NCAA Football 2019

[David in FL]

47 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

Because, unless you're in the championship game, bowls are pointless exhibition games.  The top players don't want to risk getting injured in some meaningless game and screwing their professional prospects.  It's not quite on the NBA All-Star game level, but it's not far off in terms of importance or meaning in the grand scheme of things.  Perhaps you could argue some "resiliency of the program" or something, but at the end of the day, the bowls don't matter.  It would be different if the athletes were paid; then, the players would be akin to pro golfers just wanting to make the cut or finish as high as they can (even though they won't win) to get a paycheck.  

Ah yes, the old “when we don’t win, it’s just because we didn’t really want to” argument.   Of course, it only applies to the SEC.  No other teams face the same thing.  

I’d offer that genuinely better teams should have more depth to them and pulling a senior or 3 from both teams shouldn’t affect the overall outcome much...

[Vinsk]

19 minutes ago, David in FL said:

Ah yes, the old “when we don’t win, it’s just because we didn’t really want to” argument.   Of course, it only applies to the SEC.  No other teams face the same thing.

Lol. True..but I’m talking about teams that have a realistic chance at the NC. If OSU didn’t make the playoffs for the NC...it’s just natural that the kids don’t come into a game against Fresno with grit and motivation.

 

22 minutes ago, David in FL said:

I’d offer that genuinely better teams should have more depth to them and pulling a senior or 3 from both teams shouldn’t affect the overall outcome much...

This is becoming a problem with transfers. As we’ve seen from a general attitude with these young‘uns....the kid who’s got some game but the coach wants him as a back up decides, ‘screw this I want (deserve) to play. I’m going somewhere else.

[Black Sail]

5 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

This is becoming a problem with transfers. As we’ve seen from a general attitude with these young‘uns....the kid who’s got some game but the coach wants him as a back up decides, ‘screw this I want (deserve) to play. I’m going somewhere else.

@Vinsk Absolutely! The ugly "business" of professional sports continues to rear it's head in the NCAA and even down to the high school level. It is tough enough to keep a leash on these kids by managing their expectations, but the parents and "managers" don't help by convincing the player that they need to "put themselves in position for the draft". It kills me every year. Commitment is no longer rewarded because professional players switch around from team to team through the trade system and the college kids are just taking that example and moving to where ever they think they can get the starting job. 

I long for simpler times...

[saevel25]

51 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

This is becoming a problem with transfers. As we’ve seen from a general attitude with these young‘uns....the kid who’s got some game but the coach wants him as a back up decides, ‘screw this I want (deserve) to play. I’m going somewhere else.

There are a lot more reason for players to transfer. I know a few OSU players where the player wanted to be closer to home due to family stuff that came up. 

 

[djake]

15 hours ago, Vinsk said:

Not sure where you get that. 17-10 against ...Pitt? 17-12 against Iowa? OSU would humiliate PSU. Wisconsin has a good win in beating the mediocre and unranked MSU...but neither Wisconsin or PSU have a chance against OSU.

While I agree with you regarding OSU and just how good they are this year, overlooking Penn State is a mistake.  Iowa is a very good very well coached football team and with their defense no one in the nation would blow them out.  I am not saying Iowa would beat all, but that is a team that is capable of beating anyone on any give Saturday.  Just like Auburn.  Two dangerous teams that find a way to always be the Bridesmaid.

With all of my B10 friends up here in B10 country, I picked Penn State as a the team to beat OSU this year.  Since OSU won their CFP National Championship they find a way to lose 1 game a year.

Pitt vs Penn State is a massive rivalry game.  Records mean nothing in those types of college football games.

Wisconsin is to 1 dimensional on offense to beat OSU.  As much as this pains me and the bile building in my mouth, OSU v Bucky Badger will be a very hard fought physical game.  When Bucky got their a$$ handed to them at Camp Randal in the last game of the year and thus The Axe came home.  Their Defensive team leader had a team meeting and that team got real serious about their off season work.  Bucky Badger is playing with a chip on their shoulder.  They are out to do to everyone what got done to them.  A complete and utter physical domination on their home field in the last game of the year.

In summation:

Penn State has the team speed, offensive firepower and defense to beat OSU and win the B10 Championship.  They are the only team that has enough across the board in the B10 to do so.

Wisky has what appears to be the defense to do so, but they are way to one dimensional on offense.  Whisky it overrated.

I enjoy talking smak about college football.

still - Clemson is the only team all should be comparing too.  They proved it on the field, Bama did not.

[djake]

2 hours ago, ncates00 said:

Because, unless you're in the championship game, bowls are pointless exhibition games.  The top players don't want to risk getting injured in some meaningless game and screwing their professional prospects.  It's not quite on the NBA All-Star game level, but it's not far off in terms of importance or meaning in the grand scheme of things.  Perhaps you could argue some "resiliency of the program" or something, but at the end of the day, the bowls don't matter.  It would be different if the athletes were paid; then, the players would be akin to pro golfers just wanting to make the cut or finish as high as they can (even though they won't win) to get a paycheck.  

That just shows a lack of depth on a team and is a poor excuse.  And it is just that - an excuse.

Amost every bowl team I can think of had players sit out due to NFL.  Yet the teams that had the depth won.  The SEC proved they did not on the field.  If the SEC were so almighty all powerful losing a couple players on a team would not make a difference.  Their depth was not there and the belief that they are so amazing is misguided and simply something you cannot back up.

College football teams play roughly 40 per game, not 11 on D and 11 on O only.  Every team loses players all season long for a large variety of reasons.  The NFL reason just does not cut it and it only an excuse for the team that loses.

[mcanadiens]

1 hour ago, Black Sail said:

Commitment is no longer rewarded because professional players switch around from team to team through the trade system and the college kids are just taking that example and moving to where ever they think they can get the starting job. 

It's nice to get romantic of the old college student-athlete ideal. Really that ideal still the case for the large majority of even top Div. I players. They go to the school that they commit to. Work 60 hours plus on football and then try to maintain academic eligibility with what is left. Maybe they even get a degree of some sort when they are done.

For the small, albeit high-profile, exceptions, college football isn't much more than an extended NFL training ground. Specifically with the quarterbacks, getting benched behind some other massively talented player is a significant setback. I don't know how you can blame them for transferring.  

Think about three of the top quarterbacks playing right now Joe Burrow, Jalen Hurts and Justin Fields. They all transferred. We've seen what they can do on the field right now. To have any one of the three standing on the sideline with a clipboard would be a flat-out injustice. Fields is still a young guy, but Burrow and Hurts are seniors. These guys owed it to themselves to make the moves they did. 

Edited October 15, 2019 by mcanadiens

[Black Sail]

30 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

There are a lot more reason for players to transfer. I know a few OSU players where the player wanted to be closer to home due to family stuff that came up. 

 

I totally get that. Everybody is fight their own battle. I'm just saying the higher percentage of transfers are for getting a playing job. On the other hand, it's like the news. These things have happened in the past and, of course, the landscape of things is always evolving, it is just that we now have immediate access to information as it happens and it seems like a lot more than it really is. It's the 1% taking attention from the 99%. 

9 minutes ago, mcanadiens said:

For the small, albeit high-profile, exceptions, college football isn't much more than an extended NFL training ground. Specifically with the quarterbacks, getting benched behind some other massively talented player is a significant setback. I don't know how you can blame them for transferring.  

I don't blame them at all. It is a business and NOBODY will look out for your future like YOU. Like you said...it is just a small percentage of folks. We just see them more because of our ability to consume information in real time.

[ncates00]

40 minutes ago, djake said:

That just shows a lack of depth on a team and is a poor excuse.  And it is just that - an excuse.

Perhaps, but you're assuming the players care.  You're only addressing the part about the elite sitting out and skipping over the fact that many players, elite or bench, don't care at that point.  It can be frustrating for a person trying to impress their coaches at year's end, but that's how it goes.  Whether right or wrong, that is very much a reality for many teams.

Edited October 15, 2019 by ncates00

[djake]

3 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

Perhaps, but you're assuming the players care.  You're only addressing the part about the elite sitting out and skipping over the fact that many players, elite or bench, don't care at that point.  It can be frustrating for a person trying to impress their coaches at year's end, but that's how it goes.  Whether right or wrong, that is very much a reality for many teams.

OK, if a player that is looking at entering the NFL draft sits out as much as it sucks as a fan of that team I can understand the decision.  You cannot fault a young man for making a financial decision, he already gave for his team and his Coaches helped as well.  

Next player up, if that player(s) do not care then why were they even on the team to begin with.  Why would a Coaching staff even allow this to happen.  Bowl games are major recruiting moments no matter which bowl game it is. They are also games that define whether a HC is retained or fired. 

They are games where those "Next Up" player is getting an opportunity for that moment as well as next year if they are returning.  If they happen to be a Senior they are being rewarded for all of the time they put in.

As a fan of College Football I feel there should be a playoff system beyond the current CFP model for the FBS level.  All other levels of College Football have extensive playoffs.  The FCS Playoffs are 24 teams and many of those teams produce NFL players every year.

I think the reality you are speaking of is fan based and not player based.  If you asked every player that played in every bowl game last year you would find out just how much they cared.  

Coaches, good coaches prepare their entire team day in and day out to be prepared and ready for at any moment they may very well be "Next Up".  Otherwise they would not get a helmet, pads and a uniform on the sidelines. 

[saevel25]

Definitely Wisc. and PSU will be the best tests for OSU. 

I am not sure Wisc. Defense is that legit. Looking at ESPN's FPI Team Efficiencies, they have only faced one team inside the top 50. These rankings take into account strength of opponent, but Illinois rankes 119 in offense. There is no real big step up for Wisconsin to go up against a team like Ohio State in terms of skill players. 

I am also suspicious of teams who have high Time of Possession. Is their defense propped up because they play keep away. What if OSU puts out one of their 21 points 2nd quarters on them. Do they have the tempo to get back in the game? 

 

 

[DeadMan]

17 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Definitely Wisc. and PSU will be the best tests for OSU. 

I think Michigan will be a very stern test for OSU.

 

Oh wait, I'm in the wrong year. It's 2019, not 1999.

[saevel25]

11 minutes ago, DeadMan said:

I think Michigan will be a very stern test for OSU.

Yea, being only up 3 against Illinois with nearly 8 minutes left in the 4th quarter is not good. 

If they can't run the ball, I wouldn't put much stock in them moving the ball down the field consistently. Patterson has only been above 60% completion percentage twice, against Rutgers and Navy. 

I still don't think that their defensive scheme is that good. I don't think their D-Line is at good, and it is tough to cover man to man if you can't get to the QB. 

I see them losing to PSU and ND and OSU. I think the MSU versus Mich game could be like 7 to 3? I wouldn't sleep on Indiana. Their QB is ranked 10th in QBR on ESPN.

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, saevel25 said:

Definitely Wisc. and PSU will be the best tests for OSU. 

I am not sure Wisc. Defense is that legit. Looking at ESPN's FPI Team Efficiencies, they have only faced one team inside the top 50. These rankings take into account strength of opponent, but Illinois rankes 119 in offense. There is no real big step up for Wisconsin to go up against a team like Ohio State in terms of skill players. 

I am also suspicious of teams who have high Time of Possession. Is their defense propped up because they play keep away. What if OSU puts out one of their 21 points 2nd quarters on them. Do they have the tempo to get back in the game? 

 

 

I just don’t see Wisconsin beating OSU, unless of course OSU has their odd ‘out of sync’ tragedy game. I think having a blunder two seasons straight...they’ve had enough. No more nonsense. They’ll be way too much to handle for PSU & Wisconsin. PSU hasn’t been tested to date. Not from likes of an OSU quality. 

[DeadMan]

22 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Yea, being only up 3 against Illinois with nearly 8 minutes left in the 4th quarter is not good. 

If they can't run the ball, I wouldn't put much stock in them moving the ball down the field consistently. Patterson has only been above 60% completion percentage twice, against Rutgers and Navy. 

I still don't think that their defensive scheme is that good. I don't think their D-Line is at good, and it is tough to cover man to man if you can't get to the QB. 

I see them losing to PSU and ND and OSU. I think the MSU versus Mich game could be like 7 to 3? I wouldn't sleep on Indiana. Their QB is ranked 10th in QBR on ESPN.

Michigan's offense is really, really bad. They fumble, on average, 3 times per game (and lose half of those). The offense was supposed to evolve this year and be more friendly for Patterson, but either the offense sucks or Patterson has regressed a ton. Patterson looks completely lost throwing the ball, and he will not pull in the run game. I don't know how much of that is by design, but it's bad.

Defense is good, borderline really good. They're really young, and I think you're half right about the DL. The DEs are really good (especially our pass rush specialist), but the DTs are mediocre at best. They still struggle with tempo. They're getting better at defending mesh, but I don't know if it will work against superior athletes. That's the play that OSU gashed them with over and over last year. The scheme is fine, overall, though. They just can't rely on man-to-man coverage like they did against OSU last year.

I could see them going anywhere from 2-4 to 4-2 over this last stretch. I don't think they have a prayer against OSU (unless Fields gets hurt, but even then, probably not). Best case is 1-1 against PSU and ND, I think. Indiana terrifies me, but we'll probably win on some bullshit like we do every year. MSU game will be unwatchable. It's not been a fun year, even though we're 5-1.

[saevel25]

8 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I think having a blunder two seasons straight...they’ve had enough.

Don't get me wrong, Urban Meyer is one of the top 10 coaches of all time, and Top 3 of this generation. Him not realizing the defensive scheme was highly exploitable (mostly not firing Schiano), and then teams being able to scheme up to make the team one dimensional hurt them. 

There is something different about this team under Day. They are now extremely good at making adjustments during the game. 

What I don't know is how big game Fields at QB. When fields was going to get sacked and then spun out of hit then to throw a perfect pass to the TE for a first down was something that I am extremely happy to see him do. That is huge TALENT! Then he has times were he just holds the ball for 6 seconds and gives up a sack. 

@DeadMan, The thing that makes me feel like Jim might not be there much longer is that he seems lifeless in his interviews. I just don't get a good vibe when I hear him have to answer questions about the team. 

[Vinsk]

2 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Don't get me wrong, Urban Meyer is one of the top 10 coaches of all time, and Top 3 of this generation. Him not realizing the defensive scheme was highly exploitable (mostly not firing Schiano), and then teams being able to scheme up to make the team one dimensional hurt them. 

There is something different about this team under Day. They are now extremely good at making adjustments during the game. 

What I don't know is how big game Fields at QB. When fields was going to get sacked and then spun out of hit then to throw a perfect pass to the TE for a first down was something that I am extremely happy to see him do. That is huge TALENT! Then he has times were he just holds the ball for 6 seconds and gives up a sack. 

@DeadMan, The thing that makes me feel like Jim might not be there much longer is that he seems lifeless in his interviews. I just don't get a good vibe when I hear him have to answer questions about the team. 

100% agree with all this. I wondered if the off field mess with Myer was getting to him. Great call on JH. His fiery, quirky way has fallen aside to almost total disconnect. It’s like he’s waiting for something to click rather than executing a solid plan to regain the quality Mich once had.

[dennyjones]

2 hours ago, saevel25 said:

@DeadMan, The thing that makes me feel like Jim might not be there much longer is that he seems lifeless in his interviews. I just don't get a good vibe when I hear him have to answer questions about the team. 

I heard an Ann Arbor administrator say the other day that they didn't bring in Jim Harbaugh to win championships but to raise money.   That they have done.   Their fund raising has surpassed everyone but that doesn't make the fan base happy.   They will be lucky to go 7-7.   7-8 with a Motor City Bowl loss to Slippery Rock.