*** Official 2015 College Football Thread *** (1 Viewer)

[cheese]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

I watch now because of a connection to the sport through my alma mater. I watch all of my teams games and a lot of other games for their small amount of impact on my team.

Then I'm not sure there's a problem...you can continue to do that if you want. It will just be different games than what you watch today.

Right. But what fans does the SEC or B10 or ACC or any other conference gain by splitting to offset all the MAC, AAC, MWC, etc fans that no longer care about the bigger conference games?

I'm not sure it's necessary. Meaning, I'm not sure there are enough folks with your approach that would cause a noticeable difference. I could be wrong.

You think that because you think those teams don't have fans or because you think those teams fans will start following the higher league without their team in it?

I think most (or a lot of) folks watch football because it's football. I have a lot of App State fans as friend and now UNCC has a football team, but that doesn't preclude them from following the BCS because they love college football. So if I had to select from your options above, I'd have to go with "watching the higher league without their team in it" I guess. The way things are today, the reality is there are only a handful of teams that will be in consideration for the "championship" anyway even if they are a BCS school. My team's not had a shot of being in consideration the last several years, but that doesn't prevent me from watching the season as a whole.

I don't think so personally, but I at least see where you're coming from.

Of course it's true that my team won't be considered for a championship. Hell, my team just went 12-0 and wasn't in a championship game. The other "reality" though is that the pretending works and works incredibly well. Fans of all of the lower FBS schools all believe they're competing in the same league as the big boys. That makes them care. They know if they have that magical season they can be in the Sugar Bowl and take on a Florida or Alabama just like anyone else. That makes those teams relevant to them.

I think you're also missing a key difference between a school that was always FCS vs a team being kicked out BY THE TEAMS YOU'RE HOPING THEY FOLLOW and being relegated to a lower level. The bitterness doesn't exist for a school like UNCC that would for a school like Boise or Cincinnati or UCF or dozens of others.

 

[The Commish]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

And you believe Alabama playing Central Michigan is intriguing? You've arbitrarily drawn a line at FCS schools but it's been shown to you that this might not be the best approach. The reality is, there is little difference between the worst division 1 schools and the best/better FCS schools.

It's just a logical place to draw a line because it has to be drawn somewhere. But yes, in general I think that Central Michigan would give Alabama more of a game than the Citadel. As Christo pointed out, there are exceptions to this. But in most cases its true enough.

ok

 

[timschochet]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

Yet none of the schools you mentioned are playing FCS opponents in September. Instead there are games like LSU @ Georgia, Bama @ A&M, and UF @ Miami. If you find those boring, maybe football isn't the sport for you.

Please actually know what the #### you are talking about before polluting this thread.

This year the scheduling is an exception, I will grant you that. The boring games are more spread out.

As to "polluting the thread" just stop, please.

 

[Slapdash]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

Yet none of the schools you mentioned are playing FCS opponents in September. Instead there are games like LSU @ Georgia, Bama @ A&M, and UF @ Miami. If you find those boring, maybe football isn't the sport for you.

Please actually know what the #### you are talking about before polluting this thread.

This year the scheduling is an exception, I will grant you that. The boring games are more spread out.

As to "polluting the thread" just stop, please.

Yes, take it somewhere else.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

Don't watch LSU vs Citadel then.

The first week of the season you can watch UNC vs South Carolina on Thursday night. Saturday you can watch BYU vs Virginia, Miss St vs Okla St, Penn St vs Syracuse, Alabama vs Va Tech or whatever other game floats your boat during the day. At night you get Clemson vs Georgia.

 

[timschochet]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

Yet none of the schools you mentioned are playing FCS opponents in September. Instead there are games like LSU @ Georgia, Bama @ A&M, and UF @ Miami. If you find those boring, maybe football isn't the sport for you.

Please actually know what the #### you are talking about before polluting this thread.

This year the scheduling is an exception, I will grant you that. The boring games are more spread out.

As to "polluting the thread" just stop, please.

Yes, take it somewhere else.

There's nothing more for me to say on this subject so I will drop it. I wish you would drop the insults, please.

 

[The Commish]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

I watch now because of a connection to the sport through my alma mater. I watch all of my teams games and a lot of other games for their small amount of impact on my team.

Then I'm not sure there's a problem...you can continue to do that if you want. It will just be different games than what you watch today.

Right. But what fans does the SEC or B10 or ACC or any other conference gain by splitting to offset all the MAC, AAC, MWC, etc fans that no longer care about the bigger conference games?

I'm not sure it's necessary. Meaning, I'm not sure there are enough folks with your approach that would cause a noticeable difference. I could be wrong.

You think that because you think those teams don't have fans or because you think those teams fans will start following the higher league without their team in it?

I think most (or a lot of) folks watch football because it's football. I have a lot of App State fans as friend and now UNCC has a football team, but that doesn't preclude them from following the BCS because they love college football. So if I had to select from your options above, I'd have to go with "watching the higher league without their team in it" I guess. The way things are today, the reality is there are only a handful of teams that will be in consideration for the "championship" anyway even if they are a BCS school. My team's not had a shot of being in consideration the last several years, but that doesn't prevent me from watching the season as a whole.

I don't think so personally, but I at least see where you're coming from.

Of course it's true that my team won't be considered for a championship. Hell, my team just went 12-0 and wasn't in a championship game. The other "reality" though is that the pretending works and works incredibly well. Fans of all of the lower FBS schools all believe they're competing in the same league as the big boys. That makes them care. They know if they have that magical season they can be in the Sugar Bowl and take on a Florida or Alabama just like anyone else. That makes those teams relevant to them.

I think you're also missing a key difference between a school that was always FCS vs a team being kicked out BY THE TEAMS YOU'RE HOPING THEY FOLLOW and being relegated to a lower level. The bitterness doesn't exist for a school like UNCC that would for a school like Boise or Cincinnati or UCF or dozens of others.

Actually....this is a good point. I forget about this because I generally don't care who wins the "championship" anyway. Yeah, it's funny to argue/"discuss" the merits of the two teams playing in the game, but the game itself and end goal have not really ever meant anything to me. The last full BCSNC game I watched was 2011 and that was purely because of this forum.

 

[timschochet]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

Don't watch LSU vs Citadel then.

The first week of the season you can watch UNC vs South Carolina on Thursday night. Saturday you can watch BYU vs Virginia, Miss St vs Okla St, Penn St vs Syracuse, Alabama vs Va Tech or whatever other game floats your boat during the day. At night you get Clemson vs Georgia.

Yeah, as I acknowledged to Slapdash, this year is an exception, with some very entertaining matchups early in the year. If they did this every year, I would hardly ever complain.

I am REALLY looking forward to this season.

 

[Slapdash]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

Don't watch LSU vs Citadel then.

The first week of the season you can watch UNC vs South Carolina on Thursday night. Saturday you can watch BYU vs Virginia, Miss St vs Okla St, Penn St vs Syracuse, Alabama vs Va Tech or whatever other game floats your boat during the day. At night you get Clemson vs Georgia.

That should be an interesting game, two very different types of teams.

 

[timschochet]

That Clemson vs. Georgia matchup is especially intriguing to me. Athlon's got Georgia ranked #4 and Clemson ranked #6. Not sure why Clemson is ranked so high this year- Boyd is certainly exciting, but the team hasn't demonstrated they belong in the upper tier. Can't wait to see that game...

 

[Slapdash]

That Clemson vs. Georgia matchup is especially intriguing to me. Athlon's got Georgia ranked #4 and Clemson ranked #6. Not sure why Clemson is ranked so high this year- Boyd is certainly exciting, but the team hasn't demonstrated they belong in the upper tier. Can't wait to see that game...

Happens every year.

 

[The Commish]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

Don't watch LSU vs Citadel then.

The first week of the season you can watch UNC vs South Carolina on Thursday night. Saturday you can watch BYU vs Virginia, Miss St vs Okla St, Penn St vs Syracuse, Alabama vs Va Tech or whatever other game floats your boat during the day. At night you get Clemson vs Georgia.

Yeah, as I acknowledged to Slapdash, this year is an exception, with some very entertaining matchups early in the year. If they did this every year, I would hardly ever complain.

I am REALLY looking forward to this season.

Last year you had a lot to choose from as well

USC vs Vandy

NCSU vs Tenn

MSU vs BSU

Miami vs BC

Clemson vs Auburn

Alabama vs Michigan (insert jokes here)

VT vs GT

 

[FDAS]

I sure Tim doesn't appreciate everyone proving him wrong again.

 

[Native]

That Clemson vs. Georgia matchup is especially intriguing to me. Athlon's got Georgia ranked #4 and Clemson ranked #6. Not sure why Clemson is ranked so high this year- Boyd is certainly exciting, but the team hasn't demonstrated they belong in the upper tier. Can't wait to see that game...

This game scares the crap out of me. Fans at Clemson will be pumped up ( ). Georgia then follows up with another 'easy' September game vs South Carolina ( ), followed by Division I Powerhouse North Texas ( ) and then close out the month with LSU. ( )

So typical I know. Why o' why did Georgia look for the easy way out and schedule North Texas instead of Oregon or Ohio State? With that schedule, we will be knocked out of the title race before its even begun.

 

[Politician Spock]

I sure Tim doesn't appreciate everyone proving him wrong again.

If it didn't bother him the first time, why would it bother him the 20,000 time?

 

[timschochet]

I sure Tim doesn't appreciate everyone proving him wrong again.

If it didn't bother him the first time, why would it bother him the 20,000 time?

I thought you guys had me on ignore.

 

[prefontaine]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

Yet none of the schools you mentioned are playing FCS opponents in September. Instead there are games like LSU @ Georgia, Bama @ A&M, and UF @ Miami. If you find those boring, maybe football isn't the sport for you.

Please actually know what the #### you are talking about before polluting this thread.

This year the scheduling is an exception, I will grant you that. The boring games are more spread out.

As to "polluting the thread" just stop, please.

Yes, take it somewhere else.

There's nothing more for me to say on this subject so I will drop it. I wish you would drop the insults, please.

honestly dude, there was nothing to say on the topic to begin with. Everyone plays weak games. The righteous indignation of holding others to a higher standard while saying "we aren't good enough" to have to be held to that same standard is annoying. The truth of the matter is that schools look out for their self-interest. If you want schools to schedule up, then you have to show a reason why they should.

These schools choose FCS opponents because they cost $300-400k to play. An FBS school like Rice is getting $1 million from Texas A&M for the season opener this year. If you are going to simply destroy either team and you sell out the stadium either way, why would you pay the extra $700k? And you don't even give them credit for it anyway as you whine that they are playing weak FBS schools. You won't be made happy until there is a compelling reason for schools to change scheduling philosophies. And yet you give no compelling reason they should other than your righteous indignation.

 

[prefontaine]

I don't think so personally, but I at least see where you're coming from. Of course it's true that my team won't be considered for a championship. Hell, my team just went 12-0 and wasn't in a championship game. The other "reality" though is that the pretending works and works incredibly well. Fans of all of the lower FBS schools all believe they're competing in the same league as the big boys. That makes them care. They know if they have that magical season they can be in the Sugar Bowl and take on a Florida or Alabama just like anyone else. That makes those teams relevant to them.

I think you're also missing a key difference between a school that was always FCS vs a team being kicked out BY THE TEAMS YOU'RE HOPING THEY FOLLOW and being relegated to a lower level. The bitterness doesn't exist for a school like UNCC that would for a school like Boise or Cincinnati or UCF or dozens of others.

Actually....this is a good point. I forget about this because I generally don't care who wins the "championship" anyway. Yeah, it's funny to argue/"discuss" the merits of the two teams playing in the game, but the game itself and end goal have not really ever meant anything to me. The last full BCSNC game I watched was 2011 and that was purely because of this forum.

I'm not sure this is all true. FCS and FBS used to be the same division. The primary difference is the number of scholarships (65 vs 85). But they did split in the late 70s in the exact same way we're talking about here. Believe me when I say I know where cheese is coming from because we'd almost certainly be left behind, but there is a compelling reason.

Schools have to weigh the pros and cons of competing at the top level. It costs more money and you probably win less but it's a lot more exposure for the school. The problem the big schools are having today is that they are making a ton of money and it's not a for-profit deal. Cases like the O'Bannon situation scare them because it could kill college athletics as we know it so they want to do some different things that the smaller schools simply can't afford (pay players and families a stipend for instance). The only way for that to happen is to split the division again. You'll never pass that if half the votes are from the Rices of the world. But if they don't do it, the whole thing may come crashing down....or at least it's a concern.

So I think another split is inevitable honestly.

 

[Slapdash]

I sure Tim doesn't appreciate everyone proving him wrong again.

If it didn't bother him the first time, why would it bother him the 20,000 time?

I thought you guys had me on ignore.

This exchange is quite funny when thinking about how much you hate being compared to LHUCKS...

 

[The Commish]

Prince receiving death threats

“They were like, ‘If you don’t come to our school, we’ll kill you and your family,’ and, ‘We know where you live,'” Prince told The Post. “Somehow, they got my number and FaceTimed me, flashing guns and saying stuff. But they didn’t block their number or anything, so they weren’t too smart.

Prince wouldn't name the school he nearly committed to, either, but he did narrow his lengthy list of offers down to 10 potential schools on Monday: Alabama, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Maryland, Ohio State, Rutgers, South Carolina and Vanderbilt. Prince's hometown Terrapins have been in hottest pursuit, Parker reported.

Seriously??

 

[timschochet]

I sure Tim doesn't appreciate everyone proving him wrong again.

If it didn't bother him the first time, why would it bother him the 20,000 time?

I thought you guys had me on ignore.

This exchange is quite funny when thinking about how much you hate being compared to LHUCKS...

The reason I don't like being compared to LHUCKS has nothing to do with being wrong. If I'm wrong about stuff, or if he was wrong about stuff, fine. Live and learn.

But LHUCKS made arguments with the deliberate attempt to antagonize people, to make them angry. That was his only reason for making the arguments. He seemed to thrive on ticking other people off. His posts truly fall under the category of polluting threads. I am wrong about stuff and I make mistakes and sometimes I post when I should take time to examine the facts first and then I look foolish doing so- you're right about that. But I'm not mean-spirited, I believe what I write at the time that I write it, and my purpose is never to antagonize others. I generally like almost everyone I come into contact with here and have nothing in mind other than good and interesting discussion. That's why I don't like the comparison.

 

[Slapdash]

I sure Tim doesn't appreciate everyone proving him wrong again.

If it didn't bother him the first time, why would it bother him the 20,000 time?

I thought you guys had me on ignore.

This exchange is quite funny when thinking about how much you hate being compared to LHUCKS...

The reason I don't like being compared to LHUCKS has nothing to do with being wrong. If I'm wrong about stuff, or if he was wrong about stuff, fine. Live and learn.But LHUCKS made arguments with the deliberate attempt to antagonize people, to make them angry. That was his only reason for making the arguments. He seemed to thrive on ticking other people off. His posts truly fall under the category of polluting threads. I am wrong about stuff and I make mistakes and sometimes I post when I should take time to examine the facts first and then I look foolish doing so- you're right about that. But I'm not mean-spirited, I believe what I write at the time that I write it, and my purpose is never to antagonize others. I generally like almost everyone I come into contact with here and have nothing in mind other than good and interesting discussion. That's why I don't like the comparison.

Yet that is exactly what you were doing in the quoted post.

 

[timschochet]

I sure Tim doesn't appreciate everyone proving him wrong again.

If it didn't bother him the first time, why would it bother him the 20,000 time?

I thought you guys had me on ignore.

This exchange is quite funny when thinking about how much you hate being compared to LHUCKS...

The reason I don't like being compared to LHUCKS has nothing to do with being wrong. If I'm wrong about stuff, or if he was wrong about stuff, fine. Live and learn.But LHUCKS made arguments with the deliberate attempt to antagonize people, to make them angry. That was his only reason for making the arguments. He seemed to thrive on ticking other people off. His posts truly fall under the category of polluting threads. I am wrong about stuff and I make mistakes and sometimes I post when I should take time to examine the facts first and then I look foolish doing so- you're right about that. But I'm not mean-spirited, I believe what I write at the time that I write it, and my purpose is never to antagonize others. I generally like almost everyone I come into contact with here and have nothing in mind other than good and interesting discussion. That's why I don't like the comparison.

Yet that is exactly what you were doing in the quoted post.

I don't thrive on it. That was supposed to be a joke, anyhow.

 

[Mjolnirs]

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

I sure Tim doesn't appreciate everyone proving him wrong again.

We have to schedule him for revenue reasons.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

That Clemson/Georgia game might be a shootout. UGa lost a lot of studs on defense, but return pretty much everybody on offense. Of course we know Clemson has its best players on offense in Boyd and Watkins.

 

[Christo]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

OU plays West Virginia and Notre Dame this September.

 

[Moe.]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

OU plays West Virginia and Notre Dame this September.

Even early on in the season there are two or three pretty solid matchups every week, if not more. Isn't Bama vs. aTm week 3 this year? This has gotten way better over the years imo. I'm starting to think tim is complaining just to complain.

 

[General Malaise]

I'm really curious, since we're off on this banal topic again, what are the 10 best BCS vs BCS level out of conference matchups this year? I went ahead and included indys (meaning ND). This isn't in order but just my list

1. FSU @ Florida

2. Georgia vs Clemson

3. South Carolina @ Clemson

4. ND @ Stanford

5. USC @ ND

6. ND @ Mich

7. LSU vs TCU

8. OU @ ND

9. Florida @ Miami

10. UCLA @ Nebraska

So by conference

SEC - 5

ACC - 4

ND - 4

Pac - 3

B1G - 2

Big 12 - 2

I'm looking forward to Tennessee coming up to Oregon to play this year. I think the last SEC team to travel up to Eugene was Miss State years and years ago. I don't think it'll be a very competitive game, but you never know. Last time Oregon played Tennessee in Knoxville it was a blood bath, but that was many moons and many players ago. Turnover in coaching for both teams and I'm guessing Tennessee has some talent to take to the fight. My seats are 5 rows up from where the visiting team parks its cheerleaders and historically, UTenn's squad has been well above average.

 

[GDogg]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Sure there is. There are 22 more scholarship football players playing for the lowest end FBS schools than the #1 FCS team*.

*Southern Cal, Penn St., and a few others who have scholarship limits excluded.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Sure there is. There are 22 more scholarship football players playing for the lowest end FBS schools than the #1 FCS team*.

*Southern Cal, Penn St., and a few others who have scholarship limits excluded.

No there isn't. You aren't a more impressive team because you beat Buffalo instead of Chattanooga. That's just stupid to even consider.

 

[GDogg]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Sure there is. There are 22 more scholarship football players playing for the lowest end FBS schools than the #1 FCS team*.

*Southern Cal, Penn St., and a few others who have scholarship limits excluded.

No there isn't. You aren't a more impressive team because you beat Buffalo instead of Chattanooga. That's just stupid to even consider.

Yes, actually, there is. Otherwise, why are there two separate divisions?

Are certain FCS schools better than certain FBS schools in a given year? Sure, probably. But, FCS schools are playing on an uneven playing field, so to speak, vis a vis their FBS brethren. Obviously, so are non-BCS conference FBS schools with the FBS schools.

I don't know if you are a more impressive team because you beat Buffalo instead of Chattanooga, but I think the odds that it is a more difficult W are heavily in favor of Buffalo on a year in and year out basis. Buffalo can afford more talent.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

Speaking of Buffalo ... get to know LB Khalil Mack. You'll be watching him on Sundays very soon.

 

[Raider Nation]

JAA.... your thoughts?

When robbing someone, make sure your victim can't identify you by your football team number plastered on your pants.

West Virginia defensive lineman Korey Harris was arrested Friday for first-degree armed robbery that allegedly occurred in Morgantown on July 12. Harris and two other men broke into a home and held two victims at gunpoint. It presumably didn't take long to catch Harris, as one of the victims saw the number 96 on Harris's team-issued sweatpants and figured it out.

After the university was informed, Harris was dismissed from the Mountaineers.

 

[Christo]

JAA.... your thoughts?

When robbing someone, make sure your victim can't identify you by your football team number plastered on your pants.West Virginia defensive lineman Korey Harris was arrested Friday for first-degree armed robbery that allegedly occurred in Morgantown on July 12. Harris and two other men broke into a home and held two victims at gunpoint. It presumably didn't take long to catch Harris, as one of the victims saw the number 96 on Harris's team-issued sweatpants and figured it out.

After the university was informed, Harris was dismissed from the Mountaineers.

oops

 

[Politician Spock]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Sure there is. There are 22 more scholarship football players playing for the lowest end FBS schools than the #1 FCS team*.

*Southern Cal, Penn St., and a few others who have scholarship limits excluded.

No there isn't. You aren't a more impressive team because you beat Buffalo instead of Chattanooga. That's just stupid to even consider.

Yes, actually, there is. Otherwise, why are there two separate divisions?

Are certain FCS schools better than certain FBS schools in a given year? Sure, probably. But, FCS schools are playing on an uneven playing field, so to speak, vis a vis their FBS brethren. Obviously, so are non-BCS conference FBS schools with the FBS schools.

I don't know if you are a more impressive team because you beat Buffalo instead of Chattanooga, but I think the odds that it is a more difficult W are heavily in favor of Buffalo on a year in and year out basis. Buffalo can afford more talent.

You don't know the bolded because it's stupid to even consider. You're entire post is a consideration, which in the end you admit can't show which win makes you a more impressive team.

 

[BigJohn]

Strong rumors floating that Carlos Hyde has been kicked off the team @ OSU for an altercation at a nightclub, involving a female. Not good, on so many levels.

 

[Tom Servo]

Strong rumors floating that Carlos Hyde has been kicked off the team @ OSU for an altercation at a nightclub, involving a female. Not good, on so many levels.

Urban Meyer has brought Florida to Columbus. Congratulations on being inducted into the Thug Life.

 

[BigJohn]

Strong rumors floating that Carlos Hyde has been kicked off the team @ OSU for an altercation at a nightclub, involving a female. Not good, on so many levels.

Urban Meyer has brought Florida to Columbus. Congratulations on being inducted into the Thug Life.

Has nothing to do with Urban, but thanks anyways.

 

[wadegarrett]

Strong rumors floating that Carlos Hyde has been kicked off the team @ OSU for an altercation at a nightclub, involving a female. Not good, on so many levels.

http://www.elevenwarriors.com/2013/07/23834/ohio-state-running-back-carlos-hyde-named-as-suspect-in-police-report

 

[GDogg]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Sure there is. There are 22 more scholarship football players playing for the lowest end FBS schools than the #1 FCS team*.

*Southern Cal, Penn St., and a few others who have scholarship limits excluded.

No there isn't. You aren't a more impressive team because you beat Buffalo instead of Chattanooga. That's just stupid to even consider.

Yes, actually, there is. Otherwise, why are there two separate divisions?

Are certain FCS schools better than certain FBS schools in a given year? Sure, probably. But, FCS schools are playing on an uneven playing field, so to speak, vis a vis their FBS brethren. Obviously, so are non-BCS conference FBS schools with the FBS schools.

I don't know if you are a more impressive team because you beat Buffalo instead of Chattanooga, but I think the odds that it is a more difficult W are heavily in favor of Buffalo on a year in and year out basis. Buffalo can afford more talent.

You don't know the bolded because it's stupid to even consider. You're entire post is a consideration, which in the end you admit can't show which win makes you a more impressive team.

No, that's not why I don't know. One win, in a vacuum, doesn't tell me much.

 

[Politician Spock]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Sure there is. There are 22 more scholarship football players playing for the lowest end FBS schools than the #1 FCS team*.

*Southern Cal, Penn St., and a few others who have scholarship limits excluded.

No there isn't. You aren't a more impressive team because you beat Buffalo instead of Chattanooga. That's just stupid to even consider.

Yes, actually, there is. Otherwise, why are there two separate divisions?

Are certain FCS schools better than certain FBS schools in a given year? Sure, probably. But, FCS schools are playing on an uneven playing field, so to speak, vis a vis their FBS brethren. Obviously, so are non-BCS conference FBS schools with the FBS schools.

I don't know if you are a more impressive team because you beat Buffalo instead of Chattanooga, but I think the odds that it is a more difficult W are heavily in favor of Buffalo on a year in and year out basis. Buffalo can afford more talent.

You don't know the bolded because it's stupid to even consider. You're entire post is a consideration, which in the end you admit can't show which win makes you a more impressive team.

No, that's not why I don't know. One win, in a vacuum, doesn't tell me much.

That's exactly the point. Beating Buffalo, or beating Chattanooga, are both meaningless wins.

 

[GDogg]

That's exactly the point. Beating Buffalo, or beating Chattanooga, are both meaningless wins.

Depends on the year and depends on what else the team that won did. Regardless, there's no reason for Chattanooga to be on anyone other than another FCS school's schedule.

 

[Christo]

Strong rumors floating that Carlos Hyde has been kicked off the team @ OSU for an altercation at a nightclub, involving a female. Not good, on so many levels.

Urban Meyer has brought Florida to Columbus. Congratulations on being inducted into the Thug Life.

Has nothing to do with Urban, but thanks anyways.

No ####. OSU was already waist deep before he arrived.

 

[Christo]

That's exactly the point. Beating Buffalo, or beating Chattanooga, are both meaningless wins.

Depends on the year and depends on what else the team that won did. Regardless, there's no reason for Chattanooga to be on anyone other than another FCS school's schedule.

Other than the fact that last minute changes sometimes have to be made and it's necessary to look at FCS because of scheduling difficulties.

 

[GDogg]

That's exactly the point. Beating Buffalo, or beating Chattanooga, are both meaningless wins.

Depends on the year and depends on what else the team that won did. Regardless, there's no reason for Chattanooga to be on anyone other than another FCS school's schedule.

Other than the fact that last minute changes sometimes have to be made and it's necessary to look at FCS because of scheduling difficulties.

Other than that.

 

[BigJohn]

Strong rumors floating that Carlos Hyde has been kicked off the team @ OSU for an altercation at a nightclub, involving a female. Not good, on so many levels.

http://www.elevenwarriors.com/2013/07/23834/ohio-state-running-back-carlos-hyde-named-as-suspect-in-police-report

False Alarm

 

[Tiger Fan]

5 weeks and a day :helmet:

 

[gump]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/22857775/say-goodbye-to-the-crystal-football-bcs-symbol-will-not-be-retained

"Say goodbye to the crystal football; BCS symbol will not be retained"

I disagree with this. It's a great trophy IMO....could survive the BCS association very easily. Instead we'll get yet another one that will likely be worse and obviously unrecognized.

 

[Slapdash]

Crystal Football is a cool trophy.