Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

2024 College Football Thread

KingKucci

By KingKucci,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Bama Panther Mentor

Bama Panther

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I have an odd feeling you'd be singing a completely different tune had they let Bama in.

Go back through this thread. I don’t think Bama should have gotten in. I would have been happy had they gotten in, but I’m not sure they are in the top 12.  I think they are in a group of 3-5 teams that could have beaten anyone in the field in a good day but lost badly if they had a bad day.

My problem with Indiana and SMU is that I don’t think they could have beaten anyone in the field, even on a good day. They simply got in because they ran up wins against less than stellar competition. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Bama Panther said:

Go back through this thread. I don’t think Bama should have gotten in. I would have been happy had they gotten in, but I’m not sure they are in the top 12.  I think they are in a group of 3-5 teams that could have beaten anyone in the field in a good day but lost badly if they had a bad day.

My problem with Indiana and SMU is that I don’t think they could have beaten anyone in the field, even on a good day. They simply got in because they ran up wins against less than stellar competition. 

By this standard Notre Dame shouldn't have been in either having beaten no one and lost to NIU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CamWhoaaCam Grand Master

CamWhoaaCam

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Bama Panther said:

Go back through this thread. I don’t think Bama should have gotten in. I would have been happy had they gotten in, but I’m not sure they are in the top 12.  I think they are in a group of 3-5 teams that could have beaten anyone in the field in a good day but lost badly if they had a bad day.

My problem with Indiana and SMU is that I don’t think they could have beaten anyone in the field, even on a good day. They simply got in because they ran up wins against less than stellar competition. 

All facts

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Panther Mentor

Bama Panther

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

By this standard Notre Dame shouldn't have been in either having beaten no one and lost to NIU.

This is why the arguments happen and why teams like SMU and Indiana got in with teams like Bama, South Carolina, and Ole Miss did not. Arguments can be made for any number of teams. 

ND also beat Army (finished regular season in top 20), as well as aTm and Louisville (who both finished in the top 30 of the regular season). All three were ranked at the time of their games. 

Indiana played one ranked team (tOSU) and got smoked. SMU beat Pitt, who was ranked at the time of the game but ended up outside the top 30.

Against, arguments can be made for any number of teams. The arguments for Indiana and SMU just weren’t persuasive to me. It may be my SEC bias coming through, but I think SC, Ole Miss, Bama, all had better records, even with their losses, because they did it against tougher competition from week-to-week.

Either way though, 12 teams is way too many. This was imply a money grab, and there will be tons of blowouts in the first round every year with more likely in quarters and semis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Bama Panther said:

This is why the arguments happen and why teams like SMU and Indiana got in with teams like Bama, South Carolina, and Ole Miss did not. Arguments can be made for any number of teams. 

ND also beat Army (finished regular season in top 20), as well as aTm and Louisville (who both finished in the top 30 of the regular season). All three were ranked at the time of their games. 

Indiana played one ranked team (tOSU) and got smoked. SMU beat Pitt, who was ranked at the time of the game but ended up outside the top 30.

Against, arguments can be made for any number of teams. The arguments for Indiana and SMU just weren’t persuasive to me. It may be my SEC bias coming through, but I think SC, Ole Miss, Bama, all had better records, even with their losses, because they did it against tougher competition from week-to-week.

Either way though, 12 teams is way too many. This was imply a money grab, and there will be tons of blowouts in the first round every year with more likely in quarters and semis. 

There's always going to be teams with arguments to get in regardless of how small or large the field is and the four team format features blowouts too. I like more teams having an opportunity. A 12 team field comfortably allows in everyone with a legitimate chance IMO. Bama didn't have a legit chance, they're QB can't throw. Miami didn't have a legit chance, their defense is trash tier.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Tepper's Chest Hair
      Bryce Young 5th year option exercised

      By Tepper's Chest Hair · Posted

      Sometimes its fun to read the threads/posts.  The panthers could literally hire a groundskeeper and we'd have a thread "improving the field for no other reason to prop up Bryce Young".  Apparently no move is ever done to actually make the team better.  All a conspiracy to just focus on Bryce Young. Or suddenly daydreaming and reminiscing about Sam Darnold when he was hated more than Bryce Young.  Its really fun to do a message board search about Darnold during that time period.   Or thinking there is just a tree that grows QB, and you can just easily go up and pluck one.   
    • strato
      Bryce Young 5th year option exercised

      By strato · Posted

      Yeah okay. We as an organization have been more patient with him than many. And there has been a small parade of guys drafted since he was, also to bad teams, that have passed him. Some have lapped him. As a fan I am out of patience but he gets this year it is out of my hands always has been. I just hope the bar is higher than it has been for him.    FWIW, XL dropped two passes last year. He did do some other bad stuff, just saying. 
    • tukafan21
      Bryce Young 5th year option exercised

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      Except it takes those QB's a few years to develop because they needed to learn the mental side of the game and have it catch up to their physical attributes. Bryce was supposed to be a QB savant who already had a fully developed mental side of the game and that was going to make up for his lack of physical ability.  And his lack of NFL level QB physical traits has been clear as day to anyone who has watched him the last 3 years, mainly, he just doesn't have an NFL arm, he can't zip the ball into tight spaces or throw on a line down the field like is needed at this level.
×
×
  • Create New...