• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

College Football 2017 Week 2 |OT| Remember the L-amo? Liberty sure does.

M

MugiwaraCole

Member
jfkgoblue said:
Early season rankings are supposed to. By your argument no 0-1 team should be ahead of any 1-0 team. Both Alabama and FSU were ranked in the top 5 due to what people were predicting. In these early rankings, you have to include some predictions to come up with your rankings, otherwise there isn't a way to differentiate.
Click to expand...

No, preseason rankings are supposed to. And nah, I argue the exact opposite of that. FSU is 0-1 and should be ranked above all but about maybe 7 teams right now. No idea how you got the opposite idea from me.
 
L

LizardKing

Member
Lonestar said:
http://alabama.247sports.com/Article/Sources-Major-Potential-Shift-In-NCAA-Transfer-Rules-107001121



Still a long shot, but this is potentially the NCAA moving to let players transfer and play immediately (caveat being they have to have the grades).
Click to expand...

This seems like a terrible idea. How long until the big programs start cutting kids they recruited as high school students who thought they were going to get a degree there to make scholarship room for lower tier school college talent coming in for jr/sr years? You might say it would get them a bad rep for HS recruiting, but who gives a shit when you could cherry pick top NCAA talent.

Not to mention the devastating affect this would have to the lower tier programs in becoming feeder schools for the top tier ones. I thought the NCAA wanted to promote parity not absolutely destroy it.
 
A

andycapps

Member
LizardKing said:
This seems like a terrible idea. How long until the big programs start cutting kids they recruited as high school students who thought they were going to get a degree there to make scholarship room for lower tier school college talent coming in for jr/sr years? You might say it would get them a bad rep for HS recruiting, but who gives a shit when you could cherry pick top NCAA talent.

Not to mention the devastating affect this would have to the lower tier programs in becoming feeder schools for the top tier ones. I thought the NCAA wanted to promote parity not absolutely destroy it.
Click to expand...
This already happens, essentially. But it starts with being buried on the depth chart and being encouraged by coaches that starting over somewhere else may be better for them. At least if this passes, they'll be eligible to play immediately.
 
L

LizardKing

Member
andycapps said:
This already happens, essentially. But it starts with being buried on the depth chart and being encouraged by coaches that starting over somewhere else may be better for them. At least if this passes, they'll be eligible to play immediately.
Click to expand...

It happens sure, usually to a couple kids every year or so who also aren't typically happy or fitting in. Not to anywhere near the extent this would allow for once it gets abused and you could literally create your NCAA all star team.
 
P

PlayALLtheGames

Banned
Well now this team is going to have to get up for a noon game in the rain. You're about to see another, incompetent performance on offense but at least McElwain will be able to use it as an excuse.

"Rain was hitting pretty dag gone hard out there. Kids weren't having fun; ball was slippery as heck."
 
A

andycapps

Member
LizardKing said:
It happens sure, usually to a couple kids every year or so who also aren't typically happy or fitting in. Not to anywhere near the extent this would allow for once it gets abused and you could literally create your NCAA all star team.
Click to expand...
NCAA roster limits are still in place and schools are not allowed to recruit players on another team. I don't think it's going to change the makeup of teams much, just doesn't penalize kids.

If anything, this probably hurts JUCOs a lot because kids won't have to go there to play a year before going back to FBS.
 
L

LizardKing

Member
andycapps said:
NCAA roster limits are still in place and schools are not allowed to recruit players on another team. I don't think it's going to change the makeup of teams much, just doesn't penalize kids.

If anything, this probably hurts JUCOs a lot because kids won't have to go there to play a year before going back to FBS.
Click to expand...

The roster limits will be what causes kids to get cut. Well we will just have to agree to disagree then. I think it would change the sport profoundly and for worse, and leave many victims in it's path. When Bama brings in a new NCAA all star to start, their current starter also get relegated to the bench and doesn't see playing time. How does this help the kids again? Sure he could also transfer but it's very unfair to tell a kid who got a ride from their school of choice that now you have to transfer to somewhere you don't want to be because this great player from somewhere else will be taking your place. I really don't want CFB to become this. I also don't trust the NCAA's ability to enforce any rule. Schools might not technically be able to recruit players from another team but that doesn't mean shit. That's what bagmen are for.

This is a multi million dollar business. If the system is able to be gamed, it will be. Not to mention the natural process of kids reaching out and just wanting to create those all star teams to be on them.

Maybe it doesn't have to be all or nothing though. I'd be open to the possibility of a school being allowed to add a limited number (like 1-2) per year to the roster where the one year timeout doesn't apply. That would give kids the ability to transfer from some schools to others without having to sit out, and limit abuse. Like you said that attrition is already happening anyway, and this would prevent those from being punished. I still feel this would be abused though and Bama would be adding the Khalil Mack's of the world every year and relegate players who would play to the bench or gtfo of town.

For the good of the sport and the athletes they really just need to keep this right where it is.
 
J

jfkgoblue

Member
MugiwaraCole said:
No, preseason rankings are supposed to. And nah, I argue the exact opposite of that. FSU is 0-1 and should be ranked above all but about maybe 7 teams right now. No idea how you got the opposite idea from me.
Click to expand...
But you're logic is "we can't make judgements on the future", if that was the case, every 1-0 team should be ahead of every 0-1 team. "But they lost to The #1 team". How was the team ranked there? By predicting the future. Until halfway in the season you just don't have enough of a sample size to not make future predictions in ranking a team.
 
P

Piggus

Member
You going to the game in Eugene this weekend jstevenson? I have family visiting and will miss it. :(

Don't forget to bring a mask. The smoke here is shite.
 
G

GoldenEye 007

Member
andycapps said:
Getting back is the problem.
Click to expand...
I think Miami is unique because it actually may be better for them to be away. I mean now their families will need to feed some extra big players for a week or more versus likely being able to have the university cover it ASSuming the NCAA doesn't have a problem with it.

Then again, of course people will just want to be with their families. It's a tough call and I understand Miami's position here.

But you have teams like USF now who are kicking around canceling their away UConn game this weekend. I guess Tampa could be in a similar position as Miami given changes to the track but I feel that's a bit of a stretch.
 
B

bucknuticus

Member
This weeks game poster

201702-game-poster.jpg
 
F

FyreWulff

Member
Lonestar said:
http://alabama.247sports.com/Article/Sources-Major-Potential-Shift-In-NCAA-Transfer-Rules-107001121



Still a long shot, but this is potentially the NCAA moving to let players transfer and play immediately (caveat being they have to have the grades).
Click to expand...

This is fine to me. If coaches can suddenly switch schools and be working the next week so should the players.

jstevenson said:
damn straight I am.

I'm a season ticket holder of the Ducks for this game.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of the Notre Dame game where suddenly a lot of Notre Dame's season ticket holders were from Nebraska <_<
 
R

Randolph Freelander

Member
Florida State has a rookie QB that has never taken first string reps in practice. Of course they should tumble in the polls until their results on the field warrant a higher ranking. Offense is important and we don't know if they have one.
 
B

bucknuticus

Member
Nebraska fans, if you know someone selling extra tickets to the OSU game let me know. WIll be making my way out there in October.
 
M

MugiwaraCole

Member
jfkgoblue said:
But you're logic is "we can't make judgements on the future", if that was the case, every 1-0 team should be ahead of every 0-1 team. "But they lost to The #1 team". How was the team ranked there? By predicting the future. Until halfway in the season you just don't have enough of a sample size to not make future predictions in ranking a team.
Click to expand...

Literally said "you predict the future in preseason" lol. Gotta do it then cause it's all you got. Look at recruiting, returning production, last years results, and use some nuance to put out a top 25 to start with.

It ain't preseason now. Seems weird to tell the #3 team they're really the #10 team because they lost to the #1 team. It's one game. Against the #1 team. That's a steep drop. If you're gonna do it that way, just throw out preseason rankings altogether.
 
Q

Quake1028

Member
In all seriousness, it does suck. We are not nearly what we were at one time, but I have to think we are the biggest program to ever visit Arkansas State. Plus, Rosier loses out on actual game time ahead of @ FSU. But, I completely understand why they made the decision they did.
 
R

Randolph Freelander

Member
MugiwaraCole said:
Literally said "you predict the future in preseason" lol. Gotta do it then cause it's all you got. Look at recruiting, returning production, last years results, and use some nuance to put out a top 25 to start with.

It ain't preseason now. Seems weird to tell the #3 team they're really the #10 team because they lost to the #1 team. It's one game. Against the #1 team. That's a steep drop. If you're gonna do it that way, just throw out preseason rankings altogether.
Click to expand...

-They lost to the #1 team (but who cares)
-Didn't look good doing it (week 1 though so...)
-Lost their preseason Heisman candidate QB and replaced him with a rookie with no practice reps (seems like a big deal)

If they lost Francois before the Bama game, I'm betting their preseason ranking would have taken a hit. Seems reasonable their post-Bama ranking also falls.
 
C

ChuckHoneywood

Banned
FSU should be able to "out-talent" their way to about 8 wins max. Even with Francois at QB, games vs UL, @Clem & @UF weren't going to be easy wins.
 
M

MugiwaraCole

Member
Randolph Freelander said:
-They lost to the #1 team (but who cares)
-Didn't look good doing it (week 1 though so...)
-Lost their preseason Heisman candidate QB and replaced him with a rookie with no practice reps (seems like a big deal)

If they lost Francois before the Bama game, I'm betting their preseason ranking would have taken a hit. Seems reasonable their post-Bama ranking also falls.
Click to expand...

Their preseason ranking taking a hit for losing Francois before the first rankings makes sense. It's preseason and there's nothing to go on. I don't like doing predictive shit during the season. Just feels...weird.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

UK Boxed Charts: Week 9, 2024 (Feb 25 - Mar 2)
Sales-Age
20
1K
kazuyamishima replied
UK Boxed Charts: Week 2, 2024 (Jan 07 - Jan 13)
Sales-Age 2
71
3K
Team Andromeda replied
  • Locked
College Football 2017 Week 1 |OT| Offseason's over. Back to #TALKINBOUTTHENOLES
63 64 65 66 67
3K
147K
XiaNaphryz replied
College Football 2017 Week 3 |OT| Confused as a Yankee Learning to Square Dance
31 32 33 34 35
2K
83K
ryseing replied
CFB 2017 Week 4 |OT| "We were in a nickel. But with injuries, we didn’t have a dime."
28 29 30 31 32
2K
78K
Purple Cheeto replied
Top Bottom