Andy

The two of them have been in more Super Bowls than any other franchise in the history of football.

I wouldn't say I was surprised that part wasn't scrutinized more, because the NFL is still early on the CFB-style targeting calls, but I did notice that at the time.

I'd just go college OT rules except the ball starts at midfield.

Don't line up in the horsefeathering neutral zone you horsefeathering idiot There is nothing exciting about New England games. It's all so technical, rehearsed and inevitable. It's why they're great but it's so [expletive] boring

Wendell Carter Jr. is having likely season-ending surgery on a thumb injury, because when you're the Bulls, not even the tiniest ray of hope can go unextinguished.

That was my favorite part. Bryant was destroying the ball until he got hurt, but yes, his resistance to Chiliball was why he didn't hit more homers.

It's such a horsefeathering travesty. Machado might be worth that much (via WAR, anyway) in 3 years, let alone 7.

It is more than a little strange how Dexter Lawrence (and 2 other guys) testing positive for a PED - out of a sample of reportedly only 15 Tigers - has resulted in little more than a collective shrug in the CFB media sphere.

You don't think Duke, the Tide's marquee non conference foe next year, can take them down?

Well, I feel about 25% better about ND now. Clemson is a straight up buzzsaw.

He always torches the Bulls. I can't be too made @ garpax for that one as I was a big Tyrus fan, though. HUGE hops. Too bad he had the basketball IQ of a golden retriever. I remember the 2 minutes he went supernova against the Heat in the playoffs. For one brief moment it seemed like we were about to take over the league.

I saw this as a rumor last night. Is this for real though? It's real and it's spectacular

The committee is going to make this thing an SEC vs Clemson Invitational every year going forward and the sad thing is I can't even argue too much with them

It's interesting, because neither team has faced an opponent that could really threaten them talent wise since September. It might come down to who adjusts to the higher level of play quickest (Dabo is a better coach than Kelly, so that idea doesn't fire me up much). Common opponents don't reveal much. Of the 4, both teams blew out 2 (Clemson's margins were bigger but I'm not totally sure how much it matters beyond 4-TD spreads), while ND was way better vs Syracuse and Clemson was way better vs Pitt. Both teams have really good defensive lines (Clemson's is ridiculous), so whichever QB is able to work around the pressure might have the advantage. Book has been really good at adjusting to what he sees from defenses. I can't speak to Lawrence, but I'm guessing he hasn't seen a ton of pressure. I'll be interested to see what ND's DC decides to do against him. I love both of ND's coordinators, they've done a tremendous job figuring teams out in-game all year. I expect it to be a pretty good game and if I were forced to bet the line (10.5-12) I'd take ND. This isn't 2012 - the Irish have a much more complete team than that one, and this Clemson team isn't the death machine that that Bama team was. I think Clemson will win but I'd obviously love to be surprised. You horsefeathering idiot

If not for an inept kicker the first couple weeks, they'd have made the playoffs this year. Crazy.

Magary got really horsefeathering plastered and almost died of asphyxiation.

He's broken and pretty much has been since 2016.

Unless Carolina can say with 150% certainty that this version of Cam is completely the result of a repairable shoulder injury, it's probably time to think hard about who the next QB is going to be. He's 30, so he's not gonna be getting any better.

I sort of feel bad for Rivera, who is a pretty good coach and will absolutely be fired for losing 8 in a row to end the season

You aren't the first to bring up that kind of seedings proposal, and I just find it ridiculous that anyone would seed a better team behind a worse one for no apparent reason other than 'hey, these guys aren't playing by our rules, screw them'. If you're going to have this system, seed the teams correctly. And if you want ND out of the playoff, as I assume you do, you should be thrilled they're independent. Their schedule is almost always more difficult as it is than it would be in the ACC. 2 of their 3 best wins this year, Michigan and Northwestern, aren't on the schedule if they're in the ACC. Instead, in this scenario, they're playing like Virginia and North Carolina or something. I don't understand how that change makes them worthy of a higher seed. I don’t want ND out of the playoff. They are certainly worthy. How is seeding conference winners higher as a benefit of winning their conference different than seeding the abraves and dodgers ahead of the Cubs because the Cubs didn’t win the central? I guess it’s possible that you don’t like that too but no one seems to throw a huge fit about it in general. Just like in baseball a team plays the large majority of their games against their conference/division so there should be some weight to conference champ I don't like it, but it's baseball, where home field means little to nothing, and it's a best-of-5 and not a best-of-1. That's not a relevant comparison. I'm perfectly fine factoring in conference championships when seeding, but there's no reason it should overrule such a drastic difference in resumes as the one between Notre Dame and Washington this year. Clemson is a #2 seed and shouldn't have to play a better team in the first round than the #4 seed just because one of them played in a terrible conference and the other didn't.

That sounds right. I think every power conference except the Pac-12 has a rule about playing a Power 5 opponent out of conference, and most Pac-12 teams end up playing one anyway.

I completely agree. Unfortunately nobody else seems to. Georgia only played 9. Alabama only ever plays 9. ND, unfortunately, only plays 9 next season, but with @ Georgia, @ Michigan and @ Stanford on the schedule I doubt they're going to be in playoff contention anyway.

They're literally the only team in the Power 5 that pretty much isn't allowed to lose a game. Everyone else gets a freebie extra game at the end if they're good enough to be in contention. I'd say that's plenty enough of a disadvantage without rigging the seedings of a playoff for no real reason. Clemson should get to play a Washington or something in the 1st round of this thing rather than an unbeaten team Wouldnt you rather fix the former problem rather than the latter? You seem to be upset about the seedings proposal but both problems would be fixed if you just joined the damn ACC like all of your other sports. You aren't the first to bring up that kind of seedings proposal, and I just find it ridiculous that anyone would seed a better team behind a worse one for no apparent reason other than 'hey, these guys aren't playing by our rules, screw them'. If you're going to have this system, seed the teams correctly. And if you want ND out of the playoff, as I assume you do, you should be thrilled they're independent. Their schedule is almost always more difficult as it is than it would be in the ACC. 2 of their 3 best wins this year, Michigan and Northwestern, aren't on the schedule if they're in the ACC. Instead, in this scenario, they're playing like Virginia and North Carolina or something. I don't understand how that change makes them worthy of a higher seed.

Wouldnt you rather fix the former problem rather than the latter? You seem to be upset about the seedings proposal but both problems would be fixed if you just joined the damn ACC like all of your other sports. Actually, I believe at least one of their sports (I forget what, though) is in the Big10 It's hockey - ACC doesn't have hockey and they were an awkward fit in Hockey East, which is made up entirely of New England schools.

For the horsefeathering life of me I don't understand the 'let's screw over ND for no reason to make them join a conference' attitude that permeates everybody. ND played 10 Power 5 teams this year, which is at least as many as the vast majority of any other Power 5 teams played (Clemson played 11 and I think Ohio State did too, but rarely does anyone play more than 10). Why does it matter if ND's 10 happen to be in 4 or 5 different conferences rather than a maximum of 2? Why does that justify seeding horsefeathering Washington, they of the 8-3 record against Power 5 teams, over an ND team that went 10-0 against them? Here's a looney-tunes idea: If you're going to have 8, seed them in order of how good they are, not based on some stupid arbitrary distinction like 'they won their TV cartel's championship'. Of course, the only reason we're even going to get 8 is because some conferences are pissed off they're not getting enough preferential treatment, so I expect your idea will take hold somehow. lol I just think if we have this conference setup and all but 4 teams (I think) play in a division that leads to a championship, that championship should mean something. In basketball its an autobid to the NCAA tournament. Same thing here (at least for P5). It's just stupid to make some special accommodations for basically 1 team because they just have to play Navy every year. If you want to be different for the sake of tradition fine, but since the rest of college football plays under different rules you might get screwed somehow. They're literally the only team in the Power 5 that pretty much isn't allowed to lose a game. Everyone else gets a freebie extra game at the end if they're good enough to be in contention. I'd say that's plenty enough of a disadvantage without rigging the seedings of a playoff for no real reason. Clemson should get to play a Washington or something in the 1st round of this thing rather than an unbeaten team