Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board
BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Football
Topic:  The new CFP proposal

Topic:  The new CFP proposal
Author
Message
Pataskala
General User

Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,152

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/11/2021 10:40:29 AM 
The CFP management committee has proposed a new format for the playoff -- 12 teams, the six highest-ranked conference champs plus the six highest-ranked non-champs; no limit on the number of schools from one league; no auto qualifiers. Basically, it'll amount to the five "P" conference champs plus one G5 conference champ plus five high-ranked non-champs. Some seasons it'll be the top 12 teams but most seasons it'll likely be the top 11 plus the G5 champ. Top four conference champs get a bye; 5-8 will host first-round games on campus vs 12-9; the rest will be played at bowl games. Quarterfinals will be New Year's weekend, semis after New Year's, finals after that. Essentially, like the NFL, they'd add a week to the season. Any conference champs not getting a bye would need to play 17 games to win the crown; everybody else would need to play 16. Looks like they're still planning to end the regular season over Thanksgiving with conference championships the week after and Army-Navy the week after that. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/31604970... .

Last Edited: 6/11/2021 10:43:25 AM by Pataskala

We will get by.
We will get by.
We will get by.
We will survive.
Back to Top
  
bobcatsquared
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 5,042

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/11/2021 10:44:26 AM 
And the slide down the slippery slope continues.
Back to Top
  
shabamon
General User



Member Since: 11/17/2006
Location: Cincinnati
Post Count: 6,117

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/11/2021 11:49:22 AM 
It's not perfect, but a step in the right direction. Actually, last year, you'd probably have two G5 teams (Cincinnati and Coastal Carolina) due to unranked Oregon winning the PAC 12.

Going back to 1998, under this model, 99 Marshall, 03 Miami, 12 NIU, and 16 WMU would be in.

Any model where every team in the country is not in complete control of its destiny is imperfect in my mind. Say you have a Mountain West team that begins the year ranked and a MAC team that does not garner any preseason poll votes. Both teams go undefeated, win their conferences, and finish as the top two ranked G5 teams. The MWC team gets the bid and the MAC team never had a chance to pass them (most years, the MAC team would be sweating it out hoping for another Oregon/USC situation). I want the W/L results of the season to determine bids, not a poll giving a team a head start.

12 team playoff, all 10 conference champions, two at large bids, top four conference champs get a bye, first round on campus, and if you want to get really wild, the at large teams seeded 11/12. That's my dream playoff.

Last Edited: 6/11/2021 11:52:42 AM by shabamon
Back to Top
  
Pataskala
General User

Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,152

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/11/2021 12:37:23 PM 
I don't think they'd use the AP & Coaches polls, so preseason rankings probably don't mean a lot. The first Selection Committee poll comes out in late October when teams have played more than half of their games. Still, with the Selection Committee poll, getting ranked early gives teams a leg up.

What I'd like to see is conference champs getting a home game in the first round. It should mean something that they played an extra game, even if they're not ranked 5-8. Probably won't happen because they want big, packed stadiums and most G5 stadiums are quite a bit smaller than the typical "P" stadium.

We will get by.
We will get by.
We will get by.
We will survive.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat1996
General User

Member Since: 1/2/2017
Post Count: 794

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/11/2021 8:28:13 PM 
This newest proposal is nothing more than giving the MWC, MAC, Sun Belt, CUSA and American Conferences an appetizer while the big boys get steak and lobster as per usual. Go back and figure out the last few seasons top 16 teams and the SEC will dominate this set up. Throw in a few Big Ten teams, Oregon or USC, Clemson yearly, ND, Oklahoma and another Big 12 team every year and that about does it. This proposed set up throws a tiny bone to the little guys, but permits Clemson, Ohio State, LSU, Bama, Georgia, Oklahoma, Florida, ND and some others to lose twice and still get in the 12 team set up.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat1996
General User

Member Since: 1/2/2017
Post Count: 794

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/11/2021 8:29:58 PM 
The rich get richer for certain under this new set up. As the system is now, the regular season is very important, especially to the power five conferences. One upset loss in the middle of the season can knock out a power five team.

Last Edited: 6/11/2021 8:44:34 PM by Bobcat1996
Back to Top
  
SVAC83
General User

Member Since: 10/1/2019
Post Count: 143

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/11/2021 8:59:10 PM 
I think this setup could actually be quite interesting. You could have a undefeated Notre dame team have to play in the first round and you could very well have a team ranked maybe 10th getting a BYE.

This is a win for everyone. with the extra rounds of playoffs there will be a much bigger TV contract and each conference will get a bigger share. Plus this format every year guarantees one non power 5 has a shot every year instead of no shot ever.

I think this will lead to many more teams not being afraid to schedule big out of conference games.

But i also believe this is the first step to us getting to 5 or 6 mega conferences and them splitting away from everyone else.
Back to Top
  
Pataskala
General User

Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,152

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/11/2021 11:13:27 PM 
Here's what the first six full seasons under the CFP would've looked like (*-team gets a first-round bye):

2019 -- Conf champs: #1LSU*, #2O$U*, #3Clemson*, #4Okla,* #6Oregon, #17Memphis
The rest: #5Georgia, #7Baylor, #8Wisconsin, #9Florida, #10Penn St, #11Utah

2018 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Clemson*, #4Okla*, #6O$U*, #8UCF, #9Wash
The rest: #3ND, #5Georgia, #7Mich, #10Florida, #11LSU, #12Penn St
(Note: UCF was undefeated through the conference championship game.)

2017 -- Conf champs: #1Clemson*, #2Okla*, #3Georgia*, #5O$U*, #8USC, #12UCF
The rest: #4Bama, #6Wisc, #7Auburn, #9Penn St, #10MiamiF, #11Wash
(Note: UCF was undefeated through the conference championship game.)

2016 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Clemson*, #4Wash*, #5Penn St*, #7Okla, #15WMU
The rest: #3O$U, #6Mich, #8Wisc, #9USC, #10Colo, #11FSU

2015 -- Conf champs: #1Clemson*, #2Bama*, #3Mich St*, #4Okla*, #6Stanford, #18Houston
The rest: #5Iowa, #7O$U, #8ND, #9FSU, #10UNC, #11TCU

2014 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Oregon St*, #3FSU*, #4O$U*, #5Baylor, #6TCU, #20 Boise
The rest: #7Miss St, #8Mich St, #9Ole Miss, #10Ariz, #11KSU
(Note: The B12 had no championship game in 2014. Baylor and TCU finished tied for first and were declared co-champs even though Baylor beat TCU during the regular season.)


In each year, there would have been only one G5 team in the playoff. And unless conference champs would have been guaranteed a first-round home game, the G5 team would have had only one home game in the six years, UCF in 2018.

We will get by.
We will get by.
We will get by.
We will survive.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat1996
General User

Member Since: 1/2/2017
Post Count: 794

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/12/2021 9:07:53 AM 
Pataskala wrote:
Here's what the first six full seasons under the CFP would've looked like (*-team gets a first-round bye):

2019 -- Conf champs: #1LSU*, #2O$U*, #3Clemson*, #4Okla,* #6Oregon, #17Memphis
The rest: #5Georgia, #7Baylor, #8Wisconsin, #9Florida, #10Penn St, #11Utah

2018 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Clemson*, #4Okla*, #6O$U*, #8UCF, #9Wash
The rest: #3ND, #5Georgia, #7Mich, #10Florida, #11LSU, #12Penn St
(Note: UCF was undefeated through the conference championship game.)

2017 -- Conf champs: #1Clemson*, #2Okla*, #3Georgia*, #5O$U*, #8USC, #12UCF
The rest: #4Bama, #6Wisc, #7Auburn, #9Penn St, #10MiamiF, #11Wash
(Note: UCF was undefeated through the conference championship game.)

2016 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Clemson*, #4Wash*, #5Penn St*, #7Okla, #15WMU
The rest: #3O$U, #6Mich, #8Wisc, #9USC, #10Colo, #11FSU

2015 -- Conf champs: #1Clemson*, #2Bama*, #3Mich St*, #4Okla*, #6Stanford, #18Houston
The rest: #5Iowa, #7O$U, #8ND, #9FSU, #10UNC, #11TCU

2014 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Oregon St*, #3FSU*, #4O$U*, #5Baylor, #6TCU, #20 Boise
The rest: #7Miss St, #8Mich St, #9Ole Miss, #10Ariz, #11KSU
(Note: The B12 had no championship game in 2014. Baylor and TCU finished tied for first and were declared co-champs even though Baylor beat TCU during the regular season.)


In each year, there would have been only one G5 team in the playoff. And unless conference champs would have been guaranteed a first-round home game, the G5 team would have had only one home game in the six years, UCF in 2018.


From 2017-2019 the SEC and Big Ten would have had six or one season seven teams of the 12. It will continue to be like that most years.
Back to Top
  
Campus Flow
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 4,952

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/12/2021 1:29:20 PM 
To win the championship in this new system it will require winning 3-4 games against elite competition. With the top heavy 4 team playoff it was the best of the best in there to compete but now you're letting programs compete that don't have Top 10 recruiting classes (a few not even Top 50).

The answer for the non-elite programs to be able to win in the playoff is to have a Heisman level player with the ability by themselves to take over games and will themselves to victory. That is the only way to get through a 4 team grind like this.

To attract that Heisman level player IMO it requires having a highly productive offensive scheme. A scheme that is going to make that player look good to the pros and a high probability of winning the conference championship. Those kind of players aren't going to be attracted to a G5 team that averages 27ppg while holding the opposition to 19ppg.

Boise State's development is a case study in this. First they developed an explosive offense, then won a Fiesta Bowl. From the Fiesta Bowl win they recruited better defensive talent so by the 2010 team they were winning by such margins to make a statistical case they were the #1 team in the country (they were ranked around #3 in the polls that season).

The question though is where is the recruiting heading with the format? With the second tier P5 programs getting an easy ticket to the playoff by winning their conference I believe it would favor a TCU in the Big 12 over Houston from the AAC where finishing as a Top 6 champ is in doubt. That shifts the overall recruiting away from the G5 but that could lead to a Boise State in the WAC situation where one program is so far ahead it can't possibly lose a conference game. They end up recruiting that one special player to put them over the top.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Back to Top
  
Pataskala
General User

Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,152

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/12/2021 2:37:46 PM 
Bobcat1996 wrote:
Pataskala wrote:
Here's what the first six full seasons under the CFP would've looked like (*-team gets a first-round bye):

2019 -- Conf champs: #1LSU*, #2O$U*, #3Clemson*, #4Okla,* #6Oregon, #17Memphis
The rest: #5Georgia, #7Baylor, #8Wisconsin, #9Florida, #10Penn St, #11Utah

2018 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Clemson*, #4Okla*, #6O$U*, #8UCF, #9Wash
The rest: #3ND, #5Georgia, #7Mich, #10Florida, #11LSU, #12Penn St
(Note: UCF was undefeated through the conference championship game.)

2017 -- Conf champs: #1Clemson*, #2Okla*, #3Georgia*, #5O$U*, #8USC, #12UCF
The rest: #4Bama, #6Wisc, #7Auburn, #9Penn St, #10MiamiF, #11Wash
(Note: UCF was undefeated through the conference championship game.)

2016 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Clemson*, #4Wash*, #5Penn St*, #7Okla, #15WMU
The rest: #3O$U, #6Mich, #8Wisc, #9USC, #10Colo, #11FSU

2015 -- Conf champs: #1Clemson*, #2Bama*, #3Mich St*, #4Okla*, #6Stanford, #18Houston
The rest: #5Iowa, #7O$U, #8ND, #9FSU, #10UNC, #11TCU

2014 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Oregon St*, #3FSU*, #4O$U*, #5Baylor, #6TCU, #20 Boise
The rest: #7Miss St, #8Mich St, #9Ole Miss, #10Ariz, #11KSU
(Note: The B12 had no championship game in 2014. Baylor and TCU finished tied for first and were declared co-champs even though Baylor beat TCU during the regular season.)


In each year, there would have been only one G5 team in the playoff. And unless conference champs would have been guaranteed a first-round home game, the G5 team would have had only one home game in the six years, UCF in 2018.


From 2017-2019 the SEC and Big Ten would have had six or one season seven teams of the 12. It will continue to be like that most years.


Yep. And it's in part due to the institutional bias in the selection committee. G5 teams basically have to go unbeaten and win by big margins just to have a chance. The only two times a G5 team was in the top 12 involved unbeaten teams, yet two-loss and even three-loss "P" teams are there all the time. The proposal may be a step in the right direction but it's little more than the NY6 bone that G5s currently get.

We will get by.
We will get by.
We will get by.
We will survive.
Back to Top
  
mf279801
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,452

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/12/2021 8:07:58 PM 
Pataskala wrote:
Here's what the first six full seasons under the CFP would've looked like (*-team gets a first-round bye):

2019 -- Conf champs: #1LSU*, #2O$U*, #3Clemson*, #4Okla,* #6Oregon, #17Memphis
The rest: #5Georgia, #7Baylor, #8Wisconsin, #9Florida, #10Penn St, #11Utah

2018 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Clemson*, #4Okla*, #6O$U*, #8UCF, #9Wash
The rest: #3ND, #5Georgia, #7Mich, #10Florida, #11LSU, #12Penn St
(Note: UCF was undefeated through the conference championship game.)

2017 -- Conf champs: #1Clemson*, #2Okla*, #3Georgia*, #5O$U*, #8USC, #12UCF
The rest: #4Bama, #6Wisc, #7Auburn, #9Penn St, #10MiamiF, #11Wash
(Note: UCF was undefeated through the conference championship game.)

2016 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Clemson*, #4Wash*, #5Penn St*, #7Okla, #15WMU
The rest: #3O$U, #6Mich, #8Wisc, #9USC, #10Colo, #11FSU

2015 -- Conf champs: #1Clemson*, #2Bama*, #3Mich St*, #4Okla*, #6Stanford, #18Houston
The rest: #5Iowa, #7O$U, #8ND, #9FSU, #10UNC, #11TCU

2014 -- Conf champs: #1Bama*, #2Oregon St*, #3FSU*, #4O$U*, #5Baylor, #6TCU, #20 Boise
The rest: #7Miss St, #8Mich St, #9Ole Miss, #10Ariz, #11KSU
(Note: The B12 had no championship game in 2014. Baylor and TCU finished tied for first and were declared co-champs even though Baylor beat TCU during the regular season.)


In each year, there would have been only one G5 team in the playoff. And unless conference champs would have been guaranteed a first-round home game, the G5 team would have had only one home game in the six years, UCF in 2018.


Note that in the admittedly bizarre and (hopefully) not to be replicated 2020 season, 2 G5 teams would have been in and no PAC12 teams would have
Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,478

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/12/2021 8:57:00 PM 
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.
Back to Top
  
Jeff McKinney
Moderator

Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,046

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/12/2021 9:26:17 PM 
I think the goal should be to include all D1 FBS conferences in the playoffs. This deal doesn't make that happen. If this is the way it's going to be, then the top 5 or 6 FBS conferences really do need to form their own group. Then the G5 and maybe the top tier FCS conferences need to work together to develop a playoff system.
Back to Top
  
Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,023

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/12/2021 10:00:54 PM 
Jeff McKinney wrote:
I think the goal should be to include all D1 FBS conferences in the playoffs. This deal doesn't make that happen. If this is the way it's going to be, then the top 5 or 6 FBS conferences really do need to form their own group. Then the G5 and maybe the top tier FCS conferences need to work together to develop a playoff system.


"The FBS currently has ten conferences, which are often divided into the "Power Five conferences" and the less prominent "Group of Five"."

Jeff is right on. Either all 10 conference winners are in or it's time to get out with the realization that all 10 aren't in in the first place. It's time to quit pretending.
Back to Top
  
Pataskala
General User

Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,152

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/12/2021 11:05:37 PM 
BillyTheCat wrote:
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.


The goal of the other major D1 team sports isn't to get just the best teams in their playoff/tournament. It's to placate smaller conferences by giving their conference champs a shot at the national title. Occasionally, those conference champs surprise the big guys with a deep run into the tourney. Gonzaga did it, then became a perennial power. Coastal Carolina won the College World Series a few years ago. All the conference champs in basketball, volleyball, softball and baseball get automatic bids, and there are as many as 32 of those. I'm not sure about the other sports. The 1AA/FCS playoff includes automatic bids for all but, I believe, the three conferences that choose not to participate. That's the difference between NCAA-run playoffs and the CFP-run mini-playoff. Yeah, most G5 conference champs don't have much of a chance of winning it all, but they should at least have a shot.

We will get by.
We will get by.
We will get by.
We will survive.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat1996
General User

Member Since: 1/2/2017
Post Count: 794

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/13/2021 7:40:59 AM 
The one big difference in football and all the other sports mentioned above is the huge amount of cash dished out to the power five schools. The big boys don't want to give up the money that would be paid to the smaller conferences. Football is a much different animal than all the other college sports. Look at the training facilities, stadium, locker rooms, weight room, paid staff (and this doesn't just include assistant coaches), nutrition program, etc., at places like Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Ohio State, Oklahoma and Clemson. MAC or CUSA schools can't touch that.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat1996
General User

Member Since: 1/2/2017
Post Count: 794

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/13/2021 10:03:03 AM 
If we are being honest, only a handful of power five teams have a chance at winning it all in football. Duke, Vandy and Rutgers play in power five conferences, but they aren't going to win the title in football. They are members of those leagues in football to collect a paycheck and to participate in many other college sports. The football goal at those schools and many others, should be to win as many games as possible as well as have success in the post season. Achieve those goals and more than likely, a coach will move on to a higher paying job.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,285

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/13/2021 12:12:28 PM 
Alan Swank wrote:
Jeff McKinney wrote:
I think the goal should be to include all D1 FBS conferences in the playoffs. This deal doesn't make that happen. If this is the way it's going to be, then the top 5 or 6 FBS conferences really do need to form their own group. Then the G5 and maybe the top tier FCS conferences need to work together to develop a playoff system.


"The FBS currently has ten conferences, which are often divided into the "Power Five conferences" and the less prominent "Group of Five"."

Jeff is right on. Either all 10 conference winners are in or it's time to get out with the realization that all 10 aren't in in the first place. It's time to quit pretending.


We're not eligible for a national championship. We haven't been for many, many years. There is no incentive, financial or competitive, to give all 10 conferences an auto-bid into a 12 team playoff. That will never happen.

If that's the bar, there's really no future for us in FBS. I've long felt this, and the new playoff proposal just underscores that.

Back to Top
  
Bobcat1996
General User

Member Since: 1/2/2017
Post Count: 794

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/13/2021 12:19:37 PM 
A 12-team playoff, of course, would bring in large amounts of revenue for all schools involved. Several states have passed bills that will allow college athletes to start profiting off their name, image and likeness — something the NCAA has been working with Congress to implement nationwide for some time — later this summer.

How that works with an expanded playoff field, which can also bring an increased risk of injury, is puzzling to Blumenthal and fellow Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy.

“This is another example of the big-time college sports executives and administrators making decisions just to increase their own revenue, while continuing to put the needs and health of college athletes on the back burner,” Murphy said, via USA Today.




The above is what Connecticut senators think about the 12 team playoff.

Last Edited: 6/13/2021 12:20:25 PM by Bobcat1996
Back to Top
  
SVAC83
General User

Member Since: 10/1/2019
Post Count: 143

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/13/2021 4:06:23 PM 
Doesn't this give most group of 5 schools at least the good ones to play other good group of 5 schools so that at the end they have a chance to be the highest ranked group of 5 school?
Back to Top
  
BobcatSports
General User

Member Since: 2/2/2006
Post Count: 1,068

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/13/2021 5:13:00 PM 
Well with the “expansion” to 12 teams in the playoffs being discussed let the Peden “expansion” plans begin in 3-2-1.
Back to Top
  
bobcatsquared
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 5,042

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/13/2021 5:41:45 PM 
A radio personality on WLW, didn't catch which one, said that UC will benefit form this change more than any other university. Luke Farrell will be joining him later Sunday evening to discuss.
Back to Top
  
Mike Johnson
General User



Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: North Canton, OH
Post Count: 1,707

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/13/2021 6:42:08 PM 
I still enjoy college football but my passion for it has been eroding. When I renewed my season tickets for this year, I knew I'd likely not be attending more than a couple home games. Other things have taken on increased importance. The ongoing evolution of college football in ways I find unattractive has been resulting in the erosion.

http://www.facebook.com/mikejohnson.author

Back to Top
  
Jeff McKinney
Moderator

Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,046

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/13/2021 9:15:58 PM 
Mike Johnson wrote:
I still enjoy college football but my passion for it has been eroding. When I renewed my season tickets for this year, I knew I'd likely not be attending more than a couple home games. Other things have taken on increased importance. The ongoing evolution of college football in ways I find unattractive has been resulting in the erosion.


I hear you!!
Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  1 - 25  of 37 Posts
Jump to Page:  1 | 2    Next >
View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             



WHO'S ONLINE
There are 265 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com
264 Guests
1 Registered User:
 Doc Bobcat
There are no other users looking at this page.




Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties