Second random thought waiting for a plane in San Diego

So, with all the talk about how UCF’s win over a disinterested Auburn team — sincere congrats on a remarkable season, by the way — validates the argument that they got screwed by the selection committee and deserved to be placed in the playoffs, I’ve got a couple of questions.

First, was the selection committee supposed to know in advance how the Peach Bowl would play out?

Second, if beating Auburn is the benchmark for getting your ticket to the CFP punched — the Knights didn’t lose to Auburn, unlike Alabama and Georgia, doncha know — where does the inconvenient fact that the Dawgs beat Auburn far more convincingly in the SECCG fit into that narrative?

It’s not that I have anything against UCF. It’s that I’m already hearing this bullshit being raised as grounds for playoff expansion. Just stop.

Advertisements

130 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs

130 responses to “Second random thought waiting for a plane in San Diego

  1. UCF appears to be planning a national championship parade in Orlando. Pretty ridiculous given their strength of schedule.

    Like

  2. Kdawg

    I watched that game in its entirety. Without discounting UCF undefeated season but the only P5 team I believe they beat was an uninspired Auburn team. Uninspired may be an understatement. That team didn’t look like they had a desire to be there at all. The coaches didn’t seem to either. Outside of click bait, I find it hard to believe that any of the national pundits believe that UCF could stay on the field with any of the P5 champs + Bama.

    Like

  3. dawgfan1995

    UCF gives all the Ohio State/B1G fans and anyone else who hates the SEC a hook to hang their jacket on and say, “no that’s not the national championship in Atlanta it’s UCF” (and yes, they only write in run-on sentences). That’s the charge behind the playoff expansion, too.

    Like

  4. TMC DAWG

    Senator would you consider 6 teams with the top 2 getting a first round bye?

    Like

    • No. Most seasons don’t wind up with that many teams worthy of national title consideration.

      Liked by 2 people

      • anon

        agreed—we had a 12 team playoff this year–it was the last 3 weeks of the season and the conference championship games then the rose and sugar…it was beautiful. no way to expand it and make it better.

        Like

      • 83Dawg

        We only had 3 this year.

        Yes, Bama is in the finals, but a final four covers situations when there are three or four that might be worthy–the top two are still the important thing. If you are sitting at number 5, you don’t have an argument, really.

        Just to be clear, saying that, for me, four is enough, and I thought two was too few.

        Like

      • Macallanlover

        Disagree, there are always five worthy contenders, they are called conference champions. Each should get a seat as there is no way to determine which conference is best, or provided the best test. So sending each conference’s representative is the starting point for logical and valid playoff. If we had four conferences, then four would be fine with me, although I feel the highest rated Group of 5 team should be in as well. It would still be exclusive inclusion but would put it at six, which requires two byes. I feel adding the two wild cards is the best way to get us to eight, a number that faces few/no solid reasons for not getting to that ASAP. Hard to see how a statement can be made that conference champs aren’t “worthy”.

        UCF worked so hard to earn respect this year on the field, then threw away any chance for being respected by acting like clowns who have no clue about football. UCF = Laughingstock

        Of course, they do represent a really good expansion prospect for the Big 11, quite the TV and recruiting market.

        Like

    • PTC DAWG

      We had a 7 team playoff this year…it works fine.

      Like

      • I’m guessing this is supposed to be a clever argument… not getting it.

        Like

        • TMC DAWG

          Not really, just trying to come up with a formula so we don’t have to hear this so and so should have been in.

          Like

        • PTC DAWG

          7 teams…AU/UGA winner, IN…Clemson/Miami winner IN…Wisky would have been in if they had won…6 or 7 teams had a shot up until the final weekend…..I like the current system myself. Keeps the Championship Games very meaningful for the most part.

          Like

          • DawgFlan

            In “my world” where we keep it at 4 teams but add a non-p5 champions “for consideration” game, UCF and Bama would have played the week following the conference championships, and selections would be made after.

            Like

        • Got Cowdog

          Am I looking at it wrong, or did Alabama in effect get a first round [by] by not playing a conference championship game and being placed in the final four anyway? Kind of the same thing the pundits were trying to do with ND until Miami pounded them.

          Liked by 1 person

          • David K.

            They still needed Wisconsin to lose. I’m sure they would’ve preferred to be playing championship weekend and controlling their own fate rather than hoping Wisconsin loses. But I do get your point.

            Like

            • Got Cowdog

              I’ll take some shit here for saying it, but I think I would rather play Wisconsin than Bama. On the upside, based on what I’m reading most of the rest of the country is not happy with the all SEC championship. Especially Auburn fans.
              Oh well. Que sera, sera.

              Like

        • Mayor

          What’s wrong with the playoff system is the selection committee itself. They know the identities of the teams when they decide who’s in and who’s out all the while they have their own agendas and axes to grind. I favor keeping the playoff as it is except use the BCS computers to blind-pick the top 4. Just feed in the data using numbers for everybody, including the opponents, strength of schedule, etc. Clemson shouldn’t have been #1. In fact, IMHO Clemson was the weakest of the teams in the playoff. The selection committee got the picks upside down. Bama should have been #1, followed by Georgia, OU and Clemson (they were all one loss teams). The lines on the games proved that–Georgia was favored over OU and Bama was favored over Clemson. If you ask me (and nobody did) Clemson should have been left out and UCF taken in the Tigers’ place–after all the Knights were undefeated. Pundits say the AAC is inferior and UCF was champion of an inferior league. The ACC is an inferior league. Tell me with a straight face that this year’s UCF team wouldn’t have gone undefeated against Clemson’s schedule. The only difficult game would have been against Auburn and we know how that turned out.

          Like

          • Got Cowdog

            That’s an interesting way to look at it, but UCF would not have run the table on that schedule. My “Aunt with Balls” take? They lose to Miami, Auburn (A regular season game, not a throwaway bowl? Mayor please…) Florida State, and possibly Georgia Tech. Further, do you think that UCF could stay on the field with Bama? That would IMHO amount to a scrimmage after already getting a by in the conference championship round, which like it or not is exactly that. Big advantage to Bama.

            Like

            • Mayor

              This UCF team beats Miami 8 out of 10 times. And Clemson got run out of the stadium by Bama, Saban just didn’t run up the score. As far as Auburn is concerned they played Auburn and beat them–what more can they do? You say Auburn was disinterested. What makes you think Auburn would be more interested in the regular season? Auburn has a history of not showing up for games against OOC opponents. Remember JAX State a couple of years ago?

              Like

    • Dolly Llama

      The best teams get to sit home and watch the others beat the hell out of one another before getting to play them the next week? It would be a travesty. It’s a travesty in the NFL, and it’d be an even bigger travesty for college football.

      Like

  5. I have said before playoff expansion is not happening. Numerous reasons make it too hard to pull off. Plus, I don’t think ESPN is behind it and that’s 80pct of the narrative right there.

    Doesn’t matter how many you expand to someone always feels left out- the NCAA team on the bubble that gets passed over gets their feelings hurt.

    UCF was number 12 in rankings on Dec 4 so they weren’t even close for consideration. Any talk of expansion based on peach bowl is either a retarded argument or from a UCF fan trying to make their season bigger than it was.

    Oh, and Ohio State/Big 10 fans can shut the fuck up after Bama beat down the number 1 team.

    Don’t see how you can improve what we have. now.

    Like

  6. 3rdandGrantham

    Getting on a plane to LEAVE S.D. is one of the hardest things to do. Like saying goodbye to your 14 year old Labrador on his last legs, apologizing to your wife even though you know you’re 100% right, having your wisdom teeth pulled…you get the picture.

    Like

  7. Bulldog Joe

    Off topic, but this would have been better if the OU QB was Mayfield.

    Like

  8. No Axe To Grind

    Does anyone give a damn what UCF thinks?

    Like

  9. PTC DAWG

    What else to they have to talk about? It’s perfect the way it is now…

    Like

  10. back9k9

    AU was 3-4 outside Jordan-Hare this season. That’s pretty average.
    I don’t think they are the measuring stick.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. kfoge

    So this morning Golic & Wingo played Danny White’s comments (he is AD at UCF) and he said that they beat teams as good as Auburn in their own conference. He also said that they should expand the playoff to 8 teams and use the old BCS formula. Golic and Wingo were not having any of that mess. They called him out on his SOS. UCF had the 86th ranked SOS. They also used the BCS formulas to figure who would have made the playoffs using that and UCF was 9th in BCS rankings so they wouldn’t have even made an 8 team playoff that way as well. Love it!!

    Like

  12. D.N. Nation

    Had a UCF fan try to explain to me that their wins over Memphis = UGA’s win over OU, and decided it was time to log off.

    Like

  13. addr

    Agreed. What makes it even more ridiculous is: who could you reasonably bump from the final 4 teams? By the same hindsight-based logic, Bama has even more of a claim than UCF by beating Clemson. People love to break out the transitive property when it suits them, but the transitive property is an absolutely horrible way to evaluate football teams. Maybe it’s just me, but it seems like both fans and media are putting waaaaay too much stock in these glorified exhibition games. While UCF was absolutely the better team against Auburn, and they should celebrate the win as a milestone for their program, making far reaching generalizations about either team or the playoff system based on this single game is beyond ridiculous.

    I think UCF deserved more consideration than they got, but they didn’t deserve to be in the playoff, nor were they one of the four best teams. S&P+ has them at 7, which feels about right to me – recognition for what is an extremely hard thing to do (go undefeated), but also recognition that to be considered the best and have a shot at the sport’s highest honors, you have to play the best.

    As a side note, Bill Connelly has an interesting metric that helps with this: resume S&P+. It attempts to combine a team’s Strength of Record with S&P+ for another view on who we can consider the ‘best’ team. Check it out here: https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/11/3/16556844/college-football-strength-of-schedule-rankings-2017-sos

    Interestingly, UCF just barely cracks the top 10, while both OSU and Penn State are in the top 4. The question always comes back to: are you considering the ‘best’ teams, or the most deserving? UCF probably ‘deserves’ a spot over Ohio State, but by most any metric you’ll have a hard time arguing that UCF is a better team. Given that the committee is supposed to rank the 4 best teams, UCF absolutely shouldn’t have been in the playoff.

    Like

  14. The other Doug

    I think this chatter is more about guaranteeing the Big10 and PAC access to the playoffs and the playoff money than UCF deserving a shot.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Otto

    The only other win over a ranked team was Memphis in OT.

    Auburn did pull a Bama/Utah

    Like

  16. CB

    I’m all for playoff expansion, but not because I think UCF deserves to be in. Play that Auburn game in September on a neutral field for actual results. This is why I don’t like bowl games. People overreact to them and ignore the lack of meaning. I figured Auburn would lose, UCF is a good team playing to prove something. Auburn had nothing to gain or lose.

    SECCG losers have a poor track record in bowls over the past decade or so. Bama lost to Utah once, UGA lost to Mich State, USCe got smashed by FSU, Mizzou lost, Florida lost, and now Auburn. This is nothing new.

    Like

    • dawgtired

      The teams that flop in bowls seem to be the ones that came oh-so-close but missed the mark. They had their eyes on a bigger prize right to the end only to be let down. It’s tough to get re-motivated for a smaller prize. The teams that struggle all year seem to have a end-the-year-on-a-good-note attitude in bowls just like the good teams that still have a high prize to reach.
      …not to mention the teams losing coaching staffs…you never know how that will affect the players.

      Like

    • Dolly Llama

      I read this rationale somewhere else, but it made a lot of sense to me.

      Yes, the SEC did bad in bowl games, but you’ve got an ALL SEC championship game. That, in and of itself, doesn’t necessarily make for an argument-killer until you think of how much different the bowl situation would have shaken out had even one of us not been in the final four. Everybody below us in the SEC is playing a “bowl above” themselves (and props to South Carolina for making the most of that.) Had you shifted either us or Alabama into one of those slots, that would have cascaded down and changed the whole landscape. I’m too lazy to research exactly what the shakeout would have been, but it almost certainly would have been wildly favorable to the SEC teams below us.

      Like

  17. UCF… settle down kiddos. The prize for winning the Chik-fil-a bowl is a tray of nuggets, not a natty.

    Like

  18. Bright Idea

    1.This fascination with the National Championship is making UCF not enjoy a great season.
    2. A 4 team playoff is enough. Expansion talk by the talking heads is inevitable but the championship game would be two teams full of walking dead men if the playoffs expand.
    3. Speaking of scheduling. Bring on Austin Peay. UGA gonna’ get laughed at for opening with AP next season. Kirby and McGarity are gonna’ have to reevaluate UGA’s scheduling philosophy if they plan on being a regular contender for the playoffs. The committee will frown on stooping that low if the decision is close between a couple of teams.

    Like

    • Cojones

      I agree fully with your 3rd statement. Are we able to change two of our OOCs for this coming year?

      Like

    • The Dawg abides

      Just like the committee frowned on Bama playing Mercer this year. I hate the buckeyes, but if they had scheduled a cupcake instead of Oklahoma this year they’d be in over Bama.

      Like

      • Bright Idea

        Bama played what was supposed to be a loaded FSU in week 1 and Mercer before Auburn. Big difference. Opening with Peay is going to be a huge talking point since Tech will be the only Power 5 out of conference opponent next season. Who knows what their record might be.

        Like

    • Dolly Llama

      If we beat everybody again next year, we’ll be just fine. Austin-Peay will be a footnote to a footnote by the end of the season. Especially if we’re defending national champs. And we will be.

      Like

  19. dawgtired

    “It’s that I’m already hearing this bullshit being raised as grounds for playoff expansion.”

    …just another excuse to justify what they want to do anyway.

    Like

  20. Hogbody Spradlin

    Somewhere out there I saw an Auburn blogger argue they should determine the SEC champion by the pre-1992 formula. Auburn, Alabama, and Georgia all went 7-1 but Auburn wins the tie breakers. Give the guy credit. That took some thought.

    Like

    • Bless their cheating, corrupt, Lower Alabama hearts (not for WarD Eagle).

      Like

    • Got Cowdog

      I’m not following the logic …….. No, wait, I got it. It sort of makes sense if you throw out the whole “Championship Game” narrative. There is a lot of butt-hurt in that camp, and if I squint my eyes and look at it from just the right angle I can kind of see how Auburn got fucked. Then I laugh and laugh, and pull up the screenshot of Gus and the giant butt-hurt frown from the “Championship Game” and laugh some more.
      I don’t care for Auburn.

      Like

  21. Cojones

    The top 8 teams should be considered each year to represent a CF Playoff. Going with 6 would only be a contorted stop-gap on the way. Predicating feelings for an added game on UCF’s experience is a specious argument and you must include Whisky, OSU and others in this year’s argument when considering the merits of expanding.

    Please spare me the choice between 8th and 9th as a part of your discourse and what you consider the “slippery slope” to 16. They are bogus “arguments” that don’t impact a choice for heading for an 8-team true Playoff. Please consider the difference as only between 4 and 8 teams in supposed strength of those teams.

    Like

    • Otto

      Please spare me the choice between 4th and 5th. OSU lost by homw many to Iowa and who did UCF play?

      Like

    • CB

      I don’t see how 6 is contorted. 1st round bye is pretty straightforward, and gives incentive to hold on to one of those top two spots. Hence holding the magnitude of those late season rivalry games.

      Like

      • Otto

        Exactly and reason to schedule tough OOC games like ND.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Cojones

        There is nothing straightforward with a “first round bye” and, thus, the reasoning for my words.

        Like

        • CB

          Gonna have to explain further if you’re trying to make an point. Higher seeds get byes in playoffs across the board from FCS to the NFL. Doesn’t get much more simple than that.

          Like

          • Cojones

            With 8 teams, it’s a simple 3-game Playoff (simple except for the players, of course). Making decisions as to seedings will just be another national argument, but the poll sequence obviates that position (1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5).

            Like

          • Dolly Llama

            So you think Division I college football fans should aspire to emulate the NFL or the FCS? You will need a better argument than those two examples to tell me why a bye round in a college football playoff is in the same universe as fair. It’s shitty in the NFL and the FCS. They should be working toward a no-bye system, not the other way around.

            Like

            • CB

              The better teams earn an extra week to prepare. Not really trying to convince you, don’t care what you think honestly. I’m just putting good logical thought out there. Feel free to take it or leave it. Some people think a bye is a disadvantage depending on who you ask, but no team is going to decline a free pass to the second round. That means the top two spots now have added significance (for everyone who idiotically thinks the BCS two team system was somehow superior to a playoff). I understand some of you just want to complain no matter what, but geez.

              Like

              • Cojones

                You write as if you have an original idea and that no one knows what a “bye” is. You don’t seem to be able to absorb the idea that choosing who gets a bye would just be the same arguments you now have with 4 teams getting in. Why shouldn’t everyone insist that they get a bye and the arguments provided to each team, either way, would make the lobbyists in DC blanch.

                The two teams facing each other in the NC game should play the same number of opponents to get there. If you want a “bye” feeling of perceived superiority, make sure you are the #1 team playing the #8 team.

                Like

                • CB

                  The 2011 Giants, the 2010 Packers, the 2007 Giants, the 2006 Indianapolis Colts and the 2005 Pittsburgh Steelers all won the Super Bowl without a bye. Some might even argue that a bye is a negative.

                  “I didn’t get in the tournament at all” vs “I didn’t get a bye.” Isn’t even close to the same discussion. No comparison. Also, with the length of the bowl season you could play the “wild card round” two weeks after the conference championships and two weeks before New Years. Why must we make things so complicated?

                  Like

    • Rocketdawg

      This is such bullshit.

      OSU-don’t lose to Iowa by 31
      Wisconsin-don’t lose to OSU
      UCF-play a schedule that doesn’t suck.

      There fixed it for you

      Like

  22. McNease

    Ha! I’m at Gate 25 right now heading back to CLT!

    Like

  23. Kdsdawg

    If you think the Big 10 and Pac 12 are going to continue to be happy with their conference champions being left out, you are wrong. Especially the Big 10 and all their power and $$$$. Playoff expansion is coming. Bank on it.

    Like

  24. Dawgfaithful

    That’s fine. Kudos to them. They had a great season. Too bad it doesn’t mean a damn thing. How are you gonna claim a national title when 1 of your only few games against a Power 5 team was canceled due to weather?

    Like

  25. Jared S.

    The four best teams are (and have always been):

    1) Bama
    2) Georgia
    3) Oklahoma
    4) Ohio State

    That should have been the playoff.

    Like

  26. Normaltown Mike

    What I find laughable is that when the final CFP poll came out there was uniform agreement that Climpsun was the #1 team and the only argument was Bama vs. OSU for #4.

    Now after UCF beats an Auburn team that had already lost 3 times….we’re to believe that UCF should’ve got in? Over whom?

    Like

    • Dante

      I scratched my head over Clemson. Everyone was talking about Ohio State getting dismantled by Iowa but nobody wanted to look at Clemson losing to the almighty Syracuse. I’d rather lose by 100 to Iowa than lose by 3 to Syracuse.

      Like

  27. BMan

    I’m against playoff expansion, though when it inevitably happens, I will laugh even harder when two SEC teams still end up in the title game. Once they expand, my guess is that the seeding committee selection (presented by Ortho on ESPN) will make sure that all SEC teams are on the same side of the brackets to guarantee two teams from the same conference don’t meet in the final game.

    Like

    • Cojones

      It should depend on their place in the final polls. If the SEC teams are #1 and #8, that would just end up as the lay of the land.

      Like

      • BMan

        I know how is SHOULD go, but if there’s a chance to make sure that one conference doesn’t end up with two teams in the championship, they will manipulate the system to guarantee it. Playoff expansion is about money and having more conferences get a share of it. As someone has probably already said, every time the SEC has two teams in the championship, a playoff expansion angel gets its wings.

        Liked by 1 person

  28. JCDAWG83

    UCF ,17 is the new Boise St. of the early 2000s. Good mid level team with a weak as water regular season schedule who manages a win over one traditional P5 team and the argument rages about how they should be in the playoff/championship game. Expanding the playoff to accommodate Group of 6 or whatever they’re called teams in the playoff is the equivalent of affirmative action for college football programs.

    Like

  29. Former Fan

    Its coming Senator. The B1G with not sit this one out with another all-sec championship game and no B1G representative in the playoffs. UCF would have been left out even if we went with 6 teams. The only way a UCF gets in is if it gets to 8. Any more than 6 and it goes down hill fast. At least with 6, conference champions of the P5 can all get in with one wild card for the Bama’s, and ND’s and UCF’s of the world that either don’t have the schedule or didn’t win a conference title. My fear is the next expansion will go to 8 and that is way too many.

    Like someone pointed out above, we came pretty close to an 8 team playoff this year with the conference title games. It made the conference title games actually mean something beyond local pride.

    Like

  30. Busta

    Guess I’ll jus drive from Tampa to Orlando in my Dawgs gear and join in. But seriously, the SOT that had some close calls for them sprinkled in draw criticism to us SEC teams when we play those same teams. Go undefeated with our schedules or let us play theirs. Hold that parade, they should hire Booch as he’d be a fitting new coach with their mentality.

    Like

    • Got Cowdog

      What a great thought! Booch surfaces at UCF, Wins a couple of seasons with Frost’s players (Beating UT soundly in a minor bowl, of course). Then fails to recruit well against Richt and Mullens, goes winless in his conference and gets run out of town again.

      Like

  31. Raleighwood Dawg

    Danny Kanell says so, so it must be true 😉

    Like

  32. Busta

    One more thing, may have already been said but there’s so many replies I might’ve missed it…something else that makes it funny UCF claiming to be National Champions is the fact that prior to any team having to play them the rare time they make a bowl, the team gets blasted for having them as a regular season opponent. They’d be another Mercer, Citadel etc. This is good publicity for them tho, it worked wonders for Boise and App St. I haven’t forgotten the L we took by them a few years back either, a very low point.

    Like

  33. Dawg in Lutz

    UCF didn’t win all the games on their schedule. Remember, UCF made the decision not to re-schedule their game vs GA Tech. the hurricane canceled the game; and UCF didn’t want to re-schedule.

    Like

  34. Ughhhh. My fellow Memphis fans are their biggest cheerleaders too. I’m pretty surprised they beat Auburn but the AAC is not nearly as good as its cheerleaders wish it to be. UCF won their conference title game in 2OTs over an opponent that turned around and lost to a 5 loss Iowa State team in their home stadium, in the most hyped bowl game in school history.

    “But Iowa State beat Oklahoma and TCU !”…….as if it matters not that they lost 5 games. When you are asked to go into Sanford Stadium, Jordan Hare and Kyle field you end up 4-4 in league play like Mississippi State. When you go into an empty Lincoln Financial field to play Temple, it’s a little easier to get back up for the USF rivalry on black Friday. And as we saw, they damn near lost to Memphis the next week (at home), no doubt in part because they actually participated in a game with a jacked up atmostphere and it was hard to sustain that 2 weeks in a row. That’s what we call life in the big leagues.

    Like

    • Rocket Dawg

      For teams in the Group of 5 conferences it is all about depth (or lack there of). Often the first 22 on the roster are good enough to play with the better Power 5 teams on a one off basis. Where the cream rises to the top is when the injury bug hits and you are still able to sustain a level of excellence (i.e Alabama and to and extent UGA with the injury to Eason). Take away UCF’s QB or their big pass rushing end and suddenly they are a lot less formidable. Not to mention that in these one off scenarios such as bowl games or season openers the “little guys” are able to game plan and are often more motivated. Title game losers are notorious for laying eggs on their bowl games.

      Like

  35. dawgtired

    http://www.macon.com/sports/college/university-of-georgia/bulldogs-beat/uga-football/article192631494.html
    So apparently Kirby will hire Dan Lanning, an ex-Bama GA, to replace Sherrer. He’s ‘in the family’ and familiar with our current coaching staff. From the looks of his youth, Kirby will be raising him. 🙂 Not ‘new’ blood but ‘young’ blood.

    Like

  36. Uglydawg

    These are good comments, based on logic, common sense and thought. But they are wasted on the UCF chanters and the Big10 promoters at ESPN. They won’t be swayed by a good argument. Best to answer them with just three words; “You’re just jealous”.

    Like

  37. Uglydawg

    Off the subject, but did anyone else catch it when the announcers (think it was Herbie) actually pointed out that, in the second overtime, OK got away with a couple of holds? My teeth almost fell out.
    I hate to admit it, but they did seem to make an attempt to be neutral. I turned down the volume on them for awhile, but I watched the replay today and it wasn’t so bad. One thing I noticed was how Georgia’s defense dominated in the second half..and how OK’s tackling got very poor late in the game. Dawgs deserve a lot of credit..they effectively shut BM down..he doesn’t do well under pressure.

    Like

    • dawgtired

      “OK’s tackling got very poor late in the game. ”

      It appeared OU’s DBs lost interest in trying to tackle Chubb and Sony. There were times they had the angle but our RBs just blew by them.

      Like

  38. doofusdawg

    Sorry I just can’t wait for the Trump post. I’ll bet Melania wears red.

    Like

    • Macallanlover

      Betting blue. Which is OK, because blue (along with every other hue) is her color.

      Like

    • Cojones

      I’ll bet it’s a pattern of green and blue Nordic-looking fashion with Icelandic volcanoes strategically placed.

      After Bannon’s book, Trump will wear egg on his face while his pants are on fire.

      Like

      • Cojones

        I like that everyone will know where he is in public. That makes Mueller’s subpoena team know right where to find and serve him.

        Hope both teams come out for the National Anthem in order to respectfully kneel and divide the Trump entourage.

        Like

  39. Sliceshs

    Senator, Stewart Mandel mentions the Montana Project (and you) in his latest mailbag on the Athletic (subscription required):
    https://theathletic.com/201441/2018/01/03/stewart-mandel-mailbag-oklahoma-lincoln-riley-bowl-season-pac-12/

    Like

  40. Eddie

    -The NCAA does not crown an FBS champion because it is not explicitly competitive.
    – The CFP was made by the Power5 for the Power5.
    – The CFP SOS is subjective because they decide what it is; it is not a science (i.e. LSU & Miss St. are ranked higher than Memphis & USF by the CFP= Alabama’s improved SOS over UCF.)
    – The data to compare conference strength are lacking. Take all the SEC’s OOC wins for the year, what is their best win? They don’t have any that stand out to rationalize half of the playoff field. It does not make them bad or good, especially when transitive wins have already been minimalized. No conferences as a whole have a significant OOC resume. UCF’s opponents’ record is something like 84-50 compared to Bama’s 76-53 (minus bowls and their games against them). One might claim that Bama played tougher opponents and that may be true, but how is that calculated with a high validity if their opponents are not even playing each other?
    _ The CFP and the media supporting pays no attention to even the possibility of parody.
    -Big Money- Could it be playing an influence? Our 1st amendment (Freedom of the Press) is supposed to be a watchdog of the powerful. If the powerful influence that press, then it becomes a mouthpiece for an unchecked power that leaves us prone to propaganda and corruption.

    Like