used to feel irrelevent.
I think that changed with two things. Players opting out, and the conferences redoing their contracts to avoid repeat trips.
I know the OBC made fun of the fact that you can't spell Citrus without UT, but making a NYD bowl game meant something. I believe if MSU hadn't blown a 3 score lead against Indiana in 2022, they would have gone to the Citrus Bowl based on the Big Ten's contract of not repeating in 6 years or some such. That the best MD team that didn't reach a BCS bowl, the 10-2 team in 2017, went to the Holiday Bowl, because they hadn't been there in the prior 6 years, and a 6-6 team in 2022 would have been in a NYD bowl. There was no tiering to the bowl games anymore, and IMO that made them sort of whatever
I've never assigned them any relevance. If you did, that's fine, but that sentiment is not, and has never been, universal.
-
Yup, and aside from bowls with MNC implications, they were still just meaningless exhibitions.
I always find the phrase “meaningless exhibitions“ kind of weird. Meaninglessness is in the eye of the beholder, and all of sports are basically an exhibition of some point or another.
They were meaningless in trying to determine a national champion. And I suppose it rests, again, in the eye of the beholder how broadly that meaninglessness is held.
-
I always find the phrase “meaningless exhibitions“ kind of weird. Meaninglessness is in the eye of the beholder, and all of sports are basically an exhibition of some point or another.
They were meaningless in trying to determine a national champion. And I suppose it rests, again, in the eye of the beholder how broadly that meaninglessness is held.
See my above response to AAA.
And I'm not a hardcore "MNC or nothing" guy. It's not that the MNC matters and so all other bowl games do not. It's actually the opposite.
I've always understood the origin of bowl games, which were by definition post-season exhibitions. They didn't matter for conference standings because the conference regular season was over. Until the late 60s and early 70s, they didn't even impact the final wire service rankings. And even when that changed for good in 1974, they still only mattered if you really cared about the beauty pageant that was the subjectively voted final Top 20 or Top 25.
I always wanted my team to win rather than lose, of course, but there's just not that much of import on the line in the bowl games outside of a subjective and sometimes arbitrary ranking of teams from some biased sportswriters and/or coaches.
-
Skicat used to refer to bowl season as "silly season."
The team motivated to actually be there could blow the doors off the more talented/better team. With that comes the crowing/crying over the result.
Can we go back to circa 1996? I didn't really have a problem with the polls and the possibility of having co-champs. I mentioned 2003 in another post, that was the last co-champ result we will ever have, presumably.
Playoffs generate more money I guess, and I guess the student-athlete aspect has long since been abandoned. That was an argument against playoffs back in the day--playing friggin 16 games like it's the NFL.
-
yup, unless your name is Medina and you're worried about top 10 and/or top 5 finishes in the polls
;)
I do view these things as a measure of relative program strength. In that context, whether or not you finish in the top-5/10 THIS year is almost completely irrelevant but that you have 15 of the last 30 years matters. The "15" in my example there isn't all that important. Ie, 15 isn't all that much better than 14 nor all that much worse than 16 but it is a lot different from 5 or 25.
-
Skicat used to refer to bowl season as "silly season."
The team motivated to actually be there could blow the doors off the more talented/better team. With that comes the crowing/crying over the result.
Can we go back to circa 1996? I didn't really have a problem with the polls and the possibility of having co-champs. I mentioned 2003 in another post, that was the last co-champ result we will ever have, presumably.
Playoffs generate more money I guess, and I guess the student-athlete aspect has long since been abandoned. That was an argument against playoffs back in the day--playing friggin 16 games like it's the NFL.
This one always rang hollow to me. The state champs and runners-up in Texas high school football have played 15 games since before I was born.
-
NYD games meant a lot to me and I considered them an accomplishment. Always a good game against a quality SEC team, or the Rose Bowl (or an occasional Orange/Sugar/Fiesta).
Music City was a lot of fun. Of course, it's Nashville so it's pretty hard to not have fun there.
-
I believe bowl season lasting an entire month has changed a lot of perception.
Way back when, when I was watching nearly all the big bowls, on actual New Year's Day --- it felt bigger, and better. (TWSS)
Who can keep up now....games every day. PFFFFTTTT
-
I always find the phrase “meaningless exhibitions“ kind of weird. Meaninglessness is in the eye of the beholder, and all of sports are basically an exhibition of some point or another.
They were meaningless in trying to determine a national champion. And I suppose it rests, again, in the eye of the beholder how broadly that meaninglessness is held.
Here are your beholders:
(https://i.imgur.com/i9lceRF.png)
-
See my above response to AAA.
And I'm not a hardcore "MNC or nothing" guy. It's not that the MNC matters and so all other bowl games do not. It's actually the opposite.
I've always understood the origin of bowl games, which were by definition post-season exhibitions. They didn't matter for conference standings because the conference regular season was over. Until the late 60s and early 70s, they didn't even impact the final wire service rankings. And even when that changed for good in 1974, they still only mattered if you really cared about the beauty pageant that was the subjectively voted final Top 20 or Top 25.
I always wanted my team to win rather than lose, of course, but there's just not that much of import on the line in the bowl games outside of a subjective and sometimes arbitrary ranking of teams from some biased sportswriters and/or coaches.
I guess I look at the bolded part and feel like it sort of warps things a bit.
For the vast majority of college football games, there's not that much of import on the line, and what is important is important to a relatively small group in the vast tapestry of all this. Now I acknowledge, a bowl is lesser, but I think declaring it meaningless exhibition feeds a corrosive attitude that reduces the meaning it could have. And while that meaning ain't as high as Texas-Texas A&M, it seems like the minor meaning should be worth celebrating to a degree.
It's a football game. There's spirit of competition. There's people who put in a bunch of work getting to do the thing they like doing, working together, for the 13th time all year, and it can entertain us. All that work, and they don't get that many chances to put that to use, so a last one doesn't seem like the worst outcome. And if they win, the joy of victory looks pretty sweet, even if it's after winning in Boise or Yankee Stadium.
Growing up, a parent often told me when I didn't want to do something, you can look at it as shit or look at it as gold. I don't think bowls are gold, don't get me wrong. But wanting to call them meaningless exhibitions (and this is not to pick on you, just in general) strikes as looking at them as shit for the sake of doing so. The hipster urge to be cool by not caring.
I guess I come back to the idea football should be cool and fun, if possible. Hopefully that's true of small high schools to big colleges to the NFL. Preemptively dampening the cool/fun factor for these games, which has become sort of a corrosive common attitude, just seems like taking away from possible joy for ... I don't really know why.
-
Here are your beholders:
(https://i.imgur.com/i9lceRF.png)
So I think those are kind of an interesting mix.
I think ND is being up in its feelings pissy, and K-State is also somewhat in that bag. Iowa State seems like a logistics thing, though I wish they'd try. The other ones are kind of up in the air because I don't know if they'd planned for that.
Like if you thought you were done, cleaned out the lockers, did end-of-season meetings, and then have to call everyone back, I can see how you would not do that, especially if you had a disappointing year.
But I also think a lot of this is from that creeping cynicism discussed above. And I don't give much credit for that.
-
So I think those are kind of an interesting mix.
I think ND is being up in its feelings pissy, and K-State is also somewhat in that bag. Iowa State seems like a logistics thing, though I wish they'd try. The other ones are kind of up in the air because I don't know if they'd planned for that.
Like if you thought you were done, cleaned out the lockers, did end-of-season meetings, and then have to call everyone back, I can see how you would not do that, especially if you had a disappointing year.
But I also think a lot of this is from that creeping cynicism discussed above. And I don't give much credit for that.
I think the creeping cynicism is there, because we KNOW -- these mercenary players don't give a RIP, so naturally we fans have thumbed our noses at the entire deal.
I wish I could put my fingers in my ears and pretend that these players are loyal to our universities (like we falsely believed before), but the bloom is off the rose. They'd screw over your team, my team, and anyone else's, for a damn nickel.
The mystique has gone the way of the DoDo.
-
Money is the root of much evil.
-
I think the creeping cynicism is there, because we KNOW -- these mercenary players don't give a RIP, so naturally we fans have thumbed our noses at the entire deal.
I wish I could put my fingers in my ears and pretend that these players are loyal to our universities (like we falsely believed before), but the bloom is off the rose. They'd screw over your team, my team, and anyone else's, for a damn nickel.
The mystique has gone the way of the DoDo.
That means you don't care about the whole kit and caboodle then. Which is fine, but it's specifically about bowls.
(Alas, the money thing flows from the top down. Coaches and admins model behavior, athletes follow)
-
That means you don't care about the whole kit and caboodle then. Which is fine, but it's specifically about bowls.
(Alas, the money thing flows from the top down. Coaches and admins model behavior, athletes follow)
That means you don't care far less about the whole kit and caboodle then. Which is fine, but it's specifically about bowls, which I care even far less about.
-
So I think those are kind of an interesting mix.
I think ND is being up in its feelings pissy, and K-State is also somewhat in that bag. Iowa State seems like a logistics thing, though I wish they'd try.
Just curious what you believe the difference in KSU/ISU is to make that statement in the circumstances that exist.
One coach retired, another took a different job, and their respective successors are each coaching the team they have been employed by in the playoffs/bowl games.
Maybe I'm giving a different impression of K-State fans--I'm in the minority, at least among the very loud people that have voiced their learned opinions online--in supporting declining this year.
-
Just curious what you believe the difference in KSU/ISU is to make that statement in the circumstances that exist.
One coach retired, another took a different job, and their respective successors are each coaching the team they have been employed by in the playoffs/bowl games.
Maybe I'm giving a different impression of K-State fans--I'm in the minority, at least among the very loud people that have voiced their learned opinions online--in supporting declining this year.
My basic thought was that a coach who is retiring can finish coaching out the season. Unless he isn’t actually retiring and is instead getting fired.
And I should say, if ISU was in position to send enough of a roster and staff, I think it would be good to do it. My guess was that they may not be in that position.
Some of the punctuation has me a little confused. You are fine with declining, but most people aren’t? Or the other way around?
-
This one always rang hollow to me. The state champs and runners-up in Texas high school football have played 15 games since before I was born.
Not to mention D3, the players that actually GO to class.
-
My basic thought was that a coach who is retiring can finish coaching out the season. Unless he isn’t actually retiring and is instead getting fired.
And I should say, if ISU was in position to send enough of a roster and staff, I think it would be good to do it. My guess was that they may not be in that position.
Some of the punctuation has me a little confused. You are fine with declining, but most people aren’t? Or the other way around?
I feel the same. Kansas State opting out makes zero sense. Their coach can still coach the game. But then again, 11 5-7 teams also opted out, so maybe get rid of bowls
-
Money is the root of much evil.
"Love of money" is how 1 Tim. 6:10 puts it.
-
Looking at the bracket made it clear that the Badgers had a very tough schedule. They played 4 teams out of those 12.
Corngratulations
-
If I was the HC of a 5-7 team, I'd decline, just out of principle.
-
(https://external-preview.redd.it/notre-dame-ad-says-the-acc-did-permanent-damage-to-its-v0-ajd0d3V0dWY4MDZnMS2JZCR-iZT0pR-PFORFT_x5VjSKVUybKlxIvigfMtZi.png?width=640&crop=smart&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=377ee306f46b614b6c79266476f86e792df967a3)
-
If I was the HC of a 5-7 team, I'd decline, just out of principle.
I understand that. Especially if you're accustomed to playing in bowls
if you've worked your way up to 5-7 from less than that, it's a great opportunity
-
If Fro got one season as interim HC of the Gators, and he went 5-7, he'd take the bowl game.
-
Money is the root of much evil.
You can give me a lot of your money.....you know.....just in case you need less evil in your life.
-
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/notre-dame-legend-joe-theismann-questions-why-alabama-got-into-cfp-over-fighting-irish-it-s-so-wrong/ar-AA1RXnIQ?ocid=winp2fptaskbar&cvid=3ef1fd95fa504a70946027c00efccaed&ei=25
Notre Dame legend Joe Theismann questions why Alabama got into CFP over Fighting Irish: 'It's so wrong'
-
You can give me a lot of your money.....you know.....just in case you need less evil in your life.
Yup dicey prospects but a chance I'm willing to take
-
I don't have enough to be evil with it.
-
I feel the same. Kansas State opting out makes zero sense. Their coach can still coach the game. But then again, 11 5-7 teams also opted out, so maybe get rid of bowls
If it makes zero sense to you, you haven't delved very far into the circumstances.
I don't have time today. Fitz said a lot of things I have been saying. Independently, of course.
It's best that Kansas State passes on a bowl bid | Daily Delivery (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP6Lkn-jjd4)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/PtGi4a4.jpeg)
-
I don't have enough to be evil with it.
Then the threshold must be pretty high!
-
seems to me the P4 leagues are woke to what ND is up to and have sent a message
-
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/notre-dame-legend-joe-theismann-questions-why-alabama-got-into-cfp-over-fighting-irish-it-s-so-wrong/ar-AA1RXnIQ?ocid=winp2fptaskbar&cvid=3ef1fd95fa504a70946027c00efccaed&ei=25
Notre Dame legend Joe Theismann questions why Alabama got into CFP over Fighting Irish: 'It's so wrong'
F Joe and his leprechaun
(https://i.imgur.com/9XcvQOB.png)
-
Final SOR/SP+ bracket
#12 Tulane at #5 OREGON; winner vs. #4 Texas A&M
#11 James Madison at #6 Texas Tech; winner vs. #3 OHIO STATE
#10 Alabama at #7 Ole Miss; winner vs. #2 Georgia
#9 Notre Dame at #8 Oklahoma; winner vs. #1 INDIANA
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rOVZMpAYxw
-
(https://i.imgur.com/3yb2H2J.png)
-
Insufferable arrogance. Everyone needs to quit scheduling these asshats.
(https://i.imgur.com/1OWzAM6.jpeg)
-
F Joe and his leprechaun
(https://i.imgur.com/9XcvQOB.png)
I sort of a agree but Bama they have better losses than bama so at least put them or Shorthorns in
-
Insufferable arrogance. Everyone needs to quit scheduling these asshats.
(https://i.imgur.com/1OWzAM6.jpeg)
I dunno are Catholics allowed to blatantly lie like ND Recruiting is - asking for a friend?
-
Insufferable arrogance. Everyone needs to quit scheduling these asshats.
(https://i.imgur.com/KxO9bxU.png)
cancel this one
-
I wish they could have canceled that one and kept Pitt. This ND/Lambeau thing is a return for UW/ND in Soldier Field.
Barry was forever obsessed with wanting to play ND and finally got it. The dumbass.
-
I'm sure it can still be canceled.
-
Heavy penalty.
-
Heavy penalty.
Sure, but it's only money and the B1G is swimming in the stuff.
-
I wish they could have canceled that one and kept Pitt. This ND/Lambeau thing is a return for UW/ND in Soldier Field.
Barry was forever obsessed with wanting to play ND and finally got it. The dumbass.
I know a ton of B1G fans hate Notre Dame, but they are a traditional CFB power, with a great, traveling fan base, that will get a lot of eyeballs on the game in the stands and on TV, coast to coast. From the AD's perspective, what's not to like about that? More likely to beat Pitt? Sure, but also get a lot less advantages from playing that game, even if the Badgers win, which is far from a good bet right now. And it's not like Wisconsin is threatening for a spot in the CFB playoff, which, if they had just beaten Pitt instead of losing to ND, they would have been a lock for. It will never work that way for Wisconsin. Irish fans will travel to Lambeau, drop a bunch of money in the state of Wisconsin, and get a bunch of exposure for the program. That's a good game to schedule.
-
I just don't like the Lambeau thing.
I didn't like our (not)home-and-(not)home in 2014 and 2016. If we're gonna travel all the way up there and get our ass kicked and coach fired, at least let us do it in a rowdy, fun, storied college football place. So instead it happened in the Packers' house. Yay.
And y'all missed the best place in the world to play a night game with the best tailgates you'd have been invited to, before that. For what? The Texans sterile-ass stadium? Ugh.
-
SEC Shorts - SEC teams board the Playoff Train
Thanx Bwarb pretty good one
-
Insufferable arrogance. Everyone needs to quit scheduling these asshats.
[img width=259.818 height=500]https://i.imgur.com/1OWzAM6.jpeg[/img]
I'm rooting for the world.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rOVZMpAYxw
Priceless!😂
-
I know a ton of B1G fans hate Notre Dame, but they are a traditional CFB power, with a great, traveling fan base, that will get a lot of eyeballs on the game in the stands and on TV, coast to coast. From the AD's perspective, what's not to like about that? More likely to beat Pitt? Sure, but also get a lot less advantages from playing that game, even if the Badgers win, which is far from a good bet right now. And it's not like Wisconsin is threatening for a spot in the CFB playoff, which, if they had just beaten Pitt instead of losing to ND, they would have been a lock for. It will never work that way for Wisconsin. Irish fans will travel to Lambeau, drop a bunch of money in the state of Wisconsin, and get a bunch of exposure for the program. That's a good game to schedule.
I don’t hate them. I like whipping their butts though.
-
Ed Zachery!!!
-
I just don't like the Lambeau thing.
I didn't like our (not)home-and-(not)home in 2014 and 2016. If we're gonna travel all the way up there and get our ass kicked and coach fired, at least let us do it in a rowdy, fun, storied college football place. So instead it happened in the Packers' house. Yay.
And y'all missed the best place in the world to play a night game with the best tailgates you'd have been invited to, before that. For what? The Texans sterile-ass stadium? Ugh.
I agree. I would be much more interested in an actual home and home. There's got to be a financial interest behind using the NFL stadiums.
-
I agree. I would be much more interested in an actual home and home. There's got to be a financial interest behind using the NFL stadiums.
Season tickets don't include neutrals. Just another way to F the fans over for more money.
-
I dunno are Catholics allowed to blatantly lie like ND Recruiting is - asking for a friend?
they all lie, catholics aren't any worse or better. but to answer your ? $ buys indulgences, annulments, & 4.5 40s.
-
(https://external-preview.redd.it/notre-dame-ad-says-the-acc-did-permanent-damage-to-its-v0-ajd0d3V0dWY4MDZnMS2JZCR-iZT0pR-PFORFT_x5VjSKVUybKlxIvigfMtZi.png?width=640&crop=smart&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=377ee306f46b614b6c79266476f86e792df967a3)
notre dame is fos re: their standing in the playoff relative to miami (& alabama for that matter) but i actually agree with their gripe with the acc. they're a biz partner. they should shut the bleep up & let the sitch play out.
given the mechanisms of the polls & when & whom these teams lost to the way this played out makes perfect sense to me. as is often the case with cfb circumstances exposed flaws in the system. but the committee got it right at the end of the day. we know what happened - they got in a room here at the end, saw the problem & fixed it. props to them from me for that.
that said i'd have no gripes really with either being left out to the extent that notre dame's best win is southern cal & miami's two losses are both worse than either of notre dame's losses. certainly miami deserved to be in relative to notre dame, but the day i feel sorry for a team (had they been left out) that loses to smu while coasting on an acc schedule hasn't arrived yet & likely won't anytime soon. i'm so glad they played & we have an irrefutable head to head result to blunt the hype train blowing smoke about notre dame being a threat to win it all b/c they haven't lost in three months. it's as predictable as it is asinine & tiresome.
-
but, bashing the Domers is SO MUCH fun
-
Curt Cignetti had rough news to pass along on Wednesday. Indiana expects to be without star defensive lineman Stephen Daley in the postseason.
Cignetti confirmed that Daley is dealing with a serious injury.
Daley’s injury is believed to have occurred after Indiana’s win in the Big Ten Championship Game. Video shows him dealing with an apparent injury while making his way around the stadium to celebrate with Hoosier fans.
Daley is a significant loss for Indiana as the undefeated Hoosiers try to win the College Football Playoff. Daley is second in the nation in tackles for loss with 19 on the season. He has 38 total tackles on the season, with 5.5 sacks.
-
He pulled a Gramatica, and injured himself celebrating?
-
(https://i.imgur.com/jGSlifR.png)
-
He pulled a Gramatica, and injured himself celebrating?
(https://i.imgur.com/we8hrYf.jpeg)
-
https://twitter.com/YahooSports/status/1999108497321902330?s=20
-
I like it
-
That's hot.
1988 was a loooooong time ago. 37 year olds are walking around having never seen a ND nattie. They HAVE seen the Irish claw back into the game last year only to lose by double digits to OSU and they saw them get plowed and spanked 13 years ago to Bama, though.
-
He pulled a Gramatica, and injured himself celebrating?
He was jumping up to high five fans after the game and the knee just blew. Really sad for a guy who was very low rated when he escaped 0-12 Kent State, was second string to start the year, and then had a tremendous impact when he finally got his chance.
-
https://twitter.com/YahooSports/status/1999108497321902330?s=20
As a long time ND hater, I would love to see this happen. Let’s see how much respect they gain going 12-0 against Kent State, Ball State, Bowling Green, Nevada, New Mexico, State, etc. I have to think NBC would not be too happy airing that schedule.
-
yup, put the screws to em
why would any Big Ten or SEC team schedule the extra loss that might keep them out of the playoff with the 3rd loss?
-
That's hot.
1988 was a loooooong time ago. 37 year olds are walking around having never seen a ND nattie. They HAVE seen the Irish claw back into the game last year only to lose by double digits to OSU and they saw them get plowed and spanked 13 years ago to Bama, though.
Buddy, if you think 1988 was a long time ago, let me tell you about 1939…😉
-
He was jumping up to high five fans after the game and the knee just blew. Really sad for a guy who was very low rated when he escaped 0-12 Kent State, was second string to start the year, and then had a tremendous impact when he finally got his chance.
It was probably already injured, that was just the straw that broke the back.
-
Buddy, if you think 1988 was a long time ago, let me tell you about 1939…😉
(https://gifdb.com/images/thumbnail/its-been-84-years-o45tdzpxv0db6dyb.gif)
-
yup, put the screws to em
why would any Big Ten or SEC team schedule the extra loss that might keep them out of the playoff with the 3rd loss?
It will backfire.
They aren't leaving an undefeated Notre Dame out, even if it's against Mac teams, service academies and fcs schools.
-
why not,??? ESPN/ABC got no love for NBC
-
It will backfire.
They aren't leaving an undefeated Notre Dame out, even if it's against Mac teams, service academies and fcs schools.
The message was just sent. They will definitely leave ND out.
-
The almighty dollar.
-
The message was just sent. They will definitely leave ND out.
Not an undefeated ND. Not in a 12 team playoff. Even if they played a G5 schedule.
-
Far more severe than disincentivizing them to play tough games, but forbidding it. That's the schools' plan.
But the committee is going to keep a 12-0, 11-1 ND in a holding pattern at 13th? I don't see it, no matter the schedule. It may backfire.
-
just need to put the "right" members on the committee
-
This is the equivalent to a bunch of middle school girls seeking to alienate and exclude certain classmates. Gotta love the juvenile 'leadership' of College football.
-
Sure, but ND is acting like she's hot shit when she's mid, lol.
I honestly don't see the problem of ND not earning a spot and then turning down a bowl every year.
(earning it = not being a bubble team)
See how long they go before caving in. Maybe never. Fine by me.
-
When NBC decides it's not gonna want to cover MAC, low-level non-P2 and service academy football, it's over.
-
I'll believe it when the USC series is cancelled.
-
why would old muleshoe want a 3rd loss and miss the playoff by scheduling ND? Why would the Big Ten want that?
similar to Texas scheduling Ohio St....... USC was ranked #16 when they lost to ND after beating Michigan the week before. If Muleshoe had played Washington St or San Diego st and won, they'd have only 2 losses (@Illinois & @Oregon) they'd be in the playoff
-
(https://i.imgur.com/FHjdLj8.png)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/FHjdLj8.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/N9ZMH3c.png)
-
This is the equivalent to a bunch of middle school girls seeking to alienate and exclude certain classmates. Gotta love the juvenile 'leadership' of College football.
certain classmates earn this shit
-
(https://i.imgur.com/FHjdLj8.png)
I call bullshit on the 0.1% for JMU and Tulane. It's much lower.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/FHjdLj8.png)
(https://media3.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTZjMDliOTUya2xoZzA2Y3Mya2t4bmQ0a3NydmF2N3ZlNzZsczd0dDVzM3psZzFwMCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/FYCxLHCIGaioo/200.gif)
-
should put $10 on each - just incase
-
After learning of Notre Dame's memorandum of understanding that grants the Irish preferential playoff access starting next year, athletic directors in other leagues are threatening to freeze Notre Dame out of future schedules, per @DanWolken
That left a mark
-
The Irish have gotten preferential treatment/benefit of the doubt for many decades and the first time they don't, they whine like a little bitch.
Tough shit.
-
The Irish have gotten preferential treatment/benefit of the doubt for many decades and the first time they don't, they whine like a little bitch.
Tough shit.
They took our spot in 2020 and got rolled. Still pissed off about that one.
-
I think if A&M beats Miami, we then face Ohio State. I really want to beat Miami, even though I know we probably won't beat Ohio State, just because of all the drum beats that we played a soft schedule and all that shit. Even if we lose to Ohio State, it would be nice to have a CFP win, and a chance to go against one of the best and see how we fare.
I think we are about evenly matched with Miami, could see a 33-30 type win or loss.
-
Gig 'Em!!! You's guys deserve some elite success!!
-
Gig 'Em!!! You's guys deserve some elite success!!
Thanks for the well wishes. I could live with IU, Texas Tech, Ole Miss winning. Georgia, Alabama, Miami, Ohio State...bleh.
-
Here's my bracket...FWIW.
I was very impressed with IU. Not sure how losing the defensive player changes their team, but have to go on what I saw.
(https://i.imgur.com/4YplUFm.png)
-
man's got a point....
https://twitter.com/On3sports/status/2001742541683904920?s=20
-
man's got a point....
https://twitter.com/On3sports/status/2001742541683904920?s=20
(https://i.imgur.com/QepWZit.png)
-
I blame Michigan. They're the ones who eff'd around and let TCU into a NC game they had no business in.
Apparently UGA didn't thrash them quite hard enough to stop this not-so-cute charade.
-
man's got a point....
https://twitter.com/On3sports/status/2001742541683904920?s=20
Well, of course it's true. But we live in the lie where FBS is all one entity despite the fact that we all know 80% of the population schools have zero chance.
So, just please, pull the fucking plug, break the top 30-40 schools off into their own division, and put the rest of us out of our misery.
-
I blame Michigan.
You are learning. Fundamentally, EVERYTHING bad is Michigan's fault.
-
You are learning. Fundamentally, EVERYTHING bad is Michigan's fault.
and/or Oklahoma, don't sleep on the Sooners
-
I’m going to miss the first half of the game because I’m seeing a movie. Interested to see what it looks like when I get out.
-
Well, of course it's true. But we live in the lie where FBS is all one entity despite the fact that we all know 80% of the population schools have zero chance.
So, just please, pull the fucking plug, break the top 30-40 schools off into their own division, and put the rest of us out of our misery.
We can make it 40-60 schools if we wanted, actually putting them on equal footing.
But we won't.
Whoever the hell the actual decision-makers are seem hell-bent on making college football as close to NFL as possible, while offering a lesser product.
Brilliant.
The differences made college football special.
Now, it's like a girl who is a 9 out of 10 at a part always standing next to the only girl who is hotter than her the whole night.
Brilliant.
-
We can make it 40-60 schools if we wanted, actually putting them on equal footing.
But we won't.
Whoever the hell the actual decision-makers are seem hell-bent on making college football as close to NFL as possible, while offering a lesser product.
Brilliant.
But that's the point. The actual decision makers (the top 20 schools or so) don't want to put 40-60 schools on an equal footing, because that would be elevating 20-40 schools to the same level as those top 20 that make decisions.
That's what the NFL is. Draft. Salary cap. CBA. Specific rules about free agency, trade compensation, etc. It's a system that's designed to have parity and give everyone a chance.
What the top 20 schools want is an easy path to beat up on 9-11 uncompetitive schools every year and pad their win totals and only have 1-3 games that they might actually have a chance of losing.
If anything, that will be the reason that they keep the new top division to have 40-60 schools, but they'll do EVERYTHING in their power to make sure that the bottom half to 2/3s of those schools aren't anywhere near equal footing.
-
Right, and that would be trying to somewhat keep the status quo, albeit less severely. I think it's a good idea.
But as long as every school in the conference is getting the same big bucket of money, you can claim it's okay.
The have-nots have their utility, and they can rise up every so often.
At least it's better than the big, fat lie we've always have and continue to perpetuate with G5 teams.
-
But that's the point. The actual decision makers (the top 20 schools or so) don't want to put 40-60 schools on an equal footing, because that would be elevating 20-40 schools to the same level as those top 20 that make decisions.
That's what the NFL is. Draft. Salary cap. CBA. Specific rules about free agency, trade compensation, etc. It's a system that's designed to have parity and give everyone a chance.
What the top 20 schools want is an easy path to beat up on 9-11 uncompetitive schools every year and pad their win totals and only have 1-3 games that they might actually have a chance of losing.
If anything, that will be the reason that they keep the new top division to have 40-60 schools, but they'll do EVERYTHING in their power to make sure that the bottom half to 2/3s of those schools aren't anywhere near equal footing.
Purdue has the exact same bloated TV deal as OSU and Michigan.
Act like it.
-
Purdue has the exact same bloated TV deal as OSU and Michigan.
Act like it.
Yes, and that exact same bloated TV deal has absolutely nothing to do with NIL, and the university can't spend that money on NIL. Up until this year, revenue sharing wasn't allowed, so absolutely none of that money could be spent paying players directly. And even now that it can, the money on direct payment to athletes is capped and equal across B1G schools, while NIL is not capped nor equal in any way.
Acting like TV revenues equalize everything is exactly the sort of "born on third base and claiming you hit a triple" behavior that the rest of college football hates the helmet teams for. It's the lack of realization that literally everything in the structure of the sport advantages you, and disadvantages us, and acting like one tiny little thing that's equal will make it possible to overcome.
(Oh, and I'd be remiss not to mention that the discussions that we've had on this board about PE investment is to give outsized returns to teams like OSU and Michigan... I'm assuming you're completely against that idea, in favor of parity?)
-
Indiana is the number one team in the country.
-
One tiny thing? There might be five teams outside of the Big Ten/SEC that can move enough merchandise to make up the difference. Notre Dame, Florida State... maybe Miami and Clemson.
Congrats, you are in the top 40. In the CFB landscape you are a billionaire complaining that you don't have as much money as Bill Gates.
You are born on third base, pretending you got struck out looking.
-
Indiana is the number one team in the country.
Thanks, Mark Cuban!
One tiny thing? There might be five teams outside of the Big Ten/SEC that can move enough merchandise to make up the difference. Notre Dame, Florida State... maybe Miami and Clemson.
Congrats, you are in the top 40. In the CFB landscape you are a billionaire complaining that you don't have as much money as Bill Gates.
You are born on third base, pretending you got struck out looking.
Listen, I don't deny the advantage that Purdue has being in the B1G. We're lucky that the B1G doesn't toss members to the sharks, because if they did, we'd have been jettisoned long ago.
But this is the difference... In the NFL, you have a HARD salary cap, you have a draft, you have a CBA. You have everything in the world that exists to ensure parity. That generally means that if one owner has $400B and another owner has a "mere" $10B, the teams will still be equal.
This isn't the case in MLB, which is why big-market teams like the Yankees and the Dodgers beat the piss out of everyone else. In other sports, those who have the most money have the best rosters.
In college, it's that taken to its logical extreme. If you have a "mere" $10B and your competition is Gates/Musk/Bezos/Buffett level wealth, they can outbid you for every single player, every single time, and barely even feel a pinch at all to the nut. That is a STRUCTURAL imbalance. Elite players are a finite resource, and the rich(est) can buy as many as they want, starving the rest of talent. That's how it works. The top programs already get the top HS recruits. Now with NIL and unrestricted transfer portal, they buy the top transfers, so any lesser program who identifies "under the radar" talent loses that talent.
Purdue is advantaged... Maybe even born on first base. That's a long way away from scoring compared to the programs born on third base.
-
Okay, born might be a little strong.
You were walked to third base, and pretend that you got struck out looking.
Using the MLB example, there are small market teams that are competitive because they have good front offices. There are large market teams that are dumpster fires, because they have poor front offices. The big market teams have a built in advantage, but it's far from a guarantee that they will be good. Vice versa.
-
Love the homefields on these. Would love if they moved all the games to homefield except the championship...maybe.
-
So far the one team that was clearly undeserving is showing it. Let's see if they can get it turned around. Or maybe Deboer is just shooting himself to Michigan.
-
Looks about like a Michigan team right now.
-
Big 4th down conversion for Bammer there to stay alive.
-
Sooners drop a touchdown and then drop the punt so they are working on keeping Deboer in Alabama.
-
Sooners really want Deboer to stay
-
Herbie blows,that one set of downs right before the recovered punt John Mateer scrambled out of trouble then hits the receiver 25 yds down field who promptly drops it. Old captain obvious barks he could have made the 1st down ya but he could've had 6 pts on a play herbie NEVER made for 4 yrs in C-Bus.What a mallet head
-
Herbie blows,that one set of downs right before the recovered punt John Mateer scrambled out of trouble then hits the receiver 25 yds down field who promptly drops it. Old captain obvious barks he could have made the 1st down ya but he could've had 6 pts on a play herbie NEVER made for 4 yrs in C-Bus.What a mallet head
Herbie is the absolute worst. Why can't we have Gus.
-
Sam on 11W they have a thread "Kirk Herbstreit Can’t Help Himself" you'd concur with more than a few remarks
-
Jeebis c'mon sooners don't let th under toe turn the tables
-
They'll go on that classic Bama run, beat these guys and Indiana too.
-
This is crazy. Who had Bama going on a 27-point run??
-
Heck I didn’t even realize this game was tonight. Game 1, OU beats Bama. Game 2, Bama beats OU and stays alive. Bama to face IU next.
-
OU likes to blow leads.
-
I thought Venables played defense???
-
OU likes to blow leads.
FIFY
-
Bama played homage to Iowa with 260 yards of offense and 34 points
-
So far the one team that was clearly undeserving is showing it. Let's see if they can get it turned around. Or maybe Deboer is just shooting himself to Michigan.
Which team?
-
the playoff is working - it's given us a rematch of SEC teams with a different outcome the 2nd game
I don't mind because (as Mack Brown would say b'cause) it was an entertaining game between 2 good(not great) teams!
-
Which team?
It's tough to say
-
It's tough to say
You will for sure see two of them today. Be patient.
-
Fun game! SEC is growing a little more mid in some spots, but that’s fun too!
-
This CFP in mid-Dec thing is just... Weird.
It's been so long that I think of anything post-CCGs and pre-Christmas as silly season bowls that I can't wrap my head around the idea that these are meaningful games.
-
still better than the No Fun League
-
DDD was good last night.
-
still better than the No Fun League
Of course the NFL isn't fun for Browns fans.
-
Tulane plays at Ole Miss at 3:30PM today.
JMU plays at Oregon tonight at 7:30PM.
Eagles play at the Redskins at 5:00PM today.
Packers play at the Bears tonight at 8:00PM.
CFP ratings are not gonna be good today.
fSecPN/TNT not gonna be happy.
I might watch Miami at aTm at Noon. Maybe.
-
Why do I keep seeing random articles/quotes of OSU players defending Sayin? Did I miss something?
-
Too bad the NFL is forcing this game into the AM. I have to say, the A&M in-stadium experience is one of my favorites.
-
Why do I keep seeing random articles/quotes of OSU players defending Sayin? Did I miss something?
Dunno haven't seen anything like that
-
Why do I keep seeing random articles/quotes of OSU players defending Sayin? Did I miss something?
During yesterday's DoJ Epstein files release, Sayin showed up in several photos
-
During yesterday's DoJ Epstein files release, Sayin showed up in several photos
LOL well it wouldn't take much to make him look like a teenage girl
-
Of course the NFL isn't fun for Browns fans.
Blooper Shows can be fun
-
I don't even know who to root for.
In theory I should be rooting for whoever would be easier for OSU to beat, but in reality that would probably be whichever team loses.
-
I'm just rooting for SOMETHING TO HAPPEN.
FFS, 0-0 at the half? A&M is at least moving the ball but nobody can put points on the board.
-
I will, of course, be rooting for Tulane and JMU later today...
(https://media1.tenor.com/m/idMbLvxhzIEAAAAC/some-men-just-want-to-watch-the-world-burn-batman.gif)
-
I'll be watching the Bears, in hopes that they crush the fPackers.
-
Does the "f" stand for fudge?
-
It certainly could. Nice catch.
-
A. I've found a reason I can be happy with either team winning. I think I'd prefer A&M win, but another SEC team losing would be fun.
B. The cameraman found a notable adult film star Miami fan. So that's silly.
-
Missed kicks and staunch defensive line play are the order
-
Still figuring who I would rather play. Think Miami's defense is pretty legit, TAMU might be tougher to defend.
-
3-3 after three hours...
...and Iowa's not even playing!
-
3-3 after three hours...
...and Iowa's not even playing!
The playoffs so far have been a tribute to the Big Ten West
-
Still figuring who I would rather play. Think Miami's defense is pretty legit, TAMU might be tougher to defend.
Not if they keep dropping passes
-
Not much offense in College Station.
-
Not much offense in College Station.
464 offensive yards total between both teams. This is college football... It's not uncommon at 4 minutes remaining in the 4th quarter that ONE team has such a number...
-
Well okay that number just jumped in 1 play :57:
-
Not much offense in College Station.
To be fair, this is too very good defenses. Plus the swirling winds have made any long passing extremely difficult.
-
Turnovers decide most competitive games.
-
Stole this from 11W
Until yesterday, in the still fresh CFP expanded playoff, no teams had ever lost a home playoff game. 24 hours later, two teams have. Both from the SEC.
It just means more.
Sorry but it bared pointing out :111:
-
Ole Miss up 14-0 in the 1st QTR vs Tulane. Oh gee hey, who wulda thunk it. :34:
-
Enjoyed that A&M-Miami game.
(https://i.imgur.com/yl0BaL9.jpeg)
-
Ole Miss up 14-0 in the 1st QTR vs Tulane. Oh gee hey, who wulda thunk it. :34:
Tulane is ranked #17 which seems about right to me. I think they'd be the 17th best team in the B1G.
-
Man I don't remember the announcers apologizing for letting Tennessee into the playoffs last year. Must have forgot their talking points.
-
Welp, it sucks that we lost, and I’m a little bit bewildered by the offense these last few games. I’m not saying that Miami doesn’t have a good defense, because they do. But not 3 points good. Marcell Reed has turned into a TO machine. It’s hard to not think losing your offensive coordinator at the end of the season didn’t help matters. It happens to good programs every year, no excuses.
Still a successful season, and a lot to build off of. ‘26 schedule looks to be murder, we’ll see what Elko is made of in year three.
-
Man I don't remember the announcers apologizing for letting Tennessee into the playoffs last year. Must have forgot their talking points.
Tennessee was a legit playoff team. Tulane and JMU aren't.
-
JMU is really bad.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/Jv4szCl.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/hsnP7zi.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/4IZ5PfY.jpeg)
-
This is what I've been talking about.
Is a seat at the table worth the public flogging? Is the added exposure worth being so exposed as to not belonging?
Tulane, JMU, Boise last year - they should be competing for their own NC, not THE NC. There is a nice grey area between Ohio State-Georgia and Montana-Montana State...fill it. Have competitive games vs schools on equal footing and have an opportunity at a NC.
For the love of logic.
-
Is a seat at the table worth the public flogging? Is the added exposure worth being so exposed as to not belonging?
yes, obviously yes, the seat at the table is worth $$$$$
-
yes, obviously yes, the seat at the table is worth $$$$$
There's a word for that, and it ain't capitalism. It starts with an M and ends with -ism.
-
James Madison certainly more competitive than Tennessee was last year.
-
I am somewhat reluctant to keep any G5 team out of the playoffs just for being G5, but this whole Tulane- OM game was a complete farce. For one, OM ALREADY beat the shit out of them earlier this season. If you’re going to hold Texas accountable for losing to Florida, you have to hold Tulane accountable to the same standard. I’m not even sure how Tulane even got in, I guess it’s some sort of AQ for G5 teams?
Now I’m not naive enough to believe that just because a team blows the other one out in one game that the 2nd game will be similar. Heck, we’ve got multiple examples of that NOT being true this season. OU/Bama, and UGA-Bama both had different outcomes. I just think that any G5 game vs P4 teams should be heavily weighted.
-
It's tough to say
We need to be done with G5 charity.
It's like Mercedes-Benz says:
The best, or nothing.
-
I am somewhat reluctant to keep any G5 team out of the playoffs just for being G5, but this whole Tulane- OM game was a complete farce. For one, OM ALREADY beat the shit out of them earlier this season. If you’re going to hold Texas accountable for losing to Florida, you have to hold Tulane accountable to the same standard. I’m not even sure how Tulane even got in, I guess it’s some sort of AQ for G5 teams?
.
Yeah, they take the top 5 conference champions, which is supposed to be the P4 +1 G5.
Duke won the ACC, and lost to Tulane H-H, so Tulane got their spot.
-
I am somewhat reluctant to keep any G5 team out of the playoffs just for being G5, but this whole Tulane- OM game was a complete farce. For one, OM ALREADY beat the shit out of them earlier this season. If you’re going to hold Texas accountable for losing to Florida, you have to hold Tulane accountable to the same standard. I’m not even sure how Tulane even got in, I guess it’s some sort of AQ for G5 teams?
Now I’m not naive enough to believe that just because a team blows the other one out in one game that the 2nd game will be similar. Heck, we’ve got multiple examples of that NOT being true this season. OU/Bama, and UGA-Bama both had different outcomes. I just think that any G5 game vs P4 teams should be heavily weighted.
I blame Bama
-
So the tide is due for an "L" that makes me happy
-
We need to be done with G5 charity.
It's like Mercedes-Benz says:
The best, or nothing.
No way. Winners win. Losers say we need to change the system.
-
No way. Winners win. Losers say we need to change the system.
Says losers JMU and Tulane.
-
Says losers JMU and Tulane.
I think they were happy. JMU was more competitive than Tennessee and Oregon and SMU last year. If the poindexters paid attention they would have flip flopped JMU and Tulane. But they don't, which is why you should not let the poindexters keep taking everything over.
-
JMU put up over 500 yards and 30 points in Autzen. I would have liked to see how they did against a more inept team like Oklahoma.
-
They are not in the same class.
Why pretend they are?
JMU would finish dead last in the SEC or B1G.
Tulane lost to Ole Miss twice this year, to the tune of 86-20.
Enough with the charity already.
-
You think they'd lose to Wisconsin? :o
-
They are not in the same class.
Why pretend they are?
JMU would finish dead last in the SEC or B1G.
Tulane lost to Ole Miss twice this year, to the tune of 86-20.
Enough with the charity already.
JMU would smoke a few teams in both conferences. But they won't their conference, and I hate we have to have charity for all the also rans who didn't.
End the charity!
-
JMU would smoke a few teams in both conferences. But they won't their conference, and I hate we have to have charity for all the also rans who didn't.
End the charity!
They won a crap conference. They are a tallest midget. Are you seriously unaware of this or are you being purposely obtuse?
Lots of D2, D3, and HS teams also "won their conference". They aren't included because those conferences aren't on the same level. Neither are whatever crap conferences Tulane and JMU won. Everyone knows this except apparently you since you keep falling back on this "they won their conference" argument while failing to acknowledge that their conference sucks.
-
They won a crap conference. They are a tallest midget. Are you seriously unaware of this or are you being purposely obtuse?
Lots of D2, D3, and HS teams also "won their conference". They aren't included because those conferences aren't on the same level. Neither are whatever crap conferences Tulane and JMU won. Everyone knows this except apparently you since you keep falling back on this "they won their conference" argument while failing to acknowledge that their conference sucks.
It doesn't matter if their conference sucks. What matters is they won. All the losers can apply to JMU's conference next year.
Stop Defending Losers
-
You think they'd lose to Wisconsin? :o
Yes.
-
It doesn't matter if their conference sucks. What matters is they won. All the losers can apply to JMU's conference next year.
Stop Defending Losers
Division II teams sam why extend the already too long season with participation trophies? Just because Cignetti rose from there doesn't automatically mean they get a chair at the big boy table,Texas and ND should have been in not JMU & OD. And ND needs to sack up and join a conference
-
Oklahoma and Alabama would both slaughter JMU, gimme a break.
-
The whole thing just sucks.
I miss the 1990's.
-
You realize all this kvetching is exactly the evidence TPTB will use to justify why they need to expand to 16, right?
-
Expand it to 64, with 4 more play-in games.
Or just F it and everyone gets a trophy.
-
You realize all this kvetching is exactly the evidence TPTB will use to justify why they need to expand to 16, right?
Why does college football let television run everyth...AHHH I AM NOT AS ENTERTAINED AS I COULD BE RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I'm sure JMU V. OD just might be entertaining,just stay in their lane
-
I'm sure JMU V. OD just might be entertaining,just stay in their lane
JMU beat ODU 63-27
-
Seemed mostly fine.
And if I’ve learned something from 20+ years, watching the sport, ain’t a fix in the world for people‘s desire to complain about something in this game.
-
Expand it to 64, with 4 more play-in games.
Or just F it and everyone gets a trophy.
Like the bowls! Lotta trophies.
(The trophy metaphor is so weird and flexible)
-
Like the bowls! Lotta trophies.
(The trophy metaphor is so weird and flexible)
Only for the winners.
-
How can the ACC be worse than the Big 12?
The ACC still has all of their teams, while the Big 12 has been raided six ways to Sunday.
-
The ACC has always been terrible. Keeping the same bad teams wasn't ever going to make them any better. Clemson's flash in the pan is now over, and Florida State and Miami aren't anywhere near their all-time peaks.
The ACC is still pretty good at basketball though, so the good news for them, is that it's now basketball season.
-
Lots of D2, D3, and HS teams also "won their conference". They aren't included because those conferences aren't on the same level. .
The D2, D3 and HS conference champions do indeed make their playoffs.
-
The betting lines are wider than I expected.
-
How can the ACC be worse than the Big 12?
The ACC still has all of their teams, while the Big 12 has been raided six ways to Sunday.
Now I feel bad for poor Maryland. Not even missed in the ACC I guess
-
And I don't know that the ACC is worse, it's just that the top is worse. Blame FSU, Clemson, UNC, VT, for that. I think the middle and bottom of the ACC are still better than the bottom of the Big XII
-
Clemson's flash in the pan is now over, and Florida State and Miami aren't anywhere near their all-time peaks.
well they certainly appear to be crawling back into the ring - The U just might make the big dance this year. And it was just in'23 FSU went 13-0 and may have gotten there had not Jordan Travis had his leg annihilated. So those two programs will be hanging around for the foreseeable future being right smack dab in the middle of rich recruiting real estate. Not sure about the dweeb dabo it would be nice to see him swilling trough water again
-
We're in year 22 of Miami never winning the ACC.
In that time, Wake Forest won it. GA Tech won it. Duke just won it. VA Tech won it 4 times. Pitt won it.
And that's omitting FSU and Clemson owning it over and over.
-
It doesn't matter if their conference sucks. What matters is they won. All the losers can apply to JMU's conference next year.
Stop Defending Losers
At the 2024 Ohio HS Div 1 Track Championships a guy from Westerville Central won the 400M dash with a time of 45.65.
At the Paris Olympics a British guy finished second in the 400M with a time of 43.44.
By your "logic", the Olympic Silver Medalist is a "loser" and the kid from Westerville Central should be in the next World Championship.
This is toddler logic.
-
At the 2024 Ohio HS Div 1 Track Championships a guy from Westerville Central won the 400M dash with a time of 45.65.
At the Paris Olympics a British guy finished second in the 400M with a time of 43.44.
By your "logic", the Olympic Silver Medalist is a "loser" and the kid from Westerville Central should be in the next World Championship.
This is toddler logic.
By your logic the winners of the heats shouldn't advance to the next race but instead a committee should vote on who races each other.
-
By your logic the winners of the heats shouldn't advance to the next race but instead a committee should vote on who races each other.
How about we have the best runners in the Championship?
How about we have the best CFB teams in the CFP?
-
How about we have the best runners in the Championship?
How about we have the best CFB teams in the CFP?
How about we let the "best" be determined by winning games instead of poindexters voting for them?
-
Serious question: what happened in the second half between Oregon and JMU? I stopped paying attention at the half, but was surprised by the final score. Did JMU actually make a run, or was Oregon playing not to get injured before a real game?
-
We're in year 22 of Miami never winning the ACC.
In that time, Wake Forest won it. GA Tech won it. Duke just won it. VA Tech won it 4 times. Pitt won it.
And that's omitting FSU and Clemson owning it over and over.
For all the SEC fans that believe their conference is rigged toward making sure Alabama or Georgia is propped up, I point to the ACC for football that certainly isn't rigged. This year you had Miami, Clemson, and Florida St in the Top 15 to start the season, and somehow the conference championship ends up between Duke and Virginia. Basketball conference it is.
-
How about we let the "best" be determined by winning games instead of poindexters voting for them?
So the Little Giants can get in.
Seriously Max, I have toddlers who have a better grasp on logic than you do.
It is charity for crappy conferences.
Here is a game for you: OM 45, Tulane 10.
Here is another: Louisville by 14 over JMU.
It isn't "poindexters", everyone with a grasp on reality already knew that Tulane and JMU were not on Texas/Notre Dame's level because we already saw what happened when they tried. Tulane got smoked by the 5th (ish) best team in the SEC and JMU lost by two TD's to an ACC team that didn't even tie for the ACCCG slot.
Only toddlers and Max aren't smart enough to understand this.
-
I'm reasonably confident that TCU and Boise State's success in bowl games against the big boys (including my Badgers, unfortunately, but also true kings like Oklahoma) set the table for the argument that they shouldn't be left out. And as noted above, it isn't as though P4 teams competing in the playoffs eliminated blowouts. Blowouts happen for a bunch of different reasons, and they happen to P4 teams, too.
I'm not opposed to giving the littles a chance, but I think the system should make them prove themselves in a more meaningful way. In addition to the current requirements, mandatory win against a P4 team during the regular season, conference champion, and top 15 ranking? I think that would be enough. And if there were more than one, I would make those two teams play in.
-
So the Little Giants can get in.
Seriously Max, I have toddlers who have a better grasp on logic than you do.
It is charity for crappy conferences.
Here is a game for you: OM 45, Tulane 10.
Here is another: Louisville by 14 over JMU.
It isn't "poindexters", everyone with a grasp on reality already knew that Tulane and JMU were not on Texas/Notre Dame's level because we already saw what happened when they tried. Tulane got smoked by the 5th (ish) best team in the SEC and JMU lost by two TD's to an ACC team that didn't even tie for the ACCCG slot.
Only toddlers and Max aren't smart enough to understand this.
Well hey, like a toddler, you both complain about the regular season not mattering and complain that the regular season matters too much. A masterclass in wanting it both ways, like the most annoying toddler.
-
Well hey, like a toddler, you both complain about the regular season not mattering and complain that the regular season matters too much. A masterclass in wanting it both ways, like the most annoying toddler.
Are you really this stupid or are you being purposely obtuse?
I was against expansion because I wanted the regular season games to matter but my side lost. Expansion is a done deal. The 12 team CFP isn't going away.
Now that we are here I'd like to see the 12 best teams rather than letting in a bunch of crappy tallest midgets who don't belong.
-
There's 10 FBS conference, and only the top 5 champions get a spot. The bottom 5 are left out.
-
Are you really this stupid or are you being purposely obtuse?
I was against expansion because I wanted the regular season games to matter but my side lost. Expansion is a done deal. The 12 team CFP isn't going away.
Now that we are here I'd like to see the 12 best teams rather than letting in a bunch of crappy tallest midgets who don't belong.
I'm disappointed in our general education on economics, is what I am. There are no solutions, only tradeoffs.
- I am a fan of Notre Dame and generally thought they deserved to be in over Alabama. My side lost, because they lost coin flip games to playoff teams and didn't play as strong a schedule as Bama. Under a "12 best teams" model, the TAMU-ND game and Miami-ND game are completely irrelevant to anything but seeding. Under the current system, they were critical games.
- The "G5" is half of football. Having a path for one of them to make the playoffs gives those games weight. Getting rid of that makes a lot of those games meaningless, too.
- We already have a problem with meaningless games because of the system. Indiana-OSU this year. OSU-Michigan last year, just speaking for a team I know well. Getting rid of conference champions and the G5 just exacerbates that.
- Finally, on a personal note, you are too old to be calling people names when they disagree with you on something like college football playoff formats.
-
So the Little Giants can get in.
Seriously Max, I have toddlers who have a better grasp on logic than you do.
It is charity for crappy conferences.
Here is a game for you: OM 45, Tulane 10.
Here is another: Louisville by 14 over JMU.
It isn't "poindexters", everyone with a grasp on reality already knew that Tulane and JMU were not on Texas/Notre Dame's level because we already saw what happened when they tried. Tulane got smoked by the 5th (ish) best team in the SEC and JMU lost by two TD's to an ACC team that didn't even tie for the ACCCG slot.
Only toddlers and Max aren't smart enough to understand this.
I do understand this grave injustice profoundly chaps your backside.
-
The G5 took Texas' spot.
-
I think the CFP will eventually expand to 16 to 24 teams, which will make the G-level team or teams more tolerable as part of the field.
In this year's case, maybe a 17-team or 18-team field would have worked. If there was 17 teams total, then Notre Dame, BYU, Texas, Vandy and Utah would have been added to the field, and JMU and Tulane could have essentially played a play-in game the week of Army-Navy game and the winner would play at Indiana. If you go with 18 teams, you could add USC and have Utah and USC essentially play another play-in game and the winner could play at Ohio St.
Of course, if you wanted to limit to only THE Best teams, you really only need 4 teams this year. Indiana, Ohio St, Georgia and Texas Tech. In other years, you might need as many as Ten teams. But this year really you only have 4 teams that "deserve" a shot.
-
Whoever went from 4 to 12 is a colossal, near-sighted money-grabbing dipshit.
-
The Notre Dame freeze out begins??
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/notre-dame-vs-usc-rivalry-hiatus-big-ten/
-
Always thought eight was a bit better than 12 for that step.
If we had the same results next year, Duke and ND would be in. Will be interesting if we get to a point where the insistence on “best” renders conference titles super meaningless. Lotta folks seem to want that.
-
The Notre Dame freeze out begins??
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/notre-dame-vs-usc-rivalry-hiatus-big-ten/
That was in the works for a while.
It’s going to happen not heavily for intentional reasons but because every league is going to 9 conference games. So you’re going to have to weasel out a bunch of schedule exemptions to get them games across the back half of the season.
-
We could get to both, if the decision-makers would stop getting in the way.
EVERYONE knows the SEC and Big Ten are a step above the others. Everyone knows the ACC and Big XII are a step above the G5. Why are we pretending that they do or should play on equal footing? It's that goddamn big fat lie again.
SO, the Big XII and ACC need to just combine their 16-20 best programs and cut the fat off. Create a conference that one could argue is similar to the SEC and Big Ten. THEN we can have those conf champs host playoff games, AND have big-boy at-large teams included as well.
Separately:
my problem with the 12-team format isn't even that there aren't 12 teams really in the running for the NC (there aren't) or that it's too many (it is).
My biggest problem with the jump from 4 to 12 is the decision-makers irrational aversion to a nice square tournament number like 8.
Why do we need play-ins or extra rounds or byes?!? WHY?!?! Here's the 8, here's the simple bracket, play it out. Done.
They get cute and extra when the assignment is simple and plain. WHY?!?
-
Finally, on a personal note, you are too old to be calling people names when they disagree with you on something like college football playoff formats.
LoL at this from you.
I didn't call it toddler logic because you disagreed with me. I called out your childish behavior because you stomped your foot, repeated the exact words used to defeat your "argument", and refused to engage and acknowledge the fact that winning a crap league isn't the same thing as winning an actual conference.
Act like a child, get called a toddler. Grow up, join the discussion in a logical way like an adult and I will not have a reason to call you a toddler.
-
OU went 10-2 vs a schedule with 8 top 50 teams on it.
JMU went 11-1 vs a schedule with 1 top 50 team on it and lost to it.
-
We could get to both, if the decision-makers would stop getting in the way.
EVERYONE knows the SEC and Big Ten are a step above the others. Everyone knows the ACC and Big XII are a step above the G5. Why are we pretending that they do or should play on equal footing? It's that goddamn big fat lie again.
SO, the Big XII and ACC need to just combine their 16-20 best programs and cut the fat off. Create a conference that one could argue is similar to the SEC and Big Ten. THEN we can have those conf champs host playoff games, AND have big-boy at-large teams included as well.
Separately:
my problem with the 12-team format isn't even that there aren't 12 teams really in the running for the NC (there aren't) or that it's too many (it is).
My biggest problem with the jump from 4 to 12 is the decision-makers irrational aversion to a nice square tournament number like 8.
Why do we need play-ins or extra rounds or byes?!? WHY?!?! Here's the 8, here's the simple bracket, play it out. Done.
They get cute and extra when the assignment is simple and plain. WHY?!?
What does that look like?
-
my problem with the 12-team format isn't even that there aren't 12 teams really in the running for the NC (there aren't) or that it's too many (it is).
My biggest problem with the jump from 4 to 12 is the decision-makers irrational aversion to a nice square tournament number like 8.
Why do we need play-ins or extra rounds or byes?!? WHY?!?! Here's the 8, here's the simple bracket, play it out. Done.
They get cute and extra when the assignment is simple and plain. WHY?!?
What does that look like?
It's questionable, but mine would be 5+3. Top 5 conference champs, 3 at large. Top 4 teams host at home in the quarterfinals.
Unfortunately you pretty much HAVE to give a spot to potential G5 teams. Whether it's the "big lie" or not, as long as we have the big lie that they're part of the same system as everyone else,
If you REALLY wanted to, you could put a minimum CFP committee ranking on the conference champs. I.e. you can't qualify unless you're top 20 or better. That would have limited us to 4 conference champs + 4 at-large this year, with Tulane getting in but JMU not. In some years it would allow 4 P4 conference champs and the top G5 would be eliminated.
But I agree with OAM on this... 12 is a terrible number. ESPECIALLY because the top 4 teams don't even get HFA; they get the bye but then they play at a neutral field. And as we all know, for any team not named USC or UCLA in the B1G, a "neutral field" bowl game is often a road game, commonly in SEC country.
-
OU went 10-2 vs a schedule with 8 top 50 teams on it.
JMU went 11-1 vs a schedule with 1 top 50 team on it and lost to it.
And still, I think JMU would give the Sooners a pretty good game. They are much more inept than Oregon on offense.
-
It's questionable, but mine would be 5+3. Top 5 conference champs, 3 at large. Top 4 teams host at home in the quarterfinals.
Unfortunately you pretty much HAVE to give a spot to potential G5 teams. Whether it's the "big lie" or not, as long as we have the big lie that they're part of the same system as everyone else,
If you REALLY wanted to, you could put a minimum CFP committee ranking on the conference champs. I.e. you can't qualify unless you're top 20 or better. That would have limited us to 4 conference champs + 4 at-large this year, with Tulane getting in but JMU not. In some years it would allow 4 P4 conference champs and the top G5 would be eliminated.
But I agree with OAM on this... 12 is a terrible number. ESPECIALLY because the top 4 teams don't even get HFA; they get the bye but then they play at a neutral field. And as we all know, for any team not named USC or UCLA in the B1G, a "neutral field" bowl game is often a road game, commonly in SEC country.
What I was asking is what a combined ACC/XII looks like. What schools are the "fat"?
I mean there are obvious ones, it seems, but the SEC and B1G have some of those too.
-
Ahh, got it. I guess I misunderstood the question.
-
Where would Indiana be if the B1G trimmed the fat 5 years ago?
-
Where would Indiana be if the B1G trimmed the fat 5 years ago?
Where they belong. The dustbin of history.
(Yes, I know my team would be there with them...)
-
Where they belong. The dustbin of history.
(Yes, I know my team would be there with them...)
My team would be there if it were to happen today.
-
The Atlantic XVIII Conference would be comprised of the teams that new, combined entity wanted.
If that were to actually happen, the Big Ten and SEC would need to even out, so either the SEC poaches 2 from the XII/ACC or they both go to 20. Let's just say 18.
If the SEC had unfettered access to any 2 programs, I THINK they'd do the once-traditional footprint expansion with UNC and UVA. If UNC wouldn't do it without another school from NC, that would complicate things. Let's just say NCST and VT to simplify things.
The new, combined conference would simply draft teams until they get to 18.
There would be enough backroom deals and big-monied handshakes during this time to make the old SWC blush.
The point is, you'd have 3 conferences of 18 each. These 3 champs would host 1st round games in an 8-team playoff.
The G5 would have their own playoff, funded by the big-boy conferences.
54 teams on an even footing would be great. So would 60. Hell, with 60 (20 ea), you could split back into divisions, have everyone play everyone else in their 10-team divisions, and all 6 of them could be in the playoff.
There's even, fair, square ways to do this that seem utterly foreign to the decision-makers.
-
Well, if the B1G and SEC each went to 20, that's 6 of the top programs no longer available for the ACC and XII to merge with. That conference would not be on equal footing in any sense.
SEC takes UNC, UVA, NCSU and VT.
B1G takes FSU and someone - maybe even ND.
What's left in the ACC/XII?
-
Well, it's not like UNC/UVA/NCSU/VT are traditional powers in CFB. So it's not like the ACC/XII losing them would necessarily upset the apple cart when it comes to football. It'd be a major loss for basketball, but given that the SEC isn't the most tremendous basketball conference in the world, it might be an appropriate rebalancing...
FSU/ND would be losses for the ACC/XII (albeit "loss" considering ND isn't really applicable since they're not fully in the ACC now).
But let's say, sure, you lose them all... Who would be worth it to get the ACC/XII to 20?
Traditional ACC schools you'd keep:
Clemson
Duke
GaTech
Miami
BC
Pitt
Syracuse
Cal
Stanford
Traditional XII schools you'd keep:
Arizona
Arizona St
BYU
Colorado
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
OkSU
Texas Tech
Utah
WVU
That's 20 right there. Could you maybe look at subbing out someone for SMU, TCU, Louisville, Cincinnati, Wake, UCF, etc? Maybe. Could you sub out someone like Boise St for one of the above? Maybe.
But I think you could get to a solid 20. It might still be 3rd of 3 in the actual pecking order, but over time as you're not diluting with schools numbering 61-13x for recruits, things might rebalance a little as some of these schools could start pulling in recruits. And you're in geographies that the B1G and SEC wouldn't be in, so there might be some local recruiting advantages for some of those schools. They might not be the most fertile fields, but you'd be unchallenged in AZ, KS, CO, UT, upstate NY (and frankly much of the Northeast might prefer Syracuse to anywhere else) and the Bay Area.
-
That group is not on par with the SEC and B1G.
-
That group is not on par with the SEC and B1G.
Maybe not right now.
But let's say you get things down to 60 schools. You start getting some level of unionization and a CBA, killing off unrestricted free agency the way we have with the current transfer portal. You start actually building parity into the sport...
Might it not balance out over time?
-
Probably not.
And if unequal revenue sharing takes hold, it won't even matter.
-
Dan Lanning says this game should be at Texas Tech. And he's right. If there is one thing the CFP should copy from the NFL, it's having playoff games at the home fields.
-
That group is not on par with the SEC and B1G.
No, but it's better than what they are now, 2 separate entities taking up 2 spots. Combined, they take up 1.
-
Maybe not right now.
But let's say you get things down to 60 schools. You start getting some level of unionization and a CBA, killing off unrestricted free agency the way we have with the current transfer portal. You start actually building parity into the sport...
Might it not balance out over time?
Even a stronger influence on gradual parity would be scheduling. All 12 games vs these 60 teams only. And with such a closed system, you could make it so all teams get 6 home/6 away games. No more payday games. No more cupcakes.
You know, an even playing field.
-
Even a stronger influence on gradual parity would be scheduling. All 12 games vs these 60 teams only. And with such a closed system, you could make it so all teams get 6 home/6 away games. No more payday games. No more cupcakes.
You know, an even playing field.
Why 60? Why not 32?
-
Why 60? Why not 32?
We already have 32. It's called the NFL. If college gets too close to being the NFL, it will wither away and die.
60 is big.
Lots of schools, bands, mascots, cheerleaders, etc. And yes, it allows for a traditional-looking bell curve, which I'll claim is a strength until I'm blue in the face.
Postseason teams with 11-1 type records >>>>> 9-7 teams winning Super Bowls.
-
We already have 32. It's called the NFL. If college gets too close to being the NFL, it will wither away and die.
YES!!! This is correct!
-
it already kicking in the doors to be all that w/o the benfits.The majority of these guys are still playing for little or S.A.s,it's a cluster F***
-
Why 60? Why not 32?
why not 70 or 80?
-
why not 70 or 80?
Because Oregon State. And UConn. And Kentucky. And Iowa State.
You need programs who want to commit, can commit, and will compete their fair share of the time.
That, combined with a number where everyone can play everyone else in their division/conference, yields the right number, between 32 and 80.
-
That group is not on par with the SEC and B1G.
Maybe not right now.
When the North/South Poles melt and 847s home is under a boat dock we won't have to contend with all of this.Of course we prolly won't be here either so sit yourselves down to a vessel of Eggnog with what ever spirit you choose and find some comfort there :111:
-
Because Oregon State. And UConn. And Kentucky. And Iowa State.
You need programs who want to commit, can commit, and will compete their fair share of the time.
That, combined with a number where everyone can play everyone else in their division/conference, yields the right number, between 32 and 80.
7) 10-team conferences with 9 conference games would include Kentucky & ISU, exclude Oregon St. and UConn
I think
I'd rather have them but cut out JMU and Tulane
-
Because Oregon State. And UConn. And Kentucky. And Iowa State.
Any specific reasons you singled out Kentucky and Iowa St?
-
https://twitter.com/SECShorts/status/2003465626778849754/mediaViewer?currentTweet=2003465626778849754¤tTweetUser=SECShorts
The best. 😂😂
-
I can't my head around Indiana's helmet, I really can't. Did they beat OSU? Huh.
These CFP games, to me, look close broadly speaking, usually the team with best TO ratio will prevail, and "experts" will call some "upset" amazing and a sign Team X is making a run.
Let's say Ole Miss beats UGA 38-35 on the basis of a 3-1 TO margin, though UGA outgained Ole Miss decisively, what does that mean? To me, it means the teams are pretty close overall and TOs were the main difference. But wags will claim OM is "on a mission" after Kiffin departed, blah blah blah.
That spread, to me, is too wide.
-
Any specific reasons you singled out Kentucky and Iowa St?
Kentucky hasn't come close to a conference title since before I was born. ISU...I don't think they've won one since before my DAD was born.
They're the chum. The fodder.
-
I was born before 1976, it does seem like it was a while ago. UK has some notable wins in the past few years. Every conference basically needs some pastries though.
-
Last conference title for Iowa State was in '12.
And it wasn't 2012.
-
Kentucky hasn't come close to a conference title since before I was born. ISU...I don't think they've won one since before my DAD was born.
They're the chum. The fodder.
Something the sport needs, as it’s constructed.
-
Something the sport needs, as it’s constructed.
It's fun to be chum.
-
It's fun to be chum.
If the super league comes, a lot of upper middle class teams are going to suddenly find themselves lower middle class, and as we know, it ain’t that fun.
-
I'm glad you guys agree with me.
But even including some chum, there's the bottom of the barrel that can be trimmed off.
I think 60 is good because it's 3x20, which is basically 6x10. It allows us to go back to 10-team divisions where everyone can play everyone else within their division. 6 division champs + 2 at-large yields a tidy, no-byes 8-team playoff.
It's too efficient to ever happen, but whatever.
-
Align the B1G with 20.
I know there are 6 schools that will NOT want to be joined with the PAC 4.
Mine being one of them. F that noise.
Do pods of 5. Add Arizona State (AAU member/PHX) since Furd and Cal won't collaborate with this.
https://btaa.org/ (https://btaa.org/)
Add one of the ACC schools. ?
ASU
UCLA
USC
fUO
UDub
UW
MN
IA
UNL
NU
UM
OSU
PU
IU
UI
PSU
RU
UMD
MSU
?
-
I enjoy mayhem and untidiness. Things don’t have to be perfect. Embrace entropy.
-
Well right now the Tide's still in it, is that untidey enough?
-
PSU
RU
UMD
MSU
?
Pitt or UVA for that last spot. AAU and all that.
One school that should be nervous is West Virginia. Not chum to trim off, but not a great program, either. Not strong on academics, no eyeballs to bring in. That's a good program that might get left out, ultimately.
They could very easily have won NCs in 2007 and 1988. Could have had an undefeated non-NC in 1993. Couldda, shouldda, wouldda.
They're too good a program to leave out, but things might not fall their way going forward.
-
Align the B1G with 20.
I know there are 6 schools that will NOT want to be joined with the PAC 4.
https://btaa.org/ (https://btaa.org/)
If the Big Ten was forced to split into divisions, I kinda like the idea of splitting the Big Ten into 3 separate 6-team divisions
North
Wisc, Minn, Iowa, Minn, Wash, Ore
South
USC, UCLA, ILL, NW, Ind, Pur
East
Penn St, Ohio St, MD, Rut, Mich, Mich St
Play every team in your division every year (5 games a year)
Play 12 teams in other divisions once every 3 years (4 games a year)
Then tweak it so that USC and UCLA play Wash and Ore more often and play Minn, Neb, Iowa and Wisc less often.
Also tweak it so that Wash and Ore play ILL, NW, Ind and Purdue less often and play USC and UCLA more often.
As a result it would also be tweaked so that Iowa, Neb, Minn, Wisc would play ILL, NW, Ind, Purdue more often.
-
two 9-team divisions
tweak that
-
I'm slightly amazed at all the "predictions" made about these games by "experts". I know I shouldn't be, it's click bait, and a kind of "fun" I guess. I'm not sure we have any expert anywhere who consistently beats Vegas. If we do, they likely keep it quiet. I know I can't beat Vegas, they have, well, the odds in their favor, duh. It's a remarkable "game" they devised taking advantage of the mathematically illiterate who win often enough to forget their losses and remember their good calls.
Does it make folks feel better is some "expert" predicts their team will prevail? I guess it does, but why? Folks would watch Game Day eagerly awaiting the predictions for their team as if any of it mattered beyond some theater.
Meanwhile, as I often note, competitive games hinge on turnovers and other unpredictable events. I thought Oklahoma beat Bama the first time largely on TOs, and when the score was 17-0 I thought "Well, I guess I was wrong." Then I was wrong thinking I was wrong.
It happens.
-
What cracks me up is Bill Connelly developed one of the best predictive algorithms in SP+, which has traditionally beat Vegas. ESPN hired him to bring it to them, and I'm not sure any of the "experts" have ever brought it up when making predictions.
-
One thing about Vegas is they set and maintain lines depending on how they thing the public will bet, not who they think will win. So, if SP+ does beat their odds, the public is largely ignoring it. If the public followed it, Vegas would adjust and it wouldn't. I think "popular" teams get favored more than lesser known teams because of public notice. Maybe Indiana should be favored more over Bama in reality, but Bama is getting a lot of bets because ... they are Bama, and Indy is not. But maybe there is a slog of pro money to offset that, dunno.
2025 college football SP+ rankings for all 136 FBS teams - ESPN (https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/46128861/2025-college-football-sp+-rankings-all-136-fbs-teams)
Let's see how well it does, it has Indy over Bama rather comfortably, UGA barely over OM.
-
I know I can't beat Vegas, they have, well, the odds in their favor, duh. It's a remarkable "game" they devised taking advantage of the mathematically illiterate who win often enough to forget their losses and remember their good calls.
You get a Yuengling, now I know I'm not "mathematically illiterate" more like the an eternal optimist - or was. But the underlined certainly describes the delightful degenerates in the collective I hung with for 15 yrs or so. And a lot of others who are cursed with a clue. Its just so much more than math though like factoring in intangibles - how injured is someone,accurate weather forcasting,who has whose number, HFA in certain places, who and how many don't feel like balling because they're already guaranteed gobs of green and just mail it on that day. And picking out other peculiarities, yet us forcasting Columos still thought we could figure it all out.
And BTW wagering was spring board for finding the original board as I saw the icon for fan forum/message board. CFN writers - Pete Fuital, Zemek, Cirminiello and the rest of the writers along with "Clucko the Chicken" (a coin flip) forcasted all the top 25 games weekly. And Clucko actually won the contest one year. So I showed myself in to the message board and hooked up with Carr is My Homeboy/DUDEK and Gatorama two M* Guys and we had some good/lively exchanges. So as Paul Harvey use to say "now you know the rest of the story"
-
I'm slightly amazed at all the "predictions" made about these games by "experts". I know I shouldn't be, it's click bait, and a kind of "fun" I guess. I'm not sure we have any expert anywhere who consistently beats Vegas. If we do, they likely keep it quiet. I know I can't beat Vegas, they have, well, the odds in their favor, duh. It's a remarkable "game" they devised taking advantage of the mathematically illiterate who win often enough to forget their losses and remember their good calls.
Does it make folks feel better is some "expert" predicts their team will prevail? I guess it does, but why? Folks would watch Game Day eagerly awaiting the predictions for their team as if any of it mattered beyond some theater.
Meanwhile, as I often note, competitive games hinge on turnovers and other unpredictable events. I thought Oklahoma beat Bama the first time largely on TOs, and when the score was 17-0 I thought "Well, I guess I was wrong." Then I was wrong thinking I was wrong.
It happens.
At a point, I don’t think many of these people think they’re “experts” picking games. For years, you’ve ascribed them expertise and then wondered about it.
People make picked because people who watch/consume enjoy people making picks. It’s just capitalism in action.
-
One thing about Vegas is they set and maintain lines depending on how they thing the public will bet, not who they think will win. So, if SP+ does beat their odds, the public is largely ignoring it. If the public followed it, Vegas would adjust and it wouldn't. I think "popular" teams get favored more than lesser known teams because of public notice. Maybe Indiana should be favored more over Bama in reality, but Bama is getting a lot of bets because ... they are Bama, and Indy is not. But maybe there is a slog of pro money to offset that, dunno.
2025 college football SP+ rankings for all 136 FBS teams - ESPN (https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/46128861/2025-college-football-sp+-rankings-all-136-fbs-teams)
Let's see how well it does, it has Indy over Bama rather comfortably, UGA barely over OM.
Vegas already incorporates those numbers or similar ones into their lines.
-
“Experts” in quotes. If the Vegas line includes SP+ then that can’t beat Vegas.
I think it is weighted by how bettors view things also.
-
way too many "experts" in the world
-
I watched a couple "experts" yesterday on Bama-Indy, Josh Tate and one other dude. Most of it was musings, which is fine, the bits were short.
I'm quite interested in this one. I always like seeing Bama get beat, especially by a team of "Nobodies" who are coached up, etc. (the image, not the reality). I have not seen much of Indy this season, so my own opinion is really copied from others, but I EXPECT Indy will stop whatever effort Bama attaches to running the D ball, and then Simpson has to have "one of those games".
It's also interesting to see Bama being disrespected in the media (experts again). The story to be written AFTER if somehow Bama wins will feature that aspect. Meanwhile, Indy appears to have no real "holes". They can do it all, and well. I read somewhere their QB is pretty decent. So, this could end up being over quickly and end something like 31-13 Indy. Or maybe Bama catched a break and a couple TOs and hangs around, if they can, maybe Indy panicks a bit?
Very interesting, more so than the others aside from my own rooting interest.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/gb1EwdY.jpeg)
-
two 9-team divisions
tweak that
Even Years
Norrth
Wash, Ore, Neb, Iowa, Minn, Wisc,
Mich, Mich ST, NW
South
USC, UCLA, , Ind, Purdue,. MD, Rut,
Ohio St, Penn St, ILL
Odd Years
Norrth
Wash, Ore, Neb, Iowa, Minn, Wisc,
Ohio Sr, Penn St, ILL
South
USC, UCLA, , Ind, Purdue,. MD, Rut,
Mich, Mich St, NW
-
what???
-
“Experts” in quotes. If the Vegas line includes SP+ then that can’t beat Vegas.
I think it is weighted by how bettors view things also.
Just call them what they are: The TV people they have make picks.
that’s actually an interesting space about the ratings compared to the lines. The lines should be incorporating some similar mathematical principles to what those ratings use. The ratings also come out first, so they probably do have an effect.
And I think the way it usually works is an initial line is set, but it’s only open to a small group of big bettors. Then that’s going to have an effect on the initial line movement. And then everyone else can bet and lines shift with betting patterns and news that would affect the line/betting patterns.
-
I idly wonder what percentage of total sports betting is by "whales", like wondering how much casino money is in the "back rooms" vs. the huge open floor. One sits at a blackjack table with a $10 minimum and 7 people, the casino is raking $70 per winning hand, which is roughly a bit over half the hands, and losing a bit under half. So, if the table is full, they are gaining something like $2 per round per couple of minutes, say $60 per hour, roughly. They probably pay out $30 an hour in labor and then other costs. Maybe they have 20 tables going, so mayb $600 net per hour? Very rough guess.
In a back room with say two tables, the wagers might well be tens of thousansds, so perhaps they pay out much larger sums, with not much additional overhead (comps would be greater).
So, maybe 80% of bets on sports is from "big money"?????
The lines always fascinated me, the kind of ranking I'd do is one using prospective lines from LV.
-
So Clemson and PSU are playing - what were they rated before the season kicked off?
-
So Clemson and PSU are playing - what were they rated before the season kicked off?
Preseason AP:
-
Urban Meyer on G5 teams in the College Football Playoff: 'It's not fair to the players involved' (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/urban-meyer-on-g5-teams-in-the-college-football-playoff-it-s-not-fair-to-the-players-involved/ar-AA1T5uo1?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=695021513d00495c839d42b5c1d4f2b8&ei=9)
-
So Clemson and PSU are playing - what were they rated before the season kicked off?
I told my friends that game is like 2 millionaires running into each other at a McDonalds.
-
Urban Meyer on G5 teams in the College Football Playoff: 'It's not fair to the players involved' (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/urban-meyer-on-g5-teams-in-the-college-football-playoff-it-s-not-fair-to-the-players-involved/ar-AA1T5uo1?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=695021513d00495c839d42b5c1d4f2b8&ei=9)
lotta things aren't fair
hell, the players could have went to purdue and not have been involved - would that be more fair?
-
Meyer knows about the big, fat lie better than anyone.
In 04, he went undefeated at Utah and didn't sniff the NC.
In 08, he won the NC at Florida over an undefeated Utah who didn't sniff it.
The G5 wants their seat at the table and have it, but the reality is that situation makes it even less likely they'll win a NC, because they'd have to do it on the field. They actually had a better chance at 84ing into an accidental NC when they didn't have a seat at the table.
They COULD create their own division of football and be realistic, identifying their own NC, but then they couldn't bitch and moan about fairness.
Bitching just to bitch.
-
D1 is already subdivided in football.
-
D1 is already subdivided in football.
Sigh.
Thanks.
Further subdivided.
You're on an IEP.
-
You want three levels of D1 football?
More?
-
I want there to be no big, fat lie.
Having Alabama and Ohio State in the same division as Kennesaw State is fucking stupid. And EVERYONE knows it.
-
The range of quality in FCS is more vast than that.
One of the conferences is non scholarship. It's basically a place for D1 basketball schools to park their D3 caliber football teams, and call it D1. Then there's the HBCUs....
-
Now I know you're arguing just to argue.
The gap between Alabama and Kennesaw State is VASTLY more than from Kennesaw State to zero.
So no, you're wrong.
But keep on keeping on.
-
That's just ridiculous. FCS powerhouse Montana is hardly even playing the same sport as non-scholarship Valporaiso. Yet both are FCS.
Bama lost a Bowl Game to pre-Pac 12 Utah. They wouldn't have even struggled against non-scholarship Dayton.
-
Urban Meyer can piss right off.
Fair? Fair?! FAIR?!?!
College football has never been about fairness. College football is rigged so that the rich get all the benefits and the rest get scraps.
Urban Meyer would have been pushing for Utah to be in the CFP had it existed when he was there, but then he went to two different schools where he benefited from the structural inequality of the sport, winning NCs at both schools. And NOW the SOB wants to whine about how it's unfair?
We saw what happened when he coached a team in a version of the sport that's fair.
(https://i.imgur.com/6Hp2k4t.png)
So how 'bout you STFU, Urban? Fair ain't got nothing to do with it.
-
That's just ridiculous. FCS powerhouse Montana is hardly even playing the same sport as non-scholarship Valporaiso. Yet both are FCS.
Bama lost a Bowl Game to pre-Pac 12 Utah. They wouldn't have even struggled against non-scholarship Dayton.
You must be really bored.
-
Now I know you're arguing just to argue.
The gap between Alabama and Kennesaw State is VASTLY more than from Kennesaw State to zero.
So no, you're wrong.
But keep on keeping on.
No. Kennesaw would probably be around a 30 point favorite over UMass. Would probably be a 28 point underdog to Alabama.
-
(https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ui=2&ik=26ccd07b8a&attid=0.3&permmsgid=msg-a:r5850414544604502252&view=fimg&fur=ip&permmsgid=msg-a:r5850414544604502252&sz=s0-l75-ft&attbid=ANGjdJ_7S_Mb6xP56kXNU1xhymf0NpSn5Ao6x_SNnwyUXPCddbfoE71M-4yXy1HbgzH-ky3pWyIvwj1zWwfwBb8kK16SvmLoXwH9oI3BejGIyztUIRf9Zf7zq7fKfW0&disp=emb&realattid=ii_mja8n39k3&zw)
-
You must be really bored.
Your argument is just absurd. Every other sport has a wide range of conferences, but it's all just D1, and all off the conference champions get an AQ.
In football they already siphoned off the lower half of D1 into a separate subdivision with their own playoffs. On top of that, the upper tier of D1 has a unique set up where they exclude the worst 5 conference champions from the playoff field entirely.
That's an obscene amount of concessions that they have made towards the exclusively of the CFB NC, but do you show even a modicum of gratitude? No, you grouse and complain that they don't make a third tier of D1 for the tweeners that are in between the P4 and the FCS.
-
I'm wrong for wanting a lie to end.
So sorry.
-
Lies often persist if people want to believe them.
-
especially if those people are judges and lawyers
-
Urban Meyer can piss right off.
So how 'bout you STFU, Urban? Fair ain't got nothing to do with it.
Ed Zachery
Coach Rhule has changed his thinking
a few years ago he was all for teams like Temple getting a shot, not after 3 seasons in the B1G
-
I'm wrong for wanting a lie to end.
So sorry.
What about the lie of "Look, they're 11-1! They're SOOO good!"
When 9 of the teams on their schedule didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the game.
You demand the patsies stick around so you don't have teams with records ranging 7-5 to 9-3 getting into playoffs in a league with actual parity, but then want the patsies to know their place and shut up once the playoff rolls around.
-
Lies often persist if people want to believe them.
especially if those people are judges and lawyers
or a message board iconoclast
-
Most humans, I think, are very susceptible to confirmation bias. It's rampant on social media anyway.
It's not "news" any more, but Facebook is getting even worse.
-
I'm wrong for wanting a lie to end.
So sorry.
I just want the games to matter.
So sorry.
-
I can't see how bowl games can really matter much at all, aside from to fans of the teams. It's nice when your 9-3 team wins of course, you can claim a 10 win season, but in reality, nobody else cares. Folks watch on TV because of the usual. The team gets extra practice time. Your younger players get a shot at some PT often as not.
But do I think it matters that BYU beat Tech? Nope.
-
Now, in the CFP, I get the point, we see the G5s USUALLY getting hammered, and the game is predictable. But not always, at least in the first round. I'm OK with one G5 getting in, it resolves some legal issues.
-
On bowls:
In 1973, there were 11 bowls. So 22 teams were in the club of "we had a very good season." It was prestigious. It did matter. It helped a HC have more respect. It was additional exposure. Sellouts or near-sellouts. Bowl swag for players. Warm-weather locations to enjoy.
vs
bowls are so meaningless, teams are turning them down
some are in freezing environs
no exclusivity
flooding the market, one is the same as another
no one in the stands
.
I guess it doesn't truly matter. But nothing really does. But if given the 2 options, who is actively choosing the latter?
-
TV revenue is the answer for any of this.
-
On bowls:
In 1973, there were 11 bowls. So 22 teams were in the club of "we had a very good season." It was prestigious. It did matter.
Now it's 12 that make the CFP. Even more prestigious.
-
TV revenue is the answer for any of this.
Sure.
But have things always been this way? Oh, I can make an extra dollar, so I'm going to do it.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Like gun ownership without training.
Like having kids.
People make money on all these AI videos and nonsense, but don't we all just wish they didn't? Being allowed to do something doesn't mean you should do it.
-
Money has always been a prime motivator.
-
What about the lie of "Look, they're 11-1! They're SOOO good!"
When 9 of the teams on their schedule didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the game.
You demand the patsies stick around so you don't have teams with records ranging 7-5 to 9-3 getting into playoffs in a league with actual parity, but then want the patsies to know their place and shut up once the playoff rolls around.
Meanwhile, the NFL may have a team waltz into the playoffs as a 4seed having lost 7 of last 9 games if they win next week.
-
Maybe letting the masses (and yes, their dollars) determine how you do things isn't the best plan.
There should be a middle ground between competition and entertainment. We've collectively gone off the deep end of entertainment and are no longer concerned with the competitive aspect.
I'm just saying, "hey, maybe that's not a great way to do it."
-
Maybe letting the masses (and yes, their dollars) determine how you do things isn't the best plan.
There should be a middle ground between competition and entertainment. We've collectively gone off the deep end of entertainment and are no longer concerned with the competitive aspect.
I'm just saying, "hey, maybe that's not a great way to do it."
We should let the perpetually complaining determine it! And do so in a way that makes it less like basically every other sport!!!
(It’s a bit funny that “competitive” is being used to reduce the competitive aspect, but doing to for the sake of entertainment)
-
So college football is way better for the fan today than it was 30 years ago?
Mkay.
Only complaining because the changes suck. Thanks.
-
So college football is way better for the fan today than it was 30 years ago?
Mkay.
Only complaining because the changes suck. Thanks.
In some ways yeah, in others no.
But the true complainer’s heart finds a way!
The competition/competitive interplay is interesting. A truer “competition” may in fact be less competitive.
-
Maybe letting the masses (and yes, their dollars) determine how you do things isn't the best plan.
There should be a middle ground between competition and entertainment. We've collectively gone off the deep end of entertainment and are no longer concerned with the competitive aspect.
I'm just saying, "hey, maybe that's not a great way to do it."
My issue is your "solution" conveniently aligns perfectly with what the money people want. You are the masses, here. Screw the little guy, make most of the games meaningless to ensure the biggest teams get the rewards at the end of the season. It's all there.
-
My issue is your "solution" conveniently aligns perfectly with what the money people want. You are the masses, here. Screw the little guy, make most of the games meaningless to ensure the biggest teams get the rewards at the end of the season. It's all there.
Ya my bullshit meter went off not sure what he intendeded to write but now it appears he's arguing against himself. The masses are the Blue Bloods and the punchers class right below(Top 25). And I absolutely agree the season HAS to count for something but the masses keep watching as the network numbnuts keep dragging the season out by placating programs that entirely have no business in the CFP. Cut the field down to 8 and be done with it otherwise the season will be poking it's ass in to Groundhog Day like the Sunday League. It's that absurdity that will drag the once great sport into the abyss
-
I'd rather go back to 1973 and hear others complain about that
-
No matter how things are redesigned, there will always be loud complaints by those who have zero influence over what happens, or can happen. I personally am through "redesigning" stuff I can't actually influence, whatever they do is "OK" with me, more or less, I may carp about a thing or three, maybe, but mostly in mirth. Nothing is going to satisfy everyone, or even most everyone, or even a substantial plurality, so we're doomed to constant complaints about anything that changes, or doesn't change. All sound and fury ...
And while it can be interesting perhaps to discuss ideas, which is fine, they wouldn't be perfect or near so even if implemented. So, I'm lazily just along for the ride, and if I can't stand "it", I'll just get off. That would be ... odd, because we're living through the heyday of UGA football, no other period has been anywhere near as good.
Of course, for Dawg fans, anything short of the NC is a catastrophic season.
If you can't enjoy watching .......
-
another reason to go back to 73 - no social media or message boards to give a huge voice to the unwashed masses
-
First you'd have to invent a time machine.
Better get cracking.
-
I know where there is an old DeLorean .........
-
Nothing is going to satisfy everyone, or even most everyone, or even a substantial plurality, so we're doomed to constant complaints about anything that changes, or doesn't change.
Two things in the world are known to piss people off...
The way things are...
...and change.
-
another reason to go back to 73 - no social media or message boards to give a huge voice to the unwashed masses
Another perk of the modern era: we are likely better washed
-
It’s interesting when you stop and really think about it.
Cutting out the little guys aligns with generating money, being more of an entertainment product,
matching the wants of “the masses” and designing competitive games at the expense of this being a truer competition.
And in a lot of ways, there is value in that Outlook and a good case for it (money, pleasing masses, entertainment value). But it’s good to align the motivations correctly.
-
Another perk of the modern era: we are likely better washed
well, we certainly have more and better options
-
First you'd have to invent a time machine.
Better get cracking.
Does cracking open a copious amount of Bud cans count?
-
My issue is your "solution" conveniently aligns perfectly with what the money people want. You are the masses, here. Screw the little guy, make most of the games meaningless to ensure the biggest teams get the rewards at the end of the season. It's all there.
You have it all backwards.
It's not "screw the little guy" to acknowledge they are playing on an entirely different competitive plane. It's not "screw the little guy" to have the best teams that earn it make the playoff. Letting in teams with bullshit high school schedules goes against everything we know from a competition standpoint. 11-1 and your best win is New Mexico? No, sorry, that's not good enough.
Having the little guy get his head caved in every year isn't screwing him?!? How's that?!?
And "make most of the games meaningless" how?!? Its' better for all the undefeated and 1-loss teams late in the year to not give a shit if they lose, because they're in anyway? Talk about meaningless games!
I can't believe I'm getting flack for wanting teams to earn it. What set college football apart was the urgency of the regular season. That is completely gone now. I want to go back to that. We must not be speaking the same language for you to accuse me of wanting to "make most of the games meaningless."
No, that's what we have now.
And also no, it's not a good thing to have like 15 teams' fans thinking they're still in it, for 'engagement' or 'exciting' purposes. It's bullshit, watering-down of college football. It's lottery ticket thinking. Fuck that. I'm tired of catering to the dumbest, barely-interested "fans." Fuck them.
What ever happened to making your product better in order to attract more fans? Our culture has fallen into a habit of catering to the masses to bring them in, and it's detrimental. Does it work? Does it make 0.2% more money? Sure. You got me. It works.
That doesn't mean it's the best way. Being a whore to the dollar isn't the best way.
-
JMU has lost all 11 of its offensive starters to the portal.
-
@OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) -- a serious question.
What is the "ideal" CFB championship structure, to you?
For the purposes of the question, you are appointed The Czar of College Football. You can keep the playoff or get rid of it entirely. You can split off half the FBS if you want. You can remake conferences and schedules as you see fit.
What is your idealized regular season, idealized postseason, and idealized method for crowning a champion?
(For the record; I know what mine is... Go ALL the way back. No bowl alliance / coalition / BCS. No playoff of any size. Play your games, go to bowls, and the MNC(s) are awarded by the AP and Coaches polls once all the bowl games are played.)
-
(For the record; I know what mine is... Go ALL the way back. No bowl alliance / coalition / BCS. No playoff of any size. Play your games, go to bowls, and the MNC(s) are awarded by the AP and Coaches polls once all the bowl games are played.)
Yes please.
-
The expanded playoffs were good in theory when they were going to add weight to winning your conference, but the ESPN machine will get it all unzipped. Now it will just be the 12 helmetiest teams every year, as long as they don't lose more than two games, or three if it's Bama. They will all schedule cupcake OOC schedules so that they don't lose more than two games, and the conferences will rig the schedules so that their traditional powers don't lose more than two games. CCGs will get cancelled, conference titles will be meaningless. The only way any other teams get in is if one of the traditional powers craps their pants, like Florida, Penn State and Clemson did this year. But they'll have easier schedules, so it's not likely. The regular season will be a bore fest outside of your traditional rivalry game(s), which won't really mean much in the grand scheme of things.
-
You have it all backwards.
It's not "screw the little guy" to acknowledge they are playing on an entirely different competitive plane. It's not "screw the little guy" to have the best teams that earn it make the playoff. Letting in teams with bullshit high school schedules goes against everything we know from a competition standpoint. 11-1 and your best win is New Mexico? No, sorry, that's not good enough.
Having the little guy get his head caved in every year isn't screwing him?!? How's that?!?
And "make most of the games meaningless" how?!? Its' better for all the undefeated and 1-loss teams late in the year to not give a shit if they lose, because they're in anyway? Talk about meaningless games!
I can't believe I'm getting flack for wanting teams to earn it. What set college football apart was the urgency of the regular season. That is completely gone now. I want to go back to that. We must not be speaking the same language for you to accuse me of wanting to "make most of the games meaningless."
No, that's what we have now.
And also no, it's not a good thing to have like 15 teams' fans thinking they're still in it, for 'engagement' or 'exciting' purposes. It's bullshit, watering-down of college football. It's lottery ticket thinking. Fuck that. I'm tired of catering to the dumbest, barely-interested "fans." Fuck them.
What ever happened to making your product better in order to attract more fans? Our culture has fallen into a habit of catering to the masses to bring them in, and it's detrimental. Does it work? Does it make 0.2% more money? Sure. You got me. It works.
That doesn't mean it's the best way. Being a whore to the dollar isn't the best way.
OAM,
There is a flaw with your argument. The flaw is, that you are essentially saying that somebody like New Mexico is always bad and somebody like, say Florida, is always good. And I'll concede that 99% of the time, you're right. But you can't just shut every team out who isn't in the SEC or Big 10, and relegate the ACC to Clemson/FSU/Miami and the Big 12 to.....I have no idea who would be the top teams there but we'll go with Texas Tech and Kansas State and TCU.
We always acknowledged that CFB is a flawed sport, and there are too many Div I teams. It's funny because we spent a lot of time arguing about how the regular season won't matter anymore and the playoff will ruin CFB but when somebody like Texas and ND get left out suddenly it's a bad system because.....surprise ! The regular season mattered !
So what if we've got a flawed system....it's always been flawed. Now it's just flawed differently. Personally I have always felt that no team outside of the top 8 stood any chance so I truly could care less if a 9-3 team or 9-2 team gets left out. They were never going to win it anyways. And as far as JMU or Tulane go they played by the same rules that everybody else played by. Every few years a team like Boise State will get good for a few years and get some prime bowl slot and everybody will complain that they didn't play a tough schedule and all that other bullshit but once a team like Boise State gets good nobody will schedule them. We all know Alabama, Florida, Texas A&M, and every other team in the Big 10, Big 12, and ACC really don't want to schedule good teams like Boise State because if they lose, they want to lose to another "equivalent" program. ND lost to the only two "real" teams on their schedule and still almost got into the CFP.
What they really did was find a way to get the #5-10 teams into the CFP, and give a couple of teams a chance to prove they belong, at the same time giving a couple of teams a perceived easy CFP win. Good for Ole Miss and Oregon. They did what they needed to do and are still alive. But they won't always be easy wins, sooner or later somebody will lose to an up-and-comer and it won't be pretty.
-
What is your idealized regular season, idealized postseason, and idealized method for crowning a champion?
(For the record; I know what mine is... Go ALL the way back. No bowl alliance / coalition / BCS. No playoff of any size. Play your games, go to bowls, and the MNC(s) are awarded by the AP and Coaches polls once all the bowl games are played.)
1973??
-
You have it all backwards.
It's not "screw the little guy" to acknowledge they are playing on an entirely different competitive plane. It's not "screw the little guy" to have the best teams that earn it make the playoff. Letting in teams with bullshit high school schedules goes against everything we know from a competition standpoint. 11-1 and your best win is New Mexico? No, sorry, that's not good enough.
Having the little guy get his head caved in every year isn't screwing him?!? How's that?!?
And "make most of the games meaningless" how?!? Its' better for all the undefeated and 1-loss teams late in the year to not give a shit if they lose, because they're in anyway? Talk about meaningless games!
I can't believe I'm getting flack for wanting teams to earn it. What set college football apart was the urgency of the regular season. That is completely gone now. I want to go back to that. We must not be speaking the same language for you to accuse me of wanting to "make most of the games meaningless."
No, that's what we have now.
And also no, it's not a good thing to have like 15 teams' fans thinking they're still in it, for 'engagement' or 'exciting' purposes. It's bullshit, watering-down of college football. It's lottery ticket thinking. Fuck that. I'm tired of catering to the dumbest, barely-interested "fans." Fuck them.
What ever happened to making your product better in order to attract more fans? Our culture has fallen into a habit of catering to the masses to bring them in, and it's detrimental. Does it work? Does it make 0.2% more money? Sure. You got me. It works.
That doesn't mean it's the best way. Being a whore to the dollar isn't the best way.
Again, chucking out the little guys is a push toward turning this into a better entertainment product to draw in more of the masses. I promise you, the masses want to see a big brand and not JMU. You yourself argue this is a way to attract fans.
You and the people most beholden to the dollar are comrades in arms. Congrats.
-
Yes please.
I remain extremely fascinated about what this would actually look like with modern outlooks.
it’s all well and good to say you want sports traders and inattentive coaches to pick champions, it’s another to actually watch it happen in real time. Shoot, the last time that stuff occurred, newspapers mattered and the internet didn’t.
-
1973??
1991 would suffice. That was the last year before the Bowl Coalition (92-94), followed by Bowl Alliance (95-97), and then BCS (98-2013).
Prior to that, there was no "system" in place to ensure #1 and #2 faced each other in the bowls. And in my mind, it was better that there wasn't. You played who you played, and then the pollsters sorted it out.
I remain extremely fascinated about what this would actually look like with modern outlooks.
it’s all well and good to say you want sports traders and inattentive coaches to pick champions, it’s another to actually watch it happen in real time. Shoot, the last time that stuff occurred, newspapers mattered and the internet didn’t.
Eh. You think it would be all that hard? At this point everyone can actually legitimately watch the games--perhaps not possible back in the old days.
And really, it's only at most 4-5 teams in the hunt come bowl season. It's not like they have to watch every bowl.
-
BTW I would also require a WINNING record, not .500, to qualify for bowls. So no 6-6 and not a bunch of extra bowls that then have to find 5-7 teams to field a game.
If we have 12-game schedules, minimum for a bowl is 7-5. And I'd drop it to maybe 20 bowls (40 teams), which should be sufficient to ensure that nobody has to go scraping for 6-6 or 5-7 teams to fill a slot. A bowl destination for just under 1/3 of the sport (there's what, 130 FBS teams now?) is fine with me.
-
I remain extremely fascinated about what this would actually look like with modern outlooks.
it’s all well and good to say you want sports traders and inattentive coaches to pick champions, it’s another to actually watch it happen in real time. Shoot, the last time that stuff occurred, newspapers mattered and the internet didn’t.
LBM Coach's Poll
(https://i.imgur.com/egX8U5E.png)
Sports Trader's Poll
(https://i.imgur.com/lKJWFnk.png)
-
BTW I would also require a WINNING record, not .500, to qualify for bowls. So no 6-6 and not a bunch of extra bowls that then have to find 5-7 teams to field a game.
If we have 12-game schedules, minimum for a bowl is 7-5. And I'd drop it to maybe 20 bowls (40 teams), which should be sufficient to ensure that nobody has to go scraping for 6-6 or 5-7 teams to fill a slot. A bowl destination for just under 1/3 of the sport (there's what, 130 FBS teams now?) is fine with me.
hell, make it 8 wins mandatory
-
We always acknowledged that CFB is a flawed sport, and there are too many Div I teams. It's funny because we spent a lot of time arguing about how the regular season won't matter anymore and the playoff will ruin CFB but when somebody like Texas and ND get left out suddenly it's a bad system because.....surprise ! The regular season mattered! So what if we've got a flawed system....it's always been flawed. Now it's just flawed differently. Personally I have always felt that no team outside of the top 8 stood any chance
Exactly
-
BTW I would also require a WINNING record, not .500, to qualify for bowls. So no 6-6 and not a bunch of extra bowls that then have to find 5-7 teams to field a game.
If we have 12-game schedules, minimum for a bowl is 7-5. And I'd drop it to maybe 20 bowls (40 teams), which should be sufficient to ensure that nobody has to go scraping for 6-6 or 5-7 teams to fill a slot. A bowl destination for just under 1/3 of the sport (there's what, 130 FBS teams now?) is fine with me.
You want to bake in an advantage for good teams, where they get the extra bowl practices, while the Purdues of the world don't?
-
You want to bake in an advantage for good teams, where they get the extra bowl practices, while the Purdues of the world don't?
Eh. If we can't get to 7 wins, then so be it.
We're not getting any bowl practices this year, but that's the penalty for being 2-10.
-
Eh. You think it would be all that hard? At this point everyone can actually legitimately watch the games--perhaps not possible back in the old days.
And really, it's only at most 4-5 teams in the hunt come bowl season. It's not like they have to watch every bowl.
I think it would be harder for people to accept that as a method of picking a champion. I think people have even less trust in those groups than they did back then.
there are problems with a playoff, but as base it does bring some clarity.
(there’s also something fascinating about those groups being tasked with that job, because they’re in a kind of terrible spot to do it. But that’s another conversation)
-
I think it would be harder for people to accept that as a method of picking a champion. I think people have even less trust in those groups than they did back then.
there are problems with a playoff, but as base it does bring some clarity.
(there’s also something fascinating about those groups being tasked with that job, because they’re in a kind of terrible spot to do it. But that’s another conversation)
Yeah, I get it. That's the reason that we always called it the "MNC", the mythical national champion.
But what I'd argue is that every step that we've made to make the system "objective" in determining a national champion has made the sport, overall, worse.
- We determined we had to get #1 and #2 on the field together. So the Bowl Coalition / Alliance / Championship Series was put together to do that. But ultimately some years there are more than 2 worthy teams, and some years there's only one and a whole lot of teams just worthy enough to create a debate about who is included/excluded. And then there's the G5 type teams that are basically excluded. Which in many ways is fine ethically, but creates potential antitrust issues.
- So because 2 was either too many or not enough, depending on year, we decided to go to 4. But that had inherent problems in devaluing conference championships... Winning your CCG was neither necessary nor sufficient to get into the CFP. And there were only 4 slots while we had 5 (at the time) power conferences. And it still had the G5 / antitrust problem.
- So to solve that, we went to 12. Top 5 conference champs (assuming in normal years that's 4x P4 + 1x G5, but this year was 2x G5) plus 7 at-large. Which has its own issues... By including the G5 we basically have OAM bitching about how we're letting in the tallest midgets while excluding actually really good teams. And we all know those teams are just cannon fodder--they aren't going to put together 4 straight wins against the best of the best. And you have people like me bemoaning the fact that at 12, the CFP has sucked ALL the oxygen out of the room which devalues the entire sport for about 110 teams every year. If it's CFP-or-bust, well, the vast majority of the sport is BUST before the first game is played.
So I say embrace the chaos. Are we going to argue about whether a bunch of AP reporters and chronically over-stressed college football coaches have selected the right MNC? YES! Of course we are!
That's the beauty of CFB. If you want objectivity, go watch the NFL.
-
Simply put, the old system like you mention, with a "Plus 1 as needed" caveat. In a situation like 2004, USC would play Auburn for the NC.
More thoroughly, I'd like to go back to early 90s conferences of 10 teams each and equalize things in terms of number of teams per conference and number of conference games for all.
The ACC would have to add, the Big East would include Penn St and ND, and so on.
An equal-footing, regional system of conferences, with no RB tie-in screwing it all up (1991, 1997, etc).
No big, fat lie necessary. Whether FBS, upper Division 1 is comprised of 80 or 66 or 40 or whatever number of teams, it's balanced and equal. Traditional bowls work, but we'd all want a 1 vs 2 matchup. Traditional bowl tie-ins after that are fine, if the conferences want them. Or keep it as it was back then, but having a site for a +1 as necessary (1994) as well.
The key is not pretending JMU and Ohio State are playing the same game. OSU is Formula 1 and JMU is a kid in a go-kart with a lawn-mower engine on it. Just stop it.
If Rice is still in the SWC with Texas, then there are no built-in obstacles to Rice winning the SWC and vying for a NC. If they're a cellar-dweller for 40 years, that's on them, but at least the format doesn't make them a 2nd-class citizen, their actions or lack of actions does.
G5 or mid-major programs are either in the group of conferences in this division or they're not. If no conference picks you up, then you're out. Go be in your own division and matter there, instead of being irrelevant like you are now.
-
Simply put, the old system like you mention, with a "Plus 1 as needed" caveat. In a situation like 2004, USC would play Auburn for the NC.
Ok... So it's one of two things. I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I'll let you clarify what you mean...
- Old bowl system prior to trying to force #1 vs #2, but with some sort of "extra game" if there are still major conference teams undefeated after the bowls.
- BCS system where we try to force #1 vs #2, but with the same sort of "extra game" if we determine it's needed based on major conference undefeated teams having a reasonable claim.
I'm not going to get into the logistical issues of an "extra game"... You'd be the Czar, after all. You can figure it out lol. Just trying to figure out which of the above you prefer.
-
I'd prefer a 1 vs 2, for efficiency-sake. Get it over and done with, why wait?
But if it was traditional bowl tie-ins, that's perfectly fine, too. If there's 2 undefeated teams after that, you have the +1.
The logistics are easy, if you prepare as if it will happen and then adjust if it doesn't. Yes, that costs money, but money is not an issue when it comes to college football.
There are years you'd have a 1-loss NC after the results of the bowls. If there aren't 2 undefeated teams going into the bowls, you wouldn't need a +1.
The larger point is, that in an even-footing format, there can't be egregious variances in SOS, if everyone has a normalized schedule format. SOS won't be a problem. So once you lose a game, you don't get to complain.
You may luck out and be voted NC, you may not.
-
Here's my feasible, going forward idea, from the SEC board, involving a playoff and realignment: Czar OAM (https://www.cfb51.com/sec/realignment-future-to-fix-the-damn-thing/)
-
Simply put, the old system like you mention, with a "Plus 1 as needed" caveat. In a situation like 2004, USC would play Auburn for the NC.
More thoroughly, I'd like to go back to early 90s conferences of 10 teams each and equalize things in terms of number of teams per conference and number of conference games for all.
The ACC would have to add, the Big East would include Penn St and ND, and so on.
An equal-footing, regional system of conferences, with no RB tie-in screwing it all up (1991, 1994, 1997, etc).
plus one is easy - 2 weeks after the Rose/Orange Bowl Nebraska plays Penn St. in 94 and Michigan in 97.
-
97
Indeed.
-
oops, 1997
fixed
-
When I'm bored and at the TV, I will pull up a Josh Pate segment. They generally are brief, he's fairly entertaining, and at times perhaps he notes something new to me, so a win.
I have no idea if his predictions are any better than mine, it really doesn't matter to me. Clucko might do better. I do wonder how many viewers wait with baited breath to see if he predicts a win for their team, and if that makes them feel better. Is that why folks would boo Corso if he picked against the home crowd? Probably not so much there.
Now, if MOST "experts" (using the term loosely) predict your team will win, it likely just means the LV spread is ~7 points or more. You can find that mark easily without watching. In CFB, a 7 point favorite wins about 2/3rds of the time, so it's far from a "lock" of course. But it should afford a scoch (?) of confidence, but the outcome is still in doubt.
-
@OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) -- a serious question.
What is the "ideal" CFB championship structure, to you?
For the purposes of the question, you are appointed The Czar of College Football. You can keep the playoff or get rid of it entirely. You can split off half the FBS if you want. You can remake conferences and schedules as you see fit.
What is your idealized regular season, idealized postseason, and idealized method for crowning a champion?
(For the record; I know what mine is... Go ALL the way back. No bowl alliance / coalition / BCS. No playoff of any size. Play your games, go to bowls, and the MNC(s) are awarded by the AP and Coaches polls once all the bowl games are played.)
This is it.
-
Now, if MOST "experts" (using the term loosely) predict your team will win, it likely just means YOUR TEAM WILL LOSE!!! - the LV spread is ~7 points or more. You can find that mark easily without watching. In CFB, a 7 point favorite wins about 2/3rds of the time, so it's far from a "lock" of course. But it should afford a scoch (?) of confidence, but the outcome is still in doubt.
-
What is your idealized regular season, idealized postseason, and idealized method for crowning a champion?
(For the record; I know what mine is... Go ALL the way back. No bowl alliance / coalition / BCS. No playoff of any size. Play your games, go to bowls, and the MNC(s) are awarded by the AP and Coaches polls once all the bowl games are played.)
I agree with RiffRaft This Is It and it if the coaches/writers choose differently have a one game play off. Settled,glad we got it sorted after all that stress I'm gonna finish off my 12 pk of Shiner's
-
(For the record; I know what mine is... Go ALL the way back. No bowl alliance / coalition / BCS. No playoff of any size. Play your games, go to bowls, and the MNC(s) are awarded by the AP and Coaches polls once all the bowl games are played.)
Agree.
I'll add-- go back to the conference alignments/bowl tie-ins from about 1983. PAC 10 exists, Big 8 and SWC exist, "Big Ten" actually exists, SEC is only 10 teams. I'd be okay with the Eastern Independents coalescing into their own conference as they always should have done, but other than that, early 80s conferences and bowl tie-ins.
Glad we solved that, let's move on to world peace which should be a lot easier.
-
They aren't winding it back to the stone age, boomers.
-
I agree with RiffRaft This Is It and it if the coaches/writers choose differently have a one game play off. Settled,glad we got it sorted after all that stress I'm gonna finish off my 12 pk of Shiner's
I say don't even have the one game play off.
What's wrong with a split championship? It's a beauty pageant anyway.
Agree.
I'll add-- go back to the conference alignments/bowl tie-ins from about 1983. PAC 10 exists, Big 8 and SWC exist, "Big Ten" actually exists, SEC is only 10 teams. I'd be okay with the Eastern Independents coalescing into their own conference as they always should have done, but other than that, early 80s conferences and bowl tie-ins.
Agree as well. But this is more selfish... Purdue probably won't win a conference championship more than once every 30-40 years in a 10-team Big Ten. But probably not more than once every 70-80 years in an 18-team Big Ten. So I'm just trying to improve the odds here.
Glad we solved that, let's move on to world peace which should be a lot easier.
What I don't understand it that it seems like all of us here, pretty much some of the most die hard of die hard college football fans in existence, all agree that's what we want to see.
And yet every single thing happening in the sport is going the EXACT opposite direction.
-
They aren't winding it back to the stone age, boomers.
Nope, which is why all we can hope for is edited old-timey conferences becoming the divisions of 2-3 super-conferences.
What's funny is that looking back, none of the old conferences had depth. UM and OSU completely owned the B1G since 1960. USC owned the PAC. Alabama and Tennessee owned the SEC. The Big 8 was especially top-heavy with OU and Nebraska.
Parity has gradually expanded, actually. The bluebloods became what they are due to decades of dominance. Like actual dominance, not the relative dominance that exists today with certain programs.
-
And yet every single thing happening in the sport is going the EXACT opposite direction.
I'm going to get a little ageist here, but when the evidence is so total, idk where else to go.
Somewhere along the line, the boomers decided the almighty dollar matters above all else. It matters above the general health of an entire industry. It matters more than doing the right thing. It matters more than other people's lives.
College football is no different. If you can squeeze an extra dollar out of it, you end a rivalry. If you can make an extra dime, you cause a 100-year old power conference to disband.
No, it wasn't always like this. And yes, the boomer generation is systematically extracting every last dollar from everyone beneath them because that's what they value above all else.
Now, cue the individual anecdotes as a rebuttal!!!!!
-
The Wolverines would like to wind it all the way back to whatever they did before World War 1.
-
The Wolverines would like to wind it all the way back to whatever they did before World War 1.
They were in a terrible rush.
-
Parity has gradually expanded, actually. The bluebloods became what they are due to decades of dominance. Like actual dominance, not the relative dominance that exists today with certain programs.
Well, I think some of what created that parity were actual NCAA governance decisions that limited the ability of the biggest teams to stockpile talent.
Decisions that have been undone by lawsuits and state legislatures :96:
Scholarships dropped from unlimited, to 105 (1973, partly or wholly due to Title IX), to 95 (1978), to 85 (1992). Amateurism limitations on paying players were always there (although who knows how much they were monitored/enforced in earlier eras), and limitations on player transfers were as well.
All of that was in the service of parity. Scholarship restrictions meant that the blue bloods couldn't just stockpile talent, and transfer limits ensured that smaller teams who actually could develop players and build a program around a successful coach could at least punch above their weight class for a decade or so.
But NIL and the unlimited [immediate] transfer portal turned the entire sport into unrestricted free agency. Which now means that the bluebloods who have lots of fans [and lots of money] can simply outbid others, only having to contend with upstart teams who have deep-pocketed billionaire donors.
-
I say don't even have the one game play off.
What's wrong with a split championship? It's a beauty pageant anyway.
hell, split the title in 94 & 97
THEN,.... have an unsanctioned game a week or two later in Vegas or some neutral field between Nebraska - Penn St./Michigan just for the helluvit, the money, and the fans.
-
Well, I think some of what created that parity were actual NCAA governance decisions that limited the ability of the biggest teams to stockpile talent.
Decisions that have been undone by lawsuits and state legislatures :96:
Scholarships dropped from unlimited, to 105 (1973, partly or wholly due to Title IX), to 95 (1978), to 85 (1992). Amateurism limitations on paying players were always there (although who knows how much they were monitored/enforced in earlier eras), and limitations on player transfers were as well.
All of that was in the service of parity. Scholarship restrictions meant that the blue bloods couldn't just stockpile talent, and transfer limits ensured that smaller teams who actually could develop players and build a program around a successful coach could at least punch above their weight class for a decade or so.
But NIL and the unlimited [immediate] transfer portal turned the entire sport into unrestricted free agency. Which now means that the bluebloods who have lots of fans [and lots of money] can simply outbid others, only having to contend with upstart teams who have deep-pocketed billionaire donors.
With the rosters back at 105, OSU/Michigan/Penn St can go back to signing guys that they don't intend to play, just to keep them from going to MSU/Wisconsin/Purdue.
-
With the rosters back at 105, OSU/Michigan/Penn St can go back to signing guys that they don't intend to play, just to keep them from going to MSU/Wisconsin/Purdue.
BTW rosters were never limited, just scholarships... You could have as many walk-ons as you wanted. Which in the NIL era, might be that you have a "walk-on" that would normally be a scholarship player, because his NIL deal was more than enough to pay tuition and it opened up a scholarship spot for someone who needed it but couldn't make the same amount in NIL. Now there's both a roster limit of 105 (reduced from unlimited) and a scholarship limit of 105 (increased from 85).
I think with NIL / transfer portal, though, scholarship limits are now sort of useless. Any player who isn't playing isn't going to be getting a lot of NIL, so they're not going to want to stick around. While that might not mean they'll end up at MSU/UW/Purdue, it does mean they're not just going to rot on the bench at OSU/UM/PSU for 4-5 years. "Play me, pay up, or I'm transferring" is the new normal.
-
A post-bowl +1 as needed is completely doable. Especially when you know the situation is possible back at the beginning of December.
-
A post-bowl +1 as needed is completely doable. Especially when you know the situation is possible back at the beginning of December.
But why is it needed? Will the world end if the AP and the Coaches choose a different #1?
Recognize that everything that has gone wrong for 30+ years seems to have come from wanting an "objective" national champ. It was behind forcing a #1 vs #2 on the field matchup. It was then behind expanding to a 4 team playoff, then to a 12 team playoff.
If we want to embrace the uniqueness of college football relative to the NFL, then maybe accepting that we might have two teams who are BOTH national champions at the end of the year because we have two different polls is... OK!
-
Poll the fans and players what they'd like to have happened in 1997. I'll hang up and listen.
-
Purdue probably won't win a conference championship more than once every 30-40 years in a 10-team Big Ten. But probably not more than once every 70-80 years in an 18-team Big Ten. So I'm just trying to improve the odds here.
Indians haven't won the Series in 77yrs at least your fans can hang their hats on the fact that they're amatuers
-
Indians haven't won the Series in 77yrs at least your fans can hang their hats on the fact that they're amatuers
My god, man! I thought being a Purdue fan was depressing.
But at least I can look down on anyone who lives in Cleveland with pity. I'm sorry for your existence, sir!
-
My god, man! I thought being a Purdue fan was depressing.
But at least I can look down on anyone who lives in Cleveland with pity. I'm sorry for your existence, sir!
We used to look down on Cubs Fans then the fickle finger of fate fixed us
-
Purdue won the B1G West once.
So they're better than Nebraska.
-
And Minnesota.
-
Brutal
-
What's with Bama? :043:
-
What's with Bama? :043:
Indiana.
-
Gotta love the post-Saban slaughters that Alabama goes through on a semi-regular basis.
My Bama buddy is texting me, whining how Indiana must have richer boosters, and how that’s all the difference today.
Bama’s boosters:
(https://i.imgur.com/0myYf6P.jpeg)
-
What I don't understand it that it seems like all of us here, pretty much some of the most die hard of die hard college football fans in existence, all agree that's what we want to see.
And yet every single thing happening in the sport is going the EXACT opposite direction.
In politics there is a saying that there are three kinds of voters:
- Voters who are definitely going to vote for you.
- Voters who are definitely going to vote against you.
- Voters matter.
The point is (was because things have changed somewhat) that your campaign needed to focus on the third category, the reachable voters because campaigning to #1 or #2 was a waste of time.
I think that the same concept is in play here. From a ratings/money perspective there are three types of people:
- People who are definitely going to watch.
- People who are definitely not going to watch.
- People who might watch.
We die hards are category #1 so the networks don't need to worry about us. They also don't need to worry about category #2. What matters to them is the "reachables" in category #3. The people who are somewhat interested in sports but not really into cfb. Those folks are probably a lot more likely to watch a playoff with a defined bracket.
-
Just got my tickets to the Peach Bowl.
-
Indiana is boring …..
-
Just got my tickets to the Peach Bowl.
He's yanking your proverbials LGP
-
Wow. Georgia goes down. Very impressed by Ole Miss.
-
Lots of extra drama at the end but wow, congratulations Rebels.
-
Indiana is boring …..
Georgia is not
-
Man, I got to say I’m really enjoying the CFP. Ohio State, Alabama, and Georgia are OUT. Indiana(!), Ole Miss are IN! And Oregon and Miami. Really looking forward to the next round.
This is fun.
-
Weird history and a conundrum for @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) :
For almost 30 years Florida has been the most recent team to win their first AP National Championship (1996). Of the four teams left in the CFP only Miami has prior AP NCs. So . . .
-
I don't think that, will have him rooting for Miami.
I don't know many people outside of their seventeen fans, that will be rooting for Miami.
As far as I'm concerned... Geaux Hoosiers!
-
Yeah, I can get behind the Hoosiers or Ole Miss. I know OM claims a MNC from way back, or maybe a share of the SEC championship. Either way I was very impressed by OM and IU.
-
Man, I got to say I’m really enjoying the CFP. Ohio State, Alabama, and Georgia are OUT. Indiana(!), Ole Miss are IN! And Oregon and Miami. Really looking forward to the next round.
This is fun.
Winner,winner,chicken dinner. For all of the sizzle & bombast ripping playoff expansion(in here),allowing the unfortunates in and NIL,portal,paying players. This was the push back,they may set record viewing if it's not for the fact BSPN is holding the CFPs for ransom.
-
I don't think that, will have him rooting for Miami.
I don't know many people outside of their seventeen fans, that will be rooting for Miami.
As far as I'm concerned... Geaux Hoosiers!
We have always said that Indiana football is America’s team.
-
of interest is the fact that all four teams in the semi’s have transfer portal quarterbacks who are both experienced and mobile.
-
so, it's a Blessing that Raiola is leaving
-
Yeah, I can get behind the Hoosiers or Ole Miss. I know OM claims a MNC from way back, or maybe a share of the SEC championship. Either way I was very impressed by OM and IU.
They claim three all from the late 50s/early 60s but never finished #1 in the AP. Part of that is because the final AP Poll back then was pre-bowl and in at least one of those years they almost certainly would have been #1 in a hypothetical post-bowl AP Poll.
-
So,
The 12-team playoffs have demonstrated that the previous only 4 in playoff may not have crowned the best team champion, eh?
7 of the 8 teams with a bye have lost their games.
Or, might it mean that a month-long layoff leads to poor performance, as the teams with the byes have been smoked in the 1st quarters of their games.
I guess those with time might feel like arguing. That's probably what they want us to do.
There was exactly one entertaining game in the quarterfinals. That's not good. Unless you count Alabama getting housed (like they did in their CCG) as "entertaining."
-
So,
The 12-team playoffs have demonstrated that the previous only 4 in playoff may not have crowned the best team champion, eh?
7 of the 8 teams with a bye have lost their games.
Or, might it mean that a month-long layoff leads to poor performance, as the teams with the byes have been smoked in the 1st quarters of their games.
I guess those with time might feel like arguing. That's probably what they want us to do.
There was exactly one entertaining game in the quarterfinals. That's not good. Unless you count Alabama getting housed (like they did in their CCG) as "entertaining."
Which of OM/UGA, and Miami/OSU were not entertaining to you?
-
So,
The 12-team playoffs have demonstrated that the previous only 4 in playoff may not have crowned the best team champion, eh?
7 of the 8 teams with a bye have lost their games.
Or, might it mean that a month-long layoff leads to poor performance, as the teams with the byes have been smoked in the 1st quarters of their games.
I guess those with time might feel like arguing. That's probably what they want us to do.
There was exactly one entertaining game in the quarterfinals. That's not good. Unless you count Alabama getting housed (like they did in their CCG) as "entertaining."
I for one thoroughly enjoyed the whipping Indiana put on Alabama.
-
Which of OM/UGA, and Miami/OSU were not entertaining to you?
I assumed he meant Miami/OSU and I was going to argue the point.
If I'd have been watching the Cotton Bowl as a neutral fan, I might have switched it off at halftime and if you only watched the first half then checked the final score it would have seemed reasonable to assume that Miami flat dominated the game and Ohio State simply scored a few garbage time TD's but that obviously isn't what happened.
The game was an abject disaster for Ohio State for their first five possessions. Those were:
- -7 yard 3-and-out.
- 16 yard 4-and-out.
- 3 plays for 53 yards (59 on one pass) Pick-6.
- 5 plays for 24 yards.
- 1 yard 3-and-out.
That totals to 87 yards on 18 plays <5 YPP for four punts and a Pick-6. Meanwhile Miami had:
- 3 yard 3-and-out.
- 8 plays for 42 yards then a fumble.
- 13 plays for 83 yards for a TD.
- 5 plays for 20 yards.
That totals to 148 yards on 29 plays (5.1 YPP) for a TD, two punts, a fumble, and a defensive TD.
From there through Ohio State's second TD drive, Ohio State did very well:
- 12 plays, 67 yards, missed FG.
- 11 plays, 82 yards, TD.
- 10 plays, 75 yards, TD.
That totals to 224 yards on 33 plays (6.8 YPP) for two TD's and a missed FG. Meanwhile Miami had:
- 8 plays for 18 yards, punt.
- 1 play, end of half.
- 9 plays, 43 yards, FG.
That totals to 61 yards on 17 plays (3.6 YPP excluding taking a knee at the half).
I was impressed with Ohio State's halftime adjustments. After watching that catastrophe of a first half I was happy to see the Buckeyes run three consecutive long drives with the only downside being the lack of points on the first one.
If I'd have watched the Cotton Bowl as a neutral fan, I'd have been entertained.
-
These 'new' teams on the scene and teams seeded below 4th winning a NC are just a continuation from 2014 OSU, right?
I don't think it says much about anything recent, but more about how there was nothing actually special about historical national champions.
Sure, '71 Nebraska beat 2,3, and 4, but maybe that 11-0 Michigan team might have given them fits.
Dorsett ran wild in '76 for Pitt, but it's possible USC would have held him in check.
And maybe Miami still upsets Nebraska in '83, but if Auburn or Texas was waiting in the next round, how could they possibly have brought another epic performance?!?
-
On Ole Miss:
They were the best team in 1959. Like Bama in 2011, they dominated their rematch with LSU in the Sugar Bowl.
But Syracuse went undefeated vs a drastically weaker schedule, so they got the NC.
OM allowed 2 points per game.
In 1960, OM went undefeated, tying avg LSU midseason. Minnesota beat the shit out of #1 Iowa, but then shit the bed the very next week against .500 Purdue.
Somehow, Minnesota went from 4th to 1st after a big win over 1-9 IU, while OM is penalized for a bowl win vs 7-4-1 Rice.
Basically, OM was penalized for being southern and segregated.
So was Bama in 1966.
'59 OM was the best team that year and better than '60 OM.
'60 OM deserved the NC.
OM's '60 NC is akin to OSU's in '70.....not really official. Splitting them between 2 teams is enough, a third is getting silly.
-
Which of OM/UGA, and Miami/OSU were not entertaining to you?
I didn't think that would be a hard question to answer.
oHIo looked terrible. Can probably be attributed to the layoff, but there will be no consideration for Tech having the same issue. For them, it's "the Big XII sucks" and is unworthy of having even 1 team in.
Ole Miss QB is a story. Some of the prettiest passes I've seen in a long time, and that flip on the scramble was Mahomes-eque. Played at freaking Ferris State for 2 years and jumped in the portal. Amazing.
-
I didn't think that would be a hard question to answer.
oHIo looked terrible. Can probably be attributed to the layoff, but there will be no consideration for Tech having the same issue. For them, it's "the Big XII sucks" and is unworthy of having even 1 team in.
Ole Miss QB is a story. Some of the prettiest passes I've seen in a long time, and that flip on the scramble was Mahomes-eque. Played at freaking Ferris State for 2 years and jumped in the portal. Amazing.
Interesting. I was thoroughly entertained.
Miami's defense alone --- laying wood nonstop, was fun to watch. (except for the part where a lot of it was Jakobe Thomas that portaled out from the Vols in the offseason. :()
-
I didn't think that would be a hard question to answer.
oHIo looked terrible. Can probably be attributed to the layoff, but there will be no consideration for Tech having the same issue. For them, it's "the Big XII sucks" and is unworthy of having even 1 team in.
The Buckeyes outgained Miami and had the ball with a chance to take the lead late in the game. You are tough to please.
-
oHIo looked terrible. Can probably be attributed to the layoff, but there will be no consideration for Tech having the same issue. For them, it's "the Big XII sucks" and is unworthy of having even 1 team in.
See if you can figure out the difference. Ohio State started out looking, as you said, terrible but got back into the game, outscored Miami 14-3 from mid-way through the second through mid-way through the fourth and, as @MaximumSam (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=2269) pointed out:
The Buckeyes outgained Miami and had the ball with a chance to take the lead late in the game. You are tough to please.
What more do you want?
By way of contrast Tech actually was MORE competitive in the first half and only trailed 14-0 at the half but continued to fall farther and farther behind.
The last time Tech was within one score was early in the second half and they ended up losing 23-0. Ohio State was within one score with one minute remaining and was within one score with the ball half-way through the fourth.
Tech also got outgained by almost 100 yards and did I mention that they got shut out?
Ohio State lost, I accept that but don't pretend they got completely smoked in a game that was within one score until the final minute.
Ohio State, Texas Tech, JMU, Tulane.
One of the above is not like the others, can you figure it out?
-
Ohio State didn't look terrible. They just started slow, and Miami played well. Georgia didn't look bad either. Texas Tech and Alabama were the two teams that looked like they did not belong on this stage. Same as Tulane and JMU last week
-
Bill Connelly always releases his postgame win expectancy and OSU was at 70%, so it's not like they got ran over. Indiana's was 100.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/N4Qlimg.jpeg)
-
We're still posting bowl records with 4/5 of the OL out, some dude with 3 carries on the season getting 20, and half the defense not playing?
Okay. Have fun with that.
-
Bama beat Kentucky 89-74 so they're a basketball school now
-
We're still posting bowl records with 4/5 of the OL out, some dude with 3 carries on the season getting 20, and half the defense not playing?
Okay. Have fun with that.
Ball don't lie
-
They are still in the mindset that this is pre-NIL SEC.
It isn't.
It should be a 2-bid league, once things get re-calibrated.
-
We're still posting bowl records with 4/5 of the OL out, some dude with 3 carries on the season getting 20, and half the defense not playing?
Okay. Have fun with that.
I did have fun with it!
-
the bowl games were not only played but they tallied the scores and winners were declared
if you're going to all that trouble, count 'em
I guess we're seeing who has the better team (program) with 4/5 of the OL out, some dude with 3 carries on the season getting 20, and half the defense
it's the same for both teams, so it's fair.
obviously, Iowa St, Kansas St, Notre Dame didn't want ugly bowl losses tacked onto their ugly reg seasons, so they backed out
any other team could easily have declined an invitation to take a loss in a meaningless exhibition bowl
-
Damn we as a society has lost our facking minds!!! Look what Joey Freshwater has raked in since leaving the Rebs in the lurch,according to contract FF$
Advance to CFP First Round: $150,000
Win First Round (Quarterfinal): +$250,000 (Total: $400k)
Win Quarterfinal (Semifinal): +$500,000 (Total: $900k)
Win Semifinal (Championship): +$750,000 (Total: $1.65M)
Win National Championship: +$1,000,000 (Total: $2.65M)
:o
-
don't judge society by lawyers, agents, egotistical coaches, and win at all cost SEC programs
-
don't judge society by lawyers, agents, egotistical coaches, and win at all cost SEC programs
You do realize Michigan is in the B1G, right? 🥴
-
but Joey Freshwater is not, .......... yet
-
You do realize Michigan is in the B1G, right? 🥴
You sir get a Yuengling
-
When Harbaugh realized what "or die trying" actually meant.
-
Big ratings.
https://twitter.com/rossdellenger/status/2008308953264935166?s=61
-
folks love to watch Bama get ass raped
-
What does everyone think about tonight's game?
Rematches have NOT been kind other than Ole Miss vs Tulane.
- Alabama lost 23-21 at home to Oklahoma in the 2025 regular season, beat them 34-24 in the CFP
- Ole Miss lost 43-35 at Georgia in the 2025 regular season, beat them 39-34 in the Semi-Finals.
- Ohio State lost 32-31 at Oregon in the 2024 regular season, beat them 41-21 in the CFP.
I think that Ole Miss beating Tulane twice is the lone exception but there are extenuatingcircumstances. Can Cignetti defy the trend?
-
om played probably as well as they could but at no point did it appear mia wasn’t the better team to me. great game. hopefully tonight is as good. & hopefully we cont to see variety yr to yr. i think iu is going to win it all which is just wild. the portal sucks but that’s awesome.
-
It's hard for me to pick against Indiana, they've made a believer out of me.
But I thought Ohio State was going to win it all, so what the heck do I know?
Didn't watch last night's game, but man, any outcome is better than Miami winning the NC.
So no matter what happens tonight, I'm all in on the B1G.
Geaux B1G!!
-
I nodded off in the 4th QTR and it was 19-17 Ole Miss held the lead with like 7 minutes and change.And woke up and yowzer I missed a hell of a finish :o.These have been great contests and I've missed because they were on half wit herbie's channel and I won't pay the ransome :(. Thankfully it was on radio
-
I finally made it home from Texas last night.
Game was going into the 4th quarter, getting updates from a buddy cause youse guys were slackin
I didn't pay the ransom either
looking at the replay this morning it appears pass interference could have easily been called on the Canes in the endzone - wish it would have been
-
ya was hoping for an Ole Miss V. Hoosiers for the hardware
-
Damn we as a society has lost our facking minds!!! Look what Joey Freshwater has raked in since leaving the Rebs in the lurch,according to contract FF$
Advance to CFP First Round: $150,000
Win First Round (Quarterfinal): +$250,000 (Total: $400k)
Win Quarterfinal (Semifinal): +$500,000 (Total: $900k)
Win Semifinal (Championship): +$750,000 (Total: $1.65M)
Win National Championship: +$1,000,000 (Total: $2.65M)
:o
It's even crazier when you realize it's LSU that has to pay him for those first three wins Ole Miss got, and not Ole Miss.
Any LSU admin who went to LSU or is from Louisiana probably roots against Ole Miss in general out of good taste, but recently they've probably been rooting against Ole Miss just so they stop having to pay that moron for games Ole Miss is winning.
-
I feel much better about it now that I've been assured that LSU is footing the bill
-
It's even crazier when you realize it's LSU that has to pay him for those first three wins Ole Miss got, and not Ole Miss.
Any LSU admin who went to LSU or is from Louisiana probably roots against Ole Miss in general out of good taste, but recently they've probably been rooting against Ole Miss just so they stop having to pay that moron for games Ole Miss is winning.
Wait... You're serious?
LSU's contract with Kiffin forces them to pay for wins occurring at another school--including wins that he's not on the sidelines as the HC?!
-
(https://i.imgur.com/tll3NUB.png)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/tll3NUB.png)
Make up call for that hatchet job, phantom PI call, to end the 2002 National Championship game.
-
Make up call for that hatchet job, phantom PI call, to end the 2002 National Championship game.
Yes. Refs really screwed that up. If there reviews back then, OSU wins in regulation. But they called PI on that key play. Everyone could see the call was blatant, intentional holding on the DB.
by the way/ good no call on the play during jail Mary last night.
-
Make up call for that hatchet job, phantom PI call, to end the 2002 National Championship game.
oh really so you didn't watch the whole game, there is a great snap shot of not 1 but 2 holding calls in the last two minutes that would have given the ball to tOSU to run out before the O.T.As well as the play you refer to that shows Gamble's shirt being tugged with the ball clearly in the air behind them taken from the corner endzone camera
-
Wait... You're serious?
LSU's contract with Kiffin forces them to pay for wins occurring at another school--including wins that he's not on the sidelines as the HC?!
Yep.
I'm no contract expert, or even a layman, unless it's oil and gas contracts in the state of Texas. I have several questions as to how it came about and I've wondered if it has anything to do with how his Ole Miss contract was written, since breaking that contract tends to affect how the next contract reads.
But multiple credible LSU-related outlets have talked about the payments Nubbz posted, and that it's LSU who is paying for them.
-
That's goddamned ridiculous.
Now, I kinda see the point from Kiffin's perspective... He's asking LSU:
"How much do you really want me? If I stay just another couple of weeks I might be in line for some pretty massive payouts. If you really want me, you'll compensate me for forgoing that."
But to write it into the contract in a way that gives him exactly the same amount of money, contingent on the same outcomes, for which he is no longer involved? That's BS. Negotiate out some signing bonus or whatever that makes him whole for what he's giving up but without actually making it LOOK like you're making him whole for what he's giving up.
-
oh really so you didn't watch the whole game, there is a great snap shot of not 1 but 2 holding calls in the last two minutes that would have given the ball to tOSU to run out before the O.T.As well as the play you refer to that shows Gamble's shirt being tugged with the ball clearly in the air behind them taken from the corner endzone camera
Mission accomplished. :)
-
That's goddamned ridiculous.
Now, I kinda see the point from Kiffin's perspective... He's asking LSU:
"How much do you really want me? If I stay just another couple of weeks I might be in line for some pretty massive payouts. If you really want me, you'll compensate me for forgoing that."
But to write it into the contract in a way that gives him exactly the same amount of money, contingent on the same outcomes, for which he is no longer involved? That's BS. Negotiate out some signing bonus or whatever that makes him whole for what he's giving up but without actually making it LOOK like you're making him whole for what he's giving up.
I figured LSU didn't have much confidence in Ole Miss past the Tulane game --- without their fearless leader. I'm betting it cost them more than they anticipated.
-
I figured LSU didn't have much confidence in Ole Miss past the Tulane game --- without their fearless leader. I'm betting it cost them more than they anticipated.
IMHO the dollar amounts are so silly with this stuff that worrying about whether it cost more than LSU anticipated is being penny wise and pound foolish...
Paying extra just so you don't have these terrible optics is worth it. You've lost the news cycle, look ridiculous, and he's barely been the coach for a month.
-
IMHO the dollar amounts are so silly with this stuff that worrying about whether it cost more than LSU anticipated is being penny wise and pound foolish...
Paying extra just so you don't have these terrible optics is worth it. You've lost the news cycle, look ridiculous, and he's barely been the coach for a month.
The news cycle doesn't mean diddly poop if he is winning big in Baton Rouge next year.
Negative PR will disappear like a fart in a whirlwind --- and this moment will reside in the dustbin, if anyone remembers, or cares, at all.
-
About 45 minutes from the stadium for tonight’s game. It’s 85/15 or even 90/10 IU fans to Oregon fans. This is a home game for IU. It will be the rare neutral site game where a team has to deal with crowd noise. Oregon might have to silent count.
-
Mission accomplished. :)
Na,you believed it, don't lie but at least the good guys beat TWO S-E-C UTs last season.So we have that going for us
-
Go Ducks! 🦆
-
Na,you believed it, don't lie but at least the good guys beat TWO S-E-C UTs last season.So we have that going for us
I did believe it then, and still believe it today. But the point was to be humorous and rile up you Buckeyes.
Mission accomplished.
PS…it’s about time yall figured out how to beat an SEC team. Congrats.
-
um no you should be a referee because you missed a great game
-
um no you should be a referee because you missed a great game
(https://i.imgur.com/KwkcjwK.gif)
-
At this rate we have to start talking Indiana among the greatest teams ever if they win the whole thing
-
At this rate we have to start talking Indiana among the greatest teams ever if they win the whole thing
Dominant.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/KwkcjwK.gif)
(https://i.imgur.com/bM2ovak.png)
-
At this rate we have to start talking Indiana among the greatest teams ever if they win the whole thing
whatever
-
At this rate we have to start talking Indiana among the greatest teams ever if they win the whole thing
You shut your whore mouth.
-
Ed Zachery
95 Huskers!
-
The Big Ten might have to reconsider Oregon’s membership. It’s embarrassing that a school would be humiliated like this in the semifinals.
-
Ed Zachery
95 Huskers!
You shut your whore mouth.
-
Go Ducks! 🦆
Sorry dude, not your night.
-
The Big Ten might have to reconsider Oregon’s membership. It’s embarrassing that a school would be humiliated like this in the semifinals.
Love it Hoosiers talking smack,and Mark Cuban is queuing it up so it will continue
-
On the plus side Ohio State will finish 12-2 with close losses to the National Champions and the runner up. Not bad for a rebuilding year off of an NC and with two new coordinators.
-
just how bad is Texas Tech's offense?
-
https://twitter.com/slmandel/status/2009788200173363294?s=61
-
On the plus side Ohio State will finish 12-2 with close losses to the National Champions and the runner up. Not bad for a rebuilding year off of an NC and with two new coordinators.
This is kinda what I came on to post. Ohio State's close loss to IU turned out to be REEEEEEEEALLY impressive.
-
At this rate we have to start talking Indiana among the greatest teams ever if they win the whole thing
Indeed.
-
This is kinda what I came on to post. Ohio State's close loss to IU turned out to be REEEEEEEEALLY impressive.
Initially I thought that the bad loss was losing to Indiana but now it looks like that was a "good" loss and the bad one was losing to Miami.
Since you are more neutral than I, how would you rank the teams after the NC participants? Are the other two semi-finalists automatically 3/4 or no?
-
That's goddamned ridiculous.
Now, I kinda see the point from Kiffin's perspective... He's asking LSU:
"How much do you really want me? If I stay just another couple of weeks I might be in line for some pretty massive payouts. If you really want me, you'll compensate me for forgoing that."
But to write it into the contract in a way that gives him exactly the same amount of money, contingent on the same outcomes, for which he is no longer involved? That's BS. Negotiate out some signing bonus or whatever that makes him whole for what he's giving up but without actually making it LOOK like you're making him whole for what he's giving up.
I had a friend do this with a regular job. She was like a month and a half from a bonus and some stock vesting, and got the other job to give her that bonus and the stock.
-
Sorry dude, not your night.
That is a REALLY apt comparison...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBiewQrpBBA
The premise of "not your night" was that the mob had the fix in on the other guy team...
If *that's* what you're going for... I totally understand.
-
Initially I thought that the bad loss was losing to Indiana but now it looks like that was a "good" loss and the bad one was losing to Miami.
Since you are more neutral than I, how would you rank the teams after the NC participants? Are the other two semi-finalists automatically 3/4 or no?
Well my first thought is, "is Miami even 2nd?" But they are.
Looking at the seeds, OSU at 2 had the 'worst' loss in terms of seeding, but now it's not so bad.
TT us out of the top 5, obviously, Georgia is the tough one to rank.
I'd have Ole Miss 3rd, Georgia/Oregon 4th/5th maybe....then OSU.
As bad as Oregon's loss is to IU, their win over TT was big.
Maybe UGA-OSU-UO, in that order. It doesn't really matter, it's just splitting hairs. The thing about OSU is that it hurts your ranking, losing your final 2 games.
-
Just got home from an awesome night hanging out with friends, after a memorial service earlier today for a friend who left us way too young. Made me hug my kids a liitle extra tight today.
But aside from that-- holy cow, Indiana. This team is just killing it right now. So impressive.
-
Go Ducks! 🦆
You need to wash your mouth out with Lava soap.
-
The Big Ten might have to reconsider Oregon’s membership. It’s embarrassing that a school would be humiliated like this in the semifinals.
They can F right off and get out now.
fOregon
-
Just got home from an awesome night hanging out with friends, after a memorial service earlier today for a friend who left us way too young. Made me hug my kids a liitle extra tight today.
But aside from that-- holy cow, Indiana. This team is just killing it right now. So impressive.
Had one right before Christmas and another last Sunday
-
I'll bet Cincy has changed his mind about the Hoosiers
-
being in an alternate universe where iu is the best team in the country wasn’t enough now they are ****kicking all of the powers. got to be surreal to be a hoosier rn. good for them.
-
If Miami plays against Indiana the way they did most of the game against Ole Miss, they're gonna get crushed.
One thing is clear: we know who the black hat is in this game.
-
One thing is clear: we know who the black hat is in this game.
Yeah, I'd find it difficult to root for Miami even against the other scUM.
-
How would you rank A&M? I think statistically we beat them almost everywhere except the score board.
-
How would you rank A&M? I think statistically we beat them almost everywhere except the score board.
I think there are arguments either way for the entire group right behind the top 2.
1/2 will obviously be the NC participants.
After that will be a slew of 12-2 teams and 13-2 Ole Miss.
The argument I'd make for my Buckeyes is that they clearly have the best losses. aTm's loss to Miami is probably better that tOSU's but aTm's loss to Texas is clearly worse at this point than tOSU's loss to IU.
It is going to be splitting hairs.
-
8 - Oklahoma
9 - Alabama.................winner vs 1 - Indiana
5 - Oregon
12 - James Madison......winner vs 4 - Texas Tech
7 - Texas A&M
10 - Miami...................winner vs 2 - OSU
6 - Ole Miss
11 - Tulane..................winner vs 3 - Georgia
In hindsight Should have been this
8 - Texas A&M
9 - BYU.................winner vs 1 - Indiana
5 - Oregon
12 - James Madison......winner vs 4 - Texas Tech
7 - Ole Miss
10 - Notre Dame...................winner vs 2 - OSU
6 - Miami
11 - Tulane..................winner vs 3 - Georgia
Oklahoma and Bama out. Notre Dame and BYU in. Then tweak the matchups to avoid rematches and games against the same conference
-
They can F right off and get out now.
fOregon
(https://i.imgur.com/5I5m8Xc.png)
-
I think Badge has Oregon induced tourette syndrome. ;D
-
shhhh, he's busy watching basketball right now
-
shhhh, he's busy watching basketball right now
I was out fishing.
Got three nice tunas.
-
missed a good game in Ann Arbor
-
(https://fishingbooker.com/blog/media/2022/11/Bluefin-Tuna-Fishing-in-San-Diego-Why.jpg)
-
How would you rank A&M?
Somewhere behind Texas, obviously.
-
Somewhere behind Texas, obviously.
What's your pecking order for the FBS Texas teams?
Essentially who would you root for if they were playing each other?
Obvious Texas would be first, and aTm would be last. What about the others?
-
This is kinda what I came on to post. Ohio State's close loss to IU turned out to be REEEEEEEEALLY impressive.
(https://i.imgur.com/9XmfsLf.png)
-
What's your pecking order for the FBS Texas teams?
Essentially who would you root for if they were playing each other?
Obvious Texas would be first, and aTm would be last. What about the others?
Hmmm, probably something like...
UTSA
Texas State
UTEP
Rice
SMU
TCU
Houston
Baylor
And I'd actually pull for A&M over Baylor. I'd root for almost anyone over Baylor.
-
https://twitter.com/pftcommenter/status/2010210769544348082?s=46&t=EHozF964Pc_xZmTZKPCcEA
-
Hmmm, probably something like...
UTSA
Texas State
UTEP
Rice
SMU
TCU
Houston
Baylor
And I'd actually pull for A&M over Baylor. I'd root for almost anyone over Baylor.
Honestly I end up rooting for A&M quite a bit, but I'm not necessarily a faithful representative of all Longhorn sentiment. My marriage to my i s c & a aggie wife has somewhat compromised my values. ;)
-
Are you moving them up in the pecking order?
-
Nah. It's complicated. :)
-
And I'd actually pull for A&M over Baylor. I'd root for almost anyone over Baylor.
Man, you run one little rape-ring, and people just can't get over it......
-
Nah. It's complicated. :)
*smart man*
-
Man, you run one little rape-ring, and people just can't get over it......
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozQXl17VpG0
-
Posters familiar with me may remember that I rank the closeness of a game by time, ie when was it 'over' as opposed to final score. The theory here is that a 17 point game where the leading team scored in the final seconds to make it 17 isn't all that different from a 3 point game where the trailing team scored in the final seconds to make it 3. By that standard the CFP games have really been very good for the most part. My ranking of the 10 CFP games so far:
- 00:00 Miami 31 over Ole Miss 27: Miami scored the game-winning TD with just 00:18 to go but still had to hold off a final drive that got to midfield.
- 00:06 Ole Miss 39 over UGA 34: Ole Miss' FG with 0:06 to go made it 37-34 and ended it.
- 00:24 Miami 10 over aTm 3: Miami scored the winning TD with less than two minutes to go but then aTm drove all the way to the Miami 5 where they had a 1st and goal. Unfortunately for aTm that resulted in two incomplete passes then an interception with just 24 seconds to go.
- 1:46 Miami 24 over Ohio State 14: In theory you could argue that it wasn't really over until Miami scored the final TD but I'm going with 1:46 because at that point Miami converted a 3rd and 4 at the tOSU 20 with a 14 yard pass to give them a 1st and Goal situation. I'm asserting that it wasn't over before that because a stop there means a FG attempt and even assuming that Miami makes the FG, Ohio State gets the ball back down 6 with about a minute and a half to play.
- 2:53 Alabama 34 over Oklahoma 24: Weird game. Oklahoma jumped out 17-0 then gave up 27 straight, then got back within a FG then got down 34-24 which ended up being the final score. While trailing 34-24 Oklahoma missed a 36 yard FG that would have made it a one-score game with 2:53 to go. Once they missed that, it was over.
- 6:53 Oregon 23 over TxTech 0: You could argue for earlier but it was only 13-0 heading into the 4th quarter and it was still a two-score game after Oregon's FG early in the 4th quarter. Trailing 16-0, TxTech had the ball at their own 30 with just under 7 minutes to go facing a 4th down. When they didn't get it, the game was over.
- 14:21 Indiana 38 over Alabama 3: You could argue for earlier but it was a three score game going into the 4th quarter. Indiana's TD with 14:21 to go made it a four score game and ended it.
- 14:55 Ole Miss 41 over Tulane 10: You could make an argument for the game being over sometime in the third quarter but when the fourth quarter started it was 27-3 which is technically a three score game so maybe . . . That said, it was definitely over once Ole Miss scored early in the 4th to make it 34-3.
- 22:05 Oregon 51 over JMU 34: You could argue that this was over at halftime at 34-6 but JMU got a TD on their first possession of the second half so maybe . . . Oregon answered with a TD so it was arguably over at 41-13 with 25:24 to go but then they traded punts. It was absolutely over when Oregon blocked a JMU punt for a TD to make it 48-13 with 22:05 to go.
- 23:52 Indiana 56 over Oregon 22: It was arguably over at halftime with Indiana up 35-7 but it was definitely over when they took the second half kickoff, held the ball for a little over 6 minutes, and scored to make it 42-7.
Other than the two charity cases and Indiana running roughshod over everyone in their path the games have been great. In the bottom half of the bracket every game except Ole Miss' easy win over Tulane has been decided in the final two minutes.
-
So who do you have winning the NCG?
-
I’ve been terrible at this. I picked Ohio State over Miami, Georgia over Ole Miss. but I really like Indiana. They’re undefeated, and they won their conference, the Big 10. Miami did not win the ACC. I felt like A&M matched up really well with Miami, and we did. Just came up a little short at the end. But I think destiny favors Indiana.
-
Yeah I thought Ohio State was going to win it all again. Other than that I've guessed correctly.
At this point it's very hard to pick against Indiana. And I'd absolutely prefer to see them win over Miami. Of course, I'd pull for 97.2% of college teams against Miami.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/tClZ0qh.png)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/tClZ0qh.png)
Three for IU? I know they've already got two, but I can't think of any other time since 1997 that they would have finished in the top 12...
And frankly due to the auto-bids, they'd probably have to finish top 10...
-
Three for IU? I know they've already got two, but I can't think of any other time since 1997 that they would have finished in the top 12...
And frankly due to the auto-bids, they'd probably have to finish top 10...
Yeah I can't comment on the veracity of it. It's a social media infographic, you want fact-checking too???
Given the number of G5s present though, I'd say that the originator did at least attempt to respect the auto-bids, which would mean it's not just a "final AP Top 12" or "final BCS ranking" kind of list.
-
Once you get below 10, it's starting to be a pretty sad collection of teams. A few good seasons here and there, obviously.
-
Once you get below 10, it's starting to be a pretty sad collection of teams. A few good seasons here and there, obviously.
icwudt
(https://i.imgur.com/jB4BMyo.png)
-
RichRod and Hoke combined for a lot of lean years.
-
Yeah I can't comment on the veracity of it. It's a social media infographic, you want fact-checking too???
Given the number of G5s present though, I'd say that the originator did at least attempt to respect the auto-bids, which would mean it's not just a "final AP Top 12" or "final BCS ranking" kind of list.
😂😂. “ you want fact checking too??”
Laughed out loud on that one.
-
I figured the Badgers would have had a few, being B1G champs (or close) so many times since 1997.
-
Once you get below 10, it's starting to be a pretty sad collection of teams. A few good seasons here and there, obviously.
watch it!
-
https://twitter.com/tomfornelli/status/2012208226939359478?s=46&t=EHozF964Pc_xZmTZKPCcEA
-
watch it!
Do all four of the potential appearances belong to Solich? Or did Pelini sneak one in there somewhere?
-
Yeah I can't comment on the veracity of it. It's a social media infographic, you want fact-checking too???
Given the number of G5s present though, I'd say that the originator did at least attempt to respect the auto-bids, which would mean it's not just a "final AP Top 12" or "final BCS ranking" kind of list.
TBH, if it had said "2" for IU, I wouldn't have said anything...
(https://i.imgur.com/pps7wVH.png)
-
Of course, I'd pull for 97.2% of college teams against Miami.
Only 97.2%? For me I think it is >99%. I can only think of one team that I'd actually pull for Miami against.
-
I figured the Badgers would have had a few, being B1G champs (or close) so many times since 1997.
Yeah you know, you're right. This infrographic seems like it might be very wrong. If you can't trust the internet, who can you trust???
-
Only 97.2%? For me I think it is >99%. I can only think of one team that I'd actually pull for Miami against.
I got a lot of hate for Baylor and Penn State, you know, the rapey schools.
-
It's a social media infographic, you want fact-checking too???
FWIW, I added up the appearances and at least that checks out. There are 336 appearances listed and 1998-2025 is 28 years and 28*12=336.
- tOSU, OU, Bama, and UGA each have more than half. Unsurprisingly, Ohio State is the most consistent with 22 hypothetical appearances in 28 years. That is just shy of 80% or almost four every five years.
- Oregon, Florida, LSU, Penn State, Clemson, FSU, ND, TX, USC, KSU, and M are all over 1/3 so better than one appearance every 3 years.
- UW is better than 1/4.
- Auburn, Boise, Miami, and VaTech would be averaging one appearance every 4 years.
-
Ok... So it looks like IU finished #12 in the AP poll in 2020. That's the only other year I can figure justifies them getting in.
So we have yet another thing to blame on COVID.
-
That's right, they changed the rules so that OSU would get into the Big Ten CCG instead of them.
-
That's right, they changed the rules so that OSU would get into the Big Ten CCG instead of them.
Great, so now it gives me another reason to be mad at the B1G and at OSU.
Had IU been in--and presumably lost--the CCG, they wouldn't have been top-12 and wouldn't be included in this BS infographic.
-
They still would have been included, since the graphic includes the 2s and 1s.
-
Do all four of the potential appearances belong to Solich? Or did Pelini sneak one in there somewhere?
Bo Pelini may have had 2009 and 2010, where he achieved back-to-back 10-win seasons, won the Big 12 North title in both years
-
(https://i.imgur.com/tClZ0qh.png)
Wow, makes Florida look relevant.
-
Do all four of the potential appearances belong to Solich? Or did Pelini sneak one in there somewhere?
Talk about an all time goof firing.
10 win season, running the option. What UNL fan wouldn't give their first born for that now?
-
IU currently has a 31.5 MOV for the season, against a good schedule. That's all-time great.
Higher than '20 Bama, '21 UGA, '19 LSU, '72 USC, and '71 Nebraska
About equal to '01 Miami '91 Warshington, and '18 Clemson
Behind '05 Texas and '95 Nebraska
Miami has a big mountain to climb on Monday.
-
Fun fact:
Indiana started the year with a 13-point win over Old Dominion, being +2 in turnovers and having a punt return TD.
:c029:
-
Ok... So it looks like IU finished #12 in the AP poll in 2020. That's the only other year I can figure justifies them getting in.
So we have yet another thing to blame on COVID.
I assume they’re using final CFP rankings or BCS rankings, and Indiana was 11th in that.
also would have had two G5 teams, granted they would’ve been pretty fun and decent ones.
-
Fun fact:
Indiana started the year with a 13-point win over Old Dominion, being +2 in turnovers and having a punt return TD.
:c029:
Got out gained by 1.4 yards per play.
-
Fun fact:
Indiana started the year with a 13-point win over Old Dominion, being +2 in turnovers and having a punt return TD.
:c029:
the new normal.
When you're bringing in that many transfers and shuffling the roster, those early games are ripe for upsets
-
Wow, makes Florida look relevant.
Oh come on, no need to poor-mouth your team's accomplishments. This goes back to 98 and Florida had a lot of great years back then. So did Texas. The good old days. :)
-
(https://forum.thescarletandrage.com/uploads/default/optimized/1X/7e28b84aa1a03595f0cc2e4a109440db5e994c33_2_480x500.jpeg)
-
Oh come on, no need to poor-mouth your team's accomplishments. This goes back to 98 and Florida had a lot of great years back then. So did Texas. The good old days. :)
The Wolverines would be really far down the list without those post-1/2NC Lloyd Carr years.
They'd have the three Connor Stallions years, and year one with Hoke, where he beat Fickell.
-
(https://forum.thescarletandrage.com/uploads/default/optimized/1X/7e28b84aa1a03595f0cc2e4a109440db5e994c33_2_480x500.jpeg)
Ok, but actually.
-
(https://forum.thescarletandrage.com/uploads/default/optimized/1X/7e28b84aa1a03595f0cc2e4a109440db5e994c33_2_480x500.jpeg)
This wins the internet.
-
Fun fact:
Indiana started the year with a 13-point win over Old Dominion, being +2 in turnovers and having a punt return TD.
:c029:
ODU had two 70+ yard runs from their QB on two bad defensive reads. He had 179 rushing yard and they had 314 total yards. IU had 502 total yards. Mendoza was still figuring things out and the O-line was really bad in the red zone.
-
I'm sure there's excuses on both sides. I didn't post it to put down IU, just thought it was noteworthy.
-
ODU had two 70+ yard runs from their QB on two bad defensive reads. He had 179 rushing yard and they had 314 total yards. IU had 502 total yards. Mendoza was still figuring things out and the O-line was really bad in the red zone.
That QB is now a Badger. 2 years left.
-
the Hoosiers won't let that kid do that to them again
-
Big Game James cancelled next year's VA Tech-JMU game.
-
Game day for the Hoosiers. I never, ever thought I’d be saying that on the day of the national championship game. It’s still just so surreal and dreamlike.
-
Game day for the Hoosiers. I never, ever thought I’d be saying that on the day of the national championship game. It’s still just so surreal and dreamlike.
Genuinely happy for you. It’s been stuck on Blue Blood settings for too long.
-
I'll certainly rooting for the Big RED team this evening!
-
Can't watch the game tonight but I'll certainly be pulling for anyone playing against Miami. If that crew happens to be a basketball school, so be it.
-
I wasn't gonna watch tonight - no ESPN at the house
decided to belly up to the bar at Buffalo Wild Wings - I have rewards to use or they expire.
Hopefully, the Hoosiers put the game away early so this grumpy old man can get home at a decent hour.
-
Same-same was going to go to a pub but might stop over at a Buds.It's 11° right now maybe just dust off the radio and plant it
-
hell, it's up to 17 here - windchill is a couple degrees above zero - of course that won't be the case after dark - hopin the Canes are beat by halftime!
-
The last time that the Big Ten won 3NCs in a row was 1940-42
-
did you hear that from Cincy?
-
Paul Brown coached one of them. The other two were the Gophers.
-
So we’re not calling targeting this game. Cool.
-
The last time that the Big Ten won 3NCs in a row was 1940-42
did you hear that from Cincy?
He was 40 years old back then.
-
Early thoughts: IU's defense is too good. And IU should be safe/basic on offense, like a Saban team, pre-Tua. Just score every 2nd or 3rd possession, mix-n-match TDs and FGs.
Get up 20-0 or 20-3, Miami not really threatening the whole way. IU wins something like 27-10 in a ho-hum game where the Canes never really compete.
-
Early thoughts: IU's defense is too good. And IU should be safe/basic on offense, like a Saban team, pre-Tua. Just score every 2nd or 3rd possession, mix-n-match TDs and FGs.
Get up 20-0 or 20-3, Miami not really threatening the whole way. IU wins something like 27-10 in a ho-hum game where the Canes never really compete.
Crazy to me that no one went after Indiana's DC in the coaching carousel.
-
perhaps they did but he wanted to finish this game
-
perhaps they did but he wanted to finish this game
Nebraska has experience with this
(https://awfulannouncing.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/94/2014/04/fauxpelini.jpg)
-
Crazy to me that no one went after Indiana's DC in the coaching carousel.
I said that in the Michigan thread that I would target him #2 if Dillingham said no
-
Nodded off and just woke up,welp Hoosiers up by 10 that just may be it
-
H
E
I
S
M
E
N
D
O
Z
A
-
Cignetti has BALLS.
-
H
E
I
S
M
E
N
D
O
Z
A
He threw a Perfect TD PASS BUT WR was held.
-
Heck of a championship game
-
Gotta give Miami credit, tough to kill
-
nah
-
Wow. Comes down to last 2 minutes.
-
Hell yeah Hoosiers
-
Ah, theres Carson Beck
-
Just like I predicted....
Congrats to IU! They earned it!
-
Yes!!!
-
Congrats Indiana!
-
Hoosiers!!!!
-
It really boggles the mind that Indiana has won a national championship in the game of football
-
Wow that was Amazing.
I’m stunned, so happy for Indiana right now.
I’m also a little pissed because A&M played Miami really tight, but nobody at the time realized we ran into a buzz saw.
-
Congrats Hoosiers, LGP you da man,say you are aren't a Cleveland Baseball Fan are you? ;D
-
Wow that was Amazing.
I’m stunned, so happy for Indiana right now.
I’m also a little pissed because A&M played Miami really tight, but nobody at the time realized we ran into a buzz saw.
Just imagine how good any team that beat those mighty ags by double digits must have been... :)
-
We've entered bizarro timeline.
-
It really boggles the mind that Indiana has won a national championship in the game of football
It may not be their last
B-I-G,B-I-G,B-I-G
Suck it SEC
-
American football!
-
We've entered bizarro timeline.
Sign of the Apocolypse?
-
Congrats to the Hoosiers, caught the last few minutes of the game.
Very glad Miami didn't win it.
-
Just imagine how good any team that beat those mighty ags by double digits must have been... :)
So the wife's sleeping?
-
H
E
I
S
M
E
N
D
O
Z
A
Yep, savor this one.
-
So the wife's sleeping?
Yeah she certainly didn't give a rip about this game.
-
:040:
Yeah she certainly didn't give a rip about this game.
:040:
-
Incredible.
I’ve been doing this shit since middle school when all the other kids were “Notre Dame fans” despite being just 36 miles from Memorial Stadium. I’ve watched so much shit football. I’ve loved IU through 2, 3, and 4 win seasons. I’ve sat through blowouts and close wins over MAC teams. I sat through a road loss at North Texas. I just can’t believe this. I took my son to his first IU football game in 2007 when he was 4 years old. We sat through a 41-27 home win against Akron that was closer than it should have been. He’s been a loyal IU football fan since. We watched tonight’s game together and drank beers while IU finished the most improbable season in college football history. Indiana. National Champions. In football.
-
Congratulations Indiana.
Enjoy it @LetsGoPeay (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=7) !
-
It’s so hard to win it all. So much has to go right, unless of course you know the plays. ;D
-
My IU fan friend says it's like the Cubs winning the WS.
-
The '96 Gators are no longer the most recent team to win its first NC.
-
Remember how many of us, especially me, decried the NIL because it benefitted the status quo more so than ever, and we believed that now, more than ever, the blue bloods would prevail? Well, it's not so.
That said, we have few billionaires in Iowa, and they are not big billionaires. I don't think Iowa is winning a national championship any time soon unless Mark Cuban is a traitor to his school.
I was going to say fewer billionaires are in Nebraska, but I am not so sure as Warren Buffet and others associated with Berkshire-Hathaway, may be billionaires, who could purchase players for Nebraska.
I don't think a guy financially as savvy and as financially conservative and interested in developing wealth, and being a philanthropist, as Warren Buffet, would buy a collegiate team, unless there was a profit for his company to be earned. Buffet graduated from UNL. Hmmm.
-
One of my IU neighbors (50s yoa) on the block just said (recently) , this just was never in the plans as a fan.........(he would always revert to the Jim Mora) classic quote "playoffs? playoffs? we just want to win a bowl. Gimme an Independence a Liberty, but playoffs?
hard for me to place this (not that it is required to place this event in history).
-
https://twitter.com/RedditCFB/status/2013471774919245829
-
Incredible.
I’ve been doing this shit since middle school when all the other kids were “Notre Dame fans” despite being just 36 miles from Memorial Stadium. I’ve watched so much shit football. I’ve loved IU through 2, 3, and 4 win seasons. I’ve sat through blowouts and close wins over MAC teams. I sat through a road loss at North Texas. I just can’t believe this. I took my son to his first IU football game in 2007 when he was 4 years old. We sat through a 41-27 home win against Akron that was closer than it should have been. He’s been a loyal IU football fan since. We watched tonight’s game together and drank beers while IU finished the most improbable season in college football history. Indiana. National Champions. In football.
Big Thumbs up! 👍
-
Remember how many of us, especially me, decried the NIL because it benefitted the status quo more so than ever, and we believed that now, more than ever, the blue bloods would prevail? Well, it's not so.
That said, we have few billionaires in Iowa, and they are not big billionaires. I don't think Iowa is winning a national championship any time soon unless Mark Cuban is a traitor to his school.
I was going to say fewer billionaires are in Nebraska, but I am not so sure as Warren Buffet and others associated with Berkshire-Hathaway, may be billionaires, who could purchase players for Nebraska.
I don't think a guy financially as savvy and as financially conservative and interested in developing wealth, and being a philanthropist, as Warren Buffet, would buy a collegiate team, unless there was a profit for his company to be earned. Buffet graduated from UNL. Hmmm.
You know I know it’s easy to believe that but in reality what is the makeup of their roster? Is it full of 5 and 4 star players? Was Mendoza highly recruited? I don’t even really know much else about their roster, they really just look like a bunch of hard working really disciplined team.
i think if anything it just proves that truly any team can win, even the ones who are not the top spenders.
-
Simply put, it’s hard to think of a better coaching/teambuilding job in the history of American sports. It’s like this and the miracle on ice team.
-
Ah, theres Carson Beck
https://twitter.com/adavidhalejoint/status/2013503540967199016?s=61
-
Incredible.
I’ve been doing this shit since middle school when all the other kids were “Notre Dame fans” despite being just 36 miles from Memorial Stadium. I’ve watched so much shit football. I’ve loved IU through 2, 3, and 4 win seasons. I’ve sat through blowouts and close wins over MAC teams. I sat through a road loss at North Texas. I just can’t believe this. I took my son to his first IU football game in 2007 when he was 4 years old. We sat through a 41-27 home win against Akron that was closer than it should have been. He’s been a loyal IU football fan since. We watched tonight’s game together and drank beers while IU finished the most improbable season in college football history. Indiana. National Champions. In football.
You deserve this. Congratulations.
-
Carson Back should have stayed in Georgia
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
if he wanted a legacy
-
You know I know it’s easy to believe that but in reality what is the makeup of their roster? Is it full of 5 and 4 star players? Was Mendoza highly recruited? I don’t even really know much else about their roster, they really just look like a bunch of hard working really disciplined team.
i think if anything it just proves that truly any team can win, even the ones who are not the top spenders.
you are correct but,............. let's not pretend this happens w/o Mark Cuban
-
THOUGHT OF THE DAY:
"It always seems impossible until it's done." - Nelson Mandela
-
Ah, theres Carson Beck
https://twitter.com/OnyxOdds/status/2013465371827753028?s=20
-
(https://i.imgur.com/vAK5ShZ.png)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/smd6kcM.png)
-
This has to be the most incredible coaching job in the history of sports. Their roster was not full of 4 and 5 stars, just a bunch of well disiplined and hard working athletes that play great as a team. While I would have preferred to see my team last night, I am very happy that Indiana was able to put together one of the most spectacular runs in the history of college football.
Congratulations on a hell of a season!
-
you are correct but,............. let's not pretend this happens w/o Mark Cuban
Well, I totally agree with you, but even though Cuban is most certainly "insanely rich" he's not even one of the richest alumni of a lot of the schools out there. He has an estimate NW of about $6 Billion. I haven't seen any NIL info on Indiana, but it's been reported (by various media outlets) that they are not one of the top NIL schools, which these days is north of $30 MM a year. I've heard reports they are closer to $15-20 MM in NIL, a figure that probably represents some of the middle tier SEC and Big 10 teams.
I just think they are extremely well coached and worked really hard. That pass play they executed several times last night, for critical first downs, is a prime example. I'm not even sure if it was a planned play or not, but the one where the receiver kinda catches it moving forward but twists his body back at the last second. Those were critical first downs.
All this to say that I don't agree with just saying "Well, they bought their way into the NC with the help of Mark Cuban's money". I think you're not giving them enough credit.
Also, looking at the final score, the blocked FG was a major turning point.
-
Some things never change, like the Hurrigangstas.
https://twitter.com/FanDuel/status/2013478562150351200 (https://twitter.com/FanDuel/status/2013478562150351200)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/DxOZ5Vl.png)
-
Cignetti's success makes everyone believe their school should be able to do it. They're overlooking the fact it's remarkable because it's almost impossible to do. Hoosiers hired a nobody coach from a nobody school who has turned out to be the second coming of Vince Lombardi and Cuban's cash was spent with exceptional calculation and accuracy. This came out of nowhere like the 1980 US Hockey team
-
Some things never change, like the Hurrigangstas.
Comment section reply
"Thugs who haven't seen a classroom for their entire careers."
"I mean it's Miami. Are we really surprised? They didn't earn the convict moniker for no reason. Show some class "U"
"Yep, the U is back. Showing the class from their past"
"Classless why would you or anyone be shocked!"
"F*****g trash piece of shit.Called convicts for a reason! Hahahaha f*****g bums
-
All this to say that I don't agree with just saying "Well, they bought their way into the NC with the help of Mark Cuban's money". I think you're not giving them enough credit.
we agree because this is not what I'm saying
I'm saying it took the combination of Cignetti and Cuban to pull this off.
Cignetti gets most of the credit, but this doesn't happen w/o Cuban
-
Yeah, I'm sure the Indiana guy was just telling Fletcher "Good game, bro."
Anyway, I was surprised it was such a good game. I kind of expected Indiana to run away with it, but Miami made it a much better game than I gave them credit for. Had they been able to play a cleaner game, they even could've won it, which was way outside my realm of expectation.
That B12 officiating crew was crap. Glaring, obvious, non-calls throughout the game, on both sides.
Congrats to our resident Hoosier, @LetsGoPeay (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=7) , and I guess condolences to our resident Boilermaker, @betarhoalphadelta (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=19)
A tiny part of me would like to see Miami consistently good again, because they made a great "villain" that everyone loves to hate before USC and then Alabama. But they haven't been relevant in 25 years and not worth hating. Heck, I guess if Indiana keeps playing like this, I can hate on them.
-
Evidently Miami's only penalty free game was against Ohio State. :017:
-
A tiny part of me would like to see Miami consistently good again, because they made a great "villain" that everyone loves to hate before USC and then Alabama. But they haven't been relevant in 25 years and not worth hating. Heck, I guess if Indiana keeps playing like this, I can hate on them.
I think I just solved my internal riddle of why I vaguely pull for Ohio State in The Game, and have a bit of a soft spot for them in general.
Now that I think about it, when I watched that 2002 NC game, I rooted for tOSU with the burning energy of a thousand suns, but it was because I really, really hated Miami. The Buckeyes were the team that did them in, so I guess I've been thanking them for that ever since. Michigan, OTOH, did the opposite of knocking down Pete Carroll's USC teams a peg or two.....every time those two met USC just garnered more media-bloated, sycophantic adulation.
-
I still hate Miami plenty and would be fine with their football program disappearing off the face of the earth.
-
we agree because this is not what I'm saying
I'm saying it took the combination of Cignetti and Cuban to pull this off.
Cignetti gets most of the credit, but this doesn't happen w/o Cuban
The part that a lot of people are ignoring is the ”HOW” of spending this money.
Indiana was very unique and their approach of how to spend their money. What we are also learning is that there are enormous strategic differences in how even the Blue Bloods are approaching NIL money spending.
And it is evolving rapidly. It is becoming increasingly difficult for teams to compensate younger players who have great potential, but have not produced yet. Some schools figure that out earlier than others
-
as we all know, a little luck also helps..........
finding a hypesman winner at Cal that doesn't brake the bank is good scouting but also a wee bit lucky
-
The part that a lot of people are ignoring is the ”HOW” of spending this money.
Indiana was very unique and their approach of how to spend their money. What we are also learning is that there are enormous strategic differences in how even the Blue Bloods are approaching NIL money spending.
And it is evolving rapidly. It is becoming increasingly difficult for teams to compensate younger players who have great potential, but have not produced yet. Some schools figure that out earlier than others
Good points.
No matter how much NIL you have it is still a finite amount and spending on potential just doesn't make much sense when there isn't anything to prevent that high potential youngster from just leaving once he hits his potential.
I think this is a disservice to the athletes because as this evolves I think that nobody is going to want to develop players. In the NFL you can pay for potential because you can lock a guy down to say a 5-year contract and while you might be overpaying based on potential in years 1-3 you might get an absolute steal in years 4-5. In CFB we are now effectively dealing with mercenaries so the most effective strategy is probably to be brutally ruthless, ignore stars and potential and just sign a massive crop of free agents each year. Some of those guys are going to be former 5* guys but if you steal a former 2* OLine who is now a very good Senior from a school like what Wisconsin used to be that works too. You pay them for their one year of greatness and let the Wisconsins of the world spend their time developing them. Do the same thing with QBs. Why not? The last two NC QBs were transfers where some other school dealt with the growing pains before the eventual NC school grabbed them when they were good enough to win an NC.
-
as we all know, a little luck also helps..........
finding a hypesman winner at Cal that doesn't brake the bank is good scouting but also a wee bit lucky
I was going to make exactly this point.
Luck has always been a factor and it is here too. Some guys are better at spotting diamonds in the rough than others but nobody is perfect. There simply is going to be a high degree of variation because sometimes you are going to miss. When it is a position like QB where you are only playing one of them it is going to be glaringly obvious when it happens but it will happen elsewhere too:
You might decide you need say six OLine that you think are starter quality with the theory being that you can miss on one and still have 5 but . . . There will be some years where you miss on two or miss on two then one gets injured. Other years you might hit on all six but that doesn't really help you all that much because you are only playing five. Having the right mix of hits and misses and injuries is huge and that is almost entirely luck.
-
it's noteworthy that the Hoosiers had an older roster than average
-
Remember how many of us, especially me, decried the NIL because it benefitted the status quo more so than ever, and we believed that now, more than ever, the blue bloods would prevail? Well, it's not so.
No, I think it's still true.
The more I think about this, it's similar to the two posts above from @Honestbuckeye (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=37) and @medinabuckeye1 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1547) -- it's not that money doesn't factor, it's that strategies are completely new and developing.
I suspect this will be seen similarly to the "Moneyball" era of the Oakland A's. In that, the team identified an inefficiency in the way things were done. They exploited that inefficiency, and they were successful... For about a year. And then everyone else recognized the inefficiency and adjusted, and suddenly the bigger market teams with more money started beating the A's again.
Everyone's trying to figure out how to win in the NIL era. Indiana basically found an inefficiency--when everyone else was chasing crootin' STARZ and potential with their NIL dollars, they were chasing proven on the field production.
Once the blue bloods study what Indiana did and then apply their much larger war chests and resources to doing the same, they'll start doing it better than Indiana did. They probably can't replicate finding a Cignetti, of course, but IMHO neither can Indiana. He's not going to be there forever.
-
No, I think it's still true.
The more I think about this, it's similar to the two posts above from @Honestbuckeye (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=37) and @medinabuckeye1 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1547) -- it's not that money doesn't factor, it's that strategies are completely new and developing.
I suspect this will be seen similarly to the "Moneyball" era of the Oakland A's. In that, the team identified an inefficiency in the way things were done. They exploited that inefficiency, and they were successful... For about a year. And then everyone else recognized the inefficiency and adjusted, and suddenly the bigger market teams with more money started beating the A's again.
Everyone's trying to figure out how to win in the NIL era. Indiana basically found an inefficiency--when everyone else was chasing crootin' STARZ and potential with their NIL dollars, they were chasing proven on the field production.
Once the blue bloods study what Indiana did and then apply their much larger war chests and resources to doing the same, they'll start doing it better than Indiana did. They probably can't replicate finding a Cignetti, of course, but IMHO neither can Indiana. He's not going to be there forever.
I don't want this to sound like I'm raining on IU's parade but even if the other schools never did adjust and, as you put it "study what Indiana did and then apply their much larger war chests and resources to doing the same" could Indiana replicate this anyway? I'm not saying they'd immediately fall back to being a doormat but I am saying that I don't think they'd do this 10 years straight. Even without the blue bloods doing it as well, I think that in 10 years IU would have something like 1-2 NC's, 2-3 NC Contenders, 2-3 seasons like last year where they were good but not really on the level of the top teams, 2-3 decent but non CFP teams, and 2-3 off years.
That is just the luck factor. Some years your transfer QB just isn't going to be all that good. Some years instead of having randomized injuries here and there you will have a run of injuries at one position that will leave you VERY weak at that position. Some years you'll have a bunch of guys that just don't quite fit together, etc.
-
I don't want this to sound like I'm raining on IU's parade but even if the other schools never did adjust and, as you put it "study what Indiana did and then apply their much larger war chests and resources to doing the same" could Indiana replicate this anyway? I'm not saying they'd immediately fall back to being a doormat but I am saying that I don't think they'd do this 10 years straight. Even without the blue bloods doing it as well, I think that in 10 years IU would have something like 1-2 NC's, 2-3 NC Contenders, 2-3 seasons like last year where they were good but not really on the level of the top teams, 2-3 decent but non CFP teams, and 2-3 off years.
That is just the luck factor. Some years your transfer QB just isn't going to be all that good. Some years instead of having randomized injuries here and there you will have a run of injuries at one position that will leave you VERY weak at that position. Some years you'll have a bunch of guys that just don't quite fit together, etc.
Oh, I'm not saying that Indiana can just win NCs every year. Out of their 16 games, 4 were one-score differences. A few unlucky bounces occur and we're not talking about IU's historic NC at all this morning.
What we saw previously in CFB was that traditional "doormat" programs could raise themselves for a time with the right coaching hires and running a good program. Think Purdue under Tiller (and possibly under Brohm), MSU under Dantonio, TTU under Leach, etc.
But they were always limited by recruiting. They simply could NOT compete in living rooms like Notre Dame, Michigan, or Texas. With NIL, they can. But it seems Indiana competed by doing something different than the helmets (how they identified/attracted portal guys), not that they simply outspent them.
The helmets can adjust and start doing what IU did. They're going to learn from this. And then they can do it with more money. And that means instead of ignoring the sorts of guys Indiana was trying to pull in, they can outbid Indiana. Unless Indiana can leverage this into a bigger war chest, I think ultimately they're going to fall behind. I don't think they found some magic sword that ONLY Indiana is capable of wielding.
-
On the Buckeye Board one poster said:
So the Big Ten has won 3 straight National Titles.Kids down south are like - "Paw,what's going on up North?"
-
(https://i.imgur.com/7IzOgWt.png)
-
No, I think it's still true.
The more I think about this, it's similar to the two posts above from @Honestbuckeye (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=37) and @medinabuckeye1 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1547) -- it's not that money doesn't factor, it's that strategies are completely new and developing.
I suspect this will be seen similarly to the "Moneyball" era of the Oakland A's. In that, the team identified an inefficiency in the way things were done. They exploited that inefficiency, and they were successful... For about a year. And then everyone else recognized the inefficiency and adjusted, and suddenly the bigger market teams with more money started beating the A's again.
Everyone's trying to figure out how to win in the NIL era. Indiana basically found an inefficiency--when everyone else was chasing crootin' STARZ and potential with their NIL dollars, they were chasing proven on the field production.
Once the blue bloods study what Indiana did and then apply their much larger war chests and resources to doing the same, they'll start doing it better than Indiana did. They probably can't replicate finding a Cignetti, of course, but IMHO neither can Indiana. He's not going to be there forever.
finding a Cignetti is the far biggest factor in all of this
it's the coach - always has been
any team can find one - the Blue Bloods spend more time and money to find one and keep one
interesting to me if Cignetti will stay at Indiana for some time
-
https://twitter.com/Justin_Albers/status/2013482441273442747?s=20
-
https://twitter.com/dennisdoddcbs/status/2013633268768297320?s=20
-
https://twitter.com/Justin_Albers/status/2013482441273442747?s=20
yup, my brother thought a wasted timeout
I said, "a timeout is not wasted if the play following the timeout is a good one"
-
https://twitter.com/dennisdoddcbs/status/2013633268768297320?s=20
Eh. If Indiana or other Indiana-like teams start winning NCs regularly, then this might be a valid point.
For now, it's a sample size of 1.
And other teams are already de-emphasizing high school recruiting and doing more work in the portal. Ultimately there are only gonna be so many portal players that are both a desirable upgrade, and willing to leave their current team. Much of the enticement to leave, will be financial, so there's every reason to believe that the schools with the most resources, are going to fare the best in the NIL/portal free agency era.
-
There will always be a New York Mets of College football.
-
Eh. If Indiana or other Indiana-like teams start winning NCs regularly, then this might be a valid point.
For now, it's a sample size of 1.
And other teams are already de-emphasizing high school recruiting and doing more work in the portal. Ultimately there are only gonna be so many portal players that are both a desirable upgrade, and willing to leave their current team. Much of the enticement to leave, will be financial, so there's every reason to believe that the schools with the most resources, are going to fare the best in the NIL/portal free agency era.
yes, I believe the schools with the most Mark Cubans are going to fare well
I've ALWAYS believed the schools with the best coaches are going to fare the best in any era.
-
What we saw previously in CFB was that traditional "doormat" programs could raise themselves for a time with the right coaching hires and running a good program. Think Purdue under Tiller (and possibly under Brohm), MSU under Dantonio, TTU under Leach, etc.
But they were always limited by recruiting. They simply could NOT compete in living rooms like Notre Dame, Michigan, or Texas. With NIL, they can. But it seems Indiana competed by doing something different than the helmets (how they identified/attracted portal guys), not that they simply outspent them.
The helmets can adjust and start doing what IU did. They're going to learn from this. And then they can do it with more money. And that means instead of ignoring the sorts of guys Indiana was trying to pull in, they can outbid Indiana. Unless Indiana can leverage this into a bigger war chest, I think ultimately they're going to fall behind. I don't think they found some magic sword that ONLY Indiana is capable of wielding.
I think there is something to do that. Because it wasn't just Indiana going from doormat to NC, a lot of people thought Miami didn't deserve to get in, and then they had the ball with a chance to win the whole thing.
I don't think you see the #10 team making that run in the past. Even when MSU or TCU or whoever got into the 4 team tournament, they got blasted, because the top 2-3 teams were at a whole other level. I don't think that's the case anymore. That talent is more distributed.
-
finding a Cignetti is the far biggest factor in all of this
it's the coach - always has been
any team can find one - the Blue Bloods spend more time and money to find one and keep one
interesting to me if Cignetti will stay at Indiana for some time
In logic, there is the concept of "necessary and sufficient conditions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency)".
One might say that great coaching is necessary to win a national championship, but what I think we've seen over time is that it's not sufficient. Talent matters. In the pre-NIL era, recruiting determined talent. In the NIL era, IMHO payroll determines talent.
Cignetti was never going to win an NC at JMU. He wouldn't stand a chance pre-NIL at IU either. He probably wouldn't have at IU without a $20M+ payroll to work with. It's remarkable that he did it with smaller payrolls than the blue bloods.
- Coaching: necessary but not sufficient, because if you don't have the payroll you don't have the talent
- Payroll: necessary but not sufficient, because a poorly coached talented team won't beat a well-coached talented team (of which there are many)
- Coaching + payroll: necessary and sufficient (plus luck obv)
That's my opinion, anyway.
-
In logic, there is the concept of "necessary and sufficient conditions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency)".
One might say that great coaching is necessary to win a national championship, but what I think we've seen over time is that it's not sufficient. Talent matters. In the pre-NIL era, recruiting determined talent. In the NIL era, IMHO payroll determines talent.
Cignetti was never going to win an NC at JMU. He wouldn't stand a chance pre-NIL at IU either. He probably wouldn't have at IU without a $20M+ payroll to work with. It's remarkable that he did it with smaller payrolls than the blue bloods.
- Coaching: necessary but not sufficient, because if you don't have the payroll you don't have the talent
- Payroll: necessary but not sufficient, because a poorly coached talented team won't beat a well-coached talented team (of which there are many)
- Coaching + payroll: necessary and sufficient (plus luck obv)
That's my opinion, anyway.
Yup, that's about the size of it.
-
Eh. If Indiana or other Indiana-like teams start winning NCs regularly, then this might be a valid point.
For now, it's a sample size of 1.
And other teams are already de-emphasizing high school recruiting and doing more work in the portal. Ultimately there are only gonna be so many portal players that are both a desirable upgrade, and willing to leave their current team. Much of the enticement to leave, will be financial, so there's every reason to believe that the schools with the most resources, are going to fare the best in the NIL/portal free agency era.
All you have to do is take other team’s OK players and turn them into studs, and go in the portal and pick only the guys who transition up excellently, and you can do this too!
Easy as pie!
-
Yup, that's about the size of it.
he said it with a whole lot more typing and bigger words than I
-
In logic, there is the concept of "necessary and sufficient conditions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency)".
One might say that great coaching is necessary to win a national championship, but what I think we've seen over time is that it's not sufficient. Talent matters. In the pre-NIL era, recruiting determined talent. In the NIL era, IMHO payroll determines talent.
Cignetti was never going to win an NC at JMU. He wouldn't stand a chance pre-NIL at IU either. He probably wouldn't have at IU without a $20M+ payroll to work with. It's remarkable that he did it with smaller payrolls than the blue bloods.
- Coaching: necessary but not sufficient, because if you don't have the payroll you don't have the talent
- Payroll: necessary but not sufficient, because a poorly coached talented team won't beat a well-coached talented team (of which there are many)
- Coaching + payroll: necessary and sufficient (plus luck obv)
That's my opinion, anyway.
I used to race small sailboats. We had a guy who was very good at it who came and taught us things that helped us. Someone asked him about the importance of a fast boat (it is like golf, there is a never-ending opportunity to buy additional gear to make your boat faster). His answer was that you didn't need the fastest boat on the lake to win but you weren't going to win with the slowest.
That is how I've thought of CFB for a long time. Talent = Boat. Skipper and crew = coaching. A fast boat with a skipper and crew who are clueless isn't going to win but neither is a slow boat with the best skipper and crew on the lake. The winner isn't always the fastest boat nor the best skipper/crew but it IS always at least a reasonably fast boat with at least a reasonably good skipper and crew.
I think we are all fairly confident that Indiana didn't have the highest NIL payroll so they didn't have the "fastest boat" but they were in the ballpark.
-
it's noteworthy that the Hoosiers had an older roster than average
Might have something to do with their luck.Solid players across the board that were coached up,fundamentally sound, eliminated mistakes and penalties. In short opponents had to play mistake free in order to win and Miami has NEVER been a disciplined program
-
most interesting to me is the talent/recruiting star ranking mold that Cignetti broke
all of the past MNC teams for what the last 10-15 seasons all had an average star ranking that included many 5 stars, a bunch of 4 stars and some 3 stars sprinkled in over a 4 or 5 year span.
IMO, that's what the portal changed. The 3 stars that rise to the top and the 5 stars that sink over a 1 to 3 season period mess up the high school recruiting importance
-
(https://i.imgur.com/7IzOgWt.png)
This seems about right. I will say that it feels like 2-6 you could make a reasonable argument for any of them in any of those slots. I think that TxTech, BYU, and Utah are a tad overrated given how bad the B12 looked in the CFP but it probably isn't wise to lean too much on that singular result.
I would have dropped ND about 10 spots for their tantrum but that is just me.
-
most interesting to me is the talent/recruiting star ranking mold that Cignetti broke
all of the past MNC teams for what the last 10-15 seasons all had an average star ranking that included many 5 stars, a bunch of 4 stars and some 3 stars sprinkled in over a 4 or 5 year span.
IMO, that's what the portal changed. The 3 stars that rise to the top and the 5 stars that sink over a 1 to 3 season period mess up the high school recruiting importance
Yep.
Stars matter a lot when you are recruiting 17-18 year old HS Seniors who are going to play for you for 4-5 years. There were always 5* busts and 3* All Americans but on average a team with more 5* was better than a team with less 5*.
Now that you can cherry pick AFTER 2-3 years in college the original stars are irrelevant. You need to pick based on who actually produced.
-
Serious thought....now that a lot of college players will be moving through 2-3 programs in their college career, and position coaches are also rotating through different programs constantly I wonder if they aren't better coached simply from being with 2-5 different position coaches through their journey? We already are seeing that not only do good DC and OC only stay 1-3 years Max, but QB coaches, O-Line coaches, secondary coaches etc rotate in/out constantly. A&M is almost completely turning over our staff this past season (new OC, new DC, new DLine, and I have no idea what else). So even if a players stays at the same school 3 years, the chances of him having the same position coach, same O or D coach, and same head coach are somewhat low.
-
Someone said that might be where the NFL actually steps in. The one and done NBA rule wasn't a college rule, it was an NBA rule, to protect themselves from taking high upside busts straight out of HS. That the NFL has largely sat by while NCAAF served as a free developmental league. But apparently, particularly on the lines, they are concerned about the lack of development now.
I'm not sure what the NFL can do, because the issue isn't guys trying to enter too soon, it's guys not developing. Their trust exemption gives them some latitude, so I wonder if they do something like say you must have been rostered for 2 consecutive years at the same place to be eligible. I'm sure it would be challenged, but again, CBAs and anti-trust exemptions can help
-
first first time champ since 1996 (?) - i’m happy for iu. ‘twas a good game.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/7IzOgWt.png)
6 Texas schools is crazy
-
Serious thought....now that a lot of college players will be moving through 2-3 programs in their college career,
HOLD MY BEER!
TJ Finley, QB
LSU then Auburn then Texas State then Tulane then Western KY then GA State and now Incarnate Word!
-
I don't know if I prefer it either way, but in the next 5-6 years, we'll find out if this is the new normal or if Cignetti is just Saban 2.0.
If programs like Arkansas and Maryland start winning NCs, all is revealed.
-
or 4 programs from Texas
-
Clearly we're in a time of flux, and anyone is guessing to claim they know what will happen in ten years.
-
I'm guessing Cignetti is gonna make a lot of money
-
Clearly we're in a time of flux, and anyone is guessing to claim they know what will happen in ten years.
My guess is that the end is in <10 years.
-
I'm guessing Cignetti is gonna make a lot of money
https://twitter.com/TriPSU91/status/2013617528602243165 (https://twitter.com/TriPSU91/status/2013617528602243165)
-
He should retire.
-
After the game he said "If I was smart I would retire, but we need the money."
-
A few things that seem likely, to me, within ten years:
- Expanded playoffs, probably to 16. High prob.
- Some limits on portal movement.
- Some limits on NIL?
- Rearrangement of conferences into subdivisions (?)
- More public concern over brain damage issues perhaps resulting in use of the larger helmets.
- More "rules" nobody understands.
- Purdue winning a national championship.
-
https://twitter.com/TriPSU91/status/2013617528602243165 (https://twitter.com/TriPSU91/status/2013617528602243165)
probably directly from Mark Cuban
-
https://twitter.com/TriPSU91/status/2013617528602243165 (https://twitter.com/TriPSU91/status/2013617528602243165)
"CFP first round appearance: $500,000"
Does he automatically pick up that bonus while skipping that round? Or he is "punished" for his team being so good that they didn't have to play the first round?
-
He gets that bonus too.
-
Still not as impressive as Lane Kiffin.
Freshwater picked up a bunch of bonuses for games he didn't even have to coach.
-
A few things that seem likely, to me, within ten years:
- Purdue winning a national championship.
In what sport?
-
GOLF
-
In what sport?
Engineering will become a sport when the nerds inevitably take over, so probably that one.
-
[pssst, the nerds have largely already taken over.]
-
In what sport?
downhill skiing would be my guess.
-
[pssst, the nerds have largely already taken over.]
Well, yeah, but you're not supposed to talk about it.
Now they have to kill you.
-
GOLF
on the moon
-
Something I just realized: there's a decent chance Cignetti can tell recruits he's been a position coach for two future Pro Football Hall of Famers at different positions. That's wild.
-
My guess is that the end is in <10 years.
Yeah, if the asinine Big Ten gets its way with a 24-team playoff and some 19th seed wins the NC.
It's like the decision-makers are actively breaking the sport on purpose. They're chugging all of the minibar bottles they possibly can on an airplane that's going down. None of it makes any sense.
-
A few things that seem likely, to me, within ten years:
- Rearrangement of conferences into subdivisions (?)
This made me laugh. Conference and division names like Whispering Pines or Ashton Estates.
SEC West? Nah. Just use this subdivision name generator: http://www.kristenandersen.online/subdivision-name-generator/ (http://www.kristenandersen.online/subdivision-name-generator/)
-
The playoff raises the question we have debated endlessly: how good is good enough to deserve the opportunity to play for it all. The American system has slowly increased the number of entrants, from the days of MLB taking just the outright league winners to play in the World Series, to the current bloated playoff systems that care more about TV revenue than picking the actually best teams. The NFL led the way in that with wild cards, then expanded wild cards. Hockey and Basketball started with larger playoffs, but, like baseball, relied on longer series to weed out the undeserving, then nevertheless followed the NFL's lead to allow more teams into the pool.
After last season in the CFB, there was a feeling that only the completely deserving can run the playoff table. But looking at this year's results, that is less obvious. Miami didn't win its conference championship, and was a questionable add to the pool. It was a couple of good/bad bounces from winning the title. Miami made it into the final without playing a conference champion. IU--a deserving national title winner, don't get me wrong--also played no conference champions on the way to its title. With the one-and-done format in football, there is a much higher probability that, like has happened in the NFL, a wild-card team--one that squeaks its way into the playoff--will win the national title. While they will have won the games that mattered, will they have deserved to be there? Were they, in fact, one of the very best in college football that year, or did they just get hot at the right moment, and perhaps get lucky with the right matchups in the playoffs?
There probably is no "right" answer to this question, but in my view, the 12-team playoff is already bloated (look no further than JMU, Tulane, 3-loss Alabama, and the various 2- and 3-loss teams that claimed they should be in the field). 24 makes a complete mockery of the regular season.
But...cash is king.
-
After last season in the CFB, there was a feeling that only the completely deserving can run the playoff table. But looking at this year's results, that is less obvious. Miami didn't win its conference championship, and was a questionable add to the pool. It was a couple of good/bad bounces from winning the title. Miami made it into the final without playing a conference champion. IU--a deserving national title winner, don't get me wrong--also played no conference champions on the way to its title. With the one-and-done format in football, there is a much higher probability that, like has happened in the NFL, a wild-card team--one that squeaks its way into the playoff--will win the national title. While they will have won the games that mattered, will they have deserved to be there? Were they, in fact, one of the very best in college football that year, or did they just get hot at the right moment, and perhaps get lucky with the right matchups in the playoffs?
This goes back to a discussion I've had for years here and elsewhere. My contention has always been that the old bowl system or BCS system (maybe even 4-team playoff) was not just the arbitrary beauty pageant it was purported to be, but it sought to reward the team with the best season. It was a sport where "champion" attempts to equal "team that had the best year." Whereas the NFL with it's playoff format moreso sought to reward the hottest team at the end. Maybe it could be said they were the best team by the end. Different definition of "champion" and/or "top team" for that year. I consider both of them valid ways of looking for a singular "champion" since I'm very heavy on the "M" in MNC.
I liked that cfb had something different to offer than the NFL. In a world where it's not obvious what the correct way of determining a champion is, or if there even is a correct way, it was neat to see two different levels of the game do it different ways. We got to see it play out multiple ways. Of late, it seems like cfb is doing everything in its power to be just like the NFL, and that, to me, is much more boring in that they're starting to define "winner" the same way.
-
Well,
You simply have to ask yourself " What is the purpose of Pro Ball", be it baseball, football, or basketball?
The answer is simply "Advertising".
For CFB, for a long time, it was to benefit the students and the school, but now, it's mostly for advertising.
-
This goes back to a discussion I've had for years here and elsewhere. My contention has always been that the old bowl system or BCS system (maybe even 4-team playoff) was not just the arbitrary beauty pageant it was purported to be, but it sought to reward the team with the best season. It was a sport where "champion" attempts to equal "team that had the best year." Whereas the NFL with it's playoff format moreso sought to reward the hottest team at the end. Maybe it could be said they were the best team by the end. Different definition of "champion" and/or "top team" for that year. I consider both of them valid ways of looking for a singular "champion" since I'm very heavy on the "M" in MNC.
I liked that cfb had something different to offer than the NFL. In a world where it's not obvious what the correct way of determining a champion is, or if there even is a correct way, it was neat to see two different levels of the game do it different ways. We got to see it play out multiple ways. Of late, it seems like cfb is doing everything in its power to be just like the NFL, and that, to me, is much more boring in that they're starting to define "winner" the same way.
Agree. It's why I've always been fine with conferences being different sizes from one another, and determining their conference championships in different ways than one another, and I'm also fine with there being Independents.
Every move in CFB now is just getting that much closer to the NFL, which aside from a few games per season, I stopped watching decades ago. Because it bores me.
-
So far, in every American professional league, there is still some regular season-based cutoff for who deserves a shot in the playoffs. What's the point of tha cutoff, if not to determine who is good enough to be eligible. But maybe ELA's all-team, double elimination tournament is the right answer? Not for me, but it solves this particular riddle.
And to repeat something I've said many times before, which is the better team? Team a played every other team in the league twice, once away, once at home. Team A won 90% of its games, more than any other team in the league (each of them playing every other team twice, home and away). Team b beat team a both times they played, but overall it won 50% of the time. I think the answer is obvious: team a is the better team. But it may be that team b matches its strengths better against team a's weaknesses than any other team. So in that matchup, team b is superior; but against the entire league, team a is superior. Team a should logically--to my mind--be the league champion. That is the standard international football recipe. But that's an extreme example, and doesn't equate for things that happen over the course of the season that can impact a game here or there. For that reason, I think playoffs make sense to crown champions--and, in any case, the point in sports is to win. So taking the best cohort of teams and making them play each other makes sense for crowning a champion. But should team b, in my example have a shot at the title, assuming it is a middle-of-the-pack team? I don't think so.
As utee and I have both already said, we've talked about this many times over the years, and my opinion doesn't matter to CFB. But I think 24 is too many. 12 probably is, too, but it's at least closer to defensible.
-
The Euro-soccer no playoff crap might crown the most "deserving" champion, but it's boring as hell.
I'm grateful that we have playoffs here.
-
remember how mad everyone would get when somebody 'wasn't even the conference champion!!!!!' or in the CCG game, yet in the BCS/playoff.
such quaint times.
we're not far away from NFL levels with 8-9 teams hosting playoff games.
-
Now people are annoyed if a conference champion gets in over a three-loss Texas team.
-
I'm grateful that we have playoffs here.
I agree, but I don't think everyone should get to play in the playoff.
-
Is there a league that allows everyone to play in the playoffs?
-
(https://i.imgur.com/fKfT7Qz.png)
-
Is there a league that allows everyone to play in the playoffs?
Not that I'm aware of (aside from low-level youth sports). So how to decide who is worthy of entry into the playoff? Is it just the point of negligible gains in TV revenue?
-
Well,
You simply have to ask yourself " What is the purpose of Pro Ball", be it baseball, football, or basketball?
The answer is simply "Advertising".
For CFB, for a long time, it was to benefit the students and the school, but now, it's mostly for advertising.
It also mostly was still for advertising. advertising the school, often filling stadiums, etc.
-
the purpose of most things is money $$$
-
https://twitter.com/petenakos/status/2014472383063543837?s=61
-
so, the sport's not dead yet?
-
According to a report from ESPN’s Pete Thamel, the College Football Playoff is expected to remain at 12 teams for the 2026-27 season. Speculation about the field expanding to 16 teams had been running rampant for months, but officials from the power conferences couldn’t seem to agree on the format for an expanded field.
Reporting from On3 stated that the decision to maintain the status quo stemmed from a stalemate between the SEC and the Big Ten. The SEC wants a 16-team model. The Big Ten wants a 24-team model. The other 8 FBS conferences are “ready” to expand to 16 teams for the 2026 season, according to the report.
An initial deadline to settle next year’s format was set for Dec. 1, 2025. ESPN extended that deadline to Friday. With the sport’s two most powerful leagues still in disagreement over the future of the field, nothing changes and the proverbial can gets kicked to 2027.
-
Guess I'll have to start using fSEC and fB1G.
-
Or...good job on deadlocking because 12 is better than 16.
:)
-
those 4 teams fighting for the bye week!
-
Ok I guess the CFP will be 12 teams for at least 1 more year in 2026.
But the new bowl contracts, which usually are 6-year contracts, have been on hold until they settle on the CFP format. Now what are they going to do? Do the conferences just start signing 1 year contracts with their bowl game tie-ins going forward? Actually that probably makes some sense.
The other thing I guess is not settled, is the Rose Bowl always a quarterfinal game played on NYD, or is it sometimes a semi-final played a week after NYD?
-
Well,
You simply have to ask yourself " What is the purpose of Pro Ball", be it baseball, football, or basketball?
The answer is simply "Advertising".
For CFB, for a long time, it was to benefit the students and the school, but now, it's mostly for advertising.
Advertising.
https://twitter.com/On3/status/2014786739953680821?s=20
-
Nascar jerseys?
-
The Euro-soccer no playoff crap might crown the most "deserving" champion, but it's boring as hell.
I'm grateful that we have playoffs here.
If it's boring, then you don't really like the sport.
Any entity that bends over backwards for the casual fans for an extra dollar are whores, sports very much included. The money made without all this nonsense is "enough." It really is/was. But nay!
-
Now people are annoyed if a conference champion gets in over a three-loss Texas team.
A champion of a high school conference, yes. You're so much smarter than this.
-
Is there a league that allows everyone to play in the playoffs?
The lone year I coached little league, everyone was in the playoff. We didn't win a game. We sucked.
But in playing the best team/top seed, we randomly had a conga line around the bases inning late, and beat them. It was fun and a bigger upset than any you can name, but the end result was the best team wasn't going to win the league.
The double round-robin showed they were the best team. The one-and-done playoff format got them booted vs a winless team.
Not a great system for validity, lol.
-
If it's boring, then you don't really like the sport.
Any entity that bends over backwards for the casual fans for an extra dollar are whores, sports very much included. The money made without all this nonsense is "enough." It really is/was. But nay!
I don't particularly like Euro soccer, no.
Much prefer our domestic professional sports, with their playoffs.
-
I don't particularly like Euro soccer, no.
Much prefer our domestic professional sports, with their playoffs.
...but you understand the larger point being made. Right? Right?
-
Why are you spamming all of my comments all of a sudden?
Yeesh man, find another leg to hump.
-
Is there a league that allows everyone to play in the playoffs?
Indiana high school sports.
-
I liked that cfb had something different to offer than the NFL. In a world where it's not obvious what the correct way of determining a champion is, or if there even is a correct way, it was neat to see two different levels of the game do it different ways. We got to see it play out multiple ways. Of late, it seems like cfb is doing everything in its power to be just like the NFL, and that, to me, is much more boring nauseating in that they're starting to define "winner" the same way.
Testify MDT Testify
BTW FIFY
-
Despite sticking with the 12-team format, there will be a few things different with the 2026 playoffs based on agreements from before
Notre Dame will automatically qualify for the 12 team CFP if they finished ranked in the top 12.
The ACC champion, and all P4 champions, will now automatically get a spot in the 12-team CFP no matter what they are ranked. Which means the G6 will only get 1 champion, and only 1 champion, automatically in the CFP..
The G5 will expand to the G6. The Pac will officially come back to life with 8 teams and will once again have a CCG to determine its champion. However, the Pac is no longer considered a power conference, and will be grouped in with the other G6 conferences.
It also worth noting that the ACC has not decided yet how its 2026 tiebreaker will work that will determine which 2 teams play in the ACC CCG. This will be especially tricky because 5 ACC teams will play 8 conference games and 12 ACC teams will play 9 conference games in 2026. My guess is the ACC will just have its top 2 ranked teams play in its CCG.
So if these changes were already in place in 2025, Notre Dame would have got in , and the ACC champion would have got in, and JMU would have been out. The ACC CCG would probably had Virginia playing Miami, so whoever won that game would have been in, who ever lost would probably have been out.
-
The ACC is especially stupid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkoPq5AOCOA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkoPq5AOCOA)
...is no way to run a conference, son.