Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 38
| visibility 1

New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned


Jan 14, 2015, 2:54 PM

 
The College Football Playoff: What We Learned

The first installment of the College Football Playoff is in the books, and I have to say I enjoyed every thrilling moment. While there were moments to savor, it wasn't all entertainment and there were things to be learned along the way. Photo by Matthew Emmons / USATODAY Full Story »


flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Love the Steveport References***


Jan 14, 2015, 3:12 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned


Jan 14, 2015, 3:29 PM

AMEN! Ohio State's offense won a national title with their third team QB because they were built around running the football. I hope our new OC's know we can never win anything that really matters until we can consistently RUN THE FOOTBALL.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned


Jan 14, 2015, 4:32 PM

Nope...Ohio State won that game with their 3rd string QB because Oregon couldn't generate a pass rush and had poor LB play. Jones had all day to throw the ball...even Logan Thomas could have completed passes given the time he had to throw. OSU turned the ball over 4 times...they were extremely lucky that Oregon was without its main WR's because a few times those WR's were open and dropped passes at key moments. So while Elliott ran the heck out of that ball...it was more about Oregon not getting to Jones at all. And i can't say it was the OSU OL that was dominant because Oregon got good push on them...their DL just didn't have moves to get loose.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

He was 3rd string


Jan 14, 2015, 11:32 PM [ in reply to Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned ]

but Jones is not your normal 3rd string QB. How many programs in their history have had a 3rd string QB that is going to play on Sundays? Also, expecting any team especially Clemson to have 3 qb's on the roster that could win a championship is highly unlikely simply because there are not many who have the talent to win a championship that are willing to sit on the bench for 2 or 3 years before they get their shot. At least 1 if not 2 of the Ohio St. qb's will either transfer or enter the draft so this was probably the only time we will ever see this happen in college FB.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: He was 3rd string


Jan 15, 2015, 7:17 AM

Actually Barrett said yesterday he will never transfer and expects that all 3 qb's will be back next year.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If all three return


Jan 15, 2015, 9:15 AM

that is kind of dumb on there part. I get being committed and all that but it's obvious all three are talented and could start at any school in the country that needed a QB. He may have said that but I really don't see at least 1 transferring, probably Braxton.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Is is always true that brute running wins games?


Jan 14, 2015, 3:31 PM

Or just that you play to your opponent's weakness? And many teams are not good at stopping a 60 minute run assault, at least not without getting worn down. But the Duck's secondary was suspect, too. For a 3rd team QB to go 16/23 in a championship game says a lot about that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Defense won the OSU/OU game.


Jan 14, 2015, 4:02 PM

OSU turned the ball over 4 times and OU only got 10 points off of those turnovers. I don't know what part of this folks miss. OSU had a really good defense and OU's hadn't seen one all year.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

My problem David, is that Clemson may have problems getting


Jan 14, 2015, 3:57 PM

in. We tend to over-schedule with difficult non-conf teams IMO. That should be a plus,
however, given the fact that other conference programs are better, with ranked teams rising and falling, the odds of any non-perrenial team going undefeated or with one loss is harder than it once was. Add in the prejudice perception of the ACC.

Personally and unfortunately, I don't know how realistic it is for Clemson to ever be undefeated again. We recruit well, but not as consistently as the top programs.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

This year our OOC schedule is better


Jan 14, 2015, 4:44 PM

Playing ND instead of UGA or Auburn is better in my opinion. SCar is SCar and since it is in Columbia I guess it might be a little more uncertain than last year. But hard to say if they will be any better than in 2014.

If recruiting were everything shouldn't Bama win every game? Their class rankings are always much higher by a long shot than even the #2 team.

Coaching and player development is key. And the rankings are arbitrary at best. I'd be happy to take a few more 2/3 star guys like Grady Jarrett for example.

And I think our recruiting has been on a steady increase over the last 3 or 4 classes. Just the fact that we've been able to land 3 top QBs behind Watson says a lot to me. Time will tell if we can keep it up for linemen like the 2015 class.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Let me clarify: To me it seems better to go undefeated and


Jan 14, 2015, 5:37 PM

thus win the conference, maybe playing a slightly weaker OOC schedule, than trying
to overload the schedule and having a couple of losses.

I think our recruiting is much better, but we will have to do it consistently to ever be
as deep as some of the larger programs.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

It all depends on the perceived strength of the conference


Jan 14, 2015, 11:43 PM

right now in the ACC Clemson will have to have a decent OOC schedule and go undefeated to make a 4 team playoff. Of course if the field is expanded then OOC doesn't matter as much. If the perception of the ACC teams other than FSU and Clemson can get stronger than OOC will not need to be as strong to get in. The best thing for Clemson is FSU to stay strong and we need teams like GT, VT, and Miami who have some national recognition to get better and maintain some success. Even though we may not play VT or Miami every year the fact of them winning would give the ACC more holding power in the committee. I don't agree with having to pull for a strong conference but with the way the media influences selections now you can't get by with being the only good team in the whole conference. No the SEC schools are not that great in reality but that conference has been anointed the best and until other conferences, especially the ACC can raise their stock in the minds of the writers and ESPN it will not be unlikely to see some very good teams left out, see TCU, because they play in what people deem an inferior conference.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

No it doesn't mean Bama should win every game, but


Jan 14, 2015, 9:37 PM [ in reply to This year our OOC schedule is better ]

it does mean they should have the best chance to do so, all other things being equal.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If we have one-loss, play good OOC teams, and win ACC


Jan 14, 2015, 4:46 PM [ in reply to My problem David, is that Clemson may have problems getting ]

there is a high probability that we get in. And if it's 8 teams then just win the ACC.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

There is, but look at FSU. They had a good out of conference


Jan 14, 2015, 5:41 PM

schedule, were the defending champs, but almost got bumped out even being
undefeated. If they had 1 loss, they probably would have been excluded like TCU or Baylor.
This same thing could happen to Clemson as an ACC team unfortunately.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That's because FSU was struggling to win most of their games


Jan 14, 2015, 9:40 PM

and they were failing the "eye test." They were failing in quite a few computer models also. I honestly don't think they were a top 4 team - i think TCU was better. FSU was probably more on the Baylor/Mich ST level.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Baylor was the Big 12 Conference Champ.


Jan 14, 2015, 4:00 PM

TCU might have been the better team but OSU would have pounded them like a mallard duck too.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That is just pure speculation. TCU did plenty of pounding


Jan 14, 2015, 7:13 PM

of their own, on Ole Miss, of the mighty SEC.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Two months ago, Ohio State was not even in the discussion


Jan 14, 2015, 4:07 PM

as a playoff team, maybe not even a Top 10 team.

Now, the media apes are all falling over themselves calling Ohio State a dynasty in the making.

Good Grief.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Why not? They have the best college coach of this


Jan 14, 2015, 9:44 PM

century (sorry Saban), good recruiting, facilities, support, tradition, etc. They won with a really young team too. 38-3 under Meyer so far, 24-0 in the Big Ten regular season, and 25-1 in conference overall.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

What We Learned : That is one ugly trophy.***


Jan 14, 2015, 4:18 PM



badge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Photobucket


Re: What We Learned : That is one ugly trophy.***


Jan 14, 2015, 4:21 PM

But Larry is Funny!!!

SELFIE!!

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Photobucket


4 teams are enough


Jan 14, 2015, 4:39 PM

If TCU and Baylor want to get in then schedule more teams from the top 5 conferences.
FSU scheduled Oklohoma St, Florida, and ND and then played GaT in ACC Championship game.
Ohio St only had VaT but they had the big 10 championship game.

I think Clemson would have to go undefeated to get in the playoff next year because of AppSt and Wofford. ND and USC are not enough out of conference to offset the national perspective of a weak ACC.

But neither Baylor nor TCU had out of conference opponents that would match ND and USC.

The playoff committee made it clear that scheduling matters.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: 4 teams are enough


Jan 14, 2015, 4:50 PM

I agree 4 is enough. Every single game counts and creates its own drama. Apparently Gary Peterson was OK with TCU not getting in, and obviously he lost the most with his team being left out. Whose to say Clemson could not get in with 1 loss? It just depends on how the regular season unfolds. I am fine with that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I disagree. Always better to be undefeated than have a loss


Jan 14, 2015, 5:44 PM [ in reply to 4 teams are enough ]

especially being in the ACC.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Four is NOT enough. If you win your conference, you should


Jan 14, 2015, 7:20 PM [ in reply to 4 teams are enough ]

automatically be in. If we had won out after losing to UGA, still having those ugly wins while DW was hurt, is is highly unlikely we would have gotten in. How would you have liked that, huh. It is pure foolish to say four is enough. No excuse for not having every conference champ in.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: 4 teams are enough


Jan 15, 2015, 3:00 PM [ in reply to 4 teams are enough ]

I agree that 4 teams are enough! Out of the last 10 years, most of the time it would be hard to find 4 teams truly worthy of being NC. In 2007 and 2011 it was tough to find 2! This year was unusual because there were no really dominant teams. And so there were probably 5 that could make an equal claim. I say do not water the down the competition.

I am glad there were 4 though. I expect the BCS would have put Alabama up against FSU!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

4 teams not enough go to 8 conf champ from Big 5 +3 at-large


Jan 14, 2015, 5:17 PM

It simple you control your on destiny and those schools not in Big 5 either don deserve or will have to show something special like Boise St.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned


Jan 14, 2015, 5:27 PM

I personally think 8 is too much...6 would be ideal. Every season is different, but looking at this year there wouldn't be any controversy if we had 6 teams. Give the #1 and #2 teams a bye week and then let the other 4 play the first week.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned


Jan 14, 2015, 6:35 PM

That is it. You are dead on. 6 is the number. D 1 can't do the 16 or 12 team playoff but 6 makers sense in light of the big 5 conference reality.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

A bye week is too big of an advantage that would lead to


Jan 14, 2015, 6:41 PM [ in reply to Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned ]

controversy over who is seeded #2 and 3.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Giving top two a bye is to much of an advantage, but


Jan 14, 2015, 7:22 PM [ in reply to Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned ]

six is better than four.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned


Jan 14, 2015, 8:32 PM

The shots taken at the SECheat were right on the money, and the proof was in the Final game. The best team did win the NC, even against the bias that does, in fact, exist. Just because a team plays in a favored conference doesn't make the biased opinion true, and this year proved that point. Congrats to OSU!! They deserved it, and they proved it on the field in spite of all the odds, made by the SECheat Pundits, against them. The bias is alive and well. I do hopet hat this year helped put that bias in the dumpster in which it belongs.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned


Jan 14, 2015, 9:29 PM

Nice jab at Steveport!!!! LOL

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Intrestingly enough, New England won last weekend


Jan 14, 2015, 9:35 PM

without even attempting to run the football (RBs got zero caries in the 2nd half) while Seattle and Green Bay were also both out-rushed by their opponents, and Indy had a grand total of 99 yards in a game they were leading throughout.

I think the difference is that 99% of college teams don't have QBs the caliber of Brady, Rodgers, Luck, or Wilson so if they aren't able to run the football the QBs often struggle too much.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: New Story: The College Football Playoff: What We Learned


Jan 14, 2015, 10:25 PM

What did we learn? The best team in the nation, TCU, got screwed out of playing in the playoff.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

After this year I'm afraid any ACC team


Jan 14, 2015, 11:36 PM

will have to be undefeated to be in the 4-team playoff. What FSU did put us in a bad light. Next season if we have 1 loss and a TCU/Baylor/OK has 1 loss then we will be left out.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Clemson may be able to lose one and get in.......


Jan 15, 2015, 10:23 AM

For us to make the 4 team playoff with a loss.......
Have to win the division, so win all those. Will need to clearly be the better team, not win with last minute hail marys and overtime field goals. Can lose a close one to a highly ranked team (maybe ND or GT), but have to win the ACCCG convincingly. Finally, the ACC has to be on the rise (maybe 5 teams in top 25 instead of this year's 4).

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 38
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic