Will Not Watch

[The Gipper]

I will not watch this game tonight.   It bores me.  Despise both teams.  It is a contest merely of which program has the most sophisticated HGH program.

[Browns149]

I wont watch either. Both teams are annoying. Now if the game was in, let’s say Soldier Field, Lambeau Field or maybe Browns Stadium, I’d be more interested 

But we all know that NO southern school will allow the NCAA to schedule a big time bowl game anywhere cold

Playing in Santa Clara Ca. Is ridiculous 

[mjp28]

I forgot all about it untill a few minutes ago.....might pop in to watch some unless I find something better to do.

[mjp28]

3 hours ago, mjp28 said:

I forgot all about it untill a few minutes ago.....might pop in to watch some unless I find something better to do.

HEY the Soprano marathon on HBO2, been watching it all week.

[Browns149]

I didn’t watch 1 second of it. I heard it was Clemson beatdown

Good. Alabama and Nick Saban are annoying 

[Canton Dawg]

The BCS committee really screwed up their rankings.

They had Alabama overrated, along with Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Georgia.

Once again they had a strong SEC bias, with little love for the ACC and no love for the Big 10.

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, Canton Dawg said:

The BCS committee really screwed up their rankings.

They had Alabama overrated, along with Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Georgia.

Once again they had a strong SEC bias, with little love for the ACC and no love for the Big 10.

I just do not think that they take into account the  non conf. cupcake schedules that the SEC teams constantly employ.   Until you have uniform scheduling....which in my opinion means that all P5 conferences should play a 9 game conf. schedule (Big Ten/Big 12/Pac 12 have that rule...ACC and SEC do not)...and that they should not be allowed to schedule  non FBS schools (Big Ten/Pac 12 have that rule...the others do not)....then...this "bias" may continue.

And the thing is...it may not so much be a bias.....but just a failure to recognize that these conferences do not play by the same rules. The Big Ten/Pac 12 play by harder rules. 

[Browns149]

The OSU finished 3rd in the AP ranking

Does that mean they should’ve been in the 4 team playoff?

 

[The Gipper]

13 hours ago, Browns149 said:

The OSU finished 3rd in the AP ranking

Does that mean they should’ve been in the 4 team playoff?

 

1	Clemson (61)	15-0	1,525	2
2	Alabama	14-1	1,462	1
3	Ohio State	13-1	1,364	5
4	Oklahoma	12-2	1,356	4
5	Notre Dame	12-1	1,286	3
6	LSU	10-3	1,119	11
T-7	Georgia	11-3	1,103	6
T-7	Florida	10-3	1,103	10
9	Texas	10-4	1,076	14
10	Washington State	11-2	959	12
11	UCF	12-1	898	7
12	Kentucky	10-3	820	16
13	Washington	10-4	806	9
14	Michigan	10-3	745	8
15	Syracuse	10-3	683	17
16	Texas A&M	9-4	552	21
17	Penn State	9-4	492	13
18	Fresno State	12-2	466	19
19	Army	11-2	418	22
20	West Virginia	8-4	296	15
21	Northwestern	9-5	284	NR
22	Utah State	11-2	188	NR
23	Boise State	10-3	184	23
24	Cincinnati	11-2	171	NR
25	Iowa	9-4	120	NR

[The Gipper]

One stupid thing is that the Clemson coach was bragging about them being to first team to go 15-0 since the 1890s.

All that means though is that they piled on a couple of extra  cupcakes on their schedule at the beginning of the season.

How is it that they....and no one else was allowed to schedule an extra regular season game?

[Browns149]

6 hours ago, The Gipper said:

One stupid thing is that the Clemson coach was bragging about them being to first team to go 15-0 since the 1890s.

All that means though is that they piled on a couple of extra  cupcakes on their schedule at the beginning of the season.

How is it that they....and no one else was allowed to schedule an extra regular season game?

Didn’t Alabama play 15 games too?

[Gunz41]

9 hours ago, The Gipper said:

One stupid thing is that the Clemson coach was bragging about them being to first team to go 15-0 since the 1890s.

All that means though is that they piled on a couple of extra  cupcakes on their schedule at the beginning of the season.

How is it that they....and no one else was allowed to schedule an extra regular season game?

I guess you need a trivia test. They didn't have an extra regular season game. They Were 15-0 vs Ohio State 13-1 because they played the extra game in the championship.

And going back to the topic earlier about a bias between the south vs north, and pollsters putting SEC teams in to make them look better, 6 SEC teams vs 5 Big Ten.

Again guys, nothing wrong with biases, we all have them, but when you post them, have accurate facts, or it removes merit from your argument.

Most of these teams have "cupcakes" on their schedule. The schedules are made years in advance. Unless the point wanting to be made is that an Alabama should have scheduled a Texas, Ohio State, Michigan, etc then that one game doesn't effect anything. They wouldn't have lost to another SEC team. By pointing out this SEC bias, you really are only showing yours for the Big 10.

I am just as big a Buckeye fan as any of the gentlemen on this board, but tell me which team in the Top 10 had an even close to as bad a loss as them? 2. Alabama lost to Clemson, 4. Oklahoma lost by 3 to Texas (who they later beat) and Alabama, 5. Notre Dame lost by less than Alabama, and EVERYONE around the world said that showed they didn't belong and should never get in again. 6. LSU- 3 losses to Florida by 8, Alabama by 29, and Texas AM by 2. That same Texas AM was a bad fumble call away from beating Clemson. 7. Florida- Kentucky by 11, Georgia by 19, Missouri by 21. That is a pretty bad loss. 7. Georgia- LSU by 20, Alabama by 7, Texas by 7. Texas- Maryland by 5, Oklahoma State by 3, West Virginia by 1, and Oklahoma by 12. Washington State- USC by 3, Washington by 13.

Just be honest with yourself and everyone else. Had Alabama been beaten by 30 by Vanderbilt, would you not crucify them?

[mjp28]

4 hours ago, Browns149 said:

Didn’t Alabama play 15 games too?

ALA 14-1 3 times like OSU in 2014 under Meyer, Tressel went 14-0 in 2002.

With the new playoffs they will play additional games now to try to win it all.

[The Gipper]

17 hours ago, Browns149 said:

Didn’t Alabama play 15 games too?

Yes, but they didn't win 15 games.    I guess the situation is this:   Clemson played 12 regular season games.  Then played in the ACC title game...then played in 2 playoff games (winning them all)   so that gave them 15 wins.

The point is:  so what?  Every team that goes to the CFP title game will likely then play 15 games now.  If Alabama had beat them, THEY would have been the team to have won 15 games in a season. 

[The Gipper]

14 hours ago, Gunz41 said:

I guess you need a trivia test. They didn't have an extra regular season game. They Were 15-0 vs Ohio State 13-1 because they played the extra game in the championship.

I know this....as I said....every team now that goes to the Championship game will likely play 15 games.  

And going back to the topic earlier about a bias between the south vs north, and pollsters putting SEC teams in to make them look better, 6 SEC teams vs 5 Big Ten.

Again guys, nothing wrong with biases, we all have them, but when you post them, have accurate facts, or it removes merit from your argument.

Most of these teams have "cupcakes" on their schedule. The schedules are made years in advance. Unless the point wanting to be made is that an Alabama should have scheduled a Texas, Ohio State, Michigan, etc then that one game doesn't effect anything. They wouldn't have lost to another SEC team. By pointing out this SEC bias, you really are only showing yours for the Big 10.

The point is this:  The Big Ten has this policy:   9 conference games....NO games allowed vs. Non FBS opponents. And they generally play 2 P5 non conference opponents.  SEC plays only 8 conference games....and they are allowed to schedule FCS opponents....and in some cases the SEC teams schedule 4 cupcake opponents (sometimes not even playing a single P5 non. conf. opponent).  Now...this may not happen often..but it is allowed to happen on occasion.

What I am biased in favor of is equanimity in scheduling by all of the P5 conferences....If you do not recognize the FACT that the ACC and the SEC employ a policy of easier scheduling...then you are blind.  (and honestly...I guess we cannot blame them for doing so if they are allowed to get away with it.  I put it on the CFP committee to do something about it.....such as saying something like:  a win against a non FBS opponent is considered a loss for our purposes)

I am just as big a Buckeye fan as any of the gentlemen on this board, but tell me which team in the Top 10 had an even close to as bad a loss as them?

Alabama's loss to Clemson was almost as bad.

2. Alabama lost to Clemson, 4. Oklahoma lost by 3 to Texas (who they later beat) and Alabama, 5. Notre Dame lost by less than Alabama, and EVERYONE around the world said that showed they didn't belong and should never get in again. 6. LSU- 3 losses to Florida by 8, Alabama by 29, and Texas AM by 2. That same Texas AM was a bad fumble call away from beating Clemson. 7. Florida- Kentucky by 11, Georgia by 19, Missouri by 21. That is a pretty bad loss. 7. Georgia- LSU by 20, Alabama by 7, Texas by 7. Texas- Maryland by 5, Oklahoma State by 3, West Virginia by 1, and Oklahoma by 12. Washington State- USC by 3, Washington by 13.

Just be honest with yourself and everyone else. Had Alabama been beaten by 30 by Vanderbilt, would you not crucify them?

Be honest with yourself....do you think that OSU's loss to Purdue by that margin was anything but an aberration?  The year OSU won the championship recently...they had a similar aberration loss as well.  To Virginia Tech. In theory...OSU could have had that aberration of a loss to Purdue and come back and won the whole thing.

 

[Gunz41]

1 hour ago, The Gipper said:

 

I think OSU would have been the most dangerous team in the playoffs, but no the loss to VT wasnt as bad. 

You also seem to think that a low end FBS team cant be beaten by a higher end FCS team, saying it should count as a loss. In reality they can and will beat them. Not saying every time, and not saying the specific teams involved here, but I would be willing to bet that a loss to a North Dakota State would look better to a committee as opposed to a team like Rutgers, Tulane, Louisville, etc.

You obviously don't even want to see a different side when you say Alabama loss to Clemson was almost as bad as the Purdue loss. Its called context. Its not JUST about the point total, its about who it was to. 

And don't start trying to flip things like a troll. You obviously didn't say were a little confused about 15 games when you said this.

"One stupid thing is that the Clemson coach was bragging about them being to first team to go 15-0 since the 1890s.

All that means though is that they piled on a couple of extra  cupcakes on their schedule at the beginning of the season.

How is it that they....and no one else was allowed to schedule an extra regular season game?"

 

[The Gipper]

3 hours ago, Gunz41 said:

I think OSU would have been the most dangerous team in the playoffs, but no the loss to VT wasnt as bad. 

Not quite as bad...my point is simple.... a loss like that does not mean a team cannot come back and be outstanding.

You also seem to think that a low end FBS team cant be beaten by a higher end FCS team, saying it should count as a loss. In reality they can and will beat them. Not saying every time, and not saying the specific teams involved here, but I would be willing to bet that a loss to a North Dakota State would look better to a committee as opposed to a team like Rutgers, Tulane, Louisville, etc.

Very, very rare occasion.  My point is also simple and lost on you:  a persistent policy of scheduling FCS teams CONSTITUTES a policy of scheduling cupcakes....regardless of the fact that there may be a rare FCS win over an FBS team. 

You obviously don't even want to see a different side when you say Alabama loss to Clemson was almost as bad as the Purdue loss. Its called context. Its not JUST about the point total, its about who it was to. 

I am looking at the gross score.  Alabama lost by 28 points.....OSU lost by 28 or 29 points.  And I don't care who it was to...that is an ass kicking.  If that game had happened in the regular season...no matter where the opponent was ranked....it should have disqualified Alabama from the playoffs.

And don't start trying to flip things like a troll. You obviously didn't say were a little confused about 15 games when you said this.

"One stupid thing is that the Clemson coach was bragging about them being to first team to go 15-0 since the 1890s.

All that means though is that they piled on a couple of extra  cupcakes on their schedule at the beginning of the season.

How is it that they....and no one else was allowed to schedule an extra regular season game?"

I said that I had forgotten about the fact that they played 3 postseason games.   But, here, again, it is YOU who are losing context.  My context is that in the here and now....with a 12 game schedule  plus a  conf. championship game, plus 2 playoff games, winning 15 games is likely to be expected. It is not something really totally unprecedented.   When Ohio State won a National title earlier in the 2000s they went 14-0.  I do not believe there that they played a conf title game...and they certainly did not play  2 playoff games.  Don't recall how they ended up playing 14 games, but they did.  

Bragging about winning the national championship certainly is in order.  But I would expect almost all National championship winners to win 15 games in the process.  In 2014...if OSU had not had the clinker vs Va Tech... they would have been 15-0. 

 

 

[Gunz41]

2 hours ago, The Gipper said:

 

Sorry Gip, but you cant have it both ways. You talk about Ohio State and should have been in playoff, yet say Alabama if lost like that in Regular season should have been disqualified.

I dunno, maybe its just me, and certainly not just this topic as I have shown, I just think that the same rules need to apply.

And to not use context for games is ludicrous in my mind. Yes they count the same as a loss, but to use a loss to the #1 team and then compare a loss to a 6-7 just doesnt add up.

You can say it is a rare occasion, and sure they is right, but its not usually like teams often. Who would I think would win this past year in a 10 game series between North Dakota State and Louisville, NDSU. Who was the best team in Va a couple years ago, JMU. Honestly, in your mind, who would you worry about playing more as an Ohio State fan, Tulane or North Dakota State?

The thing that gets me, whether it is fans, talking heads, etc is this, and it actually goes somewhat to your opinion, is EVERYONE wanted to say how bad Notre Dame was, how they didn't belong, and should never get in again because they lost to Clemson by 27. Alabama loses by 28, and there are 3 views on that: Clemson is just soooooo good, Alabama played badly, or Alabama will be back. To me, that is just not using the same rules. If ND doesn't deserve it, then neither would Alabama. You have to give ND the same rules too then, maybe they played their worst. These people are using history to look at ND from the Teo days. If a 27 point loss to Clemson is the standard, then neither does Ohio State.

[The Gipper]

14 hours ago, Gunz41 said:

Sorry Gip, but you cant have it both ways. You talk about Ohio State and should have been in playoff, yet say Alabama if lost like that in Regular season should have been disqualified.

No I didn't.  I didn't say that Ohio State should have been in the playoffs.  I said that if Alabama had also lost a regular season game like Ohio State did then they too should have been disqualified.  Is your reading comprehension that deficient, or did you just ASSume what I meant. (I did say that a team COULD come back and win after a defeat like that....as  it has been done before......but I did NOT say they were entitled to be put in the playoffs.  You have to compare them to other contenders)

I dunno, maybe its just me, and certainly not just this topic as I have shown, I just think that the same rules need to apply.

And that is all that I said as well.

And to not use context for games is ludicrous in my mind. Yes they count the same as a loss, but to use a loss to the #1 team and then compare a loss to a 6-7 just doesnt add up.

Maybe......but:  If Alabama say, lost to say...a #2 Georgia...or a #2 Clemson by 28 points in the regular season  that would have likely disqualified them in the committees mind even if they lost to Kentucky by the same margin.

You can say it is a rare occasion, and sure they is right, but its not usually like teams often. Who would I think would win this past year in a 10 game series between North Dakota State and Louisville, NDSU. Who was the best team in Va a couple years ago, JMU. Honestly, in your mind, who would you worry about playing more as an Ohio State fan, Tulane or North Dakota State?

NDSU may have beat one of those teams here or there....that is about it.  Over time...I would worry more about the team that plays the overall stronger schedule....the FBS team

The thing that gets me, whether it is fans, talking heads, etc is this, and it actually goes somewhat to your opinion, is EVERYONE wanted to say how bad Notre Dame was, how they didn't belong, and should never get in again because they lost to Clemson by 27.

I was never one that said ND should not have been in.  Certainly they should have been in. Do I think that OSU may have beaten them?  Yes, probably...but they still deserved to be in.  They did not have a 28 point lost during the regular season.

Alabama loses by 28, and there are 3 views on that: Clemson is just soooooo good, Alabama played badly, or Alabama will be back. To me, that is just not using the same rules. If ND doesn't deserve it, then neither would Alabama. You have to give ND the same rules too then, maybe they played their worst. These people are using history to look at ND from the Teo days. If a 27 point loss to Clemson is the standard, then neither does Ohio State.

You kind of lost me there Butch...can you clarify what you are trying to say.   

Bottom line:  In my opinion all the conferences should play by the same rules.   You should not have some playing 8 conf. games while others play 9 (generally it is assumed that that extra conf. game will be against a better opponent and not against another cream puff).  Each team should play the same number of  non-conference P5 opponents; and each team should be disallowed from playing FCS teams (there should not be a disparity in the rules about this at least, as there is now)

 

[Gunz41]

9 hours ago, The Gipper said:

 

The last part, and not saying you said it, but it seems like the overall opinion is a double standard. Use someone like Cowherd, Notre Dame loss proved that they arent worthy of being in the CFP, as they lost by 27 points. They are not given the benefit of saying, well maybe Clemson was just that good, or that ND just played their worst game of the season. No words on, well they will be back next year. Some of the justification for that, because ND lost bad when they played Alabama in the Teo year and his fake girlfriend year. Fast forward a week and ALL 3 of those things are said about Alabama. Its just a double standard, and those really get on my nerves, and it isnt just exclusive to sports.

Without going into detail, or a side, this is what we see in today's society. Pro trump crowd: cuts down the Statue of Liberty while proclaiming how much he loved Hitler "Trump is so great, that Statue needed to come down years ago and Hitler was misunderstood." That type of thing. Anti Trump people, Trump goes into a burning house and saves 8 people. "Well he should have done it faster, stayed in there to check for others"

As for had an Alabama had that type of loss, well the committee chairman said they had A LOT of discussion about putting Georgia in, with 2 losses, said it was really close. They also had them in over OSU. They had a pretty bad loss. What I am saying is their is a difference in view in a 28 point loss to Clemson vs a 29 point loss to Purdue. 

And no wasnt assuming that, I thought I read either in this thread or another where you had said OSU deserved to be in. 

Either way, it doesn't matter. We all have views on things. God Bless

[The Gipper]

3 hours ago, Gunz41 said:

The last part, and not saying you said it, but it seems like the overall opinion is a double standard. Use someone like Cowherd, Notre Dame loss proved that they arent worthy of being in the CFP, as they lost by 27 points. They are not given the benefit of saying, well maybe Clemson was just that good, or that ND just played their worst game of the season. No words on, well they will be back next year. Some of the justification for that, because ND lost bad when they played Alabama in the Teo year and his fake girlfriend year. Fast forward a week and ALL 3 of those things are said about Alabama. Its just a double standard, and those really get on my nerves, and it isnt just exclusive to sports.

Without going into detail, or a side, this is what we see in today's society. Pro trump crowd: cuts down the Statue of Liberty while proclaiming how much he loved Hitler "Trump is so great, that Statue needed to come down years ago and Hitler was misunderstood." That type of thing. Anti Trump people, Trump goes into a burning house and saves 8 people. "Well he should have done it faster, stayed in there to check for others"

As for had an Alabama had that type of loss, well the committee chairman said they had A LOT of discussion about putting Georgia in, with 2 losses, said it was really close. They also had them in over OSU. They had a pretty bad loss. What I am saying is their is a difference in view in a 28 point loss to Clemson vs a 29 point loss to Purdue. 

And no wasnt assuming that, I thought I read either in this thread or another where you had said OSU deserved to be in. 

Either way, it doesn't matter. We all have views on things. God Bless

Which God?😎