- 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
Objectively, is college football a hell of a lot more entertaining now?
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:09 pm
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:09 pm
Or is it just different?
I grew up as a young kid in the 90s and idolized everything about the sport. From logos and colors to rivalries and stats.
What I thought was good back then really isn't when compared to today's standards. I think it all changed around 2008. Last years three QB competition was gawdy.
I was thinking about Joey Harrington because of a stupid post on the rant. He finished 3rd in the Heisman rankings with some fairly pedestrian statistics.
Eric Crouch won that year. Yeah he could run, but 7tds and 10 int?!
Then I started looking around...
Even Danny Weurffel who I considered a god back then had a terrible completion percentage.
207/360 57.5%
3,625 yds
39 tds 13 int
Those numbers are okay. That 3:1 td:int ratio was considered good back then. Now it's more like 8:1 for elite qbs!
Joe Burrow's stats are light years better than what Danny Weurffel's were. I never thought I'd be able to say that about an LSU qb. But hell, I think Jamarcus was too. '
Anyway, carry on.
I grew up as a young kid in the 90s and idolized everything about the sport. From logos and colors to rivalries and stats.
What I thought was good back then really isn't when compared to today's standards. I think it all changed around 2008. Last years three QB competition was gawdy.
I was thinking about Joey Harrington because of a stupid post on the rant. He finished 3rd in the Heisman rankings with some fairly pedestrian statistics.
Eric Crouch won that year. Yeah he could run, but 7tds and 10 int?!
Then I started looking around...
Even Danny Weurffel who I considered a god back then had a terrible completion percentage.
207/360 57.5%
3,625 yds
39 tds 13 int
Those numbers are okay. That 3:1 td:int ratio was considered good back then. Now it's more like 8:1 for elite qbs!
Joe Burrow's stats are light years better than what Danny Weurffel's were. I never thought I'd be able to say that about an LSU qb. But hell, I think Jamarcus was too. '
Anyway, carry on.
32
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:11 pm to bayoubengals88
Compared to the NFL? Hell yes.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:11 pm to bayoubengals88
It actually kind of sucks considering there is only like 6-7 teams every year that actually matter and the rest are average.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:12 pm to bayoubengals88
No, not to me. I like a little bit lower scoring games than what a lot of the bigger games have become. I’m not saying I want 9-6 and incompetence on offense but maybe like 28-24 as opposed to 48-44. More modest point totals make the scoring a bit more dramatic and meaningful to me than teams just racing up and down. To each their own though.
This post was edited on 9/19/19 at 2:14 pm
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:13 pm to bayoubengals88
about 20% of the schools can actually win a title, so while it may be entertaining its incredibly broken currently.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:16 pm to bayoubengals88
For the most part, yes. Offenses are more dynamic and fun to watch.
Bigger picture, I liked the old conference/bowl system and no conference championship games (pre-90's). Texas-OU has always been huge but will be watered down when they play twice. New Year's day used to be the best day of the year bar none, and multiple games could decide the NC. Playoffs have taken that away and devalued the regular season somewhat. Moving to 16 teams or whatever, will really devalue it.
Obligatory get off my lawn.
Bigger picture, I liked the old conference/bowl system and no conference championship games (pre-90's). Texas-OU has always been huge but will be watered down when they play twice. New Year's day used to be the best day of the year bar none, and multiple games could decide the NC. Playoffs have taken that away and devalued the regular season somewhat. Moving to 16 teams or whatever, will really devalue it.
Obligatory get off my lawn.
This post was edited on 9/19/19 at 2:20 pm
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:17 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
is college football a hell of a lot more entertaining now?
I think you can easily argue that right now it's as un-entertaining as it's been in a long long time. Youv'e ALWAYS had your elite teams in the top few, but growing up (maybe this is just nostalgia, who knows) it still felt like anyone in the top 10 could make a title run. As crappy as it is to say, nick saban kinda changed all that. The last decade it's been bama then everyone else. And at present, you've now got clemson that's a rock solid guarnatee to win the ACC eveyr year with OSU and OU practically in the same position in tehir leagues. Every year you go into the season coming out of summer knowing that only about 5 teams ACTUALLY have a shot at winning it all. I mean going into this year did anyone REALLy think that wisconsin or washington or oregon had a remote chance?
I still love it because it's my life, and I'll watch until I die, but to a casual observer this has to be boring.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:17 pm to CBandits82
quote:
about 20% of the schools can actually win a title,
more like 5%
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:17 pm to bayoubengals88
I think when it's all said and done the BCS era will be college football at its zenith. It still had most of its regional charm but was getting nationalized so all the big games plus some were available to people like they hadn't necessarily been before and the conferences/rivalries hadn't been blown/bloated to hell for TV money.
This post was edited on 9/19/19 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:17 pm to CBandits82
quote:
about 20% of the schools can actually win a title
that would be roughly ~20 teams. You're insane if you think 20 teams have a chance going into the season these days. More like 4 or 5 max.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:17 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
Joe Burrow's stats are light years better than what Danny Weurffel's were
are you sure about that?
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:20 pm to bayoubengals88
Not really. Now if you lose a game (Alabama/Clemson) you still will make it into the playoff. Plus the season is just glorified scrimmages until Alabama and Clemson plays for the Championship.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:20 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:I'd agree with this.
growing up (maybe this is just nostalgia, who knows) it still felt like anyone in the top 10 could make a title run. As crappy as it is to say, nick saban kinda changed all that.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:21 pm to bayoubengals88
I don't think it was less exciting. It was just different. Offenses were much different and getting stats boosted with dink and dunk passes left and right wasn't an issue.
Also, parity and competition overall was better back then, and teams didn't have garbage rent-a-wins to pad their stats against. Players get 1-2 extra games now against complete garbage teams to make their stats better.
Do you think Harden is better than Jordan? He scores like Jordan's numbers now, but does it with a bunch of 3's, while Jordan did it with a bunch of 2's. Stats are useful to a point, but eras, style of play, how the officials call games can lead to numbers being inflated in comparison to other eras too.
I miss the old days to be honest. More smash mouth football, less about individual players, and more parity. Hell, bowl games actually meant something back then too.
Also, parity and competition overall was better back then, and teams didn't have garbage rent-a-wins to pad their stats against. Players get 1-2 extra games now against complete garbage teams to make their stats better.
Do you think Harden is better than Jordan? He scores like Jordan's numbers now, but does it with a bunch of 3's, while Jordan did it with a bunch of 2's. Stats are useful to a point, but eras, style of play, how the officials call games can lead to numbers being inflated in comparison to other eras too.
I miss the old days to be honest. More smash mouth football, less about individual players, and more parity. Hell, bowl games actually meant something back then too.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:21 pm to Winston Cup
quote:100%
are you sure about that?
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:22 pm to BeeFense5
quote:
It actually kind of sucks considering there is only like 6-7 teams every year that actually matter and the rest are average.
Well the SEC especially has turned into the Alabama show with occasional 1-2 year challenges from LSU, UGA and Auburn. Honestly, in the 90s my year would have been made (with this year's schedule) if we went 9-3 with a couple of big wins and a Citrus Bowl against some exotic team like Michigan.
Now, every game is on TV, you have big out of conference games early in the year, and it's gotten very playoff-or-bust especially in the SEC. So it's really that our expectations have changed and most of us aren't satisfied with the things that used to be pretty big deals.
In other words, we used to be like A&M fans are now.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:22 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
In other words, we used to be like A&M fans are now.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:24 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
The last decade it's been bama then everyone else. And at present, you've now got clemson that's a rock solid guarnatee to win the ACC eveyr year with OSU and OU practically in the same position in tehir leagues.
Ehh, this gets blown out of proportion too. I think Alabama having made the playoffs every year and Clemson going 4x kind of clouds the fact that there have been participants outside of the usual suspects.
Washington
Georgia
Oregon
Florida State
Michigan State
Notre Dame
All have been to the CFP
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:29 pm to Junky
quote:Love the QB play in CFB.
Compared to the NFL? Hell yes.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:32 pm to Pettifogger
The older I get, the more I appreciate and like professional sports.
The one and done has ruined college basketball.
College baseball is meh. MLB is a much better product.
College football is an NFL developmental league these days. I prefer the 90’s era of college football.
The one and done has ruined college basketball.
College baseball is meh. MLB is a much better product.
College football is an NFL developmental league these days. I prefer the 90’s era of college football.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News