What's YOUR Number 1 Pet Peeve in College Football?

[AshG]

The machismo that steers football away from fixes that could preserve the sport for decades to come and save the lives of long term players because "that's not how I played it."

 

[LouderVol]

The machismo that steers football away from fixes that could preserve the sport for decades to come and save the lives of long term players because "that's not how I played it."

are you just talking about punts/kicks? or is there something else?

 

[utvolford]

SEC refs ruining games

 

[AshG]

are you just talking about punts/kicks? or is there something else?

Punts/kicks, practice routines (using helmets only during games trains players to keep their heads out of plays), highlight reel mentality, etc.

 

[LouderVol]

Punts/kicks, practice routines (using helmets only during games trains players to keep their heads out of plays), highlight reel mentality, etc.

the helmet thing is interesting. you risk an increase in coincidental contact to hopefully minimize purposeful contact.

 

[Pepe]

Not the same thing. Every play that ends with a dead ball in the end zone results in a change of possession.

And how does that make the rule less dumb?

 

[bamawriter]

And how does that make the rule less dumb?

Is it dumb that a touchdown results in a change of possession? Or a safety?

 

[volfanbill]

Is it dumb that a touchdown results in a change of possession? Or a safety?

I get you’re trying to move goalposts like D4H, but you’re not really good at it

 

[bamawriter]

I get you’re trying to move goalposts like D4H, but you’re not really good at it

There's nothing being moved. It's a simple concept that has existed since the game was essentially rugby. In fact, the same rule still exists in rugby.

In fact, it's "moving the goalposts" to argue that the rule should be changed. The endzone is treated uniformly in all other dead ball situations. To say that it should be treated differently in the case of a fumble is to ignore the uniform standard.

 

[volfanbill]

There's nothing being moved. It's a simple concept that has existed since the game was essentially rugby. In fact, the same rule still exists in rugby.

In fact, it's "moving the goalposts" to argue that the rule should be changed. The endzone is treated uniformly in all other dead ball situations. To say that it should be treated differently in the case of a fumble is to ignore the uniform standard.

That’s the point of the thread. Just stop

 

[bamawriter]

That’s the point of the thread. Just stop

Or you could stop. I replied to Pepe's post. No one put a gun to your head and made you jump back in.

Wait... Did someone put a gun to your head? Do you need help?

 

[volfanbill]

You aren’t even in D4H’s league huh?

 

[volmanbill]

TV timeouts.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

TV timeouts.

I think that's why there's so many unnecessary replays now

 

[vol445]

Toss up between targeting and no 64 team playoff

 

[05_never_again]

Alabama ruining it and making the sport boring

Other than that, targeting.

College football the last few years has become like the NBA.

 

[Brave Volunteer]

1. The ongoing charade that the vast majority of these players are actual "student" athletes.

2. The unspoken double standard in rules thats in place to protect the money-maker programs while keeping the other programs at bay.

3. Targeting. The rule needs to be applied to offensive players who lead with the crown of their helmets (RB's), not just defensive players. Also the ejection rule is too severe imo.

4. We need an 8 team playoff. Take the 5 power conference winners and 3 at larges based on ranking.

 

[05_never_again]

4. We need an 8 team playoff. Take the 5 power conference winners and 3 at larges based on ranking.

That sounds like a great idea now, but I can only imagine the bellyaching when conference champs who are seen as weak teams get in, either by that conference overall being weak (like the Pac 12 this year) or by a big upset in a conference championship game. At some point, an 8-4 team ranked #25 would win a conference title game and automatically qualify, which would bump some at-large out of the top 8.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

That sounds like a great idea now, but I can only imagine the bellyaching when conference champs who are seen as weak teams get in, either by that conference overall being weak (like the Pac 12 this year) or by a big upset in a conference championship game. At some point, an 8-4 team ranked #25 would win a conference title game and automatically qualify, which would bump some at-large out of the top 8.

I would be fine with that.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

1. The ongoing charade that the vast majority of these players are actual "student" athletes.

2. The unspoken double standard in rules thats in place to protect the money-maker programs while keeping the other programs at bay.

3. Targeting. The rule needs to be applied to offensive players who lead with the crown of their helmets (RB's), not just defensive players. Also the ejection rule is too severe imo.

4. We need an 8 team playoff. Take the 5 power conference winners and 3 at larges based on ranking.

I was kinda mad when they flagged Ezekiel Elliot for that yesterday, but it was the right call. CFB should follow suit.

 

[05_never_again]

I would be fine with that.

So you aren't on board with the idea being to find the "four (or eight) best teams?"

I think that automatic bids are fine for college basketball, where there are 64 teams and lots of at-large spots, but not sure it is the best model for football. For example Washington would be in the playoff under this model as a conference champ - would they be #5 (weakest conference champ) or 6-8? Could an at-large be seeded higher than a conference champ? Currently, they are #9. I don't think they're a playoff team at all.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

So you aren't on board with the idea being to find the "four (or eight) best teams?"

I think that automatic bids are fine for college basketball, where there are 64 teams and lots of at-large spots, but not sure it is the best model for football. For example Washington would be in the playoff under this model as a conference champ - would they be #5 (weakest conference champ) or 6-8? Could an at-large be seeded higher than a conference champ? Currently, they are #9. I don't think they're a playoff team at all.

Actually I'm not. I'm in favor of having the most deserving teams. IMO that means conference championships. If that means a 8-5 CC gets in so be it. Best teams is entirely too subjective IMO.

 

[OnlyGodForgives]

1. idiotic overtime structure 2. 3-4 games per year against non-Power Five opponents. Teams should be playing 10 conference games per season at least plus 1-2 Power Five opps. 3. Players aren't paid. They should be handsomely compensated university employees. Importantly, they should attend classes only if they pay their way or qualify for an academic scholarship (i.e., they want the education.) You wanted one, I've got about thirty. Three is my compromise.