[DC 86]

4.9 ypa throwing and 1.3 ypc in a loss will not help.

But nobody has a spotless record.

Don't sleep on Baker Mayfield, if Oklahoma continues to roll.

Rough night for Jackson but I think he still has a comfortable lead; if he doesn't win I would bet on Jabrill Peppers, he has been getting much media love lately and has high profile games ahead. If Michigan beats Ohio State and then wins the Big-10 championship game to reach the playoff then he will be getting heavy "winner" attention right before the votes are mailed in.

[DC 86]

4.9 ypa throwing and 1.3 ypc in a loss will not help.

But nobody has a spotless record.

Don't sleep on Baker Mayfield, if Oklahoma continues to roll.

Rough night for Jackson but I think he still has a comfortable lead; if he doesn't win I would bet on Jabrill Peppers, he has been getting much media love lately and has high profile games ahead. If Michigan beats Ohio State and then wins the Big-10 championship game to reach the playoff then he will be getting heavy "winner" attention right before the votes are mailed in.

[fullmetal]

So we should root for PSU to win the Big10 east... :)

[fullmetal]

So we should root for PSU to win the Big10 east... :)

[SamAtoms1980]

Louisville ran into quite the buzzsaw in Houston.  It was so bad it makes you wonder how much was Louisville not taking Houston seriously vs. Houston being that good.  Certainly kills UL's playoff chances but I don't think Lamar Jackson's H chances with it.  As someone else said said, he virtually played without an OL and was still Louisville's best player.

I've never seen a team have more 3rd and 15+ in one game maybe ever. Fumbles, pre-snap penalties, holding penalties, completely confused OL,  receivers dropping balls, giving up a fake punt 4th down conversion.  None of that is on Jackson.  His fumble was on him, but they weren't winning that game even if they scored a TD on that drive.  And though he did miss some throws, Jackson was under duress the entire game.  What did Houston get, 10 sacks?

According to the recap, Louisville's own players admitted to being distracted by the fact that they were left out of the top 4 in the latest playoff rankings.  Surprising thing to see quoted in print.

[SamAtoms1980]

Louisville ran into quite the buzzsaw in Houston.  It was so bad it makes you wonder how much was Louisville not taking Houston seriously vs. Houston being that good.  Certainly kills UL's playoff chances but I don't think Lamar Jackson's H chances with it.  As someone else said said, he virtually played without an OL and was still Louisville's best player.

I've never seen a team have more 3rd and 15+ in one game maybe ever. Fumbles, pre-snap penalties, holding penalties, completely confused OL,  receivers dropping balls, giving up a fake punt 4th down conversion.  None of that is on Jackson.  His fumble was on him, but they weren't winning that game even if they scored a TD on that drive.  And though he did miss some throws, Jackson was under duress the entire game.  What did Houston get, 10 sacks?

According to the recap, Louisville's own players admitted to being distracted by the fact that they were left out of the top 4 in the latest playoff rankings.  Surprising thing to see quoted in print.

[BostonCard]

[quote author=HisKneeWasDown link=topic=16115.msg179514#msg179514 date=1479354774]
I was being facetious when I alluded to an 8 team playoff.

I go to a core question: why do we need to know who the #1 team is? College football went for 100 years without answering this question.

It's just a game played by students for bragging rights between students, staff, alums and the local community. There's too much money going in from national entertainment empires.

Call me old-fashioned.

It always seemed to me that the major argument against a playoff was that it would unduly prolong the season and subject players to additional risk of injury and time away from academics, not because no one cared about or needed to know who was the champion. This argument continued to be made as the regular season was expanded from 10 to 11 to 12, and in some cases 13 games. That always struck me as a bit hypocritical. 

Also, the "no one cares or needs to know who the champion is" statement strikes me as often being a sour grapes remark made by fans of teams who have no chance of achieving this goal. Maybe I missed something, but I don't recall anyone making it last year when we were in contention for the playoffs.
[/quote]

I did last year.  I had no problem having to "settle" for a Rose Bowl and being left out of the CFP, and before the announcement, I only really wanted to make the playoffs because it was a sign of being good, not because of something intrinsic for the playoffs.

Obviously, I see where we are heading, and the fact that money might start drying up for televising live sporting events will probably accelerate the prcess of trying to grab every last dollar, which means we will probably head for an 8 team playoff.  I've made my peace with it.

But here is the thing, I have enjoyed college football more in the last few years only because Stanford has done better, not because we have had a chance at making the playoffs or the BCS or whatever format is set.  I would have been just as happy had we had this level of success in the old Pac-10, playing 11 games a year plus a bowl game and having the national champion decided by a vote.  It's hard for me not to like "more football", and selfishly, it is fun to be able to watch up to 8 games in person

Be honest with yourself.  Does the existing setup enhance your enjoyment of college football compared to the previous one?  I think, at best, it is pretty marginal.  But YMMV, and if you feel like you enjoy college football more because of the possibility of making a playoff, that's totally fine.  I just hope that those of you who support the playoff can see it from my perspective as well.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=HisKneeWasDown link=topic=16115.msg179514#msg179514 date=1479354774]
I was being facetious when I alluded to an 8 team playoff.

I go to a core question: why do we need to know who the #1 team is? College football went for 100 years without answering this question.

It's just a game played by students for bragging rights between students, staff, alums and the local community. There's too much money going in from national entertainment empires.

Call me old-fashioned.

It always seemed to me that the major argument against a playoff was that it would unduly prolong the season and subject players to additional risk of injury and time away from academics, not because no one cared about or needed to know who was the champion. This argument continued to be made as the regular season was expanded from 10 to 11 to 12, and in some cases 13 games. That always struck me as a bit hypocritical. 

Also, the "no one cares or needs to know who the champion is" statement strikes me as often being a sour grapes remark made by fans of teams who have no chance of achieving this goal. Maybe I missed something, but I don't recall anyone making it last year when we were in contention for the playoffs.
[/quote]

I did last year.  I had no problem having to "settle" for a Rose Bowl and being left out of the CFP, and before the announcement, I only really wanted to make the playoffs because it was a sign of being good, not because of something intrinsic for the playoffs.

Obviously, I see where we are heading, and the fact that money might start drying up for televising live sporting events will probably accelerate the prcess of trying to grab every last dollar, which means we will probably head for an 8 team playoff.  I've made my peace with it.

But here is the thing, I have enjoyed college football more in the last few years only because Stanford has done better, not because we have had a chance at making the playoffs or the BCS or whatever format is set.  I would have been just as happy had we had this level of success in the old Pac-10, playing 11 games a year plus a bowl game and having the national champion decided by a vote.  It's hard for me not to like "more football", and selfishly, it is fun to be able to watch up to 8 games in person

Be honest with yourself.  Does the existing setup enhance your enjoyment of college football compared to the previous one?  I think, at best, it is pretty marginal.  But YMMV, and if you feel like you enjoy college football more because of the possibility of making a playoff, that's totally fine.  I just hope that those of you who support the playoff can see it from my perspective as well.

BC