Jump to content

2019 CFP National Championship - Clemson vs. Alabama

satyanash

By satyanash
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

C-Man

C-Man 27058

Posted
Posted
Just now, satyanash said:

There's never really been much parity in the NBA. Different animal imo

And even much less so the last couple of years. Basketball is a different animal in that one or two players can carry a basketball team. That doesn't work in football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Dnaguy
Dnaguy

That’s how good Bama is. When they beat themselves, its by 4 TD’s.

HundredWaters
HundredWaters

Wrong. Read the real story mongoloid faggot. 

TexasMan
TexasMan
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 32703

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, C-Man said:

And even much less so the last couple of years. Basketball is a different animal in that one or two players can carry a basketball team. That doesn't work in football.

Yeah, okay. A team wins the title two years in a row and 3 out of 4 seasons. When has that ever happened in the NBA? Oh, that's right. Literally every single decade in history except the 1970s.

And now that team is second in their conference and only 2-1/2 games up in their division.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satyanash

satyanash 14281

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 minutes ago, C-Man said:

And even much less so the last couple of years. Basketball is a different animal in that one or two players can carry a basketball team. That doesn't work in football.

Also basketball players are much less prone to injury and don't have to leave after 4 seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
C-Man

C-Man 27058

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Yeah, okay. A team wins the title two years in a row and 3 out of 4 seasons. When has that ever happened in the NBA? Oh, that's right. Literally every single decade in history except the 1970s.

And now that team is second in their conference and only 2-1/2 games up in their division.

I'm not really sure what the argument is. Tonight's game *should* be competitive and it's between the no-brainer best programs from the last four seasons. Bama is in the midst of an all-time run of dominance at the collegiate level.

Not to derail but this year's NBA is interesting. There seem to be a lot more teams hovering around just above .500 and no real runaways like you usually see. Golden State looks slightly mortal but I fully expect them to be the Warriors by the end of the season (unless Draymond continues to play poorly). The NBA has always had star-driven championship teams but the teaming-up of superstars to create super-teams is a relatively new phenomenon at least post-merger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The People’s Elbow

The People’s Elbow 707

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, C-Man said:

I'm not really sure what the argument is. Tonight's game *should* be competitive and it's between the no-brainer best programs from the last four seasons. Bama is in the midst of an all-time run of dominance at the collegiate level.

Not to derail but this year's NBA is interesting. There seem to be a lot more teams hovering around just above .500 and no real runaways like you usually see. Golden State looks slightly mortal but I fully expect them to be the Warriors by the end of the season (unless Draymond continues to play poorly). The NBA has always had star-driven championship teams but the teaming-up of superstars to create super-teams is a relatively new phenomenon at least post-merger.

Whooooosh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Sam Beckett

Doc Sam Beckett 5784

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Vic Mackey said:

Last year's I didn't even watch. First time ever for me. But I agree with your sentiment. This is now the Cavs/Warriors of the NBA. Is is the 2 best teams? Sure. Is it really that compelling? No.

 

Lulz but expand the playoffs and if it isn't Texas then I won't watch it! 

 

15 minutes ago, satyanash said:

ND still getting dogpiled by the media, lol

 

 

The difference in treatment that ND and Oklahoma are receiving for essentially the same semi final ass kicking is amusing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
relapse98

relapse98 634

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, satyanash said:

Attendance for this game is going to be bad... yikes.

Yeah. Stadium on the other side of the country from both colleges. Not the world's greatest stadium.
Still, cheapest seat on Stubhub is still $207 and they go up (way up) from there.

 

And even with poor attendance, it should still be a good game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 32703

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, satyanash said:

 

Weak sauce in that article. You can't claim "in 150 years" if you're actually going to ignore the first era of college football. I understand ignoring it in this comparison, just don't claim all 150 years if you're doing so.

Princeton and Yale were the two best teams in college football 5 years in a row from 1877-1881. Took a year off in 1882 when Harvard broke into the top 2, then were the top two teams for 4 more years in a row from 1883-1886. That's 9 out of 10 years. Then took a year off in 1887 because of Harvard again. Then two more years for good measure in 1888 and 1889.

And while I understand the argument about the small number of teams, if you're citing NHL seasons when they had 6 teams then that cancels that argument right out.

Edited by Huckleberry
Link to comment
Share on other sites
C-Man

C-Man 27058

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Weak sauce in that article. You can't claim "in 150 years" if you're actually going to ignore the first era of college football. I understand ignoring it in this comparison, just don't claim all 150 years if you're doing so.

Princeton and Yale were the two best teams in college football 5 years in a row from 1877-1881. Took a year off in 1882 when Harvard broke into the top 2, then were the top two teams for 4 more years in a row from 1883-1886. That's 9 out of 10 years. Then took a year off in 1887 because of Harvard again. Then two more years for good measure in 1889 and 1890.

And while I understand the argument about the small number of teams, if you're citing NHL seasons when they had 6 teams then that cancels that argument right out.

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
satyanash

satyanash 14281

Posted
  • Author
Posted
15 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Weak sauce in that article. You can't claim "in 150 years" if you're actually going to ignore the first era of college football. I understand ignoring it in this comparison, just don't claim all 150 years if you're doing so.

Princeton and Yale were the two best teams in college football 5 years in a row from 1877-1881. Took a year off in 1882 when Harvard broke into the top 2, then were the top two teams for 4 more years in a row from 1883-1886. That's 9 out of 10 years. Then took a year off in 1887 because of Harvard again. Then two more years for good measure in 1888 and 1889.

And while I understand the argument about the small number of teams, if you're citing NHL seasons when they had 6 teams then that cancels that argument right out.

ESPN has been making a big push to cement Bama-Clemson as the next 'must-see' rivalry: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25700715/clemson-alabama-perfect-embodiment-modern-football-rivalries

Problem is, people are already starting to get tired of it. It feels manufactured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
texifornia

texifornia 56526

Posted
Posted
Just now, satyanash said:

ESPN has been making a big push to cement Bama-Clemson as the next 'must-see' rivalry: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25700715/clemson-alabama-perfect-embodiment-modern-football-rivalries

Problem is, people are already starting to get tired of it. It feels manufactured.

The two teams and fanbases don't hate each other, there aren't any huge personalities (Saban is just a robot and Dabo is a friendly goober), it's hyper-regional, and Clemson's fanbase is tiny. There's just not a lot there beyond being really really good at college football.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cajun

Cajun 11675

Posted
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

The difference in treatment that ND and Oklahoma are receiving for essentially the same semi final ass kicking is amusing. 

Look, I'm no fan of ou, but c'mon.

I watched both games and they were very different.  The gooners fought back and did make a game of it.

Domers?  Nope.

Edited by Cajun
Link to comment
Share on other sites
C-Man

C-Man 27058

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Cajun said:

Look, I'm no fan of ou, but c'mon.

I watched both games and they were very different.  The gooners fought back and did make a game of it.

Domers?  Nope.

Notre Dame was easily the worst of the four teams in the semifinals. There are probably a half-dozen or more teams beyond Bama, Clemson Or OU that would've beaten the Irish that week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cajun

Cajun 11675

Posted
Posted

LMAO once again at the Finebaum show.  Every yuckity yuk he trots up there makes his analysis based on the premise that Clemson will have to be extremely lucky to beat big, bad Bama.

If Clemson does win tonight, I'm going to really enjoy watching the SEC excuse machine getting throttled up to 110%.                                                                                                                           

Link to comment
Share on other sites
relapse98

relapse98 634

Posted
Posted
Just now, Dewey said:

Honestly, now that Sec play is over with, I wonder how excited Bama will be? Might come out flat and with their eyes on the nfl and the ones coming back for another year, already focussing on next years Sec schedule.

How focused is Satan on another national championship? I guess we'll see but, yeah, I would think he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vic Mackey

Vic Mackey 46936

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, satyanash said:

ESPN has been making a big push to cement Bama-Clemson as the next 'must-see' rivalry: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25700715/clemson-alabama-perfect-embodiment-modern-football-rivalries

Problem is, people are already starting to get tired of it. It feels manufactured.

Same thing for the Cavs/Warriors. No real rivalry and history there. Rivalries are not formed this way. They are entrenched in history and fanbases that are passionate about that game. Bama/Clemson is not that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...