American College Football(NCAAF) 2015-2016 Discussion Thread

[Luminesa]

And now that the regular season is all but over, it's time for Byth's Shitty Predictions That Actually Happened!

Bold prediction for the year - Kansas will go winless. They're the absolute worst team in the power conferences.

Hooboy, waiting for the inevitable heartbreak after we fail to finish off another mediocre Florida team and idiot Vols fans to start calling for Butch's head.

Man, fuck Clay Travis. ANYONE DEFENDING BUTCH JONES IS AN IDIOT LOL

Fuck that motherfucker.

-Kansas is going winless this season and Beaty stands a good chance of being fired... seeing as how he was a reach to begin with. smh jayhawks. I'm thinking that only New Mexico State is worse at this point, but that's not really news. Also, Kansas being so damn bad makes me want another NCAA Football game. Rebuilding them would be fun as hell.

-UCF going winless would be perfect penance for George O'Leary being a liar and murderer who should have been fired after killing Erick Plancher.

-Mack Brown will be a serious coaching candidate somewhere this offseason.

Also, let's all review my preseason poll for a good laugh:

The True Survivor Preseason Top 25

1. Ohio State
2. TCU
3. Baylor
4. Alabama
5. Georgia
6. Auburn
7. Oregon
8. USC
9. Florida State
10. Michigan State
11. LSU
12. Notre Dame
13. Stanford
14. Clemson
15. Wisconsin
16. UCLA
17. Georgia Tech
18. Oklahoma
19. Ole Miss
20. Arizona State
21. Arkansas
22. Missouri
23. Virginia Tech
24. Arizona
25. Boise State
---
The Best of the Rest: #26 Tennessee, #27 Miami, #28 Penn State, #29 Oklahoma State, #30 Texas A&M, #31 Nebraska, #32 Marshall, #33 Utah, #34 Louisville, #35 Cincinnati, #36 Michigan, #37 Mississippi State, #38 Texas, #39 Minnesota, #40t Kansas State, #40t West Virginia

Yes, that's Georgia Tech there at #17, Arkansas at #21, Virginia Tech at #23, Arizona at #24, Penn State at #28, and Texas at #38.

Wow. Kansas really went winless?

Time to nuke, then!

[Minnysota]

TCU's best win was against Ole Miss, and it was utter domination of a 9-3 SEC West team. OSU's only performance close to resembling that was the Wisconsin game, and yet, I don't remember Wisconsin beating Alabama.

Michigan State was unquestionably better than Ole Miss. I'd argue Wisconsin likely was to because they beat an Auburn team that competed with them (and did what it took to beat Ole Miss), but I'm content with just Michigan State. My point was that OSU had better wins in the regular season, even including TCU's postseason win. When we include OSU's postseason wins, we're looking at a win against Alabama (better than beating a team that beat Alabama) and obliterating Oregon, who up until that point had kind of just destroyed everyone.

It's also necessary to mention that Ole Miss was destroyed by a pretty bad Arkansas team. What was it? 30-0?

And yet somehow OSU's close calls and poor performances, two of which came against lowly Navy and Cincinnati, were excusable?

Well, since the committee said they looked at improvement and context of games, the Navy game was excused. The Cincinnati game was close for the first half or so, and then OSU obliterated them down the stretch. But again, the defense improved tremendously over the season after that game (even if it still wasn't as elite as people thought), which was enough for the committee. You're really underselling how dominant that Wisconsin game was. It was potentially the most dominant and complete game of the year by any team, and it came against the #13 team in the country.

That loss alone was so terrible for OSU that TCU should've been in the playoff. You get destroyed by a .500 ACC team, at home, by two touchdowns, and there's another one loss team Power Five team that's played much more convincingly? You should, under no circumstances, be in the playoff bracket over that team then.

OSU lost by 14 points, one of which came on a garbage time INT returned for a TD. Auburn was losing 22-13 last night until they gave up a garbage time TD, which makes that game look a lot more lopsided than it was (even if Auburn was pretty pathetic for most of the night). Within the context of that loss, you have all but one player on the Oline making their second start, a QB who is making his first home start (in front of 100,000+ people!), and skill position players without much experience (Thomas and Marshall both coming off redshirt seasons, whoever replaced Corey Brown Samuel a freshmen, and Zeke was merely a backup the year prior).

Compare that to the team who dominated MSU (who finished #3) on the road, beat a strong Minnesota team on the road (and in the cold), and eviscerated a very good Wisconsin team (who ended up beating one of the vaunted SEC West teams). Excusing Arkansas for Alabama automatically excuses Penn State for Ohio State. They were both pretty bad teams, but OSU at least had a legitimately hostile crowd to play in front of. Really no excuse for Indiana; Indiana and Purdue have been tough games for OSU for the past decade or so (Illinois could probably fit in here too). Alabama was actually losing to Auburn at one point, who themselves ended up having a pretty mediocre season. Excusing Alabama from that excuses OSU from Michigan. Rivalry games can either be complete blowouts or they can be tough. Hoke was a failure with Michigan, but he at least had the ability to get his teams ready for The Game.

Did TCU have an argument for the playoff? Yeah, but by no means were they light years ahead of OSU in terms of resume. I'm (obviously) of the opinion they didn't have a better resume in the slightest. OSU had a worse loss, but were playing better than TCU by the end of the year. OSU had the better wins, and the same characteristic weird games that LITERALLY EVERY CONTENDER HAS AT SOME POINT. TCU had them, Alabama had them, FSU had them every week, Oregon had them (or was Washington State good enough to only lose by a TD?).

I'll make sure to remind you that the teams OSU and Baylor lost to (both by 14 points) finished with the same record. A 7-5 (7-6 after the bowl) Big 12 team is by no means somehow better than an "average" .500 ACC team.

[Luminesa]

TCU's best win was against Ole Miss, and it was utter domination of a 9-3 SEC West team. OSU's only performance close to resembling that was the Wisconsin game, and yet, I don't remember Wisconsin beating Alabama.

Michigan State was unquestionably better than Ole Miss. I'd argue Wisconsin likely was to because they beat an Auburn team that competed with them (and did what it took to beat Ole Miss), but I'm content with just Michigan State. My point was that OSU had better wins in the regular season, even including TCU's postseason win. When we include OSU's postseason wins, we're looking at a win against Alabama (better than beating a team that beat Alabama) and obliterating Oregon, who up until that point had kind of just destroyed everyone.

It's also necessary to mention that Ole Miss was destroyed by a pretty bad Arkansas team. What was it? 30-0?

And yet somehow OSU's close calls and poor performances, two of which came against lowly Navy and Cincinnati, were excusable?

Well, since the committee said they looked at improvement and context of games, the Navy game was excused. The Cincinnati game was close for the first half or so, and then OSU obliterated them down the stretch. But again, the defense improved tremendously over the season after that game (even if it still wasn't as elite as people thought), which was enough for the committee. You're really underselling how dominant that Wisconsin game was. It was potentially the most dominant and complete game of the year by any team, and it came against the #13 team in the country.

That loss alone was so terrible for OSU that TCU should've been in the playoff. You get destroyed by a .500 ACC team, at home, by two touchdowns, and there's another one loss team Power Five team that's played much more convincingly? You should, under no circumstances, be in the playoff bracket over that team then.

OSU lost by 14 points, one of which came on a garbage time INT returned for a TD. Auburn was losing 22-13 last night until they gave up a garbage time TD, which makes that game look a lot more lopsided than it was (even if Auburn was pretty pathetic for most of the night). Within the context of that loss, you have all but one player on the Oline making their second start, a QB who is making his first home start (in front of 100,000+ people!), and skill position players without much experience (Thomas and Marshall both coming off redshirt seasons, whoever replaced Corey Brown Samuel a freshmen, and Zeke was merely a backup the year prior).

Compare that to the team who dominated MSU (who finished #3) on the road, beat a strong Minnesota team on the road (and in the cold), and eviscerated a very good Wisconsin team (who ended up beating one of the vaunted SEC West teams). Excusing Arkansas for Alabama automatically excuses Penn State for Ohio State. They were both pretty bad teams, but OSU at least had a legitimately hostile crowd to play in front of. Really no excuse for Indiana; Indiana and Purdue have been tough games for OSU for the past decade or so (Illinois could probably fit in here too). Alabama was actually losing to Auburn at one point, who themselves ended up having a pretty mediocre season. Excusing Alabama from that excuses OSU from Michigan. Rivalry games can either be complete blowouts or they can be tough. Hoke was a failure with Michigan, but he at least had the ability to get his teams ready for The Game.

Did TCU have an argument for the playoff? Yeah, but by no means were they light years ahead of OSU in terms of resume. I'm (obviously) of the opinion they didn't have a better resume in the slightest. OSU had a worse loss, but were playing better than TCU by the end of the year. OSU had the better wins, and the same characteristic weird games that LITERALLY EVERY CONTENDER HAS AT SOME POINT. TCU had them, Alabama had them, FSU had them every week, Oregon had them (or was Washington State good enough to only lose by a TD?).

I'll make sure to remind you that the teams OSU and Baylor lost to (both by 14 points) finished with the same record. A 7-5 (7-6 after the bowl) Big 12 team is by no means somehow better than an "average" .500 ACC team.

Dis how dis works for the Big 5:

SEC > Big Ten > Big 12 > ACC > Pac 12

Generally, anyway. Considering Stanford beat Notre Dame and Florida State beat Florida, this isn't a perfect statement. Of course, it's those outliers that seem to matter the most, in the end.

[Minnysota]

Dis how dis works for the Big 5:

SEC > Big Ten > Big 12 > ACC > Pac 12

I generally don't like crowning the best conference until the end of bowl season, but the SEC isn't playing like the best conference right now. Like I said, they could go undefeated in bowl season, but right now either the B1G or the Big 12 are better.

[Luminesa]

Dis how dis works for the Big 5:

Big 1G > SEC > Big 12 > ACC > Pac 12

I generally don't like crowning the best conference until the end of bowl season, but the SEC isn't playing like the best conference right now. Like I said, they could go undefeated in bowl season, but right now either the B1G or the Big 12 are better.

Yeah, my first edit put Big 1G on top, because Defense wins championships. It's hard to pick between the two, because they go head-to-head and you get a mixed bag (Alabama destroys Notre Dame but gets whipped by Ohio State. LSU pounds Wisconsin but gets beat by Clemson.
Michigan destroys Northwestern but gets beaten by Appalachian State. I could go on forever.)

I suppose I could edit that. SEC has gone through some major shakeups, with Georgia suddenly being terrible and Tennessee being on a roll.

[Torisakia]

Georgia fired Mark Richt.

I'm surprised they waited this long to do it, honestly.

[Arkinesia]

Georgia fired Mark Richt.

I'm surprised they waited this long to do it, honestly.

They wanted to handle it with as much grace as possible.

[Minnysota]

Yeah, my first edit put Big 1G on top, because Defense wins championships. It's hard to pick between the two, because they go head-to-head and you get a mixed bag (Alabama destroys Notre Dame but gets whipped by Ohio State. LSU pounds Wisconsin but gets beat by Clemson.
Michigan destroys Northwestern but gets beaten by Appalachian State. I could go on forever.)

I suppose I could edit that. SEC has gone through some major shakeups, with Georgia suddenly being terrible and Tennessee being on a roll.

The tricky thing about saying defense wins championships is that those defenses have only played a select few of the CFB world. The reason I don't like comparing conferences so early (i.e., before bowl season) is because these teams by and large play in closed environments. A B1G team can dominate the B1G, but how will it do against a Pac-12 team? My criticism of CFB the past few years is that it hypes up the SEC for being good when the SEC is competitive within the SEC. We saw last year with the SEC West that just because a team looks good in its own conference, that doesn't mean it's that good relative to other teams that year.

The B1G has looked pretty good this year. If we're measuring the sticks right now, I think it looks like the best conference. It could very well end up that every B1G gets obliterated in a bowl game, or at the very least loses. We don't know yet; football is unpredictable.

[Luminesa]

Yeah, my first edit put Big 1G on top, because Defense wins championships. It's hard to pick between the two, because they go head-to-head and you get a mixed bag (Alabama destroys Notre Dame but gets whipped by Ohio State. LSU pounds Wisconsin but gets beat by Clemson.
Michigan destroys Northwestern but gets beaten by Appalachian State. I could go on forever.)

I suppose I could edit that. SEC has gone through some major shakeups, with Georgia suddenly being terrible and Tennessee being on a roll.

The tricky thing about saying defense wins championships is that those defenses have only played a select few of the CFB world. The reason I don't like comparing conferences so early (i.e., before bowl season) is because these teams by and large play in closed environments. A B1G team can dominate the B1G, but how will it do against a Pac-12 team? My criticism of CFB the past few years is that it hypes up the SEC for being good when the SEC is competitive within the SEC. We saw last year with the SEC West that just because a team looks good in its own conference, that doesn't mean it's that good relative to other teams that year.

The B1G has looked pretty good this year. If we're measuring the sticks right now, I think it looks like the best conference. It could very well end up that every B1G gets obliterated in a bowl game, or at the very least loses. We don't know yet; football is unpredictable.

Any Big 1G team could beat a Pac-12 team. Their general system is based around offense-Defense is almost nonexistent. Same with Big 12 (Baylor and TCU). If Ohio State loses, they don't give up a lot of points in the process. Or relative to other teams, I suppose. So yeah. That's why Oregon got destroyed by OSU the way they did, last year. No D, no trophy.

[The Serbian Empire]

The tricky thing about saying defense wins championships is that those defenses have only played a select few of the CFB world. The reason I don't like comparing conferences so early (i.e., before bowl season) is because these teams by and large play in closed environments. A B1G team can dominate the B1G, but how will it do against a Pac-12 team? My criticism of CFB the past few years is that it hypes up the SEC for being good when the SEC is competitive within the SEC. We saw last year with the SEC West that just because a team looks good in its own conference, that doesn't mean it's that good relative to other teams that year.

The B1G has looked pretty good this year. If we're measuring the sticks right now, I think it looks like the best conference. It could very well end up that every B1G gets obliterated in a bowl game, or at the very least loses. We don't know yet; football is unpredictable.

Any Big 1G team could beat a Pac-12 team. Their general system is based around offense-Defense is almost nonexistent. Same with Big 12 (Baylor and TCU). If Ohio State loses, they don't give up a lot of points in the process. Or relative to other teams, I suppose. So yeah. That's why Oregon got destroyed by OSU the way they did, last year. No D, no trophy.

And given the recruiting classes these B1G teams get, they have been developing talent second to none.

[Cymrea]

Dis how dis works for the Big 5:

SEC > Big Ten > Big 12 > ACC > Pac 12

This year, I would have to agree. In general, though, the Pac-12 would not be the least of that bunch.

[Arkinesia]

Dis how dis works for the Big 5:

SEC > Big Ten > Big 12 > ACC > Pac 12

This year, I would have to agree. In general, though, the Pac-12 would not be the least of that bunch.

I don't see how anyone could rank the SEC #1 among power conferences this year. Too many people drinking the Bama Kool-Aid, I guess.

East champion is 10-2 with its losses coming from a better-than-expected FSU team and a pedestrian LSU squad. Rest of that division is basically shit, Georgia sucked, Tennessee is better than their record but still kinda sucks, South Carolina was hot garbage. West is Bama with a bunch of pretenders and teams that just suck out loud.

Big Ten is basically MSU and then everyone else pretty much sucks. Big 12 is probably the best P5 conference this year, as much as that pains me to say.

[Luminesa]

Dis how dis works for the Big 5:

SEC > Big Ten > Big 12 > ACC > Pac 12

This year, I would have to agree. In general, though, the Pac-12 would not be the least of that bunch.

I only put them there because they can beat people in their own conferences just fine. But when they get to playing against teams outside their conference (be it LSU, Ohio State, anyone), they get pounded by 20 or so points.

[Arkinesia]

Oh man, Georgia is fucked. Kirby Smart? Really?

[Bythyrona]

Oh man, Georgia is fucked. Kirby Smart? Really?

I would love to see Georgia attempt to implement Alabama's defensive system like Sal Sunseri did at UT and it subsequently post the worst defense in the history of the school's football program.

[Arkinesia]

Oh man, Georgia is fucked. Kirby Smart? Really?

I would love to see Georgia attempt to implement Alabama's defensive system like Sal Sunseri did at UT and it subsequently post the worst defense in the history of the school's football program.

This hire is fucking laughable on every conceivable level. First of all, who seriously thinks that Alabama was landing defensive recruits because of Kirby Smart? Second, why, on god's green earth, in this era of offensive football, would you hire an unproven DC? Third, why wouldn't you go after a near-championship or championship coach, like, oh, I don't know, every national championship coach since 2004? It's not like Georgia's too poor to try to pry Art Briles, Gary Patterson, Rich Rodriguez, or someone like that away. Or even Chip Kelly.

I feel like the school thought that Smart = Jacob Eason definitely stays (which now seems to be untrue, lawl), and that's just fucking dumb. Making a long-term program decision over one 18-year-old kid is stupid. Eason could be paralyzed in a car crash tomorrow. Georgia athletic department needs some more foresight.

[Bythyrona]

I would love to see Georgia attempt to implement Alabama's defensive system like Sal Sunseri did at UT and it subsequently post the worst defense in the history of the school's football program.

This hire is fucking laughable on every conceivable level. First of all, who seriously thinks that Alabama was landing defensive recruits because of Kirby Smart? Second, why, on god's green earth, in this era of offensive football, would you hire an unproven DC? Third, why wouldn't you go after a near-championship or championship coach, like, oh, I don't know, every national championship coach since 2004? It's not like Georgia's too poor to try to pry Art Briles, Gary Patterson, Rich Rodriguez, or someone like that away. Or even Chip Kelly.

I feel like the school thought that Smart = Jacob Eason definitely stays (which now seems to be untrue, lawl), and that's just fucking dumb. Making a long-term program decision over one 18-year-old kid is stupid. Eason could be paralyzed in a car crash tomorrow. Georgia athletic department needs some more foresight.

You gotta hand it to dumb SEC fans who just circlejerk to any conceivable thought of becoming Alabama. I feel like this hiring stems from that repugnant phenomenon in no insignificant way. WE WANT KIRBY SMART, WE GON BAMA OF TEH EAST GAIS

lol georgia

[Torisakia]

Oh man, Georgia is fucked. Kirby Smart? Really?

It's either him or Lane Kiffin.

Actually, I'd rather them take Lane Kiffin.

[Luminesa]

I would love to see Georgia attempt to implement Alabama's defensive system like Sal Sunseri did at UT and it subsequently post the worst defense in the history of the school's football program.

This hire is fucking laughable on every conceivable level. First of all, who seriously thinks that Alabama was landing defensive recruits because of Kirby Smart? Second, why, on god's green earth, in this era of offensive football, would you hire an unproven DC? Third, why wouldn't you go after a near-championship or championship coach, like, oh, I don't know, every national championship coach since 2004? It's not like Georgia's too poor to try to pry Art Briles, Gary Patterson, Rich Rodriguez, or someone like that away. Or even Chip Kelly.

I feel like the school thought that Smart = Jacob Eason definitely stays (which now seems to be untrue, lawl), and that's just fucking dumb. Making a long-term program decision over one 18-year-old kid is stupid. Eason could be paralyzed in a car crash tomorrow. Georgia athletic department needs some more foresight.

Terrible thought, but true.

It's ridiculous how much teams are willing to sell for recruits, then they don't do anything.

We got Leonard Fournette, we gave up A LOT to get him...

But one boy doesn't make a team. He was brought-on to cover for SO MANY PROBLEMS LES MILES HAS TO FIX WITH THIS TEAM.

We need to actually try to recruit a DECENT QB next year. Seriously. We have the worst luck with QBs...

[Bythyrona]

Oh man, Georgia is fucked. Kirby Smart? Really?

It's either him or Lane Kiffin.

Actually, I'd rather them take Lane Kiffin.

He'd just leave after one year to go coach a PAC-12 school.

joey freshwater 2 colorado confirmed

[Arkinesia]

This hire is fucking laughable on every conceivable level. First of all, who seriously thinks that Alabama was landing defensive recruits because of Kirby Smart? Second, why, on god's green earth, in this era of offensive football, would you hire an unproven DC? Third, why wouldn't you go after a near-championship or championship coach, like, oh, I don't know, every national championship coach since 2004? It's not like Georgia's too poor to try to pry Art Briles, Gary Patterson, Rich Rodriguez, or someone like that away. Or even Chip Kelly.

I feel like the school thought that Smart = Jacob Eason definitely stays (which now seems to be untrue, lawl), and that's just fucking dumb. Making a long-term program decision over one 18-year-old kid is stupid. Eason could be paralyzed in a car crash tomorrow. Georgia athletic department needs some more foresight.

You gotta hand it to dumb SEC fans who just circlejerk to any conceivable thought of becoming Alabama. I feel like this hiring stems from that repugnant phenomenon in no insignificant way. WE WANT KIRBY SMART, WE GON BAMA OF TEH EAST GAIS

lol georgia

You know how people keep comparing it to Muschamp @Florida? They're not wrong

Oh man, Georgia is fucked. Kirby Smart? Really?

It's either him or Lane Kiffin.

Actually, I'd rather them take Lane Kiffin.

If those are your only choices as Georgia, then don't fire Richt. The end.

[Bythyrona]

Will Muschamp is a serious candidate for the South Carolina job.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Bythyrona]

Those damn gritty Longhorns. Sucks to be Baylor, but it happens if you lose your first- and second-strings in such a QB-centric offense.

[Luminesa]

Those damn gritty Longhorns. Sucks to be Baylor, but it happens if you lose your first- and second-strings in such a QB-centric offense.

Texas plays badly all year, then the recruiters show-up, and Texas is like, "Ooh, hey, they're looking for recruits! Let's make sure they get a picture of our good side!"

And thus they turn-up against Baylor.

What a great way to end the season. Congrats, Texas. You may have had a terrible year, but you beat your main rival Oklahoma and you pounded flipping Baylor. That's more than what LSU can say for their season.

[Bythyrona]

I wouldn't call 5-7 with wins against Oklahoma and Baylor a "terrible" year. Extremely close losses to Cal, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech can't be overlooked either - especially that brutal loss to Cal thanks to the Longhorns' special teams.