College Football 2016 Thread

Post by **brian** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:30 pm

Eh, I agree with Fournette and McCaffrey.

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:31 pm

A_B wrote:OK. I know the reasoning, but it's bullshit. McCaffery and Fournette both to skip bowl games.

It does suck, but as Deadspin notes about ten times, coaches do this sort of thing regularly.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:33 pm

I think it's shitting on their teammates.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:34 pm

sancarlos wrote:
A_B wrote:OK. I know the reasoning, but it's bullshit. McCaffery and Fournette both to skip bowl games.
It does suck, but as Deadspin notes about ten times, coaches do this sort of thing regularly.

Oh yeah. I like it when coaches do it.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:56 pm

McCaffery said he's teammates supported him. I'm sure we'll hear if that's not really the case, but fuck that anyway. His entire future could be tanked for an absolute nothing game.

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:58 pm

It would be one thing if this basketball and these guys were all "thanks, no thanks" to play in tournament. Or if they were declining to play in a game with actual meaning.

These are really close to Pro Bowl in terms of "I will never forgive myself if I suffer a career threatening injury playing in this game" level of meaningless.

Post by **brian** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:01 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote:It would be one thing if this basketball and these guys were all "thanks, no thanks" to play in tournament. Or if they were declining to play in a game with actual meaning.

These are really close to Pro Bowl in terms of "I will never forgive myself if I suffer a career threatening injury playing in this game" level of meaningless.

Not apples to apples, but if Cooper Rush decided to sit out today's game to ensure not risking injury I'd totally be OK with it. (As it stands he's probably a late round pick and can improve his stock by playing well today and in Senior Bowl).

I also think it's most likely going to be limited to a RB-only (mostly) phenomenon in future seasons for reasons which should make 100 percent sense.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:02 pm

If they're meaningless, why didn't these two sure fire NFL picks even as of a year ago, boycott the bowl games last year when neither was playing for more than pride?

Post by **brian** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:06 pm

A_B wrote:If they're meaningless, why didn't these two sure fire NFL picks even as of a year ago, boycott the bowl games last year when neither was playing for more than pride?

...because they had another year of eligibility?

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:08 pm

This is an odd hill to die on, but whatever.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:11 pm

But those games were meaningless. Neither was in the playoff. Both would have been taken in the draft if they had been eligible. So why not go full extreme and take the whole year off to protect from injury?

Hey, maybe it forces the NCAA to change something, as this is a couple of players exercising the little bit of leverage they have. I get the reasons. I said that when I first posted it. I just think if you're part of a team, you're part of the team. I didn't like it when Ben Simmons announced he was going to sit out the NIT last year, forcing his WHOLE FUCKING TEAM to miss out on more basketball, though that is more extreme than this.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:12 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote:This is an odd hill to die on, but whatever.

You people, sometimes, man. I'm not fucking dying on a hill. I have an opinion. You guys don't agree. We used to do this all the time!

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:18 pm

A_B wrote:If they're meaningless, why didn't these two sure fire NFL picks even as of a year ago, boycott the bowl games last year when neither was playing for more than pride?

Why not just skip college altogether and go pro?!?

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:21 pm

mister d wrote:
A_B wrote:If they're meaningless, why didn't these two sure fire NFL picks even as of a year ago, boycott the bowl games last year when neither was playing for more than pride?
Why not just skip college altogether and go pro?!?

Well, the problem there is that with football there's probably extremely little to no sure-fire prospects out of high school in the football realm. Lot different from basketball in that sense.

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:24 pm

A_B wrote:
Nonlinear FC wrote:This is an odd hill to die on, but whatever.
You people, sometimes, man. I'm not fucking dying on a hill. I have an opinion. You guys don't agree. We used to do this all the time!

Yeah, you're right, that was over the top.

I will catch up and politely rebuke you in a subsequent post.

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:30 pm

A_B wrote:But those games were meaningless. Neither was in the playoff. Both would have been taken in the draft if they had been eligible. So why not go full extreme and take the whole year off to protect from injury?

Hey, maybe it forces the NCAA to change something, as this is a couple of players exercising the little bit of leverage they have. I get the reasons. I said that when I first posted it. I just think if you're part of a team, you're part of the team. I didn't like it when Ben Simmons announced he was going to sit out the NIT last year, forcing his WHOLE FUCKING TEAM to miss out on more basketball, though that is more extreme than this.

Ah, so this is all just residual bitterness over a Kentucky-related thing? Duly noted. (This is a joke.)

I will say this: When I was younger and less "screw the man, man" I would agree with you about the team stuff. The more they've fucked with the bowls, and the more the rich get richer (ADs, coaches, bowl committees, TV execs, etc.) while players are scrounging around for pizza money...

I will always side with players protecting their financial future, within certain reasonable parameters. So, yeah, not cool to take a scholarship and sit out a year (frankly, highly doubt this is even feasible, but whatever). Also not cool to do what Simmons did, given the effect on the team.

In these instances, especially with the nature of football and injuries, I just can't blame them.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:31 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote:
A_B wrote:
Nonlinear FC wrote:This is an odd hill to die on, but whatever.
You people, sometimes, man. I'm not fucking dying on a hill. I have an opinion. You guys don't agree. We used to do this all the time!

Yeah, you're right, that was over the top.

I will catch up and politely rebuke you in a subsequent post.

Oh fuck you.

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:32 pm

mister d wrote:
A_B wrote:If they're meaningless, why didn't these two sure fire NFL picks even as of a year ago, boycott the bowl games last year when neither was playing for more than pride?
Why not just skip college altogether and go pro?!?

Pretty sure because it's not allowed. Almost positive you can't enter the NFL until you are 2 (maybe 3?) years out of high school.

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:32 pm

A_B wrote:
Nonlinear FC wrote:
A_B wrote:
Nonlinear FC wrote:This is an odd hill to die on, but whatever.
You people, sometimes, man. I'm not fucking dying on a hill. I have an opinion. You guys don't agree. We used to do this all the time!

Yeah, you're right, that was over the top.

I will catch up and politely rebuke you in a subsequent post.
Oh fuck you.

:D

I am a man of my word!

Post by **brian** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:38 pm

Colleges would never stand for it, but players should be allowed to go pro after high school.

If I could wave a magic wand, I'd like universities opt-in to a semipro format for universities for football and basketball that essentially allows athletes to represent a university without having to go to class (they could if they wanted to) and receive a fairly generous stipend (let's say $50K-$100K a year or so?) to allow them to "apprentice" and play for up to four years before declaring for the draft. They could go pro after one year or two, etc. if they felt they were ready.

Lots of things would need to be worked out but it's probably time to remove the ridiculous sham of amateurism where football and basketball are concerned. Rest of the college sports, esp. baseball and ice hockey where you can be drafted and have pro rights and still play college I'd leave the same.

ETA: In case it's not obvious this would likely be a level of football above and beyond what the NCAA would be monitoring. Schools uncomfortable with the idea could stay in the current structure. I think this would resolve the current issues of resource disparity in FBS. Let the Power Five essentially become semi-pro and the rest of college football can mold back into essentially FCS. Those schools would still produce NFL talent and there would still be interest in their games and TV rights, but you don't have the sham of amateurism at the top level.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:45 pm

I like that idea a lot.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 4:54 pm

So both these high profile guys are nursing some injury, so sure, that makes it somewhat easier to explain away. But it's so easy to say someone is nursing an injury as an explanation that I am skeptical.

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:00 pm

Why isn't anyone talking about the entire team that decided not to show up today?

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:03 pm

#AACTion

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:20 pm

Ryan wrote:Why isn't anyone talking about the entire team that decided not to show up today?

Because I hadn't heard about it.

Brontoburglar · Post by **Brontoburglar** » Wed Dec 21, 2016 8:50 am

Nonlinear FC wrote:
Ryan wrote:Why isn't anyone talking about the entire team that decided not to show up today?

Because I hadn't heard about it.

fire up

Nonlinear FC · Post by **Nonlinear FC** » Wed Dec 21, 2016 9:42 am

I think if you search "I'm an idiot" on this site, I will come up about a dozen times.

I actually took his post literally, I guess given the Minnesota boycott context? Thought something scandalous was going on, rather than just a .500 MAC team getting walked off the field by a team with one of the worst mascots in all of sports.

Brontoburglar · Post by **Brontoburglar** » Wed Dec 21, 2016 9:51 am

see, I read your post as a "well it didn't exist because Brian didn't talk about it for obvious reasons" one, so you totally could have avoided the mea culpa and run with it!

Post by **brian** » Wed Dec 21, 2016 12:58 pm

Welp, Johnnie's got a new favorite college football team.

ETA: False alarm.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 12:35 pm

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 12:40 pm

Yeah, the pride you feel when your alma mater plays in a really prestigious bowl game!

Post by **brian** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 12:47 pm

Kinda funny Rush posted that because I was meaning the note the weird escalation in equipment trucks I've noticed in just the last couple of years. Used to be no big deal to essentially rent a U-Haul, but now even the MAC schools are trying to one-up each other.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 1:55 pm

sancarlos wrote:Yeah, the pride you feel when your alma mater plays in a really prestigious bowl game!

UNM played in the New Mexico bowl....again. Sigh.

And Idaho would fly most games so no need for the big truck. May change with the move back to the Big Sky I'd suspect.

Post by **brian** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 2:12 pm

Rush2112 wrote:
sancarlos wrote:Yeah, the pride you feel when your alma mater plays in a really prestigious bowl game!

UNM played in the New Mexico bowl....again. Sigh.

And Idaho would fly most games so no need for the big truck. May change with the move back to the Big Sky I'd suspect.

Most schools drive their equipment to all road games (save, Hawaii or overseas, obvs). Still way cheaper than shipping it.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 3:35 pm

brian wrote:
Most schools drive their equipment to all road games (save, Hawaii or overseas, obvs). Still way cheaper than shipping it.

Every school in their current conference is in the Southeast (aside from NMSU) so makes sense to fly rather than drive. One of the reasons Idaho and NMSU weren't renewed past 2017 is because of travel costs..evidently, Idaho helps defer some costs for teams to travel to Moscow.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 3:40 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote:
mister d wrote:Why not just skip college altogether and go pro?!?
Pretty sure because it's not allowed. Almost positive you can't enter the NFL until you are 2 (maybe 3?) years out of high school.

(That was the joke. There are already restrictions in place for earning money in a given field, so imposing some pseudo-morals on top seems bullshit.)

Post by **brian** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 3:41 pm

The teams fly. The massive amount of equipment that a traveling squad of 75 players and coaches require is exceptionally cheaper to ship via ground regardless of the size of the program or the distance travelled even cross-country. Example from Boise State.

Even Power Five schools with bigger budgets and similarly far-flung travel ship all of their gear/equipment via truck.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 4:12 pm

brian wrote:The teams fly. The massive amount of equipment that a traveling squad of 75 players and coaches require is exceptionally cheaper to ship via ground regardless of the size of the program or the distance travelled even cross-country. Example from Boise State.

Even Power Five schools with bigger budgets and similarly far-flung travel ship all of their gear/equipment via truck.

Weird.

DSafetyGuy · Post by **DSafetyGuy** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 4:13 pm

brian wrote:The teams fly. The massive amount of equipment that a traveling squad of 75 players and coaches require is exceptionally cheaper to ship via ground regardless of the size of the program or the distance travelled even cross-country. Example from Boise State.

Even Power Five schools with bigger budgets and similarly far-flung travel ship all of their gear/equipment via truck.

When I still lived in LA, I once saw the Wisconsin football equipment truck a few days before they played in the Rose Bowl.

Post by **brian** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 4:24 pm

Maybe that's why Idaho was too dumb to stay FBS.

(FWIW, I don't doubt for a second that they ship some stuff with the team charters. Jerseys, other completely essential irreplaceable gear, etc. You'll notice that even in your supposedly damning image that the trailer is still connected to a motor vehicle which itself could be transporting the vast majority of stuff much more cheaply than the air cargo rate would be.)