College Football

[GTFan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pb4uski I think tOSU proved last night that it was justified to "move the goal posts" as you framed it.... they pretty much dominated #2 Clemson. Bama also looks good but I think the National Championship game should be very entertaining.

He made a good point about ND though, the CFP wanted them in it but every time ND shows that they don't belong there.

[Montecfo]

Agree that matchups are important. But just surprising to see Kentucky knock off a ranked ACC team. Clemson was also favored. But the rest of the ACC matchups were closely matched or opponent was favored.

Big 12 was able to win all their games, but they may also have been favored in all of them (except the Cotton Bowl where depleted FL faced a hot Oklahoma team), to your point.

The SEC seemed most surprising with middling or losing teams beating ranked or better record opponents. See 4-6 Kentucky, 4-5 Ole Miss and 3-7 Miss St.

In a year with little nononference play, all that's left is the natty and the post bowl analysis.

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTFan He made a good point about ND though, the CFP wanted them in it but every time ND shows that they don't belong there.

Note that I didn't disagree with that part.

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Montecfo Agree that matchups are important. But just surprising to see Kentucky knock off a ranked ACC team. Clemson was also favored. But the rest of the ACC matchups were closely matched or opponent was favored. ...

Yes, I was suprised that the tOSU/Clemson game was so lopsided... I thought it would be close, so that shows you what I know.

[Montecfo]

Ohio St now making noise about delaying the natty due to Covid. Certainly sounds like more goalpost moving. Surely Justin Fields could use another week to get healthy after some bruising hits against Clemson.

[Venturer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Montecfo Ohio St now making noise about delaying the natty due to Covid. Certainly sounds like more goalpost moving. Surely Justin Fields could use another weak to get healthy after some bruising hits against Clemson.

That 1st hit was totally uncalled for the way that player lowered his head. The commentary about what his Daddy alway told him to make sure they knew when he hit was bull. I think he was trying to get rid of a good player period. I didn't have and still don't have a dog in these fights ,but that hit was not called for and the officials made the right call.

[Montecfo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Venturer That 1st hit was totally uncalled for the way that player lowered his head. The commentary about what his Daddy alway told him to make sure they knew when he hit was bull. I think he was trying to get rid of a good player period. I didn't have and still don't have a dog in these fights ,but that hit was not called for and the officials made the right call.

I thought it was a good clean hit. A lot of the reaction seemed to be surprise that a hit to the midsection could be called targeting. But I guess that is the rule.

[garyt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunningBum Wild finish to the Liberty - Coastal Carolina game last night. Liberty was trying to run the clock down and kick a game winning field goal rather than score and give Coastal and time to score and tie it up. But they fumbled inside the one as the back was trying not to score, while one of his blockers and all of Coastal's defense was trying to push and drag him across the goal line. Liberty wound up winning in OT. I don't get paid $3M like Liberty's coach does, but I don't like relying on a FG because those aren't automatic. A 7 point lead with less than a minute to go seems better to me.

I hate the "fall down at the one" play, I say take the points. If you're defense can't hold a team from scoring a TD (assuming the score is such that a FG does them no good)with seconds left, you don't deserve to win. I'm glad that backfired on them.

[garyt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 6miths Actually I agree and should have said 'some might have felt it would not be a bad choice'. Even after watching the Clemson-ND game I didn't think it likely that ND would get dropped for Texas A&M and not only because of viewership. The commentators felt that since ND was beaten so badly that they should get booted but I don't agree with that especially in the college game. ND could have been out to a 14-0 or certainly a 10-0 early lead and it could have been a different game. There is so much emotion in the college game so I think it is more like a loss is a loss. And of course Florida couldn't really get in with 3 losses (one to an unranked team with a losing record) but it was good to see them give Alabama a run for their money. I don't see ND (or OSU if that had been the match up) doing that on New Year's Day. Of course anything can happen in college ball.

Notre Dame is always the most overrated team in CF, followed by Michigan. They get their clock cleaned every time they are mistakenly put in a big bowl game. They just don't belong.

[garyt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTFan Damn shame that the Power5 want to keep all the money in the CFP, as Herbstreit pointed out we're stuck with the same half-dozen or so teams every year because they won't expand to eight. Good teams like Cincy this year, UCF prior get shafted and then they end up beating good Power5 teams in bowls.

But not the REALLY good Power 5 teams. It'd be nice if one of those teams were given a chance one day, but the results would not be pretty. Cincinatti got beat by an 8-2 Georgia team. A competitive game, but do you really think they could hang with Bama who beat Georgia by 17?

[garyt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Montecfo Agree but there is a really good reason mid-majors can have deep runs into the basketball tournament: there are only 5 players per team on the court at the same time. So mid majors that shoot the 3 well can create mismatch issues for majors with more talented front lines and deeper benches, for example. In college football, there is really no parallel because it is much harder for a single player to make the same impact as one of 11 versus one of 5. Also, the G5 teams have less team speed. For these reasons and others, I do not think you will have a large post season tournament in FBS football.

Yep, and the fact it's just a different game. In football bigger faster athletes can manhandle lesser players. You can't really mitigate it in football like you can in basketball.

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyt I hate the "fall down at the one" play, I say take the points. If you're defense can't hold a team from scoring a TD (assuming the score is such that a FG does them no good)with seconds left, you don't deserve to win. I'm glad that backfired on them.

I agree... I hate it too... but I'll concede that in some situations it is smart football.

[GTFan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyt But not the REALLY good Power 5 teams. It'd be nice if one of those teams were given a chance one day, but the results would not be pretty. Cincinatti got beat by an 8-2 Georgia team. A competitive game, but do you really think they could hang with Bama who beat Georgia by 17?

We'll never know because they never get a chance same for all the good G5 teams. I think Cincy could've hung in just as well as ND did against Bama, frex, but no I don't think they'd win.

At this point I wouldn't take ND seriously for the CFP unless they were undefeated. They don't belong there.

[Montecfo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTFan We'll never know because they never get a chance same for all the good G5 teams. I think Cincy could've hung in just as well as ND did against Bama, frex, but no I don't think they'd win. At this point I wouldn't take ND seriously for the CFP unless they were undefeated. They don't belong there.

But how do they earn a chance? All the undefeated G5 teams lost bowl games, mostly to lesser opponents. Cincy got their chance and they lost to a 2 loss Georgia team which was blown out twice in the regular season.

I agree ND did not show well continuing a long time trend.

[GTFan]

They earn it by expanding the playoffs to include the G5. There is no other way with the P5 regime calling the CFP shots now.

https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...stem-look-like

Rittenberg: As Bill notes, eight teams solves so many issues. Again, this is more about expanding opportunity than the likelihood of new teams winning championships. Until Nick Saban, Dabo Swinney and Ryan Day move on, their programs are going to claim most of the titles.

P5 gets automatic berths, top G5 gets one, two wild cards. Problem solved. Yes, there will be disagreement about seeding and #8/9/10 etc. but that's nowhere near the issues we have now.

Also, as Mack Brown and others pointed out, it keeps more top players in the conference championships and playoff games instead of skipping championships and bowls. It ensures that entire regions aren't shut out as they are now, keeping fan interest and money flowing (it's always about the money) across the country.

Lots of reason why eight is a good solution.

[RunningBum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTFan https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...stem-look-like Rittenberg: As Bill notes, eight teams solves so many issues. Again, this is more about expanding opportunity than the likelihood of new teams winning championships. Until Nick Saban, Dabo Swinney and Ryan Day move on, their programs are going to claim most of the titles.

Not that I necessarily disagree with this piece, but the above statement is pretty stupid. Jim Tressel won a championship, and later moved on. Urban Meyer won a championship, and later moved on. Ryan Day hasn't won a championship. So what will change when he moves on? If it takes him moving on, you might have a long wait since he's only 41.

[GTFan]

Yeah he probably shouldn't have mentioned specific coaches, but it's really about what Herbstreit said initially - the same handful of teams will be in the playoffs years from now (with little else) if we don't expand access.

That doesn't mean that other teams will win consistently with eight instead of four, but we will get some Cinderella stories (like Boise State) that have no shot now.

[Montecfo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTFan Yeah he probably shouldn't have mentioned specific coaches, but it's really about what Herbstreit said initially - the same handful of teams will be in the playoffs years from now (with little else) if we don't expand access. That doesn't mean that other teams will win consistently with eight instead of four, but we will get some Cinderella stories (like Boise State) that have no shot now.

Mostly you will get some epic blowouts would be my guess.

There have been 8 G5 teams that have gone undefeated.in the BCS era. 2 of those were by Utah (now in the Power 5 Pac 12,) and one by TCU (now in the Power 5 Big 12). That leaves 5 undefeated teams in 22 years. There were none this year. There were none last year there were none the year before. And only one since 2010 (UCF in 2017).

Indeed, a lot of blowouts.

[GTFan]

Doesn't change the fact that some P5 conference champs (i.e. entire regions of the country) are shut out, as are arguably deserving teams like A&M that would've been a better pick than ND this year (or any year). It's not just the G5.

Look, I agree that the CFP gets the best four (usually). The problem is that it's the same half dozen or so and no one else gets a (long)shot chance to win, or the money. Not to mention that the good players outside the 4 jump to the NFL because they have nothing to play for.

[Montecfo]

Expanding could be interesting, but not because it gives G5 a "chance". They get chances every year every game every down. They don't even win all the games on their schedule.

Giving the truly good teams a shot (without charity slots) would be an improvement.