Your 12/6 Top 10.

[Dinsdale]

Please...please...don't tell me your Ducks are the team you speak of.

No, I must have been talking about the other team that beat Stanford in recent weeks.


Makes your statement quite silly.

[Dinsdale]

Not exactly a blowout, was it?

It's not really that they couldn't beat them, more like didn't beat them.

No argument here.

But Sam seems to think Stanford is unbeatable, for some odd reason. And since I don't think he follows football much, he seems unaware that Oregon has been unbeatable since Adams came back, and were undefeated with him healthy... but injuries are -part of the game (although apparently having a competent backup QB isn't necessarily part of the game), and you don't get do-overs.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

IIRC, he felt that Bama was superior to MSU at every position other than possibly QB.

If Cook is healthy there is no "possibly" about it. He is better and more experienced. But, Cook isn't facing Coker, he's facing Bama's defense, so in that sense Coker might still have an edge.

But, I suspect Bama is better, at least on paper, at most every other position group when you factor in depth. Depth is the key thing here since both teams want to wear you down up front. MSU's DL is very good but they don't go 12 deep the way Bama does. That is insane. MSU's 5 starters on the OL might be better than Bama's, but there is noticeable drop off in the second string. DBs and LBs go to Bama. MSU has a solid collection of experienced and productive WRs and TEs, though the WRs are a little undersized and lack top end speed. Not sure what Bama has there. RB? I suppose I'll give that one to Bama.

[Dinsdale]

The Oregons, Baylors, etc of the college football world impress less knowledgeable fans...right up until the games count for something.

Yeah, if only they could beat those smashmouth power teams...

like Stanford.

[Dinsdale]

Now win a NC.

Working on it. Next year isn't looking too bad, but...

need a QB. Badly.

There's some talent coming, and a potential stud ready to take off the redshirt, but you never know how that's going to go (no one was sure how Mariota would do... turned out OK). And the super-stud from Montana State is considering a transfer, which worked out OK this season, but isn't really a "sustainable model" for stocking QBs.

And the D-line (which was solid this year, while the 8 guys behind them were less than impressive) is taking huge losses, but the backups were fine. Lose the best O-lineman (Johnstone), but the rest were young and serviceable.

All in all, the future still looks bright... just need a freaking QB.

[Mikey]

I prefer to reference the CFP Poll. It may not be perfect but at least it's an objective barometer to judge these teams created by people who supposedly watch the games and pour over various metrics.

So, would you pick the dogs in each of these games, not just to cover but to win outright?

Baylor (17) -3.5 North Carolina (10)
Oklahoma (4) -4.5 Clemson (1)
Tennessee (23) -8.5 Northwestern (13)
Stanford (6) -7.5 Iowa (5)

[Goober McTuber]

I prefer to reference the CFP Poll. It may not be perfect but at least it's an objective barometer to judge these teams created by people who supposedly watch the games and pour over various metrics.

So, would you pick the dogs in each of these games, not just to cover but to win outright?

Baylor (17) -3.5 North Carolina (10)
Oklahoma (4) -4.5 Clemson (1)
Tennessee (23) -8.5 Northwestern (13)
Stanford (6) -7.5 Iowa (5)

Nope. Stanford might cover, though.

[Mikey]

I prefer to reference the CFP Poll. It may not be perfect but at least it's an objective barometer to judge these teams created by people who supposedly watch the games and pour over various metrics.

So, would you pick the dogs in each of these games, not just to cover but to win outright?

Baylor (17) -3.5 North Carolina (10)
Oklahoma (4) -4.5 Clemson (1)
Tennessee (23) -8.5 Northwestern (13)
Stanford (6) -7.5 Iowa (5)

Nope. Stanford might cover, though.

Stanford is the 7.5 point favorite you fucking moron.

[Goober McTuber]

In that case, I'd take all 4 dogs.

[Mikey]

In that case, I'd take all 4 dogs.

So you're going with the CFP rankings over the oddsmakers.

[Goober McTuber]

In that case, I'd take all 4 dogs.

So you're going with the CFP rankings over the oddsmakers.

You do realize that spreads are not necessarily set based on who they think will win, you fucking moron.

[Mikey]

In that case, I'd take all 4 dogs.

So you're going with the CFP rankings over the oddsmakers.

You do realize that spreads are not necessarily set based on who they think will win, you fucking moron.

I do realize that, idiot. Their ultimate goal is to get an equal amount bet on both sides. That way the bookmakers win no matter what the score is.

But the CFP rankings also don't mean that a higher ranked team would be necessarily expected to beat (or is "better" than) a lower ranked team. It's pretty much the limit of Magoo's insight, though.

[Goober McTuber]

You do realize that spreads are not necessarily set based on who they think will win, you fucking moron.

I do realize that, idiot. Their ultimate goal is to get an equal amount bet on both sides. That way the bookmakers win no matter what the score is.

But the CFP rankings also don't mean that a higher ranked team would be necessarily expected to beat (or is "better" than) a lower ranked team. It's pretty much the limit of Magoo's insight, though.

Part of the problem, you myopic fucking cretin, is that you were trying to equate 3 teams (#25 and the other 2 unranked) with 3 teams that are all within the top 15, 2 of them in the top 7.

[Mikey]

The statement I originally meant to refute before this thread went off in other directions (how could that happen here?) was:

Plus Stanford has beaten better teams than MSU has.

The fuck? Who? Notre Dame? For the sake of argument, let's say that ND is better than anyone on MSU's schedule. Fine. Stanford has that on victory. MSU has Oregon (Stanford loss), Ohio State, Michigan and Iowa. That blows the doors off of the next few victories for Stanford.

So, let's compare the examples Killian brings up. Throw out Stanford's win over ND. OK, but then you have to throw out MSU's best win which would be...tOSU. So that leaves

MSU:
Oregon (Stanford loss)
Michigan (lost to Utah)
Iowa

Stanford's next best three are probably:
USC, twice (beat Utah)
UCLA or Washington State (who also beat Oregon)

Stanford beat SC by 10 and 19 points, and UCLA by 21.
MSU's three wins were by 3, 4 and 3 points.

Are those wins "better" than Stanford's wins? Maybe. But "blows the doors off". Uh uh.

Now GFY you drooling senile fuckstick.

[Goober McTuber]

The statement I originally meant to refute before this thread went off in other directions (how could that happen here?) was:

From your very first post in this thread:

Seriously, though, I'd put SC, UCLA and Washington State (with a healthy QB) against Michigan, tOSU and Iowa and give them a 50% chance of winning.

You FAT fucking RETARD.

[Killian]

The transitive property; full proof way to win a college football argument.

"USC beat Utah who beat UofM so USC would totally beat UofM!"

Stanford: #8 ND
MSU: #5 Iowa

Push

Stanford: #25 USC
MSU: #7 OSU

Definitive edge to MSU. No way this is a coin flip.

Stanford: #25 USC
MSU: #13 Northwestern

Talent wise, an edge to USC. Given their current disfunction, probably a coin flip or better for USC. But this is the second time this team is used by Stanford.

Stanford: UR UCLA
MSU: #14 UofM

Definitive edge to MSU. No way this is a coin flip.

Stanford: UR Washington State
MSU: #15 Oregon

Definitive edge to MSU. I know; "Look fuck head, WSU beat Oregon." Great. This victory is much more impressive for MSU to everyone outside the PAC12, and probably most in the PAC12 given the circumstances.

Played then, WSU wins. Played now? No way this is a coin flip.

Michigan State's victories, no matter which way you look at it, are much more impressive than Stanford's. And no matter how you look at it, yes, they do blow the doors off of Stanford's opponents. USC has to appear twice for you to even come close to making your point.

So maybe I misspoke. Perhaps Stanford does sneak one victory in there that would be close to a coin flip against an MSU opponent. If you went by teams played and only used USC once, it's an even bigger landslide for MSU.

And if you're going to use the "fuck you, WSU beat Oregon", MSU fans will just use the "fuck you, NW beat Stanford" when you inevitably discount NW playing anyone.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Seriously, though, I'd put SC, UCLA and Washington State (with a healthy QB) against Michigan, tOSU and Iowa and give them a 50% chance of winning.

Just curious, what % chance would you give them of beating unranked Wisconsin and 5-win Nebraska?

[Mikey]

OK I'm ready to eat my words. The LA teams have been a huge flop, though SC at least made it close. Really looking forward to the Rose Bowl as it's an interesting match between pretty similar styles. I think Stanford has overall better "skill" players, though, and could compete with any of the playoff teams, and tOSU.

Too bad Boykin is such a dick - I was really looking forward to that game too.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

OK I'm ready to eat my words. The LA teams have been a huge flop, though SC at least made it close. Really looking forward to the Rose Bowl as it's an interesting match between pretty similar styles. I think Stanford has overall better "skill" players, though, and could compete with any of the playoff teams, and tOSU.

Too bad Boykin is such a dick - I was really looking forward to that game too.

Other than the playoff games, the Rose Bowl is the game I'm most looking forward to. Should be a very close game, but I give Stanford the slight edge due to McCaffrey. 23-20 Cardinal.

[Goober McTuber]

OK I'm ready to eat my words.

Should go nicely with a side order of canned bacon.

[Mikey]

OK I'm ready to eat my words.

Should go nicely with a side order of canned bacon.

I'll have to admit it's pretty funny how you keep bringing that up.
Especially since I've never even seen canned bacon.
But don't let that stop you, it's really hilarious.

[Go Coogs']

Can we all just admit we don't know what the hell we're talking about, because nobody expected a 38-0 drubbing off Sparty last night. That doesn't necessarily say how weak the B1G is or how strong the SEC is or the PAC's 3 thru 7 teams can hang with the B1G's top three.

I will say this, however, it's evident the B1G was weak this year. They in no way proved they belong as a top 4 qualifier. Unfortunately, there really was no other school that proved they deserved to be in other than maybe Stanford.

A 2 vs 3 should never end up 38-0. That was truly pathetic and bad for the current system in place.

[Goober McTuber]

OK I'm ready to eat my words.

Should go nicely with a side order of canned bacon.

I'll have to admit it's pretty funny how you keep bringing that up.
Especially since I've never even seen canned bacon.
But don't let that stop you, it's really hilarious.

Pre-cooked, canned, whatever. Let's just call it un-bacon.