re: Serious Football Discussion Thread

Let’s face it: the world is a crazy place, and college football has never shied away from adding its own brand of insanity. But why stop at a modest 4 or 12-team playoff? Let’s crank the absurdity to 96 teams. Why? Because nothing screams “we’re serious about finding the best team” like forcing half the country’s football programs to participate in a tournament longer than a Marvel movie marathon.

First off, logistics. Imagine the selection committee trying to rank teams after the top 25. Sure, Alabama and Vandy get their spots, but when you’re discussing the relative merits of Middle Tennessee State versus the Toledo Rockets, you’re basically throwing darts at a map of the Midwest. The fans? They’ll be thrilled to see the likes of Wyoming and UMass battling for gridiron glory. Heck, we’ll need a whole new set of analysts just to figure out which schools even have football teams. "I hear Stanford has one?" someone will mutter.

The playoff format would be like March Madness on steroids. The early rounds will be a beautiful mess, with underdog teams playing on fields that double as soccer pitches or high school parking lots. You’ll get scores like 56-7, but who cares? People live for the Cinderella stories. After all, who wouldn’t love to see Eastern Michigan take on Ohio State, only to lose 78-3? You’ve got to give the little guys a chance, even if it’s just a chance to be thoroughly obliterated.

A 96-team playoff is exactly what we didn’t know we needed. It’s a logistical nightmare, a scheduling disaster, and the best way to spend six straight weekends watching teams you’ve never heard of trying to dethrone the inevitable Alabama-Georgia final. Let the madness begin!

quote:

---

A 96-team playoff is exactly what we didn’t know we needed.

---

Remember how everyone was going to die if we didn’t have an indisputable national champion?

Now that your plan is in sight, we’re right back there.

quote:

---

I'm not saying make that your whole gameplan, but 2 or 3 times a game, maybe 4 or more if it's working, you get 7 offensive linemen out there with two tight ends, a QB and a RB, and mismatch up the middle. And if the defense subs well and the mismatch isn't exactly there, you've still got three eligible and capable receivers you can turn into a screen play for big yards with an audible at the line depending on the defense lineup.

---

Seriously, why don't they?

quote:

---

Seriously, why don't they?

---

I don't know, it worked for Stanford many years ago.

So do you prefer The Water Boy or Unnecessary Roughness? Explain your answer. This is serious.

quote:

---

So do you prefer The Water Boy or Unnecessary Roughness? Explain your answer. This is serious.

---

Adam Sandler is funnier than Sinbad. And the Sinbad movie is Necessary Roughness, so it's a trick question. Seriously.

quote:

---

Seems like they’ve lightened up on targeting penalties, I wonder why

---

Today's college players were in middle school when that rule came out, and have been coached their whole career to the new rule, it's not a new rule to a 20 year old, it's been the rule since they were 10. It's one of the reasons we see shittier tackling across all of football. You don't play or practice the same way as 15 years ago.

That's just my opinion.

quote:

---

I’d recommend watching the Manning Cast for Monday Night Football, and finding Belichick’s and Gruden’s YouTube channels. They’ve helped me learn a lot more of the X’s and O’s.

---

I wish they'd do the Manning Cast for a CFB matchup every week, especially SEC games.

quote:

---

AI video reviews of plays as they happen.

---

That is a lot more difficult to do than you think it is.