2019 NCAA Football Thread

[Lassr]

This is the reason I am hesitant to support expanding the playoffs. Thought there were only 3 deserving teams this year.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

At a San Antonio Spurs game and players from both Texas and Utah we’re sitting in the sections near us. Not surprisingly, when the teams were shown on the Jumbotron, the Texas players got a big cheer and the Utah players were booed.

[Skinypupy]

This is the reason I am hesitant to support expanding the playoffs. Thought there were only 3 deserving teams this year.

While I agree that there were only three dominant teams this year, I don't know that's necessarily an argument against playoff expansion. It's like saying we should only take the top three NFL teams and eliminate the rest.

I mean, Clemson has looked dominant all year...all except for the one time they didn't. While it certainly didn't today, it doesn't mean that same thing can't happen in a playoff game.

At a San Antonio Spurs game and players from both Texas and Utah we’re sitting in the sections near us. Not surprisingly, when the teams were shown on the Jumbotron, the Texas players got a big cheer and the Utah players were booed.

Yeah, I'm really interested to see how this team reacts to a de facto away game.

[GungHo]

This is insane

I’m hindsight, I guess I’m glad it’s OK and not us.

Utah would've played a much better game than ou. Oklahoma, like every team in the big 12 this year, is garbage. The conference's signature win was....K State over Mississippi State? I guess...? Maybe OU over UCLA? Hell Texas only losing by 7 to LSU might have been the best showing (and we played well in that game but definitely weren't great). It's just a bad league this year. OU should never even have been in the conversation for the CFP. At some point they have to do the eyeball test with these teams and forget conference championships. Prior to the CFP conference championships were basically window dressing going all the way back to 'the good ole days' (and good ole boys network) of the 60s-early 90s when winning your conference guaranteed you a spot in your league's designated bowl and so they meant something. But through most of the 90s until CFP they meant next to nothing. As they should in the CFP format. I have zero problems with 2 teams from one league making it at the exclusion of a conference winner from another IF THEY'RE BETTER.
And I don't think it's hard to argue that Oregon, Alabama, Utah, Auburn, and Georgia were all 'better' than OU. No one had the gaudy numbers of Hurts, though he was trending down as the season progressed and OU was a champion with only one loss. Of course it was vs a team with a losing record. That right there should trump anything else u do in the season. CFB is a beauty pageant, always has been, which is why it's so fun to talk about. But if you have a great model going down the runway and they fall off the damn stage...welp you're done. That was#4 OU losing to 5-7 K State. Thanks for playing. Better luck next year.
Even if you don't want to subscribe to my snarky take on it, there's real football wisdom in looking at highly ranked teams playing losing teams and how that team performs. We've all seen hundreds of games that the #3 team wins it in the final drive (Ohio St vs Purdue back in ohh..2003 maybe) Texas in 2005 vs KU, we were dead in the water and somehow found a way. But if you see that #3-4 team come in flatter than a pancake and then don't get any better... that's a real warning sign that something is fundamentally broken on your team . OU was in the unique position of playing some uhhhh well, not good teams to get them back on the path (as it is currently laid out) and kudos to them for doing what we asked of them. But long story longer, there's still more problems with how we pick these final 4.

there
And again skinny you have less than nothing to worry about in the Alamo bowl. Yes Texas fans show up but they're not excited to be there. And if it gets even remotely disproportionate on the scoreboard, a fairly substantial number of those ppl will be gone.

Also did I mention we replaced both our OC and our DC after our last game. So yeah expect big things from guys who got 12 practices in a completely new system...
Really really think Utah has zero trouble with Texas. We're not in a good place mentally and that's a bad place to be going up against a Top 10 team

[Jaymann]

Congrats to Clemson, they didn't panic when they fell behind early. OSU really shot themselves in the foot with a couple bonehead plays - targeting the QB and running into the kicker.

[Skinypupy]

And again skinny you have less than nothing to worry about in the Alamo bowl. Yes Texas fans show up but they're not excited to be there. And if it gets even remotely disproportionate on the scoreboard, a fairly substantial number of those ppl will be gone.

Also did I mention we replaced both our OC and our DC after our last game. So yeah expect big things from guys who got 12 practices in a completely new system...
Really really think Utah has zero trouble with Texas. We're not in a good place mentally and that's a bad place to be going up against a Top 10 team

That will be balanced out by the fact that those offensive players will be up against our 3rd and 4th string DBs. Both all-conference guys are out (one declared, one hurt) as are their back-ups (both hurt).

If our d-line can’t get pressure (which they couldn’t against Oregon), then I fully expect Ehlinger to have a field day with lots of chunk yardage plays.

Hope I’m wrong.

[Lassr]

I wish they would chunk the committee and go back to the BCS model to determine the playoff teams. They are supposed to be impartial and pick only the 4 best teams but they are human.

[Pyperkub]

I wish they would chunk the committee and go back to the BCS model to determine the playoff teams. They are supposed to be impartial and pick only the 4 best teams but they are human.

OK, so who do you think should have been #4?

[pr0ner]

I wish they would chunk the committee and go back to the BCS model to determine the playoff teams. They are supposed to be impartial and pick only the 4 best teams but they are human.

The simulated BCS rankings would have had Oklahoma #4, too, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make for this year.

Edit: Actually, the simulated BCS rankings have mirrored the 4 teams the CFP committee have chosen every year. The early years saw a one game that would have been different (BCS and CFP had 3 and 4 flipped), but lately, it's been spot on.

[Lassr]

huh, that is interesting, I could have sworn the BCS had a few different matchups in years past. And this year it wouldn't have mattered since there were only 3 teams deserving. I think several teams would have had a better showing against LSU but don't think anyone would have beaten them.

[Scuzz]

I wish they would chunk the committee and go back to the BCS model to determine the playoff teams. They are supposed to be impartial and pick only the 4 best teams but they are human.

Based on the records they did pick the four most worthy teams. Oklahoma won a power 5 conference and had only one loss.

I don't think anyone beats LSU unless they simply outscore them in a very high scoring game. Something in the 40-50 range. LSU's ofense is just that good. The defense isn't great but it is good enough to win the championship.

I was surprised Clemson won. OSU not settling for field goals in the first half really came back to haunt them.

[msduncan]

I wish they would chunk the committee and go back to the BCS model to determine the playoff teams. They are supposed to be impartial and pick only the 4 best teams but they are human.

Based on the records they did pick the four most worthy teams. Oklahoma won a power 5 conference and had only one loss.

I don't think anyone beats LSU unless they simply outscore them in a very high scoring game. Something in the 40-50 range. LSU's ofense is just that good. The defense isn't great but it is good enough to win the championship.

I was surprised Clemson won. OSU not settling for field goals in the first half really came back to haunt them.

The charter of the playoffs doesn't say they have to pick the 4 most worthy teams. It specifically says they are to choose the 4 BEST teams.

[Scuzz]

I wish they would chunk the committee and go back to the BCS model to determine the playoff teams. They are supposed to be impartial and pick only the 4 best teams but they are human.

Based on the records they did pick the four most worthy teams. Oklahoma won a power 5 conference and had only one loss.

I don't think anyone beats LSU unless they simply outscore them in a very high scoring game. Something in the 40-50 range. LSU's ofense is just that good. The defense isn't great but it is good enough to win the championship.

I was surprised Clemson won. OSU not settling for field goals in the first half really came back to haunt them.

The charter of the playoffs doesn't say they have to pick the 4 most worthy teams. It specifically says they are to choose the 4 BEST teams.

Semantics my friend.

[Apollo]

It's not semantics. Take last year for instance. Everyone agreed that Notre Dame had earned their way into the final four by being a "Power 5" equivalent team with an undefeated record, thus making them one of the 4 most worthy teams. But many also felt that Georgia was actually a better team and should have been in instead. That's the sort of decision making MSD is referring to.

Personally, I think the committee has done a good job balancing "most worthy" and "best" and I have agreed with every final four so far (if not always their ranked order). Some would argue that teams like Alabama would have done better in the final four, but Oklahoma, as a Power 5 conference champion with one loss was the obvious choice. On the other hand, there are usually only 1-3 truly elite teams each year, which is why, in a four team playoff, we have these blowouts every year. An eight team playoff would be even worse, IMHO.

[Scuzz]

I favor an 8 team playoff. You include every Power 5 Champ, they can pick them however they want. Then you go with 3 wild cards. Any three wild cards. It adds one week to the season, big deal. They make even more money.

Sure, the odds of the 8 seed winning out are not great, but in any sports playoff system those odds aren't great, but it happens from time to time.

I also think it would make for better in season scheduling, as a non-conference loss wouldn't eliminate a team from playoff contention and if your the WC it may actually make your odds of getting in better.

[Skinypupy]

Good lord...dying.

[McNutt]

I think Texas deserved a spot. Not really, but Utah is looking like they're being beaten by a top 2 team.

[msduncan]

I favor an 8 team playoff. You include every Power 5 Champ, they can pick them however they want. Then you go with 3 wild cards. Any three wild cards. It adds one week to the season, big deal. They make even more money.

Sure, the odds of the 8 seed winning out are not great, but in any sports playoff system those odds aren't great, but it happens from time to time.

I also think it would make for better in season scheduling, as a non-conference loss wouldn't eliminate a team from playoff contention and if your the WC it may actually make your odds of getting in better.

If you expand to 8, you will get more playoff games that are completely lopsided destruction fests like LSU vs Oklahoma. It's not good for the sport. Let's quit trying to be 'fair' and give everyone ribbons and instead acknowledge there are about 3 or MAYBE 4 elite teams each year. Everyone else is playing chess, not checkers.

[Skinypupy]

I wish I could say I was surprised, but I could see that one coming a mile away. Oregon provided the template to beat us, and Texas followed it to a T. Our o-line completely disappeared the last two games, and the play calling was suspect (at best). That's just kinda who Utah is though. We're usually a little better and tougher than mid-tier P5 teams and can win our fair share of those games, but we simply don't have the level of athletes to compete with what quality opponents bring to the table. Sure, we sneak a win here and there, but Whit's record against top ranked teams is what it is for a reason.

I put a lot of tonight's loss on the coaches. Oregon stole Utah's soul, and the coaches let it carry over to this game. There's lots of things they could have done to change things up, but it felt like they didn't make an adjustment the entire game. The fact that the team appeared to simply roll over and give up was about the only real surprise to me, given how many seniors we had. I simply can't explain the lack of effort there. The stat about the loser of the P12 title game being 0-8 (now 0-9) in their bowl game is an interesting one.

As awesome as much of this year was in many respects, this ending was equally as bad. Oh well...

[Scuzz]

I favor an 8 team playoff. You include every Power 5 Champ, they can pick them however they want. Then you go with 3 wild cards. Any three wild cards. It adds one week to the season, big deal. They make even more money.

Sure, the odds of the 8 seed winning out are not great, but in any sports playoff system those odds aren't great, but it happens from time to time.

I also think it would make for better in season scheduling, as a non-conference loss wouldn't eliminate a team from playoff contention and if your the WC it may actually make your odds of getting in better.

If you expand to 8, you will get more playoff games that are completely lopsided destruction fests like LSU vs Oklahoma. It's not good for the sport. Let's quit trying to be 'fair' and give everyone ribbons and instead acknowledge there are about 3 or MAYBE 4 elite teams each year. Everyone else is playing chess, not checkers.

Maybe for a year or two. After that I think you will see things start to balance out. As more teams have an opportunity to compete you will see more teams actually compete. Like in basketball or baseball. The current system just feeds the favorites.

[Jaymann]

Uh, wouldn't the elite teams be playing chess and everyone else checkers?

[Isgrimnur]

Forget it. He's rolling.

[Scuzz]

Uh, wouldn't the elite teams be playing chess and everyone else checkers?

Would you say that college basketball is now dominated by a few elite teams since they went to 64? Sure, nobody over a 10 seed wins it all but there are still upsets every year. Give 8 teams a chance to get in, make it possible for other schools or conferences to recruit, and maybe things will balance out a bit. Either way, I believe every Power 5 conference champ deserves a spot before some team that couldn't win it's own conference gets in.

[GungHo]

Forget it. He's rolling.

As good as I feel for guys like Devin Duvernay getting a win in their final game, I'm almost as pissed off wondering just where the hell this kind of effort was against the TCUs, Iowa States, and Baylors of the world when it actually mattered. Doesn't feel like we're getting our $5 million/year worth out of ole Coach Tom.

[Pyperkub]

I wish I could say I was surprised, but I could see that one coming a mile away. Oregon provided the template to beat us, and Texas followed it to a T. Our o-line completely disappeared the last two games, and the play calling was suspect (at best). That's just kinda who Utah is though. We're usually a little better and tougher than mid-tier P5 teams and can win our fair share of those games, but we simply don't have the level of athletes to compete with what quality opponents bring to the table. Sure, we sneak a win here and there, but Whit's record against top ranked teams is what it is for a reason.

I put a lot of tonight's loss on the coaches. Oregon stole Utah's soul, and the coaches let it carry over to this game. There's lots of things they could have done to change things up, but it felt like they didn't make an adjustment the entire game. The fact that the team appeared to simply roll over and give up was about the only real surprise to me, given how many seniors we had. I simply can't explain the lack of effort there. The stat about the loser of the P12 title game being 0-8 (now 0-9) in their bowl game is an interesting one.

As awesome as much of this year was in many respects, this ending was equally as bad. Oh well...

I'm expecting the late money to be heavily on Wisconsin after that game.

[Pyperkub]

I favor an 8 team playoff. You include every Power 5 Champ, they can pick them however they want. Then you go with 3 wild cards. Any three wild cards. It adds one week to the season, big deal. They make even more money.

Sure, the odds of the 8 seed winning out are not great, but in any sports playoff system those odds aren't great, but it happens from time to time.

I also think it would make for better in season scheduling, as a non-conference loss wouldn't eliminate a team from playoff contention and if your the WC it may actually make your odds of getting in better.

If you expand to 8, you will get more playoff games that are completely lopsided destruction fests like LSU vs Oklahoma. It's not good for the sport. Let's quit trying to be 'fair' and give everyone ribbons and instead acknowledge there are about 3 or MAYBE 4 elite teams each year. Everyone else is playing chess, not checkers.

It works fine for the NCAA tourney, and has provided some of the greatest moments in NCAA history.

Also, more of the top players would actually play in the bowl games, rather than sitting out, which is a problem which is only going to keep getting worse, and it kills attendance at these bowls.

I think 16 with wild cards playing true road games in the first round would be great for the sport and the fans. Alternatively, 12 with play in games (and true road games for wild cards still).

Yes, I'm hooked on the true road games, but think how cool that would have been for Memphis to have played Penn St. at home, or for Boise St to get a shot at Georgia or Baylor on the blue turf?

It would be a once in a lifetime experience for those fans, and every once in awhile, they'd get to see something like Boise St. - Oklahoma, or App St. - Michigan, or Utah - Alabama, the games fans talk about for decades.

[Skinypupy]

Utah Football also proudly tweeted out that Zack Moss broke the Utah career all-purpose yardage record...only to have him lose the record with a 4 yard loss a few plays later because the o-line couldn’t block for shit.

This is usually my favorite football day of the year, and I have zero interest in watching anything. Bah humbug.

[Isgrimnur]

There’s half a hockey game left.

[The Meal]

There’s half a hockey game left.

And these teams *do not* like each other.

[Isgrimnur]

That happens when the wildcard knocks out the division winner in the first round.

[Lassr]

That putrid Bama D was as advertised in the 1st half but they made nice adjustments at half time. Offense sputtered but put together a few good drives. And Najee mowing people over on that final drive was a nice send off for him.

[Jaymann]

What got into the Gophers?

[Lassr]

What got into the Gophers?

I dunno, but Go Gophers! Typical Auburn, play fantastic in some games and then lay a turd in others.

[Apollo]

Malzahn is consistently terrible at bowl games. In his seven seasons at Auburn he is 2-5, with his victories coming against Memphis in the Birmingham Bowl, and against the 6-6 Purdue Boilermakers in last year's Music City Bowl.

So, yeah, no big shock that we lost again. Actually, Gus Malzahn is the worst coach imaginable for a team like Auburn. He recruits well enough to have a talent advantage in most games, and manages to get an impressive win out of nowhere from time to time, while going 8-5 nearly every year. In other words, he's just good enough to hang on to his job, yet bad enough that you know Auburn will never win anything while he is the head coach.

If I had told Auburn fans 10yrs ago that we would hang on to an 8-5 coach for seven years, with one SEC championship and two bowl wins, I would've been laughed out of the room.

[Jaymann]

Woot, Oregon's Justin Herbert, the soon-to-be Chargers QB, rushes for 3 touchdowns and closes out the 4th quarter to beat the Wisconsin Badgers.

[msduncan]

Malzahn is consistently terrible at bowl games. In his seven seasons at Auburn he is 2-5, with his victories coming against Memphis in the Birmingham Bowl, and against the 6-6 Purdue Boilermakers in last year's Music City Bowl.

So, yeah, no big shock that we lost again. Actually, Gus Malzahn is the worst coach imaginable for a team like Auburn. He recruits well enough to have a talent advantage in most games, and manages to get an impressive win out of nowhere from time to time, while going 8-5 nearly every year. In other words, he's just good enough to hang on to his job, yet bad enough that you know Auburn will never win anything while he is the head coach.

If I had told Auburn fans 10yrs ago that we would hang on to an 8-5 coach for seven years, with one SEC championship and two bowl wins, I would've been laughed out of the room.

You guys are stuck on 'if they beat Alabama he's good enough'. You can tell this by the way every home Bama victory triggers a shrubbery killing storming of the field. At some point ya'll are going to have to say 'beating Bama is great, but we need to start focusing on the next level'.

It's almost the exact opposite of the Bill Curry effect where he was fired after losing to Auburn several times. Although to be honest -- Bill Curry is an asshole and that's part of why he got fired. I would have thrown the brick through his window if someone else hadn't done it.

[ImLawBoy]

That putrid Bama D was as advertised in the 1st half but they made nice adjustments at half time. Offense sputtered but put together a few good drives. And Najee mowing people over on that final drive was a nice send off for him.

That could have been a different game if Patterson had been able to hit his receivers deep, but he overthrew them all game.

And frankly, I think it's absurd that they made the players the second half. On a holiday, no less! All right thinking people should consider the halftime score the final.

[Lassr]

That putrid Bama D was as advertised in the 1st half but they made nice adjustments at half time. Offense sputtered but put together a few good drives. And Najee mowing people over on that final drive was a nice send off for him.

That could have been a different game if Patterson had been able to hit his receivers deep, but he overthrew them all game.

that's how he was at Ole Miss, looked like he had not improved at all under Harbaugh.

[ImLawBoy]

That putrid Bama D was as advertised in the 1st half but they made nice adjustments at half time. Offense sputtered but put together a few good drives. And Najee mowing people over on that final drive was a nice send off for him.

That could have been a different game if Patterson had been able to hit his receivers deep, but he overthrew them all game.

that's how he was at Ole Miss, looked like he had not improved at all under Harbaugh.

He actually had pretty remarkable accuracy on deep balls during his Michigan career, per the guy who tracks such types of things at MGoBlog. The fanbase had been clamoring for more deep shots to our giant wide receivers to take advantage of this. Maybe playing an SEC team again caused him to have PTSD and regress?

[Lassr]

Maybe playing an SEC team again caused him to have PTSD and regress?

I think his last game against Bama at Ole Miss was a 66-3 loss, so you may be onto something there.