Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 72 of 111 FirstFirst ... 2262707172737482 ... LastLast
Results 711 to 720 of 1104
  1. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,407
    Is this the best top 3 we've had in a long time?
    OhSt and LSU have been juggernauts, and I still think Dabo's Tigers have been sandbagging.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,565
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235 View Post
    Well, Wisconsin's last-second loss on a 40+ yard FG ended up with no effect on anything of note, as far as I can see. The still would be 0-2 versus OSU unless you allow them to swap halves (take the first half from each game). It shows how much deeper OSU is; I am not sure that Wisconsin has any 5-star recruits and few 4-star ones beyond Taylor. Typical UW recruiting class averages about 40th ranked; when they re-rank them three years later they end of around 15th.
    A few years ago, USA Today listed the football budgets of all the FBS programs and Wisconsin was in the top 10, so while they might not sign the most celebrated recruiting classes, they're not getting outspent by the blue bloods. I've been impressed with how Wisconsin has remained steady under the Alvarez, Bielema and Chryst reigns. Most schools don't maintain that sort of stability under those circumstances.

    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235 View Post
    I wonder what would happen if they cut the number of Football scholarships by 20; a lot of talent would end up in the mid-majors, and in the lower-to-mid-levels of Pac-12/Big Ten. Instead, what the NCAA is doing is allowing second round recruiting the feeds the biggest programs.
    Once upon on time, there were no scholarship limits. In 1973, a 105-scholarship limit was put into place, 95 in 1978 and 85 in 1992 (63 for FBS schools). Since the have-nots outnumber the haves, perhaps they will vote in another scholarship limit to 75 in the future.
    Last edited by jazzcyclist; 12-10-2019 at 12:35 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Atticus View Post
    Is this the best top 3 we've had in a long time?
    OhSt and LSU have been juggernauts, and I still think Dabo's Tigers have been sandbagging.
    2004, the year an undefeated Auburn had to watch the championship on TV, was the last time the top 3 was this deep.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzcyclist View Post
    2004, the year an undefeated Auburn had to watch the championship on TV, was the last time the top 3 was this deep.
    I think the difference is this year I believe any of the three have a legitimate shot at winning, while back then I didn't think OK had a prayer against USC. Auburn may have done better but USC was the dominant team that year.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,565
    Quote Originally Posted by 502CD View Post
    I think the difference is this year I believe any of the three have a legitimate shot at winning, while back then I didn't think OK had a prayer against USC. Auburn may have done better but USC was the dominant team that year.
    But you never know how these things will play out until the game is played. In 2004, folks were as shocked by the outcome of the USC-Oklahoma game as they were about the outcome of last year's Alabama-Clemson game and USC was only a 3-point favorite in 2004 while Clemson was actually a 6-point underdog last year.
    Last edited by jazzcyclist; 12-10-2019 at 06:32 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogery- chwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch, Wales
    Posts
    12,078
    8 team playoff inching closer to reality.

    https://twitter.com/RossDellenger/st...48550758273025

    That's exactly the right makeup - the five power 5 champs, top Group of 5, and 2 at-large.
    There are no strings on me
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ???? ???? in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.
    Posts
    12,142
    The only way to go....
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    62,061
    I might even watch some college football under that system
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,407
    Quote Originally Posted by guru View Post
    8 team playoff inching closer to reality.
    4 is plenty, but the $$$-signs are too big to ignore for the networks.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,565
    Quote Originally Posted by guru View Post
    8 team playoff inching closer to reality.

    https://twitter.com/RossDellenger/st...48550758273025

    That's exactly the right makeup - the five power 5 champs, top Group of 5, and 2 at-large.
    As I pointed out in an earlier post, not only would an 8-team format have made many pivotal regular season games meaningless but it would have made the Big 10, Big 12 and SEC championship games inconsequential as well, but at a time when many folks derive great pride from their kids' participation trophies, perhaps expansionism is inevitable.

    Furthermore, this version of expansionism which includes 6 automatic bids is the very worst kind of expansionism. Who here really wants to see LSU vs Memphis in the quarterfinals? If you're going to go to 8 teams at least use the CFP rankings to pick them. After all, even UCF, with its delusional scheduling policy, would have made the playoffs in this system. This reminds me of the push for regionals in NCAA track and field under the pretense that it would give smaller schools a chance to compete for a title, but since it's inception the same blue bloods (eg, Oregon, Arkansas, USC, etc.) have continued to dominate every year.
    Last edited by jazzcyclist; 12-11-2019 at 09:26 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •