NCAA Football 2014 Thread

[HailtotheYo]

Helping protect a rapist?

If it comes out it actually happened, we'll talk then. But, given what Winston did (only answer questions in a legal proceeding where the woman could be charged with perjury if she lied) in the hearing and the 5 page detailed account he gave (which is reported as consistent with what he's said from day one) ... I'd be willing to bet that truth is much closer to what he's saying that what she is (given that she's been inconsistent since day one) http://nypost.com/2014/12/04/in-statement-florida-st-qb-winston-denies-alleged-rape/

Although, Cowboyfan saying something about this is pretty ironic.

Just for fun, I looked up what a 16 team playoff would look like this season (using the CFP rankings and conference champions). Conference champions are listed first in the 1-16 order followed by the teams rounding out the field (conference champs ranked first by CFP rankings and then by ESPN Power rankings). In the case of the AAC (three teams tied at 7-1conference and 9-3overall I went with Memphis due to out of conference schedule and have a better conference loss).

1 - Alabama*

2 - Oregon*

3 - FSU*

4 - OhioST*

5 - Baylor*

6 - BoiseST*

7 - Memphis*

8 - Marshall*

9 - ULL* (Georgia Southern can't play in the post season this year)

10 - NI*

11 - TCU

12 - MissST

13 - Mich ST

14 - Ole Miss

15 - Arizona

16 - K State

Now, the bracket seeded according to ranking:

1 - Alabama

16 - Northern Illinois

8 - Michigan ST

9 - Ole Miss

5 - Baylor

12 - Boise ST

4 - Ohio ST

13 - Memphis

6 - TCU

11 - K State

3 - FSU

14 - Marshall

7 - Miss ST

10 - Arizona

2 - Oregon

15 - UL-Lafayette

That looks all sorts of yummy.

[HailtotheYo]

Bowl Pick'Em

Group EWB

password EWB

Is this Bowl Mania on ESPN? It's not letting me search for EWB, it must be longer than four characters. That said, it is letting me rejoin last year's group.

Group ID is 20798

NOW SIGN UP PEOPLE !!!!!!

[Maxx]

Yes, there so many rape allegations surrounding the Cowboys. Oh so many. And that's a pathetic and insulting defense. Please find examples of me ever trying to gloss over what a Cowboys player had done or try to sweep it under the rug.

We've been cool for awhile, but if you're going to start insulting my character with bullshit like this, we're going to have a problem.

[DMN in the House]

Winston has far more against him than the rape allegation, though that is enough to make your assertions about Oregon ludicrous.

Your sixteen team playoff is equally as ludicrous. Half those teams have no business playing for a national championship. All conferences are not created equal, and should not be treated as such.

[HailtotheYo]

Yes, there so many rape allegations surrounding the Cowboys. Oh so many. And that's a pathetic and insulting defense. Please find examples of me ever trying to gloss over what a Cowboys player had done or try to sweep it under the rug.

We've been cool for awhile, but if you're going to start insulting my character with bullshit like this, we're going to have a problem.

A Cowboys fan making a comment about any character, legal, or any other type of issue of anyone else is ironic. You saying that's a problem ?

Also, CJ SPILLMAN, JERRY FREAKING JONES ..... a rape accusation and a sexual assault accusation FROM THIS YEAR

If you're going to try and pop off or cheap shot ... expect to get popped back.

Anything else ?

Winston has far more against him than the rape allegation, though that is enough to make your assertions about Oregon ludicrous.

Your sixteen team playoff is equally as ludicrous. Half those teams have no business playing for a national championship. All conferences are not created equal, and should not be treated as such.

So you're saying they aren't a corporate whore and mass media fellation ?

Are they, or are they not all D1 college football teams ? If so, then yes any and all D1 conference champions deserve a shot at the National Title.

If the teams in these conferences shouldn't be treated as such, then we should not count the "power 5" wins against them as equal wins ... right ? They shouldn't count as D1 wins, right ? I mean they aren't equal .... The champions of their conference have every bit of right to a shot at a national title than anyone that didn't win their conference (which we've seen more than once).

I mentioned it before but never really got any response from anyone with the "they aren't equal" tag line. What's different about D1 college ball from all the other football divisions, the NFL, and every other freaking sport ? Why does this thinking only apply to D1 football ?

16% of the college football coaches think 16 teams is what should in.

44% say it should be 8 ...

(ESPN polled the D1 coaches)

Regardless, the vast majority feel and know that 4 isn't right.

[Maxx]

It's not fucking cheap shots it's a fucking fact. Winston is a criminal for a variety of reasons and the university is helping to shield him.

The problem here is you taking personal offense to it. Sorry if you decide to tie your identity up to FSU, that's your business, but at no point did I say that YOU are supportive of Winston or an enabler or any of that. Didn't say it outright and it wasn't implied, and I'm sure other people will back me up on that. In fact, I assumed quite the opposite.

Of course you decided to take personal offense to that and launch into a personal attack on me and my character. CJ Spillman should have been cut and gone to jail, Jerry Jones is a scumbag, Josh Brent should be in jail. I can take a fucking morale high ground on all of the shady shit that happens in colleges and all of the overt crimes that happen in colleges because I, as a person, don't engage in them or condone them and never had. And my fandom of a particular team doesn't do that either.

But you obviously can't separate that kind of shit and have a desperate need to jump in and take a bullet for FSU when someone says something disparaging about them. Guess what? That's your decision, it doesn't mean it's a personal attack on you and it certainly doesn't give you any right to make personal attacks on the person who said it.

[HailtotheYo]

It's not fucking cheap shots it's a fucking fact. Winston is a criminal for a variety of reasons and the university is helping to shield him.

The problem here is you taking personal offense to it. Sorry if you decide to tie your identity up to FSU, that's your business, but at no point did I say that YOU are supportive of Winston or an enabler or any of that. Didn't say it outright and it wasn't implied, and I'm sure other people will back me up on that. In fact, I assumed quite the opposite.

Of course you decided to take personal offense to that and launch into a personal attack on me and my character. CJ Spillman should have been cut and gone to jail, Jerry Jones is a scumbag, Josh Brent should be in jail. I can take a fucking morale high ground on all of the shady shit that happens in colleges and all of the overt crimes that happen in colleges because I, as a person, don't engage in them or condone them and never had. And my fandom of a particular team doesn't do that either.

But you obviously can't separate that kind of shit and have a desperate need to jump in and take a bullet for FSU when someone says something disparaging about them. Guess what? That's your decision, it doesn't mean it's a personal attack on you and it certainly doesn't give you any right to make personal attacks on the person who said it.

You do notice that I said COWBOYFAN ... as opposed to you, personally, right ?

I'm sorry, I'm not sure where I took personnel offense to it. If anything, you were offended when I made the comment about Cowboyfan. Although, I'm quite curious what your point was in even saying it ? I mean you really don't hang around this thread too much but were quick to jump in with nothing but a quip about him being a rapist ... just odd.

I would though, like you to show, specifically where I attacked you and your character. The only comment I made was about "Cowboyfan making a statement" ... that's it, and nothing more. So please, show me where you and your character were personally attacked. Even in the follow up I mentioned "a cowboys fan" and not you personally or specifically. Again, not sure where I took the personal offense to it (which is funny because earlier in the thread I even stated that I was 'over' Winston and felt he was more trouble than it was worth). I only stated facts about the case and said that if he was found to have done it, we'd talk. Is that being offended to you ?

I don't do, nor condone any of that behavior either. I also don't agree with slinging mud unless it's been found that it is warranted. You wanna call him a douche ? scumbag ? asshole ? Go right ahead, I agree. You want to call him a rapist when of the two parties involved he's the one that (at this point) looks to be telling the truth or at least the closest thing to it ? That's something else. And yes, it is a bit wonky coming from anyone <--- (that's not you or specific to you) that is a fan of a team notorious for character issues and issues associated with and related to what you came in and blasted off on Winston for.

right, I can't separate it. Absolutely. That's why I'm the one getting overly defensive and throwing a tirade yeah ?

[Maxx]

So when you say essentially "A Cowboys fan has no place making accusations" right after a post you quoted, in which I, a cowboys fan, make accusations...you aren't referring to me.

That is, without question, one of the most ridiculous defenses I have ever seen anyone make on this board, ever.

I'm not sure I expected an apology from you, maybe just acknowledgment that you understand I wasn't insulting you and insults to FSU are not insults to you...but instead, you fart out that.

[DMN in the House]

Yes, there so many rape allegations surrounding the Cowboys. Oh so many. And that's a pathetic and insulting defense. Please find examples of me ever trying to gloss over what a Cowboys player had done or try to sweep it under the rug.

We've been cool for awhile, but if you're going to start insulting my character with bullshit like this, we're going to have a problem.

A Cowboys fan making a comment about any character, legal, or any other type of issue of anyone else is ironic. You saying that's a problem ?

Also, CJ SPILLMAN, JERRY FREAKING JONES ..... a rape accusation and a sexual assault accusation FROM THIS YEAR

If you're going to try and pop off or cheap shot ... expect to get popped back.

Anything else ?

Winston has far more against him than the rape allegation, though that is enough to make your assertions about Oregon ludicrous.

Your sixteen team playoff is equally as ludicrous. Half those teams have no business playing for a national championship. All conferences are not created equal, and should not be treated as such.

So you're saying they aren't a corporate whore and mass media fellation ?

Are they, or are they not all D1 college football teams ? If so, then yes any and all D1 conference champions deserve a shot at the National Title.

If the teams in these conferences shouldn't be treated as such, then we should not count the "power 5" wins against them as equal wins ... right ? They shouldn't count as D1 wins, right ? I mean they aren't equal .... The champions of their conference have every bit of right to a shot at a national title than anyone that didn't win their conference (which we've seen more than once).

I mentioned it before but never really got any response from anyone with the "they aren't equal" tag line. What's different about D1 college ball from all the other football divisions, the NFL, and every other freaking sport ? Why does this thinking only apply to D1 football ?

16% of the college football coaches think 16 teams is what should in.

44% say it should be 8 ...

(ESPN polled the D1 coaches)

Regardless, the vast majority feel and know that 4 isn't right.

The wins aren't treated equally, a loss to a group of five team hurts you more than a loss to a power five team. A win against one means less. That's why a lot of teams don't want to play them when they're good.

Is it unfair? Probably. Is it reality? Yes. Those teams can't compete financially, and some of them probably shouldn't be in the FBS. But they are, and better to deal with reality instead of some pie in the sky fairness. These teams benefit by playing in winnable bowl games instead of getting smashed in first round games.

[GhostMachine]

Winston is a criminal AND a dumbass. He probably won't go nearly as high as he should in the NFL draft because of the stupid things he's done. And I hope he turns out to be one of the biggest busts in NFL history.

Also, FSU ranked as high as they are is a joke. Of the 112 or whatever Division I teams, they have a fairly soft schedule compared to some teams ranked well below them who have won games more decisively. I believe it was said on ESPN that they had the 46th toughest schedule. Plus there are some teams they barely beat that were manhandled by other teams ranked lower than FSU. FSU shouldn't even be in the top 5. Top 10, maybe, but not top 5. (And Winston aside, i actually like FSU)

Bringing that Cowboys fan comment up is more or less a no defense defense for crappy behavior on Hail's part.

Edited December 11, 2014 by GhostMachine

[HailtotheYo]

The wins aren't treated equally, a loss to a group of five team hurts you more than a loss to a power five team. A win against one means less. That's why a lot of teams don't want to play them when they're good.

Is it unfair? Probably. Is it reality? Yes. Those teams can't compete financially, and some of them probably shouldn't be in the FBS. But they are, and better to deal with reality instead of some pie in the sky fairness. These teams benefit by playing in winnable bowl games instead of getting smashed in first round games.

The SEC made its own myth be beating 3 of those schools every season. Those schools are why South Carolina, Arkansas, and Tennessee are bowl eligible and in turn feed the myth this season. It's also a joke to pretend that some of these "mid majors" or "group of 5" schools AREN'T as good or on equal footing of the bottom half of many of the Power 5 conferences. Let's be real about Wazzu, Vandy, Kansas, Wake, UConn, Tulane, Indiana, Iowa State etc etc etc ..... And no, if you're Georgia or Va Tech losing to Boise ST won't hurt you as bad as losing to say Wazzu or Kansas out of conference.

The bowl games don't do anything for these schools (except cost them money). Getting a Thursday Night ESPN game does as much/more for the program than the R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl does. It isn't "pie in the sky" fairness. It's about actuality. These schools are all FBS ... there is absolutely no justification for them not having a legitimate shot at the national title in which their team competes. They sure as shit count in the win column for a Power 5 school and determine their bowl eligibility. So only having them matter when you want is a flat out load.

I notice you once again haven't even attempted to answer as to why it's only in D1 football that the thought process is like this.

Also, FSU ranked as high as they are is a joke. Of the 112 or whatever Division I teams, they have a fairly soft schedule compared to some teams ranked well below them who have won games more decisively. I believe it was said on ESPN that they had the 46th toughest schedule. Plus there are some teams they barely beat that were manhandled by other teams ranked lower than FSU. FSU shouldn't even be in the top 5. Top 10, maybe, but not top 5. (And Winston aside, i actually like FSU)

Bringing that Cowboys fan comment up is more or less a no defense defense for crappy behavior on Hail's part.

You should check the strength of schedule for Ohio State ... they're 45 (FSU is actually 36). Also, comparatively over the last several years having a SOS of 25-40 or so is pretty normal for half of the top 10 teams or so.

Of course, this way of thinking just popped up from thin air this season. If this were last season FSU would be 1 or 2 in the AP and BCS and nobody would be saying anything at all about it.

[DMN in the House]

The wins aren't treated equally, a loss to a group of five team hurts you more than a loss to a power five team. A win against one means less. That's why a lot of teams don't want to play them when they're good.

Is it unfair? Probably. Is it reality? Yes. Those teams can't compete financially, and some of them probably shouldn't be in the FBS. But they are, and better to deal with reality instead of some pie in the sky fairness. These teams benefit by playing in winnable bowl games instead of getting smashed in first round games.

The SEC made its own myth be beating 3 of those schools every season. Those schools are why South Carolina, Arkansas, and Tennessee are bowl eligible and in turn feed the myth this season. It's also a joke to pretend that some of these "mid majors" or "group of 5" schools AREN'T as good or on equal footing of the bottom half of many of the Power 5 conferences. Let's be real about Wazzu, Vandy, Kansas, Wake, UConn, Tulane, Indiana, Iowa State etc etc etc ..... And no, if you're Georgia or Va Tech losing to Boise ST won't hurt you as bad as losing to say Wazzu or Kansas out of conference.

The bowl games don't do anything for these schools (except cost them money). Getting a Thursday Night ESPN game does as much/more for the program than the R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl does. It isn't "pie in the sky" fairness. It's about actuality. These schools are all FBS ... there is absolutely no justification for them not having a legitimate shot at the national title in which their team competes. They sure as shit count in the win column for a Power 5 school and determine their bowl eligibility. So only having them matter when you want is a flat out load.

I notice you once again haven't even attempted to answer as to why it's only in D1 football that the thought process is like this.

You should know I'm the last person to believe the SEC hype. I'm the west coast football guy.

One, the AAC isn't a power 5 conference, it's a mildly beefed up C-USA, so Tulane and UCONN don't help your argument. Wazzu is on the rise, and isn't even the traditionally weakest team in the PAC-12, that's Oregon State. The rest I can't really argue against, I just wanted to defend Wazzu >_>...

The fact that you had to name the best mid major in history kinda makes my point. I'm not disputing that Boise is very good. They'd be in a power five conference right now if it wasn't for their shit academics and location. No one looks down on a team losing to Boise (or the rest of the top half of the MWC really, they're undoubtedly the sixth best conference, sometimes better), but the rest of the group of five aren't close to that level.

I don't even know why I'm arguing this point anymore, because you're never going to get it. In the NFL, or even the lower levels of the NCAA, the teams are on far more even footing than they are in the FBS. I agree that the playoffs need expanded, but outside of adding the top group of five champion, which, a large percentage of the time would be the Mountain West champion, it would be going too far. 9-3 Memphis does not deserve a shot at the title. They did nothing to prove they did.

[Plubby]

Hey our Academics are awesome.

[HailtotheYo]

The wins aren't treated equally, a loss to a group of five team hurts you more than a loss to a power five team. A win against one means less. That's why a lot of teams don't want to play them when they're good.

Is it unfair? Probably. Is it reality? Yes. Those teams can't compete financially, and some of them probably shouldn't be in the FBS. But they are, and better to deal with reality instead of some pie in the sky fairness. These teams benefit by playing in winnable bowl games instead of getting smashed in first round games.

The SEC made its own myth be beating 3 of those schools every season. Those schools are why South Carolina, Arkansas, and Tennessee are bowl eligible and in turn feed the myth this season. It's also a joke to pretend that some of these "mid majors" or "group of 5" schools AREN'T as good or on equal footing of the bottom half of many of the Power 5 conferences. Let's be real about Wazzu, Vandy, Kansas, Wake, UConn, Tulane, Indiana, Iowa State etc etc etc ..... And no, if you're Georgia or Va Tech losing to Boise ST won't hurt you as bad as losing to say Wazzu or Kansas out of conference.

The bowl games don't do anything for these schools (except cost them money). Getting a Thursday Night ESPN game does as much/more for the program than the R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl does. It isn't "pie in the sky" fairness. It's about actuality. These schools are all FBS ... there is absolutely no justification for them not having a legitimate shot at the national title in which their team competes. They sure as shit count in the win column for a Power 5 school and determine their bowl eligibility. So only having them matter when you want is a flat out load.

I notice you once again haven't even attempted to answer as to why it's only in D1 football that the thought process is like this.

You should know I'm the last person to believe the SEC hype. I'm the west coast football guy.

One, the AAC isn't a power 5 conference, it's a mildly beefed up C-USA, so Tulane and UCONN don't help your argument. Wazzu is on the rise, and isn't even the traditionally weakest team in the PAC-12, that's Oregon State. The rest I can't really argue against, I just wanted to defend Wazzu >_>...

The fact that you had to name the best mid major in history kinda makes my point. I'm not disputing that Boise is very good. They'd be in a power five conference right now if it wasn't for their shit academics and location. No one looks down on a team losing to Boise (or the rest of the top half of the MWC really, they're undoubtedly the sixth best conference, sometimes better), but the rest of the group of five aren't close to that level.

I don't even know why I'm arguing this point anymore, because you're never going to get it. In the NFL, or even the lower levels of the NCAA, the teams are on far more even footing than they are in the FBS. I agree that the playoffs need expanded, but outside of adding the top group of five champion, which, a large percentage of the time would be the Mountain West champion, it would be going too far. 9-3 Memphis does not deserve a shot at the title. They did nothing to prove they did.

You personally don't ... and I do know that. However, you're in the same boat as me in the "able to influence anything on this matter" boat. I know plenty of fans that get it on a deeper than what the sports shows and "pros" are telling you ... but that's not the issue.

A number of these mid major schools are as good as the mid-bottom level of the Power 5. That's the point. Any given year Boise, Marshall, Fresno St, Colorado St, Northern Illinois, UCF, Cincy ..... they can all not just compete with, but beat the Power 5 schools. Indiana has no greater right to a shot at the National Title than any of these schools. Neither do the perennial cellar dwellers of the ACC, SEC, PAC, BIG10, BIG12 ... but that do.

People laughed at Utah moving to the PAC. They also said TCU would have a hard time with reality in the Big 12. Well, that's simply not the case.

Hell, actually take a look at Oregon's schedule. Who did they beat outside of Michigan St ? The 4 worst teams in the conference were on their schedule this year. They also played Wyoming and South Dakota. The rest of their schedule is their side of the conference which is ... well, please be honest with me, really not that good this year. Yeah UCLA is pretty good, but that's easily the 2nd best team on their schedule this year and it can be argued just how good they are. Please, take that for what it's actually saying as opposed to me not thinking Oregon is a top team this season.

Wow, if you don't think there's as great a gap in the lower levels of the NCAA then you need to go back and take a look. UMHB, Mount Union, UW Whitewater ? They might as well be Texas, Ohio State, or Wisconsin as far as Texas Lutheran is concerned. I mean you want to talk to me about "not getting it" but you want to claim that the lower divisions are much more closely knit than D1 ? Yeah, not at all ... not even close.

There's simply no justification for Kansas having a legitimate shot at the national title in D1 football but not Colorado State. There isn't. There's nothing I'm "not getting" about it. I completely understand your opinion and take on the debate. I do. The fact though, is that they're all Division 1 football teams as recognized by the NCAA and all of the institutions within and should have the same chance at winning their respective national title as anyone else. The other fact, is that this is the only occurrence where this thinking is applied. THAT is what I don't get ... the thought process. How it only matters in D1 football .. yes, that I don't get.

The only true argument anyone has ever been made on this front, is the money argument, to which, the playoffs (and including all the conference champions) will have it coming out the wazoo.

[DMN in the House]

I was more thinking of the FCS, in regards to being more even, but even there not every team gets a shot at the title, only certain conferences get auto bids, and schools can be left out. Comparing the situation to the NFL is ludicrous, as NFL schedules are far more balanced than any college schedule.

Yeah, the PAC-12 North was weak, but those teams are still better than the majority of the lower conferences. There are two or three good teams in the mid major conferences, and it's flipped in the larger conferences, with, maybe, two or three bad teams.

You used Oregon, so let's go with the PAC-12.

Outside of Colorado, every team in the South would have been a top two team in any group of five conference, and I might be giving too much credit to a down Boise squad (although saying 11-2 is a down squad is a testament to them, they don't have the squad to have really made noise against to teams this year). I'd honestly argue that each of them, again, except the Buffalos, would have won any group of five conference. Colorado would likely be bowl eligible playing a group of five schedule.

The North was weaker. Obviously Oregon is Oregon, but each of the other teams would, at worst, be bowl eligible with a group of five schedule.

That illustrates my problem. If the schedules were even, I'd have no problem with each conference getting a team in. They simply aren't. Outside of the very top teams, only one or two a year of which would be truly competitive, they aren't on the level of even a middle of the road power five team, and no one is arguing that they deserve a shot.

To put it another way, we can all agree that UCLA belongs no where near a playoff. Well, I'd argue that they'd have won each and every group of five conference, and the only one I'd even doubt is the MWC. Not saying Marshall couldn't beat them, but I wouldn't put it at a better than 25% chance.

It comes down to you valuing conference championships, where I'd rather just see the best teams. The system isn't fair, and, admittedly, there's no push, nor incentive, to make it fair. Given that, I'd rather see better football than the off chance that 9-3 Memphis could stay within a touchdown of Alabama or Oregon.

I'd say FSU, but we all know they'd be down ten to Memphis before coming back in the second half

[HC]

Hey, let's leave my university out of this. They held their own with UCLA.

[DMN in the House]

They did. I'm not trying to take anything away from Memphis, they've had a marvelous turn around.

They're just not national championship material this season.

[HC]

They did. I'm not trying to take anything away from Memphis, they've had a marvelous turn around.

They're just not national championship material this season.

I was just messing with you man.

Given the football program's miserable existence, I am perfectly happy with the Miami Beach Bowl.

[HailtotheYo]

I was more thinking of the FCS, in regards to being more even, but even there not every team gets a shot at the title, only certain conferences get auto bids, and schools can be left out. Comparing the situation to the NFL is ludicrous, as NFL schedules are far more balanced than any college schedule.

Yeah, the PAC-12 North was weak, but those teams are still better than the majority of the lower conferences. There are two or three good teams in the mid major conferences, and it's flipped in the larger conferences, with, maybe, two or three bad teams.

You used Oregon, so let's go with the PAC-12.

Outside of Colorado, every team in the South would have been a top two team in any group of five conference, and I might be giving too much credit to a down Boise squad (although saying 11-2 is a down squad is a testament to them, they don't have the squad to have really made noise against to teams this year). I'd honestly argue that each of them, again, except the Buffalos, would have won any group of five conference. Colorado would likely be bowl eligible playing a group of five schedule.

The North was weaker. Obviously Oregon is Oregon, but each of the other teams would, at worst, be bowl eligible with a group of five schedule.

That illustrates my problem. If the schedules were even, I'd have no problem with each conference getting a team in. They simply aren't. Outside of the very top teams, only one or two a year of which would be truly competitive, they aren't on the level of even a middle of the road power five team, and no one is arguing that they deserve a shot.

To put it another way, we can all agree that UCLA belongs no where near a playoff. Well, I'd argue that they'd have won each and every group of five conference, and the only one I'd even doubt is the MWC. Not saying Marshall couldn't beat them, but I wouldn't put it at a better than 25% chance.

It comes down to you valuing conference championships, where I'd rather just see the best teams. The system isn't fair, and, admittedly, there's no push, nor incentive, to make it fair. Given that, I'd rather see better football than the off chance that 9-3 Memphis could stay within a touchdown of Alabama or Oregon.

I'd say FSU, but we all know they'd be down ten to Memphis before coming back in the second half

Well actually the only two that don't get an auto bid are the Ivy (by choice) and the SWAC (due to their own conference schedule and title game). All of the other FCS conferences get their champion in. And yes, NFL schedules are much more even than any college schedule anywhere the fact remains that a shit conference champion gets in (and there have been some) and it's ok because they won their division. Nobody has a real problem with it (even with the weaker divisions) ... but in D1 football they do.

See, I simply don't agree with this perception. Utah is a good team yes ... but they struggled against absolute shit Colorado and lost to even worse shit Wazzu. They needed 2OT to beat Oregon State. Those were the three worst teams in the PAC and admittedly, by you, simply not good. So do you judge by their two best days (beating USC and UCLA) or by the worst ones where they struggled against the absolute bottom of the barrel of the conference ? But Oregon was in the North ... which just wasn't good this season. Stanford didn't actually beat anyone good this year, ditto Washington. Literally half the conference was not good this year. However, Oregon's resume is ok because they're all "power 5" schools ! I don't know that UCLA would have won either the American or the MWC. If the divide is that big and those schools are that much lower, then the "weak" north teams should have no problem winning or being 2nd in any group of 5 conference ... but you yourself only confidently stated that they'd be bowl eligible (which is all that a couple of them are now). That doesn't seem to line up with your prevailing point.

Only in D1 are they not really and truly talking about it ... even though the talking heads consistently reference the other divisions and how they love the aspects of their playoffs. The discussion was absolutely happening with the BCS and the exclusion.

The point is that somehow we love the story in March Madness and how the Big Sky champion (doing nothing more than Marshall or Boise St or whomever in FBS football) gets their shot in the dance and gets to take a swing at the big boys. NOBODY claims that they don't deserve to be there and have their shot. NOBODY. But in FBS football they don't belong, don't deserve it, and it's ridiculous to say they do. That math doesn't work.

.... only 10 ? You're being kind. I figured they'd at least by two touchdowns down before they decided to play

[Plubby]

There's simply no justification for Kansas having a legitimate shot at the national title in D1 football but not Colorado State.

Not the way Kansas is currently playing, no. But if Kansas were to go 11-1 and be the Baylor or TCU in a playoff schedule, then they would have earned that by beating a very difficult schedule. If Colorado State goes 11-1 and is this year's Boise State, then they better have lost to another team in the playoff, or their best chance is to play in the Fiesta Bowl.

You're right when you say there's hot garbage at the bottom of a lot of these Power 5 conferences, but to say that schedules are created sufficiently equal because the worst of the Power of 5 is worse than the top of the Group of 5 ignores that the bottom of the Group of 5 is diabolical. I still think Kansas wipes the floor with UNLV. The bottom of the Mountain West, AAC etc is not close to a Kansas, for my money. Except the MAC, The MACtion is hot from top to bottom