NCAA Football 2016-17 Thread

[Crissi]

yeah, this is fun.

Which is why I dont get why it started at 11am / 12PM EST, when this is pretty clearly prime time material.

I think someone borrowed the NFL schedule...

[xskarma]

What a game. OSU drags one out by the skin of their teeth. Michigan will get a top tier bowl game, but OSU will go to the playoffs, would be a crime to keep them out.

[Crissi]

what a game. No other will match it tonight

[xskarma]

what a game. No other will match it tonight

You never know. College football is pretty unpredictable. Never know if Auburn might get crazy against Alabama. (though I suspect not, cause Alabama has looked every bit like the team to beat)

Never know though!

[Pendulous]

Alabama forgot that they run the ball. I think aside from WR sweeps, there's been one running play.

[Crissi]

You never know. College football is pretty unpredictable. Never know if Auburn might get crazy against Alabama. (though I suspect not, cause Alabama has looked every bit like the team to beat)

Never know though!

Not the way they;re currently playing

[Buckeyenut88]

yeah, this is fun.

Which is why I dont get why it started at 11am / 12PM EST, when this is pretty clearly prime time material.

I think someone borrowed the NFL schedule...

Starts at Noon because of tradition.

[Pendulous]

Alabama is doing everything to lose this game early. It's a miracle they're still winning.

- - - Updated - - -

Meanwhile, five minutes into the second quarter and Auburn doesn't have a single first down.

[Crissi]

Starts at Noon because of tradition.

Ah, thanks! Tradtion makes sense. That's why Texas - OU is at 11am too. (although being a super late sleeper, I get cranky...)

[Armourboy]

Yep, Strong is out, and Herman is on his way in. (Apparently Herman had an exclusion in his contract where as long as it was Texas, there wouldnt need to be a buyout. loooool).

i think Strong's legacy isnt going to be the w-l (although he has the lowest win percentage of any Texas Coach with 10+ games). I think cleaning out the entitlement, filling up the recruitment and team with talent and bringing in strong values to make strong men is going to be what he's remembered for.

I tend to agree. I think when they look back at history, they will be thankful for what Charlie Strong did there. So often you see teams bring coaches to clean up the program, they do, get fired, and then the next guy is the one that benefits ( and then usually screws it all back up again).

[Xargoth6634]

Always good to beat Michigan, but that was a really, really underwhelming performance by our offense there for most of the game. What I'm worried about is getting into the playoffs with the #4 slot and getting Bama in the first round. Worked out for us a couple of years ago but not this year; we had a lot more going for us then. Honestly though, I don't think UW (even with a conference championship) should move past us in the playoff picture. Their SoS is hot garbage, but I guess we'll see how much emphasis the committee puts on being conference champs. That's assuming they can beat USC, of course. If USC wins they shouldn't have a shot; a 3 loss conference champ has no place in the final four, imo.

EDIT: Gratz on Herman, Crissi. I could be massively jinxing you but I think he'll be a great hire, especially since Strong managed to land some really good recruiting classes. As we saw with OSU and Michigan, it doesn't take much for a really good coach to turn a program around. Hopefully Herman is that guy for you all.

[xskarma]

Always good to beat Michigan, but that was a really, really underwhelming performance by our offense there for most of the game. What I'm worried about is getting into the playoffs with the #4 slot and getting Bama in the first round. Worked out for us a couple of years ago but not this year; we had a lot more going for us then. Honestly though, I don't think UW (even with a conference championship) should move past us in the playoff picture. Their SoS is hot garbage, but I guess we'll see how much emphasis the committee puts on being conference champs. That's assuming they can beat USC, of course. If USC wins they shouldn't have a shot; a 3 loss conference champ has no place in the final four, imo.

There's already voices out there saying Michigan and OSU should both be in the playoffs, regardless of what happens in the Big 10 championship. And to be honest after today's game I kind of agree. Neither Penn State nor Wisconsin are on par with Michigan and OSU and it seems pants on head crazy to put either of them in the playoffs ahead of them based on a conference game against a weaker opponent.

Then again, if the commision doesn't put weight on the conference championship game they might undermine their own arguments from previous years.

I certainly wouldn't want to be in the commissions shoes, cause either way you are going to get a ton of flack.

[Pendulous]

Failures from Florida's offense as usual.

[Xargoth6634]

There's already voices out there saying Michigan and OSU should both be in the playoffs, regardless of what happens in the Big 10 championship. And to be honest after today's game I kind of agree. Neither Penn State nor Wisconsin are on par with Michigan and OSU and it seems pants on head crazy to put either of them in the playoffs ahead of them based on a conference game against a weaker opponent.

Then again, if the commision doesn't put weight on the conference championship game they might undermine their own arguments from previous years.

I certainly wouldn't want to be in the commissions shoes, cause either way you are going to get a ton of flack.

That was an interesting read. I agree with the logic behind it, but I don't think the committee will go for it. Also, the Big Ten is (imo) the best overall football in the conference this year, and I don't think you'd find too many people who would disagree. (The best team by far is still Alabama) While the way the conference championship is playing out for the Big Ten isn't ideal as far as sending their best teams to the playoff, I'm not sure how you just throw the actual champion out of the picture, regardless of how much everyone KNOW they couldn't hang with either OSU or Michigan. You're essentially saying the regular season means nothing if you do that. I guess maybe if Wisconsin beats PSU you could say "well Wisconsin lost on the field to both these other teams with the same/better records" but if PSU wins they still have the head to head argument against OSU. Agreed that I wouldn't want to be on the committee when they make the final decision. (This is, of course, assuming that you put 2 Big Ten teams in and leave out a Pac10 winner)

SO, based on what we've seen so far and assuming UW and Clemson win out, what are your final 4 brackets, forumites? Mine:

1. Alabama vs. 4. Michigan
2. THE Ohio State University vs. 3. Clemson
National championship: #4 Michigan 24, #2 Ohio State 21.*

*I respect Harbaugh even if he is a whiny little bitch after losses, and his defense is a beast. I think his team when rested could shock Bama the way Ohio State did two years ago, and I'm not sure Ohio State could win a rematch with Michigan on a neutral field in January. But hey, maybe Bama loses but bruises/tires out UM enough that OSU could pull it out. This is assuming OSU beats Clemson...they may be inconsistent but they're a good team.

Clemson honestly hasn't been much more impressive than UW overall, but they have better wins. They consistently play down to the level of their opposition, and could've easily dropped 3+ games this season. I really don't know what to think of the ACC this year, their teams just beat each other up and are wildly inconsistent. They're still better than the PAC10 (and miles ahead of the Big12 this year), but not by leaps and bounds.

EDIT: Should say that the final 4 I posted was who I thought SHOULD play. I think the committee will go Bama/OSU/Clemson/UW in that order, or possibly bump the crowned B10 champ to #4 over UW. I guess in theory they could go Bama/Clemson/B10 champ/OSU if they really wanted to emphasize conference championships, but that'd be a really dumb move.

[Crissi]

The committee doesn't get to punish the Big12 for not having a Championship game, and then conveniently ignore the Championship game for the Big 10. No, thats bullshit and TCU / Baylor / Oklahoma should absolutely complain if that happens.

also sibut: thanks! Im hoping he can pull a Harbough this year since unlike Strong, he has talent to work with year 1. I also dont think he will backslide on morality since he seems to value what Strong did in that department.

[Xargoth6634]

The committee doesn't get to punish the Big12 for not having a Championship game, and then conveniently ignore the Championship game for the Big 10. No, thats bullshit and TCU / Baylor / Oklahoma should absolutely complain if that happens.
.

If you're still mad about 2014, your teams were bad and you should feel bad. You can complain all you want, but the response from the committee should be along the lines of GET GUD KEED this year to any complaints from the Big 12. Your best team is Oklahoma, who lost by about 600 to Ohio State at home this year. Anyway, I could be misremembering, but I don't think that the sole reason that the committee picked OSU over Baylor/TCu was the conference championship, although I know they mentioned that. The point is that the conference championship game gives you a chance to showcase your team one more time. By the odds, OSU was expected to lose to Wisconsin by 6 in the championship game that year and curbstomped them 59-0. Prior to that game, OSU/TCU/Baylor were pretty similarly regarded; I'm not sure how you can discount a statement victory like the one OSU got in the championship game.

The committee never promised to make a conference championship its #1 consideration (otherwise we'd have the Big Sky, Horizon league, etc. pushing for bids.) If two of the top four perceived best teams are in the same conference, why would you leave one out for a 2014 FSU?

[Crissi]

Not gonna rehash the 2014 debate. Just that I dont think its fair to punish one conference for it but virtually ignore it for another lol. Big 12 is getting it back in 2017 though so that may help, or may cause even more chaos if #2 beats #1 after #1 beat #2 in the normal Big12 season. Round robin accomplishes what a Conf Champ game does anyways, the committee is just lazy.

but you're right. Unless someone that's not Bama loses again, the committee is basically fucked. (also, Im totally for Washington dammit. They're a blue blood program!). I sitll cant imagine both Big 10 teams getting in, even if they deserve to. You know, having a 6 team playoff with the top 2 getting top seeds would fix this problem -_-

[Xargoth6634]

Not gonna rehash the 2014 debate. Just that I dont think its fair to punish one conference for it but virtually ignore it for another lol. Big 12 is getting it back in 2017 though so that may help, or may cause even more chaos if #2 beats #1 after #1 beat #2 in the normal Big12 season. Round robin accomplishes what a Conf Champ game does anyways, the committee is just lazy.

but you're right. Unless someone that's not Bama loses again, the committee is basically fucked. (also, Im totally for Washington dammit. They're a blue blood program!). I sitll cant imagine both Big 10 teams getting in, even if they deserve to. You know, having a 6 team playoff with the top 2 getting top seeds would fix this problem -_-

I'd be more for an 8 team playoff than 6, I think with 8 you minimize the noise from those left out to a pretty much negligible level. If you're not CLEARLY in the top 8 you really haven't taken care of business. I'd rather see UW than Michigan in from the standpoint that I love Seattle and cheer for UW in the PAC12 (and also because fuck Michigan), but like I said their resume is pretty weak. I don't think Michigan is going to make the cut and in a sense they have themselves to blame for that; losing to Iowa (even the improved Iowa that shockingly beat Nebraska by 30 today and might end up being ranked) is probably the nail in their coffin. If they had won that game and lost to OSU, they'd be heading to the Big 10 championship game anyway and the Big 10 would at that point pretty much be a lock to get 2 teams in.

And yeah, I think you guys are going to be back next year. Oklahoma is legit and will be a tough game for OSU at home, and I really think Texas could easily hit double digit wins if Herman brings the discipline and passion to the team that he's proven to be capable of. He really needs to get a good defensive coordinator, though; his teams at Houston have been excellent offensively (which makes sense since he was an OC and excellent at it) but they basically had to outscore the teams they played. When you're giving up 30-40+ points to Tulsa, SMU, Navy, and Memphis, you need to figure out what you're doing wrong. Houston should've won the AAC and ended up with an 5-3 record in conference, due mostly to their defensive woes.

[Crissi]

I know, rehire Strong as the DC! /joke

but yeah, with our defensive talent we really need a good DC to help them develop. I think / hope Herman realizes that, but i have no clue who would be a good fit that isnt currently a head coach (Patterson...) Also, with the re-rise of USC I think the Pac12 will be good again in another year or so, esp once Oregon figures things out. I dont see Washington regressing after this year.

[Xargoth6634]

I know, rehire Strong as the DC! /joke

but yeah, with our defensive talent we really need a good DC to help them develop. I think / hope Herman realizes that, but i have no clue who would be a good fit that isnt currently a head coach (Patterson...) Also, with the re-rise of USC I think the Pac12 will be good again in another year or so, esp once Oregon figures things out. I dont see Washington regressing after this year.

If you're looking for a DC I hear Charlie Weis is seeking employment LOLOLOL