All Forums | College Football

*** Week 12 NCAA football ***

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 27829
Posts: 145
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2008
Posts: 17342
Posted: #101
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:

Hate to break up the Jerry Springer circus, but could we maybe talk about games in the future....like, i dont know, maybe this F@CKING SATURDAY


Cool.


I like WF catching more than 4 tds. All motivation and no lookahead for WF...Clemson with nothing to prove, but must stay healthy


Hey BOOM......Mizzou is improving just like the rest of the SEC! Went a whole month without a td....then BAM! Instant offense stunned BYU with 2 amazing tds!!! Tigers starting to click on one cylinder 


Dude... these guys are nuts.

I never start any of this.... just post my thoughts and then boom.... trolling.

BTW... I havent posted any picks yet....  I will tomorrow...and yes...only thing Clemson cares about is staying healthy from here on out...

Clemson 31 Wake 7?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2012
Posts: 1994
Posted: #102
I took the top 12 teams in the AP Poll to see who each team played and how many wins/losses these teams have. 
1. Clemson-62 wins-58 losses Have 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
2. Ohio St-62-59 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
3. Alabama-75-44 Only has 1 team (ULM) with a losing record on their schedule. 
4. Ok St-61-57 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
5. ND-66-53 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
6. Iowa-57-64 Has 7 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
7. Ok-64-64 Has 4 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
8. Fl-59-59 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
9. Mich St-66-55 Has 4 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
10.Baylor-59-60 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
11.TCU-57-61 Has 7 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
12.No Caro-59-61 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule.
I find it very strange that while all these talking heads, no one ever mentions this. I mean they gush over Clemson but they played a 4-6 Wofford, 3-7 Ga Tech, 3-7 BC, 3-7 Syracuse and their last 2 games are against 3-7 WF and 3-7 SC.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2013
Posts: 501
Posted: #103
Quote Originally Posted by yomh1964:

I took the top 12 teams in the AP Poll to see who each team played and how many wins/losses these teams have. 
1. Clemson-62 wins-58 losses Have 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
2. Ohio St-62-59 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
3. Alabama-75-44 Only has 1 team (ULM) with a losing record on their schedule. 
4. Ok St-61-57 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
5. ND-66-53 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
6. Iowa-57-64 Has 7 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
7. Ok-64-64 Has 4 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
8. Fl-59-59 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
9. Mich St-66-55 Has 4 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
10.Baylor-59-60 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
11.TCU-57-61 Has 7 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
12.No Caro-59-61 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule.
I find it very strange that while all these talking heads, no one ever mentions this. I mean they gush over Clemson but they played a 4-6 Wofford, 3-7 Ga Tech, 3-7 BC, 3-7 Syracuse and their last 2 games are against 3-7 WF and 3-7 SC.

Good post....I love facts
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2014
Posts: 4717
Posted: #104
Quote Originally Posted by yomh1964:

I took the top 12 teams in the AP Poll to see who each team played and how many wins/losses these teams have. 
1. Clemson-62 wins-58 losses Have 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
2. Ohio St-62-59 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
3. Alabama-75-44 Only has 1 team (ULM) with a losing record on their schedule. 
4. Ok St-61-57 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
5. ND-66-53 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
6. Iowa-57-64 Has 7 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
7. Ok-64-64 Has 4 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
8. Fl-59-59 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
9. Mich St-66-55 Has 4 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
10.Baylor-59-60 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
11.TCU-57-61 Has 7 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
12.No Caro-59-61 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule.
I find it very strange that while all these talking heads, no one ever mentions this. I mean they gush over Clemson but they played a 4-6 Wofford, 3-7 Ga Tech, 3-7 BC, 3-7 Syracuse and their last 2 games are against 3-7 WF and 3-7 SC.

ALABAMA has 3(THREE) schools on that schedule that are not Div 1 schools. They only play 7 (SEVEN) league games; Oregon n the PAC 12 plays 9 league games. The SEC decided by Committee in SEC headquarters, that in week 11, instead of playing another league team, all schools could play an "easy win" school to increase bowl eligibility, and to not beat each other out of the national picture or larger bowl games. Do you think this is BAD of leagues like the PAC12 to do this? Is it SMART of the SEC to do this? 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2014
Posts: 4717
Posted: #105
I APPLAUDE ALABAMA FOR PLAYING USC --Southern Cal (in Texas I believe or some neutral site) to open 2016 LSU also plays tough opponents to open. But that is the only week they're allowed by the SEC to schedule an opponent from a major conference--the rationale is that an early loss can be overcome as the season moves away from the loss.

After LSU and Alabama, not enough effort put out by the SEC to schedule teams from the Big 5 .


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2012
Posts: 1994
Posted: #106
when bama  play ulmonroe  or clownschool  like this its a joke,100  %
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2011
Posts: 3661
Posted: #107
Prescott is far too slow to be the kind of quarterback that would give bama fits. Ohio state and clemson have the best chances of beating this tide team, but to say Watson's going to destroy that bama defense is completely ridiculous IMO. You're right with your premise, spread teams with duel threat FAST quarterbacks give Alabama fits because they're built to beat LSU and that idiot les miles bo shembeckler offense from the 50s. And there will be a game where coker is going to have to do more than just manage the game and if they lose it will be because he sucks and can't score 28+ in a game where their defense isn't lights out.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2011
Posts: 6204
Posted: #108
Relax dude-

Good point- LSU and Bama have scheduled some tougher teams over the past several years out of conference- It is ashamed the Florida hasn't followed suit- their out of conference schedule has been a joke- as is the case with Ohio St. 

Boom- just remember who the trolls are - not everyone who disagrees with you is trolling- some of us have been doing this even longer than you- Now don't go stealing my picks this week! - of course I am joking- I have a weird feeling about the card this week- tight lines in my opinion- I like Clemson 1st H this week then they will relax- Wake is garbage- 

What are your thoughts on LSU/Ole Piss? Ole Miss does have a few losses but all they have to do is load the box and LSU won't score- Ole Miss will score on LSU and I expect Treadwell to have a big day- LSU is a much easier opponent on the road- 

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2005
Posts: 41555
Posted: #109

Quote Originally Posted by Boom_Boom:



of the contenders I think Bama would be the best draw for Clemson. Why? They are very one dimensional. Other teams such as Ohio st.....you have to account for multiple threats.   

I think if Clemson and Bama played today... I got Clemson 41 - Bama 24

SORRY BOOM BUT CLEMSON WILL NOT SCORE 41 ON ALABAMAAND I HATE ALABAMA!

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 1455
Posted: #110
Quote Originally Posted by Relax_Dude:


ALABAMA has 3(THREE) schools on that schedule that are not Div 1 schools. They only play 7 (SEVEN) league games; Oregon n the PAC 12 plays 9 league games. The SEC decided by Committee in SEC headquarters, that in week 11, instead of playing another league team, all schools could play an "easy win" school to increase bowl eligibility, and to not beat each other out of the national picture or larger bowl games. Do you think this is BAD of leagues like the PAC12 to do this? Is it SMART of the SEC to do this? 


This is false on a few levels.  Division 1 includes both FBS and FCS programs.  Alabama plays one FCS school, this coming weekend, versus Charleston Southern.  

And the claim that the SEC itself agreed on this policy and was instated by the commissioner is something you either imagined, or some other non-educated fan told you.  The decision to schedule and play any opponent is strictly decided at an institutional level.  In fact, there is an SEC program that plays no FCS-level opponents this season (Florida).  This policy is not just within the SEC, but among most FBS conferences.  What is mandatory of SEC schools moving forward?  Starting next season, they must all schedule an out-of-conference game versus a Power 5 opponent.  Also as of next season, among Power 5 conferences, only the SEC and ACC will play 8-game conference schedules, while the others have moved on to 9.  Nick Saban is currently the only SEC coach in favor of transitioning to a 9-game conference schedule.

You also specifically cited the Pac-12....and if you fact-checked your comment, you'd notice multiple Pac-12 teams have suited up against FCS schools this season.

Some folks don't think deep enough to understand the impact of removing FCS schools from their schedules.  If you care about football (at any level), the state of the game, and the quality of competition across all ranks, you'd be wise to encourage the funding of these programs and their athletic departments by FBS Power 5 programs with the big checks they receive for travelling to powerhouse programs.

If you don't care about the little guys being able to play football, you should.  Ever been to the College Football Hall of Fame?  As soon as you walk in, there's a huge wall with 700 or so helmets.  That's how many colleges play football at all levels in this country.  They all contribute to the pool of talent that eventually filters to the men we watch on Sunday.  If you care about the state and health of the game, you'd support the notion that the quality of play depends on this entire system.  It's what is ultimately good for the game.

Got off topic there for a minute, and I'm not trying to be a dickk or a smartasz, but you were blatantly incorrect in your claims and my honest assessment is you just fired those statements off at the hip.  I know you are a knowledgable fan, but comments like these are what spreads confusion and fuels ridiculous debates in this forum. No...I'm not an "SEC guy."  I've been a huge fan of this game at all levels my entire life and believe in educated discussion.



 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2015
Posts: 126
Posted: #111
Quote Originally Posted by yomh1964:

I took the top 12 teams in the AP Poll to see who each team played and how many wins/losses these teams have. 
1. Clemson-62 wins-58 losses Have 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
2. Ohio St-62-59 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
3. Alabama-75-44 Only has 1 team (ULM) with a losing record on their schedule. 
4. Ok St-61-57 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
5. ND-66-53 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
6. Iowa-57-64 Has 7 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
7. Ok-64-64 Has 4 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
8. Fl-59-59 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
9. Mich St-66-55 Has 4 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
10.Baylor-59-60 Has 6 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
11.TCU-57-61 Has 7 teams with a losing record on their schedule. 
12.No Caro-59-61 Has 5 teams with a losing record on their schedule.
I find it very strange that while all these talking heads, no one ever mentions this. I mean they gush over Clemson but they played a 4-6 Wofford, 3-7 Ga Tech, 3-7 BC, 3-7 Syracuse and their last 2 games are against 3-7 WF and 3-7 SC.

Wow.. That's eye opening and you can see why the committee respects Bama so much. Good find and thanks for posting. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2012
Posts: 1994
Posted: #112
Quote Originally Posted by IndyHoosier:



This is false on a few levels.  Division 1 includes both FBS and FCS programs.  Alabama plays one FCS school, this coming weekend, versus Charleston Southern.  

And the claim that the SEC itself agreed on this policy and was instated by the commissioner is something you either imagined, or some other non-educated fan told you.  The decision to schedule and play any opponent is strictly decided at an institutional level.  In fact, there is an SEC program that plays no FCS-level opponents this season (Florida).  This policy is not just within the SEC, but among most FBS conferences.  What is mandatory of SEC schools moving forward?  Starting next season, they must all schedule an out-of-conference game versus a Power 5 opponent.  Also as of next season, among Power 5 conferences, only the SEC and ACC will play 8-game conference schedules, while the others have moved on to 9.  Nick Saban is currently the only SEC coach in favor of transitioning to a 9-game conference schedule.

You also specifically cited the Pac-12....and if you fact-checked your comment, you'd notice multiple Pac-12 teams have suited up against FCS schools this season.

Some folks don't think deep enough to understand the impact of removing FCS schools from their schedules.  If you care about football (at any level), the state of the game, and the quality of competition across all ranks, you'd be wise to encourage the funding of these programs and their athletic departments by FBS Power 5 programs with the big checks they receive for travelling to powerhouse programs.

If you don't care about the little guys being able to play football, you should.  Ever been to the College Football Hall of Fame?  As soon as you walk in, there's a huge wall with 700 or so helmets.  That's how many colleges play football at all levels in this country.  They all contribute to the pool of talent that eventually filters to the men we watch on Sunday.  If you care about the state and health of the game, you'd support the notion that the quality of play depends on this entire system.  It's what is ultimately good for the game.

Got off topic there for a minute, and I'm not trying to be a dickk or a smartasz, but you were blatantly incorrect in your claims and my honest assessment is you just fired those statements off at the hip.  I know you are a knowledgable fan, but comments like these are what spreads confusion and fuels ridiculous debates in this forum. No...I'm not an "SEC guy."  I've been a huge fan of this game at all levels my entire life and believe in educated discussion.




 solid,  my english  is not good  for writing  but its easier  to read,very good post

sorry for grammar fault  cover  gang
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2008
Posts: 17342
Posted: #113
Quote Originally Posted by blowoutgm:

Relax dude-

Good point- LSU and Bama have scheduled some tougher teams over the past several years out of conference- It is ashamed the Florida hasn't followed suit- their out of conference schedule has been a joke- as is the case with Ohio St. 

Boom- just remember who the trolls are - not everyone who disagrees with you is trolling- some of us have been doing this even longer than you- Now don't go stealing my picks this week! - of course I am joking- I have a weird feeling about the card this week- tight lines in my opinion- I like Clemson 1st H this week then they will relax- Wake is garbage- 

What are your thoughts on LSU/Ole Piss? Ole Miss does have a few losses but all they have to do is load the box and LSU won't score- Ole Miss will score on LSU and I expect Treadwell to have a big day- LSU is a much easier opponent on the road- 



yeah.. and go back and re read everyone of my threads for the last several years and you will see that I dont talk or treat people bad unless they come into my threads and start trolling and acting a fool....

I encourage you to go look and you will see and understand.



as for Florida.... did you know those cats havent played a OOC game out of the state of Florida since 1990 I think... that is embarrassing.

LSU... sorry bro. Your Tigers are finished. They need a QB Bad. Ole Miss should win that game IMO.
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2008
Posts: 17342
Posted: #114

so far:


Cincinnati / S. Florida  Under 64

Wisconsin   -10

USC  / Oregon Over 71.5

Baylor   Pick

California  +11.5




More to come.........

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 16181
Posted: #115
Quote Originally Posted by Boom_Boom:



yeah.. and go back and re read everyone of my threads for the last several years and you will see that I dont talk or treat people bad unless they come into my threads and start trolling and acting a fool....

I encourage you to go look and you will see and understand.



as for Florida.... did you know those cats havent played a OOC game out of the state of Florida since 1990 I think... that is embarrassing.

LSU... sorry bro. Your Tigers are finished. They need a QB Bad. Ole Miss should win that game IMO.

That's mainly because UF plays FSU and was playing Miami off and on consistently out of conference. That will all change soon, Florida will be playing more games like they are in a few years against Michigan in Jerry World to start the season. By then both teams could very well be top 10 pre season once Mac and Harbaugh have a few of their own classes signed with the QB's they want in their system 


 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2009
Posts: 23180
Posted: #116
BOL BOOM! 
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2008
Posts: 17342
Posted: #117
Quote Originally Posted by jwheels86:


That's mainly because UF plays FSU and was playing Miami off and on consistently out of conference. That will all change soon, Florida will be playing more games like they are in a few years against Michigan in Jerry World to start the season. By then both teams could very well be top 10 pre season once Mac and Harbaugh have a few of their own classes signed with the QB's they want in their system 




that may be true.... but going 25 years without leaving the state to play a OOC game is MIND BOGGLING


 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2010
Posts: 14091
Posted: #118
Quote Originally Posted by Boom_Boom:


so far:


Cincinnati / S. Florida  Under 64

Wisconsin   -10

USC  / Oregon Over 71.5

Baylor   Pick

California  +11.5




More to come.........

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2010
Posts: 14091
Posted: #119
Is the SEC going to score this week? Lol. No overs from that conference last week.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2011
Posts: 6204
Posted: #120
I agree - LSU is done- I have been saying it all season that they just didn't look as good as advertised(easy 1st half schedule)- As bad as it sounds I kind of hope they get gashed their last 2 games and Miles decides to step down- I am just not sure who they would go after- If we just had an innovative offensive coordinator(with a QB- even an average one) then we would be fine- Miles can recruit for sure- 

I have been leaning Baylors way all week yet people keep trying to talk me out of that lean- I just think they score at will on that Okie St. defense- As soon as I get a reliable status on their QB then I will make up my mind- 

Like that under and really like that over- Oregon/USC should be another crazy high scoring game in my opinion
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2015
Posts: 126
Posted: #121
Quote Originally Posted by IndyHoosier:



This is false on a few levels.  Division 1 includes both FBS and FCS programs.  Alabama plays one FCS school, this coming weekend, versus Charleston Southern.  

And the claim that the SEC itself agreed on this policy and was instated by the commissioner is something you either imagined, or some other non-educated fan told you.  The decision to schedule and play any opponent is strictly decided at an institutional level.  In fact, there is an SEC program that plays no FCS-level opponents this season (Florida).  This policy is not just within the SEC, but among most FBS conferences.  What is mandatory of SEC schools moving forward?  Starting next season, they must all schedule an out-of-conference game versus a Power 5 opponent.  Also as of next season, among Power 5 conferences, only the SEC and ACC will play 8-game conference schedules, while the others have moved on to 9.  Nick Saban is currently the only SEC coach in favor of transitioning to a 9-game conference schedule.

You also specifically cited the Pac-12....and if you fact-checked your comment, you'd notice multiple Pac-12 teams have suited up against FCS schools this season.

Some folks don't think deep enough to understand the impact of removing FCS schools from their schedules.  If you care about football (at any level), the state of the game, and the quality of competition across all ranks, you'd be wise to encourage the funding of these programs and their athletic departments by FBS Power 5 programs with the big checks they receive for travelling to powerhouse programs.

If you don't care about the little guys being able to play football, you should.  Ever been to the College Football Hall of Fame?  As soon as you walk in, there's a huge wall with 700 or so helmets.  That's how many colleges play football at all levels in this country.  They all contribute to the pool of talent that eventually filters to the men we watch on Sunday.  If you care about the state and health of the game, you'd support the notion that the quality of play depends on this entire system.  It's what is ultimately good for the game.

Got off topic there for a minute, and I'm not trying to be a dickk or a smartasz, but you were blatantly incorrect in your claims and my honest assessment is you just fired those statements off at the hip.  I know you are a knowledgable fan, but comments like these are what spreads confusion and fuels ridiculous debates in this forum. No...I'm not an "SEC guy."  I've been a huge fan of this game at all levels my entire life and believe in educated discussion.




Wow..... Tremendous post! Thank you 
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2008
Posts: 19509
Posted: #122
Roll Tide!
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2015
Posts: 53
Posted: #123
Quote Originally Posted by Boom_Boom:



that may be true.... but going 25 years without leaving the state to play a OOC game is MIND BOGGLING



They played @ Miami in 2013
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2015
Posts: 53
Posted: #124
Quote Originally Posted by WYNNWYNN0019:


They played @ Miami in 2013

Haha just re read what you said.  That is pretty insane!
 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2008
Posts: 7249
Posted: #125
Boom We might get a pay back game from your Tigers!...
Bet with your wallet,not your heart
All Forums | College Football
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gambling
Betting Sites
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
21+
Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER
Help Privacy Terms of Service Cookies Sitemap Forum
Covers is verified safe by:
Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2026 CS Media Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.