Parity on the horizon or fluke?

[Scofrosghost]

I don’t know about you guys but I personally love that there are no SEC teams in the natty. 
 

Fluke or parity?

[runningblind]

I hope it is a sign of burgeoning parity, and I hope the 12 team playoff and NIL/transfer portal keep that momentum going.  The same 4 or 5 teams being good/in the playoff every year makes for much less interesting games.  Spreading out the talent will let more teams make runs.

[Mavric]

I don't know if "fluke" is quite the right word.  Because it was pretty much a coin flip if Alabama or Michigan was going to win that game.

 

I think Alabama and Georgia are two of the best five teams in the nation.  So it's a bit of a fluke that neither made the championship game this year.  But I don't think the entire SEC is that much better than everyone else, as many like to claim.

 

There is a lot of parity in college football.  And that's a good thing.

[gossamorharpy]

2 hours ago, Scofrosghost said:

I don’t know about you guys but I personally love that there are no SEC teams in the natty. 
 

Fluke or parity?

The start of much needed parity.  NIL/transfer portal makes it a lot tougher for the Bama, Georgia, tOSU of the world to consistently hoard 5 star talent across the depth chart.  Bama was the only team in the playoff who's starting QB didn't start their career elsewhere.  

 

I don't think there is a team this year between the top 8 teams that would be favored over everyone else.  Seeing Washington beat Texas tells me Oregon could also go toe to toe with all the playoff teams given how close they played UW twice this year.

 

Can't wait for the playoff next year.  We will hopefully continue to see more parity with the portal era and more teams getting access to the title.

[Undone]

Michigan had become very physical in the last four years, but this past offseason they really went to a whole new level. They couldn't be manhandled by anyone this year except maybe for Georgia, but we never got to see that game. They did pretty much all of the manhandling.

 

So it was kind of Michigan standing alone outside of Georgia & Alabama in that department outside of the SEC in terms of physicality. Ohio State has fallen off the map in that department.

 

Texas & Washington matched up well against each other because they both tend to score points.

 

The championship game is the most interesting one in such a long time - but I really despise Harbaugh & Michigan after the sign stealing thing.

[Red Five]

50 minutes ago, Scofrosghost said:

I don’t know about you guys but I personally love that there are no SEC teams in the natty. 
 

Fluke or parity?

 

The SEC shouldn't have had a team in the playoffs IMO.

 

But next year with 12 the playoff it is going to be the B1G/SEC invitational. 4 B1G, 4 SEC, 1 (or 2) Big 12, 1 (or 2) ACC, and 1 G5.

[Undone]

1 minute ago, Red Five said:

But next year with 12 the playoff it is going to be the B1G/SEC invitational.

 

Yeah.

 

I don't like the playoff extending past 8 teams, even if that does give us any kind of shot at making it someday. I think 12 will make the bowl games feel fairly irrelevant when you combine all of the transfer shenanigans (until player contracts arrive).

[PasstheDamnBallGuy]

2 years in a row now that a team made the final with around a 30th average recruiting class rank in the past 5 season. Last year it didnt end so well but this Washington team is much better than TCU. 

[Undone]

28 minutes ago, PasstheDamnBallGuy said:

2 years in a row now that a team made the final with around a 30th average recruiting class rank in the past 5 season. Last year it didnt end so well but this Washington team is much better than TCU. 

 

That stat is pretty crazy. Penix was a world beater this year, though.

 

I had thought that Jalen Milroe wasn't maybe up to snuff with some more recent Alabama QB's but then I looked up his passing stats for the year...he had a 65.8% completion percentage this year, along with 23 TD's and 6 INT's.

 

Kind of reinforces how you pretty much don't make it to the top these days without an elite QB. Good thing we have one coming in.

[PasstheDamnBallGuy]

2 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

That stat is pretty crazy. Penix was a world beater this year, though.

 

I had thought that Jalen Milroe wasn't maybe up to snuff with some more recent Alabama QB's but then I looked up his passing stats for the year...he had a 65.8% completion percentage this year, along with 23 TD's and 6 INT's.

 

Kind of reinforces how you pretty much don't make it to the top these days without an elite QB. Good thing we have one coming in.

 

Wow thats crazy because I thought the same about Milroe and would not have guessed that about his stats. I do think that players like him and McCarthy, and Ewers are probably like the baseline you need to make it that far in cfb, but you need a good team around to win. They are definitely not elite but play well enough to move the ball when needed. 

[gobiggergoredder]

I still think last years game could have easily been Michigan vs tOSU had a few things gone differently.

 

Michigan gave that game on a platter.  tOSU had their chances.

[Undone]

12 minutes ago, gobiggergoredder said:

I still think last years game could have easily been Michigan vs tOSU had a few things gone differently.

 

Michigan gave that game on a platter.  tOSU had their chances.

 

Yes but you could say that about so many football games, right? In the Michigan vs. TCU game, the turnover margin was 0 (both teams had 3 turnovers). Michigan's defense just didn't really show up to play, IMO. Giving up 488 yards on defense puts you in a position to lose just about any game you're playing in that position.

 

[gobiggergoredder]

6 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Yes but you could say that about so many football games, right? In the Michigan vs. TCU game, the turnover margin was 0 (both teams had 3 turnovers). Michigan's defense just didn't really show up to play, IMO. Giving up 488 yards on defense puts you in a position to lose just about any game you're playing in that position.

 

Yes, you can do ifs all day long and that is what I’m doing.  But it’s applicable to this thread.

It was more than turnovers.  I don’t even remember the specifics.  I just remember how many opportunities they flat out blew it on.  It wasn’t Nebraska bad, but it was rough.  Dugan balled out and put together an unbelievable individual effort (I don’t want to overlook that).

[admo]

There is parity.  It's been here for a bit.  For example, 

 

Kansas won 9 games this year.

Kansas State won 9 games this year.  

Missouri (SEC) went 11-2 and beat Ohio State.

Oklahoma State won 10 games for the 8th time since 2010.  They have won 11 or 12 games in a season 3 different years.

 

Baylor has won 10 games in a year, 6 times since 2011.  And they won 11 games in a year 4 times.  Played in CCG twice in 5 years and won it once. They even had a Heisman Winner 2011  Before 2011, they typically won 2 or 3 games when they joined the Big 12 in 1997.  Occasionally 4 games.  

 

Look at what Duke and Kentucky have been able to do recently.  Even Pitt had a heisman candidate a few years ago.  Wake Forest wins.  Oregon State wins, Northwestern wins, Purdue wins, Minnesota wins.  Sure it's up and down at times, but still shows there is parity.

[Lorewarn]

1 hour ago, admo said:

There is parity.  It's been here for a bit.  For example, 

 

Kansas won 9 games this year.

Kansas State won 9 games this year.  

Missouri (SEC) went 11-2 and beat Ohio State.

Oklahoma State won 10 games for the 8th time since 2010.  They have won 11 or 12 games in a season 3 different years.

 

Baylor has won 10 games in a year, 6 times since 2011.  And they won 11 games in a year 4 times.  Played in CCG twice in 5 years and won it once. They even had a Heisman Winner 2011  Before 2011, they typically won 2 or 3 games when they joined the Big 12 in 1997.  Occasionally 4 games.  

 

Look at what Duke and Kentucky have been able to do recently.  Even Pitt had a heisman candidate a few years ago.  Wake Forest wins.  Oregon State wins, Northwestern wins, Purdue wins, Minnesota wins.  Sure it's up and down at times, but still shows there is parity.

 

 

 

I think the conversation is specifically around parity at the very top, not just in general.

 

Basement dweller teams winning 8-11 games in one random year or even over a period of a few with the right coach isn't that novel and has happened plenty of times.