Why? Cause you have an inferiority complex with Bama? :lol2:

Dominance in any sport is not good for the sport. Great teams like Duke and Kentucky in college basketball are good for the sport because they don't win every year. I'm also man enough to admit that I wish my team was the one dominating the sport. But they're not so it's bad for the sport. To Bama fans their dominance is awesome to everyone else it makes them disinterested because the outcome seems predetermined.

There is no outcome that will surprise me in this one.

 

Watching the last several games of both teams, I think the key will be the Alabama Offense against the Clemson Defense. I just don't know how well Alabama will be able to move the ball against Clemson.

 

I think Clemson will be able to move the ball against Alabama, but can they score the ball? That will be the question.

 

I'm really looking forward to this game.

Dominance in any sport is not good for the sport. Great teams like Duke and Kentucky in college basketball are good for the sport because they don't win every year. I'm also man enough to admit that I wish my team was the one dominating the sport. But they're not so it's bad for the sport. To Bama fans their dominance is awesome to everyone else it makes them disinterested because the outcome seems predetermined.

 

I think dynasties in sports are a good thing, they tend to bring in more than just the hard core fan...as they want to either see the dynasty dethroned or continued. They also drive other teams/coaches to raise their game so to speak.

I think dynasties in sports are a good thing, they tend to bring in more than just the hard core fan...as they want to either see the dynasty dethroned or continued. They also drive other teams/coaches to raise their game so to speak.

Dynasties yes. The Patriots are great for the NFL, but dynasties don't necessarily win every year. Bama doesn't win every year either, but if they win on Monday it will be the second back to back championships for them in a span of 6 years. That's not good for the sport in my opinion.

Fraud? Clemson will expose the SEC for the fraud they are!

 

Based upon your history of predictions, Clemson should be nervous now.

Dynasties yes. The Patriots are great for the NFL, but dynasties don't necessarily win every year. Bama doesn't win every year either, but if they win on Monday it will be the second back to back championships for them in a span of 6 years. That's not good for the sport in my opinion.

 

I don't see it as being bad for the sport. The Steelers won back to back Superbowls twice in 6 seasons, I don't think that was bad for the NFL. Yankees went on a crazy run a couple different times over the years and it wasn't bad for baseball. In fact I think when there is a dominant team it has two great results, 1) it unifies fans of other teams to root against the dominant teams and increases the interest in the sport 2) it causes the other teams to up their game to compete.

 

I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that Alabama wins Monday.

I don't see it as being bad for the sport. The Steelers won back to back Superbowls twice in 6 seasons, I don't think that was bad for the NFL. Yankees went on a crazy run a couple different times over the years and it wasn't bad for baseball. In fact I think when there is a dominant team it has two great results, 1) it unifies fans of other teams to root against the dominant teams and increases the interest in the sport 2) it causes the other teams to up their game to compete.

 

I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that Alabama wins Monday.

People love to talk about parity, but numbers show that eyes more so like to view dominating teams (i.e. dynasties). It rallies more people to root for/against foes.

I don't see it as being bad for the sport. The Steelers won back to back Superbowls twice in 6 seasons, I don't think that was bad for the NFL. Yankees went on a crazy run a couple different times over the years and it wasn't bad for baseball. In fact I think when there is a dominant team it has two great results, 1) it unifies fans of other teams to root against the dominant teams and increases the interest in the sport 2) it causes the other teams to up their game to compete.

 

I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that Alabama wins Monday.

Don't get me wrong. I do not think Bama wins on Monday. I think the smart money is on Clemson in this one. But when you have teams like the Steelers and the Yankees that you mentioned, those sports were immensely more popular than college football. College football is only a hot bed in the south and Midwest. If you are trying to get the fan outside that geographic area to watch then IMO it would be more attractive if the outcome didn't seem predetermined. To the casual fan of college football who doesn't watch more than a game or two a season probably just hears Bama and thinks they will win when in reality Clemson has a great shot to win on Monday and I'm expecting an instant classic.

People love to talk about parity, but numbers show that eyes more so like to view dominating teams (i.e. dynasties). It rallies more people to root for/against foes.

In the major sports like the NFL yes. Everyone loves to root against the Patriots. But with a regional sport like college football I don't think that's the case. The Midwest and South are locked in no matter what. The NE and west coast are not IMO. I don't think those regions care at all about Alabama one way or another.

Don't get me wrong. I do not think Bama wins on Monday. I think the smart money is on Clemson in this one. But when you have teams like the Steelers and the Yankees that you mentioned, those sports were immensely more popular than college football. College football is only a hot bed in the south and Midwest. If you are trying to get the fan outside that geographic area to watch then IMO it would be more attractive if the outcome didn't seem predetermined. To the casual fan of college football who doesn't watch more than a game or two a season probably just hears Bama and thinks they will win when in reality Clemson has a great shot to win on Monday and I'm expecting an instant classic.

 

So Wisconsin versus Boise St for the title would draw in more fans? What's wrong with uneducated fans thinking one way or the other, they would know even less if it was some other team.

 

You seem to be trying to get everyone to agree that Alabama (which you hate) being good is bad for college football. I disagree, I think it is good when the iconic names are in the hunt. It is much more interesting when Notre Dame, USC, Michigan, Ohio, Florida State, Miami, Texas and other iconic well know programs are at the top than just a different random team year in and year out.

 

I like seeing teams do great things and make runs at history. I don't like Highlands, but 5A isn't as interesting without them being any good...sports needs the big teams to be good.

Dominance in any sport is not good for the sport. Great teams like Duke and Kentucky in college basketball are good for the sport because they don't win every year. I'm also man enough to admit that I wish my team was the one dominating the sport. But they're not so it's bad for the sport. To Bama fans their dominance is awesome to everyone else it makes them disinterested because the outcome seems predetermined.

 

So you're just a hypocrite. Your perspective is amusing, regardless of how stupid it is :lol2:

So Wisconsin versus Boise St for the title would draw in more fans? What's wrong with uneducated fans thinking one way or the other, they would know even less if it was some other team.

 

You seem to be trying to get everyone to agree that Alabama (which you hate) being good is bad for college football. I disagree, I think it is good when the iconic names are in the hunt. It is much more interesting when Notre Dame, USC, Michigan, Ohio, Florida State, Miami, Texas and other iconic well know programs are at the top than just a different random team year in and year out.

 

I like seeing teams do great things and make runs at history. I don't like Highlands, but 5A isn't as interesting without them being any good...sports needs the big teams to be good.

Of course Wisconsin and Boise State wouldn't. Obviously I hate Bama so if you want to take anything I say about them with a grain of salt by all means do because you probably do anyways. But you're right college football is better when ALL of the big name powers are good. Especially these 6: Alabama, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Texas, and USC. 4 of those have been down in recent years as recently as the last 3 years. You're right when they are down CFB is down, but I also think one team dominating is also not the best thing.

So you're just a hypocrite. Your perspective is amusing, regardless of how stupid it is :lol2:

Doesn't every fan wish their team was Bama? That makes me no different than anyone else in that regard. Bama winning all of these championships is boring to those outside of the region we live in. Whether you believe it or not college football is not popular outside of the south and Midwest, so how do you get those viewers, give them names they know besides Bama so Texas, USC, ND, Ohio State, Michigan, etc. and give them a story. With Bama it's the same old story: Nick Saban, great defense, bug running back. @bugatti mentioned in another thread that even throughout this streak of dominance no Bama team sticks out they all are the same. That's great if you're Bama, but if you're outside of the college football region it's forgettable. Clemson on the other hand is a GREAT story if they win: dynamic QB, the antithesis of Saban as a coach at least personality wise (which will be a complete culture change for Bama fans when Swinney becomes the coach there), school that has a history of misery in big games. That's good for college football. Call me a hypocrite all you want, everyone wants their team to win every year. It doesn't get old and boring if it's your team obviously, but if it's not your team it is.

Would really like to see the Tigers pull off the upset so I'll root them on...but being practical has bama winning by 10+! :wave:

Doesn't every fan wish their team was Bama? That makes me no different than anyone else in that regard. Bama winning all of these championships is boring to those outside of the region we live in. Whether you believe it or not college football is not popular outside of the south and Midwest, so how do you get those viewers, give them names they know besides Bama so Texas, USC, ND, Ohio State, Michigan, etc. and give them a story. With Bama it's the same old story: Nick Saban, great defense, bug running back. @bugatti mentioned in another thread that even throughout this streak of dominance no Bama team sticks out they all are the same. That's great if you're Bama, but if you're outside of the college football region it's forgettable. Clemson on the other hand is a GREAT story if they win: dynamic QB, the antithesis of Saban as a coach at least personality wise (which will be a complete culture change for Bama fans when Swinney becomes the coach there), school that has a history of misery in big games. That's good for college football. Call me a hypocrite all you want, everyone wants their team to win every year. It doesn't get old and boring if it's your team obviously, but if it's not your team it is.

 

Man, you're bad for college football. We should all root against you :lol2: