2006 College Football Offseason thread

[ChrTh]

Not all teams schedule cupcakes ... did you notice a little home-and-home called Ohio State-Texas on the schedule? Or Ohio State-USC in a couple years.

It seems that more teams are getting it: it's ok to play one lousy team if there's a good reason (OSU's annual pasting of another Ohio school--not to be confused with their annual pasting of Michigan ), but try to get some good games under your belt before the season starts because it impacts the BCS (another reason not to want a playoff). A lot of schools are actually using the 12th game to schedule quality opponents--good for them.

 

[ummmm........]

Without clicking: Stanford/UC Davis? EDIT: I rule!

And hey, you'll never hear an Alabama guy besmirch a national title. Well, okay, actually you're about to. To my mind, the nature of the sport and the number of teams involved precludes a meaningful national title. Every national title college football has ever had has honored the team with the best season, not the best team. And that's okay. But to me, winning your division or conference is important, winning a national title is a bonus over which an individual team doesn't have that much control.

To be completely honest, when I said all I cared about was winning the SEC, I lied. I actually only care about winning the West. But winning the West puts you in the championship game, and once there I'd want to win that, so I care about it by proxy. If Alabama got invited to the national title, I'd get excited about it, but it's not something I care about before the season starts.

Bottom line: If Alabama wins the West every three years or so, that's meeting my expectations for a successful program.

EDIT: @ChrTh: A playoff would actually increase quality schedules. An eight team playoff guarantees every one-loss big time school gets in, so it reduces the risk of scheduling a quality opponent. OTOH, look at Auburn. They scheduled a home-and-home with USC and it relegated them to an also-ran with one should've been year. Schedule a cupcake there and they're a minor dynasty . . .

 

[Azale]

Well, I guess thats where we differ...if Texas only wins the Big 12 South, people here are calling for Mack Brown's head And the fun of any sport is to see who THE BEST out of everyone is. Especially when there are over 100 teams at the start, 25 truly good teams at least, and about 6 teams usually at the end who could probably each win the title game.

8/16 team playoff would be nice, but at least the BCS ensures we have a champion or *cough* champions.

 

[ummmm........]

Oh, people are calling for Mike Shula's head (or at least his control over the offense), believe me. I'm just not one of them.

My point is not that who THE BEST is unimportant, but that it's irrelevant in football. The nature of the sport is that even the absolute most dominant teams in any given year aren't going to win vs. the second most dominant team more than 60-65% of the time. And that's a really dominant team. The two top teams are usually neck and neck. Often you can throw a couple more teams there as well. That doesn't make the national title unimportant, it just makes it an unrealistic goal, for anyone.

I'm still a fan of the plus-one model where #2 plays #3 for the right to play #1, not because it's better or more fair, but because it gives meaning to being #1. Right now, it doesn't matter: #1=#2, everyone else may as well be #119.

 

[Fetus4188]

I'm the only Pac-10 fan here, aren't I? That's a shame.

I can agree with ummmm........ about that not really caring about the national championship. In fact, this year I might rather not have one because I would rather Cal return to the Rose Bowl after so many decades than go somewhere that just doesn't have the tradition. That said, it's been far too long since Cal has been at the top. But it looks like they're going to have a very serious chance of going all the way this year. Unfortunately--and fortunate at the same time--the conference is looking to be pretty competetive this year. Arizona State should have another turbo-charged pass offense. USC is, of course, loaded with top recruits and still has some experience. Oregon has two great QBs if they ever decide to get their heads out of their asses and use just one. Arizona and Wazzu are trying to push their way into the top half. Overall it looks like its going to be another typical year of powerful offenses and some less than desirable defense, of the few good defenses last year, only two are really remaining intact: Cal and Oregon State. Well, anyway, I doubt anyone here cares about us westerners anyway. One thing I am looking forward to is the 9 game conference season, finally it has come .

 

[ummmm........]

I was so going to read that post, but I went to bed after the first quarter. :jk

 

[Fetus4188]

This is probably the only subject that can get me to write a full length post here anymore

 

[shortguy]

Well, anyway, I doubt anyone here cares about us westerners anyway.

You're right; We don't. I sometimes forget that the Pac 10 exists for whole months at a time.

I don't really have any good predictions on what's going to happen in the ACC next year (haven't been paying that much attention), but I don't think Georgia Tech will be so great. I agree with Azale; they just never quite reach their supposed potential.

 

[pawpaw]

I don't think Georgia Tech will be so great. I agree with Azale; they just never quite reach their supposed potential.

We'll know right off the bat--their first game is Notre Dame

 

[downtown]

Did you guys see the vegas odds on winning it all next season? they had Notre Dame and OKLAHOMA tied at 7:1 for top odds. Ohio State, Texas, USC and i think one more team are a 8:1

 

[pawpaw]

Did you guys see the vegas odds on winning it all next season? they had Notre Dame and OKLAHOMA tied at 7:1 for top odds. Ohio State, Texas, USC and i think one more team are a 8:1

Oklahoma will win the little 12 next year. They lost 16 starters to the draft last year, they struggled because they were young, not because there was no talent--by the end of the year they were very good. Will be even better this year.

 

[RedFusion]

You're right; We don't. I sometimes forget that the Pac 10 exists for whole months at a time.

I don't really have any good predictions on what's going to happen in the ACC next year (haven't been paying that much attention), but I don't think Georgia Tech will be so great. I agree with Azale; they just never quite reach their supposed potential.

That's why I picked them though, no one thinks that GT will be that good next year. For example, if this thread was a year ago and someone would have said that Penn State is going to go to a BCS bowl, I doubt many people would be agreeing with that. If you look over the past 4 season that Gailey has been head coach, they've had some incredible upsets (and near-ones) like Miami and Auburn this year, NC State a few years ago when they were ranked in the top 10, numerous wins over ranked ACC opponents, and they played Georgia real tough this past season. In addition, they get a favorable schedule this year, their biggest tests come against Notre Dame and Miami--both at home I might add. Their other challenges all have some problems next year, VT and NC State both lose a lot; VT nearly it's entire starting offense and a notable chunk of it's D, NC State loses a ton of good D underclassmen in this years draft, and it's O since Chow and Rivers left hasn't been anything too write home about. Virginia will be it's usual mediocre self. Maryland, while losing a lot of skill position players in addition to it's LB core, has the most chance of giving them any problems.

Oh and just for fun, has anyone else seen this:
http://www.onepeat.com/

 

[shortguy]

That's why I picked them though, no one thinks that GT will be that good next year. For example, if this thread was a year ago and someone would have said that Penn State is going to go to a BCS bowl, I doubt many people would be agreeing with that. If you look over the past 4 season that Gailey has been head coach, they've had some incredible upsets (and near-ones) like Miami and Auburn this year, NC State a few years ago when they were ranked in the top 10, numerous wins over ranked ACC opponents, and they played Georgia real tough this past season. In addition, they get a favorable schedule this year, their biggest tests come against Notre Dame and Miami--both at home I might add. Their other challenges all have some problems next year, VT and NC State both lose a lot; VT nearly it's entire starting offense and a notable chunk of it's D, NC State loses a ton of good D underclassmen in this years draft, and it's O since Chow and Rivers left hasn't been anything too write home about. Virginia will be it's usual mediocre self. Maryland, while losing a lot of skill position players in addition to it's LB core, has the most chance of giving them any problems.

That's true, but still, GT has a recent history of being maddeningly inconsistent. They pull off those nice upsets that you talk about, but they also lose to VT by over 40, lose to us (mediocre, as you say), and get creamed in a subpar bowl. I would be surprised if they just magically put it together next year.

 

[RedFusion]

That's true, but still, GT has a recent history of being maddeningly inconsistent. They pull off those nice upsets that you talk about, but they also lose to VT by over 40, lose to us (mediocre, as you say), and get creamed in a subpar bowl. I would be surprised if they just magically put it together next year.

Hence, that's why they are my surprise pick. Remember what Penn State did the year before this, they lost to a traditionally weak Northwestern on their way to going only 2-6 in conference play (one of those wins was over Indiana I should add).

 

[RedFusion]

Dennis Erickson has taken over as head coach for the Idaho Vandals...gotta admit, I totally didn't see this one coming! I'm really shocked that such a high profile coach would take the Idaho job, I guess he didn't want to leave the west coast.

 

[ChrTh]

Dennis Erickson has taken over as head coach for the Idaho Vandals...gotta admit, I totally didn't see this one coming! I'm really shocked that such a high profile coach would take the Idaho job, I guess he didn't want to leave the west coast.

Dennis Erickson started at Idaho ... maybe he felt this was the best way of completing his "Legacy", since he wasn't going to get another shot in the NFL.

 

[RedFusion]

scratch that.

 

[Azale]

scratch what? Erickson going to Idaho?

Hope not, I want to see those ugly-azz jerseys on ESPN Thursday Night one day! I-D-A-H-O!!!

 

[RedFusion]

Oh no, I accidently posted in the wrong thread there, Erickson is still going to the vandals. No worries.