OFFICIAL 2015-2016 College Football Season Thread

RichDale718 said:
Just seen Mike Alstott's son got offered and is class of 2017, feeling old again
Click to expand...

Get used to it, |I

Can't wrap my head around seeing the kids of players I grew up watching, playing college ball. Like seeing Christian McCaffrey ball out just reminds me of watching videos of his pops and how he used to cut materials from his uniform so he could feel lighter on the field, :lol. I think the first one that made me feel old was when Hardy Nickerson Jr was being recruited.
 
Last year there was bunch of them, there's an Asante Jr, Surtain Jr, and many more coming up within the next few years.
 
I remember when Duron Carter was at tOSU, that made me feel super old....and that was like 4-5 years ago :lol
 
UF is kinda in a weird spot, you would think the offense would be better, but I don't see Franks being the real answer there at QB and will that defense ever be that good again?

Tennessee, UGA, UF winning & losing all effects Miami, so I'm rooting for that disaster Mizzou to win that division. :lol
 
RichDale718 said:
UF is kinda in a weird spot, you would think the offense would be better, but I don't see Franks being the real answer there at QB and will that defense ever be that good again?

Tennessee, UGA, UF winning & losing all effects Miami, so I'm rooting for that disaster Mizzou to win that division. :lol
Click to expand...

I think defense will always be pretty good.

With coach Mac i think having a good rb and oline will be most important thing. Our qbs will be like they are at bama, game managers that take a deep shot after running game has defense moved up.
Oline was trash last year and Kelvin Taylor was always a bit overrated imo. I think Scarlett and Mark Thompson will be an upgrade.
Nussmeier is suspect as an OC qb play better be much improved this year.
UF always recruits well on defense, not worried about that.
 
JoeClear said:
That dude got few lucky breaks last season and is only a notch above Champ as a coach
Click to expand...

Yes, but you have to remember that Will Grier and Treon Harris were your quarterbacks

Nussmeier is suspect as an OC qb play better be much improved this year.
Click to expand...

Biggest thing for that, is that you have to have a QB there in the 1st place
 
Last edited:
dreClark said:
Yes, but you have to remember that Will Grier and Treon Harris were your quarterbacks
Biggest thing for that, is that you have to have a QB there in the 1st place
Click to expand...

I agree, he did pretty well at bama with McCarron at qb. His year at Michigan was a disaster with Devin Gardner, hopefully that was a product of Brady Hoke.

If Callaway gets back i think the offense will improve. Hearing good things about Freddie Swain. Maybe Worton or Fullwood step up.
 
N'Kosi back on board and Kevaughn Dingle
pimp.gif
 
http://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2016/MAR16/DBMar14.html

Toughest Opponent Records for 2016.

The question arises each year: Who plays the toughest schedule? At the beginning of the season, the NCAA releases a rating of each team's schedule based on its opponents' records from the previous season. This is a good method, but it does have obvious flaws.

The first flaw is simply basing the ratings on opponents' records from the previous season. Let's look at a few examples:

•In 2014, I had TCU as my most improved team in the country. The Horned Frogs won 12 games and nearly made the first College Football Playoff in 2014. I also had Memphis as one of my most improved teams, and the Tigers won the Miami Beach Bowl, finishing 10-3 and ranked No. 25 in the Associated Press poll in 2014. However, if you used the NCAA method, you got credit for playing two teams that were a combined 7-17 in 2013 with TCU being 4-8 and Memphis 3-9.

•Vanderbilt was clearly a much weaker team in 2014 than in 2013. It was coming off a 9-4 season but had only 10 returning starters and a new head coach. Fresno State had Derek Carr in 2013 and went 11-2 but last year had just 13 returning starters and was replacing an NFL starting quarterback. By the NCAA method of determining strength of schedule, you would have gotten credit for playing a pair of teams that were 20-6 the previous year, yet those two teams finished a combined 9-17 in 2014.

•Last year, I pointed out that teams like Michigan (5-7 in 2014), Stanford (8-5 in 2014) and Northwestern (5-7 in 2014) were all much stronger in 2015. Those three teams, who combined for an 18-19 record in 2014, combined to go 32-8 in 2015.

The second flaw is that a team's record does not determine its strength. Let's look at two teams for this year and see which one is really the stronger team:

Last year, Western Kentucky went 12-2 while being led by senior quarterback Brandon Doughty. Tennessee was just 9-4. A closer look shows that WKU played a total of three Power 5 conference teams. Vanderbilt had a 20-11 first-down edge versus them and 385-246 edge in yardage, and WKU was lucky to escape with a 14-12 win over a team that eventually finished 4-8. In the other two Power 5 matchups, Western Kentucky lost to Indiana (6-7) on the road and was beaten by LSU in Baton Rouge 48-20.

Overall, their foes had a combined losing record on the year. The Volunteers may have lost 4 games last year, but their defeats were to Alabama (national champ), Oklahoma (playoff semifinalist), Florida (SEC East Champ) and Arkansas (8-5 bowl team). Tennessee blew double-digit fourth-quarter leads versus Oklahoma and Florida and had the ball when trailing by five points on the road at Alabama at the end of the game. Against that same Vanderbilt team that outplayed WKU, Tennessee led 53-14 before allowing two late garbage touchdowns. This year, WKU loses quarterback Doughty and has just 11 returning starters. If they played Tennessee's schedule this year, they would be an underdog in at least eight or nine games. Tennessee has 17 returning starters, including quarterback Joshua Dobbs, and is the clear-cut favorite to win the SEC East, likely will be a top-10 team and could be favored in as many as 11 games. In my toughest schedule, I will have Tennessee a much tougher foe in 2016 than WKU. But using the NCAA's method, Western Kentucky is the tougher team (12-2 versus 9-4).

Now let's turn our attention to 2016. I decided to see what the NCAA method would come up with for toughest opponents faced. Below is a chart of the top 25 teams ranked by highest percentage of opponent wins (or toughest schedule). The opponent wins, losses and win percentage are the NCAA's method -- not mine. The chart also shows the number of opponents each team will face that finished the season ranked in the top 25, the number of teams that had a winning record last year, and number of opponents that made the postseason.

RANK TEAM WIN Post SSN
Rank Team W L % TEAMS RECORD TEAMS
1. LSU 108 52 67.5% 4 10 10
2. Arkansas 104 52 66.7% 5 10 9
3. Mississippi 102 52 66.2% 3 10 10
4. Auburn 100 56 64.1% 4 9 9
5. USC 101 58 63.5% 5 9 11
6. Wisconsin 98 57 63.2% 6 7 10
7. BYU 97 57 63.0% 2 10 11
8. Alabama 97 58 62.6% 3 10 10
9. Northwestern 97 59 62.2% 4 7 10
10. Florida St 96 61 61.1% 4 9 9
11. Iowa St 95 61 60.9% 5 8 10
12. Ohio St 95 61 60.9% 5 7 10
13. SMU 93 60 60.8% 5 8 8
14. Illinois 94 61 60.6% 6 7 9
15. Texas A&M 91 60 60.3% 3 9 8
16. Kent St 93 62 60.0% 1 9 8
17. Pittsburgh 92 62 59.7% 3 9 8
18. Michigan St 90 61 59.6% 5 7 8
19. Syracuse 93 64 59.2% 3 9 10
20. Georgia Tech 91 63 59.1% 2 8 8
21. Oregon St 91 64 58.7% 3 9 10
22. Kansas 89 63 58.6% 4 8 9
23. South Carolina 89 63 58.6% 2 7 6
24. NC State 90 64 58.4% 4 7 7
25. Notre Dame 91 65 58.3% 3 9 9
26. Texas 89 64 58.2% 5 8 9
27. Tennessee 89 64 58.2% 2 7 7
28. Colorado 90 65 58.1% 4 9 10
29. North Carolina 88 64 57.9% 1 9 9
30. Mississippi St 87 64 57.6% 3 8 7
31. California 90 67 57.3% 3 8 9
32. Washington 88 66 57.1% 3 8 9
33. Rutgers 88 66 57.1% 4 7 9
34. Penn St 88 67 56.8% 5 6 8
35. Arizona St 87 67 56.5% 2 10 9
36. Oklahoma 87 67 56.5% 5 7 8
37. Virginia 88 68 56.4% 2 9 10
38. Vanderbilt 85 66 56.3% 3 7 7
39. Arizona 87 69 55.8% 2 8 8
40. Purdue 85 68 55.6% 3 7 9
41. Utah St 86 69 55.5% 0 10 9
42. Akron 83 67 55.3% 1 7 7
43. UCLA 86 70 55.1% 2 8 9
44. Texas Tech 83 68 55.0% 4 6 8
45. ULM 82 68 54.7% 1 7 7
46. West Virginia 82 68 54.7% 4 6 7
47. Miami, Fl 83 69 54.6% 3 8 8
48. UCF 83 69 54.6% 3 6 7
49. North Texas 83 69 54.6% 2 7 6
50. Memphis 84 70 54.5% 4 7 8
51. Kentucky 84 70 54.5% 2 7 7
52. Duke 82 69 54.3% 3 8 7
53. Louisville 83 70 54.2% 3 6 6
54. Bowling Green 81 69 54.0% 1 8 7
55. Miami, Oh 83 71 53.9% 2 8 8
56. Kansas St 81 70 53.6% 5 7 7
57. Tulsa 81 70 53.6% 3 6 6
58. Hawaii 89 77 53.6% 1 9 9
59. Washington St 82 71 53.6% 2 8 8
60. Stanford 83 72 53.5% 2 8 9
61. Oklahoma St 80 71 53.0% 3 7 8
62. Navy 81 72 52.9% 2 6 8
63. Utah 82 73 52.9% 1 8 10
64. Virginia Tech 79 71 52.7% 2 7 6
65. Nebraska 80 72 52.6% 5 5 7
66. UL Lafayette 78 71 52.3% 0 6 6
67. USF 79 73 52.0% 3 7 7
68. Western Michigan 77 72 51.7% 1 7 6
69. TCU 78 73 51.7% 3 7 8
70. Texas St 78 73 51.7% 1 6 6
71. Iowa 79 74 51.6% 3 5 7
72. Cincinnati 78 74 51.3% 2 6 7
73. San Jose St 79 75 51.3% 1 7 8
74. Indiana 77 74 51.0% 4 5 6
75. Rice 76 74 50.7% 3 6 5
76. Old Dominion 76 74 50.7% 1 6 5
77. Oregon 78 76 50.6% 2 6 8
78. Michigan 78 76 50.6% 4 5 6
79. Toledo 77 76 50.3% 0 8 8
80. Troy 76 76 50.0% 1 5 6
81. Missouri 75 75 50.0% 2 7 7
82. Georgia St 75 75 50.0% 1 6 5
83. Northern Illinois 75 77 49.3% 0 7 7
84. Georgia 74 76 49.3% 3 5 5
85. Fresno St 75 79 48.7% 0 5 9
86. East Carolina 74 78 48.7% 2 7 8
87. Minnesota 73 77 48.7% 3 5 6
88. South Alabama 73 77 48.7% 1 5 6
89. Wyoming 75 80 48.4% 0 7 9
90. Tulane 73 78 48.3% 3 5 6
91. Wake Forest 73 78 48.3% 2 5 6
92. Baylor 72 77 48.3% 3 5 6
93. New Mexico St 72 77 48.3% 0 5 5
94. Marshall 72 78 48.0% 1 6 6
95. Louisiana Tech 72 78 48.0% 1 6 5
96. Army 71 77 48.0% 3 5 5
97. Florida Atlantic 71 78 47.7% 1 4 5
98. Ball St 71 79 47.3% 0 6 7
99. Houston 71 79 47.3% 2 5 7
100. Connecticut 71 79 47.3% 3 5 5
101. Maryland 71 80 47.0% 3 4 7
102. Boston College 71 80 47.0% 2 5 6
103. Florida 69 78 46.9% 2 5 5
104. UTSA 70 80 46.7% 0 6 6
105. Charlotte 70 80 46.7% 1 4 5
106. UNLV 70 82 46.1% 0 6 7
107. WKU 68 81 45.6% 1 4 4
108. Clemson 67 81 45.3% 1 6 5
109. Middle Tennessee 67 82 45.0% 1 4 4
110. Colorado St 68 84 44.7% 0 5 6
111. Eastern Michigan 67 83 44.7% 0 6 6
112. Georgia Southern 66 82 44.6% 1 4 5
113. Arkansas St 66 82 44.6% 0 4 5
114. Buffalo 66 85 43.7% 0 6 6
115. FIU 65 85 43.3% 1 4 5
116. Appalachian St 65 85 43.3% 0 4 5
117. Boise St 66 87 43.1% 0 5 7
118. Air Force 65 86 43.0% 1 4 7
119. Massachusetts 64 85 43.0% 1 4 4
120. San Diego St 65 87 42.8% 0 5 7
121. Central Michigan 63 85 42.6% 1 5 5
122. Ohio 63 85 42.6% 0 5 5
123. Idaho 62 86 41.9% 0 3 4
124. Nevada 62 88 41.3% 1 3 5
125. Southern Miss 59 85 41.0% 1 3 3
126. New Mexico 62 90 40.8% 0 4 6
127. Temple 56 91 38.1% 0 4 5
128. UTEP 52 94 35.6% 0 2 2

LSU is at the top of the list, with its opponents a combined 108-52 (67.5 percent) last year. Arkansas is second, with its opponents combining for a 104-52 record (66.7 percent) . The Big Ten and SEC are well-represented, with the SEC having five teams in the top eight of toughest schedules and the Big Ten having three of the top 13. An interesting team to watch is Wisconsin. Last year, the Badgers' opponents combined for a 66-70 record, and they faced just three teams that finished with a winning record. This year, the Badgers' foes were 98-57, and they face 10 teams that made it to the postseason last year.

At the other end of the spectrum, UTEP plays the lightest schedule, with its foes last year combining for just a 52-94 (35.6 percent) record. Temple plays the second-lightest slate at 56-91 (38.1 percent). The Power 5 teams with the lightest schedule are Clemson -- whose foes were just 67-81 (45.3 percent) last year, the 20th weakest -- and Florida, whose foes were 69-78 (46.9 percent) or 23rd lightest. This list is one on which you would rather rank at the bottom than at the top.

Now let's look at the three columns to the right.

The first column is the amount of foes that a team plays that were ranked in the Top 25 at the end of last year. Wisconsin and Illinois grab the top spot, as each play six. There are 20 teams that do not face a team that was ranked at the end of the season. There are 52 teams that play one ranked team or fewer, and 49 of them are in Group of 5 conferences. The only three Power 5 teams in that group are Clemson, North Carolina and Utah, which each face just one foe that finished ranked at the end of last season.

Next, seven teams face 10 opponents that finished with a winning record: Alabama, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, BYU, Arizona State and, surprisingly, Utah State. Just 17 teams face four or fewer opponents that had a winning record, and the only one of those in the Power 5 conferences is Maryland. UTEP plays just two.

And last, only two teams face 11 opponents that were in the postseason last year: USC and Utah State; but USC "wins" this tiebreaker, as one of Utah State's foes was Southern Utah, which was in the FCS playoffs. The teams that face the fewest opponents that were in the postseason last year are UTEP, which faces just two, and Southern Miss, which plays three.

When I release my toughest schedule rankings in my upcoming magazine, they take two major factors into account:

The first is my nine sets of power ratings. This ensures that an FCS team is rated lower than a team like Nebraska. Nebraska was 6-7 last year but beat UCLA in a bowl game and lost four games on the final play, with six of their seven losses by seven points or fewer. The second factor is the number of home and away games played.

I send my magazine to the press at the end of May, and it will hit newsstands at the end of June. I analyze the difference between my toughest schedule and the NCAA's toughest schedule, and I will share with you my toughest schedule. My power ratings are finalized at the end of May, so you can get those before you even pick up this year's magazine.
 
And then backs down almost immediately.

gene smith ‏@OSU_AD 1h1 hour ago
STATEMENT: My comments at a soccer press conference yesterday were not meant to discredit our rival. I apologize to ...
MORE>>>
1/2


gene smith ‏@OSU_AD 1h1 hour ago
...UM student-athletes & my good friend Warde Manuel. We at OSU look forward to continuing the greatest rivalry in collegiate football.
2/2

some haymaker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest News

View All News

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

Site contents may not be incorporated into AI training data or any other derivative works without prior express written consent.

Links to participating merchants may generate referral or affiliate commissions that help support our community. See our policies for details. NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

| Xenforo Add-ons © by ©XenTR | Media embeds via s9e/MediaSites
Back
Top Bottom