Official 2009-2010 NCAA Football Thread

[fathom]

Is that Iowa punts or total punts? I realize GT can score, but Iowa has a premiere defense and I would expect that we could force at least two GT punts. And Iowa doesn't exactly have a potent offense, although they are close.

 

Paul Johnson doesn't punt the ball if it's 4th down and fewer than 5 yards. That's how little confidence he has in his defense. And that's for punts in a game. There have been no punts by either team in the last 9 quarters GT has played.

[GoodAsGould]

Its for entertainment. There is no perfect system. Even in basketball the tournament doesnt mean that the best team wins, it just is fun to watch.

 

The system now, is a lot better than it was where you may not have even seen Alabama/Texas, and instead saw Alabama play a random team, Texas play a random team and the other unbeaten teams not play either. The old system would have had potentially 3-4 ties of undefeated teams.

 

Bowl games are good for some reasons, bad for others, but they give us entertainment and that is the goal.

 

Right but every team that deserves a chance has the possibility to win, while in Football you have three undefeated teams who arent getting a chance at all and TCU is getting a slap in the face by being matched up vs Boise.

[whitesoxfan99]

More transfers and decommits coming for the Illinois coaching staff. I just can't fathom why Zook would be back for another year. If young fire him now there is enough talent on the team for a competent coach to win the next couple of years and maybe they can turn around 2010 recruiting as well.

[Palehosefan]

More transfers and decommits coming for the Illinois coaching staff. I just can't fathom why Zook would be back for another year. If young fire him now there is enough talent on the team for a competent coach to win the next couple of years and maybe they can turn around 2010 recruiting as well.

 

As an outsider, I just can't fathom why Zook hasn't already been shown the door. There's not a lot of big programs out there looking for coaches this offseason. The Illini job would seemingly be only behind the Notre Dame job right now on the priority list, right there with Virginia.

 

Zook has plenty of evidence to suggest that he's just not a good head coach. He is in the same mold as John Blake, guys that are excellent recruiting coordinators, but lousy head coaches.

 

Go throw money at Chris Peterson. He can clearly see that Boise State isn't a destination point after another undefeated 13-0 season and still not even in the top 5 rankings.

[Soxbadger]

Right but every team that deserves a chance has the possibility to win, while in Football you have three undefeated teams who arent getting a chance at all and TCU is getting a slap in the face by being matched up vs Boise.

 

Not every team. There is always an arbitrary line drawn where one team does not get a chance. In the basketball tournament that line is 64, if you are the 65th team you dont get a chance. In football if there was a playoff it would be the 9th team, or the 17th team, or whatever the case may be.

 

"Deserve" is arbitrary. We each define it our own way.

[Kyyle23]

Not every team. There is always an arbitrary line drawn where one team does not get a chance. In the basketball tournament that line is 64, if you are the 65th team you dont get a chance. In football if there was a playoff it would be the 9th team, or the 17th team, or whatever the case may be.

 

"Deserve" is arbitrary. We each define it our own way.

 

bulls*** semantics. That is all

[whitesoxfan99]

Looks like Suh actually has a chance to win the Heisman

 

http://www.stiffarmtrophy.com/

[GoodAsGould]

Not every team. There is always an arbitrary line drawn where one team does not get a chance. In the basketball tournament that line is 64, if you are the 65th team you dont get a chance. In football if there was a playoff it would be the 9th team, or the 17th team, or whatever the case may be.

 

"Deserve" is arbitrary. We each define it our own way.

 

Well 64 is a big number, if you arent in the top 64 do you really deserve a shot to win it all? And in Football right now there are 5 undefeated teams, so without a doubt they all deserve a shot, and that still leaves room for three 1 loss teams if you want to make it 8 teams. Im much more sympathetic to team going undefeated and not having a shot at the playoffs or a team with a tough schedule and only 1 loss than I would be to a 2 or 3 loss team.

[kev211]

If ND hires Edsall im going to go insane. I knew firing Weis was a bad idea this year.

[Soxbadger]

Well 64 is a big number, if you arent in the top 64 do you really deserve a shot to win it all?

 

I dont know. I just know that the we hear about the 65th team every year and that there are fans of teams who constantly believe that they deserved a similar chance. I personally think 64 is a large enough field, but I also would be pretty upset if my team went 20-11 and some how didnt make the tournament while another team that was 19-12 did.

 

And in Football right now there are 5 undefeated teams, so without a doubt they all deserve a shot, and that still leaves room for three 1 loss teams if you want to make it 8 teams. Im much more sympathetic to team going undefeated and not having a shot at the playoffs or a team with a tough schedule and only 1 loss than I would be to a 2 or 3 loss team.

 

But this is just this year. Next year there could be 10 teams with 1 loss and 10 teams with 2 losses, and maybe one of those 2 loss teams beat a 1 loss team.

 

There is just no way to really create a fair system. Its fun to watch, but its just entertainment.

[GoodAsGould]

I dont know. I just know that the we hear about the 65th team every year and that there are fans of teams who constantly believe that they deserved a similar chance. I personally think 64 is a large enough field, but I also would be pretty upset if my team went 20-11 and some how didnt make the tournament while another team that was 19-12 did.

 

 

 

But this is just this year. Next year there could be 10 teams with 1 loss and 10 teams with 2 losses, and maybe one of those 2 loss teams beat a 1 loss team.

 

There is just no way to really create a fair system. Its fun to watch, but its just entertainment.

 

Right, but at the very least you can make the argument well if you only loss 1 time or if you went undefeated you would be in. As apposed to TCU/Boise/Cincy where they didnt lose at all and still not getting a chance for the championship. Yes, there will always be some teams that feel sleighted(sp?) but atleast in a playoff scenario if you go undefeated you will be in the playoffs.

[Soxbadger]

you go undefeated you will be in the playoffs.

 

Thats not 100% true. There are scenarios where 8 or more teams could go undefeated. Its highly unlikely, but the possibility exists.

 

Thats why I really just dont care about a playoff system. It may be more enjoyable, it may be less enjoyable, but it will in no way end the argument over who is the best team. If anything it potentially could create more arguments.

 

IE Florida makes the playoff after losing to Alabama. Alabama loses in the first round to opponent X, Florida goes on to win the the playoffs but never faces Alabama or opponent X.

 

Its just for fun.

[GoodAsGould]

Thats not 100% true. There are scenarios where 8 or more teams could go undefeated. Its highly unlikely, but the possibility exists.

 

Thats why I really just dont care about a playoff system. It may be more enjoyable, it may be less enjoyable, but it will in no way end the argument over who is the best team. If anything it potentially could create more arguments.

 

IE Florida makes the playoff after losing to Alabama. Alabama loses in the first round to opponent X, Florida goes on to win the the playoffs but never faces Alabama or opponent X.

 

Its just for fun.

 

Im not a college football expert by any means, but has there ever been a year where there has been 8 undefeated teams and how long ago has it been?

[Soxbadger]

I doubt there has been a year where there have been 8 unbeaten teams. (I think this year with 5 unbeaten is the most).

 

There probably has been a year where there have been 8 unbeaten and 1 loss teams or just 8 1 loss teams.

 

But not all wins and losses are equal.

 

If Florida played Cinci's schedule, how many losses do you think they would have? If they didnt have to play the SEC championship, there were 6 undefeated and 6 with 2 losses. How do you pick 8 from that? And if you only pick 4, 1 of the unbeaten's doesnt get a chance.

[GoodAsGould]

I doubt there has been a year where there have been 8 unbeaten teams. (I think this year with 5 unbeaten is the most).

 

There probably has been a year where there have been 8 unbeaten and 1 loss teams or just 8 1 loss teams.

 

But not all wins and losses are equal.

 

If Florida played Cinci's schedule, how many losses do you think they would have? If they didnt have to play the SEC championship, there were 6 undefeated and 6 with 2 losses. How do you pick 8 from that? And if you only pick 4, 1 of the unbeaten's doesnt get a chance.

 

I dont see any reason to get rid of the division championship games, those can go a far way to determine seeding, and if there were 8 teams this year Florida would still get in. Hell if they really wanted to make sure every deserving team got in could extend it to 16 teams, at that point if you took care of business and did what your supposed to do, that team will be in the playoffs.

[Soxbadger]

I guess I just think that no matter how much its expanded people are going to have the same complaints. When the NCAA tourney comes you hear of expanding the field to 128.

 

If you went to 16, there is another line where people complain about. There are numerous teams with 3 losses and a Central Michigan team with 2 losses. Not all of them would make the top "16". There is always going to be a team that is left out, I think bowl games are a fun tradition and it gives more college players the chance to have a college defining moment.

 

I believe there are currently 33 bowls. That gives 66 teams a change to play in the postseason and give their fans something to cheer about.

 

Maybe it doesnt select the best champion, but it gives more people a chance to experience something.

Edited December 7, 2009 by Soxbadger

[southsider2k5]

Even Iowa State!

[Kyyle23]

I guess I just think that no matter how much its expanded people are going to have the same complaints. When the NCAA tourney comes you hear of expanding the field to 128.

 

If you went to 16, there is another line where people complain about. There are numerous teams with 3 losses and a Central Michigan team with 2 losses. Not all of them would make the top "16". There is always going to be a team that is left out, I think bowl games are a fun tradition and it gives more college players the chance to have a college defining moment.

 

I believe there are currently 33 bowls. That gives 66 teams a change to play in the postseason and give their fans something to cheer about.

 

Maybe it doesnt select the best champion, but it gives more people a chance to experience something.

 

Sure there is always going to be a left out team, but the idea of somewhat of a playoff is just so much more appealing than what is currently in place. You say that there are 64 teams and there is always a 65th team that feels they deserved to be there. Well then they have the NIT. And now the CBI. And all of the DII and DIII schools have their own playoff designed to reward a team for having a good regular season. And at the end of all of these tournaments, we KNOW who is the clear cut winner, and we saw how they came to win it all.

 

Every year in College Football it is questionable. Every year. Thats just not right, and the archaic system needs to be changed/upgraded/revamped. Saying to a team like Boise St or TCU "Well at least you got a bowl and thats a fun tradition" does not change the fact that both of these teams played the entire season wanting to test the mettle of BCS teams, and that has totally been taken away from them.

 

A playoff can still contain Bowls. Playoffs can run up the ladder and move their way through the Sugar/Orange/Tostidos Fiesta/Rose Bowl and these sponsors can still retain their Bowl name and money that goes with it. The idea of going bowling can still exist with a playoff in place, and people act like it would just fall off the table.

 

and I understand that no matter what happens, there will always be complaints and the lame ass hypocritical academic reasoning that it shouldnt happen. But this system is far too imperfect and fundamentally flawed to continue.

[RockRaines]

Is that Iowa punts or total punts? I realize GT can score, but Iowa has a premiere defense and I would expect that we could force at least two GT punts. And Iowa doesn't exactly have a potent offense, although they are close.

 

 

The exciting thing is a few insiders are talking about Henderson having Iowa climbing up on his list and some believe Iowa is at the top of his list. If they could land him, it would be Iowa's best recruiting class in..well...forever.

I got Iowa in that game.

 

And where are you hearing this about Henderson? Is he even taking a visit to Iowa City? Top school are supposed to be USC, OSU, and Fla

[Soxbadger]

But this system is far too imperfect and fundamentally flawed to continue.

 

It depends on what the goal of the system is.

 

If the goal is to determine an absolute champion, then its beyond flawed, its completely unusable.

 

If the goal is to make money for schools, the NCAA and give students the most post season opportunities, then this is probably the best system.

 

The problem is that you will never get the NCAA or schools to agree to a 64 team playoff (which is 5 extra games), unless you completely change the entire season. You would probably have to cut the regular season to 9 games and then have the playoffs. That would mean a bad team may only play 9 games. You would have crazy scheduling issues because no one would want to play tough teams. Youd have all the power teams have schedules like TCU, Boise, because there is no reason to play USC v OSU, if that 1 game may keep you from the playoffs.

 

There is just no perfect system, I wish there was.

[RockRaines]

I honestly dont know why everyone is so upset about the bowls, I think they will be entertaining and close for the most part, except for Cincy and Florida.

[CrimsonWeltall]

Not every team. There is always an arbitrary line drawn where one team does not get a chance.

 

Every NCAA basketball team has a chance. They can win their conference tourney. What more winning could TCU/Cincy/Boise have done?

 

And even if it's somewhat arbitrary to have 64 rather than 54 or 74 or 44, it provides far, far, far more margin of error. Does anyone even recall legitimate title contenders getting denied a tourney birth? That happens *every year* with the BCS.

[CrimsonWeltall]

You would have crazy scheduling issues because no one would want to play tough teams. Youd have all the power teams have schedules like TCU, Boise, because there is no reason to play USC v OSU, if that 1 game may keep you from the playoffs.

 

They already have silly scheduling. How does Alabama get away with playing 7 home games and 4 away games (+2 neutral)?

[RockRaines]

Every NCAA basketball team has a chance. They can win their conference tourney. What more winning could TCU/Cincy/Boise have done?

 

And even if it's somewhat arbitrary to have 64 rather than 54 or 74 or 44, it provides far, far, far more margin of error. Does anyone even recall legitimate title contenders getting denied a tourney birth? That happens *every year* with the BCS.

They could have played someone better than they did. If they beat numerous ranked opponents and another team didnt, then they would be ranked higher than them. Pretty straight forward actually.

[Soxbadger]

Then youll get arguments such as:

 

No one would play TCU, etc.

 

A lot of the problem is that the schedule is made years in advance that some times what looked like a good game turns out to be bad one.