Interest Decline in College Football?

USC: Zero AP Top 10 finishes. No Natties
UCLA: 2 AP Top 10 finishes (1997 #5 and 1998 #8). No Natties
Arizona: 2 AP Top 10 finishes (1993 #10 and 1998 #4). No Natties
Arizona St: 1 AP Top 10 finishes (1996 #4). No Natties
Washington: 2 AP Top 10 finishes (1990 #5 and 1991 #2)
Oregon: ZERO AP Top 10 finishes. No Natties

7 Total AP Top 10 finishes and Zero AP Natties among the 6 PAC teams he insinuated was a "power".

Heck. Florida St had 10 AP Top 10 finishes all by themselves with 2 Natties.
AP #4, #4, #2, #1, #4, #4, #3, #3, #3, #1
They had 10 AP Top 5 finishes.

FSU was fucking "dominant" and to compare those PAC teams with them is asinine dumbfuckery.
Then he tosses Syracuse in there for the cherry on top.

LMFAO!!!

You clearly don't read my posts and just resort to insults. You are the most immature poster to respond to and cannot engage in conversation. Go FUCK YOURSELF, you are not even worth replying to.

I NEVER SAID PAC12 was dominants, I said it had parity (as in NO DOMINENT TEAM). You didn't bother read it and are just looking to prove you are right and hate on me because you have no life. 4 Responses to me shows you are obsessed and have no life. Come talk to me when you can engage in adult conversation.

The 1990s had parity as in no dominant team except maybe Nebraska who had a shadow of Dominance compared to Alabama. Don't even bother replying

You win. I am idiot. Are you happy? All your conversations result in these stupid, idiotic fights that prove nothing other than the fact you LITERALLY have NO FUCKING LIFE.
 
I do think they would have gotten in over TCU/Baylor in 2014 based on name recognition.
Same goes for Oklahoma.

ND and Oklahoma put more butts in seats and more eyeballs on TV sets. I would say same about Nebraska, USC, Texas in similar scenario.
in place of who?
4. 12-1 Big Ten Champion Ohio State
3. 13-0 (with 31 game win streak) ACC champ prior year NC Florida State
2. 12-1 Oregon Pac 12 champs
1. 12-1 Alabama SEC champs


even an 11-1 oklahoma or Notre Dame was not getting in there. a 12-0 team would but not a 1 loss.
 
4 Responses to me shows you are obsessed and have no life. Come talk to me when you can engage in adult conversation.

The 1990s had parity as in no dominant team except maybe Nebraska who had a shadow of Dominance compared to Alabama. Don't even bother replying

You win. I am idiot. Are you happy? All your conversations result in these stupid, idiotic fights that prove nothing other than the fact you LITERALLY have NO FUCKING LIFE.


I pity you get a life. I am done with this conversation. Go make 5-10 posts showing how you are correct and pull a bunch of stats because you have no life and HAVE to be correct. It is clear you cannot have a conversation like a normal human being. High School must have been rough for you.

You said I had 5-10 and you're already triggered at 4.

You simply can't be trusted.

BTW FSU was the most dominant team of the 90's They finished all 10 years in the Top 5 of the AP. They also got the '93 head-to-head over Nebraska.

Do some homework, dolt.
 
in place of who?
4. 12-1 Big Ten Champion Ohio State
3. 13-0 (with 31 game win streak) ACC champ prior year NC Florida State
2. 12-1 Oregon Pac 12 champs
1. 12-1 Alabama SEC champs


even an 11-1 oklahoma or Notre Dame was not getting in there. a 12-0 team would but not a 1 loss.

Obviously Oregon.
12-1 ND or Oklahoma gets in over 12-1 Oregon.
Not even close.
 
Was it USF that is going to replace jersey numbers with Q code thing? You snap that thing and it will try to sell you that fake college student's merchandise!

Whores have run CFB for a long time. But when whores go around unashamed out in the open, they're not fun anymore. There's no doubt this sport is headed for a serious decline in the near future. They'll try to make it the NFL and alums will be disgusted and general interest will drop fast.

1650502897672.png:puke:
 
Last edited:
Yeah, ND fans may have complained about that, but their AD agreed to it. He was one of four on the working group that came up with the model.

ND's problem, and I am not a ND hater, is that they have wet the bed every time they got to a CFP or NY6 Bowl game. Every time. At some point you have to aske why they keep getting lumped in if they can't win. No other school could lose that regularly and still be seen an elite team.
hmmm sounds like a certain school who finally broke out after 40 years
 
hmmm sounds like a certain school who finally broke out after 40 years
It's funny that I thought through that when I typed what I did. But, no, our first CFP we beat OU in one of the best Rose Bowls ever, and lost in OT on an incredible play by Bama. The next year we lost in OT to Bama in the SECCG. We didn't get blown out. When in NY6 Bowl games, we win most of the time. We are 7-2 in NY6 bowls in the BCS/CFP era. So when we look at the highlighted part of my post, we are the exact opposite of

It's not that ND hasn't won a natty in a long time ... that was our problem ... they simply haven't been competitive when playing good teams. We won 2 SEC championships under Richt, and even though he faded in the last 5 or 6 years, in the first half of his coaching career UGA played great against good teams. Smart's record against the top 25 is something like 75% wins, with most losses being to Bama and LSU.

I am actually a fan of ND. I respect their stubbornness, although it irks me that they get favoritism often. But, college football is all about ND for someone like me that grew up watching CFB in the 60s and 70s. They will get in the 12 teams CFP a lot, but I do think they have to continue to make their schedule better.
 
But, college football is all about ND for someone like me that grew up watching CFB in the 60s and 70s.
Well shit. You are a member of the Get Off My Lawn club. All this time you had me tricked into thinking you were a more open minded youngster.
:beer2:
 
Now this is a nice concise post that gets to the point. @WhosYourDawggy could learn a thing or two from RA

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.
 
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.

LOL

You haven't refuted one thing I've posted. Just a lot of "REEEEEE! Stop fact checking my perception/opinion"

The reason is because you can't (or won't take the time) to refute the historical factual data that I've posted.
My point wouldn't be much different had I used UPI/Coaches polling. The main difference in that is Michigan would have had ZERO national titles and Nebraska would have 3.
That still wouldn't change the fact that FSU was the most dominant program in the 90's, with Nebraska a close 2nd, and Florida 3rd.

Again.... Every generation has 4-5 teams (At Best) that are "dominant" in that generation.

You actually used Syracuse in attempt to refute that point. LMFAO!!

1650548563119.png
 
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.
excuseTEXT.jpeg
 
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.
top 10 2010 - 2019.png


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.
 
Obviously Oregon.
12-1 ND or Oklahoma gets in over 12-1 Oregon.
Not even close.
Oregon was #2 in the country after a game 5 loss to an Arizona team who won the Pac south 10-4 and ranked 19
how would that be obvious for them to jump 3 teams?
 
Was it USF that is going to replace jersey numbers with Q code thing? You snap that thing and it will try to sell you that fake college student's merchandise!

Whores have run CFB for a long time. But when whores go around unashamed out in the open, they're not fun anymore. There's no doubt this sport is headed for a serious decline in the near future. They'll try to make it the NFL and alums will be disgusted and general interest will drop fast.

View attachment 68847:puke:
they arent replacing them this was just for the spring game
 
they arent replacing them this was just for the spring game
They will...or do 100 other gross things to help the kids sell merchandise. It's how they'll get recruits.

I hated the Tebow years at UF for CFB. Going for a game weekend, I want to see alumni and experience a bit of the old atmosphere. I do not want to see slobs who've mistake CFB for the NFL. If UF jumps on this 'come here and we'll help you sell jerseys' bullshit recruiting, I'm going to start avoiding it all.
 
gonna need your definition of dominant and very good with those teams u listed
Well if you go off National Titles alone, here is the 1990s:

1990: Colorado and Georgia Tech
1991: Miami and Washington
1992: Alabama
1993: Florida State (Auburn was unbeaten but on probation)
1994: Nebraska, Penn State
1995: Nebraska
1996: Florida
1997: Nebraska and Michigan
1998: Tennessee
1999: Florida State
2000: Oklahoma

That is 12 different teams (13 if you count unbeaten Auburn. Also Ohio State was regularly in contention and Kansas State and UCLA were in contention in 1998 so you could argue up to 16 teams)

Far greater parity than today.


Let's continue your dumfuckery.

This is where you became disingenuous to cover for your original false narrative to argue my point that every generation only has 4-5 (At Best) "dominant" teams

For starters you're using 2010 Oklahoma in the 90's. A decade has 10 years, not 11. Eliminate Oklahoma from the 90's (1990 - 1999).
Penn St was not awarded a National Title in either the AP or Coaches Poll. Eliminate Penn St.

If going by 2010 - 2019 standards....Colorado and Georgia Tech (1990), Miami and Washington (1991), Nebraska and Michigan (1997) would have played for the National Championship. Only one would have been crowned. Eliminate one of each.

Therefore, in 2010 - 2019 you'd have had 7 different National Champions among 1990's teams.

Actual 2010 - 2019 National Champions..

2010: Auburn
2011, 2012, 2015, 2017: Alabama
2013: Florida St
2014: Ohio St
2016, 2018: Clemson
2019: LSU

2010 - 2019: 6 different National Champions
1990 - 1999: 7 different National Champions

"OMG, one less National Champion = Less Parity"

LOL.
No there was parity below Bama, Clemson, and Ohio St in the 2010's, just like there was parity below FSU, Nebraska, and Florida in the 90's.
 
Oregon was #2 in the country after a game 5 loss to an Arizona team who won the Pac south 10-4 and ranked 19
how would that be obvious for them to jump 3 teams?

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.
 
Back
Top