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
 Share

Recommended Posts

The byes really are just absurd.  I think #12 Clemson would have been favored over some of these bye teams on neutral field…..and that’s not chest thumping that Clemson team as that good 

got to take the auto byes out of this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CRA said:

The byes really are just absurd.  I think #12 Clemson would have been favored over some of these bye teams on neutral field…..and that’s not chest thumping that Clemson team as that good 

got to take the auto byes out of this

Every "I SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PLAYOFF" team lost so far. Clemson was not in the class of basically any of these teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

I've defended the new format. I still like the 12 team format. But there's no sugar coating it. It has produced terribly uncompetitive games so far.

Unfortunately, it isn't going to get better. What is being laid bare is that there has never really been much parity in college football because it has always existed as a sport without a salary cap. This will continue until the facade drops, they actually are professional teams(have been for almost 40 years now) and there is a salary cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Every "I SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PLAYOFF" team lost so far. Clemson was not in the class of basically any of these teams.

If you're on the bubble of the field I don't wanna hear it. You don't have a legit shot. What I **** about the 12 team field is that it definitely gets every team in the country that might potentially have a fighting chance in the field.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I've defended the new format. I still like the 12 team format. But there's no sugar coating it. It has produced terribly uncompetitive games so far.

I think you should rank them 1-12.  Top 4 get byes.  A nod to the old format and making them unique from the rest .  Then the rest of the field 5-12 which was added plays each other and into a game vs the top 4. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Every "I SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PLAYOFF" team lost so far. Clemson was not in the class of basically any of these teams.

Huh? Clemson to date has given a winner a better run at it than anyone else.  Also they happened to do things to that Texas D no one, not a single SEC team, has done all season.  Clemson basically is the one loser that wasn’t totally outclassed.  They definitely didn’t show up and give people fodder to point at them

Clemson was actually seeded properly.   They were seeded poorly despite a conference title.   Same should have been done for all the other weaker teams despite their titles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CRA said:

I think you should rank them 1-12.  Top 4 get byes.  A nod to the old format and making them unique from the rest .  Then the rest of the field 5-12 which was added plays each other and into a game vs the top 4. 

This makes sense but they are rewarding the conference champions which I agree with personally.  Regardless of format you are going to see blowouts.  

I would keep it like this and if you are a bubble top 12 team and don't make it too bad.  It hasn't proven out any of those teams belonged 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Every "I SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PLAYOFF" team lost so far. Clemson was not in the class of basically any of these teams.

We've gotta quit thumping this narrative as factual given who did or didnt suit up. Thats the reality of non CFP bowl season. Portal,Coaches gone, players not playing or quitting mid game. 

It's just not realistic. If you cheer for a conference knock yourself out. But what a team did week 1-12 has maybe even less than zero to do with a bowl game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, CRA said:

Huh? Clemson to date has given a winner a better run at it than anyone else.  Also they happened to do things to that Texas D no one, not a single SEC team, has done all season.  Clemson basically is the one loser that wasn’t totally outclassed.  They definitely didn’t show up and give people fodder to point at them

Clemson was actually seeded properly.   They were seeded poorly despite a conference title.   Same should have been done for all the other weaker teams despite their titles. 

That's right, I forgot you guys actually made it and got beat pretty soundly by Texas.

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I like what Freeling brings to the table all around. If he is willing to put in the work he has an opportunity to be one of the better Tackles in the league down the line. Hunter Brazzell and Hecht are all premium additions but development from our staff are the key to unlocking them. Hopefully Lee and Wheatley will provide much needed additional depth to our secondary. Beyond that it's important not to get too caught up in draft grades. Many drafts over the years that turned out to be really good were not fawned over with praise. While some that were ended up being historical duds. Panthers fans ought to know this as well as anyone. In conclusion...
    • Maybe a bit of a homer take but I can't give us a grade lower than A.   Freeling was arguably the best LT prospect in the draft.  His athletic ability is off the chart and at 6'7" that can move.  It was a no brainer pick.   Hunter's key word is Violence. Putting him next to Brown should scare an offensive coordinator. These two give Scourton and Phillips plenty of chances to get one on one opportunities. Brazzell, another tall receiver with sprinter speed.  Our WR room is filled with tall talented WR.  Brazzell is going to give us a WR that can take to roof off the defense.  Basically Jimmy Horn with size. W. Lee III has a nickname of the Blanket. (heard this on the Beleav podcast with J. Stewart)  What a great name.  A great value in the 5th round. Hecht A strong, fast and extremely smart center. Many had him listed as the best center in the draft.  He's most likely a starter sooner than later. Wheatley A good safety in round 5.  Someone who could see playing time.   Kuwatch  I love this pick.  At minimum he will be a key piece on special teams and with some good coaching he'll see some packages where he'll play.  His down piece is he doesn't stay up in the running game.  Good coaching will fix this.  He reminds me a bit of A.J. Klein.   All these picks were great value.  I believe everyone of them were graded higher than the pick we took them.   Dan Morgan is IMO doing a great job turning this team into a good team with great depth.
    • Moton is a class act.  
×
×
  • Create New...