NCAA Football 2017 season

[pr0ner]

All the debating is over. Alabama is in.

[Chrisoc13]

All the debating is over. Alabama is in.

Tough to be upset about that. I would have given the nod to Ohio State but Alabama is deserving as well.

Plus hopefully it gives us another chance to watch them lose... kidding MSD. Kind of.

[Skinypupy]

All the debating is over. Alabama is in.

Blech.

Of course, I would have felt the same about OSU getting in, so it was kind of a lose-lose.

[pr0ner]

All the debating is over. Alabama is in.

Tough to be upset about that. I would have given the nod to Ohio State but Alabama is deserving as well.

Plus hopefully it gives us another chance to watch them lose... kidding MSD. Kind of.

Since Bama plays Clemson, I really do hope Bama loses.

[Skinypupy]

I'll just leave this here

[PLW]

And Bama is favored by 1. LOL

[Jaymann]

And Bama is favored by 1. LOL

I think I would take Clemson +1.

[gameoverman]

I think what happened in the Iowa game is what kills Ohio State's right to complain about this decision. No matter what anyone can say about Alabama and who they beat or didn't beat, how do you explain that Iowa game result?

[Pyperkub]

Seriously though -- 35 point loss just three weeks ago to an unranked team. I know you guys have Bama fatigue but I'm not sure how you can justify putting in a 2 loss team with a RECENT loss like that in ahead of Bama.

I didn't. I said earlier in the thread that there was no way Ohio state would get in over Alabama.

[Carpet_pissr]

God I hope Alabama destroys Clemson. It won’t happen, but I am not sure I can stand much more of the orange crushwear and paraphernalia that has plagued my eyes since last year. Not to mention the smugness of my Clemson loving acquaintances.

[PLW]

You have no idea.

[Carpet_pissr]

Yeah, I feel for you, man.

[Scuzz]

All the debating is over. Alabama is in.

Blech.

Of course, I would have felt the same about OSU getting in, so it was kind of a lose-lose.

I don't like Alabama getting it but I don't like OSU either. But I do think you should give some credit to a team that wins it's conference.

And while Alabama isn't at fault for FSU turning out crappy, they play what, 4 away games per year on average. Nobody schedules to their advantage like Alabama.

[ImLawBoy]

I think another issue the committee faces, one that plays against Alabama, is that if they snub OSU, then they will shut both the Big Ten and PAC champions, and thus two of the Power 5 conferences, completely out of the playoffs. OSU has the marquis wins that Alabama does not, as well as the conference championship. I think Bama is going to be left out. On the plus side, this supports a stronger argument for expanding the playoffs to 8 teams.

I'd argue that this hurts the 8 team argument. We don't even have a worthy fourth team for the playoffs this year - what good would it do to add four more teams?

[McNutt]

That's a good point. The whole point of the 4-team playoffs was to avoid having a questionable top two teams meet in the championship game. Right now there's no question that the top two teams are in it. Since that's covered, too bad if you didn't make the next two spots.

[PLW]

I'd argue that this hurts the 8 team argument. We don't even have a worthy fourth team for the playoffs this year - what good would it do to add four more teams?

I mean, sort of. Turns out the unworthy fourth team is actually the favorite to win the whole things.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

I think another issue the committee faces, one that plays against Alabama, is that if they snub OSU, then they will shut both the Big Ten and PAC champions, and thus two of the Power 5 conferences, completely out of the playoffs. OSU has the marquis wins that Alabama does not, as well as the conference championship. I think Bama is going to be left out. On the plus side, this supports a stronger argument for expanding the playoffs to 8 teams.

I'd argue that this hurts the 8 team argument. We don't even have a worthy fourth team for the playoffs this year - what good would it do to add four more teams?

But of course the definition of "worthy" is completely dependent on the number of teams allowed in. If it's an 8-team playoff, then both OSU and Alabama are definitely "worthy".

[rshetts2]

I think another issue the committee faces, one that plays against Alabama, is that if they snub OSU, then they will shut both the Big Ten and PAC champions, and thus two of the Power 5 conferences, completely out of the playoffs. OSU has the marquis wins that Alabama does not, as well as the conference championship. I think Bama is going to be left out. On the plus side, this supports a stronger argument for expanding the playoffs to 8 teams.

I'd argue that this hurts the 8 team argument. We don't even have a worthy fourth team for the playoffs this year - what good would it do to add four more teams?

That clearly depends on how worthy is defined. One of the teams left out beat the current favorite. Do you really believe that Auburn would be incapable of winning the playoffs, if they had been included? Or OSU? I believe that the next 4 teams could all be deemed as worthy, even if their odds may not be as good. Beside even a team like USC could add some fun and excitement to the playoffs. A cinderella story could add a lot and be a great part of the fun. And if they ended up getting thumped? So what, teams get thumped in the playoffs every year, even in the 4 team set up.

[Scuzz]

This is not a season of the true dreadnought in college football. All the teams lost. That Alabama would open as a 1 point fav against Clemson amazes me. Personally I think Oklahoma is the team to beat as they are playing the best football right now. But, nobody plays again for almost a month.

Hasn't Alabama been the favorite the last couple years only to lose twice?

[gameoverman]

That's a good point. The whole point of the 4-team playoffs was to avoid having a questionable top two teams meet in the championship game. Right now there's no question that the top two teams are in it. Since that's covered, too bad if you didn't make the next two spots.

I disagree with this line of thinking because it assumes all wins are predictable. If you have an 8 team playoff, and 3 teams are 'worthy' and 5 teams are filler, you don't know how it will turn out. One of the filler teams may turn out to win the championship.

I think the point of the 4 team playoff is to make sure the two favorites don't have the game handed to them, they have to win their way to the big game. An 8 team playoff is a way to prevent awkward years where maybe two or three teams had arguments for being the fourth team in.

[Skinypupy]

Oregon's Willie Taggart might be headed to Florida State

Even if it's not true, I just like watching Ducks fans squirm.

[ImLawBoy]

I'd argue that this hurts the 8 team argument. We don't even have a worthy fourth team for the playoffs this year - what good would it do to add four more teams?

I mean, sort of. Turns out the unworthy fourth team is actually the favorite to win the whole things.

I'm not persuaded by betting lines, which are set to try to get as much money for Vegas as possible, and are not really a reliable arbiter of who is better.

So who is worthy? Well, it depends on what you're going for. If you're going for the best team, then it's probably a more narrow group. If you're more interested in crowning a champion, regardless of whether that team is truly the best team, then you want more teams. The college football world has traditionally gone with the former approach, first by having various groups of voters pick the best team, then by having the BCS trying to match the two top teams, and now by the CoFoPo matching the top four. In contrast, the college basketball world has taken the latter approach by bringing in 64 teams and letting the chips fall where they may. Both approaches have their merits.

For football, I kind of like the less is more approach to fewer teams being involved in the championship. The basketball tournament is great fun, but logistics of football require a shorter tournament, which reduces the chaotic fun. Plus, football has the bowl system for teams left out of the championship to fall back on. Part of my lack of enthusiasm for expanding the playoff is that I just don't understand the animosity many people have toward the bowl system. Too many bowls? Oh no! More random college football during the holidays! Whatever will I do???

[Skinypupy]

If nothing else, the Herm Edwards experiment at ASU will be wonderfully insane.

[Isgrimnur]

[Pyperkub]

I think another issue the committee faces, one that plays against Alabama, is that if they snub OSU, then they will shut both the Big Ten and PAC champions, and thus two of the Power 5 conferences, completely out of the playoffs. OSU has the marquis wins that Alabama does not, as well as the conference championship. I think Bama is going to be left out. On the plus side, this supports a stronger argument for expanding the playoffs to 8 teams.

I'd argue that this hurts the 8 team argument. We don't even have a worthy fourth team for the playoffs this year - what good would it do to add four more teams?

That clearly depends on how worthy is defined. One of the teams left out beat the current favorite. Do you really believe that Auburn would be incapable of winning the playoffs, if they had been included? Or OSU? I believe that the next 4 teams could all be deemed as worthy, even if their odds may not be as good. Beside even a team like USC could add some fun and excitement to the playoffs. A cinderella story could add a lot and be a great part of the fun. And if they ended up getting thumped? So what, teams get thumped in the playoffs every year, even in the 4 team set up.

Auburn won their big games at home, but couldn't do it on the road or at a neutral site, so no, I don't think they belong or could win multiple games against top teams at neutral sites.

[LawBeefaroni]

I'd argue that this hurts the 8 team argument. We don't even have a worthy fourth team for the playoffs this year - what good would it do to add four more teams?

I mean, sort of. Turns out the unworthy fourth team is actually the favorite to win the whole things.

I'm not persuaded by betting lines, which are set to try to get as much money for Vegas as possible, and are not really a reliable arbiter of who is better.

So who is worthy? Well, it depends on what you're going for. If you're going for the best team, then it's probably a more narrow group. If you're more interested in crowning a champion, regardless of whether that team is truly the best team, then you want more teams. The college football world has traditionally gone with the former approach, first by having various groups of voters pick the best team, then by having the BCS trying to match the two top teams, and now by the CoFoPo matching the top four. In contrast, the college basketball world has taken the latter approach by bringing in 64 teams and letting the chips fall where they may. Both approaches have their merits.

For football, I kind of like the less is more approach to fewer teams being involved in the championship. The basketball tournament is great fun, but logistics of football require a shorter tournament, which reduces the chaotic fun. Plus, football has the bowl system for teams left out of the championship to fall back on. Part of my lack of enthusiasm for expanding the playoff is that I just don't understand the animosity many people have toward the bowl system. Too many bowls? Oh no! More random college football during the holidays! Whatever will I do???

Agree about bowl games. They are the holiday presents at the end of the season. They don't all to have national implications to be enjoyable.


All Alabama being a 1 point favorite means is that Alabama fans are pounding them in Vegas. Well, fans and other bettors. People don't always bet rationally so the line is used to keep bets balanced and favorable to the book.

[Pyperkub]

Mike Riley back to Oregon St.

Three years after moving on to Nebraska after two stints as the head coach of the Beavers, Riley is coming back "home" to Oregon State as an assistant head coach without an actual position assignment under first-year coach Jonathan Smith.

Great hire for the first time head coach, IMHO.

[Skinypupy]

Mike Riley back to Oregon St.

Three years after moving on to Nebraska after two stints as the head coach of the Beavers, Riley is coming back "home" to Oregon State as an assistant head coach without an actual position assignment under first-year coach Jonathan Smith.

Great hire for the first time head coach, IMHO.

Good for Riley and for OSU.

Sometimes a coach has all the money he will ever need, but still wants to be around the game and work with the players. Utah had Dennis Erickson here for a few years as a RB coach, and he was a fantastic asset to the organization without having the pressure of being a head coach.

Hope it works for both Riley and the school.

[Apollo]

I think that this season showed that 4 teams is the way to go. I had been thinking that if OSU got in and somehow won they would be, far and away, the least impressive National Champion ever. Did anyone actually watch that Iowa game? That was a deal-breaker.

It also doesn't help that Alabama traditionally plays well in 2/4 team "playoff" games, whereas Ohio State, with one exception in the last 15 years, usually gets stomped.

At any rate, this Alabama team is solid but not likely to win it all. I think Clemson or Georgia will take it this year. I don't see Oklahoma doing well since they don't have a defense in the same league as Alabama/Georgia/Clemson.

[Chrisoc13]

Did you honestly just call the BCS a 2 team playoff? Haha wow. That's a new one. Ohio State has been just about as impressive as Alabama in the playoff era in terms of wins in the playoffs. Sorry.

[Skinypupy]

I had been thinking that if OSU got in and somehow won they would be, far and away, the least impressive National Champion ever.

"Ever"? That's an awfully bold claim.

[Apollo]

Did you honestly just call the BCS a 2 team playoff? Haha wow. That's a new one. Ohio State has been just about as impressive as Alabama in the playoff era in terms of wins in the playoffs. Sorry.

Being a BYU fan must make one incredibly bitter. I suppose it has something to do with the realization that your team will never win a conference title, much less a national title, under the current format.

But, yes, the BCS was a two team playoff for the National Title. How soon we forget:

2007: Florida 41 Ohio State 14
2008: LSU 38 Ohio State 24
2016: Clemson 31 Ohio State 0

2014 was their one good year out of the last 15. So, yes, if you pretend the BCS never happened, Ohio State comes closer to respectability with their Championship three years ago. But then there's last year's 31-0 blowout loss by a Ohio State team that was clearly superior to this year's team and the fact that, over the last 15 years, Alabama has won 4 titles to Ohio State's 1.

Don't worry: Saban will eventually retire and Alabama will almost certainly screw up hiring the next coach by insisting on someone with ties to the University. But for now, it's really no surprise that Alabama is going to get the benefit of the doubt over Ohio State, even if you somehow overlook the Iowa game.

[Apollo]

I had been thinking that if OSU got in and somehow won they would be, far and away, the least impressive National Champion ever.

"Ever"? That's an awfully bold claim.

Well, I was only thinking of Champions since the AP poll was created in 1936. Maybe there were some unimpressive champions back in the pre-poll days, I can't really say. But two loss National Champions are very rare, and two loss National Champions with a 31 point loss to an unranked team are non-existent. At least until greed convinces the NCAA to go to an 8 team playoff, which will open the door for teams with 3 or even 4 losses to win it all.

[Chrisoc13]

Did you honestly just call the BCS a 2 team playoff? Haha wow. That's a new one. Ohio State has been just about as impressive as Alabama in the playoff era in terms of wins in the playoffs. Sorry.

Being a BYU fan must make one incredibly bitter. I suppose it has something to do with the realization that your team will never win a conference title, much less a national title, under the current format.

But, yes, the BCS was a two team playoff for the National Title. How soon we forget:

2007: Florida 41 Ohio State 14
2008: LSU 38 Ohio State 24
2016: Clemson 31 Ohio State 0

2014 was their one good year out of the last 15. So, yes, if you pretend the BCS never happened, Ohio State comes closer to respectability with their Championship three years ago. But then there's last year's 31-0 blowout loss by a Ohio State team that was clearly superior to this year's team and the fact that, over the last 15 years, Alabama has won 4 titles to Ohio State's 1.

Don't worry: Saban will eventually retire and Alabama will almost certainly screw up hiring the next coach by insisting on someone with ties to the University. But for now, it's really no surprise that Alabama is going to get the benefit of the doubt over Ohio State, even if you somehow overlook the Iowa game.

Wow. Just wow. Uncalled for after simply pointing out nobody ever had thought of the BCS as a playoff before. I point that out and state Ohio State has as many championships as Alabama in the actual playoff era, note that is not a personal attack (though you seem to have trouble distinguishing that) and yet you decide to take the personal attack route. Classy. I'll remember that.

Sorry, the BCS was good for Alabama so I can see why you would want to include it but... Truth is Alabama has been dominant for a decade but only won one of the last 3 playoffs. Alabama fans are probably the only fans in the world that want to go back to the BCS. It does make you wonder if your team had actually had to play a playoff earlier if you might have less titles...

Thanks for one more reason to root against Alabama. What a great fanbase. Strong smack talk. BYU can't win a conference title! True. But water is also wet, we aren't in a conference so who cares, what kind of crap talk is that? BYU won't ever win another national title. Probably true. But that's always been true. The year we won it was a perfect storm of mediocrity in college football allowing the only unbeaten team left to grab it. But I'll take it, the team still has a crystal football that can't be taken away, even if in all honesty that year alone undoes your "Ohio State would be the weakest national champion ever" talk.

BYU has a special set of circumstances that tie their hands in college football. But I would always be more proud to be a BYU fan than a ridiculously rude condescending fan of some powerhouse program that can't even handle the discussion of another team being in the playoff instead of them. Give me a break Apollo.

[Skinypupy]

But I'll take it, the team still has a crystal football that can't be taken away, even if in all honesty that year alone undoes your "Ohio State would be the weakest national champion ever" talk.

I was going to mention something about BYUs title being the impetus for creating the BCS in the first place, but thought that might seem too petty coming from me. . Bit my tongue on the rest of my comments, but you summed it up well.

Anyhoo, a little more info on Mike Riley returning to Oregon State. I really hope this is a win for him...he’s one of the nicest guys in college football.

[Pyperkub]

The biggest reason for going to 8 in my mind would be the inclusion of schools like UCF or Boise St.

If that were to happen, I'd also want the first round to be at home fields, and make wild card/non conference champion entrants play a true road game. Make wild card entrant Alabama beat UCF @ UCF in other words.

This way, the small college upsets of the ncaa basketball tourney could happen too, and home fans would get intersectional matchups they never get to see, and new rivalries could grow.

[msduncan]

Did you honestly just call the BCS a 2 team playoff? Haha wow. That's a new one. Ohio State has been just about as impressive as Alabama in the playoff era in terms of wins in the playoffs. Sorry.

Being a BYU fan must make one incredibly bitter. I suppose it has something to do with the realization that your team will never win a conference title, much less a national title, under the current format.

But, yes, the BCS was a two team playoff for the National Title. How soon we forget:

2007: Florida 41 Ohio State 14
2008: LSU 38 Ohio State 24
2016: Clemson 31 Ohio State 0

2014 was their one good year out of the last 15. So, yes, if you pretend the BCS never happened, Ohio State comes closer to respectability with their Championship three years ago. But then there's last year's 31-0 blowout loss by a Ohio State team that was clearly superior to this year's team and the fact that, over the last 15 years, Alabama has won 4 titles to Ohio State's 1.

Don't worry: Saban will eventually retire and Alabama will almost certainly screw up hiring the next coach by insisting on someone with ties to the University. But for now, it's really no surprise that Alabama is going to get the benefit of the doubt over Ohio State, even if you somehow overlook the Iowa game.

Wow. Just wow. Uncalled for after simply pointing out nobody ever had thought of the BCS as a playoff before. I point that out and state Ohio State has as many championships as Alabama in the actual playoff era, note that is not a personal attack (though you seem to have trouble distinguishing that) and yet you decide to take the personal attack route. Classy. I'll remember that.

Sorry, the BCS was good for Alabama so I can see why you would want to include it but... Truth is Alabama has been dominant for a decade but only won one of the last 3 playoffs. Alabama fans are probably the only fans in the world that want to go back to the BCS. It does make you wonder if your team had actually had to play a playoff earlier if you might have less titles...

Thanks for one more reason to root against Alabama. What a great fanbase. Strong smack talk. BYU can't win a conference title! True. But water is also wet, we aren't in a conference so who cares, what kind of crap talk is that? BYU won't ever win another national title. Probably true. But that's always been true. The year we won it was a perfect storm of mediocrity in college football allowing the only unbeaten team left to grab it. But I'll take it, the team still has a crystal football that can't be taken away, even if in all honesty that year alone undoes your "Ohio State would be the weakest national champion ever" talk.

BYU has a special set of circumstances that tie their hands in college football. But I would always be more proud to be a BYU fan than a ridiculously rude condescending fan of some powerhouse program that can't even handle the discussion of another team being in the playoff instead of them. Give me a break Apollo.

The very LAST team that would be considered 'Apollo's team' would be Alabama. He's an Auburn fan.

[ImLawBoy]

Speaking of the Wolverines, Wilton Speight has officially announced his intention to grad transfer for his fifth year. With O'Korn graduating, that leaves redshirt sophomore Brandon Peters or redshirt freshman Dylan McCaffrey (of the football McCaffreys) in the driver's seat next year (barring an unlikely grad transfer or one of the two true freshmen QBs coming in winning the job). Certainly can't be worse than O'Korn, and I'm looking forward to Harbaugh finally having one of his QB recruits be the man. Speight did about as much as could realistically be expected of him, and I wish him the best (maybe at Virginia?), but the raw talent level of the new QBs is a step up.

So, it looks like there's another option at QB for the Wolverines. Ole Miss QB Shea Patterson is transferring to Michigan. Folks seem confident that he'll get a waiver on the requirement to sit out a year because of the Ole Miss scandal shenanigans. Patterson was a 5 star recruit who was the number one QB in the 2016 class. Some Michigan folks (like MGoBlog think Peters will still be the guy next year, but I'm sure that Harbaugh will have an open competition among Peters, Patterson, and McCaffrey to win the job. I'm feeling good about the QB position for next year.

[Pyperkub]

Speaking of the Wolverines, Wilton Speight has officially announced his intention to grad transfer for his fifth year. With O'Korn graduating, that leaves redshirt sophomore Brandon Peters or redshirt freshman Dylan McCaffrey (of the football McCaffreys) in the driver's seat next year (barring an unlikely grad transfer or one of the two true freshmen QBs coming in winning the job). Certainly can't be worse than O'Korn, and I'm looking forward to Harbaugh finally having one of his QB recruits be the man. Speight did about as much as could realistically be expected of him, and I wish him the best (maybe at Virginia?), but the raw talent level of the new QBs is a step up.

So, it looks like there's another option at QB for the Wolverines. Ole Miss QB Shea Patterson is transferring to Michigan. Folks seem confident that he'll get a waiver on the requirement to sit out a year because of the Ole Miss scandal shenanigans. Patterson was a 5 star recruit who was the number one QB in the 2016 class. Some Michigan folks (like MGoBlog think Peters will still be the guy next year, but I'm sure that Harbaugh will have an open competition among Peters, Patterson, and McCaffrey to win the job. I'm feeling good about the QB position for next year.

Didn't he suffer a season-ending injury late? Will he be recovered?

[ImLawBoy]

He did miss the last few games with injury, but I haven't seen any chatter that he won't be available for next year if he gets a waiver from the NCAA.