Page 3 of 61 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
13
53
... LastLast
  1. #41
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,790
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    Not sure what you're arguing. Your own list only includes 1 team in the past 12 years, and they would have been easily dispatched by the actual champs.
    Hey, where'd the goalposts go, they were right here...


    Oh wait, you're holding them in your hands

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    College football hasn’t had a true upstart champion in a long time.
    I wouldn't say Dabo's first title was that long ago. This being a rarity is also more of an issue with the playoff format and before it the BCS, not with recruiting.

    College Basketball is as dirty if not more so than football recruiting and your posts comes across as someone not paying attention to all the portal shenanigans that have happened in the last 2 years in basketball which makes football look normal by comparison.

    The SEC was in the BCS title game 10/15 times(and 9 years straight to end it), no wonder it led to a snow ball effect that carried over into the CFP era when 1 conference was nearly guaranteed a birth into the title game just by winning that conference and no other one was. The SEC got better and everyone else got worse because of this bias.

    The fact Dabo built Clemson up from a team that couldn't even beat South Carolina to national champions absolutely proves a startup champion is possible in football- it was just a hell of a lot harder in the BCS and CFP era especially if the conference patch on your jersey didn't say SEC.

    If we had a 16 team(comparable to basketball and viable) playoff starting from 1998 when the BCS did it would look wildly different now. When we see crazy upsets on a bi weekly basis in college football it's incredibly foolish to think we would never see any upsets in a large team playoff leading to unlikely champions.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2023-06-30 at 07:16 AM.

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    I wouldn't say Dabo's first title was that long ago. This being a rarity is also more of an issue with the playoff format and before it the BCS, not with recruiting.

    College Basketball is as dirty if not more so than football recruiting and your posts comes across as someone not paying attention to all the portal shenanigans that have happened in the last 2 years in basketball which makes football look normal by comparison.

    The SEC was in the BCS title game 10/15 times(and 9 years straight to end it), no wonder it led to a snow ball effect that carried over into the CFP era when 1 conference was nearly guaranteed a birth into the title game just by winning that conference and no other one was. The SEC got better and everyone else got worse because of this bias.

    The fact Dabo built Clemson up from a team that couldn't even beat South Carolina to national champions absolutely proves a startup champion is possible in football- it was just a hell of a lot harder in the BCS and CFP era especially if the conference patch on your jersey didn't say SEC.

    If we had a 16 team(comparable to basketball and viable) playoff starting from 1998 when the BCS did it would look wildly different now. When we see crazy upsets on a bi weekly basis in college football it's incredibly foolish to think we would never see any upsets in a large team playoff leading to unlikely champions.
    Clemson's championship was also a result of incredible spending on their program (similar to Georgia) for a few years that led to them being competitive. It was a slow gradual rise (also aided by a pro bowl level NFL qb, which is the biggest edge you can have to get you over the top).

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Lilithvia View Post
    Hey, where'd the goalposts go, they were right here...


    Oh wait, you're holding them in your hands
    Still waiting for you to actually say something relevant...

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    Clemson's championship was also a result of incredible spending on their program (similar to Georgia) for a few years that led to them being competitive. It was a slow gradual rise (also aided by a pro bowl level NFL qb, which is the biggest edge you can have to get you over the top).
    Clemson was spending big on football way before Dabo ever got there. They always had good talent but not enough to get over the hump and be elite, Watson got them over the hump much like we see happen all too often in college basketball. In 2015 preseason rankings Clemson was barely in the top 25 and where a team that have lost to South Carolina 5 straight times. I absolutely consider their 2016 NC season an upstart championship, nobody even thought of them as a NC contender until towards the end of the 2015 season and then they closed the deal the next year.

    UGA was a team that always had elite as fuck talent right in their backyard but either choked in big games or let their talent leave the state. The only problem they ever had was finding the right head coach, and Smart was the guy. They where always destined to be a dynasty once they got that figured out. Clemson was not a sure thing like that. UGA before Smart was just like Florida State, Florida and Texas currently are- sleeping giants that should be way better than they are.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2023-06-30 at 11:54 AM.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    Clemson was spending big on football way before Dabo ever got there. They always had good talent but not enough to get over the hump and be elite, Watson got them over the hump much like we see happen all too often in college basketball. In 2015 preseason rankings Clemson was barely in the top 25 and where a team that have lost to South Carolina 5 straight times. I absolutely consider their 2016 NC season an upstart championship, nobody even thought of them as a NC contender until towards the end of the 2015 season and then they closed the deal the next year.

    UGA was a team that always had elite as fuck talent right in their backyard but either choked in big games or let their talent leave the state. The only problem they ever had was finding the right head coach, and Smart was the guy. They where always destined to be a dynasty once they got that figured out. Clemson was not a sure thing like that. UGA before Smart was just like Florida State, Florida and Texas currently are- sleeping giants that should be way better than they are.
    Totally agree that Clemson rose out of relative obscurity, but it was a slow and steady 5 year rise, not a thunderbolt. Here were their recruiting rankings before they won:

    2011: 10
    2012: 20
    2013: 15
    2014: 16
    2015; 9
    2016: 11

    And here's an article about the money they "pumped" into the program from 2012 (article written a week before Watson committed):

    https://www.goupstate.com/story/news...m/29983857007/

    And that the best example anyone could come with over the past ten-ish years. A down south football program that went on a spending spree, lucked into a pro bowl level qb, and near top tier recruiting for 5 years was able to compete with Alabama.

    Compare it to recent NCAA champs like UConn, Baylor, Virginia, Villanova. Villanova's recruiting rankings before 2016 were:

    27
    36
    48
    29
    45

    I'm not claiming there are no shenanigans in college basketball, by the way - I'm just saying that there's far more reason to have hope for teams that don't recruit the best or have the highest NIL budget. Some of that is just inherently how basketball works - you just need a few guys, not 40 - but I also believe some of it is that the very best guys who go to the top schools mostly end up going to the NBA before they could truly dominate college.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    Totally agree that Clemson rose out of relative obscurity, but it was a slow and steady 5 year rise, not a thunderbolt. Here were their recruiting rankings before they won:

    2011: 10
    2012: 20
    2013: 15
    2014: 16
    2015; 9
    2016: 11

    And here's an article about the money they "pumped" into the program from 2012 (article written a week before Watson committed):

    https://www.goupstate.com/story/news...m/29983857007/

    And that the best example anyone could come with over the past ten-ish years. A down south football program that went on a spending spree, lucked into a pro bowl level qb, and near top tier recruiting for 5 years was able to compete with Alabama.

    Compare it to recent NCAA champs like UConn, Baylor, Virginia, Villanova. Villanova's recruiting rankings before 2016 were:

    27
    36
    48
    29
    45

    I'm not claiming there are no shenanigans in college basketball, by the way - I'm just saying that there's far more reason to have hope for teams that don't recruit the best or have the highest NIL budget. Some of that is just inherently how basketball works - you just need a few guys, not 40 - but I also believe some of it is that the very best guys who go to the top schools mostly end up going to the NBA before they could truly dominate college.
    Recruiting in the teens out of 130ish FBS teams ain't much different from recruiting in the 30s out of 350ish teams. That's still the very tippity top of the sport, and the biggest difference is teams actually get a shot in basketball without having near perfect seasons. You would see a lot more Clemsons had we been playing with an expanded playoff for the last 20 years.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    Recruiting in the teens out of 130ish FBS teams ain't much different from recruiting in the 30s out of 350ish teams. That's still the very tippity top of the sport, and the biggest difference is teams actually get a shot in basketball without having near perfect seasons. You would see a lot more Clemsons had we been playing with an expanded playoff for the last 20 years.
    That's the fundamental thing I disagree with. I think we'd see more SEC vs. SEC finals if we had an expanded playoff.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    That's the fundamental thing I disagree with. I think we'd see more SEC vs. SEC finals if we had an expanded playoff.
    You would see both. It's not really something to disagree with, the odds and numbers literally say there would be more SEC vs SEC finals and also more surprise winners cause more opportunities for upsets.

    People used to make a similar bullshit argument that "the 4th ranked team could never win", then the 4th ranked team won the very first CFP. You would absolutely see unlikely winners every few years, not necessarily cause they upset a bama or UGA but could be cause some other team did. That's the reason you see varied winners in basketball not because recruiting matters less lol...
    Last edited by Tech614; 2023-06-30 at 11:49 PM.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    You would see both. It's not really something to disagree with, the odds and numbers literally say there would be more SEC vs SEC finals and also more surprise winners cause more opportunities for upsets.

    People used to make a similar bullshit argument that "the 4th ranked team could never win", then the 4th ranked team won the very first CFP. You would absolutely see unlikely winners every few years, not necessarily cause they upset a bama or UGA but could be cause some other team did. That's the reason you see varied winners in basketball not because recruiting matters less lol...
    You might be right, but some things would need to change for that to happen. Most recent champs are among the most talented teams in history, rivaling teams like 2001 Miami. There seems to be an upper tier that's just a cut above most years. Maybe that's driven by the lack of opportunity created by the CFB system, so players are less likely to go to lower profile schools. Either way we'll find out over the next few years.

  10. #50
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,790
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    Still waiting for you to actually say something relevant...
    Curious, because everything I've said has been relevant until you moved the goalposts

  11. #51
    Over 9000! Milchshake's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Shitposter Burn Out
    Posts
    9,929
    Bad day for Clownzano and his fans.


    Like a student that tries to hide their bare minimum book report, by stuffing in the middle of the stack. The general framework media deal... sounds like it will be the bare minimum.
    PAC 10 athletic departments are hurt for cash and uneasy about dilutting payments with expansion. Dont want to repeat the mistakes of the previous expansion. The Comcast repayments blew a hole in their budgets ontop of everything else.
    Government Affiliated Snark

  12. #52
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,790
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    That's the fundamental thing I disagree with. I think we'd see more SEC vs. SEC finals if we had an expanded playoff.
    Hi 2008 Utah who went undefeated and beat a Bama team by a field goal more than the national champions did, and beat several top 15 teams on their way to doing so

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ShakesForPRide View Post
    Bad day for Clownzano and his fans.


    Like a student that tries to hide their bare minimum book report, by stuffing in the middle of the stack. The general framework media deal... sounds like it will be the bare minimum.
    PAC 10 athletic departments are hurt for cash and uneasy about dilutting payments with expansion. Dont want to repeat the mistakes of the previous expansion. The Comcast repayments blew a hole in their budgets ontop of everything else.
    This coming from a conference who doesn't even know where conference logos go on a field

  13. #53
    Moderator Crissi's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    32,142
    Discuss civilly please.

  14. #54
    The Undying
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    34,506
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    You might be right, but some things would need to change for that to happen. Most recent champs are among the most talented teams in history, rivaling teams like 2001 Miami. There seems to be an upper tier that's just a cut above most years. Maybe that's driven by the lack of opportunity created by the CFB system, so players are less likely to go to lower profile schools. Either way we'll find out over the next few years.
    The next few years after the expanded CFP will be interesting. I see more "clemsons" coming out of the woodwork to advance farther than they've been allowed to with the old CFP system.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ShakesForPRide View Post
    Bad day for Clownzano and his fans.


    Like a student that tries to hide their bare minimum book report, by stuffing in the middle of the stack. The general framework media deal... sounds like it will be the bare minimum.
    PAC 10 athletic departments are hurt for cash and uneasy about dilutting payments with expansion. Dont want to repeat the mistakes of the previous expansion. The Comcast repayments blew a hole in their budgets ontop of everything else.
    Not sure where your animosity comes from re that guy - he does great sports reporting with terrific accuracy. Maybe you're upset by the news and are blaming the messenger....

  15. #55
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,790
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    Not sure where your animosity comes from re that guy - he does great sports reporting with terrific accuracy. Maybe you're upset by the news and are blaming the messenger....
    This right here describes Big12 Anons to a T.

    Feels like they are so invested because they don't want their conference to die

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Lilithvia View Post
    This right here describes Big12 Anons to a T.

    Feels like they are so invested because they don't want their conference to die
    Don't think the Big 12 has any real threat of dying, nobody is trying to poach kansas schools, oSu, Iowa State, WVU, UCF, BYU or the million texas schools. Maybe the Big Ten decides it wants a texas school and go's after TCU(doubtful but not impossible) that's about the only school they have any risk of losing anymore. They have a secure future as the "best non power conference". The Pac and ACC only has the future of it's most valuable programs left eventually getting poached by the Big Ten and SEC and the full regional identity of CFB will finally die it's long, terrible death thanks to monetary greed.

    Pac and ACC can definitely survive for awhile yet but the Big 12 has a future into the 2030s unlike them which will probably crumble the second their most recent GORs expire.

    Anyways when the next round of expansion happens and the ACC/Pac get poached I expect the Big 12 to move to add UConn, Syracuse, Duke, Louisville, Arizona, ASU, Colorado and Utah so you shouldn't disrespect your future conference too much No need to worry, it's Oregon State, Washington State and Cal that are fucked you will be fine.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2023-07-02 at 02:36 PM.

  17. #57
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,790
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    Don't think the Big 12 has any real threat of dying, nobody is trying to poach kansas schools, oSu, Iowa State, WVU, UCF, BYU or the million texas schools. Maybe the Big Ten decides it wants a texas school and go's after TCU(doubtful but not impossible) that's about the only school they have any risk of losing anymore. They have a secure future as the "best non power conference". The Pac and ACC only has the future of it's most valuable programs left eventually getting poached by the Big Ten and SEC and the full regional identity of CFB will finally die it's long, terrible death thanks to monetary greed.

    Pac and ACC can definitely survive for awhile yet but the Big 12 has a future into the 2030s unlike them which will probably crumble the second their most recent GORs expire.

    Anyways when the next round of expansion happens and the ACC/Pac get poached I expect the Big 12 to move to add UConn, Syracuse, Duke, Louisville, Arizona, ASU, Colorado and Utah so you shouldn't disrespect your future conference too much No need to worry, it's Oregon State, Washington State and Cal that are fucked you will be fine.
    I'm going to laugh my ass off on July 21st

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Lilithvia View Post
    I'm going to laugh my ass off on July 21st
    For what? A media deal finally being signed doesn't change anything of what I said.

    Conference expansion and consolidation doesn't leave room for the Pac or ACC to survive 15 years from now. You're talking about the Big 12 dying but the Big Ten and SEC aren't interested in their teams.

    Big Ten would be interested in: Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Notre Dame, UNC, Miami, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Virginia

    The SEC would be interested in: Notre Dame, UNC, NC State, Florida State, Clemson, Virginia, Virginia Tech

    Not that either would add all those programs but they will probably look to add 4 of them each when new media deals are due.

    The Big 12 is safe, the B1G and SEC aren't trying to poach them lmfao. The Pac and ACC are the conferenced without a long term future. I get that there might be some heavy cope with you about your future being in the same conference as BYU again but it's the most likely scenario. Just enjoy the Pac while its safe for the next 7-10 years.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2023-07-02 at 10:10 PM.

  19. #59
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,790
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    For what? A media deal finally being signed doesn't change anything of what I said.

    Conference expansion and consolidation doesn't leave room for the Pac or ACC to survive 15 years from now. You're talking about the Big 12 dying but the Big Ten and SEC aren't interested in their teams.

    Big Ten would be interested in: Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Notre Dame, UNC, Miami, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Virginia

    The SEC would be interested in: Notre Dame, UNC, NC State, Florida State, Clemson, Virginia, Virginia Tech

    Not that either would add all those programs but they will probably look to add 4 of them each when new media deals are due.

    The Big 12 is safe, the B1G and SEC aren't trying to poach them lmfao. The Pac and ACC are the conferenced without a long term future. I get that there might be some heavy cope with you about your future being in the same conference as BYU again but it's the most likely scenario. Just enjoy the Pac while its safe for the next 7-10 years.
    Oregon and Washington were USC's first choice, not UCLA. And guess who said they didn't bring enough to the table? Fox.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Lilithvia View Post
    Oregon and Washington were USC's first choice, not UCLA. And guess who said they didn't bring enough to the table? Fox.
    You should stick to your lane on spreading bullshit pac news cause you're really sitting here trying to spread bullshit to a big ten fan about things that didn't happen?

    1. USC went to the B1G by themselves and asked to join, they didn't care about having any west coast partner.
    2. The B1G after USC asked to join went to UCLA by themselves because they wanted the entire LA market and not just part of it, along with a natural rival for USC.
    3. Oregon and Washington asked to join AFTER USC and UCLA already did and the B1G told them to wait because the media deal was already being finalized and they wouldn't increase the pot enough for average payments to not be decreased.

    #3 is not an issue when a new media deal is being negotiated years from now and they will be looking to add 4 teams to get to 20 and Oregon/Washington will be added with 2 more super valuable east coast brands from the ACC. Not to mention if it really came to it the B1G could just offer them reduced payouts and it would still be far more money than they would make staying in the PAC.

    Stop coping. Utah's future is the Big 12, it's not great for college football but that's the reality of it. The PAC and ACC absolutely WILL fall within the next decade give or take.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2023-07-03 at 11:57 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •