2025 NCAA Football Thread

[Deleterious]

You deserve to lose if you rush two on 4th and 9.

[GalagaGuy]

What a game!   Love seeing Georgia lose.  

[Mr.TaterSalad]

Shame on the officiating crew for not using common sense and giving Georgia two free plays to try and beat Ole Miss. It's almost like John Gotti got to someone before the game and told the officials Georgia better win. They added a free second on the clock. Then gave Georgia a free kick, which Ole Miss stupidly didn't defend and should have. I thought the clock ran on an onside kick, but apparently not since that's technically a free kick. A dumb ending to an otherwise great game. 

[Hongbit]

How did everybody miss on Tristen Chambliss from Forest Hills Northern in Grand Rapids.    I’m not just taking about UM & MSU when I say everybody,  Central, Eastern, Western, Wayne,  Grand Valley, all missed on him too.    Crazy to go from Ferris to the CFP semis in a year.  

[romad1]

Sean McDonogh so...shouty. 

[Mr.TaterSalad]

9 hours ago, Hongbit said:

How did everybody miss on Tristen Chambliss from Forest Hills Northern in Grand Rapids.    I’m not just taking about UM & MSU when I say everybody,  Central, Eastern, Western, Wayne,  Grand Valley, all missed on him too.    Crazy to go from Ferris to the CFP semis in a year.  

Well we know why Sherrone missed him. As to everyone else, not sure. I'm surprised Ohio and other Big Ten schools missed him too.

[Tigeraholic1]

 

 

[Deleterious]

Next year's title game will be played January 25th, 2027.  It would normally be the Monday before that, but the NFL has a Monday night playoff game that weekend.  

[Tigeraholic1]

5 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

Next year's title game will be played January 25th, 2027.  It would normally be the Monday before that, but the NFL has a Monday night playoff game that weekend.  

The 25th? Thats crazy late.

[Deleterious]

 

[Hongbit]

1 hour ago, Deleterious said:

Next year's title game will be played January 25th, 2027.  It would normally be the Monday before that, but the NFL has a Monday night playoff game that weekend.  

Lanning’s plan makes way too much sense for college football to actually implement. 

[Sports_Freak]

I said the other day that I thought there were too many bad teams playing in Bowl games just so they could have more Bowl games. I turn on ESPN and the Mayo Bowl is on. Mississippi State is playing and they're 5-7. Seriously?

[MichiganCardinal]

I’m not sure if it’s NIL, the expanded playoff, or both, but having a Final Four of Indiana, Miami, Ole Miss, and Oregon is really good for the sport.

[Sports_Freak]

5 hours ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I’m not sure if it’s NIL, the expanded playoff, or both, but having a Final Four of Indiana, Miami, Ole Miss, and Oregon is really good for the sport.

I like the Ole Mississippi story. Their coach leaves to take a job at LSU before their bowl game and they go ahead and win anyway. Ha-Ha.

[Deleterious]

Going to LSU to chase a NC while the team he left is in the final four is funny.  Reminds me of the mystery box bit on Family Guy.

 

[gehringer_2]

9 hours ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I’m not sure if it’s NIL, the expanded playoff, or both, but having a Final Four of Indiana, Miami, Ole Miss, and Oregon is really good for the sport.

it just stands as confirmation of what people all the way back to Schembechler had long known but found it pointless to carry on about - which was the traditional powers in the South were powers because they were spending money on players. When that option was made available to everyone, that advantage disappeared and that's why the dynasties in Alabama like Georgia are struggling. A good marker was Nick Saban. He knew which side his bread was buttered on, and when he saw he was going to have to settle for same  toast as everyone else, he bailed. 

Edited Saturday at 03:07 PM by gehringer_2

[casimir]

I’m not sure the better story, Indiana or Ole Miss.  I guess as long as they both win next week, I have a little more time to decide.

[buddha]

13 hours ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I’m not sure if it’s NIL, the expanded playoff, or both, but having a Final Four of Indiana, Miami, Ole Miss, and Oregon is really good for the sport.

why?

[MichiganCardinal]

1 hour ago, buddha said:

why?

Ultimately it's just my opinion, but I don't think a 136-team league, or even just the 68 in the power conferences, should be reduced to three or four who go to and usually win the championship every year because of a dichotomy in how the sport is designed into haves and have nots. It's a similar problem that I have with baseball with five teams combining for something like 30% of all the money paid to players (and surprise surprise, two of them meeting in the World Series each of the last two years).

In the four-team playoff eight teams accounted for 83% of all the playoff teams: Alabama (8/10 years), Clemson (6/10), Ohio State (5/10),  Oklahoma (4/10), Michigan (3/10), Georgia (3/10), Washington (2/10), and Notre Dame (2/10). They also accounted for all but one of the champions.

But since the expansion, with a limited sample size, eight different teams have appeared. Half of them (Indiana, Miami, Ole Miss, Penn State) had never appeared in the four-team format and another two (Oregon and Texas) had only appeared once.

Water will find its level and I'm sure in 10 years the likes of Alabama, Ohio State, and Georgia will appear more often in the semifinals than Indiana and Ole Miss. But I do think a bit of dilution is a good thing if it means giving the "other" 60 power conference teams a puncher's chance at winning--or at least seriously competing for--a national championship.


 

[buddha]

30 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

Ultimately it's just my opinion, but I don't think a 136-team league, or even just the 68 in the power conferences, should be reduced to three or four who go to and usually win the championship every year because of a dichotomy in how the sport is designed into haves and have nots. It's a similar problem that I have with baseball with five teams combining for something like 30% of all the money paid to players (and surprise surprise, two of them meeting in the World Series each of the last two years).

In the four-team playoff eight teams accounted for 83% of all the playoff teams: Alabama (8/10 years), Clemson (6/10), Ohio State (5/10),  Oklahoma (4/10), Michigan (3/10), Georgia (3/10), Washington (2/10), and Notre Dame (2/10). They also accounted for all but one of the champions.

But since the expansion, with a limited sample size, eight different teams have appeared. Half of them (Indiana, Miami, Ole Miss, Penn State) had never appeared in the four-team format and another two (Oregon and Texas) had only appeared once.

Water will find its level and I'm sure in 10 years the likes of Alabama, Ohio State, and Georgia will appear more often in the semifinals than Indiana and Ole Miss. But I do think a bit of dilution is a good thing if it means giving the "other" 60 power conference teams a puncher's chance at winning--or at least seriously competing for--a national championship.


 

i understand, but i dont know if that is "good for the sport."

i dont necessarily think parity is automatically good for interest in sports.  i think the sport is better when its franchises with large fan bases are involved in championships because more people care about those teams.

[Tigeraholic1]

33 minutes ago, buddha said:

i understand, but i dont know if that is "good for the sport."

i dont necessarily think parity is automatically good for interest in sports.  i think the sport is better when its franchises with large fan bases are involved in championships because more people care about those teams.

Obsessed with blue bloods.

[buddha]

15 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

Obsessed with blue bloods.

hey, i even still include notre dame in that group even though they havent won a championship since the reagan administration.

[Deleterious]

And this is why they still have bowl games.

 

[Deleterious]

No numbers on the 2nd round yet.

 

[MichiganCardinal]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

i understand, but i dont know if that is "good for the sport."

i dont necessarily think parity is automatically good for interest in sports.  i think the sport is better when its franchises with large fan bases are involved in championships because more people care about those teams.

This is fair. “The sport” isn’t really one thing after all. What I want as a fan, versus what another person wants as a fan, versus what Warde Manuel wants as an administrator, versus what ESPN wants, versus what the NCAA wants, are all very different.

For me, I’m an NFL fan above all. I have my alma maters that I will like to see win. But when they’re not playing, I’d much rather see Indiana, Ole Miss, Virginia Tech, or Arizona State win a national championship over (yet) another Ohio State, Alabama, or Georgia.