What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2019 College football thread - It's 2020, yo. Go to the new thread. (3 Viewers)

Don't Noonan said:
So?  I was at the game here at Arizona State.  They played like crap for 2 weeks straight.  The difference between me and you is I believe the Rose Bowl is a pretty good motivator and talent will prevail.
Click to expand...
I see.....so the Rose Bowl will be a good motivator for this team, but a chance at the Playoffs, not so much?  Solid reasoning.

 
Don't Noonan said:
They overlooked ASU.  It happens.  18-21 year old kids.   :shrug:
Click to expand...
I agree with both you and GM. Oregon has been trending the wrong direction the last couple weeks, and they totally blew it against ASU. Now would I be shocked if they spank Utah...no, but this was a wasted season. We had it in our grasp and dropped the ball.

 
Long Ball Larry said:
OSU and Clemson are really not in regardless of what happens this weekend?
Click to expand...
I think OSU and LSU are in unless the very unlikely happens and they are blown out.  Not sure about Clemson if Utah and/or OU win.  :shrug:  Hard to leave out the defending champ I guess, but it could be Georgia, LSU, OSU, and Utah/OU.  Clemson losing is the least likely outcome.  They are currently the heaviest favorite.

Chaos if Clemson loses.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
seahawk 17 said:
Don't Noonan said:
They overlooked ASU.  It happens.  18-21 year old kids.   :shrug:
Click to expand...
I agree with both you and GM. Oregon has been trending the wrong direction the last couple weeks, and they totally blew it against ASU. Now would I be shocked if they spank Utah...no, but this was a wasted season. We had it in our grasp and dropped the ball.
Click to expand...
The Ducks (ahem) laying an egg in Arizona was the least surprising thing to happen in college football this season.

Their pre-determined conference championship foe went to the same state, were ready to play, and won by 74 points.  Ducks don't thrive in the desert, at least under Mario.

 
AAABatteries said:
I’m convinced on OSU but not totally on Clemson - ACC was really poor this year.  If it does happen then some heads will explode.  Could you imagine UGA winning and 4 of the 5 conference champs being left out?  
Click to expand...
Defending champs that haven't lost in 2 years. They're in. 

 
seahawk 17 said:
I agree with both you and GM. Oregon has been trending the wrong direction the last couple weeks, and they totally blew it against ASU. Now would I be shocked if they spank Utah...no, but this was a wasted season. We had it in our grasp and dropped the ball.
Click to expand...
Understood.  I guess I just didn't view this as a playoff caliber team when compared to prior teams and thought they would lose badly to Ohio State or LSU.  Pac 12 championship and Rose Bowl was always my goal this year.  

 
@chrisfallica: I'm going into the weekend assuming Clemson, LSU and Ohio State are in regardless of what happens Saturday. Have clearly separated themselves from everyone else. If Georgia wins, they are in. If Georgia loses, I have Utah (with a win) ahead of Big 12 champ right now.

 
Assuming normal scores in games, If Georgia wins a close one:
1-Ohio state
2-Clemson
3-Georgia
4-Oklahoma, if they win
5-LSU
6-Utah
7-Baylor, if they win.

If LSU loses big:
1-Ohio state
2-georgia
3-Clemson
4-Oklahoma, if they win
5-Utah
6-baylor if they win
7-LSU

In my opinion, LSU has to win to get in unless Baylor and Utah win by a normal amount, and the LSU loss is close. OU is in if they win.

Names on jerseys matter to the committee.

I’m not comparing how i believe the committee will treat the names on front of OU and LSU. I’m comparing names of Baylor and Utah v. LSU and OU.

OU v LSU with one loss:

OU conference championship.
OU winning last few games
OU has name recognition.
OU has a few top 25 wins
OU beat Texas by a comparable amount.

It avoids controversy as far as inclusion.

It values conference championships

Sure, LSU would have better wins and loss, but when has that not mattered as much to the committee? When it’s a blue blood with the inferior resume. OU is a blue blood.

The resume will matter if it’s LSU v Baylor or Utah.

It’s how they work. They find the result they want then change the criteria to justify the result and tout that as what matters this week.

You don’t even have to look very hard to see the committee choosing which factors matter more based on their desired outcome:

Why was Ohio state ahead of LSU last week?

Because the committee thought Ohio state was better and wanted them at 1. Therefore, eye test / complete team became more important than resume. Now, after this week, the resumes are pretty much the same.

Why was Alabama at 5 with no quality wins versus Minnesota and Baylor? Because the committee wanted them ahead.

The resume only matters of it favors who they think is better.

 
I think I gotta hope for a Clemson win (obviously) and a UGa win. UGA, at this point, seems to be by far the weakest of the possible teams to play in the 2/3 game. 

 
Rutgers is giving Schiano a $7.7 million starting budget for his assistants and staff, which is up from like $3 million under Ash. Truly remarkable what can be accomplished when this state does what damn near every other state in the country does with regularity and rallies in support of its in state program. 

 
RUSF18 said:
Rutgers is giving Schiano a $7.7 million starting budget for his assistants and staff, which is up from like $3 million under Ash. Truly remarkable what can be accomplished when this state does what damn near every other state in the country does with regularity and rallies in support of its in state program. 
Click to expand...
Rutgers is also set to begin receiving their portion of the B1G funds in the next year or two, right?

 
@bigmarc27

I thought you didn't know what I was talking about. 

Why did you delete your post calling me out about Hilinski playing with a torn ACL? Something about me up on a high horse? 

#FAKENEWS

Well it looks like you spouted off too early. 

Hilinski does not have a torn ACL

He was medically cleared by USC doctors and his family doctor. 

Dabo is still a POS for playing Deshaun Watson his freshman year against us with a torn ACL when his job was on the line. Not to mention Willie Corn and Kyle Parker playing hurt as well. 

I know we're on opposite sides of the rivalry but you should really let all of the facts come in before you start taking jabs. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
Rutgers is also set to begin receiving their portion of the B1G funds in the next year or two, right?
Click to expand...
The full portion (equal to everyone else in the conference) isn’t coming until 2027 now because the school borrowed against future revenues to attempt to make up some of the shortfalls that they’ve been dealing with. But starting in 2021 we start pulling in like $45 million a year from the conference compared to something like $20 million now. It’s maybe $15 million short of what everyone else will be making but obviously gets us much closer. 

 
In The Zone said:
@bigmarc27

I thought you didn't know what I was talking about. 

Why did you delete your post calling me out about Hilinski playing with a torn ACL? Something about me up on a high horse? 

#FAKENEWS

Well it looks like you spouted off too early. 

Hilinski does not have a torn ACL

He was medically cleared by USC doctors and his family doctor. 

Dabo is still a POS for playing Deshaun Watson his freshman year against us with a torn ACL when his job was on the line. Not to mention Willie Corn and Kyle Parker playing hurt as well. 

I know we're on opposite sides of the rivalry but you should really let all of the facts come in before you start taking jabs. 
Click to expand...
I didn’t know. The link to the article had gamecock fans spouting off about Deshaun. You guys need to run a tighter ship down in Columbia.  

 
FreeBaGeL said:
As someone who literally ran the firesteveaddazio.com website when he was at Florida, this is about as unsurprising as it gets.
Click to expand...
If the biggest Rutgers donors didn’t mobilize against the AD Pat Hobbs for how he blew the Schiano negotiations, Addazio would be getting announced as the new Rutgers HC today. He was Hobbs’ pick. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
L5UT1ger said:
Assuming normal scores in games, If Georgia wins a close one:
1-Ohio state
2-Clemson
3-Georgia
4-Oklahoma, if they win
5-LSU
6-Utah
7-Baylor, if they win.

If LSU loses big:
1-Ohio state
2-georgia
3-Clemson
4-Oklahoma, if they win
5-Utah
6-baylor if they win
7-LSU

In my opinion, LSU has to win to get in unless Baylor and Utah win by a normal amount, and the LSU loss is close. OU is in if they win.

Names on jerseys matter to the committee.

I’m not comparing how i believe the committee will treat the names on front of OU and LSU. I’m comparing names of Baylor and Utah v. LSU and OU.

OU v LSU with one loss:

OU conference championship.
OU winning last few games
OU has name recognition.
OU has a few top 25 wins
OU beat Texas by a comparable amount.

It avoids controversy as far as inclusion.

It values conference championships

Sure, LSU would have better wins and loss, but when has that not mattered as much to the committee? When it’s a blue blood with the inferior resume. OU is a blue blood.

The resume will matter if it’s LSU v Baylor or Utah.

It’s how they work. They find the result they want then change the criteria to justify the result and tout that as what matters this week.

You don’t even have to look very hard to see the committee choosing which factors matter more based on their desired outcome:

Why was Ohio state ahead of LSU last week?

Because the committee thought Ohio state was better and wanted them at 1. Therefore, eye test / complete team became more important than resume. Now, after this week, the resumes are pretty much the same.

Why was Alabama at 5 with no quality wins versus Minnesota and Baylor? Because the committee wanted them ahead.

The resume only matters of it favors who they think is better.
Click to expand...
Conference championship is a nice tiebreaker but there is no way it trumps the difference of a team playing against 1 top 15 opponent and having a loss to an unranked team versus a team that played against 4 top 15 opponents and whose only loss was to another playoff team.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL said:
Conference championship is a nice tiebreaker but there is no way it trumps the difference of a team playing against 1 top 15 opponent and having a loss to an unranked team versus a team that played against 4 top 15 opponents and whose only loss was to another playoff team.
Click to expand...
The SEC and ACC only play 8 conference games which allows a large number of the conference to have a good record and inflated ranking.  If the ACC wasn't the worst conference in football this year they would have other teams in the mix.  Not a level playing field.  Utah or Oklahoma will get in.

 
Don't Noonan said:
The SEC and ACC only play 8 conference games which allows a large number of the conference to have a good record and inflated ranking.  If the ACC wasn't the worst conference in football this year they would have other teams in the mix.  Not a level playing field.  Utah or Oklahoma will get in.
Click to expand...
The ACC hardly ever has multiple teams in the mix.

Besides, it's silly to bear it down to that one thing when 3 of the SEC teams (LSU, Auburn, Florida) in the mix more than made up for it with a real OOC game or two while OU/Utah played 1 OOC bowl eligible team combined.

Are you sure Auburn only survived as a 3-loss team because they didn't have to play mighty Vandy and got that gimme game against Oregon instead?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL said:
Does the ACC ever have multiple teams in the mix?

Besides, it's silly to bear it down to that one thing when 3 of the SEC teams (LSU, Auburn, Florida) in the mix more than made up for it with a real OOC game or two while OU/Utah played 1 OOC bowl eligible team combined.

Are you sure Auburn only survived as a 3-loss team because they didn't have to play mighty Vandy and got that gimme game against Oregon instead?
Click to expand...
You have inflated rankings for SEC teams because they have 1 less conference game.  Simple as that.

 
Don't Noonan said:
You have inflated rankings for SEC teams because they have 1 less conference game.  Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Even if I were to take your theory at face value (again I think some of the disparities in OOC schedule make up for one less conference game), my rankings don't matter and the CFP have those "inflated" rankings as well.  Those are the people that you're claiming will take Utah/OU over a 1-loss LSU.

Based on last week's CFP rankings (obviously will change some tonight).

LSU will have played
#4 Georgia
#5 Alabama
#11 Florida
#14 Oregon
#15 Auburn

Utah will have played
#14 Oregon
UNR USC
UNR California
UNR Washington
UNR Arizona State

You really think that the playoff committee is going to look at those sets of opponents and decide they're equal because the Pac-12 teams played an extra conference opponent, when they're the ones that gave them those rankings in the first place with that already in mind?

 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think LSU is in with a loss unless they are blown out.  :shrug: Wins over Florida, Auburn, Alabama and a common opponent to OU (Texas).  Plus they would have that all important quality loss to Georgia.  

Drop the committee and bring back the computer rankings.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't really follow what Noonan is saying (no offense) but why does everyone always sub in Vandy in this argument? It wouldn't always be the worst team in the other division, and they wouldn't drop the Oregon game, they'd drop Towson or whatever FCS school they played last week. Obviously the schedule would be better overall. 

They need to go to 9, there is no acceptable argument against. I don't want to hear about the neutral site game, it's the same deal with OU and Texas who each "lose" a home game every other year, they've somehow managed to stay afloat. 

 
Moe. said:
I don't really follow what Noonan is saying (no offense) but why does everyone always sub in Vandy in this argument? It wouldn't always be the worst team in the other division, and they wouldn't drop the Oregon game, they'd drop Towson or whatever FCS school they played last week. Obviously the schedule would be better overall. 

They need to go to 9, there is no acceptable argument against. I don't want to hear about the neutral site game, it's the same deal with OU and Texas who each "lose" a home game every other year, they've somehow managed to stay afloat. 
Click to expand...
I think with more conference games they'd be less likely to schedule those tough OOC games that a lot of the top SEC teams have been scheduling in recent years.  I think it's much more likely they'd drop the Oregon/Clemson type games they've been playing lately, as we see with OU/Utah who have that extra conference game and played #### all out of conference this year.

Regarding the first half of the sentence Auburn already played Florida/Georgia and the entire SEC West this year, so even if it weren't Vandy they would have necessarily gotten this year it would have been some other crappy non-Georgia, non-Florida team from the east.

I can agree that it is probably easier on average in the long run to have 8 games instead of 9 but Noonan is way exaggerating the effect it has (especially when we start considering some of the OOC games that would be dropped).  The ACC is living proof of that.  The ACC only plays 8 conference games yet I'm not sure in the entire CFP history they've ever had more than 2 teams ranked in the CFP top 15 at this point in the season, yet the SEC has 5 right now.

I'm all for that extra conference game, but it's moot regardless since his whole point was that the CFP would recognize that and put Utah/OU in when the CFP are the ones ranking all those SEC teams highly in the first place, with that knowledge already on the table.

They're not going to suddenly decide that USC/ASU/Cal/Washington is comparable to Florida/Alabama/Georgia/Auburn when they've already ranked those latter 4 way ahead of the former 4 with the knowledge of the extra conference game already readily available.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL said:
I think with more conference games they'd be less likely to schedule those tough OOC games that a lot of the top SEC teams have been scheduling in recent years.  I think it's much more likely they'd drop the Oregon/Clemson type games they've been playing lately, as we see with OU/Utah who have that extra conference game and played #### all out of conference this year.

Regarding the first half of the sentence Auburn already played Florida/Georgia and the entire SEC West this year, so even if it weren't Vandy they would have necessarily gotten this year it would have been some other crappy non-Georgia, non-Florida team from the east.

I can agree that it is probably easier on average in the long run to have 8 games instead of 9 but Noonan is way exaggerating the effect it has (especially when we start considering some of the OOC games that would be dropped).  The ACC is living proof of that.  The ACC only plays 8 conference games yet I'm not sure in the entire CFP history they've ever had more than 2 teams ranked in the CFP top 15 at this point in the season, yet the SEC has 5 right now.

I'm all for that extra conference game, but it's moot regardless since his whole point was that the CFP would recognize that and put Utah/OU in when the CFP are the ones ranking all those SEC teams highly in the first place, with that knowledge already on the table.
Click to expand...
No, they wouldn't.

Are you sure we see that with OU? They play a marquee OOC game every year. You can't control how good the teams you schedule years in advance end up being, but OU played UCLA and Houston this year, two pretty solid programs. I'd prefer they replace the FCS team with another local mid-major like Tulsa or UNT or something but that's pretty much an ideal schedule. 

 
I realize I jumped in this mid-convo, I have no idea what Noonan is saying, I don't think the committee cares and they rightly just evaluate the full schedule. They still should go to 9. 

 
now THIS will potentially make some folks happy

@Brett_McMurphy: Odds for next Panthers coach via http://bit.ly/BetOnlineCFB

Jim Harbaugh 3/1
Jason Garrett 5/1
Josh McDaniels 11/2
Dan Quinn, Urban Meyer 6/1       
Greg Roman, Mike LaFleur                 12/1
Jay Gruden 14/1
Doug Marrone 16/1
Pat Shurmur 18/1
Doug Pederson 20/1
Bill Cowher 100/1

 
Moe. said:
I realize I jumped in this mid-convo, I have no idea what Noonan is saying, I don't think the committee cares and they rightly just evaluate the full schedule. They still should go to 9. 
Click to expand...
If your point is fairness then maybe except nobody gives a damn about things being fair.

 
I don't really have a point other than I think they should play 9 conference games. I don't really care about the fairness between conferences or whatever, I mostly want to see it because it would be better for me personally as it would be more entertaining. 

 
Have I mentioned that I think the SEC and ACC should play 9 conference games? I feel like I'm dancing around the point here. They should play 9 conference games. 

 
Fat Drunk and Stupid said:
I sure wish we could get some chatter about Oregon going in here.  :mellow:
Click to expand...
I'll be at the P-12 championship game on Friday so I sure hope @Don't Noonan is right, but the way this Oregon team has been playing since the bye has me afraid that @General Malaise is correct and the Ducks will get boat raced.  That offense has just been putrid since the bye after the USC game, and Herbert is just off.  The weather is supposed to be really sloppy with another storm rolling through Thursday and into Friday, so could be a low scoring affair (which would be to Oregon's benefit).

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Even if I were to take your theory at face value (again I think some of the disparities in OOC schedule make up for one less conference game), my rankings don't matter and the CFP have those "inflated" rankings as well.  Those are the people that you're claiming will take Utah/OU over a 1-loss LSU.

Based on last week's CFP rankings (obviously will change some tonight).

LSU will have played
#4 Georgia
#5 Alabama
#11 Florida
#14 Oregon
#15 Auburn

Utah will have played
#14 Oregon
UNR USC
UNR California
UNR Washington
UNR Arizona State

You really think that the playoff committee is going to look at those sets of opponents and decide they're equal because the Pac-12 teams played an extra conference opponent, when they're the ones that gave them those rankings in the first place with that already in mind?

 
Click to expand...
USC is ranked 23, not unranked

 
FreeBaGeL said:
I think with more conference games they'd be less likely to schedule those tough OOC games that a lot of the top SEC teams have been scheduling in recent years.  I think it's much more likely they'd drop the Oregon/Clemson type games they've been playing lately, as we see with OU/Utah who have that extra conference game and played #### all out of conference this year.

Regarding the first half of the sentence Auburn already played Florida/Georgia and the entire SEC West this year, so even if it weren't Vandy they would have necessarily gotten this year it would have been some other crappy non-Georgia, non-Florida team from the east.

I can agree that it is probably easier on average in the long run to have 8 games instead of 9 but Noonan is way exaggerating the effect it has (especially when we start considering some of the OOC games that would be dropped).  The ACC is living proof of that.  The ACC only plays 8 conference games yet I'm not sure in the entire CFP history they've ever had more than 2 teams ranked in the CFP top 15 at this point in the season, yet the SEC has 5 right now.

I'm all for that extra conference game, but it's moot regardless since his whole point was that the CFP would recognize that and put Utah/OU in when the CFP are the ones ranking all those SEC teams highly in the first place, with that knowledge already on the table.

They're not going to suddenly decide that USC/ASU/Cal/Washington is comparable to Florida/Alabama/Georgia/Auburn when they've already ranked those latter 4 way ahead of the former 4 with the knowledge of the extra conference game already readily available.
Click to expand...
I am not overstating anything.  Quit acting like it is only the SEC or ACC that schedules tough out of conference games.  USC plays ND every year and never scheduled a nobody.  Oregon had Auburn this year and home and home with Ohio State starting next year.  Hell, Oregon had a home and home with Georgia and Georgia backed out, so did Texas A&M.  

 
SFBayDuck said:
I'll be at the P-12 championship game on Friday so I sure hope @Don't Noonan is right, but the way this Oregon team has been playing since the bye has me afraid that @General Malaise is correct and the Ducks will get boat raced.  That offense has just been putrid since the bye after the USC game, and Herbert is just off.  The weather is supposed to be really sloppy with another storm rolling through Thursday and into Friday, so could be a low scoring affair (which would be to Oregon's benefit).
Click to expand...
I am not sure the bad weather will benefit Oregon.  They need to rely on Herbert with Utah rush defense.  USC beat them through the air.  Oregon's D needs to come to play.

If it comes down to an Oregon field goal we are doomed.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SWC
***official 2024/25 women’s college bball thread*** paige gets her title and will soon be beat up and abused in the wnba
19 20 21
Replies
1K
Views
49K
pollardsvision
pollardsvision
Chadstroma
AI: Use and Learn to Use
2
Replies
71
Views
2K
urbanhack
urbanhack
Chadstroma
EA Sports: NCAA College Football 25
Replies
4
Views
432
Kanil
Kanil

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top