MUScoop

MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: GGGG on September 10, 2018, 04:20:41 PM

Title: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 10, 2018, 04:20:41 PM
I'll kick this off with UConn arguably being on the wrong end of the worse statistical loss in modern college football history.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/9/10/17841626/boise-state-uconn-2018-stats-results
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: cheebs09 on September 10, 2018, 04:27:32 PM
I'll kick this off with UConn arguably being on the wrong end of the worse statistical loss in modern college football history.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/9/10/17841626/boise-state-uconn-2018-stats-results

So that ACC invite is right around the corner?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: TAMU Eagle on September 10, 2018, 06:19:15 PM
I'll kick this off with UConn arguably being on the wrong end of the worse statistical loss in modern college football history.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/9/10/17841626/boise-state-uconn-2018-stats-results

https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=56587.0

It's okay, no one liked my thread.  ;D

I do want an answer to the question I posed though: What are other people's thoughts about the fumble in the end zone rule? For the life of me I can't understand why the team who fumbles should lose possession.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 10, 2018, 08:41:09 PM
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=56587.0

It's okay, no one liked my thread.  ;D

I do want an answer to the question I posed though: What are other people's thoughts about the fumble in the end zone rule? For the life of me I can't understand why the team who fumbles should lose possession.


I've been saying it for years.  It logically makes no sense that a fumble out of bounds at the one stays with the offensive team at the one, but a team that progresses a yard further and fumbles, gives up possession.  The rule is too punitive.

Fumbling team should keep possession out at the 20.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: cheebs09 on September 10, 2018, 09:52:18 PM

I've been saying it for years.  It logically makes no sense that a fumble out of bounds at the one stays with the offensive team at the one, but a team that progresses a yard further and fumbles, gives up possession.  The rule is too punitive.

Fumbling team should keep possession out at the 20.

Why not at the yardline they fumbled at? I agree that it is a rule that doesn’t make sense. Was there an issue with people fumbling forward near the goal line before this rule?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 11, 2018, 08:15:17 AM
Why not at the yardline they fumbled at? I agree that it is a rule that doesn’t make sense. Was there an issue with people fumbling forward near the goal line before this rule?


Actually I think the rule has been in place since the beginning of football.  It just hasn't changed.  Spot of the fumble makes sense to me as well.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: mu03eng on September 11, 2018, 09:06:12 AM
Why not at the yardline they fumbled at? I agree that it is a rule that doesn’t make sense. Was there an issue with people fumbling forward near the goal line before this rule?

It's not just a college rule, it's the same in the NFL....and the concept pre-dates the invention of the forward pass where teams might have been tempted to fumble the ball forward as they were being tackled so they could recover it in the end zone. At the end of the day it's an antiquated rule that could probably be eliminated but because it is invoked so infrequently it doesn't get any attention.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on September 11, 2018, 12:06:33 PM
It's not just a college rule, it's the same in the NFL....and the concept pre-dates the invention of the forward pass where teams might have been tempted to fumble the ball forward as they were being tackled so they could recover it in the end zone. At the end of the day it's an antiquated rule that could probably be eliminated but because it is invoked so infrequently it doesn't get any attention.

I’d disagree about the infrequency, I’d bet it happens at least every other weekend or so in the NFL.

As far as CFB, really impressed with A&M under Fischer so far, that was a resilient performance on sat night. Clemson manhandled themin the first half and they were right in it.

Alternatively, Kevin Sumlin has taken one of the most exciting and dynamic players in CFB, Khalil Tate, and tried to make him a more traditional passer at Arizona and their offense has been horrific as a result. He DESTORYED defenses last year with his legs and this year he has 22 yards rushing...total. For a guy who averaged 130. I get it’s a different offense, but that’s stubbornly asinine.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: brewcity77 on September 15, 2018, 05:51:04 PM
Wow, gotta suck when your CFB season is over before conference play even starts. Bye bye Bucky.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on September 15, 2018, 05:57:55 PM
It's not just a college rule, it's the same in the NFL....and the concept pre-dates the invention of the forward pass where teams might have been tempted to fumble the ball forward as they were being tackled so they could recover it in the end zone. At the end of the day it's an antiquated rule that could probably be eliminated but because it is invoked so infrequently it doesn't get any attention.

Yea, make it simple. If the offensive team recovers spot it where the fumble took place if the ball advanced, or where it is if they went backwards. Gotta reward the defensive team.

Also, suck it Bucky.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jsglow on September 15, 2018, 06:29:05 PM
Wow, gotta suck when your CFB season is over before conference play even starts. Bye bye Bucky.

That's gotta sting.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Jay Bee on September 15, 2018, 06:47:13 PM
I luv cougars, heyna
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on September 15, 2018, 06:51:01 PM
Unbelievable thriller again in LSU/Auburn game.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: tower912 on September 15, 2018, 07:27:55 PM
BYU. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: rocket surgeon on September 15, 2018, 07:29:39 PM
That's gotta sting.

 i couldn't believe the "storm'in mormons' were 20-something dogs-jumped all over that on bovada
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on September 15, 2018, 07:33:20 PM
Opponent beat Bucky today.

h/t @fathermarquette
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: 4everwarriors on September 15, 2018, 07:52:49 PM
Gaglianone wuz so far wide on the tyin' fg, he nearly hit F*ckin's trailer home, hey?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on September 15, 2018, 07:58:32 PM
Gaglianone wuz so far wide on the tyin' fg, he nearly hit F*ckin's trailer home, hey?

Lol.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on September 15, 2018, 08:03:24 PM
Gaglianone wuz so far wide on the tyin' fg, he nearly hit F*ckin's trailer home, hey?

F*cker took out my giant satellite dish.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on September 15, 2018, 08:28:48 PM
Unbelievable thriller again in LSU/Auburn game.

Coach O is a treasure. I’ve turned into a legit LSU fan in hopes that I never have to go a Saturday afternoon without him.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: PTM on September 15, 2018, 08:51:33 PM
Coach O is a treasure. I’ve turned into a legit LSU fan in hopes that I never have to go a Saturday afternoon without him.

This. I never watch college football, Coach O has me watching college football. I want to run through a god damn brick wall for that man.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on September 15, 2018, 09:07:24 PM
The program is perpetually overrated.  They play no one, terrible division, benefit from that terrible division to sometimes remain relevant at the end of the year.  BYU did the nation a favor today. Thank you
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Anti-Dentite on September 15, 2018, 09:46:00 PM
The program is perpetually overrated.  They play no one, terrible division, benefit from that terrible division to sometimes remain relevant at the end of the year.  BYU did the nation a favor today. Thank you
Amen, something we can all agree on. F##k those dirty rodents.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: RJax55 on September 15, 2018, 10:02:31 PM
This. I never watch college football, Coach O has me watching college football. I want to run through a god damn brick wall for that man.

Drink enough Monsters and anything is possible.

https://deadspin.com/lsu-coach-ed-orgeron-drinks-enough-caffeine-to-harm-a-n-1795091525 (https://deadspin.com/lsu-coach-ed-orgeron-drinks-enough-caffeine-to-harm-a-n-1795091525)
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: brewcity77 on September 15, 2018, 10:03:31 PM
i couldn't believe the "storm'in mormons' were 20-something dogs-jumped all over that on bovada

When Bucky struggled so much last week with New Mexico (it was a 3-point game midway through the 3rd quarter) I had a feeling they were going to take a fall sooner rather than later. Can't say I'm all that surprised by this.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUEng92 on September 15, 2018, 10:20:18 PM
Coach O is a treasure. I’ve turned into a legit LSU fan in hopes that I never have to go a Saturday afternoon without him.
I assume you are talking about the guy with the cameo in The Blind Side.

I remember the first time I saw that scene I thought "he's the only one that isn't actually a coach". Then I realized he was way too bad of an actor, so he must be a coach.

Google saved the day again.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on September 16, 2018, 06:47:51 AM
One of my two favorite teams won today, as BYU beat F%cky but Vandy couldn't quite come back all the way against the Flailin' Irish.

ND barely beat Ball State and Vandy at home, but they'll move up in the rankings. One of the weaker top-10 teams of recent vintage. Wait till they start playing actual opponents.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: tower912 on September 16, 2018, 06:52:41 AM
One of my two favorite teams won today, as BYU beat F%cky but Vandy couldn't quite come back all the way against the Flailin' Irish.

ND barely beat Ball State and Vandy at home, but they'll move up in the rankings. One of the weaker top-10 teams of recent vintage. Wait till they start playing actual opponents.
Right.  They started with a Big 10 team, so it was mid-major, mid-major, Vanderbilt.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: real chili 83 on September 16, 2018, 06:58:26 AM
Right.  They started with a Big 10 team, so it was mid-major, mid-major, Vanderbilt.

ND had better refs than Bucky.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 16, 2018, 08:08:33 AM
When Bucky struggled so much last week with New Mexico (it was a 3-point game midway through the 3rd quarter) I had a feeling they were going to take a fall sooner rather than later. Can't say I'm all that surprised by this.

Defense isn’t as good this year and Hornibrook just hasn’t taken that next step.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Anti-Dentite on September 16, 2018, 08:31:40 AM
Did I hear correctly in that 7 Big 13 or 14, whatever it is lost non-conference games yesterday?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: 4everwarriors on September 16, 2018, 09:17:10 AM
Yeah butt, knot at home, hey?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on September 16, 2018, 04:18:45 PM
Did I hear correctly in that the Big Ten lost non-conference games yesterday?
Nebraska to Troy
Purdue to Missouri
Northwestern to Akron
Wis to BYU
Rutgers to Kansas
Maryland to Temple
Illinois to USF

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on September 16, 2018, 05:34:52 PM
Nebraska to Troy
Purdue to Missouri
Northwestern to Akron
Wis to BYU
Rutgers to Kansas
Maryland to Temple
Illinois to USF

Low major.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Anti-Dentite on September 16, 2018, 05:57:54 PM
Nebraska to Troy
Purdue to Missouri
Northwestern to Akron
Wis to BYU
Rutgers to Kansas
Maryland to Temple
Illinois to USF
That’s an embarrassing casualty list except for Rutgers who is truly a mid major, didn’t belong in the BE or Big 13 or 14.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: StillAWarrior on September 18, 2018, 04:18:16 PM
Has anyone ever been to a football game at Indiana?  Any idea whether they fill the stadium or whether I'll be able to get two cheap tickets as a walk-up on Saturday night (vs. MSU)?  For what it's worth, I won't be a particularly motivated buyer -- we're going to be visiting campus, and if we can get tickets, great.  If not, that's fine too.  I'm just wondering if I should even expect to get a ticket.  I see them for $45 online, and, frankly, I'm not sure we'd pay that.

Edited to add:  if someone here says, "Oh man, the Hoosier football experience is something you don't want to miss" I'd be skeptical, but interested to hear that.  If that were the case, well then...sure...$45 would seem more attractive.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 18, 2018, 05:00:57 PM
You’ll be able to walk up. Hoosier football isn’t a top notch experience by any means.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: StillAWarrior on September 18, 2018, 05:04:58 PM
You’ll be able to walk up. Hoosier football isn’t a top notch experience by any means.

Thanks. Kind what I figured. I’ll be visiting with my daughter and figured it might be fun if it’s cheap. If not, it’s fun just being on a college campus on game day. I think she’ll enjoy it either way.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: 4everwarriors on September 18, 2018, 06:24:19 PM
May wanna ring up T-Cubed. He's connections and such, hey?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 23, 2018, 08:32:42 AM
Wow, gotta suck when your CFB season is over before conference play even starts. Bye bye Bucky.


BTW, I am not sure how UW's season is "over."  If they win out, they will very likely be in the playoffs because that assumes wins at Michigan, at Penn State and against either of those two or Ohio State in the Big Ten Championship Game.

And that schedule is why I thought the  playoff talk was not realistic anyway. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on September 23, 2018, 10:16:51 AM
ND looked much, much better with Book
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on September 23, 2018, 10:47:35 AM
Old Dominion resurrected their program in 2009, knocks off top 15 Virginia Tech and receives more publicity then they could possibly ever pay for. That will be the biggest surprise win of the year, one of the biggest in the last decade.  Backup QB throws for 495 yards. 

ODU was ranked 124th out of 129 FBS schools. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 23, 2018, 11:27:52 AM
Old Dominion resurrected their program in 2009, knocks off top 15 Virginia Tech and receives more publicity then they could possibly ever pay for. That will be the biggest surprise win of the year, one of the biggest in the last decade.  Backup QB throws for 495 yards. 

ODU was ranked 124th out of 129 FBS schools. 

More publicity than they could possibly pay for?  These upsets happen routinely. No one will remember it next month.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Lennys Tap on September 23, 2018, 10:20:26 PM
More publicity than they could possibly pay for?  These upsets happen routinely. No one will remember it next month.

From ESPN: "The Monarchs were 0-3 entering Saturday, including a blowout loss to Liberty, a first year FBS team, and coming off a humiliating loss to Charlotte. ESPN's Football Power Index gave ODU a 1.8% chance of winning, making this the largest upset by an FBS opponent in the metric's 14 year history."

Upsets happen routinely, but not "these upsets".
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on September 23, 2018, 10:35:46 PM
From ESPN: "The Monarchs were 0-3 entering Saturday, including a blowout loss to Liberty, a first year FBS team, and coming off a humiliating loss to Charlotte. ESPN's Football Power Index gave ODU a 1.8% chance of winning, making this the largest upset by an FBS opponent in the metric's 14 year history."

Upsets happen routinely, but not "these upsets".

Yep, other than the fact that VT travelled to ODU, I would say it was the biggest FBS upset since App St over UM
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 24, 2018, 07:50:44 AM
From ESPN: "The Monarchs were 0-3 entering Saturday, including a blowout loss to Liberty, a first year FBS team, and coming off a humiliating loss to Charlotte. ESPN's Football Power Index gave ODU a 1.8% chance of winning, making this the largest upset by an FBS opponent in the metric's 14 year history."

Upsets happen routinely, but not "these upsets".

Cool. Again, hardly anyone will remember next month. It really doesn't bring that much publicity.


Yep, other than the fact that VT travelled to ODU, I would say it was the biggest FBS upset since App St over UM

Virginia Tech aint Michigan.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Waldo Jeffers on September 24, 2018, 08:34:07 AM
https://www.craigcalcaterra.com/blog/uncs-football-stadium-memorial-to-the-leader-of-a-white-supremacist-massacre
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on September 24, 2018, 09:22:30 AM
Virginia Tech aint Michigan.

Cool.  Thats not the point I was making.  A school who has been FBS for 3 years pulled and was terrible this year stomped a top-15 opponent at home and was a massive upset by any metric.  This wasn't a conference team catching a familiar opponent napping.  So you're wrong on this sort of upset happening every week.  And maybe the national media forgets about it, but I can assure you the state of Virginia wont, which is where ODU will gain needed publicity and recruiting cache for football.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: The Deane Team on September 24, 2018, 09:30:47 AM
Saw this on the twitter:

"Kentucky and Duke are ranked in the same football AP poll for the 1st time since 1957. They have been ranked in the same basketball AP poll 547 times in that span."
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 24, 2018, 10:46:26 AM
Cool.  Thats not the point I was making.  A school who has been FBS for 3 years pulled and was terrible this year stomped a top-15 opponent at home and was a massive upset by any metric.  This wasn't a conference team catching a familiar opponent napping.  So you're wrong on this sort of upset happening every week.  And maybe the national media forgets about it, but I can assure you the state of Virginia wont, which is where ODU will gain needed publicity and recruiting cache for football.


Again, a low level FBS school upsets a ranked P5 school pretty much every year.  Such as last year.  Without looking it up, can you remember who is was?  There was also one in 2015.  Probably don't remember that one either.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on September 24, 2018, 11:03:34 AM
Saw this on the twitter:

"Kentucky and Duke are ranked in the same football AP poll for the 1st time since 1957. They have been ranked in the same basketball AP poll 547 times in that span."

Interesting.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on September 24, 2018, 11:30:44 AM
Virginia Tech aint Michigan.

Not only that, but the Hokies have a history of losing games like this. This may not even be their worst loss:

2010 - James Madison 21, #13 VaTech 16 (JMU was a 31-point dog)
1998 - Temple 28, #14 VaTech 24 (Temple was a 35-point dog)

For the record, ODU was a 28.5-point underdog Saturday.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on September 24, 2018, 12:13:10 PM

Again, a low level FBS school upsets a ranked P5 school pretty much every year.  Such as last year.  Without looking it up, can you remember who is was?  There was also one in 2015.  Probably don't remember that one either.

"Low level", so you just mean non-P5?  I assume you're talking about Troy-LSU last year.  Which was probably the "biggest" upset of the non-con.  But Troy is a solid program who won their conference last year.  Thats different than a team who got blown out by an FCS school the weak before and who most people wouldn't know played FBS football.

I indeed don't recall 2015.  I looked it up, are you talking Citadel/South Carolina?  Cause that USC team was TRAAAASSHH.

It might not still be a national story in December but it wasn't a run of the mill weekly or annual upset.

But yea, VT does love choking in buy games.  I don't know how good JMU was in 2010, but JMU is probably  perennial top 3 FCS program, along with NDSU.  They could, and often do, handle FBS teams when given a chance.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 24, 2018, 12:59:03 PM
"Low level", so you just mean non-P5?  I assume you're talking about Troy-LSU last year.  Which was probably the "biggest" upset of the non-con.  But Troy is a solid program who won their conference last year.  Thats different than a team who got blown out by an FCS school the weak before and who most people wouldn't know played FBS football.

I indeed don't recall 2015.  I looked it up, are you talking Citadel/South Carolina?  Cause that USC team was TRAAAASSHH.

It might not still be a national story in December but it wasn't a run of the mill weekly or annual upset.

But yea, VT does love choking in buy games.  I don't know how good JMU was in 2010, but JMU is probably  perennial top 3 FCS program, along with NDSU.  They could, and often do, handle FBS teams when given a chance.


2015 was Memphis over Ole Miss.

But my point is that those single, one-off events don't have lasting positive PR implications.  That's really was my entire point to counter what Chicos said.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on September 24, 2018, 04:38:16 PM
But yea, VT does love choking in buy games.  I don't know how good JMU was in 2010, but JMU is probably  perennial top 3 FCS program, along with NDSU.  They could, and often do, handle FBS teams when given a chance.

James Madison has had some really good FCS teams, but 2010 wasn't one of them. They went 6-5 that year, including 3-5 in conference.
They have knocked off a few FBS teams, but outside the one game against VaTech, by and large they were bad FBS teams. They beat ECU last year (ECU finished 3-9) and SMU in 2015 (Mustangs were 2-10 that year).
In recent seasons, they've also lost twice to UNC (by 28 and 30, respectively), Maryland (by 45) and West Virginia (by 30). They lost by 11 earlier this year to a meh NC State team.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on September 24, 2018, 05:14:43 PM
Jeremy Larkin from Northwestern had to retire today for medical reasons.

Whenever it seems like Northwestern is primed to have a special year, it all goes to hell.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on September 24, 2018, 05:33:43 PM
Jeremy Larkin from Northwestern had to retire today for medical reasons.

Whenever it seems like Northwestern is primed to have a special year, it all goes to hell.

Any chance for a special year went out the window with the Duke game...and then shattered on the pavement with the Akron loss.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on September 24, 2018, 05:40:12 PM
Any chance for a special year went out the window with the Duke game...and then shattered on the pavement with the Akron loss.

I mean, obviously. But its just a similar feeling to 2012 when they were 3-0, had Ohio St. on the ropes blew the lead and then their entire season imploded after Venric Mark got hurt.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on September 24, 2018, 05:52:59 PM
Jeremy Larkin from Northwestern had to retire today for medical reasons.

Whenever it seems like Northwestern is primed to have a special year, it all goes to hell.

Per twitter, spinal stenosis. If he had to retire, rather then have a surgery and sit the rest of the season out, I'd guess cervical stenosis +/- spinal cord compression.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on September 25, 2018, 01:28:49 PM
Yep, other than the fact that VT travelled to ODU, I would say it was the biggest FBS upset since App St over UM
App. State was not in the FBS at that time. They were the two time defending champs in the FCS level when they beat Michigan.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on September 25, 2018, 10:50:50 PM

2015 was Memphis over Ole Miss.

But my point is that those single, one-off events don't have lasting positive PR implications.  That's really was my entire point to counter what Chicos said.

People still talk about App State over Michigan.   ODU was 0-3.  They didn't have a program from 1942 through 2008.  They were nearly dead last in every FBS ranking.  This will be one of the ESPY Upsets Of The Year come next Summer.  Monumental upset.  Biggest on record since ESPN rankings started.

ODU @ Liberty (1-2)  Loss  52-10
ODU vs FIU (2-2)  Loss 28-20
ODU @ Charlotte (2-2)  Loss  28-25

ODU vs #13 Virginia Tech (2-1)  Win 49-35

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on September 26, 2018, 08:50:06 AM
People still talk about App State over Michigan.   ODU was 0-3.  They didn't have a program from 1942 through 2008.  They were nearly dead last in every FBS ranking.  This will be one of the ESPY Upsets Of The Year come next Summer.  Monumental upset.  Biggest on record since ESPN rankings started.

ODU @ Liberty (1-2)  Loss  52-10
ODU vs FIU (2-2)  Loss 28-20
ODU @ Charlotte (2-2)  Loss  28-25

ODU vs #13 Virginia Tech (2-1)  Win 49-35




No one will care in a month.  No one cares about the ESPYs.

Case in point.  Go to any marginal college basketball fan and ask them to name the teams involved in the 16 v. 1 upset from last year's tournament.  I doubt 5% would recall who played. 

What has been will be again,
    what has been done will be done again;
    there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there anything of which one can say,
    “Look! This is something new”?
It was here already, long ago;
    it was here before our time.

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on September 26, 2018, 09:04:03 AM

No one will care in a month.  No one cares about the ESPYs.

Case in point.  Go to any marginal college basketball fan and ask them to name the teams involved in the 16 v. 1 upset from last year's tournament.  I doubt 5% would recall who played. 

What has been will be again,
    what has been done will be done again;
    there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there anything of which one can say,
    “Look! This is something new”?
It was here already, long ago;
    it was here before our time.

I think chicos2 was simply saying that ODU over VaTech was a bigger upset than App St over Michigan because App St has been a fine program (albeit not a high-major one) for a long time while ODU has been one step up from Marquette club football.

And on this occasion, I agree with c2.

However, sultan, I agree with you about the ESPYs and all that. And the App State win probably will be remembered longer because it was so outrageous at the time; there have been big upsets since then but that was one that really energized all college football fans whose school colors aren't maize and blue.

Neither of them were Chaminade over Ralph Sampson, of course! Heck, neither of them were UMBC over Sampson's alma mater!
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on September 26, 2018, 12:41:20 PM
I think chicos2 was simply saying that ODU over VaTech was a bigger upset than App St over Michigan because App St has been a fine program (albeit not a high-major one) for a long time while ODU has been one step up from Marquette club football.

And on this occasion, I agree with c2.

However, sultan, I agree with you about the ESPYs and all that. And the App State win probably will be remembered longer because it was so outrageous at the time; there have been big upsets since then but that was one that really energized all college football fans whose school colors aren't maize and blue.

Neither of them were Chaminade over Ralph Sampson, of course! Heck, neither of them were UMBC over Sampson's alma mater!

Well said
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on September 26, 2018, 01:56:07 PM

No one will care in a month. 
ODU fans and players will care forever!

That said, to the point I think you are trying to make, unless VT goes 12-1 with winning the ACC, it (ODU's win) will not be talked about after this weekend.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on September 27, 2018, 02:54:55 PM
Clemson senior QB Kelly Bryant leaves program so he can play elsewhere next season. He had lost the starting job to a freshman.

Highest-profile example so far of the new "redshirt allowed after 4 games" rule.

Excellent rule, giving the athletes a little of the control that had been exclusively reserved for coaches and other rich, powerful figures.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on October 01, 2018, 07:50:53 AM
Funny how things went with Trevor Lawrence knocked out of the game vs Syracuse. Gut check comeback for Clemson.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Lazar's Headband on October 01, 2018, 09:02:29 AM
Clemson senior QB Kelly Bryant leaves program so he can play elsewhere next season. He had lost the starting job to a freshman.

Highest-profile example so far of the new "redshirt allowed after 4 games" rule.

Excellent rule, giving the athletes a little of the control that had been exclusively reserved for coaches and other rich, powerful figures.

Bryant is an unintended beneficiary of the rule. I believe he also needs to grad transfer to be immediately eligible next year,  so it's two rules that combine to form a loophole.

The rule is intended to let players either 1) get a little playing time early in the season to determine if they can contribute as true freshman or should redshirt, or 2) get some game experience late in the year for teams that are looking ahead to next year.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: muwarrior69 on October 02, 2018, 05:06:05 PM
Come on Mods! Lock this thread! What heresy discussing college football here On MUScoop.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on October 02, 2018, 08:40:14 PM
Big games this weekend...
Oklahoma vs Texas @11am on FOX
LSU @ Florida @ 2:30 on CBS
Notre Dame @ Va Tech @7pm on ABC
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on October 06, 2018, 09:09:21 PM
Old Dominion loses again. 1-5.  Virginia Tech trails #6 Notre Dame by 1 point in the second half. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 06, 2018, 09:19:17 PM
Old Dominion loses again. 1-5.  Virginia Tech trails #6 Notre Dame by 1 point in the second half. 

So?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: cheebs09 on October 07, 2018, 02:14:11 AM
Old Dominion loses again. 1-5.  Virginia Tech trails #6 Notre Dame by 1 point in the second half.

Only way ODU is relevant now is if they are the loss that keeps VT out of the playoff. After tonight, it looks like that ship has sailed.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on October 07, 2018, 07:20:46 AM
Effen ND.

I still have confidence in them that they'll find a way to lose to either Navy, Syracuse or both.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on October 07, 2018, 08:58:20 AM
Effen ND.

I still have confidence in them that they'll find a way to lose to either Navy, Syracuse or both.

Northwestern has your back
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on October 07, 2018, 10:37:24 AM
Northwestern has your back

That would be swell, too.

All of the above would be best of all!!!!!

It sucks that my favorite team is 0-6 so far this season.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on October 07, 2018, 07:13:25 PM
Notre Dame put the hurt on Va Tech in that second half.  They look good.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on October 13, 2018, 02:54:28 PM
Cardiac Cats are back.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on October 13, 2018, 08:14:14 PM
Wild day!
-Outstanding game with Oregon beating Washington in OT.
-Sparty wins at Happy Valley.
-Irish with a comeback win vs Pitt.
-LSU smacked Georgia. Easy money as a 7 point home dog.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: CreightonWarrior on October 13, 2018, 09:22:25 PM
Thinking the badgers could make a playoff with Hornibrook at QB is hilarious.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 13, 2018, 09:26:06 PM
Thinking the badgers could make a playoff with Hornibrook at QB is hilarious.

Just hasn’t improved. Really disappointing.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on October 13, 2018, 10:10:59 PM
Just hasn’t improved. Really disappointing.

I'd have only been disappointed had the Badgers made the playoff.

Now that they're done, maybe the fraud that is ND will get exposed one of these weeks. I mean, now they've barely beaten Ball State and Pitt.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 16, 2018, 11:30:31 AM
Nick Bosa is leaving Ohio State to prepare for the NFL Draft.
And, of course, already is being dragged as a greedy quitter by some of the Buckeye faithful.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on October 16, 2018, 11:45:53 AM
Thinking the badgers could make a playoff with Hornibrook at QB is hilarious.

Maybe its just me, but his throwing motion looks... off.  Its almost like his elbow is pinned to his ribs or something.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Archies Bat on October 16, 2018, 01:10:49 PM
Nick Bosa is leaving Ohio State to prepare for the NFL Draft.
And, of course, already is being dragged as a greedy quitter by some of the Buckeye faithful.

I don't like it as a fan.

I'd do it if I were him.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: tower912 on October 16, 2018, 01:24:32 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/nick-bosa-will-withdraw-from-ohio-state-prepare-for-nfl/ar-BBOta1O?li=BBnba9I

The eternal debate.    Smart businessman or quitter?     Since he is dropping out of school to do this, is he abusing his scholarship?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on October 16, 2018, 03:46:30 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/nick-bosa-will-withdraw-from-ohio-state-prepare-for-nfl/ar-BBOta1O?li=BBnba9I

The eternal debate.    Smart businessman or quitter?     Since he is dropping out of school to do this, is he abusing his scholarship?

Smart businessman, 100%.  He wasn't going to be back in time to contribute this season, he's going to likely be a top 5 pick if he recovers from this injury properly, his efforts are best focused on recovery and preparation for the next stage in his life.  The same people getting pissed at him would have no issue with him withdrawing from school in mid-Jan after the season like most players with a high likelihood of getting drafted.

As for abusing his scholarship, hell no.  If he was staying on without ever intending to play for OSU again or work towards his degree, it would be more of an abuse than this.

These are the same fans who vigorously supported Urban Meyer, and to a lesser extent Zach Smith, yet they are gonna get up in arms about something like this.  Pathetic.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 17, 2018, 12:09:46 PM
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/wolverines/2018/10/17/michigan-football-iran-president-mahmoud-ahmadinejad/1668260002

Ahmadinejad is a Michigan football fan. Obviously.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on October 17, 2018, 01:18:48 PM
https://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/is-notre-dame-finally-going-to-get-us-an-8-team-playoff
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Its DJOver on October 17, 2018, 01:38:22 PM
https://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/is-notre-dame-finally-going-to-get-us-an-8-team-playoff

I think it'll eventually happen because $$$, but with a conference championship game, plus potentially 3 playoff games, it would essentially end non-conference play.  You probably end up with more good games, but you would get no Washington v Auburn, Texas v USC, Miami v LSU, BYU v UW-Madison.  As someone who only occasionally watches games, and only high profile ones at that, the Ohio State v Oklahoma game last year was the best one I've seen in a while.  Not saying that no non-conference would be a good or bad thing, but it would essentially be over.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 17, 2018, 01:51:56 PM
I think it'll eventually happen because $$$, but with a conference championship game, plus potentially 3 playoff games, it would essentially end non-conference play.  You probably end up with more good games, but you would get no Washington v Auburn, Texas v USC, Miami v LSU, BYU v UW-Madison.  As someone who only occasionally watches games, and only high profile ones at that, the Ohio State v Oklahoma game last year was the best one I've seen in a while.  Not saying that no non-conference would be a good or bad thing, but it would essentially be over.

I'm not sure it would be that significant.
It basically means one extra game for four teams, out of 130 FBS programs (or about 3 percent).
I can't imagine 130 teams surrendering their non-conference schedules because four of them might face an additional game in mid-January.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Its DJOver on October 17, 2018, 01:59:43 PM
I'm not sure it would be that significant.
It basically means one extra game for four teams, out of 130 FBS programs (or about 3 percent).
I can't imagine 130 teams surrendering their non-conference schedules because four of them might face an additional game in mid-January.

I should have been clearer, it would end non-conference for title contenders.  You would still get the likes of Savannah St v UAB, or Georgia St v Kennesaw St, but the high profile match-ups, that draw viewers, would end.  Any P5 team that has legit aspirations of wining their conference would not schedule a non-conference opponent.  And once again, I'm not saying that it's good or bad, but I think it would happen.

Edit:
It's also worth noting that teams only scheduled the high profile match-ups in hopes of getting a quality win, in case they drop a game or two in conference play.  In 2016, Ohio St didn't even win the B14 East, but because they had a quality win blowing Oklahoma out, they still made the playoffs.  If it's easier to make the playoffs, you won't need those high profile games in September.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 17, 2018, 02:12:53 PM
I should have been clearer, It would end non-conference for title contenders.  You would still get the likes of Savannah St v UAB, or Georgia St v Kennesaw St, but the high profile match-ups, that draw viewers, would end.  Any P5 team that has legit aspirations of wining their conference would not schedule a non-conference opponent.  And once again, I'm not sating that it's good or bad, but I think it would happen.

Some of these non-conference games are set many years in advance (e.g. Notre Dame and Alabama just announced a home-and-home for 2028 and 2029, Pitt and Wisconsin recently announced a home-and-home for 2026 and 2027).
Unless you're Alabama, Clemson and Ohio State and you can guarantee no coaching change over the next decade, how can anyone know they're a title contender that far in advance?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Its DJOver on October 17, 2018, 02:24:05 PM
Some of these non-conference games are set many years in advance (e.g. Notre Dame and Alabama just announced a home-and-home for 2028 and 2029, Pitt and Wisconsin recently announced a home-and-home for 2026 and 2027).
Unless you're Alabama, Clemson and Ohio State and you can guarantee no coaching change over the next decade, how can anyone know they're a title contender that far in advance?

Couple things.  I think it'll happen eventually, but not for quite a while.  The current deal runs through 2026, and nothing will happen before then. 

It doesn't mater if you're actually a contender, what matters is that you think that you'll be a contender.  Michigan always has the mindset that they should be contending for a championship even if they haven't been for a while.  Unless the pool of top quality running backs and poor quarterbacks dries up, Wisconsin will start every season with the mindset that the B14 West is terrible, so if they win that and get Ohio St on a bad day, they'll be going to the playoffs.  Both programs have had these mindsets for a while now, and don't show any sign of changing them soon.  Even programs that are currently terrible, but have a strong history wouldn't schedule a non-con opponent, Nebraska for example.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on October 27, 2018, 01:56:49 PM
Go Cats, aina?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: 4everwarriors on October 28, 2018, 09:23:14 AM
Ass kickin', hey?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jsglow on October 28, 2018, 10:53:59 AM
This just in.  The much ballyhooed Badgers blow.  They'll end up playing in the 'who gives a d@mn bowl' in Little Rock Arkansas.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 28, 2018, 10:59:25 AM
This just in.  The much ballyhooed Badgers blow.  They'll end up playing in the 'who gives a d@mn bowl' in Little Rock Arkansas.

Which will draw better ratings than any Marquette regular season game this year.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on October 29, 2018, 12:59:03 PM
Which will draw better ratings than any Marquette regular season game this year.

So? Really, Sultan, what does that have to do with anything?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 29, 2018, 01:02:41 PM
Which will draw better ratings than any Marquette regular season game this year.

Hang a banner.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 29, 2018, 01:06:08 PM
So? Really, Sultan, what does that have to do with anything?


Well...glow labelled it the "who gives a d@mn" bowl.  Apparently plenty of people do.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUDish on October 29, 2018, 01:26:21 PM
I'd call the Illinois football program a dumpster fire, but that would be being too kind to dumpster fires everywhere.

It's stunning with the amount of high school football talent in the state just how awful Illinois has been for a long time now. They are basically the equivalent of DePaul basketball.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on October 29, 2018, 01:54:40 PM
I'd call the Illinois football program a dumpster fire, but that would be being too kind to dumpster fires everywhere.

It's stunning with the amount of high school football talent in the state just how awful Illinois has been for a long time now. They are basically the equivalent of DePaul basketball.

Is there really that much talent in the state though?

Illinois has always been a basketball state and I'd argue football plays 3rd or 4th fiddle behind volleyball and maybe soccer.

Every once in awhile you'll get a Clayton Thorson or a Justin Jackson, but typically players on a good high school team like a Maine South or Loyola haven't historically translated well to college.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 29, 2018, 02:05:30 PM
I'd call the Illinois football program a dumpster fire, but that would be being too kind to dumpster fires everywhere.

It's stunning with the amount of high school football talent in the state just how awful Illinois has been for a long time now. They are basically the equivalent of DePaul basketball.

Oddly, I recently was surprised by how little football talent Illinois produces relative to its size.

The state's Class of 2016 had just one top 200 player (per 247).
Class of 2017 had three.
Class of 2018 had one.
Class of 2019 has two (the highest rated being #138).

Not that it's an excuse for how bad the Illini have been (we can blame that on terrible coaching hires since John Mackvic), but the state hasn't been a hotbed for college football talent since Donovan McNabb and Simeon Rice were teammates at Mount Carmel.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 29, 2018, 02:16:58 PM
Oddly, I recently was surprised by how little football talent Illinois produces relative to its size.

The state's Class of 2016 had just one top 200 player (per 247).
Class of 2017 had three.
Class of 2018 had one.
Class of 2019 has two (the highest rated being #138).

Not that it's an excuse for how bad the Illini have been (we can blame that on terrible coaching hires since John Mackvic), but the state hasn't been a hotbed for college football talent since Donovan McNabb and Simeon Rice were teammates at Mount Carmel.


Of the seven players listed above, did Illinois get any of them though?

One of the reasons Wisconsin has been good for the last 25 years is that it's very rare for top prospects to leave the state.  And those prospects have been the core of the offensive line, defensive line, occasional linebacker, etc.  They just have to go out of state and get the skill positions elsewhere.

Wisconsin can also do this because it is undoubtedly the state's football school.  Not only is it literally the only D1 program in the state, by and large the people of Wisconsin will default to the Badgers as "their" team.

I don't think you can say the same about the people from Illinois.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on October 29, 2018, 02:18:17 PM

Of the seven players listed above, did Illinois get any of them though?

One of the reasons Wisconsin has been good for the last 25 years is that it's very rare for top prospects to leave the state.  And those prospects have been the core of the offensive line, defensive line, occasional linebacker, etc.  They just have to go out of state and get the skill positions elsewhere.

Wisconsin can also do this because it is undoubtedly the state's football school.  Not only is it literally the only D1 program in the state, by and large the people of Wisconsin will default to the Badgers as "their" team.

I don't think you can say the same about the people from Illinois.

Illinois also has to fight off Northwestern whil Wisconsin doesn't have any other school instate.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUDish on October 29, 2018, 02:22:54 PM
I'm probably out of the loop and not paying as much attention then, figured the state of Illinois was still at/near top 10 for producing high school talent, but I believe now what you guys said.

The Illini program just feels like there's been zero innovative thoughts going on there over the last two decades. I'm not a CFB expert by any stretch, but I think I read Lovie is like the 5th highest paid coach in D1?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 29, 2018, 02:43:53 PM
Illinois also has to fight off Northwestern whil Wisconsin doesn't have any other school instate.

And Notre Dame, especially for the Catholic school kids.

To answer Sultan's question, those seven kids went to: Georgia, Iowa, Miami (FL), Notre Dame, Michigan State, Minnesota and uncommitted.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 29, 2018, 02:45:08 PM
Hiring Lovie was beyond ridiculous - and that's what Pakuni is getting at.  They have constantly hired the wrong guys. 

Here's what they should do.  Hire a successful coach from another G5 school, THAT ISN'T THE MAC!!!  For some reason, Big Ten teams LOVE their MAC coaches, and they almost always suck.  Look at the "paddle the boat" guy up in Minnesota.  I mean really.

So who would that be?  Luke Fickell, Cincinnati, Former OSU DC. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on October 29, 2018, 03:10:13 PM
Hiring Lovie was beyond ridiculous - and that's what Pakuni is getting at.  They have constantly hired the wrong guys. 

Here's what they should do.  Hire a successful coach from another G5 school, THAT ISN'T THE MAC!!!  For some reason, Big Ten teams LOVE their MAC coaches, and they almost always suck.  Look at the "paddle the boat" guy up in Minnesota.  I mean really.

So who would that be?  Luke Fickell, Cincinnati, Former OSU DC.

Illinois will never succeed by out Big Tenning the Big Ten. They've got to make a real effort to get weird. Maybe hire a spread guy?  A couple options would be Mike Norvell from Memphis, Jay Norvell from Nevada. Maybe Ken Niumatalolo would be willing to leave Navy? That could be fun and strange.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 29, 2018, 03:16:45 PM
Hiring Lovie was beyond ridiculous - and that's what Pakuni is getting at.  They have constantly hired the wrong guys. 

Here's what they should do.  Hire a successful coach from another G5 school, THAT ISN'T THE MAC!!!  For some reason, Big Ten teams LOVE their MAC coaches, and they almost always suck.  Look at the "paddle the boat" guy up in Minnesota.  I mean really.

So who would that be?  Luke Fickell, Cincinnati, Former OSU DC.

Well, the MAC did produce Saban and Meyer, so it's not all bad.
Really, Illinois needs to think much bigger than it ever has and make a large offer to someone who's had success at a P5 school. Maybe Dana Holgorsen, who's from the Midwest, isn't in the 25 highest paid coaches in college football and would generate a lot of excitement in Chambana.
Or Kyle Whittingham who's got to be tired of Utah by now and, likewise, isn't in the top 25 when it comes to salary.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on October 29, 2018, 03:19:16 PM
Well, the MAC did produce Saban and Meyer, so it's not all bad.
Really, Illinois needs to think much bigger than it ever has and make a large offer to someone who's had success at a P5 school. Maybe Dana Holgorsen, who's from the Midwest, isn't in the 25 highest paid coaches in college football and would generate a lot of excitement in Chambana.
Or Kyle Whittingham who's got to be tired of Utah by now and, likewise, isn't in the top 25 when it comes to salary.

This is what U of I did with Underwood, and it paid off. Maybe they go back to the well? Gundy seems on the verge of being fired pretty much all the time, and the list I saw had him being paid the same amount as Lovie.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on October 29, 2018, 03:38:06 PM

Well...glow labelled it the "who gives a d@mn" bowl.  Apparently plenty of people do.

You compared apples to oranges, which is unlike you.

I mean, the WhateverWhoCares.com Bowl will probably have more viewers than Gilligan's Island reruns on Nick At Nite, too, but that doesn't mean we can't have fun mocking F%cky for being in a second-rate bowl.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 29, 2018, 03:40:48 PM
Illinois will never succeed by out Big Tenning the Big Ten. They've got to make a real effort to get weird. Maybe hire a spread guy?  A couple options would be Mike Norvell from Memphis, Jay Norvell from Nevada. Maybe Ken Niumatalolo would be willing to leave Navy? That could be fun and strange.

I don't disagree.  But the Norvells really haven't done anything though.


Well, the MAC did produce Saban and Meyer, so it's not all bad.
Really, Illinois needs to think much bigger than it ever has and make a large offer to someone who's had success at a P5 school. Maybe Dana Holgorsen, who's from the Midwest, isn't in the 25 highest paid coaches in college football and would generate a lot of excitement in Chambana.
Or Kyle Whittingham who's got to be tired of Utah by now and, likewise, isn't in the top 25 when it comes to salary.

Holgorsen could be interesting.  Not sure Whittingham would leave.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on October 29, 2018, 03:44:40 PM

Well...glow labelled it the "who gives a d@mn" bowl.  Apparently plenty of people do.
Yep. The worst bowl game still draw over a million viewers.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jsglow on October 29, 2018, 05:51:50 PM
Yep. The worst bowl game still draw over a million viewers.

It will, you guys are right.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on October 29, 2018, 06:36:24 PM
What's the feeling among Illinois alumni/donors? Are they realistic about the current state of the program or do they expect a new guy to be competing for conference championship within 2-3 seasons?

Because if they're anything like some (most?) Bears fans (meatballs) then nothing will satisfy then and they'll never allow anyone to build a program the right way
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on October 29, 2018, 06:54:41 PM
I don't disagree.  But the Norvells really haven't done anything though.

Jay hasnt yet at Nevada, but Mike has done a very good job at Memphis.  8-4 in his first year, 10-2 last year and only lost to UCF twice, but took them to the wire in the conference championship.  And they are 4-4 this year, which is disappointing, but they lost to Navy on the road and UCF at home by a combined 2 points after losing a record setting QB and a WR that went in the second round.  I think he's gonna be a hot name in the offseason, even though I believe he is the highest paid non-P5 HC.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on October 30, 2018, 10:09:18 AM
Really, Illinois needs to think much bigger than it ever has and make a large offer to someone who's had success at a P5 school.

Three words: Decided. Schematic. Advantage.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 30, 2018, 10:15:17 AM
What's the feeling among Illinois alumni/donors? Are they realistic about the current state of the program or do they expect a new guy to be competing for conference championship within 2-3 seasons?

Because if they're anything like some (most?) Bears fans (meatballs) then nothing will satisfy then and they'll never allow anyone to build a program the right way

The Illini alums/fans I know don't have outsized expectations for the football program (hoops on the other hand ...).
There's no belief they should be competing with Ohio State, Michigan, etc., on a regular basis. They just want to be respectable and appear in a major bowl now and again. I think they look at programs like Iowa, Michigan State and even Wisconsin and, understandably, ask 'Why not us?'

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUDish on October 30, 2018, 10:21:54 AM
The Illini alums/fans I know don't have outsized expectations for the football program (hoops on the other hand ...).
There's no belief they should be competing with Ohio State, Michigan, etc., on a regular basis. They just want to be respectable and appear in a major bowl now and again. I think they look at programs like Iowa, Michigan State and even Wisconsin and, understandably, ask 'Why not us?'

I immediately thought of Iowa and Mich St as what Illinois should aspire to be. I think that's right on the money.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on October 30, 2018, 10:27:27 AM
I immediately thought of Iowa and Mich St as what Illinois should aspire to be. I think that's right on the money.

I think their recruiting base is so much worse, though. Wisconsin and Iowa have entire states full of cornfed OL in training who aspire to be Badgers and Hawkeyes from birth. Even Michigan is a much better recruiting ground than IL, and MSU gets a lot of the guys that don't go to UM or tOSU.  Illinois is pretty bare for football talent, and what is there is either Chicago suburbs (private school or public schools with a private school mentality who collectively view Champaigne as a wasteland) or southern IL where U of I is going to run into northern SEC/eastern Big 12 country. I still contend Illinois only path to success is to get weird and form an identity along the lines of a Mike Leach, Paul Johnson, or other small cult of personality.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 30, 2018, 10:42:53 AM
I think their recruiting base is so much worse, though. Wisconsin and Iowa have entire states full of cornfed OL in training who aspire to be Badgers and Hawkeyes from birth. Even Michigan is a much better recruiting ground than IL, and MSU gets a lot of the guys that don't go to UM or tOSU.  Illinois is pretty bare for football talent, and what is there is either Chicago suburbs (private school or public schools with a private school mentality who collectively view Champaigne as a wasteland) or southern IL where U of I is going to run into northern SEC/eastern Big 12 country. I still contend Illinois only path to success is to get weird and form an identity along the lines of a Mike Leach, Paul Johnson, or other small cult of personality.

So, I know I talked down the Illinois recruiting base earlier in this thread, but there's definitely far more talent to be had in the state than in Wisconsin and Iowa.  And I don't think city/suburban kids view Champaign as a wasteland ... the campus, after all, teems with city/suburban kids.
But you're correct that, barring some family connection, nobody in the Chicago area grows up dreaming of playing for the state school. That's what generations of mediocrity combined with a long-term lack of program identity will do for you.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 30, 2018, 10:53:28 AM
So, I know I talked down the Illinois recruiting base earlier in this thread, but there's definitely far more talent to be had in the state than in Wisconsin and Iowa.  And I don't think city/suburban kids view Champaign as a wasteland ... the campus, after all, teems with city/suburban kids.
But you're correct that, barring some family connection, nobody in the Chicago area grows up dreaming of playing for the state school. That's what generations of mediocrity combined with a long-term lack of program identity will do for you.


And that's why Illinois doesn't need to "get weird."  Just get a good coach.

Iowa hired Hayden Fry in 1979 and hired Kirk Ferentz when he retired.  Everyone knows what Iowa football is.  Wisconsin hired Barry Alvarez in 1990, and outside of a two year stint with Gary Andersen, has been run pretty much the same way since then with two of his assistants.  Everyone knows what Wisconsin football is. 

Both Fry and Alvarez knew that how you build long-term success is by looking at what the high schools are producing in their main recruiting areas.  It's not some spread option stuff.  It is run of the mill, power football.  All of that feeds their programs.  Someone said earlier that Illinois cannot "out Big Ten the Big Ten."  But that's exactly what Iowa and Wisconsin have done!  (Michigan State too.)

Getting weird may bring Illinois some wins early.  But I just don't think it's sustainable.  Purdue did that with Joe Tiller.  It worked pretty good for awhile - until Joe was pushed out and the program has sucked since then.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jsglow on October 30, 2018, 11:00:38 AM

And that's why Illinois doesn't need to "get weird."  Just get a good coach.

Iowa hired Hayden Fry in 1979 and hired Kirk Ferentz when he retired.  Everyone knows what Iowa football is.  Wisconsin hired Barry Alvarez in 1990, and outside of a two year stint with Gary Andersen, has been run pretty much the same way since then with two of his assistants.  Everyone knows what Wisconsin football is. 

Both Fry and Alvarez knew that how you build long-term success is by looking at what the high schools are producing in their main recruiting areas.  It's not some spread option stuff.  It is run of the mill, power football.  All of that feeds their programs.  Someone said earlier that Illinois cannot "out Big Ten the Big Ten."  But that's exactly what Iowa and Wisconsin have done!  (Michigan State too.)

Getting weird may bring Illinois some wins early.  But I just don't think it's sustainable.  Purdue did that with Joe Tiller.  It worked pretty good for awhile - until Joe was pushed out and the program has sucked since then.

This.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Lazar's Headband on October 30, 2018, 11:03:10 AM
The walk-on program is another reason Wisconsin football thrives. Alvarez modeled it after Nebraska under Tom Osborne. (Alvarez also went to Nebraska.)

Jared Abbrederris (sic?) and Alex Erickson were HS QBs. Both moved to WR and went onto the NFL. Joe Schobert went from HS RB to NFL LB.  The list goes on and on.  There is even a book about WI walk-ons; Walk-on This Way.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on October 30, 2018, 11:13:16 AM

And that's why Illinois doesn't need to "get weird."  Just get a good coach.

Iowa hired Hayden Fry in 1979 and hired Kirk Ferentz when he retired.  Everyone knows what Iowa football is.  Wisconsin hired Barry Alvarez in 1990, and outside of a two year stint with Gary Andersen, has been run pretty much the same way since then with two of his assistants.  Everyone knows what Wisconsin football is. 

Both Fry and Alvarez knew that how you build long-term success is by looking at what the high schools are producing in their main recruiting areas.  It's not some spread option stuff.  It is run of the mill, power football.  All of that feeds their programs.  Someone said earlier that Illinois cannot "out Big Ten the Big Ten."  But that's exactly what Iowa and Wisconsin have done!  (Michigan State too.)

Getting weird may bring Illinois some wins early.  But I just don't think it's sustainable.  Purdue did that with Joe Tiller.  It worked pretty good for awhile - until Joe was pushed out and the program has sucked since then.

Agree to disagree that IL can follow the Wisconsin or Iowa model. While Wisco and Iowa as states may not have the aggregate in-state recruiting talent of Illinois, those schools are so insulated from recruiting competition that they are able to retain a disproportionate number of their own top guys, who skew heavily toward one or two positions and enable them to develop a program identity (the bolded section of your post above). 

You see that culturally, not just in football terms, and its not just based on one coach. When you drive even into northern Wisconsin, just watch for how many service and retail businesses are called "Badger X."  Or in Iowa, how many of the same business are "Hawkeye X."  Those high school recruits aren't going anywhere else. And you'll never get that in Illinois. Their success isn't because they got "just a good coach" its because that coach's success was able to exploit a statewide hunger to identify with the school that was already there, and that feeds on itself - and Illinois will never have that. They'll always have - at best - a 25% chance of fending off ND, and nothern B10 schools for Chicago area kids, and maybe a slightly better chance at fending off the B12 or SEC for kids in the southern part of the state.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 30, 2018, 11:26:51 AM
Agree to disagree that IL can follow the Wisconsin or Iowa model. While Wisco and Iowa as states may not have the aggregate in-state recruiting talent of Illinois, those schools are so insulated from recruiting competition that they are able to retain a disproportionate number of their own top guys, who skew heavily toward one or two positions and enable them to develop a program identity (the bolded section of your post above). 

You see that culturally, not just in football terms, and its not just based on one coach. When you drive even into northern Wisconsin, just watch for how many service and retail businesses are called "Badger X."  Or in Iowa, how many of the same business are "Hawkeye X."  Those high school recruits aren't going anywhere else. And you'll never get that in Illinois. Their success isn't because they got "just a good coach" its because that coach's success was able to exploit a statewide hunger to identify with the school that was already there, and that feeds on itself - and Illinois will never have that. They'll always have - at best - a 25% chance of fending off ND, and nothern B10 schools for Chicago area kids, and maybe a slightly better chance at fending off the B12 or SEC for kids in the southern part of the state.


You are making the assumption this has always been the case.  It hasn't.  In the 1980s, Wisconsin football talent was routinely heading elsewhere.  Hell, Iowa was routinely recruiting guys out of Wisconsin during that time.  Michigan and Nebraska had a ton of Wisconsin kids back in the day too. 

Alvarez made a HUGE deal of sealing the borders and not letting the in-state talent leave.  Brent Moss was a high school All-American running back from Racine who was down to Michigan and Penn State before Alvarez walked in the door and convinced him that he could be the cornerstone of a championship team.

Lazar is 100% accurate, that even "non-scholarship" talent was invited to walk on and earn a scholarship.  Jim Leonhard is the best example of that.

It takes a good coach, time and effort.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 30, 2018, 11:41:56 AM
Agree to disagree that IL can follow the Wisconsin or Iowa model. While Wisco and Iowa as states may not have the aggregate in-state recruiting talent of Illinois, those schools are so insulated from recruiting competition that they are able to retain a disproportionate number of their own top guys, who skew heavily toward one or two positions and enable them to develop a program identity (the bolded section of your post above). 

You see that culturally, not just in football terms, and its not just based on one coach. When you drive even into northern Wisconsin, just watch for how many service and retail businesses are called "Badger X."  Or in Iowa, how many of the same business are "Hawkeye X."  Those high school recruits aren't going anywhere else. And you'll never get that in Illinois. Their success isn't because they got "just a good coach" its because that coach's success was able to exploit a statewide hunger to identify with the school that was already there, and that feeds on itself - and Illinois will never have that. They'll always have - at best - a 25% chance of fending off ND, and nothern B10 schools for Chicago area kids, and maybe a slightly better chance at fending off the B12 or SEC for kids in the southern part of the state.

Wisconsin and Iowa have succeeded not so much because they've kept elite talent at home, but because they've landed so much of the mid-level kids (say, in the top 150 to 500) and then developed them.
Illinois hasn't even got those kids.
Iowa and Wisconsin also benefit from the lack of in-state competition for those mid-level recruits. Iowa has Iowa State, but they've always been the much little brother, and Wisconsin doesn't even have an FCS program to compete against.
Illinois, on the other hand, has good FBS programs at Northwestern and Northern Illinois, along with four FCS programs.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on October 30, 2018, 12:18:35 PM
Sultan - you're right to point out my recency bias. I do think that Illinois has a lot of things working against it that Iowa and Wisco don't have, and so U of I's momentum will always be more fragile than Iowa's, Wisco's, or Nebraska's.  But they could aim for a MSU-ish level of success with some good coaching hires.  Its such a stepping stone job at this point, though, that even with big $ I think they'd need to string three good hires together to legitimately improve the program in a sustainable way.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on October 30, 2018, 12:39:45 PM
Oddly, I recently was surprised by how little football talent Illinois produces relative to its size.

The state's Class of 2016 had just one top 200 player (per 247).
Class of 2017 had three.
Class of 2018 had one.
Class of 2019 has two (the highest rated being #138).

Not that it's an excuse for how bad the Illini have been (we can blame that on terrible coaching hires since John Mackvic), but the state hasn't been a hotbed for college football talent since Donovan McNabb and Simeon Rice were teammates at Mount Carmel.

Uhhhh....Simeon Rice went to the school of hard knocks.   C'mon now.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 30, 2018, 02:56:04 PM
So DJ Durkin has been reinstated by Maryland.  Apparently the President of the University didn't want him back.  However the Board of Trustees told the President that he would be out of a job unless he reinstated Durkin.

That sounds normal.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on October 30, 2018, 03:04:07 PM
So DJ Durkin has been reinstated by Maryland.  Apparently the President of the University didn't want him back.  However the Board of Trustees told the President that he would be out of a job unless he reinstated Durkin.

That sounds normal.

10-15 with a bulletin board win over a mediocre Texas team last year AND the program has a 2 game winning streak over Minnesota.  And he's a sterling 1-1 vs Rutgers.  I don't know how you CANT overlook his concerning behavior for those results.  Rockstar with a headset
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 30, 2018, 03:13:09 PM
So apparently the President is leaving his job.

https://www.chronicle.com/article/U-of-Maryland-President-Steps/244960/?fbclid=IwAR0ao-QEE0gC6sMPt4VLBZ6FFMok5PkDcpACNmb3BBUs4DbzQwd8SC2seCQ#.W9i3UhKJLHk.facebook

And of course there is this tidbit, which is just so precious:

"The day before, regents had been presented with a nearly 200-page investigative report that describes a program with little administrative oversight, in which “problems festered because too many players feared speaking out.” It also described inappropriate behavior by Rick Court, the former strength-and-conditioning coach, who at one point threw what the report described as a “trash can full of vomit” at players.

According to the Post, regents strongly urged Loh to allow Durkin to return from a suspension that was imposed in August. Many regents were impressed by their in-person meeting with Durkin during Friday’s board meeting, the newspaper reported."


I mean really.  What the f*ck is that?  They commission a report that says the program is a trainwreck, but they meet with the guy in person and he seems like a nice guy.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on October 30, 2018, 03:18:32 PM
So apparently the President is leaving his job.

Saw this line and got excited for a second there ...
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 30, 2018, 03:20:17 PM
@DanWolken

What’s amazing about this press conference is that Maryland has an easy and foolproof (albeit expensive) way to fix everything and they’re deliberately choosing the most complex solution with the smallest chance of success.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on October 31, 2018, 10:02:09 AM
College Football Playoff Rankings, Oct. 30
1.Alabama (8-0)
2.Clemson (8-0)
3.LSU (7-1)
4.Notre Dame (8-0)
5.Michigan (7-1)
6.Georgia (7-1)
7.Oklahoma (7-1)
8.Washington State (7-1)
9.Kentucky (7-1)
10.Ohio State (7-1)
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 31, 2018, 10:09:26 AM
I don't see Clemson or ND losing.  I would put them in the playoffs.

Alabama plays at LSU Saturday.  Alabama wins and they are pretty much in the playoffs even if they lose in the SEC Championship Game.  LSU wins and neither can afford another loss.  Which could get real weird if UGA wins out and wins the SECCG.

Michigan has at Penn State this weekend and home against OSU.  If they win out, coupled with an LSU loss, they are in as well.

Oklahoma, Washington State and Kentucky / Georgia likely need help.  (Kentucky and Georgia play this weekend)


So right now, I am projecting Alabama v. Michigan and Clemson v. ND.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on October 31, 2018, 10:47:33 AM
I could see Notre Dame losing to Northwestern, Syracuse or @ USC.

Also, Michigan host Penn State this Saturday. They are at Ohio State to end the year.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on October 31, 2018, 10:49:15 AM
Oh look, Urban Meyer with a new health issue when his team is disappointing and he's catching some other assorted off the field heat at his current job...

I would never make light of severe health issues and brain disease is horrible, but Meyer is a known and proven liar who has stretched and distorted the truth for personal gain repeatedly.  This seems conveniently like the Florida situation where his "dangerous" health issues wonderfully cleared up in a single season away from coaching.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on October 31, 2018, 10:52:24 AM
Also, Michigan host Penn State this Saturday. They are at Ohio State to end the year.

Thanks for the correction.  Have no idea how I screwed that up.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on October 31, 2018, 10:53:53 AM
I don't see Clemson or ND losing.  I would put them in the playoffs.

Alabama plays at LSU Saturday.  Alabama wins and they are pretty much in the playoffs even if they lose in the SEC Championship Game.  LSU wins and neither can afford another loss.  Which could get real weird if UGA wins out and wins the SECCG.

Michigan has at Penn State this weekend and home against OSU.  If they win out, coupled with an LSU loss, they are in as well.

Oklahoma, Washington State and Kentucky / Georgia likely need help.  (Kentucky and Georgia play this weekend)


So right now, I am projecting Alabama v. Michigan and Clemson v. ND.

If Alabama has one loss on the year, whether this weekend or in the SEC championship, I think they're still in. So if the SEC has two one loss teams, I think both are in. The only team that could ruin that would be if Michigan went undefeated in the Big 10, I think the committee would have a hard time keeping them out (though I think the only SEC team Michigan would beat on a neutral field is Kentucky).
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on October 31, 2018, 11:33:20 AM
I could see Notre Dame losing to Northwestern, Syracuse or @ USC.

Me too. They almost lost at home to Ball State and Pitt.

Rooting for them to choke away 2 of these 3!!

Although, it would be satisfying to see them get to the playoffs as the No. 4 seed and lose by 10,000 points to Bama.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on October 31, 2018, 02:09:11 PM
Me too. They almost lost at home to Ball State and Pitt.


There was never a point where they almost lost to Ball State. They just let them hang around. Now, Pitt was a different story.

As a USC lifelong fan, the storied Coliseum is always a "little louder when the Fighting Irish come to town" --Keith Jackson  ;D
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on October 31, 2018, 05:36:46 PM
Now this from a Washington Post sports writer ...

Rick Maese @RickMaese
And in a stunning twist, the University Maryland has parted ways with DJ Durkin… more coming soon…
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: nyg on October 31, 2018, 06:50:05 PM
Now this from a Washington Post sports writer ...

Rick Maese @RickMaese
And in a stunning twist, the University Maryland has parted ways with DJ Durkin… more coming soon…

Lots of backlash from yesterday’s Regents decision.  Deceased player’s family, UMD students, many players, some of whom walked out of Durkin first back team meeting, politicians, and then Gov. Hogan said this morning that decision was strange and he wanted to look into it.  Gov. Hogan originally appointed members to the Board of Regents.  Canada to coach remainder of season. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: RJax55 on October 31, 2018, 08:24:09 PM
Lots of backlash from yesterday’s Regents decision.  Deceased player’s family, UMD students, many players, some of whom walked out of Durkin first back team meeting, politicians, and then Gov. Hogan said this morning that decision was strange and he wanted to look into it.  Gov. Hogan originally appointed members to the Board of Regents.  Canada to coach remainder of season.

I think the players speaking out was the end. If Durkin stayed, there's was no way he was going to be able to recruit effectively anymore. So the program's future outlook with him was poor at best. With no future and no ability to lead the current team, he simply had no value to the program. The Board of Regents initial decision was as short-sided as you will find.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on October 31, 2018, 08:37:17 PM
I think the players speaking out was the end. If Durkin stayed, there's was no way he was going to be able to recruit effectively anymore. So the program's future outlook with him was poor at best. With no future and no ability to lead the current team, he simply had no value to the program. The Board of Regents initial decision was as short-sided as you will find.

I really don't understand the board's decision. What did they have to gain? Was there some blackmail or financial win/loss at stake?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: nyg on October 31, 2018, 09:09:11 PM
I really don't understand the board's decision. What did they have to gain? Was there some blackmail or financial win/loss at stake?

No one understood decision, just a nightmare for UMD.
Perception of lack of transparency and UMD did not relieve those in charge.
It’s over now, most are appeased and the Terps will move forward.  New coach process to start after season.
No big financials, but Durkin gets 5.5 million buyout. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on October 31, 2018, 09:28:46 PM
The only way MD could have handled the whole thing worse would have been to have promoted Durkin to university president. What a travesty.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 01, 2018, 10:27:46 AM
I have been working in higher education for nearly 30 years and I have never read a letter like this one.

https://twitter.com/TraceeWilkins/status/1058013632821374978
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on November 01, 2018, 11:13:38 AM
No one understood decision, just a nightmare for UMD.
Perception of lack of transparency and UMD did not relieve those in charge.
It’s over now, most are appeased and the Terps will move forward.  New coach process to start after season.
No big financials, but Durkin gets 5.5 million buyout.

This motherf%cker kills a kid and get 5 and a half mil? Something is seriously wrong with college coaching contracts.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on November 01, 2018, 11:31:02 AM
This motherf%cker kills a kid and get 5 and a half mil? Something is seriously wrong with college coaching contracts.

They could try to fire him for cause, but that's an uphill battle that would drag on in the courts for a long time (Sarkisian's case against USC just ended this summer, nearly three years after he was fired).
Durkin didn't actually kill a kid, after all. Much easier just to pay him to go away.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 01, 2018, 11:36:59 AM
They could try to fire him for cause, but that's an uphill battle that would drag on in the courts for a long time (Sarkisian's case against USC just ended this summer, nearly three years after he was fired).
Durkin didn't actually kill a kid, after all. Much easier just to pay him to go away.



The uphill battle made much tougher since the Board reinstated him to begin with.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Lazar's Headband on November 01, 2018, 11:54:44 AM
This motherf%cker kills a kid and get 5 and a half mil? Something is seriously wrong with college coaching contracts.

Wrongful death civil lawsuit, anyone?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: nyg on November 01, 2018, 12:15:07 PM
Wrongful death civil lawsuit, anyone?

President Loh admitted in a national press conference that UMD was at fault with the death.  The family has hired Bill Murphy, a prominent Baltimore attorney, and this will be settled outside the courtroom. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on November 01, 2018, 01:47:08 PM
President Loh admitted in a national press conference that UMD was at fault with the death.  The family has hired Bill Murphy, a prominent Baltimore attorney, and this will be settled outside the courtroom.

The family could go after Durkin personally, too. I'd be surprised if they didn't. I sure as hell would.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on November 01, 2018, 02:16:39 PM
The family could go after Durkin personally, too. I'd be surprised if they didn't. I sure as hell would.

Good chance he'll be indemnified by the university. The university's insurer could fight that, but if his contract was written well, it'll be a losing fight.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on November 01, 2018, 04:51:40 PM
https://twitter.com/lukebroadwater/status/1058055229734821894?s=19
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: 4everwarriors on November 02, 2018, 03:11:31 PM
Saw this line and got excited for a second there ...




Nads, drop the sildenafil dose down ta 50 mg and ya won't get so many false alarms, hey?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on November 02, 2018, 05:15:54 PM
Any sh!t talking requests aimed towards Notre Dame fans tomorrow?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on November 03, 2018, 01:36:24 PM
I have been working in higher education for nearly 30 years and I have never read a letter like this one.

https://twitter.com/TraceeWilkins/status/1058013632821374978

I take it you work at a small school, small athletics program or non scholarship?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on November 03, 2018, 06:55:42 PM
I don’t watch much college football at all but while waiting for the Bama LSU game, which I am interested in, I have the ND vs. NW game on. ND had a punt return where the defender wraps up the return man and gets hit right in his back, freeing up the return man for probably 20 extra yards with no flag.

Then on 3rd and 7 ND’s QB ran a keeper, got tripped up and was clearly down at the very least a full yard behind the first down mark yet the refs gave him a first down. Thankfully replay reversed it. ND then goes for it on 4th and 1 and gets a gift of a spot to pick up the first.

Zebras want that pot of gold.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: real chili 83 on November 03, 2018, 07:17:55 PM
 ND sucks
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUEng92 on November 03, 2018, 08:07:19 PM
Things I've learned following Alabama vs. LSU on Twitter...

1) Alabama and LSU fans have the worst grammar I've encountered on Twitter...which is saying something.

2) Every call is against LSU and nothing is called on Alabama

3) Every call is against Alabama and nothing is called on LSU

4) The announcers apparently like to perform certain intimate acts on Alabama that I can not describe here

5) "The announcers never say anything good about Alabama"

6) When a defensive lineman crosses the line of scrimmage but gets back before the snap it should still be called a "false start"
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on November 03, 2018, 08:50:01 PM
Not a shock. Stats are big for Bama. 300 plus yards to 60.

OU and Tech is in a shotout.

ND starting to roll.

Michigan smacked Penn State. 42-7

Thriller as WVU went for 2 and got the win at Texas 43-42.

Purdue' s late field goal beats Iowa.



Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: real chili 83 on November 03, 2018, 08:58:44 PM
Not a shock. Stats are big for Bama. 300 plus yards to 60.

OU and Tech is in a shotout.

ND starting to SUCK, again.

Michigan smacked Penn State. 42-7

Thriller as WVU went for 2 and got the win at Texas 43-42.

Purdue' s late field goal beats Iowa.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on November 03, 2018, 10:28:17 PM
That sucked. Thought they may have had a chance after the blocked punt. Damn.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: 4everwarriors on November 04, 2018, 07:50:11 AM
I take it you work at a small school, small athletics program or non scholarship?




Marian University, hey?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on November 04, 2018, 09:30:20 AM
I have been working in higher education for nearly 30 years and I have never read a letter like this one.

https://twitter.com/TraceeWilkins/status/1058013632821374978

The writers of that letter are not particularly well informed of hiring/firing coaches across the nation.  They say the know of no other institutions where the board/regents can hire/fire a coach.

I know of several. 

Many Universities have an executive compensation board within their board of trustees or regents that have the sole authority to approve or deny any contracts above a certain $ amount, which coaches fall under. 

None of that changes the fact that the Board of Regents really F'd this one up.  What a mess. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 04, 2018, 09:56:07 AM
I take it you work at a small school, small athletics program or non scholarship?

The writers of that letter are not particularly well informed of hiring/firing coaches across the nation.  They say the know of no other institutions where the board/regents can hire/fire a coach.

I know of several. 

Many Universities have an executive compensation board within their board of trustees or regents that have the sole authority to approve or deny any contracts above a certain $ amount, which coaches fall under. 

None of that changes the fact that the Board of Regents really F'd this one up.  What a mess. 


No I mean I haven’t seen a public university foundation board publicly call out the governing board of the institution like that.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on November 04, 2018, 10:03:34 AM

No I mean I haven’t seen a public university foundation board publicly call out the governing board of the institution like that.

Not disagreeing with that at all.  Such a completely f'd up situation.

Just found that element odd when I read the actual letter.  To me, it seems like emotions are running hot in decision makers in this one, and logic/thinking is at times taking a backseat. Never a good situation when that occurs.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on November 12, 2018, 01:30:46 PM
Davidson lost its FCS game 56-52 to San Diego despite getting 789 rushing yards -- yes, 789, a division record. That is not a typo!!

Their top 4 rushers had 231, 197, 153 and 150 yards. They scored on runs of 94, 90 and 80 yards.

Crazy stuff!!!
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on November 14, 2018, 12:57:55 PM
Two more things of interest ...

2020 will see the debut of the Myrtle Beach Bowl. That will be the 40th -- fortieth!!!!! -- postseason bowl. At least 35 of which will be totally irrelevant.

Also, D3 Earlham College has lost a record 53 straight games and decided to suspend its program at least for next season. I know a kid who went there. He described it as "Bohemian." When I asked him what that meant, he said: "The girls don't shave their armpits."
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on November 14, 2018, 02:53:22 PM
Can't wait.  :-\

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/myrtle-beach-bowl-to-become-first-college-football-bowl-game/article_b478f294-e76f-11e8-9357-ef820b0bd1c4.html
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on November 14, 2018, 02:56:18 PM
Two more things of interest ...

2020 will see the debut of the Myrtle Beach Bowl. That will be the 40th -- fortieth!!!!! -- postseason bowl. At least 35 of which will be totally irrelevant.

Also, D3 Earlham College has lost a record 53 straight games and decided to suspend its program at least for next season. I know a kid who went there. He described it as "Bohemian." When I asked him what that meant, he said: "The girls don't shave their armpits."

Never understood the complaining about the number of bowl games.
1. It's free football!
2. If you don't like free football (communist!) you have the option of doing something else (America, f yeah).
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: theBabyDavid on November 15, 2018, 01:22:58 PM
Oh look, Urban Meyer with a new health issue when his team is disappointing and he's catching some other assorted off the field heat at his current job...

I would never make light of severe health issues and brain disease is horrible, but Meyer is a known and proven liar who has stretched and distorted the truth for personal gain repeatedly.  This seems conveniently like the Florida situation where his "dangerous" health issues wonderfully cleared up in a single season away from coaching.


Wags, just saw your PM. Cheers.

The Urb is a pretty despicable guy. Amazing how Nixon's life was in danger from a sudden case of phlebitis right when he was getting impeached.

Same with The Urb. Always coming down with some grave malady right when he is getting unwanted attention...

Jim Harbaugh is a goofy guy. But he is definitely on the up and up.

tOSU now has had two consecutive cheaters leading the buck nuts.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUDish on November 17, 2018, 05:49:04 PM
The Lovie Smith experience seems to be going well today.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 17, 2018, 06:38:53 PM
Nice come from behind win for UW.  Taylor with 300+ yards.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on November 19, 2018, 09:17:28 AM
I really hate SEC cupcake Saturday.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 19, 2018, 09:23:38 AM
Yeah no kidding.  It was my first Saturday night in awhile with nothing going on, and not a single decent game. 

BTW, the Pac 12 is probably real excited at the prospect of a Utah v. either Washington or Washington State championship game. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: TAMU Eagle on November 25, 2018, 12:06:31 AM
How bout them Aggies?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 25, 2018, 07:29:23 AM
How bout them Aggies?


I made it through the first overtime and was just too damn tired...damn...
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: tower912 on November 25, 2018, 07:34:01 AM
Urban >>>>>>Harbaugh.    Harbaugh's only hope of beating OSU is for Meyer to retire again. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 25, 2018, 07:54:23 AM
Harbaugh's rep has really taken a hit at Michigan.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 25, 2018, 09:08:22 AM
So Notre Dame wrapped up a spot in the College Football Playoff yesterday.  They aren't as good as Bama or Clemson, but this isn't the same bunch that got its doors blown off by Bama a couple years ago.  I doubt they win the championship, but they will be more competitive.

Bama is a lock IMO even if they lose to Georgia in the SECCG next Saturday.  Ditto Clemson and Pitt in the ACCCG.

So about the fourth spot:

**Georgia IMO is one of the top four teams in the country, but they are going to have to beat Bama to get a spot - two losses aren't going to get them in.  Georgia is one of the teams that can beat Alabama though.

**Ohio State may the the next in line if they beat Northwestern.  But they would get their doors blown off by any of the top 3.

**Oklahoma.  See Ohio State.

**UCF.  Not likely especially since they lost their QB to a horrible injury Friday.  But they likely aren't going to be competitive either.

**If all four lose their conference championship games, Georgia will back their way in with Washington State and LSU losing this weekend.  College football is really weak below the top teams this year.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on November 25, 2018, 10:02:31 AM
So Notre Dame wrapped up a spot in the College Football Playoff yesterday.  They aren't as good as Bama or Clemson, but this isn't the same bunch that got its doors blown off by Bama a couple years ago.  I doubt they win the championship, but they will be more competitive.

Bama is a lock IMO even if they lose to Georgia in the SECCG next Saturday.  Ditto Clemson and Pitt in the ACCCG.

So about the fourth spot:

**Georgia IMO is one of the top four teams in the country, but they are going to have to beat Bama to get a spot - two losses aren't going to get them in.  Georgia is one of the teams that can beat Alabama though.

**Ohio State may the the next in line if they beat Northwestern.  But they would get their doors blown off by any of the top 3.

**Oklahoma.  See Ohio State.

**UCF.  Not likely especially since they lost their QB to a horrible injury Friday.  But they likely aren't going to be competitive either.

**If all four lose their conference championship games, Georgia will back their way in with Washington State and LSU losing this weekend.  College football is really weak below the top teams this year.

Bama and ND are locks. Clemson ought to be, unless they somehow get routed by Pitt, which seems a near impossibility.
Georgia is in if they beat Bama. Out of they don't.
The clear next team up in the scenario is Oklahoma. Their one loss came in the final seconds to a ranked opponent.
As for Ohio State, getting blown out by a .500 Purdue team should disqualify them. The fact they also should have lost to Maryland only confirms that they don't belong in ahead of a one-loss Oklahoma or Georgia..
Also, putting Ohio State in the playoff after everything that went down there early in the year is a bad look. The committee isn't supposed to consider such things, but if it's a virtual tie between OSU and Oklahoma, it ought to push it in the Sooners favor.
By the way, what's the over on an Alabama-Oklahoma semifinal? Seems like Bama could put up 70 on that defense.

UCF, sadly, has no chance. If Milton were still in the picture, they'd have an argument.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on November 25, 2018, 07:58:27 PM
How bout them Aggies?
I thought LSU won after the int. I flipped it off too another game on my 2nd tv. I see the score at the bottom of the screen on ND/USC game, tied at 31. Crazy.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on November 25, 2018, 08:01:40 PM


Bama is a lock IMO even if they lose to Georgia in the SECCG next Saturday.  Ditto Clemson and Pitt in the ACCCG.


I really hope Clemson is out, if they somehow lose to an average Pitt team. ACC is very poor this season.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: TAMU Eagle on November 25, 2018, 09:14:59 PM
I thought LSU won after the int. I flipped it off too another game on my 2nd tv. I see the score at the bottom of the screen on ND/USC game, tied at 31. Crazy.

The INT getting called back was the right call. The spot on the ensuing 4th down....I can admit that LSU absolutely got robbed because of that call. It happens though and fans were treated to another 2.5 hours of excitement as a result. That's a game that I'll remember for a long time.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on November 25, 2018, 09:23:48 PM
Surprised to see Wisconsin lose at home to Minnesota.  Feels like they've had that axe forever.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on November 25, 2018, 10:15:45 PM
The INT getting called back was the right call. The spot on the ensuing 4th down....I can admit that LSU absolutely got robbed because of that call. It happens though and fans were treated to another 2.5 hours of excitement as a result. That's a game that I'll remember for a long time.

Digital first down line was 2 yards off. It was a first, absolutely.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUDish on November 25, 2018, 11:37:03 PM
Lovie Smith got an extension at Illinois.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 26, 2018, 08:28:32 AM
Lovie Smith got an extension at Illinois.


Cause they couldn't afford his buy-out.  To be fair, the extension could have a less expensive buy-out.  I really doubt that he's still there in two years.  But two years is a long time.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on November 27, 2018, 08:05:25 AM
A very sensible argument regarding how conference championship games have outlived their usefulness and that this weekend should be set aside for national quarterfinals taking place on campus sites.

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football-playoff-doesnt-need-expansion-needs-reform-005615013.html
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on November 27, 2018, 10:35:29 AM
A very sensible argument regarding how conference championship games have outlived their usefulness and that this weekend should be set aside for national quarterfinals taking place on campus sites.

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football-playoff-doesnt-need-expansion-needs-reform-005615013.html
The only league that really cares about their conference title game is the SEC.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 01, 2018, 06:46:20 PM
The SEC Championship Game was quite entertaining.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: nyg on December 01, 2018, 07:02:07 PM
The SEC Championship Game was quite entertaining.

 Very.  Kirby Smart fake punting on own 45 in tie game with three minutes left, can’t wait to hear his explanation. Georgia fans probably going nuts.  Last year Tua for Hurts, now Hurts for Tua.  Like movie script.

Side note, if Kyler Murray from Okl was 6ft 3, he would probably be the most promising college QB in history.  What a player with arm strength, accuracy and a set of wheels.  But, he is not and on to the Oakland As. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on December 01, 2018, 07:06:21 PM
I found myself cheering for Alabama late with the backup QB.  I'm now going to take a shower.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 01, 2018, 08:38:12 PM
The SEC Championship Game was quite entertaining.
About time. They have had blowouts almost every year. Strange.

If you are a Georgia fan you must be sick. Second straight game vs Bama the back up quarterback beats you in the same stadium.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUDish on December 01, 2018, 10:29:57 PM
Haskins could go #1 overall, he’s the best draft eligible QB and looks the part, definitely passes the eye test.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 02, 2018, 11:41:16 AM
Clemson vs Notre Dame in the Cotton Bowl Classic.

Alabama vs Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 11:44:42 AM
Bama in a romp.

Clemson with a squeaker v. ND.  ND is better than people think.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 02, 2018, 11:54:36 AM
Early lines from Vegas.

Alabama -14 Oklahoma
Clemson -11.5 Notre Dame
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 02, 2018, 12:13:00 PM
Isn't NCAA Football's motto "every game matters?"  Tell UCF their last 25 games have mattered.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 12:25:56 PM
Isn't NCAA Football's motto "every game matters?"  Tell UCF their last 25 games have mattered.

They don’t. They’re not good enough.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 02, 2018, 12:29:47 PM
They don’t. They’re not good enough.

Yeah so the reality is the motto should be “Very few games actually matter.”
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 12:31:05 PM
Yeah so the reality is the motto should be “Very few games actually matter.”

Well I’ve never heard of the motto and really don’t care. UCF isn’t one of the top four teams.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 02, 2018, 12:34:00 PM
Well I’ve never heard of the motto and really don’t care. UCF isn’t one of the top four teams.

Okay.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 12:46:13 PM
Yeah so the reality is the motto should be “Very few games actually matter.”

UCF's nonconference regular season opponents the past two seasons, with their records:
Georgia Tech (5-6)
Maryland (4-8)
Florida International (8-5)
South Carolina State (5-6)
North Carolina (2-9)
Florida Atlantic (5-7)
Pitt (7-6)

They've played four P5 opponents, all of whom were unranked and combined for a 18-29 record. 
They can't control the strength of their conference schedule, so if they think they deserve a place at the big boy table, they better start playing the big boys. Until then, they can stop whining and declaring themselves national champions.

Serious question ... which of the four playoff teams do you believe UCF is better than?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 02, 2018, 12:51:41 PM
UCF's nonconference regular season opponents the past two seasons, with their records:
Georgia Tech (5-6)
Maryland (4-8)
Florida International (8-5)
South Carolina State (5-6)
North Carolina (2-9)
Florida Atlantic (5-7)
Pitt (7-6)

They've played four P5 opponents, all of whom were unranked and combined for a 18-29 record. 
They can't control the strength of their conference schedule, so if they think they deserve a place at the big boy table, they better start playing the big boys. Until then, they can stop whining and declaring themselves national champions.

Serious question ... which of the four playoff teams do you believe UCF is better than?

That’s cool. When you have to schedule games 4 seasons ahead of time good luck deciding which teams to try to schedule. Not sure what teams would want to play UCF but maybe you’re right and they’re just not trying to schedule anyone. I believe they had 2 games cancelled due to hurricanes the last 2 seasons.

Glad the NCAA official record book acknowledges them as National Champs last season though. I’m glad UCF went all in on mocking the NCAA.

Point of the post was don’t come out with a motto of “every game matters” when you come up with your CFP and then have a team win 25 straight games and tell them not one of those games mattered.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 12:57:32 PM
Yes I’m sure all of college football has been shaken to its core because the Colley-Matrix listed UCF as national champions last year.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 02, 2018, 01:11:45 PM
I think It's cool that UCF claims a title. That has been going on for the past 100 years.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: CreightonWarrior on December 02, 2018, 01:12:25 PM
That’s cool. When you have to schedule games 4 seasons ahead of time good luck deciding which teams to try to schedule.
None of those 4 teams have been good in awhile so not a shocker that they weren't good this year. UCF correctly wasn't and won't be in any conversation.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 02, 2018, 01:16:44 PM
None of those 4 teams have been good in awhile so not a shocker that they weren't good this year. UCF correctly wasn't and won't be in any conversation.

Well, North Carolina was. They were a top 10 team, that played in the ACC Championship Game a couple of years ago.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on December 02, 2018, 01:23:07 PM
I think its unrealistic to think that any teams that project to be top 25-ish would be willing to schedule UCF in September. There just isn't any upside.

Also, loving the under on Bama-Oklahoma (79). I don't think that Saban lets it turn into a shootout. I think he slows his offense down in order to give Oklahoma fewer possessions.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 01:34:46 PM
That’s cool. When you have to schedule games 4 seasons ahead of time good luck deciding which teams to try to schedule. Not sure what teams would want to play UCF but maybe you’re right and they’re just not trying to schedule anyone. I believe they had 2 games cancelled due to hurricanes the last 2 seasons.

Glad the NCAA official record book acknowledges them as National Champs last season though. I’m glad UCF went all in on mocking the NCAA.

Point of the post was don’t come out with a motto of “every game matters” when you come up with your CFP and then have a team win 25 straight games and tell them not one of those games mattered.

Guess I'm confused about which excuse we're going with here. UCF's weak nonconference schedule is due to a) hurricanes, b) everybody good is afraid to play them* or c) it's hard to schedule good teams in advance*.

Speaking of things the NCAA says, when it created a playoff, its stated goal was to select the best four teams.
Do you believe UCF is one of the best four teams? If not, what's your point? Advocating for a system that rewards teams for playing weaker schedules?

* For comparison sake, Alabama in the Saban era has opened against: No. 9 Clemson in 2008; No. 7 Virginia Tech in 2009; No. 8 Michigan in 2012; No. 20 Wisconsin in 2015; No. 20 Southern Cal in 2016; and No. 3 Florida State in 2017.
But those teams (and Bama, I guess) are ducking UCF?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 02, 2018, 01:41:08 PM
Guess I'm confused about which excuse we're going with here. UCF's weak nonconference schedule is due to a) hurricanes, b) everybody good is afraid to play them* or c) it's hard to schedule good teams in advance*.

Speaking of things the NCAA says, when it created a playoff, its stated goal was to select the best four teams.
Do you believe UCF is one of the best four teams? If not, what's your point? Advocating for a system that rewards teams for playing weaker schedules?

* For comparison sake, Alabama in the Saban era has opened against: No. 9 Clemson in 2008; No. 7 Virginia Tech in 2009; No. 8 Michigan in 2012; No. 20 Wisconsin in 2015; No. 20 Southern Cal in 2016; and No. 3 Florida State in 2017.
But those teams (and Bama, I guess) are ducking UCF?

Yes, I’m certain a top team is just as willing to play UCF in the non conference as they are to play Alabama. Good comparison. UCF must just not be trying.

I’ll repeat the point for you a third time. The point is that they came out with the motto “Every game matters.” UCF has won 25 straight games, of which 0 have mattered.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 01:56:53 PM
Yes, I’m certain a top team is just as willing to play UCF in the non conference as they are to play Alabama. Good comparison. UCF must just not be trying.

The point you're missing is that good teams aren't afraid to play good teams out of conference, which seems to be the complaint from the 'UCF gets screwed' crowd. Again, if they want a seat at the table, schedule better.

Quote
I’ll repeat the point for you a third time. The point is that they came out with the motto “Every game matters.” UCF has won 25 straight games, of which 0 have mattered.

So we agree that UCF doesn't belong in the playoff. But you think they should get in anyhow because of a motto.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 02, 2018, 02:05:48 PM
The point you're missing is that good teams aren't afraid to play good teams out of conference, which seems to be the complaint from the 'UCF gets screwed' crowd. Again, if they want a seat at the table, schedule better.

So we agree that UCF doesn't belong in the playoff. But you think they should get in anyhow because of a motto.

Nope. I’m seeing the point. The point is entirely flawed. Scheduling Alabama or Auburn or Wisconsin is entirely different than scheduling UCF. Comparing the two is silly. First of all even if they scheduled games for the next year and had a pretty dang good idea that UCF would be a quality opponent when they actually played them there’s only downside for their opponent if it’s Bama or OU or O$U. If they win then they beat the AAC champions, which does nothing. If they lose then their season is over. Vs. scheduling a Bama vs. OU game. The loser can still bounce back, win their conference and go to the CFP after the winner wins their conference. And again, you schedule these games 4 years out. The chances of Clemson or Bama being a quality opponent 4 years from now is much, much, much higher than UCF being a quality opponent 4 years from now. The comparison is dumb and to suggest UCF can get a prime time non-con game easily if they want to is even dumber.

And I’m not arguing UCF should be in. I’m laughing at the fact the NCAA tried to sell that every game mattered when in reality there are like 10 games a year that determine who has a chance to win a national title.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on December 02, 2018, 02:13:00 PM
Nope. I’m seeing the point. The point is entirely flawed. Scheduling Alabama or Auburn or Wisconsin is entirely different than scheduling UCF. Comparing the two is silly. First of all even if they scheduled games for the next year and had a pretty dang good idea that UCF would be a quality opponent when they actually played them there’s only downside for their opponent if it’s Bama or OU or O$U. If they win then they beat the AAC champions, which does nothing. If they lose then their season is over. Vs. scheduling a Bama vs. OU game. The loser can still bounce back, win their conference and go to the CFP after the winner wins their conference. And again, you schedule these games 4 years out. The chances of Clemson or Bama being a quality opponent 4 years from now is much, much, much higher than UCF being a quality opponent 4 years from now. The comparison is dumb and to suggest UCF can get a prime time non-con game easily if they want to is even dumber.

And I’m not arguing UCF should be in. I’m laughing at the fact the NCAA tried to sell that every game mattered when in reality there are like 10 games a year that determine who has a chance to win a national title.

To add to this.  Let's say UCF did schedule Alabama.  Played at Alabama and lost 31-28.  Then went on to win every game they played by 20+ points. 

UCF would have zero chance at playing for the national title.  Now, if Ohio State schedules Alabama at a neutral site and loses 31-14, then goes on and wins each of their remaining games.  They are playing for a national title.

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 02:14:25 PM
Nope. I’m seeing the point. The point is entirely flawed. Scheduling Alabama or Auburn or Wisconsin is entirely different than scheduling UCF. Comparing the two is silly. First of all even if they scheduled games for the next year and had a pretty dang good idea that UCF would be a quality opponent when they actually played them there’s only downside for their opponent if it’s Bama or OU or O$U. If they win then they beat the AAC champions, which does nothing. If they lose then their season is over. Vs. scheduling a Bama vs. OU game. The loser can still bounce back, win their conference and go to the CFP after the winner wins their conference. And again, you schedule these games 4 years out. The chances of Clemson or Bama being a quality opponent 4 years from now is much, much, much higher than UCF being a quality opponent 4 years from now. The comparison is dumb and to suggest UCF can get a prime time non-con game easily if they want to is even dumber.

And I’m not arguing UCF should be in. I’m laughing at the fact the NCAA tried to sell that every game mattered when in reality there are like 10 games a year that determine who has a chance to win a national title.

The NCAA is saying nothing of the sort.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 02:15:23 PM
To add to this.  Let's say UCF did schedule Alabama.  Played at Alabama and lost 31-28.  Then went on to win every game they played by 20+ points. 

UCF would have zero chance at playing for the national title.  Now, if Ohio State schedules Alabama at a neutral site and loses 31-14, then goes on and wins each of their remaining games.  They are playing for a national title.




Yep.

UCF should drop to FCS if it wants to win a national title.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on December 02, 2018, 02:22:18 PM
Scheduling Alabama or Auburn or Wisconsin is entirely different than scheduling UCF... If they win then they beat the AAC champions, which does nothing. If they lose then their season is over. Vs. scheduling a Bama vs. OU game. The loser can still bounce back, win their conference and go to the CFP after the winner wins their conference. And again, you schedule these games 4 years out. The chances of Clemson or Bama being a quality opponent 4 years from now is much, much, much higher than UCF being a quality opponent 4 years from now.

I think this is generally right.  It can turn around, but you have to establish your brand for literally like ten years before anyone will see any upside to playing you. Boise St has played at least one and often two P5 schools every year since 2009.  Generally though, i think the teams you play have to be either on the road against teams that need an attendance/profile boost or neutral site games with a chance to draw a big crowd.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on December 02, 2018, 02:23:59 PM

Yep.

UCF should drop to FCS if it wants to win a national title.

My complaint is that it isn't a NCAA national title, it is a P5 title.  Wades is right that saying "all games matter" is incorrect. 

Personally, I would prefer if the NCAA did away with FCS and FBS and instead simply put the P5 in its own division, they cannot schedule people outside the P5, and they can choose whatever title system they want.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 02:24:51 PM
My complaint is that it isn't a NCAA national title, it is a P5 title.  Wades is right that saying "all games matter" is incorrect. 

Personally, I would prefer if the NCAA did away with FCS and FBS and instead simply put the P5 in its own division, they cannot schedule people outside the P5, and they can choose whatever title system they want.

I’m cool with that. Too much trash in FBS anyway.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 02:28:14 PM
Nope. I’m seeing the point. The point is entirely flawed. Scheduling Alabama or Auburn or Wisconsin is entirely different than scheduling UCF. Comparing the two is silly. First of all even if they scheduled games for the next year and had a pretty dang good idea that UCF would be a quality opponent when they actually played them there’s only downside for their opponent if it’s Bama or OU or O$U. If they win then they beat the AAC champions, which does nothing. If they lose then their season is over. Vs. scheduling a Bama vs. OU game. The loser can still bounce back, win their conference and go to the CFP after the winner wins their conference. And again, you schedule these games 4 years out. The chances of Clemson or Bama being a quality opponent 4 years from now is much, much, much higher than UCF being a quality opponent 4 years from now. The comparison is dumb and to suggest UCF can get a prime time non-con game easily if they want to is even dumber.

Your point would have more validity if P5 blueblood programs didn't schedule AAC opponents every year. But they do.
This year, Michigan played SMU; Texas played Tulsa; Ohio State played Tulane.
In 2017, Oklahoma played Tulane; Michigan played Cincy; Notre Dame played Temple.
In 2016, Penn State played Temple; Florida State played South Florida; Oklahoma played Houston; Ohio State played Tulsa.
In 2015, Florida played ECU; Penn State played Temple; Oklahoma played Tulsa.
In 2014, Oklhoma played Tulsa; Texas A&M played SMU; Ohio State played Cincy; and (gasp!) UCF played Penn State.

Why can these AAC teams get matchups with top-tier programs, but it's "entirely flawed" to think UCF can?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 02, 2018, 02:39:53 PM
Your point would have more validity if P5 blueblood programs didn't schedule AAC opponents every year. But they do.
This year, Michigan played SMU; Texas played Tulsa; Ohio State played Tulane.
In 2017, Oklahoma played Tulane; Michigan played Cincy; Notre Dame played Temple.
In 2016, Penn State played Temple; Florida State played South Florida; Oklahoma played Houston; Ohio State played Tulsa.
In 2015, Florida played ECU; Penn State played Temple; Oklahoma played Tulsa.
In 2014, Oklhoma played Tulsa; Texas A&M played SMU; Ohio State played Cincy; and (gasp!) UCF played Penn State.

Why can these AAC teams get matchups with top-tier programs, but it's "entirely flawed" to think UCF can?

When UCF would’ve scheduled UNC they would’ve been a better team than Michigan, Texas, Florida, etc.

UCF smoked Pitt who just played in a P5 conference title game yesterday.

Who should UCF schedule this offseason so that in 2023 they have a quality non-con opponent? Think Saban will jump all over their phone call if they make that call? I don’t.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: nyg on December 02, 2018, 02:43:22 PM
Make the playoffs a top 8 team system. 

First four games, 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5, the 1 thru 4 teams get to play games at home.  Following week, the games go to a neutral site bowl as it is now.

Eliminate the same old, same old discussion that has going on since four team playoff system implementated.     Just a matter of time before changes to be made. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 02:50:24 PM
Make the playoffs a top 8 team system. 

First four games, 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5, the 1 thru 4 teams get to play games at home.  Following week, the games go to a neutral site bowl as it is now.

Eliminate the same old, same old discussion that has going on since four team playoff system implementated.     Just a matter of time before changes to be made. 

Yeah round of 8 should have been this weekend. Losers can still play in a bowl too.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 02:53:56 PM
Make the playoffs a top 8 team system. 

First four games, 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5, the 1 thru 4 teams get to play games at home.  Following week, the games go to a neutral site bowl as it is now.

Eliminate the same old, same old discussion that has going on since four team playoff system implementated.     Just a matter of time before changes to be made.

I think it should go to eight, but it won't eliminate the discussion any more than the hoops tourney going from 32 to 64 to 68 has eliminated the discussion.
Instead of the 5th and 6th teams griping, it'll be the 9th and 10th. Some teams/fans are always going to complain about left out. And that's a good thing! The debate and drama and dumb arguments is a big part of why we love sports in the first place.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: tower912 on December 02, 2018, 03:12:59 PM
I'm good with 8.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: nyg on December 02, 2018, 03:14:09 PM
UCF at Alabama
Michigan at Clemson
Ohio St at Notre Dame
Georgia at Oklahoma

This is what a first week would look like if eight teams.
# 9 Washington and #10 Florida have no argument since both have three losses. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 03:21:51 PM
UCF at Alabama
Michigan at Clemson
Ohio St at Notre Dame
Georgia at Oklahoma

This is what a first week would look like if eight teams.
# 9 Washington and #10 Florida have no argument since both have three losses.

Georgia is arguing with two losses.
Ohio State argued last year with two losses.
Penn State argued in 2016 with two losses.
Teams will always argue (and again, that's not a bad thing).
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on December 02, 2018, 03:31:09 PM
I think it should go to eight, but it won't eliminate the discussion any more than the hoops tourney going from 32 to 64 to 68 has eliminated the discussion.
Instead of the 5th and 6th teams griping, it'll be the 9th and 10th. Some teams/fans are always going to complain about left out. And that's a good thing! The debate and drama and dumb arguments is a big part of why we love sports in the first place.

Strongly disagree.

With 8 teams, you are all but certain to include at least one or two that have multiple losses.  In college football, that's plenty.  If the 9th team is whining with 2 losses that they didn't get in, no one will shed any tears.  They just aren't credible to make the argument to get in.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 03:44:54 PM
Strongly disagree.

With 8 teams, you are all but certain to include at least one or two that have multiple losses.  In college football, that's plenty.  If the 9th team is whining with 2 losses that they didn't get in, no one will shed any tears.  They just aren't credible to make the argument to get in.

Some two-loss teams will get in. But any two-loss team that doesn't get in won't have a credible argument.
That logic evades me.

Under an 8-team system last year, a three-loss Auburn would have gotten in ahead of undefeated UCF, and two-loss Penn State, Miami and USC. But you're saying there wouldn't have been debate, right?

In 2016, three-loss Wisconsin would have been in before three-loss USC, Colorado, Florida State, Oklahoma State and Louisville. And there'd have been no debate? Six teams with the same number of losses, but no one would dispute the selection.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: WarriorDad on December 02, 2018, 03:49:30 PM
Some two-loss teams will get in. But any two-loss team that doesn't get in won't have a credible argument.
That logic evades me.

Under an 8-team system last year, a three-loss Auburn would have gotten in ahead of undefeated UCF, and two-loss Penn State, Miami and USC. But you're saying there wouldn't have been debate, right?

A 2 loss team from the SEC with a monster schedule will get in, especially if one of the losses is in the SEC title game.  A 2 loss Pac 12 team with an average schedule, or a 2 loss ACC team most likely won't.  In my view 4 was too few, 8 is plenty to decide a champion for both quantity and logistical reasons.  I would even think 6 and giving top two teams byes.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 02, 2018, 04:19:39 PM

Yep.

UCF should drop to FCS if it wants to win a national title.
No, money in the FCS level. Heck, Southern and Grambling bypass the FCS level playoff, to just play in the Bayou Classic.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 04:24:27 PM
Right.  So they are making their choice.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 02, 2018, 04:25:41 PM
I’m laughing at the fact the NCAA tried to sell that every game mattered when in reality there are like 10 games a year that determine who has a chance to win a national title.
The NCAA has zero to do with the CFP. The five "power 5" commissioner run big time college football. You ever see an NCAA ad on TV? When it shows all these NCAA sports, the football part is ND State winning in the FCS level title. You don't see Bama or Clemson.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 02, 2018, 04:30:57 PM
2018-19 Bowl Schedule
https://fbschedules.com/college-football-bowl-schedule/
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on December 02, 2018, 04:32:28 PM
No, money in the FCS level. Heck, Southern and Grambling bypass the FCS level playoff, to just play in the Bayou Classic.

There is no money in the FBS for them either.  Many of the universities in the AAC or losing close to $30M a year on athletics because of football, with the prayer that the P5 will include them in a spit-off from the rest of the FBS to form their own 6-league division in college athletics and then split proceeds more evenly amongst them.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 04:33:35 PM
@BruceFeldmanCFB
Since the end of the 2009 season this’ll be the third time Miami’s faced Wisconsin in a bowl game. That’ll be two more times than they’ve played fellow ACC member Wake Forest in that stretch.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 04:34:29 PM
There is no money in the FBS for them either.  Many of the universities in the AAC or losing close to $30M a year on athletics because of football, with the prayer that the P5 will include them in a spit-off from the rest of the FBS to form their own 6-league division in college athletics and then split proceeds more evenly amongst them.


There won't be any money there either.  The fan interest in college football is all at the very top. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on December 02, 2018, 04:37:54 PM

There won't be any money there either.  The fan interest in college football is all at the very top.

I agree.  It's a fools errand by these universities.  In my opinion they should either go to the FCS or drop football entirely.  From an alumni and donation standpoint, the FCS makes more sense.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 02, 2018, 04:41:14 PM
All the money is from ESPN & FOX playing the Big Ten, ACC, Big 12, SEC and PAC-12.

That why I feel lucky as a Marquette fan that FOX was starting a new network and needed to start with live games. The Big East got $500 million over 12 years. Heck, the AAC does have some good football teams over the past 6 years of that league. UCF, USF, Houston, Navy & Temple stick out to me. The AAC TV deal with football gets less than the Big East. Just think about that. Wow.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 04:43:11 PM
I agree.  It's a fools errand by these universities.  In my opinion they should either go to the FCS or drop football entirely.  From an alumni and donation standpoint, the FCS makes more sense.

But here's why they don't:

UCF athletics director Danny White keeps racking up big wins.
The Knights set a fundraising record, earning $13.4 million in cash-gift revenues during the 2017-18 fiscal year that just wrapped up in June.
The total surpassed last year’s record-setting fundraising mark by $2.5 million.
To put the surge in perspective, UCF raised $5.2 million during the 2011-12 academic year


https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/sports-editor-blog/os-sp-ucf-athletics-fundraising-record-20180720-story.html

In other words, "There's gold up in them thar hills!" And it's not just TV revenue, either.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 04:54:01 PM
I've said it before, but athletics is best viewed as a marketing expense at the D1 level.  It's an admissions expense at the lower levels.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on December 02, 2018, 05:03:21 PM
But here's why they don't:

UCF athletics director Danny White keeps racking up big wins.
The Knights set a fundraising record, earning $13.4 million in cash-gift revenues during the 2017-18 fiscal year that just wrapped up in June.
The total surpassed last year’s record-setting fundraising mark by $2.5 million.
To put the surge in perspective, UCF raised $5.2 million during the 2011-12 academic year


https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/sports-editor-blog/os-sp-ucf-athletics-fundraising-record-20180720-story.html

In other words, "There's gold up in them thar hills!" And it's not just TV revenue, either.

The increases in fundraising a largely affected by the fact that UCF is a newer school, with a young alumni base that is just coming into the age ranges where significant donations would be expected. 

Maybe UCF could use some of that additional revenue to stop charging their 60,000 students $350 a year in an athletics fee.  50% of UCF's revenue is coming from student fees and/or allotments from the general university budget.  If it wasn't for those two elements they'd be losing $30M a year on football just like the other AAC members.

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 05:09:55 PM
The increases in fundraising a largely affected by the fact that UCF is a newer school, with a young alumni base that is just coming into the age ranges where significant donations would be expected. 

Maybe UCF could use some of that additional revenue to stop charging their 60,000 students $350 a year in an athletics fee.  50% of UCF's revenue is coming from student fees and/or allotments from the general university budget.  If it wasn't for those two elements they'd be losing $30M a year on football just like the other AAC members.

Newer is all relative, but UCF is 55 years old.
And it's nuts to think that record donations to the athletic fund coming immediately after unprecedented success on the football field is a mere coincidence.
In fact, there's a proven link between athletic success and donations. Loyola, for example, says its donations were up 660 percent after their Final Four run.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on December 02, 2018, 05:20:38 PM
Newer is all relative, but UCF is 55 years old.
And it's nuts to think that record donations to the athletic fund coming immediately after unprecedented success on the football field is a mere coincidence.
In fact, there's a proven link between athletic success and donations. Loyola, for example, says its donations were up 660 percent after their Final Four run.

Its just not as simple as you are claiming it is. 

UCF just recently started a new capital campaign with a goal of $500M in donations.  For these campaigns, usually about half of it is secured before announcing the campaign and setting the goal (so they can be assured of reaching it).  They then announce the donations with delays, to keep steady publicity to help secure more donations. 

Much of these donations to athletics were likely secured long before their undefeated season. 

Now, the increase in Loyola isn't simply a result of success.  If they continue to see success, you will see massive decreases in donations that trend back down toward average year-year levels. What success does, is allows a temporary window to go and ask/collect more revenue.  Long term though, there is no increase in overall revenue that correlates with success, because their is only so much money in the donor pool and athletics isn't a cause that most of that pool cares about.

The number one reason people donate is because they believe in some kind of mission/cause and the University has a project that is consistent with that cause.

And yes, being 55 years old, their first graduates are now in their 70's.  Post-retirement ages, and donations left at death, are ripe fruit for big donations, each year now that pool of potential donors is growing exponentially for UCF.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 05:29:23 PM
Its just not as simple as you are claiming it is. 

So then, are general donations to UCF up as significantly as those to the athletic fund? Should be if it's not athletic success driving this, right?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on December 02, 2018, 06:08:51 PM
So then, are general donations to UCF up as significantly as those to the athletic fund? Should be if it's not athletic success driving this, right?

And they are, they brought in a record setting $81M last year, including their largest donation ($10.25M) ever (for a business school).
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 06:12:39 PM
But athletic success is part of that equation.  It makes people feel good about the school.  It's a point of pride. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 02, 2018, 07:03:18 PM
And they are, they brought in a record setting $81M last year, including their largest donation ($10.25M) ever (for a business school).

How does that compare to 2012?

Actually, that largest donation you mention came from a couple who described themselves as "ardent UCF Knights football fans" and they earmarked a chunk of that money specifically for the football program.  And the photo the university put out with the announcement of the donation has them posing with a football jersey.
So probably football had a part in it.

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/education/school-zone/os-ucf-donation-alumni-20180907-story,amp.html
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 02, 2018, 08:17:04 PM
Usually the largest donors to an institution give to multiple parts of the institution.  So this doesn't surprise me in the least.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on December 02, 2018, 10:35:19 PM
How does that compare to 2012?

Actually, that largest donation you mention came from a couple who described themselves as "ardent UCF Knights football fans" and they earmarked a chunk of that money specifically for the football program.  And the photo the university put out with the announcement of the donation has them posing with a football jersey.
So probably football had a part in it.

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/education/school-zone/os-ucf-donation-alumni-20180907-story,amp.html

$12.5M in 2012.  So approximately a 7-fold increase since then in charitable giving.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 03, 2018, 08:23:34 AM
A lot of interesting points and debates here the last couple of days. I'll throw out my 8 cents ...

1. The 4 most deserving teams were selected.

2. If it was possible to feel less than 0% sorry for Ohio State, that's what I'd feel. Want to make the final 4? Don't lose to mediocre-at-best Purdue (2018) and Iowa (2017) teams. You and only you controlled your fate. You and only you cost yourself playoff bids. Period. Alabama didn't lose to Vanderbilt, Clemson didn't lose to Wake Forest, Oklahoma didn't lose to Texas Tech, and Notre Dame didn't lose to Florida State. When you lose by 700 points to Purdue, there are consequences.

3. I also don't feel sorry for UCF. That's life in the big city. If they want to declare themselves national champions, cool. They can declare themselves Miss Universe for all I care.

4. An 8-team playoff would be the best situation. You have the champion of each P5 conference and 3 at-large teams, the top 4 seeds host the quarterfinals, and the rest of the schedule is the same as now. Yes, the #9 team will beyotch, but who cares? If you made it a 64-team field, the #65 team would beyotch.

5. The main problem with this is that we already are asking college kids to play an awful lot of games. Maybe you go back to an 11-game regular season (which was the norm until about 20 years ago) or eliminate conference title games (which now serve as de-facto play-in games). Either move would reduce schools' financial takes, though, so I imagine both would be resisted. So they would talk a good game about caring most about the athlete-students' well-being, but that would be another lie.

6. It's fun to talk about this stuff, but any 8-team playoff is many, many, many years away. If it ever happens.

7. I never watch meaningless bowl games -- not even one second of any of them -- but I do watch these playoffs, and I think I'm a fairly typical "casual college football fan."

8. I am now officially a Clemson fan. Go Tigers! Crush ND!
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 03, 2018, 08:27:08 AM
Regarding #5,  FCS, D2 and D3 teams that advance far enough are already playing as many games as you are suggesting for FBS schools.  In the case of D2 and D3, they are doing so all before Christmas as well. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 03, 2018, 08:32:20 AM
Regarding #5,  FCS, D2 and D3 teams that advance far enough are already playing as many games as you are suggesting for FBS schools.  In the case of D2 and D3, they are doing so all before Christmas as well.

Good point, Sultan. I guess folks at those schools don't really care about the health of their athlete-students either!
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 03, 2018, 09:28:48 AM
$12.5M in 2012.  So approximately a 7-fold increase since then in charitable giving.

I don't think you're doing an apples to apples comparison.
I presume you're getting the $12.5 million from the school's FY2012 financial report (let me know if that's wrong).
Looking at the same line item in the FY2017 report, the figure is $29.9 million ... well short of a 7-fold increase, and a lesser growth rate than athletic department giving.
Also, if you read the report, it appears "The UCF Athletics Association, Inc." is among the "component units" included in the overall statement, so that the total donations includes donations to the athletic departments. Again, if I'm mistaken about that, let me know.
But regardless, according to the financial reports at least, giving to the general university definitely has not increased 7-fold, and has not grown at a rate faster than the athletic department.

Lastly, I'll just drop this here and won't derail this thread any further. It's a 10-year study of the link between contributions and athletic success at D-1 schools. TL;DR version: Schools with athletic success see more than twice the contributions as schools without.

The results show a significant statistical difference of more than double in the percent increase of overall
private  contributions  for  institutions  with  athletics  success  compared  with  all  higher  education  institutions.  Furthermore, 
a  small  statistical  difference  was  found  for  the  athletics  success  in  private  institutions  compared  with  public  institutions 
that experienced similar athletics success. No difference was found by region, for history of athletics success, or between
basketball or football athletics success for those institutions experiencing athletics success. The study concluded that there
are significant implications for overall private financial support for institutions that experience athletics success, especially
those with a private affiliation.


https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2158244015611186

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: forgetful on December 03, 2018, 10:11:29 AM
I don't think you're doing an apples to apples comparison.
I presume you're getting the $12.5 million from the school's FY2012 financial report (let me know if that's wrong).
Looking at the same line item in the FY2017 report, the figure is $29.9 million ... well short of a 7-fold increase, and a lesser growth rate than athletic department giving.
Also, if you read the report, it appears "The UCF Athletics Association, Inc." is among the "component units" included in the overall statement, so that the total donations includes donations to the athletic departments. Again, if I'm mistaken about that, let me know.
But regardless, according to the financial reports at least, giving to the general university definitely has not increased 7-fold, and has not grown at a rate faster than the athletic department.

Lastly, I'll just drop this here and won't derail this thread any further. It's a 10-year study of the link between contributions and athletic success at D-1 schools. TL;DR version: Schools with athletic success see more than twice the contributions as schools without.

The results show a significant statistical difference of more than double in the percent increase of overall
private  contributions  for  institutions  with  athletics  success  compared  with  all  higher  education  institutions.  Furthermore, 
a  small  statistical  difference  was  found  for  the  athletics  success  in  private  institutions  compared  with  public  institutions 
that experienced similar athletics success. No difference was found by region, for history of athletics success, or between
basketball or football athletics success for those institutions experiencing athletics success. The study concluded that there
are significant implications for overall private financial support for institutions that experience athletics success, especially
those with a private affiliation.


https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2158244015611186

The $12.5M was from the UCF Foundation annual report.  The amount in the 2017 Foundation report is $63M. The $81M is probably fiscal year 2018.

I'm aware of that paper and others, and reiterate that it isn't as simple as athletic success.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 03, 2018, 12:44:03 PM


7. I never watch meaningless bowl games -- not even one second of any of them -- but I do watch these playoffs, and I think I'm a fairly typical "casual college football fan."


If you are only watching 3 games. Semi & finals, I'm not sure casual fan is the correct term. So, you will not watch the Rose, Peach, Fiesta or Sugar Bowls?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on December 04, 2018, 07:29:49 AM
Urban retiring after Rose bowl due to brain cyst

No way he ends up somewhere else in a couple years, right?

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 04, 2018, 07:46:42 AM
Urban retiring after Rose bowl due to brain cyst

No way he ends up somewhere else in a couple years, right?


Probably.  Can't seem to handle the job physically but doesn't want to do anything else.

EDIT:  So USC in about a year?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on December 04, 2018, 08:08:15 AM

Probably.  Can't seem to handle the job physically but doesn't want to do anything else.

EDIT:  So USC in about a year?

Or Notre Dame
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 04, 2018, 08:11:19 AM
Is Brian Kelly going somewhere?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on December 04, 2018, 10:58:47 AM
Is Brian Kelly going somewhere?

Not this year, at least
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on December 04, 2018, 03:51:34 PM

Probably.  Can't seem to handle the job physically but doesn't want to do anything else.

EDIT:  So USC in about a year?

I don't think so - Urban Meyer refuses to subject himself to oversight of any kind. USC's Helton hire shows how much power the athletic department holds there. Notre Dame is even worse. I would bet on an SEC school or southern ACC/B12 school desperate to win and willing to make Meyer the king of his own castle.  Two years is pretty far out to look, but I would put my order of likelihood as (1) FSU, (2)Oklahoma State, (3) Tennessee, (4) Oklahoma.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 04, 2018, 03:57:47 PM
I don't think so - Urban Meyer refuses to subject himself to oversight of any kind. USC's Helton hire shows how much power the athletic department holds there. Notre Dame is even worse. I would bet on an SEC school or southern ACC/B12 school desperate to win and willing to make Meyer the king of his own castle.  Two years is pretty far out to look, but I would put my order of likelihood as (1) FSU, (2)Oklahoma State, (3) Tennessee, (4) Oklahoma.


Well I have a feeling that Swann might be run out of USC after next year too which could open the door for him.

But the idea of him at FSU coaching against his former assistant at Florida would be interesting.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on December 04, 2018, 04:09:56 PM

Well I have a feeling that Swann might be run out of USC after next year too which could open the door for him.

But the idea of him at FSU coaching against his former assistant at Florida would be interesting.

That's a good point. If USC goes bowlless another year or two, I could see them pining for the wild west Pete Carroll days and seeing Meyer as their white knight.  My thought was that FSU would back the money truck up for Urban - I can only imagine the uncomfortable dynamic that will be brewing with their donors if Taggart doesn't start winning.  And they also let Bowden get away with straight up killing a kid, so its not like they'll care about a couple of deleted text messages. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on December 04, 2018, 10:33:15 PM
As I’ve mentioned, going to school in OH, I unfortunately have many friends that are ardent OSU fans. Fortunately, most of them are refreshingly realistic about Urban, and can acknowledge his myriad flaws. They saw this coming and are kind of relieved he’s gone.

HOWEVER, then you have my old roommate’s wife. She’s not the diehard sleep in a jersey fan, but she’s a vocal one. She posted an IG praising Urban being “a complete class act”, “a committed family man”, and “an ADMIRABLE man of god”. You can’t make it up.  Can’t fathom being that much of a naive Pollyanna
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 05, 2018, 11:18:39 AM
Or Notre Dame


https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/12/4/18125398/urban-meyer-retiring-ohio-state-florida
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: StillAWarrior on December 05, 2018, 11:27:24 AM

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/12/4/18125398/urban-meyer-retiring-ohio-state-florida

That was a pretty good read.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 05, 2018, 11:35:30 AM
If you are only watching 3 games. Semi & finals, I'm not sure casual fan is the correct term. So, you will not watch the Rose, Peach, Fiesta or Sugar Bowls?

I will be surprised if I watch one second of those exhibition games.

So you're probably right that, at least when it comes to college football, I'm a "sub-casual fan."

My point was that many of those who have little interest in exhibition football games -- which basically is what 37 of the 40 bowl games are -- will tune in to games that actually matter.

And of course I'm not talking about fans of teams. I acknowledge that Troy fans are probably totally geeked for the Dollar General Bowl.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 05, 2018, 11:38:25 AM
That was a pretty good read.


He's a REALLY good writer.  Good thing I don't have to go incognito to steal his stuff.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on December 08, 2018, 08:27:04 AM
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25479055/florida-gators-ad-scott-stricklin-welcome-2-1-series-vs-ucf-knights

UCF apparently has some options
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: tower912 on December 08, 2018, 08:29:04 AM
I will only watch a college bowl game if there is not a decent college basketball game on.    Or, for that matter, a Hallmark Christmas movie.   
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 08, 2018, 09:42:03 AM
I really don't pay much attention to non-Marquette college basketball until after football season ends.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Herman Cain on December 18, 2018, 04:48:30 PM
I missed the announcement that Les Miles was named Head Coach at Kansas. Looks like he is off to a good start in recruiting.
  https://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/big-12/university-of-kansas/article223266440.html
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 19, 2018, 09:37:34 AM
Ya, you missed it. I watched the press conference! I love Les.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 19, 2018, 05:01:23 PM
So, today's National Signing Day, and the SEC has the top four recruiting classes and nine of the top 20 (compared to three Big 10, two ACC, three Pac 12 and two Big 12).
So, what makes other conferences think expansion would lessen SEC domination of the playoff? Unless they hope to rig it to give conference winners an automatic bid.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 19, 2018, 10:32:56 PM
Shh, everybody, I'm trying to concentrate on the DXL Frisco Bowl.

Because when San Diego State and Ohio get together, you can just throw away the record book.

Wait ... the game is over? Never mind.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 20, 2018, 08:06:53 AM
So, today's National Signing Day, and the SEC has the top four recruiting classes and nine of the top 20 (compared to three Big 10, two ACC, three Pac 12 and two Big 12).
So, what makes other conferences think expansion would lessen SEC domination of the playoff? Unless they hope to rig it to give conference winners an automatic bid.


I am reasonably certain that an expansion of the playoffs would guaranty a representative from each of the conferences.  (Not necessarily the conference champion though.)
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 20, 2018, 09:04:22 AM
NC's top QB and top OL had verbally committed to Florida State and NC State, respectively. Both changed their mind and signed with UNC, which just recently changed coaches (re-hiring Mack Brown after he had left for Texas years ago).

Just a reminder that while verbal commitments are wonderful, celebration should be kept at a minimum until the name is on the dotted line.

Maybe this happens more in football than basketball? I have no idea.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: RJax55 on December 20, 2018, 09:13:05 AM
NC's top QB and top OL had verbally committed to Florida State and NC State, respectively. Both changed their mind and signed with UNC, which just recently changed coaches (re-hiring Mack Brown after he had left for Texas years ago).

Just a reminder that while verbal commitments are wonderful, celebration should be kept at a minimum until the name is on the dotted line.

Maybe this happens more in football than basketball? I have no idea.

Happens all the time in college football. The basketball signing period is extremely tame in comparison.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 20, 2018, 09:23:51 AM

I am reasonably certain that an expansion of the playoffs would guaranty a representative from each of the conferences.  (Not necessarily the conference champion though.)

Maybe.
If the selection committee's stated goal continues to be "the best teams," there won't be a rep from each conference. There'd be no Pac 12 team this year, since none ranked in the top 8.
If the other conferences wave the white flag, admit they can't compete with the SEC and institute a system that guarantees it, then yes, it'll guarantee it.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 20, 2018, 09:42:50 AM
Maybe.
If the selection committee's stated goal continues to be "the best teams," there won't be a rep from each conference. There'd be no Pac 12 team this year, since none ranked in the top 8.
If the other conferences wave the white flag, admit they can't compete with the SEC and institute a system that guarantees it, then yes, it'll guarantee it.

It would be hard to believe that an expansion to 8 wouldn't mandate inclusion of the champion from each P5 conference, because every comment from every league commissioner I have seen has advocated that. But stranger things have happened and maybe that will end up not being the case.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 20, 2018, 09:45:37 AM
I mean, the NCAA basketball tournament doesn't include the 68 best teams.  I wouldn't think it would be a great tragedy if the expanded playoffs included someone from every P5 conference. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 20, 2018, 10:26:33 AM
I mean, the NCAA basketball tournament doesn't include the 68 best teams.  I wouldn't think it would be a great tragedy if the expanded playoffs included someone from every P5 conference.

I'm not sure 3 at-large bids vs 36 at-large bids is an apples-to-apples comparison, but regardless, nobody is suggesting a great tragedy here.
But also, I don't believe the NCAA tournament committee has declared its goal to be assembling the "best 68 teams." The CFB committee's stated goal, on the other hand, is "to choose the four best teams in the nation at the end of the regular season."
So, if you're going to change the criteria to require a team from each P5 conference, you'll necessarily have to shift the mandate away from choosing "the best" teams.  Which is fine ... they should just call it what it  is.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on December 20, 2018, 11:16:51 AM
The realities of playing a conference schedule would basically net out to representatives from each of the P5 conferences anyway.  While my personal "eye test" tells me the SEC has 4 of the best 8 teams in the country most seasons, over the course of a conference sched, those teams beat up on each other too much for one conference to ever get more than 3 teams in the top 8 of any ranking system.  So even if we reserve a spot for each of the P5 schools and a Group of 5 team, I don't think the end result will ever be a team ranked higher than 6 or 7 in the AP getting snubbed.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 20, 2018, 05:13:30 PM
This is an interesting conversation but I gotta run.

Big party at the house to watch the Bad Boy Mowers Gasparilla Bowl.

It's been a tradition in the MU82 family for decades!
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 22, 2018, 01:33:40 PM
Not too many people I feel less sorry for than college football coaches who might not get incentive bonuses because one or two of their players skip bowl games to avoid injury.

https://www.apnews.com/d0184d9d55124c068a29afdc673843fd

The lowest paid coach in this article makes nearly $2 million annually. The unpaid players, whose lives the coaches have controlled in entirety for years, are skipping exhibition games so they can protect their chance to earn millions, too.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: dgies9156 on December 25, 2018, 07:44:17 AM
This is an interesting conversation but I gotta run.

Big party at the house to watch the Bad Boy Mowers Gasparilla Bowl.

It's been a tradition in the MU82 family for decades!

You have that tradition too?

Christmas would not be Christmas if it were not for the Bad Boy Mowers Gasparilla Bowl. I'll bet even Joseph and Mary were watching the Bad Boy Mowers Gasparilla Bowl on the first Christmas! It's why there was no room at the inn!

Merry Christmas Scoopers!
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: real chili 83 on December 25, 2018, 08:27:40 AM
ND sucks.

Merry Christmas!
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on December 26, 2018, 02:59:14 PM
What are ya'll thoughts on the Servpro First Responder Bowl announcing its not going to play in the Servpro First Responder Bowl?  Personally, I think that if I were a member of Servpro First Responder Bowl's team, and had spent all year in the weight room and on the practice field with Servpro First Responder Bowl, I'd be pissed. What a selfish decision, regardless of the money or safety at play for Servpro First Responder Bowl. I'd like to see Servpro First Responder Bowl tell Servpro First Responder Bowl's teammates that the Servpro First Responder Bowl doesn't matter and that the season is over.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Chili on December 27, 2018, 12:13:29 AM
What are ya'll thoughts on the Servpro First Responder Bowl announcing its not going to play in the Servpro First Responder Bowl?  Personally, I think that if I were a member of Servpro First Responder Bowl's team, and had spent all year in the weight room and on the practice field with Servpro First Responder Bowl, I'd be pissed. What a selfish decision, regardless of the money or safety at play for Servpro First Responder Bowl. I'd like to see Servpro First Responder Bowl tell Servpro First Responder Bowl's teammates that the Servpro First Responder Bowl doesn't matter and that the season is over.

It doesn't matter - it's just an exhibition game. All bowl games are worthless outside of the 2 semi's and the national championship.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on December 27, 2018, 12:35:59 AM
It doesn't matter - it's just an exhibition game. All bowl games are worthless outside of the 2 semi's and the national championship.

Not all, but many.  Maybe I am bias from going to so many Rose bowls, but that is a special game
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 27, 2018, 07:51:37 AM
Not all, but many.  Maybe I am bias from going to so many Rose Bowls, but that is a special game
I agree. True football fans agree as well. Rose, Sugar, Sun, Holiday, Peach, etc. It's these small games that some are giving others a bad name. Even, the small ones gets a solid rating.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: tower912 on December 27, 2018, 08:19:37 AM
What are ya'll thoughts on the Servpro First Responder Bowl announcing its not going to play in the Servpro First Responder Bowl?  Personally, I think that if I were a member of Servpro First Responder Bowl's team, and had spent all year in the weight room and on the practice field with Servpro First Responder Bowl, I'd be pissed. What a selfish decision, regardless of the money or safety at play for Servpro First Responder Bowl. I'd like to see Servpro First Responder Bowl tell Servpro First Responder Bowl's teammates that the Servpro First Responder Bowl doesn't matter and that the season is over.

It shows how little I follow it that I only figured out what this post was about this morning.   Exhibition game called due to weather.   
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 27, 2018, 12:11:30 PM
It doesn't matter - it's just an exhibition game. All bowl games are worthless outside of the 2 semi's and the national championship.

Did you feel the same about MU's NIT games last year?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Chili on December 27, 2018, 06:22:20 PM
Did you feel the same about MU's NIT games last year?

For the most part yes. Bowl Games exist just to exploit athletes and line the pockets of the bowl board (and subsequent employees) via enthusiastic alumni & shaking down universities.

I think any player who has a pro prospect should sit out for sure rather than risk your career in anything that's not playoff related (non championship bowls only - FCS & FBS tournament play).

The NIT is at least something schools make some money from but I do agree it's really just for fun and doesn't mean anything.

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 27, 2018, 06:28:53 PM
Did you feel the same about MU's NIT games last year?

I wouldn't watch any of these exhibition games, but I am not a fan of any of the teams playing in them. I certainly can understand why a school's fans would watch the Poulin Weed-Eater Beef O Brady's Masengill Disposable Bowl, no matter how meaningless it might be. I mean, those same fans like to watch the spring intrasquad game.

While I watched MU's NIT games and wanted us to win, it really didn't matter much to me that we lost when we did. It's a tournament of also-rans, a way to get a little more run for the guys. I'd be surprised if many people who weren't fans of MU or our opponents watched any of our NIT games for more than 12 seconds.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jsglow on December 27, 2018, 07:09:18 PM
I wouldn't watch any of these exhibition games, but I am not a fan of any of the teams playing in them. I certainly can understand why a school's fans would watch the Poulin Weed-Eater Beef O Brady's Masengill Disposable Bowl, no matter how meaningless it might be. I mean, those same fans like to watch the spring intrasquad game.

While I watched MU's NIT games and wanted us to win, it really didn't matter much to me that we lost when we did. It's a tournament of also-rans, a way to get a little more run for the guys. I'd be surprised if many people who weren't fans of MU or our opponents watched any of our NIT games for more than 12 seconds.

They may not have watched for 12 seconds but chick and I sure had a helluva good time attending all 3.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on December 27, 2018, 07:28:28 PM
Did you feel the same about MU's NIT games last year?

I sure did and it helped MU and their youth play in postseason games where you lose and go home.  The same can be said for some of these college football teams that springboard to the next season.  In my view it depends on how mature the team is, do they benefit from this type of game or are the experi need and it doesn’t matter.

As far as sitting out, I get why they do it, but is a bowl game in late December a lesser game than playing a cupcake in week 2 that they will beat by 50?  In terms of quality, no.  The onl difference is timing, which does matter because of pro prospects coming up next.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 27, 2018, 07:50:32 PM
Ok. Will try to get this back on track.
Dexter Lawrence is one of three Clemson players who are suspended for the game vs Notre Dame after drug tests revealed trace amounts of ostarine, an anabolic performance-enhancing substance utilized primarily to generate lean muscle.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 27, 2018, 10:08:42 PM
They may not have watched for 12 seconds but chick and I sure had a helluva good time attending all 3.

If I lived nearby, I'd have joined you and cheered for our Warriors right along with you, glow. Just as I would attend Marquette Madness and cheered there, too.

Ok. Will try to get this back on track.
Dexter Lawrence is one of three Clemson players who are suspended for the game vs Notre Dame after drug tests revealed trace amounts of ostarine, an anabolic performance-enhancing substance utilized primarily to generate lean muscle.

As somebody whose only favorite college football team is whichever team is playing ND in a given week, this is disappointing. I want Clemson to win, and would prefer they win by 802 points or so. And they still might.

As for Lawrence, them's the breaks. This happens every year to a few athletes who say, "I had no idea." Then they usually vow to make triple-sure they don't "accidentally" take the wrong supplements in the future. Mmm-hmm. In the end, though, this won't cost him one penny in the future; and given that he now has no chance to suffer a career-ending injury in the game, it actually could make him lots of pennies.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jsglow on December 28, 2018, 08:40:32 AM
You know what?  Bucky actually looked pretty damn good last night.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 28, 2018, 09:00:40 AM
You know what?  Bucky actually looked pretty damn good last night.

Best 7-5 team in the country?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 28, 2018, 09:11:32 AM
You know what?  Bucky actually looked pretty damn good last night.


Miami has been overrated all year.  Richt has one more year or he's going to be run out of there.  They have lost 10 of their last 16 stretching back to last year.  And the thing is, Miami really isn't that great of a program.  They haven't had a season with less than three losses for 15 years.  (Since joining the ACC.) 

And if you can't stop the run v. Wisconsin, they are going to look good.  B10 teams know this and forced UW to throw with usually terrible results for UW.  Miami couldn't do that.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jsglow on December 28, 2018, 10:04:43 AM
I'm thinking that growth on the defense side of the ball and the change at QB makes a difference.  They had looked terrible against Minny. That was back to Wisconsin football last night. I'll venture that they'll win 10 next year.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 28, 2018, 12:12:03 PM
Why will there be a change at QB?  Even though it seems like Hornibrook as been throwing INTs since the beginning of the decade, he's only a junior.

But you are correct about the defense.  Took a big step back this year.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 28, 2018, 12:33:47 PM
I have both dogs covering but both favorites winning tomorrow.  I think Bama by 10 and Clemson by 6.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 28, 2018, 01:17:52 PM
I got Auburn -4. Iowa State +5 and Syracuse +7, today. That Syracuse number I locked in weeks ago. Syracuse is now -3.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 28, 2018, 01:39:33 PM
For the most part yes. Bowl Games exist just to exploit athletes and line the pockets of the bowl board (and subsequent employees) via enthusiastic alumni & shaking down universities.

I think any player who has a pro prospect should sit out for sure rather than risk your career in anything that's not playoff related (non championship bowls only - FCS & FBS tournament play).

The NIT is at least something schools make some money from but I do agree it's really just for fun and doesn't mean anything.

You're certainly free to that take, and I'm not trying to dissuade you from it, but if you're going to take a principled stand on the exploitation of college athletes, why only for certain bowl games? Npn-athletes line their pockets via the efforts of athletes all season long, and not just in football. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jsglow on December 28, 2018, 03:55:27 PM
Why will there be a change at QB?  Even though it seems like Hornibrook as been throwing INTs since the beginning of the decade, he's only a junior.

But you are correct about the defense.  Took a big step back this year.

Does this new kid beat him out?  I think maybe.  Hornibrook basically sucks.  I'd make it a competition in the Spring.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: dgies9156 on December 28, 2018, 09:34:32 PM
Did you feel the same about MU's NIT games last year?

Absolutely.

I said at the time I thought we should stay home. The NIT is the Not Invited Tournament. I recognize Brother Glow and Sister Chick had a great time there and we won a few games. But these games had little meaning.

In the case of college bowls, most are meaningless. I'd favor an eight team tournament with the champions of the Power Five conferences getting an automatic bye. The last three spots would be at-large. It would mean another battery of bowls would get hyper-treatment. Maybe the Bad Boy Mower Gasperilla Bowl could become a first rounder for the national championship.

Everything else -- garbage. If I was a top collegian wanting to play in the NFL the last thing I would want would be to risk injury in a meaningless, nonsensical bowl in Shreveport, LA, or a cold Yankee Stadium that's 60 percent empty. Unless, someone provided me with a $50 million insurance policy.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 28, 2018, 09:45:13 PM
Absolutely.

I said at the time I thought we should stay home. The NIT is the Not Invited Tournament. I recognize Brother Glow and Sister Chick had a great time there and we won a few games. But these games had little meaning.

I think it was meaningful.  The head coach certainly thinks so.

But if Rowsey wanted to skip it to avoid injury, I would have been fine with it.  Even though the chances of injury in basketball are much less than in football.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 28, 2018, 10:38:09 PM
Absolutely.

I said at the time I thought we should stay home. The NIT is the Not Invited Tournament. I recognize Brother Glow and Sister Chick had a great time there and we won a few games. But these games had little meaning.

In the case of college bowls, most are meaningless. I'd favor an eight team tournament with the champions of the Power Five conferences getting an automatic bye. The last three spots would be at-large. It would mean another battery of bowls would get hyper-treatment. Maybe the Bad Boy Mower Gasperilla Bowl could become a first rounder for the national championship.

Everything else -- garbage. If I was a top collegian wanting to play in the NFL the last thing I would want would be to risk injury in a meaningless, nonsensical bowl in Shreveport, LA, or a cold Yankee Stadium that's 60 percent empty. Unless, someone provided me with a $50 million insurance policy.

I agree with every word of this about the bowl games. And I guess I agree about the NIT, too, but as a Marquette fan I did enjoy watching our lads (even if it was a little painful to watch an obviously hobbled Sam).

I didn't watch a single minute of any NIT game in which MU didn't play, and I didn't watch a single second of any bowl games outside of the actual playoff games.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: dgies9156 on December 29, 2018, 07:23:08 AM
I agree with every word of this about the bowl games. And I guess I agree about the NIT, too, but as a Marquette fan I did enjoy watching our lads (even if it was a little painful to watch an obviously hobbled Sam).

I didn't watch a single minute of any NIT game in which MU didn't play, and I didn't watch a single second of any bowl games outside of the actual playoff games.

I didn't say I didn't watch the televised exhibition games involving our Warriors. Once the die was cast, I stood with our dudes and watched the game from the comfort of my family room in Florida. If I had been in Chicago, I likely would have been like Brother Glow and Sister Chick and attended games.

To paraphrase Mr. Wonderful on Shark Tank: Once we were out, the NIT was dead to me.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 29, 2018, 10:14:19 AM
Saturday 12/29
Peach Bowl: 10 Florida vs. 7 Michigan, 11:00, ESPN - Bob Wischusen, Brock Huard, Allison Williams

Belk Bowl: South Carolina vs. Virginia, 11:00, ABC - Adam Amin, Anthony Becht, Rocky Boiman(f)

Arizona Bowl: Arkansas State vs. Nevada, 12:00, CBS SN - Rich Waltz, Aaron Murray, John Schriffen

Cotton Bowl: 3 Notre Dame vs 2 Clemson, 3:00, ESPN - Sean McDonough, Todd Blackledge, Holly Rowe, Tom Rinaldi

Orange Bowl: 4 Oklahoma vs. 1 Alabama, 7:00, ESPN - Chris Fowler, Kirk Herbstreit, Maria Taylor, Laura Rutledge
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on December 29, 2018, 02:42:36 PM
Big ten is getting whooped by the sec
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: wadesworld on December 29, 2018, 05:36:07 PM
Can we please leave Notre Dame out of the CFP from now on?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: real chili 83 on December 29, 2018, 07:11:56 PM
Outed.....again.

#happydance
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 29, 2018, 09:25:16 PM
Love, love, love that my favorite team won big!!!

ND will NEVER win another national title. Never, ever, ever. Love it!
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: real chili 83 on December 30, 2018, 05:59:50 AM
https://www.southbendtribune.com/sports/college/notredame/football/more-of-the-big-bowl-same-for-notre-dame/article_97f62874-cc70-5d3d-b9ca-60578c35d3f9.html
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 30, 2018, 07:58:32 AM
https://www.southbendtribune.com/sports/college/notredame/football/more-of-the-big-bowl-same-for-notre-dame/article_97f62874-cc70-5d3d-b9ca-60578c35d3f9.html

If I could only inject that article into my veins...
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 30, 2018, 01:20:13 PM

Miami has been overrated all year.  Richt has one more year or he's going to be run out of there.  They have lost 10 of their last 16 stretching back to last year.  And the thing is, Miami really isn't that great of a program.  They haven't had a season with less than three losses for 15 years.  (Since joining the ACC.) 

And if you can't stop the run v. Wisconsin, they are going to look good.  B10 teams know this and forced UW to throw with usually terrible results for UW.  Miami couldn't do that.


Well Richt retired today. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 30, 2018, 02:08:00 PM
After 2 years, Houston fired Major Applewhite.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: nyg on December 30, 2018, 02:33:39 PM

Well Richt retired today.

Richt could recruit at Georgia, but at Miami he was not getting the really good kids from Ft. Lauderdale, Pahokee and Belle Glade.

This opening should be really interesting.  Manny Diaz just left to be new coach at Temple, does he do a reverse?  Lane Kiffen up the road at FAU.  Bob Stoops, the ex Oklahoma coach or Mario Cristabol at Oregon. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 30, 2018, 03:31:33 PM
After 2 years, Houston fired Major Applewhite.

Smart move.  Cut their losses early.  Looks like Dana Holgorsen might leave WVU to go there.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 30, 2018, 03:55:26 PM
Smart move.  Cut their losses early.  Looks like Dana Holgorsen might leave WVU to go there.

That would be really surprising. It would be choosing to go somewhere you know you're never going to compete for a national title. And if he doesn't win a ton there, he probably can forget about ever getting a gig better than the one he has now.
I would guess if his name is out there, it's because he's looking for more money from WVU. which is fair, because he's relatively underpaid.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 30, 2018, 04:01:45 PM
That's exactly why his name is out there.  And apparently WVU doesn't want to pay him.  He's not the easiest guy to get along with so my guess is that they wouldn't mind if he walked.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 30, 2018, 06:41:10 PM
After 2 years, Houston fired Major Applewhite.

Didn't need 5, aina?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on December 30, 2018, 07:14:28 PM
Monday 12/31
Military Bowl: Cincinnati vs. Virginia Tech, 11:00, ESPN - Mike Corey, Rene Ingoglia, Alex Corddry

Sun Bowl: Stanford vs. Pittsburgh, 1:00, CBS - Brad Nessler, Gary Danielson, Jamie Erdahl

Redbox Bowl: Michigan State vs. Oregon, 2:00, FOX - Joe Davis, Brady Quinn, Bruce Feldman

Liberty Bowl: 23 Missouri vs. Oklahoma State, 2:45, ESPN - Clay Matvick, Dan Orlovsky, Paul Carcaterra

Holiday Bowl: 22 Northwestern vs. 17 Utah, 6:00, FS1 - Gus Johnson, Joel Klatt, Jenny Taft

Gator Bowl: NC State vs. 19 Texas A&M, 6:30, ESPN - Adam Amin, Rod Gilmore, Quint Kessenich

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 30, 2018, 09:56:41 PM
Richt could recruit at Georgia, but at Miami he was not getting the really good kids from Ft. Lauderdale, Pahokee and Belle Glade.

This opening should be really interesting.  Manny Diaz just left to be new coach at Temple, does he do a reverse?  Lane Kiffen up the road at FAU.  Bob Stoops, the ex Oklahoma coach or Mario Cristabol at Oregon. 

Manny Diaz it is...after accepting Temple job a couple weeks ago.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 30, 2018, 10:18:24 PM
Manny Diaz it is...after accepting Temple job a couple weeks ago.

Shouldn't he have to sit out a year before he's eligible?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on December 30, 2018, 10:55:52 PM
Didn't need 5, aina?

Good thing we didn’t listen to the experts that wanted Wojo out after two, eh?

Bill McCartney the best example, 7-25 after three seasons including 1-10 in year three.  Went on to win a national championship at same school.

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on December 30, 2018, 10:57:22 PM
Shouldn't he have to sit out a year before he's eligible?

Did he receive any benefits?  Paid yet? Did he have a buyout?  Give players buyouts and I say transfer all day and all long if you wish.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: nyg on December 31, 2018, 07:30:35 AM
Did he receive any benefits?  Paid yet? Did he have a buyout?  Give players buyouts and I say transfer all day and all long if you wish.

Just a buyout.  Temple gets 4 million from Miami. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on December 31, 2018, 07:54:08 AM
Good thing we didn’t listen to the experts that wanted Wojo our after two, eh?

Bill McCartney the best example, 7-25 after three seasons including 1-10 in year three.  Went on to win a national championship at same school.


Applewhite wasn't McCartney.  He took over a team with good talent, did above average work and apparently lost the locker room.  And that's after taking over as an assistant. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 31, 2018, 09:15:14 AM
Give players buyouts and I say transfer all day and all long if you wish.

You OK with the player's new school paying the buyout?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on December 31, 2018, 09:30:45 AM
Did he receive any benefits?  Paid yet? Did he have a buyout?  Give players buyouts and I say transfer all day and all long if you wish.

OK, sure. Though I'm surprised you now want to make athletes employees of the university and all that comes with that (like, you know, rights and fair compensation). Mark Emmert would not approve.
Also, keep in mind, just as with coaches, the players wouldn't be paying a dime of these buyout costs.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 31, 2018, 11:29:30 AM
Sure, I'm all for players having buyouts that -- as several fellow Scoopers beat me to -- their new schools would pay every time.

Total freedom for athletes, just as the coaches have. That's fair, and it's what college sports should have.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Jockey on December 31, 2018, 05:13:59 PM
Back to the subject of whether there should be 8 teams in the Playoffs.....

Why? As we just saw, there are only 2 teams that have any chance to win it all. Why add 4 more teams that would have almost no chance?


I meant that rhetorically, of course. There is only one reason to add 4 more teams.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on December 31, 2018, 05:37:35 PM
OK, sure. Though I'm surprised you now want to make athletes employees of the university and all that comes with that (like, you know, rights and fair compensation). Mark Emmert would not approve.
Also, keep in mind, just as with coaches, the players wouldn't be paying a dime of these buyout costs.

In some cases they don't, in some cases they do.  For example, a coach is supposed to get X at new school, but that is deducted to pay buyout.  Then there are examples where coach doesn't pay a dime, wealthy booster or new school pays buyout in full. 

Based on what some of you advocate, I'm surprised you guys aren't for 10 day contracts....let players come and go each week...trade them on a virtual stock market baby. Let's go.  Oh, and forget any enrollment in classes...that's for schmucks 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on December 31, 2018, 06:22:25 PM
In some cases they don't, in some cases they do.  For example, a coach is supposed to get X at new school, but that is deducted to pay buyout.  Then there are examples where coach doesn't pay a dime, wealthy booster or new school pays buyout in full. 

Based on what some of you advocate, I'm surprised you guys aren't for 10 day contracts....let players come and go each week...trade them on a virtual stock market baby. Let's go.  Oh, and forget any enrollment in classes...that's for schmucks

When in doubt, introduce strawmen, shift goalposts and bring in dopey hypotheticals.

In other words, just keep hoopaloopin', baby.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on December 31, 2018, 06:35:21 PM
When in doubt, introduce strawmen, shift goalposts and bring in dopey hypotheticals.

In other words, just keep hoopaloopin', baby.

Reformists are never happy....literally.  Today's victory to savor, but tomorrow means additional changes....I'm just helping you get there faster...the inevitability of it all.  All a matter of time, baby.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Lennys Tap on December 31, 2018, 09:05:00 PM
Reformists are never happy....literally.  Today's victory to savor, but tomorrow means additional changes....I'm just helping you get there faster...the inevitability of it all.  All a matter of time, baby.

In that case, let's never reform anything. Maybe we can even turn back the clock - make blacks three fifths of a person, take away women's right to vote, etc..You know, all the good old days things that the pesky reformers screwed up.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on December 31, 2018, 10:58:44 PM
We want Bama.

Roll damn Cats.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on January 01, 2019, 03:29:44 PM
Reformists are never happy....literally.  Today's victory to savor, but tomorrow means additional changes....I'm just helping you get there faster...the inevitability of it all.  All a matter of time, baby.

What Lenny said.

Go shift some more goalposts and create more strawmen.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on January 01, 2019, 03:42:57 PM
What Lenny said.

Go shift some more goalposts and create more strawmen.

Reformists, that is their daily mantra....move the goalposts again and again and again and again....
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on January 01, 2019, 03:56:59 PM
Yes continuous improvement should be the goal of every organization.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on January 07, 2019, 10:50:51 PM
So much fun to see Nick Saban lose by 10,000 points!
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: tower912 on January 08, 2019, 07:17:25 AM
Agreed.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on January 08, 2019, 07:41:04 AM
Saban has not lost that bad, since the year after he won the title at LSU. That was a 44-15 game at UGA.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: StillAWarrior on January 08, 2019, 07:58:53 AM
So much fun to see Nick Saban lose by 10,000 points!

Agreed.

So...how much would you have bet if someone would have offered you Alabama +25?  I might have gone broke.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: TSmith34 on January 08, 2019, 09:20:38 AM
Reformists, that is their daily mantra....move the goalposts again and again and again and again....
It is yours, too.  You just happen to want to move them backwards.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: StillAWarrior on January 08, 2019, 09:52:55 AM
So much fun to see Nick Saban lose by 10,000 points!

It's nice to see him take some responsibility (http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25711621/nick-saban-alabama-crimson-tide-takes-blame-botched-fake-field-goal).  He's almost as good at throwing kids under the bus while "taking responsibility" as Charlie Weiss was.  This really is an impressive quote:  "We thought we had a really, really good fake, and somebody didn't block a guy they were supposed to block, and so it didn't work.  So it was a bad call. It's always that way."  Translation:  "I'll take the blame for making a bad call (but it was only bad call because one of the kids screwed up)."
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on January 08, 2019, 10:23:35 AM
It's nice to see him take some responsibility (http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25711621/nick-saban-alabama-crimson-tide-takes-blame-botched-fake-field-goal).  He's almost as good at throwing kids under the bus while "taking responsibility" as Charlie Weiss was.  This really is an impressive quote:  "We thought we had a really, really good fake, and somebody didn't block a guy they were supposed to block, and so it didn't work.  So it was a bad call. It's always that way."  Translation:  "I'll take the blame for making a bad call (but it was only bad call because one of the kids screwed up)."

d-bag.

The fact that he wins only makes him a winning d-bag.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MUBurrow on January 08, 2019, 10:24:48 AM
I was rooting for Alabama yesterday for the same reason that I root for the Yankees vs the Red Sox. If its going to be evil empire vs next in line aspiring evil empire, might as well go full dark side.  If Dabo sustains Saban's success, he's going to be even worse to listen to in 5 years than Saban is now.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on January 08, 2019, 11:19:41 AM
I could see Dabo ending up at Carolina if Riverboat Ron gets the axe next year.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on January 08, 2019, 11:27:09 AM
I could see Dabo ending up at Carolina if Riverboat Ron gets the axe next year.

I would guess there's only one job Dabo would leave Clemson for. And that's the job of the guy he just beat.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: reinko on January 08, 2019, 11:36:06 AM
I would guess there's only one job Dabo would leave Clemson for. And that's the job of the guy he just beat.

I know next to nothing about CFB, but why would Dabo leave for an SEC school?  He can recruit top notch talent, is the king of SC, in a good enough conference but not too much of a buzzsaw to make the top 4 every year.

Edit.  Except for $$$, yes.  But my guess is Clemson will match anything SC or 'Bama offers, but what the hell do I know.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on January 08, 2019, 11:41:27 AM
If Dabo ends up with the Panthers, that would be fine. If not, that also would be fine. I have no idea if he would be a good pro coach, a bad pro coach or something in between.

I also have no idea if Dabo ever wants to leave Clemson, where as reinko says he is wildly successful, incredibly rich, and the master of his own fiefdom. Maybe he does want to go to Bama or the NFL or elsewhere eventually. Or maybe he doesn't. The only thing I know is that none of us here knows.

And of course, I also have no idea if Dabo will become as big a d-bag as Saban, who has spent decades perfecting his d-baggery.

On a related note ...

I think Bama just gave up another TD!


Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on January 08, 2019, 11:50:04 AM
I know next to nothing about CFB, but why would Dabo leave for an SEC school?  He can recruit top notch talent, is the king of SC, in a good enough conference but not too much of a buzzsaw to make the top 4 every year.

Edit.  Except for $$$, yes.  But my guess is Clemson will match anything SC or 'Bama offers, but what the hell do I know.

He's an Alabama native who played for the Crimson Tide then coached there for seven years before going to Clemson.
I think the only thing that might keep him - and perhaps some other quality candidates - from the job is that Saban will be an impossible act to follow. Regardless of last night's game, what he's done at Bama is unprecedented in college football.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: StillAWarrior on January 08, 2019, 12:26:09 PM
He's an Alabama native who played for the Crimson Tide then coached there for seven years before going to Clemson.
I think the only thing that might keep him - and perhaps some other quality candidates - from the job is that Saban will be an impossible act to follow. Regardless of last night's game, what he's done at Bama is unprecedented in college football.

You can be a pretty great coach at Bama and still only be third on their list of their greatest coaches.  He's got a great thing going at Clemson.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on January 08, 2019, 12:32:20 PM
It's nice to see him take some responsibility (http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25711621/nick-saban-alabama-crimson-tide-takes-blame-botched-fake-field-goal).  He's almost as good at throwing kids under the bus while "taking responsibility" as Charlie Weiss was.  This really is an impressive quote:  "We thought we had a really, really good fake, and somebody didn't block a guy they were supposed to block, and so it didn't work.  So it was a bad call. It's always that way."  Translation:  "I'll take the blame for making a bad call (but it was only bad call because one of the kids screwed up)."

Of course, you're not exactly including all of what Saban said after the game.

“I just have a feeling that I didn’t do a very good job for our team, with our team, giving them the best opportunity to be successful,” Saban said. “I always feel that way, even sometimes when we win, I think there’s things we could do better or that I could have done better.
“But particularly in this case, never really ever got comfortable with what we needed to do to win this game, especially on defense, especially the matchups we had in our secondary versus their receivers. That was something that was kind of bothering me going into the game, and as the game unfolded, it worked out that those matchups were a big difference in the game.”


I get why people dislike Saban, but it's unfair to suggest he didn't take the blame last night.
Oh, and he was right about the fake. It was a bad call and it did get blown up because of a missed block.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: StillAWarrior on January 08, 2019, 12:44:58 PM
Of course, you're not exactly including all of what Saban said after the game.

“I just have a feeling that I didn’t do a very good job for our team, with our team, giving them the best opportunity to be successful,” Saban said. “I always feel that way, even sometimes when we win, I think there’s things we could do better or that I could have done better.
“But particularly in this case, never really ever got comfortable with what we needed to do to win this game, especially on defense, especially the matchups we had in our secondary versus their receivers. That was something that was kind of bothering me going into the game, and as the game unfolded, it worked out that those matchups were a big difference in the game.”


I get why people dislike Saban, but it's unfair to suggest he didn't take the blame last night.
Oh, and he was right about the fake. It was a bad call and it did get blown up because of a missed block.

I quoted from the article that I read.  If he said other things that were reported in other places, good on him.  I never claimed to be providing a comprehensive summary of everything Saban said about last night's game.

And someone should have called off the fake when they saw the defensive alignment.  I'm honestly not sure who has that responsibility on their staff.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: JWags85 on January 08, 2019, 01:02:34 PM
If Dabo sustains Saban's success, he's going to be even worse to listen to in 5 years than Saban is now.

I don't know about that.  There are differences in their approaches.

Saban, much like his former boss Billy B in NE, takes a pretty soulless, straight forward, obsessive approach to coaching.  Dabo is no doubt equally as focused and organized, but clearly has a lot more fun with it and creates a much more light hearted environment around his program.  Saban didn't even celebrate a national championship a few years back and could only focus on going back to recruiting.  Hes a lunatic.

I was having a discussion with my friend last night about how long Saban coaches.  He's 67 so we said he's probably got 8-10 years left cause I can't see him putting his feet up on a beach and relaxing, the man doesn't know how to turn off.

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on January 08, 2019, 01:15:20 PM
I would guess there's only one job Dabo would leave Clemson for. And that's the job of the guy he just beat.

In my world they say this is already a done deal.  Sabian retires, Dabo comes back home to his alma mater.  Depending on who you believe in the industry they say this has essentially been agreed to a few years ago from a gentlemen’s perspective and Clemson knows it.

Guess we will see.  Can’t believe Saban wants to do this too many more years. Especially the recruiting part.

Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: StillAWarrior on January 08, 2019, 01:17:15 PM
In my world they say this is already a done deal.  Sabian retires, Dabo comes back home to his alma mater.  Depending on who you believe in the industry they say this has essentially been agreed to a few years ago from a gentlemen’s perspective and Clemson knows it.

Guess we will see.  Can’t believe Saban wants to do this too many more years. Especially the recruiting part.

As evidenced by the fact that we're all here, the lure of one's alma mater is a powerful thing.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on January 08, 2019, 01:17:31 PM
It is yours, too.  You just happen to want to move them backwards.

Nope.  Progress doesn’t always mean moving forward, even if some people want to pretend that is the case.

And yes, by definition reformists are never happy. There is always the next perceived injustice they have to tackle.  Wash, rinse, repeat.  It is inate in their nature. 
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on January 08, 2019, 01:19:42 PM
As evidenced by the fact that we're all here, the lure of one's alma mater is a powerful thing.

True, and because of the specialness of that program to be one to carry it on is big.

Anyone following Saban has a brutal job, but someone like Dabo who has some ships already makes that transition much more manageable.  Especially if they go on a further roll here over the next few years, some Tide fans and boosters will be pushing for it.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on January 08, 2019, 01:25:04 PM
And yes, by definition reformists are never happy. There is always the next perceived injustice they have to tackle.  Wash, rinse, repeat.  It is inate in their nature.

This is such a bad, bad argument.
All the great leaders in human history were reformists. As was the guy I suspect you worship as God.
"That Jesus  ... always shifting goalposts and never happy."
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on January 08, 2019, 03:46:54 PM
In my world they say this is already a done deal.  Sabian retires, Dabo comes back home to his alma mater.  Depending on who you believe in the industry they say this has essentially been agreed to a few years ago from a gentlemen’s perspective and Clemson knows it.

Guess we will see.  Can’t believe Saban wants to do this too many more years. Especially the recruiting part.
Paul Finebaum thinks since Dabo won his 2nd title, he will be a lifelong guy at Clemson. Hard to disagree.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: jesmu84 on January 09, 2019, 10:12:55 PM
Is Jalen Hurts transfer worth following?

What about Justin Fields?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on January 09, 2019, 11:54:07 PM
Paul Finebaum thinks since Dabo won his 2nd title, he will be a lifelong guy at Clemson. Hard to disagree.

We'll see, but in the end I believe he ends up going to Bama.   If would be one thing if he hadn't won any and so difficult to follow a legend, but that hurdle has been knocked over.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Mr. Nielsen on January 10, 2019, 12:25:09 PM
Is Jalen Hurts transfer worth following?

What about Justin Fields?
yes & yes
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on January 16, 2019, 03:31:40 PM
In another classic case of NCAA hypocrisy, Oklahoma is bringing in a transfer (Jalen Hurts) to be its QB next year, but blocking the guy whose presumptive job Hurts is taking (Auston Kendall) from being eligible at the school of his choosing next year.
There's zero reason for Oklahoma to do this other than wanting to f--- with the kid.

https://deadspin.com/oklahoma-is-happy-to-accept-transfers-but-unwilling-to-1831814269
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on January 16, 2019, 07:06:17 PM
In another classic case of NCAA hypocrisy, Oklahoma is bringing in a transfer (Jalen Hurts) to be its QB next year, but blocking the guy whose presumptive job Hurts is taking (Auston Kendall) from being eligible at the school of his choosing next year.
There's zero reason for Oklahoma to do this other than wanting to f--- with the kid.

https://deadspin.com/oklahoma-is-happy-to-accept-transfers-but-unwilling-to-1831814269

Kendall is eligible immediately to play at WVU, OU is not blocking his transfer.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on January 16, 2019, 07:15:19 PM
Kendall is eligible immediately to play at WVU, OU is not blocking his transfer.

It shouldn't have taken a public shaming for Oklahoma to reverse their decision and do the right thing.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Cheeks on January 16, 2019, 08:03:04 PM
It shouldn't have taken a public shaming for Oklahoma to reverse their decision and do the right thing.

Maybe right, but the way you and others framed it as hypocritical was not correct.  They followed the rules.  This was an inter conference transfer which is different than an out of conference, that’s why the exception exists.  If they were the same thing, the rules wouldn’t be the same.

They definitely buckled due to the response, but them taking Hurts from another conference is much different than their guy going to a school within their conference.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: MU82 on January 17, 2019, 07:18:21 AM
It shouldn't have taken a public shaming for Oklahoma to reverse their decision and do the right thing.

Correct.

Athletes should be totally free to transfer anywhere they like whenever they want ... just as coaches are. And I don't want to hear about the sham buyout clauses in coaches' contracts; not a single coach in the last 10 years has paid that himself.
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: GGGG on January 17, 2019, 08:38:47 AM
Maybe right, but the way you and others framed it as hypocritical was not correct.  They followed the rules.  This was an inter conference transfer which is different than an out of conference, that’s why the exception exists.  If they were the same thing, the rules wouldn’t be the same.

They definitely buckled due to the response, but them taking Hurts from another conference is much different than their guy going to a school within their conference.


It really isn't that different. Its just another barrier that schools put up.

And Oklahoma is being hypocritical because of how they got Mayfield immediately eligible after he transferred from Texas Tech.  (ie, same conference)
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: Pakuni on January 17, 2019, 09:27:43 AM
Maybe right, but the way you and others framed it as hypocritical was not correct.  They followed the rules.  This was an inter conference transfer which is different than an out of conference, that’s why the exception exists.  If they were the same thing, the rules wouldn’t be the same.

They definitely buckled due to the response, but them taking Hurts from another conference is much different than their guy going to a school within their conference.

1. If "just following the rules" is Oklahoma's justification, then it's hypocritical. Two years ago, Oklahoma - after much lobbying and politicking - obtained a waiver of the rule to get Baker Mayfield an additional year of eligibility (during which he led the Sooners to the playoff and won the Heisman). Apparently then, the rule wasn't important to uphold. But with Austin Kendall, it was (until they were publicly shamed into doing the right thing).

2. Beyond that, the rule itself is hypocritical. There's no such rule for coaches, administrators, band members, faculty, students on academic scholarships, etc. Just athletes. Why?
Title: Re: 2018 College Football Thread
Post by: CTWarrior on January 17, 2019, 11:21:42 AM

It really isn't that different. Its just another barrier that schools put up.

And Oklahoma is being hypocritical because of how they got Mayfield immediately eligible after he transferred from Texas Tech.  (ie, same conference)

I understand the rule in theory since the departing QB may know some things that will be helpful when they play each other.  But he would still know that stuff if he had to sit out.  At any rate, in the end I agree that Oklahoma should have just let him go from the start, particularly given the situation.