And then on the other end of the spectrum is Portland State which is awful.

Yeah, it would be a fun matchup. I feel like the game would hinge on if the 2018 team could grab a lead. If 2018 goes up 10-14 points, it's over. The 2021 team isn't winning a shootout and is going to have a tough time coming back. They need a slower, lower scoring game where they could grind out like a 27-24 win.

I'm referring to the 2018 team. You said you'd give the nod to 2021 because of 4th quarter play and defense.

The 2018 team was frequently up 25-30 so they didn't need big time 4th quarter play all the time. But since you like 4th quarter play, the 2018 team did this:

-trailed San Diego 21-20 with 4 minutes left in the third quarter but scored 5 straight TDs to end the game and outscored San Diego 27-0 in the 4th quarter.
-trailed Idaho State 37-22 with 13 minutes left, got 2 TDs in 3 drives to tie the game before winning in OT (got lucky that Idaho missed a short FG at the end of regulation).
-Montana trailed 21-3 at half and 21-13 going into the 4th quarter. Scored 5 straight TDs and outscored Montana 36-0 in the 4th quarter (and 46-0 in the second half).

Based on what each team has done so far (so I'm basing 13 games vs 8), the 2018 is clearly better to me. The 2021 team could end up better if they beat one of Sac/EW, finishes 9-2 and at least wins a playoff game. The 2018 team also handled San Diego, who made the playoffs.

Can't just look at wins. You have you look at losses also. The 2018 team lost to a 9-4 FBS team and twice to the team that made the FCS title game. No losing to a team that, at best, will end up at 3-8. The 2018 team hammered bad teams. We played two close Big Sky games that we won, against two 6-5 teams in Montana (down 21-13 entering the 4th though won by 28) and Idaho St (44-37 in OT).

FWIW, Sagarin has this team at 56.34 at 2018 at 61.86.

Don't need to worry about 4th quarter play when you're up 25-30 going into the 4th quarter week in and week out.

Similar to us in 2018 missing Weber and Montana St. Just the luck of the draw in a huge conference.

2019 they drew EW, Weber, both Montana’s and us.

Decent chance Montana State drops one of @Montana and @EW. Even if Sac loses to us, winning the other three would mean co champs at worst if Montana State drops one.

Yeah, the last two weeks could be rough.

Cal Davis a zero. — movielover

Is the Cal Davis logo actually a thing and if so, where? Honestly curious. I've seen us referred to as Cal Davis on some of the national sites before but didn't know if the university was using it at all.

I know I'm not the only one who hates when UCD is referred to as Cal Davis and it appears you do as well.

Guessing this one won't last long.

Agreed. It would be one thing if they were just hammering everyone they played and you don't want to drop the defending champs until they lose. But Eastern has better wins and has generally been hammering the bad teams.

The coaches poll not even having Sac in there even after they win in Montana is hilariously bad also. And it's not even close either. Coaches have them 34th.

Should move up a couple spots in the polls. We're 13 in the STATS poll and No. 10 East Tennessee and No. 12 Rhode Island both lost. Could jump No.5 Montana since they lost at home to Sac. Their resume isn't all that great. Beat a bad Washington team, 1-6 Western Illinois, 1-5 Cal Poly and 0-5 Dixie St by 17 (we beat them by 33). Their losses are better than ours though. So who knows.

I bet we'll be ahead of them as a lot of voters will dock them for losing to an unranked team (though Sac might be ranked after this) and will give us the nod because we've got a better record.

I’m terrified of their game against us. Fewest points they’ve scored in a game is 34 against Montana. Also put up 35 against UNLV though that took 2 OTs. Only had 20 in regulation. Other 5 they’ve put up at least 50 including 60+ 4 times.

Why do you seem so hell bent on defending terrible people like Jon Gruden?

Like when you say the following...

I believe having an opinion on non-players as coaches / refs (women), and kneeling at games, falls more into strategy and political beliefs. — movielover

it's clear you just don't get it.

Did you even read the article I posted? I'd recommend you do. It will explain things much better than I can.

It depends on the extent of it. There have been NBA players (Kobe I remember specifically) who have been fined for using homophobic language. A white WR was fined years ago for using the n-word out of anger at a concert. A similar thing would probably happen today, though maybe they'd be suspended for a game, which seems fair.

The difference is twofold. One is the extent to how often Gruden used these types of language. I'm not naive enough to believe the incidents Kobe and the WR were fined for were the first time they used that language. But you can't punish someone for a hypothetical. But this wasn't one incident from Gruden. It was a series of emails showing that this wasn't a mistake out of anger. This is who he is. The other guys could theoretically argue it was a one time thing (though again, I wouldn't believe them). Gruden can't. Secondly, Gruden is in a position of power, which means you're held to a higher standard. And for a league that has issues with a lack of diversity among its coaching staffs, having a racist coach who only hires white OC's and DC's is a problem.

So to answer your first question, if it came out tomorrow that Tom Brady did the exact same thing as Jon Gruden did, I would hope the Bucs would cut him instantly and would be disappointed if they didn't.

As for your terminology of "being fired for life", I'm not sure exactly what that means. Should Gruden ever get a job in the NFL again? No, he shouldn't. There are plenty of coaches out there who could do just as good a job as Gruden without being a bigot. He's made millions of dollars in his life and won't suffer one bit for it. The league is better off without him.

College coaches and administrators should too. Hell, if it came out that one of my bosses at work did the same thing as Gruden, I'd expect him to get canned too. The obvious difference is it would be easier for my boss to move on and get a different job than Gruden, but my boss also isn't a multi millionaire.

Racism is bad. Homophobia is bad. Sexism is bad. These aren't mistakes you are. It's who you are as a person. And there are consequences for being a bad person.

https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2021/10/12/22722678/jon-gruden-emails-resignation-raiders-coach

Another good article about the Gruden situation and why it's a problem beyond just his words being incredibly offensive.

Yes, black guys are allowed to use the n word.

I don't listen to a ton of rap music but I wasn't aware white dudes are dropping n bombs all over the place.

On a lighter note, I'm still waiting for one of my favorite sites to update.

http://isgrudengoneyet.com/

Well this is quite wrong on a number of counts.

Dropping the n-word 11 times, whether directed at someone or not, is unacceptable. She used the "well if they can say it, I can say it" defense. Sorry, doesn't work like that. She also said that "If you're that hypersensitive about color and don't have a sense of humor, don't marry out of your race."

Additionally, regarding her "firing". She was removed from the air for a day, apologized and was back on the air. She ended her radio program at the end of that year and currently has a show on SiriusXM. So, not fired and currently working.

How did I find that info out? I googled her name. Not very difficult.