ImageImage

College Football Discussion - CFP Set

Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25, humanrefutation

User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 108,848
And1: 42,926
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#701 » by ReasonablySober » Sun Dec 22, 2024 12:07 am

This game has ruled.
Mtsportsfan
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,371
And1: 414
Joined: Oct 21, 2017
     

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#702 » by Mtsportsfan » Sun Dec 22, 2024 12:09 am

Pretty crappy games ! Hope the OSU - Tenn game is good!
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 112,526
And1: 28,198
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#703 » by trwi7 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 12:13 am

lol nice calls Clemson
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
Mtsportsfan
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,371
And1: 414
Joined: Oct 21, 2017
     

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#704 » by Mtsportsfan » Sun Dec 22, 2024 12:14 am

Left the Texas game early , looked like a blow out! I see it tightened up!
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 108,848
And1: 42,926
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#705 » by ReasonablySober » Sun Dec 22, 2024 12:22 am

Yea, Clemson choked late.
PintSizedBox10
Head Coach
Posts: 7,450
And1: 3,781
Joined: Mar 31, 2019
   

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#706 » by PintSizedBox10 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 12:28 am

Clemson had his forward progress stopped for an entire second. Blow the damn whistle
User avatar
Matches Malone
RealGM
Posts: 37,734
And1: 27,943
Joined: Nov 23, 2005
     

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#707 » by Matches Malone » Sun Dec 22, 2024 1:47 am

Going to be a hot commodity come draft time.

Read on Twitter
Gery Woelfel wrote:Got a time big boy?
PintSizedBox10
Head Coach
Posts: 7,450
And1: 3,781
Joined: Mar 31, 2019
   

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#708 » by PintSizedBox10 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 2:11 am

How do you not call that PI. Refs are ruining football
midranger
RealGM
Posts: 40,055
And1: 11,736
Joined: May 12, 2002

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#709 » by midranger » Sun Dec 22, 2024 3:47 am

The sarcastic SEC chant must continue. Don’t let ESPN cut away from it
Please reconsider your animal consumption.
Mags FTW
RealGM
Posts: 35,686
And1: 8,234
Joined: Feb 16, 2006
Location: Flickin' It

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#710 » by Mags FTW » Sun Dec 22, 2024 4:43 am

Maybe we should just do eight teams.
MVP2110
General Manager
Posts: 8,911
And1: 4,705
Joined: Jun 28, 2012
Location: Appleton WI
       

Re: College Football Discussion - Belichick to UNC 

Post#711 » by MVP2110 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 1:37 pm

Mags FTW wrote:Maybe we should just do eight teams.


Eh, in the 4 team CFP 67% of games were 2+ score games. Blowouts are just more of a thing in college football.
Coach Drew: "Milwaukee has always been a team that I have been intrigued by. When we played them, they were a tough team for us to play. Although we did beat them all four times"
User avatar
MickeyDavis
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 106,026
And1: 57,954
Joined: May 02, 2002
Location: The Craps Table
     

Re: College Football Discussion - CFP 

Post#712 » by MickeyDavis » Sun Dec 22, 2024 1:57 pm

Disappointing first round. Hopefully the quarterfinals are more competitive.
I'm against picketing but I don't know how to show it.
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 112,526
And1: 28,198
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

Re: College Football Discussion - CFP 

Post#713 » by trwi7 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 3:37 pm

12 is fine but they need to get rid of power 4 conference champ gets automatic top 4 seed and there should be home games through the quarterfinals. Arizona State and Boise State should have had to play this weekend and Oregon should not have to play Ohio State as their "reward" for getting the top seed.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
User avatar
MickeyDavis
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 106,026
And1: 57,954
Joined: May 02, 2002
Location: The Craps Table
     

Re: College Football Discussion - CFP 

Post#714 » by MickeyDavis » Sun Dec 22, 2024 7:13 pm

20 of 30 games in the 4 team CFP were decided by double digits.
I'm against picketing but I don't know how to show it.
MVP2110
General Manager
Posts: 8,911
And1: 4,705
Joined: Jun 28, 2012
Location: Appleton WI
       

Re: College Football Discussion - CFP 

Post#715 » by MVP2110 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 7:46 pm

trwi7 wrote:12 is fine but they need to get rid of power 4 conference champ gets automatic top 4 seed and there should be home games through the quarterfinals. Arizona State and Boise State should have had to play this weekend and Oregon should not have to play Ohio State as their "reward" for getting the top seed.


Nah, conference champs should absolutely get rewarded. Just reseed after R1 so Texas doesnt get rewarded for losing their conference championship game. If you want a bye then win your conference
Coach Drew: "Milwaukee has always been a team that I have been intrigued by. When we played them, they were a tough team for us to play. Although we did beat them all four times"
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 112,526
And1: 28,198
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

Re: College Football Discussion - CFP 

Post#716 » by trwi7 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 8:03 pm

MVP2110 wrote:
trwi7 wrote:12 is fine but they need to get rid of power 4 conference champ gets automatic top 4 seed and there should be home games through the quarterfinals. Arizona State and Boise State should have had to play this weekend and Oregon should not have to play Ohio State as their "reward" for getting the top seed.


Nah, conference champs should absolutely get rewarded.


They're rewarded by making it. They should not be rewarded by getting a guaranteed QF spot over better teams.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
MVP2110
General Manager
Posts: 8,911
And1: 4,705
Joined: Jun 28, 2012
Location: Appleton WI
       

Re: College Football Discussion - CFP 

Post#717 » by MVP2110 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 9:36 pm

trwi7 wrote:
MVP2110 wrote:
trwi7 wrote:12 is fine but they need to get rid of power 4 conference champ gets automatic top 4 seed and there should be home games through the quarterfinals. Arizona State and Boise State should have had to play this weekend and Oregon should not have to play Ohio State as their "reward" for getting the top seed.


Nah, conference champs should absolutely get rewarded.


They're rewarded by making it. They should not be rewarded by getting a guaranteed QF spot over better teams.


They absolutely should. To win your conference you have to win an extra game during the season, winning that extra conference championship game should guarentee you having to play 1 less playoff game. If the conference championships didn't guarantee a bye then there would have been no reason for Oregon, Georgia, Texas, Penn St etc to try during the conference title games and Notre Dame would get a bonus for not being in a conference
Coach Drew: "Milwaukee has always been a team that I have been intrigued by. When we played them, they were a tough team for us to play. Although we did beat them all four times"
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 112,526
And1: 28,198
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

Re: College Football Discussion - CFP 

Post#718 » by trwi7 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 10:40 pm

MVP2110 wrote:
trwi7 wrote:
MVP2110 wrote:
Nah, conference champs should absolutely get rewarded.


They're rewarded by making it. They should not be rewarded by getting a guaranteed QF spot over better teams.


They absolutely should. To win your conference you have to win an extra game during the season, winning that extra conference championship game should guarentee you having to play 1 less playoff game. If the conference championships didn't guarantee a bye then there would have been no reason for Oregon, Georgia, Texas, Penn St etc to try during the conference title games and Notre Dame would get a bonus for not being in a conference


You could also end up getting like a 9-5 team getting a bye. Reseeding doesn't work either because reseeding this year would still have Oregon playing Ohio State.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
MVP2110
General Manager
Posts: 8,911
And1: 4,705
Joined: Jun 28, 2012
Location: Appleton WI
       

Re: College Football Discussion - CFP 

Post#719 » by MVP2110 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 11:07 pm

trwi7 wrote:
MVP2110 wrote:
trwi7 wrote:
They're rewarded by making it. They should not be rewarded by getting a guaranteed QF spot over better teams.


They absolutely should. To win your conference you have to win an extra game during the season, winning that extra conference championship game should guarentee you having to play 1 less playoff game. If the conference championships didn't guarantee a bye then there would have been no reason for Oregon, Georgia, Texas, Penn St etc to try during the conference title games and Notre Dame would get a bonus for not being in a conference


You could also end up getting like a 9-5 team getting a bye. Reseeding doesn't work either because reseeding this year would still have Oregon playing Ohio State.


Boise St was ranked 9 & Arizona St was 11. If you reseeded you'd have

1. Oregon vs 11. Arizona St
2. Georgia vs 9. Boise St
3. Texas vs 6. Ohio St
4. Penn St vs 5. Notre Dame
Coach Drew: "Milwaukee has always been a team that I have been intrigued by. When we played them, they were a tough team for us to play. Although we did beat them all four times"
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 112,526
And1: 28,198
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

Re: College Football Discussion - CFP 

Post#720 » by trwi7 » Sun Dec 22, 2024 11:10 pm

MVP2110 wrote:
trwi7 wrote:
MVP2110 wrote:
They absolutely should. To win your conference you have to win an extra game during the season, winning that extra conference championship game should guarentee you having to play 1 less playoff game. If the conference championships didn't guarantee a bye then there would have been no reason for Oregon, Georgia, Texas, Penn St etc to try during the conference title games and Notre Dame would get a bonus for not being in a conference


You could also end up getting like a 9-5 team getting a bye. Reseeding doesn't work either because reseeding this year would still have Oregon playing Ohio State.


Boise St was ranked 9 & Arizona St was 11. If you reseeded you'd have

1. Oregon vs 11. Arizona St
2. Georgia vs 9. Boise St
3. Texas vs 6. Ohio St
4. Penn St vs 5. Notre Dame


That's re-ranking. Reseeding would be taking the seed they were given and moving them. Like if Indiana beat Notre Dame they would be playing Oregon. That's reseeding. What you're doing is basically what I'm saying should happen at bare minimum.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.

Return to Green Bay Packers