- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If PSU and OSU were reversed?
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:21 am to ReauxlTide222
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:21 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:You unknowingly proved my point. When was the last time a team won the Super Bowl back to back? I don't remember honestly. The last time a team won the natty back to back in college? Multiple instances in the last 20 years.
Yes, and go lose to Urban or Saban like 10 of the last 13 NC runner ups have.
I think I made that number up, so forgive me for that. But the you catch my drift. It is hard as shite to win a NC for 97% of the teams out there. Impossible for most.
Bill Belichick, arguably one of the best coaches in football history, hasn't won a Super Bowl back to back if I recall correctly, and he has who appears to be tGOAT QB.
Saban trotted out Blake Sims and won a natty. He also won 2011 and 2012 with an above average game manager at QB.
Urban trotted out a 3rd string QB and won a natty.
AU went to the natty with a converted DB at QB, although they didn't win.
On another note, all you really need in CFB to get by is a decent QB to make the offense above average or mediocre and offset by defense and a decent to good defense.
That kind of shite doesn't happen in the NFL due to parity's existence. If you don't have an elite offense/defense or a combo of good offense/defense, your arse isn't winning the Super Bowl.
The 97% number is also highly skewed due to the vast majority of CFB being irrelevant in the natty picture. The SEC hasn't sent a different rep to compete for it all other than UA or AU since 2011.
3
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:40 am to Kodar
quote:I hate when I do that.
You unknowingly proved my point
quote:You don't.
Bill Belichick, arguably one of the best coaches in football history, hasn't won a Super Bowl back to back if I recall correctly
This post was edited on 12/1/16 at 12:42 am
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:47 am to highbooost
Bro, your boy fricked with kids, give it a rest
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:47 am to Kodar
I hear you. But there are no excuses to not be good in the NFL. Teams go from shite to really good...really quickly. If a team wants to be good, and is willing to put in effort and not be stupid as shite, the world is their oyster.
If Kentucky wants to be good at foo.....jk, they'll never be good. The % of teams who have zero chance of winning a NC is WAY larger than the % of NFL teams who have a chance to win a SB.
If Kentucky wants to be good at foo.....jk, they'll never be good. The % of teams who have zero chance of winning a NC is WAY larger than the % of NFL teams who have a chance to win a SB.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:49 am to Ed Osteen
quote:This is where we should all exit the thread
Bro, your boy fricked with kids, give it a rest
Posted on 12/1/16 at 1:21 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:I'm not sure if this sarcasm, but for the record I hate doing it to my self
I hate when I do that.
quote:My bad then.
You don't.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 1:24 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:That's kind of my point. There are so many teams that can compete that cannibalism takes over. No game is a gimme at any point. Granted, technically no game in CFB is a gimme either, but what were Chattanooga's chances of actually beating Bama?
I hear you. But there are no excuses to not be good in the NFL. Teams go from shite to really good...really quickly. If a team wants to be good, and is willing to put in effort and not be stupid as shite, the world is their oyster.
Think of the SECW a few years ago when the country was wondering if the SEC wouldn't even get a rep in due to knocking each other off. It didn't happen, but it was a legitimate concern.
quote:Eh, what I would say here is basically the same as above.
If Kentucky wants to be good at foo.....jk, they'll never be good. The % of teams who have zero chance of winning a NC is WAY larger than the % of NFL teams who have a chance to win a SB.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 1:24 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:Yep, been fun. I would say a whack may be on the way now.
This is where we should all exit the thread
Posted on 12/1/16 at 1:26 am to Kodar
tPSU?
Posted on 12/1/16 at 1:58 am to highbooost
PSU is 1-2 vs top 25 teams. There's a clear difference.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 2:01 am to Kodar
quote:Oh, no, I was being serious
I'm not sure if this sarcasm, but for the record I hate doing it to my self
Posted on 12/1/16 at 4:38 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Oh, no, I was being serious
Posted on 12/1/16 at 5:17 am to ReauxlTide222
TCU's best win was Kansas State. Their schedule was as or more embarrassing. TCU and Ohio State were comparable teams. At that point, the committee's tiebreakers mattered.
This isn't that hard.
This isn't that hard.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 6:30 am to highbooost
Sadly if the roles were reversed the committee and media would put OSU in before PSU. All they are worried about is $$$$$$$. Head to head PSU won and won the division. Win title game and they should be in but they'll be left out.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 7:59 am to highbooost
quote:
highbooost
Please please please please don't let this guy be an LSU fan.
The post about Michigan and Wisconsin not being quality wins because they were close games may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard on here.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News