ADVERTISEMENT

State of college football

There is a big separation between those 3 and everyone else. Hell, Bama just clobbered their rival in the iron bowl. One that is the top 25.
 
Probably because there is less talent out there because mommy doesn't want her son playing the sport. Only solution would probably to limit 75 scholarships?? Maybe??
 
  • Like
Reactions: pbrad
You want to win you pay up..simple solution...otherwise you shut up and take your lumps
 
  • Like
Reactions: pierre93
There is a big separation between those 3 and everyone else. Hell, Bama just clobbered their rival in the iron bowl. One that is the top 25.

Georgia is as talented as those other 3 this season, they just had horrible QB play for much of the year. Had Newman not opted out or JT Daniels been able to play earlier I have little doubt they would be right near the top of the playoff rankings.
 
Been saying this for the last 5 years. It’s Bama, Clemson, Ohio State and a rotating 4th team every year. The rest are not even close. Not even competitive. Shades above and below mediocrity.

College football is not enjoyable anymore.

Conferences should cap the coaching salaries, so school like Pitt could spread the money around a little bit more.

I know. I know. Half of you have a Pavlovian instinct to reject any such idea as unAmerican.
 
Conferences should cap the coaching salaries, so school like Pitt could spread the money around a little bit more.

I know. I know. Half of you have a Pavlovian instinct to reject any such idea as unAmerican.

I'm normally one of those who reject those unAmerican ideas. Except in sports. The reason why I make an exception in sports is because I view it like the whole industry is one business not each industry being it's own business. You need a level of parity for it to be interesting. Otherwise we have what we currently have and seem destined to for the future. And that does take away. Look at NFL vs MLB. MLB lost an entire generation of fans in Pittsburgh and came close to in other small market cities. NFL lost people for social opinions but not because fans feel like supporting their team is a waste.
 
Been saying this for the last 5 years. It’s Bama, Clemson, Ohio State and a rotating 4th team every year. The rest are not even close. Not even competitive. Shades above and below mediocrity.

College football is not enjoyable anymore.
Needs to be some sort of cap. Helped most of the small market franchises in the NFL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mikefln
You want to win you pay up..simple solution...otherwise you shut up and take your lumps
Agree and Pitt takes the cheap route. We had it really going back in the the mid 70's early 80's. But it was like we were ashamed of our own success. The academic buffs contributed very much to the football mediocrity.
 
Been saying this for the last 5 years. It’s Bama, Clemson, Ohio State and a rotating 4th team every year. The rest are not even close. Not even competitive. Shades above and below mediocrity.

College football is not enjoyable anymore.

Bingo. Just said this to my dad. They have to fix it. Limit scholarships to 70.
 
Probably because there is less talent out there because mommy doesn't want her son playing the sport. Only solution would probably to limit 75 scholarships?? Maybe??
The 75 would be their top 75 today
 
There was no doubt the PItt administration held the football program back after the run in the 1970s and 1980s. Its the same schools every year who win recruiting. There are only some many top notch football players out there. The championship will probably be Clemson and Alabama again. Those big schools have the revenue plus the donations come in from the happy fan base every year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThePanthers
Ohio State isn't even in same league as Clemson and Alabama. They're a notch below in there with Oklahoma.
 
Capping coaches salaries and limiting the number of scholarships to 75 solves nothing.

Clemson, Bama, TOSU and soon to be Texas A&M outspend everyone in facilities.

5 stars love it and will continue to go there.

Salaries and limits on schollies solve nothing.
 
Been saying this for the last 5 years. It’s Bama, Clemson, Ohio State and a rotating 4th team every year. The rest are not even close. Not even competitive. Shades above and below mediocrity.

College football is not enjoyable anymore.
Been saying the same thing since the CFP and conference realignments myself.

The traditions, the rivalries, the pageantry, the regional pride, the hope that your team could catch lightning in a bottle, go undefeated, win its league, go to a top tier bowl and stake a claim for the NC......

Long gone. Ruined by the money.
 
I agree that a coaching salary cap probably does little; the teams with the revenue will just focus it onto other things.
Scholarship reductions help some, but not enough to change the current paradigm

The correct answer is that instead of 125-130 FBS teams that are sort of split into two groups, there needs to be a split into 4-6 groups of schools of similar sizes and demographics.


Of course, it will never happen. Never mind the Pitts and Georgia Techs having no shot at a National Championship, we still see FCS teams move from that division up to be clobbered routinely at the FBS level, all because it pays more for them to lose.

Oddly enough, Pitt's location in the ACC is favorable for the to be successful, save for that one team (Clemson) in there. Nine or ten other teams I would expect Pitt to go 10-10 or so against for the next twenty years (Duke and Wake I'd expect a much better mark against)
 
Georgia is as talented as those other 3 this season, they just had horrible QB play for much of the year. Had Newman not opted out or JT Daniels been able to play earlier I have little doubt they would be right near the top of the playoff rankings.
So you’re saying Georgia woulda/shoulda been this year’s rotating 4th team. But they’re not because they don’t stack up at the most important difference-making position on the field.

So Notre Dame is this year’s rotating #4 team.

Let’s remember though, last year’s rotating #4 won it all!
 
  • Like
Reactions: PittFathead87
I agree that a coaching salary cap probably does little; the teams with the revenue will just focus it onto other things.
Scholarship reductions help some, but not enough to change the current paradigm

The correct answer is that instead of 125-130 FBS teams that are sort of split into two groups, there needs to be a split into 4-6 groups of schools of similar sizes and demographics.


Of course, it will never happen. Never mind the Pitts and Georgia Techs having no shot at a National Championship, we still see FCS teams move from that division up to be clobbered routinely at the FBS level, all because it pays more for them to lose.

Oddly enough, Pitt's location in the ACC is favorable for the to be successful, save for that one team (Clemson) in there. Nine or ten other teams I would expect Pitt to go 10-10 or so against for the next twenty years (Duke and Wake I'd expect a much better mark against)
I think it needs to be more than 4 or 6 groups ... the truth is, there is going to be a top dog that rises to the top of each grouping. That is exactly what has happened with the re-aligned conferences. Bama has jumped to top dog out of 14 teams in SEC, Clemson is top dog out of 14 teams in ACC, OSU top dog in 14 team Big 10, Oklahoma is top dog in 10 team Big 12. Part of the reason why Pac12 is "down" is because they do not have a dominant team right now. I would rather see there be 16 conferences in FBS, with only say 8 teams max per conference. Then you at least have 16 top dogs. I also think teams like Cincinnati, or UCF from a few years ago, need to be given a shot. If they run the table, then they should get in over a 1 loss Clemson team, or an OSU team that only plays 7 or 8 games. As we saw with Boise State playing in big bowls years ago, these teams can sometimes compete with the bigger conferences at least for one game. So why not give them a chance? It would make things more interesting. Smaller conferences also give you a chance to play more non-conference games, which can be used to restore many traditional rivalries. Unfortunately, it will never happen because of the money.
 
Last edited:
Ohio State isn't even in same league as Clemson and Alabama. They're a notch below in there with Oklahoma.
What? Have you been scouting for the CFL? Ohio State players are routinely drafted in large quantities and early.
 
When Ohio State lines up against Clemson and Alabama who's winning? Sorry, it's Clemson and Alabama then everyone else right now.
 
I think it needs to be more than 4 or 6 groups ... the truth is, there is going to be a top dog that rises to the top of each grouping. That is exactly what has happened with the re-aligned conferences. Bama has jumped to top dog out of 14 teams in SEC, Clemson is top dog out of 14 teams in ACC, OSU top dog in 14 team Big 10, Oklahoma is top dog in 10 team Big 12. Part of the reason why Pac12 is "down" is because they do not have a dominant team right now. I would rather see there be 16 conferences in FBS, with only say 8 teams max per conference. Then you at least have 16 top dogs. I also think teams like Cincinnati, or UCF from a few years ago, need to be given a shot. If they run the table, then they should get in over a 1 loss Clemson team, or an OSU team that only plays 7 or 8 games. As we saw with Boise State playing in big bowls years ago, these teams can sometimes compete with the bigger conferences at least for one game. So why not give them a chance? It would make things more interesting. Smaller conferences also give you a chance to play more non-conference games, which can be used to restore many traditional rivalries. Unfortunately, it will never happen because of the money.
I think the smaller conference i.e. Group of Five would be far better served to get their own playoff set up and make their own National Champion.
You brought up Cincy. Yes it was last year, but their game against Ohio State last year - the Buckeyes won 42-0 - tells me all I need to know about Cincy being in a playoff against Ohio St, Alabama, etc. Be a National Champion against schools their size. Absolutely zero shame in that.
 
When wasn’t that the case though?
The state of college football is always: 3 or 4 teams from a limited pool of blue bloods dominate, with a johnny come lately (Miami, FSU, UF, Clemson) rising up to join them.

Look at the list of National Title winners. Where is the parity? BYU, GT, and Colorado are the only teams that stick out over the last 40 years. It’s always the same pool of winners every year.
 
I think the smaller conference i.e. Group of Five would be far better served to get their own playoff set up and make their own National Champion.
You brought up Cincy. Yes it was last year, but their game against Ohio State last year - the Buckeyes won 42-0 - tells me all I need to know about Cincy being in a playoff against Ohio St, Alabama, etc. Be a National Champion against schools their size. Absolutely zero shame in that.
I hear you that these elite schools are way above all other programs. But that's fine ... I'd rather see Bama/OSU/Clemson beat Cincy in a playoff game 42-0 than LSU beating Oklahoma 63-28, or Clemson beating ND 30-3, or Clemson beating OSU 31-0, or Bama beating MSU 38-0, etc. If AAC and other conferences are given a chance, then it at least makes them relevant and worth paying attention to during the regular season.

Right now, the only conferences relevant to the national title conversation are SEC, ACC, Big 10, and Big 12. After this year it will be 4 years since Pac12 got in the playoff, so they really are not relevant. And Big 12 was only relevant in the playoff conversation for what, 3 weeks this season until their contenders were essentially eliminated? If you gave AAC a chance, it would be worth following their games which would be fun and good for college football in my opinion.
 
Georgia is as talented as those other 3 this season, they just had horrible QB play for much of the year. Had Newman not opted out or JT Daniels been able to play earlier I have little doubt they would be right near the top of the playoff rankings.

Their system sucks for QBs. It's the same formations, same plays over and over.

1st down - trips bunch, HB dive
2nd down - trips bunch, HB dive
3rd down - trips bunch, QB throw to sidelines

It's not that UGA has worse players, it's just that their coaches put them behind the 8 ball.
 
Their system sucks for QBs. It's the same formations, same plays over and over.

1st down - trips bunch, HB dive
2nd down - trips bunch, HB dive
3rd down - trips bunch, QB throw to sidelines

It's not that UGA has worse players, it's just that their coaches put them behind the 8 ball.

Sounds like Pitt's offensive coaches. Not saying their personnel is as good as Georgia, because it's not, but with the right scheme and putting your players in position to succeed is an amazing thing.

The inability to have Addison and Turner on the field at the same time is, to say the least, negligent.

I really think if Lane Kiffin had Pitt's personnel they'd drop 35+ on most teams they play.
 
I hear you that these elite schools are way above all other programs. But that's fine ... I'd rather see Bama/OSU/Clemson beat Cincy in a playoff game 42-0 than LSU beating Oklahoma 63-28, or Clemson beating ND 30-3, or Clemson beating OSU 31-0, or Bama beating MSU 38-0, etc. If AAC and other conferences are given a chance, then it at least makes them relevant and worth paying attention to during the regular season.

Right now, the only conferences relevant to the national title conversation are SEC, ACC, Big 10, and Big 12. After this year it will be 4 years since Pac12 got in the playoff, so they really are not relevant. And Big 12 was only relevant in the playoff conversation for what, 3 weeks this season until their contenders were essentially eliminated? If you gave AAC a chance, it would be worth following their games which would be fun and good for college football in my opinion.
Maybe.
I just think, at this point, teams like Cincy and Boise, as well as Pitt and Georgia Tech and WVU, are better off doing their own tournament instead of smashing their head against a brick wall.
 
So you’re saying Georgia woulda/shoulda been this year’s rotating 4th team. But they’re not because they don’t stack up at the most important difference-making position on the field.

So Notre Dame is this year’s rotating #4 team.

Let’s remember though, last year’s rotating #4 won it all!

Im saying they have as much talent as those other teams, they just happened to have to play their 3rd and 4th string QB’s for much of the season.

It would be like Alabama playing without both Mac Jones and Bryce Young, or Clemson without both Lawrence and Ugiagelelei. They would still be one of the top 10 teams in the country like Georgia is, just not elite.
 
Maybe.
I just think, at this point, teams like Cincy and Boise, as well as Pitt and Georgia Tech and WVU, are better off doing their own tournament instead of smashing their head against a brick wall.

It isn't just like Cincy, Boise, Pitt, GT, and WVU. It's basically everyone except Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, and one other team every year.

Alabama beat Texas A&M 52-24. Texas A&M is ranked #5. Bama just smoked Auburn who was #22.

I believe only 11 team have made the playoff.

I think the biggest reason is football coaches are easily the most stubborn when it comes to their scheme/personnel they run. They adapt less than any other head coaches in other sports. And for programs like Pitt that can't happen. The blow outs are due to running a scheme that Pitt can't recruit to when you play ND and Clemson. Can't put your DBs on islands every play against the best WRs in college football. When you do that you're inviting blowouts.
 
Been saying this for the last 5 years. It’s Bama, Clemson, Ohio State and a rotating 4th team every year. The rest are not even close. Not even competitive. Shades above and below mediocrity.

College football is not enjoyable anymore.

it will get far worse paying players
 
It isn't just like Cincy, Boise, Pitt, GT, and WVU. It's basically everyone except Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, and one other team every year.

Alabama beat Texas A&M 52-24. Texas A&M is ranked #5. Bama just smoked Auburn who was #22.

I believe only 11 team have made the playoff.

I think the biggest reason is football coaches are easily the most stubborn when it comes to their scheme/personnel they run. They adapt less than any other head coaches in other sports. And for programs like Pitt that can't happen. The blow outs are due to running a scheme that Pitt can't recruit to when you play ND and Clemson. Can't put your DBs on islands every play against the best WRs in college football. When you do that you're inviting blowouts.
Agree about the defense. It’s designed to fail against good QB’s.
On the offensive side, the only way for the Pitt’s of the world to succeed is to run a wide open spread offense.
 
It isn't just like Cincy, Boise, Pitt, GT, and WVU. It's basically everyone except Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, and one other team every year.

Alabama beat Texas A&M 52-24. Texas A&M is ranked #5. Bama just smoked Auburn who was #22.

I believe only 11 team have made the playoff.

I think the biggest reason is football coaches are easily the most stubborn when it comes to their scheme/personnel they run. They adapt less than any other head coaches in other sports. And for programs like Pitt that can't happen. The blow outs are due to running a scheme that Pitt can't recruit to when you play ND and Clemson. Can't put your DBs on islands every play against the best WRs in college football. When you do that you're inviting blowouts.
Obviously I didn’t mean literally just Pitt, Cincy, etc. Pitt is no different than about 30 other schools, despite what the doomsayers on this board think
But some places have a far, far better chance to reach that tier than others.
Some , unless things change, have virtually no chance.
 
Obviously I didn’t mean literally just Pitt, Cincy, etc. Pitt is no different than about 30 other schools, despite what the doomsayers on this board think
But some places have a far, far better chance to reach that tier than others.
Some , unless things change, have virtually no chance.

Yeah I understand what you're saying. I mean realistically, we should be rooting for 3-1 in OOC play and 6-2 in conference with an ACC Championship Game appearance and possbile NYD6 game. Maybe everyone once and a while 4-0 in the OOC. Should be rooting for 9-3/10-2 but that's the ceiling.

I do believe it is attainable. But Narduzzi needs to hit on an OC or it's over.
 
Yeah I understand what you're saying. I mean realistically, we should be rooting for 3-1 in OOC play and 6-2 in conference with an ACC Championship Game appearance and possbile NYD6 game. Maybe everyone once and a while 4-0 in the OOC. Should be rooting for 9-3/10-2 but that's the ceiling.

I do believe it is attainable. But Narduzzi needs to hit on an OC or it's over.
There’s no reason why Pitt can’t go 3-1 in ooc and 5-3 in conference. A bowl win makes 9. Narduzzi will never reach 9. There is a coach, several that is, that can reach 10 at Pitt. All are coaching at non P5 schools today. A new OC is not the answer. Firing Narduzzi and hiring his replacement is. And heather really needs to be shopping her resume right now while her stock is high. It’s being pumped before it’s dumped. I’m on to her. She still hiding in the basement? Vacationing at OBX. Orbiting the earth. Silence is deadly.
 
There’s no reason why Pitt can’t go 3-1 in ooc and 5-3 in conference. A bowl win makes 9. Narduzzi will never reach 9. There is a coach, several that is, that can reach 10 at Pitt. All are coaching at non P5 schools today. A new OC is not the answer. Firing Narduzzi and hiring his replacement is. And heather really needs to be shopping her resume right now while her stock is high. It’s being pumped before it’s dumped. I’m on to her. She still hiding in the basement? Vacationing at OBX. Orbiting the earth. Silence is deadly.

An OC could definitely propel the team to a 9/10 win season. I think if Pitt played its normal schedule this year they may have won 9 games.
 
An OC could definitely propel the team to a 9/10 win season. I think if Pitt played its normal schedule this year they may have won 9 games.
If they played their original schedule + a bowl game, then I’d say 8-5 is a reasonable prediction. A good OC and another good recruiter like Beatty on the offensive side of the ball would lead to a 9/10 win season.
 
Been saying this for the last 5 years. It’s Bama, Clemson, Ohio State and a rotating 4th team every year. The rest are not even close. Not even competitive. Shades above and below mediocrity.

College football is not enjoyable anymore.
No. Just like ESPN obsesses on Clemson, Alabama, Notre Dame, Ohio State. Only when fans tune out, boycott the CFP, will the powers that be pay attention.

I though the NCAA was working to make college football more competitive. Instead, we have a monopoly.
 
It isn't just like Cincy, Boise, Pitt, GT, and WVU. It's basically everyone except Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, and one other team every year.

Alabama beat Texas A&M 52-24. Texas A&M is ranked #5. Bama just smoked Auburn who was #22.

I believe only 11 team have made the playoff.

I think the biggest reason is football coaches are easily the most stubborn when it comes to their scheme/personnel they run. They adapt less than any other head coaches in other sports. And for programs like Pitt that can't happen. The blow outs are due to running a scheme that Pitt can't recruit to when you play ND and Clemson. Can't put your DBs on islands every play against the best WRs in college football. When you do that you're inviting blowouts.

MSU won a B1G Championship playing that scheme.

IMO, the reason for the blow outs this year to ND & Clemson was mainly due to the lack of a running game. (and obviously KP out for ND) Against a team with as much quick strike capability as Clemson, I think you have to have some semblance of a running game and control the clock, for a realistic chance to win. Not really a good matchup for this Pitt team. Pitt came out playing to their strengths, and unfortunately, the drops returned, Kenny was pressured and it led to the Panthers finding themselves in a big hole early. Fans often bitch about a coach "playing not to lose" and what happened early yesterday is the down side of that. Once Pitt settled down and focused, they got some rhythm and landed some punches.

I think they adapt less due to the time restraints, and constant change in personnel. I think they feel their best chance for success is to implement a system and go with it.
 
MSU won a B1G Championship playing that scheme.

IMO, the reason for the blow outs this year to ND & Clemson was mainly due to the lack of a running game. (and obviously KP out for ND) Against a team with as much quick strike capability as Clemson, I think you have to have some semblance of a running game and control the clock, for a realistic chance to win. Not really a good matchup for this Pitt team. Pitt came out playing to their strengths, and unfortunately, the drops returned, Kenny was pressured and it led to the Panthers finding themselves in a big hole early. Fans often bitch about a coach "playing not to lose" and what happened early yesterday is the down side of that. Once Pitt settled down and focused, they got some rhythm and landed some punches.

I think they adapt less due to the time restraints, and constant change in personnel. I think they feel their best chance for success is to implement a system and go with it.

They did, but the QB talent in the Big10 is less. Before Haskin's who was drafted in the first round last year the last Big10 QB to be drafted in the first round was in like the late 90s I think. ACC has better QBs who have shown for years they can make those throws. That's why Pitt's loses are to the best QBs they've played. Lawrence, Book, Leary, Jurkovec could make those throws. Miami couldn't really and I actually think Pitt wins if Kenny is healthy.
 
MSU won a B1G Championship playing that scheme.

IMO, the reason for the blow outs this year to ND & Clemson was mainly due to the lack of a running game. (and obviously KP out for ND) Against a team with as much quick strike capability as Clemson, I think you have to have some semblance of a running game and control the clock, for a realistic chance to win. Not really a good matchup for this Pitt team. Pitt came out playing to their strengths, and unfortunately, the drops returned, Kenny was pressured and it led to the Panthers finding themselves in a big hole early. Fans often bitch about a coach "playing not to lose" and what happened early yesterday is the down side of that. Once Pitt settled down and focused, they got some rhythm and landed some punches.

I think they adapt less due to the time restraints, and constant change in personnel. I think they feel their best chance for success is to implement a system and go with it.

But I agree with the offense. Pitt has to run a wide open spread offense and make teams like Clemson defend the entire field. That's what Canada did. Along with having threats all over the field. That, along with being a great play caller and mastering that offense, kept teams off balance all day.
 
They did, but the QB talent in the Big10 is less. Before Haskin's who was drafted in the first round last year the last Big10 QB to be drafted in the first round was in like the late 90s I think. ACC has better QBs who have shown for years they can make those throws. That's why Pitt's loses are to the best QBs they've played. Lawrence, Book, Leary, Jurkovec could make those throws. Miami couldn't really and I actually think Pitt wins if Kenny is healthy.

The defense isn't exactly the reason Pitt lost to NCSU, BC, or Miami. The offense in the red zone was the biggest reason Pitt lost to NCSU.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT