The Official 2015-2016 Football Season Thread

[|iR|Focalor]

If UNC lost to South Carolina this year... that could be precisely why they aren't ranked better. South Carolina would actually have to improve to be considered something as lofty as "horrible". When Georgia played South Carolina back on September 19th, Georgia's performance against them had everyone convinced that Georgia was actually a "good" team. And they were better at that time than they are now, for sure. If Georgia had to play Alabama this weekend rather than when they played them back on October 3rd, it would end with Georgia scoring probably 6 points or less and Alabama scoring 50 points or more. Which... has only happened to Georgia one time, having an opponent score over 50 points at home in Athens GA when Florida did it to them back in 1995 while Steve Spurrier was coaching the Gators. They got Spurrier back for it though when they beat South Carolina 52 to 20 this year. Folks around Athens saw it as a good omen for things this year. But... turns out we all suck at divination I guess.


Bad taste in your mouth, Spurrier?

It's okay though, Richt's probably gonna be jobless by January too.

[haunted]

This article explained it a tad better than me(#5):

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/11/4/9667542/ncaa-football-playoff-rankings-alabama-clemson-notre-dame-memphis

I may have exaggerated a bit, but it's obvious they're being harsh on nc relative to several other teams.

[haunted]

And the loss was definitely a bad one and leaves a sour taste in my mouth, nc would probably score 50 too if they played them again.

[|iR|Focalor]

The problem I have with how the NCAA seeds/seeded bowl games in the previous BCS era and the newfangled playoff system is how two different 1-loss teams are regarded in relation to when the single loss happened. Losing the very first game of the regular season and winning all the rest WAS and STILL IS preferred over losing the 12th game of the regular season. A team loses that 12th game, and it's literally IMPOSSIBLE to make it into the playoffs and get a shot at the national title. But if a team loses only 1 game between their 1st and 6th game on the schedule (depending on previous ranking... and other factors... factors like being called "Alabama" ) they still have an opportunity to play for a national title. How does that make any sense? 1 loss is 1 loss. In the NFL, your overall record is what determines your placement in the playoffs, and all wins and losses count the same no matter when they occur.

This is also what I FUCKING HATE SO MUCH about how Nascar has changed how they determine who wins the Sprint Cup series championship. Used to, the driver with the best overall record for the entire season and thus the most points would win the championship. If there's 30 races in a season, one driver could win 17 races (more than half), start 9 races on the pole (for bonus points), finish in the top 10 all the races he didn't win (for more bonus points) and then he could conceivably crash out and DNF (did not finish) in the very last 2 races of the season, and STILL win the Championship because he won more races than anyone else that season. Makes sense, right? Not anymore. Now drivers have to earn so many points before a certain point in the season to become eligible for the "chase" and the retarded new way that Nascar has incorporated a bullshit way of having "playoffs" into their series. Ugh. I fucking hate it. It completely ruins the history and the sense of tradition within the sport. I can't even watch Nascar anymore because of it.

Problem in the NCAA is that there SOOOO many schools in so many conferences, so it becomes impossible to count every schools record as the sole determining factor because there will always be so many schools with the same overall records.

Really the only solution I see is that the NCAA needs to figure up a points system that they can use to kinda-sorta "grade" teams at the end of the regular season to determine bowl seeding when more than one contender has a tying overall record. I think the overall record should be the FIRST determining factor in seeding, but when teams have tying records, they refer to the points they've accrued over the season to determine rank between the tied teams. Award points on a per-game basis for things like total points for, total points against, points difference, opponent rank at the time of the game, bonus points for takeaways/INTs, subtract bonus points for fumbles lost, etc. Let MATH and STATS and FACTS be the thing that determines, not some assholes undoubtedly biased or possibly misguided opinion.

This is COLLEGE football we're talking about. Surely they can find a statistics or math professor to help them out with designing a fair and working system. How can I be the first and only person to think of something like this? There's no way that's possible, I'm not that smart. So it becomes apparent: They don't WANT an unbiased system. They don't WANT to remove human error from the equation. They WANT to play favorites when and where they can get away with it.

[haunted]

I couldn't agree more. I know I'm only venting about nc but that's the problem as a whole, it should be more objective and if anything try to schedule more intra conference games to reduce subjectivity in the model and make it more accurate. This whole explaining alabama's high ranking for "the nature in which their games were won"(relative to to Florida and others) then taking zero consideration and perhaps exaggerating nc's only loss is bull shit. I mean, relatively they ARE no matter how much I agree that sc was a bad loss. Already wishing there was an 8 team playoff with how this committee is doing things.

[|iR|Focalor]

I dunno if ACC does this, they probably do, but in the SEC, out of the 12 games you play, 6 are from your own division, and 2 are from the opposite side of the conference, for a total of 8 conference games. Then you have 3 random shitties from a nearby non-major conference, and then the final 12th game is always your in-state (or neighboring state) rival from a different conference, for a total of 4 non-conference games. 6 division opponents + 2 opposite division of conference opponents + 3 randoms + 1 in-state rival = 12 games.

To me, it makes the most sense that anyone in the 2 playoff bowl games would be conference champions, but... for starters, you have 5 major power conferences: ACC, SEC, Pac12, Big12, and Big10. One of the 5 is gonna get snubbed. Then you have non-major conference teams who are basically thought of as the retarded red-headed step children of college football. Nobody wants to give them credit for jack shit unless they miraculously get gifted with one opponent that pollsters have chronic boners for like Alabama or Ohio State and they dry-fuck them for 40+ point differential like TCU was doing to folks before joining the Big12.

So, uh.... yeah. I don't see the advantage at ALL of having a playoff system. It comes down to 4 teams having an opportunity to earn the title, but it has only alleviated any real or perceived favoritism and human error from the process by a pointlessly negligible amount. It's like the whole point of it was do as much as they possibly could to make it SOUND like they changed something,... even though they actually changed nothing at all. I don't see anything being "improved" by this change one bit. I don't understand why they can get away with it either. Imagine if Roger Goodell came out and said, "Hey guys! Remember how we moved up the kickoff spot 10 yards to improve the game and you loved it? Remember how we moved back the field goal kicking spot to improve the game and you loved it? Well we've heard people complaining that certain teams with records that don't grant them access to the playoffs would be better suited for the playoffs than teams with the best records. So from now on, we're gonna select 18 coaches at random from around the league to VOTE on who gets one of the 4 wildcard seeds. Because there's NO WAY there could be any controversy, bias, or corruption involved with such a thing! YOU'RE WELCOME, YOU STUPID DUMBASS FOOTBALL FANS!" Because as ridiculous as I made that sound, that's basically what happened with this NCAA playoff shit. And how the fuck do they prove that this system is legit and there's no corruption behind it? It's impossible.

I say go back to the BCS system. At least it made more sense even if it was still flawed.

[haunted]

Yup, id take the bcs system over this. If anything the flaws of the bcs were amplified through this stupid play-off committee. I can't wait for unc to make #24 after beating duke and all of the small conference teams losing and dropping off the radar. Wooohoooo!!!

[Sgt. Dick]

Toledo already lost this week, that should open up the space for UNC, if they take care of business this week.

[haunted]

I'm sure, they should just already be in now though. It'd be nice for pitt to pull out a W on notre dame.. Not only would it force notre dame down in the rankings but they'd be forced to use it to unc's benefit with a win on pitt.

Alabama v. LSU
Clemson v. FSU
TCU v. Oklahoma state

3 huge match-ups today... NC v. Duke not quite as high profile but very crucial as well.

[haunted]

Things are starting to get a bit more interesting. Alabama beating lsu but Mississippi losing should make them remain stagnant, although they'll get a +1 boost likely. If miss had won, they'd be ahead of Ohio state.

1. Clemson
2. Ohio state
3. Alabama
4. notre dame
5. Oklahoma st
6. Baylor
7. LSU
8. Iowa
9. Florida
10. Stanford
11. Utah
12. TCU

After that, whatever. Unc will likely be 16th in the AP but unranked in the playoff rankings again after setting or approaching a handful of ncaa, ACC and school records. 

If you missed the highlights, nc played very well especially their qb Williams.

[|iR|Focalor]

LSU... was anyone convinced that they were a top team before Saturday night? Yeah? Well now you know. They're not, never were, and the only reason they got such hype is because A, the people at ESPN are fucking idiots, and B, they're SEC (and probably C, because they've contended for the title within the last 8 years, which kinda ties back into point A that the guys at ESPN are fucking idiots). Leonard Fournette was never gonna be the best runningback in college football. At some point, he was gonna get exposed for what he is: average. And all these dicksuckers wanting to take the Heisman from Fournette and hand it to Henry now? Pfft. Morons. Henry ain't shit either.

Anyway, Alabama wins another one, yay for you retards! Enjoy it while it lasts, you sister fucking inbred booger eaters. One day the NCAA is gonna have to investigate Nick Saban. All I'm gonna say.

[haunted]

Yeah that's about what I thought would happen, plus home for bama but neither are extremely impressive. I wish nc had a stronger schedule so they could perhaps but this sc loss behind them. I guess I should feel like that opposed to being pissed off that the good ol boy teams like Alabama and Ohio state that get their dicks sucked by the polls despite losing to a shitty va tech team last year. Beating ga tech, Pitt, duke, nc state, va tech, Miami etc only gets you so far. So when I really see nc whipping dukes ass harder than anyone has done(8th rated defense in nation), nc beating Pitt at home by the same margin as notre dame and better than undefeated Iowa did, beat Illinois by 40 when Illinois beat Nebraska and barely lost to Iowa(and on top of that, Miami beat Nebraska who just beat Michigan state, lmfao), nc score the most yards/points on ga tech 2nd to Clemson and only barely, etc etc beating teams way worse than other teams are and spanking teams with staple wins blah blah blah blah bl............ Actually, fuck those cock suckers who gives a shit about nc's schedule

[Sgt. Dick]

UNC is beginning to get some attention and will be ranked in the playoff polls this week.
The bad part is even if they win out and beat Clemson in the ACC championship game they probably won't make t in the top 4.
Many ranked teams lost this week - #2 LSU, #7 MSU,  #8 TCU, #13 Memphis, #16 FSU, #18 Ole Miss,  #19 Texas A&M, and #24 Toledo.

There are still a lot of games to be played between ranked teams, so if the games go a certain way everyone could have a loss.

Now to my Saturday,  I sat in the Swamp at UF for over 3 hours watching FLA struggle against Vandy.  The defense did their job once again, they gave up 175 yards and 7 points for the game (74 yards and Vandy's only score came on 1 big play).
To say the offense was offensive, would be giving them to much credit.  Treon Harris is so bad that the coaches have decided to not use half the playbook.  FLA is a one dimensional team that even Vandy can shutdown.  FLA did turn the ball over 4 times (all in Vandy territory), but the way the offense was playing they probably would not of scored anyway.  Whoever FLA plays in the championship game, will blow them out.
I predict that FLA's offense will not score 10 points in the championship game.  here is how I see the rest of FLA's season going.
11/14 - Loss to South Carolina
11/21 - Win against FAU
11/28 - Loss to FSU
Loss in SEC Championship Game
Loss in whatever Bowl game they play in unless it is some no name bowl played in mid December.   

[Sgt. Dick]

Missouri Football players say they will strike until the school president resigns.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/14078494/missouri-tigers-football-players-strike-embattled-tim-wolfe-resigns

This is about racial incidents that have happened on campus recently and how the president handled them.
I think it is good that high profile students on campus are speaking up, but I don't think boycotting football activities is the way to go, when you were given a scholarship to play football.  I think the school should pull their scholarship if they do not fulfill their side of the agreement.
Protest all you want, but do the job that you were given a free education for doing.

[haunted]

South Carolina lost to Tennessee, Kentucky, and Texas a&m by a combined 14 points. Even if your team slips on defense, as long as your offense is putting points up its been enough to edge them out. NC limited them to less points than all of these teams, but threw 3 picks in the red zone. Two of which sc majorly capitalized on, 1 was 2nd in goal with 2 mins left in the game... Resulting in a 17-13 loss. I guess you could say it's dependent on which Florida shows up, but i think it should be an moderately easy win for the gators.

I think y'all are heading into the FSU game as a 40/60 underdog at the worst, 45/55 at the best. That one is completely doable. Sec championship, probably not but crazier things happen every weekend.

And, unc may be getting attention from the AP, coaches poll, and ESPN finally but they won't from the playoff committee. The committee views inter-conference wins/losses as conference strength in the big 10 and sec. In the big 12 and pac its circumstantial or to their biased discretion, it probably barely hurts them overall. In the ACC, especially the coastal division, it hurts the conference tremendously. If unc were to win out and beat Clemson in the ACC championship I'd doubt they'd even get a New Years six bowl. Right now they're projected to have a 30% chance of winning the championship, Clemson 68%, and 2% divided among Miami and Pitt. Yet, they're also projected to face a #6 sec team in the belk bowl by ESPN. Lol