forums

Kiffin calls out ACC and takes a shot at Mario

Bunker Mentality said:
This makes he case that it should be 16 if NIL/parity creates more competitive teams and if being left out creates controversy like this. If people want to make legitimate arguments that Miami, Alabama, Ole Miss, ASU, BYU could be competitive for a championship then they should be allowed to make the argument with their pads while division champs get byes.

More meaningful NCAA football games and a less corruptible CFP process is a good thing. Let's see what Cinderella looks like in shoulder pads..
Click to expand...
Miami and Alabama have no chance at a championship.
 
Advertisement
dude is fighting with fans on twitter instead of closing recruits? this is the people want?
he has one of the biggest NIL budgets and doesnt even try and recruit, just goes to portal.
 
Everyone talking, *****ing and complaining is great for the sport. It generates interest where before there was none.
 
what a massive gash.

I mean you literally beat no one other than the GA. Yeah I'm sure those games at Arkansas and UF were super loud. Give me a break.
 
Bunker Mentality said:
This makes he case that it should be 16 if NIL/parity creates more competitive teams and being left out of the playoff creates controversy like this. If people want to make legitimate arguments that Miami, Alabama, Ole Miss, ASU, BYU could be competitive for a championship then they should be afforded the opportunity to compete and make the argument with their pads while division champs get byes.

More meaningful NCAA football games and a less corruptible CFP process is a good thing; let's see how Cinderella looks in shoulder pads..
Click to expand...
This is all just headed towards the semi pro football league NFL landscape. Networks knew this would happen once they went to the playoff. More teams are gonna ***** about not getting in and the only real solution will be expanding the field.

What if we make a league of say ... 32 total teams? And there are no real divisions but the schedules are made so that schedule strengths are as even as possible going into the year. From there we can make a postseason that is comprised of the 8 to 12 best teams...
 
Advertisement
JayCane20 said:
Miami and Alabama have no chance at a championship.
Click to expand...

That's beside the point...

Bama may have the opportunity to compete in the playoff and Miami will not, which is precisely why this situation supports an argument for 16 teams. Basketball does it with 64 and football should be able to manage 16.

Let them settle it on the field.
 
I like Kiffin as a coach but this was the year Ole Miss was supposed to make a move in the SEC and be in the playoff.

This year is considered a failure for him and he need to put his twitter fingers away
 
PSU Cane said:
When you expand a playoff to 3x what is used to be, this is the result. A lot more teams are going feel they have an argument to be Top-12 vs those with an argument for Top-4, even with some really bad losses or weak schedules. With so much money involved, i can only see it getting uglier.

Ole Miss had 1 great win and 3 losses to unranked teams. They had as easy an SEC schedule as you can possibly get and didn't take advantage of it.
Click to expand...
It's gonna get dumber and dumber every year.
 
Advertisement
Bunker Mentality said:
That's beside the point...

Bama may have the opportunity to compete in the playoff and Miami will not, which is precisely why this situation supports an argument for 16 teams. Basketball does it with 64 and football should be able to manage 16.

Let them settle it on the field.
Click to expand...
Then next year 17-18-19 will ***** about the same exact thing.

They need some ground rules… 3 losses disqualifies you from playoff football unless you can do that and still win your conference, a loss to a team that finishes sub .500 should disqualify you, a loss to a G6 team should disqualify you. Or all of those things should put you behind the teams with 2 losses, no losses to sub .500 teams, and no G6 losses. Then, if there’s still room in the top 12, we will first take the team with no G6 losses, then the team with no sub .500 losses, then we’ll look at the 3 loss teams
 
canester95 said:
The ACC is garbage, Don t get me wrong….BUT Lane can pound sand.
Click to expand...
It’s really not though, at least not this year. Unfortunately for the ACC, we had too many mid teams going up against the SEC this year. We went 3-8.

- Missouri beat Boston College by 6. This is a Missouri team that’s been ranked most of the year and in the playoff ranking. They beat BC by 6?
- Clemson loses to UGA big and South Carolina by 3 pts on the last drive. This big bad SC team beat a down Clemson by 3? I’m not so impressed with that, we beat Clemson last year with Emory at 7-5.
- Cal beats Auburn who is trash
- Louisville destroys Kentucky on the road. People wake up, Georgia beat Kentucky 16-6??? Ole Miss LOST to 4-8 Kentucky
- VT loses to Vandy by 7. Both meh teams.
- Mighty Georgia needs 8 overtime’s to beat GT? GT is 7-5 and they take the #1 SEC team to the wire? Won’t don’t yall understand.
- Obviously we destroyed UF on the road while Ole Miss lost to them. We even had a common opponent with Bama, that we beat more soundly and we were on the road while they were at home.

NC St lost to Tenn before they started playing CJ Bailey, Wake got whooped by Ole Miss.



My point is that if Syracuse plays any team in the SEC at home, I would not put them any lower than a TD underdog, including Bama and UGA. Louisville can play with any team in the SEC. Miami can play with any team in the SEC. SMU can play with any team in the SEC.

The SEC is not the clear cut power conference it used to be. The sport this year was much more balanced but the committee still sees a 3 loss SEC team with 2 bad losses as better than the 2 loss ACC team with really no bad loses.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
skydogcane6 said:
This is all just headed towards the semi pro football league NFL landscape. Networks knew this would happen once they went to the playoff. More teams are gonna ***** about not getting in and the only real solution will be expanding the field.

What if we make a league of say ... 32 total teams? And there are no real divisions but the schedules are made so that schedule strengths are as even as possible going into the year. From there we can make a postseason that is comprised of the 8 to 12 best teams...
Click to expand...
Few thoughts

"Headed towards the semi pro football league"
- pretty sure we passed that exit a few years ago

I am not sure we would be in a 32 team league
- If we did, we probably would be in the last 5 or 10 teams.
- There are a ton of teams with average to below average records that would be asked to join ahead of us including: Michigan, USC, Florida, Clemson, Auburn .....
- Would the Miami teams from the 80's and 90's get in...... no doubt. As of late ........?
 
Lane and Mario have the same type of ceiling as a coach

I wanted Mario over Lane because at least Mario isn’t a ****** when he talks
 
Advertisement
When 2 teams generally played for the title people complained when outsider team Z wasn’t also a mythical national champion.

When the final four was constructed people complained about the 2-3 teams with comparable records, SOS, etc not being one of the four teams.

Now with the recent conference hegemony under fake free market principles (lift! Drag! Fire!) teams x, y, and Z are complaining but certain conference pride is even more dominant than ever before in constructing arguments.

At every level of the NC structure above there is massive complaining. But…..At least now so many good teams are getting into the new tournament format that really the decision for NC is less ambiguous than ever before
 
JayCane20 said:
Then next year 17-18-19 will ***** about the same exact thing.

They need some ground rules… 3 losses disqualifies you from playoff football unless you can do that and still win your conference, a loss to a team that finishes sub .500 should disqualify you, a loss to a G6 team should disqualify you. Or all of those things should put you behind the teams with 2 losses, no losses to sub .500 teams, and no G6 losses. Then, if there’s still room in the top 12, we will first take the team with no G6 losses, then the team with no sub .500 losses, then we’ll look at the 3 loss teams
Click to expand...

nah...

You (anyone) can make a lot of arguments but 16 ensures teams that should have a decent shot do.
 
JayCane20 said:
Then next year 17-18-19 will ***** about the same exact thing.

They need some ground rules… 3 losses disqualifies you from playoff football unless you can do that and still win your conference, a loss to a team that finishes sub .500 should disqualify you, a loss to a G6 team should disqualify you. Or all of those things should put you behind the teams with 2 losses, no losses to sub .500 teams, and no G6 losses. Then, if there’s still room in the top 12, we will first take the team with no G6 losses, then the team with no sub .500 losses, then we’ll look at the 3 loss teams
Click to expand...
I’d be curious what that would look like for this season
 
Advertisement
Back
Top