So is Alabama out?
- Thread starter Permacock70
- Start date
BS if they get in. UGA looked good but BAMA really struggled. If it were close, they would have an argument. 100% on Vandy. Helps that BYU lost by a good many points. They don't have an argument.
Possible Bama out. If Virginia wins ACC and Miami allowed in would be wrong. No way ACC deserves 2 teams in playoffs. If Duke wins it probably comes down to Tulane, Bama or ND.
Bama blows.
They lost to a bottom feeder ACC team with only 5 wins, barely beat a 5 win team without an HC on their last regular season game, and just got embarrassed with an anemic offense.
3 loss team does not deserve to be in a field of 12, while all other teams have at most 2 losses.
They lost to a bottom feeder ACC team with only 5 wins, barely beat a 5 win team without an HC on their last regular season game, and just got embarrassed with an anemic offense.
3 loss team does not deserve to be in a field of 12, while all other teams have at most 2 losses.
But still went to Athens and won. Even though losing big today.
I don't have a dog in the fight, but if a team was "in" before their conf. champ. game they shouldn't drop "out" for losing it. Conference championship games should only determine a conference champ, not eliminate the loser.
The logic of dropping behind a team they were ahead of because the other team didn't have to play another game is completely flawed - the other team didn't suddenly get better by not playing. Being penalized for being better than other teams and getting to play in a championship game the other teams weren't good enough to be in is the epitome of CFB stupidity.
And they don't have 3 regular season losses - thay have 2 in the same 12 games as the rest of the teams.
The logic of dropping behind a team they were ahead of because the other team didn't have to play another game is completely flawed - the other team didn't suddenly get better by not playing. Being penalized for being better than other teams and getting to play in a championship game the other teams weren't good enough to be in is the epitome of CFB stupidity.
And they don't have 3 regular season losses - thay have 2 in the same 12 games as the rest of the teams.
I have strong feelings about the SEC getting more teams in the CFP than anyone else, but I find your argument against Bama compelling. If they miss the CFP, it's their own fault. That loss to Oklahoma late in the season at home was damning also.
That game in Athens was crazy. Bama went up 24-0 in the first half and won 27-24. UGA receiver dropped a sure td pass in the second half.
No 3 loss team should be in the CFP, especially one who lost to a 5 win ACC team and needed overtime to beat a UK team that fired their coach.
I'm tired of Bama. It's time for the SEC to quit protecting them. SEC tried to fix the game tonight. UGA had 80 yds in penalties, Bama had 5.
Alabama probably shouldn't be in, but the committee set a precedent last year when they said a team would not be punished for losing their conference championship game. They ignored the additional data point last year when SMU lost to a 9-3 team, so I think they have to ignore the additional data point this year when Bama lost to an 11-1 team. If they push Bama out, then I think it's inevitable that a team will opt out of a conference championship game in the not-too-distant future.
This.
If you tell me I have nothing to gain but everything to lose by playing in a conf champ game, then it's a no-brainer.
Why should a team be penalized for being better than all but 1 team in their conference, especially when it's the deepest conference? (and in this case Bama already beat UGA in Athens, so the message is that didn't matter)
By the way, I agree with you. That said, you opt out of the conference championship, you opt out of the playoffs.
To go along with your argument, how can Duke be the best team in their conference but it's likely they won't get in, but Miami will? They also won an extra game. Let's get rid of conference championship games and automatic bids. Problem solved. Or, select playoff teams prior to conference championships.
Last edited:
Bama probably should be in, they got blown out by an improving weekly GA team, but every time Bama plays a team, they get their best!!
To hell with Vandy and Pavia, they should be penalized because of Pavia and Mom!!
I disagree to a degree. Should a team like ND that plays such a weak schedule get in over a team playing a Hard schedule? No IMO!
Please, we all know what we saw yesterday and that was not a playoff caliber team.
using your argument, then Ohio St, ND, Michigan, Oregon, Texas, etc, etc can always claim the same criteria to have a permanent spot in the playoffs.
Last edited:
We’ll see if you or the committee is correct. IMO you don’t penalize a team playing an extra game (championship game) to a top 5 opponent. Granted Bama didn’t play their best, but they would beat JMU by 20 points. And BYU by two TDs
Then using this argument, you shouldn't reward a team for playing an extra game either.
(The committee will do what it wants to do, my opinion will just be my opinion, so me being "correct" or not is irrelevant)
Last edited:
Logic doesn't apply since ND is ahead of teams who beat them head to head and other teams with superior records. ND should be dropped out to make room for BYU, Miami, and any other 10-2 team
Never said the committee was using logic, just that if Team A was currently "in" the field ahead of Team B for losing a game that Team B wasn't good enough to get into makes no sense - Team B didn't show anything sitting on sidelines to justify jumping over Team A.
But everyone knows this isn't based on logic or rewarding the best teams, it's based on getting the matchups they want for TV dollars.
Until they take away conference champions, you are not going to get the best teams.
They will put Miami in so the ACC will have a team in the playoff.
Sort of DEI for conferences.
Sort of DEI for conferences.
As much as I agree, I disagree with the Committee ASheShe doesn’t deserve a team IMO
Indiana
Georgia
Texas Tech
Tulane
James Madison
Those are the five highest ranked conference champions.
Tulane and James Madison bump BYU and Miami if the committee keeps their word and teams won't be penalized who didn't play or who lost in their conference championship.
Good points but I'll have to part ways with you at, "you opt out of the conference championship, you opt out of the playoffs", since teams are being put at a disadvantage versus other teams, creating an even more unequal path situation and a call from conf members to eliminate the game for the all-risk/no-reward scenario that it is for some. There are already complaints being publicly aired - Kirby Smart brought it up after the game - about going to a 9-game conf schedule is putting them at more of a disadvantage since the conf will incur 8 more guaranteed losses by playing it and not an OOC opponent. So, now we see schedules are being tailored to give a school the best chances of making the CFP based on wins, not SOS or some other metric the committee said they would use since they obviously aren't (USC just dropped Miami from the upcoming schedule for this very reason).
The Duke situation is created by the self-inflicted rule regarding conf champs and rankings. The CFP never saw this coming and need a way out other than showing obvious favoritism and rigging the outcome. I doubt anyone thinks Duke is the "best" team in the ACC but they got the chance to upset the apple cart because of the convoluted way the ACC breaks ties since they have so many teams that can't play each other within an eight game conference schedule in a conference of 67 (or something close to that number) schools.
However, I agree with your follow-up proposal/solution and was having that conversation the other day about the only way they can say they aren't penalizing teams for losing their conf champ is to remove that from the equation and select ahead of those games. But as long as they insist on having AQs for being a conf champ, that would make it a tricky path to navigate and removes a lot of their power to achieve their primary goal: getting the TV matchups they want (not getting the 12 or 16 best teams assembled).
Curious to see how this all shakes out in a little while.
Again, 100% agree with you. I'm just suggesting that if the solution is to opt out of conference championship games, there could be an easy solution to ensure they play.Good points but I'll have to part ways with you at, "you opt out of the conference championship, you opt out of the playoffs", since teams are being put at a disadvantage versus other teams, creating an even more unequal path situation and a call from conf members to eliminate the game for the all-risk/no-reward scenario that it is for some. There are already complaints being publicly aired - Kirby Smart brought it up after the game - about going to a 9-game conf schedule is putting them at more of a disadvantage since the conf will incur 8 more guaranteed losses by playing it and not an OOC opponent. So, now we see schedules are being tailored to give a school the best chances of making the CFP based on wins, not SOS or some other metric the committee said they would use since they obviously aren't (USC just dropped Miami from the upcoming schedule for this very reason).
The Duke situation is created by the self-inflicted rule regarding conf champs and rankings. The CFP never saw this coming and need a way out other than showing obvious favoritism and rigging the outcome. I doubt anyone thinks Duke is the "best" team in the ACC but they got the chance to upset the apple cart because of the convoluted way the ACC breaks ties since they have so many teams that can't play each other within an eight game conference schedule in a conference of 67 (or something close to that number) schools.
However, I agree with your follow-up proposal/solution and was having that conversation the other day about the only way they can say they aren't penalizing teams for losing their conf champ is to remove that from the equation and select ahead of those games. But as long as they insist on having AQs for being a conf champ, that would make it a tricky path to navigate and removes a lot of their power to achieve their primary goal: getting the TV matchups they want (not getting the 12 or 16 best teams assembled).
Curious to see how this all shakes out in a little while.
I hope Alabama doesn't get in so it blows up! I'm sure Alabama didn't want to play that game last night.
If I were running things, I would make the following changes.
1- get rid of automatic bids
2- make the picks prior to conference championships. Up to conference if they want to have a championship game.
Unfortunately, this is true. Welcome to an expanded playoff, folks: Where conference championships mean nothing and #25 James Madison, who went 0-0 against top-25 teams and whose marquee win was a 24-20 victory over Washington State, is headed to the playoff.
If both conference championship game teams are in, why play the game.
Definitely setting it up for teams to opt out if the process continues this way.
Congratulations! You have unlocked the secret to the whole playoff "system" (cough)
Can't drop ND out even if they're 0-12.
It would violate every rule in college football and the universe. Haven't you heard???? ND is the Alpha and Omega of college football. The beginning and the End of college football. Even when they lose, they win. I hate them.
Or until they expand to 16 teams so that the committee can have a little more wiggle room to take in teams they generally view as "unworthy" (cough Vanderbilt this year, US last year, etc....you know, the mutts of CFB)
Even if we were at 16 this year, I don't think Tulane and JMU would be deserving, but they would be in.
You would not have the 16 best teams.
Probably not a popular stance, but I find myself leaning towards what someone called "the DEI" playoffs.
Honestly, I dont want to see 2 B10 teams, ND and a bunch of SEC teams play in the playoffs every year.
We just watched a season full of SEC games, and with the 9 game schedule, we're going to see even more. I just dint feel like watching the same game we watched a couple weeks ago again in the playoffs.
I get that it means less deserving teams get in. But I'm on the idea that I'd rather see UGA clobber Miami than see them play Bama a THIRD time.
Honestly, I dont want to see 2 B10 teams, ND and a bunch of SEC teams play in the playoffs every year.
We just watched a season full of SEC games, and with the 9 game schedule, we're going to see even more. I just dint feel like watching the same game we watched a couple weeks ago again in the playoffs.
I get that it means less deserving teams get in. But I'm on the idea that I'd rather see UGA clobber Miami than see them play Bama a THIRD time.
It's not about you. I'm quite certain the ratings would be much higher and game competitive if UGA was playing Bama in the playoffs vs UGA and Tulane. You may want DEI but it's not what the players, coached and fans want.
The committee will take the path of least resistance (and the most $$). They'll put Bama in over Miami.