Originally Posted by Prison Bitch:
Reminds me of every Alabama football game.
I’m excited to see how the CFP shakes out this year. How will Bama and Clemson and Oklahoma and Ohio State be slotted??? Maybe OU is the 2 and Clemson is the 4???? That would spice things up.
Originally Posted by Pablo:
I’m excited to see how the CFP shakes out this year. How will Bama and Clemson and Oklahoma and Ohio State be slotted??? Maybe OU is the 2 and Clemson is the 4???? That would spice things up.
So much intrigue.
It’s quite hilarious hearing a college football fan whine about “competitiveness” [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rams Fan:
Since 1991, 14 different schools have had at least a share of the championship
in football.
That number is 16 for basketball.
What’s the big difference?
The difference is that in a given season, there are about 6-8 football teams that have a realistic chance to win a championship, including 3 or 4 of the same teams every fucking year. Most non-conference games are intentionally non-competitive. [Reply]
Originally Posted by AdolfOliverBush:
The difference is that in a given season, there are about 6-8 football teams that have a realistic chance to win a championship, including 3 or 4 of the same teams every ****ing year. Most non-conference games are intentionally non-competitive.
Isn’t that usually the case with basketball? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rams Fan:
Since 1991, 14 different schools have had at least a share of the championship
in football.
That number is 16 for basketball.
What’s the big difference?
Nice try. CFA has split titles which makes your comparison apples to oranges.
It misses the point anyway. Small schools can win in hoops but can’t in football. Tiny schools like Bay, Zags, Butler, Villanova et al can play for that title. No Iowa can upset Kansas, Mercer Duke, Weber State UNC, Oral Bob Ohio State, on and on. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Prison Bitch:
Nice try. CFA has split titles which makes your comparison apples to oranges.
It misses the point anyway. Small schools can win in hoops but can’t in football. Tiny schools like Bay, Zags, Butler, Villanova et al can play for that title. No Iowa can upset Kansas, Mercer Duke, Weber State UNC, Oral Bob Ohio State, on and on.
Baylor is a P5 school so exclude them from Zaga, Butler, Villanova.
Yes, they can compete for the title-but haven’t won it aside from Villanova.
If your argument is smaller schools have a higher chance to compete for a title in basketball vs football, sure, I’ll agree. But if you’re saying there’s significantly more parity than football with regards to winning a title, I disagree completely.
The Blue Bloods still dominate basketball for the most part and aside from the odd rise of UConn have done that for the better part of 60+ years. [Reply]
