BigRedBuster

Exactly....and we would be hearing now how the SEC and Florida State are obviously light years ahead of everyone else bla bla bla going into this year....when that obviously wasn't true last year.

Because they won their conference. How did they win their conference if the regular season doesn't matter? What I think we are saying is that in both scenarios, the regular season matters. It just matters in a different way. However, in fact, I think in the current and future (hopefully 8 team playoff), I would argue that the regular season maters more. Last year, there were WAY more games in the regular season that mattered to the national championship than in prior years. For OSU, every game after VTech still mattered last year. In prior years, every game after VTech would have meant absolutely nothing as far as the NC goes.

And thus the problem with a four-team playoff. The team that was far and away the best team at the end of the year is left out because of a slip-up at the beginning of the year after losing their starting QB in camp. We're stuck trying to compare wins and losses with basically no common opponents. I don't think it failed. It just didn't agree with your opinion. So, now we're saying the regular season doesn't matter? Isn't this the argument that was made for decades as to why there wasn't a playoff at the D1 level? Coach T's picks are exactly how I would have picked them, but I wouldn't have given FSU the overall #1. If we go back to the way things used to be, Ohio State doesn't end up as the NC. There were a lot of years in there back in the late 80's and early 90's where Florida State was the hottest team in the country at season's end but had one loss earlier in the season to Miami by a missed field goal. They never ended up as NC. I'm really not sure we want to argue about when the loss occurred during the season. The way things are, Ohio State shouldn't have been in the playoff. I've always advocated an 8 team playoff. Last year is a great example of what happens when you have too small of a sample size. Without expanding the playoff, we're left with just as bigof cluster as we had with the BCS. How in the heck can you say the regular season doesn't matter in this. How do these teams get into the discussion? By playing well and winning all but maybe one of their games in the regular season. If you somehow take only conference champions, the regular season is extremely important because how do you win your conference? By playing well and winning games in the regular season. I agree with the 8 team play off. I think it is the best overall number. Take all power 5 conference champions and three wild cards.

It's true. The public opinion of her trustworthiness is her biggest weakness. That's why the e-mail thing will be ridden into the ground regardless of whether there is any "there" there. Again, we'll see. Could be that Hillary is imploding and Sanders/Biden/whoever is going to win the nomination. Then again . . . I doubt you or most people paying attention would make that bet. I didn't say I was going to make a bet one way or the other. I do know one thing from past experience watching these. Very seldom does it work out a year from now the way it looks now.

I saw a poll not too long ago where a heck of a lot of people don't trust Hillary. It even included a lot of Democrats. If those people don't like Sanders and are only supporting Hillary because she isn't Sanders but still a Dem, then they could switch to Joe.

That's true . . . but these people aren't going to jump ship: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorsements_for_the_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016 (For example, looks like HRC already has endorsements from all but about ten Democratic senators. Here's the GOP side if you'd like to see the contrast: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorsements_for_the_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016) I agree . . . but he'd have to offer something that she doesn't if he wants to beat her and I don't know what that would be. Yes, people do change their endorsements. If a Senator starts to think that Uncle Joe is more electable due to all of Hillary's baggage, they might switch. He wouldn't necessarily have to offer anything different as far as issues. But, just be more electable.

Which Hillary voters, and why? Sanders is a very liberal, self proclaimed socialist. That is only going to appeal to certain voters. To a certain extent, it's no different than the idiots claiming they support Trump. Those voters only want a certain type of candidate that appeals to their views. Someone like Hillary or Uncle Joe, appeal to a more broad Democratic voter. One who leans left but is looking for more of an established candidate. To an extent, Hillary is like Bush. We know what we get with them because they have been in politics for a long time. We are familiar with the families and any baggage the bring along. Trump and Sanders are wild cards that appeal to voters that don't want that "familiar" candidate. So, if/when Joe gets in the race, he is going to appeal to more of the Hillary voters than Sanders voters. And...he will be able to take some of Hillary's donations, endorsements...etc. But why would they support Joe over Hillary? Because he's "happy" like someone noted above? (And your last line sort of glosses over the fact that so many people have already endorsed Hillary, pledged those donations, etc. Even if Biden decides to enter the race he is starting with a diminished field of potential donors and supporters.) These candidates are not done asking and collecting money or getting endorsements. I guess you would have to ask them why they would want Joe over Hillary. I can't find much appealing with either of them. All i'm saying is that Joe is more like Hillary than Sanders.

Ah. She's desperate. Gotcha. No, my original post said she is "acting deperate". In this post I said she "looks desperate". You would have to ask her if she "is desperate". Big difference.

I agree. Bo played young players when he felt it was beneficial or needed. And...probably not much different than this year.

Gilligan

Which Hillary voters, and why? Sanders is a very liberal, self proclaimed socialist. That is only going to appeal to certain voters. To a certain extent, it's no different than the idiots claiming they support Trump. Those voters only want a certain type of candidate that appeals to their views. Someone like Hillary or Uncle Joe, appeal to a more broad Democratic voter. One who leans left but is looking for more of an established candidate. To an extent, Hillary is like Bush. We know what we get with them because they have been in politics for a long time. We are familiar with the families and any baggage the bring along. Trump and Sanders are wild cards that appeal to voters that don't want that "familiar" candidate. So, if/when Joe gets in the race, he is going to appeal to more of the Hillary voters than Sanders voters. And...he will be able to take some of Hillary's donations, endorsements...etc.

How so? My comment came from what the article is about. She is working hard to claim something that just isn't true. Bush's immigration views are not the same as Trumps. But, she is trying to tie the two together in an effort to discredit all Republican candidates based on what the idiot is saying. No need to claim something that is so blatantly not true unless she is actually concerned. No. She really doesn't. The GOP (when they aren't whining about a "coronation") desperately wants to make her appear weak by trumpeting every challenger. Nothing is more boring to the political media than a done deal . . . so they're desperately pretending that Hillary is in genuine danger of losing the primary. Think about the motivations behind the hot takes. Any Democratic candidate would leap at the chance to switch places with Hillary, and with good reason. Sure.....they would love to be in her shoes due to her leading for right now. However, Sanders has gained a lot of ground and continues to do so. And, Uncle Joe hasn't even gotten into the race yet.She has gone from around 65% in March to 45% recently. Meanwhile Sanders has gone from 0% to 22.5% pretty fast. Biden is sitting at 12-13% without even campaigning yet. LINK It's not just her poll numbers that show the magnitude of her lead. It's her fundraising. It's her endorsements. Etc. She might be the strongest non-incumbent frontrunner at this point in the race in the past ~decade+. Of course she's going to try to tie Jeb W. to Trump. If it works it weakens her most likely general election opponent. Does the constant sniping at Hillary by the GOP candidates show how concerned they are at her strength or their own weakness? I'd say no . . . it shows that they know what most of us know . . . she is going to win the nomination. If you're talking about someone making something up about her...then yes. If you are talking about someone who is pointing out valid concerns or issues...then no. The point is, she does't need to be making stuff up. She is in the lead. Any candidate making stuff up just looks desperate.

Put me in the camp of not being a fan of having different packages of plays for each running back. If that's the case, once we get into a few games, every DC is going to know what running plays are going to be called depending on what RB is in the game. The one exception is if you have one guy (Cross) that is a big bruiser that you pretty much know he is going to come in in short yardage plays and pound it up the middle for a few yards. Now, you might slant the play calling one way a little if a certain player is in. But, you can't all of a sudden not run inside because Newby is in, or, you can't all of a sudden not throw any screen passes because Wilbon is in...etc.

The big difference is that BP would not have told anyone if a true freshman were to play let alone 7. I doubt that 7 would have played, he would have tried to RS as many as possible. Which was his MO. The freshman RB is playing because he has earned the right to play. Just like I think they all have earned the right to play. Linebacker is thin, but I think they really like what they have there. McKeown who I think is down on the offense has been really high on what he has saw at linebacker. I don't doubt that. My question is, in what capacity will we see him on the field? Everything I have heard has Newby as the starting RB Is Ozigbo now #2 or will we see him more as a return specialist?

That is an absolutely great picture. A group of guys playing great as a team and having a blast winning for the Cubs.

From the comments, I got the feeling he was going to be playing a lot of special teams. Would he be returning kickoffs?

Was it two years ago that the front 7 on defense was mostly freshmen and sophomores on the two deep? We had major growing pains at the time. And, that is an example of Bo being willing to play young players. I am all for playing freshmen as long as they are out there surrounded with upper classmen that can guide them, teach them and keep their heads on straight under pressure. It's a recipe for failure if you put an entire group of very young players on the field at the same time.

True, in fairness to BigRedBuster, the way you worded your question made it seem like you didn't believe they'd improve. Both of these quotes are from you. I know you intended to say something else but it didn't come off that way. The way I asked him a question, made it sound like I was making a statement? Speaking through this keyboard is a very difficult thing. To be completely honest, I was simply asking Redux a question because I was curious of his opinion on it. I guess I don't get how anything came across as me stating my opinion on it. It was a question. I think pretty highly of Fyfe already. I think Darlington is a damn good QB too. The only one of the bunch I haven't seen anything to be impressed with is A.J. Bush. So the fact is, I not only was questioning how he thought they would a talented stable of QB's by mid-season, and what he would see from them to make him think so, but I disagree with the entire premise of his statement to begin with. I think those guys are pretty talented QB's to begin with. I think there were some assumptions made instead of just taking my comment at what was typed. And, all I did was ask..."why wouldn't they improve" and then gave reasoning as to why I think they should and will improve. Seems to me that you jumped down my throat and acted like my comments were so insulting and you basically did what you're accusing me of.

No...it's not dumb. It's a pretty good reason.

How so? No. She really doesn't. The GOP (when they aren't whining about a "coronation") desperately wants to make her appear weak by trumpeting every challenger. Nothing is more boring to the political media than a done deal . . . so they're desperately pretending that Hillary is in genuine danger of losing the primary. Think about the motivations behind the hot takes. Any Democratic candidate would leap at the chance to switch places with Hillary, and with good reason. One thing for sure, Carl, you are a true believer. Uncle Joe is about to get into the ring wt Obama's blessing. While Joe is the clown in the race, he will be preferable by many who see Hillary as the liar in the race. Contrast the image - Happy Uncle Joe vs cranky lemon face Aunt Hillary. Either way, when Joe gets in - I suspect the fur and the fake hair will start flying and will hopefully take Trump out of the news - maybe then the repub primary voters can start looking at the other guys. Uncle Joe isn't going to take much from Sanders. he is going to take it from Hillary.

Oregon State is currently 85th in recruiting per 247 with a coach that in 2014 (I think the recruiting class he took over at Wisconsin with) ended up 33rd. Now, I know there is a lot of time before signing day this year, but I would be absolutely shocked if OSU climbed anywhere close to 33rd. Meanwhile, the last recruiting class Riley had in Corvallis was 2014 and his class was 63rd. Right now he is sitting at 22nd at Nebraska. There is a big difference in recruiting to Nebraska and Wisconsin than there is recruiting to Corvallis.

Scott Frost, Eric Crouch, Jamal Lord, etc. all did okay with it as well I personally think that the thought of a QB that runs like that can't stay as healthy as a pure passing QB is a myth.

That is crazy. I'm guessing they had some really really lopsided wins.

It's because all the champs have to play 12 regular season games, just like the Big XII, but they also have to play an extra playoff game, unlike the Big XII. And...yes....it is a playoff game....as it should be.