Found this on a message board and it’s too good not to share (although I really, really hope it’s not just sarcasm).
I hope Clemson only kicks field goals in the opener, too.
This gives a whole new meaning to the term “dead period” ($$).
The NCAA is investigating whether the Arizona State football program hosted high school prospects during the recent COVID-19 dead period, and possibly other recruiting violations, The Athletic has learned.
It’s unknown how many prospects Arizona State is alleged to have entertained during the COVID-19 period or when they might have visited. Per one source, the school’s athletic compliance office recently started interviewing staff members. A former athletic department employee said some people in the football offices are concerned about losing their jobs.
“ASU can confirm the NCAA is conducting an investigation regarding allegations related to our football program,” Arizona State vice president of media relations and strategic communications Katie Paquet said in a statement to The Athletic. “In accordance with NCAA bylaws, the university cannot provide further comment at this time.”
What makes this really special is that half the coaching staff, including head coach Herm Edwards, tested positive for COVID-19.
Aw, isn’t this cute? The 800-pound gorilla in the room has concerns ($$).
“It’s time to take a little reset as far as we’re concerned,” said Lee Fitting, ESPN’s senior vice president of production overseeing college football. “Obviously, the Playoff needs to remain a priority A) for the sport and B) for business. But at the same time, I’m worried that we’ve gone a little too far away from what makes college football great — and that is that there is something in every game for the fans out there. It’s not just the top four, five, six or seven teams who are playing for something.”
“If we just become too much about Playoff and you lose one game, and we’re saying, ‘Forget about them, they lost the game. They’re out. They’re done,’” Fitting said. “I hate that. I don’t want to hear that. ‘If Penn State loses in September, they’re out. They’re done.’ I mean, they’re Penn State. They have an enormous national following. They’re a huge part of the fabric of college football. They’re not done. They may be out of the Playoff race today. But their games are still relevant to their fan base and in the conference. They are a big part of the sport. So how do we continue to cover them properly?”
Gosh, however did that happen?
But first, [ESPN’s College GameDay] would talk about the College Football Playoff. Ohio State’s first mention came 40 seconds into the broadcast, with Clemson following just after the minute mark. Features and discussions regarding Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State and Notre Dame — the four teams that would make the Playoff in 2020 — combined for more than 45 minutes of the three-hour broadcast. When Jimbo Fisher popped on the screen for a pregame interview leading into Texas A&M’s game against Auburn, the first question posed to the Aggies’ head coach was about his fifth-ranked team’s Playoff positioning. The word “Playoff” appeared in a closed-captioning transcript of the episode (provided by college football archivist Tim Burke) 27 times. Only the championship weekend edition of GameDay on Dec. 19 had more Playoff mentions (35).
These people are so full of shit.
Here’s the money part:
As insane as those numbers in his chart are — and for Georgia, those are pretty damned insane — remember (1) there’s two-thirds of a season’s worth of erratic QB play baked into them and (2) Monken didn’t get a spring practice to install his offense. Neither of those are part of the 2021 story.
Maybe we should just chill the fuck out about Georgia’s offense for a while and wait to see if consistency pays off.
So, here’s something.
As someone who thinks “normal fan” is an oxymoron, I’m not sure how thrilled I’d be about a poster on, say, Stingtalk, getting a spot on the selection committee. I think I’d settle for a qualification that anyone who expresses an opinion on social media is immediately disqualified. (I keed, I keed… I think.)
Seth Emerson ($$):
Almost exactly two years ago, Kirby Smart stood in a basement conference room, telling a roomful of reporters at SEC meetings why he was doing something that seemed either brave or risky, depending on your outlook: Georgia’s future schedules, at Smart’s behest, had added Oklahoma, Clemson, Texas and Florida State, with Ohio State, Oregon and Louisville to come.
No, Smart insisted, it was not because he had any inkling or insight that playoff expansion was coming.
“I have no clue,” Smart said. “I’m not forecasting this. What I am forecasting is we’re going to have a strength of schedule that’s going to allow us — (whether the playoff is) one, two, three, four, eight teams — to be one of the teams in the conversation because of who we play.”
Honestly, as much as I love beefing up Georgia’s non-conference schedule purely from a fan’s standpoint, I’m not sure Smart will turn out to be right about that under the proposed 12-team format for the CFP. The reason I say that is because the new structure clearly establishes a place for conference champions, but is totally silent about the role strength of schedule will play in the rankings. And when you leave purely subjective standards in place for half the playoff field, silence strikes me as being pretty significant.
“I think a lot of this is going to boil down to strength of schedule,” Smart said on ESPN radio’s Marty & McGee show. “For a long time now we have been trying to build up our future strength of schedule, because it’s not the losses that are going to kill you, it’s not playing the best teams.”
That’s an assumption on Smart’s part, one that some may argue against. The selection committee has never come out and declared, well, anything, about its criteria. But when all else is equal it sure seems strength of schedule is more important than a team’s pure record.
Seth’s “all else is equal” is doing some very heavy lifting there, methinks. I do agree if there’s a point where the selection committee is having to split the thinnest of hairs between two teams, strength of schedule should come into play. But who knows how often that’s really going to be the case? I don’t. Neither does Kirby Smart.
“The naysayers,” Smart said two years ago, referring to critics of harder scheduling, “will say an extra loss is going to cost you. My argument is the men in that (selection) room, the women in that room that are on that committee, are going to have to balance somebody that goes out and plays three nonconference Power 5 teams.”
I think that argument carried a lot more weight when we thought we were looking at an eight-team playoff field, all chosen in a similar manner to the way teams are currently selected. Now, I’m not so sure. That’s what silence will do for you.
Now, Seth does make a good point that there were other considerations in play, such as regular season attendance and recruiting, behind the non-conference scheduling. But we all know ultimately that this is going to be judged by whether this pays off on selection day.