If Bama goes to the playoff AGAIN after sitting out the SECCG.....

[soflagator]

Thats not what i said. I said about 4 plays. An onsides recovery, and about 3 plays to get to the endzone, which by that point in the game was about all it was taking them to get a score. As to your general point, yeah, they were in the game. Are you really going to try to argue that the onsides was meaningless and they had zero chance had they recovered?

I was just going off your quote that an onside kickoff recovery would've equaled a win. And no, I'm not at all saying the onside kick was meaningless. My point was that both of those games were competitive. Like I said, it's been stated here 1000 times, and as recent as last night, that the game against Lsu was not close and we were never a threat. Yet, that score difference never reached greater than 14 points, while Alabama at one point was down 20. We also spent nearly half the game either tied or in the lead, while the Tide never lead and only spent the first 5 minutes tied.

I'm not getting into a pissing match. And I don't even disagree that they aren't one of the four best teams(though again, I think their resume sucks this year). I just don't get how after 2 weeks to prepare, giving up 46 at home and spending the entire night trying to get out of a hole you allowed yourself to get into is somehow deemed acceptable. But a week removed from a big win over Aub, and being within striking distance all night on the road is considered "never close" and an unacceptable loss.

It's absurd the lengths that some are going to in their attempts to discredit everything this team(and staff) does.

 

[GatorInGeorgia]

I'm not so sure they are. They are sort of a paper tiger. They don't play anybody. SECW is not what it was a couple years ago, it's a 2 team race now, Bama and LSU. Bama has been on top but the tide has shifted. Other than LSU and Auburn they play nobody, and their last two games vs great competition they got their asses kicked. A couple years ago the SECW was different because A&M, Auburn and Ole Miss were stronger. Now, they look like they crush everybody because their strength of schedule is weak. My top 5 right now is:

LSU
OSU
Clemson
PSU
Alabama

I have them close to #4 but I think they are beatable by everyone I have ranked above them and maybe a team or two beneath them.

FWIW I am also no longer sold on Tua. Couple years ago he was unbelievable but these days he's injury prone and making mistakes. I'm curious to see where he goes in the draft now, he was once the consensus #1 pick now that is completely out the window.

Penn State just got beat by Minnesota and you have them at #4?

 

[The Lateral Move]

I'm not so sure they are. They are sort of a paper tiger. They don't play anybody. SECW is not what it was a couple years ago, it's a 2 team race now, Bama and LSU. Bama has been on top but the tide has shifted. Other than LSU and Auburn they play nobody, and their last two games vs great competition they got their asses kicked. A couple years ago the SECW was different because A&M, Auburn and Ole Miss were stronger. Now, they look like they crush everybody because their strength of schedule is weak. My top 5 right now is:

LSU
OSU
Clemson
PSU
Alabama

I have them close to #4 but I think they are beatable by everyone I have ranked above them and maybe a team or two beneath them.

FWIW I am also no longer sold on Tua. Couple years ago he was unbelievable but these days he's injury prone and making mistakes. I'm curious to see where he goes in the draft now, he was once the consensus #1 pick now that is completely out the window.

All of that made sense until you could only come up with Penn State to put ahead of them

Penn State is not a top 4 team

 

[GatorInGeorgia]

The playoffs suck, whether it be 4 teams, 6 teams or 8 teams and it’s ruining CFB. Go back to 1 vs. 2, one game for all the marbles.

 

[GatorFL]

Anybody but Bama guys. Anybody but Bama. I was gonna put Arky above them. My point is, PSU has something to play for. Bama doesn’t.

 

[Mr2Bits]

Anybody but Bama guys. Anybody but Bama. I was gonna put Arky above them. My point is, PSU has something to play for. Bama doesn’t.

Auburn loss aside, the committee just teed then up to be a shoe in for that 4 spot. They and ESPN are salivating for a 1v4 SEC championship game. I really see no way LSU is left out at this point tbh

 

[ThreatMatrix]

Just pretend the season ended Sat. and we had an 8 team playoff. It'd most likely be:

1. LSU vs. 8.Utah
2. OSU vs. 7. Minn (this game would kinda suck because it'd be a rematch)
3. Clem vs. 6. Oregon
4. Bama vs. 5. uga

Which one of you ass wipes wouldn't watch every second of every one of those games? Whether it dilutes the regular season or not, I'm all for whatever makes the season longer and gives us more meaningful games at the end. It'd also cut back on some of the meaningless bowl games for the "superstars" to sit out of. Plus there'd always be at least 3 SEC teams in it and we'd get to hear the rest of the country cry.

Other than Bama UGA I wouldn't watch. The LSU, OSU and Clemson games would be blowouts.

 

[MJMGator]

The playoffs suck, whether it be 4 teams, 6 teams or 8 teams and it’s ruining CFB. Go back to 1 vs. 2, one game for all the marbles.

BCS. Worked pretty good if you ask me. Got the top 2 teams right just about every year.

 

[GatorInGeorgia]

BCS. Worked pretty good if you ask me. Got the top 2 teams right just about every year.

Yep.

 

[soflagator]

BCS. Worked pretty good if you ask me. Got the top 2 teams right just about every year.

Yep.

I still don’t know why we can’t have both. As you said, the formula worked very well in determining the best teams. The expansion argument centered around years like ‘00, ‘01, ‘03, ‘04 and ‘08 where you had that third team that had a decent claim for a spot. But outside of ‘01, I can’t think of a single year where one of the teams just didn’t belong. So I’m ok with the idea of the 4-team playoff because there are cases where it’s not clear cut(OhSt’14). But instead of having a bunch of individuals hashing if out, which is basically what the AP was for so many years, have the BCS formula tell us who the 4 best teams are. How hard is that? I truly don’t get why the two ideas couldn’t coexist.

 

[GatorInGeorgia]

I still don’t know why we can’t have both. As you said, the formula worked very well in determining the best teams. The expansion argument centered in years like ‘00, ‘01, ‘03, ‘04 and ‘08 where you had that third team that had a decent claim for a spot. But outside of ‘01, I can’t think of a single year where one of the teams just didn’t belong. So I’m ok with the idea of the 4-team playoff because there are cases where it’s not clear cut(OhSt’14). But instead of having a bunch of individuals hashing if out, which is basically what the AP was for so many years, have the BCD formula tell us who the 4 best teams are. How hard is that? I truly don’t get why the two ideas couldn’t coexist.

Here’s my position and I’ve said this on this board multiple times over the years. In any given year, when you go with #1 vs. #2 you may have a 3rd outlier team that has a legitimate claim to be in the title game but you seldom have a 4th team with as strong a claim to be included as the #3 team.

When you increase the number of teams included with a playoff, you’re also including the number of outlier teams that have a legitimate argument to be included. So with a 4 team playoff, you probably have a 5th, 6th & 7th team with a valid argument as to why they were unfairly left out.

Go to an 8 team playoff and you probably have 4 teams (maybe 5 or 6) that have a legitimate reason to cry foul.

So at the end of the day, if the BCS worked well choosing the top 2 teams, why even bother having a 4 team playoff...even if a BCS like system is used to pick the 4 teams?

 

[soflagator]

Here’s my position and I’ve said this on this board multiple times over the years. In any given year, when you go with #1 vs. #2 you may have a 3rd outlier team that has a legitimate claim to be in the title game but you seldom have a 4th team with as strong a claim to be included as the #3 team.

When you increase the number of teams included with a playoff, you’re also including the number of outlier teams that have a legitimate argument to be included. So with a 4 team playoff, you probably have a 5th, 6th & 7th team with a valid argument as to why they were unfairly left out.

Go to an 8 team playoff and you probably have 4 teams (maybe 5 or 6) that have a legitimate reason to cry foul.

So at the end of the day, if the BCS worked well choosing the top 2 teams, why even bother having a 4 team playoff...even if a BCS like system is used to pick the 4 teams?

Yeah, I’m fine with eliminating the playoff. I’m just saying the only real objection to the BCS was occasionally one team on that cusp. So unless you have a 1seed resting while 2 and 3 battle it out, the 4team idea was inevitable. But I think there’s more than enough data to show that 4 is already stretching it. And I think the criteria at the current level is enough to say “sorry, no” to 5 and beyond without a ton of second guessing. Because you’re right. We hear whining from #66 every March for that very reason. But once you get to 5 in cfb, there are enough knocks against teams to leave them out.

Look at last year. The teams whining were uga and OHSt. One had two losses and didn’t win their conference. The other had two losses and were destroyed by a .500 Purdue team. That will be commonplace. Those kinds of teams have no claim to anything beyond a standard bowl. And by the end of a season, #5-10 will all have some type of glaring deficiencies that keep them out of the discussion. I’m not sure you could say that about teams like ‘00um, ‘04Aub or ‘08UT. That’s the difference I see.

 

[MJMGator]

Check out this article from USA TODAY:

Winners and losers in second College Football Playoff rankings include LSU and Alabama

College Football Playoff rankings: LSU, Alabama in winners, losers

 

[ThreatMatrix]

Check out this article from USA TODAY:

Winners and losers in second College Football Playoff rankings include LSU and Alabama

College Football Playoff rankings: LSU, Alabama in winners, losers

You're not the boss of me.

 

[Oscar the G]

Check out this article from USA TODAY:

Winners and losers in second College Football Playoff rankings include LSU and Alabama

College Football Playoff rankings: LSU, Alabama in winners, losers

I dont buy any if that. If Alabama wins out they will probably get the 4th seed.

 

[SeabeeGator]

I dont buy any if that. If Alabama wins out they will probably get the 4th seed.

So interesting aside... Bama’s sustained superiority is likely to carry them into the playoff (meaning past seasons count in the human factor) but so too does the perception of the talent. They routinely win the “recruiting” championship. We might be seeing a not so subtle shift to a CFB where recruiting rankings actually matter. They create the perception of “loaded” and Bama/Clemson/OSU/UGA are clearly benefitting right now.

TL;DR - Crootin’ matters but might be given extra weight soon if teams with a perceived talent advantage are given shots at the playoff over conference winners. Also, need to make it less biased towards Bama, FSU, UGA, etc.

 

[Oscar the G]

Is it the perceived talent or the fact that most of those teams have won championships recently? I dont think its happened yet, I think you are jumping the gun, but it's worth keeping an eye on. As we all know, the 2 go hand in hand.

 

[Egor's Assistant]

So interesting aside... Bama’s sustained superiority is likely to carry them into the playoff (meaning past seasons count in the human factor) but so too does the perception of the talent. They routinely win the “recruiting” championship. We might be seeing a not so subtle shift to a CFB where recruiting rankings actually matter. They create the perception of “loaded” and Bama/Clemson/OSU/UGA are clearly benefitting right now.

TL;DR - Crootin’ matters but might be given extra weight soon if teams with a perceived talent advantage are given shots at the playoff over conference winners. Also, need to make it less biased towards Bama, FSU, UGA, etc.

It's also about TV ratings and the way the NFL is marketed by identifying and magnifying star players. More 5-star players, the more eyeballs and interest. Tua is must watch TV. Can't see him being sidelined if they win out.

 

[SeabeeGator]

Is it the perceived talent or the fact that most of those teams have won championships recently? I dont think its happened yet, I think you are jumping the gun, but it's worth keeping an eye on. As we all know, the 2 go hand in hand.

I don’t think they’d ever come out and state it. What I mean is those teams will have a perception advantage in a larger playoff system before game 1. It’s up to them to stay in the hunt but are you going to put a say... 11-1 Northwestern that didn’t win its championship over a 11-1 Bama? I think not. Those selection committee types are going to default to perceived talent and ability to win the playoff. I don’t think its a big deal at 4 teams but its definitely a big deal at 8. Additionally, media attention is a good point - I guarantee we see ND in there almost every year, no matter how many times they get blown out.

 

[88drgator]

According to CFN:
"Technically, Florida should be higher. Its two losses came to No. 1 LSU and No. 4 Georgia. It’s win over No. 12 Auburn is better than anything Ohio State, Clemson, Alabama, Oregon, Utah, Penn State and Oklahoma have done – and that’s the problem with all of this. A team shouldn’t be punished just because it had to play nasty teams, and others didn’t. With the combination of resume and eye-test – like the committee uses, Florida should’ve settled in around seven or so, and …"

I'd be mad as hell if we win out and don't get NY6 bowl.