Reece and Herbie shut the hell up
- Thread starter GoldCountryND
- Start date
“influencing the committee. show some proof or shut up.”
I’ll shut up when you show some proof that it’s not.
I’ll shut up when you show some proof that it’s not.
QUESTION - What does Kirk Herbstreit, Reece Davis, David Pollack, Jesse Palmer, Mike Tirico, Doug Flutie, Paul Finebaum, Colin Cowherd and Skip Bayless all have in common??
ANSWER - none of them are members of the College Football Playoff Committee. And therefore have no vote in which teams make the playoff and which teams do not.
Thank you and good day.
ANSWER - none of them are members of the College Football Playoff Committee. And therefore have no vote in which teams make the playoff and which teams do not.
Thank you and good day.
Why would it be a joke? Bama has been # 1 the entire season. Even if they lose the SECCG, do you not think they are one of the best four teams in the country?
I think right now, there is a nirvana scenario and a nightmare scenario for the committee. The nirvana is that we lose one of these last two games and get out of the way. It's in the comparison of one loss teams where our lack of a 13th game, and losing late, hurts us. Not us being undefeated compared against one loss teams. The nightmare is Georgia beating Alabama. Unless that game is a blowout which is as likely as winning the Powerball, the committee will feel very hard pressed to move one-loss Bama from #1 to #5. So Georgia and Bama are both in. If Clemson and ND are still undefeated, that's three P5 conferences out of the playoff. That will not sit well with a lot of people, regardless of how justified it may be.
It could be the impetus for a larger playoff, just like the Bama v LSU BCSCG disaster was a few years ago, which brought us to the four game playoff.
It could be the impetus for a larger playoff, just like the Bama v LSU BCSCG disaster was a few years ago, which brought us to the four game playoff.
If they lose to Georgia then no, I would think Clemson, Notre dame, and Michigan, and Georgia are all better assuming they all win out.
Everyone wants to say Clemson and Bama are so much better than everyone else. Wouldn’t be suprised at all if it was a Notre dame Michigan title game
You are entitled to your opinion, but I would imagine that Bama would be at least a 7 point favorite over Clemson, ND, or Michigan.
I think the committee members are smart enough to understand that for the sake of controversy/ratings, ESPN will say anything to stir the pot. It is part of their job.
So your opinion is that there’s no chance? Ok, that’s fair. You’re just as entitled to have that opinion as someone that doesn’t, right? I mean, none of us here really know if they’re influenced. But some here like to condescendingly act as though their opinion is right and anyone that disagrees is crazy. That’s their MO.
so were you looking in the mirror while typing that drivel?
Bottom line is that you have no proof the committee gives a rats ass what talking heads think but you won't admit it
I think the committee spends a significant amount of time with each other debating and ranking that top 25 that the words of Kirk Herbstreit have no value. Frankly, I would assume that they spend little, if any, time watching pundits give opinions.
I wasn't bothered, for what it's worth, by the ND/Michigan 'debate' on Tuesday night. The rankings have barely changed near the top over the past few weeks. They need something to discuss, even if it's manufactured.
Sure sounded like the head of the committee was echoing exactly what the espn guys were saying after the first playoff vote a few weeks ago. Gave a lot of credit to UM for blowout win against PSU and didn’t have much to say about ND at all other than pronouncing our QB’s name as “Booker”. That alone tells me the committee, at least the head of the committee, isn’t really watching shit on his own. Gee, I wonder if he’s absorbing some information from outside sources and TV analysts? It happens even if they say it’s not. Impossible not to hear some of it.
Regardless ND controls its own destiny so that’s all that matters. Just win out and there’s nothing to worry about.
I cant find the site but saw the lines out if those 3 games were to happen right now. Againest clemson it was around 8. 14 vs michigan. 20.5 vs ND
Agreed, as is Syracuse and Stanford. And Mich , Stan were at home. I think we are fully deserving of our ranking but I have no idea how good we really are. And that won't be determined until playoffs--- no way we don't post w's vs cause/sc
Are they? Or aren't they?
Question to you....does their reputation give them benefit of the doubt?
Of course it does.
It's been going on since humans were voting on polls etc etc.
The problem that makes things questionable is this....
the SEC is given the red carpet.
The SEC teams get their rankings by beating other SEC teams.
Big out of conference games with the SEC are the rarity.
Lets look at two of Bama's games that people drool over. You know...the trendy people.
LSU, Mississippi State.
LSU is a one trick pony. One dimensional. They lost to an average Florida team. The Bama lovers say well it was in the swamp. Alright...but Kentucky whipped Florida's ass. In the swamp.
LSU is HIGHLY overrated.
Mississippi State..
Watch the game? The MSU coaching staff should have been fired at half time. They had a fumble recovery when the score was 0-0...officials ruled it down. They could have challenged it. They didn't. Are you joking...they didn't.
They score twice right before half. One was a phantom block in the back call. The second was a delay of game.
Regardless just like the LSU win...people are drooling over this shutout.
Shutting out teams in 2018 is impressive but LSU, and MSU are NOT offensive power houses.
So how good is Alabama? They aren't immortal.
Would Oklahoma put 45 points on them? Maybe.
The talking heads want to poke holes in our schedule...Christ our schedule looks Goliath compared to Bama's.
And so the trendy rhetoric of kissing Bama's ass continues.
“so were you looking in the mirror while typing that drivel?
Bottom line is that you have no proof the committee gives a rats ass what talking heads think but you won't admit it”
I “won’t admit it”? Lol. You’re a strange cat. You can’t prove shit either, so give it a rest.
Bottom line is that you have no proof the committee gives a rats ass what talking heads think but you won't admit it”
I “won’t admit it”? Lol. You’re a strange cat. You can’t prove shit either, so give it a rest.
Vegas lines don’t mean they think team x is y points better than team z. They set the lines based on what they think will get 50 percent of the money on each side
Last edited:
Out of curiosity, how many bama games have you seen this year? Forget what everyone else is saying, what's your opinion of bama?
i think oklahoma would score 40 on them. they'd also likely give up 70. This is the best Bama team i've seen under coach by a large margin. this team would crush the 2012 Bama.
Yeah, not trying to come off as a bama slappy. Dont like saban. Funny how nobody talks about all those paid players. Not too long ago, they were averaging a player getting paid bout every 3 years and those are the ones that were caught. I think that #3 ranking is important. Gotta hope bama makes some mistakes in one of the 2 games.
“I think the committee spends a significant amount of time with each other debating and ranking that top 25 that the words of Kirk Herbstreit have no value. Frankly, I would assume that they spend little, if any, time watching pundits give opinions.”
That’s fine. That’s your opinion that the committee members don’t watch or listen to or get influenced by the lead analysts on the lead college football network in the country. Sounds kind of strange that they wouldn’t want to take in supposed expert analysis in order to be thorough, but you’re probably right, condy is too busy debating & ranking the top 25 to get sucked in by their business partner that dabbles in the sport and televises the CFP. I, for one, think it happens but I don’t know for sure. Neither do you. It’s debatable, in other words.
That’s fine. That’s your opinion that the committee members don’t watch or listen to or get influenced by the lead analysts on the lead college football network in the country. Sounds kind of strange that they wouldn’t want to take in supposed expert analysis in order to be thorough, but you’re probably right, condy is too busy debating & ranking the top 25 to get sucked in by their business partner that dabbles in the sport and televises the CFP. I, for one, think it happens but I don’t know for sure. Neither do you. It’s debatable, in other words.
“They need something to discuss, even if it's manufactured.”
Had a feeling you wouldn’t mind fake news.
Had a feeling you wouldn’t mind fake news.
Speaking of Herbie, "Inside College Football", a show that doesn't take themselves too serious and has a good time while discussing college football, just had the panelists reveal their most recent Final Four. Right on cue, Randy Cross lists ND outside at #5. Predictably, he has Cuse over ND. He has gone against ND in every big game this season as far as I can tell.
no its not
only YOUR ego says otherwise
those committee members know their job; and in the end THEY will be the one to get the heat.
Yet YOU think they would bother to listen to so called experts who are no more qualified on anything then THEY are
your hubris knows no bounds
So yes you are full of crap
If I look at the people on the committee, I feel safe in saying that they know enough about football that they don't feel the need to watch "expert analysis" on what's going on.
You also may want to learn who is and who isn't on the playoff committee.
“If I look at the people on the committee, I feel safe in saying that they know enough about football that they don't feel the need to watch "expert analysis" on what's going on.
You also may want to learn who is and who isn't on the playoff committee.”
I know who’s on the committee and if you think they don’t get influenced by outside noise, maybe you think the members are robots, who knows? But I’m gonna go ahead and think that they do and you can go ahead and think that they don’t, deal?
You also may want to learn who is and who isn't on the playoff committee.”
I know who’s on the committee and if you think they don’t get influenced by outside noise, maybe you think the members are robots, who knows? But I’m gonna go ahead and think that they do and you can go ahead and think that they don’t, deal?
Burma, we’ve established that you think I’m full of crap. I feel the same way about you. I’m still not sure why you are so upset that someone thinks the committee members may be swayed by some so called experts’ opinions, but tbh, I really don’t give a shit what you think. Hope you have a great day and can remain calm in case anyone else slights the committee again.
I think it's a reasonable assumption that most of them are quite busy enough that they're not sitting on their couch watching ESPN or listening to Paul Finebaum.
I have two radical ideas....
1. The Committee should be made up to represent all of the FBS. 1 representative from all 10 conferences, 1 for the independents and 2 at-larges with no direct college football program relationships. So now all teams are being judged without bias or the appearance of bias.
2. NO rankings until the final ranking. Let ALL the games be played before they start ranking teams based on "quality wins" versus ranked opponents (many of which drop out later anyway). Then they won't have to justify moving people up and down and then have to backtrack later when their reasoning turned out to be flawed. Plus they aren't behold to keeping one team behind another simply because they started off far apart.
Part of all the arguing about the rankings is they do these first weeks for nothing more than entertainment value. We're talking about a playoff. The entertainment value should be in the games, not speculating about who gets in weeks before the final poll. Basketball waits until the regular season is over before their selection process.
1. The Committee should be made up to represent all of the FBS. 1 representative from all 10 conferences, 1 for the independents and 2 at-larges with no direct college football program relationships. So now all teams are being judged without bias or the appearance of bias.
2. NO rankings until the final ranking. Let ALL the games be played before they start ranking teams based on "quality wins" versus ranked opponents (many of which drop out later anyway). Then they won't have to justify moving people up and down and then have to backtrack later when their reasoning turned out to be flawed. Plus they aren't behold to keeping one team behind another simply because they started off far apart.
Part of all the arguing about the rankings is they do these first weeks for nothing more than entertainment value. We're talking about a playoff. The entertainment value should be in the games, not speculating about who gets in weeks before the final poll. Basketball waits until the regular season is over before their selection process.
“I think it's a reasonable assumption that most of them are quite busy enough that they're not sitting on their couch watching ESPN or listening to Paul Feinbaum”
And I think it’s a reasonable assumption that they listen in to the noise from time to time and decide on their own if they agree w/ it or not. They’re not quarantined, are they? To say that they watch or listen to very little, if any at all, is way more unbelievable that it is to say they do, IMO.
And I think it’s a reasonable assumption that they listen in to the noise from time to time and decide on their own if they agree w/ it or not. They’re not quarantined, are they? To say that they watch or listen to very little, if any at all, is way more unbelievable that it is to say they do, IMO.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Football Changes to Notre Dame's support staff for 2024 season
- Latest: Tyler James
