Official (2015-2016) College Football Thread OSU#1

[quote name='Chitown021']and damn you Baylor! If you had just lost to Kansas State they'd be in the title game![/QUOTE]


Because Notre Dame would have a chance to beat another crap Big 12 team and claim a title they wouldn't deserve?

Yeah, I'd rather watch Alabama beat the shit out of them instead, thanks Baylor.
 
Figured Bama would win pretty easy, but didn't expect this level of domination.

Digging watching on ESPN 3D on my new plasma as well.
 
[quote name='blindinglights']I'm jealous. How's football in 3D?[/QUOTE]

It's pretty neat. The depth helps with telling how far away coverage is on pass plays etc.

Added benefit of not getting many commercials, mostly just highlights and game pics with some ads forother espn 3d stuff like the winter X games.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And this ladies and gentlemen, is why we need an eight team playoff.

Scrub teams hanging onto a long-dead legacy like ND would get bounced early on and we could see something along the lines of a rematch between Georgia and Alabama.
 
Well that wraps up the college season, I'm sure the traffic on this thread will die down quite a bit now. I'm glad I stumbled over it this year and look forward to upcoming posts and future seasons. Good Night! :)
 
[quote name='pitfallharry219']
I don't know if I've ever heard Musburger get that excited.[/QUOTE]

That's pretty much the game last night. Hot girl with an old man gawking at her.

So the BCS gave us 4 of 5 blowouts. Thanks for such a quality system.

Since Oregon was brought up... They would have lost too. Maybe not by 28 but still it would have been bad. How do I figure? Oregon struggled against a good defense Stanford and lost. Oregon offense doesn't work against top defenses as proven by history. Alabama is #1 in scoring defense.

Until the BCS goes to at least 16 will we finally see competitive big bowl games. This top 4 stuff won't give us that.
 
[quote name='lordopus99']That's pretty much the game last night. Hot girl with an old man gawking at her.

So the BCS gave us 4 of 5 blowouts. Thanks for such a quality system.

Since Oregon was brought up... They would have lost too. Maybe not by 28 but still it would have been bad. How do I figure? Oregon struggled against a good defense Stanford and lost. Oregon offense doesn't work against top defenses as proven by history. Alabama is #1 in scoring defense.

Until the BCS goes to at least 16 will we finally see competitive big bowl games. This top 4 stuff won't give us that.[/QUOTE]

I'm confused as to how a 16 game playoff would have given us more competitive games. The first round of the playoffs would have been the same blowouts. The problem this year was that there really weren't any great teams besides maybe 'Bama. Just my 2 cents.
 
Yeah, the more teams you put in the playoffs the more blow outs you get.

And no guarantee you get a good title game. Look how many Super Bowls have been blow outs over the years. Some years there's just a team or two that's way better than everyone else.

Alabama vs. Oregon would have been a much better match up. Alabama's defense isn't infallible against explosive spread offenses. See their loss to Texas A&M as case in point.

[quote name='chuckie88']Well that wraps up the college season, I'm sure the traffic on this thread will die down quite a bit now. I'm glad I stumbled over it this year and look forward to upcoming posts and future seasons. Good Night! :)[/QUOTE]

Yeah, the thread will die off until August unless there's some more realignment news or something. I don't expect much of anything to happen until the Maryland-ACC lawsuit is settled and we see how much of the $50 million or so buyout they have to pay.

Only other thing will be MWC expanding--San Diego State will probably re-join Boise at the least, and maybe they grab a couple other Big East leftovers or incoming members.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='dmaul1114']Yeah, the more teams you put in the playoffs the more blow outs you get.

And no guarantee you get a good title game. Look how many Super Bowls have been blow outs over the years. Some years there's just a team or two that's way better than everyone else.

Alabama vs. Oregon would have been a much better match up. Alabama's defense isn't infallible against explosive spread offenses. See their loss to Texas A&M as case in point.



Yeah, the thread will die off until August unless there's some more realignment news or something. I don't expect much of anything to happen until the Maryland-ACC lawsuit is settled and we see how much of the $50 million or so buyout they have to pay.

Only other thing will be MWC expanding--San Diego State will probably re-join Boise at the least, and maybe they grab a couple other Big East leftovers or incoming members.[/QUOTE]

The last super bowl blowout was 10 years ago.
 
I stand corrected. Haven't paid a ton of attention to the NFL since the 90s, and back then it seemed like it was always the Cowboys or 49ers blowing someone out.

I don't think the college game will have that kind of parity though. NFL has the hard salary cap, where as there are HUGE money and resource differences between the elite programs and everyone else even when just looking at the power conference teams.

So there will always be some mismatches in 8 or (especially) 16 team playoffs as champs from weaker conferences get in etc. and get stomped by the huge money programs like Bama, Oregon etc. that can afford all the fancy facility things to entice recruits, pay top coaches 4-5+ million to stay around etc.

A 4 team playoff would probably have the least amount of blow outs. But there will still be cases where a team like ND that played a weaker schedule runs the table and gets in while stronger 1 loss teams get left out.
 
[quote name='kill3r7']I'm confused as to how a 16 game playoff would have given us more competitive games. The first round of the playoffs would have been the same blowouts. The problem this year was that there really weren't any great teams besides maybe 'Bama. Just my 2 cents.[/QUOTE]

If it happened this year A&M would be left out. They might be the best team out there. Their two losses combined for only 7 points. They were the first game of Johnny Football career and the other against top 10 LSU. 16 would cover the good teams and allow everyone to prove their spot. Giving us competitive games in the 2nd, 3rd, and Championship Game.
 
[quote name='munch']The last super bowl blowout was 10 years ago.[/QUOTE]

Keep in mind that correlation does not equal causation. Furthermore, there is no correlation that playoffs =/= blowouts. The reason we have witnessed less blowouts in the Superbowl has to do with parity, which can be attributed to the greatest QB era in the history of the league.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']
A 4 team playoff would probably have the least amount of blow outs. But there will still be cases where a team like ND that played a weaker schedule runs the table and gets in while stronger 1 loss teams get left out.[/QUOTE]
Not this year... Florida was the #3 team and they were hammered by Louisville ranked #20 in Week 15. ND couldn't show up in Alabama so who says they favor any better against Oregon. So both games potentially blowouts. Oregon again struggles against real defenses so Alabama still wins with blowout.

With 16, you get teams like A&M, Oklahoma, Clemson, and of course my Noles. All teams which on a given day can take down the giants.
 
[quote name='kill3r7']Keep in mind that correlation does not equal causation. Furthermore, there is no correlation that playoffs =/= blowouts. The reason we have witnessed less blowouts in the Superbowl has to do with parity, which can be attributed to the greatest QB era in the history of the league.[/QUOTE]

I wasn't making any correlations, just responding to the post that said that there has been a lot of super bowl blowouts. Of course you won't get magical parity in ncaaf because of a playoff. But you will more teams that have a chance to play.

A playoff isn't going to fix the most significant problem with college football, which is that these kids need to be financially compensated.
 
[quote name='lordopus99']If it happened this year A&M would be left out. They might be the best team out there. Their two losses combined for only 7 points. They were the first game of Johnny Football career and the other against top 10 LSU. 16 would cover the good teams and allow everyone to prove their spot. Giving us competitive games in the 2nd, 3rd, and Championship Game.[/QUOTE]

I'm a proponent of a playoff system because it affords more teams the ability to compete for the title but I have no illusions that it will result in a more competitive field. There is no guarantee that those additional games would have been more competitive. Many folks, including quite a few people on this board, thought Oregon vs KSU was going to be a competitive game but it wasn't. The idea that somehow you can guarantee more competitive games is simply false.
 
I think an 8 team field will let in all the teams that can be truly competitive with the top 1 or 2 teams each year.

Sixteen would be overkill most years. Yes Louisville who would have been like a 15 or 16 seed beat UF this year who would have been a 3 or 4 seed probably, but I really think UF just wasn't fired up and ready for that game.

I'm fine with either. Probably just wouldn't watch many of the first round games in a 16 game playoff, just like I don't watch much of the opening round games in March Madness. Not worth sitting through blowouts to see an upset or two.

To be fair, most of my sports watching these days are just my teams games (and really only if they're having decent years) and championship games. Too little free time to watch games I don't have a rooting interest in or a title on the line. Especially with football with 3-4 hour games when I could knock out a good chunk of a game or catch up on a couple movies in that time.

Rambling point being I'm not the market they'd be after with a longer playoff anyway.
 
[quote name='munch']I wasn't making any correlations, just responding to the post that said that there has been a lot of super bowl blowouts. Of course you won't get magical parity in ncaaf because of a playoff. But you will more teams that have a chance to play.[/QUOTE]

My bad, I thought you were arguing that the playoffs in the NFL have prevented blowouts.

A playoff isn't going to fix the most significant problem with college football, which is that these kids need to be financially compensated.
Click to expand...
I know this is a very trendy argument but most people don't consider the financial costs involved with running a college athletic department. If you were to examine the financial data from most college programs you would realize that most football programs end up losing money. For starters due to Title 9 (not blaming the ladies merely pointing out a fact that most people tend to neglect) for every football player on a scholarship (85 per team) there must be the same number of scholarships offered to female athletes. Factor in all the facility costs, stadium upgrades, travel costs, free gear, meals and you can see the costs add up pretty quickly.

I'm not implying that colleges do not make money from sports (most of them are for profit corporations) but the issue is always presented from the players side and no one seems to want to discuss the entire picture. Furthermore, it is also worth noting that often there is a tremendous amount of pressure and opposition from faculty, students and other powerful individuals who don't care for football and sports in general. After all college is an institution of higher learning not a feeder for the NFL, NBA or MLB.
 
Most major conference Football programs are making money, but a good chunk of the ADs are still in the red from the non-revenue sports.

I think that will go away for the big 4 or 5 conference teams with the bump in revenue they're getting from the playoff deal, how much TV contracts have jumped, revenue from league cable channels like the B1G network etc.

That said I'm still mixed on paying the players. I'm fine if it's just giving them more of a stipend. A couple thousand a semester or whatever to have more spending money. They are getting free tuition, room and board already.

If we're talking paying them big salaries, I'm a lot more hesitant. If the NFL/NBA are kicking in the money (instead of having a free minor league system like currently), then great. Also ok if my above assumption is true and the top level schools can do it just from football profits. But in either case I'd prefer seeing the student requirement removed. Just give them the option to take classes for free, but don't require it IMO. Win-win then as they get paid and professors aren't dealing with athletes who don't care at all about class. While those who do can still go for free.
 
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8849699/chip-kelly-bolts-oregon-ducks-coach-philadelphia-eagles

So much for Kelly staying at Oregon, he's the new coach of the Eagles.

http://espn.go.com/college-football...te-reinstated-mountain-west-conference-member

And San Diego State is also staying in the MWC rather than going to the Big East. Been some rumbling that Cincy and UCONN may join for football only and put their other sports in the new league with the 7 catholic schools that are leaving the BE.

Solid plan IMO. Creates a fairly solid football league in the MWC (even moreso if they can get BYU to rejoin) and a very strong basketball conference that maintains a lot of the original Big East (sans Syracuse etc.).
 
[quote name='lordopus99']His comments were idiotic. He said someone was playing a sick joke on him yet he supposely visited her multiple times (stated in the media at the time). He is just one terrible, terrible person.[/QUOTE]


I was just watching a little bit of the press conference ND just held. The AD says supposedly Manti never met her and when he spoke about "meeting" it was the on-line type. He referenced the documentary and TV show "Catfish" as examples of what happened to Te'o. He wouldn't get into a lot of the specifics as he kept saying he'd let Manti tell the story and just kept praising his character. He said that's the reason he wasn't suspicious and fell for this "hoax" so hard.

This seems like a whole lot of spin and damage control to keep it from hurting his draft status.
 
Probably not that dumb, but to put it nicely these guys aren't in college for hard science degrees or even degrees in several cases.
 
[quote name='Chitown021']I was just watching a little bit of the press conference ND just held. The AD says supposedly Manti never met her and when he spoke about "meeting" it was the on-line type. He referenced the documentary and TV show "Catfish" as examples of what happened to Te'o. He wouldn't get into a lot of the specifics as he kept saying he'd let Manti tell the story and just kept praising his character. He said that's the reason he wasn't suspicious and fell for this "hoax" so hard.

This seems like a whole lot of spin and damage control to keep it from hurting his draft status.[/QUOTE]

This article describes in astounding detail how Manti and Lennay met in person http://articles.southbendtribune.co...brian-and-ottilia-manti-te-o-irish-head-coach

EDIT: The page is no longer available, LOL, the plot thickens
 
[quote name='Burning Karma']http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...brian-and-ottilia-manti-te-o-irish-head-coach

Is this the one you are looking for?[/QUOTE]

That leads to a 404 error also, but anyways, the South Bend Tribune reposted it. They took it off claiming the article had been archived for 2 months already (flat out lie, several people on their FB page reported reading the article on the 16th, including myself)

Everyone looks bad in this situation.
 
[quote name='A Happy Panda']That leads to a 404 error also, but anyways, the South Bend Tribune reposted it. They took it off claiming the article had been archived for 2 months already (flat out lie, several people on their FB page reported reading the article on the 16th, including myself)

Everyone looks bad in this situation.[/QUOTE]
Well shit, it was working when I posted it. At least they reposted it.
 
[quote name='evildeadjedi']The media should have known that the GF didn't exist since the WBC didn't attempt to protest the funeral.[/QUOTE]


LOL, bravo sir! :applause:

Even thought it was an imaginary death I'm surprised they still didn't try to protest in and spew their nonsense.
 
[quote name='blindinglights']Manti's interview hasn't made me any less suspicious. Especially considering he confessed to lying about actually meeting her.[/QUOTE]

I still don't get why the interview wasn't done on camera.
 
[quote name='Chitown021']LOL, bravo sir! :applause:

Even thought it was an imaginary death I'm surprised they still didn't try to protest in and spew their nonsense.[/QUOTE]

Exactly
 
[quote name='chuckie88']Actually, I think that the Freedom have the right idea. The imaginary-friend-day type activities sound like a good time to me! :lol:[/QUOTE]

I think that this idea is awesome as well but they are getting a ton of hate for it on their Facebook page.
 
Lots of rumblings about realignment again center around the ACC getting raided.

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1463673

Big 12 has a meeting on Monday and Tuesday and discussing expansion is on the agenda. Rumblings on twitter and boards that UVA is close to jumping to the Big Ten. UMD filed a countersuit to the ACC and per reports it's starting to look like they'll get out of all or most of the buyout (looks as though the jump from $20 million to $50 million may not go into effect until July). If so that would really open the flood gates.

The common twitter/board speculation is something along the following lines:

Big Ten grabs UVA and UNC or GT.

If it's UVA, SEC takes UNC and Duke. If it's UNC the SEC goes elsewhere--maybe VT and NC State

Big 12 grabs 4-6 of the rest to get to 14 or 16 members. FSU, Miami and Clemson are the most strongly rumored. With GT, VT, NC State and Lousiville also mentioned if they aren't grabbed by one of the other two.

In any case, all that stuff is just speculation. Only facts are that the Big 12 commish said the other day that they could be proactive in expansion and that they will discuss it at the meeting next week.

I'm kind of indifferent. I'd like WVU to get some eastern partners. But most of the teams discussed are so far south that it really doesn't help much on travel. If there was more talk about Lousiville, Pitt, and VT to the Big 12 I'd be more intrigued as that would get old rivals back and cut down on travel for the team and fans a lot.
 
Interesting speculation, I'm sure that the conference realignment stuff will only continue over the next few months. If I'm being a selfish Wolverine fan, I'd be excited to have Georgia Tech join the Big Ten so that I would have the chance to watch Michigan here in Atlanta.
 
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8942451/barry-alvarez-says-big-ten-schedule-fcs-teams

The Big 10 will no longer schedule FCS teams. I hope the other power leagues follow suit. We should see a move toward playing tougher schedules since the selection committee will heavily consider SoS when picking the 4 teams.

Also likely good news for mid-majors as now they'll get a few more games against Big 10 teams (and other leagues if they follow suit) in place of the FCS cupcake games.

As for realignment, nothing new there. Just the same rumblings as last month. Seems everything is in a holding pattern pending the outcome of the UMD-ACC lawsuits.

Only semi-news was the ACC tried again to get members to agree to a grant of rights to solidify the league, but the vote failed.
 
The Big 10 raiding ACC again stuff is picking up a lot of steam on Twitter with some media types included. Dienhart from the Big Ten Network tweeted some stuff yesterday and ESPN Insider Rumor Central has picked up on it as well (don't have an account so can only read this blurb).

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/col...10/b1g-reportedly-offered-another-acc-program
Back room deals to decide college football's future as it pertains to realignment appear to be in full swing once again. And it's the Big Ten Conference which continues to lead the way.

An offer to join the Big Ten has reportedly been extended to another ACC program.

To continue reading this article you must be an Insider
Click to expand...


UVA and UNC are the two teams discussed on Twitter, with UVA thought to be a lock and UNC weighting the decision as they want Duke to go with them and apparently the B1G isn't interested.
 
"Big 10 talk buzzing again. (Virginia) being mentioned often as likely to join. Georgia Tech still in the mix. UNC, the big domino, has an offer," Jeff Ermann of InsideMDSports.com tweeted.

North Carolina is a program both the Big Ten and the SEC likely covet due to its athletics, location and academic standing.

If the league were to offer another program, there are two trains of thought. Virginia is a more logical geographical fit after the league added Maryland and potentially North Carolina. But the Big Ten supposedly covets the Atlanta market and Georgia Tech.

Another domino may be tipping in the never ending game of college football realignment.
Click to expand...

Thanks to whatever cheap magazine site got me a 5 year ESPN sub.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top