Dr. Pomade

Herman had nothing to do with Ohio State's success. Nick Saban has had nothing to do with Alabama's 19 titles in the past 10 years. Belichick has had nothing to do with the Patriots' success. Hmm I think you might be on to something here, Joshie.

Because Tim Beck and Jim Bollman were really the geniuses behind the offensive explosion of Ohio State during its playoff run in 2014...

Enjoyed A+

Why don't we just play Indiana on that Tuesday afternoon and give ourselves 10 days to get ready

#MACtion!

PS - Harbaugh to Oregon

Why wouldn't you want to take a job where you are at the top of your profession making ridiculous sums of money and living in arguably one of the greatest cities on earth? I mean Ann Arbor is cool and all that, but come on.

Charlie Strong to Oregon

Alabama straight smoked USC.

The 2006 Ohio State team was the greatest CFB team ever right up until about 2 minutes into the BCS championship game.

Because dynamic offense bro I think I covered that already

Last night Clemson amassed 470 total yards. Last night Penn State amassed 435 total yards. Last night Watson went 23 of 34 for 288 yards and 3 TDs and 1 INT. Last night McSorely went 22 of 31 for 384 yards and 4 TDs and 0 INT. Yes, it's clear Penn State isn't even close to being as dynamic as Clemson. Where's the crack pipe again?

No, the committee called me this morning and I suggested they go with Clemson - Ohio State, so that's how it shook out.

No defense = dynamic offenses see, for example: B12, ACC. Pac

Yes because Oklahoma can't score points and neither can Michigan, Penn State, or Wisconsin.

But you get rematch of Ohio State - Clemson from a couple of years ago, which is nice. That game was the only game Ohio State has ever lost in its history when scoring 35 points or more.

I think we handle Clemson - they aren't used to playing anyone who actually plays defense - and let's hope Washington lands a hay maker against Bama.

Pretty much nailed it.

Wait, now you are quoting an article that shows that his completion percentage went down by 10 percent from last year to this year and this is somehow supposed to suggest he hasn't regressed? Am I taking crazy pills?

Yes, it's faulty logic. To say that Player A is really good at X does not mean Player A is "once in a lifetime talent" at X as it suggests that he's the only one in a lifetime that has that talent. Just because someone isn't as good at something as someone else doesn't mean they aren't really good at it. The second fastest sprinter in the world who lost to Usain Bolt is still really fucking fast at running 100 yards down a track.

Where exactly is that data presented in the article you quoted? I must have missed it.

Just because Ginn was better at taking a 15 yard slant to the house doesn't mean he wasn't also a really good deep ball threat. Just because Smith was the best at Ohio State at catching a 30 yard bomb over his shoulder (not sure if I agree completely, but for the sake of argument I will) doesn't mean he was a once in a lifetime deep ball talent. Other receivers we've had are capable of and have caught 30 yard bombs over their shoulder. The two aren't mutually exclusive. See how I did that? That's logic

Not based on the numbers quoted in that article he's not. 57 % complete to Smith in 2014 50 % complete to Thomas in 2015 47 % complete to Samuel in 2016 See how those numbers go down? That's math

Just because Ginn isn't #1 in career YPC percentage in the NCAA doesn't mean he wasn't a really good deep ball threat. Or are you saying that statistics never lie? Because if that's the case then I'd refer you to my fancy chart here showing that 50 percent is greater than 47 percent...

Besides, you're dodging my point: the article you quoted didn't exactly use the best data to support it's opinion. I'm not disagreeing with the possibility that Barrett isn't the problem, I'm just pointing out the article didn't do itself much of a favor. "Ladies and gentleman of the jury, my client is innocent of murder. He has killed many people, but not this dead guy were are talking about today. No, that guy he didn't kill, though he did kill a couple and their dog earlier that same day. You must acquit."