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

CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted

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
Hoenheim Grand Master

Hoenheim

Posted
Posted

Whoever bet on the favorites for these first 2 rounds of the cfp probably won alot of money 💰 none of the underdogs are putting up a fight at ALL

I feel like at least Ohio State vs Oregon should give us some entertainment  . Jesus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
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
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
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
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
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
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
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
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
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
Shocker Grand Master

Shocker

Posted
Posted
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
SCMunnerlyn1 Experienced

SCMunnerlyn1

Posted
Posted
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
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • AU-panther
      Week 6 PFF grades vs. DAL

      By AU-panther · Posted

      Say you don't understand PFF without saying you don't understand PFF... Every week seems like some of the same people are complaining about something they clearly don't understand.  I'm not saying they are the end all resource out there but once you understand their methodology you can start to appreciate some of their work. For example, their grading system isn't a high school grading system, try to look at some of it in relative terms.  Rico had an 82 rushing grade, that's pretty good.  I would be curious to know how that compares to every other running back this past weekend. Also, I think he had a few penalties, which if I'm not mistaken are graded pretty harshly.      
    • strato
      Passing Stats

      By strato · Posted

      Can we go back to square one for a minute and remember what we paid for this guy and how he was sold?  He was like, the anti excuse. Makes everybody better, Did we get that?  I think the answer is still coming but so far you might can say that for a game or two.  Cam had issues with personnel every season almost. Horrible OL, but he had receivers. Decent to good OL no receivers. Etc. Bryce needs to stand up, or keep standing up, however you want to put it. It is big boy time in year 3. He doesn’t have to make the playoffs but there is a standard. We’ll see what happens.  But the excuses are just fuging tired.  ps, I mean let’s not crown him when he has franchise record production in two wins,.. let’s see when they stop that, how he does then. 
    • BEASTfromdaEAST
      Ikem Ekwonu is slated to GET PAID

      By BEASTfromdaEAST · Posted

      Where do you draw line top3 or top 5 money then? I wish he goes for a "hometown" deal and doesn't try and reset market but it's going to be tough to argue not paying him BIG MONEY if he continues do be a stabilizing force on the left side of line. DM got some tough decisions to make at the OT position coming up.   
×
×
  • Create New...