January 7, 20196 yr Just now, satyanash said: There's never really been much parity in the NBA. Different animal imo And even much less so the last couple of years. Basketball is a different animal in that one or two players can carry a basketball team. That doesn't work in football.
January 7, 20196 yr 1 minute ago, C-Man said: And even much less so the last couple of years. Basketball is a different animal in that one or two players can carry a basketball team. That doesn't work in football. Yeah, okay. A team wins the title two years in a row and 3 out of 4 seasons. When has that ever happened in the NBA? Oh, that's right. Literally every single decade in history except the 1970s. And now that team is second in their conference and only 2-1/2 games up in their division.
January 7, 20196 yr Author 9 minutes ago, C-Man said: And even much less so the last couple of years. Basketball is a different animal in that one or two players can carry a basketball team. That doesn't work in football. Also basketball players are much less prone to injury and don't have to leave after 4 seasons.
January 7, 20196 yr 5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said: Yeah, okay. A team wins the title two years in a row and 3 out of 4 seasons. When has that ever happened in the NBA? Oh, that's right. Literally every single decade in history except the 1970s. And now that team is second in their conference and only 2-1/2 games up in their division. I'm not really sure what the argument is. Tonight's game *should* be competitive and it's between the no-brainer best programs from the last four seasons. Bama is in the midst of an all-time run of dominance at the collegiate level. Not to derail but this year's NBA is interesting. There seem to be a lot more teams hovering around just above .500 and no real runaways like you usually see. Golden State looks slightly mortal but I fully expect them to be the Warriors by the end of the season (unless Draymond continues to play poorly). The NBA has always had star-driven championship teams but the teaming-up of superstars to create super-teams is a relatively new phenomenon at least post-merger.
January 7, 20196 yr For those who remember Spillymeals from the earlier days of SBNation, this is a great time to reread the Nick Saban Jello mold edition: https://www.sbnation.com/2013/9/13/4726396/nick-saban-jello-mold-roll-tide
January 7, 20196 yr 6 minutes ago, C-Man said: I'm not really sure what the argument is. Tonight's game *should* be competitive and it's between the no-brainer best programs from the last four seasons. Bama is in the midst of an all-time run of dominance at the collegiate level. Not to derail but this year's NBA is interesting. There seem to be a lot more teams hovering around just above .500 and no real runaways like you usually see. Golden State looks slightly mortal but I fully expect them to be the Warriors by the end of the season (unless Draymond continues to play poorly). The NBA has always had star-driven championship teams but the teaming-up of superstars to create super-teams is a relatively new phenomenon at least post-merger. Whooooosh.
January 7, 20196 yr Just now, satyanash said: Surprisingly weak - most Clemson grads I know are pretty good looking.
January 7, 20196 yr 2 hours ago, Vic Mackey said: Last year's I didn't even watch. First time ever for me. But I agree with your sentiment. This is now the Cavs/Warriors of the NBA. Is is the 2 best teams? Sure. Is it really that compelling? No. Lulz but expand the playoffs and if it isn't Texas then I won't watch it! 15 minutes ago, satyanash said: ND still getting dogpiled by the media, lol The difference in treatment that ND and Oklahoma are receiving for essentially the same semi final ass kicking is amusing.
January 7, 20196 yr 1 minute ago, texifornia said: Surprisingly weak - most Clemson grads I know are pretty good looking. SFO Wx is tough on southern hair
January 7, 20196 yr 22 minutes ago, satyanash said: ND still getting dogpiled by the media, lol #nocloakroom ... but secsecsec vs. Notre Dame is like the football version of Identity Politics blacks vs. gays.
January 7, 20196 yr 33 minutes ago, satyanash said: Attendance for this game is going to be bad... yikes. Yeah. Stadium on the other side of the country from both colleges. Not the world's greatest stadium. Still, cheapest seat on Stubhub is still $207 and they go up (way up) from there. And even with poor attendance, it should still be a good game.
January 7, 20196 yr 6 hours ago, The Earl of Texas said: Haven’t cared this little about the title game in my life Oh really? Are you 8 years old?
January 7, 20196 yr 14 minutes ago, satyanash said: Weak sauce in that article. You can't claim "in 150 years" if you're actually going to ignore the first era of college football. I understand ignoring it in this comparison, just don't claim all 150 years if you're doing so. Princeton and Yale were the two best teams in college football 5 years in a row from 1877-1881. Took a year off in 1882 when Harvard broke into the top 2, then were the top two teams for 4 more years in a row from 1883-1886. That's 9 out of 10 years. Then took a year off in 1887 because of Harvard again. Then two more years for good measure in 1888 and 1889. And while I understand the argument about the small number of teams, if you're citing NHL seasons when they had 6 teams then that cancels that argument right out. Edited January 7, 20196 yr by Huckleberry
January 7, 20196 yr 5 hours ago, satyanash said: aggy jumping all over this. Like sheep jumping. Put it on the wall. Whoop.
January 7, 20196 yr 3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said: Weak sauce in that article. You can't claim "in 150 years" if you're actually going to ignore the first era of college football. I understand ignoring it in this comparison, just don't claim all 150 years if you're doing so. Princeton and Yale were the two best teams in college football 5 years in a row from 1877-1881. Took a year off in 1882 when Harvard broke into the top 2, then were the top two teams for 4 more years in a row from 1883-1886. That's 9 out of 10 years. Then took a year off in 1887 because of Harvard again. Then two more years for good measure in 1889 and 1890. And while I understand the argument about the small number of teams, if you're citing NHL seasons when they had 6 teams then that cancels that argument right out.
January 7, 20196 yr Author 15 minutes ago, Huckleberry said: Weak sauce in that article. You can't claim "in 150 years" if you're actually going to ignore the first era of college football. I understand ignoring it in this comparison, just don't claim all 150 years if you're doing so. Princeton and Yale were the two best teams in college football 5 years in a row from 1877-1881. Took a year off in 1882 when Harvard broke into the top 2, then were the top two teams for 4 more years in a row from 1883-1886. That's 9 out of 10 years. Then took a year off in 1887 because of Harvard again. Then two more years for good measure in 1888 and 1889. And while I understand the argument about the small number of teams, if you're citing NHL seasons when they had 6 teams then that cancels that argument right out. ESPN has been making a big push to cement Bama-Clemson as the next 'must-see' rivalry: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25700715/clemson-alabama-perfect-embodiment-modern-football-rivalries Problem is, people are already starting to get tired of it. It feels manufactured.
January 7, 20196 yr I guess prices are going up. The closest thing to his 419 row 11 is row 9 and its $261.27 right now (3:39) or row 13 at $275.08. And his 418 row 19 is now $253. He did good advertising the cheap tickets! Edited January 7, 20196 yr by relapse98
January 7, 20196 yr Just now, satyanash said: ESPN has been making a big push to cement Bama-Clemson as the next 'must-see' rivalry: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25700715/clemson-alabama-perfect-embodiment-modern-football-rivalries Problem is, people are already starting to get tired of it. It feels manufactured. The two teams and fanbases don't hate each other, there aren't any huge personalities (Saban is just a robot and Dabo is a friendly goober), it's hyper-regional, and Clemson's fanbase is tiny. There's just not a lot there beyond being really really good at college football.
January 7, 20196 yr 45 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said: The difference in treatment that ND and Oklahoma are receiving for essentially the same semi final ass kicking is amusing. Look, I'm no fan of ou, but c'mon. I watched both games and they were very different. The gooners fought back and did make a game of it. Domers? Nope. Edited January 7, 20196 yr by Cajun
January 7, 20196 yr 3 minutes ago, Cajun said: Look, I'm no fan of ou, but c'mon. I watched both games and they were very different. The gooners fought back and did make a game of it. Domers? Nope. Notre Dame was easily the worst of the four teams in the semifinals. There are probably a half-dozen or more teams beyond Bama, Clemson Or OU that would've beaten the Irish that week.
January 7, 20196 yr LMAO once again at the Finebaum show. Every yuckity yuk he trots up there makes his analysis based on the premise that Clemson will have to be extremely lucky to beat big, bad Bama. If Clemson does win tonight, I'm going to really enjoy watching the SEC excuse machine getting throttled up to 110%.
January 7, 20196 yr Honestly, now that Sec play is over with, I wonder how excited Bama will be? Might come out flat and with their eyes on the nfl and the ones coming back for another year, already focussing on next years Sec schedule.
January 7, 20196 yr Just now, Dewey said: Honestly, now that Sec play is over with, I wonder how excited Bama will be? Might come out flat and with their eyes on the nfl and the ones coming back for another year, already focussing on next years Sec schedule. How focused is Satan on another national championship? I guess we'll see but, yeah, I would think he is.
January 7, 20196 yr Author 1 hour ago, texifornia said: Surprisingly weak - most Clemson grads I know are pretty good looking. They all look super-short too. I guess a low CoG helps w/ cheerleading
January 7, 20196 yr 34 minutes ago, satyanash said: ESPN has been making a big push to cement Bama-Clemson as the next 'must-see' rivalry: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25700715/clemson-alabama-perfect-embodiment-modern-football-rivalries Problem is, people are already starting to get tired of it. It feels manufactured. Same thing for the Cavs/Warriors. No real rivalry and history there. Rivalries are not formed this way. They are entrenched in history and fanbases that are passionate about that game. Bama/Clemson is not that.
January 7, 20196 yr Man, wtf FSU. #5 talent team and 5-7 record. Ouch.Yeah, seems like their former coach might have signed a bunch of guys that recruiting services love but have various issues preventing them from succeeding in college.
January 7, 20196 yr 1 hour ago, relapse98 said: How focused is Satan on another national championship? I guess we'll see but, yeah, I would think he is. Satan is plenty focused no doubt. The question is how focused are his minions?
January 7, 20196 yr Outside of seeing future nfl talent finally play comparable talent, i have zero interest in this game.
January 8, 20196 yr Saban and belichek are fuck buddies?And why is gameday at that shithole in da station?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.