Jump to content

🏈 2019 College Football pre-season thread


Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, Stoney said:

Georgia RBs don’t make the list with Todd Gurley, Sonny Michel, Nick Chubb, Knowshon Moreno, Musa Smith but Arkansas makes it?

What about NC State’s QBs? Philip Rivers, Russell Wilson, Ryan Finley, Mike Glennon, Jacoby Brissett. That’s a pretty darn solid group of QBs. @MavGrad99 pick two of them and put’em on LSU, how many Nattys y’all win?

It’s a very curious list to say the least.

Arkansas was gonna be on the list regardless, but UGA not on there is a head-scratcher. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MrBuddyGarrity said:

Arkansas was gonna be on the list regardless, but UGA not on there is a head-scratcher. 

It’s done as a calculation based on where those players were drafted. Some Georgia RBs dropped in the draft due to injuries etc.  

However, I agree... UGA May have had the best collection of RBs as far as college productivity and wow factor than any school in the country.  Bama produced some machines, but nothing like the game changers UGA put out there

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do we feel about the playoff committee? Not about the number of teams, but about how they are selected. Let’s just assume 4 teams is the number we are stuck with. Would you rather it be a committee selecting the teams, or a computer formula like the BCS selecting the teams, or possibly another method. 

I know we have talked about this a lot, but it’s usually a debate about the number of teams or automatic bids, we rarely (maybe I missed it) have discussed what we thought about just selecting 4 like we currently have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bcs was good, better than a playoff committee.  I say go to 8 teams.  Use the old bcs bowls as playoff games.  P5 conf champs get auto bids, then the next 3 highest ranked teams.  Use the bcs rank to seed.  1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4,5 in bcs bowls.  Then have two semifinals and the finals.  

 

Go to 14 team split conferences with 9 conf games, 3 ooc games with no fcs games.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

The bcs was good, better than a playoff committee.  I say go to 8 teams.  Use the old bcs bowls as playoff games.  P5 conf champs get auto bids, then the next 3 highest ranked teams.  Use the bcs rank to seed.  1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4,5 in bcs bowls.  Then have two semifinals and the finals.  

 

Go to 14 team split conferences with 9 conf games, 3 ooc games with no fcs games.  

The whole thing was to assume you have to stay at 4 teams... 

So you’re saying the top 4 bcs formula teams enter a 4 team playoff? I agree I like that better than a committee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, WETSU said:

The whole thing was to assume you have to stay at 4 teams... 

So you’re saying the top 4 bcs formula teams enter a 4 team playoff? I agree I like that better than a committee. 

A committee can have too much human bias involved.  A 4 team playoff when there are 5 conferences leaves one out, possibly two with human bias.  8 allows winning your conference to mean something (guaranteed berth) then 3 at large.  It would also give a team like Georgia, who felt they deserved a shot, to actually prove themselves.  It would also give a fair shot to the G5 teams.  As it sits now, there is absolutely no shot for them.  You can argue they can schedule tougher opponents, etc.......  won’t matter.  A committee will never give them a shot, especially when the committee is comprised mainly of folks who represent P5 schools.  

 

Now if it strictly is limited to 4 teams..... yes go back to the BCS rankings to rank the top 25.  Then take your highest ranked conference champions.  Your conference games should matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

A committee can have too much human bias involved.  A 4 team playoff when there are 5 conferences leaves one out, possibly two with human bias.  8 allows winning your conference to mean something (guaranteed berth) then 3 at large.  It would also give a team like Georgia, who felt they deserved a shot, to actually prove themselves.  It would also give a fair shot to the G5 teams.  As it sits now, there is absolutely no shot for them.  You can argue they can schedule tougher opponents, etc.......  won’t matter.  A committee will never give them a shot, especially when the committee is comprised mainly of folks who represent P5 schools.  

 

Now if it strictly is limited to 4 teams..... yes go back to the BCS rankings to rank the top 25.  Then take your highest ranked conference champions.  Your conference games should matter.

I know the argument for 8. I am strictly talking about 4 teams. So you think conference championship is mandatory then take the 4 highest of that group. I can get behind that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, WETSU said:

I know the argument for 8. I am strictly talking about 4 teams. So you think conference championship is mandatory then take the 4 highest of that group. I can get behind that. 

Winning your conference should mean something.  However with only 4 teams that diminishes it to a certain extent, especially with humans picking “their best 4”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, WETSU said:

I know the argument for 8. I am strictly talking about 4 teams. So you think conference championship is mandatory then take the 4 highest of that group. I can get behind that. 

Winning your conference should mean something.  However with only 4 teams that diminishes it to a certain extent, especially with humans picking “their best 4”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, WETSU said:

How do we feel about the playoff committee? Not about the number of teams, but about how they are selected. Let’s just assume 4 teams is the number we are stuck with. Would you rather it be a committee selecting the teams, or a computer formula like the BCS selecting the teams, or possibly another method. 

I know we have talked about this a lot, but it’s usually a debate about the number of teams or automatic bids, we rarely (maybe I missed it) have discussed what we thought about just selecting 4 like we currently have. 

I go back and forth on this. I'm not a big fan of the committee, so I would choose the BCS formula, but I still thought there were flaws in that. 

If we stick with the committee, I think they would have to expand to 6-8 teams, but if it's just 4 teams I'd go with the BCS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, DB2point0 said:

The bcs was good, better than a playoff committee.  I say go to 8 teams.  Use the old bcs bowls as playoff games.  P5 conf champs get auto bids, then the next 3 highest ranked teams.  Use the bcs rank to seed.  1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4,5 in bcs bowls.  Then have two semifinals and the finals.  

 

Go to 14 team split conferences with 9 conf games, 3 ooc games with no fcs games.  

The BCS was cheated.  LSU and Bama exploited the BCS formula with their scheduling 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MavGrad99 said:

The BCS was cheated.  LSU and Bama exploited the BCS formula with their scheduling 

I actually think there was less bias and more consistency with the bcs than the committee.  One year the committee says conference champions matter, the next it didn’t.  There was no consistency with them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, DB2point0 said:

I actually think there was less bias and more consistency with the bcs than the committee.  One year the committee says conference champions matter, the next it didn’t.  There was no consistency with them.  

I agree.  However, the BCS was created to be free of bias from humans... but it created a bias towards larger conferences.  So then they go to this mess... and all or did was create a bias towards larger conferences...  I think both items work if you expand this thing to 8-16 and include conference champions 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Florida finished last season with only 3 losses, and destroyed Michigan in their bowl game. It was a very solid season for their first year under a new HC. 

I agree they are a littl too high, but based off what they have returning and how they finished last season, it’s hard to put them much farther back than about 10-12 imo. 8 is a tad high though I agree. I’d say 12 is about right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Mr. P changed the title to 🏈 2019 College Football pre-season thread

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...