Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, NashLonghorn said:

Unless that third loss comes in a blowout at the CCG, then that's okay.

See, I get both sides. But that third loss still came when they made the CCG. Does it make sense? No. Not at all, actually. But to make it make sense you have to try and get into the moron logic of the committee. They're idiots. All they have working upstairs is some fossilized stagnation about to collapse into an event horizon. They're rich, but they're out of their league. The problem is if you have coaches do the voting, they're all (most, not all) would stab their "friend" in the back for a spot. The are nothing more than functional sociopaths. 
 

So who can make the picks? Literally no one. Mack Brown smiley glad-handing Bob Stoops and Art Briles didn't help his case in 2008. There is no place for "nice guys." They're all bottom-feeder, basement dwelling kiddie loving freaks. You can't have people like Kirk Bohl's voting. He's a troll and a fucktard. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, NashLonghorn said:

I believe we are going to a 105 man roster next year.

Correct. I was just hypothetically talking about this year alone,not next season, which will be pretty cool. But damn, 105? That seems like overkill. 

Posted
1 minute ago, William Bludworth said:

Correct. I was just hypothetically talking about this year alone,not next season, which will be pretty cool. But damn, 105? That seems like overkill. 

It used to be unlimited..................

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Hookem10 said:

The funny thing is that last year floridas schedule was so crazy ppl were saying if they go 9-3 - might be good enough to get in with the wins they’ll have. This year we basically had that schedule and went 9-3 and it was a hell no you ain’t getting in. And it was Florida that held us back was the cherry on top. 

It was the Georgia loss that killed us. That last loss did us in. People are so hung up on Florida, when it's really just the third loss. It could have been to Indiana, Arkansas, whomever, but when Georgia bodied us, they buried us with no CFP dreams. 

Posted
26 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

The CFP committee will never allow a 3-loss team in. Ever. It simply will never happen

The sample size for a 12 team playoff fields is 2. There hasn’t been a three loss team as a at-large bid yet, but if this format continues in some way there absolutely will be eventually. 

It didn’t work out for us this year. The last few weeks of this season alone, OU, Bama, Miami, Aggy, and BYU all had games that they could have easily lost. We needed 2 or 3 to happen and none of them did, so it goes. 

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, UncleSonny said:

The sample size for a 12 team playoff fields is 2. There hasn’t been a three loss team as a at-large bid yet, but if this format continues in some way there absolutely will be eventually. 

It didn’t work out for us this year. The last few weeks of this season alone, OU, Bama, Miami, Aggy, and BYU all had games that they could have easily lost. We needed 2 or 3 to happen and none of them did, so it goes. 

Gimme that 16 team field.

Or 24.

 

Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

Gimme that 16 team field.

Or 24.

 

16 feels right to me, but the debates will be the exact same. We’ll just be having them about teams 14-20 instead of 8-14.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

 But you can't lose to both Florida AND Georgia and expect to be rewarded.

I think we are in the same page but who knows on this thread. I didn't think we would get in because of three losses and not who we lost to.  We are in at 10-2 with Tech's, Indiana's or Oregon's schedule and all of them got rewarded in spite of their OOC.  No one would give a shit about Florida and it would only matter for the 5-6-7 seed. If Florida was 6-6 versus 4-8, it would help rankings as the committee members are a bunch of idiots.

Also, last year Tennessee got in losing to Arkansas and Georgia.  Bama was first man out losing to Vandy, Oklahoma and Tennessee.  So you can lose to a crap SEC team and get in if you only have 2 losses and almost with 3.

With going to nine SEC games, you have to schedule weak OOC games. 

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, UncleSonny said:

The sample size for a 12 team playoff fields is 2. There hasn’t been a three loss team as a at-large bid yet, but if this format continues in some way there absolutely will be eventually. 

It didn’t work out for us this year. The last few weeks of this season alone, OU, Bama, Miami, Aggy, and BYU all had games that they could have easily lost. We needed 2 or 3 to happen and none of them did, so it goes. 

I just don't see it happening only because of fake "integrity," so they will dig their heels in and put in three G5 schools before a 3-loss team from any conference, imo. Just look at this year - Miami and aggy are both dog shit, but they have one and two losses (to whom doesn't matter to the committee). They put in two G5 teams just to spite everyone else, even though they know it's a bullshit move and will cause consternation amongst CFB fandom. They're the human embodiment of entropy. The more chaos that can bring, the better for them. Until people get sick of their shit and stop watching, it will continue, unfortunately. 

The committee aren't made of CFB fans, they're made of people who have an agenda (whatever that may be to them). All they see are conferences, which is the best, let's sprinkle in some bullshit, meet minimal requirements, and voilá! They are barely functional sociopaths and idiots. They take a paycheck, cause entropy amongst the sport, then go to sleep until next December. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

16 feels right to me, but the debates will be the exact same. We’ll just be having them about teams 14-20 instead of 8-14.

Top 25. One play-in game between 24 and 25. Winner makes a field of 24.

It's perfect.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Hornsome said:

I think we are in the same page but who knows on this thread. I didn't think we would get in because of three losses and not who we lost to.  We are in at 10-2 with Tech's, Indiana's or Oregon's schedule and all of them got rewarded in spite of their OOC.  No one would give a shit about Florida and it would only matter for the 5-6-7 seed. If Florida was 6-6 versus 4-8, it would help rankings as the committee members are a bunch of idiots.

Also, last year Tennessee got in losing to Arkansas and Georgia.  Bama was first man out losing to Vandy, Oklahoma and Tennessee.  So you can lose to a crap SEC team and get in if you only have 2 losses and almost with 3.

With going to nine SEC games, you have to schedule weak OOC games. 

Yes! We are definitely on the same page! You're saying exactly what I'm saying. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

I just don't see it happening only because of fake "integrity," so they will dig their heels in and put in three G5 schools

You’re wrong. This season of there had been only 9 P4 programs that had finished with 2 losses or less you think the committee would have bumped up UNT (at 25 coming off a loss) over Texas for that last spot? There is no fucking way 

Posted
5 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

They put in two G5 teams just to spite everyone else, even though they know it's a bullshit move and will cause consternation amongst CFB fandom.

The 2 G5 teams are in because of the rule that top 5 highest ranked conference champions get an auto bid. I don’t see how this is a spiteful move when it’s actually written into the rules. 

Posted
Just now, UncleSonny said:

You’re wrong. This season of there had been only 9 P4 programs that had finished with 2 losses or less you think the committee would have bumped up UNT (at 25 coming off a loss) over Texas for that last spot? There is no fucking way 

I mean, the committee, again, isn't made up of CFB fans, it's made up of people who have their own agenda. They just signed a contract with ND for them to automatically get a bid if they are in the top 12 as an independent. There's always going to be backdoor hand shaking and deal making. If I'm wrong, that's cool.  I would like to actually be wrong on this. If I'm wrong that means we can get in and I'm all the more happy for it. Who wouldn't want to see their alma mater/team in the CFP, regardless of 2-3 losses? I'm all for it. I'm just trying to think of it like a sociopathic committee member would. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, MrBig said:

The 2 G5 teams are in because of the rule that top 5 highest ranked conference champions get an auto bid. I don’t see how this is a spiteful move when it’s actually written into the rules. 

It's the two G5, not one. I rread the rules maybe a year ago, and if I'm wrong, my apologies, but I thought it only said one auto for the G5? Like the ACC and Big 12? Seems weird that they can get two and two bigger conferences only have 1? I dunno, it's all left up to chance, anyway. Don't lose three games, win the games you're supposed to, and win games that are equal to you and we wouldn't be in this mess, right? If we had taken care of business and beaten one of Florida and Georgia, this would all be moot. 

Posted
38 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

Me too, dude. I get holding out hope, but some were doing mental gymnastics like I haven't seen in a long, long time. The CFP committee will never allow a 3-loss team in. Ever. It simply will never happen. 16 team playoffs is where you can get like two 3-loss teams in, if not one more. But right now, they would put in six G5 schools over any 3-loss team from any conference. Because "integrity"

I think it will happen at some point(regular season) for one of the at large bids and it will likely be an SEC team or ND.  (4) 7-1 in conference teams from the SEC drug the floor up a bit, IMO.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

I think it will happen at some point(regular season) for one of the at large bids and it will likely be an SEC team or ND.  (4) 7-1 in conference teams from the SEC drug the floor up a bit, IMO.

 

Yeah, possibly. But I'm also not thinking like a fan, I'm thinking (or trying) like a below average IQ committee member would. If it can benefit them in some way financially, they'll probably do it. It's all numbers to them. If they see their bank account has a new deposit, they'll do what they need to do, and if that means they "vote" to allow a 3-loss SEC or ND in,  nothing will stop said vote. You just have to get everyone, or at least the majority on the same page. They're all pathological liars and manipulators, so swindling one of their own wouldn't even cause the amyglada to allow a neuron to hit for an emotional response. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Nivek said:

Hope Sark also understands they don’t value at home, neutral or away games differently or how many away games in a row a team plays. Because the committee doesn’t watch football games and cannot be bothered with research.

They also appear to discredit rivalry game outcomes so we get less benefit from beating aggy and OU, which is fun

  • Rage+1 3
Posted
1 minute ago, B00M said:

They also appear to discredit rivalry game outcomes so we get less benefit from beating aggy and OU, which is fun

I think that was just used for Texas ONLY.

Why? That's what you get when you have Yurachek, a knuckle-dragging mouth-breather Vengeful piggy as the CFP selection committee chair, who hates Texas more than he likes his own school.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, B00M said:

They also appear to discredit rivalry game outcomes so we get less benefit from beating aggy and OU, which is fun

unless you beat a "better than advertised" fantastic 5-6 Auburn team in a classic down to wire the iron bowl rivalry game by the grace of some SEC ref fuckery.

then you get full credit!

  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

Yeah, possibly. But I'm also not thinking like a fan, I'm thinking (or trying) like a below average IQ committee member would. If it can benefit them in some way financially, they'll probably do it. It's all numbers to them. If they see their bank account has a new deposit, they'll do what they need to do, and if that means they "vote" to allow a 3-loss SEC or ND in,  nothing will stop said vote. You just have to get everyone, or at least the majority on the same page. They're all pathological liars and manipulators, so swindling one of their own wouldn't even cause the amyglada to allow a neuron to hit for an emotional response. 

Also a 6th SEC team(taking 5 of the 7 at large spots) with no ACC would have been "FSU lawsuit!" territory....our resume is obviously better than Miami's but whatever...

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

Also a 6th SEC team(taking 5 of the 7 at large spots) with no ACC would have been "FSU lawsuit!" territory....our resume is obviously better than Miami's but whatever...

For sure it is. Our resume is better than half of the teams in the playoffs. But man, we have looked like run over dog shit on offense. The two teams we have equal recruits with — one we lost by a TD at their house, and the other brought a shovel and buried us in their house. Georgia is on a different level than Ohio State, in my personal opinion. I really believe the NC game will be UGA vs IU. They're just so complete. 

Anyway, yeah, to be honest, I'm kind of conflicted on it, but I also hope we don't lose three games again and find out. I hope this season has taught Sark you cannot sleep walk through a schedule, tinker with it mid-seaaon, then find something functional that works and expect to just make the playoffs. If they start allowing 3-loss teams in, wouldn't that just encourage more bad behavior regarding staffing when all they can do is convince themselves that they still have a rope to get in if X, Y, Z happens? That's one of the reasons why I'm happy they aren't letting those teams in, yet at least. We don't need Sark convincing himself that in year 8 Kyle Flood just needs more time. 

Getting left out could be what this staff and players need. Just like Georgia when they went chimpanzee pissed on FSU and not one of their draftable players sat out. That really, really pissed them off, and maybe that's what this team needs. Don't quit. Don't get complacent. Go bitch slap whomever is in front of you. Kill everybody. Work harder. Come back next season and start the murder spree over. Imagine Colin Simmons, Justus Terry, Sharma, Charles, Watson, Kanu, Lavon Johnson (tbh, I don't know anything about him), Zina Umeozulu all coming to kill you because they're still pissed they missed the CFP, got beaten by Ohio State, and Georgia body bagged them the year prior. I want those motherfuckers to kill everybody, and I want Arch to leave with a NC trophy and go be better than his uncles. 

Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, William Bludworth said:

I'm gonna be real with you— and yes I'm ashamed, I have no idea who she is. She's way outside my age gap. Like closer to 25-30 years my age. But she was hot in that photo, no doubt. 

She looks to have amazing tits, or at one time did. 

IMG_3112.jpeg


image.thumb.jpeg.160d6df8ee6b6cdeafa267e84429e553.jpeg

@William Bludworth Before there was Katarina Witt, there was Dorothy Hamill who won gold for the USA at the ‘76 Winter Olympics.  Every girl in America wanted that “wedge” hairstyle.  And every guy wanted………..

Edited by Harrison Stafford
  • Drool 1
Posted
Just now, Harrison Stafford said:


image.thumb.jpeg.160d6df8ee6b6cdeafa267e84429e553.jpeg

@William Bludworth Before there was Katarina Witt, there was Dorothy Hamill who won gold for the USA at the ‘76 Winter Olympics.  Every girl in America wanted that “wedge” hairstyle.  

I don't know who she is, but I get a 70s vibe with that hair. Love her smile, tho. I can imagine every girl wanting her haircut. It's weird how hairstyles come about. It reminds me of David Beckham and every guy wanted his haircuts. 

Posted
1 hour ago, William Bludworth said:

It's the two G5, not one. I rread the rules maybe a year ago, and if I'm wrong, my apologies, but I thought it only said one auto for the G5? Like the ACC and Big 12? Seems weird that they can get two and two bigger conferences only have 1? I dunno, it's all left up to chance, anyway. Don't lose three games, win the games you're supposed to, and win games that are equal to you and we wouldn't be in this mess, right? If we had taken care of business and beaten one of Florida and Georgia, this would all be moot. 

The rule is “top 5 ranked conference champs get a bid” + 7 at-large

Top 5 conference rankings (auto bids)

#1 Indiana (Big Ten Champ)

#3 Georgia (SEC Champ)

#4 Texas Tech (Big 12 Champ)

#11 Tulane (American Champ)

#12 JMU (Sun Belt Champ)

——cutoff 

Unranked - Duke (ACC champs) 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
42 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

For sure it is. Our resume is better than half of the teams in the playoffs. But man, we have looked like run over dog shit on offense. The two teams we have equal recruits with — one we lost by a TD at their house, and the other brought a shovel and buried us in their house. Georgia is on a different level than Ohio State, in my personal opinion. I really believe the NC game will be UGA vs IU. They're just so complete. 

Anyway, yeah, to be honest, I'm kind of conflicted on it, but I also hope we don't lose three games again and find out. I hope this season has taught Sark you cannot sleep walk through a schedule, tinker with it mid-seaaon, then find something functional that works and expect to just make the playoffs. If they start allowing 3-loss teams in, wouldn't that just encourage more bad behavior regarding staffing when all they can do is convince themselves that they still have a rope to get in if X, Y, Z happens? That's one of the reasons why I'm happy they aren't letting those teams in, yet at least. We don't need Sark convincing himself that in year 8 Kyle Flood just needs more time. 

Getting left out could be what this staff and players need. Just like Georgia when they went chimpanzee pissed on FSU and not one of their draftable players sat out. That really, really pissed them off, and maybe that's what this team needs. Don't quit. Don't get complacent. Go bitch slap whomever is in front of you. Kill everybody. Work harder. Come back next season and start the murder spree over. Imagine Colin Simmons, Justus Terry, Sharma, Charles, Watson, Kanu, Lavon Johnson (tbh, I don't know anything about him), Zina Umeozulu all coming to kill you because they're still pissed they missed the CFP, got beaten by Ohio State, and Georgia body bagged them the year prior. I want those motherfuckers to kill everybody, and I want Arch to leave with a NC trophy and go be better than his uncles. 

That’s quite a wishcast. 

  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, MrBig said:

The rule is “top 5 ranked conference champs get a bid” + 7 at-large

Top 5 conference rankings (auto bids)

#1 Indiana (Big Ten Champ)

#3 Georgia (SEC Champ)

#4 Texas Tech (Big 12 Champ)

#11 Tulane (American Champ)

#12 JMU (Sun Belt Champ)

——cutoff 

Unranked - Duke (ACC champs) 

 

Ah, OK. Gotcha. Makes sense now. POS rep

2 minutes ago, Vanilla Strange Gato said:

That’s quite a wishcast. 

Oh yeah, for sure. No doubt.

Posted

It really ought to be the top 4 ranked Conference Champs with group of 5 becoming an auto bid if in the top 12. The Boise state team from last year would be heavily favored over both of these teams. 

Posted
27 minutes ago, Harrison Stafford said:


image.thumb.jpeg.160d6df8ee6b6cdeafa267e84429e553.jpeg

@William Bludworth Before there was Katarina Witt, there was Dorothy Hamill who won gold for the USA at the ‘76 Winter Olympics.  Every girl in America wanted that “wedge” hairstyle.  And every guy wanted………..

image.thumb.png.9bd24a3e7b35e735afad45f5b59ef87d.png

image.thumb.png.a56037c47843ae221051fe1d92c34741.png

From that same era as Dorothy Hamill, I also remember pairs-skater JoJo Starbuck.

Posted
8 minutes ago, ITHorn said:

It really ought to be the top 4 ranked Conference Champs with group of 5 becoming an auto bid if in the top 12. The Boise state team from last year would be heavily favored over both of these teams. 

How is this different than what it already is now? A G5 school (Tulane) was ranked as one of the top 4 conferences, that’s why JMU got the bid that was traditionally for a G5 school. 

Posted

The difference is that 

4 minutes ago, MrBig said:

How is this different than what it already is now? A G5 school (Tulane) was ranked as one of the top 4 conferences, that’s why JMU got the bid that was traditionally for a G5 school. 

In this scenario, JMU and Tulane wouldn't have both gotten in opening another at large bid.

Posted
1 hour ago, ITHorn said:

The difference is that 

In this scenario, JMU and Tulane wouldn't have both gotten in opening another at large bid.

Tulane would have been in. They are the ranked in the highest top 4 of conference champs. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...