• The KillerFrogs

2020 “Other” Bowl Games

Wexahu

Full Member
Keep looking. Doesn't seem clear at all to me. Both teams playing strong defense, but all GA's yards coming on about 3 long passes, and Cincy is having steady success maintaining drives. GA has more obvious starsies, but the "team" playing better at this point is Cincy.

They are showing they deserved to be in the beauty pageant, much more than tOSU or ND. I don't care if they "only" beat certain teams by "not enough," it's hard to go through a full schedule undefeated, whatever the league. Even if they wind up losing this game, they earned the right to be in the pageant and their being left out pretty well proves how corrupt the selection process is.

I think it’s funny how people pretend the opt outs for prepping for the draft don’t have an impact. Georgia is missing two O-lineman, a tight end, two CBs and a linebacker. I presume all were among their better players and all would be playing if the game were a month ago. That'd be like us having Storment, Avila, Wells, Tomlinson, Caesar, and Wallow decide not to play and acting like it doesn't really matter. Of course these opt outs change things. A lot in some cases.
 

CountryFrog

Active Member
Well no, I didn't say it's absolute, there is obviously always going to be more analysis required than simply the W-L and treat all other things as equal. But these guys played at a high enough level all season to show they were legit.

Compare that for example with Florida, who had they beaten Bama in the SEC CCG, I'm guessing would've gotten in with iirc, ONE victory vs. a team with a winning record- that being Bama.

I really hope all the 8-team speculation comes to be, it would solve a lot of this nonsense. Truthfully I miss the old days where you got a bowl based on conference affiliation and then everyone could argue about the final rankings after all the bowls, but that ship sailed and it ain't coming back so let's have a legit playoff if we're going to call it a playoff.
I understand if you didn't mean it to be absolute but the way you said it was pretty absolute.
 

CountryFrog

Active Member
I think it’s funny how people pretend the opt outs for prepping for the draft don’t have an impact. Georgia is missing two O-lineman, a tight end, two CBs and a linebacker. I presume all were among their better players and all would be playing if the game were a month ago. That'd be like us having Storment, Avila, Wells, Tomlinson, Caesar, and Wallow decide not to play and acting like it doesn't really matter. Of course these opt outs change things. A lot in some cases.
It obviously has an impact. But aren't you the one who's always saying that you don't want to hear about injuries with TCU because it's always being exaggerated? So I don't know what the difference is there.

Plus the general media opinion with SEC team superiority always includes their unmatched depth. But then as soon as they actually have to utilize that depth and lose then it's because they were missing guys.
 

froginmn

Full Member
I think it’s funny how people pretend the opt outs for prepping for the draft don’t have an impact. Georgia is missing two O-lineman, a tight end, two CBs and a linebacker. I presume all were among their better players and all would be playing if the game were a month ago. That'd be like us having Storment, Avila, Wells, Tomlinson, Caesar, and Wallow decide not to play and acting like it doesn't really matter. Of course these opt outs change things. A lot in some cases.
I'd assume that a team with consistent top 5 recruiting classes should have the depth to overcome that. And beat a G5 team.
 

LSU Game Attendee

Active Member
Opt-out declarations should be made prior to bowl placement.

Like Dan “[ Finebaum ]ters Full” Mullen said, the scout team shouldn’t get to enjoy a high quality bowl earned by a team that ceased to exist at the end of the regular season.
 

Wexahu

Full Member
It obviously has an impact. But aren't you the one who's always saying that you don't want to hear about injuries with TCU because it's always being exaggerated? So I don't know what the difference is there.

Plus the general media opinion with SEC team superiority always includes their unmatched depth. But then as soon as they actually have to utilize that depth and lose then it's because they were missing guys.

I don't want to hear about injuries when it clearly is exaggerated. Like GP saying last year that 40 guys were hurt or something ridiculous like that, when it was clear from watching games and seeing who was playing that the number was far, far, less than that. I get that injuries matter, but everyone deals with injuries, people tend to just magnify their own and ignore everyone else's.

But having 6 starters opt out after a season in which you're already dealing with typical injury attrition....how can that not make a huge difference?
 

Pharm Frog

Full Member
I don't want to hear about injuries when it clearly is exaggerated. Like GP saying last year that 40 guys were hurt or something ridiculous like that, when it was clear from watching games and seeing who was playing that the number was far, far, less than that. I get that injuries matter, but everyone deals with injuries, people tend to just magnify their own and ignore everyone else's.

But having 6 starters opt out after a season in which you're already dealing with typical injury attrition....how can that not make a huge difference?

I don’t want to hear about injuries or opt outs. Show up and play. Only two things to talk about: results or excuses.
 

CountryFrog

Active Member
I don't want to hear about injuries when it clearly is exaggerated. Like GP saying last year that 40 guys were hurt or something ridiculous like that, when it was clear from watching games and seeing who was playing that the number was far, far, less than that. I get that injuries matter, but everyone deals with injuries, people tend to just magnify their own and ignore everyone else's.

But having 6 starters opt out after a season in which you're already dealing with typical injury attrition....how can that not make a huge difference?
I think you just try so hard to be objective TCU fan with some things that it quickly becomes contradictory. The idea that opt outs are a bigger deal than injuries is laughable.

But if you really do believe that added attrition for one team over another is a big deal than I'm sure you'd agree that a team like Ohio St should never warrant playoff consideration having experienced roughly half the attrition of their competition this year.
 

Wexahu

Full Member
I think you just try so hard to be objective TCU fan with some things that it quickly becomes contradictory. The idea that opt outs are a bigger deal than injuries is laughable.

But if you really do believe that added attrition for one team over another is a big deal than I'm sure you'd agree that a team like Ohio St should never warrant playoff consideration having experienced roughly half the attrition of their competition this year.

I do try and be an objective fan. Why wouldn't I?

If we had a bunch of guys sitting out and we were getting beat by a team we thought we were better than, and they didn't have anyone sitting out, do you honestly think we'd say well, they are just better than us. Hell no, everyone would be sayin had we had those guys, the outcome would have been different. If that's being an objective fan, then I'm guilty as charged.

And I'd have had ZERO problem had they left Ohio State out of the playoffs for the reason you cite. It would have been hilarious for the Big 10.

Edit: And I'll add, had TCU been 6-0 this year and didn't play 3 additional games against, say, Kansas, Kansas State, and Texas Tech because those three teams opted out of the game, I don't think there's be many, if any, TCU fans saying we should not have received consideration for the playoffs. In fact, I think it'd be quite the opposite.
 
Top