Right now I am seeing Oklahoma -7.5. I can buy a half point so I might take OU -7. I am really high on them.

In a lesser game, the MAC Championship Game, I like Akron getting more than three TDs. I know Toledo is good for that conference and they have a good program but that seems like a lot. On the other hand, it could be a sucker bet as in, are they begging you to take the points???

On a side note, I kind of feel bad for those kids. Even as a metro Detroiter, how would you like your reward for a successful season be a trip to downtown Detroit?

😮

So apparently Brohm turned down the Tennessee job in hopes of getting the Louisville gig, which Bobby Petrino has (again). So from what I read, if Brohm goes to Louisville, Petrino could take the Tennessee job.

College football coaching is like a soap opera.

Totally get your opinion on OU, it is probably the smarter bet.

I too like Akron. 3 games ago they suspended their Sr QB Thomas Woodson. Woodson had struggled this year with new receivers and Zips #1 RB got hurt in Sept as well. Woodson is not a runner. So the O was really underwhelming. When Woodson got suspended they inserted Fr Kato Nelson and while raw and erratic, he immediately brought playmaking ability to the team that they had not had. So from that standpoint this Toledo-Akron rematch has a chance to much more competitive than the earlier 48-21 Toledo win.

And just when you didn't think it could get any more bizarre. The University of Tennessee has FIRED Athletic Director John Currie.

Gundy turned down $42 million over 6 years.

Don't think that all Vol fans want that **** Kiffin back. I certainly don't. And, I don't think that he is being considered by those who are controlling the process. (The Haslams and other powerful boosters... Peyton...)

It's an embarrassing situation for those of us who love the University and the State of Tennessee.

Now they are after Brohm from Purdue. I really don't know why anyone would walk into the mess that appears to be Tennessee currently.

I feel bad what the good people of Tennessee are going through. On the other hand, those people who threw temper tantrums Sunday I have no compassion for.

I think Brohm has a very very high ceiling. That would've been a strong hire. The big concern would've been that he would leave anywhere for Louisville.

But did he back out over negotiations or it becoming public or was it not as far along as some of those press people said? At this point, in just about any area, how can you believe any speculation even the most trusted sources report on anything? So much has been proving to be BS more and more.

Doren? Butch Jones staying might've been better.

I forget who the latest name is.

Tee Martin will be there if you want him, but he has never lead a program as a head coach and about 2 months ago USC fans were ready to fire him.

Saw rumors today of Mike Leach. Not sure Leach will ever take a program to the top. Competitive, yes. National or conference title level, probably not.

At least he'd be entertaining.

Yes, Oklahoma is HOT.

I just can't trust their D. WVU with backup QB making first career start drove them into the RZ first 3 drives racking up over 200y on those opening possessions, but came away with just 10 pts (either thanks to the OU D clamping down, or the lack of QB experience out of the 'eers). Then since WV D couldn't offer any resistance to OU O the game was essentially over at halftime, but OU D still allowed WVU O to walk down field for back-to-back TDs to start the 3rd.

OU did a number on TCU the first time around, but that is the exception. TCU isn't overly threatening like most Big Xll teams are, but even, hell Kansas St had their way with the Sooner D.

I'm not going to sell Patterson short in this game. I would not bet TCU to win, but might consider getting over a TD with them and count on them to be more competitive this time around.

Baylor had their way with the OU defense.

I don't think TCU has the offense to stick with the Sooners though.

And just when you didn't think it could get any more bizarre. The University of Tennessee has FIRED Athletic Director John Currie.

Phil Fulmer should be back on the field.

Saw rumors today of Mike Leach. Not sure Leach will ever take a program to the top. Competitive, yes. National or conference title level, probably not.

At least he'd be entertaining.

True to your last point. Not sure why anyone would touch that knucklehead though. Maybe if they need the media exposure?

Saw rumors today of Mike Leach. Not sure Leach will ever take a program to the top. Competitive, yes. National or conference title level, probably not.

At least he'd be entertaining.

True to your last point. Not sure why anyone would touch that knucklehead though. Maybe if they need the media exposure?

They seem pretty good at getting media exposure lately without Leach.... 😉 😛

Looking forward to Championship Saturday. The beer store in our lobby should be primed for business today. 😉 😉

Another big $ day yesterday four big wins and a push. Actually could have "in-betweened" the Ohio State - Wisky game. Took the Badgers +7 early and then the number dropped to Buckeyes -4. I thought that that would mean Barrett either wouldn't play or be very limited. He actually played very well, credit to him. I liked Wisconsin well enough that I didn't lay any of it off onto OSU. Have a feeling the local sports accountant took a beating on that one.

Likely gets the Buckeyes in, although Clemson will immediately cancel their check. Was really hoping Wisconsin would win and prevent both Saban & Meyer from being involved in the playoff.

It's going to be really hard for me to rekindle my long lost love for Nebraska, but I might try with Frost leading the team!

Pick 'Em results - oldcoot is our 8th different winner in 9 years! Well done!

place - name- total pts-dropped pts-W-L

1-Even Older Coot-223-10-223-181
2-kirbyskids-219-10-219-173
3-Sang-219-11-219-185
4-Fighting Irish-219- 9- 219-185
5-Fanklin Dawg- 218 -9- 218-174
6-fast43- 213 - 10- 213-191
7-Dabosweenie- 212 -8- 212-192
8 -The Quack is Back!!!!- 208- 0- 208-196
9 -nebish- 203 -5- 203-201
10 -rockytophotseat- 199 -8- 199-205
11 -Where's My Mule?-
155 -0- 155-249

There will be a bowl pick'em.

It's going to be really hard for me to rekindle my long lost love for Nebraska, but I might try with Frost leading the team!

Hope so Neb, it'll still take a while to turn things but I think he'll have the focus and ability to do it. Comes down to how well he does getting the talented recruits. I'm optimistic.

Pick 'Em results - oldcoot is our 8th different winner in 9 years! Well done!

place - name- total pts-dropped pts-W-L

1-Even Older Coot-223-10-223-181
2-kirbyskids-219-10-219-173
3-Sang-219-11-219-185
4-Fighting Irish-219- 9- 219-185
5-Fanklin Dawg- 218 -9- 218-174
6-fast43- 213 - 10- 213-191
7-Dabosweenie- 212 -8- 212-192
8 -The Quack is Back!!!!- 208- 0- 208-196
9 -nebish- 203 -5- 203-201
10 -rockytophotseat- 199 -8- 199-205
11 -Where's My Mule?-
155 -0- 155-249

There will be a bowl pick'em.

Thanks! Really helped me focus on my actual wagers from week to week.

Now that the word is out, the accolades are rolling in from people and publications alike:

"If I was a betting man, I'd follow Coot's picks exclusively!" - Pete Rose

"Amazing! Incredible! Fantastic!" - Roget's Thesaurus

"I didn't see that coming!" - Miss Cleo

"He did pretty...pretty...pretty good." - Larry David

😉

Herbstreit. Too funny.

https://ohiostate.247sports.com/Bolt/ESPN-analyst-Kirk-Herbstreit-stunned-by-last-College-Football-Playoff-rankings-111650166

I think Ohio State should have gotten into the playoff instead of Alabama but I guess you could have flipped a coin between the two. I think that blowout loss to Iowa really hurt The Bucks.

I think Ohio State should have gotten into the playoff instead of Alabama but I guess you could have flipped a coin between the two. I think that blowout loss to Iowa really hurt The Bucks.

So, you were okay last year when OSU got into the playoffs under nearly identical circumstance?

Alabama lost ONE game - albeit late in the season to in-state rival, Auburn. I'm actually one of the folks who THOUGT that conference play-offs were supposed to be the bracket to determine the CHAMPIONSHIP play-offs. But it has been pointed out to me that those games exist only to make money (heavy cynicism on my part).

Years ago, when the new play-off system was being touted as the sure-fire way of determining a champion - I was stating that it would create an entire new set of problems. The championship will likely always be "mythical".

I think Ohio State should have gotten into the playoff instead of Alabama but I guess you could have flipped a coin between the two. I think that blowout loss to Iowa really hurt The Bucks.

So, you were okay last year when OSU got into the playoffs under nearly identical circumstance?

Alabama lost ONE game - albeit late in the season to in-state rival, Auburn. I'm actually one of the folks who THOUGT that conference play-offs were supposed to be the bracket to determine the CHAMPIONSHIP play-offs. But it has been pointed out to me that those games exist only to make money (heavy cynicism on my part).

Years ago, when the new play-off system was being touted as the sure-fire way of determining a champion - I was stating that it would create an entire new set of problems. The championship will likely always be "mythical".

Not unless you expand the playoffs to eight teams.

Alabama lost to Auburn a week after playing Mercer at home. How come strength-of-schedule and playing a cupcake late in the year every year hurts everyone else except Alabama?

I think Ohio State should have gotten into the playoff instead of Alabama but I guess you could have flipped a coin between the two. I think that blowout loss to Iowa really hurt The Bucks.

So, you were okay last year when OSU got into the playoffs under nearly identical circumstance?

Never said anything about last year. But since you asked, I don't think OSU should have gotten in last year since Pen State beat them. So I don't think the circumstances are identical. I am by no means an OSU apologist. I'm from Michigan.

Regarding Alabama, I just think OSU is better. Tougher schedule. This year the SEC wasn't the same as it has been over the past several years. My guess is Alabama's (and Saban's) reputation played into the decision.

And I thought winning your conference held more clout.

I don't have a horse in the race. I don't like either team. Again, I just think OSU is better.

I'm sure it wasn't an easy decision. Either way, someone is going to be unhappy. There's no perfect system but I think it's better than it used to be.

Herman Edwards to Arizona State? That is a WTF moment.

Yeah, this surprises the hell out of me. He's 63 so he could conceivably coach for 5-10 years so I guess his age shouldn't matter.

Selfishly, I will miss him on ESPN. He kind of has a fatherly sports-related vibe to him if that makes sense.

Don't care about ASU one way or another but I will probably root for them because I have so much respect for Herm.

4 teams or 8 teams - conference champions only should be eligible for a national title shot. I've said it for as long as we've had a college football thread here. 2000 Nebraska, 2003 Oklahoma, 2011 Alabama, 2016 Ohio State and 2017 Alabama should never been given the chance at the national title. If you are the second best team in your own division or conference, how can you be legitimately considered the best team in the nation? What is best? I don't know. You don't know. The committee doesn't know. The results of the games knows and should be respected. Alabama lost their most important game of the year, they had their destiny in their own hands vs Auburn and lost. Why give them a mulligan?

This year there is no strong 4th team. Give it to UCF.

When I supported the "plus one" 4 team playoff model the idea was in some years give access to an exceptional mid major team. This is the year. Ohio St, USC are not elite teams and not worthy of a seat at the table. Obviously I'm excluding Alabama for reasons posted above.

I looked at the 6 BCS computer averages for Alabama, Ohio State and UCF. You throw out the highest and lowest and average the remaining 4. Alabama .84, Ohio State .84, UCF .82. Two hundredths of a pt behind.

Think the gap between an undefeated UCF and 1 loss Alabama and 2 loss Ohio St from down P5 conferences is large? It isn't.

What I find so hypocritical is two years ago Saban said you needed to win your conference to get in.

And yet, who took to lobbying just the opposite after the loss to Auburn?

I guess it's which shoe needs to fit.

I think Ohio State should have gotten into the playoff instead of Alabama but I guess you could have flipped a coin between the two. I think that blowout loss to Iowa really hurt The Bucks.

So, you were okay last year when OSU got into the playoffs under nearly identical circumstance?

Alabama lost ONE game - albeit late in the season to in-state rival, Auburn. I'm actually one of the folks who THOUGT that conference play-offs were supposed to be the bracket to determine the CHAMPIONSHIP play-offs. But it has been pointed out to me that those games exist only to make money (heavy cynicism on my part).

Years ago, when the new play-off system was being touted as the sure-fire way of determining a champion - I was stating that it would create an entire new set of problems. The championship will likely always be "mythical".

Not unless you expand the playoffs to eight teams.

Alabama lost to Auburn a week after playing Mercer at home. How come strength-of-schedule and playing a cupcake late in the year every year hurts everyone else except Alabama?

Agreed, playing Mercer should have disqualified Alabama as they are an FCS team. The SEC and ACC should go to a 9 game conference schedule like the rest of the conferences.

What I find so hypocritical is two years ago Saban said you needed to win your conference to get in.

And yet, who took to lobbying just the opposite after the loss to Auburn?

I guess it's which shoe needs to fit.

And what I find ironic, not about Saban necessarily, but coaches in his position is this: When another team is betting somebody at halftime or post game after a team has lost the reporters always ask about "what did they (the other team) do, etc" and coaches always, everyone one I've ever heard, answer that question by making it about their own team. Execution issues, penalties, miss tackles, asignmenets as to say "it isn't about the other team, it's about what we didn't do to win".

Then when it comes to post season national title consideration all of sudden these coaches are finding flaws with other teams to compare their own against. It comes down to looking in the mirror.

Had Alabama not gotten in all they had do was look at the Auburn loss. Ohio State didn't get in, look at the bad Iowa loss. USC didn't get in, look at the bad Notre Dame loss. Unless you are undefeated there is nobody else that took something away from you, you took the opportunity away from yourself.

But funny about Saban. On sportscenter as part of his "pick us" phone call he literally said "Georgia lost to Auburn by more than we did". For a coach to be saying that kind of stuff is a bad look.

Bottom line, win more games and you'll almost always get to where you want to be.

I think Ohio State should have gotten into the playoff instead of Alabama but I guess you could have flipped a coin between the two. I think that blowout loss to Iowa really hurt The Bucks.

So, you were okay last year when OSU got into the playoffs under nearly identical circumstance?

Alabama lost ONE game - albeit late in the season to in-state rival, Auburn. I'm actually one of the folks who THOUGT that conference play-offs were supposed to be the bracket to determine the CHAMPIONSHIP play-offs. But it has been pointed out to me that those games exist only to make money (heavy cynicism on my part).

Years ago, when the new play-off system was being touted as the sure-fire way of determining a champion - I was stating that it would create an entire new set of problems. The championship will likely always be "mythical".

Not unless you expand the playoffs to eight teams.

Alabama lost to Auburn a week after playing Mercer at home. How come strength-of-schedule and playing a cupcake late in the year every year hurts everyone else except Alabama?

Agreed, playing Mercer should have disqualified Alabama as they are an FCS team. The SEC and ACC should go to a 9 game conference schedule like the rest of the conferences.

But FBS teams are not excluded from playing FCS teams and many teams play FCS teams.

Not all FCS teams are garbage either. Mercer is bad. But many FCS teams are infact better than many FBS teams. I would take any team in the FCS playoffs to beat the worst 5 teams in the Big Ten straight up.

I believe the only two programs to have never played an FCS school is USC and UCLA.

Going to 9 conference games would be an improvement and I am glad the PAC12 and Big 10 have done it (Big Xll did it out of necessity in their now 10 team league). But that still presents a problem, in leagues of 12 or 14 teams, you play 8 conference games you are still not playing 3 or 5 teams from your own conference every year. You are in a league that doesn't play 5 of your own members, your own counterparts, your own supposed equals, that is a problem.

And the problem is Wisconsin this season. Their 8 game Big Ten schedule saw them miss the 3 other best teams in the league, Michigan St, Penn St, and Ohio St. In their 9th game, which you could say they only got to Indy thanks to that weak schedule, they finally did play one of the other 10 win teams from the other division and they lost.

Success for a team shouldn't be determined by who you don't play thanks to the schedule maker, it should be determined by who you beat and in large conferences we have these days it isn't possible to truly play it out on the field like it used to be.

So in the quest for more money and growth we actually have diminished the overall quality and legitimacy of the conference champions we are crowning. But making more money and doing the right thing aren't always compatible as we know.

And the problem is Wisconsin this season. Their 8 game Big Ten schedule saw them miss the 3 other best teams in the league, Michigan St, Penn St, and Ohio St. In their 9th game, which you could say they only got to Indy thanks to that weak schedule, they finally did play one of the other 10 win teams from the other division and they lost.

As a Badger alum I agree with this, but it's why I think Alabama is a better team than OSU. I hate that the BIG 10 (B16 or whatever) split into 2 divisions. Now UW plays maybe 1 good BIG10 team a season because the BIG 10 West is garbage (Iowa, NW, or Nebraska occasionally make some noise). Meanwhile PSU, Michigan, MSU, and OSU battle it out all season in the East. I'm glad UW made it interesting in the championship game against OSU, but they were ranked way too high. They should still be behind Auburn, who played Georgia twice while UW played only a single team that finished in the Top 25 (Northwestern). I actually think USC is the team we should be talking about and not OSU, but I guess we'll find out in the Cotton Bowl.

8-game playoff system would be great, but there will never be a perfect solution. What makes this OSU/Bama talk irrelevant is either team is the worst of the 4 playoff teams. OSU was previously ranked 8th for a reason.

interesting conversation-- someone said there is no worthy number 4 team. who knows. every team in playoff had a bad game. its difficult to go undefeated---too many variables. i think if you go the conference champion only route you need an 8 team playoff-probably top 6 conferences and one or two independents (which can come from another conference as well). Then i buy that argument

If not, i think with a 4 team playoff you cannot just make it conference champion. so far only the SEC has had this dilemma but at some point it will fall to other conferences as well. If Alabama should win which i think is a possibility then aren't they the best team?

I think they deserved to get in with one loss versus 2 for OSU but can see other side as well.

Anyhow more importantly GO ARMY!!!! 2 in a row!!!!

The thing about the unworthy 4th spot, I definitely said that, someone else may've as well. I think body of work and "eye test" whatever you want to say, very few, if anyone, would argue that Clemson, Oklahoma and Georgia are the 3 most deserving and proven and I'll add elite teams in the country. Each one of them has earned the right to play on for the chance to win it all.

4? USC has not been dominant in their wins. USC is a good team, and by me say do not deserve a national title shot isn't to be taken to say they aren't good. But clearly they are not elite. They've only outgained their opponents by 1100 yards on the season. By comparison Clemson is +2200 yards. Oklahoma +2500. Georgia +2100. Now, I am not down on the PAC12. To the contrary I think the PAC 12 is actually one of the deepest most competitive leagues this year, with the ACC. So while USC faced some decent competition on a weekly basis, they did not handle those games with the dominance one should or would expect from a national title contender - historically speaking compared to the outstanding teams that have competed for and won it before.

So that is USC.

I think I may've touched on this here before about Alabama or Ohio State, or that could've been somewhere else, but this is the worst the SEC has been in a very long time. It's not Alabama's fault necessarily, but it is their fault that essentially the Tide had a 1 game season and they lost that. It would be like letting Wisconsin into the playoff after losing the B1G Title. In I will defend Alabama's nonconference schedule very strongly on the other hand. Their games against Fresno and Colorado State are very good mid major teams this year. Fresno exceeded everyone's expectations and CSU was a little off, but still quality opponent. The FSU game, anyone who watches and follows the sport like we do knows that the week 1 healthy FSU team was one hell of a challenge. If Francois had not gotten hurt and 1 or 2 plays changed in that game, FSU very well could've won that game. What FSU became post the Francois injury compared to week 1 are very very different teams for reasons you already know or we can get into if needed. So throwing out Mercer against Alabama matters very little to me because in all reality that was their only layup out of confernece all year. Problem is they faced layups in their conference just about weekly. And they finished second in the west and they team they lost to lost the title game, yet they get in.

As bad as the SEC is this year to think they have 50% of the playoff spots open to the entire country really makes me upset. If this was a strong year for the SEC I might be able to concede my position a little, while still disagreeing with it, I could acknowledge the difficulty and strength of a good SEC. 2017 was not a good SEC. People say things like "it makes no sense to have a 4 team playoff when you have 5 P5 conferences" Yeah well look at it now, a 4 team playoff and only 3 of the 5 P5 conferences get in. How you like them apples?

So that is that.

What I think would be outstanding is a P5 4 team playoff and a G5 (group of 5 - the midmajors) 4 team playoff featuring conference champions only. I would enthusiastically go to bat on that one.

The problem with the 8 team model is this, here we are, or I am, saying that there is no worthy 4th team. So then we are just going to open the door to other "nonworthy" teams to fill spots 5, 6, 7, 8? If you are going to do that then just make it conference champs only. Everyone knows the rules, no committee, win your league and you are in. Sure there are 10 leagues in FBS currently, so 2 would be shut out. And if we use a host of computer rankings like the BCS used to we would find out that some years the Sun Belt Champ or the MAC Champ or the CUSA Champ, or whatever, 2 teams each year wouldn't make it - and likely for good reason. But taking 8 out of the 10 and playing them off is the fairest way to do it. If not keep it at 4, subdivide the current P5 and G5 teams making up the 130 teams currently classified together and do dual 4 team playoffs.

What about Notre Dame? I knew somebody was going to ask. Well, it shouldn't be the ncaa's problem to make a system that fits independents, make the 4 independents fit into the system if they want to participate for the national championship. There is it.

I would like to echo one very important statement in closing....GO ARMY BEAT NAVY!!!! CIC coming to West Point!!

So, are you going to watch the Rose Bowl or the Sugar Bowl?