CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: medinabuckeye1 on December 30, 2019, 01:50:49 PM
-
There aren't any B1G teams involved :03: but I think this game deserves a thread. You can combine it if you disagree.
I think the biggest question that immediately pops into my head is how will the widely disparate semi-final experiences impact the Championship?
LSU just romped all over Oklahoma. In one of the other threads someone noted that an LSU player was admonishing his teammates to avoid getting drawn into shoving matches because "we need you next game" in the first half of the LSU/OU game. It was that obvious. LSU's starters rested down the stretch and should be ready to go at 100% with no problems.
Meanwhile, I feel like Clemson just went 10 rounds in a heavy-weight fight. The game was decided on a play that began with about 00:30 on the clock so their starters never got a chance to rest, they are much more beat up than LSU and one would assume that they are a lot more emotionally drained. Clemson was down big, had a huge comeback to take the lead, fell behind again and trailed with less than two minutes to go, then retook the lead then gave up 52 yards to see their opponent in scoring position then finally won the game on an INT with just over 30 seconds to go. That would be emotionally draining for anybody.
Can Clemson recover quickly enough to be ready to give LSU 100%? On the other hand, it could help Clemson that they just came through a big test. If they get down they can look back at the semi-final and know that they CAN come back. LSU has not trailed in a game since being down 13-10 to Auburn early in the second half on October 26.
-
This game is dead to me.
I'll be just returning from Cabo and I'll be in bed.
-
I think and hope this will be one helluva game
hopefully w/o the Officials being called into question
-
Oddly, the worldwide leader gives Clemson a 55.5% chance to win while according to my phone the wise guys out in the desert say LSU by 5.5 in a roughly 37-32 game (Over/Under is 69).
What say you?
-
Toss up. Clemson is talented and resilient. So is LSU.
-
LSU will stomp their asses into a mudhole
-
if Clemson can run the ball, game on.
If not, LSU by double digits.
-
LSU will stomp their asses into a mudhole
that's what I said about Ohio St.
-
if Clemson can run the ball, game on.
If not, LSU by double digits.
Lawrence can run, just don't hit him in the arm and think you've knocked him out of the contest
pisses him off
-
Can Burrow have ANOTHER lights out game like he just had? If so, well, fork in it.
LSU 38 Clemson 35
-
It's not like that was Burrow's sole fantastic game of 2019. I expect him to play extremely well once again.
-
I know he played extremely well all year and won the ESPN Trophy for best back, but I've never seen a game like he just played, ever.
-
There are more Clemson fans around here than LSU fans, and they can be insuferable, so I'm pulling for LSU. Alabama and Clemson is a tie.
-
We regularly compete directly with LSU for recruits and regional branding/mindshare. We rarely cross paths with Clemson for any of that. So for Texas, a Clemson win would be significantly better.
But I still think LSU's gonna win by a couple TDs when all is said and done. I'd be fine with being wrong though.
-
If Clemson wins, will we all get Clemson fatigue, replacing Bama?
-
I would definitely watch if the game was Saturday. Not sure if I will this year. Have skipped most of them but did watch last year.
-
If Clemson wins, will we all get Clemson fatigue, replacing Bama?
Doubtful. But I've been around Clempsup fans, and yeah, they can be insufferable.
-
I won't watch. But am hoping for an LSU curb stomping.
Do we know from which conference the refs will be from? 😈
-
I won't watch. But am hoping for an LSU curb stomping.
Do we know from which conference the refs will be from? 😈
PAC
https://thespun.com/college-football/pac-12-referees-college-football-playoff-national-championship
(https://thespun.com/college-football/pac-12-referees-college-football-playoff-national-championship)
-
If Clemson wins, will we all get Clemson fatigue, replacing Bama?
I'm not sure Clemson has quite achieved "Evil Empire" status yet.
-
I think part of Alabama fatigue is related to SEC fatigue in general. Clemson doesn't have that same issue.
-
that's what I said about Ohio St.
So you're off by a game
-
I think part of Alabama fatigue is related to SEC fatigue in general. Clemson doesn't have that same issue.
I also think Clemson hasn't gotten the same mulligans as Alabama. 'Bama lost to LSU in 2012, then got to rematch them in the BCS championship. Bama is one of the few 11-1 teams without a conference championship to get into the CFP. Clemson always got in as a conference champion. Alabama got a mulligan again in 2017-18.
I don't think Clemson's run has been seen as undeserving, whereas 'Bama has been almost in a "well, they get the benefit of the doubt" scenario multiple times.
-
There are more Clemson fans around here than LSU fans, and they can be insuferable, so I'm pulling for LSU. Alabama and Clemson is a tie.
I get this. Back in 2007 I went to the Final Four in Atlanta. In between the semifinals (tOSU>Georgetown, UF>UCLA) I ran into a Georgia fan who said "GO BUCKS". I was somewhat surprised because I expected UGA fans to root for UF based on conference pride. The UGA fan explained that he usually would root for the conference team but that UF fans were, according to him, totally insufferable. At that point UF was the reigning BB and FB Champion so it made sense.
-
Clemson hammering Bama likely caused some to look the over way. That may change if Clemson wins this one.
-
Clemson hammering Bama likely caused some to look the over way. That may change if Clemson wins this one.
Yep. The enemy of my enemy is my friend...
...until he becomes powerful enough to be my top enemy.
-
If Clemson wins, will we all get Clemson fatigue, replacing Bama?
I think, as noted above, that Bama fatigue is partially based on SEC fatigue and partially based on the suspicion that Bama got undeserved mulligans.
That said, Clemson fatigue is growing and it will only grow more if they win their second straight and third in four NC.
-
Excellent point from bwar and medina on the Alabama mulligans factoring into the fatigue and discontent around their program.
Honestly I've always liked Alabama. Maybe if they go another decade without winning another NC, I could get back to that. It would also help if my own team weren't sucking so hard for so many years.
-
I think Alabama mulligan fatigue could swiftly transition to Clemson schedule fatigue if the ACC is dreadful again next year. This presumes Clemson makes the 2020 playoff.
-
https://fbschedules.com/ncaa-2020/team/clemson (https://fbschedules.com/ncaa-2020/team/clemson)
They play at Notre Dame. I can't see another game they realistically could lose. Their recruiting has been at the very top of late.
-
I think Alabama mulligan fatigue could swiftly transition to Clemson schedule fatigue if the ACC is dreadful again next year. This presumes Clemson makes the 2020 playoff.
I don't see how they could miss at this point. Top recruiting classes, top coaching, crap conference. It all adds up to 13-0 again.
-
They smoked UVA. Florida somewhat struggled a bit. Syllogism doesn't work of course, but LSU struggled with Florida. Clemson might be THAT good, despite that UNC relative debacle. Joe Burreaux is the wild card for me, he is playing at some kind of weird level I've not seen before.
This game will be worth watching methinks. As for Clemson fatigue, it is hard to see how they don't make the playoffs routinely, Bamaesque, until some year where somebody gets some kind of edge. The do have a series with UGA, but that's 2029-2030.
-
Honestly I've always liked Alabama. Maybe if they go another decade without winning another NC, I could get back to that. It would also help if my own team weren't sucking so hard for so many years.
I've talked to the Lord about this but I received Dabo's permission and blessing 1st.The Lord said that the beatings will continue until the salty rubes on SurleyHorns stop badmouthing the Buckeyes
-
To date, it is rare that a not quite blue blood has made the playoffs. Is there any reason to expect that to change? (I'm including Clemson as a recent Blue Blood here.)
UGA, Oregon, MSU, maybe somebody else of lesser stature have one appearance (for MSU not pretty). I think it will continue to be mostly from the group Bama/Clemson/Ohio State/Oklahoma and then at times another "near BB" kind of team. We almost had Utah this year, they really dropped in the bowl pecking order.
Will fans tire of that?
-
As for Clemson fatigue, it is hard to see how they don't make the playoffs routinely, Bamaesque, until some year where somebody gets some kind of edge. The do have a series with UGA, but that's 2029-2030.
that's what they said about Florida St a few seasons back when they were dominating
I've always thought Brent Venables was one of the best defensive coaches in the game
-
https://fbschedules.com/ncaa-2020/team/clemson (https://fbschedules.com/ncaa-2020/team/clemson)
They play at Notre Dame. I can't see another game they realistically could lose. Their recruiting has been at the very top of late.
To their credit they do play at Florida State next year. FSU obviously wasn't great this year but they are a very strong team generally.
That OOC is weak but only IF the ACC is still weak. They do play a P5 team (USCe) and a quasi-P5 team (ND). The other two though are horrible. Akron was probably the worst team in all of FBS this year and Citadel is FCS.
The other thing is that even if they lose at ND, that has no bearing on the ACCCG so if they end up 11-1 they'll be right back in the ACCCG against a (probably) weak opponent and 12-1 with a P5 Championship probably gets them in.
-
They smoked UVA. Florida somewhat struggled a bit. Syllogism doesn't work of course, but LSU struggled with Florida. Clemson might be THAT good, despite that UNC relative debacle. Joe Burreaux is the wild card for me, he is playing at some kind of weird level I've not seen before.
This game will be worth watching methinks. As for Clemson fatigue, it is hard to see how they don't make the playoffs routinely, Bamaesque, until some year where somebody gets some kind of edge. The do have a series with UGA, but that's 2029-2030.
In some ways it is worse with Clemson/Oklahoma than it is with Bama because we all know that the SEC is a powerful league. When Bama wins it, that is an accomplishment worth noting. This year's ACC was horrible and now that OU has dropped to 0-4 in CFP games I think there are going to be questions about the value of winning the B12 going forward.
Note, I'm not trying to pick a fight with @utee94 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=15) or @CWSooner (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1544) or any other B12 fans here. I'm just saying that it IS a potential issue. It was for the B1G after MSU's blowout loss to Bama in 2015. Recent conference history/performance matters whether we like it or not. For the B1G:
In 2014 tOSU won the NC. Then in 2015 MSU won the B1G at 12-1 with a bad loss to a Nebraska team that finished 6-6. Part of the reason that the Nebraska loss did NOT keep MSU out of the CFP was that they had defeated last year's NC and won the conference that the previous NC came from.
Then in 2016 tOSU got in at 11-1 and without a Championship based partially on the perception of tOSU based on winning the CFP in 2014 and winning the Fiesta Bowl in 2015. Ohio State was seen as a legit contender for the NC even without a P5 Championship based partially on perception based on prior years.
Then in 2017 tOSU was left out at 11-2 with a P5 Championship and one of the losses being to a fellow P5 Champion based partially on the fact that tOSU had gotten blown out in the CFP the previous year. 11-1 non-Champion Bama was seen as a more legitimate NC contender based on both teams' past results.
Then in 2018 tOSU was left out and even held behind an 11-2 non-champion from the SEC despite being a 12-1 P5 Champion. By that time the B1G had gone three years without being competitive in the CFP (MSU in 2015 and tOSU in 2016 were blown out) so the SEC runner-up was seen as a more legit NC challenger than the 12-1 B1G Champion.
This year tOSU eliminated all doubt by going 13-0 and their CFP performance did not make them look unworthy of the CFP slot. They clearly stood toe-to-toe with Clemson even though they lost. Next year's B1G Champion will benefit from that even if it isn't tOSU.
This will be a problem for next year's B12 Champion because they have had four CFP chances and only been close one time. If next year's B1G and B12 Champions are close and in contention for the fourth spot I strongly believe that it will go to the B1G Champion based on that history.
-
In some ways it is worse with Clemson/Oklahoma than it is with Bama because we all know that the SEC is a powerful league. When Bama wins it, that is an accomplishment worth noting. This year's ACC was horrible and now that OU has dropped to 0-4 in CFP games I think there are going to be questions about the value of winning the B12 going forward.
Note, I'm not trying to pick a fight with @utee94 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=15) or @CWSooner (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1544) or any other B12 fans here. I'm just saying that it IS a potential issue. It was for the B1G after MSU's blowout loss to Bama in 2015. Recent conference history/performance matters whether we like it or not. For the B1G:
In 2014 tOSU won the NC. Then in 2015 MSU won the B1G at 12-1 with a bad loss to a Nebraska team that finished 6-6. Part of the reason that the Nebraska loss did NOT keep MSU out of the CFP was that they had defeated last year's NC and won the conference that the previous NC came from.
Then in 2016 tOSU got in at 11-1 and without a Championship based partially on the perception of tOSU based on winning the CFP in 2014 and winning the Fiesta Bowl in 2015. Ohio State was seen as a legit contender for the NC even without a P5 Championship based partially on perception based on prior years.
Then in 2017 tOSU was left out at 11-2 with a P5 Championship and one of the losses being to a fellow P5 Champion based partially on the fact that tOSU had gotten blown out in the CFP the previous year. 11-1 non-Champion Bama was seen as a more legitimate NC contender based on both teams' past results.
Then in 2018 tOSU was left out and even held behind an 11-2 non-champion from the SEC despite being a 12-1 P5 Champion. By that time the B1G had gone three years without being competitive in the CFP (MSU in 2015 and tOSU in 2016 were blown out) so the SEC runner-up was seen as a more legit NC challenger than the 12-1 B1G Champion.
This year tOSU eliminated all doubt by going 13-0 and their CFP performance did not make them look unworthy of the CFP slot. They clearly stood toe-to-toe with Clemson even though they lost. Next year's B1G Champion will benefit from that even if it isn't tOSU.
This will be a problem for next year's B12 Champion because they have had four CFP chances and only been close one time. If next year's B1G and B12 Champions are close and in contention for the fourth spot I strongly believe that it will go to the B1G Champion based on that history.
An undefeated Texas or OU are going to get into the CFP, I hope we call agree on that?
A 1-loss Texas or OU might not, depending. We're certainly not going to get the BOTD that the SEC gets, or that Clemson gets.
But we'll get as much or more than the PAC or any non-Clemson ACC team does.
So I think what you're really getting at, is that a 1-loss B12 champ might get edged by a 1-loss B1G champ. My response is... maybe? Depends on who it is. A 1-loss Texas or OU is likely going to get bumped for a 1-loss Ohio State. Beyond that? I don't think it's much of an issue for Texas or OU. For the rest of the B12, it was always going to be an issue regardless.
-
An undefeated Texas or OU are going to get into the CFP, I hope we call agree on that?
A 1-loss Texas or OU might not, depending. We're certainly not going to get the BOTD that the SEC gets, or that Clemson gets.
But we'll get as much or more than the PAC or any non-Clemson ACC team does.
So I think what you're really getting at, is that a 1-loss B12 champ might get edged by a 1-loss B1G champ. My response is... maybe? Depends on who it is. A 1-loss Texas or OU is likely going to get bumped for a 1-loss Ohio State. Beyond that? I don't think it's much of an issue for Texas or OU. For the rest of the B12, it was always going to be an issue regardless.
Agreed on point one, but I don't think it is just UT or OU. IMHO, any undefeated P5 team is getting in unless there are five or six of them (in theory there could be six counting ND) and one or more HAS to get left out.
I am not really bothered by the BOTD that Clemson and the SEC get. They have earned it. The non-Bama SEC teams haven't really earned it, but any team that wins the SEC will have either beaten Bama or beaten a team that did. I'm ok with that.
You are probably right with regard to the PAC and non-Clemson ACC. The PAC is 1-2 in CFP games, the win was in the very first CFP game, and the two losses were not particularly close. The non-Clemson ACC is 0-1. The problem is that the B12's 0-4 is also not good.
By conference:
- 8-4 SEC about to be either 9-4 or 8-5 (6-3 Bama, 1-1 UGA, 1-0 LSU)
- 6-3 ACC about to be either 7-3 or 6-4 (6-2 Clemson, 0-1 FSU)
- 2-3 B1G (2-2 tOSU, 0-1 MSU)
- 1-2 PAC (1-1 Oregon, 0-1 Washington)
- 0-4 B12 (all OU)
- 0-1 Independent (all ND)
As you know, I don't think it is nearly as much about "helmet" as you do. I do think that it is possible that a 12-1 OU or UT could get bumped for a 12-1 Wisconsin. If it was only about helmet, obviously OU/UT would win that but if you look at CFP results, UW is from a conference that is 2-3 and OU/UT are from a conference that is 0-4. The thing is that it will be hard to tell because there will always be a lot of moving parts. How good/bad were the teams' OOC's? How dominant/close were their wins? How good was the rest of the league and therefore their SoS?
-
Yup. On helmet along, OU and Texas only get bumped if the alternative is Ohio State, Alabama, or Clemson, presuming all are 12-1. And Clemson was a 3 seed when 13-0 versus LSU and OSU at 13-0.
-
possibly Michigan if they ever beat OSU
-
So, it won't be the Wolverines then?
-
We Are Penn St???
a 1-loss PSU squad with a Big Ten Title in their pocket would be hard to leave out
could easily bump OU or Texas from the XII
obviously this would come down to relative strengths of conferences and schedules
-
So, it won't be the Wolverines then?
Exactly why I didn't include them.
-
We Are Penn St???
a 1-loss PSU squad with a Big Ten Title in their pocket would be hard to leave out
could easily bump OU or Texas from the XII
obviously this would come down to relative strengths of conferences and schedules
Maybe Penn State? But they just don't turn on as many television sets as Texas, so if it came down to it, I'd expect the Horns to go.
-
you are correct, but I feel PSU's helmet is shiny enough to get the nod
unless ESPN/SEC really does hate the Big Ten as Badger believess
-
you are correct, but I feel PSU's helmet is shiny enough to get the nod
unless ESPN/SEC really does hate the Big Ten as Badger believess
I think a 1-loss Texas with a decent in-conference loss and an OOC win over any of these teams on our schedule for the next 10 years: LSU, Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, Georgia, or Florida (which gets us through 2031), is going to get the nod over PSU. Every time. You can certainly disagree, but it wouldn't make much sense. :)
The trick, of course, is for Texas to get to that point. We're a long way off right now.
-
The other thing is that even if they lose at ND, that has no bearing on the ACCCG so if they end up 11-1 they'll be right back in the ACCCG against a (probably) weak opponent and 12-1 with a P5 Championship probably gets them in.
Exactly. 12-1 with an ACC championship is likely enough, and not necessarily a mulligan.
Beating ND, losing an ACC game to a team where they miss the ACCCG and finish 11-1, THAT will be the test of whether they get a mulligan.
-
Agreed on point one, but I don't think it is just UT or OU. IMHO, any undefeated P5 team is getting in unless there are five or six of them (in theory there could be six counting ND) and one or more HAS to get left out.
I am not really bothered by the BOTD that Clemson and the SEC get. They have earned it. The non-Bama SEC teams haven't really earned it, but any team that wins the SEC will have either beaten Bama or beaten a team that did. I'm ok with that.
You are probably right with regard to the PAC and non-Clemson ACC. The PAC is 1-2 in CFP games, the win was in the very first CFP game, and the two losses were not particularly close. The non-Clemson ACC is 0-1. The problem is that the B12's 0-4 is also not good.
By conference:
- 8-4 SEC about to be either 9-4 or 8-5 (6-3 Bama, 1-1 UGA, 1-0 LSU)
- 6-3 ACC about to be either 7-3 or 6-4 (6-2 Clemson, 0-1 FSU)
- 2-3 B1G (2-2 tOSU, 0-1 MSU)
- 1-2 PAC (1-1 Oregon, 0-1 Washington)
- 0-4 B12 (all OU)
- 0-1 Independent (all ND)
As you know, I don't think it is nearly as much about "helmet" as you do. I do think that it is possible that a 12-1 OU or UT could get bumped for a 12-1 Wisconsin. If it was only about helmet, obviously OU/UT would win that but if you look at CFP results, UW is from a conference that is 2-3 and OU/UT are from a conference that is 0-4. The thing is that it will be hard to tell because there will always be a lot of moving parts. How good/bad were the teams' OOC's? How dominant/close were their wins? How good was the rest of the league and therefore their SoS?
Yes, we'll continue to disagree fundamentally on this one. I'll focus specifically on Texas here, because OU is the team that keeps losing and it could be held against them.
But over the next decade+, Texas' OOC is: LSUx1, Alabama x2, Ohio State x2, Michigan x2, Georgia x2, Florida x2. So if Texas beats one of those teams in the OOC, and has a reasonable loss in-conference, there aren't a whole lot of scenarios where Texas is going to get bumped.
As for non-Ohio State teams in the CFP, well everyone also remembers Alabama 38, Michigan State 0. I think you're assuming too much halo-effect for OTHER B1G teams, when it's really just Ohio State that has held its own in the CFP.
So no, I don't think Ohio State's halo effect alone, is going to be enough to put in a non-helmet B1G team over Texas, regardless of how many times OU has pooped the bed. It'll take something beyond that, like Texas' sole loss being something REALLY bad, to make that happen.
-
Oh, I meant to add that if Texas went undefeated in-conference but LOST the marquee OOC game, then the situation would get way murkier. It would depend then, on how close the loss was, and what the rest of the SOS for all teams being considered, were.
So in that scenario, then yeah, I'll concede that a non-helmet B1G 1-loss champ could go ahead of 1-loss Texas B12 champ, if the balance of their season looked really good by comparison. But I think it would have to be really engaging, and the likes of that Michigan State team from a few years back that lost to a 5-7 Nebraska team, would probably not have enough juice to get the job done.
-
Oh, I meant to add that if Texas went undefeated in-conference but LOST the marquee OOC game, then the situation would get way murkier. It would depend then, on how close the loss was, and what the rest of the SOS for all teams being considered, were.
I agree. IMHO, the most survivable losses in the CFP era are:
- A conference loss to a good team that does NOT keep you out of the CG.
- Any conference loss that does NOT keep you out of the CG.
- An OOC loss to a team that is good enough to be excusable but not so good that you end up compared to them H2H for a CFP spot.
- A conference loss that keeps you out of the CG.
- An OOC loss to a bad team.
- An OOC loss to a team that is in contention for a CFP spot.
When you lose in conference, as long as it doesn't keep you out of the CG, you can still "prove" that you are the better team. Last year's tOSU loss to PU is a great example. It wasn't even close, 49-20 but by season's end they had five common opponents:
- Northwestern: tOSU won 45-24, PU lost 31-27
- Minnesota: tOSU won 30-14, PU lost 41-10
- Nebraska: tOSU won 36-31, PU won 42-28
- Indiana: tOSU won 49-26, PU won 28-21
- Michigan State: tOSU won 26-6, PU lost 23-13
Not only did tOSU go 5-0 to PU's 2-3 but one of PU's two wins (IU) was substantially smaller than tOSU's win against the same team. As it turned out, that was NOT survivable for tOSU THAT year, but that is close to the best loss you could have. The only things that would make it better would be if it had been closer and if PU had finished with a more respectable record (instead of 6-6 on selection day).
When you lose OOC the problem is that a lot of people are going to wonder if you really are worse than that team and then obviously worse than whoever wins their conference if they don't. Ie, if Texas had finished 12-1 after the loss to LSU this year but say Bama won the SEC at 12-1 while LSU finished 11-1 there is little or no chance that Texas would have gotten in over an 11-1 LSU team that beat them and lost only to Bama.
-
I agree. IMHO, the most survivable losses in the CFP era are:
- A conference loss to a good team that does NOT keep you out of the CG.
- Any conference loss that does NOT keep you out of the CG.
- An OOC loss to a team that is good enough to be excusable but not so good that you end up compared to them H2H for a CFP spot.
- A conference loss that keeps you out of the CG.
- An OOC loss to a bad team.
- An OOC loss to a team that is in contention for a CFP spot.
When you lose in conference, as long as it doesn't keep you out of the CG, you can still "prove" that you are the better team. Last year's tOSU loss to PU is a great example. It wasn't even close, 49-20 but by season's end they had five common opponents:
- Northwestern: tOSU won 45-24, PU lost 31-27
- Minnesota: tOSU won 30-14, PU lost 41-10
- Nebraska: tOSU won 36-31, PU won 42-28
- Indiana: tOSU won 49-26, PU won 28-21
- Michigan State: tOSU won 26-6, PU lost 23-13
Not only did tOSU go 5-0 to PU's 2-3 but one of PU's two wins (IU) was substantially smaller than tOSU's win against the same team. As it turned out, that was NOT survivable for tOSU THAT year, but that is close to the best loss you could have. The only things that would make it better would be if it had been closer and if PU had finished with a more respectable record (instead of 6-6 on selection day).
When you lose OOC the problem is that a lot of people are going to wonder if you really are worse than that team and then obviously worse than whoever wins their conference if they don't. Ie, if Texas had finished 12-1 after the loss to LSU this year but say Bama won the SEC at 12-1 while LSU finished 11-1 there is little or no chance that Texas would have gotten in over an 11-1 LSU team that beat them and lost only to Bama.
I was with your opinions for the most part, up until this bit. In the case of Alabama and LSU alone, I could see it happening. But if it's any other team and LSU, then I won't agree, because Alabama's halo is enough to protect that LSU team from Texas' helmet, but replace Alabama with Auburn and I don't agree.
In that case the extra game WOULD matter, as would being a conference champion, as would having the greater helmetosity. Texas' game against LSU was a close one, decided on the final possession. Folks will allow teams a chance to improve throughout the season, and Texas going undefeated beyond that point would be a sign of improvement, while LSU losing later in the season to someone not named Alabama would show weakness rather than strength.
Regardless, it's all academic. Texas isn't anywhere close at this point. I'd love for Texas to be good enough to test your theories against mine. Maybe by the time our teams play in the OOC in a few years, we'll be there. One can hope.
-
I'd love for Texas to be good enough to test your theories against mine.
It is always going to be difficult to test theories because there are a slew of potential reasons including:
- Helmetosity
- SoS
- Dominance of wins
- Quality wins
- Closeness (or lack of closeness) of loss
- Quality (or lack of quality) of loss
- Recent history of team (or conference) in CFP/NY6 games
- Conference Title
It is always going to be impossible to hold seven of those constant and compare solely based on the other one. Furthermore, in any case in which it is debatable each team is going to have an advantage on at least one of those categories and it is usually going to be more like 4-3 or 5-2.
Ohio State has been involved in enough of these controversies that they are a decent comparison.
2014 on those characteristics tOSU vs Baylor:
- Helmetosity: Big advantage to tOSU
- SoS: Big advantage to tOSU (don't pick SMU, Buffalo, and a bad FCS team as your OOC)
- Dominance of wins: Fairly close, advantage to Baylor earlier in the season, tOSU later.
- Quality wins: Baylor beat #6 TCU, #11 KSU; tOSU beat #8 MSU, #18 UW, #25 MN. You can argue this either way, Baylor's are higher ranked but tOSU has more.
- Closeness of loss: Both lost by 14
- Quality of loss: Baylor lost on the road to a WVU team that was 7-5 on selection day, tOSU lost at home to a VaTech team that was 6-6 on selection day. Advantage Baylor but it is close.
- Recent history of team (or conference) in CFP/NY6 games: Slight advantage to tOSU, they had lost close to Clemson the previous year in the Orange Bowl, Baylor had lost to UCF in the Fiesta.
- Conference Title: tOSU was and I think the committee treated Baylor as one as well.
I get two big advantages for tOSU and six that are pretty close to toss-ups. If the comparison had been between tOSU and TCU I think it would have been closer because TCU's SoS was better than Baylor's and their loss was MUCH better than either tOSU's or Baylor's. While tOSU and Baylor both lost by two TD's to a ~.500 team, TCU lost by a FG to a 12-1 team. I think the committee picked Baylor over TCU based on H2H then picked tOSU over Baylor based on SoS and 59-0.
-
It is always going to be difficult to test theories because there are a slew of potential reasons including:
- Helmetosity
- SoS
- Dominance of wins
- Quality wins
- Closeness (or lack of closeness) of loss
- Quality (or lack of quality) of loss
- Recent history of team (or conference) in CFP/NY6 games
- Conference Title
It is always going to be impossible to hold seven of those constant and compare solely based on the other one. Furthermore, in any case in which it is debatable each team is going to have an advantage on at least one of those categories and it is usually going to be more like 4-3 or 5-2.
Ohio State has been involved in enough of these controversies that they are a decent comparison.
2014 on those characteristics tOSU vs Baylor:
- Helmetosity: Big advantage to tOSU
- SoS: Big advantage to tOSU (don't pick SMU, Buffalo, and a bad FCS team as your OOC)
- Dominance of wins: Fairly close, advantage to Baylor earlier in the season, tOSU later.
- Quality wins: Baylor beat #6 TCU, #11 KSU; tOSU beat #8 MSU, #18 UW, #25 MN. You can argue this either way, Baylor's are higher ranked but tOSU has more.
- Closeness of loss: Both lost by 14
- Quality of loss: Baylor lost on the road to a WVU team that was 7-5 on selection day, tOSU lost at home to a VaTech team that was 6-6 on selection day. Advantage Baylor but it is close.
- Recent history of team (or conference) in CFP/NY6 games: Slight advantage to tOSU, they had lost close to Clemson the previous year in the Orange Bowl, Baylor had lost to UCF in the Fiesta.
- Conference Title: tOSU was and I think the committee treated Baylor as one as well.
I get two big advantages for tOSU and six that are pretty close to toss-ups. If the comparison had been between tOSU and TCU I think it would have been closer because TCU's SoS was better than Baylor's and their loss was MUCH better than either tOSU's or Baylor's. While tOSU and Baylor both lost by two TD's to a ~.500 team, TCU lost by a FG to a 12-1 team. I think the committee picked Baylor over TCU based on H2H then picked tOSU over Baylor based on SoS and 59-0.
As you know, I believe their decision was far, far simpler than that. ;)
But the Buckeyes did make it easy on the Committee by obliterating their B1G CCG opponent. And tOSU was certainly deserving, I'd never claim they weren't. I believed that even without them ultimately winning the CFP championship.
-
As you know, I believe their decision was far, far simpler than that. ;)
But the Buckeyes did make it easy on the Committee by obliterating their B1G CCG opponent. And tOSU was certainly deserving, I'd never claim they weren't. I believed that even without them ultimately winning the CFP championship.
As I said above, I think it would have been a MUCH tougher call if it had been between tOSU and TCU but I think in the committee's mind it was between B12 Champion Baylor (because they had the H2H over TCU) and B1G Champion tOSU. Looked at that way, after the B1GCG it really wasn't very close in my mind. If you ignore helmet completely tOSU still was roughly even with TCU in every other category except SoS where tOSU was WAY better.
I appreciate your comment about "even without them ultimately winning". A while back we had someone on here claiming that tOSU got all kinds of breaks that they didn't deserve and he used tOSU's 31-0 loss to Clemson in the 2016 CFP to "prove" that they didn't belong but tried to claim that tOSU's NC in 2014 was not valid evidence that they DID belong in 2014 and similarly that Baylor's 2014 Bowl loss was not valid evidence either.
IMHO, what happens in the CFP doesn't prove or disprove anything either way. The decision is made on selection day without knowing what will happen and that is that. I can see an argument that it is valid but I can't stand when someone tries to cherry-pick and say that it counts when it supports their argument but doesn't count when it doesn't. CFP results either are evidence or they are not. If they are then 2014's results "prove" that tOSU deserved their shot and 2016's results suggest that they did not. If they are not then neither are relevant. You just can't have it both ways and I'm glad that at least you aren't trying to but plenty of people do.
-
possibly Michigan if they ever beat OSU
(https://i.imgur.com/Z0PYKln.png)
-
In some ways it is worse with Clemson/Oklahoma than it is with Bama because we all know that the SEC is a powerful league. When Bama wins it, that is an accomplishment worth noting. This year's ACC was horrible and now that OU has dropped to 0-4 in CFP games I think there are going to be questions about the value of winning the B12 going forward.
Note, I'm not trying to pick a fight with @utee94 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=15) or @CWSooner (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1544) or any other B12 fans here. I'm just saying that it IS a potential issue. It was for the B1G after MSU's blowout loss to Bama in 2015. Recent conference history/performance matters whether we like it or not. For the B1G:
In 2014 tOSU won the NC. Then in 2015 MSU won the B1G at 12-1 with a bad loss to a Nebraska team that finished 6-6. Part of the reason that the Nebraska loss did NOT keep MSU out of the CFP was that they had defeated last year's NC and won the conference that the previous NC came from.
Then in 2016 tOSU got in at 11-1 and without a Championship based partially on the perception of tOSU based on winning the CFP in 2014 and winning the Fiesta Bowl in 2015. Ohio State was seen as a legit contender for the NC even without a P5 Championship based partially on perception based on prior years.
Then in 2017 tOSU was left out at 11-2 with a P5 Championship and one of the losses being to a fellow P5 Champion based partially on the fact that tOSU had gotten blown out in the CFP the previous year. 11-1 non-Champion Bama was seen as a more legitimate NC contender based on both teams' past results.
Then in 2018 tOSU was left out and even held behind an 11-2 non-champion from the SEC despite being a 12-1 P5 Champion. By that time the B1G had gone three years without being competitive in the CFP (MSU in 2015 and tOSU in 2016 were blown out) so the SEC runner-up was seen as a more legit NC challenger than the 12-1 B1G Champion.
This year tOSU eliminated all doubt by going 13-0 and their CFP performance did not make them look unworthy of the CFP slot. They clearly stood toe-to-toe with Clemson even though they lost. Next year's B1G Champion will benefit from that even if it isn't tOSU.
This will be a problem for next year's B12 Champion because they have had four CFP chances and only been close one time. If next year's B1G and B12 Champions are close and in contention for the fourth spot I strongly believe that it will go to the B1G Champion based on that history.
I think you are correct, Medina.
I also think that a conference's overall bowl history plays a secondary role, which is why I even rooted for Texas to beat Utah. And why I will hold my nose and root for Baylor to beat Georgia in the Sugar Bowl.
EDIT: I see that you addressed my additional point in a later post than the one I quoted.
-
In some ways it is worse with Clemson/Oklahoma than it is with Bama because we all know that the SEC is a powerful league. When Bama wins it, that is an accomplishment worth noting. This year's ACC was horrible and now that OU has dropped to 0-4 in CFP games I think there are going to be questions about the value of winning the B12 going forward.
Note, I'm not trying to pick a fight with @utee94 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=15) or @CWSooner (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1544) or any other B12 fans here. I'm just saying that it IS a potential issue. It was for the B1G after MSU's blowout loss to Bama in 2015. Recent conference history/performance matters whether we like it or not. For the B1G:
In 2014 tOSU won the NC. Then in 2015 MSU won the B1G at 12-1 with a bad loss to a Nebraska team that finished 6-6. Part of the reason that the Nebraska loss did NOT keep MSU out of the CFP was that they had defeated last year's NC and won the conference that the previous NC came from.
Then in 2016 tOSU got in at 11-1 and without a Championship based partially on the perception of tOSU based on winning the CFP in 2014 and winning the Fiesta Bowl in 2015. Ohio State was seen as a legit contender for the NC even without a P5 Championship based partially on perception based on prior years.
Then in 2017 tOSU was left out at 11-2 with a P5 Championship and one of the losses being to a fellow P5 Champion based partially on the fact that tOSU had gotten blown out in the CFP the previous year. 11-1 non-Champion Bama was seen as a more legitimate NC contender based on both teams' past results.
Then in 2018 tOSU was left out and even held behind an 11-2 non-champion from the SEC despite being a 12-1 P5 Champion. By that time the B1G had gone three years without being competitive in the CFP (MSU in 2015 and tOSU in 2016 were blown out) so the SEC runner-up was seen as a more legit NC challenger than the 12-1 B1G Champion.
This year tOSU eliminated all doubt by going 13-0 and their CFP performance did not make them look unworthy of the CFP slot. They clearly stood toe-to-toe with Clemson even though they lost. Next year's B1G Champion will benefit from that even if it isn't tOSU.
This will be a problem for next year's B12 Champion because they have had four CFP chances and only been close one time. If next year's B1G and B12 Champions are close and in contention for the fourth spot I strongly believe that it will go to the B1G Champion based on that history.
Medina, I think you are a very wise poster, but I must disagree on the fundamental premise here.
I think you’re over crediting the history and the latticework of it all, and not putting enough on each season. A writer I liked pointed out, record is the top reason a team gets to the playoff. Looking back, we’ll start with 2015, the first year with a playoff hangover:
2015: MSU got in because it was a 1-loss P5 champ. OSU did not because there were four such champs for four spots.
2016: OSU got in because there were four 1 or zero loss teams in P5 and the best G5 lacked even that level’s helmetness. Had Oklahoma lost one fewer games, or would’ve gone, 2014 title notwithstanding.
2017: OSU got shut out because it lost twice, and one of those losses was to Iowa by blowout. Bama being Bama certainly helped, as did the fact the Tide would’ve been favored against the other three teams in the field. If OSU didn’t lose to Iowa or OU, it probably goes. (And if OU has two losses, Bama goes in its place)
2018: This was the most interesting one, and even this I don’t think had a lick to do with previous playoff appearances. OSU managed to get in a narrative rut, with even our educated posters holding them behind Michigan over and over. And by the time the humiliated Michigan, it mostly just tore down the Wolverines and didn’t boost OSU (bad conference title game does didn’t help, nor did the scoreboard watching that day). It was strange because that shoulda been a real, bonafide controversy and it hardly was. Perhaps this is because whoever met Bama was gonna get slaughtered, and we all figured, why not OU? The UGA part was weird, but they had some push off nearly beating Bama, and the order after 4 is kinda meaningless. I mean, OSU, a team with a title was held out by a team/conference that had yet to win a playoff game.
Anyway. Maybe this puts a pox on the Big 12, but that will start with the CFP breaking other conventions. There’s still only five P5 champs. And at least one or two usually take multiple losses. And as long as that happens, the Big 12 champ will probably keep going in perpetuity as long as it has a single loss, save for years ND has 1 or zero losses, when it might be a little more competitive. Interestingly the Big 12, is in a slightly good spot because it’s setup makes a one-loss non-champ a harder feat to pull off (one-loss teams can’t lose division tiebreakers).
We can talk about the relative merits of going by record (a legit question). But in the end, we’ll still need more viable options to replace OU. This year that would have been: An LSU-UGA rematch (nah), two-loss Oregon which got upended by ASU and the best parts of the resume are beating USC, Utah and a lot of 7-5 teams, the Baylor squad OU swept and two-loss Bama with a backup QB. Maybe those teams don’t get jumped quite so badly, but they still get battered and we’re left saying “were they really the best for that spot?”
-
There is a fairly rotund fellow they feature on ESPN who covers betting, I have no clue if he's any good or not, don't care much, but of all the games he picked this season, he chose UGA over Baylor, give the points. I thought at first he was saying Baylor, as I think Baylor is a very good team, and UGA is down 15 players now for the bowl, many of them starters (including three from the OL). And I have not thought UGA was doing well at all on offense this year. The defense is pretty sound, but the offense struggles to RTDB.
I'll stick with picking Baylor. Maybe the "kids" UGA will have to play will be highly motivated and pull this off. Might be better than guys protecting their NFL status.
-
I was idly thinking about this LSU-Clemson game, and again, I think it will be close unless one team gets a bunch of TOs. It will be close enough that 1-2-3 "key plays" (calls) will determine the winner. I fear the refs may play a role, again.
-
No, we are not a bitter fan base at all. Actual Radio spot for 97.1 The Fan Columbus Sports Radio.
"NCAA National Championship Game, LSU vs. Clemson brought to you by... Really... Bad... Officiating, in the Fiesta Bowl. 97.1 is airing a game Ohio St should be in but isn't. Monday Night 8pm."
-
I think the Championship Game is closer to Spring Games than Thanksgiving
-
I'm picking Clemson, as I'm assuming about 50 of LSU's players are locked up for what they did to OU.
-
I think the Championship Game is closer to Spring Games than Thanksgiving
I know, I keep forgetting there is still another game. Today would have been a good time time for the game (or even better, last Saturday). As it is there's a decent chance I'll forget the game is on Monday night if I'm doing something else.
-
While I concede we will never go back to the old bowl/poll system, cant the TV honks figure out a better programming plan? Why are they so in love w Monday night? NFL avoidance is understandable, but, the ceding of NYD is the bigger problem. I still cant get over how surprised they were when the NY Eve experiment blew up in their faces.
-
So CBSsports.com has their 8-experts pick the game thing....here's the scores:
32-29
34-31
37-30
35-31
35-31
37-31
37-33
38-29
.
All the same. My problem isn't with all the scores being the same or their experts all playing it safe or prudent or whatever you want to call it. Here's the thing...if your 8 experts all think the same thing, why bother with 8 experts?
.
Shrug.
-
I definitely like a first half under. I kind of like the under generally.
-
Geaux Jeaux Burreaux,hopes he wipes that smug,snotty smile off Dabos petulant puss.Their were other smug coaches but between luck,God and Bagmen he takes the cakeSpurrier had that same look but he was clever/interesting,not the condescending Jesus is our OC bs
-
Congrats to the future champs, whoever that is, because I'll probably be asleep by the time they determine it
-
Ya might have to reach for the Yuban instead of the Yuengling if I'm going to hang on until Dabo gets his just deserts
-
Can Burrow have ANOTHER lights out game like he just had? If so, well, fork in it.
LSU 38 Clemson 35
Note my prediction is the same as that of the experts, in quotes.
-
LSU 35, Clemson 30
-
LSU 35, Clemson 30
So many experts.
-
this is the toughest team LSU has faced this season, and... that's saying something as they've played the longhorns, auburn, georgia, bama, florida... et al. still, this is the toughest team yet.
clemson is a good team- but they aren't the best. tOSU was the best- and i ain't placating audience by saying that either. it is/was between LSU and tOSU in my opinion... then tOSU soils the sheets by marching into the redzone and settling for FG's- else that game wouldn't have been close (i've watched it three times, now- including this afternoon) and questionable calls wouldn't be something we'd be worried about.
LSU has enjoyed drawing people into 'their' game... which, if anyone has ever listened to me and if i ain't FoS, THAT is the mark of a champion... make them play 'your' game and by taking them out of their own (outside their 'comfort zone').
problem: Clemson is actually capable of playing D (regardless of what happened with tOSU)- and.... they may be able to confound LSU.
I think this game plays out like the LSU/Vandy game this season more than the LSU/Auburn game. they're gonna have to step up tempo and run with Clemson, outscoring them (ala the vandy game) and making Clemson go for the big gains (which seems to be something easily achieved with Dabo- luring him into that trap.... if Vennable (sp?) "holds the line", LSU loses in a game more like the Auburn game.
Clemson needs to pressure the LSU backfield with reckless abandon early- play man-to-man with safety covering/doubling down on the 50/50 receiver- hoping pressure can bust up Burrow before he checks down to the 'free' receiver. If they can do that early, i really think they can shake Burrow up into second guessing himself. problem: nobody else has been able to do that to Burrow, and... those LSU lineman are the real deal... and... the LSU receiver corps are freaks- dragging defenders for half a set of downs on average AFTER first contact.
so... it SHOULD be LSU- big... like, 42~55 to Clemson's 21~28..... should be.... ought to be...... but.....
I got a funny feeling that reminds me of a Bama meeting against Texas and a certain Colt getting bounced HARD early and not returning... and that pony reminds me more of Burrow (a donkey?) more than Sunshine QB'ing Clemson (sorry, that is exactly what he looks like- from "remember the titans").
without that 'home alone' kid behind center for LSU.......... ouch. it'll be Clemson BIG... and...
if i had the money and motivation to drop it on yellow or orange- it would be.... orange... 'klempson' pulls out a TIGHT win... perhaps even OT.
-
So many experts.
How can Drew afford us all?
Originally Drew autocorrected to Free. Freudian autocorrect?
-
I got a funny feeling that reminds me of a Bama meeting against Texas and a certain Colt getting bounced HARD early and not returning... and that pony reminds me more of Burrow (a donkey?) more than Sunshine QB'ing Clemson (sorry, that is exactly what he looks like- from "remember the titans").
My wife is pulling for LSU purely because of Lawrence. She doesn't know his name [I believe], she just refers to him as that Clemson QB and then flips her hair derisively...
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/caeea5b5936cdf9db7a6a174d2773b51/tenor.gif?itemid=13227467)
-
Clemson 27-23 but geaux Tigers. Clemson fans are asshats.
-
T Law does have some of the best hair we've seen in sports in a long time.
-
Geaux Jeaux Burreaux,hopes he wipes that smug,snotty smile off Dabos petulant puss.Their were other smug coaches but between luck,God and Bagmen he takes the cakeSpurrier had that same look but he was clever/interesting,not the condescending Jesus is our OC bs
Yeah, I have family in rural SC and it's the buckle of the bible belt. He could win more NCs than Saban, but if he didn't give all the glory to god, he'd get run outta town.
.
It's gross. If all the junk said is true, god is the biggest sports fan of us all. And he's got a lot riding on it. And he's got an in.
-
Clemson 27-23 but geaux Tigers. Clemson fans are asshats.
Go play LSU in a bowl game in New Orleans. Then you'll see some asshat fans.
LSU fans are at most a half-step above Miami fans in the Hall of Shame, where lower is more shameful. The big difference is that there are only about 50,000 real Miami fans, whereas there are millions of LSU fans. And they all come out when LSU plays for the NC in the Big Easy. Which LSU has done every time it has played for the NC.
If Clemson wins, their fans will be lucky to escape New Orleans without injury.
Nevertheless, I'm holding my nose and rooting for LSU.
-
LSU fans are the best, other than Ole Miss, and maybe a hundred other teams.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/WwUWcdX.jpg)
-
The only way the PAC-12 can get to this game....the refs!
-
Yeah, I have family in rural SC and it's the buckle of the bible belt. He could win more NCs than Saban, but if he didn't give all the glory to god, he'd get run outta town.
.
It's gross. If all the junk said is true, god is the biggest sports fan of us all. And he's got a lot riding on it. And he's got an in.
Hmm. I’ve never found it condescending or off putting. Is it genuine? No idea. That’s between him and God. Is it brilliant? Absolutely. Dabo plays perfectly to his fanbase and recruiting base.
-
...and that conversation should be in area-51 exclusively..
good stop by the bayou bengals...
-
Good punt. Military aluminum alloy ...
-
good grief... Burrow doesn't waste a play... his linemen do, but not him.
-
Illegal blindside block. Sigh. I miss football.
-
right?
and LSU needed Clemson to score to flip the field... if this holds up, it'll be a game of just that... field position...
-
Good to see a call go against the Diety Dabo.I think Joe's gonna get game back
-
they're under Burrow's skin... already. this is gonna go badly for them.
-
Clemson look like the clearly better team so far, despite the DPI LSU gets away with.
Burrow is not sharp at all.
-
And LSU responds with a 52-yard TD.
-
where are these officials from?
-
The apathetic coast.
-
i ask because they're concerned about the hits- but not so much the handsy db's on either side of the ball... don't get me wrong- let em' play, but be consistent.
i don't think it much of factor thus far.
-
Nice run keep them from pinning their ears back
-
those clemson LB's marching right through at will.
-
lol, #7 Grant Delpit, Thorpe winner.....I'm going to take a shit angle and then jog.....ffs.
-
Need 6 here Cajuns
-
How many punts gave their been in the opponent's side of the field? At least four I think
-
They're ignoring sabermetric football.
-
I could see the first punt by Clem but didn't like the second. Better than seeing a fake punt attempt
-
lol, #19 got shook like a basketball defender
-
Heh! Funny to see LSU complaining about the Clemson guy with the "cramp." LSU guys "cramped" up over and over against Texas, as the "dry Texas heat" was something they just weren't used to!
-
Clemson should have ran more and shortened this game. They gave LSU too many possessions, now the DL is whipped and Burrow will eat them alive if they aren't getting pressure.
-
LSU winning this game based almost solely on one matchup on the outside
-
Hilarious how gary Patterson works these film room broadcasts everytime. Wonder if he changes shirts at half?
-
The PI a killer.
-
My goodness Burrow with that run
-
This Burrow guy is pretty good.
-
Yeah Baby!
-
The PI a killer.
I kinda liked it
-
Burrow is a way better athlete/runner than preppie realize.
-
shut up dabo you whiny little biatch
-
Rooting interests aside , it gassed Clemson. Lawrence will have an hour between passes.
-
Rooting interests aside , it gassed Clemson. Lawrence will have an hour between passes.
HUH?
-
HUH?
The PI. If the donkey doesnt ram the WR, lsu punts and the D gets to sit down, and maybe Clemson answers. Instead 28-17 and your back on D to start 3rd.
-
The PI gassed Clemson, causing more than an hour of rest for the Clemson QB.
Hard to believe Clemson this behind after the game they've played.
-
"Coming up: 11 greatest players in cfb history revealed"
.
prepare yourself for a bunch of NFL resumes
-
They just wanted to honor the old guys that are still alive. That's nice.
-
Like: Clemson's fight song when they score
Hate: when any team's band blares their horns all the way to the snap
-
Jim Brown probably isn't even the best player in Syracuse history, college career only
-
Jim Brown probably isn't even the best player in Syracuse history, college career only
2,091 yards rushing over 3 seasons, 24 games. That's some you really had to be there and nowhere else for 150 years to draw that conclusion.
-
I had no problem with what it turned out to be. There's tons of NFL stuff like that, and not enough for college football. Brown probably should have won a Heisman, but finished 5th.
I will never ever ever be able to swallow Stabauch being on these all-time teams. How'd he get a Heisman? Life magazine cover? If he was drafted and played for the Browns instead of the Cowboys, he'd be a random nobody, forgotten to time. He could scramble. He was pretty. He lost to 4-7 SMU. Some QB at Oregon had a far superior year, but he was west of the Mississippi, wasn't on a magazine cover, and perhaps wasn't pretty.
.
You could close your eyes and find 30 better QBs in history, and very likely 50 more. None of it matters, but still.
-
Lol. I love how #1 Kendrick of Clemson gets beat, dives and tackles the WR out of desperation but doesn’t get called because the ball was overthrown, and then gets up and signals incomplete as if he had something to do with it.
-
Pac 12! Back
-
Lol
-
Again, Jim Brown is #1 because of his NFL career. That's the problem. But giving a nice moment for a bunch of old guys was nice. It'd be nicer if we didn't have to make a big lie out of it.
-
Got to repeat that stat: LSU had more yards in the 2nd quarter than Clemson gave up PER GAME, on average.
-
Lol. I love how #1 Kendrick of Clemson gets beat, dives and tackles the WR out of desperation but doesn’t get called because the ball was overthrown, and then gets up and signals incomplete as if he had something to do with it.
ESPN just named him the #6 best player of all time
-
Weakest fookin' call I've seen,is it God or the Devil someone likes Clemsux
-
You could feasibly make a legit all-time college football team of nearly anonymous players. Which is sad.
-
What are LSU fans possibly booing about that PI call?
Stingley might be my favorite player in the country.
-
Ya start pounding the nails in
-
Wow straight dropped a TD....the Biletnikoff winner......
-
Wow straight dropped a TD....the Biletnikoff winner......
Mo Rivera blew a WS game 7 save.
-
Ugh...Clemson's mascot has committed multiple violent crimes...just look at him.
-
If LSU hangs on here they will have 5 wins over teams who will finish top 10. Clemson, OU, Bama, UGA, and UF. That doesn’t include wins over Texas, TAMU, and Auburn.
That’s as tough a schedule as I can ever remember.
-
If LSU hangs on here they will have 5 wins over teams who will finish top 10. Clemson, OU, Bama, UGA, and UF. That doesn’t include wins over Texas, TAMU, and Auburn.
That’s as tough a schedule as I can ever remember.
Yeah, but they let that backup Ole Miss QB run for a million yards, so.......not that impressive.
-
Not a banner half for Kendrick, even with the drop and the overthrow
-
Guy had no chance. Lsu just at another level.
-
Not a lot stopping them from hanging half a hundy...
-
I'd put WR Corp of Bama or LSU over any of the remaining nfl squads.
-
LSU is a tough team... there ain't no denying it. they were beat the first quarter- then.. willed themselves back in it... and now? it's turning ugly, and Lawrence will throw a couple INT's hide and watch...
-
Is it called back?
-
Hm, I don't necessarily disagree, but for all of the far more blatant offensive PI that's ignored, surprised they called that. I'm always Team Defense though, and hate all the crap that WRs typically get away with
-
Spicoli gets spiked
-
I'm surprised I'm still awake
-
does taco bell really think that freaky tent makes people want to eat taco's?
-
Fowler can take his plane to Aussie anytime now.
-
nice thing about the coaches feed view is that you could see why Lawrence isn't playing well. LSU's DBs not letting anyone get open.
-
I'm surprised I'm still awake
Four hours into this and we're just barely getting to Q4
-
It's been a bad visual watching the film room. Lsu all over WRs.
-
Four hours into this and we're just barely getting to Q4
Monday night football!
-
Monday night football!
Athlons preview like 15 or so years ago had 25 reasons why college football was better than the NFL, and I think like 20 of them no longer apply.
-
Its been a slow leak, that's for sure. Wait till we get more playoffs!
-
Nebraska remains the last undefeated back to back national champion.
-
I’ve never seen a player turnaround in 1 year like Joe Burrow. He was OK in 2018. Not bad. Not great. He was NOTHING like this. Never seen someone get that much better in a single year.
-
well, we made it through that..... and, though i figure most here didn't notice- but there are almost 16k people on the page right now.. well, i bet there are like 50 PEOPLE, and almost 15.95k robots... and the page held up. damn- last time we were hit like that the page crawled.
glad i didn't drop that money i was talking about five or so pages back.... i'd be pissed right now if i had.
-
I feel for Clemson fans. I remember being in New Orleans watching my team lose to LSU
-
Ed Orgeron has to be seen to be believed. This dude is like a WWE/Adam Sandler movie character. Reminds me of the assistant coach in Waterboy.
-
I’ve never seen a player turnaround in 1 year like Joe Burrow. He was OK in 2018. Not bad. Not great. He was NOTHING like this. Never seen someone get that much better in a single year.
guy was a perfect balance of recklessness and skill. a LOT of the passes he's thrown this season should never have found their mark. he's truly got an NFL ready arm- hitting tiny windows before they open... as in 'anticipating' the window.
risky, but with an arm and some vision- you get what we saw this season... not exactly this game, but this season.
-
I was thinking damn, it's getting late, here in AZ. Definitely don't miss staying up after midnight for these types of games. No reason they don't start 7pm EST or so.
-
This LSU team might be the best ever. Not a great defense, but good enough. Basically an all-time offense.
-
I feel for Clemson fans. I remember being in New Orleans watching my team lose to LSU
I was there too :(
Incidentally, has LSU ever played a NC Game not in NOLA?
-
I was there too :(
Incidentally, has LSU ever played a NC Game not in NOLA?
No.
-
Ed Orgeron has to be seen to be believed. This dude is like a WWE/Adam Sandler movie character. Reminds me of the assistant coach in Waterboy.
Has it been confirmed that Coach O is actually human, and not a neatly shaved bear in a headset?
-
No money in the travel budget for anywhere else.
-
Has it been confirmed that Coach O is actually human, and not a neatly shaved bear in a headset?
bump
-
Just viewed the photo on espn of the inside of the Mercedes Benz Superdome, and reflect upon how awful it was after it was breached by the hurricane when it was used as a storm shelter by those who had no where else to go.
I thought then it would not be useable again. Plumbers are great! Remediators are great! And, now, LSU is great!
But, I am still thinking the SEC officiating team eliminated the best football team in 2019-20 college football.
-
Just viewed the photo on espn of the inside of the Mercedes Benz Superdome, and reflect upon how awful it was after it was breached by the hurricane when it was used as a storm shelter by those who had no where else to go.
I thought then it would not be useable again. Plumbers are great! Remediators are great! And, now, LSU is great!
But, I am still thinking the SEC officiating team eliminated the best football team in 2019-20 college football.
Stop thinking that. The best team hoisted the trophy.
-
Yeah....the first 1 seed to win the playoff, and we're poo-pooing it because of refs. Good grief.
-
Yes what a great season for LSU. They were not going to be denied by anybody. Very impressive. Actually I was also impressed by Clemson because even though they were out manned and they never really gave up.
-
I feel for Clemson fans.
Umm,No
-
If LSU hangs on here they will have 5 wins over teams who will finish top 10. Clemson, OU, Bama, UGA, and UF. That doesn’t include wins over Texas, TAMU, and Auburn.
That’s as tough a schedule as I can ever remember.
Absolutely - enjoy it because w/o Burrow they'll be back down to earth soon enough.Maybe some of their home grown guys will stay put
-
While I believe that Ohio State should probably beat Clemson 6-7 times out of 10 this year, they'd probably win about 3 against LSU. That nut was just too tough to crack. Even a fully-loaded Bama couldn't do it.
-
If there was a defining drive it had to the last minute of the 1st half.LSU up 21-17 and JB had that nice I dunno 20 yd run and get out of bounds in the red zone and next he throws a TD with 14 seconds left.Also in the 3rd QTR with LSU up 28-25 Clemson LB gets kicked out for H2H and LSU scores not long after.You could hear wind going out of their sails
-
If there was a defining drive it had to the last minute of the 1st half.LSU up 21-17 and JB had that rice I dunno 20 yd run and get out of bounds in the red zone and next he throws a TD with 14 seconds left.Also in the 3rd QTR with LSU up 28-25 Clemson LB gets kicked out for H2H and LSU scores not long after.You could hear wind going out of their sails
Yeah, they allowed a 3rd & 19 conversion on that drive before half.
-
Absolutely - enjoy it because w/o Burrow they'll be back down to earth soon enough.Maybe some of their home grown guys will stay put
I think they'll continue to be very good, but they certainly did catch lightning in a bottle this season. I'm glad that Burrow will be gone before we have to play them in Baton Rouge in September. Not sure how many of those outstanding WRs are moving on, but I hope it's ALL of them. :)
-
Prolly,if they're eligible - dems po-boys soon to be not
-
I like and can appreciate the talent of borrow. However, much of his success was coaching.
Its not common coaches allow their QBs to sling like that even of they can... The coaches generally mitigate risk. A player cocky enough are a dime a dozen if left to their own devices but a coach isn't.
I wager another will emerge and almost as good as burrow was. But man, that kid was magnificent, and those receivers played just as hungry... The entire team played hard and above their station on paper. That, y'all, is coaching as much as talent.
-
I wager another will emerge and almost as good as burrow was.
I'd take that wager,Burrow was always very accurate LSU caught lightning in the bottle.He was the center of debate back in 2016 on Buckeye Boards (before he broke his thumb).The LSU coaches obviously let him be himself but it's a tall order finding someone to replace a once in a generation player.LSU always has talent just hard luck under center though - I'm happy for him.One of the reporters said "now it's on to Cincinnati"
-
I like and can appreciate the talent of borrow. However, much of his success was coaching.
Its not common coaches allow their QBs to sling like that even of they can... The coaches generally mitigate risk. A player cocky enough are a dime a dozen if left to their own devices but a coach isn't.
I wager another will emerge and almost as good as burrow was. But man, that kid was magnificent, and those receivers played just as hungry... The entire team played hard and above their station on paper. That, y'all, is coaching as much as talent.
Joe Brady has to be bucking for a promotion methinks. Burrow was basically an afterthought at OSU and Brady made him the best QB in all of CFB at LSU.
LSU is going to have to make him co-OC or something like that soon, otherwise he'll grab another prime gig (maybe even in the NFL).
-
Joe Brady has to be bucking for a promotion methinks. Burrow was basically an afterthought at OSU and Brady made him the best QB in all of CFB at LSU.
LSU is going to have to make him co-OC or something like that soon, otherwise he'll grab another prime gig (maybe even in the NFL).
Burrow was way more than an afterthought at Ohio State. Not sure where this narrative comes from?
he went into the close battle with Haskins to be #2, and was winning that battle until he broke his hand. That gave the role to Haskins, who promptly came into the road game AT Michigan and brought OSU a come from behind win on
the biggest stage. For 2018- both were given an equal shot in the spring, and by all accounts it was a real battle with no clear winner.
Meyer didn’t conclude a starter for fall- and Burrow- smartly- did not want to risk it so he shopped himself in the portal. OSU did NOT want him to leave- but once he made his mind up- they made sure to not stand in his way.
meanwhile- Haskins Threw 50 td passes in his rookie, and only season as a starter. 50.
Burrow got a full year of starting in 18, and had an OK season, while Haskins was doing that/ breaking nearly every big ten and OSU passing record.
Then 2019 happened and that’s in the history books now.
-
I will add that Haskins success can be traced directly to Ryan Day- and he followed that up with Fields this year, who himself was responsible for 50 touchdowns (40+ throwing I believe).
It might have been pretty good if Burrow got to work with Day for 2 full seasons.
-
https://twitter.com/BrodyLogan/status/1217089108817793025
-
While I believe that Ohio State should probably beat Clemson 6-7 times out of 10 this year, they'd probably win about 3 against LSU. That nut was just too tough to crack. Even a fully-loaded Bama couldn't do it.
This is about how I feel. I'm still dissappointed about the Clemson loss because it still just feels like one of those games where my team was better but just came up a little short that night. That said, I agree, LSU would probably win against Ohio State anyway.
-
It seems now that Bama and LSU have reluctantly and successfully gone to the big offense, enough defense trend...who still hasn't? Stanford? Michigan? MSU? Georgia?
.
Anywho. If Bama doesn't win the West next year, I see them going back to their previous style of bullying you with talent and depth and defense. Can a program do that? Go back?
With Tua gone, they may try to. It'll be interesting to me.
-
It seems now that Bama and LSU have reluctantly and successfully gone to the big offense, enough defense trend...who still hasn't? Stanford? Michigan? MSU? Georgia?
.
Anywho. If Bama doesn't win the West next year, I see them going back to their previous style of bullying you with talent and depth and defense. Can a program do that? Go back?
With Tua gone, they may try to. It'll be interesting to me.
Michigan tried to morph their offense this past year with mixed results. Georgia stands out as a team that has been somewhat limited, we'll see how they look with a more mobile quarterback. MSU really needs to up their game.
-
Things come full circle the more they change the more they stay the same
-
Has anyone mentioned the Pirate hired @ Miss ST?Too bad it wasn't the MSU in E.Lansing - that would be interesting
-
It seems now that Bama and LSU have reluctantly and successfully gone to the big offense, enough defense trend...who still hasn't? Stanford? Michigan? MSU? Georgia?
.
Anywho. If Bama doesn't win the West next year, I see them going back to their previous style of bullying you with talent and depth and defense. Can a program do that? Go back?
With Tua gone, they may try to. It'll be interesting to me.
Badgers.
-
I feel for Clemson fans. I remember being in New Orleans watching my team lose to LSU
I don't.
-
I feel for Clemson fans. I remember being in New Orleans watching my team lose to LSU
I don't.
I was there too :(
Incidentally, has LSU ever played a NC Game not in NOLA?
As was I.
-
There were 86 pass attempts in last nights championship game. Probably 90+ if you include scrambles. Zero holding calls. Zero interceptions. I'd hate to be a DC in CF right now. They must feel as if they're calling defense in a 7v7 league.
-
There were 86 pass attempts in last nights championship game. Probably 90+ if you include scrambles. Zero holding calls. Zero interceptions. I'd hate to be a DC in CF right now. They must feel as if they're calling defense in a 7v7 league.
One really soft Offensive PI call. So you've got that. If people want this style of football, I guess, but it's not for me. I'm not even sure what the defensive counterpunch to this is?
-
I'm an option football guy at heart. That doesn't mean I hate the forward pass, but games like last night just fail to hold my interest. Sure, if your team was involved, that changes the equation. But I'd rather watch a game like Auburn/Minn or Oregon/Wisky than what was on display last night. I know they mean less, but for my personal style preferences, those other games hold my attention better.
-
Joe Brady has to be bucking for a promotion methinks. Burrow was basically an afterthought at OSU and Brady made him the best QB in all of CFB at LSU.
LSU is going to have to make him co-OC or something like that soon, otherwise he'll grab another prime gig (maybe even in the NFL).
I disagree. Burrow was ahead of the future NFL 1st round draft, single season multiple B1G record holder, until his thumb injury. That's not an after thought.
-
It seems now that Bama and LSU have reluctantly and successfully gone to the big offense, enough defense trend...who still hasn't? Stanford? Michigan? MSU? Georgia?
.
Anywho. If Bama doesn't win the West next year, I see them going back to their previous style of bullying you with talent and depth and defense. Can a program do that? Go back?
With Tua gone, they may try to. It'll be interesting to me.
I think it's, as I've said before, an attempt to avoid variance.
When you're stronger than your opponent, the most statistically sound strategy is to wear them down, avoid mistakes, play the field position game, etc. The idea is that because you're better than your opponent, you want to limit possessions, limit their big-play ability, and generally rely on you being better to win a game. For that, you want a low-risk, low-variance offensive philosophy, and just trust your ability. It's Tresselball.
When you're weaker than your opponent, you have to rely on higher-risk, but higher-reward strategies. You're not going to beat your opponent in straight-up, hat-on-hat, big boy football. So you go for more aggressive offense, which has big-play potential, but more chances for downside variance (turnovers, two incompletions in a row basically killing a drive, etc). It means that on a good day you can beat a team that you absolutely shouldn't beat. But on a bad day, it might mean that a team that would ordinarily beat you by 14 beats you by 35 because you lose the TO margin and have too many three-and-outs.
Now, when you're a strong opponent AND have a wide-open offense, you can be insanely explosive. If an aggressive offensive strategy can make an average-talent team much more explosive, it can make an elite-talent team truly unstoppable. But... It doesn't eliminate the inherent variance of an aggressive offense. It means that on a bad day, you're more likely to lose to an inferior team than if you had a less aggressive but lower-variance offense.
But there's a downside to the less-aggressive low-variance offense too... If you're facing a high-variance but inferior team, and they're having a good day, you may not have the firepower necessary to beat them--even if you played well offensively. It's a lot easier as a coach to defend your job if your team played well and your inferior opponent just played out-of-their-minds better, than if you play poorly and lose to an inferior team that just played average.
What I think we're seeing is that it's more likely that as coaches start to accept the wisdom of analytics, they're starting to see that being risk-averse is worse in the long run, even if it means they have to accept some variance.
-
One really soft Offensive PI call. So you've got that. If people want this style of football, I guess, but it's not for me. I'm not even sure what the defensive counterpunch to this is?
Man-to-man across the board and blitzing like a banshee?
-
Well Clemson did it a little and Auburn did it vs LSU - going into a 4-1-7 defense. Ideally with maybe 3 DEs and a speedy LB, and more CBs than safeties.
-
I think it's, as I've said before, an attempt to avoid variance.
When you're stronger than your opponent, the most statistically sound strategy is to wear them down, avoid mistakes, play the field position game, etc. The idea is that because you're better than your opponent, you want to limit possessions, limit their big-play ability, and generally rely on you being better to win a game. For that, you want a low-risk, low-variance offensive philosophy, and just trust your ability. It's Tresselball.
When you're weaker than your opponent, you have to rely on higher-risk, but higher-reward strategies. You're not going to beat your opponent in straight-up, hat-on-hat, big boy football. So you go for more aggressive offense, which has big-play potential, but more chances for downside variance (turnovers, two incompletions in a row basically killing a drive, etc). It means that on a good day you can beat a team that you absolutely shouldn't beat. But on a bad day, it might mean that a team that would ordinarily beat you by 14 beats you by 35 because you lose the TO margin and have too many three-and-outs.
Now, when you're a strong opponent AND have a wide-open offense, you can be insanely explosive. If an aggressive offensive strategy can make an average-talent team much more explosive, it can make an elite-talent team truly unstoppable. But... It doesn't eliminate the inherent variance of an aggressive offense. It means that on a bad day, you're more likely to lose to an inferior team than if you had a less aggressive but lower-variance offense.
But there's a downside to the less-aggressive low-variance offense too... If you're facing a high-variance but inferior team, and they're having a good day, you may not have the firepower necessary to beat them--even if you played well offensively. It's a lot easier as a coach to defend your job if your team played well and your inferior opponent just played out-of-their-minds better, than if you play poorly and lose to an inferior team that just played average.
What I think we're seeing is that it's more likely that as coaches start to accept the wisdom of analytics, they're starting to see that being risk-averse is worse in the long run, even if it means they have to accept some variance.
Well my thing is that no matter who the HC or DC is, once you go full-bore, crazy offense on your team, your defense is going to suffer, period. Alabama's defense hasn't been as good since Tua took over. There's myriad reasons, but one causes the other.
-
I think it's, as I've said before, an attempt to avoid variance.
When you're stronger than your opponent, the most statistically sound strategy is to wear them down, avoid mistakes, play the field position game, etc. The idea is that because you're better than your opponent, you want to limit possessions, limit their big-play ability, and generally rely on you being better to win a game. For that, you want a low-risk, low-variance offensive philosophy, and just trust your ability. It's Tresselball.
When you're weaker than your opponent, you have to rely on higher-risk, but higher-reward strategies. You're not going to beat your opponent in straight-up, hat-on-hat, big boy football. So you go for more aggressive offense, which has big-play potential, but more chances for downside variance (turnovers, two incompletions in a row basically killing a drive, etc). It means that on a good day you can beat a team that you absolutely shouldn't beat. But on a bad day, it might mean that a team that would ordinarily beat you by 14 beats you by 35 because you lose the TO margin and have too many three-and-outs.
Now, when you're a strong opponent AND have a wide-open offense, you can be insanely explosive. If an aggressive offensive strategy can make an average-talent team much more explosive, it can make an elite-talent team truly unstoppable. But... It doesn't eliminate the inherent variance of an aggressive offense. It means that on a bad day, you're more likely to lose to an inferior team than if you had a less aggressive but lower-variance offense.
But there's a downside to the less-aggressive low-variance offense too... If you're facing a high-variance but inferior team, and they're having a good day, you may not have the firepower necessary to beat them--even if you played well offensively. It's a lot easier as a coach to defend your job if your team played well and your inferior opponent just played out-of-their-minds better, than if you play poorly and lose to an inferior team that just played average.
What I think we're seeing is that it's more likely that as coaches start to accept the wisdom of analytics, they're starting to see that being risk-averse is worse in the long run, even if it means they have to accept some variance.
With all respect, I have to disagree with a central tenet.
Low possessions, field position are not favorite friendly. Wearing down sort of is. Even if you’re low-risk, slowing it down in fact makes it high variance.
It’s similar to a gambling expected value problem. The longer one gambles, the more likely the odds are to settle on whoever has the edge. If you’re a better poker player than me, I want to play fewer hands rather than more, because long term, I’m in trouble. It’s the same way a three-game series is higher variance than a seven game series.
What the thing you mentioned about the high variance underdog I think partially relies of the fact favorites historically played the way you said, and those quirky tactics were outliers that got the Tress teams out of comfort zones.
But if there’s a favorite comfortable with tempo, trying to track meet them just makes it likely you give up 70. Shoot, look at what Army did to Oklahoma and Michigan. The knights needed fewer breaks because the gave had literally less football.
-
Joe Brady headed to the Panthers. It's a real question what LSU looks like next year after having one of the best seasons of all time.
-
Joe Brady headed to the Panthers. It's a real question what LSU looks like next year after having one of the best seasons of all time.
:88:
-
Well Clemson did it a little and Auburn did it vs LSU - going into a 4-1-7 defense. Ideally with maybe 3 DEs and a speedy LB, and more CBs than safeties.
I'm pretty sure that's against the rules.
-
I'm pretty sure that's against the rules.
That's what makes it so smart....:72:
.
3-1-7
-
a lot of cryptic tweets from one Brian Mauer, fr. Tennessee.... a highly touted talent but in need of a weight room... some suggesting a transfer to LSU in coming... would be interesting. he's got the arm, mobility, and the moxy- he just needs some weight before he starts/continues throwing it at senior LB's. JG staying and Bailey in the wings seems to have prompted speculation, and then his recent tweets suggest he's about to make some sort of move and an announcement is forthcoming... and then the ties to LSU... makes it interesting...
this dang portal... changes the landscape of the game by my reckoning.
-
Any QB running to Red Stick with Brady gone might need to rethink things.
-
The portal is used a lot in non rev sports too I'm noticing. Well,not all vball programs are non-rev.
-
a lot of cryptic tweets from one Brian Mauer, fr. Tennessee.... a highly touted talent but in need of a weight room... some suggesting a transfer to LSU in coming... would be interesting. he's got the arm, mobility, and the moxy- he just needs some weight before he starts/continues throwing it at senior LB's. JG staying and Bailey in the wings seems to have prompted speculation, and then his recent tweets suggest he's about to make some sort of move and an announcement is forthcoming... and then the ties to LSU... makes it interesting...
this dang portal... changes the landscape of the game by my reckoning.
I assume the Hill kid might also be a factor in his choice?
-
With all respect, I have to disagree with a central tenet.
Low possessions, field position are not favorite friendly. Wearing down sort of is. Even if you’re low-risk, slowing it down in fact makes it high variance.
It’s similar to a gambling expected value problem. The longer one gambles, the more likely the odds are to settle on whoever has the edge. If you’re a better poker player than me, I want to play fewer hands rather than more, because long term, I’m in trouble. It’s the same way a three-game series is higher variance than a seven game series.
What the thing you mentioned about the high variance underdog I think partially relies of the fact favorites historically played the way you said, and those quirky tactics were outliers that got the Tress teams out of comfort zones.
But if there’s a favorite comfortable with tempo, trying to track meet them just makes it likely you give up 70. Shoot, look at what Army did to Oklahoma and Michigan. The knights needed fewer breaks because the gave had literally less football.
Understood and I agree. Perhaps I'm conflating a low-risk / low-variance strategy which emphasizes ball control and field position with necessarily reducing possessions (because you're running the ball and not stopping the clock). Reducing possessions is a higher-variance effect of a lower-variance overall strategy, if that makes sense?
So yeah, that was a bit of a mistake on my part.