Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'College Football Soundoff' started by gymman1031, May 9, 2019.
That's a lot of typing. Do you think that Brian Kelly wins a national title at Notre Dame?
I'm sorry I got sidetracked. I dont know but he almost won a national championship at Cincinnati. People don't talk about that. Get also won several I believe at Grand Valley St. It is worth noting (not necessarily suggesting it determined the outcome) but he as notably absent at the Sugar Bowl. If I remember correctly the players weren't notufied until after he was gone. To Notre Dame. So the question I gave us why didn't he simply just stay there? I'm not saying he isn't a good fit at Notre Dame. But national titles are a difficult proposition. I don't think anyone here really recignizes the scale to which they require a person's hard work and dedication. Possibly because there were programs like Notre Dane they made it look all too easy. It's anything but. I guess I'm beating a dead horse here. People don't listen to me. I don't frankly care if he wins another championship. You stand by your program and you don't leave. Like I said in 2012 it was Oregon winning the national championship. It wasn't Alabama. Ok? Ok.
You guys think you can rewrite history to suit a storyline you feel happy with. That's wrong. In 1980 and I'm not tryna ng to diminish Georgia's claim a championship exclysive to my platform would have given it to Pittsburg. Why? They deserve it that's why. Or at least the relative proficiency end if it. Just like Florida merits it in 1984.
How then does BYU capture any measure if it? They don't without help. Iowa shares a NC. It's quite amazing actually. But it results in a split national tithes claim. Between BYU and Iowa. 50/50. Weird. Iowa St shares 2017 with C. Florida. Can Pittsburgh claim a NC apart from Georgia? Probably not. Why?
Well despite finishing ahead of the Bulldogs (means a title appropriated to the logistic I apply) might more approriately belong to the second more deserving team! UGA.
It's weird but I think we'll be able to decipher it in due time. Pittsburgh wasn't a NC in 1980. Its hard to get all the variables correct but impetus should fall to the best team.
Alabama won a national title without representing its division in SECCG, but Brian Kelly isn't winning a title at Notre Dame.
Buddy everyone who watched college football during the 1997 season could see Nebraska get better at the end of the year and proved it by absolutely crushing a Payton Manning led Tennessee team while michigan struggled to win vs a Pac 10 weak Washington State team. 10 out of 10 times Nebraska would have beat michigan that year. By the way you lost any credibility claiming Notre Dame isn’t independent. We play 5 Acc games a year for recruiting in the east and southeast. Oh we also play the Big 10, Big 12, Pac 12 conference teams every year because we can as an independent.
Championships don't turn on a dime. I have a problem with 1997 because Nebraska cheated to beat Missouri. You can't then or now deflect a football with your foot. It's illegal. And it resulted in an overtime win. The result should have been a tie. Honestly that still upsets me. As far as Nebraska 'getting better' I'm not sure it matters. Yeah they were assuredly a better team at the end of the season. BFD.
I still think that Missouri fane weighs paramount toward a championship. As it should. But Michigan wasn't a team to be taken lightly. At the time Washington St was a beast. Your recollection is poor. Mike Price I think was nearly hired at Alabama. Eventually went to U.T.EP. and while it may be true that professionally it was Peyton Manning who proved the superior, at the time I think some might gave argued that the better quarterback was Ryan Leaf. That was a good team Michigan played and defeated in the Rose Bowl. By the way Peyton Manning never won a championship at Tennessee. That was Tee Martin and that was after Peyton Manning graduated. Point being g that the title while it included Tennessee wasn't exclusive to that team, that championship, or that game. And Missouri damn near best Nebraska. I know they didn't. But they damn near did. It was remarkable Nebrasja pulled a win out if it but like I said at the time nobody knew who the better player was. I thought no Ryan Leaf was the better player.
Anyway there was a split championship that gear notwithstanding all that. I lose all credibility for telling the truth? Notre Dame is fully partnered either the Atlantic Coast Conference. One of fifteen. Fully partnered. They find play a full schedule but I think that's chicken shit.
They ARE in the Atlantic Coast Conference and they should have played Clemson in the ACC championship game. A game they assuredly would gave lost, had they been admitted. It's pathetic.
In effect they are clovering their ass also Clemson's . It should have been a championship between Clemson and Notre Dame. Michigan didn't play Nebraska in a title game. At least not then. Actually it's interesting they played them in the Alamo Bowl (2005). And in the Fiesta Bowl (1986). Both of them were tithe pairings of teams. What credibility do I lack? Yours? GMAFB. I know what I'm talking about. F.W.I.W. Tennessee was rated #3 and I think (could be wrong) Washington St #4. That's why siome thought Nebraska the better. They annhilated the third best team. But Michigan annhilated Colorado.
I think Colorado and Nebraska played in 1997. You might wasn't to compare scores. Before you cone to need and start calling me out in shit you clearly aren't taking into consideration. Before bkaming me for it. No Notre Dame is no longer independent. They are in the ACC.
Wow, simply wow..... God bless your heart!
You ever considered seeing a psychiatrist?
What the **** kind of question is that? Oh Notre Dame is do great and tremendous that they only lose by thirty. Not fifty. Yeah they realltly proved deserving of that 'at large' bid didn't they? So glad nonbody listened to me and put Notre Dame in the ACC championship. Would have messed everything up if they had. We'd have missed in that classic spectacle in the Cotton Bowl Im sure will be remembered for generations. As great a pairing as it was. What a showdown. I'm sure glad that was reserved the the Cotton Bowl and not wasted for a championship game. That would have been a disaster wouldn't it have been? Right? 10/20/12 Notre Dame 17 Brigham Young 14. Wow. Dominance.
Did Oklahoma, OSU and Bama have to “compete” for a championship when they got in without a conference championship? The Big 12 didn’t even have a CCG in 2016 when OU got in. The stupidity on this board is astounding.
So You just want the opportunity to play in a theoretical CCG to be hanging out there even though there have been 4 teams now in what, 5 years, that have gotten in without winning a CCG? Think for yourself for a chance instead of listening to other bonehead CFB fans.
I’m going to go out on a limb and assume you’re having a bad day. Care more than I do about the Irish, somehow. We live in your head. Insecurities from the past? The Irish got stomped. Get over it. They deserved to be there.
Take some meds. Psycho.
**** you asshoke. **** Notre Dame too. Last time I checked Brigham Young wasn't losing to Ckemson (or for that matter, any other team) by 30 in the Cotton Bowl. In fact last time they played there they won 19-15 over a pretty respectable Kansas St. team. In 1996.
And last time they played Notre Dame I think it went to O T. I think Notre Dame won 17-10. That's if my memory sufficiently remembers it.
Here’s the thing, if BYU played Clemson last year, it’d have been a 40+ point bloodbath. BYU can’t lose to elite teams by 30 when they can’t even get within 5 wins of playing against them in a bowl.
I don’t know why you’re acting so pissy. Grow up.
And they say ND fans live in the past... this dude just rattled off ‘96. That’s the last time BYU had a good enough season to play an elite team? ND has had 2000, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2012, 2015, 2018. Granted they lost all of them in fabulous showings. At least I can accept their shortcomings instead of distributing long drawn out slurs of insults.
I'm not acting pissy. I was citing what I consider evidence that if nothing we positions other teams in close proximity to Notre Dame. I never went to Brigham Young. My education such as it is is primarily connected to Boulder although that's been sufficiently long enough nit to matter. But last time I remember Colorado played ng Notre Dame if I remember correctly it was a lop-sided win favoring Colorado in the Fiesta Bowl. And the lady time I remember Colorado playing Brigham Young it was a close game favoring Brigham Young. My point simply is that Notre Dame doesn't exactly exude magnificence. Yes there are in the Atlantic Coast Conference and yes I believe should remain there. And yes I think they cheated us of a championship game by not participating as they ought to have in place of Pittsburgh. That's like short-sheeting a bed it's stupid and it's juvenile. Just suit up and play like you have a pair. It don't. But this middle of the road the crap has got to stop. It's irritating as all get out.
LOL. Maybe ND’s offense gave them nothing because of Clemson’s defense? Just a thought.
Clemson scored two TD’s to end the 1st half. The last was 85 yards in less than a minute. What game were you watching?
Until proven otherwise, O$U is the only northern team imo capable of winning a title. ND and UM are the two most overrated programs in the modern history of college football.
I’m interested to see if Frost can turn NU back into a power. Just seems like kids these days grew up with NU being irrelevant.
BYU won a measure of the Belt. By the way the lady time I remember Notre Dame playing in a Belt NC was against Colorado.
Orange Bowl. I knew I was forgetting something fairly important. Colorado won.
10-9. Make if it whatever you want. I thought it was interesting however. Notre Dame is do good it seems they are consistently BEATEN. What was it 1988?
Yeah pretty good about twenty years ago. BYU's Belt NC was in 1996. Against Kansas St. But the team Brigham Young defeated (actually they also beat them in 1984, too) was Tulsa. What's Notre Dame's record vs. Tulsa? I frankly don't remember. Maybe you do. But the point I've been making all along is how credible an opponent Tulsa is. I remember it was Pittsburgh's coach who best Notre Dame. Oh BYU beat Notre Dame in 2004. It was a reprisal to Brigham Young championship season played in 1984. Twenty years later they played Notre Dame. Tulsa is 1-0 all time vs. Notre Dame 28-27. I think that's noteworthy. Says something I think to the credibility of BYU's championship .
Too long; didn’t read. You really throw too much effort at trying to make BYU look like a powerhouse.
You are a LOON...
How many times have they been in the playoffs or title game in the last 10 years
Not my mission. But to your point that they beat a credible (by any measure) Tulsa team, twice in a title game (review the standard and you will see what I mean) says something to the credibility of their title.
It's actually pretty interesting. If you suspend disbelief. BYU really did something quite remarkable. Not because I say do.
For example. I demonstrated that if I include 1983 and apply the same measure from which I infer a championship (relative proficiency) it becomes pretty clear that BYU was up to the task. Putting it simply (do as to not hide the motive) they were successful in matching the credibility of Florida. That's really not open to interpretation. They were up to the task and I think they were successful in getting there (title game).
A game yet to follow. Another interesting thing as I've stated in nearly every comparison I've done BYU is second.
Not first. Second. Why is that relevant? Again it's fairly simple. To prove they were in fact the national champion necessitates (in a title game) they play a comparable opponent meriting their duplicity.
Am I wrong to suggest by having beaten Oklahoma (in a title pairing) that qualifies BYU? BYU tied Iowa. 1991. In a title game.
In fact it was the very game BYU qualified to in 1984. By tying Iowa assuming you can follow the rationale that admits Iowa as a co-champion again second place (tie for first but I've since learned a tie for first is equivalent to finishing second).
Another prospectus puts them immediately behind Washington. Who were second in tye Pac-Ten. BYU beat Washington, 31-3 to secure second place. Immediately behind Florida who were third in the AP poll. (BYU first, Washington second). What does BYU need to do to distinguish themselves? Win.
And win consistently. Regularly and often.
Which I believe they've rone with reckless abandon.
I get tired if the stupidity if people in your board if I write a paragraph or two I'm told I've written a book. You guys really suck.
Anyway BYU beat Nebraska in 2015. They beat Oklahoma in 2012. They beat Miami, FL in a 1990. And they beat Tulsa in 1996. Who else is left? Bottom line people who want to dismiss BYU are short-chabging themselved. Pound for pound I'd say BYU is ever bit as credible as Notre Dame. Best them in 2004. Cumulatively Notre Dame holds an advantage so what? I'll post the records so people can make their own decisions. It was Todd Graham at Tulsa. 2010.
The answer is still no. #DealWithIt
Be like everyone else, wallow in your in mediocrity. As far as BYU goes they were able to mount a challenge by being a top-contender long before they actually scaled the summit if My Kilmanjaro. They were able to prosper. Now look at 2007. Tulsa if you dare. You will see something pretty interesting. A Tulsa team (long before they beat Notre Dame) giving their best against a NC contender OkIahoma) and look at how they fared against C.Florida? See there ARE teams that aren't getting their recognition.
Remember in 2001 when Nebraska was beaten 63-26 by Colorado, didn’t play in the CCG and still got a chance to play for the Natty?
Man is that program a shitshow now.
Every time you post, you type a novel. Less is more. The only thing Ive learned from your long-winded posts is how badly Notre Dame resides in your head.
Actually that's not completely true. Yes they were beaten in a division championship by Colorado who advanced to play Texas in the Big XII championship. A game Colorado won. The Fiesta Bowl I believe was obligated to the Big XII championship and I believe exercised that option when they took Colorado whom I believe were second behind Nebraska in the pecking order. Following which they (Fiesta Bowl committee) simply passed on Nebraska since at that point it would have been ridiculous (and redundant) and selected Oregon. Who were last in line. (#4 as far as protocol). In other words it was a conundrum. I'm sure the Rose might have preferred Colorado but Colorado was first pick as well as Oregon who were last.
So they had to pick from what was available.Specifically that meant taking Nebraska to allow the other championship there first option. What you are describing was something people hated about the BCS but as per usual it pretty much righted itself. Colorado were embarrassed by Oregon. Nebraska were beaten by Miami, FL and it seems reasonable to conclude (infer) the national champions were properly reflected to the measure to which one applies. In the Rose Bowl I think that selected a champion.
I guess we could argue about protocol. Protocol would have admitted Oregon but also Illinois. Which probably means an Miami,FL vs. Nebraska pairing in the Orange. I believe instead it was Florida and Maryland. I think it worked out pretty well.
Come on. Lighten up a little. The reason I mention Notre Dame is because everyone wants them to be on a pedestal. I'm not sure it really matters where you position them. At the top or somewhere else. Why I bring them into the conversation is less about Notre Dame and more about the challenge if being at the top. Tulsa beat Notre Dame. That was big news at the time. I'm of the opinion that to be a national champion requires a deminstration of precision to that level of competition. I'm not sure how else to infer it.
So Brigham Young beat S. Methodist in the Holiday Bowl 46-45. In 1984 S.Methodist beat Notre Dame 27-20 in the Aloha Bowl.
S. Methodist were 10-2. Losses to Houston (7-5) as well as Texas. Texas lost to Baylor 24-10. BYU beat Baylor 47-13. And Houston lost to Boston College in the Cotton Bowl. Brigham Young beat Boston College in the next year's kickoff classic. 28-14.
But what really piques my curiosity is Tulsa. A very unheraded team but a very good team. Beat Indiana St. (24-17). Indiana St beat Louisville (2-9) who beat Houston.
Honestly it should be readily apoarent to anyone how good Tulsa were that season. BYU defeated Tulsa 35-15. I think that's reflective of the championship that BYU carried through 1984. Or at least reflective of the nature of it.
Our 1991 Orange Bowl (1990 season), we weren't really playing for the NC. We had 2 losses and were ranked 5th going into the game. If we had won, it's more likely Georgia Tech would've had a unanimous title in both polls. It was a great game, though. We were robbed by the clipping call on Rocket Ismail's punt return TD at the end.
BYU is a festering boil on the ass of college football.
As close as they will ever get
It is? No it isn't. It's interesting if you take an open-minded position. I think you might discover how much they contribute to it.
2007 was an interesting year. I thought BYU were pretty respectable that year. They were beaten by Tulsa. I think that's reflective of the general quality Tulsa shares. Tulsa were beaten convincingly by Oklahoma. Who were 11-3 on the year but still managed to beat Missouri a very good team. Who BYU best in 1983 in route to claiming a Holiday Bowl. Missouri was a quality program. I think we can all agree on that particular note. Then and now. So if BYU wasn't legitimate how did they manage to win?
Sane argument applies to any other team you want you bring into the fray. I think the facts are there to learn from. BYU beat a good Tulsa team. Best them 35-15. That's demonstrative of something. Beat Baylor 47-13. That's a reflection of a teams ability to rise to the occasion and prevail. I'm nit sure what else is required? Maybe someone rise can explanation n to me why it wouldn't include Brigham Young if in the sane circumstance it would C.Florida. Tit for tat.
That's the point I'm making. Two peas in a pod. I see a lot of similarity. Between them.
I still consider BYU the superior program.
But there are similarities that make either I think a legitimate champion in either circumstance. I think that's fairly self-evident. I doubt anyone can refute it. If I'm wrong I'm not sure where, why, or how.
Don’t you have to be a fan of a blue blood to post ITT?
Notre Dame will never have enough athletes to compete with the other big time programs to win a CFP.
Well I can't really chine in on the motuvatiinak aspect whether or not it was sufficient you put your team in a title gane but it was sufficient to claim a Belt NC. You really can't dispute that fact. You can claim malaise or poor officiating or whatever else but a Belt (CFP) hung in the balance. FACT.
Which probably is why Colorado is still considered a legitimate national champion. It doesn't matter if you like it. That's irrelevant. Similarly in 1986 it seems pretty obvious to me that Brigham Young (as a result if having beaten Tulsa) . Were a NC.
People can hate it, throw stones at it it or whatever else but they claimed a NC. Nitwitgstanf ng that fact they were a NC.
Which is why 1984 really isn't in dispute. If UF can claim full proprietary over 1996 then I think it's fair to assign full proprietary to BTU for doing essentially the same thing.
I think they are always going to be a very formidable force. I'm just disappointed they weren't admitted to the ACC championship. People understand why don't they? Pittsburgh went. I think that was only because Virginia didn't qualify but you want your best two teams in that championship.
I guess it all worked out o.k. But that was mostly good fortune and I'm not suggesting the Cotton Bowl was a come-on. A parade or something like that. Maybe it was intentional. But I'd rather have seen Notre Dame in the ACC championship game. They qualified. I don't think it would have posed a problem to have given them priority status.
What that might have done to the seedings?seems reasonable that Georgia might have been admitted. In place of Notre Dame. It all came out in the wash. But I think it's rudiculous to pretend Notre Dame isn't affiliated with the championship. It's stupid. I think something should be done about it. But I guess everything came out o.k.
Personally, I don’t think Colorado deserved the AP title that year. They had 5 downs vs Missouri, and a loss and a tie. Georgia Tech should’ve won the unanimous title.
I wasn't referencing the AP championship. But to your point relative to a valid title claim I believe it was @Deathroll who suggested any bona-fide claim include a media credential. I'm down with that. Colorado best Missouri. I know people are going to try to claim otherwise. Colorado won. They weren't given five downs. They (Charles Johnson) spiked the football on first down ONLY because the official ruled the player was still in bounds which he wouldn't have been if he hadn't slipped. And he actually slipped out if bounds. So that's one down they wasted. I believe it was second down Bieniemy nearly cleared it but was stopped short. Necessitated another spike (on third down but the marker said second). Which in reality (as far as progression) it WAS. Which means Bieniemy was stopped short on third down and C J. scored on fourth.
That's if we give Colorado credit for not taking a time-out which they did. Yeah there were five downs. But only 3/5 were utilized to advance the football. I think Colorado beat Missouri. Personally Colorado beat them. The championship wasn't about Georgia Tech but ended up including them anyway since there were people who thought they were superior. But the fact remains Colorado's title claim is legitimate. And it includes a media credential besides. The Associated Press voted Colorado #1. Colorado best Notre Dame to earn a share of the national championship a full measure. With a media credential. They deserve it.
Again with the belt lol there is no belt. The poster above is correct , bless your heart.
No there is. Ohio St were in fact the winner (recipient) of the Belt championship. Last year. There are variations to it admittedly. But assuredly there is a Belt title directed to the CFP champion as presently constituted. Which means Clemson was a Belt champion. As we're (preceding year) Alabama, also Pittsburgh (as well as Ohio St., USF) which eventually (as a result if having beaten Memphis, who beat Tulabe who beat S.Methidist, who best Houston who best USF who were 7-0. Claimed a Belt. It should be united but they keep skiingmaming mistakes particular to how it's distributed). Kentucky has a measure of it. As do Clemson (CFP) as do Ohio St. As does Louisiana St (beat C Florida in the Fiesta Bowl). Yes I'm fact there IS a Belt.
It's the primary basis from which CFP falls.