Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

College football: what we learned
Quote | Reply
What did we learn this weekend, regarding college football and the playoff picture?

I’ll offer:

There’s not much sense ranking teams with several weeks to go other than media hype and increasing fan interest. The volatility at the top can be substantial over the last few weeks.

When it comes to who will beat who and how badly, when “top” teams collide we don’t know jack.

Going undefeated looks better and better, regardless of conference and/or strength of schedule. (I’ll stand by my prediction that an undefeated Power Five champ will always get in.)

Some teams fold like a cheap suit when they get hit in the mouth and their hopes and dreams start to slip away (looking at you Notre Dame and Georgia). Others, love them or hate them, seem to find a way to grit it out (Alabama).

So, what did we learn?
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [DieselPete] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
well we learned that Army is 8-2 and undefeated at Michie Stadium this year! Yesterday's 'w' against the demon deacons weren't pretty but we got er done.

next up N. Texas in Denton and then a two week break before defeating Navy and bringing the CIC trophy home where it belongs :-)

/r

Steve
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [Steve Hawley] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Steve Hawley wrote:
well we learned that Army is 8-2 and undefeated at Michie Stadium this year! Yesterday's 'w' against the demon deacons weren't pretty but we got er done.

next up N. Texas in Denton and then a two week break before defeating Navy and bringing the CIC trophy home where it belongs :-)

/r

I'm really impressed how well Army has played this year. You should be proud. Army Navy has the potential to be a close evenly matched game.
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [DieselPete] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
We learned the SEC is overrated again. Alabama was exposed.
Wisconsin runs the table and they are in
Miami is better than expected
OU may be worthy of a bid
The whole process is BS and 6 champs and 2 at large is the way to go
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [DieselPete] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Notre Dame sucks. Yeah baby. Say it loud.

"If one does not know to which port one is sailing, no wind is favorable." - Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [jkca1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jkca1 wrote:
Notre Dame sucks. Yeah baby. Say it loud.

Didn’t see that score coming. Miami may be for real.
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
We learned the SEC is overrated again. Alabama was exposed.
Wisconsin runs the table and they are in
Miami is better than expected
OU may be worthy of a bid
The whole process is BS and 6 champs and 2 at large is the way to go

I think the 5+3 is the future and will happen after one conference from the Power Five gets left out a few years in a row.

Why 6+2? From the AAC, MAC, Sun Belt, Mountain West and Conference USA, which can make a facts-based argument that it is better than the others? What would the criteria even be? Out-of-conference record over some number of years against the Power Five and against the other “mid-majors”?
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [DieselPete] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
We learned that the Cougs are 9-2. The mad scientist, Mike Leach, is for real. The last three years' win totals will be 9,8 and 9+(hopefully). Looking at WSU's record since he took over in 2012 makes it obvious. They struggled for a few years until his recruits started all playing, then they started winning. People want to play for this guy.

Go Cougs!
Last edited by: zed707: Nov 12, 17 12:37
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [DieselPete] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That James Madison has the longest winning streak in D1 football. Yes the FCS is D1.

All I Wanted Was A Pepsi, Just One Pepsi

De Soto Ambassador
https://teamrwb.org
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [DieselPete] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DieselPete wrote:
windywave wrote:
We learned the SEC is overrated again. Alabama was exposed.
Wisconsin runs the table and they are in
Miami is better than expected
OU may be worthy of a bid
The whole process is BS and 6 champs and 2 at large is the way to go

I think the 5+3 is the future and will happen after one conference from the Power Five gets left out a few years in a row.

Why 6+2? From the AAC, MAC, Sun Belt, Mountain West and Conference USA, which can make a facts-based argument that it is better than the others? What would the criteria even be? Out-of-conference record over some number of years against the Power Five and against the other “mid-majors”?

The gap between the AAC as a whole and the "P5" is significantly less than the gap between the other 4 and the AAC. The reason they won't include them is money. What I'd really like is TV money mutualized over all conferences and teams.
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I’m wide open to being convinced that the AAC is better than the other mid-major conferences but I need some data. Whatcha got?
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [DieselPete] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DieselPete wrote:

I’ll stand by my prediction that an undefeated Power Five champ will always get in.

Quote:

Well, that's just common sense.

It's all about the post count!!!
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [japarker24] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
japarker24 wrote:
DieselPete wrote:

I’ll stand by my prediction that an undefeated Power Five champ will always get in.

Quote:

Well, that's just common sense.

On another thread there were posters taking the position that an undefeated Wisconsin team would be left out.
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [Patrick E] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Patrick E wrote:
jkca1 wrote:
Notre Dame sucks. Yeah baby. Say it loud.


Didn’t see that score coming. Miami may be for real.

Agreed. Miami played a hell of a game. On top of that Kelly's teams just do not show up for the games that count. Sure they can dominate mid-season, but towards the end where every game counts, the Irish just can't pull it off. I expect them to lose to Stanford next week as well.
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [DieselPete] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DieselPete wrote:
I’m wide open to being convinced that the AAC is better than the other mid-major conferences but I need some data. Whatcha got?

Head to head AAC versus both P5 and the other 4?
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
DieselPete wrote:
I’m wide open to being convinced that the AAC is better than the other mid-major conferences but I need some data. Whatcha got?

Head to head AAC versus both P5 and the other 4?

That would be great. If someone showed me the AAC does X against the Power Five and the other conferences do somewhat or even much worse and that the AAC does X against the other mid-majors, then I could be convinced. But I need some numbers. And over some number of years.
Quote Reply
Re: College football: what we learned [Billabong] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Billabong wrote:
That James Madison has the longest winning streak in D1 football. Yes the FCS is D1.

The Dukes? I wanted to watch the JMU - Richmond game but could not find it anywhere. Really good football played in the FCS.
Quote Reply