Mr. P

Stepp broke the story:

They've got OU at #15... which is fair, all things considered.

Nah. It's because Washington decided to play poorly. That's the only reason. Michigan had nothing to do with Washington's struggles. It was purely self-inflicted on the Huskies part. Michigan did nothing. They got nothing. Most overrated team in college football.

Aren't they losing a bunch? Not saying they don't have depth, but it seems odd to suggest losing so many weapons will make them somehow better, especially since they'll be competing in a tougher league.

Michigan ain't played nobody.

"Competitive depth."

Lol, how was it different? I couldn't even tell... This season if I saw a guy I liked, I signed him. Was that different previous years?

I concur with the others, it's a better app than NFL. The push notifications bailed me out on several occasions where there was a late scratch due to injury.

Yup... and we've still got scoreboard. 34-30, podnah.

Whoa whoa whoa, let's not get crazy. Our collective attention spans are pushing max capacity as it is.

Really? Wow... admittedly I didn't pay too much attention. I've been called out for that several times this season.

Oh, for sure! We're gonna take our lumps. I have no illusions that we're just gonna walk in Day 1 and start wrecking shop. Remember: this is only Year 2 of a near-complete rebuild of the program. We're walking in there with a patchwork o-line and a green QB. A new offensive coordinator. A new defensive coordinator. Etc. and etc. and blah blah blah. I still expect to be competitive though. I won't accept just rolling over against Alabama and Georgia and the like. These programs are not gods. They are beatable. Not saying we're ready right now, but we have no excuse to not compete.

We got nuthin. Entire team quit. Gonna have to scour the student section just for warm bodies. Our five-star QB is garbage. Our coaching staff sucks. Gonna be 0-11 in the mighty mighty S-E-C.

Oh, I understand that. I just don't see it as a negative. I'm of the mind that T-Law could've benefited from some seasoning. It wouldn't have raised his value any, so I don't blame him for bouncing.

BTW, I'm not opposed to kickers being docked for missing field goals. The penalty should be the point value: missed XPs are -1 and missed FGs are -3. Shoot, make them -4 if they miss a kick inside the 20.

Yeah, see, we're coming at this from opposite perspectives. I'm actually trying to drive the scoring down, so that it more closely resembles an actual game. I'm wanting more 42-35 wins. To hell with these 190 to 175 point games. What is this, minor league basketball?

(To bring this back to the topic), case in point: Quinn Ewers. Could he go pro now? Yes. Would he be drafted? Almost certainly. So, why stay?

Jayden Daniels has been a starting collegiate QB since 2019. For all intents and purposes he's just as much an "old man" as Penix (who redshirted in 2018). Moreover, I don't recall Daniels being on any Heisman or NFL prospect lists until breaking through this year. But it's an interesting topic, and one that I had with friends and family during the break: do more of these superstar college QBs really need to bide their time before trying to make the jump? For some, nah, I get it. You gotta get while the getting's good. Your stock may never be higher. These guys are the exception. But others (the majority, I would argue) would be wise to study the career trajectory of dudes like Penix and Daniels. There's something to be said for growing and maturing in the game. The fastest path isn't always the best.

See, I don't know what it is, but when I think about my favorite exchanges with Colin Robinson, it's always Nandor.

I'm not a party to this debate, but I just want to jump in and say that I read this sentence in Nandor's thick Ottoman accent.

In another year or so the high school recruiting industry will become all but completely overshadowed by transfer recruiting.

To be fair, Penix did that to pretty much every college QB this year. I don't understand how or why anyone drafts any QB ahead of him, dude's got the goods. He's as fully developed a college QB as I've seen since Burrow.

Best case scenario.

Here's my ideal set-up for starters: QB RB RB or WR RB or WR TE or WR TE or WR K DST My rationale? This arrangement most closely mimics a *real* football lineup, in the sense that it requires four skill players in the backfield and two on the line. This also allows different owners to "run an offense" by using different types of lineups. For example: You could have one owner running a Spread style system that emphasizes RBs but leans heavily on predictions from a bevy of wideouts, OR you could have someone utilizing a fullhouse backfield with multiple RBs and double TE. Some owners don't have a worthwhile TE and some owners may be weak in WR but have a couple solid TEs. Some owners have a stable of RBs, but no wideouts. Etc. and etc. With this layout, owners could arrange their teams around their talent, which in my opinion more closely aligns with how football actually works. An added bonus is that this arrangement reduces our number of starters, which would also require fewer bench players, and thus allow more decent players in the free agent pool. Which would then allow more teams to bounce back from having lost one or two star players, and thus keep the league more competitive.