2024 non-GT games thread

[stinger78]

These were all teams that were supposed to prove how deep and strong the SEC is. Really embarrassing. Shockingly embarrassing. Embarrassing in a mortifyingly embarrassing kind of way.

Just. Super. Embarrassing.

 

[GTJackets]

Have you met an $EC fan? Just will say that they didn't want to be there since it wasn't the playoffs and therefore it don't count.

I posted a few weeks ago about my conversations at church with SC fans in the aftermath of the GT-uga and USC-Clem games. After the first round of the playoffs, I was close enough to overhear another conversation while I was busy welcoming a first-time family. Same SC fans. Apparently the blowouts in the first round just proved that there is a problem with the system. Weaker teams that shouldn't have made it in. But of course when TN came up, "well, TN isn't that bad. Their starting RB was out most of the game." So, it seems the only difference between the SEC teams and everybody else is the quality of their starting RBs. If they get hurt, they are reduced to the lowly status of the rest of the NCAA.

It really is amazing how the narratives create themselves. I would love to hear what they have to say this Sunday but I won't be there. They can't tell me they didn't want it after what Bielema did to them today. Maybe taking the lead after that whole incident was enough and they didn't need to actually finish the game.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Guess Boise State is proving that all those years they had winning records they were actually good.

Penn State could come back and blow them out but Boise has already proven we need teams like this in the playoffs to test the “stronger” teams.

 

[FredJacket]

Nobody is objective. Not me. Not y'all. Not the SEC fan. Not the B1G fan. Not the ACC fan. Not the media pundits. Not the AP voters. Not the CFB playoff committee.

Some more objective than others. ...but for "anyone" to pretend or claim to be objective is crazy. It's impossible for anyone "into" college football to eliminate their biases (plural).

THWG!!

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Boise State had a TD called back for a personal foul and I swear I can’t see it. Am I just getting persnickety in my old age or does it seem like refs are deciding more and more games? I’ve watched football for decades and it felt like you could go for years without seeing bad calls that decided games and now it feels like you have bunches of these every season.

Anyway, this call has changed the whole momentum of the game.

 

[FredJacket]

Boise State had a TD called back for a personal foul and I swear I can’t see it. Am I just getting persnickety in my old age or does it seem like refs are deciding more and more games? I’ve watched football for decades and it felt like you could go for years without seeing bad calls that decided games and now it feels like you have bunches of these every season.

Anyway, this call has changed the whole momentum of the game.

Just a thought... & not sure how far back you're "old age" goes. But we take for granted how much TV [replay] coverage has advanced. The number of cameras & personnel bringing the game to us means we get multiple views of every questionable play in slow-mo (if needed). Back in the day... we just "accepted" so many calls & non-calls (especially) or couldn't see calls to be able to 2nd guess. I think that plus how fast the game is now... means officiating "looks" much worse than it was years ago... probably unfairly.

 

[gtee91]

Boise State had a TD called back for a personal foul and I swear I can’t see it. Am I just getting persnickety in my old age or does it seem like refs are deciding more and more games? I’ve watched football for decades and it felt like you could go for years without seeing bad calls that decided games and now it feels like you have bunches of these every season.

Anyway, this call has changed the whole momentum of the game.

Agree...I saw nothing on the replay

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Just a thought... & not sure how far back you're "old age" goes. But we take for granted how much TV [replay] coverage has advanced. The number of cameras & personnel bringing the game to us means we get multiple views of every questionable play in slow-mo (if needed). Back in the day... we just "accepted" so many calls & non-calls (especially) or couldn't see calls to be able to 2nd guess. I think that plus how fast the game is now... means officiating "looks" much worse than it was years ago... probably unfairly.

Could be. I don’t know. It’s not like critical calls haven’t been replayed for several years now. Just can’t remember this many questionable calls even five years ago. And it just seems like the number of these calls has increased steadily every year for the last decade.

 

[awbuzz]

ACC got 2nd bowl win today!
35-34

 

[stinger78]

Nobody is objective. Not me. Not y'all. Not the SEC fan. Not the B1G fan. Not the ACC fan. Not the media pundits. Not the AP voters. Not the CFB playoff committee.

Some more objective than others. ...but for "anyone" to pretend or claim to be objective is crazy. It's impossible for anyone "into" college football to eliminate their biases (plural).

THWG!!

 

[stinger78]

Just a thought... & not sure how far back you're "old age" goes. But we take for granted how much TV [replay] coverage has advanced. The number of cameras & personnel bringing the game to us means we get multiple views of every questionable play in slow-mo (if needed). Back in the day... we just "accepted" so many calls & non-calls (especially) or couldn't see calls to be able to 2nd guess. I think that plus how fast the game is now... means officiating "looks" much worse than it was years ago... probably unfairly.

So, you’re upshot is we’re really not seeing what we’re seeing?

 

[FredJacket]

So, you’re upshot is we’re really not seeing what we’re seeing?

No. Just offering some perspective that may be meaningful... but maybe not.

 

[stinger78]

No. Just offering some perspective that may be meaningful... but maybe not.

Maybe you’re not objective?

 

[FredJacket]

Maybe you’re not objective?

I'm not. I'm convinced Ga Tech is better than they [objectively] are.

 

[JacketOff]

Just a thought... & not sure how far back your "old age" goes. But we take for granted how much TV [replay] coverage has advanced. The number of cameras & personnel bringing the game to us means we get multiple views of every questionable play in slow-mo (if needed). Back in the day... we just "accepted" so many calls & non-calls (especially) or couldn't see calls to be able to 2nd guess. I think that plus how fast the game is now... means officiating "looks" much worse than it was years ago... probably unfairly.

Officiating is without a doubt so much better now than it ever has been in the past, across all sports. People who say otherwise are just using confirmation bias anytime they see a bad call or one they disagree with.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Officiating is without a doubt so much better now than it ever has been in the past, across all sports. People who say otherwise are just using confirmation bias anytime they see a bad call or one they disagree with.

And your “objective” data for this is….?

 

[stinger78]

And your “objective” data for this is….?

Fred

 

[stinger 1957]

Boise State had a TD called back for a personal foul and I swear I can’t see it. Am I just getting persnickety in my old age or does it seem like refs are deciding more and more games? I’ve watched football for decades and it felt like you could go for years without seeing bad calls that decided games and now it feels like you have bunches of these every season.

Anyway, this call has changed the whole momentum of the game.

End of season and playoff, money, survival of conferences, who ends up with the TV in future, all causing what you are seeing IMO. Truly believe the word came down from SEC office that refs needed to be sure UGA made the playoffs.

 

[FredJacket]

End of season and playoff, money, survival of conferences, who ends up with the TV in future, all causing what you are seeing IMO. Truly believe the word came down from SEC office that refs needed to be sure UGA made the playoffs.

Anecdotal.... I haven't scrubbed all the possible connections & obviously potential conflicts of interest. But UVAs AD (Carla Williams) is on the committee. She's a former UGA athlete & later part of their athletic department. I'm pretty sure the rules do NOT require her to recuse herself from discussing UGA re rankings for the committee. Just UVA and/or if she has family/kids as part of other teams discussed.

This was her 1st (of 3) year on the committee.

I'm not suggesting UGA shouldn't have made the field this year... but these committee members have biases. Perhaps they all cancel out... but I doubt that. I also don't have a better system in mind to select a field. I can think of many "different" systems... better is more difficult.

 

[stinger78]

Anecdotal.... I haven't scrubbed all the possible connections & obviously potential conflicts of interest. But UVAs AD (Carla Williams) is on the committee. She's a former UGA athlete & later part of their athletic department. I'm pretty sure the rules do NOT require her to recuse herself from discussing UGA re rankings for the committee. Just UVA and/or if she has family/kids as part of other teams discussed.

This was her 1st (of 3) year on the committee.

I'm not suggesting UGA shouldn't have made the field this year... but these committee members have biases. Perhaps they all cancel out... but I doubt that. I also don't have a better system in mind to select a field. I can think of many "different" systems... better is more difficult.

There’s an easy system. All the “committee” would have to do would be the seeding.