quote:

quote:
Since 2010, Alabama is 4-5 in the regular season against SEC teams that finished the season ranked.

Using Final AP Rankings

2012:

ND #4 W (doesn't count because post-season)
Georiga #5 W (doesn't count because post-season)
LSU #15 W
A&M #5 (tied w/ UGA) L
Michigan #24 W

2-1

2011:

LSU NCG #2 W (doesn't count here because post-season)
LSU #2 L
Arkansas #5 W

1-1

2010:
Auburn #1 L
LSU #8 L
Arkansas #12 W
Michigan St #14 W (doesn't count because post-season)
Mississippi St #15 W
South Carolina #22 L

2-3

So by my count, regular season record against ranked (by end of season AP poll) is 5-5.

I think it's a bit silly to ignore the quality wins against opponents in the post season. Also interesting that it starts in 2010 to ignore the 2009 season where we went 5-0 against ranked opponents.

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by arwicklu

Houston, TX

Member since Jan 2008

7627 posts

Posted on 10/1/13 at 11:44 pm to jbond

quote:
think it's a bit silly to ignore the quality wins against opponents in the post season. Also interesting that it starts in 2010 to ignore the 2009 season where we went 5-0 against ranked opponents.

Obviously the thread could be Bama destroys everyone since 2009 except in 2010. We'd only have to worry about 9-6 and JFF crap.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by wahoocs

Lafayette, LA

Member since Nov 2004

22385 posts

Posted on 10/1/13 at 11:47 pm to jbond

This thread was entertaining.

Mostly because of how many posters couldn't comprehend the OP, and it was only a sentence long.

And, here, the final post, still all fricked up over it.

S-E-C games!

And the point of the statement is merely something we all know to be true. Alabama has had worthy championship teams that have suffered losses and still won championships with the weakest schedule of all SEC contenders.

Probably good enough teams to legitimately have accomplished the same feat with a decent schedule, they just seem to get the benefit anyway.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196