2017 College Football Season thread

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by tarcone

This year you would have
Clenson, Miami, tOSU, Wisconsin, Auburn, Georgia, Alabama (WC), USC, Stanford, Oklahoma, TCU, UCF, FAU, Toledo, Fresno St, Troy.

Seed them 1 through 16

Sounds pretty good. No bitching because you play your conference to qualify. Other 5 are represented. And UCF could beat a Miami.

I think it would be awesome.

Id rather go back in time where the prestige of the bowls was enough to satisfy fans. We could still debate on who the best team was after the bowls just like we still do. The National Championship game still doesnt solve the problem some people wanted to think they could solve in a short season.

Lets go back to 1987 and forget the BCS nonsense.

There was once upon a time when winning the Rose Bowl meant a great deal to programs. And now winning the National Championship game is what matters hence the SEC domination lately. Selling recruits the opportunity to play in the 1 game that really matters is why Alabama is stacked 3 deep with 4-5 star recruits at every position.

[Edward64]

Not me. Much prefer the 4 team championship game. I think 4 is good, I would not want to expand it.

Its not perfect (what is) but it was much more nebulous and open to debate with just bowl games.

[mauchow]

8 or 16 has to be next step.

[Kodos]

I think 8 is perfect. Gives the UCFs of the world a shot without totally watering down the playoff. Five power 5 champs, 3 at large bids.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I think 8 is perfect. Gives the UCFs of the world a shot without totally watering down the playoff. Five power 5 champs, 3 at large bids.

Yep.. and it's going to happen.. follow the money.

[lungs]

16 teams

Top 14 SEC schools
2 at large

[panerd]

Originally Posted by lungs

16 teams

Top 14 SEC schools
2 at large

Sounds a lot like the NCAA tournament with the Big 10 and Big 12 who account for 25% of the field and like 2 of the last 25 titles.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by panerd

Sounds a lot like the NCAA tournament with the Big 10 and Big 12 who account for 25% of the field and like 2 of the last 25 titles.

Let's call it 2.5 since Maryland is in the Big Ten now.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

College football is the greatest damn sport in the world and it seems everyone loves it and is determined to change it and screw it up simultaneously.

And that's where I get ready to take up arms & go full NBC on people fucking with it.

The ones most eager to mess with it are typically the ones that don't get how it's already the best of the high profile bunch. I don't want those folks to go away mad, I simply want them to go away.

[Logan]

We've gone from multiple bodies voting for a champion after a bunch of random games to 4 teams settling it on the field, in a pretty short period of time.

Not sure how that is screwing things up.

[albionmoonlight]

I have no idea what the solution is, but it just seems wrong to have something called a "playoff" if it is possible for an undefeated team to not be part of it.

I didn't watch enough CFB this year to know whether Central Florida deserved a spot over the 4 that made it. My argument is more general and semantic. Whatever we have now is not a playoff.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I have no idea what the solution is, but it just seems wrong to have something called a "playoff" if it is possible for an undefeated team to not be part of it.

There are 130 teams in FBS (and another 124 FCS programs that can be scheduled) of wildly varying quality. Assigning a team to the playoffs by simply going undefeated without considering the quality of the schedule played is ridiculous.

[Kodos]

They did beat Auburn, of the Mighty SEC.

[digamma]

Paul Johnson, Georgia Tech reach agreement on extension

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by digamma

Paul Johnson, Georgia Tech reach agreement on extension

Exclusive footage of JiMiGA's reaction to this news:

[hollmt]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Exclusive footage of JiMiGA's reaction to this news:

so, no more posts from Jon then?

[bob]

I have no clue what GT is doing here. He already had 3 more seasons on his contract. Why extend him?

[digamma]

Because you get killed by negative recruiting if you don't. Coaches basically have to have a 4 year contract in today's world.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by digamma

Because you get killed by negative recruiting if you don't. Coaches basically have to have a 4 year contract in today's world.

Which is odd because what coach has ever made it to the end of his contract and then just wasn't renewed?

[digamma]

Exactly, you can argue it's cosmetics, but it matters for recruiting and coach hiring. What matters are the buyout and exit terms, and as I understand it those are roughly equivalent or are slightly more favorable to GT.

[bob]

Originally Posted by digamma

Because you get killed by negative recruiting if you don't. Coaches basically have to have a 4 year contract in today's world.

He hasn't been battling Clemson and UGa for recruits lately, he's been fighting Georgia State and Kennesaw St. if he can't win that battle by virtue of being GT and in the ACC, regardless of years remaining on his contract, perhaps he shouldn't be the coach anymore.

[digamma]

Yeah, that's just not true. Totally reasonable to have a conversation about this and whether it's the right move but we should work with reality.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Exclusive footage of JiMiGA's reaction to this news:

Would be more likely to get that reaction from me if I thought there was anyone steering that ship that had the sense God gave a goose.

As it is, well, this sort of insanity just isn't a surprise anymore. It's ... expected.

[bob]

Originally Posted by digamma

Yeah, that's just not true. Totally reasonable to have a conversation about this and whether it's the right move but we should work with reality.

I don't have time to do the research now, but there are plenty of guys that Tech has that weren't offered by any other power 5 conference school.

Now the both UGA and Clemson have their shit together, GT doesn't have time to play 1950s style football. They are far enough beyond - don't need to intentionally make it worse.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I think 8 is perfect. Gives the UCFs of the world a shot without totally watering down the playoff. Five power 5 champs, 3 at large bids.

That seems likely, and I'm sure I will watch and enjoy it all.

Still dislike the inevitable watering-down of the regular season. And here, presumably with no home field advantage, there's no real loss for a top-tier team when they lose a late-season game. So, you slip from the #1 seed to the #6 seed. Whatever. It's still win three games and get the trophy.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by bob

I don't have time to do the research now, but there are plenty of guys that Tech has that weren't offered by any other power 5 conference school.

Now the both UGA and Clemson have their shit together, GT doesn't have time to play 1950s style football. They are far enough beyond - don't need to intentionally make it worse.

Honestly, you're having a different conversation. If you want GT to compete year in, year out with Clemson, your issue is with the university and the academic side of things, and well, with you.

On the first point, GT's hampered by a limited curriculum and a clamp down on admissions and actual class going since the O'Leary shenanigans of backloading required classes until athletic eligibility expired. So, that cuts off a pretty significant portion of the talent pool who can go to Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn and Clemson. The Board of Regents has dragged its feet on the creation of new majors, which were promised.

The second point is how cash strapped GT is compared to its neighbors you want them to compete with. AD Stansbury gets it and recently approved the hiring of at least 4 pure recruiting staff jobs. You can help with this if you think recruiting is the problem--there's a big fundraising push. Go for it! https://imgur.com/a/5XZpn#qIWRXbD

The truth is GT recruiting is pretty much what it has been from a ranking perspective since the early 80s. There have been a couple of exceptional classes along the way, but in general it's sort of mid-30s to mid-40s each year. Has been that way under Johnson, was under Gailey, O'Leary, Lewis, Ross and Curry.

It seems like your real issue is really with the offense. That's fine and maybe a reasonable position. I'd argue that given the limitations, some form of gimmick offense (option, air raid, etc.) is what is going to give you the occasional 9-10 win season that Johnson has gotten to go along with the traditional 6+ win seasons. You will bring up 2015 and this season, so have at it. Johnson is still the winningest coach at GT since Bobby Dodd and there probably aren't too many better options right now.

[bob]

I'm not expecting them to compete with those schools. I'm expecting them to not make things worse than they need to be. And like I said, things will get worse for them since Clemson and UGA have unleashed the powers they actually are.

The air raid would at least be watchable and draw eye balls. If the NCAA ever gets around to banning cut blocks for safety reasons, this offense is screwed.

[digamma]

OK, at least we've established your issue is not with recruiting. We're getting somewhere!

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by digamma

Johnson is still the winningest coach at GT since Bobby Dodd

Based on total wins, not winning percentage. George O'Leary had a higher winning percentage, and actually Chan Gailey wasn't that much worse than Johnson (~57% to ~58% - O'Leary's Tech winning percentage is around 61%). Johnson has just been their a long time - 10 seasons.

So I'm not entirely sure why you don't think you can't do any different/better.

[tarcone]

Shoot Kirk Ferentz became Iowa's all time win leader this season. Passed legendary Hayden Fry. What a disgrace.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by digamma

Exactly, you can argue it's cosmetics, but it matters for recruiting and coach hiring. What matters are the buyout and exit terms, and as I understand it those are roughly equivalent or are slightly more favorable to GT.

Yep, you can actually have extensions that make it easier and cheaper to fire a coach after another season, but those details are rarely reported.

Originally Posted by QuikSand

That seems likely, and I'm sure I will watch and enjoy it all.

Still dislike the inevitable watering-down of the regular season. And here, presumably with no home field advantage, there's no real loss for a top-tier team when they lose a late-season game. So, you slip from the #1 seed to the #6 seed. Whatever. It's still win three games and get the trophy.

I like the idea of 6 (or 12) with byes for top teams, or playing the first round of an 8 team playoff on the higher seeds campus... something needs to be done, otherwise you'll have a farce where Georgia & Auburn are playing the SEC title game and both are more concerned with avoiding injury than playing all out to win because they're both guaranteed spots in an 8 team playoff at neutral sites. (I'd also use Clemson/Miami in that example, but Miami didn't show up to the ACCCG anyways. )

Fwiw CU I'm opposed to watering the regular season down to effectively nothing, but I also don't buy the safety argument against a 16 team tournament. Conference championship charades would have to disappear, but you've been having those for years at the FCS/D2/D3 levels, heck even many HS's play 15 or 16 games in a season.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

That seems likely, and I'm sure I will watch and enjoy it all.

Still dislike the inevitable watering-down of the regular season. And here, presumably with no home field advantage, there's no real loss for a top-tier team when they lose a late-season game. So, you slip from the #1 seed to the #6 seed. Whatever. It's still win three games and get the trophy.

My guess is with 8 teams that round 1 would be on college campuses. Which actually would be pretty cool. I'd be more in favor of 6 teams with byes to really reward the top 2. UCF would get in under this one I would think.

[CU Tiger]

Regarding GT, what surprises me the most - the city of Atlanta produces as much elite db talent as the rest of the country combined, possibly excluding South Florida.

Yet GT hasn't fielded a consistent elite d. Despite a ball control offense.

[Vince, Pt. II]

I think 8 is both easier and would generate more money, so is likely to happen.

I'm with those above that think 6 with 2 byes is probably the best way to do it without watering down the regular season too much.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Regarding GT, what surprises me the most - the city of Atlanta produces as much elite db talent as the rest of the country combined, possibly excluding South Florida.

Yet GT hasn't fielded a consistent elite d. Despite a ball control offense.

This is totally fair, and I think it is in part due to recruiting and part schemes. The years GT has had strong defenses they either had again a gimmicky scheme (Tenuta) or had found diamonds in the rough on the DL (thinking of the year 2* Vance Walker and Michael Johnson played).

[digamma]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Based on total wins, not winning percentage. George O'Leary had a higher winning percentage, and actually Chan Gailey wasn't that much worse than Johnson (~57% to ~58% - O'Leary's Tech winning percentage is around 61%). Johnson has just been their a long time - 10 seasons.

So I'm not entirely sure why you don't think you can't do any different/better.

Coming into the season he had the biggest winning percentage too. Being here longer has value, as does making 2 Orange Bowls and winning three times in Athens. I've been going to GT games since 1981, so that's the basis for my opinion of thinking that it kind of is what it is. GT is a better than average football school most years that can put up an occasional 10 win season (Johnson's done that twice with two more 9 win seasons).

[ISiddiqui]

I really believe you are the only GT fan that I know that likes Paul Johnson. All the others wanted him fired years ago.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by digamma

This is totally fair, and I think it is in part due to recruiting and part schemes. The years GT has had strong defenses they either had again a gimmicky scheme (Tenuta) or had found diamonds in the rough on the DL (thinking of the year 2* Vance Walker and Michael Johnson played).

I dont disagree. I think Johnson may be the best scheme guy in the country. He also knows intrinsically what every position needs on his offense. He is almost Parcells like in his personnel feel on the offensive side of the ball.

I am just consistently shocked he hasnt brought in a stud ace D-Coordinator, yet. I know Nate personally from his time at Wofford. I think he is going to do good things and is used to working around a 3-O offense. But why doesn he need an unproven coordinator? Frankly GT should be above that.

But man GT has a bunch to offer. And D-Coords live for stats. If you coach opposite an offense that limits possessions you can put up gaudy defensive stats. I dont think PJ sells his vision well. I think if he had more sales in him and called a John Chavis, Kevin Steele, Ellis Johnson - old school been through the ringer D-Coord and sold him on having the best D in the country, recruiting metro atlanta as his back yard and autonomy. I think it would do wonders for him.

Also there is just no soft way to say this, while by all accounts Andy McCollum is a great guy. Having a 60 year old white dude as your recruiting coordinator in Metro Atlanta...that isnt a recipe for success. You mention Clemson and UGA specifically, and I'd throw in Auburn the same. Those are the 3 schools GT has to combat consistently and occasionally beat for talent to be elite, in my opinion.Look at the RC at those three school. McCollum has his work cut out for him before he even gets to the limitations GT places on him academically. Then he compounds his problems by not having any back room staff. Clemson has 10+ people in the recruiting operations department. UGA lists 9 and has about 4 more unofficially. Another Joe Speed, young, energetic, relateable would go a long way in GT's favor.

Frankly I think Johnson thinks he can out score and limit possessions of opponents and doesn't feel like he needs to focus on that side of the ball.

I have long believed that there are 3 factors to success in college football (not an original thought)
- acquisition of talent
- development of talent
- scheme and in game strategy

I'd rate Johnson as a whole
- D
- B
- A

in those areas.

However to me, given only 1 to pick. I would rate acquisition of talent as the #1 most important priority over all others.

Anyway sorry for the rant just a slow Friday and always like thinking football

[digamma]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

But man GT has a bunch to offer. And D-Coords live for stats. If you coach opposite an offense that limits possessions you can put up gaudy defensive stats. I dont think PJ sells his vision well. I think if he had more sales in him and called a John Chavis, Kevin Steele, Ellis Johnson - old school been through the ringer D-Coord and sold him on having the best D in the country, recruiting metro atlanta as his back yard and autonomy. I think it would do wonders for him.

It's funny, Ellis Johnson was CPJ's first choice as a DC when he got to GT but couldn't get the budget approval to hire him. (Which is another issue all together, I think GT is like 10th out of 12 reporting schools in the ACC in assistant salaries.)

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by digamma

It's funny, Ellis Johnson was CPJ's first choice as a DC when he got to GT but couldn't get the budget approval to hire him. (Which is another issue all together, I think GT is like 10th out of 12 reporting schools in the ACC in assistant salaries.)

Surely that wasn't in the Radakovich days?
Dan has never met a dollar he couldn't spend.

He has done fantastic things for Clemson, but Im very fiscally conservative - his spending scares me.

[bob]

Originally Posted by digamma

OK, at least we've established your issue is not with recruiting. We're getting somewhere!

To circle back on this, you seem to think that the option is GT's best bet to combat the recruiting issues they have. I seem to think it actually causes some of the recruiting issues.

I think it is possible we are both right.

[cartman]

Sumlin to Arizona

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

and doesn't feel like he needs to focus on that side of the ball.

Sorta like special teams then?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Regarding GT, what surprises me the most - the city of Atlanta produces as much elite db talent as the rest of the country combined, possibly excluding South Florida. Yet GT hasn't fielded a consistent elite d. Despite a ball control offense.

How many of them can spell cat if you spot them the C and the A?

And how many of them don't flee immediately at the mere notion of the math load even if they're up the educational food chain from that point?

edit to add: And of the ones who aren't impacted by those two things, how many of those are willing to deal with one of the more dangerous campuses around?

[bob]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

I have long believed that there are 3 factors to success in college football (not an original thought)
- acquisition of talent
- development of talent
- scheme and in game strategy

I'd rate Johnson as a whole
- D
- B
- A

in those areas.

That last score is way too high. He is completely incapable of making in game adjustments.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by cartman

Sumlin to Arizona

I'm not sure how much of an upgrade that is.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I'm not sure how much of an upgrade that is.

It really isn't, not meaningful in even the short/medium term.

[dawgfan]

Terrible news out of Pullman: the presumptive heir at QB for Washington State with Luke Falk graduating has committed suicide:

Pullman PD has confirmed Tyler Hilinski's demise. pic.twitter.com/c83GNV74ZY

— Stefanie Loh (@StefanieLoh) January 17, 2018

[NobodyHere]

Such a shame. Depression is a plague upon humanity.

[bhlloy]

Apparently Allen was underwhelming in terms of accuracy at the Senior Bowl today.

If he goes above Darnold (or Rosen, but he’s a different type of QB altogether) it will be bizarre IMO. Darnold is supposedly turnover prone and needs to work on his accuracy and pocket presence, and yet he had one more interception in two years than Allen had in two and a half, and his completion percentage is nearly ten points higher - against division 1 major conference athletes.

Anything is possible in terms of NFL QB’s but I just don’t see any possible reason you could look at Allen and see a guy who is even comparable to Darnold. Maybe a slightly bigger arm? I don’t get it at all.