ShotgunDawg
06-15-2014, 01:35 PM
Happy Fathers Day to everyone.
Since the World Cup is going on, and since we are all ready for college football, I thought it might be an interesting conversation about which World Cup teams, college football team most resemble.
I am basing my comparisons off team perception, history, and historical style of play.
Disclaimer: There are many more college football teams than World Cup powers with any sort of reputation. So, many college football teams will be left out.
Feel free to agree, disagree, or make your own list.
1. Southern California = Brazil- USC is near the beach, possibly has more flare than any other college football team historically, a ton of Heisman Trophies, and, due to local talent base and recruiting region, maybe the highest ceiling of any team in college football.
2. Alabama = Germany - Alabama and Germany are both known for being big, physical, stubborn, and discipline. One is a football powerhouse and the other is a World Cup power. Both teams lack the finesse and flare that typically goes along with being an elite team, but both are disciplined and talented enough to the point that it doesn't matter. Both also possess some under the radar form of corruption that always seem the threaten their existence.
3. Oregon = Netherlands - Oregon and the Netherlands share many similarities. Pound for pound they both may be the teams in their respective sports. Both teams have little to no recruiting base and really haven't won a ton at the highest level, but have really cool uniforms, play an exciting, skilled, fast brand of football, compete at the highest level, and have fans that love to smoke pot.
4. Notre Dame = England - Easy comparison. Lot of history, over hyped, over talked about, too high of expectations, and have a bunch of slow white boys running around that can't beat good teams.
5. Auburn = Argentina - Both Auburn and Argentina have won titles by cheating (Auburn with Newton and Argentina with "hand of god" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ccNkksrfls). Both teams play a wide open style that can be fun to watch and both teams have legendary players. However, while Auburn and Argentina are certainly considered very good teams and a threats, they both are usually left off the list of "elite teams" possibly because they are both little brothers in their region. Auburn < Bama and Argentina < Brazil.
6. Texas A&M = USA - Ahhhh, Texas A&M the school with all the resources, stadiums, money, etc... to be a national power, but, due to not being able to settle on an identity of play, and because most of their recruiting base consist of over coached, non-creative suburban kids, they can't seem to find the identity or style of play the perfectly fits and meshes with the talent their recruiting base produces. However, due to the resources they have, they are a sleeping giant that no one knows when exactly they will make the jump from being a solid average team to being elite and competing for championships.
7. Ole Miss = Mexico - Yes, both Ole Miss and Mexico were once good, but now are second rate in their own region (Mexico < USA, and Ole Miss < MSU). Both fan bases have expectations that far exceed their talent level and depth, and both teams usually have one player that makes the perception of them greater than reality.
8. Mississippi State = Ivory Coast/ Ghana - Both the Ivory Coast and Ghana are sneaky good, have some of the most underrated players in the world, are capable of beating most of the best teams, but lack the depth and finances to really take the next step. Plus Mississippi State has the highest African American student population in the SEC.
9. Stanford = Spain - While Stanford has not won a National Championship like Spain won the World Cup. Both teams have high aptitude and smart players, but play the most boring, ball control style of play in the world. Both teams will put you to sleep, but often win.
10. Vanderbilt = Japan - Very structured, smart, skilled players that just lack the overall talent level to compete with the big boys.
11. Kentucky = Australia - They both suck at "football", but are good at other sports like cricket, rugby, and basketball.
12. Tennessee = France - They both really care, have rabid fan bases, and once won a championship. But now, they are a shell of their old selves, and no one quite knows who they are, where they get their players from, and what style they play.
13. LSU = Italy - Italy is usually the most defensive, hardest hitting, toughest team in the world cup. They often play a dumbed down offense that can be boring the watch at times, but they play elite defense and are hell to score on and beat. They also quite often win.
Anyway, these are all I could think of right now. If you think of better comparisons or more comparisons, please share.
Since the World Cup is going on, and since we are all ready for college football, I thought it might be an interesting conversation about which World Cup teams, college football team most resemble.
I am basing my comparisons off team perception, history, and historical style of play.
Disclaimer: There are many more college football teams than World Cup powers with any sort of reputation. So, many college football teams will be left out.
Feel free to agree, disagree, or make your own list.
1. Southern California = Brazil- USC is near the beach, possibly has more flare than any other college football team historically, a ton of Heisman Trophies, and, due to local talent base and recruiting region, maybe the highest ceiling of any team in college football.
2. Alabama = Germany - Alabama and Germany are both known for being big, physical, stubborn, and discipline. One is a football powerhouse and the other is a World Cup power. Both teams lack the finesse and flare that typically goes along with being an elite team, but both are disciplined and talented enough to the point that it doesn't matter. Both also possess some under the radar form of corruption that always seem the threaten their existence.
3. Oregon = Netherlands - Oregon and the Netherlands share many similarities. Pound for pound they both may be the teams in their respective sports. Both teams have little to no recruiting base and really haven't won a ton at the highest level, but have really cool uniforms, play an exciting, skilled, fast brand of football, compete at the highest level, and have fans that love to smoke pot.
4. Notre Dame = England - Easy comparison. Lot of history, over hyped, over talked about, too high of expectations, and have a bunch of slow white boys running around that can't beat good teams.
5. Auburn = Argentina - Both Auburn and Argentina have won titles by cheating (Auburn with Newton and Argentina with "hand of god" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ccNkksrfls). Both teams play a wide open style that can be fun to watch and both teams have legendary players. However, while Auburn and Argentina are certainly considered very good teams and a threats, they both are usually left off the list of "elite teams" possibly because they are both little brothers in their region. Auburn < Bama and Argentina < Brazil.
6. Texas A&M = USA - Ahhhh, Texas A&M the school with all the resources, stadiums, money, etc... to be a national power, but, due to not being able to settle on an identity of play, and because most of their recruiting base consist of over coached, non-creative suburban kids, they can't seem to find the identity or style of play the perfectly fits and meshes with the talent their recruiting base produces. However, due to the resources they have, they are a sleeping giant that no one knows when exactly they will make the jump from being a solid average team to being elite and competing for championships.
7. Ole Miss = Mexico - Yes, both Ole Miss and Mexico were once good, but now are second rate in their own region (Mexico < USA, and Ole Miss < MSU). Both fan bases have expectations that far exceed their talent level and depth, and both teams usually have one player that makes the perception of them greater than reality.
8. Mississippi State = Ivory Coast/ Ghana - Both the Ivory Coast and Ghana are sneaky good, have some of the most underrated players in the world, are capable of beating most of the best teams, but lack the depth and finances to really take the next step. Plus Mississippi State has the highest African American student population in the SEC.
9. Stanford = Spain - While Stanford has not won a National Championship like Spain won the World Cup. Both teams have high aptitude and smart players, but play the most boring, ball control style of play in the world. Both teams will put you to sleep, but often win.
10. Vanderbilt = Japan - Very structured, smart, skilled players that just lack the overall talent level to compete with the big boys.
11. Kentucky = Australia - They both suck at "football", but are good at other sports like cricket, rugby, and basketball.
12. Tennessee = France - They both really care, have rabid fan bases, and once won a championship. But now, they are a shell of their old selves, and no one quite knows who they are, where they get their players from, and what style they play.
13. LSU = Italy - Italy is usually the most defensive, hardest hitting, toughest team in the world cup. They often play a dumbed down offense that can be boring the watch at times, but they play elite defense and are hell to score on and beat. They also quite often win.
Anyway, these are all I could think of right now. If you think of better comparisons or more comparisons, please share.