College Football 19-20: Where We Kinda Want Clemson As Champion.

[WisconsinWildcard]

Why do it that way?

I mean, I assume it's a scam, but I can't figure out the scam in this instance.

Is it a way for the institution to run on private donations but still rake in public funding? Or a way to hide their profits so they can duck taxes and qualify for other state and federal goodies?

The short answer is I am not sure how it all started that way. It likely has origins in many of these institutions being separate entities, eventfully merging into large health care systems.

It also gives flexibility in having clinically vs research oriented staff. The fact remains you need to see patients and do things to make money in our health care system. Those who are research oriented may only do 1-2 days of clinic a week, they are a "loss" for revenue for a large health system, but great for a large university. Those staff get a larger proportion of salary from the university and much less from the health system. These physicians are also in a traditional tenure track.

There are also clinical physicians who get much more salary from the health system and much less from the university. They are on a different "tenure track" that does not have similar requirements of publish or perish, and often they can stay as assistant professor for as long as they want. Promotion happens but it is based more on clinical production/teaching/etc.

You will lose so many recruiting battles for top physicians if you were to pay just from a large university pool. A neurosurgeon makes like 400k-1M/year. Offer them a 150K/year professorship and very few will jump at that. But if you offer them a 100K/year university salary and then 200-400K additional based on clinical productivity you can then recruit much better.

 

[WisconsinWildcard]

It also gives physicians control of salary outside of state budget. If 50K of a 250K salary is state university based with 200K based on the private health system, you can weather budget cuts from the state and not lose all your staff.

 

[dxmnkd316]

The short answer is I am not sure how it all started that way. It likely has origins in many of these institutions being separate entities, eventfully merging into large health care systems.

It also gives flexibility in having clinically vs research oriented staff. The fact remains you need to see patients and do things to make money in our health care system. Those who are research oriented may only do 1-2 days of clinic a week, they are a "loss" for revenue for a large health system, but great for a large university. Those staff get a larger proportion of salary from the university and much less from the health system. These physicians are also in a traditional tenure track.

There are also clinical physicians who get much more salary from the health system and much less from the university. They are on a different "tenure track" that does not have similar requirements of publish or perish, and often they can stay as assistant professor for as long as they want. Promotion happens but it is based more on clinical production/teaching/etc.

You will lose so many recruiting battles for top physicians if you were to pay just from a large university pool. A neurosurgeon makes like 400k-1M/year. Offer them a 150K/year professorship and very few will jump at that. But if you offer them a 100K/year university salary and then 200-400K additional based on clinical productivity you can then recruit much better.

not that you need anyone to vouch for this, but that’s exactly how my doctor’s practice works. She’s teaching 3-4 days a week and sees patients on Mondays. PITA for scheduling appointments, but she’s amazing and needs to be spreading her knowledge and methods to others.

 

[MichVandal]

Is anyone aware of the COVID protocol difference between the B1G and the ACC?

I hate the bucks as any other Michigan fan, but man, the grief that Dabo is laying on OSU for playing so few games is kind of interesting. Yea, the B1G didn't do a great job, but it would be interesting to hear if Clemson would have not played games with a different set of standards.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Is anyone aware of the COVID protocol difference between the B1G and the ACC?

I hate the bucks as any other Michigan fan, but man, the grief that Dabo is laying on OSU for playing so few games is kind of interesting. Yea, the B1G didn't do a great job, but it would be interesting to hear if Clemson would have not played games with a different set of standards.

I don’t know the details, but from what I read, it certainly seems the B1G had the toughest protocols of any conference.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Heisman finalist Kyle Trask with 3 interceptions in the first quarter of the Cotton Bowl. Oklahoma up on Florida 17-0.

I don't usually care for Oklahoma Football, but it is always nice seeing the SEC's "best" get steamrolled. Here's to hoping OU keeps it up and pours it on.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

OU trounces Florida 55-20. Of course, the talking point is all about how Florida had a few optouts, and they weren't "the same team" as they had been in 2020.

Shove it up your tailpipe SEC apologists. A few optouts doesn't mean you should get spanked by 5 touchdowns against a Big 12 team. Embarrassing loss last night for the SEC. Here's to another tomorrow afternoon! : - )

 

[MichVandal]

OU trounces Florida 55-20. Of course, the talking point is all about how Florida had a few optouts, and they weren't "the same team" as they had been in 2020.

Shove it up your tailpipe SEC apologists. A few optouts doesn't mean you should get spanked by 5 touchdowns against a Big 12 team. Embarrassing loss last night for the SEC. Here's to another tomorrow afternoon! : - )

It's also a pretty weak problem to have- as I was watching last night, I kept thinking about the "reason" bowls are so important to the players. At least the excuse we have been told over and over again for years. Apparently not. If they were afraid of getting hurt, they should not have played the entire season. Same if they were really worried about COVID- they live in freaking Florida for crying out loud.

A loss is a loss, and a blowout is a blowout- make excuses all you want. Florida was embarrassed by that.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

It's also a pretty weak problem to have- as I was watching last night, I kept thinking about the "reason" bowls are so important to the players. At least the excuse we have been told over and over again for years. Apparently not. If they were afraid of getting hurt, they should not have played the entire season. Same if they were really worried about COVID- they live in freaking Florida for crying out loud.

A loss is a loss, and a blowout is a blowout- make excuses all you want. Florida was embarrassed by that.

Agreed.

I'm curious to see how the SEC performs in some of the other bowls, such as the Peach Bowl (Georgia v. Cincinnati) and the Citrus Bowl (Auburn v. Northwestern). Alabama has looked very impressive this season, but after last night's performance, perhaps the SEC was just watered down a bit this season? I'm probably just looking for reasons to be hopeful that Notre Dame can knock of Alabama. I'm also a bit concerned that Clemson might suffer the same fate as last year (if they manage to knock of Ohio State) and run into an absolute buzzsaw in the title game.

 

[SJHovey]

Agreed.

I'm curious to see how the SEC performs in some of the other bowls, such as the Peach Bowl (Georgia v. Cincinnati) and the Citrus Bowl (Auburn v. Northwestern). Alabama has looked very impressive this season, but after last night's performance, perhaps the SEC was just watered down a bit this season? I'm probably just looking for reasons to be hopeful that Notre Dame can knock of Alabama. I'm also a bit concerned that Clemson might suffer the same fate as last year (if they manage to knock of Ohio State) and run into an absolute buzzsaw in the title game.

I expect Notre Dame to get drilled.

 

[MichVandal]

Agreed.

I'm curious to see how the SEC performs in some of the other bowls, such as the Peach Bowl (Georgia v. Cincinnati) and the Citrus Bowl (Auburn v. Northwestern). Alabama has looked very impressive this season, but after last night's performance, perhaps the SEC was just watered down a bit this season? I'm probably just looking for reasons to be hopeful that Notre Dame can knock of Alabama. I'm also a bit concerned that Clemson might suffer the same fate as last year (if they manage to knock of Ohio State) and run into an absolute buzzsaw in the title game.

I'm so torn about that game. I honestly can't stand ND, and the hype that surrounds them- IMHO, it's worse than Bama. But I also hate Bama.

As much as I just loath OSU, I kind of hope: 1) Bama embarrasses ND, badly. 2) OSU makes Clemson look like they stayed in Carolina (I know that hurts for you FS23....), and then 3) OSU does that again against bama.

I'd also like to pretend that I won't watch the games, but there's literally nothing else to do tomorrow (need a break from working on our project).

Actually, for the hater of this situation- they would be rooting for COVID cancelations of the games....

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

I expect Notre Dame to get drilled.

Yeah, me too. Like I said, I'm just looking for reasons to be hopeful.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

I'm so torn about that game. I honestly can't stand ND, and the hype that surrounds them- IMHO, it's worse than Bama. But I also hate Bama.

As much as I just loath OSU, I kind of hope: 1) Bama embarrasses ND, badly. 2) OSU makes Clemson look like they stayed in Carolina (I know that hurts for you FS23....), and then 3) OSU does that again against bama.

I'd also like to pretend that I won't watch the games, but there's literally nothing else to do tomorrow (need a break from working on our project).

Actually, for the hater of this situation- they would be rooting for COVID cancelations of the games....

I am relatively indifferent towards Notre Dame. They have a unique tradition in this country. I'm also not surrounded by Notre Dame fanboys.

As for Alabama, I don't have any natural hate towards them, they just have been too good for too long. They aren't my team, and if my team isn't going to win, I'd like to see different teams win it all (preferably those who have not done so, or have not done so in a long time).

If Clemson were not my team, I could be on board with your hope...although Ohio State doesn't really fit the bill that I laid out above about cheering for teams that don't win titles, or at least not very often (although as discussed previously, the B1G does). If Clemson doesn't win it this year, I guess I would prefer Notre Dame over OSU and Alabama.

That being said, my hope is almost exactly the opposite of yours: (1) Notre Dame destroys Alabama in a thorough and embarrassing fashion; (2) Clemson takes down Ohio State...however necessary; and (3) Clemson wins the rubber match with the Irish.

As for watching the games, last night was the first bowl game I've watched thus far. I will probably watch the USA-Sweden World Juniors game tonight, but tomorrow I will definitely be watching some college football.

Go Tigers!

 

[SJHovey]

With respect to the discussion about bowl games, and whether they are important or not to the players and teams, I am of the opinion that the playoff system, even as limited as it is, has killed the bowl games. I'm fine with that.

Before there was a playoff, the bowl games still sort of had some significance. They were a reward at the end of a long season.

But once the playoff format started, if you weren't in the playoffs, the season felt over. At that point bowls ceased to matter.

If I were the bowls, I'd be pushing hard for an expansion of the playoffs, even if it means shifting your bowl from the traditional date on which it is played.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

With respect to the discussion about bowl games, and whether they are important or not to the players and teams, I am of the opinion that the playoff system, even as limited as it is, has killed the bowl games. I'm fine with that.

Before there was a playoff, the bowl games still sort of had some significance. They were a reward at the end of a long season.

But once the playoff format started, if you weren't in the playoffs, the season felt over. At that point bowls ceased to matter.

If I were the bowls, I'd be pushing hard for an expansion of the playoffs, even if it means shifting your bowl from the traditional date on which it is played.

It would be an interesting research project to look into the perceived downfall of the bowl games. First, what objective metrics would one apply (ratings, money generated, attendance, etc.) to determine that the bowl games have indeed fallen. I agree with you that the perception of the bowl games has fallen (I don't know if I would go as far as to say that bowls have ceased to matter), but it would be interesting to see what objective criteria actually support that perception. Second, presuming that is the case, I think it would be interesting to analyze the role the playoff played in such downfall. I think there could potentially be other causes, including the proliferation of the bowl system to begin with, the BCS system that started to mess with "traditional" bowl games, and perhaps external forces, such as the role of the NFL Draft and high profile injuries in bowl games. Perhaps even the expansion of the Power 5 conferences, the increase in regular season games, and/or the watering down of bowl eligible teams played a role. Finally, an analysis of what the best solution is going forward. Should we expand the playoff? To 8/16/24/32 teams? Should we scrap the playoff in its entirety? Should we eliminate all bowl games? Should we decrease the number of bowl games? Increase requirements (e.g., must win 10 games, play for conference championship, etc.) for bowl eligible teams? Lots of interesting questions.

 

[Kepler]

I expect Notre Dame to get drilled.

I can't see us winning. I guess we can drag the puck against the boards for 60 minutes and hope for one mistake to exploit.

We could beat Ohio State. We could beat Clemson (all we need is Lawrence out!) But Bama is Speed Kills and I'm not even sure our offense can outrun their defense let alone the converse.

I suspect Bama and Clemson will win in blowouts and then have a 91+ point game in the final.

 

[French Rage]

With respect to the discussion about bowl games, and whether they are important or not to the players and teams, I am of the opinion that the playoff system, even as limited as it is, has killed the bowl games. I'm fine with that.

Before there was a playoff, the bowl games still sort of had some significance. They were a reward at the end of a long season.

But once the playoff format started, if you weren't in the playoffs, the season felt over. At that point bowls ceased to matter.

If I were the bowls, I'd be pushing hard for an expansion of the playoffs, even if it means shifting your bowl from the traditional date on which it is played.

There is still some importance to the NY6 bowls, based on their history and the fact you get to show how you match up against another top-tier teams that in theory cares. But for all of the other bowls, I agree they lose significance in that people care less how you do against another mediocre team, much less a mediocre team that might not even care.

The teams themselves though might value bowls not so much for the game but rather it allows them to hold team practices for another month. That gives them extra time to develop players for the next year, and every little bit counts there.

 

[French Rage]

OU trounces Florida 55-20. Of course, the talking point is all about how Florida had a few optouts, and they weren't "the same team" as they had been in 2020.

Shove it up your tailpipe SEC apologists. A few optouts doesn't mean you should get spanked by 5 touchdowns against a Big 12 team. Embarrassing loss last night for the SEC. Here's to another tomorrow afternoon! : - )

Along the lines of optouts, OkSt had a WR who did well in the first half of their bowl game and then take himself out of the second half, figuring he had done all he needed to to impress scouts.

 

[dxmnkd316]

The bowls ruined themselves by having 800 different bowls.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Along the lines of optouts, OkSt had a WR who did well in the first half of their bowl game and then take himself out of the second half, figuring he had done all he needed to to impress scouts.

I did not see that, but interesting. I wonder if part of that concept too is because the players aren't getting paid. It would be interesting to see the number of optouts if players were paid and/or schools were permitted to purchase insurance for their players' benefit in the event of injury.