2017-2018 College Football Thread

[goose]

A big chunk of the country, tired of hearing about how great the SEC is and tired of seeing Alabama fawned over, no longer care about the NCAA football championship. Some of us will still watch it, or parts of it depending on what else is on, but don't really care. Like the Yankees in the World Series or the Cheatriots in the Super Bowl. Meh.

 

 

Suffering severe butthurt after Bama's defense stomped all over Clemson's offense?

Not at all. Not a Clemson fan, unless they're playing Alabama. Just tired of the media and Alabama fans blathering on about how great the SEC is when the stats don't prove that. They have Alabama, a couple of teams that are usually pretty good, and then the rest of them which is just like almost every other conference in NCAA football. The only other team that gets as much cloyingly disgusting love from the media is Notre Dame.

 

In Bama's case, it is justified. Come on, Bama has won 4 National Championships in the past 8 years. And of course, Bama might make it 5 in 9 years (but I hope not, go Dawgs!)

 

SEC teams have won the NC 9 times in the past 12 years (counting this year, since either Georgia or Bama will win it). In other words, in the past 12 years, non-SEC schools have won the NC only 3 times as opposed to 9 for the SEC. In that time period, 4 different SEC schools won the NC (and it will be 5 different ones if Georgia wins this year)

 

SEC - 9 ACC -2 Big 10 - 1

 

With that kind of run with the National Championship, OF COURSE the SEC, and Bama in particular, has developed a tremendous reputation and one that is totally justified, being won on the field again and again. Don't like it? Well, complain to all the other conferences that have managed to win only 3 NC's in 12 years, combined. Tell them to get their friggin acts together instead of sucking so much.

 

No other conference comes even close to what the SEC has done over the past dozen years, not remotely close.

 

Btw, going back 20 years -- 5 different SEC schools have won the NC in the past 20 years. If Georgia wins the upcoming game, it will be 6 different teams. What other conference comes close to that sort of record in the modern era, not only in number of NC's won but also in the number of different schools from the conference winning them? Uh -- none.

Just because the SEC is top heavy now doesn't mean that we should forget the last 20 years. I think people forget about the five to seven teams that finish in the top 25 every single year. Alabama has earned the benefit of the doubt when being selected to the championship series.

Since when is 20 years the "modern era"? That's just a randomly picked number to make the SEC look better than it's fans and the media make it out to be. A whole lot of "what have you don't for me lately"?

It's just the cycle that the SEC is either in or has possibly completed. Either way, you can't deny the dominance of the conference for the last two decades unless it's base on sour grapes.

There's no doubt they have some great teams in the SEC but they also have some shitty ones. Tennessee was 0-8 in the conference and 4-8 overall. Arkansas was 1-7 and 4-8. If all you want to go by is the national champion, then you should also look at the whole picture, and not just the last however many years.

What team should have beat out Alabama for the last spot?

Wisconsin or UCF. Bama got in by virtue of having a "by" in the conference championships. That shouldn't happen, in my view. I disagree with the idea that "the best four teams" should be selected. Rather, it should be four teams that earned their way in through the established path. You miss your championship, you've missed the feed into playoff.

 

Are you even paying attention to what you just wrote? It is self contradictory. Wisconsin? The team that lost in the Big 10 championship game to Ohio State? Wisconsin should have been selected over Ohio State? How is that consistent with your feed-in method?

 

As for UCF, nobody was seriously considering them for the playoff. The teams that were being debated for the 4th slot were Alabama and Ohio State, with a few also arguing for USC. I find it funny that you were claiming earlier in this thread that Alabama should not be considered because it had a supposedly weak schedule, but now turn around and claim UCF should have been selected. Have you even looked at that weaksauce schedule UCF played?

Yes. But, they were undefeated nonetheless. And Wisconsin lost a very close game to Ohio State, which shows to me that they have a legit claim in a year where there is some question as to who should go. But let's talk about Bama. Undedeated? No. Conference champion? No. Close loss in a championship? No.

 

That's three strikes.

 

Ohio State had two losses, as you know.

Edited January 5, 2018 by goose

[Dread Pirate Robert]

A big chunk of the country, tired of hearing about how great the SEC is and tired of seeing Alabama fawned over, no longer care about the NCAA football championship. Some of us will still watch it, or parts of it depending on what else is on, but don't really care. Like the Yankees in the World Series or the Cheatriots in the Super Bowl. Meh.

 

 

Suffering severe butthurt after Bama's defense stomped all over Clemson's offense?

Not at all. Not a Clemson fan, unless they're playing Alabama. Just tired of the media and Alabama fans blathering on about how great the SEC is when the stats don't prove that. They have Alabama, a couple of teams that are usually pretty good, and then the rest of them which is just like almost every other conference in NCAA football. The only other team that gets as much cloyingly disgusting love from the media is Notre Dame.

 

In Bama's case, it is justified. Come on, Bama has won 4 National Championships in the past 8 years. And of course, Bama might make it 5 in 9 years (but I hope not, go Dawgs!)

 

SEC teams have won the NC 9 times in the past 12 years (counting this year, since either Georgia or Bama will win it). In other words, in the past 12 years, non-SEC schools have won the NC only 3 times as opposed to 9 for the SEC. In that time period, 4 different SEC schools won the NC (and it will be 5 different ones if Georgia wins this year)

 

SEC - 9 ACC -2 Big 10 - 1

 

With that kind of run with the National Championship, OF COURSE the SEC, and Bama in particular, has developed a tremendous reputation and one that is totally justified, being won on the field again and again. Don't like it? Well, complain to all the other conferences that have managed to win only 3 NC's in 12 years, combined. Tell them to get their friggin acts together instead of sucking so much.

 

No other conference comes even close to what the SEC has done over the past dozen years, not remotely close.

 

Btw, going back 20 years -- 5 different SEC schools have won the NC in the past 20 years. If Georgia wins the upcoming game, it will be 6 different teams. What other conference comes close to that sort of record in the modern era, not only in number of NC's won but also in the number of different schools from the conference winning them? Uh -- none.

Just because the SEC is top heavy now doesn't mean that we should forget the last 20 years. I think people forget about the five to seven teams that finish in the top 25 every single year. Alabama has earned the benefit of the doubt when being selected to the championship series.

Since when is 20 years the "modern era"? That's just a randomly picked number to make the SEC look better than it's fans and the media make it out to be. A whole lot of "what have you don't for me lately"?

It's just the cycle that the SEC is either in or has possibly completed. Either way, you can't deny the dominance of the conference for the last two decades unless it's base on sour grapes.

There's no doubt they have some great teams in the SEC but they also have some shitty ones. Tennessee was 0-8 in the conference and 4-8 overall. Arkansas was 1-7 and 4-8. If all you want to go by is the national champion, then you should also look at the whole picture, and not just the last however many years.

What team should have beat out Alabama for the last spot?

Wisconsin or UCF. Bama got in by virtue of having a "by" in the conference championships. That shouldn't happen, in my view. I disagree with the idea that "the best four teams" should be selected. Rather, it should be four teams that earned their way in through the established path. You miss your championship, you've missed the feed into playoff.

 

Are you even paying attention to what you just wrote? It is self contradictory. Wisconsin? The team that lost in the Big 10 championship game to Ohio State? Wisconsin should have been selected over Ohio State? How is that consistent with your feed-in method?

 

As for UCF, nobody was seriously considering them for the playoff. The teams that were being debated for the 4th slot were Alabama and Ohio State, with a few also arguing for USC. I find it funny that you were claiming earlier in this thread that Alabama should not be considered because it had a supposedly weak schedule, but now turn around and claim UCF should have been selected. Have you even looked at that weaksauce schedule UCF played?

Yes. But, they were undefeated nonetheless. And Wisconsin lost a very close game to Ohio State, which shows to me that they have a legit claim in a year where there is some question as to who should go. But let's talk about Bama. Undedeated? No. Conference champion? No. Close loss in a championship? No.

 

That's three strikes.

 

Ohio State had two losses, as you know.

 

It is bizarre to argue that Bama does not belong in the playoff after what they did to Clemson in the first round.

 

Whatever, fantasize away if it makes you happy, doesn't change anything.

[goose]

A big chunk of the country, tired of hearing about how great the SEC is and tired of seeing Alabama fawned over, no longer care about the NCAA football championship. Some of us will still watch it, or parts of it depending on what else is on, but don't really care. Like the Yankees in the World Series or the Cheatriots in the Super Bowl. Meh.

 

 

Suffering severe butthurt after Bama's defense stomped all over Clemson's offense?

Not at all. Not a Clemson fan, unless they're playing Alabama. Just tired of the media and Alabama fans blathering on about how great the SEC is when the stats don't prove that. They have Alabama, a couple of teams that are usually pretty good, and then the rest of them which is just like almost every other conference in NCAA football. The only other team that gets as much cloyingly disgusting love from the media is Notre Dame.

 

In Bama's case, it is justified. Come on, Bama has won 4 National Championships in the past 8 years. And of course, Bama might make it 5 in 9 years (but I hope not, go Dawgs!)

 

SEC teams have won the NC 9 times in the past 12 years (counting this year, since either Georgia or Bama will win it). In other words, in the past 12 years, non-SEC schools have won the NC only 3 times as opposed to 9 for the SEC. In that time period, 4 different SEC schools won the NC (and it will be 5 different ones if Georgia wins this year)

 

SEC - 9 ACC -2 Big 10 - 1

 

With that kind of run with the National Championship, OF COURSE the SEC, and Bama in particular, has developed a tremendous reputation and one that is totally justified, being won on the field again and again. Don't like it? Well, complain to all the other conferences that have managed to win only 3 NC's in 12 years, combined. Tell them to get their friggin acts together instead of sucking so much.

 

No other conference comes even close to what the SEC has done over the past dozen years, not remotely close.

 

Btw, going back 20 years -- 5 different SEC schools have won the NC in the past 20 years. If Georgia wins the upcoming game, it will be 6 different teams. What other conference comes close to that sort of record in the modern era, not only in number of NC's won but also in the number of different schools from the conference winning them? Uh -- none.

Just because the SEC is top heavy now doesn't mean that we should forget the last 20 years. I think people forget about the five to seven teams that finish in the top 25 every single year. Alabama has earned the benefit of the doubt when being selected to the championship series.

Since when is 20 years the "modern era"? That's just a randomly picked number to make the SEC look better than it's fans and the media make it out to be. A whole lot of "what have you don't for me lately"?

It's just the cycle that the SEC is either in or has possibly completed. Either way, you can't deny the dominance of the conference for the last two decades unless it's base on sour grapes.

There's no doubt they have some great teams in the SEC but they also have some shitty ones. Tennessee was 0-8 in the conference and 4-8 overall. Arkansas was 1-7 and 4-8. If all you want to go by is the national champion, then you should also look at the whole picture, and not just the last however many years.

What team should have beat out Alabama for the last spot?

Wisconsin or UCF. Bama got in by virtue of having a "by" in the conference championships. That shouldn't happen, in my view. I disagree with the idea that "the best four teams" should be selected. Rather, it should be four teams that earned their way in through the established path. You miss your championship, you've missed the feed into playoff.

 

Are you even paying attention to what you just wrote? It is self contradictory. Wisconsin? The team that lost in the Big 10 championship game to Ohio State? Wisconsin should have been selected over Ohio State? How is that consistent with your feed-in method?

 

As for UCF, nobody was seriously considering them for the playoff. The teams that were being debated for the 4th slot were Alabama and Ohio State, with a few also arguing for USC. I find it funny that you were claiming earlier in this thread that Alabama should not be considered because it had a supposedly weak schedule, but now turn around and claim UCF should have been selected. Have you even looked at that weaksauce schedule UCF played?

Yes. But, they were undefeated nonetheless. And Wisconsin lost a very close game to Ohio State, which shows to me that they have a legit claim in a year where there is some question as to who should go. But let's talk about Bama. Undedeated? No. Conference champion? No. Close loss in a championship? No.

 

That's three strikes.

 

Ohio State had two losses, as you know.

 

It is bizarre to argue that Bama does not belong in the playoff after what they did to Clemson in the first round.

 

Whatever, fantasize away if it makes you happy, doesn't change anything.

Always the gentleman.

 

As for fantasies, how bizarre is it to suggest that an undefeated team that destroyed Auburn doesn't belong?

[Dread Pirate Robert]

A big chunk of the country, tired of hearing about how great the SEC is and tired of seeing Alabama fawned over, no longer care about the NCAA football championship. Some of us will still watch it, or parts of it depending on what else is on, but don't really care. Like the Yankees in the World Series or the Cheatriots in the Super Bowl. Meh.

 

 

Suffering severe butthurt after Bama's defense stomped all over Clemson's offense?

Not at all. Not a Clemson fan, unless they're playing Alabama. Just tired of the media and Alabama fans blathering on about how great the SEC is when the stats don't prove that. They have Alabama, a couple of teams that are usually pretty good, and then the rest of them which is just like almost every other conference in NCAA football. The only other team that gets as much cloyingly disgusting love from the media is Notre Dame.

 

In Bama's case, it is justified. Come on, Bama has won 4 National Championships in the past 8 years. And of course, Bama might make it 5 in 9 years (but I hope not, go Dawgs!)

 

SEC teams have won the NC 9 times in the past 12 years (counting this year, since either Georgia or Bama will win it). In other words, in the past 12 years, non-SEC schools have won the NC only 3 times as opposed to 9 for the SEC. In that time period, 4 different SEC schools won the NC (and it will be 5 different ones if Georgia wins this year)

 

SEC - 9 ACC -2 Big 10 - 1

 

With that kind of run with the National Championship, OF COURSE the SEC, and Bama in particular, has developed a tremendous reputation and one that is totally justified, being won on the field again and again. Don't like it? Well, complain to all the other conferences that have managed to win only 3 NC's in 12 years, combined. Tell them to get their friggin acts together instead of sucking so much.

 

No other conference comes even close to what the SEC has done over the past dozen years, not remotely close.

 

Btw, going back 20 years -- 5 different SEC schools have won the NC in the past 20 years. If Georgia wins the upcoming game, it will be 6 different teams. What other conference comes close to that sort of record in the modern era, not only in number of NC's won but also in the number of different schools from the conference winning them? Uh -- none.

Just because the SEC is top heavy now doesn't mean that we should forget the last 20 years. I think people forget about the five to seven teams that finish in the top 25 every single year. Alabama has earned the benefit of the doubt when being selected to the championship series.

Since when is 20 years the "modern era"? That's just a randomly picked number to make the SEC look better than it's fans and the media make it out to be. A whole lot of "what have you don't for me lately"?

It's just the cycle that the SEC is either in or has possibly completed. Either way, you can't deny the dominance of the conference for the last two decades unless it's base on sour grapes.

There's no doubt they have some great teams in the SEC but they also have some shitty ones. Tennessee was 0-8 in the conference and 4-8 overall. Arkansas was 1-7 and 4-8. If all you want to go by is the national champion, then you should also look at the whole picture, and not just the last however many years.

What team should have beat out Alabama for the last spot?

Wisconsin or UCF. Bama got in by virtue of having a "by" in the conference championships. That shouldn't happen, in my view. I disagree with the idea that "the best four teams" should be selected. Rather, it should be four teams that earned their way in through the established path. You miss your championship, you've missed the feed into playoff.

 

Are you even paying attention to what you just wrote? It is self contradictory. Wisconsin? The team that lost in the Big 10 championship game to Ohio State? Wisconsin should have been selected over Ohio State? How is that consistent with your feed-in method?

 

As for UCF, nobody was seriously considering them for the playoff. The teams that were being debated for the 4th slot were Alabama and Ohio State, with a few also arguing for USC. I find it funny that you were claiming earlier in this thread that Alabama should not be considered because it had a supposedly weak schedule, but now turn around and claim UCF should have been selected. Have you even looked at that weaksauce schedule UCF played?

Yes. But, they were undefeated nonetheless. And Wisconsin lost a very close game to Ohio State, which shows to me that they have a legit claim in a year where there is some question as to who should go. But let's talk about Bama. Undedeated? No. Conference champion? No. Close loss in a championship? No.

 

That's three strikes.

 

Ohio State had two losses, as you know.

 

It is bizarre to argue that Bama does not belong in the playoff after what they did to Clemson in the first round.

 

Whatever, fantasize away if it makes you happy, doesn't change anything.

Always the gentleman.

 

As for fantasies, how bizarre is it to suggest that an undefeated team that destroyed Auburn doesn't belong?

 

UCF won that game by one score. It was tied at the end of the 3rd quarter. Auburn outperformed UCF in that game by every statistical measure except for turnovers, with more yards, greater time of possession, fewer penalty yards against them, number of first downs gained, and 3rd down conversion rate. It was the 3 Auburn turnovers against only 1 by UCF which enabled the UCF win by one score. In what alternate universe does that constitute Auburn being "destroyed" by UCF? You appear to just be making this shit up as you go along.

 

Further, I don't recall you or anybody else arguing that UCF should be in the playoff prior to the playoff selection. To argue that now just comes across as sour grapes because you don't like the fact that Alabama got in.

 

If Ohio State had been selected instead of Bama, I would not be hearing one word from you about how UCF should have been in, and you damned well know it.

Edited January 5, 2018 by Dread Pirate Robert

[goose]

A big chunk of the country, tired of hearing about how great the SEC is and tired of seeing Alabama fawned over, no longer care about the NCAA football championship. Some of us will still watch it, or parts of it depending on what else is on, but don't really care. Like the Yankees in the World Series or the Cheatriots in the Super Bowl. Meh.

 

 

Suffering severe butthurt after Bama's defense stomped all over Clemson's offense?

Not at all. Not a Clemson fan, unless they're playing Alabama. Just tired of the media and Alabama fans blathering on about how great the SEC is when the stats don't prove that. They have Alabama, a couple of teams that are usually pretty good, and then the rest of them which is just like almost every other conference in NCAA football. The only other team that gets as much cloyingly disgusting love from the media is Notre Dame.

 

In Bama's case, it is justified. Come on, Bama has won 4 National Championships in the past 8 years. And of course, Bama might make it 5 in 9 years (but I hope not, go Dawgs!)

 

SEC teams have won the NC 9 times in the past 12 years (counting this year, since either Georgia or Bama will win it). In other words, in the past 12 years, non-SEC schools have won the NC only 3 times as opposed to 9 for the SEC. In that time period, 4 different SEC schools won the NC (and it will be 5 different ones if Georgia wins this year)

 

SEC - 9 ACC -2 Big 10 - 1

 

With that kind of run with the National Championship, OF COURSE the SEC, and Bama in particular, has developed a tremendous reputation and one that is totally justified, being won on the field again and again. Don't like it? Well, complain to all the other conferences that have managed to win only 3 NC's in 12 years, combined. Tell them to get their friggin acts together instead of sucking so much.

 

No other conference comes even close to what the SEC has done over the past dozen years, not remotely close.

 

Btw, going back 20 years -- 5 different SEC schools have won the NC in the past 20 years. If Georgia wins the upcoming game, it will be 6 different teams. What other conference comes close to that sort of record in the modern era, not only in number of NC's won but also in the number of different schools from the conference winning them? Uh -- none.

Just because the SEC is top heavy now doesn't mean that we should forget the last 20 years. I think people forget about the five to seven teams that finish in the top 25 every single year. Alabama has earned the benefit of the doubt when being selected to the championship series.

Since when is 20 years the "modern era"? That's just a randomly picked number to make the SEC look better than it's fans and the media make it out to be. A whole lot of "what have you don't for me lately"?

It's just the cycle that the SEC is either in or has possibly completed. Either way, you can't deny the dominance of the conference for the last two decades unless it's base on sour grapes.

There's no doubt they have some great teams in the SEC but they also have some shitty ones. Tennessee was 0-8 in the conference and 4-8 overall. Arkansas was 1-7 and 4-8. If all you want to go by is the national champion, then you should also look at the whole picture, and not just the last however many years.

What team should have beat out Alabama for the last spot?

Wisconsin or UCF. Bama got in by virtue of having a "by" in the conference championships. That shouldn't happen, in my view. I disagree with the idea that "the best four teams" should be selected. Rather, it should be four teams that earned their way in through the established path. You miss your championship, you've missed the feed into playoff.

 

Are you even paying attention to what you just wrote? It is self contradictory. Wisconsin? The team that lost in the Big 10 championship game to Ohio State? Wisconsin should have been selected over Ohio State? How is that consistent with your feed-in method?

 

As for UCF, nobody was seriously considering them for the playoff. The teams that were being debated for the 4th slot were Alabama and Ohio State, with a few also arguing for USC. I find it funny that you were claiming earlier in this thread that Alabama should not be considered because it had a supposedly weak schedule, but now turn around and claim UCF should have been selected. Have you even looked at that weaksauce schedule UCF played?

Yes. But, they were undefeated nonetheless. And Wisconsin lost a very close game to Ohio State, which shows to me that they have a legit claim in a year where there is some question as to who should go. But let's talk about Bama. Undedeated? No. Conference champion? No. Close loss in a championship? No.

 

That's three strikes.

 

Ohio State had two losses, as you know.

 

It is bizarre to argue that Bama does not belong in the playoff after what they did to Clemson in the first round.

 

Whatever, fantasize away if it makes you happy, doesn't change anything.

Always the gentleman.

 

As for fantasies, how bizarre is it to suggest that an undefeated team that destroyed Auburn doesn't belong?

 

UCF won that game by one score. It was tied at the end of the 3rd quarter. Auburn outperformed UCF in that game by every statistical measure except for turnovers, with more yards, greater time of possession, fewer penalty yards against them, number of first downs gained, and 3rd down conversion rate. It was the 3 Auburn turnovers against only 1 by UCF which enabled the UCF win by one score. In what alternate universe does that constitute Auburn being "destroyed" by UCF? You appear to just be making this shit up as you go along.

 

Further, I don't recall you or anybody else arguing that UCF should be in the playoff prior to the playoff selection. To argue that now just comes across as sour grapes because you don't like the fact that Alabama got in.

 

If Ohio State had been selected instead of Bama, I would not be hearing one word from you about how UCF should have been in, and you damned well know it.

That is not that case, Mr. Rourke.

[Dread Pirate Robert]

A big chunk of the country, tired of hearing about how great the SEC is and tired of seeing Alabama fawned over, no longer care about the NCAA football championship. Some of us will still watch it, or parts of it depending on what else is on, but don't really care. Like the Yankees in the World Series or the Cheatriots in the Super Bowl. Meh.

 

 

Suffering severe butthurt after Bama's defense stomped all over Clemson's offense?

Not at all. Not a Clemson fan, unless they're playing Alabama. Just tired of the media and Alabama fans blathering on about how great the SEC is when the stats don't prove that. They have Alabama, a couple of teams that are usually pretty good, and then the rest of them which is just like almost every other conference in NCAA football. The only other team that gets as much cloyingly disgusting love from the media is Notre Dame.

 

In Bama's case, it is justified. Come on, Bama has won 4 National Championships in the past 8 years. And of course, Bama might make it 5 in 9 years (but I hope not, go Dawgs!)

 

SEC teams have won the NC 9 times in the past 12 years (counting this year, since either Georgia or Bama will win it). In other words, in the past 12 years, non-SEC schools have won the NC only 3 times as opposed to 9 for the SEC. In that time period, 4 different SEC schools won the NC (and it will be 5 different ones if Georgia wins this year)

 

SEC - 9 ACC -2 Big 10 - 1

 

With that kind of run with the National Championship, OF COURSE the SEC, and Bama in particular, has developed a tremendous reputation and one that is totally justified, being won on the field again and again. Don't like it? Well, complain to all the other conferences that have managed to win only 3 NC's in 12 years, combined. Tell them to get their friggin acts together instead of sucking so much.

 

No other conference comes even close to what the SEC has done over the past dozen years, not remotely close.

 

Btw, going back 20 years -- 5 different SEC schools have won the NC in the past 20 years. If Georgia wins the upcoming game, it will be 6 different teams. What other conference comes close to that sort of record in the modern era, not only in number of NC's won but also in the number of different schools from the conference winning them? Uh -- none.

Just because the SEC is top heavy now doesn't mean that we should forget the last 20 years. I think people forget about the five to seven teams that finish in the top 25 every single year. Alabama has earned the benefit of the doubt when being selected to the championship series.

Since when is 20 years the "modern era"? That's just a randomly picked number to make the SEC look better than it's fans and the media make it out to be. A whole lot of "what have you don't for me lately"?

It's just the cycle that the SEC is either in or has possibly completed. Either way, you can't deny the dominance of the conference for the last two decades unless it's base on sour grapes.

There's no doubt they have some great teams in the SEC but they also have some shitty ones. Tennessee was 0-8 in the conference and 4-8 overall. Arkansas was 1-7 and 4-8. If all you want to go by is the national champion, then you should also look at the whole picture, and not just the last however many years.

What team should have beat out Alabama for the last spot?

Wisconsin or UCF. Bama got in by virtue of having a "by" in the conference championships. That shouldn't happen, in my view. I disagree with the idea that "the best four teams" should be selected. Rather, it should be four teams that earned their way in through the established path. You miss your championship, you've missed the feed into playoff.

 

Are you even paying attention to what you just wrote? It is self contradictory. Wisconsin? The team that lost in the Big 10 championship game to Ohio State? Wisconsin should have been selected over Ohio State? How is that consistent with your feed-in method?

 

As for UCF, nobody was seriously considering them for the playoff. The teams that were being debated for the 4th slot were Alabama and Ohio State, with a few also arguing for USC. I find it funny that you were claiming earlier in this thread that Alabama should not be considered because it had a supposedly weak schedule, but now turn around and claim UCF should have been selected. Have you even looked at that weaksauce schedule UCF played?

Yes. But, they were undefeated nonetheless. And Wisconsin lost a very close game to Ohio State, which shows to me that they have a legit claim in a year where there is some question as to who should go. But let's talk about Bama. Undedeated? No. Conference champion? No. Close loss in a championship? No.

 

That's three strikes.

 

Ohio State had two losses, as you know.

 

It is bizarre to argue that Bama does not belong in the playoff after what they did to Clemson in the first round.

 

Whatever, fantasize away if it makes you happy, doesn't change anything.

Always the gentleman.

 

As for fantasies, how bizarre is it to suggest that an undefeated team that destroyed Auburn doesn't belong?

 

UCF won that game by one score. It was tied at the end of the 3rd quarter. Auburn outperformed UCF in that game by every statistical measure except for turnovers, with more yards, greater time of possession, fewer penalty yards against them, number of first downs gained, and 3rd down conversion rate. It was the 3 Auburn turnovers against only 1 by UCF which enabled the UCF win by one score. In what alternate universe does that constitute Auburn being "destroyed" by UCF? You appear to just be making this shit up as you go along.

 

Further, I don't recall you or anybody else arguing that UCF should be in the playoff prior to the playoff selection. To argue that now just comes across as sour grapes because you don't like the fact that Alabama got in.

 

If Ohio State had been selected instead of Bama, I would not be hearing one word from you about how UCF should have been in, and you damned well know it.

That is not that case, Mr. Rourke.

Mr. Rourke?

 

I don't get the reference.

[liquidcrystalcompass]

A big chunk of the country, tired of hearing about how great the SEC is and tired of seeing Alabama fawned over, no longer care about the NCAA football championship. Some of us will still watch it, or parts of it depending on what else is on, but don't really care. Like the Yankees in the World Series or the Cheatriots in the Super Bowl. Meh.

 

 

Suffering severe butthurt after Bama's defense stomped all over Clemson's offense?

Not at all. Not a Clemson fan, unless they're playing Alabama. Just tired of the media and Alabama fans blathering on about how great the SEC is when the stats don't prove that. They have Alabama, a couple of teams that are usually pretty good, and then the rest of them which is just like almost every other conference in NCAA football. The only other team that gets as much cloyingly disgusting love from the media is Notre Dame.

 

In Bama's case, it is justified. Come on, Bama has won 4 National Championships in the past 8 years. And of course, Bama might make it 5 in 9 years (but I hope not, go Dawgs!)

 

SEC teams have won the NC 9 times in the past 12 years (counting this year, since either Georgia or Bama will win it). In other words, in the past 12 years, non-SEC schools have won the NC only 3 times as opposed to 9 for the SEC. In that time period, 4 different SEC schools won the NC (and it will be 5 different ones if Georgia wins this year)

 

SEC - 9 ACC -2 Big 10 - 1

 

With that kind of run with the National Championship, OF COURSE the SEC, and Bama in particular, has developed a tremendous reputation and one that is totally justified, being won on the field again and again. Don't like it? Well, complain to all the other conferences that have managed to win only 3 NC's in 12 years, combined. Tell them to get their friggin acts together instead of sucking so much.

 

No other conference comes even close to what the SEC has done over the past dozen years, not remotely close.

 

Btw, going back 20 years -- 5 different SEC schools have won the NC in the past 20 years. If Georgia wins the upcoming game, it will be 6 different teams. What other conference comes close to that sort of record in the modern era, not only in number of NC's won but also in the number of different schools from the conference winning them? Uh -- none.

Just because the SEC is top heavy now doesn't mean that we should forget the last 20 years. I think people forget about the five to seven teams that finish in the top 25 every single year. Alabama has earned the benefit of the doubt when being selected to the championship series.

Since when is 20 years the "modern era"? That's just a randomly picked number to make the SEC look better than it's fans and the media make it out to be. A whole lot of "what have you don't for me lately"?

It's just the cycle that the SEC is either in or has possibly completed. Either way, you can't deny the dominance of the conference for the last two decades unless it's base on sour grapes.

There's no doubt they have some great teams in the SEC but they also have some shitty ones. Tennessee was 0-8 in the conference and 4-8 overall. Arkansas was 1-7 and 4-8. If all you want to go by is the national champion, then you should also look at the whole picture, and not just the last however many years.

What team should have beat out Alabama for the last spot?

Wisconsin or UCF. Bama got in by virtue of having a "by" in the conference championships. That shouldn't happen, in my view. I disagree with the idea that "the best four teams" should be selected. Rather, it should be four teams that earned their way in through the established path. You miss your championship, you've missed the feed into playoff.

 

Are you even paying attention to what you just wrote? It is self contradictory. Wisconsin? The team that lost in the Big 10 championship game to Ohio State? Wisconsin should have been selected over Ohio State? How is that consistent with your feed-in method?

 

As for UCF, nobody was seriously considering them for the playoff. The teams that were being debated for the 4th slot were Alabama and Ohio State, with a few also arguing for USC. I find it funny that you were claiming earlier in this thread that Alabama should not be considered because it had a supposedly weak schedule, but now turn around and claim UCF should have been selected. Have you even looked at that weaksauce schedule UCF played?

Yes. But, they were undefeated nonetheless. And Wisconsin lost a very close game to Ohio State, which shows to me that they have a legit claim in a year where there is some question as to who should go. But let's talk about Bama. Undedeated? No. Conference champion? No. Close loss in a championship? No.

 

That's three strikes.

 

Ohio State had two losses, as you know.

 

It is bizarre to argue that Bama does not belong in the playoff after what they did to Clemson in the first round.

 

Whatever, fantasize away if it makes you happy, doesn't change anything.

Always the gentleman.

 

As for fantasies, how bizarre is it to suggest that an undefeated team that destroyed Auburn doesn't belong?

 

UCF won that game by one score. It was tied at the end of the 3rd quarter. Auburn outperformed UCF in that game by every statistical measure except for turnovers, with more yards, greater time of possession, fewer penalty yards against them, number of first downs gained, and 3rd down conversion rate. It was the 3 Auburn turnovers against only 1 by UCF which enabled the UCF win by one score. In what alternate universe does that constitute Auburn being "destroyed" by UCF? You appear to just be making this shit up as you go along.

 

Further, I don't recall you or anybody else arguing that UCF should be in the playoff prior to the playoff selection. To argue that now just comes across as sour grapes because you don't like the fact that Alabama got in.

 

If Ohio State had been selected instead of Bama, I would not be hearing one word from you about how UCF should have been in, and you damned well know it.

That is not that case, Mr. Rourke.

Mr. Rourke?

 

I don't get the reference.

Fantasy Island

[liquidcrystalcompass]

For what it's worth, Alabama would mop the floor with UCF. I can see a case for UCF getting in but I'd personally give it to Bama. And if Alabama wins the whole thing it will bring us one step closer to a playoff field of eight. And I"m for that.

[Dread Pirate Robert]

A big chunk of the country, tired of hearing about how great the SEC is and tired of seeing Alabama fawned over, no longer care about the NCAA football championship. Some of us will still watch it, or parts of it depending on what else is on, but don't really care. Like the Yankees in the World Series or the Cheatriots in the Super Bowl. Meh.

 

 

Suffering severe butthurt after Bama's defense stomped all over Clemson's offense?

Not at all. Not a Clemson fan, unless they're playing Alabama. Just tired of the media and Alabama fans blathering on about how great the SEC is when the stats don't prove that. They have Alabama, a couple of teams that are usually pretty good, and then the rest of them which is just like almost every other conference in NCAA football. The only other team that gets as much cloyingly disgusting love from the media is Notre Dame.

 

In Bama's case, it is justified. Come on, Bama has won 4 National Championships in the past 8 years. And of course, Bama might make it 5 in 9 years (but I hope not, go Dawgs!)

 

SEC teams have won the NC 9 times in the past 12 years (counting this year, since either Georgia or Bama will win it). In other words, in the past 12 years, non-SEC schools have won the NC only 3 times as opposed to 9 for the SEC. In that time period, 4 different SEC schools won the NC (and it will be 5 different ones if Georgia wins this year)

 

SEC - 9 ACC -2 Big 10 - 1

 

With that kind of run with the National Championship, OF COURSE the SEC, and Bama in particular, has developed a tremendous reputation and one that is totally justified, being won on the field again and again. Don't like it? Well, complain to all the other conferences that have managed to win only 3 NC's in 12 years, combined. Tell them to get their friggin acts together instead of sucking so much.

 

No other conference comes even close to what the SEC has done over the past dozen years, not remotely close.

 

Btw, going back 20 years -- 5 different SEC schools have won the NC in the past 20 years. If Georgia wins the upcoming game, it will be 6 different teams. What other conference comes close to that sort of record in the modern era, not only in number of NC's won but also in the number of different schools from the conference winning them? Uh -- none.

Just because the SEC is top heavy now doesn't mean that we should forget the last 20 years. I think people forget about the five to seven teams that finish in the top 25 every single year. Alabama has earned the benefit of the doubt when being selected to the championship series.

Since when is 20 years the "modern era"? That's just a randomly picked number to make the SEC look better than it's fans and the media make it out to be. A whole lot of "what have you don't for me lately"?

It's just the cycle that the SEC is either in or has possibly completed. Either way, you can't deny the dominance of the conference for the last two decades unless it's base on sour grapes.

There's no doubt they have some great teams in the SEC but they also have some shitty ones. Tennessee was 0-8 in the conference and 4-8 overall. Arkansas was 1-7 and 4-8. If all you want to go by is the national champion, then you should also look at the whole picture, and not just the last however many years.

What team should have beat out Alabama for the last spot?

Wisconsin or UCF. Bama got in by virtue of having a "by" in the conference championships. That shouldn't happen, in my view. I disagree with the idea that "the best four teams" should be selected. Rather, it should be four teams that earned their way in through the established path. You miss your championship, you've missed the feed into playoff.

 

Are you even paying attention to what you just wrote? It is self contradictory. Wisconsin? The team that lost in the Big 10 championship game to Ohio State? Wisconsin should have been selected over Ohio State? How is that consistent with your feed-in method?

 

As for UCF, nobody was seriously considering them for the playoff. The teams that were being debated for the 4th slot were Alabama and Ohio State, with a few also arguing for USC. I find it funny that you were claiming earlier in this thread that Alabama should not be considered because it had a supposedly weak schedule, but now turn around and claim UCF should have been selected. Have you even looked at that weaksauce schedule UCF played?

Yes. But, they were undefeated nonetheless. And Wisconsin lost a very close game to Ohio State, which shows to me that they have a legit claim in a year where there is some question as to who should go. But let's talk about Bama. Undedeated? No. Conference champion? No. Close loss in a championship? No.

 

That's three strikes.

 

Ohio State had two losses, as you know.

 

It is bizarre to argue that Bama does not belong in the playoff after what they did to Clemson in the first round.

 

Whatever, fantasize away if it makes you happy, doesn't change anything.

Always the gentleman.

 

As for fantasies, how bizarre is it to suggest that an undefeated team that destroyed Auburn doesn't belong?

 

UCF won that game by one score. It was tied at the end of the 3rd quarter. Auburn outperformed UCF in that game by every statistical measure except for turnovers, with more yards, greater time of possession, fewer penalty yards against them, number of first downs gained, and 3rd down conversion rate. It was the 3 Auburn turnovers against only 1 by UCF which enabled the UCF win by one score. In what alternate universe does that constitute Auburn being "destroyed" by UCF? You appear to just be making this shit up as you go along.

 

Further, I don't recall you or anybody else arguing that UCF should be in the playoff prior to the playoff selection. To argue that now just comes across as sour grapes because you don't like the fact that Alabama got in.

 

If Ohio State had been selected instead of Bama, I would not be hearing one word from you about how UCF should have been in, and you damned well know it.

That is not that case, Mr. Rourke.

Mr. Rourke?

 

I don't get the reference.

Fantasy Island

......................

Edited January 6, 2018 by Dread Pirate Robert

[goose]

For what it's worth, Alabama would mop the floor with UCF. I can see a case for UCF getting in but I'd personally give it to Bama. And if Alabama wins the whole thing it will bring us one step closer to a playoff field of eight. And I"m for that.

So we can bitch about teams #9 and #10.

 

:dweez: :dweez: :dweez:

[goose]

A big chunk of the country, tired of hearing about how great the SEC is and tired of seeing Alabama fawned over, no longer care about the NCAA football championship. Some of us will still watch it, or parts of it depending on what else is on, but don't really care. Like the Yankees in the World Series or the Cheatriots in the Super Bowl. Meh.

 

 

Suffering severe butthurt after Bama's defense stomped all over Clemson's offense?

Not at all. Not a Clemson fan, unless they're playing Alabama. Just tired of the media and Alabama fans blathering on about how great the SEC is when the stats don't prove that. They have Alabama, a couple of teams that are usually pretty good, and then the rest of them which is just like almost every other conference in NCAA football. The only other team that gets as much cloyingly disgusting love from the media is Notre Dame.

 

In Bama's case, it is justified. Come on, Bama has won 4 National Championships in the past 8 years. And of course, Bama might make it 5 in 9 years (but I hope not, go Dawgs!)

 

SEC teams have won the NC 9 times in the past 12 years (counting this year, since either Georgia or Bama will win it). In other words, in the past 12 years, non-SEC schools have won the NC only 3 times as opposed to 9 for the SEC. In that time period, 4 different SEC schools won the NC (and it will be 5 different ones if Georgia wins this year)

 

SEC - 9 ACC -2 Big 10 - 1

 

With that kind of run with the National Championship, OF COURSE the SEC, and Bama in particular, has developed a tremendous reputation and one that is totally justified, being won on the field again and again. Don't like it? Well, complain to all the other conferences that have managed to win only 3 NC's in 12 years, combined. Tell them to get their friggin acts together instead of sucking so much.

 

No other conference comes even close to what the SEC has done over the past dozen years, not remotely close.

 

Btw, going back 20 years -- 5 different SEC schools have won the NC in the past 20 years. If Georgia wins the upcoming game, it will be 6 different teams. What other conference comes close to that sort of record in the modern era, not only in number of NC's won but also in the number of different schools from the conference winning them? Uh -- none.

Just because the SEC is top heavy now doesn't mean that we should forget the last 20 years. I think people forget about the five to seven teams that finish in the top 25 every single year. Alabama has earned the benefit of the doubt when being selected to the championship series.

Since when is 20 years the "modern era"? That's just a randomly picked number to make the SEC look better than it's fans and the media make it out to be. A whole lot of "what have you don't for me lately"?

It's just the cycle that the SEC is either in or has possibly completed. Either way, you can't deny the dominance of the conference for the last two decades unless it's base on sour grapes.

There's no doubt they have some great teams in the SEC but they also have some shitty ones. Tennessee was 0-8 in the conference and 4-8 overall. Arkansas was 1-7 and 4-8. If all you want to go by is the national champion, then you should also look at the whole picture, and not just the last however many years.

What team should have beat out Alabama for the last spot?

Wisconsin or UCF. Bama got in by virtue of having a "by" in the conference championships. That shouldn't happen, in my view. I disagree with the idea that "the best four teams" should be selected. Rather, it should be four teams that earned their way in through the established path. You miss your championship, you've missed the feed into playoff.

 

Are you even paying attention to what you just wrote? It is self contradictory. Wisconsin? The team that lost in the Big 10 championship game to Ohio State? Wisconsin should have been selected over Ohio State? How is that consistent with your feed-in method?

 

As for UCF, nobody was seriously considering them for the playoff. The teams that were being debated for the 4th slot were Alabama and Ohio State, with a few also arguing for USC. I find it funny that you were claiming earlier in this thread that Alabama should not be considered because it had a supposedly weak schedule, but now turn around and claim UCF should have been selected. Have you even looked at that weaksauce schedule UCF played?

Yes. But, they were undefeated nonetheless. And Wisconsin lost a very close game to Ohio State, which shows to me that they have a legit claim in a year where there is some question as to who should go. But let's talk about Bama. Undedeated? No. Conference champion? No. Close loss in a championship? No.

 

That's three strikes.

 

Ohio State had two losses, as you know.

 

It is bizarre to argue that Bama does not belong in the playoff after what they did to Clemson in the first round.

 

Whatever, fantasize away if it makes you happy, doesn't change anything.

Always the gentleman.

 

As for fantasies, how bizarre is it to suggest that an undefeated team that destroyed Auburn doesn't belong?

 

UCF won that game by one score. It was tied at the end of the 3rd quarter. Auburn outperformed UCF in that game by every statistical measure except for turnovers, with more yards, greater time of possession, fewer penalty yards against them, number of first downs gained, and 3rd down conversion rate. It was the 3 Auburn turnovers against only 1 by UCF which enabled the UCF win by one score. In what alternate universe does that constitute Auburn being "destroyed" by UCF? You appear to just be making this shit up as you go along.

 

Further, I don't recall you or anybody else arguing that UCF should be in the playoff prior to the playoff selection. To argue that now just comes across as sour grapes because you don't like the fact that Alabama got in.

 

If Ohio State had been selected instead of Bama, I would not be hearing one word from you about how UCF should have been in, and you damned well know it.

That is not that case, Mr. Rourke.

Mr. Rourke?

 

I don't get the reference.

Fantasy Island

......................

[goose]

For what it's worth, Alabama would mop the floor with UCF.

So would Auburn.

[liquidcrystalcompass]

For what it's worth, Alabama would mop the floor with UCF. I can see a case for UCF getting in but I'd personally give it to Bama. And if Alabama wins the whole thing it will bring us one step closer to a playoff field of eight. And I"m for that.

So we can bitch about teams #9 and #10.

 

:dweez: :dweez: :dweez:

That thought crossed my mind when I posted. Hey at nine or ten, you have less to bitch about. I'd take the conference champions from each of the power five and have three at large.

[goose]

For what it's worth, Alabama would mop the floor with UCF. I can see a case for UCF getting in but I'd personally give it to Bama. And if Alabama wins the whole thing it will bring us one step closer to a playoff field of eight. And I"m for that.

So we can bitch about teams #9 and #10.

 

:dweez: :dweez: :dweez:

That thought crossed my mind when I posted. Hey at nine or ten, you have less to bitch about. I'd take the conference champions from each of the power five and have three at large.

I think that would work and would be an improvement.

[Dread Pirate Robert]

For what it's worth, Alabama would mop the floor with UCF.

So would Auburn.

 

I don't recall anybody saying that.

[Dread Pirate Robert]

Anyway, is there anybody in this forum who is pulling for Alabama to win, or are we all united in hoping that they lose?

[Dread Pirate Robert]

If Alabama got blown out, that would increase controversy about the selection, and would be another step towards an expanded play off.

 

Another reason to hope Georgia stomps on Alabama, aside from wanting to see Saban's head explode.

[liquidcrystalcompass]

I really don't care who wins to be honest.

[Fordgalaxy]

If Alabama got blown out, that would increase controversy about the selection, and would be another step towards an expanded play off.

 

Another reason to hope Georgia stomps on Alabama, aside from wanting to see Saban's head explode.

 

Sure, it's nicer to win, but at the end of the night, he's going home as the highest paid public official in the state and the 2nd highest paid college football coach in the country, making almost $7,000,000 a year.

[goose]

If Alabama got blown out, that would increase controversy about the selection, and would be another step towards an expanded play off.

 

 

Go Dawgs.

[Dread Pirate Robert]

I really don't care who wins to be honest.

 

Dude, what's wrong with you? You can't be neutral when it comes to Saban or Bama winning or losing ;)

[Blue Barchetta]

GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO DAWGS! SIC'EM! WOOF! WOOF! WOOF!

[Blue Barchetta]

For what it's worth, Alabama would mop the floor with UCF. I can see a case for UCF getting in but I'd personally give it to Bama. And if Alabama wins the whole thing it will bring us one step closer to a playoff field of eight. And I"m for that.

So we can bitch about teams #9 and #10.

 

:dweez: :dweez: :dweez:

That thought crossed my mind when I posted. Hey at nine or ten, you have less to bitch about. I'd take the conference champions from each of the power five and have three at large.

I think that would work and would be an improvement.

They won't do it....makes too much sense.

[Fordgalaxy]

For what it's worth, Alabama would mop the floor with UCF. I can see a case for UCF getting in but I'd personally give it to Bama. And if Alabama wins the whole thing it will bring us one step closer to a playoff field of eight. And I"m for that.

So we can bitch about teams #9 and #10.

 

:dweez: :dweez: :dweez:

That thought crossed my mind when I posted. Hey at nine or ten, you have less to bitch about. I'd take the conference champions from each of the power five and have three at large.

I think that would work and would be an improvement.

They won't do it....makes too much sense.

If someone would show them how much money they stood to make, they'd be all over it.

[Blue Barchetta]

For what it's worth, Alabama would mop the floor with UCF. I can see a case for UCF getting in but I'd personally give it to Bama. And if Alabama wins the whole thing it will bring us one step closer to a playoff field of eight. And I"m for that.

So we can bitch about teams #9 and #10.

 

:dweez: :dweez: :dweez:

That thought crossed my mind when I posted. Hey at nine or ten, you have less to bitch about. I'd take the conference champions from each of the power five and have three at large.

I think that would work and would be an improvement.

They won't do it....makes too much sense.

If someone would show them how much money they stood to make, they'd be all over it.

The excuse I've heard them use is, "It would diminish the regular season."

Huh? How? You still have to win your conference to be assured of a spot. Otherwise, you have to make a good enough impression on the committee to be picked. If anything, it would enhance the regular season.