All Things SkunkBear

[dublinirish]

SCUM loading up on 3 star kids this 2019 cycle, excited to see the fallout when they pull those offers late on while chasing higher rated kids

 

[BobbyMac]

Rivals Freebie:

https://n.rivals.com/news/three-point-stance-overrated-coaches-heisman-hopefuls

Most overrated Coaches

1. Jim Harbaugh, Michigan

Harbaugh is the clear winner here. In fact, in an anonymous CBS Sports poll of college coaches asking who the most overrated was, Harbaugh was the clear No. 1 among his peers. Records of 28-11 and 18-8 in conference aren't bad at all in the Big Ten, but he hasn’t finished higher than third in his own division and he makes a boatload of money. I’m as guilty as anyone for overrating him, as I had him as the fifth-best coach in the country heading into last year. But I’m starting to scratch my head a bit.

Just a bit?

 

[ulukinatme]

Here's hoping he starts with a big "L" on the year and, like Hoke before him, it spells his doom. That 37-0 loss in 2014 was the final straw for Fred Flintstone, he was a dead man from that point on.

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

Here's hoping he starts with a big "L" on the year and, like Hoke before him, it spells his doom. That 37-0 loss in 2014 was the final straw for Fred Flintstone, he was a dead man from that point on.

Hear, hear.

 

[connor_in]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Jim Harbaugh requesting for the rules to be changed because his team can't win a conference championship - or even come close to making it to one - is the most Michigan thing ever <a href="https://t.co/fdICq6k7LV">https://t.co/fdICq6k7LV</a></p>— The Black Sheep MSU (@BlackSheep_MSU) <a href="https://twitter.com/BlackSheep_MSU/status/1021468213215973379?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 23, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Valpodoc85]

https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/commen..._16team_playoff_with/?st=JJYW47RT&sh=1f9d0507

 

[ulukinatme]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Jim Harbaugh requesting for the rules to be changed because his team can't win a conference championship - or even come close to making it to one - is the most Michigan thing ever <a href="https://t.co/fdICq6k7LV">https://t.co/fdICq6k7LV</a></p>— The Black Sheep MSU (@BlackSheep_MSU) <a href="https://twitter.com/BlackSheep_MSU/status/1021468213215973379?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 23, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

"Those that stay will be champions."

 

[NorthDakota]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Jim Harbaugh requesting for the rules to be changed because his team can't win a conference championship - or even come close to making it to one - is the most Michigan thing ever <a href="https://t.co/fdICq6k7LV">https://t.co/fdICq6k7LV</a></p>— The Black Sheep MSU (@BlackSheep_MSU) <a href="https://twitter.com/BlackSheep_MSU/status/1021468213215973379?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 23, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I wrote a paper my freshman year of college, 2010, on this very subject.

If I remember correctly, my paper called for every conference champion to qualify, plus the required number of At-Large bids to make it to 16.

Looking back, I think I was incorrect. Part of what makes the FBS the best season in sports is the number of de facto playoff type games that result from the regular season. 4, 6, or 8 seems reasonable. 16 is definitely too many.

 

[Valpodoc85]

Maybe there should be participation trophy's......?

 

[Irish YJ]

I wrote a paper my freshman year of college, 2010, on this very subject.

If I remember correctly, my paper called for every conference champion to qualify, plus the required number of At-Large bids to make it to 16.

Looking back, I think I was incorrect. Part of what makes the FBS the best season in sports is the number of de facto playoff type games that result from the regular season. 4, 6, or 8 seems reasonable. 16 is definitely too many.

8 is the perfect number. P5+3

 

[snoopdog]

I actually agree with the playoffs be expanded and do away with the conference championship. More games more excitement

 

[Redbar]

Maybe there should be participation trophy's......?

Isn’t that what conference championships are? You are not going to win the Natty, but thanks for playing. A little something for the also rans.

 

[IrishLion]

8 is the perfect number. P5+3

I like 8, but I like:

5 Power Conference Champs
1 Highest Rated Group-of-5 team
2 At Large

There would need to be a stipulation on the Group-of-5 team, like they need to be rated in the top 20 or something, just to protect against years where a UCF or Boise State doesn't rise up and win 10+ games. If they all beat each other up in a random year and there's not a top-20 Group-of-5 team, then you go with 3 At Large.

(I also like it because ND gets in at 10-2 most years [with some obvious exceptions])

 

[IrishLion]

Sparty sending their best to rattle Jim Harbaugh at media day:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The ultimate "Sparty gonna Spart" question asked by smug Crowley Sullivan from something called SpartanWire.<br><br>You can hear the snickers all the way from EL. <a href="https://t.co/80lFRfwEFg">pic.twitter.com/80lFRfwEFg</a></p>— Due# (@JDue51) <a href="https://twitter.com/JDue51/status/1021465109984694272?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 23, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

I actually agree with the playoffs be expanded and do away with the conference championship. More games more excitement

I couldn't disagree with this more. Every week is essentially a playoff game in college football. Your season can be over in October. Every Saturday counts. How much more exciting can you get than that?

More games for the sake of more games would only water down the sport from September - November. It's not supposed to be easy to make the playoffs.

Harbaugh's comments about expanding the playoffs are ridiculous. That's something you expect to hear from Lovie Smith at Illinois or the head coach of Indiana. Not from the head man in Ann Arbor. What a joke.

The best part is, even if they DID expand it to 16 teams, only one of Jimbo's squads at Michigan would have qualified so far.

 

[koonja]

Sparty sending their best to rattle Jim Harbaugh at media day:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The ultimate "Sparty gonna Spart" question asked by smug Crowley Sullivan from something called SpartanWire.<br><br>You can hear the snickers all the way from EL. <a href="https://t.co/80lFRfwEFg">pic.twitter.com/80lFRfwEFg</a></p>— Due# (@JDue51) <a href="https://twitter.com/JDue51/status/1021465109984694272?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 23, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

That reporter has brass balls. What was Jim's response?

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

Isn’t that what conference championships are? You are not going to win the Natty, but thanks for playing. A little something for the also rans.

So last year, the 4 playoff teams were: Oklahoma, Georgia, Clemson, and Alabama.

If Oklahoma loses to TCU in the Big 12 Championship game, they don't make the playoff. If UGA loses to Auburn in the SEC Championship game, Auburn replaced UGA in the playoff. If Clemson loses to Miami in the ACC Championship game, Clemson out, Miami or winner of pOSU/Wisco B1G gets in instead.

Explain to me how any of these are participation games? In several cases, they are essentially the equivalent of a wild card game in the NFL.

 

[IrishLion]

That reporter has brass balls. What was Jim's response?

He actually took it on the chin and talked about how continued hard work will lead to success, and that success will lead to championships.

 

[greyhammer90]

I couldn't disagree with this more. Every week is essentially a playoff game in college football. Your season can be over in October. Every Saturday counts. How much more exciting can you get than that?

Disagree.

1) The playoffs going to 4 teams were supposed to kill the regular season. They didn't.
2) Despite protests to the contrary, every Saturday doesn't count equally. September games don't mean as much as November games.
3) The "every Saturday" mantra only holds true for some teams (Big 12 almost every year), others can take two losses and get in on preseason rankings or conference prestige (SEC). This needs to be corrected, probably by incentivizing a proper reward for winning conference championships.
4) What is so amazing about having a one-and-done season anyway? CFB fans are enamored with this concept but the truth is that 90% of teams are eliminated by mid-October and that's boring. Do we really think that Michigan/Notre Dame or Alabama/Auburn would mean any less to the fans or the teams if it ended up not effecting the championship outcome? (My inclusion of Auburn/Alabama is definitely intended irony considering what happened last year). It also encourages teams to schedule themselves into a 11 win season so that they can get in when others are falling in November.

8 team playoff, 5 conference champion auto-bids, 3 at large. It makes so much sense to me its dumbfounding that we don't already have it. Conference championships mean something, strength of schedule means something, the Boise/UCF's of the world can get it when they have an amazing season, the NDs/BYUs can get in if they are a top ten team. It would remove the bulk of polling/recency bias since conference play runs through the whole season and is formula based. It would be difficult for every team to make it. It would be even more difficult to win it. We finally get to see the best of every area of the country play each other on the basis of games won, not preseason hype.

 

[IrishLion]

Disagree.

1) The playoffs going to 4 teams were supposed to kill the regular season. They didn't.
2) Despite protests to the contrary, every Saturday doesn't count equally. September games don't mean as much as November games.
3) The "every Saturday" mantra only holds true for some teams (Big 12 almost every year), others can take two losses and get in on preseason rankings or conference prestige (SEC). This needs to be corrected, probably by incentivizing a proper reward for winning conference championships.
4) What is so amazing about having a one-and-done season anyway? CFB fans are enamored with this concept but the truth is that 90% of teams are eliminated by mid-October and that's boring. Do we really think that Michigan/Notre Dame or Alabama/Auburn would mean any less to the fans or the teams if it ended up not effecting the championship outcome? (My inclusion of Auburn/Alabama is definitely intended irony considering what happened last year). It also encourages teams to schedule themselves into a 11 win season so that they can get in when others are falling in November.

8 team playoff, 5 conference champion auto-bids, 3 at large. It makes so much sense to me its dumbfounding that we don't already have it. Conference championships mean something, strength of schedule means something, the Boise/UCF's of the world can get it when they have an amazing season, the NDs/BYUs can get in if they are a top ten team. It would remove the bulk of polling/recency bias since conference play runs through the whole season and is formula based. It would be difficult for every team to make it. It would be even more difficult to win it. We finally get to see the best of every area of the country play each other on the basis of games won, not preseason hype.

The only problem here is that UCF STILL would have been left out of an 8-team playoff last year. The committee had them ranked 12th (!) in the final rankings that determined the playoff and the NY6 bowls.

That's why I advocate for 5 conference champs, 2 at large, and 1 for the highest-rated Group-of-5 team.

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

Disagree.


8 team playoff, 5 conference champion auto-bids, 3 at large. It makes so much sense to me its dumbfounding that we don't already have it.

This we actually agree on. The whole point of my comment was to downplay Harbaugh's comments that "more is better" i.e. a 16 team playoff. Sorry for not being more clear. I've said before that an 8 team with an auto-bid for all 5 conference champs makes the most sense (perhaps not on here, I can't remember. I'm still a pretty new poster, but I've advocated for this among my friends/family). We have it in every other sport for division winners. 8 teams seems like the perfect number to me.

To Lion's point, I think it really depends on the year. To automatically give the highest Group of 5 team a nod seems a little dramatic to me. I would say a 10-3 Auburn team last year, with that SOS, should be in over UCF all day. Even though they beat Auburn in their bowl game (hindsight is 20/20), I think there would have been a huge uproar if Auburn was left out and UCF included.

If you don't beat anyone to prove you are good enough to play in the playoffs beforehand, what gives you the right to be included? They had a game against GT that was cancelled. If they played that one the argument grows a little stronger. It will always be debated, but I was for leaving the Knights out of it.

 

[greyhammer90]

The only problem here is that UCF STILL would have been left out of an 8-team playoff last year. The committee had them ranked 12th (!) in the final rankings that determined the playoff and the NY6 bowls.

That's why I advocate for 5 conference champs, 2 at large, and 1 for the highest-rated Group-of-5 team.

I could live with that, though I think even the best G5 teams are typically not top ten teams. So I lean more towards leaving the occasional exceptional G5 out than letting the usual best G5 team in. It's not absolutely fair, and occasionally there are going to be teams left out, but it's as close to fair as I can make it.

 

[Irish#1]

The only problem here is that UCF STILL would have been left out of an 8-team playoff last year. The committee had them ranked 12th (!) in the final rankings that determined the playoff and the NY6 bowls.

That's why I advocate for 5 conference champs, 2 at large, and 1 for the highest-rated Group-of-5 team.

I'm for 8 teams, but like the NCAA MBB tournament, someone who thinks they should have gotten in will be left out anyway you slice it.

I remember when they expanded it past just conference winners. Schools still whined about being left out. Then they jumper to 32 and the whining still went on. They're at 68 teams now and someone always complains.

 

[IrishLion]

I could live with that, though I think even the best G5 teams are typically not top ten teams. So I lean more towards leaving the occasional exceptional G5 out than letting the usual best G5 team in. It's not absolutely fair, and occasionally there are going to be teams left out, but it's as close to fair as I can make it.

I'm for 8 teams, but like the NCAA MBB tournament, someone who thinks they should have gotten in will be left out anyway you slice it.

I remember when they expanded it past just conference winners. Schools still whined about being left out. Then they jumper to 32 and the whining still went on. They're at 68 teams now and someone always complains.

I mentioned in a separate/previous post in the thread that the slot for the highest-rated group-of-5 team should have an attached stipulation, like they need to be in the top 15 or 20 or something.

 

[IrishLion]

To Lion's point, I think it really depends on the year. To automatically give the highest Group of 5 team a nod seems a little dramatic to me. I would say a 10-3 Auburn team last year, with that SOS, should be in over UCF all day. Even though they beat Auburn in their bowl game (hindsight is 20/20), I think there would have been a huge uproar if Auburn was left out and UCF included.

If you don't beat anyone to prove you are good enough to play in the playoffs beforehand, what gives you the right to be included? They had a game against GT that was cancelled. If they played that one the argument grows a little stronger. It will always be debated, but I was for leaving the Knights out of it.

I don't disagree with you, as mentioned above. You don't want to give an automatic bid to the best Group-of-5 team when there's a chance that it could be a 9-3 Boise State team or something like that. We won't always get a 12-0 UCF that can make a compelling argument. But in years where there IS a team worthy of top-15 consideration, I think they deserve a shot.

And I understand the contradiction that they're being placed into a playoff for the best 8 teams, even though they only need to be in the top 15 to qualify, but I think if you expand the playoff, you have to give the little guys a shot to prove themselves.

It's easy to say "you gotta schedule the big teams and prove yourself since you're in a crappy conference, sorry 'bout it," when scheduling for Group-of-5 teams isn't nearly that easy. It's hard for teams like Boise (and now maybe UCF if they have another good year) to find willing, name-brand opponents to play, even if they're willing to play a one-off road game where the big school hosts, because the big schools don't see a risk-reward benefit.

Bama gains nothing for beating UCF during the year, but it's a major blow if they were to somehow lose, so it's bad business for Bama to schedule that game. As a result, teams like UCF are starting behind the 8-ball, even if they have every intent of strengthening their schedule to prove that they belong.

 

[Irish#1]

I mentioned in a separate/previous post in the thread that the slot for the highest-rated group-of-5 team should have an attached stipulation, like they need to be in the top 15 or 20 or something.

Don't disagree, but someone will bitch. amirite?

 

[ACamp1900]

This page is a big reason why cfb kind of dying to me...

 

[MNIrishman]

I think the only real answer is five conference champs plus ND.

 

[MNIrishman]

I mentioned in a separate/previous post in the thread that the slot for the highest-rated group-of-5 team should have an attached stipulation, like they need to be in the top 15 or 20 or something.

They should all have stipulations, like a minimum rank, number of OOC P5 games, and minimum SoS.

 

[T Town Tommy]

I like the five conference champs, two at large, but am stuck on the G5. I would have a hard time with a 12th ranked G5 getting in over a top 10 ranked P5 school. Maybe the G5 should have their own version of a playoff. If so, take the five conference champs and three at large. Eliminate one or two OOC games and make each conference play a minimum of nine conference games a year. And any non P5 opponent should be factored in somehow other than SOS to punish teams that schedule them. I want P5 schools to continue to play them as they need the financial support but the P5 school should do it at the risk of being downgraded somehow in the end.