You are absolutely right, and also JF deserves a ton of credit for the hire. A lot of people were skeptical when they heard him talk about having his list of potential coaches ready should anyone on his staff leave. He proved them wrong with not just this hire, but all his off-season coaching moves.
I don't have much confidence in him at this point, but you have to give him one more year. It doesn't make sense to stick with him until now, just to fire him right before he gets a chance to show what he can do with his best recruiting class with a year under its belt. Another disappointing season next year and he has to go.
Love this kid. Now, if Micah Parsons would just give us this kind of commitment...
Clifford led his high school to a state championship. Looks like this is becoming a theme with JF's QB recruits.
I think it will be very difficult for either one of them to win because of the other. I don't see either of them dominating the offense the way that is necessary to win the heisman.
I hear what you're saying. There is talent to be had in NJ. But as of now, there appears to be no loyalty to Rutgers by in-state kids. Just look back at the some of comments/reactions some of our guys from NJ have had over the past few years. They view Rutgers as a joke. They have a long road ahead of them to gain that loyalty.
I can get on board with Maryland, but I just don't see any way Rutgers was a good addition. We all know the conference's motivation was to capture the NYC market. I would love to see an analysis to determine if adding Rutgers actually increased B1G games on TV in that market or increased ratings. I suspect the answer is no to both questions. I also think they are generally not worthy of being in the big ten. On the field, they are a historically bad program. Off the field, they are a trashy fan base that gives the B1G a bad name.
"Repeal and Replace" is a popular phrase in the news these days. I say we repeal Rutger's admission in the conference and replace with someone better!
I still have friends that are saying "ehh I'm still not sold on Franklin..." If someone on here feels this way too, please explain.
I have considered this as well, but I am all about embracing Pitt as a true rival, which means giving them whiteout treatment.
Great news for the team and the younger guys who will benefit from his leadership, but I also think this was the best decision for him personally. Aside from finishing his degree, which is always an important factor in this decision, this is the right move from a football perspective. He looks NFL ready in the run game, but he definitely has room to improve in the passing game. I think he really has an opportunity to improve his draft stock with another year in college.
This was an unbelievable season for the blue and white, but we have some unfinished business to take care of. As you said, Sept 9th can't come soon enough. I hope it's an 8:00 pm white out so they feel the full force of a PSU beat down.
D'andre Swift and Mark Webb. They are taking an official visit in January.
I'm not sure I agree, but man it's really nice to see this kind of positivity and confidence from our fans. It's been a long time.
I think the key to winning this game for us is Trace. I hate to say it, but I don't expect a huge day on the ground for Saquon. Wisconsin has a great run D and they are going to commit to stopping the run. Trace will have to sling the rock for us to win this one. Hopefully he is up to the task.
Interesting that you have us at #2. How are your power rankings determined? Does this mean the RLR staff's collective opinion is that we are a better team than Michigan?
Yea I completely understand the argument that Ohio State and Michigan are better than we are, and I actually agree. I think if we play Ohio State 10 times on a neutral field they probably win 6 or 7. My post here is just getting at the way they are talking about each team.
At the end of the day, I am okay with OSU being ranked ahead of us even though we beat them. Head to head is not the only thing that matters. But I do have a problem with putting a non-conference champion into the playoff and leaving out the champion of that same conference, barring a crazy upset in the championship game. It's one thing if a 4 loss team came out of the other division and pulled an upset. That would be a fluke and that team shouldn't be in the playoff. But we have two really good teams playing in the championship. If OSU is in the playoff, the conference champion has to be in too.
Same here, but I'm really concerned about the O-line in this one.
The committee is exhibiting a clear double standard in the way they treat OSU's loss to us and our loss at Michigan. For OSU, they were on the road against a top 10 team at night and only lost because of a special teams play, so we don't really care. The eye test tells us they are better than PSU, even though they lost. For PSU, they got crushed by Michigan. We don't care that it was on the road and they had water boys playing linebacker because of injuries. We don't care that it was early in the year and the team as improved immensely since then. They lost, so they are out. For us, a loss is a loss and that's it. For OSU, wellllll they lost, but....
Good article. The committee's mandate is to identify the four "best" teams, which inherently creates the potential conundrum they will find themselves in if we win this weekend. The committee has been fortunate in its existence so far that it hasn't really faced this type of scenario. But this is going to continue to happen. This highlights the problem with choosing the four "best" teams. In my opinion, they should choose the four most deserving teams and conference championship should be of most importance. The best team on paper doesn't always win the championship. That is what's great about sports. Were the Giants the best team in the NFL when they beat the Patriots in the Superbowl in 2007? No, but they won the game! The idea that you can choose a team out of a conference for the playoff and leave out the champion of that conference is ludicrous to me.
And I'm not just saying this because PSU is involved. I have felt strongly about this since day one of the playoff when there were discussions of the SEC getting two teams over a champion of another conference. The way I see it, the conference championship is effectively a playoff game. You want to play for the national championship? Win your conference! If the two of the four best teams in the country play in the same division (this can easily/already has happened in the B1G East or SEC West) then the head to head game between the two is also effectively a playoff game. I know some people completely disagree with this position, but I think it's very simple. Sports is not about who is the best team on paper or the "eye test", it's about winning on the field. Any other process for determining a champion erodes the game at a fundamental level.
Of course, there is an obvious easy solution to this dilemma. Just go to an 8 team playoff, give an automatic bid to the 5 conference champions and 3 at large bids. The problem they are facing now will continue to occur and just imagine how much worse it will be if ND gets its act together and puts together an 11 or 12 win season. Now you are talking about leaving out two conference champions.
No surprise. Nothing is keeping Barkley off the field in a game like this.
I thoroughly enjoyed watching and listening to Harbaugh cry like a little bitch
I'm not ready to celebrate yet. Give me a B1G title and give me Bama!
Throw some more dough at Moorhead too!
So you're not impressed by a winning streak over teams we should beat and also not impressed by a win over the team nobody expected us to beat? So you're just not impressed with wins. Makes sense