Chances That Anybody But.... Wins the 2021 Natty

[We Are Decent]

You have no idea what you’re talking about. LSU had 3 top 10 recruiting classes, including a #2, 5, and 7, in the 4 years prior to their 2019 championship season, and they hadn’t sniffed the playoff in any of those prior years. They’ve been reeling in top classes for years, regardless of whether they’ve been in the championship hunt or not.

It's pretty clear you just google searched the answers but I'll provide context. Being in seventh means little to nothing considering there's a four-team playoff system, and the two years prior to their 2019 team that would mean that they'd mostly be comprised was their ranked 7 and 15, and then after their championship they've had the following:

• #5 in 2019
• #4 in 2020
• #3 in 2021
• #3 in 2022 at the moment (Projected to finish Top 5 still)

Did you think this was a gotcha moment? From 2010-2018 they've averaged being in 7-8th place, since 2019 they've averaged 3-4th. Reading comprehension is key my friend, no one claimed LSU didn't recruit good before, but that their recruiting received a boost thereafter.

It’s not asinine for elite players to choose the schools that give them the best chance to get into the NFL and win championships, even if, and probably because, they have to compete against other elite prospects. If they’re scared to compete, we don’t want them. It certainly hasn’t stopped them from going to Alabama.

You practically just agreed with my point dimwit. For example if a team recruited a five star RB and a high four star RB in the same Class, or apply that with any position, there will surely be one of them transferring at some point. How can you develop them if you're not giving them playtime which scouts won't even bother with? And who knows maybe it's for good reasons, maybe that one of the players is clearly just not as good, but to them their draft stock and potential was just hindered. I don't blame people like Zach Evans going to TCU over other choices, he had a great first season, would've bene better than being at the top SEC schools, that's for sure.

Of those 4 teams, only Auburn has made the playoff, Texas and Michigan have been getting better classes than Auburn, and it hasn’t been because they made the playoff, they haven’t been close.

Auburn has never made the playoffs LOL. They've been to a couple BCS Title games but never the actual CFP, so this counter does not work against me.

The playoff is a creation of the P5 conferences, when it expands they’ll make sure all the P5s are included. Count on it.

Usually because the Pac 12 Champion or Oklahoma will reach the Top 8 or Top 12 every year, I just disagree with the autobids proposal.

Funny, back in 2011, when all this playoff expansion started, people complained that Alabama got in the BCSCG without winning their conference, and that conference championships had to mean something. Then, when Ohio State was about to get left out of the playoff, ironically because Penn State won the B10 that year, all of the sudden conference championships weren’t that important anymore. Maybe, just maybe, they could make conference championships meaningful if they ensure the conference champions are rewarded for winning them

Um, no? If you're not the best in 8-12 teams, you simply don't deserve to be in, Oklahoma State and Penn State were eligible to complain in their respective years and should be used for examples for extension and not for making auto bids to conference champions. Either conferences mean something and apply auto bids for all of them, or just for none of them. And if you want to separate then just what I said prior, I-A, I-AA, & I-AAA, at least it'd be accurate and honest.

The issue isn’t when to start playing games, the issue is too damn many games. You can’t just keep making the season longer and longer; in 2013 you could win a national championship playing 13 or 14 games, and now you people want to make it 16 or 17. It’s not your bodies and careers on the line, it’s easy for you to say it’s just another couple of games. They don’t owe it to you to play as many games as you think is necessary to get a “true” champion.

What an insulting straw man argument. This isn't about players owing anything to fans, this is about giving players a chance when realistically they never had that chance. The funny thing is that in your mind you believe as if you're arguing on the players behalf when we all goddamn know that A&M, Cincinnati, Indiana, Oklahoma, Oregon, etc. all those players wanted a chance to get in last year, regardless if it meant playing for more games. Instead lots choose to opt out of bowl games because it doesn't mean shit anymore, either playoffs or no playoffs. That's what the culture of BCS & CFP created, stop limiting the field for f**ks sake. It's also not even about the number of games one plays as you can, we don't need conference championships anyway, as football isn't dependent on it for determining who's 1st place because we already know who would be in first place, that's why those are more disposable if you want to maintain a similar amount of games that you want. This argument is straight insulting, as if practical corporation teams and fanbases like Alabama actually care what the players want, much less what the entirety of players around the NCAA want. Don't bring that argument to me, that's bullshit.

 

[batchaps4me]