2025 College Football Thread: Jordon leaves Belichick for Sonny Dykes (17 Viewers)

[Chadstroma]

Well shoot.

Miami will be dangerous moving ahead. Some playmakers there.

No they won't.

ok

Notre Dame will have a better season than Miami will come December. Bet.

Have you seen ND's schedule? Its terrible. So I reckon they may have a better record because they don't play anyone. Texas A&M next week. Maybe USC will be ranked. That's it.

With the playoffs at 12 games they should just join the acc and be done with it.

It is a money loser for them to join. There is no reason or benefit for ND to join other than all the whining of other school's fanbases who could not survive as an independent.

 

[Chadstroma]

Well shoot.

Miami will be dangerous moving ahead. Some playmakers there.

No they won't.

ok

Notre Dame will have a better season than Miami will come December. Bet.

Not a sarcastic ok... a "I really don't care to argue about it" ok.

 

[turnjose7]

About the only thing we know about Sayin is he was qbing an offense that benefitted from 5 turnovers basically and had 14 points to show for it. It really looked like they told him "don't lose it for us"

Pretty low bar, but he cleared it.

Huh? 5 turnovers? I don't know what this means. If you are suggesting that Sayin had the benefit of good field position or something like that, it's just untrue. Ohio State's average starting field position was 19.5 with nearly half their drives starting inside their own 10. The approach of being told not to lose the game is true. But between his skill players having uncharacteristically bad games, starting with horrible field position, and facing a really tough defense, it was still a challenging situation for someone making his first start and he handled it well.

 

[The Longtime Lurker]

About the only thing we know about Sayin is he was qbing an offense that benefitted from 5 turnovers basically and had 14 points to show for it. It really looked like they told him "don't lose it for us"

Pretty low bar, but he cleared it.

Huh? 5 turnovers? I don't know what this means. If you are suggesting that Sayin had the benefit of good field position or something like that, it's just untrue. Ohio State's average starting field position was 19.5 with nearly half their drives starting inside their own 10. The approach of being told not to lose the game is true. But between his skill players having uncharacteristically bad games, starting with horrible field position, and facing a really tough defense, it was still a challenging situation for someone making his first start and he handled it well.

I think he's talking about the turnovers on downs.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

About the only thing we know about Sayin is he was qbing an offense that benefitted from 5 turnovers basically and had 14 points to show for it. It really looked like they told him "don't lose it for us"

Pretty low bar, but he cleared it.

Huh? 5 turnovers? I don't know what this means. If you are suggesting that Sayin had the benefit of good field position or something like that, it's just untrue. Ohio State's average starting field position was 19.5 with nearly half their drives starting inside their own 10. The approach of being told not to lose the game is true. But between his skill players having uncharacteristically bad games, starting with horrible field position, and facing a really tough defense, it was still a challenging situation for someone making his first start and he handled it well.

MOST of the time, there is little to try and "interpret" in what I say. I stay as objective as possible. It's generally accepted that if you turn the ball over on downs it can be considered a "turnover". They had FOUR of those plus an INT that I remember. If just one of those ended differently it's a completely different ball game. All I said was that offense had 14 points under those circumstances and that it appeared like the bar set for him by the coaching staff (subjective I know) was "don't mess it up".

 

[Dr. Octopus]

About the only thing we know about Sayin is he was qbing an offense that benefitted from 5 turnovers basically and had 14 points to show for it. It really looked like they told him "don't lose it for us"

Pretty low bar, but he cleared it.

Huh? 5 turnovers? I don't know what this means. If you are suggesting that Sayin had the benefit of good field position or something like that, it's just untrue. Ohio State's average starting field position was 19.5 with nearly half their drives starting inside their own 10. The approach of being told not to lose the game is true. But between his skill players having uncharacteristically bad games, starting with horrible field position, and facing a really tough defense, it was still a challenging situation for someone making his first start and he handled it well.

MOST of the time, there is little to try and "interpret" in what I say. I stay as objective as possible. It's generally accepted that if you turn the ball over on downs it can be considered a "turnover". They had FOUR of those plus an INT that I remember. If just one of those ended differently it's a completely different ball game. All I said was that offense had 14 points under those circumstances and that it appeared like the bar set for him by the coaching staff (subjective I know) was "don't mess it up".

It is a “turnover on downs” but generally no one considers that a turnover - by that definition a punt is also a turnover.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

To be clear, I know they are technically different. It's generally accepted that the effects of a turnover on downs and a turnover (INT, fumble, etc) have a very similar practical affect. It was said three or four times live on air and then pointed out the rest of the day on the various "analysis" shows. I didn't really think this was all that controversial.

 

[Smack Tripper]

ND defense front 7 needs to take a look at itself in the mirror. All night they got pushed around.

ND offense got a lot LOT better once they realized they had Love and playing vertical was allowed. It took Denbrock far too long to trust Carr and it was too little, too late. Hopefully next game they realize those two can play football from the first snap instead of holding them both back.

I agree all around, ND coaching lost that game. I get some degree of training wheels, first Carr start miami prime time game, let him wade into the game but that means you give Love opportunities. And Denbrock was the GOOD coordinator

Ash is such trash its hard to fathom, been part of losing organizations for ten years, defense sits in zone all night, can't get any pressure, no adjustments, no creativity

Just sat back and let them get picked apart all night.

 

[massraider]

I agree all around, ND coaching lost that game

Eh, and MIA coaching let them back in the game by turtling up and going all Knute Rockne in the 2nd half. MIA won the line of scrimmage battle on both sides, all night long. That's a problem for Notre Dame, if they have title aspirations.

MIA isn't a true contender. Carson Beck can run an offense, but I don't know if there's any special out there catching the ball. And the RB are only OK.

 

[Smack Tripper]

I agree all around, ND coaching lost that game

Eh, and MIA coaching let them back in the game by turtling up and going all Knute Rockne in the 2nd half. MIA won the line of scrimmage battle on both sides, all night long. That's a problem for Notre Dame, if they have title aspirations.

MIA isn't a true contender. Carson Beck can run an offense, but I don't know if there's any special out there catching the ball. And the RB are only OK.

But ND hit some plays to get back in the game. Both teams are trying.

If we agree the Irish were the more talented team than it falls to coaching in my eyes.

Adjustments are overrated as a concept but ND's adjustments against Penn State won them that game.

I mean, Freeman WAS a DC, first game with Ash maybe he didn't want to get in his rice bowl but when you look at the ND schedule, this was their real resume building game, so now they have to win out most likely and they have pot holes along the way. Just a very disheartening start, I have no doubt if Golden was still the DC they win that game.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Just saw an interesting stat.

Under Deboer, Alabama is 4-4 when favored by 14+ points.

Under Saban, Alabama was 131-2 when favored by 14+ points.

 

[turnjose7]

To be clear, I know they are technically different. It's generally accepted that the effects of a turnover on downs and a turnover (INT, fumble, etc) have a very similar practical affect. It was said three or four times live on air and then pointed out the rest of the day on the various "analysis" shows. I didn't really think this was all that controversial.

Right, but the practical effect of the turnover depends on where it occurs on the field. While OSU surely benefits from the turnover in all cases, when it comes to how it affects perception of Sayin and the offense's performance, it isn't super helpful if it is occurring deep in Ohio State territory. Especially something like the goal line stand which resulted in a "turnover" at the OSU one. It makes the OSU offense and QB look worse than they otherwise would, not better, because against a good defense in a low scoring game it all but forces them to play ultra conservative. So the phrasing "Sayin is he was qbing an offense that benefitted from 5 turnovers" doesn't really make sense and that was the source of my confusion.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

To be clear, I know they are technically different. It's generally accepted that the effects of a turnover on downs and a turnover (INT, fumble, etc) have a very similar practical affect. It was said three or four times live on air and then pointed out the rest of the day on the various "analysis" shows. I didn't really think this was all that controversial.

Right, but the practical effect of the turnover depends on where it occurs on the field. While OSU surely benefits from the turnover in all cases, when it comes to how it affects perception of Sayin and the offense's performance, it isn't super helpful if it is occurring deep in Ohio State territory. Especially something like the goal line stand which resulted in a "turnover" at the OSU one. It makes the OSU offense and QB look worse than they otherwise would, not better, because against a good defense in a low scoring game it all but forces them to play ultra conservative. So the phrasing "Sayin is he was qbing an offense that benefitted from 5 turnovers" doesn't really make sense and that was the source of my confusion.

Ok. Reduce the number by one. Doesn't materially change the argument. Meyer was even talking about the gifts on the halftime show not understanding why Texas wouldn't punt and pin them deep. Are you of the opinion that there is very little benefit of a first time starter at QB getting to start at the 35/45 instead of inside the 20?

None of this is a knock on your QB though. Just not really buying that we learned a whole lot about him anf his abilities in that game. If we go with two field goals and a punt on three of the remaining turnover on downs and things would have probably looked different, don't you think?

 

[turnjose7]

To be clear, I know they are technically different. It's generally accepted that the effects of a turnover on downs and a turnover (INT, fumble, etc) have a very similar practical affect. It was said three or four times live on air and then pointed out the rest of the day on the various "analysis" shows. I didn't really think this was all that controversial.

Right, but the practical effect of the turnover depends on where it occurs on the field. While OSU surely benefits from the turnover in all cases, when it comes to how it affects perception of Sayin and the offense's performance, it isn't super helpful if it is occurring deep in Ohio State territory. Especially something like the goal line stand which resulted in a "turnover" at the OSU one. It makes the OSU offense and QB look worse than they otherwise would, not better, because against a good defense in a low scoring game it all but forces them to play ultra conservative. So the phrasing "Sayin is he was qbing an offense that benefitted from 5 turnovers" doesn't really make sense and that was the source of my confusion.

Ok. Reduce the number by one. Doesn't materially change the argument. Meyer was even talking about the gifts on the halftime show not understanding why Texas wouldn't punt and pin them deep. Are you of the opinion that there is very little benefit of a first time starter at QB getting to start at the 35/45 instead of inside the 20?

None of this is a knock on your QB though. Just not really buying that we learned a whole lot about him anf his abilities in that game. If we go with two field goals and a punt on three of the remaining turnover on downs and things would have probably looked different, don't you think?

I'm saying I don't think this happened very often. Two of the turnovers on downs happened inside the OSU 10 and a third was on the final drive of the game. So in none of those cases did the OSU offense benefit from getting the ball on downs. The first drive of the game and interception are the only two times OSU got the ball in good field position because of the types of turnovers you describe. Which certainly helped but I don't think that it is uncommon to have a couple such drives in almost every game, and it is balanced on the other side by the fact that two of the turnovers on downs started inside the 10 and also Texas' punter was really good and OSU had 3 other drives start inside the 10 as a result. 5 OSU drives started inside their own 10 yard line and excepting the kneel down at the end, only 1 started past their 35. That is way worse field position than a team has on average so the idea that the OSU offense benefited by the way the back and forth played out just doesn't hold up.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

To be clear, I know they are technically different. It's generally accepted that the effects of a turnover on downs and a turnover (INT, fumble, etc) have a very similar practical affect. It was said three or four times live on air and then pointed out the rest of the day on the various "analysis" shows. I didn't really think this was all that controversial.

Right, but the practical effect of the turnover depends on where it occurs on the field. While OSU surely benefits from the turnover in all cases, when it comes to how it affects perception of Sayin and the offense's performance, it isn't super helpful if it is occurring deep in Ohio State territory. Especially something like the goal line stand which resulted in a "turnover" at the OSU one. It makes the OSU offense and QB look worse than they otherwise would, not better, because against a good defense in a low scoring game it all but forces them to play ultra conservative. So the phrasing "Sayin is he was qbing an offense that benefitted from 5 turnovers" doesn't really make sense and that was the source of my confusion.

Ok. Reduce the number by one. Doesn't materially change the argument. Meyer was even talking about the gifts on the halftime show not understanding why Texas wouldn't punt and pin them deep. Are you of the opinion that there is very little benefit of a first time starter at QB getting to start at the 35/45 instead of inside the 20?

None of this is a knock on your QB though. Just not really buying that we learned a whole lot about him anf his abilities in that game. If we go with two field goals and a punt on three of the remaining turnover on downs and things would have probably looked different, don't you think?

I'm saying I don't think this happened very often. Two of the turnovers on downs happened inside the OSU 10 and a third was on the final drive of the game. So in none of those cases did the OSU offense benefit from getting the ball on downs. The first drive of the game and interception are the only two times OSU got the ball in good field position because of the types of turnovers you describe. Which certainly helped but I don't think that it is uncommon to have a couple such drives in almost every game, and it is balanced on the other side by the fact that two of the turnovers on downs started inside the 10 and also Texas' punter was really good and OSU had 3 other drives start inside the 10 as a result. 5 OSU drives started inside their own 10 yard line and excepting the kneel down at the end, only 1 started past their 35. That is way worse field position than a team has on average so the idea that the OSU offense benefited by the way the back and forth played out just doesn't hold up.

No, they benefitted by Texas choosing to forgo points. Im pretty sure any time a team chooses to forgo point or field position the opposition is happy with the decision as they benefit greatly by the mistake. Didn't think this was controversial either, but I guess it is.

 

[belljr]

Which Jordan is in more demand tonight?

 

[fruity pebbles]

UNCs QB has zero zip on the ball

 

[AAABatteries]

Just saw an interesting stat.

Under Deboer, Alabama is 4-4 when favored by 14+ points.

Under Saban, Alabama was 131-2 when favored by 14+ points.

I know it’s not the point of the stat but Saban being a 2-td favorite 58% of the time (230 total games) is ridiculous.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Belichick’s gonna transfer mid game

 

[HellToupee]

It’s amazing this is the best qb Belichick/Lombardi could bring in.

And this defense , oofa

 

[fruity pebbles]

lol fans seen funneling out of the stadium in the third quarter.

 

[WDIK2]

Wow. Deion, the Manning Family and Alabama should write Belichick a thank you note.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Brad Johnson's kid playing QB now

 

[Chadstroma]

So if Belicheat fails miserably for his time at NC like he is in this game, can we all finally agree that he rode two all time greats in the pros to be considered one of the best coaches of all time?

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So if Belicheat fails miserably for his time at NC like he is in this game, can we all finally agree that he rode two all time greats in the pros to be considered one of the best coaches of all time?

No

 

[Chadstroma]

So if Belicheat fails miserably for his time at NC like he is in this game, can we all finally agree that he rode two all time greats in the pros to be considered one of the best coaches of all time?

No

Ok... and why?

It is the first game but this is embarrassing. Certainly not fitting for a college team with the "all time great" coach at the helm and this isn't like in the past where you had to build a program in recruiting.

Let's say his stint at NC is mediocre (what I think it will end up being). What would he have accomplished without LT or Brady on his team?

My position has always been that he is a "good coach" but has been blessed with two of the all time greats that have made him overrated. Without one of them he has a bad stint with the Browns and immediately flamed out with the Pats. If he follows it up with a also ran showing at NC, it basically proves my point.

If, he turns NC into a perennial powerhouse then I am out of excuses and will relinquish. However, if NC doesn't do much of anything then he is just another good coach that got unbelievably lucky with the talent that he rode to HOF coaching career.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So if Belicheat fails miserably for his time at NC like he is in this game, can we all finally agree that he rode two all time greats in the pros to be considered one of the best coaches of all time?

No

Ok... and why?

It is the first game but this is embarrassing. Certainly not fitting for a college team with the "all time great" coach at the helm and this isn't like in the past where you had to build a program in recruiting.

Let's say his stint at NC is mediocre (what I think it will end up being). What would he have accomplished without LT or Brady on his team?

My position has always been that he is a "good coach" but has been blessed with two of the all time greats that have made him overrated. Without one of them he has a bad stint with the Browns and immediately flamed out with the Pats. If he follows it up with a also ran showing at NC, it basically proves my point.

If, he turns NC into a perennial powerhouse then I am out of excuses and will relinquish. However, if NC doesn't do much of anything then he is just another good coach that got unbelievably lucky with the talent that he rode to HOF coaching career.

What coach in any major sport has won 6 championships without hall of fame players? Brady is obviously the GOAT but he didn't have that dynasty by himself.

You're comparing apples to oranges too. Send Phil Jackson to Boston College and if he doesn't win there then he was a good coach that got lucky with talent?

 

[Desert_Power]

UNCs QB has zero zip on the ball

Seems like quite the wind-up too.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

"We're moving on to Charlotte"

-Belichick in the post game

 

[Capella]

It was definitely all Brady

 

[Chadstroma]

So if Belicheat fails miserably for his time at NC like he is in this game, can we all finally agree that he rode two all time greats in the pros to be considered one of the best coaches of all time?

No

Ok... and why?

It is the first game but this is embarrassing. Certainly not fitting for a college team with the "all time great" coach at the helm and this isn't like in the past where you had to build a program in recruiting.

Let's say his stint at NC is mediocre (what I think it will end up being). What would he have accomplished without LT or Brady on his team?

My position has always been that he is a "good coach" but has been blessed with two of the all time greats that have made him overrated. Without one of them he has a bad stint with the Browns and immediately flamed out with the Pats. If he follows it up with a also ran showing at NC, it basically proves my point.

If, he turns NC into a perennial powerhouse then I am out of excuses and will relinquish. However, if NC doesn't do much of anything then he is just another good coach that got unbelievably lucky with the talent that he rode to HOF coaching career.

What coach in any major sport has won 6 championships without hall of fame players? Brady is obviously the GOAT but he didn't have that dynasty by himself.

You're comparing apples to oranges too. Send Phil Jackson to Boston College and if he doesn't win there then he was a good coach that got lucky with talent?

Got it... only a all time great coach could win without LT or Brady and not just a good coach.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So if Belicheat fails miserably for his time at NC like he is in this game, can we all finally agree that he rode two all time greats in the pros to be considered one of the best coaches of all time?

No

Ok... and why?

It is the first game but this is embarrassing. Certainly not fitting for a college team with the "all time great" coach at the helm and this isn't like in the past where you had to build a program in recruiting.

Let's say his stint at NC is mediocre (what I think it will end up being). What would he have accomplished without LT or Brady on his team?

My position has always been that he is a "good coach" but has been blessed with two of the all time greats that have made him overrated. Without one of them he has a bad stint with the Browns and immediately flamed out with the Pats. If he follows it up with a also ran showing at NC, it basically proves my point.

If, he turns NC into a perennial powerhouse then I am out of excuses and will relinquish. However, if NC doesn't do much of anything then he is just another good coach that got unbelievably lucky with the talent that he rode to HOF coaching career.

What coach in any major sport has won 6 championships without hall of fame players? Brady is obviously the GOAT but he didn't have that dynasty by himself.

You're comparing apples to oranges too. Send Phil Jackson to Boston College and if he doesn't win there then he was a good coach that got lucky with talent?

Got it... only a all time great coach could win without LT or Brady and not just a good coach.

I noticed you ignored my question. I guess go back to the Skip Bayless hot takes.

 

[Chadstroma]

I noticed you ignored my question. I guess go back to the Skip Bayless hot takes.

I don't watch/listen to Skip (not even sure what shows he is on). I actually do not even like him from the little I have seen of him in the past so I have no idea what hia takes are. The only sports shows I watch regularly are Pat McAfee, Insiders, and NFL Live.

I didn't know I was required to answer you. Sure, if Phil went elsewhere and struggled without a Jordan or Kobe/Shaq on his team then I would say that that was a great indicator that he was maybe not the GOAT basketball coach.

I do think he is a great coach just for his ability to deal successfully with the personalities he had to deal with as both the Bulls and Lakers could have gone off the rails. That was his strength without any doubt. He wasn't a great tactician or innovator (the Triangle was Tex's offense). For GOAT basketball coach, I would take Wooden without hesitation.

Belicheat is a good coach. I am not denying that. But the Browns was not a successful run, However, there is a lot of evidence to suggest that he is over rated and I believe in that evidence.

First, his winning percentage with Brady was .769 while without Brady a really not good .449. This includes his time with the Browns and the Patriots both when Brady was hurt and after he left. His best record with a QB during this years was Matt Cassel at 10-5 and Jimmy "wet noodle" G 2-0 (getting two wins out of Jimmy G is actually a great argument that he is actually the GOAT but I digress). Mac Jones 18-24, Testaverde 17-16, Kosar 11-18, Newton 7-8, Bledsoe 5-13 among others.

Brady leaves and win a SB with another team and coach. Again, what has Belicheat done? Nothing with the Patriots and getting off to a horrible start with NC. If he fails in NC then you really have some work cut out for you to explain how he is the GOAT football coach.

 

[blue42]

I noticed you ignored my question. I guess go back to the Skip Bayless hot takes.

I don't watch/listen to Skip (not even sure what shows he is on). I actually do not even like him from the little I have seen of him in the past so I have no idea what hia takes are. The only sports shows I watch regularly are Pat McAfee, Insiders, and NFL Live.

I didn't know I was required to answer you. Sure, if Phil went elsewhere and struggled without a Jordan or Kobe/Shaq on his team then I would say that that was a great indicator that he was maybe not the GOAT basketball coach.

I do think he is a great coach just for his ability to deal successfully with the personalities he had to deal with as both the Bulls and Lakers could have gone off the rails. That was his strength without any doubt. He wasn't a great tactician or innovator (the Triangle was Tex's offense). For GOAT basketball coach, I would take Wooden without hesitation.

Belicheat is a good coach. I am not denying that. But the Browns was not a successful run, However, there is a lot of evidence to suggest that he is over rated and I believe in that evidence.

First, his winning percentage with Brady was .769 while without Brady a really not good .449. This includes his time with the Browns and the Patriots both when Brady was hurt and after he left. His best record with a QB during this years was Matt Cassel at 10-5 and Jimmy "wet noodle" G 2-0 (getting two wins out of Jimmy G is actually a great argument that he is actually the GOAT but I digress). Mac Jones 18-24, Testaverde 17-16, Kosar 11-18, Newton 7-8, Bledsoe 5-13 among others.

Brady leaves and win a SB with another team and coach. Again, what has Belicheat done? Nothing with the Patriots and getting off to a horrible start with NC. If he fails in NC then you really have some work cut out for you to explain how he is the GOAT football coach.

Your Belichick argument makes sense.

Your Phil one does not.

 

[identikit]

Least Bill got the girl...

 

[rockaction]

Wow, the kids are making four million dollars? I think they should get all that they can but I can't help but think that it will actually ruin the earning potential of college football in the long run. The appeal was that they were amateurs. It's weird to have universities claim that athletes earning four million dollars and who don't really go to class are students at the university. I know it's merely been a veneer since about 1966 or so, but the veneer is getting ripped off at a rapid rate.

I can't see the demand for it lasting. What? Our hired guns are better than your hired guns!

Who cares? It's eating itself, IMO. That said, them being unpaid and basically indentured servants was oodles worse.

Oh, and Belichick had a bunch to do with the Patriots winning six Super Bowls. I think Brady had a much greater role, but somebody had to guide it. Besides, it seems like the nation and the press actually bought into his dour cheating ways. Weird. It showed where society was at, and now look at us in 2025!

 

[The Longtime Lurker]

Oh Billy... Atleast there's always the gold digger brand to fall back on

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I noticed you ignored my question. I guess go back to the Skip Bayless hot takes.

I don't watch/listen to Skip (not even sure what shows he is on). I actually do not even like him from the little I have seen of him in the past so I have no idea what hia takes are. The only sports shows I watch regularly are Pat McAfee, Insiders, and NFL Live.

I didn't know I was required to answer you. Sure, if Phil went elsewhere and struggled without a Jordan or Kobe/Shaq on his team then I would say that that was a great indicator that he was maybe not the GOAT basketball coach.

I do think he is a great coach just for his ability to deal successfully with the personalities he had to deal with as both the Bulls and Lakers could have gone off the rails. That was his strength without any doubt. He wasn't a great tactician or innovator (the Triangle was Tex's offense). For GOAT basketball coach, I would take Wooden without hesitation.

Belicheat is a good coach. I am not denying that. But the Browns was not a successful run, However, there is a lot of evidence to suggest that he is over rated and I believe in that evidence.

First, his winning percentage with Brady was .769 while without Brady a really not good .449. This includes his time with the Browns and the Patriots both when Brady was hurt and after he left. His best record with a QB during this years was Matt Cassel at 10-5 and Jimmy "wet noodle" G 2-0 (getting two wins out of Jimmy G is actually a great argument that he is actually the GOAT but I digress). Mac Jones 18-24, Testaverde 17-16, Kosar 11-18, Newton 7-8, Bledsoe 5-13 among others.

Brady leaves and win a SB with another team and coach. Again, what has Belicheat done? Nothing with the Patriots and getting off to a horrible start with NC. If he fails in NC then you really have some work cut out for you to explain how he is the GOAT football coach.

List your "great" coaches. I'm failing to find those that won several championships without great talent.

 

[rockaction]

Oh Billy... Atleast there's always the gold digger brand to fall back on

Serious fall from grace. Only the most old-fashioned and virtuous of old men should stay in the public eye after seventy. It's all downhill from there if they don't.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Off topic but I was at a volleyball game on Sunday between NCAA #5 v #8, pulled up the Texas roster on the official UT website and looked up a players bio. There’s a little dollar sign icon next to the players’ names. Fans can click on the dollar sign and there are options to give the players money - like $10 for a block of $20 for an ace.

 

[rockaction]

Off topic but I was at a volleyball game on Sunday between NCAA #5 v #8, pulled up the Texas roster on the official UT website and looked up a players bio. There’s a little dollar sign icon next to the players’ names. Fans can click on the dollar sign and there are options to give the players money - like $10 for a block of $20 for an ace.

We're kind of doomed.

 

[mr. furley]

holy ****, the takes around UNC and Belichick are ****ing SIZZLING this morning

 

[mr. furley]

Off topic but I was at a volleyball game on Sunday between NCAA #5 v #8, pulled up the Texas roster on the official UT website and looked up a players bio. There’s a little dollar sign icon next to the players’ names. Fans can click on the dollar sign and there are options to give the players money - like $10 for a block of $20 for an ace.

this seems very not good for the integrity of sports

 

[Sparky Polastri]

This will put the "Jimmys/Joes" vs "X/O" debate to an end rather quickly. College football is significantly more about the Jimmys/Joes. ****, both Saban and Meyer have said this multiple times. Said it when announced and will say it again. Bill will be as successful in CFB as Saban/Meyer were in the NFL. The two situations are just different and Bill doesn't have the skills (or interest I'd argue, but that opinion) to acquire the talent.

 

[kupcho1]

The appeal was that they were amateurs.

No, that was never the case.

The appeal was and continues to be that they represent your college and fans live vicariously through them. Their success or failure on the field (or court) was your success or failure. Now obviously this doesn't apply to everyone, but it does for the passionate fan of college athletics.

 

[rockaction]

The appeal was that they were amateurs.

No, that was never the case.

The appeal was and continues to be that they represent your college and fans live vicariously through them. Their success or failure on the field (or court) was your success or failure. Now obviously this doesn't apply to everyone, but it does for the passionate fan of college athletics.

You're right to a degree, but I don't think it's that easy. Nor does history really bear that out. The real appeal until recently was that they were part of the university in some meaningful way and not just employees. There was at least the facade of university life that the guys were going through. And it was part amateurism. They were big men on campuses, but they were also going through the same thing the other students were. Note I also said around '66 or so. I'm thinking that somewhere in the mid '60s when society changed that college athletics really changed and the perks started to be paramount for the athletes and the whole spirit of the thing was different.

The drift in professional sports from the regular guy who lived on your block to the wealthy athlete that lived apart from you gave rise to the importance of college sports. The kids were now the relatable ones. I think it's this relatability that led to these billion dollar deals and this industry. And that the impulse of relatability is strained when the athlete is no longer relatable. And I think the cycle will begin again in college. Who can relate to a student earning four million dollars who has been to two other universities in the past two years? I can't be the only one to point this out.

And you can't tell me that in the fifties amateurism and being part of the student body wasn't a great deal of the pull or the attraction to college sports. Yes, there were the Ivies and cheer squads and student sections and all of that, but that's child's play compared to the utter hugeness of all of this.

It will eat itself to death.

 

[General Malaise]

GM'S TOP 20

1. Penn State
2. LSU
3. Georgia
4. Oregon
5. Ohio State
6. Miami
7. Arizona State
8. South Carolina
9. Illinois
10. Texas
11. Clemson
12. Notre Dame
13. Florida State
14. Florida
15. Michigan
16. SMU
17. Iowa State
18. Alabama
19. Ole Miss
20. Oklahoma

 

[Beef Ravioli Part 2]

GM'S TOP 20

1. Penn State
2. LSU
3. Georgia
4. Oregon
5. Ohio State
6. Miami
7. Arizona State
8. South Carolina
9. Illinois
10. Texas
11. Clemson
12. Notre Dame
13. Florida State
14. Florida
15. Michigan
16. SMU
17. Iowa State
18. Alabama
19. Ole Miss
20. Oklahoma

Is there a preseason GM TOP 20 to compare this too?

 

[General Malaise]

GM'S TOP 20

1. Penn State
2. LSU
3. Georgia
4. Oregon
5. Ohio State
6. Miami
7. Arizona State
8. South Carolina
9. Illinois
10. Texas
11. Clemson
12. Notre Dame
13. Florida State
14. Florida
15. Michigan
16. SMU
17. Iowa State
18. Alabama
19. Ole Miss
20. Oklahoma

Is there a preseason GM TOP 20 to compare this too?

There is not. GM thinks pre-season polls are ridiculous.

 

[AAABatteries]

Off topic but I was at a volleyball game on Sunday between NCAA #5 v #8, pulled up the Texas roster on the official UT website and looked up a players bio. There’s a little dollar sign icon next to the players’ names. Fans can click on the dollar sign and there are options to give the players money - like $10 for a block of $20 for an ace.

I'm going to start putting a GoFundMe QR code on all my PowerPoint presentation and reports/dashboard.