All Activity

Debating the pros of a 24 team playoff is a bit like debating the pros of getting herpes.

You're right. Until Texas wins by 30+ every week and exceeds the Saban era at Alabama, there's no reason to ever be happy or optimistic.

I don't doubt they are playoff worthy but they simply haven't been tested in the same way. I think the 24 team playoff lets it play out on the field vs relying on a committee which is a positive in a sport with vast scheduling differences.

The truth hurts

I can live with that!

@Blake Munroe care to tell him about the wonderful pot sponsorship you got? 😂😂

Soundly stated though I do think Indiana is a very good team.

Is this a clever advertisement for a new cannabis product?

The OP is not wrong. And bashing him for not enjoying the win is very predictable and just as useless. There’s nothing anyone on this site can do to fix either issue.

Clickbait in progress.

Xavier MuHimmad come on down!

When will it be annouce?

Yup. Plus a 10-2 Notre Dame team should not get in if there only “good” wins out to Wisconsin and SMU

This year you will see several 9-3 teams with much better resumes miss out on the playoffs. Indiana will be 11-1 with 0 ranked wins UCLA will be 12-0 with a backup QB with 1 "ranked" win over Oregon 17-15 In a 12 team playoff, weak schedules matter too much for how the committee ranks teams. In my opinion, a 9-3 Texas or 9-3 LSU should be in over an 11-1 Indiana if you compare the resumes honestly. In a 24 team playoff, you get to see that actually play out on the field vs leaving it to a committee.

We have 2 of the best wins in the country, and 2 of the worst losses. Nothing makes sense currently, anywhere. We also haven't seen the end of it I'm afraid. Regardless, there was an overall improvement this weekend that I am hopeful we continue to see growth from. Played 3 good quarters of football instead of 2! Great post, Beldar!

Seems like we may have something

You can't possibly be so blind to think that the issue is a close game or getting a penalty. The issue is making it a close game because you act and play stupidly. We have had plenty of penalties without this crew. You're gonna get a penalty with every crew when you punch someone in the face, tackle someone 3 yards out of bounds, and hit a QB in the back 3 steps after the ball is out. Have an original thought for once.

So I have been and remain critical of Sark's playcalling on offense. However, I do think we should consider not framing everything through the offense. IMO this should clearly be a defense led team. And they performed pretty magnificently. Now if the offensive playcalling could continue to adjust to complementing the defense versus operating in an offensive vacuum then I think we might settle down and play some more consistent football. On Arch's second interception, I'm not sure you are helping the team out by calling a deep wheel route to your 3rd string(?) TE with a backup LT in the game. I agree Arch needs to eat that but why are we calling that play in that instance? I don't get it. I liked the commitment to the run game. I wonder why we got away from the short passing game. Those really complement our defense. There is a path to more consistency for this team but I think it means playing to win with defense and a bit of ball control. Your thoughts?

Good choice . Hook em

Is anyone else in the country that much better? We could lose to everyone left on our schedule or win out. This season is hard to explain. Georgia lost to Auburn at home. If the original poster reads this board, very few think we are anything but what we have seen. Capable of beating Ohio State and losing to Blow U or Florida . We won. Apparently the poster thinks we should never have a close game or get a penalty. Sorry, with this crew we had Saturday, we average over 10 penalties in all the games they do and 6 with rest of SEC refs. Non SEC refs we have less .

bingo