Recent Comments
For a while it looked like the Big12 would struggle to survive and now it looks like the PAC12 will struggle to survive.
Eh, it's Napier's first season as Florida's HC, his first P5 HC job and his first SEC HC job. He's also going head to head against a major in-state rival who is coached by a more experienced HC. And Napier hasn't actually coached a single real game against a real opponent. Any determinations being made about Napier's recruiting is very premature.
Name one actually elite offense CJH oversaw. His offenses have ranked high in certain stats, but that's because he excels at running up scores and yards against hapless defenses. Actual elite offenses are capable of beating both great and elite defenses, something Heupel's offenses haven't done.
gwhite your repeated reliance on referencing "shootouts" and you're opinion as to whether UT and UGA are likely to win them absurd. Teams don't win championships by planning on consistently getting into and winning "shootouts". Championships are won with nothing less than great defenses. Decent or good defenses won't cut it and you seem to be unaware of that.
BYU and Ga State might have been ranked higher in a few offensive statistics, but (1) who did they play? and (2) 2019 was without a doubt UGA's worst offense under Smart. We had a first year OC who was not retained the next year. Also, Ga State that year was not anywhere near a "good" team by SEC standards. Just because they surpassed UGA in some offense statistic, does not mean they were a good team. Tennessee lost to a mediocre G5 program, don't try to make it anything else by relying on meaningless offense stats. Tennessee absolutely does lose to bad teams, and they do so often. And that hail mary was not the "darkest days", you delusional homer. Also, the next year UGA profoundly and historically stomped UT at home and held them scoreless with true freshman QB playing. UT might put up good stats under CHJ, but they will not "own" UGA. You've been saying that for years on SDS and you're seemingly not even aware of the sheer quantity of horribly wrong predictions about UT and UGA you've made.
Gwhite, you're focus on Heupel's scoring average while OC, and not the quantity of games won by Missouri, speaks volumes about your misguided analysis of Heupel. It absolutely doesn't matter how many points Missouri scored. What matters is that Missouri won nothing of consequence while Heupel was OC. UCF too for that matter. Sure, Heupel's UT squad moved the ball well on UGA between the 20's, but managed only a single field goal outside of the first and last possessions of the game. How on earth can you look at that result and walk away with any positive conclusions? Moving the ball well between the 20's and failing to score is not the result of a magically innovative offense. Also, genius, UGA had one of the most explosive offenses in the country last year. Seriously, look it up. The explosiveness just relies on different tactics than the narrow definition you are employing. UGA's offense is most definitely not ancient and not "non-dynamic". You really do have no clue what you're talking about, sorry to be the one to break that to you. Let me clue you in a little, the longer Heupel runs his offense, the better defenses will be at scheming against it, especially those with talented defenses and strong schemes. CJH's first season is likely a microcosm of his tenure at UT -- run up the score against hapless defenses and fail to beat good defenses. Fans like you apparently lap that up and beat your chest over meaningless offensive statistics padded by the bad teams. Hey, quick question, what's Heupel's overall record, as a HC and OC, against ranked teams and top-20 defenses? Hint: it's very bad.
ghwite, your 4D chess has your brain drawing conclusions rooted in fantasy. Lanning does have intimate knowledge of UGA, but he likely won't have the talent or culture in place to take proper advantage of it during (1) his first game as a HC, which is also (2) the season opener and first game in a new system for those kids.
Oregon was not pass heavy under Cristobal and even if they want to return to being pass heavy, their first game with a new HC is likely not going to see them air it out effectively. You seem to be relying on your memory of Oregon from the Chip Kelly years. Which was a long time ago and is generally in-line with your CFB knowledge.
Tennessee scored on the very first and very last possession against UGA, with only a single field goal in between. Tennessee's offense isn't the first to excel between the 20 yard lines and become completely impotent in the red zone. That's a hallmark of a weak, gimmicky offense. And gwhite, you really want to bring up upsets?
UGA has struggled against Bama, yes. But, with a few exceptions, most of the games in the time period you referenced (were you notably cutoff '07 to manipulate your numbers) were either in the SECCG or the NC. That's a tad bit different than UT's games against Bama. Also, referring to Bama's offense in the SECCG last season as "Heupel ball" might be one of the most categorically inaccurate things you've ever said. Heupel's offense isn't cutting edge or innovative. He ran is at Missouri for years with mediocre success. He ran it for a few years at UCF with ultimately decreasing success. Heupel did not invent fast offenses that overly rely on imprudent 50/50 balls. But, being that you are generally highly miseducated on CFB, I can understand why every time you see a long pass you think you're witnessing "Heupel ball".
"I don’t think any D will keep us under 35 points per any game this season" And then you proceeded to accuse AFan of being delusional. Oh, the irony. And this gem: "...the D only has to be competent. Does not have to be very good in order for the offense to win shootouts." That approach will result in 0 championships or SEC titles. To win anything of merit, much more than a "competent D" is needed.
Whenever big, anonymous money and its attendant lawyers enter the scene, very little good is likely to come out of it. I hope some sort of rules and regulations help give structure and a level playing field to NIL or else collectives, boosters, and attorneys are going to ruin this sport.
I agree that QBs coming out of high school have a tendency to be overrated. Physical size and an uneven level of competition tends to make some high school QBs seem to be better than they actually are or appear to have potential they don't really have.
At best, a bump in recruiting this year but that's it. Absolutely won't send Texas into another "stratosphere".
From a look at the list of 4 and 5-star QBs that Texas has had since 2010, I don't think Texas' issues have involved lack of QB talent. They've failed to develop talent (at QB and everywhere) and have a poor culture. I wonder how Arch is going to fix any of that.
Interesting move. I wish him luck and hope he's able to develop and have a shot at the NFL.
Also, happy father's day to all the dads of SDS
I think the running game will actually be better because of a (hopefully) better OL, improved passing game to keep defenses honest, and one of the best TE rooms in the country. The offense in general this year could very well be better than last year.
Ryan Day, in my opinion, is way more likely to win the NC before the other coaches. Many of them are on the first steps of a culture/program rebuild and others haven't exactly shown yet they're capable. But, anything is possible.
I've ragged on Notre Dame plenty, but that was always from the perspective of media hype and them continually faceplanting on large stages. However, I believe CBK is a good coach and I think he'll have LSU ready to compete sooner rather than later. It was noteworthy that a number of coaches seemed to not be interested in joining his staff, but I still think he'll do a good job with the talent LSU has access to and putting them in positions to succeed. I always chalked up ND's faceplanting to them being overrated by the powers that be and stacked up against clearly superior opponents, more than an overall failing on CBK's part.
I mean, all teams schedule some amount of cupcakes, so I don't understand how this is objectionable to some. It's not realistic, or in a program's best interest, to exclusively schedule powerhouses or major programs. And splitting hairs of the conference or division a cupcake belongs to doesn't really mean much. This story is a non-story.
Because they lost to two unranked teams along with the four ranked teams they also lost to.
Gwhite, statistical rankings alone don't determine if X's offenses is better than Y's. Primarily that's because the statics you champion are not weighted to account for quality of opponent. Tennessee's offense last year performed very well against weaker opponents and was largely stymied by better opponents. Tennessee went 1-4 against ranked opponents last year and in those games scored an average of 20 points. I'm not saying Tennessee was bad last year, but those numbers absolutely destroy all the hype and sunshine you've been repeatedly pumping about Tennessee's offense.
"I can’t imagine that there could be a setting that we could build a better roster than we can here." That's loser speak. Riley can't imagine improving upon the rosters he assembled at OU, so he left for USC with its undefined "different" energy?
Exactly. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but there's a big difference between a low scoring game due to inept offenses versus a low scoring game due to outstanding defenses. And I'm easily just as entertained by great defenses squaring off as I am for offenses.
Haynes is unbelievably biased to the point where he can't even fathom the legitimacy of the other side of the NIL issue. Which is extremely typical given the current state of political and social affairs.
Money alone won't change program fortunes. Programs are still going to have to develop and coach. And an increase in net talent will allow you to more easily bully many programs, but it takes more than talent alone to win big. Player development and the quality of the coaching staff will combine to neutralize in part the flash and glitz of NIL. The kids who have a true shot at the NFL
Collectives will still have to rely on donations and "boosters", so that's where the concept of ROI comes in. People giving to the collectives expect a return in the sense of program fortunes. If fortunes aren't changed by much, the collectives could very well see less coming in.
It takes far more than a single top recruit to come remotely close to changing the fortunes of a program. And if Missouri doesn't show itself capable of taking substantive steps forward with the new recruiting wins NIL allows, boosters could very well grow exhausted at throwing big money towards high school kids.
There's only ever been a few dominate programs at any one time in CFB, and those programs at the top have never stayed there long. Alabama under Saban is an historical outlier. The basis for your comment is grounded in recency bias. The parity you describe has never really ever existed. And NIL, reigned in or not, will not bring that kind of parity about. It will just cause a quicker-than-usual reshuffling of programs at the top.