BTF

Michigan changed the narrative last year. You know what's embarrassing? The SEC is DOMINATING college basketball right now. The big bad Big Ten is a has been. Power shifts are possible. I've got the Big Ten ahead of the SEC this year in football. I know that's embarrassing for the SEC, but it is what it is. Back in the 80's and 90's, Wisconsin was the laughing stock of the Big Ten in sports.. It was pretty embarassing to lose to them in both football and basketball. Things just change over time. From purely a numbers standpoint, what Indiana did this year was impressive. That's why Sagarin* has them at #9, and to Alabama's credit, they are at #7. Numbers don't lie. IU's just isn't as bad as Finebaum says they are. He's just a little bitter. We all know the guy is biased as hell. *Takes a deep breath

Cignetti's staff did a better job in year one than DeBoer's staff. You have to admit, something was missing this year at Alabama. They lost to two unranked teams. Cignetti didn't fall prey to that. I'm not saying that DeBoer isn't a good coach, that would be "asinine." I'm just saying that Cignetti's staff did a better job in 2024 than his did. I'm sure DeBoer will right the ship. I'm betting that he will, but success at Washington doesn't necessarily equate to success at Alabama. We all know that. See Lincoln Riley as Exibit A.

I don't think Cignetti's arrogance is why IU is getting raked over the coals. I think it's because they are Indiana. There was a time when it was Kentucky and North Carolina. Those are basketball schools. It seems to be offending to football powers when schools like that enter the mix. This year it was IU. And that, in my opinion, is why they are an easy target. Couple that with Alabama losing three games and now the nation has something massive to bitch about. At the end of the day, don't lose three games. Now, who am I taking on a neutral field between IU and Alabama? It's basically IU's coaching versus Alabama's talent. I'll go with the talent in this one if there's money on the line. But make no mistake, IU was deserving of making the field and Alabama was not. If the committe would have chosen Alabama, that would have created an awful standard moving forward. Coaches be warned: Win the games you're supposed to win, period. Notre Dame was on thin ice the entire season. One loss following the embarrassing loss to NIU would have put them out. But they took care of business the rest of the way.

The committee got it right. IU took care of business, whereas Alabama did not. The lesson? If you want to make the playoffs, don't lose three games, two against unranked opponants. Inidana beat every unranked opponant they played into absolute utter submission with the exception of Michigan. Again, the Tide would have gotten demolished last Friday night if it were them playing in South Bend. They sure as hell wouldn't have won in Columbus. Very doubtfull in Happy Valley. Sorry, the SEC can cry and whine all they want, but there's a changing of the guard in college football.

IU is unjustly being picked on, they're an easy target. Especially from the cry babies of of the south. Fans quickly forget how impressive the Hoosiers were during the season. They didn't just beat teams, they beat them easily. There's not a team in America that would have beat the Irish in South Bend that night. They would have beaten the Tide by two touchdowns minimum. One could say the same thing about Columbus. Probably Happy Valley as well. Those home environments were magnified 25% due to being the first playoff games hosted by campuses. Indiana was a victim of playing on the road, plain and simple. Different game on a neutral field. Same outcome, but different game for sure.

I was thinking the same thing. I didn't figure there were nine players on Purdue's team capable of playing at a level of the nine mentioned teams. Ultimately, I kid, but I can't help what pops up into my head first thing sometimes.

Seriously, @temptation, they make the first down on that play they still have to move the ball 40+ yards to score against a defense that had given them nothing the entire game. I get it, blackjack says never punt the ball, EVER. But I think that changes after watching the dynamics of a game through three quarters. Pin em deep, force a turnover, get a short touchdown. Stick with me Temp, you'll learn.

Regardless of what he said in the press conference, my take was that he thought he could pin the Irish deep and force a turnover rather than give the ball back at midfield. I thought it was a good decision.

The only problem I have with the Open Division is that some very good football teams are going to have their season ended after one week. I'm not a big fan of that. When you have a really good team, you earn your right to advance and play more football. That being said, I do think that being picked as one of the best eight is an achievement in itself. If you're a good team in the current format and bow out early, no one will remember you. If you're picked as one of the top eight, like the College Fooball Playoff, you'll always be remembered for reaching that elite level. And let's be honest, if you're one of the eight best teams in the state of Indiana, you deserve to be remembered. Let's pick on Heritage Hills for a minute. No one outside their community will remember what they did this year. However, if they made the Top 8, then that team will never be forgotten by a large portion of the football community.

Rodney?

You and I will get along well. Short answers are all that I require. Don't need jiberish. Thank you.

Long story short. Your claim is that the 1956 field was pretty talented and it's impossible to prove that racism played a factor as a fact? I'm sort of with you on this. My question would be, had racism NOT played a role, would he have had enough votes to surpass Hornung? Last word goes to @PHJIrish on his one............unless someone else on this forum is 81 years old.

Yeah, that would be something if Notre Dame could pull it off. Michigan and Notre Dame back to back. I've been thinking about that lately. The two winningest programs in football (not withstanding the NCAA's bogus penalty on the Irish), both of whom had been on a long drought.

Looking forward to the video. I'm well aware of Johnny Bright's mistreatment among his foes. Tragic, but what a good man to pull through that. I've said all along that the Heisman should go to a senior, which appears to be the case decades ago. It's hard for me to feel sorry for Jackson or Walker, considering they both ultimately walked away with the trophy. Regarding Brown, I'm not saying he wasn't a victim of racism, I'm just saying that there appeared to be some other pretty good candidates in that class. I really just don't know the answer and don't feel like speculating on something I have zero knowledge of.

I was thinking the same thing. I hate to count Notre Dame, Texas, and Georgia out though.

Not sure I can debate that.

That's a big IF. The same could be said for a number of teams if they had home field advantage throughout, including Notre Dame. A neutral field takes care of all that.

Obviously Oregon and Georgia make the top four. From there, I think Notre Dame is the easy pick for #3. After that get's tough. Penn State has the best resume as their only losses were close ones to Oregon and Ohio State. The Texas loss at home by 15 points to me is about the same as Ohio State losing a close one to Michigan at home. It's the most bitter rivalry in sports, so you have to give the Buckeyes a little bit of grace there. But Ohio State beat Penn State head to head, so I think that propells them to the playoffs. 1. Oregon - Big Ten Champs, no further explanation 2. Georgia - SEC Champs, no further explanation 3. Notre Dame - Won impressively over the eleven best teams on their schedule 4. Ohio State - See above

You have a point, absolutely. Hell, even Vegas would have Bama as the favorite over IU. Still not sure I'm buying it. I trust Cignetti at this point much more than I do DeBoer. I'm almost thinking to scale back to eight teams. Don't give a three loss team an opportunity to cry about not making it in. Every game counts just a little more.

Didn't catch that. And what's with Alabama Jones? It's like he's trying to hard to create an identity. Bear Bryant had a hat, he thinks he needs one too?

Elaborate.

What have you done for me lately? New year, new coach. This isn't a Nick Saban led Alabama team. IU earned their way in over Alabama. Fail three times, twice against non-ranked opponants, you don't deserve to be in. What kind of precedent would be sent if they allowed Bama in?

I think you know what I mean. If I'm a high profile quarterback I'm sure as hell not committing to Notre Dame or IU my freshmen year. I may never get a chance to develope with their history of bringing in new quarterbacks. If I'm Carr or Angeli, I'm bailing. It's no wonder Jackson bolted. He saw the writing on the wall.

Alabama lost to Vanderbilt and got smoked by Oklahoma. Why should anyone trust that they could be IU?

So the new trend will be for the best quarterbacks to start at a mid-major and work their way up. I guess it's just the way it is, I don't have to like it. Clemson is officially my fifth favorite team. ND, IU, Ball State, Purdue, Clemson. I love the way Dabo does it, loyalty to those committed from the beginning.