2016 NCAA football thread

Four undefeated teams is extremely unlikely, but it would take a lot more than that to get Houston into the playoffs. The legitimate reason for this is that the champion of any P5 conference will have played a much more difficult schedule than Houston, so the mere fact that they have fewer losses would not get Houston into the playoff. The illegitimate -- and far more powerful -- reason is that the playoffs are the P5's party and they don't really want to let a G5 school in there if they can help it . . .

If Oklahoma or Louisville had emerged as the champion of their conference with their only loss being to an undefeated Houston, that might have made Houston too big to ignore, but with the way things have fallen so far Houston really needs some non-name teams to win some of the big conferences if they want a chance . . .
 
Winning all your games and that still not being good enough is a major reason why we have a playoff in the first place. The committee will take all kinds of flak for picking a 10-1 school over an 11-0, unless that school pulled a Baylor and cupcaked their whole schedule. Houston's schedule is easy, but they did not cupcake it. They just play their regular conference play--and with the leeway they had for OOC play, they played Oklahoma and Louisville. That deserves respect. That also gets them a Cinderella slipper, which we know from NCAA's how popular that is.
 
I disagree . . .

In other news, Birmingham was the fourth biggest media market for Clemson/Louisville despite the Alabama game being on at the same time . . .
 
LSU is going to have to euthanize their mascot (a tiger). This comes right when they can their coach. They can't catch a break, can they?
 
They just play their regular conference play.

Which is a cupcake conference. Don't get me wrong, I think Houston is good and is deserving of playoff consideration, but I don't think the committee is going to take them seriously until they get themselves out of the American.
 
LSU/Florida has been cancelled with no immediate plans to reschedule. It's easier than you might imagine for this to impact the SEC title race . . .
 
Eh, you never know how the season is going to play out, but LSU would probably have been better off playing Florida this weekend. The only available date for a possible rescheduling is Nov 19, and that would give LSU four straight SEC games to end the season, with the last three on the road. Not really ideal. Also, Florida will probably be in a better position from a personnel standpoint at the end of the year than they are now, probably . . .

LSU offered to pay Florida's travel to play in Baton Rouge this weekend, and Florida offered to cancel its Nov 19 game and reschedule then, but each refused the other's offer. I'm not really willing to point fingers in this situation, but I wouldn't say it was breaking LSU's way . . .

Hopefully it won't matter ofc. Even if Florida doesn't lose again, Tennessee would need to lose twice before Florida could jump them since Tennessee still has the head-to-head. With A&M and Alabama looming, that isn't out of the realm of possibility, but I'd be surprised if Florida doesn't slip up somewhere as well. The West is a little more convoluted, but it's still hard to see LSU ending at the top with only one loss while Alabama and A&M both have two or more . . .
 
I know Rutgers isn't very good but this ass-whooping they're getting from Michigan is absurd. Early in the 4th Michigan's up 71-0, outgained Rutgers 540 yards to 10(5 passing, 5 rushing, good balance)...this is just dumb lol
 
Well it wasn't me that called A&M by seven, I was just pointing out the line. I was actually very impressed with Tennessee today, more so than in their previous comeback wins, really . . .

And there were some embarrassing blowouts today, but some nice surprises too. Plus we got our first bowl eligible teams this weekend. A pretty good day for football overall, I'd say . . .

We bid a fond farewell to Maryland, Houston, Tennessee, Air Force and Miami, so there is also a lot more breathing room in the ranks of the undefeated . . :

Ohio State: Not as impressive today as they had been earlier in the year, but not exactly a poor showing either. Not as good of a chance of winning their conference as Clemson has, but I think the Big Ten champ should be ahead of the ACC champ, and I'm still picking Ohio State to win the Big Ten for now . . .

Alabama: Hopefully Tennessee will be too deflated to put up much of a fight this week, but then there's A&M after that, and LSU and Auburn are looking better than they did earlier in the year as well. Far from a sure thing . . .

Clemson: Still pretty tough to see them losing the ACC, unless it's in a fluky conference title game or something. So pretty much a lock for the playoffs, or as close as anyone can be at this point . . .

Washington: Maybe I'm overvaluing Oregon still, but I was really impressed with Washington today. And the Pac-12 gets a boost from Houston losing as well . . .

Michigan: There comes a point where margin of victory doesn't matter, it just falls under the 'a whole lot' category. I'd put them over Clemson in the BCS era, but now that the playoffs prioritize winning your conference, projected conference champs have to come first . . .

A&M: Gets an off week to prepare for Alabama, which should be a great game. I'm still picking us though . . .

Nebraska: I still don't think they have any real hope of winning the Big Ten, but stranger things. And if they did win the Big Ten they would def still go in ahead of the Big XII champ, whoever that may be . . .

Baylor: Still hard to see them surviving the season undefeated, though the Big XII does have a slightly better chance at making the playoffs now that Houston lost . . .

WVU: Still seems like a pretender, just waiting to get knocked off once they play someone good. Like Miami today. Wait a minute . . .

Boise: Probably won't lose, definitely won't matter . . .

Western Michigan: Still won't matter, but they're bowl eligible . . .
 
Last year Navy's winning was presenting a question for BCS, so it seems only reasonable that this year they beat Houston to table a question till next season... :D
 
Well, last year was the playoffs not the BCS but I suppose there is some symmetry in how Houston crushed Navy's hopes last year -- though Navy had already lost to ND -- and how Navy reciprocated this year . . .

Fun with numbers . . :

In five of our first six games, our third score has been a non-offensive TD in the second quarter . . .

We pressured Arkansas' QB on sixty-nine percent of his dropbacks, and he still threw for over four hundred yards . . .
 
Last edited:
More fun with numbers . . :

We're 7-1 in the last eight games where we scored less than thirty. It used to be that you always scored less than thirty, but these days that's pretty impressive . . .

Also, hype aside this weekend's game with Tennessee doesn't really mean much for the West race. If we lose, we'd need to also lose to A&M, LSU, Auburn or Miss State before it would affect the division standings, and if we did lose to any of those except Miss State we'd fall behind them whether we beat Tennessee or not. Just sayin' . . .
 
Last edited:
I know Rutgers isn't very good but this ass-whooping they're getting from Michigan is absurd. Early in the 4th Michigan's up 71-0, outgained Rutgers 540 yards to 10(5 passing, 5 rushing, good balance)...this is just dumb lol

Yeah, Rutgers has absolutely no business being in the Big Ten. In their last three games they have been outscored 150-7. They are extremely noncompetitive in the two main sports that matter in college athletics (football and basketball) and really shouldn't be in any of the power conferences. They should have stayed in the American or moved to a conference that's more their speed like C-USA. The only reason they were brought in was to increase the Big Ten's brand in the east coast markets and start drawing some of those recruits into the Big Ten. It was a completely money-driven move that does nothing to better the level of competition in the conference. In my ideal world, I'd like to see Rutgers booted out of the conference and replaced with someone who would at least be competitive like West Virginia or one of the top teams in the MAC. Any of those would do a much better job of competing than Rutgers.

I also hate that Rutgers is in the Big Ten East with Ohio State so we have to play them EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Sure, it's a guaranteed win, but having to play them every year really does drag down the quality of OSU's schedule.
 
As great as it would be from a fan's perspective, you really can't play a schedule that provides quality competition every week. Any team would be a shell of itself after twelve games like that. You could get better competition week in and week out if you shortened the schedule, but the financial realities aren't going to let that happen and the actual number of quality matchups wouldn't be increased anyway, they'd just be played over a shorter period of time . . .
 
As great as it would be from a fan's perspective, you really can't play a schedule that provides quality competition every week. Any team would be a shell of itself after twelve games like that. You could get better competition week in and week out if you shortened the schedule, but the financial realities aren't going to let that happen and the actual number of quality matchups wouldn't be increased anyway, they'd just be played over a shorter period of time . . .

I'm not saying I want the Buckeyes to play the likes of Alabama week in and week out, but I don't want them playing teams like Rutgers either. That's why I would like a team like West Virginia in the Big Ten. They are easy enough that the Buckeyes wouldn't have too much trouble with them, but they are good enough that the rest of the country wouldn't roll their eyes at the Buckeyes beating them.
 
Back
Top Bottom