Red Mosquito

Whose your team again GH? Colorado?

Bammer wrote: College football will always >>>> pro football for anyone that went to a school with a legit football program. And fantasy football players should be referred to as "fantasy players" not "fantasy owners" for real.

Went to USC and grew up rooting for Texas, and I prefer the NFL. So your statement is false.

The NFL is the height of the football world. Games like Eagles-Cowboys from Sunday are just as good as the best college games and seem to happen more frequently.

darth_vedder wrote:Whose your team again GH? Colorado?

I didn't go to a D-I school, thus no college team. I honestly like it, it's a bit of a relief to not be tied to the emotion swings of fandom in at least one sport. There are certain schools I may like more than others, though.

The SEC bias is real

verb_to_trust wrote:The SEC bias is real

But the west is actually really good. The east is an incredibly expensive Junior Varsity effort. Auburn needs to be shifted to the east, Mizzouri to the west.

Orpheus wrote:

Bammer wrote: College football will always >>>> pro football for anyone that went to a school with a legit football program. And fantasy football players should be referred to as "fantasy players" not "fantasy owners" for real.

Went to USC and grew up rooting for Texas, and I prefer the NFL. So your statement is false.

The NFL is the height of the football world. Games like Eagles-Cowboys from Sunday are just as good as the best college games and seem to happen more frequently.

I still love seeing games like last weeks Clemson and FSU contest and the National Championship game was awesome last year, but yeah, when it's done well anyway, the NFL is so good. (this year not so much) same with the NBA.

Electromatic wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:The SEC bias is real

But the west is actually really good. The east is an incredibly expensive Junior Varsity effort. Auburn needs to be shifted to the east, Mizzouri to the west.

We may never win another conference game if that happens.

Mizzou has competed. The teams that should move are vandy/kentucky

Orpheus wrote:

Bammer wrote: College football will always >>>> pro football for anyone that went to a school with a legit football program. And fantasy football players should be referred to as "fantasy players" not "fantasy owners" for real.

Went to USC and grew up rooting for Texas, and I prefer the NFL. So your statement is false.

The NFL is the height of the football world. Games like Eagles-Cowboys from Sunday are just as good as the best college games and seem to happen more frequently.

verb_to_trust wrote:The SEC bias is real

Green Habit wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Whose your team again GH? Colorado?

I didn't go to a D-I school, thus no college team. I honestly like it, it's a bit of a relief to not be tied to the emotion swings of fandom in at least one sport. There are certain schools I may like more than others, though.

I know you don't post much in PJ chat but over there, we like to rank things. Can I expect your list by cob tomorrow?

What a joke the first playoff ranking is. I know it doesn't really matter until the last ranking, but A&M above Washington? And Penn State number 12?!?!

re: College vs. NFL, I prefer the college game. For me, the No Fun League just keeps getting worse. Shitty owners, a shitty commish, and shitty refs are all but killing it for me. I know college football has it's problems too, and at some point I may just kinda walk away from football all together. For now, I still watch both, and college is better.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:What a joke the first playoff ranking is. I know it doesn't really matter until the last ranking, but A&M above Washington? And Penn State number 12?!?!

I guess they put a lot of weight into what they think is strength of schedule, but yeah, UW should be #4. We really need an 8 team playoff.

darth_vedder wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:What a joke the first playoff ranking is. I know it doesn't really matter until the last ranking, but A&M above Washington? And Penn State number 12?!?!

I guess they put a lot of weight into what they think is strength of schedule, but yeah, UW should be #4. We really need an 8 team playoff.

I disagree as it would become more muddy around 7-8-9-10 rankings. There will be a TON of 1 or 2 loss teams in that area and then there would be even more butthurt schools come selection time.

darth_vedder wrote:re: College vs. NFL, I prefer the college game. For me, the No Fun League just keeps getting worse. Shitty owners, a shitty commish, and shitty refs are all but killing it for me. I know college football has it's problems too, and at some point I may just kinda walk away from football all together. For now, I still watch both, and college is better.

Yeah, I agree with this. The NFL just seems completely soulless.

darth_vedder wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Whose your team again GH? Colorado?

I didn't go to a D-I school, thus no college team. I honestly like it, it's a bit of a relief to not be tied to the emotion swings of fandom in at least one sport. There are certain schools I may like more than others, though.

I know you don't post much in PJ chat but over there, we like to rank things. Can I expect your list by cob tomorrow?

It's a real fluid list, based on a lot of different factors. Some examples:
--I like to see BSU and Idaho do well just because I know so many people who went to those schools. To a lesser extent, the same also applies to the other four major Northwest schools (UW, Wazzu, UO, OSU).
--That can also apply to RMers of past and present. You're a good representation of Clemson fans, so I'll pull for them over SCar. I've gotten to know several Michigan and MSU fans through here, so those schools got a boost, and then B and Joesanity come in to balance things out on the tOSU side.
--Schools that have produced great Denver Broncos tend to get a boost. For example, I like Stanford because both John Elway and Ed McCaffrey came from there, and they currently have Christian McCaffrey.
--Cultural factors of schools can also apply. For example, even though they produced Gary Kubiak and Von Miller, I just can't get behind the weird culture of Texas A&M. I definitely prefer the culture of UT, therefore I like to see the Longhorns do well.
--Notre Dame regularly bugs me because they think their football program should be special. Just join the damn ACC in full already. To a lesser extent this applies to BYU as well--cultural factors also go against them.

So yeah, no real hard set rules.

darth_vedder wrote:re: College vs. NFL, I prefer the college game. For me, the No Fun League just keeps getting worse. Shitty owners, a shitty commish, and shitty refs are all but killing it for me. I know college football has it's problems too, and at some point I may just kinda walk away from football all together. For now, I still watch both, and college is better.

It doesn't help when your favorite NFL team has quite possibly the shittiest owner.

Green Habit wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Whose your team again GH? Colorado?

I didn't go to a D-I school, thus no college team. I honestly like it, it's a bit of a relief to not be tied to the emotion swings of fandom in at least one sport. There are certain schools I may like more than others, though.

I know you don't post much in PJ chat but over there, we like to rank things. Can I expect your list by cob tomorrow?

It's a real fluid list, based on a lot of different factors. Some examples:
--I like to see BSU and Idaho do well just because I know so many people who went to those schools. To a lesser extent, the same also applies to the other four major Northwest schools (UW, Wazzu, UO, OSU).
--That can also apply to RMers of past and present. You're a good representation of Clemson fans, so I'll pull for them over SCar. I've gotten to know several Michigan and MSU fans through here, so those schools got a boost, and then B and Joesanity come in to balance things out on the tOSU side.
--Schools that have produced great Denver Broncos tend to get a boost. For example, I like Stanford because both John Elway and Ed McCaffrey came from there, and they currently have Christian McCaffrey.
--Cultural factors of schools can also apply. For example, even though they produced Gary Kubiak and Von Miller, I just can't get behind the weird culture of Texas A&M. I definitely prefer the culture of UT, therefore I like to see the Longhorns do well.
--Notre Dame regularly bugs me because they think their football program should be special. Just join the damn ACC in full already. To a lesser extent this applies to BYU as well--cultural factors also go against them.

So yeah, no real hard set rules.

roll tide

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:What a joke the first playoff ranking is. I know it doesn't really matter until the last ranking, but A&M above Washington? And Penn State number 12?!?!

I guess they put a lot of weight into what they think is strength of schedule, but yeah, UW should be #4. We really need an 8 team playoff.

I disagree as it would become more muddy around 7-8-9-10 rankings. There will be a TON of 1 or 2 loss teams in that area and then there would be even more butthurt schools come selection time.

Here's how I'd do it:
--4 conferences of 18 teams each, 9 team divisions. Play 8 round robin within your division, 4 with whoever else you want (even a team inside your conference but outside your division).
--12 team playoff. Keep the CCGs where they are now around late November/early December, take a week off for finals, then do a round each week. That should put the semis around New Year's and the final around where it is now.
--Conference champs get an automatic playoff berth and a first round bye--but not necessarily the top 4 seeds, just in case a weak division winner gets an upset in a CCG.
--8 wild cards, determined and seeded first based on W/L record, and then apply objective tiebreakers similar to the NFL.
--Throw the damn polls and the damn committee into a dumpster fire.