Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to College Football

Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Moderator: Football Moderators

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby A Fleshner Fantasy » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:40 am

deerayfan072 wrote:
A Fleshner Fantasy wrote:
Hskr- While I put Georgia ahead of both LSU and UF, I could see either or both of them jumping Georgia.

deeray- Isn't is more impressive to beat a good team close than a bad team by a lot?


I didn't do it. It was conjecture on why someone would have made the moves you asked about. As I said, I haven't had OK out of my top 2. It has been USC and OK


Oh ok, I misunderstood what you said, sorry about that.
Image

Thanks to abrunn for the awesome sig
A Fleshner Fantasy
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 7746
Joined: 11 May 2006
Home Cafe: Football
Location: The Big House

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby Metroid » Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:06 am

deerayfan072 wrote:
HskrPwr13 wrote:
Metroid wrote:Oregon still ranked by some....Knapp has em in the top 20 still! 8-o


Not in my top20, but their body of work up to this point, is still decent. Obviously, if they continue to slide with the 5th string QB, they'll continue to fall.


Here is how I looked at Oregon:

There defense, outside of that BSU game and the first quarter plus 4 seconds of the Purdue game, has been pretty dominant. Oregon has a solid run game and had they had any pass game at all in the BSU game they win that game. Also, had Bellotti decided to play their Frosh QB at half instead of late in that game, they win that game, maybe even going away. Without a pass threat they are not a top 25 team IMO, but if they get any pass attack they are a top 15 to 20 IMO. I put them where I did because although I love their new QB and he looked great, that was with a team that had no idea he would see the field. I want to wait and see what he does when a team gameplans for him. If he plays decent this week, they have a chance to beat everyone on their schedule except for USC


I missed this....great analysis dee. I totally agree, with a pass threat they are easily a top 15 team. The Jeremiah Johnson/LaGarrett Blount combo is punishing, and add Andre Crenshaw in there for a third change of pace and you have a very potent rushing attack. Both Johnson and Blount had a hundred yards in the Boise St. game, they each would rip off some big runs but basically all the Broncos had to do was stack the box and eventually put the Ducks in too many 3rd and long situations. Without a passing game they are mediocre at best. As far as why our defense under performed last week, I think it's a combo of them coming out flat to start and them being affected by the offenses poor play, they seem to really feed of the offense. Add to that quite a few special teams miscues and 4 turnovers, they were in a lot of bad situations. Also not having CB Walter Thurmond III on the field last week hurt a little, he should play today against Wazzu. ;-D

I'd love to believe Bellotti will just move Thomas into the starting role and build a game plan for him but I highly doubt that will happen, I still expect Masoli to start. I do expect(or hope)Thomas is put in the #2 spot behind Masoli. :-?

Oh and if the Beavers can beat USC so can we. :-D
Image
Metroid
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicCafe RankerGraphics ExpertEagle Eye
Posts: 22544
Joined: 9 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Bringing the funk in P-Town!

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby deerayfan072 » Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:49 pm

I am going to do something different this week for the article. Rather than my analysis of 3 games I am going to write a quick think on college ball in general. Here is my thought:

This weekend and last few years have made me think hard about CFB. I think CFB has changed. The clock rules combined with recruiting and good coaches going to different schools has created a lot of parity in CFB. I don't think we will ever see a run like FSU had in 90's where they finished in the top 5 almost every year, or Miami in the 80's where they just flat out dominated people. In fact, I don't think we will see teams go undefeated anymore. Talent has been distributed throughout the country and every game has become a battle. It seems that teams are constantly losing to teams they "should have beaten". I think it is tough to get up for every game each week. Also, the clock rules have hurt the better teams IMO. The longer a game goes the more likely the most talented team will win because they have more touches and more chance to come back. A shorter game favors the underdogs and makes it a lot easier to be upset.

Thoughts?
Image
deerayfan072
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18976
Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: On an Island

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby Free Bagel » Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:55 pm

I was thinking the exact same thing Dee. You guys were talking about all the upsets in the game talk thread and following it up with "man I love college football", and I was just thinking "really, you guys like this?"

I mean, with the new recruiting and clock rules, there's just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much parity for the system that's set up with only 2 teams making it to the NC game at the end. With these new rules that create this near NFL-like parity, you HAVE to have a playoff system. Otherwise, it's just stupid.

Who are the best two teams? How the heck are we supposed to figure that out when EVERYONE has losses or near losses to "bad" teams.

Upsets don't even mean anything anymore when they happen 15 times per year.
Image
Free Bagel
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertMock(ing) DrafterCafe Musketeer
Posts: 8495
Joined: 25 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Titletown, FL

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby deerayfan072 » Sat Sep 27, 2008 6:04 pm

Free Bagel wrote:I was thinking the exact same thing Dee. You guys were talking about all the upsets in the game talk thread and following it up with "man I love college football", and I was just thinking "really, you guys like this?"

I mean, with the new recruiting and clock rules, there's just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much parity for the system that's set up with only 2 teams making it to the NC game at the end. With these new rules that create this near NFL-like parity, you HAVE to have a playoff system. Otherwise, it's just stupid.

Who are the best two teams? How the heck are we supposed to figure that out when EVERYONE has losses or near losses to "bad" teams.

Upsets don't even mean anything anymore when they happen 15 times per year.


And we are stuck with the current system at least until 2011 I believe and from what I have read/heard the heads of the conferences are now more towards the BCS then ever.
Image
deerayfan072
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18976
Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: On an Island

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby deerayfan072 » Sat Sep 27, 2008 6:52 pm

Free Bagel wrote:I was thinking the exact same thing Dee. You guys were talking about all the upsets in the game talk thread and following it up with "man I love college football", and I was just thinking "really, you guys like this?"

I mean, with the new recruiting and clock rules, there's just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much parity for the system that's set up with only 2 teams making it to the NC game at the end. With these new rules that create this near NFL-like parity, you HAVE to have a playoff system. Otherwise, it's just stupid.

Who are the best two teams? How the heck are we supposed to figure that out when EVERYONE has losses or near losses to "bad" teams.

Upsets don't even mean anything anymore when they happen 15 times per year.


What are people's thoughts on that? Is so many upsets good or bad for CFB? I remember when there would be 1-3 real upsets each year and I remember those games to this day, but now they have become somewhat routine
Image
deerayfan072
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18976
Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: On an Island

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby A Fleshner Fantasy » Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:11 pm

deerayfan072 wrote:
Free Bagel wrote:I was thinking the exact same thing Dee. You guys were talking about all the upsets in the game talk thread and following it up with "man I love college football", and I was just thinking "really, you guys like this?"

I mean, with the new recruiting and clock rules, there's just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much parity for the system that's set up with only 2 teams making it to the NC game at the end. With these new rules that create this near NFL-like parity, you HAVE to have a playoff system. Otherwise, it's just stupid.

Who are the best two teams? How the heck are we supposed to figure that out when EVERYONE has losses or near losses to "bad" teams.

Upsets don't even mean anything anymore when they happen 15 times per year.


What are people's thoughts on that? Is so many upsets good or bad for CFB? I remember when there would be 1-3 real upsets each year and I remember those games to this day, but now they have become somewhat routine


With the current system, I don't think this many. If there were a playoff, I'd LOVE it.
Image

Thanks to abrunn for the awesome sig
A Fleshner Fantasy
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 7746
Joined: 11 May 2006
Home Cafe: Football
Location: The Big House

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby HskrPwr13 » Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:41 am

I disagree with the clock rules being a large reason for parity/more upsets. Teams from the WAC, MWC, and Big East have been closing the gap ever since the schollarship rules changed and since channels like ESPN pretty much guarantees exposure for everyone. Even though the current and traditional top teams are generally going to get the hottest recruits, its not as much of a given now that a player can start right away at a lesser program and still receive all of the notariety that he could only get from playing in a BCS conference. I dont disagree with your premise on why a shorter game helps the dog, but if you took the scholly rule changes and exposure changes out of the scenario, the clock rule changes would have virtually no bearing on the outcome of these perceived mismatch games.

Still gotta laugh at you playoff pushers. So 12 games x 120 teams, 1440 games not counting bowls and conference title games, cant get us to agree on a national champion, but throw 1-3 more games onto the pile and all will be figured out? C'mon. Look, if you can set up a balance schedule (as I have done), then I can buy into a somewhat NFL model of playoff. Without that, we use the same cow dung formula currently used to provide us with one or a few more entertaining games that will leave us no further satisfied as to who the champion is than what we currently have.

Really, no teams are dominating college football like there were in the past? How not? Some of the names may have changed, but every year arent we talking about the same handful of teams for the national title? In the 90s there was Miami, FSU, Nebraska, Michigan, OSU, Florida, and Tenn talked about every year for the title. Now we have LSU, Oklahoma, Florida, USC, OSU, Texas, and up until this season Michigan. I would have to put USCs run right up there with the likes of Miami, FSU, or Nebraska of the 80s/90s. So even with many of the traditional dregs of college football getting some now, the cream is still rising to the top. If dynasties weren't still a reality, we wouldnt have fans of programs like NU PO'd that we don't have our rightful spot at the big boy table. We'd just accept that everyone is basically equal and that we can only be a contender once every few years. So yes, I think the upsets are "neat" even if they happen more frequently than they used to as long as it doesnt happen to "my" team. I'm not saying I hated being a Husker fan back in the day, but I wonder how boring it must have been for the rest of country to pretty much know that the no.1 ranking would basically be decided by whoever won the end of year OU/NU, USC/UCLA, or Michigan/OSU game. If your team wasnt a pre-season top5, there was little reason to get your hopes up as probably 2 of the top5 would wind up undefeated since the competition was so far beneath them.
HskrPwr13
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3936
Joined: 8 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby A Fleshner Fantasy » Sun Sep 28, 2008 8:21 am

Well, I'm preparing to do my rankings now. I think I've got to at least have a minor shakeup here, because otherwise, even I'd disagree with my own rankings.
Image

Thanks to abrunn for the awesome sig
A Fleshner Fantasy
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 7746
Joined: 11 May 2006
Home Cafe: Football
Location: The Big House

Re: Week 5 Cafe Rankings and Discussion

Postby knapplc » Sun Sep 28, 2008 8:59 am

To answer Bagel's question, NO, I do not like this. It's absurd. Hskr, the problem with the 1,440 games is that with a pool of teams greater than 100, it's just about impossible to develop a true strength of schedule, so you have no idea how good teams really are. We're three weeks into the NFL season and there are still major questions about teams, and that's with a 32-team pool. With more than three times that number in college football, there's simply no way to determine how good a team really is with a 13-game schedule. So then you're left with these ridiculous "opinion gauges" to determine who is the "best" team, and as we're seeing, they're often wrong.

But now, since the NCAA Robin-Hooded all the talent from the programs like Michigan, OSU, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Penn State, LSU, Miami, FSU... etc, that spent decades building programs and gave it to the Mountain Wests of the world with their stupid scholarship rules, we will NEVER have a good idea who is the best team ever again, because, as has been shown quite clearly lately, any school can beat any other school on "any given Saturday."

Where's the fun in that? Who, aside from the 1,097 fans from Boise State, thought it was really great that Oklahoma lost that game? What has Boise St. ever done for college football? Oklahoma is one of the most storied programs in the annals of the sport. They're one of the pillars of the game. Without those schollie rules, Boise St. doesn't even make that game. Oooh, exciting.

With these parity rules, this BCS system is ridiculous and unwieldy. It means that, instead of 10-15 teams having a shot at the MNC, now 25-30 have that shot, with another 25-30 a weak schedule away from contention. Since maybe half of these teams will even play one game against each other, how can you possibly determine who "deserves" to be in the title game with this system?
Image
How 'bout them Huskers!
knapplc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18961
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: It's an L, not an I

PreviousNext

Return to College Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 21:47 hours
(and 42 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact