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!

*** Official 2015 College Football Thread *** (19 Viewers)

What's bad for FSU is that if/when GT loses by 3 TDs to UGA they will get crapped on for a weak CG opponent. Not saying that would be wrong but it's not FSU's fault.

 
As an aside, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with any team being ranked ahead of an undefeated team - for me the criteria should be to rank the teams based on who you think would win on a neutral field. Simply being undefeated is only indicative of the notion that you have been better than the teams you played, on the states you played them. IF FSU lose Winston, I would not have any problem if they were left off the list - if the committee felt like FSU without Winston is not a top-4 team.

This should not be like the bowls, where its a "reward" for a good season - it should be a subjective vote on who the 4 best teams are at the end of the season.
You're rewarding teams for what they should have done, instead of what they actually did. Results should trump talent.

 
What's bad for FSU is that if/when GT loses by 3 TDs to UGA they will get crapped on for a weak CG opponent. Not saying that would be wrong but it's not FSU's fault.
This would be the narrative regardless of opponent. ETA: Though I will say, I think a win against GT is much more impressive than a win over Duke. GT's played a pretty decent schedule this year compared to Duke's. GT should give them a better game.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What's bad for FSU is that if/when GT loses by 3 TDs to UGA they will get crapped on for a weak CG opponent. Not saying that would be wrong but it's not FSU's fault.
and Duke wouldn't have been a weak opponent?
Duke would have even one of the 3 or 4 easiest games on their schedule.

Tech will be near the top. I think Louisville or healthy Clemson may be a little better but it's close.

 
Why isn't there an early signing period for CFB??

MSU recruit's scholarship pulled and not happy about it

Is it classless or a sign Mullen's headed somewhere else?? :popcorn:

ETA: To be fair....they asked him to grayshirt...didn't pull it right out from under him. It's a dubious distinction, but one I know the FFA will focus on...just clearing the air at the start.
Business as usual in the SEC when you take 35 commitments every year knowing you can't sign them all.

 
What's bad for FSU is that if/when GT loses by 3 TDs to UGA they will get crapped on for a weak CG opponent. Not saying that would be wrong but it's not FSU's fault.
What's bad for FSU is if/when GT loses by 3 TDs to UGA, then FSU squeaks out another last second win against GT like they've done all year.

 
Why isn't there an early signing period for CFB??

MSU recruit's scholarship pulled and not happy about it

Is it classless or a sign Mullen's headed somewhere else?? :popcorn:

ETA: To be fair....they asked him to grayshirt...didn't pull it right out from under him. It's a dubious distinction, but one I know the FFA will focus on...just clearing the air at the start.
Business as usual in the SEC when you take 35 commitments every year knowing you can't sign them all.
FSU took 29 last year...Miami 27...NC State 31.

Alabama 26...LSU 25...Auburn 24...TAMU 22...UF 24...UGA 21.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why isn't there an early signing period for CFB??

MSU recruit's scholarship pulled and not happy about it

Is it classless or a sign Mullen's headed somewhere else?? :popcorn:

ETA: To be fair....they asked him to grayshirt...didn't pull it right out from under him. It's a dubious distinction, but one I know the FFA will focus on...just clearing the air at the start.
Business as usual in the SEC when you take 35 commitments every year knowing you can't sign them all.
FSU took 29 last year...Miami 27...NC State 31.

Alabama 26...LSU 25...Auburn 24...TAMU 22...UF 24...UGA 21.
What does that have to do with my comment? You talked about actual signings. I'm talking about commitments. This kid Mullen is messing with won't count as someone Miss St takes this year either.

 
Why isn't there an early signing period for CFB??

MSU recruit's scholarship pulled and not happy about it

Is it classless or a sign Mullen's headed somewhere else?? :popcorn:

ETA: To be fair....they asked him to grayshirt...didn't pull it right out from under him. It's a dubious distinction, but one I know the FFA will focus on...just clearing the air at the start.
Business as usual in the SEC when you take 35 commitments every year knowing you can't sign them all.
FSU took 29 last year...Miami 27...NC State 31.

Alabama 26...LSU 25...Auburn 24...TAMU 22...UF 24...UGA 21.
What does that have to do with my comment? You talked about actual signings. I'm talking about commitments. This kid Mullen is messing with won't count as someone Miss St takes this year either.
Oh..OK...so they drop 10-15 commits every year, sure.

I'm not saying I agree with everything that happens in that 'greyshirt' world...but it's exaggerated.

The SEC averaged 25 signees...the ACC 24. The Big 12 averaged 26. There is no difference.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why isn't there an early signing period for CFB??

MSU recruit's scholarship pulled and not happy about it

Is it classless or a sign Mullen's headed somewhere else?? :popcorn:

ETA: To be fair....they asked him to grayshirt...didn't pull it right out from under him. It's a dubious distinction, but one I know the FFA will focus on...just clearing the air at the start.
Business as usual in the SEC when you take 35 commitments every year knowing you can't sign them all.
FSU took 29 last year...Miami 27...NC State 31.

Alabama 26...LSU 25...Auburn 24...TAMU 22...UF 24...UGA 21.
Is this the number that was actually signed or the number they accepted commitments from? I think you guys are talking about two different things. ETA: Nevermind...carry on

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why isn't there an early signing period for CFB??

MSU recruit's scholarship pulled and not happy about it

Is it classless or a sign Mullen's headed somewhere else?? :popcorn:

ETA: To be fair....they asked him to grayshirt...didn't pull it right out from under him. It's a dubious distinction, but one I know the FFA will focus on...just clearing the air at the start.
Business as usual in the SEC when you take 35 commitments every year knowing you can't sign them all.
FSU took 29 last year...Miami 27...NC State 31. Alabama 26...LSU 25...Auburn 24...TAMU 22...UF 24...UGA 21.
What does that have to do with my comment? You talked about actual signings. I'm talking about commitments. This kid Mullen is messing with won't count as someone Miss St takes this year either.
Oh..OK...so they drop 10-15 commits every year, sure.I'm not saying I agree with everything that happens in that 'greyshirt' world...but it's exaggerated.

The SEC averaged 25 signees...the ACC 24. The Big 12 averaged 26. There is no difference.
Still irrelevant.

 
Why isn't there an early signing period for CFB??

MSU recruit's scholarship pulled and not happy about it

Is it classless or a sign Mullen's headed somewhere else?? :popcorn:

ETA: To be fair....they asked him to grayshirt...didn't pull it right out from under him. It's a dubious distinction, but one I know the FFA will focus on...just clearing the air at the start.
Business as usual in the SEC when you take 35 commitments every year knowing you can't sign them all.
FSU took 29 last year...Miami 27...NC State 31. Alabama 26...LSU 25...Auburn 24...TAMU 22...UF 24...UGA 21.
What does that have to do with my comment? You talked about actual signings. I'm talking about commitments. This kid Mullen is messing with won't count as someone Miss St takes this year either.
Oh..OK...so they drop 10-15 commits every year, sure.I'm not saying I agree with everything that happens in that 'greyshirt' world...but it's exaggerated.

The SEC averaged 25 signees...the ACC 24. The Big 12 averaged 26. There is no difference.
Still irrelevant.
Who cares?

 
See what you're saying and it's a valid argument. But even if Baylor was #6 and OSU #7 as of today; if OSU wins out I think they jump both Baylor and TCU b/c of the extra conference championship game win.
you may be right, although the committee has stated that the Big12's lack of a CCG will not be counted against them. Also, on the day of the Big10 championship game, Baylor will be playing a top ten (or 12) Kansas State team.

 
Why isn't there an early signing period for CFB??

MSU recruit's scholarship pulled and not happy about it

Is it classless or a sign Mullen's headed somewhere else?? :popcorn:

ETA: To be fair....they asked him to grayshirt...didn't pull it right out from under him. It's a dubious distinction, but one I know the FFA will focus on...just clearing the air at the start.
Business as usual in the SEC when you take 35 commitments every year knowing you can't sign them all.
FSU took 29 last year...Miami 27...NC State 31. Alabama 26...LSU 25...Auburn 24...TAMU 22...UF 24...UGA 21.
What does that have to do with my comment? You talked about actual signings. I'm talking about commitments. This kid Mullen is messing with won't count as someone Miss St takes this year either.
Oh..OK...so they drop 10-15 commits every year, sure.I'm not saying I agree with everything that happens in that 'greyshirt' world...but it's exaggerated.

The SEC averaged 25 signees...the ACC 24. The Big 12 averaged 26. There is no difference.
Still irrelevant.
Who cares?
People that dislike an entire group of teams, due to their favorite team continually falling short on the field?

 
People that dislike an entire group of teams, due to their favorite team continually falling short on the field?
meh....it's a #### move regardless of what conference the team's a part of, especially in this situation where the kid's getting ready to enroll early.
Everybody puts out more offers than they have available. It's not a #### move. It's just a numbers game.

 
People that dislike an entire group of teams, due to their favorite team continually falling short on the field?
meh....it's a #### move regardless of what conference the team's a part of, especially in this situation where the kid's getting ready to enroll early.
Everybody puts out more offers than they have available. It's not a #### move. It's just a numbers game.
No, putting out more offers than available isn't a #### move. Who said it was?

 
People that dislike an entire group of teams, due to their favorite team continually falling short on the field?
meh....it's a #### move regardless of what conference the team's a part of, especially in this situation where the kid's getting ready to enroll early.
Everybody puts out more offers than they have available. It's not a #### move. It's just a numbers game.
I'm pretty sure this an SEC-only problem.

 
Why are FSU fans crying about not being #1?
They should really be #1, but I'm not sure why they're are making these comments about theoretical schedules and such to support that point.
Maybe - I don't watch enough college football to know, or have an informed opinion. But surely the only goal for teams this year is to be in the top-4 - order should be of little consequences. There is no home-field advantage, and I would think the difference in quality from 1 to 4 is going to be small, so the practical difference between 1 and 3 is negligible.

As an aside, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with any team being ranked ahead of an undefeated team - for me the criteria should be to rank the teams based on who you think would win on a neutral field. Simply being undefeated is only indicative of the notion that you have been better than the teams you played, on the states you played them. IF FSU lose Winston, I would not have any problem if they were left off the list - if the committee felt like FSU without Winston is not a top-4 team.

This should not be like the bowls, where its a "reward" for a good season - it should be a subjective vote on who the 4 best teams are at the end of the season.
Disagree strongly with the bold since FSU beat their toughest opponent (tallest midget) without Winston.

 
The Commish said:
Alonzo Mosely said:
The Commish said:
Fat Drunk and Stupid said:
People that dislike an entire group of teams, due to their favorite team continually falling short on the field?
meh....it's a #### move regardless of what conference the team's a part of, especially in this situation where the kid's getting ready to enroll early.
Everybody puts out more offers than they have available. It's not a #### move. It's just a numbers game.
No, putting out more offers than available isn't a #### move. Who said it was?
What was the #### move then Sparky?

 
Alonzo Mosely said:
The Commish said:
Fat Drunk and Stupid said:
People that dislike an entire group of teams, due to their favorite team continually falling short on the field?
meh....it's a #### move regardless of what conference the team's a part of, especially in this situation where the kid's getting ready to enroll early.
Everybody puts out more offers than they have available. It's not a #### move. It's just a numbers game.
Everyone doesn't take more commits than they have scholarships. In fact it's something I complain about Paul Johnson doing. I wish he would do it to be more competitive.

 
Why are FSU fans crying about not being #1?
They should really be #1, but I'm not sure why they're are making these comments about theoretical schedules and such to support that point.
Maybe - I don't watch enough college football to know, or have an informed opinion. But surely the only goal for teams this year is to be in the top-4 - order should be of little consequences. There is no home-field advantage, and I would think the difference in quality from 1 to 4 is going to be small, so the practical difference between 1 and 3 is negligible.

As an aside, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with any team being ranked ahead of an undefeated team - for me the criteria should be to rank the teams based on who you think would win on a neutral field. Simply being undefeated is only indicative of the notion that you have been better than the teams you played, on the states you played them. IF FSU lose Winston, I would not have any problem if they were left off the list - if the committee felt like FSU without Winston is not a top-4 team.

This should not be like the bowls, where its a "reward" for a good season - it should be a subjective vote on who the 4 best teams are at the end of the season.
Disagree strongly with the bold since FSU beat their toughest opponent (tallest midget) without Winston.
Your aside comment says why that stat is irrelevant - without Winston, they are not the 4th best team in the country. Sorry. :shrug:

 
Rick James said:
AAABatteries said:
What's bad for FSU is that if/when GT loses by 3 TDs to UGA they will get crapped on for a weak CG opponent. Not saying that would be wrong but it's not FSU's fault.
and Duke wouldn't have been a weak opponent?
Sure - no one takes Duke seriously. My point had nothing to do with it being Tech vs. Duke. It was after the game was over. I do think it would be interesting if say UGA wins the SEC and blows out Tech and FSU goes undefeated but struggles with Tech AND it came down to UGA and FSU for the #4 spot who would get it. Just another unlikely scenario but one that could happen.

Maybe I should be like Tim and say that if Tech wins out they will be National Champs!

 
Joe T said:
AAABatteries said:
What's bad for FSU is that if/when GT loses by 3 TDs to UGA they will get crapped on for a weak CG opponent. Not saying that would be wrong but it's not FSU's fault.
What's bad for FSU is if/when GT loses by 3 TDs to UGA, then FSU squeaks out another last second win against GT like they've done all year.
Kind of what I meant but thanks.

 
The Commish said:
Alonzo Mosely said:
The Commish said:
Fat Drunk and Stupid said:
People that dislike an entire group of teams, due to their favorite team continually falling short on the field?
meh....it's a #### move regardless of what conference the team's a part of, especially in this situation where the kid's getting ready to enroll early.
Everybody puts out more offers than they have available. It's not a #### move. It's just a numbers game.
No, putting out more offers than available isn't a #### move. Who said it was?
What was the #### move then Sparky?
the #### move was giving the kid a scholarship, then 10ish days before graduating telling him they want him to "gray shirt". He had plans of enrolling early etc. That's the #### move sport.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
Alonzo Mosely said:
The Commish said:
Fat Drunk and Stupid said:
People that dislike an entire group of teams, due to their favorite team continually falling short on the field?
meh....it's a #### move regardless of what conference the team's a part of, especially in this situation where the kid's getting ready to enroll early.
Everybody puts out more offers than they have available. It's not a #### move. It's just a numbers game.
No, putting out more offers than available isn't a #### move. Who said it was?
What was the #### move then Sparky?
the #### move was giving the kid a scholarship, then 10ish days before graduating telling him they want him to "gray shirt". He had plans of enrolling early etc. That's the #### move sport.
What did you want them to do, exceed their limit and lose future scholarships?

 
Alonzo Mosely said:
The Commish said:
Fat Drunk and Stupid said:
People that dislike an entire group of teams, due to their favorite team continually falling short on the field?
meh....it's a #### move regardless of what conference the team's a part of, especially in this situation where the kid's getting ready to enroll early.
Everybody puts out more offers than they have available. It's not a #### move. It's just a numbers game.
Everyone doesn't take more commits than they have scholarships. In fact it's something I complain about Paul Johnson doing. I wish he would do it to be more competitive.
So he's the one?

 
What did you want them to do, exceed their limit and lose future scholarships?
Honor their commitment to the young man? Not really that complicated :shrug: Or, if that's too difficult, be honest with him on where he stands with the program. That's probably too difficult as well. Guess they should just keep screwing kids over with no recourse.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What did you want them to do, exceed their limit and lose future scholarships?
Honor their commitment to the young man? Not really that complicated :shrug: Or, if that's too difficult, be honest with him on where he stands with the program. That's probably too difficult as well. Guess they should just keep screwing kids over with no recourse.
You do realize that of every program only offered the number of scholarships they had, less kids would get scholarships right?

 
What did you want them to do, exceed their limit and lose future scholarships?
Honor their commitment to the young man? Not really that complicated :shrug: Or, if that's too difficult, be honest with him on where he stands with the program. That's probably too difficult as well. Guess they should just keep screwing kids over with no recourse.
You do realize that of every program only offered the number of scholarships they had, less kids would get scholarships right?
Why do you keep going down this path when it has nothing to do with the event? I'm not even sure what you're saying here is correct. Schools have the number of scholarships they have. Exactly, that many scholarships will be filled unless the school chooses not to fill them. The number of scholarships offered doesn't have much of anything to do with how many get the scholarships. The number of spots does though.

 
What did you want them to do, exceed their limit and lose future scholarships?
Honor their commitment to the young man? Not really that complicated :shrug: Or, if that's too difficult, be honest with him on where he stands with the program. That's probably too difficult as well. Guess they should just keep screwing kids over with no recourse.
You do realize that of every program only offered the number of scholarships they had, less kids would get scholarships right?
Why do you keep going down this path when it has nothing to do with the event? I'm not even sure what you're saying here is correct. Schools have the number of scholarships they have. Exactly, that many scholarships will be filled unless the school chooses not to fill them. The number of scholarships offered doesn't have much of anything to do with how many get the scholarships. The number of spots does though.
They have to over offer in anticipation of denials/renegs. If you have 30, offer 30 and 25 accept, then you have at least 5 dead scholarship years that could have gone to deserving kids. In this case, it is not exactly the number you have available that get allocated as yo seem to think happens all the time. So you offer more and hope to hit your number. Sometimes you get too many and you have to offer the gray shirt route or tell them they are SOL.

 
I've noticed over the last couple a weeks that a lot of folks in this thread seem to have UGa in Atlanta, ignoring the fact that Mizzou is a game ahead of them with 2 bad opponents left on the schedule.

Not saying I would be surprised if Mizzou dropped one of those games, but I think they have a better than 50% chance of winning both.

 
What did you want them to do, exceed their limit and lose future scholarships?
Honor their commitment to the young man? Not really that complicated :shrug: Or, if that's too difficult, be honest with him on where he stands with the program. That's probably too difficult as well. Guess they should just keep screwing kids over with no recourse.
You do realize that of every program only offered the number of scholarships they had, less kids would get scholarships right?
Why do you keep going down this path when it has nothing to do with the event? I'm not even sure what you're saying here is correct. Schools have the number of scholarships they have. Exactly, that many scholarships will be filled unless the school chooses not to fill them. The number of scholarships offered doesn't have much of anything to do with how many get the scholarships. The number of spots does though.
They have to over offer in anticipation of denials/renegs. If you have 30, offer 30 and 25 accept, then you have at least 5 dead scholarship years that could have gone to deserving kids. In this case, it is not exactly the number you have available that get allocated as yo seem to think happens all the time. So you offer more and hope to hit your number. Sometimes you get too many and you have to offer the gray shirt route or tell them they are SOL.
Again....this doesn't have anything to do with the incident. This situation is addressing what happened after the offer was made and how the kid was treated. I think I'm being fished....I'll just drop it and let you figure it out on your own. Good luck.

 
I've noticed over the last couple a weeks that a lot of folks in this thread seem to have UGa in Atlanta, ignoring the fact that Mizzou is a game ahead of them with 2 bad opponents left on the schedule.

Not saying I would be surprised if Mizzou dropped one of those games, but I think they have a better than 50% chance of winning both.
Was having a conversation with my brother about that last night. They certainly should have a better than 50% chance of winning those games.

 
I've noticed over the last couple a weeks that a lot of folks in this thread seem to have UGa in Atlanta, ignoring the fact that Mizzou is a game ahead of them with 2 bad opponents left on the schedule.

Not saying I would be surprised if Mizzou dropped one of those games, but I think they have a better than 50% chance of winning both.
Mizzou is a 3.5 pt dog tomorrow.

 
I've noticed over the last couple a weeks that a lot of folks in this thread seem to have UGa in Atlanta, ignoring the fact that Mizzou is a game ahead of them with 2 bad opponents left on the schedule.

Not saying I would be surprised if Mizzou dropped one of those games, but I think they have a better than 50% chance of winning both.
Mizzou is a 3.5 pt dog tomorrow.
And they may get steamrolled next week against Arky.

 
I guess I haven't watched the correct Missouri games this year. I get a different impression of that team. They've had some decent wins, but a really crappy loss to Indiana that I keep forgetting about. That said, I doubt Tenn is in the top 50 of anything notable. Missouri is really a dog in that game?

 
I guess I haven't watched the correct Missouri games this year. I get a different impression of that team. They've had some decent wins, but a really crappy loss to Indiana that I keep forgetting about. That said, I doubt Tenn is in the top 50 of anything notable. Missouri is really a dog in that game?
Since UT made the switch to Dobbs at QB, they've beaten South Carolina and Kentucky. Nothing earth-shattering, but he looks like the real deal.

 
I guess I haven't watched the correct Missouri games this year. I get a different impression of that team. They've had some decent wins, but a really crappy loss to Indiana that I keep forgetting about. That said, I doubt Tenn is in the top 50 of anything notable. Missouri is really a dog in that game?
Since UT made the switch to Dobbs at QB, they've beaten South Carolina and Kentucky. Nothing earth-shattering, but he looks like the real deal.
Certainly seems like it, but it seems to me that Missouri's just a bit better than those schools. They beat S Carolina and Kentucky too right?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top