f13.net

Baccari Rambo out for four games for marijuana use (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7752169/georgia-bulldogs-bacarri-rambo-suspended-failing-drug-test-prep-coach-says)




 :rofl:

I hate my school some days.

I love your school. 

I could actually here "yeeeah, that the ticket!" at the end of that quote.

Dumbest
Suspension
Ever.

You mean dumbest excuse ever?   :awesome_for_real:

For weed...  :uhrr:

UGA is one of four schools that suspend people for a failed drug test on the first offense. They can punish you up to 50% of the year for a second. If Rambo were to mess up again, he'd be dismissed.

I think that most people here at f13 would agree that the laws for marijuana posession/smoking are pretty stupid.  That is a pretty juvenile excuse though. 

Stupid or not, college programs don't want their kids doing it. If the college program says show up here at this time, or be in by this time of night and he missed that, it would be the same suspension as weed smoking. It all falls under the "violation of team rules" header.

Absolutely.  And if the rules are applied fairly and in an unbiased fashion, the dude is an idiot for breaking them.

I can assure you that Mark Richt is not being arbitrary with his rules. There is one thing you can trust the man on, and that is he doesn't cover this type of stuff up. Everyone gets punished for their own stupidity.

I was thinking more about the incident with the African American basketball player at BYU that got kicked off of the team for doing something that many of the white players did not get in trouble for.  Richt seems like a good guy.

But it is still Bulldog football - only two people care.  :why_so_serious:

Bobby Petrino was in a motorcycle crash, some of you may have seen it. But wait, there's more:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7779961/bobby-petrino-arkansas-razorbacks-placed-paid-leave-apologizes-relationship

Turns out Bobbah had a 25 year old babe on with him, Jessica Dorell:

(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s183/ec1016/DXPMQGKDTVVUBQS20110502215546.jpg)

Who happens to have been engaged to a UA swimming coach. God Bless the SEC.

I remember this exactly same story when it was the UGA AD and involved Red Panties in his lap.

Petrino is out...

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7798429/arkansas-razorbacks-fire-bobby-petrino-coach

Wow. I honestly thought that they would try to weasel out of this one. The kicker was that he hired her on the staff. If he hadn't done that, he'd still have his job, no doubt.

Arkansas is going to have to scramble now to get a coach in place with only 5 months left before the season.

The problem with Petrino is that he is a raging jackass.  I've personally never met him but the guy that owns the construction company that my father works for has done some business with people that have had to deal with Petrino on a daily basis (from his time in Louisville) and the guy is almost universally loathed.  Petrino is the very definition of "making a deal with the devil" because sure, he'll win you some games, but you have to put up with his jackassery to do it.  Arkansas won't miss him.

I thought Petrino was a douchebag for quitting on the shitty Falcons team 13 games into the 2007 season and not even having the decency to address the players directly before fucking off to Arkansas. As I heard about this story this morning, I see that he has found new depths of douchebaggery to plumb. And it's not even smart douchebaggery. I mean, banging a homely blonde chick half your age, THEN HIRING HER on a fast-track out of 159 applicants after you gave her $20 grand for who knows what? That sequence of choices just tells me you are made of stupid.

I love how many Hog fans were trying to defend him keeping his job.

"Its the Easter season, this is about forgiveness!" - That's not what Easter is about numbnuts.
"We all make mistakes, he's a great coach!" - Really? You've cheated on your wife and then hired your mistress?
"Forgive and forget!" - It's not your job to forgive, it's his wife's job. The rest of what he did is a legal nightmare.
"Let's get back to what's really important, winning games!" - That's the funniest excuse, because Arkansas hasn't won the West since 2006, and they ended that on a 3 game losing streak in the Championship and the Bowl game.

This chick is figuratively fucked (we all know she's literally fucked  :grin:).  She might as well drop all pretenses now and start doing porn.

I would not watch that.

6/10, do not want.

She's not that bad (http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/326120/20120410/jessica-dorrell-photos-bobby-petrino-motorcycle-wreck.htm). 

This strikes me as one of those instances where 99% of the people who say shit like that would probably hit it when it happened to present at their house drunk and nekkid.

Once again, just because men are lazy doesn't mean that a chick is hot.

I think she's relatively attractive, and in a way she's better looking than a lot of supermodel skeletons that you see running around. 

I don't really care what kind of shenanigans people get up to in their private life; the thing that should (and did) get him fired was the hiring bit, that gets you into actual conflict of interest/corrupt use of school funds territory.

She has a decent body but goddamn, that face makes me think of this guy (http://na.leagueoflegends.com/champions/35/shaco_the_demon_jester).

And he's hawt.   :awesome_for_real:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7819005/ncf-tcu-marijuana-problem-just-one-many-elite-college-programs-espn-magazine (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7819005/ncf-tcu-marijuana-problem-just-one-many-elite-college-programs-espn-magazine)

Covers some of the stuff we'd discussed about the issues of pot use in college football. According to those surveys, 26.7% of college football players are smoking pot.

Arkansas hires former U of L and Michigan State Coach John L. Smith (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7846339/arkansas-razorbacks-bring-back-coach-john-l-smith-1-year-deal) to coach their team for a one year contract.

So they go from one sleazeball former U of L coach to another sleazeball U of L coach.    He lasted at Weber State for about 15 minutes. 

I personally think this is a decent move by Arkansas.  They stand to lose nothing, really, and have a tough team coming back.  Smith is a proven coach who did very well at U of L, but had trouble recruiting to MSU.  He could turn out to be a real steal for the Razorbacks.

I doubt it, tbh. Arkansas will always be an outisder in the SEC. Nobody really thinks of them as an SEC team, and they have to contend with counter-recruiting by Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Texas, Texas A&M, and OU. The other problem is that Arkansas, the state, doesn't produce a lot of football talent. Not even half the kids on the team are from Arkansas. So to be competitive you have to recruit out of state kids to come to Fayetteville over Tuscaloosa, Baton Rouge, Austin, etc. Fayetteville is in the middle of nowhere. It's closer to the Ozarks national park than it is to a major city. The closest thing to it is Tulsa, which isn't exactly a bastion of nightlife.

Have you ever been to Tuscaloosa or Baton Rogue? Talk about the middle of fucking nowhere. At least Baton Rogue has New Orleans within drinking and driving distance.

Of course, LSU and Bama have the benefits of a shitton of nationally televised games, which is incentive all on its own.

Yep, both are a HOOT, not to mention the chicks are hotter than any time I've spent in Fayetteville.

I've also been to Starksville, and that's the reason he couldn't recruit there either. That has to be the most god-awful college town in the SEC.

Starkpatch is truly a shithole of a town that quite literally would not be more than a cow pasture if it were not for Mississippi State. But then, of the 3 big college towns in the state (Oxford - Ole Miss and Hattiesburg - Southern Miss), only Hattiesburg is even remotely worth going to IMO. And none of them are good enough places to overlook the fact that you'll be forced to live in Mississippi if you are recruited there, with all that entails. Add on that none of those programs have challenged for anything like a title since Archie Manning played pretty much kills any recruitment possibilities for those universities.

But yeah, Arkansas is pretty much a shithole state too.

A couple of seasons of winning will do wonders for a team like Arkansas, and they do have a little history, having won the title in (I believe) 1974.  They also recruit from Memphis and east Texas/Dallas so there is a recruiting base there for them. 

I'm more thinking that Smith will be a good hire because he's a good coach and they have a stacked team this year.  They were returning a ton from last years team.  They didn't need someone to come in that was a complete newb to the system. 

To digress-  I personally find Arkansas fans to be some of the biggest idiots around.  I hate running into them at games. 

1977, and it was a 5 way tie. They finished, of course, behind Alabama and Notre Dame in the AP.

Actually, we're both wrong.  It was 1964.  It was still contested with Alabama winning the AP, but Arky was undefeated that year.  That's the one that they officially claim.

Wat? (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7858795/bcs-eliminates-eight-16-team-playoff-proposals) 



How many different ways can you do a four team playoff?   :headscratch:

Sounds like they've nixed an 8 or 16 team playoff.  It also sounds like they're nixing the bowl system championship, for all you playoff fanatics.

They will still cock this up. There will be some stupid rule like you can't have two teams from the same conference in there.

Wow.  This is a great read on Urban Meyer (http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2012-04-09/urban-meyer-florida-ohio-state-ncaa-violation-recruiting-drugs-program-will-musc) and his time at Florida. 

They don't pull any punches with Urban. 

So the SEC and Big 12 have decided to collaborate (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7946916/college-football-big-12-sec-bowl-death-knell-acc) in Rose Bowl fashion and pit their top teams against each other on a New Year's day bowl.  This article suggests that it may be the death knell for the ACC now that the Big East has died.  If we do go to a four team playoff with the four power conferences being participants (which may be likely) then I don't see how the ACC survives.  There has been some rumbling that Florduh State may move to the Big 12.  If it happens I don't see the ACC surviving as a football oriented conference. 

To be fair, the ACC hasn't been a meaningful football conference since the BCS started.

I've always been surprised that Miami and Florida State couldn't pull it together in the ACC.  It's a total dogshit conference.  Those two teams should have owned it and been playing for a national title every 3-4 years. 

Miami hasn't been the same without Butch. They started losing out when the SEC and the BCS took over though. FSU? Fuck FSU - (I went to Miami for a brief 4 years of graduate school)

Two current Auburn football players shot and wounded over the weekend (http://abcnews.go.com/US/auburn-football-player-dead-alabama-apartment-shooting/story?id=16535642#.T9T7iOJYsci), and two former players killed.  Auburn is a wretched hive of scum and villainy.  They are pretty much the epitome of everything that sucks about the SEC in football. 


I can deal with Bama because of their tradition, I like LSU because of The Hat, I'm a Kentucky fan, and I like UGa.  The rest of the SEC can rot. 

Guys arguing over chicks, football players get shot?

It sounds like the football players weren't involved. Then again, who knows. There are certain parties you don't go to.

Auburn is the trailer park of college football.

Well, it appears as if a 4 team playoff (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8079000/possible-playoff-marks-sea-change-college-football) is coming our way for college football. 

I know most of you here know that I'm against the idea of a playoff and would prefer the old, pre-BCS bowl system but I guess who cares at this point.  It's going to happen so might as well sit back and enjoy the ride.   :awesome_for_real:

The author also feels like I do, BTW, but it's a good article:

A playoff would identify the best team though, because College Football is different than other sports. The teams don't all play each other at some point, and the playoff field is small. It would be different if the playoff field was 16 and there were teams getting in with 9-3 records. With a 4 man field, you'll get teams with 1 loss at most.

That said, there are things I like and things I don't like about the proposal. First, I like the idea of a committee in favor of conference champs, because winning your shitty conference doesn't mean you deserve to be the playoffs. If you conference is terrible and you scheduled nothing outside of that, you suck. (I'm looking at you ACC and Big East). Second, I like the idea of the 4 teams because it means that you don't get 2 loss teams in the playoffs (barring a weird season, 2007 jumps to mind).

What I don't like? The fucking Bowls are still involved in the semi-finals, and the championship games goes to the highest bidder. So instead of having it be an additional home game for the higher seeds in the semi-finals, they have to travel to one of the BCS bowl locations, then travel again to the championship location which could be anywhere. That's ridiculous. It needs to all at one location, or it needs to be home games with a BCS bowl final location. Fans can't travel twice easily to locations because they don't know who will win, so you'll get corporate crap taking over the games just like the Super Bowl. Whatever. It's money grubbing, but I'll live.

There's no guarantee that the playoff in football would determine the best team.  What about the teams that are left out of a playoff?  Boise State and Stanford probably would have gotten the shaft last year and they still won't get "their shot" which is what this mess is all about anyway.  

I've never been a big fan of having the tournament choose who is the "champion" for the year in any sport.  There should probably be separate awards, really, for who wins the polls in the regular season and who wins the post-season tournament- very similar to what they do in NCAA basketball conferences.  I know that the idea is to try and give the "little guy" a chance to show their stuff and to alleviate any bias in the polls that might be brought on due to perceived conference difficulty but there's just always too much luck involved in a single elimination playoff.  Take the Giants last 2 superbowls.  I don't think there's a reasonable way to argue that they were the best team in either of those years, when the year is considered as a whole.  They just got hot and lucky at the right time.  That can happen with a 4 team playoff, too.  I don't think Oklahoma State had any business being in the final four, but they would have been.  And if they got hot and won it it hasn't proved much.  Same thing with Boise State.  

Addendum-  but yeah, fuck it.  You and I have argued this into the ground.  Bring on a playoff and let's see what happens!

I'll say this:

1 - You can't compare pro leagues to college leagues. One has 30 teams, the other has over 120 up to 300+.
2 - 4 teams out of 120 FBS is a percentage of 3.33% in the college playoffs. In the NFL it's 12 out of 32 or 37.5% in the playoffs.
3 - The chances of you choosing an unworthy team in 3.33% of your league is minimal. In 37.5% of your league it's very possible.
4 - This smaller playoff with a committee isn't designed to give smaller schools a chance, which is good in my opinion. If you want to play big boy ball, get in a big boy conference and play.
5 - Fuck Boise State. Playing 10 games against high school teams doesn't sway me.
6 - Fuck the SEC teams (like mine) who schedule patsies for their home teams that screw over their own fans. I have to put up with Buffalo, FL-Atl, and GA-Southern? No thanks.
7 - Fuck the big bowls and their money grubbing officers. They are the #1 reason this system doesn't work yet.

Look, we've already beat this thing to death.  I would prefer the old way but it isn't going to happen.  I lose.  You're right.  I do agree with  you about most of what you've presented. 

Now if only OKC wins, your journey to the dark side will be complete!  :drill:

They won't.

And you're still an asshole.   :awesome_for_real:

When you look at the high impact teams in the NCAA, the pool gets much smaller.  The rest I pretty much agree with though the SEC is probably the class of the NCAA.  

As for the rest, I can tell you that the players on the best teams want a playoff system.  I played in a bowl game (we won the Independence Bowl).  As someone on the field, the whole thing felt like a money grab even then. It's the schools that don't want the playoff.  The schools want to suck as much money out of the machine as they possibly can.  The only solution to this whole fucking mess is to get the money out of college sports.  Of course that's never going to happen.  

I think the SEC is probably the best conference as well, followed by the Big 12, then the PAC-12 and lastly the Big Ten. I don't count the ACC or the Big East as football conferences.

Still, just because your schedule is hard doesn't mean you should schedule THREE home pattycake games. Two was bad enough, but three is a completely money grab dick slap to your fans. I mean FFS there is a middle ground between playing USC in a home and home vs. playing Mississippi Directional school for the blind. Why not schedule some of the lower class teams in the Big 12? Why not bring in a team like Texas Tech? Or an ACC team like Boston College? Or a Big 10 team like Illinois? What does that hurt? It would at least generate more interest in the game than some podunk D2 squad.

Not when the NCAA is running things.  They want the money in the machine even more than the schools do.  

Nevermind that most schools don't make any money on athletics.  

It's near free marketing.  Some of the best marketing available.  You'd be frightened to know how many freshmen make their school decision based on the athletics program. 

I know that played into my decision to go to Georgia when I was living in Texas.

This is true for the big name schools.  I don't think it holds much water for Baylor or Iowa State or Washington State.  There are also some outliers, like Minnesota ( :why_so_serious:) who seem to have a great sports following despite being putrid at most athletic events.  



That and the signed order to expel you from the state? 

It looks like Texas is scheduling pretty well this year (http://www.mackbrown-texasfootball.com/sports/m-footbl/sched/tex-m-footbl-sched.html) in OOC.  I like the Wyoming game. 

I'm guessing that you're not a hockey fan!  :grin:


I'd like it more if it were played in Laramie.  Things change when you play at 7300 feet.

They did play in Laramie in 2009.  I'm assuming it was a 2 for 1 deal or UT may be going back up there.  They certainly gave the longhorns everything they wanted there, that's for sure, and it was closer than the 41-10 score would indicate. 

And hell, I grew up a Kentucky football fan.  It doesn't get any shittier than that. 

Vanderbilt. If there are any fans that is.  :why_so_serious:

I have to say that, if true that the players want a playoff, then that is the way to go.  It's a game changer on the decision and should be what sways the end result, not necessarily what the fans want. 

Miami is up shit creek.  Al Golden breaks recruiting rules for the second time in his two years (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8185297/miami-hurricanes-staff-broke-recruiting-rules-report-says).  I suspect that his days are numbered and Miami may be ready to get the death penalty.  This is some seriously SMU shit they have going on down there in south Florida.  


Here is the Yahoo article (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--hurricanes-coach-al-golden-s-staff-used-booster-s-associate-in-potential-recruiting-violations.html), which is much more in depth and the source of the ESPN blurb. 




Golden is fucked.

The NCAA is set to punish Penn State on Monday (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8188629/penn-state-nittany-lions-not-facing-death-penalty-monday-ncaa-source-says), but it won't be the death penalty. 


This should be interesting.  I suspect that it won't be as bad as the death penalty, but will probably hamstring PSU for the foreseeable future.  It also appears as though they have skipped a few steps to get to this point, including the typical Infractions Committee.  Well, 8 AM can't come soon enough.  Drama here we come!   :heart:

Hit em in the wallet, take away their TV revenue.

Too much money in the Big Ten for them to give the death penalty to a school in the conference.

That's an option.  They're talking "unprecedented penalties" and I suppose that could mean anything.  I suspect it will be more than the typical reduction in scholarships and bowl ban nonsense.  I was thinking that if you really wanted to send a message take away their ability to offer athletic scholarships for a few years.  That would certainly be worse than the death penalty. 

Okay, so the Penn State Sanctions (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8191027/penn-state-hit-60-million-fine-4-year-bowl-ban-wins-dating-1998):

1.  60 million dollars paid into a fund to prevent child sexual abuse
2.  Vacating all wins back to 1998 (Paterno's record changed to represent)
3.  4 year bowl ban
4.  10 scholarship reduction from 25 to 15 for 4 years.


This is a big deal.  While it's still not as big of a deal as the death penalty, I think it's pretty fair.  I would have tacked on another year for the bowl ban and scholarship reduction, personally.


Addendum-  this now makes Bobby Bowden (who, along with Miami, took cheating in football to another level in the '80s and '90s) the D1 leader for wins in a somewhat paradoxical twist of fate. 

There's more than that. In addition to the 10 schollies per signing period lost,  they also are reduced to 75 scholarships total this year, and for the next four years afterward are reduced to 65 total. Also, all PSU players may transfer immediately without sitting out a year, and any team that signs a PSU player doesn't have to count him against the 85 scholly limit.

The Big 10 piled on and said all shared bowl revenue PSU would normally get will be donated to charity for the next four years, lifted all transfer restrictions to other member schools, and formally censured them (whatever that means).

Instead of the death penalty, they're getting put on life support for four years. Not sure which is worse.

I am so very very very happy they allowed the kids to transfer.

This gets them completely out of a poisoned program. Fuck Penn State, anybody who was worried about the players got a very clear message that the NCAA wasn't going to hold them hostage.

I doubt there will be enough spots for all of them.  Some of the kids will be fucked unless they want to go 1-AA or D2.

There are 120 schools. They will find homes if they want to go. Also, if they are there and want to get an education there are plenty of schools with worse football programs and better academics.

Vacating previous wins is completely silly in regards to a sanction against any football team. I get it, the NCAA wants to relegate Paterno to a footnote of a bad memory - but the kids that played on that team for those years know the games they won... so does the rest of the nation with all the vids and books and what-not. By the book, Bowden has the record... but I'd like to think at least he knows Paterno still has a better record, symbolic penalties aside.

As for the rest of the sanctions... Basically putting PSU into a coma for the next few years and then the recovery period after of another 5 years. I can go with that I suppose, but the precedent being set here by NOT giving them the death penalty really puts the NCAA in a bind. If this situation didn't do it, then really... I can't see anything trumping it so the death penalty comes off the table as a sanction.

As for the transfers... yeah, these kids will find a home and good on Emmertt for suspending the 1 year waiting process for them. It is not like PSU has been nationally relevant in a long time outside of the scandal. Good seasons, but nothing to keep them in the top 10 consistently.

Like I said above, the NCAA isn't counting Penn State players towards scholly limits. The NCAA didn't come right out and say it, saying only "we'll work with schools not to restrict these players' options", but that's basically what it means.

Good for them.  Glad to hear the NCAA finally did something sensible. 

I wonder what the over under is on new recruits bailing out. I don't see any reason to play for an institution where you:

1 - Will be universally hated next season.
2 - Can't play in any bowl games or championship for your entire college life
3 - Lose the chance to be competitive due to lower scholarships.
4 - Have to deal with the fact that if you're there for an education, your diploma just took a huge PR hit.

A lot of people thought "death penalty" meant "kill the football team at penn state forever" and see this as a slap on the wrist.  Something like that was never ever in the cards, what they got is as bad as it gets.  The death penalty might be more symbolic but it really is not as harsh, their team will not compete for the next decade.

They will probably still beat Illinois though  :|

Maybe this year since Illinois has a brand new coach. However, I think Tim Beckman is a great coach for that team. He started with a job in the SEC, worked his way up to the DC at OKst, and did a HELL of a job with a program at Toledo that hadn't been to a bowl game in 3 years before he showed up.

And definitely Indiana.

ESPN (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8191027/penn-state-hit-60-million-fine-4-year-bowl-ban-wins-dating-1998): "Under NCAA rules covering postseason bans, players are allowed to transfer without sitting out a season as long as their remaining eligibility is shorter than or equal to the length of the ban."

So that's at least one bit of standard procedure the NCAA followed :awesome_for_real:.

A one year "death penalty", like what Southern Methodist got in 1987, probably would have been better than this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Methodist_University_football_scandal

They should probably extend the transfer amnesty to all the athletes in other sports that are going to be fucked by football income crashing, too (which would be basically everything besides men's basketball probably.)

Still to be determined. SMU was a top flight football program that was completely erased from the national scene for ~30 years because of it.

In all reality, SMU was a program that wouldn't have existed without cheating.  They were pretty much a .500 team until they figured out about paying players from 82-86.  PSU has a long, storied history with national titles and undefeated seasons. 

My general question about this whole deal is what is the NCAA going to do about people that are actually (and flagrantly) violating its rules?  What about the Cam Newton incident, in which Mississippi State was actively trying to purchase a player for a LOT of money?  Are they going to say that "it's not in our rulebook" when the next incident like this comes up?  Of course covering up child molestation isn't precisely in the rulebook either.  What about Miami that has been paying players for going on 30 years?  Or what about tOSU which has that envelopes of money for players issue going on?  This is the NCAA's hour to prove that it's not a hypocritical and greedy organization but I suspect that this is just a power play by Mark Emmert to show that he's in charge.

Miami and UNC are next to get the smackdown

Miami and UNC have been skirting the rules with SMU type abandonment.  UNC has been using a professor to teach sham classes for athletes since 1999.  Miami has been paying players since the early '80s.  Miami has been on probation and needs to be shut down for a couple of years.  They are the prime example for everything that is wrong with college football.  The UNC thing is huge (particularly for them, considering UNC's academic reputation) and smacks of the shit going down in the 1980's with Kentucky basketball.  They need to have a penalty similar to what PSU got and there needs to be a thorough investigation into what has been going on with their basketball team.  

If they knock UNC basketball please please please vacate their title win against Illinois so we can get out first major sport title (even if it is tainted :p )

Vacated wins don't go to the losing team.

Just let him have his fantasy.   :why_so_serious:

Apparently Moody's may downgrade Penn State's credit rating (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/ncaa/07/24/penn-state-credit.ap/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a10&eref=sihp).  This isn't all that shocking, I suppose, but what absolutely floored me is that the university has about $1 billion in debt.  What sort of deal are we running where a public university can have that kind of debt?  That's absolutely insane. 

They are sitting on 1.8 billion in their endowment, so still in the black on a balance sheet basis. My guess is most of that is financed construction. Not all that unusual.

Yes, but how much of that endowment is liquid enough to deal with nonsense like Jerry Sandusky? 

Sounds like Penn Stare was going to get a 4 year death penalty if they didn't take the sanctions that they got.  The NCAA was going to open a full investigation and it sounds as if there was more stuff there than we've heard about.

Rage:

http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/Cal-Big-Game-bonfire-tradition-doused-3745370.php

 :heartbreak:

Write a letter and cancel your season tickets (if you have them).

That's the only way to get these schools to stop pulling this shit. I've already told UGA this season that it will be my last as a season ticket holder if they continue to schedule 3 bullshit games, in addition to having to put up with Missouri suddenly in the conference. That'll be a home game next year, whoopdefucking do.

Thing is, I can't really blame Cal for this, the Pac-12 forced the scheduling on us over our (and Stanford's) protests. And I don't have season tickets, just Big Game tickets... and skipping Big Game would be like skipping Thanksgiving, it is so not an option for me.

I feel the same away about Georgia/Florida in Jacksonville.

I gave up my Texas tickets 2 years ago (and I actually think UT is doing things reasonably well with their scheduling).

I'm just getting tired of the monetization of the sport. All decisions are based on money rather than what's best for the fans or the game. In addition, the games themselves have become so bad when you watch one team, that there's no reason to go to them. Why would I waste my time travelling 2 hours in traffic to Athens, going to a noon kickoff against a shitty school, watch a blowout for 3.5 hours with commercial timeouts, and then spend 2.5 hours in traffic getting back to Atlanta? I'll have spent 8 hours and over $100 in tickets and gas to watch us kick the shit out of some charity program as a cash grab.

In that time, I'll have probably missed 3 good matchups on TV, not paid $5 for a Coke, or $10 for parking, and I can do it in my PJ pants with the screen door open letting the breeze in.

I think the sports media drives it as much as anything, too (and of course that's indirectly about money too.)

I firmly believe that the majority of college football fans don't care about much beyond their own team. They want to have a good season, win their rivalry game, and have a shot at their conference's traditional big bowl game. They might pay some attention to other stuff in their conference or maybe another local team, but the big picture is of no importance. The only people who care about more than that are the people who go crazy for any/all football, gamblers, and the media, and I'd bet that even added together they're dwarfed by the population of people who watch any college football at all.

The BCS, the playoff, etc., all this useless crap is an attempt to get the 'normal' college football fan to give a shit about stuff they have no real reason to be interested in, in the name of money.

Particularly when the best seats that you'll ever have are in your living room.  The new HD broadcasts are amazing. 

Seeing as I fit heavily into the first two groups, I would be biased about this. However, I know that the majority of football fans in the South not only care about our teams. We care about YOUR (the greater YOUR, not Cal. We don't give a shit about Cal  :awesome_for_real:) team losing. And we will watch it with wild abandon.

I love how you traded your "Texas" for your "Suthunuh".   :grin:

I grew up in Texas, but I went to college in the south. If there's anything I know, it's how ridiculous football can be in both regions.

That being said, Texas in no way shape or form cares as much about college ball as they do pro in the cities, or high school in the towns.

Austin and College Station would argue differently.   :awesome_for_real:

I personally like the atmosphere around college football much more in Texas and the west coast.  It's more laid back.  I love going to USC games with my father in law. 

It's different for sure. Austin's more about keeping it weird than football, but it's certainly your biggest city that cares. College Station I'd qualify as a "town" over a city. Like Athens, GA for example.

Dallas cares about the Cowboys. That's almost it unless another team happens to be going to the finals, then you get bandwagoners.

Texas v. A&M produced a 7.9 rating in Houston, with a 7.3 in Dallas. The Houston v. Jacksonville game that week produced a 25.3 rating in Houston. It's just not even close.

I love Athens in the Fall. Hell, I love that town anytime. That said, the best stadium I been in was Colorado's. Something about the mountains as a backdrop just made it picturesque. Might have been lightheaded from the air though.

Yeah, Athens is a kickass town too. 

I would suspect that NFL>>>College in all venues, its just a matter of how much.

True, but to show you the difference, Georgia v. Florida last year pulled an 18.4 in Atlanta, compared to the Falcons average of a 20.9 rating during the year. That's what I mean when I say the south is seriously about college ball. If you look at states like Alabama & Mississippi where they don't have a pro team, it's even more obvious in aggregate.

Cal football 2010: 57,873 per game
Oakland Raiders 2010: 46,431 per game

Of course using the Raiders is almost cheating.  :grin: (I picked 2010 since we were playing in a temporary venue last season)

Pull the 49ers numbers.  :grin:

You're not seriously comparing the following of the Falcons to the Cowboys/Houstons?

I'm comparing them to Houston for sure. Why wouldn't I?

Both playoff teams, same record, both in huge TV market cities.

I always enjoy stadium capacity numbers myself. College (if you live near a D1 school) seems much more accessible in price and availability of seating; especially when you get into some of these absurd college stadiums of +100k. Atmosphere on college game day is also well beyond any NFL game I have been to/around... and I live in Pittsburgh. I am fully biased toward the SEC considering my time spent at LSU and making road trips to Bama, UGA, Florida, Arkansas, and Miss St, but being on those campuses during game day is sooo much better than any tailgate party for an NFL team, IMHO. College games afford a more intimate setting but the pro game is by far better quality - for the most part.

Oh I agree. 96,000 in Athens is 10x more fun than 70,000 in the Georgia Dome.

Unless it's the SEC championship!  :grin:

I don't think they're comparable at all.  Even by your numbers (20 average versus a 25 for Houston versus fucking Jacksonville) there is a huge dropoff.  That doesn't even take into account the enormous numbers of Cowboys fans in Houston. 

So you disagree then that Texas cities proportionally care more about pro football than SEC cities?

A&M doesn't count yet.

No, I'm saying that you probably underestimate the difference if you're comparing it to the Falcons.  I'm arguing that you're not taking your argument far enough in Texas.  So, in a way I'm agreeing with you, but still trying to argue with you.   :awesome_for_real:

You are a disturbed man with your sports.  :why_so_serious:

Okay, Mr. I Love Baseball.   :oh_i_see:

If you don't love baseball, you hate Americuh.

Also, you perburbly terk ur jerbs!

They're across the Bay, thus they compete with Stanford.  :why_so_serious:

:awesome_for_real:

Berkeley is still closer though, at least until the Niners move to Santa Clara.

Certainly better than you guys do.    :drill:

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncf/story/_/id/8219810/silas-redd-spurns-penn-state-nittany-lions-heading-usc-trojans

Silas is off to USC... wonder which walk-on is going to get the shaft.

The one with the richest daddy.

I thought part of the whole deal was that the destination teams could exceed their scholarships or whatever to take in PSU players?

Teams with scholarship limitations already don't get that benefit.

Oh right, USC. Derp.

The floodgates are opening at Penn State. Several more players have reportedly transferred out.

It makes sense to go.  It sucks for them, because I'm sure they'd rather stay, but they have to be competitive guys.  And playing for PSU could seriously hurt your draft status right now. 

Meh, I think the draft thing is a stretch. No NFL team is going to ding a player based on the shit that happened at a school way before they even got there. It will impact how much visibility the PSU players get throughout the year which may or may not impact the invites to the combine or team workouts.

Nobody gets overlooked by the NFL scouts. They are everwhere. Hell even Conference USA schools have like 80+ players on NFL rosters.

It can easily affect where they are taken in the draft.  It's hard for guys on shitty teams to get above the 3rd round. 

The 9th overall pick was a LB off a Boston College team that went 4-8 with no bowl game. The 11th overall pick was a DT off Memphis who went 2-10.

What the hell are you talking about?

I'm not going to argue against your N of 1 example, but how many players in the top round of the draft were from "power" schools?  Most of them.  PSU runs the real risk of being out of that echelon of school in a very short time. 

With all the new rookie salary caps, it really is a moot point at this juncture aside from bragging rights and "offset" language.

There's a difference between being drafted in the third or fourth round and not at all.  There's plenty of guys that go undrafted because people think they are a good prospect yet don't want to waste a pick on them, usually because they're at a secondary big league school or a FCS school. 

The former gets you a guaranteed look in training camp, the latter does not.  That's a huge difference for most players.

If you are good, you'll go regardless of Div 1 school. My point is, no NFL team is seriously going to ding a current player at Penn State just for being at that school. Losing quality players some now, more later and down the road, yeah... that will make it a bitch to excel when you are playing with other "less quality" players. That will end up stinging sure...

This guy that lives a couple of doors down from my in-laws is some sort of a scout for the Vikings.  What he does, exactly, I don't know but he has a decent house and drives a nice car.   :awesome_for_real:  Anyway, the way he talks is there's a bit of a metagame to it.  I mean, if you can get a better quality guy at a lower pick you'd like to, because then you can use the higher pick for someone that is just as good but maybe a little more competitive to get to. 

PSU is in no way going to suddenly become Kentucky, but at the same time the days of saying, "well, it's a linebacker from Penn State so we better take him before someone else" are going to go bye bye. 

If I use the definition of "power school" as those with either huge national publicity or competing for their division in a major conference in the last 5 years.

First round, about 20. Still, I think Stanford was an anomoly created by the USC sanctions and a great QB. I don't see them continuing that trend in the future.
2nd round? Only about 12-13 in 2012 were from power schools.
3rd round? About 16.

So depending on how you look at it, it's about 50 of the 95 picks. Most of those kids are from small conferences or bad teams in major conferences. We can go all day on this, but I think you'd be shocked exactly how little being on a good college team matters outside of the first 10 picks.

Mostly I think Ghost has his chicken/egg order mixed up. The kids on those 'power' teams get picked early because the power teams get the best players.

You guys are making this a black and white issue when  you know that isn't true.  Are you telling me that nobody on the better conference teams is every picked at a higher spot because of the team they played on?  A lot of this is hindsight, but there are scads of examples of guys from big schools that were picked too high, which would be evidence of such bias in the draft.

Never said NOBODY. But looking over the 2012 draft of WRs... first pick from a "power" school was 54th from OK then 63rd from LSU. First round saw OKSt., ND who has not been relevant since the 80s, Baylor and Illinois (honorable mention to Quick taken first in the 2nd round from App St.). Now we can himhaw all day about how weak the WR field was this year, but the fact is the guys picked first were not from the pinnacle of the college football ranks. Good teams no doubt (save for Illinois... i mean really?), but given a kid from LSU or Ohio State or Oklahoma over a kid from Baylor or App St?

But you are right... it definitely is not a black and white issue. But I think the grey area is a lot more to do with being a standout against the competition (however shitty) versus just being on a great team. You can say if two guys are damn near equal in abilities, you probably would take the one from a power team rather than a Boise St or Pitt. But when you are a blue chipper and play against Big East competition rather than SEC competition, your stats are padded a bit better against the near invisibility you get from playing is said league. That said... PSU is still playing in the Big 10 - but the quality of the team is going to diminish greatly which will impact recruiting blue chip players... even ones who want to go to Penn St.

It's black and white with bias at the top-end. Like I said, when you look at the first 10 picks, you usually come up with teams in the power schools with the highest visibility. Beyond that, the variation of a power v. non-power team is really quite even.

It's also a myth that our media coverage has changed this trend. Your belief that being on a lesser team made getting picked tougher in the first 3 rounds wasn't any more true in 1982 than 2012. Here's some examples:

In 1982, of the 83 1-3 round picks, 17 guys came from schools outside the major conferences.
In 2012, of the 95 1-3 round picks, 20 came from smaller conference teams.

That's not even including teams from the major conferences that were awful.

Okay.  So your pool of prospects is much, much bigger when you're outside the bubble.  Your stats don't mean anything when it comes to refuting bias. 

Technically I think the burden of proof would be on you to prove bias? In any case I think what Paelos is showing fits with what you would expect in general; The big schools generate 75%-80% of the NFL draft picks, and they probably get about 75%-80% of the best HS recruits. Reputation does play a role, it just plays it on the front end when the players who have the potential to develop into NFL players are deciding where to go (and perhaps to an extent in determining where the coaches/trainers with the best ability to help them are working.)

The proof of bias is seen every time there is a player picked from a power school that ends up sucking ass and is out of the league in three years.  It happens all the time.  If there was no bias in the selection process it would be largely perfect and we wouldn't have any Rick Mirers or Heath Shulers and Joe Flacco and Tony Romo would be number one picks. 

Tim Couch - Kentucky
David Carr - Fresno State
Ryan Leaf - Washington State
Dan McGwire - SDSU
Byron Leftwich - Marshall
Kyle Boller - Cal ( :oh_i_see:)
Jeff George - Illinois
Joey Harrington and Akili Smith - pre-Chip Kelly Oregon
Kelly Stouffer - Colorado State
Jim Druckenmiller - Virginia Tech (/wrists)
David Klingler and Andre Ware - Houston

All first round QB picks, many of them top 10/5, from non power schools, all busts. And there are a bunch more guys in the 70s/80s, I didn't feel like going any farther back.

In other words, simply picking a player from a power school that turns out to be a bust is not proof of anything.

Pretty much. It's self-selecting coming out of high school. The kids have to go through one round of play to determine whether they are busts, then another round at the NFL level. The biggest schools in the major conference get the best perceived high school talent, but I think what the NFL thing proves is that big colleges miss 25-30% of the time. That's how great kids end up at smaller schools for the most part, but get drafted to the NFL anyway.

There's also the academics issue that keeps talented guys from going to bigger name schools like Michigan or Georgia or Florduh. 

I guess we'll just all have to agree to disagree.  I don't see how there can help but be bias towards larger schools in the NFL draft.  That's part of the allure of going to a big name school.  I don't think that you absolutely won't get drafted if you go to Kentucky, but I bet Stevie Johnson would have been drafted a lot higher had he gone to South Carolina or Georgia.  Why?  He would have been surrounded by better players which would have elevated his game.  That's just a common sense observation.

On another note, I have a friend that is a close relative of Couch.  She says he is dumber than a box of rocks and that the reason he didn't stick in the league is he had trouble with the NFL playbook.   :awesome_for_real:

Or, or...you can just admit you made a random off the cuff statement without all the information. That's fine too.

No.  I think you're wrong and making no sense, but then again you never grasp on to something and hold on to it without admitting that there could be no other option, do you?   :awesome_for_real:

But there's no point in getting into an argument about it. 

I just think you're trying to go with the "agree to disagree" thing when it's clear after you've already changed tactics twice to get around your original quote, which was wrong.


This is unequivocally false. It happens all the time that shitty teams produce 1-3rd round NFL talent. It is in fact, not hard at all to do this because NFL scouts are there to evaluate player talent on an individual basis. Then you started meandering down the path of bias.

Dude.  Look at your own fucking facts.  You said that there were about 20% of the draft that was from a non high BCS team and how many more players are there that play for non-BCS teams?  A shitload.  It's harder to get drafted high in the draft from a podunk team, end of story.  You're a CPA.  You are used to numbers and I'm sure you took statistics in college to be able to understand this.  

Equivalent talent at Alabama will not get drafted at the same spot as a guy from Western Michigan, or even Arizona.  

Seriously man, look at the 2011 NFL draft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_NFL_Draft).  The first guy taken from a questionable team is the dude from Villanova at pick #49 (sorry, guy from Temple at #30 :oh_i_see:).  Then there's some dude at 54 from Temple and then the third round opens up a bit to have something like 10 guys from lesser name schools.  That's like winning the fucking lottery to go from Troy to the third round of the NFL draft.  

The first guy on a shitty team in that draft is the #16 pick out of Purdue (4-8), then #17 out of Colorado (5-7).

There are 16 guys in that first draft of 3 rounds from smaller conferences. There are 4 guys from teams with losing records in the first round. There were 8 in the second round off losing teams. There were 2 in the 3rd round.

So there you go, in that draft 30 of the 97 picks. Over 30% all told that were either from small programs or on losing teams. After all that's said and done, you have almost a 1/3 chance to get into the top 3 rounds from a shitty school that year. Is that hard? We could do this for almost every year in the draft if we had the time and inclination, and I doubt we'd get much different results.

If you recall the whole initial point that stemmed this ridiculous tirade was that NFL teams will find talent no matter where it is (in reference to people staying on Penn State). It will not keep someone who is great on a shitty school out of the first three rounds simply because they are on a shitty school. Talent is talent, and it will rise to the top.

EDIT - Also, settle down. You made an off the cuff comment, and it's questionable. If you'd said just the first round, I'd agree with you. Fact is, you tossed in the 2 other rounds as well, and I think that's too far. I'm pointing that out because I think at times you have a proclivity to get defensive in spite of facts.

Same to you, big guy!   :awesome_for_real:  You're the one that keeps on going with this by making it a black/white issue.  Sure guys get drafted in the first, second, third rounds from shitty teams.  That doesn't make it easy.  I'll let you go play football for Stephen F. Austin University and see how easy YOU think it is to get drafted from a second or third tier school.  

That's not what you said, you said SHITTY TEAM  :grin:

Look, quit being a sanctimonious asshat.  We aren't discussing the tax code here, bro.  You offered Colorado and Purdue as shitty teams, but they clearly have history.  So does PSU.  Maybe the sanctions won't affect the ability of their players to be drafted at all, I dont know.  We will never know without a thorough statistical analysis (and the benefit of hindsight or predicting the future) that neither you or I are going to be willing to do, so we might as well have a difference of opinion on the matter.  I think there is more bias than you in the draft.  The reality is probably that there is more than you expect and less than I do.  So there you go. 

I only poke at you because I find it endlessly amusing that you just won't simply refine your statement to the first round (where we would all agree that it's extremely difficult to get there on a losing squad, there is a huge bias to winning teams, and bigger programs get better recruits). It's like you are morally against admitting you shot from the hip and tossed in a few extra rounds for good measure (where I think we caN again agree that the field opens up to include many more losing schools and small conferences).

I mean shit man, I do it all the time. Sometimes we don't post what we meant. Sometimes i think I may have a larger view of something, and then Ingmar practically shows up right on time whenever I make a grandiose statement without all the facts. I think he enjoys it. The great thing about sports is we can banter about subjective crap all day long without too much issue. Like I said, I only give you crap because it's like I AM GHOST I MADE NO ERRORS, RAWR!

Just to toss in another note about players from other conferences, as of 2010 the 5 major conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big 12, SEC, Pac 12) produced 1278 of the 1696 total players on the NFL roster. That means about 25% come from the smaller programs, which is about what we saw.

 :grin:

SEE?  :awesome_for_real:

I agree with you on the arguing-about-sports thing; I get super overly picky in arguing about sports and games and shit because I need that outlet to stop me from doing it about shit that matters more, without it I would turn into another one of Those Guys in the Politics forum really fast and that would be much worse.

It's also much easier to not take arguments about shit like sports personally. FOR MOST OF US.  :awesome_for_real:

Yeah pretty much, it's like our version of the Politics-lite forum.

Because I'd never go there on a dare.

It's sports talk, not the politics forum.  When you get into your condescending mode (for really no good reason, in this instance) it obviously puts me on the defensive, dude.  Like I said, there's no reason to be a sanctimonious asshat.  This happens between you and me all the time because, well, you're a CPA and I'm a doctor.  We always think we're right (and I still am  :grin:).

Anyway, I'm done talking about this.  There are a pretty small number of regular posters on this board so let's just keep it civil and move on to something else.  Like cycling.  

We got a solid page out of it during the dead period of Paterno's statue coming down and opening day kickoff. I'd say it's probably run it's course as well.

In other news, one of the UGA offensive lineman is a complete moron (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8226680/georgia-bulldogs-coach-mark-richt-says-ot-kolton-houston-ineligible). He got busted for a banned steroid and now claims that it's still in his system from a shoulder surgery he had 2.5 years ago in high school.

The only reason that he's a moron is that he turned in his own urine during a drug screen.

That's a pretty amazing excuse.  At least claim it was some oddball OTC supplement you're taking. 

The hits just keep on coming for my Bulldogs (http://blogs.ajc.com/uga-sports-blog/2012/08/02/notebook-georgia-confirms-chase-vassers-may-dui-arrest/)

Chase Vasser, the Junior OLB is now suspended for 2 games for a DUI arrest in May. That's now 4 of our defensive starters that will miss the Mizzou game. Ugh.

I would honestly expect Richt to have a little bit better control of his team than he seems to.  You guys are always getting players in trouble for something.  It's not what I expect from Mark. 

Mark likes to turn the other cheek a lot, so the players take full advantage. However, once it becomes painfully obvious they won't get any better, we dump them in a very public fashion.

Yeah, but it's still not what I expected of him.  I expect that of Urban Meyer or Bobby Petrino or Gene Chizik, but Richt seemed to be cut from a different cloth than those dudes. 

Honeybadger dismissed from LSU for violation of team rules (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/10/tyrann-mathieu-lsu-football-dismissed-rules_n_1764858.html?utm_hp_ref=sports)

When asked, he said he doesn't give a shit.

Oh man, that's what, *one day* after ESPN did a big feature article on him on their site? Lawl.

How badly do you have to fuck up to be that good and still get kicked off a mercenary team like LSU? Jesus.

:facepalm:

I'll be at the bar for the rest of the season.

This is exactly what I was thinking.  I imagine the real story will come out soon.  Undoubtedly drugs or firearms or both. 

Early word is another failed series of drug tests.

LSU (NCAA rule?) has a three failed and you are gone rule. At least Les didn't try to skirt the rule. Sadly, he didn't do that last year with Jordan 'useless' Jefferson after he was literally thrown in jail.

Bet he is wishing he had left early for the NFL, eh?

Technically he couldn't being only a soph.

It's from the magazine so a bit farther than that, but yeah...

Wow.  Just wow.  Julius Peppers got a mind boggling 1.824 GPA at UNC (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8265076/north-carolina-tar-heels-probe-online-posting-possible-julius-peppers-transcript), and apparently most of the grades that he needed to stay eligible came from the African American Studies department at UNC (this is the one that has been causing them so much grief). 

It's going to be really interesting to see what comes of this once it's all said and done, but I have to believe that the new-look kick your ass NCAA that stuffed Penn State's head up their ass is going to not be too kind on UNC. 

They weren't kind to UCF either.  And UCF was really, really guilty.  The kind where even the sports reporters and talking heads were like  :awesome_for_real:.

Can the NCAA really take specific actions against schools for academic transgressions?  I mean an obvious case is someone taking a test for someone else.  But, what happens when an athletic program gets wind of an easy course or god forbid a major?

Hell, my university had Jazz Appreciation and Issues in Sports -- both four credit classes that essentially asked you to fog a mirror for an A.

There's already evidence of academic wrongdoing at UNC. They've already gotten a bowl ban and lost some scholarships for transgressions under Butch Davis.  The bigger question is whether or not there was an issue with the basketball program (or a bigger issue with the football program than was indicated by the initial investigation).  The original investigation only went back to 2007.  Many members of the Sean May national title team were in the same classes that got the football team in trouble......

Addendum-  I have to say that I find it fairly reprehensible that the NCAA goes bonkers on something that is not precisely in their rulebook (PSU scandal) and seems as though the organization is going to stick its head in the sand over academic fraud at a member institution.  The NCAA has certainly raised the bar of expectation with the PSU ruling, and while I don't think it's an unmerited punishment for Penn State, they need to look closely at the facts in this UNC case.  This is probably going to end up being the most well documented case of rampant institutional academic fraud in history.  I know that the big players (Bama, USC, Florida, Ohio State, Michigan, etc.)  probably have similar programs set up for their athletes, but this is out in the open.  The NCAA should dole out significant penalties for Miami and UNC. 

It isn't what I would have expected from:

1) a school as good academically as UNC in general
2) a public school
3) a school that really doesn't have any kind of decent history of doing well at football

So yeah the big uh-oh is going to be if this touches the basketball program.

The thing is, I think the schools some folks would "expect" this at, such as Florida, Ohio State, Michigan, and USC, are extremely strong schools academically.  Yes, UNC is in the triangle, but many top athletic schools have excellent academic programs as well.

(I'm not saying you said this, just using your post as a springboard)

You shouldn't say such things about the University of Second Choice.

The most respected scholar in my field teaches at USC.  Getting on any paper with him is a guarantee for a tenured position at the public university of your choosing.

Undergraduates who complete programs and work with him gain entry to the grad school of their choosing with a letter of recommendation from him.

Yes, his work is that big.

But, I'll admit, UC Berkeley is my third love, after USF (hail, alma mater!), and Duke (hail, summer programs!).

Important people actually are Gamecocks? Who knew?!  :why_so_serious:

Doesn't change the fact that it's still the University of Spoiled Children :awesome_for_real:

I was speaking about University of Southern California, but since you asked, yes.  A very famous and wonderful Hemingway scholar named Carl Eby teaches there.  He's a super guy (and amazingly talented).

As a side note, somehow I am derailing this thread.

GO BULLS!  Win the Big East, also known as the conference even cable TV can't seem to give a shit about.

Who is that?

Richard E. Mayer

I thought you were a butcher?

On another note, why does this matter? Why does the NCAA care about these people pretending to be academic when everything about them says otherwise?

This (http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/people/faculty/mayer/) says he has served as faculty at UCSB since 1975, not USC. 

Hmm.  Let me double check.

Nope.  I stand corrected.  Well played, sir.

And if you check the butcher thread, I said I took a promotion and I'm in the Instructional Technology field now.

Hooooooray derail.

So, who thinks Skip Holtz keeps his job after this year?  Wait, maybe I should start with who knows who Skip Holtz is?

Good question, and I'm glad you asked. Here's why. In the long run, this will cost them money. They know it. They have numbers right now that attendance is down, TV is taking over, and the schools are recruiting people who are barely students to fill rosters. The problem is that people/fans/customers get tired of the mercenary aspect of the sport and the off-the-field issues that come with hiding this crap under a rock.

The main draw of college football isn't how good the players are. The main draw is rivalries, connecting with your past, and connecting with a locale. If people start to feel like the system is all about money, and they sacrifice rivalries and one of those two important connections, people will stop showing up. The economy, the conference realignment bullshit, and the ridiculous thuggery we've seen in the last 3 years have damaged college ball a lot economically. You would have NEVER seen them talk about a playoff 10 years ago. Now you can because the dollars aren't as rosy as they'd like them to be. Even though teams are getting more money from TV dollars, they are starting to lose it at the gate.

There's also their mission statement to consider- 


One would think that, if it weren't for academics, that the NCAA would have no reason to exist at all.  They state as much in their Priorities statement.


Office of the President.   (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/NCAA+President/On+the+Mark)

Also, Mark Emmert is a douchebag.  :oh_i_see:

USC went on a buying spree for faculty starting about ten years ago, they got a lot of pretty cool people. I think they're still waiting for that to change their student body...  :why_so_serious:

I don't know why anyone is surprised at the UNC stuff. I know I was ranting about this a while back but with any of the really major football and basketball programs, I 100% guarantee you there is something going on like what Nyang'oro was doing. Michigan had a much quieter scandal of this kind a couple of years ago when it came to light that there was a professor who was doing a fuckton of individual tutorials at 1 credit per for athletes. I think most programs are either better at hiding it with clever titles, a larger number of complicit faculty, etc. or are more ruthless at keeping this kind of practice from coming to light. (One way to do that, for example, is to direct athletes to courses taught by adjunct faculty, who know that if they rat out the program or fail to cooperate with greasing the eligibility wheels, they can be fired at will, unlike tenure-track faculty. Syracuse did that for a while until a woman who didn't get with the program and got canned went to the press.)

I don't think the issue is that anyone is shocked by the UNC academic scandal.  Most reasonable people would assume that some form of grade doctoring is going on at some level for every institution with high power athletic programs.  Make no mistake, however, that this is the largest and most egregious form of grade fraud that has occurred to date.  This dwarfs the rules violations that occurred at Florida State about a decade ago, which was to that point the largest such violation to be discovered.  My own issue with the situation stems more from the complete disregard that the NCAA seems to have with its own rules and mission statement.  Now that the UNC thing is out in the open they should be obligated to do something with UNC, i.e. proper punishment, and to make rules that might clean up college athletics.  But they probably won't because the NCAA is a terribly corrupt organization. 

My brother in law is a UNC grad and I can confirm that he found one of these classes. During drop/add he happened upon a class for African studies that qualified for his elective credit late in his senior year. He was just looking for easy crap to finish out the college career since he already had a job lined up.

He went into the class the first day, and it was him, a few other dudes he didn't know. And the entire baskeball team. The entire grade was based on attendance, taken on random days. Just so happened the only days the team showed up were the days the teach decided to count.

Here's an interesting article on ESPN (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8236949/ncaa-increases-minimum-eligibility-standards-division-student-athletes) about the quandary that the NCAA is dealing with in enacting harsher requirements for eligibility. 


The fact that almost half of men's basketball players wouldn't meet the standards that they've set up is a telling statistic.  There are a lot of ethical quandaries involved with this, but at the end of the day I feel that the universities should decide if they are going to place academics ahead of athletics or let athletics run the show.  The US has a long history of attempting to integrate athletics and education (from early school ages on through university) and has let the athletics start to lead in importance.  Hell, kids are in athletics all year round now and high school football starts weeks or even months prior to the academic school year.  What's more important?  I think it's sending a bad message. 

The fucking NCAA needs to become an semipro sports association affiliated with but not supported by the members schools. Let the schools spin off their successful programs as business entities that are funded by IPO's and run like businesses, let these kids become paid semi-professionals and have the goddamn NFL/NBA/other major sports leagues kick in a portion to make them a true minor league/academy system. Participation in semi-pro or pro sports should be totally separate from the academics side so that we don't have this bullshit happening anymore. Take all that under the table money and put it over the table and not let it affect whether a kid goes to school or not.

This bullshit system we have now is not working for the students, or the colleges. It's making a whole shitload of people a whole shitload of money off exploiting these kids and the public education system. FUCK THAT.

The only people it's working for are the assholes making a fuckton of money who don't want to share it with the actual players beyond whatever shit they can shovel them under the table.

Crack Baby Basketball Association, you say?

Three more days.......  :awesome_for_real:

South Carolin/Vandy tonight at 7:00! 

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict an upset.   :awesome_for_real:

There's a solid chance Clowney puts someone in the hospital in this game. I know Vandy is getting good pub lately, but I think they are going to get ground down.

SC loses to Vandy and Spurrier may just eat his visor. SC by 3 touchdowns.

Vandy SHOULD be winning this game if their offense was remotely functional. As it stands, not so much. I don't think SC can give it away more than they already are, and it's tied.

Vandy gave them a tight game.  Lattimore rushed for 109 yards at 4.7 per carry.  Still a decent showing by the Commode Doors.

That's just more proof of how amazingly awesome the whole SEC is from top to bottom!  :why_so_serious:

Vanderbilt is no cakewalk.  They've made improvements and should be better than Kentucky and possibly Tennessee this year in their division.

I'll be the first to say SC is wildly overrated. I think UGA is too, but they have a much easier schedule.

Utah opener was a fun romp, plus the Stanley Cup was there!

Utah has a football team?   :why_so_serious:

Headed to the USF home opener tomorrow at Raymond James.  Drunken shenanigans to ensue, followed by a complete demolition of whatever division-ii school was lucky enough to make thousands of dollars while we demolish them.

Whatever happened to Snakecharmer?  His team has a big fucking game tomorrow.  I can't wait to watch that one.

Bah. I still feel Michigan only looked good because the Big 10 has been slipping. Really the only team in that conference that poses any challenge is Wisconsin - which we'll see now that Wilson has departed. Maybe Mich St., but again... QB issues. Don't get me wrong though, I'd love to see Bama fall on their faces out of the gate... but not going to happen this year - not with that offensive line.

Oh, I think Bama is going to demolish Michigan.  

Also, don't forget Boise State/Michigan State tonight.  This will be the only decent team Boise will play all year, so you'll want to watch it.

I have to follow Bama by proxy, since the girlfriend's family is from there, so I can be Snakecharmer by proxy?   :awesome_for_real:

Bama will roll Michigan.  Maybe by even four touchdowns.  Their defense and o-line is just that good.

Isn't their D only returning 4 starters? I might eat my words with a Denard turnover show, but I think it will be a lot closer than 4 touchdowns. Bama also lost Richardson, but I could probably run behind that line...

To me, the big question is Toussaint. If he is benched cause of his DUI stuff, MI has absolutely no chance.

And yet you don't seem to remember the epic beatdown Utah put on them in the Sugar Bowl. Maybe you mentally blocked it.  :grin:

UGA plays our first cupcake tomorrow. Whoopeeeeee.

I'll be keeping track of the other games going on the national scale, Alabama being foremost. It will be interesting to see how their defense adapts to the loss of many key starters.

We've been dating for 18 months, so no.  :)  I could tell you more about big UGA and UF losses than Bama ones.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8322048/michigan-wolverines-suspend-fitzgerald-toussaint-frank-clark-vs-alabama-crimson-tide

Ok, 4 TDs is about right.

Unless there's a pick 6, i don't trust Alabama to put up 28 on anybody in the top 10.

I think they're going to break Denard Robinson's legs.

If you consider Michigan to be a top 10 team then we should talk about this lucrative investment deal concerning a bridge.  :awesome_for_real:

I hope Michigan State wins by 100.   :grin:

I am taking much delight in watching Penn state lose

Agreed. I'd rather the B1G had kicked them out and make it the Big 10 again.

Meanwhile Ohio St. 56 Miami (OH) 10. 563 yards of total offense and Meyer refuses to take a knee with the ball on the 1 yard line and a minute left. I for one welcome our SEC overlord.

Wow.  That was a real shit stain of a performance, Ingmar.   :ye_gods:

Also, Auburn versus Clemson.   :uhrr:

Not sure if Michigan is terribad or Alabama is scary good.

Little of both... lot more for Alabama though.

Even Kirk was saying he wanted to change his championship pick during the broadcast.

Alabama is scary.

For now. I withhold judgement until they start their SEC schedule.

Denard Robinson-  200 yards passing on 11/26 attempts, 2 interceptions and 1 TD, 27 yards rushing on 10 attempts. 

That's good defense because Robinson is dangerous.  I expect he'll run rampant over the Big Ten again this year. 

Meh... He'll be great against piss poor, slow defenses, but that is about it. Had tOSU not imploded under tattoo ink, Michigan would still be a footnote.

Welp, Kentucky/Louisville is in an hour.  I'm sure you all will watch this piece of shit game, too.   :grin:

Ugh, I didn't exactly have high expectations for Florida this year, but that game gave me fucking heartburn.  Such a frustrating game to watch.  I could have sworn at one point during the game I saw a clown car drive across the field.

Yeah.  It was Mackbrown driving it, laughing his ass off at you weirdos for hiring Muschamp away from him. 

 :woot:

In news most people don't care about, UF is god awful.  Holy QB-contraversy folks!  And I'm not convinced their RB is LSU/Bama caliber that Muschamp is trying to bill him as.

Also, USF was underwhelming.  They played about as good as my four Dale's Pale Ales did in the parking lot...they got the job done, but I was longing for more in the second half.

Could have been worse.  At least they weren't Pitt.  :grin:

First off... Pitt.  :ye_gods: I don't get it around here... There is no air of a Div I football on this campus anywhere - I guess I blame the Steelers for it and the no local football stadium, but the U dealt with it and there was a huge college football presence in Coral Gables. I was spoiled at LSU and SEC football, but man, being on Pitt's campus outside of an occasional weekend in Feb when the basketball team is doing well is just sad.

And this catch was noteworthy. tOSU has receivers that can catch? Who knew?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY_RSMNXhKg

Pitt's campus is very urban.  Just the set up of it doesn't feel like a football school to me.  But, then again, I'm used to the big, sprawling Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC campuses. 

Urban Meyer is going to face rape the big 10. They have no idea what they just let in their conference. It will be good for them in the long haul if they embrace it.

It won't be that much different than what OSU was doing to the Big Ten previously, although they may win a title or two under Urban. 

Well tOSU is pretty urban... though they don't share a stadium with an NFL team. And it really is not any more urban than other places that have huge college football teams, like USC. I guess it might be a culmination of having to share a stadium with the Steelers cult, being this close to a major city, and having a perennially shitty football team. This time of the year is my favorite in the sports calendar, but living here and working for this school - it can be deflating. Thank god I am not a Pitt fan.

I am actually surprised that Pitt wasn't able to continue the success they had with Tony Dorsett into more winning seasons in the '80s.  As far as there being other urban schools, yes OSU and USC are urban.  Yet they already have a significant tradition that started long prior to their current status of urbanization.  Your point about the stadium is a good one.  I think you have to have a great stadium to be really successful in this day and age, and by "great stadium" I mean kick ass tailgating and, as a result, hot chicks.

This article (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/page/BMOC-090412/big-man-campus-weighs-week-1-college-football) has a couple of interesting points about the complete beatdown that Okie State put on Savannah State. 


I'm actually a bit shocked that a team like Okie State would have any interest in playing such an awful school.  They would have a better test playing against their scout team and Okie State needs to pad their schedule in all ways possible. 

Savannah State is highlighting the purpose of college football. That's it. The money. And don't go crying for the kids... Those guys got the chance to play on a huge stage. Getting blown out will sting, but I'd venture a guess that guys going to that school are not assuming they'll get a look by the NFL. At least they got to play (and got stomped) a game at the level of the guys that do.

Oh, I don't cry for "the kids" at all.  A good chunk of them are getting a free ride education and the rest are choosing to play of their own free will.  If they don't like getting beaten 84-0 they can either pay for their own education like the rest of us or quit and focus on classes.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8346278/oregon-ducks-trying-random-drug-testing-athletes (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8346278/oregon-ducks-trying-random-drug-testing-athletes)

Looks like the Ducks are owning up to the drug issue they have on the team. Personally, I don't find it shocking at all that about half the team was smoking. I'd be shocked if there weren't similar numbers in the SEC schools as well. I know UGA has had major problems with our guys getting busted with pot.

It's something I'd like to see get out of college football. As of the last surveys (http://www.higheredcenter.org/files/product/marijuana.pdf) about a third of the total student population at unversities had smoked weed. The percentage amongst most college athletes was much lower. That means that the percentage of football players, if the numbers from ESPN are accurate, is a very large part of those athletes on dope.

Testing college kids for weed...

I don't give a shit if they are or are not. If anything, test for steroids, amphetamines, human growth hormone, you know.. performance enhancing drugs. Marijuana is such a joke, here and as a federal law in general.

What a waste of time.

We may need to keep the knives away from Ab, the way the Utes are playing.

Please remove my belt and shoelaces.

Oh man, that was tough to watch.

Ugh.   :uhrr:

LOL Arkansas.

This is by far going to be Tedford's worst year at Cal, it looks like.

Top 25 had some MAJOR issues yesterday, that being the most  :why_so_serious: one.

#13 Wisconsin getting destroyed by the Oregon State Beavers? Whoops.
#16 Nebraska dropping the ball against UCLA? Holy cow.
#19 Michigan barely escaping AIR FORCE after their drubbing by Bama? That team's in trouble.
#22 Notre Dame and #24 Florida needed a FG to get by their unrankeds.

The SEC and the Big 10 looked pretty bad yesterday. The SEC managed to get the dunce cap of the week due to Arkansas.

Man Illinois got trounced. At least they lost an early season game so people won't think Beckman is a miracle worker.

Well now let's not be too hasty here. SEC had the wins... Big10 lost 2 in Nebraska and Wisconsin. And FL was playing a good A&M team. LA-Monroe though.. yeah, whoever said Arkansas was going the route of last year's LSU reached a little too far with that one.

Woooooooo.  How about dem Cowboys?

In a game practically no one but me cared about, USF barely scraped by Nevada after we sucked to the tune of three touchdowns in the first.

That Nevada team looked damn good though.  That quarterback can play for sure.

That was a hell of a game.  I think Okie State may be a bit overrated, but Zona looks damned good.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8358337/arkansas-razorbacks-take-historic-plunge-ap-top-25

LMAO. The Arkansas loss was so bad that it knocked them, not just out of the top ten, but completely out of the polls.  :awesome_for_real:

We're ranked now. I don't like this. 

We do have absolutely the most perfect QB for Rich's system.  So, at least we're not having someone with Foles' agility running this thing. Defense is still a sieve.

It's the worst loss since Michigan losing to App State. I could tell you that without needing the article.  :awesome_for_real:

Well yeah... But App St. was actually pretty good for a long time in a lower division. ULM hasn't bene above .500 since they joined the FBS.

Wow.  LSU is losing 4 more players (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8369773/lsu-tigers-tahj-jones-three-other-players-ruled-ineligible-season).  What sort of circus are you guys running down there?   :grin:

Yeah, Tahj is a loss... but that just shows you how deep the Tigers are. He hasn't played and neither did the other guys. I don't know about the circus part... kids are found academically inelig all the time. We ARE talking about a college football player here... not the brightest bulbs in the store. About the only reason some are even in college is due to football - but that has been discussed already. Tahj is a loss no doubt, but so far it has not done a lot to hurt them.

Admit it.  It's a circus.   :oh_i_see:

You guys are finished.  Les Miles is still my favorite coach, though.  :why_so_serious:

Interesting.  Notre Dame has moved to the ACC in all sports except for football (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8369070/notre-dame-sports-football-hockey-acc).  And they will play 5 ACC football games per year to be "ACC lite".  I wonder how long that will last.   :oh_i_see:

I can't help but believe that once Notre Dame makes their final choice that you'll really see the current conference system that we have now implode into something completely different.  Some folks think that you'll have four superconferences, but I'm not sure that will happen unless the Big 12 dies.  And really, as long as Texas is in the Big 12 it will keep kicking along.  The Big East is fucking toast.  They might as well start dismantling it now.

The Big 12 is an interesting situation because, as I said, it's the Texas Conference.  Whatever UT does really determines the fate of the conference.  They are really playing chicken right now.  They have power over a small number of crappy teams but Oklahoma will be more and more in the driver's seat.  Once Oklahoma makes the move, it's all over.  There will be nobody left but WVU, who I suspect the SEC would take on if they needed a 15th and 16th team. 

So Ab, does Utah get boatraced by BYU this weekend? Because I have to pick this game for a pool, and coming off that Utah State...game, I have no idea WTF to do.

They're going to get pummeled.   :oh_i_see:

I wouldn't be so sure. I think it will be a close game with a couple of fluky plays deciding things (which is how the game has been over the last decade except for three times where the Utes beat the hell out of them).  Depends a lot if John White IV is playing and they have been really cagey about his status after he tweaked his ankle last week. I think right now Utah is underrated based upon a game where they just laid an egg against a really fired up team on the road and BYU is overrated because they have played two shitty teams and haven't faced a good defense (which the Utes still have). I think it is a toss up really but the conventional wisdom right now is BYU.

Just be happy that I'm making a prediction against your team.   :oh_i_see:

Now go put some money on the Utes.  Hurry!

I never bet on the Utes. I've been known to bet against them in the right situation so I come out ahead either way (i.e. with a win or money).

Cal versus Ohio State....... :oh_i_see:

Good luck, Ingmar.  You're going to need it.  

Edit-  ouch.  :ye_gods:

Cal struck back, we got ourselves a ballgame!

That was some piss poor defense by OSU, but I'll take it. 

HERE WE GO CAL!  :drill:

Edit: or you know, completely lose a guy in the secondary. Good grief.

VA Tech got boatraced by Pitt. The ACC is a floating joke.

Yeah... holy shitsticks Pitt. Me and the coworkers were debating how hard they lose. Tonight, I dine on crow.

So.......Tennessee versus Florida.  Is it a really a bad thing to hope for someone to blow up the stadium?   :awesome_for_real:

UT leads at the half, what a goal line stand!  But FLA has some great players, this game is kick ass.

We've been patient for two years, the time for the Dooley Era to produce is here.

Let's go VOLUNTEERS!

Boo.  Stupid Tennessee. 

Yay Big East!  Maybe we'll finally get some respect.

And I thought our new kicker could't possibly be worse than the last one.  :why_so_serious:

I really thought UT would beat 'em this year.  *sigh*  Well, grats to an explosive FLA team.  That 80 yard TD run broke our backs.   :heartbreak:

UT is better this year though, maybe this game is something we can learn from. 

So much for Kiffin's #2 program  :grin:

Haha, 4 years in a row.

My father-in-law is going to slit his wrists.   :awesome_for_real:

Nah, Kiffin's long gone.  This is all Dooley now.  I've been patient for the last two years; I know he's had a mess to clean up.  But he needs to start beating SEC teams RIGHT NOW.  All the excuses are gone.  Win or GTFO.

Dooley blows.

That was some crazy ass shit in the Utah game. Had to win it three times. Told you it would come down to the fourth quarter.

(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y222/Abagadro/564122_4484250741594_1523099399_n.jpg)

Well look slike it is Bama and LSU ranked 1 & 2 come this week. Again. Go figure. Thanks USC.  :awesome_for_real:

I reserve a little judgement, but this year's crop of college football talent doesn't look very good. I haven't seen any teams other than Alabama who just scream "contender" yet. LSU might, but they need to play somebody to give me a reference point like they did early in 2011. We'll see how they fare against Florida and SC before they get their big battle against Alabama.

I'm looking around and thinking, who else? Oregon? They've played nobody yet, and they won't until USC. OU? Same story. They play K State next week, and they could easily lose that game. FSU? The ACC is a joke, I can't take them seriously. Georgia? Lulz. Please. We barely scraped by a very average Mizzou.

Respect our overblown and undeserved ranking!  :oh_i_see:

I feel the same way about my team. I look at UGA and go...yeah we'd get torn up against Bama in an SEC championship.

Arizona might actually be decent.

Ah, one of the funnier things I've seen on Deadspin, well, ever........Trainer Eyefucking Bruce Ellington of South Carolina (http://deadspin.com/5943840/heres-a-south-carolina-trainer-eyefucking-bruce-ellington).

(http://cdn-thumbs.viddler.com/thumbnail_2_e3311513_v3.jpg)

Also, leave it to Lane Kiffin to throw his Heisman Trophy candidate quarterback under the bus (http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncf/story/_/id/8389450/usc-trojans-coach-lane-kiffin-puzzled-really-poor-decisions-matt-barkley).  Way to go, sleazebag. 

He's not wrong. I think he said it because he's trying to get his QBs head out of the Heisman and NFL talk.

He's a fucking douchebag.  That's never the right way to do things.  Do it in private if you want, or in the film session, but don't do it to the fucking media.  That will do nothing but drive a wedge into the heart of the team.

Spurrier did it and does it all the time.

You're not seriously going to hold out Spurrier as an example of what to do, are you?  He's the OG douchebag.

Can you guys not do this again? Please.

Sorry man.  We'll knock it off.  We're too much alike and like to argue about minutia. 

What it really boils down to is the

a) Kiffin is was and will always be an asshole.
b) Who gives a shit, it's USC.

I hate Notre Dame with a fiery passion, save for one game a year.

My wife and her dad are huge USC fans, so I man up and pull for them so I can stay married.  It's tough though, because I royally hate Kiffin. 

I think USC is a complete QB fail factory that produces dipshits who read their own press clippings.

They do tend to have success in the NCAA though.  You can't equate what happens in the NFL to their graduates.

I ...what? I can't even...

Let me translate that into English for ghost.

The performance of USC's quarterbacks once they hit the NFL is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

The PAC-10 was also dogshit for a decade. I'm actually excited that they are improving in a lot of areas. Oregon, ULCA, Arizona, Stanford, etc. I'd even toss the Beavers in there for upset potential, and I like the fact that Leach is at Washington State.

Sorry.  Had to run see a couple of patients and royally fucked that one.  What Ingmar said.  

Also, USC did win a national title with one of these shitty quarterbacks you're talking about.  And they've won several Heismans, two with quarterbacks. 

EDIT: Rasix said to stop doing this

Looks as though the Big East is getting dropped in the lurch.  The ACC is close to a deal with the Orange Bowl (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8392440/atlantic-coast-conference-working-deal-orange-bowl), which would leave the Big East without a major bowl tie in.  They also have no conference championship sponsor and no TV deal.  Look for Louisville, UConn, South Florida, and Rutgers to bail at the first reasonable opportunity.  It may, in reality, be too late for them unless they want to try and latch on to the Big 12.  The SEC might look at Rutgers but they wouldn't tough South Florida or Louisville as they already have those markets sewed up.  I suppose UConn is a possibility too.  It really would be goofy to see UConn or Rutgers in the Southeastern Conference. 

The thing that blows my mind is the ACC is the biggest bunch of shenanigans in college football right now.  They have two teams:  Clemson and FSU who are anywhere near competitive right now.  And, their track record over the past five years is a fucking joke.

I know I get my panties in a wad about the Big East, but they really do get shit on over and over.  Who's talking about Pitt's roflstomp of VaTech?  Fucking nobody.

The Big East really fucked up by not highly encouraging all of it's members to field D1 football squads back in the 70s and 80s.  The ACC isn't a strong football conference on the field, but it is a pretty fierce business opponent.  I don't see it losing to the Big 12 in the oncoming war for who is the fifth wheel (literally) in the big conference showdown. 

Here's (http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/whats-the-sec-network-worth-a-year.php) an interesting article written about the nuclear bomb that the SEC is getting ready to drop on the college football landscape, aka The SEC Network.  


Once this happens, it's going to be all over for the rest of the college football world.  The University of Texas is going to rue their douchiness regarding the Longhorn Network.

ACC keeps losing and no one will give a shit about their product, lessening their business leverage.  NBC's ratings of ND games are a good example of this.

Bullshit.  They've never had a strong football component and have managed to do very, very well.  And Notre Dame is still a money making machine.  They are still the weakest of the "Big Four", but add Notre Dame as a full time member and Texas and you have a very formidable conference.

Here's (http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/notre-dame-to-acc-for-five-games-what-now.php) another article, discussing the stability (or lack thereof) of the college football landscape.  

The author agrees with me, to an extent, that what happens with Texas will dictate any future dominoes that fall.  I really find this business with Notre Dame interesting.  I almost think that Notre Dame will need that conference affiliation going forward, meaning full affiliation.  I suspect that this is just a trial balloon to see how the big money donors will respond, and possibly is viewed as a nice middle step to try and ease those big donors into the idea of being in a conference.  I can't imagine that the Longhorn Network or anything that Notre Dame will do will come close to the types of dollars you'll eventually see thrown around for the conference "networks", i.e. Big Ten Network clones.

The author feels that the Big 12 is done with expansion, and I agree with that, however I feel that their position is much more precarious.

ACC was dominant in the 90's and early 00's with FSU, Clemson, VaTech, Wake Forest, and GaTech.  I fail to see how your argument makes any sense when compared to facts. 

And Notre Dame football is a joke lately:  their marginal seasons the last ten years,  the lack of big wins, and their nigh-worthless bowl bids reflect this.

I really wonder if you're trolling, to be honest.

They weren't dominant.  Competitive is a better word.  And I don't think I'd hang out Wake Forrest and VaTech as examples of dominance.  Florida State is the only dominant team, over an extended stretch, that the ACC has had in football.  The strength of the ACC has always been the basketball portion of the conference and, much like the Big Ten, the elitism that seems to come with being a member of the ACC.  

The ACC still remains a very viable player in the football world, as is evidenced by their outmaneuvering  of their opponents with the Notre Dame deal, regardless of this lack of success.  Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, Clemson, UNC, Virginia....all of these schools are in valuable markets and are valuable to their schools regardless of how they do on the field.  Notre Dame still remains one of the most marketable teams in the country.  They sell out wherever they play and even had something like 35,000 people go to see them in Ireland.  Just wait-  when Notre Dame's deal is up in 2 or 3 years (I don't remember when it's done) they will get a huge deal.  They may even do a network, like Texas.  

In all honesty, I think you're missing the point-  on the field success doesn't matter as much for the ACC or Notre Dame and their financial dealings.  The schools appear to be able to work well together and have put together a good financial sharing package and a gigantic buyout.  This is much, much more stable than the Big 12 where everyone is just waiting for the next guy to move, like a pistol duel (fitting for the old west, eh?).  The Big East is  :dead_horse: and the Big 12 will be the next domino to fall.  

Until they break up the SEC stronghold on college football at the top end, the performance of the rest of the conferences is a moot point, imo.

Other than for me to chuckle at every year when I hear "THIS IS THE ACC'S CHANCE TO PROVE IT ON A NATIONAL STAGE." Right before they get owned across the board by week 3.

Also, if this was the 4 team playoff year, the Big 10 would already be eliminated from contention in before October.

As it should be.  :awesome_for_real:

Once the SEC Network hits it will never matter again. 

Performance on the field is moot, but there's more to it than that.  The idiocy of the Big 12 pandering to Texas proves that you have to have more going on with your conference than simply wins.  Looking at the remaining four conferences (ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, PAC-12) it is pretty clear that the PAC-12 and Big Ten are financially and structurally fine and will be included in the "Big Four" when it happens.  The Big Ten is about more than football and the PAC-12 is benefited by geography.  The battle really comes down to Big 12 verus ACC and the ACC has more intangibles. 

I think the Big 12 and ACC would be dissolved, tbh. I'd do 4 conferences of 8 teams. Have everyone play each other (7 games), do 4 cross conference games, and 1 traditional rivalry. Also, have a promotion/demotion system for last team in each conference.

North - Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Purdue, Missouri
South - Texas, OU, Arkansas, LSU, Alabama, Auburn, A&M, Oklahoma State
East - Georgia, Florida, Florida State, South Carolina, Clemson, Miami, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
West - Stanford, USC, Oregon, Arizona, Cal, UCLA, Boise State, Utah

The rest of the larger programs would be organized into the subtier 8's in North, South, East, West, with the champions making it into the big boy conferences.

The programs that survive on paycheck games from the bigger schools get eliminated or move to FCS. Make it impossible for teams to schedule themselves. Have the NCAA pull the schedules ala the NFL. No more cupcakes. No more paying for losses. No more crap.

If you're going to do 4 conferences it would be either the ACC or the Big 12, not both.  Well, not unless the Big East pulls it out of their ass.

SEC
PAC-12
Big Ten
ACC or Big 12

I would like something close to this, but programs like Texas Tech, Oregon State, Tennessee, Iowa, Kansas, Kansas State,  Cincinnati, Louisville, VaTech, and GaTech get left out.

All of those teams have been top 10 or played BCS games in the last ten years.

Wake has had a marked decline since the late 90s, but VaTech made a national championship (where they got spanked, but still).  Do you really find the ACC that far ahead in basketball?  Big East seems to have the upper hand in basketball from my perspective.

And don't get me wrong...I love the Blue Devils.

I don't see them doing anything that drastic, in part because if you want to keep all the other sports as is in terms of conference, etc., which I'm sure most places do, now you're adding yet another layer of bureaucracy on top of everything.

I think the ACC is the better bet for long term survival since Pitt, Syracuse and Notre Dame have moved to the ACC from the Big East.  With the addition of Syracuse and Pitt the ACC is a much, much better basketball conference too.  Sure you have UConn and Louisville, but there really isn't much else after that.  Maybe Villanova, but nobody is consistent.  The ACC is much better top to bottom and has UNC and Duke, two of the four premier teams in the history of the sport.

Lane Kiffin is fucking ridiculous.  What a douche. 

http://youtu.be/VFTJ_SdXm4g (http://youtu.be/VFTJ_SdXm4g)

What pissed him off there?

He doesn't like chatting about player injuries.

Yeah UGA's gone to a policy now where they don't talk about suspensions.

College coaches as a whole I think are getting sick of the media. That being said, Mark Richt is certainly more polite about it than Kiffin.

Given we don't know the circumstances of the player that got asked about (or even which one) I find it hard to get too far up his ass about that, and I hate USC as much as any 10 people.

It would be really easy to just say, "I'm not answering questions about that," and leave it at that instead of being a royal jackass.  But Kiffin has a nice history of being a dick.

Well yeah, he'll run away at the first sign of trouble rather than stand there and take it like a man. Ask any Tennessee fan.

Also, I wonder how often people confuse him for Daniel Tosh.

As I've said, my father-in-law is a huge USC fan.  For some reason he absolutely loves Kiffin.  I just don't get it.  The guy is a complete dick, a mediocre coach and left a huge trail of NCAA rules violations at UT.  I can't wait until the fire the little pretentious prick. 

I wonder if there's some Monte holdover love.  I have a hard time hating Lane because I loved Monte so much.

Bucs golden years, how I miss you.

Can't decide who to root against tomorrow, the zoobs or the tater-zoobs.

Do what I do when Florida plays Tennessee. Pray for random acts of God.

Who is what, again?

Also, here is a fine example of why you don't want to tailgate at the University of Kentucky:

http://youtu.be/QZXAqmtTDrs (http://youtu.be/QZXAqmtTDrs)

Zoobs= BYU

Tater-Zoobs= Boise State

I think you gotta go with the regular zoobs.  I hate upstarts.

Root against BYU, that rivalry has the weight of decades.

Boise is joining the Big East.  That's punishment enough.

Ya, I hate BYU with the passion of a thousand suns. Boise has kicked our asses the last decade though, so that is hard to overlook.

When presented with sort of quandary I usually will pull for the underdog, yet I will still hold out hope that the winner will lose a player or two to terrible, possibly career ending, injuries.   :why_so_serious:


This otherwise looks to be a decent week for football.  

Arizona vs. Oregon
Clemson vs. Floriduh State
Oklahoma vs. K State
Missouri vs. South Carolina
Michigan vs. Notre Dame

Notre Dame actually looks pretty damned good.  Their win over Michigan State was pretty huge.  Clemson vs. Florida State is a gigantic game, but I could really care less about either team.  

My team plays Florida.  I look for it to be 3000 to 0.  At halftime.  

Addendum-  pick your upset.  Mine is KSU over OU.   :grin:

Missouri over SC is my upset.

I know it would technically be an upset, but I think Michigan is going to get crushed by the domers.

Okay, Ab, who are we sending our collective bad will to?  I'm leaning toward Boise, but if you say BYU I'm all in.
 :awesome_for_real:

I think yall's confusion over which team to hate affected both of them... BECAUSE THEY BOTH LOOK LIKE SHIT!

0-0 at the half? ESPN is wondering how to get their viewers back from the shitty NFL matchup.

Actually, never mind.  This game is atrocious.  I'm going to bed.   :oh_i_see:

Heh, can the game be declared so bad that it counts as a loss for both teams?

Watching Boise State fail 4 times in a row to get it in from the 1 yard line should immediately remove their team from contention for the year. How the hell do they not have a kicker? Wow.

AHAHHAHHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHA!


Nice one Roscoe.

I like Clemson over FSU.  FSU didn't look great against Wake until Wake's defense got tired later in the second/third quarters.

Clemson in a nailbiter, 24-20.

Boise should not be in the top 25.  And I have to say that I am so happy that we aren't going to have to deal with the "what if" discussions this year, at least from that camp. 

The only "what if" for Boise should be what if they hold tryouts for kicker this week.

According to the box score their guy made an XP and missed a FG.  That's not uncommon to see.  Good kickers miss FGs.  I don't understand the hubbub.  They still won.   :?

Uh, they went for every 4th down in creation because they couldn't trust the guy to kick a 30 yarder. You may notice this on the ZERO OUT OF FIVE 4th down conversion attempts.

Yea. Peterson wouldn't even let him try it from the one yard line on a FG that would have basically sealed the game.

Atrocious coaching from both sides in that game.

I thought David Pollack was going to have a stroke when he went for 2 on that TD. He was almost screaming, THEY HAVE NO KICKER! WHAT ARE YOU DOING? THEY HAVE NO CHOICES IN OT!

Wow.  The poor guy must be really bad.  They need to have an open tryout then.  Surely they could get some poor schmoe to do it.

(http://ksr.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/granny-says-gators-suck.jpg)

 :awesome_for_real:

Thanks for that! I will be forwarding to my tailgate.

My kid never wants to wear his Kentucky football jersey, but he is insisting on wearing it today.  He must be a Florida fan. 

OSU's defense is looking really good again today against fUCLA - glad we don't play them until last.

Edit: Our fucking kicker ><

Well here we go. Now all these ND fans are going to come back crawling outta the woodwork. God damn it... literally. Please?

That was a ballsy play that the hat called, having his QB throw across the field that late in a tight game.  It worked out well for him.  LSU has a way to go to be top 5, IMO, but they have a ton of talent. 

.....and, predictably, OU eats shit. 

UGA steamrolled Vandy. I am pleased.

I hope you didn't gamble on that Missouri game.   :why_so_serious:

It's like we're afraid of the end zone.

That's a decent score against Oregon this far in, particularly at their place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4jGSvxCRp4

The Vols manged to outlast that football powerhouse, Akron.

Nebraska wins in a defensive showdown  :why_so_serious:

LOL Razorbacks!

Having a BCS ranking in the first 4 weeks is the dumbest idea ever.  Let the good teams knock down the tomato cans and have a couple of in conference matches before assigning a rank.  Shit, I don't even know who is in what conference anymore.

Ahh college football, where a win still knocks you down the rankings. Is it any wonder why coaches run up the scores when they can?  :awesome_for_real:

When you fight a midget, you better beat the shit out of him.

I never liked Tenessee fans... but this is cool.  Maybe Ab can shave his facial hair into a big U.

(http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/.yeVhIuRTJ92B8WpHQufPQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NQ--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/sptusncaafexperts/tennessee-hair.jpg)

I don't get it, who's that?

Look at the shape of his goatee.

(http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/10495_702967984765_1169626942_n.jpg)

I think I see some pixels.

Yeah, it's a shitty photo.  But it's sooooooo right on target. 

That picture  :ye_gods:
I blame photoshop  :oh_i_see:

Ah, the College Football thread...

Loving what I am seeing out of Bama this year.  I could type out all sorts of superlatives but they are that good.  Can't wait for LSU.

Barring a disaster, I haven't seen anything that says they aren't the best team in the country.

We'll see how UGA looks against Tennessee and SC, and then you might have a contender.

Great to see you, Snakecharmer.  I knew it would be some shitty Aalabalmaa picture to get you to turn back up. :awesome_for_real:

Thanks, Ghost  :heart:

The only disaster I can see is McCarron getting nuked (shoulder, concussion, whatever) by a speedrusher blowing by Fluker at the RT position.  He's regressed this year and his footwork has gotten sloppy - not to mention he's been telegraphing run/pass.*  Somebody like Mingo or Montgomery from LSU will eat him (Fluker) for dinner with McCarron being the desert.  The positive to blowing teams out  and putting in 2nd and 3rd string in midway through the 3rd (or sooner) is young players (including QBs) getting lots of playing time.  The downside is when they put those 2nd and 3rd stringers in, they don't run their normal pro style offense that much.  They go to a simple spread, run read option to utilize the QBs speed (back up Blake Simms has incredible speed) and Phillip Ely (pro style) isn't getting many snaps.  Bama is a young team and I'll be really interested to see how they handle adversity - being down a score or so, things not going right, etc.  

The other thing that worries me a bit is the defense - they're playing really well.  But it's no secret that Smart/Saban preach hitting the QB high.  When, and not if, the refs start calling that for penalties because of the emphasis on safety, I could see some situational things come to haunt them.  I'll even admit that Bama plays it reaaaaaally freaking close to hits on the QB and there's been more than one occasion that I've thought they've gotten away with a high/late hit in QB pressures.

I've been to 3 games this year (Michigan, Arkansas, and Western Kentucky).  The TV doesn't do justice as to how much bigger and faster Bama is than whoever they face.  It's almost not fair.

*There's a couple other issues that contribute to it, but I'm not in a position to post it publicly during the season.

I will pick on you for one thing. You have a tough game against LSU, and then absolutely nada for the rest of the year. You proved Michigan didn't belong in the title discussion (or anybody in the Big 10 for that matter), and Notre Dame put the icing on them not belonging in the Top 25. Saban can preach take it week to week, but outside of maybe a geeked up MS State team, I see no threats. And even that's at home.

UGA has the same schedule, minus the out of conference start. Instead we get a SC team nobody knows anything about, and a Florida team nobody expected to be good. Other than that, our schedule is laughable.

Those 3 games, Bama v. LSU, UGA v. SC, and obviously UGA-FL will decide the SEC Championship game.

If Alabama wins out they are going to the title game whether you take the schedule into consideration or not.  LSU's schedule is a nightmare.  If they win out except for Bama we may see another title game rematch from last year. 

I think the Nat'l Champ is FSU v Bama.  FSU is ridiculously fast and strong this year.  Should they win out, they've got a good line to the BCS championship.

Although, I'm praying USF can unfuck themselves and make their record 2-0 against FSU, but those Ball State and Rutgers games... my fucking god.  Ugh.  :uhrr:

I think FSU's defense will get murdered against anybody who can run the ball. Clemson put 136 yards on FSU on the ground, and the Tigers are about 40th in the nation running the ball.

You know who is going to run the ball well? Florida at 24th in the nation. You know who has a better defense than anybody they've faced? Florida at 20th in the nation. I don't think FSU can get past that game. I think they can go 11-0 just to have their dreams die at the hands of the Gators.

The Gators are overrated, IMO.  They had a mediocre day against a very, very shitty Kentucky defense.

I've watched UF play one good half of football, and that was against TA&M.  I've watched FSU play a very good Clemson team where they faced adversity and overcame it, and also a Wake game where they manhandled them.

That being said, UFvFSU is the same as UGAvUF.  Anything can happen, no matter what the record.  Bama should be mindful of that during the Iron Bowl as well.

I still think FSU, UGA, and Bama are the stronger teams in those matchups though.

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/765354/thumbs/o-R2D2-KEG-570.jpg?1)

 :heart:

What? They beat Kentucky 38-0. They stopped trying completely in the 4th quarter and just ran the ball constantly.

You know who had a mediocre day? LSU v. Auburn. That's the yardstick you need to use.

College football where it is not so much the win, but the QUALITY of win that matters the most. I don't discount the LSU offense looking like it was struggling against Auburn quite a few times, but I'll take this over the USC-Stanford outcome every time.

Kentucky is the worst team in D1 football this year.  The Gators should have hung 60 plus on them.  But they didn't look that great in the first half, IMO.  And why bring LSU into it?  We're not talking about them.

Kentucky may not even be the worst team in the SEC, let alone Div1. I know that was hyperbole, but I think you're either too close to the situation, or don't grasp how shitty other teams are this year around the league.

For one, Arkansas or Auburn may give anybody in the SEC a run for the worst team. Second, Tulane is probably the worst Div1 team in the nation (0-3 and they average single digit points a game). They lost by 35 to Tulsa. Anyway, Kentucky has major issues, but the spread in that game was only 24.5, not some 35+ disaster.

Kentucky averages more points a game than Auburn. Arkansas gives up more points a game than anybody in the SEC. Auburn can't even average 300 yards a game of offense.

Kentucky, if Max Smith remains hurt, is absolutely putrid.  Did you happen to see how shitty Morgan Newton was in that game?  Now I tend to believe that UK may have made more of a game of it if Smith had played because I think Florida is grossly overrated, but whatever.  We'll see when they play.

Since you brought them up, I do think LSU is probably overrated as well.  I think UGa is (if it's possible, considering their ranking) underrated.  I can't wait until the USCjr/UGa game.  That will be lights out fun.

Kentucky would beat us by 20.

No fucking way.  I think Cal will pull out 5-6 wins.  Kentucky will be lucky to beat Samford.  They lost to Western Kentucky, for chrissakes.   :awesome_for_real:

We'll see when UK plays in Arkansas. That will be one of the two games to determine SHITTIEST TEAM IN ALL THE LAAAAAAAAAAND!

Yeah, Arkansas is terrible.  I wonder how much difference Petrino would have made.  John L Smith is crazy as a fucking loon though, so it may have been a big deal. 

The loser can play the loser of Cal-WSU in the Shit Sandwich Bowl.

I think coaching is much bigger in football than I ever gave it credit for in the last decade. That being said, a supremely talented QB (Cam Newton, RG3, Kellen Moore, Tim Tebow) can make a lot of mediocre coaches look like worldbeaters.

However, look at Alabama before they picked up Saban. Complete fucking mess. Now? Powerhouse. Look at Petrino and Arkansas. Powerhouse to Outhouse in a year. Look at Tennessee after Fulmer, or UGA before Richt showed up.

Surely you're not suggesting that Gene Chizik is a shitty coach...... :oh_i_see:

He went 5-19 at Iowa State. A team that, since his departure, has managed to go 21-20 with a huge upset that ruined Oklahoma State's national shot.

MEANWHILE, he came to an Auburn team that, without Cam Newton, is 17-15 with a 7-11 conference record.

I'm not just suggesting he's a shitty coach. I'm outright saying it.  :grin: He probably deserves to be fired at the end of this season when he hands Auburn a collective losing record without Scam, and Auburn doesn't go to a Bowl game 2 years after winning a national title.

I'm not sure that needed an actual explanation.   :awesome_for_real:

Mack Brown was doing a little dance, okay a BIG dance, when ISU hired him away from Texas. 

Well well Washington.

Yeah, fuck Stanford.

Woohoo! Can't believe how well the defense played. That was truly amazing. Only regret is that it wasn't Oregon  :drill:

Savor the flavor. I was a great game and you made me money! Thanks!

Oregon probably won't go well on the road.  :ye_gods:

Man, mixed feelings. On the one hand, ha ha Stanford - on the other hand, I'm not ready for UW to be good again.  :oh_i_see:

Yeah, Oregon is going to paste UW.

Better?  :awesome_for_real:

I don't think they could take Aalabalmaa.

We may find out.  Would be a joy of a game to watch.

Like last year with LSU? Speed kills and so does a defense.

I'm sort of eyeing Louisville playing Virginia Tech as an upset. I really like Louisville's offense.

That would be awesome if Louisville actually was playing Virginia Tech (http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/preview?gameId=322732572).   :grin:

I mean Cincy. Dammit. My stupid boss has me thinking about Louisville.

I think VA Tech falls down this weekend in a letdown.

They might have lost to Loserville, but they'll kick Cincinnati's ass.

Okay, you're right, Paelos.  Arkansas is the worst team in D1 football.   :oh_i_see:

Addendum-  I hope you're at the UGa game and rooting your boys on, because if they don't win I may have to drive to Georgia and kick your ass.......  :grin:

Yeah I was. That was madness. I've never seen our Dawgs take what should have been a completely well executed first half and turn it into a fucking disaster. So many self-inflicted wounds. The good news is that we finally started to get our shit together in the second half, but our defense was totally gassed. Not pretty, but a win's a win.

Yeah, Arkansas got absolutely smoked. Also, how about that Cincy upset! WOOOO!

What the fuck is up with the illinois uniforms. Not only does a blue helmet look wrong, but they used the wrong shades of both blue and orange  :ye_gods:

Yeah, nice call on Cincinnati.  They've got a decent squad. 

Holy shit on Geno Smith's statline: 45/51, 656 yards, 8 TDs, no picks. The game didn't even go into overtime.

/knocks over table

The whole god damn weekend was a defensive disaster. I was reading the pregame stuff on the Bayor:WVA game and the writers were hinting at point totals in the 80s. Looking at that, I was thinking, how the hell do you play a game without a defense? Then saw it was @ 70 pts for the half. Of course, my SEC blood kept me thinking, these guys would get destroyed by someone with a defense since they had none themselves.

And I have to admit now that Mettenberger just does not seem to have control of that LSU offense. Say what you will about Jarrett Lee, but at least he looked like he could handle the huddle... Being a sympathetic, I'll cut him some slack being his first year playing with a offense that ran the gauntlet last year together, but holy shit kid - you are supposed to be a step up from Lee (and miles above dingleberry Jefferson). Arm and accuracy are fine; head, not so much. Hell LSU's defense didn't even show up. Soooo many "NFL" shoulder tackles that did fuck all to stop anyone. Reid needs to be sat down for a quarter and go over the basics of tackling - perhaps use instructions in IKEA format, only more understandable.

Surreal weekend though... SCaro down 10 at half, TO KENTUCKY?? Sure they came back to win, but still. That score for the Tenn/UGA game  :ye_gods: . Even mighty Bama was down in the quarter to Ole' Miss. FSU was shaky again USF, and Texas/OSU was another basketball score. Definitely a fun weekend... in a sack-race-with-your-sister kinda way.

First off, I'd fucking OWN my sister in a sack race; her boobs would knock her out.  Second, lower tier SEC teams like KY, Vandy and, sadly now UT, aren't a bit scared of Bama or LSU or anyone.  They play (and usually lose to) them every year.  The SEC is a gloriously competitive conference.

As for the game, UT once again shows it can somehow pull a loss out of any situation. Two 2nd half losses now.  You can't spell 'quit' without a U and a T.  :heartbreak:

Edit:  Grats to UGA, great gut check there.

Yeah, for 15 seconds.

 :why_so_serious:

Yeah, SC was sleepwalking in the first half.  Plus Kentucky had a couple of very, very lucky occurrences.  For instance, one pass was batted into the air by an SC defender (should have been an interception) yet somehow a KY player came down with it for a huge gain. 

Drunk posting at its finest? Pics?

Ab, can you upset USC? Is it possible?

It's not possible.

You said that about VA Tech last week.  :awesome_for_real:

Well, you picked Missouri to beat South Carolina and we see how that turned out.   :grin:

I only see two elite teams in college this year: Alabama and Oregon.  I think every other team could take a hit from just about anyone if they allow a lapse in concentration. 

I'm still not sold on Oregon.  They have played a relatively light schedule.  We'll see how they respond with the USC/Stanford/Oregon State slate later in the year. 

It won't be easy to get out of the PAC12 undefeated.  They'll stumble somewhere. 

Washington showed me that Stanford was overrated.  I also not convinced that USC could beat anyone in the top half of the SEC (and I'm not an SEC fan). 

I guess we'll see when they play.  USC is very, very tough at home and they are still stinging from the last defeat by Oregon (first ever I believe) in the Colosseum. 

USC hasn't played anyone... Hawaii, Syracuse, and Cal?  Please.

I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of their national title chances and overall ranking.  They're just tough to beat at home.  And they have home run talent on offense. 

Hopefully Saturday! I am going to have plenty of beer on hand as a backup plan, however.

Washington's pass defense is questionable. That's my only issue with that matchup.

I'm giving UW a chance, but only if the game is at Washington.  They looked good against Stanford, but not good enough to beat the Ducks at home.  I'll be pulling for them, though.  I'm not a huge fan of Oregon.

I think Washington, whom I do respect as a club and has played a better schedule so far, is going to get beat on the road, but they keep it under 2 TDs.

They've only scored 93 points in 4 games, which in that shootout league won't cut it. Also, the teams they've played so far haven't exactly been passing machines, including LSU who still put almost 200 yards on them through the air. Stanford, SD State, and LSU are all ranked 90 or above in passing yards.

Oregon isn't as good offensively as last year, at all. Their numbers are inflated by playing absolute crap.

While I agree with you about everything else, I'd take this bet.  I don't think that Washington has the speed on the OLB's or the defensive backs to contain Oregon.  I predict that Oregon will beat Washington pretty soundly (by more than 14 points).

I, quite unfortunately, completely agree with this.   :oh_i_see:

You could be right. I'm taking Washington getting 24.5, so there's a large gap between what I think and what Vegas will take action on  :awesome_for_real:

Still, I think Oregon hasn't seen anything like Washington, nor has Washington seen anything like Oregon's attack. I give the edge to Washington only because Oregon is getting more yards on the ground than the air this year. If they run it like LSU, it's a rout. If they run it like Stanford...

Wow.  John L. Smith lists a total of 40.7 million dollars in debt now in his bankruptcy filings.  How the fuck did he get that in debt?  He was a head coach for roughly 17 years, certainly not making enough to even sniff that level of loans.  This all smells fishy to me.

My guess is he was coerced to pick up real estate deals at the height of the market, and now it's all gone to shit. My other guess is that he did it through about 5-6 shell corporations.

It's not that uncommon. I have a client that's $78M in debt for similar problems.

EDIT: I read the filing. Unshockingly, I was correct. He owes $15M to BB&T and $20M to Terra Springs LLC, a company he was involved with that did land development in Louisville while he as the coach from 1998-2002. The market went south, he got burned, and his personal guarantee is on the $15M note related to Terra from BB&T.

He's also involved in several other shell corps, such as Terra Acquisition, Terra Ventures, and Beech Spring Farm, as well as an investment in a Texas Roadhouse.

You can thank me later, Ab, preferably with a Movember donation.   :grin:

Utah is running out of gas. Man it's close and their D is holding them in the game, but holy crap the penalties!  :ye_gods:

Sigh. Spotted 14 and still can't get it done.

Refs sucked. Utah made some boneheaded mistakes. USC has much better talent in most positions. Game.

It was a good game, and Utah thankfully covered. However, they deserved to win. They just aren't deep enough, and that illegal man downfield penalty to remove the bomb TD was a complete joke. I can't believe a ref would make that call.

Alright, here's my upset pick for the weekend. Ghost will love this.

Kentucky upsets Mississippi State, and gets their first SEC win of the year.

You're fucking loony, Paelos.   :oh_i_see:

UCLA is going to lose.

I really want to believe that ND might lose this weekend but I haven't seen more than a quarter of any of Miami's games so no idea if its possible.

I wish I could believe we'll beat UCLA. There's every chance that Cal goes 1-11 this season, with the 1 coming against a FCS school.

This is the worst team we've fielded since Tom Holmoe was the coach.

What's your upset pick, we'll see who gets one  :grin:

How about Miami over Notre Dame? 

That's an interesting one, and would be huge as well. Let's roll the dice!

Well I was hoping the new QB would provide some spark, and he did for Kentucky.

Then he gets injured, so yeah this game is toast. I'd have loved to see how it could have gone if Towles had been able to keep going. Whitlow is terrible.

EDIT: Also, Auburn? Wow. Worse than Arkansas.

Rich Rod wtf. 1 min and two timeouts on the road? Play for OT.  Gaaaaaah.

Kentucky is in a bad spot.  They've been running a scheme that favors a drop back QB like Towles, yet they have a decent QB in Whitlow that is a dual threat guy.  Whitlow has been much better in practice, apparently, but let's be realistic.  The whole thing is a fucking dumpster fire.  They'll be lucky if Towles doesn't transfer.  That guy has some talent.

And......it looks like UGa is going to take it in the rump. 

WTB a serviceable QB. Fucking hell, why can't LSU actually field a quarterback worth anything? Good on FL for putting it in his hands and exposing LSU as 1 dimensional. Can we get Lee back please... /cry 

UGA's offense finally gets exposed. Our offensive coordinator is still the same fucking moron who believes if you run it at them enough, eventually it will work.

Maybe if he looked at the stats before the game, he would have realized that SC's #7 in the nation in run defense. It's akin to just running it 60% of the time at Alabama and hoping you gain some ground. Good fucking luck.

The faster we can get rid of this ridiculously entrenched coaching staff, the better. It's been over a decade and we've been completely lapped by the rest of the SEC.

At least you all have a QB.

And WTF Florida St??  :drill:

*ahem*

Miami did get fucking rolled though.

As a Florida fan, this was just a great day of football all around.

What the fuck was up with Notre Dame's helmets (http://solecollector.com/news/adidas-unveils-new-notre-dame-techfit-football-uniforms/)?   :ye_gods:

I wonder how much money went into designing that dumpster fire of a uniform.

(http://kentuckysportsradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/georgia-cheerleader-500x333.jpg)

They should suit her up.  :awesome_for_real:

Georgia's problems aren't in our players. I think the NFL ranks speak soundly to that fact over the last decade.

The problem continues to be coaching, and I've been harping on it for the last 4 years.

Sign of the times. I don't mind the change up on some teams... and Oregon continues to corner the market on sleek uniforms. Only real problem I had with the ND uniforms is the helmet. That thing is just wrong.

Uniform changes are all about attracting young players. Going for a more modern, fresh look may go against the traditionalist vein, but most of the new players don't give a damn about the traditions. They want to look good getting off the bus.

I think it looks ridiculous, but I'm a 30 something white guy, not an 18 year old black recruit.

Yeah, I get that.  I really like Missouri's uniforms and I like the alternate Ohio State uniforms.  Just because it's new doesn't mean it has to be fugly.

Also, Paelos, I think you're missing the point on the picture.   :grin:

You mean the black player with the tag "All Irish"?

Yeah I rolled my eyes at that one.  :oh_i_see:

Yer so funny.   :awesome_for_real:

Next we can have an Asian player for FSU with the tag, "All Seminole"

That would be equally ridiculous of a slogan.

Then again, Tom Cruise did play the Last Samurai, so I supposed that set the bar in ridiculous racial goofs.

:facepalm:

I know, I know, the story is based on a white guy in colonialization of Japan. That's not the point. The point is that when you hear a title of "The Last Samurai" you don't immediately think OH LOOK A HONKY!

I don't think that's the picture ghost meant.  :-P

I know, I'm just being pissy.  :grin:

My team got owned in the face, I'm dealing with the 2nd stage of grief, ANGER!

Southerners.   :awesome_for_real:

He's just angry because he thinks that the chick is super hot. 

She's got guns, does she have the abs?

I think it doesn't matter because she'd kick all of our asses.

Holy God, that thing is fucking ugly. Who the fuck thought that would be a good idea?

Aside from the helmet it's not too bad. 

Right above her cock.

A little UT eyebleach to compensate for that UGA hoor.

(http://chivethebrigade.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/vols-tennessee-girls-500-63.jpg?w=500&h=829)

There are a few great games this weekend:

1.  USC vs. LSU-  I'm thinking LSU will pull their heads out of their asses on offense and put together a better game at home, but I'm starting to think that USC is the real deal.  They've got a bitch of a schedule and will probably play in the national title game if they go undefeated. 
2.  Stanford vs. Notre Dame-  I'm not a big Notre Dame fan, but they're showing that they are less of a house of cards than in previous years.  I think they win pretty big over Stanford, who I like even less than Notre Dame. 
3.  Oregon State vs. BYU-  BYU is pretty tough at home, typically, and I think this could be an upset.  OSU's best win was over Arizona, IMO.  I'm picking the zoobs (is that right?).
4.  Texas vs. OU-  Both of these teams are terribly overrated, in my mind.  I think OU wins again this year.  I'm not a big fan of Mack Brown or his current coordinators. 
5.  Aggy vs. Lewsiana Tech-  What the hell was the AD of Aggy thinking on this one?  Oh, right.....it's aggy.  I think they'll have a tough game on their hands. 
6.  Tennessee vs. Mississippi St.-  Tennessee goes down again.

.....and a bunch of shitty ass ACC games.   :ye_gods:

Oregon State is without their QB and their backup has thrown a grand total of something like 16 passes in his college career.  BYU is supposedly going back to their senior starting QB who has been injured, but he pretty much sucks (known locally as "that noodle-armed Hobbit").  BYU's defense will likely shut down OSU and they will manage some flukey BS TD and that's all they will need. BYU is actually favored in the game, so it won't really be an upset (except for the ranking, which we will hear about interminably by the zoob douchebags).

And "Zoob" is correct. It derives from the derisive description of the place as BYZoo (i.e. a place you can go to look at the animals, but wouldn't want to live in).

Sweet!   tOSU and Texas are doing a home and home.   (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8487712/ohio-state-buckeyes-texas-longhorns-set-home-home-series).  Texas tends to play some good schools.

I think the Big 10 needs to do more of that. I applaud teams making an effort to go outside that conference and try to prove it on the road. It's something I think the ACC needs to do as well.

They may not win the games, but they have to try. Otherwise, they'll get no respect in the overall polls.

OSU has been very good about it.  Michigan, Michigan State and Wisconsin are decent.  The Big Ten is certainly better than the SEC or ACC. 

You mean the SEC that played in the two Kickoff games this year against ranked opponents?  :oh_i_see:

Sorry, Paelos.  The SEC is at the bottom of the heap in playing shitty teams (http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2012-06-29/sec-nonconference-schedule-rankings-alabama-florida-lsu-missouri-arkansas).  When you consider the quality of the SEC, they shouldn't allow FCS opponents.  It's insulting.  Even you've bitched about the shitty schedule UGa plays.

Point #1 - The difference between the 4 real football conferences (Big 12, Big 10, SEC, and Pac 12) is not that big of a percentage. The SEC lags by 6% in BCS opponents. Wake me when I care.

Point #2 - The difference in those 4 conferences in non-BCS opponents is 4%. Again, who cares. We're literally talking about 1-2 games here.

Point #3 - The Big 10 is the only one not playing FCS schools in non-conference. Know why? Because there's a ton of shitty schools in those states that are technically in the FBS, but have no business playing big boy football. I'm looking at you Eastern and Central Michigan, Ohio, Western Michigan, Northern Illinois, Miami of Ohio

Point #4 - I agree that playing FCS opponents is total crap, and I hate seeing it on my schedule. However, if they make the rule league wide, I don't think you'd get as much support from the other conferences as you might think. They love to bash the SEC for it, and yet make their choice deals with directional schools in week 1, too.

Point #5 - Outside of last years asinine championship game. There's been ample opportunity to dethrone an SEC champion on the national stage. The day that happens, I guarantee the SEC schedules harder, because they WILL hear about it. Until then, why should they? Is there anything to gain by making up 4-6% on other conferences, other than some wacky perception in the national media?

So.....what's your point? 

The SEC is by far and away the best league and they play a shitty ass OOC schedule.  I think it's insulting to the fans to play FCS schools and can appreciate the Big Ten and PAC 12 scheduling. 

I doubt those FCS schools think it is insulting when the biggest payout of the year comes with that game. The other side of the coin so to speak is the fact that if these schools never get a game with the "big boys," their programs would suffer greatly, at least financially. These schools would hardly ever get seen otherwise as well. So they play a powerhouse school, get to play on national TV, get the biggest paycheck of the year to keep their program afloat, and maybe get blown out? There is incentive on both teams' parts to schedule that game, it is not just about the big boy getting a freebee.

The SEC needs to stop scheduling their patsy games in the last 3 weeks of the season. Do that shit before conference games like everyone else.

I'm sure their players think its insulting when they lose 56 to 10 and then don't really see any of that money.

You didn't read at all. There's an immaterial difference between their scheduling when you break it down. All BCS teams aren't created equal (ACC & BIG EAST), and all FBS teams aren't created equal (Eastern, Western, Central Michigan).

My point is that OOC scheduling is a perception issue. It's people pointing at the SEC and saying look at that, when they do the same thing in a different way. Let me give you Ohio State as an example. They played Miami OH, UCF, Cal, and UAB. Those teams are combined 4-10 in OOC. Two of them are in conference USA, the other is in the MAC. Do you really take those schools more seriously than an FCS school? Because I don't.

Cal and Central Florida I definitely take more seriously than Savannah State.   :uhrr:

You mean the Savannah state that played an ACC and Big 12 OCC this year? Don't see the SEC on that one either.

Admit it, most of this is perception, not reality.

No.  The SEC has a relatively weaker schedule than the PAC or the Big Ten. 

Assumptions not withstanding, I doubt that gameday paycheck goes in someone's pocket and not to the school's athletic program - which might be the bulk of their funds. Take that away and see how many of these schools close up shop. The players might be dejected getting pounded on for a OOC game against a powerhouse, but they do get national exposure if they fit into a television spot and what competitor at that level of commitment doesn't want their shot against the best even if they have little chance? And they do have a chance at winning or even keeping it close enough to validate the program.

:facepalm:

Just for clarification-  OOC only.  Full schedule SEC is still the toughest. 

Well for one thing, the Big 10 plays less OOC games because they have 12 members instead of 14. However, they play one more BCS team. Here's a list of those BCS teams for the Big 10 not including doubles:

Alabama, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Boston College, Vanderbilt, UCLA, Virginia, Temple, Cal, Arizona State, Oregon State

Here's the SEC: Arizona State, Syracuse, Northwestern, Wake Forest, Michigan, Rutgers, FSU, Washington, Texas, Clemson, GA Tech, Louisville

Average power ranking of those teams for the Big 10 - 44.3
Average power ranking of those teams for the SEC - 42.6
Difference of about 4% in favor of the Big 10.

So you want to argue about 4%? That's all well and good until you consider the SoS from the conference. Big 10 PR - 39.4 and the SEC PR - 46.3

That's a difference of 17%

They see it by the money paying for the fact that there's a program there at all. FCS environment is really nothing like the BCS level, they need those games just to stay afloat, their programs are not money machines.

I don't trust SoS in college football to be meaningful, too much media ranking feedback loop action there.

Agree, particularly in the first 4 weeks of the season.  Wasn't Arkansas ranked 8th in the early polls?  Shows you what people know early on.

That's not SoS by media. That's power rankings by statfox that they use to make the lines for gamblers.

EDIT: Lowest rated team in the SEC is Kentucky at 31. Highest is Bama at 64.

Lowest in Big 10 is Indiana at 25, highest is Michigan at 51.

I would never argue that the overall SOS is anything but the hardest for SEC teams.  Just cherry picking the BCS schools played in the OOC schedule doesn't tell you much.  Of course I'd expect such a comparison to be similar. 

I'm not cherry picking. That's all of them that are BCS.

If you want to argue the merits of Eastern Michigan v. Jacksonville St, I'm just going to laugh at you. The idea of comparing Conference USA schools v. FCS is a joke. Neither of those schools are going to challenge anybody.

I averaged up all of the FCS and "directional" schools for the Big Ten, SEC and PAC12. 

The SEC plays a total of 40 schools of that sort, of which most of them are FCS.  The average per SEC team is 3.33 with Mississippi State and Aggie playing 4 each.  Missouri has the least number of low quality opponents.

The Big Ten plays a total of 26 of such schools, many of which are "directional" schools (which, due to scholarship numbers and the overall quality of athlete I DO place in a different category than FCS schools.  Average is 2.17. 

The PAC 12 plays 11 such opponents for an average of less than 1. 

Case rested. 

Well if you're counting 40 of the SEC schools as directional or FCS, most of them can't be FCS since there were only 15 on the list. Simple math of 25>15. So, no.

Also, your PAC 12 number is misleading because they only play 3 OOC games, not 4. In the end, it simply doesn't matter. I don't count scheduling teams like Hawaii, San Jose State, Rice, etc as tough opponents.

I mean FFS you're honestly splitting hairs about this. NOBODY WORTH A DAMN LOSES THE NON-BCS GAMES. It doesn't matter if you schedule Memphis or Southwestern Shittown. Stanford is still going to steamroll them, and they were scheduled to be a tuneup win early in the season. Oregon could too, and USC, and Wisconsin, and Ohio State, and Michigan, and pretty much everyone that's going to at least go for the top 25.

Here are the PAC-12 losses out of that OOC schedule: LSU, Nevada, Ohio State, Missouri, BYU, Colorado State, Sacramento State, Fresno State, Utah State. The funny thing is that the last four are pretty much the fault of Utah and Colorado (aka the new kids). Other than that, you have BCS opponents and Cal tripping over it's own dick against Nevada.

SEC losses? Northwestern, Louisville, Western KY, Louisiana Monroe, Rutgers, Texas, and Clemson. Funny part there is that Western KY and LA Monroe is courtesy of our two worst programs in the league who get to battle out their shittiness this week! Arkansas v. Kentucky! WOOO! (Maybe Auburn too, but they beat LA Monroe  :why_so_serious: )

No tripping involved, Nevada is just a flat out better team than us.

Yeah, Nevada and some of those other non-BCS teams are decent, something Paelos is ignoring.


Addendum-  Colorado, however, is fucking putrid.   :ye_gods: 

I'll give Louisiana Tech some credit, since they managed to sneak into the top 25. Good on them.

Well they did trounce Illinois by 40+ points.  Of course, junior college teams can probably accomplish that this year.

So Utes have decided to start their true freshman at UCLA today. Should be interesting.  :oh_i_see:

Texas is getting their asses handed to them by Oklahoma yet again.

You can't be taken seriously when your defense is that shitty.

I fully expect that to bite WVA as well.

I don't know that Utah wins another game this year.

At least you won't have to wait long to see it.  :awesome_for_real:

Wow.  Didn't expect that sort of ass stomping.


Addendum-  but, then again, it's clear after today that Texas is awful.  I fully expect OU and OSU to beat the fuck out of WVU, and probably K-State too.

Nothing like a prediction coming true on the same day!  :grin:

EDIT: I'm interested to see Washington v. USC tonight. I won't go as far as to predict an upset, but I'm interested in seeing what I believe is a tough Washington club at home.

WTB offense please. Thanks.   :oh_i_see:

Well at least my tears go well with the tequila. :cry:

Can we revisit the idea that Kentucky is the worst team in D1 football?

Do you face Auburn?

No.  However, Auburn lost to Arky 24-7 in a full game.  Kentucky lost to Arky 49-7 in a rain shortened game-  called about 6 minutes into the third quarter. 

I am going to go with Illinois being the worst team this year.

According to my handicapper sites, you are now the worst team in the SEC. You are tied with Illinois in shittiness.

However, the worst team in D1 right now is Massachusetts. They are 0-6 on the season with losses to Uconn, Indiana, Michigan, Miami OH, Ohio, and Western Michigan. They've been beaten by a combined 178 points in those games.

Oh and for the Leaders and Legends out there, the Big 10 doesn't have a single team in the BCS top 25.

The Big East and ACC are laughing at you.

I think this is one of the few things Colin Cowherd is completely spot on about.  The Big Ten is in a death spiral that it will never get out of.  Kids don't want to live in the rust belt.  They want to live in the South or in LA/West coast.  Outside of Ohio State, I doubt the Big Ten will ever be relevant again.

I really doubt that a huge number of people say FUCK YEAH I WANT TO LIVE IN BIRMINGHAM. The appeal of Alabama is not the where, it is the perception that it is a fast track to the NFL.

Also: Kansas State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati, Boise State, Iowa State, all in the BCS top 25 standings. Half of those are in Big 10 areas geographically, the rest are in places more or less as unappealing to live in.

And I didn't even mention the Texas schools.  :grin:

Also it has to be pointed out that Ohio State *would* be in the BCS top 25, if they were not on probation.

Yes, but you're missing part of the reason.  If you have to choose between the traditional powerhouses of Alabama, Florida, Texas A and M or Texas, USC, USC Jr., etc. versus Happy fucking valley or Columbus or Ann Arbor, there's no comparison.  And that's why you're starting to see more success from the south.  There's nobody in the North/Northeast that is worth a fuck any more and it's because of the migration of "cool" and money to the south and west.  Also, kids don't want to play in the cold weather any  more than they have to, so that factors into the equation. 

The south has always been successful in football, I don't think there's any new trend there. USC also. But then - the Florida schools are worse lately than they have been for years? And UCLA hasn't been good for years now, despite being in a much nicer part of LA. By this theory those places should be generally thriving, along with the rest of the ACC. I'm very skeptical of any broad single reason killing football forever in the Midwest in favor of those places.

I don't know if you've ever been to Eugene, by the way, but there is nothing about Oregon that is going to magically attract athletes either. Unless they really like coffee houses, or they're hipsters.

The answer as to why there are more kids going to Southern schools has a lot to do with where they are growing up. There has been a largescale migration of the black population in America back to the South. The NY Times covers some of it in this article (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/us/25south.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) which details that the black population in the south is at it's highest in over half a century. Michigan and Illinois have been losing ground in this regard, even though they were long-held traditional black communities. Younger black people especially are moving down to the South in favor of the northern communities.

Basically, the South is becoming a more integrated place, and with that integration comes a more robust college-eligible community. Considering the percentage of black athletes at top schools, it makes sense that the overall demographic shift in America mirrors the demographic shift of power in college football. The best recruits in the nation are coming out of the South. Just look at the top 10 on ESPN's recruiting boards. They are all young black kids, and 8 out of 10 of them play in the South for high school.

Sad to say that the public school systems in the South are also some of the worst in the nation. Might only be corollary, but conclusions will be made on that and probably right most of the time.  :oh_i_see:

And they're moving why?  Because of the economy. 

Certainly part of it. Another part is that the stigmas of the 1960s are dead. There are black leaders in city governments, black community leaders, and black artists/moguls/athletes that choose to live in the South. It's a Renaissance of sorts, culturally.

Also, many of the Southern states have no income tax or a very small one. Many of them provide more opportunities for better housing and cost of living decreases. Plus the weather isn't brutal.

Demographers can't agree with all the who's and why's, but the facts are there that the numbers are shifting, and with a more robust black population comes better football players.

There's also the factor that kids can practice longer in the South due to the weather. 

Huh.  I've never had a double post issue here.  It must be because I'm so fucking sleepy from making nocturnal babies.   :oh_i_see:


Here, I'll make it useful-  Not looking really great for Mack Brown (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8508448/mack-brown-texas-longhorns-holds-no-plans-retire-wake-rout), when he has to start justifying his existence. 

Brown should be fired. They haven't beaten anybody ranked since 2009. Sorta like Richt.

At some point you have to ask yourself if any other coach could do he's doing. I think yes. They have the most fertile recruiting ground in the region. They have the most money of any college program in the region. They have a national brand. They have legions of supporters.

There's no reason why they shouldn't be beating ranked teams.

Hmm.  I wonder what the chances Mack Brown gets pushed out after this year are?  And who might they hire?  I could see them going after Peterson from Boise. 

Charlie Strong would be my choice.

Yeah, he would be reasonable as well, as would Dan Mullen from MSU. 

My upset of the week special is West Virginia over Kansas State. 

West Virginia is favored.  :oh_i_see:

And at home.

Meh.  I'm just looking at the rankings.  Plus I got little sleep last night so give me a break.   :awesome_for_real:

I'm leaning towards Texas A&M over LSU as my upset special. Home dog against the favored #6 Tigers coming off their SC win.

Cal over Stanfurd, clearly.

Thought about that. Then I guessed they are going to come off the ND game really pissed off.

I'd say lean even further. I don't think the LSU defense can completely shut down the Aggies and their offense sure as shit can't match the Aggies output. I give the Tigers credit for beating SC, but they didn't beat them comfortably.

Actually, I'm going to reverse my previous pick and go with K-State over WVU.  Because I'm stubborn.

LSU absolutely cannot pass, so they will try to grind the ball on the Aggies and play ball control. Considering that I believe the worst part of the Aggies defense is their secondary (111th in the nation), and their run D is a solid #5 in the SEC, I think I'm going to go with it as my pick for sure.

LOCK IT IN! Aggies beat the Tigers this Saturday.

Which is astounding given Mettenberger was supposed to be a step up to the passing attack. Please can I have Jarrett Lee back - he was the only real serviceable arm we have had since Flynn.

Mettenberger seems like he is in slow-mo, for sure.  I'm not sure he's going to be the answer for LSU.

LSU and Florida aren't for real in my book. The problem is they are so one-dimensional they NEVER pass well.  The bottom 4 teams in passing this year in the SEC? Kentucky, LSU, Auburn, and Florida.

Just think about that for a second.

That's interesting, because I consider Driskell to be competent at passing. 

Yeah most people do until they dig on the numbers. He's completing things fine, but they are short, and it's not often at all. He's 74/111 for over 66% completion. He dinks and dunks with the best of them. Sounds good on paper, until you consider the fact that Florida is 117th in the nation in pass attempts. They've only thrown the ball 27 more times than Georgia Tech and Navy, the famed Triple Option schools.

Wow.  I still consider Florida a notch up from LSU.  They've got more offensive horses running the ball.  Driskell himself is a big threat.

Here's an upset pick for you: Illinois will not lose this week!

Playing BYE?

Oregon plays Arizona State tonight.  I'm thinking that Oregon may have a little difficulty with this game. 

You had too many letters in your statement. I cleaned it up for you.

ASU hasn't played anyone decent yet.  They lost to Missouri.

I think they'll put up some points on Oregon, because I don't think their red zone offense can be any more inept than Arizona's, and Oregon will give up yards.   I don't see them beating Oregon, but hey, weird shit happens in the PAC all of the time.

I don't think they beat Oregon. I also don't think Oregon has faced anything that resembles a defense yet. Arizona State has a solid defense.

I'm taking the 8 points.

I don't think ASU will win, but I don't thing Oregon is going to mow them down by 60 points like they've been doing to everyone else. 

(https://dl.dropbox.com/u/82533/duckhunt.jpg)

Yeah, I told all you fuckers this one could be tight.   :oh_i_see:

 :ye_gods:

That team is frightening.

The only challenge that is going to face Oregon is going to be USC, then OSU.  Other than those two games, it will be just like last night. 

Having said that... our 2nd, 3rd, 4th string guys are going to get their ass chewed in practice.  Unable to move the ball in the second half, giving up two touchdowns to a combination of big plays and sustained drives?  Kelly (and Aliotti) will not stand for that bullshit. 

Lastly, Bennett needs to learn to fucking pass.  I don't know if it's because he was throwing to a group of 2nd/3rd string guys, but it seriously looked like a high school quarterback out there.

I'll say it again... Oregon and Alabama are in a different league than the rest of the NCAA this year.  I'm dying to see Oregon's offense play Alabama's defense.  That would be epic to watch.   

I concur. But I think Bama's defense > Oregon's offense. Defensive speed is always a premium in the SEC, and LSU demonstrated that against the, albeit younger, ORE squad. Then again, this football season, like the NFL, is just full of "wtf happened" so no one knows what to expect next week or any of the other weeks.

The problem with Oregon is that they put the ball on the ground a lot.  The teams they've faced aren't in the same league as top SEC teams in terms of causing turnovers and capitalizing on them.  I'm just worried they'll pull out a six+ turnover outing like they did against LSU.  

Plus, it helps to have a month to prepare against that offense and the actual athletes to simulate it.

And yah, USC and OSU are going to be hellish games for them.  OSU in particular.  That WR duo and that defense.   :ye_gods:  They have a shot against anyone.

Oregon might be better than a top tier SEC defense for a game, i.e. the national title game, however if they had to play against that caliber of defense over an extended season schedule they'd be fucked and probably finish up with 2-3 losses. 

I think if you give Nick Saban 30 days to gameplan, he could beat the Giants, let alone the Ducks.

There's two problems I have with Oregon. 1 - The only SEC team they've beaten with Chip Kelly at the helm is Tennessee, in 3 opportunities. 2 - They've only won one bowl game in his tenure, against last year's Wisconsin team.

I think this is clearly their best team though. 

Didn't help him beat the Utes.


(Sorry, team sucks so bad right now I have to live in the past).

Care to make a friendly wager on whether or not Kentucky beats the spread, Paelos? 

Are you taking Kentucky?

Absolutely fucking not.   :oh_i_see:

Then we have no bet  :awesome_for_real:

After watching Kentucky play Arkansas, I've come to your line of thinking. They are the worst team in the SEC bar none. I'd love to see them play Auburn to prove it on the field, but alas, it is not to be.

The only major college team that may be worse is Colorado. 

Crap.  South Carolina is getting destroyed.   :oh_i_see:

Puts the Dawgs back in the hunt.

Not sure how I feel about that given what I just witnessed.

Also, BYU should be fucking ashamed. This is the biggest fraud Notre Dame team I've ever seen.

You guys are absolutely not going to be back in the hunt.  Georgia sucks donkey dicks.   :oh_i_see:

Also, how the fuck was Iowa State in the top 25?   :oh_i_see: :oh_i_see:

Meh... nevermind.  :oh_i_see:

That was a tough win for LSU, Binary. 

Actually, I was posting and ESPN screengrab that showed the WVU game stats, only they were season stats put in place of the game stats. I wasn't quick enough on the grab though.

And if LSU actually had a QB or a serviceable offensive coordinator, they'd be stomping people. Seriously... how do you win a game when your QB throws for under 100 yards in the game? Meh. A win is a win, but ffs... solve the damn passing game already.

 :oh_i_see:

Heh.   :awesome_for_real:

That was maybe the worst Big Game ever. Stanford looked mediocre, we looked wretched.

That's what happens when you play it on the wrong day.

Chances of Georgia getting it's ass handed to us this weekend: 98%

UGA/FL will be interesting. I am more interested in the MissSt/Bama game. State has been pretty much off the radar the whole season even though they are undefeated. However, I think UGA has the better upset shot.

No, UGA/FL will be very UNinteresting. We have no upset shot. The last time we beat an undefeated Florida team coming into the game was 1985. The last two times we played a top 10 Florida team (2008-2009), we lost both by a combined 63 points.

The only shot we have is if Florida suffers a bout of the flu, literally shits themselves in the first quarter, and fumbles the ball 4 times.

Yeah the whole experience was just wrong. The weather was wrong, the stakes were wrong, none of the normal events happened practically, the mood was all wrong in the stadium. Wrong wrong wrong. Fuck you, Pac-12.

I'm pulling for ya, UGA, but Gillislee is the real fucking deal.  He's like if Rainey could take a hit.

I'm laying a lot of money the other way so I can wash these ticket costs.

UGa is going to get demolished.

Looks to be a very fun weekend of college football ahead of us.  For as lame as last weekend was, this one will make up for it in spades.

Important games:

1.  Cincinnati versus Louisville-  I'm not sold on Louisville as a top 10 team.  Their schedule is suspect and they don't have any great wins.  UC is good and could prove to be a tough match for the Cardinals at home
2.  Mississippi State versus Alabama-  I'm thinking Alabama will win, but not by a lot (maybe 2 touchdowns?)
3.  Florida versus Georgia-  Georgia will probably give Florida a better game than everyone is expecting.  I'm going to say that this one is a toss up, after thinking about it for a bit. 
4.  Texas Tech versus K State-  I think K state wins by 2-3 touchdowns.  They could even end up playing for the title if some people stub their toes along the way.
5.  Notre Dame versus Oklahoma-  Wow.  This is just exciting.  Two old school powers slugging it out as #5 versus #8.  I figure Oklahoma will win, but Notre Dame's defense is damned good. 
6.  USC versus Arizona-  USC is vulnerable this year.  Arizona's three losses have been to highly ranked teams.  They have beaten Oklahoma State and beat Washington pretty handily.  This could be a good game if USC isn't at their best.
7.  Tennessee versus South Carolina-  Good game to watch.  I hope Tennessee gets pulverized.

 :grin:

I'm going to nickname this weekend "Exposure Weekend" in CFB:

I think Cincy will struggle against Louisville because they are on the road, and because their pass defense gave up 250+ to Fordham and Miami of Ohio through the air. Teddy Bridgewater is one of those guys who hasn't made it on the Heisman watch yet, but if he goes undefeated and K State stumbles, he'll get a look. He is that good.

MS State v. Alabama, the fact anybody considers MS State to be good is because they are undefeated against crap. Wins over KY, TN, and Auburn? Please. This is going to be worse than the UGA v. SC exposure of an "undefeated" program.

My feeling on GA/FL this year are well documented. We're a lockerroom divided, the coaching staff is pretending nothing is wrong, and FL is seething for revenge over last year's loss. We suck. FL owns us.

K State. This one might be close, but I doubt it. Texas Tech's defense has been torched by teams like OU and TCU. K State's never allowed more than 21 points to much better teams, including OU.

Notre Dame is going to get smoked. This is the game where they finally get exposed as well.

USC v. Arizona. No offense to either school, but this is irrelevant. Unless it's Oregon or Oregon State, right now I could care less about the PAC 12.

Tennessee maybe lets Dooley keep his job if he beats teh old Ball Coach. Otherwise, it's coming to a close fast.

I decided at the start of the year if Dooley can't get us three SEC wins he needs to go.  Clock's ticking.

His last press conference was very interesting.  You could see the desperate crazy in his eyes.  Talking about putting his resignation on the table at the end of the year he said "I'm not a dumbass." 

Sir, I'm not sure you'll make it long enough to have that option.

It was really sad to see Lattimore go down like that.  He's had two shitty injuries in two years.

Illinois lost to Indiana at home. Definitely the worst team in the country this year.

Looks like Lattimore broke his tibia.  I guess that's better than the ACL option.

Depends on how bad. Ask Joe Theisman.

That was a tib-fib fracture.  Different deal than a tibia alone. 

It was the bad regrowth of his tibia that cause him to retire. He ended up with one leg shorter than the other.

I didn't know that, but a tib-fib is nothing to fuck with, particularly a compound fracture.  A simple tibia fracture which responds well and is easily reduced should have a better long term prognosis than an ACL injury though.

I broke my tibia clean though when I was 12.  I was never quite the same athletically.  Obviously this guy is in another world in that respect.

LOL Trojans.

Thanks UGA. You really do make dreams come true.   :drill:

So which SEC team will now magically leapfrog everyone to be #2?

Excepting Louisville I'm like the fucking Kwizatz Haderach (so far)  this week.  That doesn't happen often.   :awesome_for_real:

Wow. UW finally gets a win vs a Top 10 team. They goddamned played enough of them this season.

 :yahoo:

Man, if we could only close we'd be in the driver's seat to get our shit kicked in by Oregon again.  As is, a UofA win over USC is a fine day.

We can't play D for shit, but the Matt Scott, Kadim Carey, Austin Hill trio is pretty effective at racking up yardage and points.  This season is going to be one giant WHAT-IF at the end.

I hope its a blizzard when you play up here on the 17th.

Marcus Lattimore reportedly fractured his femur and tore all four ligaments in his knee (http://www.nesn.com/2012/10/report-marcus-lattimore-broke-femur-patella-tore-acl-mcl-pcl-lcl-in-knee.html). 

That is a horrific injury, if true.  He will be done playing football. 

 :ye_gods:

Right on Louisville, Right on Alabama, dead wrong on Georgia, right on K State, totally wrong on Notre Dame, USC and Arizona still is irrelevant unless USC loses to UCLA and AZ State, and Dooley is getting canned for sure.

Also, go Dawgs.  :awesome_for_real:

8 turnovers in Cal-UW last night. Apparently playing on Friday night means playing like the other teams that play on Fridays.  :uhrr:

Fucking Pittsburgh.   :oh_i_see:

My god, Pac12 refs are terrible at spotting the ball still aren't they?

One of these days LSU might develop an actual balanced offense. The day that happens, they'll win the title.

I don't see it happening anytime soon though.  :facepalm:


Btw, UGA started  :ye_gods: and finished  :awesome_for_real: today.

A bullshit pass interference call negating a turnover may very well cost Oregon this game. My god the PAC 12 needs better refs :p

Edit: phew, bad ref makes bad call to make up for previous one a little bit.

Based on what I've seen, there's a couple title games that jump out to me as good, and a couple that just out as really bad ideas.

Title games that would be interesting:

K State v. Oregon or K State v. Bama

Games that would not be interesting:

ND v. anybody.
Oregon v. Bama.

That was a badass ending to the LSU-Bama game. 

How does UCLA lose to us, then roll Arizona like that?

Don't know, but it's very disturbing.  How can one team be so bad on the road?  FFS. 

Seems like PAC-12 teams are collectively terrible on the road.

Except for Oregon, who look unstoppable. 

They need to stop dicking around and get rid of Studrawa and get someone with an offensive mind put in place. That said, last night fell on the defense sadly. They got too tight looking at the score board on that last series and flat out blew it. That said, at least they stood toe-to-toe with Bama on defense - and aside from that last play, I'd say LSU's D looked slightly better - at least statswise.

While I dislike Bama as a rival, a small black part of me wanted them to win. If they lost, then I doubt there would be an SEC team in the BCSC. Oregon will win out, ND -can go fuck themselves - but they'll probably win out (god damn you Pitt), and K-St. Given those would run the table, that would leave the SEC out. Gotta keep it in the South, and all that.

I still doubt Oregon as unstoppable. Playing a USC defense doesn't impress me. Nor does giving up 51 points to a USC team that didn't even score that many on COLORADO.

Bama can be beaten. Last night proved exactly how their offense can be shut down. The fact LSU went into a soft coverage prevent with the game on the line was beyond stupid, and let McCarron pick apart their coverage with the same dink and dunk stuff they pulled all first half. Let's be clear, while McCarron did help them move the ball downfield, he's not a downfield passer. Forcing him to do that make Bama completely one-dimensional. It's the reason he was 1-7 in the second half on passes before the final drive.

K State to me is still the most impressive team in the country. They now have 3 back to back to back wins over ranked teams, and a huge upset win in Norman, OK. They are averaging 5th most points in the nation, and 21s in points against. They are balanced. They have the offensive and the defensive strength to hang with anybody, plus the Heisman winner IMO.

ND has the upset win over OU, much like K State. While they have wins over ranked teams in the Big 10, that conference is wretched, and those teams are no longer relevant. Michigan and Michigan State have proven to be cakewalk opponents for other major programs. Their total OOC record is horrible, while the Big 12's OOC record is best in the nation. That's why K State sits so highly in the computer rankings. The gap will get even bigger when ND takes a hit for having to go to triple OT to just get by a 4-4 Big East team in South Bend.

I honestly believe that Oregon's offense will hang 45 plus on anyone they play.  Their defense is suspect, but they are a better team than people are giving them credit for. 

They might be. I'll admit I don't know yet because honestly they haven't played anybody I've considered to be decent. I'd like to see what they look like before the biggest game of the year, but that's impossible with their schedule. It's a larger scale "Boise State" problem.

I wasn't really sold on them until I watched a couple of their games.  They are fast.  And they've now beaten 3 top 25 teams, one of which was a top 5 at the beginning of the year.  It's not an SEC schedule, but it's not a Boise schedule either.  They end up with OSU and Stanford, both of which are decent but not great.  It's a comparable, though slightly easier, schedule than K-State plays, in my opinion.

Arizona and Washington have 8 losses combined. USC is now behind UCLA.

OU, Texas Tech, West Virginia, OK State, and Texas will all have higher rankings at the end of the day that Oregon's quality wins.

Maybe.  Other than OU they look about even right now.  We'll have to see how it shakes out at the end of the year.

McCarron had a bad night and came into the game a bit dinged up, but to say he's not a downfield passer is not quite accurate.  His completion ratio for passes thrown over 25 yards is a pretty insane 72 percent. (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/colleges/alabama/post/_/id/7827/statistical-breakdown-lsu-alabama)  His number 1 (Amari Cooper) receiver going out with an ankle didn't help.  Hell, as a team, Bama is really dinged up and desperately need an offweek.  But LSU played better than they've played all season and probably better than they'll play the rest of the year.  Mettenberger had his Stephen Garcia 2010 moment (which frankly is what I was terrified of) and his receivers actually started making plays.

Saban had remarked that before last year's LSU / Bama regular season game that the team was a little too ramped up.  I wonder if they came out here this year just a little too flat.  But going into Tiger Stadium at night vs LSU and coming out with a win?  Hell yeah, I'll take it and RUN.

Honestly though, Texas A&M scares me more than LSU does.

Personal opinion, I don't think McCarron had a bad night. I think he faced his first taste of adversity, and it revealed what he actually is as a passer. The truth about Alabama's offense is they don't like to pass much, because they already know this. In fact, they are 113th in the country in pass attempts. McCarron came through at the end, but even then that drive was more about Miles choice to play in a soft coverage, and Yeldon making an outstanding play on a screen.

I think if you have a weapon, Saban uses it. When you don't, Saban hides it. He's hiding McCarron, and attacking with guys like Yeldon and Lacey.

I do think A&M will give you issues. I've warned my cocky Alabama fan friends about this already. It will be the first time you've faced a dynamic passer all year.

I'm not going to argue that McCarron is Tom Brady, but you have to give the guy some credit.  He's thrown for almost 2,000 yards, 19 touchdowns and 0 interceptions.  That's pretty goddamned good. 

Here's where you're (Paelos) looking at numbers and not actually watching the game to see how they got there...

Those 2000 yards, 19 TDs and 0 INTs were obtained in basically in the first half.  LSU is the only game he's played the full game  Every other game, he (and the rest of the starters) were pulled as early as after the first offensive series after halftime or sometime else in the 3rd quarter.  So, if you were to somehow average out, I'd guesstimate that McCarron (and the rest of the 1st string) were playing an average of 2.5 quarters a game up until LSU.   Backups have played the rest, and when they put the backups in, they switch to a run read option and grind the rest of the game out.  The backups have thrown maybe a half dozen passes - the rest are all runs.

He's not hiding him, dude.  He's had free reign of that offense and has been slinging it around since the BCS game.  And exposing how to shut Bama down is a whole lot easier than actually doing it.  It's no secret - load as many as you can in the box and put your secondary in man/zone mix coverage.  But besides LSU, who else on Bama's schedule (nevermind whoever they'll play in the BCS NCG) has the horses to actually do it?  Nobody.

Also, on Yeldon's TD, LSU wasn't in soft coverage.  They were bringing the heat, which is why the screen pass was a perfect playcall.

Give Paelos a break.  He's a CPA.  He sits around and masturbates to numbers all day.

He's playing at a high level and the expectations are huge. People will try to shoehorn him into the Heisman talk, but nobody really believes it. Also, you are right that he's going most of his TD damage in the first half with about 1300 yards.

I'll take it a step further though. Here's his breakdown of ranked v. unranked teams. Unranked? 16 TDs and 1600 yards. Ranked? 235 against MS State with 3 Tds, 165 against LSU with 1 TD. Now if you know what we know about MS State, saying they are a ranked or tough team should be said with a crooked smile. My point is that you can toss out the numbers from prior games. The only game numbers you need to worry about right now is the LSU game, the upcoming A&M, and the SEC championship. That will tell you all you need to know about how McCarron will fare in an National Championship if he gets a shot. Those 3 will be against the toughest opponents, and the ones that have a standout facet of their game they can showcase.

In fact, take a good look at the A&M game because their pass D isn't that great. There will be chances for AJ to make plays if he can. A&M's rushing defense is 2x better than their pass coverage D, and they will try to force the issue.

I just want to say that Yeldon may be the best true freshman RB that I've watched in my entire life.  Speed, strength, and quickness... he's like an NFL sized Barry Sanders.  If he can stay healthy, I expect him to win the Heisman next year.

I would agree with that. Yeldon has the stop and go lateral movement speed that can eat alive a defense that isn't absolutely fundamentally sound on their tackles. And there aren't that many of those in college ball.

You mean...such as...win the offensive MVP in the BCS NCG as he did last year against LSU?

I'm not quite sure what your argument here is other than you're really really wrong.  He's not the elite, prototypical NFL second coming of a Manning Brady lovechild, but he's pretty damned good.

He went for 234 yards with no TDs in the NCG.

I'm not trying to rewrite history here. The fact he was the "offensive MVP" or whatever you want to call it is a joke. The defense in that game held LSU to 0 points in the national championship. Fuck, you could have kicked a field goal and won. All else is a moot point. In fact, your kicker should have gotten the offensive MVP in that game for his 5 FGs.

I'm making the argument that people always want to make the QB bigger than he is when a team wins, but I think McCarron is a wash. He's not a liability, he's not really an asset either. In the same way I questioned whether or not LSU's QB could perform on a national stage (he didn't 3 times in a row in 2011), I question whether or not McCarron can do the same against a K State, an Oregon, an A&M, or even a UGA. Maybe he won't have to, which is what all Alabama fans should be rooting for.

I think he was the offensive MVP only because they couldn't give it to all 5 of the linemen. 

I believe I could speak for LSU and say we'd take McCarron in a heartbeat. But first, we need to find someone for Offensive Coord.

Yeah this. The guy is a fine QB - I WOULD KILL FOR A QB THIS GOOD - but he's really not up to the level of the rest of the squad.

Also mark it on your calendars, I agreed with Paelos about a sports thing.  :grin:

It's amazing how long you guys have maintained that putrid offense.  Your games with us are absolutely dreadful.

I am nearly certain we had to make some sort of horrible deal with the devil type agreement where Maynard had to be the starting QB in order to get Keenan Allen to stay. I mean, I know recruiting them together was a package deal, but I think it goes farther than that, and even as good as Allen is it has been fucking us. Maynard is done after this year, and the redshirt dude is supposed to be really good, so we'll see. Allen probably goes to the NFL, but we have some good skill players at WR and RB still. The o line continues to worry me though.

I have several questions about the games this weekend in CFB.

1 - Can FSU keep from laying an egg on the road against a very sub-par VA Tech team? They've yet to really blow any team out on the road, and dropped a bad one to NC State.
2 - Is Oregon State good enough to beat Stanford on the road?
3 - Will USC go into a tailspin against AZ State?
4 - Can Alabama contain Johnny Football and A&M?
5 - How many will Oregon hang on Cal?
6 - What will ND have to apologize for after the Boston College game?
7 - Which Big 10 team will set football back another 5 decades?
8 - Will Auburn go winless in the SEC two years off a national title?

I think we won't give up as many as Colorado did at least.  :why_so_serious:

Yes, no, no, absolutely, a million, absolutely nothing, all of them, absofuckinglutely

I would love to see Kentucky play Auburn.   :oh_i_see:

The answer to number 7 is Illinois, clearly.

Hey, you guys got your shot coming against Purdon't here soon.   :awesome_for_real:

Is there a more boring football team than Virginia Tech?  I'm looking at the Florida State/Va Tech game and thinking I'd rather watch the Ball State/Toledo game from last night again.  At least Toledo has a guy named Fluellen, which is awesome.

Hey that Toledo and Ball State turned out to be pretty exciting. I love the T-Th games. They usually provide a lot of closely matched entertainment.

EDIT: Go Ohio! Beat those Bowling Green...somethings. Google says Falcons.  :awesome_for_real:

(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y222/Abagadro/0Kq17.jpg)

Watching this VA Tech v. FSU game is painful. They are both just so bad offensively.

I told you it was going to be bad.   :oh_i_see:

This talk of A and M upsetting Alabama is funny.  Bama is going to demolish A and M.  There may be dead bodies on the field after it's over.   :oh_i_see:

Oh I think Alabama will win by 10 or so, but I don't think they can run away with it. A&M has way too much firepower to be dominated completely in the game.

A&M needs to focus on ball security against Alabama. They would have beaten LSU soundly except for their 5 turnovers in that game. Also A&M can put up 400 yards against anyone. Whether or not that's enough to win is debatable, but I think they can keep it interesting.

I don't think the A&M defensive line will make a dent in that fortress of linemen they surround McCarron with. There are very few teams that can in my opinion.

I totally agree. A&M's best hope is to play a shifting ameoba defense that confuses the line. They can't hope to bull rush them, so they'll have to outscheme them.

Alabama's defense is damned good.  I see no reason to believe that A and M will put up 400 yards against them. 

LSU's defense is damn good too. Maybe even better. A&M put up 400 on them.

Alabama's main weakness is they've been untested by any real offense with a top tier QB. No, Denard Robinson isn't that at all.

Aggie is going to get squashed.  LSU's defense may have been better before idiocy lost them a great player, but they aren't right now.

LOL Northwestern.  All you have to do is punt it into the endzone and instead you give them a runback to the 40, completed hail pass, FG. OT.

I thought those guys were supposed to be smart.


EDIT: And they lose.

Louisville got destroyed by Syracuse.  That breaks my heart.   :awesome_for_real:

Thanks for the jinxing. ARG. RTR.

Oops.

Bama just got knocked the fuck out!  That Johnny Manziel, holy shit, does that kid have skills!

Edit:  And to top it off, a shot of Saban crying to a ref.  Gold Jerry, gold!

And down goes Tyson...  :ye_gods: