Imagine how this would go over in Philly 

10 minutes ago, downundermike said:

 

Lol PFF is such a joke…TJ Edwards all pro? Lololol

Well, the cost to keep TJ Edwards just went up.

Nevermind I'm dumb. I missed where it said PFF. I can't read this morning.

21 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

True in many ways, but like (I think it was) Iggles Phan said, all the emotion and fanfare has been gutted.

So as you can probably tell, this issue hits home for me.  I root for one of the Also-Rans, WVU.  We're probably one of the prime cases of how the NIL/transfer portal can destroy a program.

We used to have to gear up to compete with the big boys, maybe every 3-4 years and that was great.  

Now, the program cant get any traction at all. Its entirely dependent on the coaching staff or boosters essentially turning tricks.  WVU spends a lot, its not about money, we're usually in the top 10 or so as a program in terms of dollars spent.  But we literally have lost 17/21 signees from the last recruiting class.   Its not just disgruntled players, even our star players who get tons of PT are getting picked off by bigger programs and theres absolutely nothing that can be done.  Theres no way you can build a program that way, you just have to hope to catch lightning in a bottle for a year, then start all over again.

You know its bad when even the historic 'big boys' are lost in the wilderness.   Look at who you mentioned:  Nebraska, Oklahoma, someone mentioned Miami the other day.  Theyre all caught up in the fray and no one has any idea how to manage this in any sustainable way, not even Georgia or Alabama, theyll just turn their roster over.

Case in point, its bad for most players who enter the portal, many dont find a new home or end up going to a worse situation.

 

 

 

They should limit out of state players to 10 per team. 

Just now, metal said:

Well, the cost to keep TJ Edwards just went up.

No it didn’t 

Just now, metal said:

Well, the cost to keep TJ Edwards just went up.

no it didn't 

TCU getting blown out isn’t anything new in the CFB playoff since they started it around 10 years ago. There have been 27 CFB playoff games and 19 of them have had a winning margin of three touchdowns or more. So a majority of the time, one team is significantly better than the other and the two semi final games we saw this year were outliers, not the norm. I don’t have an issue with TCU getting in. You can’t say they didn’t deserve it with how they beat Michigan. I’m okay expanding the playoffs, but only to six teams. I’m not a fan of the 12 team expansion. But money talks. 

19 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

True in many ways, but like (I think it was) Iggles Phan said, all the emotion and fanfare has been gutted.

So as you can probably tell, this issue hits home for me.  I root for one of the Also-Rans, WVU.  We're probably one of the prime cases of how the NIL/transfer portal can destroy a program.

We used to have to gear up to compete with the big boys, maybe every 3-4 years and that was great.  

Now, the program cant get any traction at all. Its entirely dependent on the coaching staff or boosters essentially turning tricks.  WVU spends a lot, its not about money, we're usually in the top 10 or so as a program in terms of dollars spent.  But we literally have lost 17/21 signees from the last recruiting class.   Its not just disgruntled players, even our star players who get tons of PT are getting picked off by bigger programs and theres absolutely nothing that can be done.  Theres no way you can build a program that way, you just have to hope to catch lightning in a bottle for a year, then start all over again.

You know its bad when even the historic 'big boys' are lost in the wilderness.   Look at who you mentioned:  Nebraska, Oklahoma, someone mentioned Miami the other day.  Theyre all caught up in the fray and no one has any idea how to manage this in any sustainable way, not even Georgia or Alabama, theyll just turn their roster over.

Case in point, its bad for most players who enter the portal, many dont find a new home or end up going to a worse situation.

It's almost like football is big business.  

8 minutes ago, metal said:

Well, the cost to keep TJ Edwards just went up.

That's fine. We need 2 new starters at LB next year anyway (one will be Dean).

17 hours ago, RLC said:

I hope the Bucs and Cowboys beat the hell out of each other.

Wasn't Dallas last LB always injured from a neck injury too?

16 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Now that seeding is set, I want to circle back to the AFC vs NFC debate. Seeds are as follows. 

1. Chiefs/Eagles

2. Bills/San Francisco 

3. Bengals/Vikings

4. Jags/Bucs

5. Chargers/Cowboys

6. Ravens/Giants

7. Dolphins/Seahawks

If we were to pick the better team in each group, IMO it would be:

1. Chiefs

2. Bills

3. Bengals

4. Bucs slightly

5. Cowboys slightly

6. Ravens

7. Dolphins

I could be swayed with the Bucs/Cowboys arguments, but everything else points to AFC being the stronger conference. I'm not saying the NFC has no chance and there is any given Sunday but I think the majority of the time, AFC comes out on top.  

Was it @FranklinFldEBUpper that felt the NFC was better?

49ers over the Bills

5 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Wasn't Dallas last LB always injured from a neck injury too?

Was it @FranklinFldEBUpper that felt the NFC was better?

I'm sure he will reply directly, but I thought his point was that there isn't nearly the discrepancy that some people think -- and he's correct.

By my calculations, the NFC total win-loss records are 136-134-2, where the AFC is 133-135-2.  It's not a balanced schedule, but the playoff breakdowns in both conferences are similar.  Top seeds are 14-3, #7 seeds in both conferences are 9-8, worst division winner in AFC is 9-8 and 8-9 in NFC.

It could be argued the AFC is better at the top, but not throughout the conference.

 

6 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Wasn't Dallas last LB always injured from a neck injury too?

Was it @FranklinFldEBUpper that felt the NFC was better?

I didn’t necessarily assert that the NFC was better.  But rather that it is ridiculous how the NFC is characterized routinely as being terrible, especially since they won more interconference games than their counterparts and did so last year as well.

For what it’s worth, I think there are only three good teams in the AFC compared to four in the NFC. The rest of the playoff teams are just noise.

Just some musings on the Eagles playoff run...

I've been pretty bearish over the last 3 games.  I know you all say I'm negative, but I was as high on this team from late September through early December as anyone.  I am just very concerned that it is exceptionally difficult to power down all systems, sleep walk through a full month, and then suddenly jump start all the engines for a playoff game.

But one sliver...I wonder if they called the offense they did for the last 3 weeks...not to keep things vanilla...but entirely to avoid injury.  Short 3-step drops with quick releases minimize the risk of the QB getting hit in the pocket.  No QB runs.  Everything to the first read.  No running game avoids piles in the middle of the field for the OL, preserves the RBs.  I'm not arguing that it was a good idea or effective plan, but I just wonder if that was the driving force behind the type of offense and playcalling we've seen for the last few weeks....just avoiding that physical style of play and the run game entirely to preserve health.  All short drops and quick releases keep it as close to flag football as possible.

It makes me feel a little bit reassured to buy into the notion that the coaching staff didn't actually think this was the way to call a game if you are serious about winning it.

3 hours ago, McMVP said:

Just like OSU woke up after the Michigan game. Alabama should’ve been the other team.  I think the championship game would’ve looked similar if either Alabama or OSU was playing TCU

Yeah, it was just a matter of time before someone would pine for Alabama, a two loss team that didn’t even qualify for their conference championship. But they deserve it because they’re Alabama and everyone just knows they’re the bestest.

3 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Just some musings on the Eagles playoff run...

I've been pretty bearish over the last 3 games.  I know you all say I'm negative, but I was as high on this team from late September through early December as anyone.  I am just very concerned that it is exceptionally difficult to power down all systems, sleep walk through a full month, and then suddenly jump start all the engines for a playoff game.

But one sliver...I wonder if they called the offense they did for the last 3 weeks...not to keep things vanilla...but entirely to avoid injury.  Short 3-step drops with quick releases minimize the risk of the QB getting hit in the pocket.  No QB runs.  Everything to the first read.  No running game avoids piles in the middle of the field for the OL, preserves the RBs.  I'm not arguing that it was a good idea or effective plan, but I just wonder if that was the driving force behind the type of offense and playcalling we've seen for the last few weeks....just avoiding that physical style of play and the run game entirely to preserve health.  All short drops and quick releases keep it as close to flag football as possible.

It makes me feel a little bit reassured to buy into the notion that the coaching staff didn't actually think this was the way to call a game if you are serious about winning it.

I’ve also thought of it a bit like this. The question is the injuries and also whether we can turn it back on or not. 

58 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

This is why Scripps Spelling Bee remains king of the academic athletic competitions. 

The winner does get like $50,000.  

43 minutes ago, NCTANK said:

hasn’t college football always been about the upper tier? i’m old enough to remember if you weren’t Notre Dame, or Nebraska, or Oklahoma, you didn’t stand a snowballs chance in hell of being even considered for a title. fast forward decades and only the names have changed but the antiquated system was still in place. at least now there is a playoff where you have to earn it on the field. it’s better now and i say expand it even more. take away these meaningless bowl games, where many of the stars opt out anyway, and give them something to actually play for besides a bucket of mayonnaise. 

The problem with expansion is really time and the physical nature of football.  I don't think you can expand it to beyond 16 teams.  16 teams would give you 4 games.  I don't think that's necessarily that bad given the size of college football rosters. 16 teams also has been workable for years at the FCS level. 

 I think having bowl games is fine.  There's a market for it.  I just think they need to get the bowl games out of the Championship series.  

Did not watch the game last night.  Sounds like it was a beauty :).  Curious was Ringo covering Quentin Johnston the whole game?  Noticed Johnston only finished with one catch for 3 yards.

4 hours ago, Casey @ Bat said:

Who was the guy who was an Arizona State grad? Had Will Ferrell in his avatar. Was it Prince Kelby ?

 

4 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yup.  Crazy pills.

Didn’t he change his screen name?

32 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

They should limit out of state players to 10 per team. 

No it didn’t 

Why? It doesn't benefit the students or the school.  

41 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

The governor would send the National Guard to make the teams play each other twice.  Also, there's too much money in that rivalry.  That's the issue is that the money drives decisions.  Paying the players is not causing all of these changes.  It's all about money and power football schools wanting to keep money coming into them.  

Never said it was... it's the last brick to fall.

4 hours ago, metal said:

Worst National Championship game since Alabama/Notre Dame. At least it was an entertaining bowl season though.

It lacked drama, but the quality of play on the field was superb. It was also an excellent opportunity to see a whole bunch of NFL prospects in action in a game that truly mattered.

JMO

Just now, Bacarty2 said:

IF TCU had Alabama's schedule they'd probably have 4+ losses. I think Michigan in the SEC would probably have 2 L's, if not more. 

 

OK and? 

If you look at the product of college football today heading into the mid 2020’s vs the product from pre BCS which is better overall? Consider all FBS teams, all fans, etc. including both tv experiences and fan experiences at games. 

3 hours ago, McMVP said:

Just like OSU woke up after the Michigan game. Alabama should’ve been the other team.  I think the championship game would’ve looked similar if either Alabama or OSU was playing TCU

TCU got into the game the old fashioned way … they earned it.

10 minutes ago, mattwill said:

 

Didn’t he change his screen name?

Not that I am aware of.