Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Jelly used to do the "Which SEC team will win the national championship" threads every year, so I thought I'd bring it back while broadening it to include the southern ACC teams.

So which team will continue the iron-fist rule the southeast has over college football?

Florida State.

Who cares? The BSC-CAA matchup in the last game of the year will be a much better game. The SEC is utterly worthless....

Southern California

dbackjon wrote:Southern California

Would rather see UW but this.

Good thing they don't have to open the season against Alabama this year.

Pwns wrote:Jelly used to do the "Which SEC team will win the national championship" threads every year, so I thought I'd bring it back while broadening it to include the southern ACC teams.

So which team will continue the iron-fist rule the southeast has over college football?

Of course you need to broaden it - the SEC has only won one of the past 4 FBS titles, so of course that thread no longer made sense. And didn't Ohio St (is that southeast too? I mean, they call Michigan "that team up north" so maybe Ohio can be considered southern for this thread) win 3 years ago?

GannonFan wrote:

Pwns wrote:Jelly used to do the "Which SEC team will win the national championship" threads every year, so I thought I'd bring it back while broadening it to include the southern ACC teams.

So which team will continue the iron-fist rule the southeast has over college football?

Of course you need to broaden it - the SEC has only won one of the past 4 FBS titles, so of course that thread no longer made sense. And didn't Ohio St (is that southeast too? I mean, they call Michigan "that team up north" so maybe Ohio can be considered southern for this thread) win 3 years ago?

Sure Ohio State won it in 2014, but the southeast has a claim to 10 of the last 11 national championships. And a southeast team will win it all again this year unless Tom Herman gets Texas going quickly.

College football, in-breeding and illiteracy... it's what the southeast does.

Pwns wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Of course you need to broaden it - the SEC has only won one of the past 4 FBS titles, so of course that thread no longer made sense. And didn't Ohio St (is that southeast too? I mean, they call Michigan "that team up north" so maybe Ohio can be considered southern for this thread) win 3 years ago?

Sure Ohio State won it in 2014, but the southeast has a claim to 10 of the last 11 national championships. And a southeast team will win it all again this year unless Tom Herman gets Texas going quickly.

Heck, I'm sure with Texas A&M in the SEC you can include Texas in the southeast classification too.

89Hen wrote:College football, in-breeding and illiteracy... it's what the southeast does.

89Hen wrote:College football, in-breeding and illiteracy... it's what the southeast does.

Weather, food, and chicks too, but who's counting.

Baldy wrote:

89Hen wrote:College football, in-breeding and illiteracy... it's what the southeast does.

Weather, food, and chicks too, but who's counting.

Humidity, obesity and baby chickens. Yup.

GannonFan wrote:

Pwns wrote:
Sure Ohio State won it in 2014, but the southeast has a claim to 10 of the last 11 national championships. And a southeast team will win it all again this year unless Tom Herman gets Texas going quickly.

Heck, I'm sure with Texas A&M in the SEC you can include Texas in the southeast classification too.

The southeastern teams in the aforementioned 10 national championships are in Louisiana, Alabama, South Carolina, and Florida. That's hardly being capricious about what constitutes a southeastern team.

It's always been my contention that it's more the southeast than than the SEC that dominates FBS, but the SEC also dominates because it's one of two Power 5 conferences with a footprint in the southeast, and the other-one is more a basketball-centered league.

Skjellyfetti wrote:Good thing they don't have to open the season against Alabama this year.

Good thing for Bummer now that Darnold is their starter.

89Hen wrote:

Baldy wrote:
Weather, food, and chicks too, but who's counting.

Humidity, obesity and baby chickens. Yup.

As compared to...

Baldy wrote:

89Hen wrote: Humidity, obesity and baby chickens. Yup.

As compared to...

One state (and not even all of the state) compared to a whole region.

89Hen wrote:

Baldy wrote:
As compared to...

One state (and not even all of the state) compared to a whole region.

It's your region, Jabronihen. Congratulations.

Baldy wrote:

89Hen wrote: One state (and not even all of the state) compared to a whole region.

It's your region, Jabronihen. Congratulations.

That makes no sense.

89Hen wrote:

Baldy wrote: It's your region, Jabronihen. Congratulations.

That makes no sense.

Sorry, I can't dumb it down any more.

Baldy wrote:

89Hen wrote: That makes no sense.

Sorry, I can't dumb it down any more.

I get that you're stuck on maximum dumb living in Savannah, but you usually try to step it up around here.

You know one thing that always gets me as a resident of Louisiana is how LSU usually has more players on NFL rosters than Alabama does yet the success in terms of national titles doesn't follow. Like just now I checked it and as of now it's 61 LSU players on NFL pre season rosters vs. 56 Alabama players.

It'll be winnowed down but what you're probably going to see when the rosters are finalized is the numbers of players from each program on NFL rosters is going to be comparable and it's more likely than not that LSU will have slightly more.

It's just downright frustrating.

Alabama, year in and year out, does not have a talent advantage over LSU. But they sure do have a results advantage.

JohnStOnge wrote:You know one thing that always gets me as a resident of Louisiana is how LSU usually has more players on NFL rosters than Alabama does yet the success in terms of national titles doesn't follow. Like just now I checked it and as of now it's 61 LSU players on NFL pre season rosters vs. 56 Alabama players.

It'll be winnowed down but what you're probably going to see when the rosters are finalized is the numbers of players from each program on NFL rosters is going to be comparable and it's more likely than not that LSU will have slightly more.

It's just downright frustrating.

Alabama, year in and year out, does not have a talent advantage over LSU. But they sure do have a results advantage.

LSU needs to get away from the pro-style crap and run a real offense. They probably could've been a juggernaut if they had coughed up the money to hire Tom Herman, but they're basically going to do exactly what UGA did and keep going with the same lame, pedestrian offenses.

89Hen wrote:College football, in-breeding and illiteracy... it's what the southeast does.

You left off frying foods. We do that pretty damn well.

Who voted Florida?