Week 1 Games

[ChiefGritty]

Destroy how?

I am a devout college football traditionalist who believes that the sport is meant to be focused on games played during the regular season at campus sites, and that the national championship ought to remain a sort of pseudo-mythical entity determined by polls that is just another prize in a sport where rivalries and conference championships still define what people are playing for.

That's a personal aesthetic preference of course, but I also truly believe that the more CFB becomes a glossy frictionless procession of major brands playing at neutral sites focused around a season-ending playoff for all the marbles, the more it becomes just a JV NFL, and it will go the way of every other minor league sport everywhere else in the world. College football is magical because it's weird and different and kinda dumb and always stubbornly what it is. That's a value people seem to be losing the ability to accurately calculate in our modern world.

 

[KrushCow31]

So should we start talking about how Notre Dame is overrated year after year?

I mean, we lost to Clemson by less than Alabama. It counts.

ND did lose a lot of firepower at WR and RB, so we will see. Georgia will show you exactly what kind of team ND has this year.

 

[ChiefGritty]

I mean, we lost to Clemson by less than Alabama. It counts.

ND did lose a lot of firepower at WR and RB, so we will see. Georgia will show you exactly what kind of team ND has this year.

we lost to Clemson by less than Alabama.

we

 

[Deleted member 631370]

So, during Nick Saban's tenure, Alabama has played the following OOC opponents:

2008: Clemson (neutral)
2009: Virginia Tech (neutral)
2010: Penn State
2011: @ Penn State
2012: Michigan (neutral)
2013: Virginia Tech (neutral)
2014: West Virginia (neutral)
2015: Wisconsin (neutral)
2016: USC (neutral)
2017: Florida State (neutral)
2018: Louisville (neutral)

Several of those, when scheduled, were anticipated as blockbuster games -- like the FSU game in 2017 and the Louisville game in 2018 (before that program suddenly fell apart). But that lineup is pretty darn respectable. Considering they only got one home game out of all of them.

It seems like the evidence doesn't suggest this notion that Alabama schedules a bunch of freebies in the OOC.

 

[ChiefGritty]

So, during Nick Saban's tenure, Alabama has played the following OOC opponents:

2008: Clemson (neutral)
2009: Virginia Tech (neutral)
2010: Penn State
2011: @ Penn State
2012: Michigan (neutral)
2013: Virginia Tech (neutral)
2014: West Virginia (neutral)
2015: Wisconsin (neutral)
2016: USC (neutral)
2017: Florida State (neutral)
2018: Louisville (neutral)

Several of those, when scheduled, were anticipated as blockbuster games -- like the FSU game in 2017 and the Louisville game in 2018 (before that program suddenly fell apart). But that lineup is pretty darn respectable. Considering they only got one home game out of all of them.

It seems like the evidence doesn't suggest this notion that Alabama schedules a bunch of freebies in the OOC.

Oh I'm not trying to make some broader point about Saban or Bama. As you lay out, they've played people in the past (they could still do better of course).

But that 2019 slate ain't good enough. Shame on them.

 

[KrushCow31]

:-( but I go to grad school at ND and live in SB. My loyalty is still Illinois over ND. My proof is getting kicked out of the ND student section for wearing all orange when Illinois played ND in bball last year.

 

[ILL_INI]

So, during Nick Saban's tenure, Alabama has played the following OOC opponents:

2008: Clemson (neutral)
2009: Virginia Tech (neutral)
2010: Penn State
2011: @ Penn State
2012: Michigan (neutral)
2013: Virginia Tech (neutral)
2014: West Virginia (neutral)
2015: Wisconsin (neutral)
2016: USC (neutral)
2017: Florida State (neutral)
2018: Louisville (neutral)

Several of those, when scheduled, were anticipated as blockbuster games -- like the FSU game in 2017 and the Louisville game in 2018 (before that program suddenly fell apart). But that lineup is pretty darn respectable. Considering they only got one home game out of all of them.

It seems like the evidence doesn't suggest this notion that Alabama schedules a bunch of freebies in the OOC.

So was the 2011 Penn State game Alabama's only true road game out of conference in twelve years? If so, that's pathetic.

 

[YankeeIllini]

So, during Nick Saban's tenure, Alabama has played the following OOC opponents:

2008: Clemson (neutral)
2009: Virginia Tech (neutral)
2010: Penn State
2011: @ Penn State
2012: Michigan (neutral)
2013: Virginia Tech (neutral)
2014: West Virginia (neutral)
2015: Wisconsin (neutral)
2016: USC (neutral)
2017: Florida State (neutral)
2018: Louisville (neutral)

Several of those, when scheduled, were anticipated as blockbuster games -- like the FSU game in 2017 and the Louisville game in 2018 (before that program suddenly fell apart). But that lineup is pretty darn respectable. Considering they only got one home game out of all of them.

It seems like the evidence doesn't suggest this notion that Alabama schedules a bunch of freebies in the OOC.

Their complete OOC schedule since 2007 excluding bowl games (Saban’s first year):

2007: Western Carolina (W 52-6), Houston (W 21-14) and Louisiana- Monroe (L 21-14)
2008: Tulane (W 21-6), Western Kentucky (W 41-7), Arkansas State (W 35-0)
2009: Virginia Tech (W 34-24), FIU (W 40-14), North Texas (W 53-7), Tennessee-Chattanooga (W 45-0)
2010: San Jose State (W 48-3), Duke (W 62-13), Georgia State (W 63-7)
2011: Kent State (W 48-7), Penn State (W 27-11), North Texas (W 41-0). Georgia Southern (W 45-21)
2012: Michigan (W 41-14), Western Kentucky (W 35-0), Florida Atlantic (W 40-7), Western Carolina (W 49-0)
2013: Virginia Tech (W 35-10), Colorado State (W 31-6), Georgia State (W45-3), Tennessee-Chattanooga (W 49-0)
2014: West Virginia (W 33-23), Florida Atlantic (W 41-0), Southern Miss (W 52-12), Western Carolina (W 48-14)
2015: Wisconsin (W 35-17), Middle Tennessee St. (W 37-10), Louisiana-Monroe (W 34-0), Charleston Southern (W 56-6)
2016: USC (W 52-6), Western Kentucky (W 38-10),Kent State (W 48-0), Tennessee-Chattanooga (W 31-3)
2017: Florida State (W 24-7), Fresno State (W 41-10), Colorado State (W 41-23), Mercer (W 56-0)
2018: Louisville (W 51-14), Arkansas State (W 57-7), Citadel (W 50-17)
2019: Duke, New Mexico State, Southern Miss, Western Carolina

Out of 49 games, they scheduled P5 teams 10 times, roughly once per season, and almost always at the beginning of the year. One could come up with any number of conspiracy theories out there, but I'd suggest that they purposely schedule their toughest non-con foe early because they can take advantage of the superior athletes they obtain before other teams hit their stride. I also note they schedule thei last (and weakest) non-con opponent the second-to-last weekend of the season to give their kids a de facto bye week, and to garner a win (and virtually eliminate the possibility of a loss; they are 48-1 vs noncon foes since Saban came on board) when the committee is evaluating teams for the playoffs. BTW, Saban is 146-21 at Alabama, but 11-5 in bowl games.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it!

 

[YankeeIllini]

So was the 2011 Penn State game Alabama's only true road game out of conference in twelve years? If so, that's pathetic.

No, they played Florida State in 2007, Virginia Tech in 2009, Duke in 2010, Penn State in 2011, Virginia Tech in 2013, none since then.

 

[Deleted member 654622]

Considering they only got one home game out of all of them.

It seems like the evidence doesn't suggest this notion that Alabama schedules a bunch of freebies in the OOC.

So playing these games at either the Jerry Dome or the Georgia Dome every year is not an advantage?

 

[ILL_INI]

No, they played Florida State in 2007, Virginia Tech in 2009, Duke in 2010, Penn State in 2011, Virginia Tech in 2013, none since then.

Thanks. I believe I read somewhere that they have recently announced a home and home with Wisconsin for 2024 & 2025.

 

[BananaShampoo]

Thanks. I believe I read somewhere that they have recently announced a home and home with Wisconsin for 2024 & 2025.

I almost feel bad for Wisconsin. Almost...

 

[ChiefGritty]

I also note they schedule thei last (and weakest) non-con opponent the second-to-last weekend of the season to give their kids a de facto bye week, and to garner a win

Cupcake Week the Saturday before Rivalry Week has been an SEC tradition since forever. They all do it.

 

[Deleted member 654622]

No, they played Florida State in 2007, Virginia Tech in 2009, Duke in 2010, Penn State in 2011, Virginia Tech in 2013, none since then.

2007 vs Florida State was in Jacksonville Florida
2008 vs Clemson was in Atlanta
2009 vs Virginia Tech was in Atlanta
2010 vs Duke was ACTUALLY at Duke
2011 vs Penn State was ACTUALLY at Penn State
2012 vs Michigan was at the Jerry Dome
2013 vs Virginia Tech was in Atlanta
2014 vs West Virginia was in Atlanta
2015 vs Wisconsin was at the Jerry Dome
2016 vs USC was at the Jerry Dome
2017 vs Florida State in Atlanta
2018 vs Louisville at the Citris Bowl

Anyone else see a pattern here? Technically these are neutral site games but there is a clear advantage for Alabama to continually play in a stadium over and over. And correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the SEC champ game in Atlanta as well? It's crap

 

[ChiefGritty]

Anyone else see a pattern here? Technically these are neutral site games but there is a clear advantage for Alabama to continually play in a stadium over and over. And correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the SEC champ game in Atlanta as well? It's crap

It's not really an unfair advantage per se for Bama to play a Florida State or a Virginia Tech in Atlanta. That's an easy trip for any big fanbase in the South.

The scam is that these big neutral site early season clashes (always one in Atlanta, always one in Dallas, seems like Orlando, Miami and Charlotte are increasingly on that list, etc) are a way for all of these big time programs to play in markets they want to recruit without ever having to play a true road game.

It's one of those things that was cool once, but constantly making these fanbases travel and pay huge ticket costs (nobody's season tickets are valid for this, cha-ching), while broadcasting games in antiseptic neutral NFL environments is just the sport eating its seed corn. It's grabbing short term profits at the cost of long-term investment in the product.

This stuff always gets coded as "smart" or "savvy" as revenues spiral to the ceiling due to a temporary leveraged position vis a vis existing broadcasting infrastructure. When the winds change on that, and they will, this stuff is going to be revealed for what it is, eating one cookie today instead of two tomorrow.

 

[thunderwear]

It's not really an unfair advantage per se for Bama to play a Florida State or a Virginia Tech in Atlanta. That's an easy trip for any big fanbase in the South.

The scam is that these big neutral site early season clashes (always one in Atlanta, always one in Dallas, seems like Orlando, Miami and Charlotte are increasingly on that list, etc) are a way for all of these big time programs to play in markets they want to recruit without ever having to play a true road game.

It's one of those things that was cool once, but constantly making these fanbases travel and pay huge ticket costs (nobody's season tickets are valid for this, cha-ching), while broadcasting games in antiseptic neutral NFL environments is just the sport eating its seed corn. It's grabbing short term profits at the cost of long-term investment in the product.

This stuff always gets coded as "smart" or "savvy" as revenues spiral to the ceiling due to a temporary leveraged position vis a vis existing broadcasting infrastructure. When the winds change on that, and they will, this stuff is going to be revealed for what it is, eating one cookie today instead of two tomorrow.

I’m curious on your logic. How is it the sport eating ins it’s seed corn and what does that mean)?

Why do you think the winds will change?

 

[ktal]

People arguing to expand the four team format of the playoffs must have been watching different games than me since it began. I can't think of a single year when four teams entered the playoffs with a real chance to win it.

Year Biggest losing spread (SEMI's)
2014 --- 29 (OR/FSU)
2015 --- 38 (AL/MSU)
2016 --- 31 (CLE/OSU)
2017 --- 18 (AL/CLE)
2018 --- 27 (CLM/ND)

But there have certainly been two teams with a chance to win. Usually the same two, unfortunately.

FINAL
'14--- 22 (OSU/OR)
'15--- 5 (AL/CLE)
'16--- 4 (CLE/AL)
'17--- 3 (AL/GA)
'18--- 28 (CLE/AL)

 

[ChiefGritty]

I’m curious on your logic. How is it the sport eating ins it’s seed corn and what does that mean)?

Why do you think the winds will change?

Well eating your seed corn is a metaphor whereby if you're growing corn, you eat (or I guess sell) some of it, and you save some to plant so you have corn the next year. If you eat the seed corn, that means you're eating good now, but you're ensuring you won't have enough to eat later.

Everything in sports that extracts more money out of the customer at the cost of making the product either worse or less accessible to people is eating your seed corn, in my view. I very much count these neutral site games in that category.

And the way the winds are going to change is that college football, and lots of other sports but probably college football most of all, gets the lions share of its revenue based on its ability to siphon off cable TV subscriptions. Cable TV subscriptions are going the way of the dodo bird, and when that happens, college football is going to be left generating revenue based on customers' interest in engaging with the product. The sport won't die, college football is extremely popular and lots of people will want to watch it. But getting paid for broadcasting Rutgers-Purdue becomes a tougher sell then, and a lot of decisions like that are going to become a drag on the funds coming in.

Maybe at that point the conventional wisdom will shift, and we'll start regularly seeing Bama in the Big House or Texas in Death Valley or whatever, these thrilling, attention-grabbing matchups. But that would require somebody giving up a buck they're currently getting, and we all know how willing the powers that be are to do that. What seems more likely to me is that little by little college football will just become a little less popular, one more young person playing Fortnite or whatever instead.

I could go on and on about this, but to make a long story....still fairly long, I think sports in general and maybe college football most of all is a visceral, communal experience of and for the masses, and its long, long term financial interests are to lean into that, rather than monetizing it away piece by piece.

 

[Deleted member 654622]

It's not really an unfair advantage per se for Bama to play a Florida State or a Virginia Tech in Atlanta. That's an easy trip for any big fanbase in the South.

The scam is that these big neutral site early season clashes (always one in Atlanta, always one in Dallas, seems like Orlando, Miami and Charlotte are increasingly on that list, etc) are a way for all of these big time programs to play in markets they want to recruit without ever having to play a true road game.

It's one of those things that was cool once, but constantly making these fanbases travel and pay huge ticket costs (nobody's season tickets are valid for this, cha-ching), while broadcasting games in antiseptic neutral NFL environments is just the sport eating its seed corn. It's grabbing short term profits at the cost of long-term investment in the product.

This stuff always gets coded as "smart" or "savvy" as revenues spiral to the ceiling due to a temporary leveraged position vis a vis existing broadcasting infrastructure. When the winds change on that, and they will, this stuff is going to be revealed for what it is, eating one cookie today instead of two tomorrow.

You don't think there is an advantage to playing in the same stadium multiple times against a team making the trip for the first? Don't see the logic in that

 

[Deleted member 631370]

2007 vs Florida State was in Jacksonville Florida
2008 vs Clemson was in Atlanta
2009 vs Virginia Tech was in Atlanta
2010 vs Duke was ACTUALLY at Duke
2011 vs Penn State was ACTUALLY at Penn State
2012 vs Michigan was at the Jerry Dome
2013 vs Virginia Tech was in Atlanta
2014 vs West Virginia was in Atlanta
2015 vs Wisconsin was at the Jerry Dome
2016 vs USC was at the Jerry Dome
2017 vs Florida State in Atlanta
2018 vs Louisville at the Citris Bowl

Anyone else see a pattern here? Technically these are neutral site games but there is a clear advantage for Alabama to continually play in a stadium over and over. And correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the SEC champ game in Atlanta as well? It's crap

Wait......you're telling me Alabama has an advantage over a VT or a Clemson or a Florida State by playing in Atlanta because of familiarity? Come on. ACC teams have long played in the Peach Bowl, and Atlanta is geographically proximate to those schools as well. Their fans showed up in large numbers.

They've played in the Jerry Dome like three times in the past 10 years. That's supposed to give them an advantage? Seriously?

Alabama has the gaudy record they have under Saban not because they schedule advantageously, but because they're pretty awesome. Their record on the road in the SEC is pretty astounding, too.

There are 101 reasons to hate on the SEC. But some of this argumentation is silly. Over the past 10 seasons, Alabama's strength of schedule has been #12, #1, #6, #3, #1, #7, #2, #1, #1, and #6. Granted, the past few years have also factored in the CFP, which increases their SOS. I'd have to go back and see what their regular season SOS was, but based on the strength of the SEC -- and scheduling at least one big name non-conference opponent on a neutral field each year -- I imagine it's fairly respectable.

 

[thunderwear]

Well eating your seed corn is a metaphor whereby if you're growing corn, you eat (or I guess sell) some of it, and you save some to plant so you have corn the next year. If you eat the seed corn, that means you're eating good now, but you're ensuring you won't have enough to eat later.

Everything in sports that extracts more money out of the customer at the cost of making the product either worse or less accessible to people is eating your seed corn, in my view. I very much count these neutral site games in that category.

And the way the winds are going to change is that college football, and lots of other sports but probably college football most of all, gets the lions share of its revenue based on its ability to siphon off cable TV subscriptions. Cable TV subscriptions are going the way of the dodo bird, and when that happens, college football is going to be left generating revenue based on customers' interest in engaging with the product. The sport won't die, college football is extremely popular and lots of people will want to watch it. But getting paid for broadcasting Rutgers-Purdue becomes a tougher sell then, and a lot of decisions like that are going to become a drag on the funds coming in.

Maybe at that point the conventional wisdom will shift, and we'll start regularly seeing Bama in the Big House or Texas in Death Valley or whatever, these thrilling, attention-grabbing matchups. But that would require somebody giving up a buck they're currently getting, and we all know how willing the powers that be are to do that. What seems more likely to me is that little by little college football will just become a little less popular, one more young person playing Fortnite or whatever instead.

I could go on and on about this, but to make a long story....still fairly long, I think sports in general and maybe college football most of all is a visceral, communal experience of and for the masses, and its long, long term financial interests are to lean into that, rather than monetizing it away piece by piece.

This is well thought out. I hadn't put thought into it, but I’m not sure that one neutral court game (where people can plan to attend) accomplishes this. I agree with you that the cfp is slowly but surely leading to a denigration and disinterest in bowl games (I’ve stopped watching almost every non cfp game; n=1). I’ve also noticed that ratings are starting to slide and care for watching sports is declining in younger generations. And I think this is much to your point.

 

[FiveStar]

People arguing to expand the four team format of the playoffs must have been watching different games than me since it began. I can't think of a single year when four teams entered the playoffs with a real chance to win it.

Year Biggest losing spread (SEMI's)
2014 --- 29 (OR/FSU)
2015 --- 38 (AL/MSU)
2016 --- 31 (CLE/OSU)
2017 --- 18 (AL/CLE)
2018 --- 27 (CLM/ND)

But there have certainly been two teams with a chance to win. Usually the same two, unfortunately.

FINAL
'14--- 22 (OSU/OR)
'15--- 5 (AL/CLE)
'16--- 4 (CLE/AL)
'17--- 3 (AL/GA)
'18--- 28 (CLE/AL)

Can you think of a year all 68 teams in the ncaa tournament had a real chance to win it?

 

[Deleted member 654622]

Wait......you're telling me Alabama has an advantage over a VT or a Clemson or a Florida State by playing in Atlanta because of familiarity? Come on. ACC teams have long played in the Peach Bowl, and Atlanta is geographically proximate to those schools as well. Their fans showed up in large numbers.

They've played in the Jerry Dome like three times in the past 10 years. That's supposed to give them an advantage? Seriously?

Alabama has the gaudy record they have under Saban not because they schedule advantageously, but because they're pretty awesome. Their record on the road in the SEC is pretty astounding, too.

There are 101 reasons to hate on the SEC. But some of this argumentation is silly. Over the past 10 seasons, Alabama's strength of schedule has been #12, #1, #6, #3, #1, #7, #2, #1, #1, and #6. Granted, the past few years have also factored in the CFP, which increases their SOS. I'd have to go back and see what their regular season SOS was, but based on the strength of the SEC -- and scheduling at least one big name non-conference opponent on a neutral field each year -- I imagine it's fairly respectable.

Do I think a team gets an advantage over playing in a stadium multiple times vs a team that doesn't? Yes I do. Next question
Alabama is pretty awesome? Didn't say Alabama wasn't a great team. What I am saying is they play a weaker schedule than they are given credit for without any punishment(see my post about their competition last year). Therefor not only are they a great team, they are getting credit for beating up on chumps. They are allowed to play cupcakes to get healthy and rested before 1 of their 3 actual games throughout the year.
Their SOS is based off this incorrect aura that the SEC is great from top to bottom.(see my post about their competition last year).

 

[Pride of Hebron]

:-( but I go to grad school at ND and live in SB. My loyalty is still Illinois over ND. My proof is getting kicked out of the ND student section for wearing all orange when Illinois played ND in bball last year.

Traitor.

 

[TwoElevenEastDaniel]

Jeff Thomas just muffed a punt. Wouldn't have fit the system anyway.