What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

2019 College football thread - It's 2020, yo. Go to the new thread. (7 Viewers)

AAABatteries said:
Why?  The only explanation would be to avoid a rematch of LSU-Bama in the semis.  LSU would have beaten Texas, Bama, Auburn, A&M, Florida and UGA.  
Click to expand...
Texas and A&M really wont count for anything.

tOSU will have beaten Cinci, Wisconsin, PSU, Michigan, and Minnesota.

After yesterday I would agree that LSU deserves #1 right now, but we still have some games to play.

 
I think Utah deserves it assuming they win out and beat Oregon. They will have a very similar resume in terms of OU but they just look so much better. I don’t think Bama will be seriously considered against those two one-loss teams, assuming it plays out that way. Would like to see that D against LSU. Still a long ways to go though. 

 
Moe. said:
I think Utah deserves it assuming they win out and beat Oregon. They will have a very similar resume in terms of OU but they just look so much better. I don’t think Bama will be seriously considered against those two one-loss teams, assuming it plays out that way. Would like to see that D against LSU. Still a long ways to go though. 
Click to expand...
I'll believe that when I see it

 
Greg Schiano no longer a candidate at Rutgers, sources told

@Stadium

. RU offered 8-year, $32M deal, but it wasn’t enough. "You can’t blame Rutgers for not allocating more money or BOG for being concerned about his unprecedented requests,”

 
SHIZNITTTT said:
Greg Schiano no longer a candidate at Rutgers, sources told

@Stadium

. RU offered 8-year, $32M deal, but it wasn’t enough. "You can’t blame Rutgers for not allocating more money or BOG for being concerned about his unprecedented requests,”
Click to expand...
https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/2019/11/white-flag-not-white-smoke-rutgers-kills-big-time-football-dream-with-greg-schiano-fiasco-politi.html?outputType=amp&__twitter_impression=true
 

best read on it. Stupid admin they have there. 

 
Not sure what's worse 

- Schiano is the ideal candidate for a school in  a P5 conference  

- Said school can't even pony up the cash for his not unreasonable requests.

 
JaxBill said:
Not sure what's worse 

- Schiano is the ideal candidate for a school in  a P5 conference  

- Said school can't even pony up the cash for his not unreasonable requests.
Click to expand...
The article said he came in with a scouting report of every player on the roster and the top-100 players in the portal to try to get them back up to speed. Even started recruiting in a way. Guy was the perfect fit for them. 
 

It’s hysterical the Big 10 added that bozo program. Shame it’s not hurting them financially some way. 

 
Capella said:
The article said he came in with a scouting report of every player on the roster and the top-100 players in the portal to try to get them back up to speed. Even started recruiting in a way. Guy was the perfect fit for them. 
 

It’s hysterical the Big 10 added that bozo program. Shame it’s not hurting them financially some way. 
Click to expand...
Not getting a deal done with Schiano is the best thing that could happen to me. I’ve completely checked out of following the Rutgers program over the last couple years. The blowouts and gross mismanagement just haven’t affected me, which is amazing. I lived and died with this team during the first Schiano run and into the Flood era before he ran out of Schiano’s players and just completely #### the bed. 

If they brought him back, even though it would have been a few years before he got them to be just mediocre again, I would’ve fallen right back in. I would have signed myself up for more eventual heartache as I’m getting into my 40s. Who needs that?

Rutgers doing this really may have contributed to me living a longer life. Now I just need to hope that the outrage and donors cutting off donations if the AD isn’t fired doesn’t actually work. 

 
Doug B said:
Short Attention Span Theater over here:

That's a five-and-a-half minute video -- what are Brando's bullet points? :D  
Click to expand...
OK ... I don't like listening to videos at work, but I put the sound on low and listened to Brando. Good rant. The basic points are:

1) Too many SEC teams scheduling cupcakes in November (viz, this past weekend)
2) SEC's eight-game conference slate is bogus -- go to nine games. Too many lower-tier SEC schools are getting cheap sixth and seventh wins and getting into bowls.
3) General schedule inequity is a problem all over college football. Clemson's 2019 schedule is easier than UCF's 2017 and 2018 schedules.
4) Due to schedule inequity, an eight-team playoff is a must.

...

I never realized this was really an issue, but I see where he's going with proposing a nine-game conference schedule for the SEC. I hadn't realized that all (?) other Power 5 conferences played a nine-game conference slate. So he's saying no more Samfords and Tennessee-Martins in November.  And no more cheap Beef O'Brady Bowl berths for 6-6 SEC teams.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Doug B said:
OK ... I don't like listening to videos at work, but I put the sound on low and listened to Brando. Good rant. The basic points are:

1) Too many SEC teams scheduling cupcakes in November (viz, this past weekend)
2) SEC's eight-game conference slate is bogus -- go to nine games. Too many lower-tier SEC schools are getting cheap sixth and seventh wins and getting into bowls.
3) General schedule inequity is a problem all over college football. Clemson's 2019 schedule is easier than UCF's 2017 and 2018 schedules.
4) Due to schedule inequity, an eight-team playoff is a must.

...

I never realized this was really an issue, but I see where he's going with proposing a nine-game conference schedule for the SEC. I hadn't realized that all (?) other Power 5 conferences played a nine-game conference slate. So he's saying no more Samfords and Tennessee-Martins in November.  And no more cheap Beef O'Brady Bowl berths for 6-6 SEC teams.
Click to expand...
Bad Boy Mowers Gasparilla Bowl to you bub.

Great idea. I'm sure a 6-6 CUSA team will bring a sizable contingent to St. Pete. 

 
Doug B said:
I never realized this was really an issue, but I see where he's going with proposing a nine-game conference schedule for the SEC. I hadn't realized that all (?) other Power 5 conferences played a nine-game conference slate. So he's saying no more Samfords and Tennessee-Martins in November.  And no more cheap Beef O'Brady Bowl berths for 6-6 SEC teams.
Click to expand...
We talk about this here all the time...the summary is...ACC is also an 8-game conference schedule.  The SEC votes the 9-game schedule down every year (except Saban and Malzahn last year).  UF and UGA are the big opponents driven by the fact that they'd likely lose a home game every other year, unless they blow up the Jax game.

 
gump said:
We talk about this here all the time...the summary is...ACC is also an 8-game conference schedule.  The SEC votes the 9-game schedule down every year (except Saban and Malzahn last year).  UF and UGA are the big opponents driven by the fact that they'd likely lose a home game every other year, unless they blow up the Jax game.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. The missing piece of the logic puzzle for me was that three other conferences have their teams play nine conference games. I was unsure why media from outside of the SEC area (and some from inside like Brando) made an issue of the SEC's eight-game slate.

 
JaxBill said:
Bad Boy Mowers Gasparilla Bowl to you bub.

Great idea. I'm sure a 6-6 CUSA team will bring a sizable contingent to St. Pete. 
Click to expand...
Exactly. These bowls exist solely to make money. Nobody, and I cannot stress this enough, nobody cares about fairness. A 6-6 SEC team is getting a spot ahead of a CUSA team with a better record every single time. 

 
gump said:
We talk about this here all the time...the summary is...ACC is also an 8-game conference schedule.  The SEC votes the 9-game schedule down every year (except Saban and Malzahn last year).  UF and UGA are the big opponents driven by the fact that they'd likely lose a home game every other year, unless they blow up the Jax game.
Click to expand...
The whining about that issue is so dumb.  Most ACC and SEC schools play each other which is the equivalent of the 9th conference game anyway.  In GT's case, it's way harder than anyone they could throw at us in the ACC since we already get Clemson every year anyway.  Often times, these schools play a 10th power five game too.  Everyone just focuses on the cupcake game in November.

 
Brando also said the playoff should be 8 teams where they play at each other's (highest seed) campus instead of a neutral bowl site somewhere across the country.  That will never happen due to bowl money.  Ever.  

I agree with Brando that they should go to a 6 or 8 team playoff and that teams shouldn't schedule OOC cupcake teams in November.  I'm a Clemson fan but hate that they played Wofford in early November.  I don't mind scheduling Wofford or Samford in September.  But hate those games in November for anyone (Clemson, Bama, OSU, LSU, Aub, FSU, UF, PSU, OU and on and on).  That said, season schedules are not created the summer before the season starts.  

As a Clemson fan, I'd rather see them play TA&M in November instead of early September.  Wofford should have been early Sept and A&M early November, for instance.  Maybe logistics would have prevented that this season, though. 

Strong teams get better as the season goes on so no reason for Bama/LSU to play Samford/Tenn-Martins just before Thanksgiving. 

 
Ramblin Wreck said:
The whining about that issue is so dumb.  Most ACC and SEC schools play each other which is the equivalent of the 9th conference game anyway.  In GT's case, it's way harder than anyone they could throw at us in the ACC since we already get Clemson every year anyway.  Often times, these schools play a 10th power five game too.  Everyone just focuses on the cupcake game in November.
Click to expand...
Agreed...it's spin...many years that cupcake is ranked higher than Rutgers.  And what do we think the result of adding a 9th SEC game to those schedule strengths will do?  If we expand to an 8-team playoff, it'll put more SEC team in.

The biggest driver of the change now I think is the fan experience.

 
It is hard for BIG fans to get on that podium when you have Rutgers on the schedule. Y’all just need to cool it with that, that extra conference game when they show up is literally worthless. 

 
Doug B said:
OK ... I don't like listening to videos at work, but I put the sound on low and listened to Brando. Good rant. The basic points are:

1) Too many SEC teams scheduling cupcakes in November (viz, this past weekend)
2) SEC's eight-game conference slate is bogus -- go to nine games. Too many lower-tier SEC schools are getting cheap sixth and seventh wins and getting into bowls.
3) General schedule inequity is a problem all over college football. Clemson's 2019 schedule is easier than UCF's 2017 and 2018 schedules.
4) Due to schedule inequity, an eight-team playoff is a must.

...

I never realized this was really an issue, but I see where he's going with proposing a nine-game conference schedule for the SEC. I hadn't realized that all (?) other Power 5 conferences played a nine-game conference slate. So he's saying no more Samfords and Tennessee-Martins in November.  And no more cheap Beef O'Brady Bowl berths for 6-6 SEC teams.
Click to expand...


This is just logic diarrhea.   All of the first 3 points can be true, and it doesn't make 4 true.  AND all of the first 3 things can be addressed and does not make a 8 team playoff any less important.  

Schedule inequity is not driving the need for a playoff.   

 
Capella said:
It is hard for BIG fans to get on that podium when you have Rutgers on the schedule. Y’all just need to cool it with that, that extra conference game when they show up is literally worthless. 
Click to expand...
No disagreement there GB. 

BTW, PSU is -41 against Rutgers this week; you in?  :lol:

 
To me the 9 game conference schedule is just more fun.  There's no reason why some SEC schools don't play eachother every 6 years.  If the outcome is you let some teams with 4 conference wins in bowl games, then fine.  Or just cancel most of the bowls.  Either way.  

 
Capella said:
It is hard for BIG fans to get on that podium when you have Rutgers on the schedule. Y’all just need to cool it with that, that extra conference game when they show up is literally worthless. 
Click to expand...
College football fans have a unique ability to make some very bizarre arguments.

 
bigmarc27 said:
If Utah wins out, they deserve the 4 spot. 
Click to expand...
I don't think they need to dominate, but they can't 'look bad.' But, yes - I agree. The committee seems to value a one loss conference champ substantially higher than a one loss non-champ. Rightfully so.

 
Politician Spock said:
If it will accelerate Notre Dame joining the ACC, the B1G will gladly donate Rutgers to the ACC. 
Click to expand...
Lol no other conference is dumb enough to take them. If somehow they were a free agent would Conference USA even take them? I can’t imagine. They are basically a bad sun belt program in the most powerful conference. Wild. 

 
Capella said:
Lol no other conference is dumb enough to take them. If somehow they were a free agent would Conference USA even take them? I can’t imagine. They are basically a bad sun belt program in the most powerful conference. Wild. 
Click to expand...
They could form a new conference with Liberty. 

 
Never was in favor of .500 teams making bowl games. I get that it's good for the kids and I can turn it off if I don't want to watch it, but the number of bowl games with 6-6 or 7-5 teams is crazy.

It won't happen, but it seems like the easiest solution to it all is to qualify games for bowl eligibility: FCS or lower teams don't count towards bowl eligibility. Play all the teams you want, but if you're the SEC and play one of those teams annually, you only get 11 other games to get bowl eligible. Then the conferences/schools can choose on their own on how to best make it to eligibility.

 
RUSF18 said:
Not getting a deal done with Schiano is the best thing that could happen to me. I’ve completely checked out of following the Rutgers program over the last couple years. The blowouts and gross mismanagement just haven’t affected me, which is amazing. I lived and died with this team during the first Schiano run and into the Flood era before he ran out of Schiano’s players and just completely #### the bed. 

If they brought him back, even though it would have been a few years before he got them to be just mediocre again, I would’ve fallen right back in. I would have signed myself up for more eventual heartache as I’m getting into my 40s. Who needs that?

Rutgers doing this really may have contributed to me living a longer life. Now I just need to hope that the outrage and donors cutting off donations if the AD isn’t fired doesn’t actually work. 
Click to expand...
Steve Politi's column today telling Rutgers to go back to playing Lehigh and Lafayette was right on point.

I think it's the "Peter Principle" in effect.  They were doing okay (for a few years anyway), against the South Florida's of the world.  Then got promoted well beyond their capacity.  

 
Don Quixote said:
Steve Politi's column today telling Rutgers to go back to playing Lehigh and Lafayette was right on point.

I think it's the "Peter Principle" in effect.  They were doing okay (for a few years anyway), against the South Florida's of the world.  Then got promoted well beyond their capacity.  
Click to expand...
They could drop to 1-AA and have a rivalry with Delaware.

 
Jayded said:
Never was in favor of .500 teams making bowl games. I get that it's good for the kids and I can turn it off if I don't want to watch it, but the number of bowl games with 6-6 or 7-5 teams is crazy.

It won't happen, but it seems like the easiest solution to it all is to qualify games for bowl eligibility: FCS or lower teams don't count towards bowl eligibility. Play all the teams you want, but if you're the SEC and play one of those teams annually, you only get 11 other games to get bowl eligible. Then the conferences/schools can choose on their own on how to best make it to eligibility.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, I've never understood why people complain about the number of bowls.

More college football >>> Less college football.

 
whoknew said:
With all due respect, I've never understood why people complain about the number of bowls.

More college football >>> Less college football.
Click to expand...
Yes. And for a lot of these guys this is their last time ever playing. Nobody is comparing the quick lane bowl to the rose bowl. It’s just fun for the players (allegedly) and makes money for everybody involved. Win-win which would be win-win-win if the players shared the profits. 

 
whoknew said:
With all due respect, I've never understood why people complain about the number of bowls.

More college football >>> Less college football.
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on the lens of what a bowl game is. If it's just purely a fun exhibition game then heck yeah bring them on. I don't like that the conferences got all of their weird tie-ins to eliminate some of the otherwise fun/whacky matchups we might have seen. I totally agree with Capella too about being more giving to the players as well.

My sentiment was more in the vein of the bowl being a "reward" for a .500 season. I guess maybe I should think more macro about it, given the hard work the kids put in across the country doing this, but a break-even season doesn't feel like one that should be rewarded purely considering its outcome.

 
Jayded said:
I guess it depends on the lens of what a bowl game is. If it's just purely a fun exhibition game then heck yeah bring them on. I don't like that the conferences got all of their weird tie-ins to eliminate some of the otherwise fun/whacky matchups we might have seen. I totally agree with Capella too about being more giving to the players as well.

My sentiment was more in the vein of the bowl being a "reward" for a .500 season. I guess maybe I should think more macro about it, given the hard work the kids put in across the country doing this, but a break-even season doesn't feel like one that should be rewarded purely considering its outcome.
Click to expand...
I kinda get that but like you said it’s a ton of work and a lot of them (more than most would acknowledge) are also balancing school. There is no harm sending them to Florida for 10 days. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PIK95
What happened to the Chill Wave Thread?
Replies
30
Views
611
Long Ball Larry
Long Ball Larry
squistion
2024 New Music Thread
2 3 4
Replies
190
Views
4K
El Floppo
El Floppo
[icon]
OFFICIAL - Buying / Selling / Moving Thread
2 3 4
Replies
151
Views
3K
krista4
krista4

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 8 (members: 0, guests: 8)
Top