Interest Decline in College Football?

[OlyDuck]

I reiterate Name Recognition.

Prior to the 2014 CFP selection...

Baylor (11-1) only loss was to West Virginia (7-6)
TCU (11-1) only loss was to #5 Baylor

Had there been a Big 12 CCG and #3 TCU had won, they'd have been (12-1) and a better loss than #2 Oregon (12-1).
TCU lost to #6 Baylor 'on the road' and Oregon lost to #7 Arizona 'at home'.
I'm using the CFP poll one week prior to selection day.
You could have made an argument for TCU right there.


Had Notre Dame or Oklahoma been 12-1 they'd have gotten in over Oregon at 12-1 on Name Recognition...

Florida St (13-0), Alabama (12-1), Ohio St (12-1), Notre Dame (12-1) puts a lot more butts in seats and eyeballs on tv screens than Florida St (13-0), Alabama (12-1), Ohio St (12-1), Oregon (12-1).

Florida St (13-0), Alabama (12-1), Ohio St (12-1), Oklahoma (12-1) puts a lot more butts in seats and eyeballs on tv screens than Florida St (13-0), Alabama (12-1), Ohio St (12-1), Oregon (12-1).

I know it hurts, but Oregon does not have the flavor of Notre Dame or Oklahoma. The entire college football world knows this other than apparently you.

Oregon was #2 from week 12 on. sorry to break it to you but Oregon has enough of a name to hold that position. if oregon was at 4 i could see that happening but from 2 to out while winning out the rest of the way with wins vs 18 UCLA 17 Utah and 7 Arizona? doubt

 

[fordman84]

You are the most immature poster to respond to and cannot engage in conversation.

whoa whoa whoa WHOA!
Why didn't I get a chance to enter this contest? Who are you to make this declaration?

 

[Red_Alert]

Oregon was #2 from week 12 on. sorry to break it to you but Oregon has enough of a name to hold that position. if oregon was at 4 i could see that happening but from 2 to out while winning out the rest of the way with wins vs 18 UCLA 17 Utah and 7 Arizona? doubt

TCU was #3 the week prior to the CFP selection and dropped to #6 the day of selection. The reason they dropped to #6 on selection day was because the Big 12 didn't have a CCG leaving them with just 11 wins.

Oregon (12-1) would likely have gotten in over a (12-1) TCU. I can easily concede that.

But not over a (12-1) Notre Dame or (12-1) Oklahoma, because Name Recognition.

That is obviously OPINION.

 

[fordman84]

You are a moron. @WhosYourDawggy, from my understanding, graduated Vanderbilt law school and it shows more in his posts because at least he can stay on topic.

No where in his rambling did @Red_Alert say anything constructive. He never discussed or tried to disprove my main statement about how the 1990s had significantly more parity than today. No where in his rambling does he do that. He takes a small, random statement with little importance to my article about Oregon and USC and went off on a tangent about it full of insults (you guys seem to respond to insults well but most professionals see that as someone melting down/losing the argument).

@WhosYourDawggy would destroy @Red_Alert in any meaningful debate today. Not wanting to get too much into my personal life but I am in a position to make that call. At the very least, @WhosYourDawggy actually reads the full posts and provides meaningful responses even if they are long. You don't get that from the Red_Alert Trolling.

You have fallen, hook-line-and-seeker from a troll who just likes to post random shit from CFB data websites. Red Alert is NOT even consistent with his own arguments, he makes this big spill citing to AP in this thread but in earlier arguments when I quoted AP Rankings, he stated the media doesn't know what they are talking about (experts who have actually studied and played the smart don't know enough as Red_Alert, that is arrogance, douchebag, trolling at its finest). Also if you ever call out @Red_Alert, he just deflects or dodges anything meaningful or pushes you to provide a "link" and dig through pages on here. The guy is a loser and you can't see it.

Not to mention his 4-5 responses to my single response shows a major obsession issue.

If I wanted to win a debate, I would take @WhosYourDawggy anytime. This is why I sometimes don't respect this board very much, there isn't a sense of reality on here. I ran some of your past arguments by people in discussions and the general consensus did not favor the opinion on this board. The common response I got, was that I was wasting time talking to people on the internet. They are probably correct. I probably made a mistake even responding to @Red_Alert in the first place. The guy is an idiot and isn't interested in any meaningful conversation. He just wants to start fights with people on here.

The best part was that the very post that I made that started this argument had a disclaimer that it was my perception from the period. Keep in mind that nearly every argument about CFB is 95-97% opinion. There isn't a lot of true facts in any of the discussions on this message board.

Found Dawggy's mom.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Found Dawggy's mom.

You keep my momma's name out of yo fuckin mouf!

 

[OlyDuck]

TCU was #3 the week prior to the CFP selection and dropped to #6 the day of selection. The reason they dropped to #6 on selection day was because the Big 12 didn't have a CCG leaving them with just 11 wins.

Oregon (12-1) would likely have gotten in over a (12-1) TCU. I can easily concede that.

But not over a (12-1) Notre Dame or (12-1) Oklahoma, because Name Recognition.

That is obviously OPINION.

1,2,3,4 held 1 week and then same at selection according to espn

 

[Deep Creek]

TCU was #3 the week prior to the CFP selection and dropped to #6 the day of selection. The reason they dropped to #6 on selection day was because the Big 12 didn't have a CCG leaving them with just 11 wins.

Oregon (12-1) would likely have gotten in over a (12-1) TCU. I can easily concede that.

But not over a (12-1) Notre Dame or (12-1) Oklahoma, because Name Recognition.

That is obviously OPINION.

And they beat Iowa State 55-3 the last week of the season which dropped them to #6. They should have beaten them 56-3. That'd have dropped them out of the top 10.

But, TCU proved the CFP selection committee was correct in leaving them out. They couldn't beat Ole Miss but 42-3 in their bowl game.

 

[Red_Alert]

1,2,3,4 held 1 week and then same at selection according to espn

Nope.

TCU was #3 on Dec 2nd and dropped to #6 on selection day Dec 7th

FSU moved from #4 up to #3
Ohio St moved from #5 up to #4
Baylor moved from #6 up to #5

The reason Baylor moved ahead of TCU was the earlier head-to-head.
The reason TCU dropped to #6 was because without a CCG they maxed at (11-1) where FSU and Ohio St had CCG's to get them to 12 wins.

Week-by-Week CFP Selection Committee Rankings: 2014

Week-by-Week CFP Selection Committee Rankings: 2014

collegefootballplayoff.com

 

[Red_Alert]

And they beat Iowa State 55-3 the last week of the season which dropped them to #6. They should have beaten them 56-3. That'd have dropped them out of the top 10.

But, TCU proved the CFP selection committee was correct in leaving them out. They couldn't beat Ole Miss but 42-3 in their bowl game.

Well I'm not gonna argue after CFP selection day.

It was (11-1) as opposed to everybody else's (12-1) and a (13-0) that dropped TCU.

The week prior to selection day.

Oregon CFP ranked opponents: Arizona #7 (L), Michigan St #8, UCLA #15, Utah #23, Arizona #7 (W)
TCU CFP ranked opponents: Baylor #6 (L), Kansas St #9, Oklahoma #20

 

[Deep Creek]

Well I'm not gonna argue after CFP selection day.

It was (11-1) as opposed to everybody else's (12-1) and a (13-0) that dropped TCU.

The week prior to selection day.

Oregon CFP ranked opponents: Arizona #7 (L), Michigan St #8, UCLA #15, Utah #23, Arizona #7 (W)
TCU CFP ranked opponents: Baylor #6 (L), Kansas St #9, Oklahoma #20

Hell no. No one can. Proof was in the pudding. Ohio State won it. But records are misleading. FSU was the fraud that year. But they weren't gonna leave out an undefeated defending champ...even if they were slogging along.

And that name recognition is powerful. Even if they hadn't crapped the bed at Baylor, I doubt TCU would have gotten in at 12-0. TCU ain't got the cache that big names do. And a B1G 12-1 team is considered better than a Big 12 12-0 team.

 

[Red_Alert]

Hell no. No one can. Proof was in the pudding. Ohio State won it. But records are misleading. FSU was the fraud that year. But they weren't gonna leave out an undefeated defending champ...even if they were slogging along.

And that name recognition is powerful. Even if they hadn't crapped the bed at Baylor, I doubt TCU would have gotten in at 12-0. TCU ain't got the cache that big names do. And a B1G 12-1 team is considered better than a Big 12 12-0 team.

Yeah, I was only arguing TCU against Oregon had they both been (12-1).

Arguing TCU is stretch since Oregon was the 'more consistent' program in that timeframe and had held that #2 CFP spot for 4 weeks prior to selection day. Oregon did nothing to hurt themselves in their CCG. If anything they got to vindicate that earlier home loss to Arizona.

Had Oregon been up against a Notre Dame or Oklahoma (at 12-1) though, it's likely a different story.

 

[OlyDuck]

Yeah, I was only arguing TCU against Oregon had they both been (12-1).

Arguing TCU is stretch since Oregon was the 'more consistent' program in that timeframe and had held that #2 CFP spot for 4 weeks prior to selection day. Oregon did nothing to hurt themselves in their CCG. If anything they got to vindicate that earlier home loss to Arizona.

Had Oregon been up against a Notre Dame or Oklahoma (at 12-1) though, it's likely a different story.

i think that would come down to who ND or OK lost to and when

ND first loss of the season came at week 7 to FSU that would hurt them even if they fought their way back up because people would argue against a potential rematch. and it was second half of the season, harder to come back from more often than not. their other losses Arizona State, Northwestern, Louisville and USC in the last 4 weeks also all unlikely to recover from even if they were the only loss.

Oklahoma likely would recover from the early TCU loss but the others would have been harder to in terms of time. Baylor and Kansas State both ranked would be easier forgiveness on the who. Oklahoma State rival last game and they were 6-6 at end of regular season would not even if they still finished 12-1.

 

[Mistaken4193]

I think looking back the 4 team playoff was the worst thing CFB could do because it allows Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, and Georgia a loss without penalty.

Either expand to 6 or 8 and guarantee everybody from every region of country a shot. Or go back to the BCS where 1 loss 95% knocks out a Blue Blood unless they get extreme chaos similar to what Alabama got in 2011 and 2012.

With the BCS this years National Title game would have been Alabama/Michigan which would have been a lot more interesting nationally.

 

[Kburjr]

From 2010 - 2019 there was parity below Bama, Clemson, Ohio St.

Again.... Every generation has 4-5 teams (At Best) that are "dominant".
Just because a team or two happens to break through and win a conference doesn't make them "dominant" in that generation.
Just because a team wins the majority of it's conference championships in a generation doesn't make them "dominant".

Top 10 winningest teams of 2010 - 2019.
View attachment 68995


Oh Look!!!
#1 Alabama: 3 National Titles (Top 10 AP 10 times ) (Top 5 AP 7 times ) (Top 25 AP Unranked - Zero )
#2 Ohio St: 1 National Title (Top 10 AP 8 times ) (Top 5 AP 7 times ) (Top 25 AP Unranked 1 time)
#3 Clemson: 2 National Titles (Top 10 AP 6 times ) (Top 5 AP 5 times ) (Top 25 AP Unranked 1 time )
#4 Oklahoma: No Natties (Top 10 AP 7 times ) (Top 5 AP 4 times ) (Top 25 AP Unranked 1 time )
#5 LSU: 1 National Title (Top 10 AP 4 times) (Top 5 AP 2 times) (Top 25 AP Unranked 1 time )
.
.
#6 Oregon: No Natties (Top 10 AP 6 times) (Top 5 AP 5 times ) (Top 25 AP Unranked 3 times )
#7 Wisconsin: No Natties (Top 10 AP 4 times ) (Top 5 AP zero times ) (Top 25 AP Unranked 2 times)
#8 Stanford: No Natties (Top 10 AP 4 times) (Top 5 AP 2 times ) (Top 25 AP Unranked 2 times)
#9 Georgia: No Natties (Top 10 AP 5 times) (Top 5 AP 3 times) (Top 25 AP Unranked 4 times )
#10 Florida St: 1 National Title (Top 10 AP 4 times) (Top 5 AP 2 times) (Top 25 AP Unranked 3 times)

Similar to the '90s (FSU, Nebraska, Florida) there are 3 that stand out (dominant) from 2010 - 2019.
They are Bama, Clemson, and Ohio St.

You can do this with EVERY generation of CFB.

Keep my school's(#7) name out of your fuckin mouth.

 

[Red_Alert]

Keep my school's(#7) name out of your fuckin mouth.

Y'all been on the edge. Other than Russell Wilson, just a QB away mostly.

 

[jjc2009]

I think the problem some people have is that by not playing in a conference championship, you have one less game that could keep you out. For example, any SEC team has had to go through Bama for the past 12 years. That for the most part was an elimination game. You don't have that.

The fans of teams that think this usually have their schedules littered with FCS teams and those games are often strategically placed around more important games on the schedule. The “13th data point” argument is kind of BS when you have 1-2 glorified scrimmages on your schedule every year.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

The fans of teams that think this usually have their schedules littered with FCS teams and those games are often strategically placed around more important games on the schedule. The “13th data point” argument is kind of BS when you have 1-2 glorified scrimmages on your schedule every year.

Forget your dodge by trying to excuse your lack of a conference championship game but putting down my team the SEC. Whether it matters that you don't have a CCG has no relationship to whether the SEC plays FCS teams or how they schedule. Nice try to distract. It is patently obvious that if you were in the ACC or the B1G, the two conferences you most likely would be in, that you would have to play an extra game against Clemson or tOSU. Now can you see why that's important? You would have a large likelihood of losing those games, and they would likely keep you out of the CFP. So, yes, playing a CCG matters ... it matters a lot in the current configuration. I think you know that.

Now to the BCS games and the way we schedule. Let's first look at your upcoming schedule. Do you think it is any coincidence that you have a bye week (your second of the year) the week before you play Clemson? See, while you criticize us for that, I think it is smart you do that. Nothing wrong with optimizing your schedule, and you shouldn't throw stones while living in a glass house. I'd bet if I went back and looked, ND is smart and strategically places its bye weeks.

I happen to agree that we shouldn't play FCS teams. I do that understanding that we do, and that there is a good rationale for doing it - it funds those programs. But, if we never played another I'd be behind that. I won't pay for tickets to go to such a game. None of us play 1-2 such games. And, I'd put or schedule up against yours all day long. As for the week 11 "byes" who cares when you play them. The SEC starts conference play sooner than other conferences, and we scatter in cupcakes in week 11. It's smart ... and it helps before our weekend of rivalry games. Other teams front load their cupcakes in what is the equivalent of a pre-season. We just happen to use the cupcakes as a byte week later in the season.

I've made it clear I like ND, and that I have a lot of respect for your school and team. You'd be better off just admitting that not playing in a CCG helps you, and that at least in the last decade or so your SOS has not been all that good.

 

[jjc2009]

Forget your dodge by trying to excuse your lack of a conference championship game but putting down my team the SEC. Whether it matters that you don't have a CCG has no relationship to whether the SEC plays FCS teams or how they schedule. Nice try to distract. It is patently obvious that if you were in the ACC or the B1G, the two conferences you most likely would be in, that you would have to play an extra game against Clemson or tOSU. Now can you see why that's important? You would have a large likelihood of losing those games, and they would likely keep you out of the CFP. So, yes, playing a CCG matters ... it matters a lot in the current configuration. I think you know that.

Now to the BCS games and the way we schedule. Let's first look at your upcoming schedule. Do you think it is any coincidence that you have a bye week (your second of the year) the week before you play Clemson? See, while you criticize us for that, I think it is smart you do that. Nothing wrong with optimizing your schedule, and you shouldn't throw stones while living in a glass house. I'd bet if I went back and looked, ND is smart and strategically places its bye weeks.

I happen to agree that we shouldn't play FCS teams. I do that understanding that we do, and that there is a good rationale for doing it - it funds those programs. But, if we never played another I'd be behind that. I won't pay for tickets to go to such a game. None of us play 1-2 such games. And, I'd put or schedule up against yours all day long. As for the week 11 "byes" who cares when you play them. The SEC starts conference play sooner than other conferences, and we scatter in cupcakes in week 11. It's smart ... and it helps before our weekend of rivalry games. Other teams front load their cupcakes in what is the equivalent of a pre-season. We just happen to use the cupcakes as a byte week later in the season.

I've made it clear I like ND, and that I have a lot of respect for your school and team. You'd be better off just admitting that not playing in a CCG helps you, and that at least in the last decade or so your SOS has not been all that good.

Blah blah blah. Do you get paid by the word? You’re also protesting a bit too loudly. I didn’t refer to any one team or conference yet you jumped all over this like a fat girl on a Twinkie.

 

[Deep Creek]

Blah blah blah. Do you get paid by the word? You’re also protesting a bit too loudly. I didn’t refer to any one team or conference yet you jumped all over this like a fat girl on a Twinkie.

He’s an attorney. You ever met one that wasn’t long winded? First course in law school is Do Not Be Brief.

 

[jjc2009]

He’s an attorney. You ever met one that wasn’t long winded? First course in law school is Do Not Be Brief.

I am as well for 20 + years. And that’s a fallacy. Short succinct and to the point. That’s how judges want it. They don’t have all day to read long winded diatribes.