OFFICIAL 2018 COLLEGE FOOTBALL OFFSEASON THREAD

fahqu001 · Mar 12, 2018

casper90403 said:
Baker to the Browns #1? Is that really being discussed? They would be fools to pass on Barkley.

Maybe I'm wrong but sounds like a real reach on Baker at #1. Think it's posturing from the Browns???

Bobby Layne · Mar 13, 2018

10508 cardo jr ln · Mar 13, 2018

casper90403 said:
Baker to the Browns #1? Is that really being discussed? They would be fools to pass on Barkley.

I'd take Baker at #4, trade the #1 pick for another great player + draft picks and get another RB later in the 1st/2nd Rd. Saquon aint Adrian Peterson or Todd Gurley, no way I'm taking him #1

Bobby Layne · Mar 13, 2018

You probably shouldn't take a RB at 1 regardless of who is available. Honestly taking a QB at 1 and 4 for the Brown's wouldn't be the worst idea.

It's basically what Jimmy did when he got to the Cowboys with Aikman and Steve Walsh. If drafting a QB in the top 5 is essentially a 50/50 proposition, the odds of both of them busting are only 1 in 4 if you take two.

nako xl · Mar 13, 2018

Bobby Layne said:
You probably shouldn't take a RB at 1 regardless of who is available. Honestly taking a QB at 1 and 4 for the Brown's wouldn't be the worst idea.

It's basically what Jimmy did when he got to the Cowboys with Aikman and Steve Walsh. If drafting a QB in the top 5 is essentially a 50/50 proposition, the odds of both of them busting are only 1 in 4 if you take two.

Browns would prob take Baker and Allen and miss on both.

N41D · Mar 13, 2018

I honestly wouldn’t blame them if they didn’t go quarterback with either pick...

10508 cardo jr ln · Mar 13, 2018

Verde Shuttles · Mar 14, 2018

Listening to the audible, pac-12 really going to ****

nako xl · Mar 14, 2018

Verde Shuttles said:
Listening to the audible, pac-12 really going to ****

What'd they say? I heard Ryan Abraham the USC writer was on today.

Bobby Layne · Mar 14, 2018

nako xl said:
What'd they say? I heard Ryan Abraham the USC writer was on today.

Basically he touched on the usual **** SC fans complain about, and Larry Scott's incompetence.

The brand name programs shouldn't be playing Friday games but other than that I think you guys make too much of the scheduling stuff. Those games generate eyeballs for games that otherwise wouldn't have them playing on Saturday when they feature match ups like Utah-Arizona, and Oregon St-Colorado, and it does make sense why the conference and the networks would want marquee in conference games like SC-Stanford to be played earlier from a ratings perspective.

nako xl · Mar 14, 2018

Bobby Layne said:
Basically he touched on the usual **** SC fans complain about, and Larry Scott's incompetence.

The brand name programs shouldn't be playing Friday games but other than that I think you guys make too much of the scheduling stuff. Those games generate eyeballs for games that otherwise wouldn't have them playing on Saturday when they feature match ups like Utah-Arizona, and Oregon St-Colorado, and it does make sense why the conference and the networks would want marquee in conference games like SC-Stanford to be played earlier from a ratings perspective.

The complaint isn't that Friday games are played. It's that the away team in those Friday games seems to always be coming off a Saturday night away game 6 days earlier. No team has ever won the Friday back to back game. Only one team in the conference has had to play the Friday after an away game twice: USC. Next season USC will be the only team in the conference to play a Friday night game in 3 straight seasons -- and this time after Stanford and Texas (on the road) the two weeks prior.

The ACC and SEC don't force teams to play 9 games, but the PAC does and they make teams play their marquee OOC games in the first half of the season (that way every team gets their chance to do the Los Angeles road trip in the 2nd half of the season to recruit). What eyeballs is having your top ranked teams in SC and Washington playing all 10:30 and 11pm ET kickoffs helping to bring in?

The complaining SC fans and PAC 12 fans do is about how the conference intentionally schedules advantages for weaker teams and assigns the worst/most biased officiating crews to certain games to try to have everyone's record bunched up in the middle. What you end up with is USC losing to WSU and UW losing to ASU. All it does is help the conference eliminate itself from national contention (and injure its players) midway through the season. No one cares about parity. They want to see the best teams playing at their best and competing at full strength and momentum against the rest of the country's. USC didn't have a bye for 12 straight weeks. Most SEC teams had had a bye and played two cupcakes by then going into the home stretch of the season. Pac 12 fans have a right to be annoyed.

Plus the deal Larry cut is so garbage you can't even watch the games! How is it easier for me to catch SC out in NYC than it was when I was in LA last year??

Bobby Layne · Mar 14, 2018

nako xl said:
The complaint isn't that Friday games are played. It's that the away team in those Friday games seems to always be coming off a Saturday night away game 6 days earlier. No team has ever won the Friday back to back game. Only one team in the conference has had to play the Friday after an away game twice: USC. Next season USC will be the only team in the conference to play a Friday night game in 3 straight seasons -- and this time after Stanford and Texas (on the road) the two weeks prior.

The ACC and SEC don't force teams to play 9 games, but the PAC does and they make teams play their marquee OOC games in the first half of the season (that way every team gets their chance to do the Los Angeles road trip in the 2nd half of the season to recruit). What eyeballs is having your top ranked teams in SC and Washington playing all 10:30 and 11pm ET kickoffs helping to bring in?

The complaining SC fans and PAC 12 fans do is about how the conference intentionally schedules advantages for weaker teams and assigns the worst/most biased officiating crews to certain games to try to have everyone's record bunched up in the middle. What you end up with is USC losing to WSU and UW losing to ASU. All it does is help the conference eliminate itself from national contention (and injure its players) midway through the season. No one cares about parity. They want to see the best teams playing at their best and competing at full strength and momentum against the rest of the country's. USC didn't have a bye for 12 straight weeks. Most SEC teams had had a bye and played two cupcakes by then going into the home stretch of the season. Pac 12 fans have a right to be annoyed.

Plus the deal Larry cut is so garbage you can't even watch the games! How is it easier for me to catch SC out in NYC than it was when I was in LA last year??

The B1G does both of the bolded, and you know damn well the Pac 12 isn't instructing their referees to officiate in a way to increase parity in the conference :lol:

. Occam's razor bruh, ya'll just have trash officials like everyone else.

SC lost to Wazzu and UW lost to ASU because they were both teams that didn't deserve to be in national contention. Had 0 to do with the schedule.

Scott is an idiot for not just using the BTN blueprint for the Pac 12 network, but those games are on at 10:30 and 11 for a reason. That is the only way people out here are even going to watch those games with the ACC, SEC, B1G, Big XII, and ND all playing most of their games in the eastern and central time zones.

nako xl · Mar 14, 2018

Man, for two years every team that has played a Friday-Saturday turn around game has lost. I'm not going to argue with you about national contention. It's tough on the players and it's ****** scheduling. The refs thing is a quantifiable stat that I've seen. Certain games would be among the the nation's leaders in penalties every week. The refs over officiate by design, and especially when particular teams are involved.

A Pac 12 ref was the guy who ejected that Kentucky player in the music city bowl.

It's not the same trash officials as everyone else.