College Football Week 13 discussions (In-state rivalry week/possible Black Friday)

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It's not about that, it's about the retarded BCS system. Most football fans say let the best teams all play each other and see who is really best. College football fans say I'd rather watch mascots and guys touching rocks instead of a football game.

Like I've said, college football fans in support of the system seem to love everything about college football except the football part.

Myself, and I assume JiMGA and all the other people who argue against you, were watching, loving and occasionally posting about a pretty epic football game today. Oregon is currently down in the 2nd quarter in another game shaping up for a nice 2nd half. If Nevada keeps it close vs. Boise I'll enjoy that game as well. Meanwhile your sole post today is decrying the system, complaining about how things should be different, and accusing us of not caring about the actual football games.

(It's doubly hilarious to me you are choosing this day to attack the system when both Auburn and Oregon would be in a playoff even with a loss today.)

Originally Posted by TroyF

The other stuff? I'm pretty sure his dad is scum. I'm not sure if Cam is or not. I'm pretty sure every team in the SEC has money change hands on a yearly basis. It's not a matter of IF someone else in the conference will get caught again. . . it's who and when. All I know is that Cam the football player is a hell of a player and he deserves most of the plaudits he gets for his work between the lines.

+1 on all this. I'll love delving into the off-field drama, but I'm not going to let it affect my enjoyment of watching Cam Newton the football player.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

1 on all this. I'll love delving into the off-field drama, but I'm not going to let it affect my enjoyment of watching Cam Newton the football player.

But it will still let you go back and pass judgement on Reggie Bush right? Didn't hear anybody standing up and making these kind of arguments 6 months ago. If the only difference between the two cases is Newton is still playing, that's a BS double standard.

I hate the rules that say these kids can't get any compensation for their part in a billion dollar industry but I'm sorry if I can't get too teary eyed thinking about his legacy and your viewing pleasure after watching everybody in the country shit all over the football program I support for the last 6 months.

[DeToxRox]

Forget all the BCS nonsense for now. The real bullshit is how badly Arizona is getting jobbed by the refs tonight. I almost never bitch about refs but holy fuck.

[DeToxRox]

Dola, Roger Goodell just tweeted "wow these Pac 10 refs are making the pro game look manly"

[CU Tiger]

So if SC beats Auburn (God help us all) and Oregon loses tonight, could we have a BSU v. TCU MNC?

Actually a friend and huge SEC guy wants AU to lose next week and Oreonto lose tonight, because he thinks somehow that will result in AU vs LSU for the MNC. Not sure how hat would evr happen, but its his thoughts.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

But it will still let you go back and pass judgement on Reggie Bush right? Didn't hear anybody standing up and making these kind of arguments 6 months ago. If the only difference between the two cases is Newton is still playing, that's a BS double standard.

I hate the rules that say these kids can't get any compensation for their part in a billion dollar industry but I'm sorry if I can't get too teary eyed thinking about his legacy and your viewing pleasure after watching everybody in the country shit all over the football program I support for the last 6 months.

No one I have heard has acused Cam of getting a penny in all this, meanwhil Reggie lived in a seaside condo and drove a car valued as much as what Cecil reportedly asked for.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

But it will still let you go back and pass judgement on Reggie Bush right? Didn't hear anybody standing up and making these kind of arguments 6 months ago. If the only difference between the two cases is Newton is still playing, that's a BS double standard.

I hate the rules that say these kids can't get any compensation for their part in a billion dollar industry but I'm sorry if I can't get too teary eyed thinking about his legacy and your viewing pleasure after watching everybody in the country shit all over the football program I support for the last 6 months.

Under the rules Bush was ineligible and he should have returned his Heisman. USC was playing an ineligible player and should have forfeited the wins. If even part of what is being rumored is true then Newton is ineligible, should forfeit his Heisman, and same with Auburn and its wins. I wish the NCAA would get off its ass (where it is even possible) to suspend players in a timely manner instead of retroactively years down the road. Until they actually do that I will enjoy watching Cam Newton between the lines, just as I have fond memories of Reggie Bush's run against Fresno State, or his leap through the end zone vs. Texas even if they were later declared to have never happened.

I also have a hard time feeling sorry for a USC fan after seeing my program get shit on for a decade+ with almost none of the on-field success to go along with it.

[bhlloy]

So the standard for cheating is plausable deniability? Your family can get as much money as they like but as long as they can claim you didn't know about it, you are good in the court of public opinion? (which doesn't even address the fact that Cam told MSU that he was going to Auburn because the money was too much)

If Cam really had a problem with his father making him pay for play, then he could have gone to the NCAA at any point during his recruitment. To say he wasn't aware of it or was being forced into it seems the high of naivety, but if you want to believe that, go ahead. In 2 years when we have another Heisman and maybe another national title getting given back, I'm sure that will make all the difference.

[Atocep]

Pitt fans calling for Rich Rodriguez to replace Wanny is the highlight of my weekend.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Pitt fans calling for Rich Rodriguez to replace Wanny is the highlight of my weekend.

As long as Wanstedt doesn't go to Michigan, I am all for it.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Myself, and I assume JiMGA and all the other people who argue against you, were watching, loving and occasionally posting about a pretty epic football game today. Oregon is currently down in the 2nd quarter in another game shaping up for a nice 2nd half. If Nevada keeps it close vs. Boise I'll enjoy that game as well. Meanwhile your sole post today is decrying the system, complaining about how things should be different, and accusing us of not caring about the actual football games.

(It's doubly hilarious to me you are choosing this day to attack the system when both Auburn and Oregon would be in a playoff even with a loss today.)+1 on all this. I'll love delving into the off-field drama, but I'm not going to let it affect my enjoyment of watching Cam Newton the football player.

It's a beauty pageant. Sure they are great games, but it's great teams against average/good teams. It's not great teams vs great teams. I enjoy Auburn/Alabama and Oregon/Arizona like I enjoyed watching the Patriots and Jets yesterday. Being challenged for awhile against run-of-the-mill teams.

But at the end of the season, I know those teams will have to go through the best to win a Championship. I know the Patriots will have to go through the Jets, Steelers, and maybe Colts to get through the AFC to play a team that went through the best in the NFC to get there. So I enjoy both's regular seasons because I enjoy football, but I know one will end with the best playing the best and the others will end up with computers, writers and coaches determining who looked prettiest in their evening gown.

[SirFozzie]

ESPN loves throwing monickers around like Showdown Saturday.

In retrospect, this one should be labeled "Cocktease Friday"

[digamma]

Did we watch the same football games? I was satisfied.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It's a beauty pageant. Sure they are great games, but it's great teams against average/good teams. It's not great teams vs great teams. I enjoy Auburn/Alabama and Oregon/Arizona like I enjoyed watching the Patriots and Jets yesterday. Being challenged for awhile against run-of-the-mill teams.

Under your plan, Auburn-Alabama would have been a terrible game. Auburn would have either not played its starters or sat them after the first quarter. No tension, no passion, nothing. Just get ready for the play-offs. Boring.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

So the standard for cheating is plausable deniability? Your family can get as much money as they like but as long as they can claim you didn't know about it, you are good in the court of public opinion? (which doesn't even address the fact that Cam told MSU that he was going to Auburn because the money was too much)

If Cam really had a problem with his father making him pay for play, then he could have gone to the NCAA at any point during his recruitment. To say he wasn't aware of it or was being forced into it seems the high of naivety, but if you want to believe that, go ahead. In 2 years when we have another Heisman and maybe another national title getting given back, I'm sure
that will make all the difference.

The accusations about Bush were there while he was at USC. They were just brushed aside. There were plenty of rumors about Bush and the USC program as a whole.

Of course Cam could have went to the NCAA and turned his father in. . . but how many people would have made that decision? This is one of those things where it is incredibly easy to say what you would have done, but incredibly hard to actually have done it. Humiliate your father?

It may seem naive, but have you ever seen a controlling parent? I have and it's pretty believable that it COULD have happened.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by digamma

Under your plan, Auburn-Alabama would have been a terrible game. Auburn would have either not played its starters or sat them after the first quarter. No tension, no passion, nothing. Just get ready for the play-offs. Boring.

Tell that to the NFL who shits all over college football ratings.

[RainMaker]

TroyF, shouldn't you be watching my Bulls beat your Nuggets without Rose?

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by digamma

Under your plan, Auburn-Alabama would have been a terrible game. Auburn would have either not played its starters or sat them after the first quarter. No tension, no passion, nothing. Just get ready for the play-offs. Boring.

Boring for today, sure. Of course instead of 30 bowl games where people watch their team, one or two good matchups and the title game, we'd have a solid months worth of drama and we could STILL have those bowl games.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Tell that to the NFL who shits all over college football ratings.

Or should I tell it to the college football ticket printers who shit all over their NFL counterparts?

Comparing ratings to a league with 32 teams and at most 16 games a weekend in set made for television blocks is meaningless and silly, just as my suggestion above to compare attendance numbers for a college weekend where there could be 50+ college games.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Boring for today, sure. Of course instead of 30 bowl games where people watch their team, one or two good matchups and the title game, we'd have a solid months worth of drama and we could STILL have those bowl games.

This is a fair argument--no doubt a play-off would be exciting, but in my mind to the detriment of the regular season (and more than just this weekend). I'm not sure you can quantify the effect on scheduling, rivalries, tradition, etc. Maybe that makes me curmudgeonly or conservative or afraid of change, but I like what we've got between September 1 and December 1 (give or take a few days each way).

[mauchow]

That was a pretty nice throw there by Moore..

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by digamma

This is a fair argument--no doubt a play-off would be exciting, but in my mind to the detriment of the regular season (and more than just this weekend). I'm not sure you can quantify the effect on scheduling, rivalries, tradition, etc. Maybe that makes me curmudgeonly or conservative or afraid of change, but I like what we've got between September 1 and December 1 (give or take a few days each way).

Are the NFL playoffs a "detriment to the regular season"?

Please explain how that would be the case? Teams would still have to have the best regular season that they could so they get into the playoffs.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by digamma

Or should I tell it to the college football ticket printers who shit all over their NFL counterparts?

Comparing ratings to a league with 32 teams and at most 16 games a weekend in set made for television blocks is meaningless and silly, just as my suggestion above to compare attendance numbers for a college weekend where there could be 50+ college games.

And a postseason filled with half empty stadiums and ratings that get beaten out by episodes of Real Housewives. While the average Sunday Night NFL game destroys the average BCS game.

I won't compare the postseasons of the two because quite frankly, that gets downright embarrasing. For such an exciting system and how boring the NFL system is, it's amazing how they can't come close to competing with it.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Are the NFL playoffs a "detriment to the regular season"?

Please explain how that would be the case? Teams would still have to have the best regular season that they could so they get into the playoffs.

It is apples and oranges.

The college regular season is so exciting because if you want to contend for a title you need to bring it every week. One loss and you are out, it makes literally every game a playoff for the top teams.

In the NFL the team that wins the title likely has 3-4 losses, so you can afford an off week.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by digamma

This is a fair argument--no doubt a play-off would be exciting, but in my mind to the detriment of the regular season (and more than just this weekend). I'm not sure you can quantify the effect on scheduling, rivalries, tradition, etc. Maybe that makes me curmudgeonly or conservative or afraid of change, but I like what we've got between September 1 and December 1 (give or take a few days each way).

I don't see how it hurts anything. A playoff would have home/away games and we both know how huge having home field advantage can be in college football. I doubt Auburn would be resting starters and risking having to go on the road in the playoffs. As for scheduling, teams could actually schedule tough games as they wouldn't fear a loss ruining their season. Maybe we won't have to watch teams like Ohio State put Eastern Michigan and Ohio on their table.

But your second sentence said it all. It's about rivalries and tradition, not about football to you. That's fine. I've been saying that those in support of the system like everything about college football but the football part. Just as there are people who watch award shows to see what everyone is wearing.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Lathum

It is apples and oranges.

The college regular season is so exciting because if you want to contend for a title you need to bring it every week. One loss and you are out, it makes literally every game a playoff for the top teams.

In the NFL the team that wins the title likely has 3-4 losses, so you can afford an off week.

Yet those games involving those teams can't come remotely close to ratings of an NFL game with crappy teams. For all the excitement this system brings, it's odd how more people aren't watching it.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

It is apples and oranges.

The college regular season is so exciting because if you want to contend for a title you need to bring it every week. One loss and you are out, it makes literally every game a playoff for the top teams.

In the NFL the team that wins the title likely has 3-4 losses, so you can afford an off week.

Not really. They still have to bring it every week. Take the top 16 teams and you are looking at 2 losses at the most. This actually give teams with one loss that much more incentive to bring it every week.

[EagleFan]

dola: Plus, as RainMaker points out above... If you know that one loss could be the difference between home playoff games and road ones you are still going to be bringing it each and every week.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Not really. They still have to bring it every week. Take the top 16 teams and you are looking at 2 losses at the most. This actually give teams with one loss that much more incentive to bring it every week.

Not to mention home field advantage playing a huge role.

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Yet those games involving those teams can't come remotely close to ratings of an NFL game with crappy teams. For all the excitement this system brings, it's odd how more people aren't watching it.

I don't see why anyone would think that college football should have TV ratings as high as the NFL, which is the most popular sports league in the country. How many people watch the US Amateur compared to the Masters? The College World Series compared to the World Series? I think college football does incredibly well considering most of the players are playing for free and that some of the country's biggest markets don't have relevant teams (now or even traditionally). A playoff system (which I would like to see btw) would not suddenly make college football as big as the NFL.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

I don't see why anyone would think that college football should have TV ratings as high as the NFL, which is the most popular sports league in the country. How many people watch the US Amateur compared to the Masters? The College World Series compared to the World Series? I think college football does incredibly well considering most of the players are playing for free and that some of the country's biggest markets don't have relevant teams (now or even traditionally). A playoff system (which I would like to see btw) would not suddenly make college football as big as the NFL.

Because it's football, and this country has shown they can't get enough of it. A month long playoff of the best teams playing each other week after week would bring massive ratings.

And that whole part about deciding the champion on the field.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Because it's football, and this country has shown they can't get enough of it. A month long playoff of the best teams playing each other week after week would bring massive ratings.

And that whole part about deciding the champion on the field.

We already see what March Madness does for college basketball. Imagine what a playoff system would do for college football.

[Izulde]

I don't think you can quite compare March Madness to a projected college football playoffs.

March Madness = 65 teams and a lot more people with a rooting interest, because of school affiliation, if nothing else. There's also the gambling element.

Football playoffs = 12? 16 teams? That's about a 50 team difference.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Izulde

I don't think you can quite compare March Madness to a projected college football playoffs.

March Madness = 65 teams and a lot more people with a rooting interest, because of school affiliation, if nothing else. There's also the gambling element.

Football playoffs = 12? 16 teams? That's about a 50 team difference.

Still a gambling element for drawing people to a football playoff system. Plus the interest is going to be there much more for a playoff game than for "sponsor of the year who really cares dot come bowl".

[RainMaker]

Gambling is much larger in college football than it is in college basketball. A playoff would ramp that up even more.

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Because it's football, and this country has shown they can't get enough of it. A month long playoff of the best teams playing each other week after week would bring massive ratings.

And that whole part about deciding the champion on the field.

It could well increase ratings but not to the level of NFL playoff games imo.

What kind of playoff system would you prefer though?

Personally I like the sixteen team proposal (11 conference winners and then top 5 other teams decided by something similar to the BCS rankings) but a lot of people don't like the idea of the weakest conference winners in a given year getting a spot in the playoffs.

But since the seeding would be by the rankings (with most of the wild card teams very likely to be seeded ahead of the worst conference winners), I think that would still keep teams fighting for the top seeds and keep regular season games meaningful enough, since a game against a school like Northern Illinois/UCF/Florida International in the first round would be much better than facing a team like Stanford/LSU/Wisconsin. If there was home field advantage in the first round or two there would be an even bigger incentive to earn one of the top seeds.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

It could well increase ratings but not to the level of NFL playoff games imo.

What kind of playoff system would you prefer though?

Personally I like the sixteen team proposal (11 conference winners and then top 5 other teams decided by something similar to the BCS rankings) but a lot of people don't like the idea of the weakest conference winners in a given year getting a spot in the playoffs.

But since the seeding would be by the rankings (with most of the wild card teams very likely to be seeded ahead of the worst conference winners), I think that would still keep teams fighting for the top seeds and keep regular season games meaningful enough, since a game against a school like Northern Illinois/UCF/Florida International in the first round would be much better than facing a team like Stanford/LSU/Wisconsin. If there was home field advantage in the first round or two there would be an even bigger incentive to earn one of the top seeds.

Yeah, it won't equal the NFL but I think they can get pretty close.

I prefer the 16-team one you listed with some exceptions. I'd make the conference winner bid similar to how D2 does "earned access". The conference winner gets in if they are ranked at a certain level. So you'd have to at least be in the top 25 or 30 of the BCS to get in. Otherwise it adds an extra at-large. That would eliminate giving a bid to the Sun Belt or MAC in years where they don't have a worthy team (like this year).

The playoffs would be home field advantage for the higher seeds and a championship game at a neutral site.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Yeah, it won't equal the NFL but I think they can get pretty close.

I prefer the 16-team one you listed with some exceptions. I'd make the conference winner bid similar to how D2 does "earned access". The conference winner gets in if they are ranked at a certain level. So you'd have to at least be in the top 25 or 30 of the BCS to get in. Otherwise it adds an extra at-large. That would eliminate giving a bid to the Sun Belt or MAC in years where they don't have a worthy team (like this year).

The playoffs would be home field advantage for the higher seeds and a championship game at a neutral site.

I hereby declare RainMaker as the NCAA Football Playoff czar.... Make it so!!!

[RainMaker]

I would also move a lot of the bowls to the beginning of the season. We are seeing the big neutral site games taking place here and there but this would ramp it up a bit. It would also hopefully encourage schools to schedule real teams. While it's tough to base off the previous years results, you can keep conference tie-ins to these games. So every year you can kickoff the season in some city with a Pac-10/Big 10 game. Or SEC/Big 12 game.

[RainMaker]

I'm surprised more teams don't use the pistol formation. I know it's caught on at some schools but it seems so perfect for college.

This one is going down to the wire although Nevada seems to have Boise's number this half. Sort of pulling for Nevada as they really have built a nice program there and deserve some credit.

[Izulde]

I will be extremely annoyed if Reno wins. Not only would I like to see Boise State have a chance to get in the national title game, but I hate the Asshatpack more than any other school, with perhaps the exceptions of Minnesota and Yale.

[kcchief19]

What a run there by Martin. Holy cow.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm surprised more teams don't use the pistol formation. I know it's caught on at some schools but it seems so perfect for college.

This one is going down to the wire although Nevada seems to have Boise's number this half. Sort of pulling for Nevada as they really have built a nice program there and deserve some credit.

I'm torn because I'm rooting for Boise but this Nevada team has really been fun to watch the last few years. They are a legit top 25 team, I've thought so all season. A buddy and I are discussing Nevada vs. Utah this year, and I think Nevada is the better team.

Will be tough for them to sustain their success without Kapernick. That kid is perfect in that offense.

[RainMaker]

Yeah, Nevada is better than Utah.

[cmp]

Is Les Miles coaching Nevada? Clock management was very poor.

[cmp]

Wow. And one second left.

[DeToxRox]

WOW

Inexcusable by Nevada though.

[kcchief19]

Holy crap.

[RainMaker]

Why Nevada? WHY?

[bhlloy]

Yup, that's why you are Nevada-Reno. The coach that called the coverage on that play should be fired, right now. That's unbelievably inexcusable.