OT: Poll Shows Fans Believe Buckeyes Could Beat the Browns

Submitted by BursleyHall82 on

A poll of Ohio voters - an actual scientific poll - shows that 62 percent of repondents think the Ohio State Buckeyes could beat the Cleveland Browns in a game of football. Only 23 percent picked the Browns. You'll find the poll and story here.

I'm of the belief that the worst NFL team would beat the best NCAA team by at least two touchdowns. Even the worst NFL team is bigger, faster and stronger.

The poll also showed that Urban Meyer is the second-most popular person in the state, behind only LeBron James. It didn't say where Harbaugh ranked.

mGrowOld

October 7th, 2016 at 2:22 PM ^

What's funny is that for all the shit the Browns take nationally they've been in every game this year with the exception of the Eagles and if we had a compentent fucking kicker we'd have won two games aleady (Ravens & Dolphins).  And the Redskins game we got totally boned by a lady ref awarding the football to the skins on a fumble EVEN THOUGH OUR RUNNING BACK HAD IT IN HIS HANDS AT THE TIME.

Do the Browns suck right now?  Yes.   Are they better than the 49ers, the Jaguars and a few other bottom-feeders?  I think so.   Somebody tweeted the other day asking the question why do the Browns get trashed so much when, over the last four years, they've won 18 games to Jacksoville's 14 games?  Why arent they the national punching bag?

So would we beat the Buckeyes?  Hell fucking yes.  

mGrowOld

October 7th, 2016 at 2:58 PM ^

The person signalling Redskins ball IS a lady ref (a pretty one I might add)

The player holding the ball over his head was NOT deemed to have recovered it.  Instead you'll notice she's looking at a scrum with no ball in and deciding the Redskins have recovered the invisable ball.

Even the Skins players themselves were laughing about it after the game.  Said they "pretended" to have the ball and she bought it.

Image result for browns fumble vs redskins

mGrowOld

October 7th, 2016 at 3:28 PM ^

I will say in my defense two things:

 

1. If this happened to any other team BUT my Browns the media would've gone nuts.  As it was it made PTI, ESPN and host of other media outlets but more as a "hey look, the stupid Cleveland Browns got screwed over...ha,ha,ha,ha,ha!"  I can only imgine the firestorm if this had happened to Dallas, Pittsburgh or God Forbid, one of the NYC teams.

2. The NFL is doing everything they can to cover for her incompetence rather than admidt it.  I do think they want more lady refs (woman demographic and all that) so owning the fact that she never saw the fucking ball when making the call would be pretty bad.  

http://thebiglead.com/2016/10/03/nfl-is-going-to-bizarre-lengths-to-def…

Prolly best for us in the long run anyway.  Not going to win many (any?) games this year so losses just increase our shot at the #1 pick and whatever QB we want.

Image result for sarah thomas ref

rc15

October 7th, 2016 at 2:24 PM ^

No way any current NFL team loses to a college team in the same era.

The question I've always wondered is how far back do you have to go for a current college team to beat an NFL team. Does 2016 Michigan beat the 1990 Lions? How far back do you have to go that you think 2016 Michigan would beat the super bowl champ?

TrueBlue2003

October 7th, 2016 at 2:52 PM ^

Certainly wouldn't be the 1990 Lions.  Modern, passing football was well into effect, and by then NFL players were getting enough S&C and the league that today's college teams wouldn't have competed then.  It's probably pre-Super Bowl era, but I bet 2016 Michigan could beat the 1957 NFL Champion Lions:

lbpeley

October 7th, 2016 at 3:00 PM ^

it was the '58 Lions that got beat in an exhibition game by the College All Stars Team. Back then the reigning NFL champs would have an exhibition game against a hand picked college all star team. The Lions were the only team to ever lose that game. Because of course they were.

rc15

October 7th, 2016 at 3:17 PM ^

I just think the current level of athleticism is so much higher that it overcomes the talent difference. The 1990 Lions didn't have a 300+ pound offensive lineman on the roster. The further back you go, the smaller and slower the NFL players are going to get.

LSAClassOf2000

October 7th, 2016 at 2:42 PM ^

I would suspect it is a bit of both, and perhaps even a conflict between the two positions even within some voters. I know that, as a long-suffering Lions fan, there are moments where my confidence in the team to win is just barely north of that line between college and NFL teams, if you will, but then I remember - as others have said - that it is extremely unlikely that a college team would beat an NFL team in the same era, even a lowly, somewhat less than competitive NFL team.

BursleyHall82

October 7th, 2016 at 2:25 PM ^

Most of you young pups aren't old enough to remember it, but until 1976, the season always started in late July or early August with the reigning NFL champs playing a team of college all-stars at Soldier Field in Chicago. (U-M's Jerry Ford played in this game in 1935.)

Most every year, including the last 12 that were played, the NFL team won easily, despite treating it like an exhibition. See the history here.

The Cleveland Browns and Michigan Wolverines are both better than the Ohio State Buckeyes.

Steeveebr

October 7th, 2016 at 8:58 PM ^

So in roughly 40 games between college all stars and super bowl reigning champions...

 

College team:

9 wins... close to 25%

2 ties... 

4 games decided by a field goal or less...

7 games decided by a touchdown or less inlcude the second to last game...

 

I'd bet on the pro team every time but I would definitely bet against a 10 straight win spread.

Perkis-Size Me

October 7th, 2016 at 5:56 PM ^

And I "could" wake up tomorrow morning next to Margot Robbie and hear her confess her undying love to me.

But I have as good a chance of that happening as the Buckeyes do in beating the Cleveland Browns.

Meyer's spread would get TORCHED by athletes who know how to handle it. Barrett would be decapitated by halftime. Same would go for Michigan, Alabama, or whoever.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

ckersh74

October 7th, 2016 at 2:51 PM ^

I remember when it was "Miami could beat the Bengals!!!" about 15 years ago. And before that it was Nebraska. Child, please. Any NFL team would break that spread offense in half and murderdeathkill at least 1 QB and possibly 2. And then the offense would go through a college defense like a hot knife through warm butter. 50 point game, easily. This is complete and utter nonsense. Even the almighty Alabama would get their shorts smoked off.

Gr1mlock

October 7th, 2016 at 2:55 PM ^

I agree with you, no matter how bad the worst NFL team is, they would throttle the best NCAA team.  Here's the easiest way to think about it: on Ohio State (or pick your other arbitrary best NCAA team at recent times) right now, there are probably at best half a dozen or so NFL starter level players and maybe 20 guys total good enough to play in the NFL.  On the worst NFL team, there are 22 NFL starter level players and 53 guys good enough to play in the NFL.  The level of talent is almost incomprehensibly higher at the NFL level.  This should never be a question, no college team can hang with an NFL team.  I'm mildly curious if a college all american team could even hang with an NFL team, but I wouldn't put my money on it.  

Sac Fly

October 7th, 2016 at 3:12 PM ^

When they were doing the college vs pro game the scores weren't close. Looking back at the last 12 games only two were 1 score games, and that's with an NFL team that wasn't even trying.

That was the 60's and 70's. Just on size alone in today's game an NFL team would turn a college team into paste. Could you imagine a college center/guard going against Vince Wilfork?

maizenblue92

October 7th, 2016 at 3:01 PM ^

The only NFL team in a modern era (post 2000 to be specific) vulnerable to lose to a college team would have been the 2008 Detroit Lions. They were a standard deviation of talent below your standard horrible NFL team.

lilpenny1316

October 7th, 2016 at 3:04 PM ^

I took a look at that season a few weeks ago and they led a lot* of those games in the second half, including some double digit leads.  If the Lions didn't IR Jon Kitna prematurely, they probably eek out 2-4 wins that season.  Remember that team started out with Megatron and still servicable Roy Williams at WR.

* A lot considering how pitiful their record was.

maizenblue92

October 7th, 2016 at 4:58 PM ^

3 TDs is excessive. In the last 2-3 years Vegas said the spread between Alabama (not the best college team of the last 15 years) and Jacksonville (not the worst pro team of the last 15 years) at 17 points. 01 Canes or 04 Trojans vs the 08 Lions could reasonably be a spread under 10 points. How many 10 or fewer point underdogs win in a given year? The possibility exists.

Bill Bafferty

October 7th, 2016 at 3:04 PM ^

I think the best college team would be lucky to even get a first down against any NFL team. NFL teams are made up of 58 professionals that do nothing but prepare and play football.

lilpenny1316

October 7th, 2016 at 3:09 PM ^

Our starting QB last year is the backup in Detroit (Orlovsky does not exist in my reality).  Most of the Lions skill position guys were All-Conference/All-American types.  For one of the more mediocre teams in the NFL, they are chock full of guys that were standouts in college.

Think about it.  What 20 year old kid is going across the middle to catch a pass with James Harrison patroling that area?  Even Bama players don't get paid enough to do that.

pescadero

October 7th, 2016 at 3:21 PM ^

I'm of the belief that the worst NFL team would beat the best NCAA team by at least two touchdowns.

 

If they tried, it'd be more like 6-8 touchdowns.