Printable View
If only there were a way to make this a little better...
Click on the tweet and read the entire thread. Good stuff
It's impossible to calculate collectively how much money college football loses due to this.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/bradpowers7/status/1151910388172115968?s=21[/Tweet]
As much as I anticipate Bama vs Clemson Part 5 taking place in the Playoff, we’re also due a 2007 or 2014 type year where a bunch of craziness happens and things go totally off script. That said, good luck to everyone else trying to dethrone Bama and Clemson as long as Tua and Trevor Lawrence are still in school.
You could be correct, but to me the sport and MSU need Bama and Clemson to play as many times as necessary to lead to rule changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Falcon
A wild year only delays what is best for the sport.
Georgia is gonna win it all this year.
I think they have a good shot. It is time for them to slay the dragon.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
They may but they are literally the only other team that has accumulated enough talent to have a chanceQuote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
Im just not on board this train. You still have to line up and play the games, Im all for using math and analytics to help you but I think it has just gone over the top in every league that uses it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Shotgun you are the billy beane of this board haha
Let's see how fields looks, but Ohio st is loaded with talent... they've signed 27 guys with a 96+ composite rating (11 are 5-stars) the last 3 years. If you count fields, that number goes to 28 and 12 5-stars. If day is a good coach and fields lives up to hype, they're gonna be a handfulQuote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
It's not just about recruiting rankings and it's not necessarily about a single games. It's about the fact that these "super teams" have enough talent to play bad vs average teams and still win. Thus they only have to play well in about 2/3 games per year. That allows those teams to circle a few games and prepare for them at a higher level both emotionally and schematically.Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
That's just not good for the sport. A team like MSU, has to play well about 7 times a year or they'll lose.
To many ifs. Day wasn't even a good OC on paper.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
Maybe.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
I don't think it's that big of an "if" on fields... I think he's gonna be a stud. Day may not be good, but he has the most talented roster in the big 10 by far.
Where do you get day wasn't a good OC? Last year rankings...
National rankings...
Total offense - 2nd
Scoring offense - 8th
S&P+ offense - 4th
FEI - 4th
They are WAAAY more talented than most anyone they play and their offensive efficiency or something like that is off. Bartoo talks about how average he is all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
So they're elite in almost every category, but you throw all that out bc of some stat bartoo uses that you don't even know what it is? Seems fair, shotgun hahaQuote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
BTW... Clemson, Oklahoma, Georgia, and Bama are waaay more talented than most everyone they play too
The SEC/Birmingham Conference will never let this happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
In general I think competitive balance is decreasing...but that chart actually makes me less convinced of that. Not sure why he used it, it hurts his overall point.
I thought the same thing... He could have cherry picked better stats to make his point...Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness
His graphic just shows that this year is (thus far) an outlier along with 04 and 09....
25/1 may as well be 100/1. Auburn penn st and Washington were better than 25/1 last year and nobody would have bet on those schools to win it last year.
Everyone has known since the 70s, only a handful of schools have a good chance to win the N.C.
However, Clemson isn?t one the national blue bloods. You can build a N.C. program in most places as evident by Clemson. But there just isn?t going to be a bunch of programs year in and out with a chance. That?s just the nature of the beast until some huge changes are made.
Lost in all of this "lack of parity" between the top 5 or 6 teams and the rest of college football is the fact that there are still 10-12 "winnable" games on most everyone's schedule... why not win the games vs "non-elites", go 11-1ish, and get in the CFP?
That path worked really well for the 2017 UCF Knights.Quote:
Originally Posted by TUSK
I think tosu and uga are the only 2 programs with enough talent to be considered a decent bet to knock off bama and/or clemson. That doesn't mean other teams can't/won't, it just means anyone else besides tosu and uga would need to play a near perfect game while bama/clemson to bring their C game and it'd be considered a monumental upset. Even programs like Michigan and LSU would be no more than a ~20% to knock off bama/clemson right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
Oklahoma or Texas will be in playoff contention, but neither have the defensive talent right now to be a good upset pick against bama/clemson imo. They might hang around awhile or scare them for 3 quarters, but at some point they'll need to get stops/turnovers and they can't unless bama just fumbles the ball all game like the OM games from a few years back. Bama/clemson are just as dangerous on offense and have a defense stocked with future NFL players, so they could actually be relied on to get a big stop or turnover.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maroonthirteen
Clemson ain't bama/tosu historically speaking, but they do have a natty from the 80s, a big ass stadium that's filled every week, and a killer local recruiting footprint. They were easily a top 15-20 program historically speaking prior to the run under dabo.
You are correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgs
....and they made a good hire with Dabo and elevated their program. My point was while there may only be 3-5 teams with a chance to win it this year. There could be many more that could make things more interesting if they got their sh** together. USC, UCLA, Texas, ND, Mich And Miami are underachieving in my opinion. But then there is a 100 programs with zero chance, probably ever.
If they'd gone undefeated in any legit conference and/or had an SOS a lot better than 72 , they woulda been in the mix... Had '17 UCF played MSU's schedule, they wouldn't have had enough players left to field a competitive team come bowl season, much less go undefeated.Quote:
Originally Posted by TaleofTwoDogs
Competition/SOS is not going to ever be an issue with you guys (or any SEC program)... ever...
Just because of our name, I think the college football talking heads willQuote:
Originally Posted by TUSK
Always scrutinized our OCC schedule if we are ever in a position such as 2014 again.
We weren’t getting in at 11-1 in 2014. (OCC was USM, UAB, USA and UTMartin.). But that was because Herbstreet and tv wanted OhSt.
Sure we can rotate the 5-6 legit contender spots every few years among a handful of programs depending on who is going thru a coaching change or a run of underperforming classes, but the point is that it seems like any given season the pool of teams competing for the top is very very very limited. Could bama cycle down when Saban steps down? Sure, but simply sliding LSU into bama's slot and letting them be a regular natty contender every year for an extended run isn't the type competitive balance I am taking about when I wanna see more competitive balance in CFB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maroonthirteen
I hate to see college football become predictable and boring. Thank God for the NFL.
My opinion is simple: if a game is not competitive, then it's not worth watching or even caring about. With the simple solution of scholarship reduction there for the taking, I wonder whether the NCAA is on a secret suicide mission.
They may have snuck into the bottom of the top 20, but they were in no way easily in the top 15ish.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgs
Alabama
Ohio State
Michigan
USC
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Nebraska
Texas
Florida
Florida State
LSU
Miami
Penn State
Tennessee
Georgia
Auburn
That is 16 programs who were all clearly ahead of Clemson.
I agree. I haven't gone out of my way to watch any of our shit non-conference games since I was at state 15+ years ago and games were social outings. Too much life to live for me to set aside 3+ hours to watch us beat Tulane 50-7 and still have no idea if we are 6-7 win good or 9+ win good. And anyone who says that we've lost games like Tulane before, that's true and when we lose those kinda games I am definitely happy I didn't waste my time on that shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by drunkernhelldawg
"Easily top 15-20" means they are in that range. Thanks for proving my point by actually taking the time to go thru programs and list them out. But really, after that list, who is left? Programs like UCLA, Arkansas, a&m, Michigan st, Wisconsin, and Pittsburgh are the type of programs usually ranked in the late teens/early 20s of best all time programs, and pre-dabo, clemson was ahead of most or all of them and definitively is ahead of them now.Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness
That said, clemson and uga look awfully similar (1 natty in the early 80s and lots of underachieving since). Clemson beat uga on getting back to the top of the mountain. I do think uga gets to the top soon though and if I was power ranking programs right now for the next 5 years it's bama 1, clemson 1a and tosu and uga a coin flip at 3/4.
Well Dan had TWO years that he should have won Bama......period.
Notre Dame should not be allowed in the playoff any longer. I blame the lack of competition solely on that farce. WSU, UGA, Texas, Florida, Ohio State would've beaten them in the playoff last year. I know that UGA didn't care in their bowl game vs Texas.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
People forget that the final score was 45-34 Bama over Oklahoma. That was an enjoyable semifinal. I do think WSU, UGA, Texas, Florida, Ohio State would've given Clemson a more competitive semi game.
To me, the 7 preseason teams probably represents the winner from each of the power 5 + a few others that have all of the best QBs that distribute the ball. The goal is the best 4 of the 7 so you know you're going to see the best QB play. it doesn't matter if one has a loss or two.
****ing notre dame really ruined the entire perception last year. the two semis & NC 2 years ago were awesome. Well, except that, a running QB in Kelly Bryant shit the bed, as expected, vs Bama.