2023-2024 NCAA Football Thread

[Bruce]

The last paragraph is exactly what I have been saying about the SEC for years now .... It's Bama and now Georgia as well and 1 other team from year to year that may be good .... but thats it.

The Big Ten is not much better, Michigan, Ohio State and to a little lessor degree, Penn State ( who lost to Michigan/Ohio State) and now Iowa ( who lost to Michigan/Penn State).

The only reason the other teams have better records is because they are playing each other, mediocre vs bad, when they come up against the Big Two (Mich/Ohio State), always a loss.

For example, Wisconsin had a winning record, look at the teams it won against.( and lost to Indiana, 3-9 this year)

 

[cpalmer2k]

The Big Ten is not much better, Michigan, Ohio State and to a little lessor degree, Penn State ( who lost to Michigan/Ohio State) and now Iowa ( who lost to Michigan/Penn State).

The only reason the other teams have better records is because they are playing each other, mediocre vs bad, when they come up against the Big Two (Mich/Ohio State), always a loss.

For example, Wisconsin had a winning record, look at the teams it won against.( and lost to Indiana, 3-9 this year)

Exactly. All the conferences are about the same in reality. You have a couple of consistent teams at the top, with an occasional upstart team making some noise. The SEC just gets all the hype.

 

[Derwin0]

College football really has become a joke. Just move to the 12 team playoff now and let the teams fight it out.

Agree, putting Alabama in over FSU made the selection committee a mockery.

Hopefully Michigan destroys Alabama in the Rose Bowl. Unlike other Big Ten teams, Michigan actually has a winning record against the SEC.

 

[Derwin0]

Why even have rankings then.

Why even play the games if winning & losing doesn't matter.

 

[Derwin0]

12 team playoff. Conference champs get auto bids and 6 at large. Or is it 5/7.

It's still 6/6. Playoff committee has recommending changing to a 5/7, but it takes a unanimous vote to change it, and I don't see the Group of 5 voting to change it as now they'll get 2 teams in.

Sources: CFP set to present 5+7 model to board

The College Football Playoff management committee has agreed upon a 5+7 model and will present it to the 11 presidents and chancellors who control the CFP, sources confirmed to ESPN.

www.espn.com

The 5+7 model, which was agreed upon at Thursday's in-person meeting in Dallas, is a change from the previous 6+6 proposal and still requires unanimous approval by the 11 presidents and chancellors who control the CFP.

 

[Yespage]

Exactly. All the conferences are about the same in reality. You have a couple of consistent teams at the top, with an occasional upstart team making some noise. The SEC just gets all the hype.

The SEC are a bunch of bums because they are the SEC, but technically and begrudgingly, their stranglehold on the Title (along with the ACC) for the last 17 years kind of makes the hype into "hype", and it is simply accurate to say the SEC/ACC teams usually win the title.

The entire debate on who is better or who deserves it more is made easier to swallow when one realizes that College Football is 70% money, 20% tradition, 10% sport.

 

[Derwin0]

Even the guys at SEC Shorts know FSU got screwed.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZm3pc5HbsY


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf5a0Bl6uJ0

 

[Yespage]

Why even play the games if winning & losing doesn't matter.

Let's ask Florida State and Georgia their thoughts on winning and losing mattering.

Agree, putting Alabama in over FSU made the selection committee a mockery.

Does it? This is what makes college football a mockery of sport. It is indeterminate to manage who is better based on the schedule. FSU is undefeated, but Alabama beat the #1 team... or was it the #6 (#5, #4?!)? Alabama's only loss came to the #3 team in the nation. FSU's strength of schedule was 55th. Liberty was also undefeated, but it is okay to hold their dreadful strength of schedule against them, but not FSU, which wasn't nearly as hard as Alabama's or Georgia's?

To me, the controversy is FSU being #5 in the end, not #4 or #6, because they didn't lose. Why does FSU finish in front of one single loss team with a harder schedule but not the other who also had a hard schedule? I get that there is no way in heck to actually use statistics to demonstrate one school being better than the other with the same number of losses, and that is the fault of the game and schedule itself.

College football has a dreadful over-reliance on wins/losses when the schedule isn't built for that purpose. In general, the W's count for about the same value, regardless the strength of win. Strength of schedule is only used as a mild amplifier for an overall record.

 

[Don in CT]

All of the conferences are top heavy. A few great teams and a lot of bottom feeders. Even Michigan had a cakewalk schedule and they are number 1.

 

[Jimbo]

The SEC are a bunch of bums because they are the SEC, but technically and begrudgingly, their stranglehold on the Title (along with the ACC) for the last 17 years kind of makes the hype into "hype", and it is simply accurate to say the SEC/ACC teams usually win the title.

The entire debate on who is better or who deserves it more is made easier to swallow when one realizes that College Football is 70% money, 20% tradition, 10% sport.

Here, I'll simplify it for you ... its Bama and Georgia and for a Short time Clemson & LSU ...

Thats it ....
Rest of the ACC or SEC have done very little.

 

[Jimbo]

Let's ask Florida State and Georgia their thoughts on winning and losing mattering.

Does it? This is what makes college football a mockery of sport. It is indeterminate to manage who is better based on the schedule. FSU is undefeated, but Alabama beat the #1 team... or was it the #6 (#5, #4?!)? Alabama's only loss came to the #3 team in the nation. FSU's strength of schedule was 55th. Liberty was also undefeated, but it is okay to hold their dreadful strength of schedule against them, but not FSU, which wasn't nearly as hard as Alabama's or Georgia's?

To me, the controversy is FSU being #5 in the end, not #4 or #6, because they didn't lose. Why does FSU finish in front of one single loss team with a harder schedule but not the other who also had a hard schedule? I get that there is no way in heck to actually use statistics to demonstrate one school being better than the other with the same number of losses, and that is the fault of the game and schedule itself.

College football has a dreadful over-reliance on wins/losses when the schedule isn't built for that purpose. In general, the W's count for about the same value, regardless the strength of win. Strength of schedule is only used as a mild amplifier for an overall record.

Georgia's schedule wasn't all that tough according to the Committee they were 37th I think.

 

[Jimbo]

Agree, putting Alabama in over FSU made the selection committee a mockery.

Hopefully Michigan destroys Alabama in the Rose Bowl. Unlike other Big Ten teams, Michigan actually has a winning record against the SEC.

This may come down to if Michigan can keep Milrose in the pocket.

 

[Jimbo]

It's still 6/6. Playoff committee has recommending changing to a 5/7, but it takes a unanimous vote to change it, and I don't see the Group of 5 voting to change it as now they'll get 2 teams in.

Sources: CFP set to present 5+7 model to board

The College Football Playoff management committee has agreed upon a 5+7 model and will present it to the 11 presidents and chancellors who control the CFP, sources confirmed to ESPN.

www.espn.com

Keep in mind, that doesn't mean the Top 12 ranked teams.

 

[Ronnie-]

Here, I'll simplify it for you ... its Bama and Georgia and for a Short time Clemson & LSU ...

Thats it ....
Rest of the ACC or SEC have done very little.

In his 17 year timeframe, the SEC has won the NC 13 times with 5 different teams. Only 1 of those teams doesnt have multiple titles (Auburn).

That is far and away more titles AND teams than any other conference in that time frame.

 

[Derwin0]

Here, I'll simplify it for you ... its Bama and Georgia and for a Short time Clemson & LSU ...

And Aubarn, Tennesse and Florida. The SEC has had 6 different teams win a National Championship under the current playoff system and BCS. That's well over a third (42%) of the conference.

 

[Derwin0]

Keep in mind, that doesn't mean the Top 12 ranked teams.

Never said it was. Technically it only guarantees the top 6, but since 3 or 4 conference champs will be in the top 6 it realistically means the top 9 or 10 will make it as 3 or 4 conference champs won't be ranked high (more if there are upsets in conference championship games).

I like the idea of conference champions being guaranteed a bid as it allows teams in that don't have a "name" preventing them from being screwed by a committee. It's why March Madness is fun to watch.

 

[Derwin0]

In his 17 year timeframe, the SEC has won the NC 13 times with 5 different teams. Only 1 of those teams doesnt have multiple titles (Auburn).

That is far and away more titles AND teams than any other conference in that time frame.

Current System

• SEC - 3 (Georgia, Alabama, LSU)
• ACC - 1 (Clempson)
• Big Ten - 1 (Ohio State)

BCS

• SEC - 5 (Alabama, LSU, Florida, Aubarn, Tennesee)
• Big XII - 2 (Texas, Oklahoma)
• ACC - 1 (FSU)
• Big East - 1 (Miami)
• Big Ten - 1 (Ohio State)
• Pac12 - USC(w)

Pretty evident to see which conference is best top to bottom, and which one's are top heavy.

 

[Jimbo]

In his 17 year timeframe, the SEC has won the NC 13 times with 5 different teams. Only 1 of those teams doesnt have multiple titles (Auburn).

That is far and away more titles AND teams than any other conference in that time frame.

No Kidding ....
Never said otherwise .

Btw, what 17 year timeframe are you referring to ?
I was thinking 2013/14 when the systems changed last .

I never said the SEC hadn't won more than others ...

I was pointing out that its a Few teams and then the rest, like all other conferences.

Since the new format came in you have had Bama and Georgia and 1 LSU ...
Not sure where your saying that 5 teams won it in the timeframe I mentioned.

 

[Derwin0]

I was pointing out that its a Few teams and then the rest, like all other conferences.

How is 6 out of 14 a few? (as for timeframe, that is for both the CFP and BCS).

Ronnie probably meant to include Tennessee (who won the first BCS Title game) but likely has a mental block to any kind of success the Vols might have and thus limited the number of years he mentioned in order to exclude them.

 

[Jimbo]

Current System

• SEC - 3 (Georgia, Alabama, LSU)
• ACC - 1 (Clempson)
• Big Ten - 1 (Ohio State)

BCS

• SEC - 5 (Alabama, LSU, Florida, Aubarn, Tennesee)
• Big XII - 2 (Texas, Oklahoma)
• ACC - 1 (FSU)
• Big East - 1 (Miami)
• Big Ten - 1 (Ohio State)
• Pac12 - USC(w)

Pretty evident to see which conference is best top to bottom, and which one's are top heavy.

Never said other wise.

WHY does everyone want to ARGUE all the time.

Can't we ever have a Conversation, instead of people quickly pointing out how they think the poster is wrong ???

I was referring to the current system.