All of you complaining about the state/direction of college football are wrong. Yes, all of you. I've been wanting to say this for awhile now, but I've held my water to think about it. We're simply living through the final evolution of what the sport would always become once the concept of "national champions" was introduced. Think about it: it was regionally driven before. Bowl games were meant to be the ultimate reward for a winning season. They were special because it'd often be the only opportunity for teams in different regions to play each other. The concept of "blue bloods?" Almost wholly driven by schools with the pull to dominate their spheres by stockpiling talent. Often unfairly so, in retrospect. Which brings me to my next point: NIL. Still a new concept schools are all learning to navigate in real time. But under-the-table, backroom deals were how blue bloods became so in the first place. NIL just removed the veil from a concept that'd been in play for eons. You don't hate NIL or transferring--you hate that you know about it. The cloak and dagger shit is over, and that's a good thing. Wanna be a "blue blood?" Pony up like one. Or lean on your pre-modern era name built on a clandestine, unfair system until it's no longer an effective recruiting tool for young recruits who want to win (several examples of this, such as Nebraska). Which brings me to my final point: the expanding playoff. I've heard all your counterarguments to playoff expansion, but they all have a critical flaw: the size of the sport. Simply put, there are too many schools nationally to justify a playoff with only 4, 8, or even 12 teams. And a playoff is the only legitimate way to determine a true national champion in a field this large (and in a sport where styles of play and injuries greatly affect matchups and outcomes). Subjective rankings are a joke (too often affected by bias/initial rank. Teams that begin ranked high often take a long time to slide out of the polls, even after horrific losses. Conversely, many good teams never climb very high if they began ranked low or unranked). Great for debate, but a poor method of predicting on-field results. Which brings me to my final point: competition. America's true national pastime. Why do we watch games that have zero bearing on our favorite team with enthusiastic interest? We love to see the results of school's best efforts against each other. We want to see who is truly the best head to head when the stakes are high. Not "national champions" determined by journalists or due to favorable schedules against tepid comp. In an expanded playoff system, the regular season isn't devalued: it is enhanced. An early loss doesn't end your season--it shows where a team must improve to achieve their goals. A weak schedule isn't rewarded with a fool's gold high ranking simply for insulating yourself from legitimate comp and getting up for a good team (that has a harder row to hoe) a couple of times a year. Upsets will still happen. Juggernauts will still happen. And they will be more legitimate because there's nowhere to hide anymore. There are fewer gimmes. Can't coast on perception or hoard talent. You must reevaluate and intentionally reload every year, or you WILL get got. You don't hate where college football is headed. You just hate living through the change you knew would eventually come. Honestly, it's a shame it's taken this long. But now that it's here, show me how good you really are. Year in and year out, no matter what logo is on your helmet. Put the rock down, and let's ball 🏈

The Lord's work hath been done 🙏👍😁

In the end, it doesn't even matter 🤣

I know. And I'm grateful for it.

Gun ownership is not about fear, it's about prudence. It's already primarily a hobby for most firearm enthusiasts.

oh*o. Because I was raised to be racist against the entire state of oh*o.

Goran Dragić 😭

Minnesota is a problem.

Have a night, Javonte Williams!

I don't care how good or bad either team is, it's ALWAYS good when the Cowboys smack the e*gles.