Jump to content
Alphadawg7

Does CFB Championship game end the “they can beat a pro team” stuff finally?

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said:

Using the Bills in that scenario was always dumb.  It's pretty clear all the talk about us being the worst team in the league was way off base.

 

The bills weren't even the worst team ppg wise in the league.  They ended ahead of jax and Arizona.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

While I do doubt the notion that a college team could beat an NFL team in the modern era, I DO want to point this out: Every year for 42 years, an exhibition game was played between a college all-stars team made up of the best seniors in college, and an NFL team. The College All-Stars won 9 of those 42 games. So a little more often than once every 5 years, a team made up of college players DID beat an NFL team. Granted, the NFL teams may not have played all their starters or tried that hard given that these were exhibition games, but nevertheless. I thought this was really interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_College_All-Star_Game

Edited by Logic
  • Awesome! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BuffaloButt said:

I read that Alabama said they could beat the Cardinals.  They said the Cardinals were trash and they would beat them.   

 

It would never happen, the NFL team would always win.  There is a big difference between the NFL and the best college team.  This can be put to rest. 

You are wrong on that - historically speaking. 

 

You probaly don’t remember the

Chicago College All Star Games

The NFL Champions played a roster of College All Stars, and the kids won 9 of the 42 games and tied the Pros twice. 

Just posted this and saw Logic had done pretty much the same thing right above my post. :w00t:

 

:beer:

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, section122 said:

 

The bills weren't even the worst team ppg wise in the league.  They ended ahead of jax and Arizona.

 

at the time they were easily among the worst teams

 

context context

context

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

That last night was an NFL football game taking place before the guys are in the NFL. 

 

There will not be many starters on that field last night who will not play in the National Football league. There will be a handful at most... and sure some special teamers and backups who played some snaps but in 5 years the 44 starters in this game I suspect 35 of them at least are playing in the National Football League. 

 

Those two programmes are so far ahead of the rest of college football at the moment it is scary. 

Revisionist history alert.

 

All year, we heard how Bama was the best CFB team in history, and everyone was a first rounder and no team could hold a candle to them.  No team could cover 28 against the Bills or Cards or Raiders except this Bama team. 

 

Not from you, mind you. But Clemson was an afterthought by National Media types.

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thing: by definition, the Bills roster is filled, entirely, with college athletes deemed good enough to play at the next level (the NFL).  How do we know?  B/C they are playing in the NFL.

 

Alabama's roster is not.  They will send a HUGE number of kids to the NFL in the draft this year, I'm sure.  But it won't be anything close to the entire starting lineup.  And of those, how many will actually stick beyond their first training camp?  

 

Folks seem to forget that the absolute WORST NFL team is FILLED with college all stars who have demonstrated they are good enough to play at the next level, even if they don't play as well as others around them at that level.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Logic said:

While I do doubt the notion that a college team could beat an NFL team in the modern era, I DO want to point this out: Every year for 42 years, an exhibition game was played between a college all-stars team made up of the best seniors in college, and an NFL team. The College All-Stars won 9 of those 42 games. So a little more often than once every 5 years, a team made up of college players DID beat an NFL team. Granted, the NFL teams may not have played all their starters or tried that hard given that these were exhibition games, but nevertheless. I thought this was really interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_College_All-Star_Game

Hasn’t been played in almost half a century tho...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

Revisionist history alert.

 

All year, we heard how Bama was the best CFB team in history, and everyone was a first rounder and no team could hold a candle to them.  No team could cover 28 against the Bills or Cards or Raiders except this Bama team. 

 

Not from you, mind you. But Clemson was an afterthought by National Media types.

 

 

 

 

Go back and find my first posts on the subject. The only revision I would like is I included Oklahoma in with these two. I was wrong on that. This pair is way ahead. 

17 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

Here's the thing: by definition, the Bills roster is filled, entirely, with college athletes deemed good enough to play at the next level (the NFL).  How do we know?  B/C they are playing in the NFL.

 

Alabama's roster is not.  They will send a HUGE number of kids to the NFL in the draft this year, I'm sure.  But it won't be anything close to the entire starting lineup.  And of those, how many will actually stick beyond their first training camp?  

 

Folks seem to forget that the absolute WORST NFL team is FILLED with college all stars who have demonstrated they are good enough to play at the next level, even if they don't play as well as others around them at that level.

 

 

 

We crunched the numbers last year. Every starter on the 2016 Alabama defense is now in the NFL. By the end of this next draft every starter on the 2017 defense will be too. Offense it is more like 60/40 (60 in league 40 not) I grant you.... but Alabama and Clemson don't have 5 or 6 stars and then a bunch of guys who will never play on Sundays. The talent isnt nearly as spread out in college football as it used to be. If you start for one of those teams the chances are you will play (and likely start) in the NFL. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Go back and find my first posts on the subject. The only revision I would like is I included Oklahoma in with these two. I was wrong on that. This pair is way ahead. 

Oh I believe you and agree. I just know there was never a host of articles about if Clemson could cover against an NFL team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Ethan in Portland said:

#8 made more great catches in one single quarter of football than the entire Bills WR group did in two years.  

 

 

Except in the NFL a number of them would have been incompletions as only had one foot down inbounds.

 

Not faulting him they were still some amazing catches, but those are the rules in the NFL.

 

Edited by Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The crazy thing for Clemson is that Lawrence would be the clear cut #1 overall pick in this draft and Ross would likely go top 5. Both freshman!

 

I'm beating a dead horse here, but I'm all about Clenin Ferrell. Not sure if he's gonna be there at 9 considering the shine a good performance in the NC game gives a player.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, formerlyofCtown said:

Really?  Someday you will figure it out.  Shaq was dominant at the College level.  You just made the counter point against the whole College team could beat NFL team and you dont even realise it.

Shaq at the level he played at this season would dominate a college Olineman.  Now after they have had an NFL offseason or two then you have something.

Bruce Smith got a whole 6.5  sacks his Rookie season.

That stat is to show the transition to the NFL for College players not any kind of Buce Shaq comparison.

I was only kidding about a college team beating an Nfl team...

 

regarding Shaq, id still take the current Clemson defensive ends over him.  An NFL off-season or two has never fixed Shaqs lack of quickness or pass rush skills.  Edge setting, Shaq perhaps would be the run down man....3rd downs tho (money down), i would prefer those Clemson guys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dabills21 said:

Kidding aside, that Clemson QB is something special.  He's be a top 10 pick this year as a 19 year old true freshman.  

 

 

And you know what's going to happen right? Some perennial winner like Pittsburgh, New England, Green Bay etc are going to bottom out in 2 years and wind up with Lawrence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

And you know what's going to happen right? Some perennial winner like Pittsburgh, New England, Green Bay etc are going to bottom out in 2 years and wind up with Lawrence. 

That would be so fitting. Could also see Luck having some injury issues and Lawrence winding up in Indy. (Definitely don't want to see any QB lose their livelihood.)

 

Lawrence better get himself one hell of an insurance policy. Kind of an odd situation he's in. Already reached the apex at the collegiate level as a freshman. I'm sure he'd like to be an all time college great, but we're ALL about money at some point. Gotta wait 2 years to get paid. 

Edited by LSHMEAB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

And you know what's going to happen right? Some perennial winner like Pittsburgh, New England, Green Bay etc are going to bottom out in 2 years and wind up with Lawrence. 

 

Yep. New England. New ***** England. And you will hear me cry all the way from old England. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Logic said:

While I do doubt the notion that a college team could beat an NFL team in the modern era, I DO want to point this out: Every year for 42 years, an exhibition game was played between a college all-stars team made up of the best seniors in college, and an NFL team. The College All-Stars won 9 of those 42 games. So a little more often than once every 5 years, a team made up of college players DID beat an NFL team. Granted, the NFL teams may not have played all their starters or tried that hard given that these were exhibition games, but nevertheless. I thought this was really interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_College_All-Star_Game

 

Couple of things:

 

One, they collected the best players in all of college football...thats a MASSIVE difference than just a random college football team that has a lot of its players that will never play a down of professional football.  

 

Two, the game is substantially different today.  The NFL players are so much bigger and faster than college kids.  Players now a days have so much technology, training, etc that goes into them that they are still substantially getting bigger and stronger once in the pros.  

 

Three, the modern games today are vastly different.  The NFL is so far ahead of the college game in complexity, schemes, and speed compared to the old days, especially in the passing game.  

3 hours ago, Nanker said:

You are wrong on that - historically speaking. 

 

You probaly don’t remember the

Chicago College All Star Games

The NFL Champions played a roster of College All Stars, and the kids won 9 of the 42 games and tied the Pros twice. 

Just posted this and saw Logic had done pretty much the same thing right above my post. :w00t:

 

:beer:

 

He wasnt wrong...a college "team" is no where close to the same thing as a college "all star" team.  Not even comparable, not to mention the different eras and how different todays games are.  

 

Edited by Alphadawg7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Go back and find my first posts on the subject. The only revision I would like is I included Oklahoma in with these two. I was wrong on that. This pair is way ahead. 

 

We crunched the numbers last year. Every starter on the 2016 Alabama defense is now in the NFL. By the end of this next draft every starter on the 2017 defense will be too. Offense it is more like 60/40 (60 in league 40 not) I grant you.... but Alabama and Clemson don't have 5 or 6 stars and then a bunch of guys who will never play on Sundays. The talent isnt nearly as spread out in college football as it used to be. If you start for one of those teams the chances are you will play (and likely start) in the NFL. 

 

The D and O-lines will move over fine

 

QB not a hope

 

skill players, look elsewhere for pros

 

 

and since the QB and skill players are about 80% of recognition for a school.....  your 60/40 should be submerged a ton...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Go back and find my first posts on the subject. The only revision I would like is I included Oklahoma in with these two. I was wrong on that. This pair is way ahead. 

 

We crunched the numbers last year. Every starter on the 2016 Alabama defense is now in the NFL. By the end of this next draft every starter on the 2017 defense will be too. Offense it is more like 60/40 (60 in league 40 not) I grant you.... but Alabama and Clemson don't have 5 or 6 stars and then a bunch of guys who will never play on Sundays. The talent isnt nearly as spread out in college football as it used to be. If you start for one of those teams the chances are you will play (and likely start) in the NFL. 

 

Ok, let's pretend what you just said is true above, which feels aggressively optimistic, but lets say you are right anyway.

 

When this was originally being discussed, you told me that Bama might win, but if they didn't, Buffalo would NOT cover the spread against Bama because the Bama defense has so many future NFL players on it, in fact, you said all of them.  You said this Bama team was different, it was essentially a PRO team on the field with very few people who won't make the NFL.  YET:

  1. They just got blown out by a COLLEGE team.  A College team which does not, under any circumstance, have the same number of pro players on it that an NFL franchise has on it which is 100% all professional players.  
  2. A 19 year old QB just lit them up.  If you take that same QB and put him against an NFL defense tomorrow, he is going to have a terrible game.  You put that kid against the Bills defense and he won't throw for 100 yards and probably has 5 picks.  He isnt ready to play against an NFL defense...yet he just lit up this legendary Bama D I heard about all year and he did it with a mix of players who will make the NFL and guys who will never go pro.  The entire Clemson offense is not going to all be NFL players, and the ones that do make the NFL are not all going to be good long term starters.
  3. Clemson defense, which was NOT as touted by anyone here as highly as the Bama defense, just shut down Bama's offense.  An NFL defense will crush them even more than Clemson did, especially the Bills.  
  4. Not one of these kids has taken one snap in an NFL practice let alone played a game.  NFL rookies week 1 are playing their first game...but yet they have spent 7 months learning the pro game, going through practice, camp, preseason etc.  And yet, most rookies still are not impactful week 1 of their professional careers.  I would say its safe to say that 95%+ of all rookies do not make a week 1 impact that is even notable.  Now you are expecting a team of college kids who dont even have those 7 months of NFL work to come in on day 1 and compete strongly against a professional football team...thats quite the reach.  Not to mention, many of the kids on that team who probably eventually make the NFL aren't ready to go to the NFL today and will go back to school at least another year.  
  5. College teams look dominant because they are facing other college teams made up of mostly players that will never make the pros.  Yes certain programs play tougher schedules, but those "tough" teams still have more kids on their roster that won't play in the pros than kids that will.  

Everyone, especially the media, was obviously wrong about Bama's dominance, its not even disputable.  Just like they were wrong earlier this year when they said Duke could beat the Cavs who then went out and lost to a college team like a week later.  Bama got destroyed by one of their peers.  Wasnt even a game.  They will not beat an NFL team, nor cover the spread. 

Edited by Alphadawg7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Ok, let's pretend what you just said is true above, which feels aggressively optimistic, but lets say you are right anyway.

 

When this was originally being discussed, you told me that Bama could win and if they didn't, Buffalo would NOT cover the spread against Bama because the Bama defense has so many future NFL players on it, in fact, you said all of them.  You said this Bama team was different, it was essentially a PRO team on the field with very few people who won't make the NFL.  YET:

  1. They just got blown out by a COLLEGE team.  A College team which does not, under any circumstance, have the same number of pro players on it that an NFL franchise has on it which is 100% all professional players.  
  2. A 19 year old QB just lit them up.  If you take that same QB and put him against an NFL defense tomorrow, he is going to have a terrible game.  You put that kid against the Bills defense and he won't throw for 100 yards and probably has 5 picks.  He isnt ready to play against an NFL defense...yet he just lit up this legendary Bama D I heard about all year and he did it with a mix of players who will make the NFL and guys who will never go pro.  The entire Clemson offense is not going to all be NFL players, and the ones that do make the NFL are not all going to be good long term starters.
  3. Clemson defense, which was NOT as touted by anyone here as highly as the Bama defense, just shut down Bama's offense.  An NFL defense will crush them even more than Clemson did, especially the Bills.  
  4. Not one of these kids has taken one snap in an NFL practice let alone played a game.  NFL rookies week 1 are playing their first game...but yet they have spent 7 months learning the pro game, going through practice, camp, preseason etc.  And yet, most rookies still are not impactful week 1 of their professional careers.  I would say its safe to say that 95%+ of all rookies do not make a week 1 impact that is even notable.  Now you are expecting a team of college kids who dont even have those 7 months of NFL work to come in on day 1 and compete strongly against a professional football team...thats quite the reach.  Not to mention, many of the kids on that team who probably eventually make the NFL aren't ready to go to the NFL today and will go back to school at least another year.  
  5. College teams look dominant because they are facing other college teams made up of mostly players that will never make the pros.  Yes certain programs play tougher schedules, but those "tough" teams still have more kids on their roster that won't play in the pros than kids that will.  

Everyone, especially the media, was obviously wrong about Bama's dominance, its not even disputable.  Just like they were wrong earlier this year when they said Duke could beat the Cavs who then went out and lost to a college team like a week later.  Bama got destroyed by one of their peers.  Wasnt even a game.  They will not beat an NFL team, nor cover the spread. 

I still say they might not even be able to finish the game due to injuries. 

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Ok, let's pretend what you just said is true above, which feels aggressively optimistic, but lets say you are right anyway.

 

When this was originally being discussed, you told me that Bama might win, but if they didn't, Buffalo would NOT cover the spread against Bama because the Bama defense has so many future NFL players on it, in fact, you said all of them.  You said this Bama team was different, it was essentially a PRO team on the field with very few people who won't make the NFL.  YET:

  1. They just got blown out by a COLLEGE team.  A College team which does not, under any circumstance, have the same number of pro players on it that an NFL franchise has on it which is 100% all professional players.  
  2. A 19 year old QB just lit them up.  If you take that same QB and put him against an NFL defense tomorrow, he is going to have a terrible game.  You put that kid against the Bills defense and he won't throw for 100 yards and probably has 5 picks.  He isnt ready to play against an NFL defense...yet he just lit up this legendary Bama D I heard about all year and he did it with a mix of players who will make the NFL and guys who will never go pro.  The entire Clemson offense is not going to all be NFL players, and the ones that do make the NFL are not all going to be good long term starters.
  3. Clemson defense, which was NOT as touted by anyone here as highly as the Bama defense, just shut down Bama's offense.  An NFL defense will crush them even more than Clemson did, especially the Bills.  
  4. Not one of these kids has taken one snap in an NFL practice let alone played a game.  NFL rookies week 1 are playing their first game...but yet they have spent 7 months learning the pro game, going through practice, camp, preseason etc.  And yet, most rookies still are not impactful week 1 of their professional careers.  I would say its safe to say that 95%+ of all rookies do not make a week 1 impact that is even notable.  Now you are expecting a team of college kids who dont even have those 7 months of NFL work to come in on day 1 and compete strongly against a professional football team...thats quite the reach.  Not to mention, many of the kids on that team who probably eventually make the NFL aren't ready to go to the NFL today and will go back to school at least another year.  
  5. College teams look dominant because they are facing other college teams made up of mostly players that will never make the pros.  Yes certain programs play tougher schedules, but those "tough" teams still have more kids on their roster that won't play in the pros than kids that will.  

Everyone, especially the media, was obviously wrong about Bama's dominance, its not even disputable.  Just like they were wrong earlier this year when they said Duke could beat the Cavs who then went out and lost to a college team like a week later.  Bama got destroyed by one of their peers.  Wasnt even a game.  They will not beat an NFL team, nor cover the spread. 

 

Let me correct you on one point because it does matter in the context of what you are saying I argued. While the thread was about whether the Bills would cover the spread I repeatedly said that it wasn't about the Bills from my perspective. Nor was it really about whether the NFL team covered the spread although I, like Kirby, felt that the point spreads for the bottom feeder teams in the NFL were interesting. I also conceded on point 4 when we discussed.

 

The reason I entered that thread was to dispute the argument that Alabama is undertalented to compare to a bottom end NFL team because that argument was being made "there are guys on that team who won't be pros". I don't think they are (at least at the starter level) and still believe that. They ARE different in that regard. Their whole starting 2016 defense is playing in the NFL 7 starters, 3 backups and 1 special teamer. After this year's draft their whole 2017 starting defense will be as well. These are indisputable facts.  There are no grocery baggers starting on those defenses. Their might be one or two on the offense but not on the defense. 

 

Last night they got lit up by a true freshman Quarterback who was phenomenal. The 2016 defense got lit up by Deshaun Watson too. Sometimes great defensive teams get beaten by great Quarterbacks. That happenes in the pros the same as in college. As for how would Trevor Lawrence fare in the NFL.... we will have to wait a couple more years to see - but if he was able to and declared for the 2019 NFL Draft he would be a top 10 pick and the first Quarterback off the board. 

 

So do I downgrade my view on the Alabama defense after last night? No, not really. I think they are still super talented and like their 2016 and 2017 predecessors they will all play in the NFL. Their offensive line and running backs probably will too and the QB will also get drafted. Wide receiver and tight end they are thinner and I never argued otherwise. 

 

What I do think is that people can no longer sleep on the job Dabo has done with Clemson. That programme is now ready to challenge Alabma as the dominant force in college football. 

 

The central point I made 2 months ago stands - This Alabama team and even this Clemson team are different. There are very few grocery baggers. These programmes are absolutely stacked with NFL talent. 

 

I put the over/under on the number of the 44 starters from last night playing in the NFL (and I mean making teams and playing snaps not getting drafted in the 7th and being on practice squads) at 35. Where do you put it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Let me correct you on one point because it does matter in the context of what you are saying I argued. While the thread was about whether the Bills would cover the spread I repeatedly said that it wasn't about the Bills from my perspective. Nor was it really about whether the NFL team covered the spread although I, like Kirby, felt that the point spreads for the bottom feeder teams in the NFL were interesting. I also conceded on point 4 when we discussed.

 

The reason I entered that thread was to dispute the argument that Alabama is undertalented to compare to a bottom end NFL team because that argument was being made "there are guys on that team who won't be pros". I don't think they are (at least at the starter level) and still believe that. They ARE different in that regard. Their whole starting 2016 defense is playing in the NFL 7 starters, 3 backups and 1 special teamer. After this year's draft their whole 2017 starting defense will be as well. These are indisputable facts.  There are no grocery baggers starting on those defenses. Their might be one or two on the offense but not on the defense. 

 

Last night they got lit up by a true freshman Quarterback who was phenomenal. The 2016 defense got lit up by Deshaun Watson too. Sometimes great defensive teams get beaten by great Quarterbacks. That happenes in the pros the same as in college. As for how would Trevor Lawrence fare in the NFL.... we will have to wait a couple more years to see - but if he was able to and declared for the 2019 NFL Draft he would be a top 10 pick and the first Quarterback off the board. 

 

So do I downgrade my view on the Alabama defense after last night? No, not really. I think they are still super talented and like their 2016 and 2017 predecessors they will all play in the NFL. Their offensive line and running backs probably will too and the QB will also get drafted. Wide receiver and tight end they are thinner and I never argued otherwise. 

 

What I do think is that people can no longer sleep on the job Dabo has done with Clemson. That programme is now ready to challenge Alabma as the dominant force in college football. 

 

The central point I made 2 months ago stands - This Alabama team and even this Clemson team are different. There are very few grocery baggers. These programmes are absolutely stacked with NFL talent. 

 

I put the over/under on the number of the 44 starters from last night playing in the NFL (and I mean making teams and playing snaps not getting drafted in the 7th and being on practice squads) at 35. Where do you put it? 

 

I bolded the part above for one reason...that this isnt about how Lawrence will EVENTUALLY fare in the NFL. This is about Lawrenece right now at this exact moment.  If he was in the draft this year, I agree, he would likely be a first round pick and this kid certainly seems promising.  But if he stepped onto a a field today at this exact moment against an NFL defense he would get eaten alive.  And that same kid who would get swallowed whole but an NFL defense today just lit up that famed Bama defense and blew them out.  That was really where my point was with him, is that Lawrence is not NFL ready to start a game and yet he just dismantled this heralded Bama defense.  Now imagine what an NFL QB would do playing along side 10 other NFL starting players with also a bench full of NFL professional players.

 

Agree on Clemson...but I think they were already there and have been there for a few years.

 

But again, this notion that a college program, even one as good as Alabama would beat an NFL team is silly.  And even the notion that an NFL team wouldn't cover a 28 point spread against them is also pretty silly.  Last time someone suggested they could beat a pro team they mentioned the Raiders.  I mean Carr would throw for 500+ yards and 6 TDs if they faced the Raiders, and would probably leave the game early in the 4th Quarter the blow out would be so big.

 

To answer your last question...honestly don't know the answer to that question as I haven't broken every player down in that way.  In my best guess opinion, I do feel its quite aggressively optimistic to suggest that 35 of the 44 starters will go on to be relevant NFL players.  As you stated, you are suggesting that 35 of the 44 players will be relevant draft picks who play relevant snaps in the NFL, not 7th rounder or UDFAs who end up on PS..  Not even so much on the number that make it, but that you think 35 of the 44 players will be relevant in the NFL is astonishing considering the bust rate of the first round alone of the best players in football is greater than 50%.  To suggest that 35 out of 44 players from 2 schools would be relevant contributors seems like a stretch to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BuffaloButt said:

I read that Alabama said they could beat the Cardinals.  They said the Cardinals were trash and they would beat them.   

 

It would never happen, the NFL team would always win.  There is a big difference between the NFL and the best college team.  This can be put to rest. 

Why is it that a lot of Alabama guys in the NFL swear the Tide could beat an NFL team? Don’t you think they are better qualified than anyone to make that judgment?

 

Obviously a poor showing for Alabama, but I think what we really saw is Tua getting exposed.  He played poorly vs Georgia, too, and it appears he just might not be very good.  Biggest difference in the game last night was the two QBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

To answer your last question...honestly don't know the answer to that question as I haven't broken every player down in that way.  In my best guess opinion, I do feel its quite aggressively optimistic to suggest that 35 of the 44 starters will go on to be relevant NFL players.  As you stated, you are suggesting that 35 of the 44 players will be relevant draft picks who play relevant snaps in the NFL, not 7th rounder or UDFAs who end up on PS..  Not even so much on the number that make it, but that you think 35 of the 44 players will be relevant in the NFL is astonishing considering the bust rate of the first round alone of the best players in football is greater than 50%.  To suggest that 35 out of 44 players from 2 schools would be relevant contributors seems like a stretch to say the least.

 

And this is the crux of what we were disagreeing about two months ago and still disagree on. Much more than spreads or anything else. The 50% doesn't apply to these two teams. They are not normal college teams. The whole of the last two Bama defenses are going to be proper NFL players bar possibly the one linebacker who is already in and is a special teamer only so far. The bust rate on these guys is nowhere near 50/50.

 

I am happy to come back to the starters in that game last night and track them. My estimation is that 35 of the 44 will play meaningful snaps in the NFL and a majority of those will be starters. 

 

College football has changed. 10 years ago the talent was more evenly spread. It isn't anymore. Recruiting has changed. Kirby talks about in much more detail than me but the powerhouses are recruiting nationwide on a much greater scale than before. You think it is incredible to believe that these two teams have such a wealth of the talent between them. I don't. I think they are demonstrating almost unprecedented dominance. I am not a CFB history buff and I know the playoff has changed the dynamic a little but have two schools ever played 3 National Title games in 4 years between them before? 

Edited by GunnerBill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I bolded the part above for one reason...that this isnt about how Lawrence will EVENTUALLY fare in the NFL. This is about Lawrenece right now at this exact moment.  If he was in the draft this year, I agree, he would likely be a first round pick and this kid certainly seems promising.  But if he stepped onto a a field today at this exact moment against an NFL defense he would get eaten alive.  

You have zero evidence for this statement.  DeShaun Watson, who similarly excelled vs. Alabama in the national championship game, did exactly the same thing in the NFL 8 months later.  There really isn't much doubt that Lawrence would be the first player picked this year if he was draft-eligible.  

 

It's not arguable that every player from Alabama's 2016 defense (and, soon, its 2017 defense) is in the NFL.  Both Alabama and Clemson have far more future number 1 picks in their lineups than any NFL team--probably as many as 10 each.  Each NFL team only gets one number one pick per year.  There is practically no limit to the number of such players Sweeney and Saban can sign.

 

Last night proved two things: (1) Right now, Clemson is at least as loaded with talent as Alabama is and (2) Clemson has a much better QB. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×