Started By
Message
Has CFB always been ugly?
Posted on 9/25/17 at 11:55 am
Posted on 9/25/17 at 11:55 am
It seems like everyone these days hates their head coach and thinks their team should be better. If you turn on the TV its hard not to think that "Team A looks horrible", and even teams with winning records are winning ugly with their fans disappointed and in an uproar.
Auburn, Arkansas, Florida, LSU, Ole Miss, Missouri, Tennessee, and Texas A&M all have a very sizeable portions of their fan bases demanding a coaching change. That's over half the league.
And while its easy for fans to say that the majority of the SEC is horrible this year, the SEC continues to prove on the field that its overall the nation's best conference.
*Alabama soundly defeated a healthy Florida State team.
*South Carolina beat NC State (one of the better ACC teams)
*Georgia won at Notre Dame
*Vanderbilt (!) beat Kansas State
And even in close losses, the SEC proved very competitive:
*Auburn held Clemson to just 14 points and lost by just 8 points in Death Valley. Clemson is widely considered as one of the two or three best teams in the country.
*TCU will likely be in the CFB Playoff hunt come November yet Arkansas trailed just 14-7 until the final 3 minutes of the game.
So if the SEC is so bad why do we continue to be the best conference on the field? Has college football always been this ugly but it was just concealed by fewer games on television? Why do teams look so bad now compared to in years past?
Auburn, Arkansas, Florida, LSU, Ole Miss, Missouri, Tennessee, and Texas A&M all have a very sizeable portions of their fan bases demanding a coaching change. That's over half the league.
And while its easy for fans to say that the majority of the SEC is horrible this year, the SEC continues to prove on the field that its overall the nation's best conference.
*Alabama soundly defeated a healthy Florida State team.
*South Carolina beat NC State (one of the better ACC teams)
*Georgia won at Notre Dame
*Vanderbilt (!) beat Kansas State
And even in close losses, the SEC proved very competitive:
*Auburn held Clemson to just 14 points and lost by just 8 points in Death Valley. Clemson is widely considered as one of the two or three best teams in the country.
*TCU will likely be in the CFB Playoff hunt come November yet Arkansas trailed just 14-7 until the final 3 minutes of the game.
So if the SEC is so bad why do we continue to be the best conference on the field? Has college football always been this ugly but it was just concealed by fewer games on television? Why do teams look so bad now compared to in years past?
13
Posted on 9/25/17 at 11:57 am to BHMKyle
If you lose a game or experience a close game you officially suck now. Thats the standard.
Although the ways Missouri has lost games the last two years by such large margins I kind of understand why they're upset.
Although the ways Missouri has lost games the last two years by such large margins I kind of understand why they're upset.
Posted on 9/25/17 at 11:58 am to BHMKyle
Yes
Posted on 9/25/17 at 11:58 am to BHMKyle
The SEC was this ugly circa 2004 and 2005
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:10 pm to MontyFranklyn
As a State fan, I say you may get angry with your coach from time to time, but screaming for a coach to be fired for 8-4 and 9-3 seasons unless you're Alabama pulling in #1 recruiting classes on a yearly basis is idiotic.
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:24 pm to BHMKyle
No. Social media gives every idiot a loud voice.
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:24 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
It seems like everyone these days hates their head coach and thinks their team should be better. If you turn on the TV its hard not to think that "Team A looks horrible", and even teams with winning records are winning ugly with their fans disappointed and in an uproar.
It's because the game itself has changed. People used to be a lot more "casual" about college football. 30 years ago, CFB didn't even crown a "true" national champion. You didn't even get invited to a bowl game unless you had a great season. The parity was laughable; it was truly a case of the "haves" (teams like Nebraska, Alabama, etc.) and the "have nots."
I think that made people a lot more mellow, and expectations were tempered.
Since a lot of games weren't on TV, I think people just invested less in college football, and probably spent more of their fall Saturdays fishing on the lake. There was no YouTube, and so if you heard that LSU won 24-17, you were just like "Great!" There was no second-guessing how the team actually executed.
Now the increased parity gives more teams a chance, and everyone wants a piece of that national championship crown. Throw in the fact that every game is on TV, and you have people who invest entire Saturdays watching the season unfold. It's like a giant reality show in which people actually have passionate ties to one of the constestants.
This post was edited on 9/25/17 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:26 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
*Alabama soundly defeated a healthy Florida State team.
*South Carolina beat NC State (one of the better ACC teams)
*Georgia won at Notre Dame
*Vanderbilt (!) beat Kansas State
These are good wins:
Florida got demolished by Michigan
Mizzou got boatraced by Purdue at home
Ole Miss lost to Cal
Sure take the good wins and run with them. But consider the not so good defeats as well. Every conference has some bad OOC losses, while every conference has some good OOC wins. The SEC used to go 7-1 in those types of games, now they are going .500 like everyone else
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:28 pm to BHMKyle
Part of it is coach's salaries. They're higher than ever and people expect more than ever. It comes with the territory.
That said, 9-3 is now completely unacceptable to many fans. I think part of it is the "rangz" culture that has come about over the last several years. Many people think that if you're not directly competing for a championship then football is not enjoyable and not worth it.
That said, 9-3 is now completely unacceptable to many fans. I think part of it is the "rangz" culture that has come about over the last several years. Many people think that if you're not directly competing for a championship then football is not enjoyable and not worth it.
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:29 pm to MontyFranklyn
quote:
The SEC was this ugly circa 2004 and 2005
Fact.
Only reason bama won 10 games in 2005 was the sec was garbage
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:32 pm to BHMKyle
It is us being spoiled as fans. We expect to dominate. But it's also the product of coaches being paid so much. AU could have beaten Clemson had they stretched the perimeter running game and stopped allowing them to collapse the pocket. It was elementary coaching that you'd expect them to recognize at the price point. I take zero issue in losing when common sense is applied. I take great issue with losing by doing the same fricking thing over and over that is not working.
Get paid $5,000,000 a year, you better be on your Ps and Qs.
Get paid $5,000,000 a year, you better be on your Ps and Qs.
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:33 pm to ksayetiger
quote:
Only reason bama won 10 games in 2005 was the sec was garbage
Got Shula?
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:34 pm to AUbagman
quote:
take great issue with losing by doing the same fricking thing over and over that is not working.
Copied so i can paste it the next time some idiot asks why lsu fired the best coach in their history
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:36 pm to ksayetiger
You won't hear any shite talking from me, Tubs was the same as Les. I just expected LSU to make a better hire after Les.
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:40 pm to BHMKyle
College Football has transitioned to a win at all cost and now mentality.
The notion of a "student athlete" in college football is a farse.
College Football is minor league football and fans demand to win now.
Our league in particular is highlighted here because we have an all time great coaching in the conference.
Its only human nature to look over and say, "why the frick, why are they winning and not us".
The notion of a "student athlete" in college football is a farse.
College Football is minor league football and fans demand to win now.
Our league in particular is highlighted here because we have an all time great coaching in the conference.
Its only human nature to look over and say, "why the frick, why are they winning and not us".
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:42 pm to TeddyWestside
quote:
That said, 9-3 is now completely
Its kind of sad really.
College Football is not what it once was.
Its basically professional ball coated over by a university.
College football got massive and this is the by product.
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:43 pm to BHMKyle
great thread and topic by the way 
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:45 pm to CBandits82
Exactly. The process of hiring and firing coaches has changed. The mentality now is "Let's get a guy who will win games and if he can't do it get him out." Back in the day when they hired a coach, they were looking for someone to stick around for thirty years, be a good ambassador for the university and for the athletic department, graduate players, and hopefully win some. That's not to say that it was ever totally honest, as long as they've kept score they were willing to do what it takes to win, but the mentality toward collegiate athletics sure was different.
Really, I would say that, like every other aspect of our society, coaching has become more specialized and people have become more expendable in the pursuit of a lofty goal.
Really, I would say that, like every other aspect of our society, coaching has become more specialized and people have become more expendable in the pursuit of a lofty goal.
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:51 pm to TeddyWestside
quote:
Many people think that if you're not directly competing for a championship then football is not enjoyable and not worth it.
In the culture now when you aren't competing for titles what are you competing for.
I think the bowl scenario has helped this.
Years ago, it was an honor to get into a bowl game. It was a big deal and you were pumped. When LSU played Notre Dame in 97 in Shreveport I was ecstatic. Now a bowl means nothing to most. Who cares? a 6-6 team gets into a bowl ( which is a tragedy IMO).
Posted on 9/25/17 at 12:52 pm to BHMKyle
College football has become more competitive in the national setting. I think that part is a plus. Personally, I'm not a big fan of NFL as I'm sure many of you are the same. Just not as passionate. But like others have said, CFB has gotten bigger. The teams are like movies and the coaches are the directors. No body wants to pay money to see a shitastic movie.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News