2019 College football thread - Utah moves up to a deluxe CFP apartment...in the sky-ay-ay.

[bigmarc27 3,559]

7 minutes ago, Fat Drunk and Stupid said:

 

I suspect Steele will actually be the HC, which I don't like at all.  I want Gus gone more than worrying about who will replace him though.   Check back in 18 months, when I will hate the new guy just as much.

Terry is rehabbing his coaching skills at Clemson right now. Give that man a second chance!

[Fat Drunk and Stupid 4,856]

3 minutes ago, bigmarc27 said:

Terry is rehabbing his coaching skills at Clemson right now. Give that man a second chance!

https://media.giphy.com/media/1oCY8AbLypO34syFvr/giphy.gif

[Politician Spock 5,206]

4 hours ago, Tom Servo said:

When my alma mater and three others dominate a bowl system, it's cause to celebrate.

At least it's better than 2 SEC teams in the CFP.

I have no problem with two SEC teams playing in the Asa S. Bushnell Bowl.

[Doug B 2,660]

1 hour ago, L5UT1ger said:

Now, [LSU pays] the most for Aranda of anyone and his defenses are getting progressively worse.

I am not certain why ... but doesn't it seem like in football, it's practically impossible to have an elite offense and an elite defense at the same time? I don't know if defenses (when paired with great offenses) get fatigued from having to get back on the field so much and so quickly. LSU seems to play solid defense in the first halves of games, and then let up with 3+ score leads in the second half. The Auburn game would be an exception.

LSU does seemed to get gashed for big yardage more frequently than a good college defense should. But does game context matter? If an opposing offense is doing all of its damage when down 20+ points, and never manage to cut it down to a TD or less (Bama and Auburn excepted) ... what is that opposing offense really accomplishing?

It does take away some style points, though. Given the final score, it doesn't look to casual observers that LSU really handled Alabama decisively, when in fact, LSU did for 30-something minutes of game time -- but then mentally relaxed (IMHO) and "let" a desperate Alabama team score a bunch in the second half. Similar for Ole Miss except that LSU's offense gave the defense a bigger points cushion.

[bigmarc27 3,559]

1 minute ago, Doug B said:

I am not certain why ... but doesn't it seem like in football, it's practically impossible to have an elite offense and an elite defense at the same time? I don't know if defenses (when paired with great offenses) get fatigued from having to get back on the field so much and so quickly. LSU seems to play solid defense in the first halves of games, and then let up with 3+ score leads in the second half. The Auburn game would be an exception.

LSU does seemed to get gashed for big yardage more frequently than a good college defense should. But does game context matter? If an opposing offense is doing all of its damage when down 20+ points, and never manage to cut it down to a TD or less (Bama and Auburn excepted) ... what is that opposing offense really accomplishing?

It does take away some style points, though. Given the final score, it doesn't look to casual observers that LSU really handled Alabama decisively, when in fact, LSU did for 30-something minutes of game time -- but then mentally relaxed (IMHO) and "let" a desperate Alabama team score a bunch in the second half. Similar for Ole Miss except that LSU's offense gave the defense a bigger points cushion.

Mandel and Feldman were talking about this on the Audible this week. Basically exactly what you were saying, that it’s very difficult to have both an elite offense and defense, and that only Clemson and Ohio State have managed to do so. Mentioned that when Bama went towards a more open offense, their defenses quickly became less intimidating. 

[Capella 21,698]

3 hours ago, L5UT1ger said:

Is there any link to the 2003 version of the BCS applied to this year anywhere? Im old and dont google so good.

I’ll do this later today 

[Capella 21,698]

3 hours ago, L5UT1ger said:

Is there any link to the 2003 version of the BCS applied to this year anywhere? Im old and dont google so good.

Remember the Cotton and Peach were not part of the BCS then so they are excluded. Also no Big East now so I will put in highest rated group of 5. 
 

Sugar (National Title): #1 LSU vs #2 OSU

Orange: #3 Clemson (ACC) vs #17 Cincinnati 

Rose: #6 Oregon (Pac) vs #9 Penn State (BIG)

Fiesta: #8 Oklahoma vs #4 Georgia (highest at-large) 

 

so there ya go. Clemson gets screwed. Orange is gross  Fiesta and Rose get two great games that are completely meaningless. 

[jplvr 538]

Tua outlook for recovery: 8 months to football.

Pete Thamel has some Bama fans all hot and bothered about coming back next year to improve draft status, but I think that's nanners... well, I guess there's a chance where he was assuredly gone before the injury. I think he still goes in the Top 10, and would say there's no chance of him dropping out of the Top 20. Not that there isn't a good reason to worry about his injuries, but someone will take a chance. 

I know Capella was probably just looking at the current rankings, but I've seen loads of people arguing Georgia at #4 in their final rankings. How in the world is that even possible? The only way they get into this thing is beating LSU in Atlanta, and probably end up ranked higher than LSU in the end. That's the only way I see the SEC getting 2 anyway. I guess they're just using current rankings too, but it's just annoying and probably an issue for me which relates to my committee hatred. I wish we would've just kept the BCS model to decide the 4 teams.

I think the Final 4 is going to end up being: LSU, OSU, Clemson, and Oklahoma.

 

[Don't Noonan 4,484]

43 minutes ago, jplvr said:

Tua outlook for recovery: 8 months to football.

Pete Thamel has some Bama fans all hot and bothered about coming back next year to improve draft status, but I think that's nanners... well, I guess there's a chance where he was assuredly gone before the injury. I think he still goes in the Top 10, and would say there's no chance of him dropping out of the Top 20. Not that there isn't a good reason to worry about his injuries, but someone will take a chance. 

I know Capella was probably just looking at the current rankings, but I've seen loads of people arguing Georgia at #4 in their final rankings. How in the world is that even possible? The only way they get into this thing is beating LSU in Atlanta, and probably end up ranked higher than LSU in the end. That's the only way I see the SEC getting 2 anyway. I guess they're just using current rankings too, but it's just annoying and probably an issue for me which relates to my committee hatred. I wish we would've just kept the BCS model to decide the 4 teams.

I think the Final 4 is going to end up being: LSU, OSU, Clemson, and Oklahoma.

 

Are you assuming both Oregon and Utah lose another game?

[General Malaise 22,016]

1 hour ago, Don't Noonan said:

Are you assuming both Oregon and Utah lose another game?

No, he's assuming the committee will elect to go with 1 loss Oklahoma over 1 loss Utah/Oregon because they play in the Pac12.  I think most of the country believes that way. 

[bigmarc27 3,559]

1 minute ago, General Malaise said:

No, he's assuming the committee will elect to go with 1 loss Oklahoma over 1 loss Utah/Oregon because they play in the Pac12.  I think most of the country believes that way. 

I don’t quite understand why Oklahoma would get the benefit of the doubt anymore. They’ve not only lost every time they’ve made the playoff, they’ve been throttled in two of those three losses. 

[Don't Noonan 4,484]

5 minutes ago, General Malaise said:

No, he's assuming the committee will elect to go with 1 loss Oklahoma over 1 loss Utah/Oregon because they play in the Pac12.  I think most of the country believes that way. 

The more I think about it if Oregon wins out they are a lock to get in.  They would be the first team in the playoff era to win 10 conference games (10-0).  Correct me if I am wrong there because I heard that earlier.  The SEC only plays 8 conference games which hurts their argument.  

Also, I think Utah is very solid and could very well beat Oregon.  Rose bowl would be a nice consolation prize if that happens.

[gump 1,617]

8 minutes ago, General Malaise said:

No, he's assuming the committee will elect to go with 1 loss Oklahoma over 1 loss Utah/Oregon because they play in the Pac12.  I think most of the country believes that way. 

You keep saying this, while the Committee ranks both P12 leaders multiple spots ahead of OU...trying the reverse jinx?

[jplvr 538]

I just think that's how it's going to play out. I'm not making any sort of statement on who I think has the better argument. No reason for anyone to get defensive.

[Capella 21,698]

24 minutes ago, bigmarc27 said:

I don’t quite understand why Oklahoma would get the benefit of the doubt anymore. They’ve not only lost every time they’ve made the playoff, they’ve been throttled in two of those three losses. 

Doesn’t matter at all. 

[Politician Spock 5,206]

4 hours ago, Capella said:

Remember the Cotton and Peach were not part of the BCS then so they are excluded. Also no Big East now so I will put in highest rated group of 5. 
 

Sugar (National Title): #1 LSU vs #2 OSU

Orange: #3 Clemson (ACC) vs #17 Cincinnati 

Rose: #6 Oregon (Pac) vs #9 Penn State (BIG)

Fiesta: #8 Oklahoma vs #4 Georgia (highest at-large) 

 

so there ya go. Clemson gets screwed. Orange is gross  Fiesta and Rose get two great games that are completely meaningless. 

OSU didn't play LSU in the NC game until the 2007 season.

In the 2003 season LSU beat Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl for the title. 

[Capella 21,698]

Just now, Politician Spock said:

OSU didn't play LSU in the NC game until the 2007 season.

In the 2003 season LSU beat Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl for the title. 

 

[gocuse3 59]

7 hours ago, Politician Spock said:

OSU didn't play LSU in the NC game until the 2007 season.

In the 2003 season LSU beat Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl for the title. 

Ohio state played Florida but the post was showing what the current rankings would look like in the BCS era

[AAABatteries 18,239]

22 hours ago, Tom Servo said:

When my alma mater and three others dominate a bowl system, it's cause to celebrate.

At least it's better than 2 SEC teams in the CFP.

If UGA beats LSU then the SEC will get 2 teams, IMO.

[The Man With No Name 777]

59 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

If UGA beats LSU then the SEC will get 2 teams, IMO.

Agree. But I don't think anyone beats Ohio State this season. they have dominated every team they played including a 42-0 win against Cincinatti (their only loss). They have beaten every team by at least 24. At Michigan could be their closest game until playoffs. They have been dominant since their loss to Penn State.

[Tom Servo 5,742]

1 hour ago, AAABatteries said:

If UGA beats LSU then the SEC will get 2 teams, IMO.

I was working the D3 shtick here, GB.

[gump 1,617]

17 hours ago, gump said:

You keep saying this, while the Committee ranks both P12 leaders multiple spots ahead of OU...trying the reverse jinx?

OU moved up a whopping 1 spot after beating Baylor...not sure how they have any chance now if both P12s win out.

[Capella 21,698]

33 minutes ago, gump said:

OU moved up a whopping 1 spot after beating Baylor...not sure how they have any chance now if both P12s win out.

They don’t. 

[Tom Servo 5,742]

2 hours ago, gump said:

OU moved up a whopping 1 spot after beating Baylor...not sure how they have any chance now if both P12s win out.

Well, one of UO or da Utes are going to lose.  Right now, neither one has a signature win and yet both are ahead of PSU. But, that's the nature of this here beast. If PSU wins out, things will change...or not.

 

[Capella 21,698]

PSU is going to get absolutely creamed on Saturday. 

[Moe. 1,777]

2 hours ago, gump said:

OU moved up a whopping 1 spot after beating Baylor...not sure how they have any chance now if both P12s win out.

Not that the current rankings matter a lick, but yeah they don't have a chance. I think Gundy beats OU this year though, Sooners have looked awful the last three games. 

Memphis or whatever in the Cotton Bowl here we come! 

Edited November 20 by Moe.

[Insein 8,231]

23 minutes ago, Capella said:

PSU is going to get absolutely creamed on Saturday. 

We'll see. 

[WDIK2 469]

18 minutes ago, Moe. said:

Not that the current rankings matter a lick, but yeah they don't have a chance. I think Gundy beats OU this year though, Sooners have looked awful the last three games. 

Memphis or whatever in the Cotton Bowl here we come! 

Not sure OSU has the horses to keep up this year.  A Baylor rematch would be interesting, but their mental stability might be in question after what happened last week.

[SHIZNITTTT 2,509]

@TimBrando

If Bama and OU wind up in the Sugar Bowl, I’ve got the over/under at 8 Star players opting out to prepare for the Draft. That’s what “Who’s In” has perpetuated for the modern day internet athlete!

[General Malaise 22,016]

3 hours ago, gump said:

OU moved up a whopping 1 spot after beating Baylor...not sure how they have any chance now if both P12s win out.

To be clear, it was Jeep (not me) saying that OU would get in over a Pac12 school. 

 

[General Malaise 22,016]

53 minutes ago, Insein said:

We'll see. 

Just looked at the line.....18.5

 

[General Malaise 22,016]

7 minutes ago, SHIZNITTTT said:

@TimBrando

If Bama and OU wind up in the Sugar Bowl, I’ve got the over/under at 8 Star players opting out to prepare for the Draft. That’s what “Who’s In” has perpetuated for the modern day internet athlete!

I think this is ultimately what will TRULY lead to playoff expansion.  These meaningless bowl games are more meaningless by the year because of this very reason.  Sponsors are going to get pissed off and pull their money and the NCAA will have no other choice BUT to expand.

[SHIZNITTTT 2,509]

1 minute ago, General Malaise said:

I think this is ultimately what will TRULY lead to playoff expansion.  These meaningless bowl games are more meaningless by the year because of this very reason.  Sponsors are going to get pissed off and pull their money and the NCAA will have no other choice BUT to expand.

I was having this same discussion with some buddies the other day. The only thing that gets the NCAA to move on expansion is $$$.   People are not going to travel to bowl games if the best players are going to sit out.  Agreed that sponsors will say #### this I am not paying millions to watch the backups play.    Win/Win for the fan. 

[Ramblin Wreck 11,478]

2 minutes ago, General Malaise said:

I think this is ultimately what will TRULY lead to playoff expansion.  These meaningless bowl games are more meaningless by the year because of this very reason.  Sponsors are going to get pissed off and pull their money and the NCAA will have no other choice BUT to expand.

Don't disagree at all but take someone like that tackle from Iowa that is projected to go top 5-10.  Why would he be playing at all in November?  These games are meaningless too not just the non-playoff bowl games.

[WDIK2 469]

Bama fans, any chance Taulia takes over as the starter? Looks like he's played 2 games.  If he's half as dynamic as his brother I didn't know if Bama would try to use that for style points. Or is it settled that he will redshirt if possible?

[Moe. 1,777]

47 minutes ago, WDIK2 said:

Not sure OSU has the horses to keep up this year.  A Baylor rematch would be interesting, but their mental stability might be in question after what happened last week.

A little shetland pony or something should be enough, maybe a greyhound or two. OU isn't that great. 

[CletiusMaximus 6,858]

On 11/19/2019 at 12:34 PM, Capella said:

Remember the Cotton and Peach were not part of the BCS then so they are excluded. Also no Big East now so I will put in highest rated group of 5. 
 

Sugar (National Title): #1 LSU vs #2 OSU

Orange: #3 Clemson (ACC) vs #17 Cincinnati 

Rose: #6 Oregon (Pac) vs #9 Penn State (BIG)

Fiesta: #8 Oklahoma vs #4 Georgia (highest at-large) 

 

so there ya go. Clemson gets screwed. Orange is gross  Fiesta and Rose get two great games that are completely meaningless. 

Pre-BCS (all games played on New Year's Day):

Sugar: LSU v Clemson

Orange: Georgia v [highest at-large]

Cotton: Oklahoma v Alabama

Rose: Ohio St. v Oregon/Utah 

With luck, we'd have a split national championship and have something to argue about for years to come.

 

 

 

[gump 1,617]

22 minutes ago, WDIK2 said:

Bama fans, any chance Taulia takes over as the starter? Looks like he's played 2 games.  If he's half as dynamic as his brother I didn't know if Bama would try to use that for style points. Or is it settled that he will redshirt if possible?

No chance this year. In Spring who knows...Mac will be the returning Senior, Taulia will have another year, and a very highly touted QB from Cali will arrive in January.  Taulia had a lot of interest from LSU too, so some are predicting a transfer.  He's definitely not at his brother's level though.

[Tom Servo 5,742]

2 hours ago, Capella said:

PSU is going to get absolutely creamed on Saturday. 

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but a majority of the games over the last few years have been closer than expected.

[Capella 21,698]

1 hour ago, SHIZNITTTT said:

@TimBrando

If Bama and OU wind up in the Sugar Bowl, I’ve got the over/under at 8 Star players opting out to prepare for the Draft. That’s what “Who’s In” has perpetuated for the modern day internet athlete!

What an idiot 

[General Malaise 22,016]

1 hour ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Don't disagree at all but take someone like that tackle from Iowa that is projected to go top 5-10.  Why would he be playing at all in November?  These games are meaningless too not just the non-playoff bowl games.

Honestly don't have an answer to this.  

[Doug B 2,660]

2 hours ago, General Malaise said:

These meaningless bowl games are more meaningless by the year because of this very reason.

Absolutely true.

Just rewinding the tape a few decades ... I wonder why sitting out bowl games wasn't a thing back in the 1980s and 1990s? There were certainly plenty of guys with NFL futures playing in meaningless bowl games. For instance, was there a good reason, in retrospect for Barry Sanders to play in the 1988 Holiday Bowl? To stay in long enough to amass 222 yards and 5 TDs in a 62-14 rout? That almost certainly wouldn't happen today.

I know that in absolute terms, the money is bigger today. But still ... $500 K a year set you up very nicely 30 years ago.

[General Malaise 22,016]

10 minutes ago, Doug B said:

Absolutely true.

Just rewinding the tape a few decades ... I wonder why sitting out bowl games wasn't a thing back in the 1980s and 1990s? There were certainly plenty of guys with NFL futures playing in meaningless bowl games. For instance, was there a good reason, in retrospect for Barry Sanders to play in the 1988 Holiday Bowl? To stay in long enough to amass 222 yards and 5 TDs in a 62-14 rout? That almost certainly wouldn't happen today.

I know that in absolute terms, the money is bigger today. But still ... $500 K a year set you up very nicely 30 years ago.

Because back then, men were men and the idea of bailing on your team was unconscionable.  Players bought into the idea of TEAM first.  

And, the bowl games meant more back then too.  They are meaningless today unless they are the final four.  It's sad, but it's the truth.  

[Doug B 2,660]

53 minutes ago, General Malaise said:

2 hours ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Don't disagree at all but take someone like that tackle from Iowa that is projected to go top 5-10.  Why would he be playing at all in November?  These games are meaningless too not just the non-playoff bowl games.

Honestly don't have an answer to this.  

There seems to be a balance somewhere. Would NFL teams hold it against a Top-5 draft prospect who purposefully sat out their last college season? Let's say Tua Tagovailoa withdrew from Alabama after this past spring semester. He announces that he will go to Nike headquarters (or wherever) and train privately to prepare for the 2020 NFL Draft.

Does the NFL go along? Or does the league collectively play the "He's been away from the game too long" card at the 2020 Draft and thus cause Tua to fall far enough to have made the decision to skip college ball in 2019 not worth it?

[Capella 21,698]

4 minutes ago, Doug B said:

There seems to be a balance somewhere. Would NFL teams hold it against a Top-5 draft prospect who purposefully sat out their last college season? Let's say Tua Tagovailoa withdrew from Alabama after this past spring semester. He announces that he will go to Nike headquarters (or wherever) and train privately to prepare for the 2020 NFL Draft.

Does the NFL go along? Or does the league collectively play the "He's been away from the game too long" card at the 2020 Draft and thus cause Tua to fall far enough to have made the decision to skip college ball in 2019 not worth it?

They don’t care at all. He had enough tape to be fine. If they have enough tape on you they’d probably prefer you don’t play. 

[SHIZNITTTT 2,509]

5 minutes ago, Doug B said:

There seems to be a balance somewhere. Would NFL teams hold it against a Top-5 draft prospect who purposefully sat out their last college season? Let's say Tua Tagovailoa withdrew from Alabama after this past spring semester. He announces that he will go to Nike headquarters (or wherever) and train privately to prepare for the 2020 NFL Draft.

Does the NFL go along? Or does the league collectively play the "He's been away from the game too long" card at the 2020 Draft and thus cause Tua to fall far enough to have made the decision to skip college ball in 2019 not worth it?

NFLPA president Eric Winston applauds the moves by Leonard Fournette and Christian McCaffrey as smart financial decisions.

[Politician Spock 5,206]

2 hours ago, Tom Servo said:

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but a majority of the games over the last few years have been closer than expected.

Yep. If this keeps up, Penn State will make a better rival for Ohio State than Michigan. 

[Politician Spock 5,206]

56 minutes ago, General Malaise said:

Because back then, men were men and the idea of bailing on your team was unconscionable.  Players bought into the idea of TEAM first.  

And, the bowl games meant more back then too.  They are meaningless today unless they are the final four.  It's sad, but it's the truth.  

It's not sad at all. 

What's sad is the highest level of college football is the only level of football anywhere without a decent playoff.... and that is because of the bowls. #### the bowls!

[Tom Servo 5,742]

17 minutes ago, Politician Spock said:

Yep. If this keeps up, Penn State will make a better rival for Ohio State than Michigan. 

We do have more wins against you this century than Michigan.

[SHIZNITTTT 2,509]

Top College Football Players Of All Time:

The gap between #1 and #2  WOW. 

Rank        Player                                         No. 1 votes            Total  points

1         Herschel Walker, RB, Georgia       31                           455

2         Tim Tebow, QB,  Florida                  8                            286

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-football/news/cfb-150-georgia-herschel-walker-sporting-news-top-college-football-player-all-time/1ax03yb8b23me1urn4xzqkdays