Started By
Message
re: Joel Klatt says Bama is in
Posted on 12/6/24 at 2:55 pm to RollTide33
Posted on 12/6/24 at 2:55 pm to RollTide33
quote:
So them punishing UGA for losing a conference championship game is proof they won't punish SMU for doing the same thing? Sound logic.
I brought up the UGA game partly because I'm surprised y'all didn't use it after the first reply. 5 deserving conference champions last year, 2 of which you would have had to boot. Not the case this year. It's not hard to justify keeping a 9-3 team out of a 12-team playoff as it is 2 one-loss or undefeated conference champions.
0
Posted on 12/6/24 at 2:59 pm to BigBird09
quote:
Please show me where a team was removed from the playoffs after a losing a conference championship game in recent weeks. I knew Alabama would be in that 11th spot because of their resume. The committee hasn't done anything surprising to this point. This would be a surprise
The committee shitted all over your feelings of "optics" when it didn't leave us out and ranked us above Miami, Ole Miss and SC when people like you were saying we would and should be out.
The committee head already admitted SMU could drop out and they have kept SMU so high to open the door for just that.
Nothing you said is based off of the facts or what the committee has done. It is purely based on how you feel which isn't our reality it is only yours
Posted on 12/6/24 at 3:17 pm to 1BamaRTR
quote:
UGA like SMU was in the playoffs before they had to play in the CCG. UGA was essentially punished for losing it but SMU won’t be? In 2017 the same thing happened to AU. There’s precedent for losing your CCG and being booted from the playoffs.
The UGA situation isn't remotely comparable. See my prior reply. As for 2017 Auburn, they already had 2 losses before the championship game. Justifying putting a 1-loss team in over a 2-loss team from the same conference is more than reasonable. Not to mention the catastrophic result of that 3rd loss from Auburn only made it easier. Not to mention, these were situations in 4-team playoffs with deserving alternatives.
I'm not saying it's not possible, but some of y'all acting like it's a foregone conclusion are really putting a lot of faith in the committee for fans of a 9-3 team.
quote:
Don’t worry you will be. If anything this all seems like your anxiety over this trying to convince you otherwise
I have zero anxiety over this, because I don't think we have deserved a shot. Like I've previously said, I knew we'd be in over Miami (and all the other teams).
Posted on 12/6/24 at 3:22 pm to YStar
quote:
The committee shitted all over your feelings of "optics" when it didn't leave us out and ranked us above Miami, Ole Miss and SC when people like you were saying we would and should be out.
YStar, you insult others constantly for "unintelligent" posts while ironically posting some of the dumbest shite on this board. Read the damn quote in your post.
quote:
Please show me where a team was removed from the playoffs after a losing a conference championship game in recent weeks. I knew Alabama would be in that 11th spot because of their resume. The committee hasn't done anything surprising to this point. This would be a surprise
I bolded it for you, so you could more easily read through it a few times.
Posted on 12/6/24 at 3:59 pm to Lieutenant Dan
His projected rankings after CCG weekend:
Uga and UTx would be pissed for the triple match before the CG
Uga and UTx would be pissed for the triple match before the CG
This post was edited on 12/6/24 at 4:00 pm
Posted on 12/6/24 at 4:12 pm to Che Boludo
That Clemson and Alabama bracket is wildly easy outside compared to the 1 and 2 seed brackets
Posted on 12/6/24 at 4:16 pm to UhOhOreo
quote:
That Clemson and Alabama bracket is wildly easy outside compared to the 1 and 2 seed brackets
Clemson route is absolutely the easiest.
Playing tOSU in a late DEC game in the Shoe isn't a gimmee for anyone, though
But, yes, 1 and 2 get screwed in that one.
It's why the conference autobid idea sucks.
Rank the top 12 and go.
Posted on 12/6/24 at 4:24 pm to BigBird09
"People like you"
Do you know what that means?
The best part of your retort is you dared not actually address the facts; your feelings guide this wayward perspective you have.. not the facts.
You ignore the facts and continue to bring up how you feel when multiple people have proven you wrong.
1. The committee in the last has left out or dropped the loser of a conference (UGA last year)
2. The committee chairman has already admitted SMU could be dropped out if they lose this game
3. The committee chairman also admitted those who have made the playoffs and are not playing as of that rankings release won't see their status loss
4. That means he admitted SMU is the only one who can lose their spot.
5. We have evidence of how they value SOS. They dropped a 2-loss Miami behind a 3-loss Alabama
6. We have evidence of how they valued Alabama. They defended Alabama strongly by stating our SOS, wins against Top25, wins against +.500 and wins against UGA.
7. We know they don't value SMU because they only moved SMU up to the top 10 due to teams losing. They still have them on the outside and have been critical of their 75th ranked SOS
There are more but I'm tired of us having to repeat ourselves.
These are facts. This is why we're in. Now respond but spare me how you feel and your opinions. Give us facts which support what you believe or be quiet.
Do you know what that means?
The best part of your retort is you dared not actually address the facts; your feelings guide this wayward perspective you have.. not the facts.
You ignore the facts and continue to bring up how you feel when multiple people have proven you wrong.
1. The committee in the last has left out or dropped the loser of a conference (UGA last year)
2. The committee chairman has already admitted SMU could be dropped out if they lose this game
3. The committee chairman also admitted those who have made the playoffs and are not playing as of that rankings release won't see their status loss
4. That means he admitted SMU is the only one who can lose their spot.
5. We have evidence of how they value SOS. They dropped a 2-loss Miami behind a 3-loss Alabama
6. We have evidence of how they valued Alabama. They defended Alabama strongly by stating our SOS, wins against Top25, wins against +.500 and wins against UGA.
7. We know they don't value SMU because they only moved SMU up to the top 10 due to teams losing. They still have them on the outside and have been critical of their 75th ranked SOS
There are more but I'm tired of us having to repeat ourselves.
These are facts. This is why we're in. Now respond but spare me how you feel and your opinions. Give us facts which support what you believe or be quiet.
Posted on 12/6/24 at 7:34 pm to Che Boludo
We’d get boatraced in Columbus. Their defense is too good for us to move the ball.
Posted on 12/6/24 at 10:10 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
In a few years we will be at 16 anyways
Posted on 12/7/24 at 7:47 am to Lieutenant Dan
I thought the part where he actually discussed sitting in on a mock vote was interesting. They break the teams up into pods of 4 for their deep dive. He said SMU is at 8 with 1 loss and Bama at 11 with 3.
And, if SMU loses, it may be the first time SMU and Bama are paired together in a pod for comparison in depth. Just as Miami and Bama likely were compared in the same pod last week.
If that's true, one has to agree with his logic, as Miami had a better 2 loss resume than a potential 2 loss SMU will have.
And, if SMU loses, it may be the first time SMU and Bama are paired together in a pod for comparison in depth. Just as Miami and Bama likely were compared in the same pod last week.
If that's true, one has to agree with his logic, as Miami had a better 2 loss resume than a potential 2 loss SMU will have.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 8:22 am to YStar
Yeah the more I think about it, the more it appears SMU has to win to get in
Having lost to the only two ranked teams you’ve played, and neither of them being top15 going into today is going to lay the groundwork for committee to keep bama in
Having lost to the only two ranked teams you’ve played, and neither of them being top15 going into today is going to lay the groundwork for committee to keep bama in
Posted on 12/7/24 at 8:52 am to HighTide_ATL
It’s easier to sleep on SMU winning but I’m confident that Alabama is in the field. SMU’s schedule is just absolutely trash.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 9:26 am to UltimaParadox
quote:
If SMU gets dropped below Alabama if they lose on Saturday, then the playoff format will change very soon.
Why? Georgia lost a championship game last year and dropped out
USC dropped one the year before that and dropped out in favor of an Ohio state team that didn’t play. Championship game losers have dropped out of the pool nearly every season of the playoffs. Why in the hell are we acting like they don’t matter now? They’ve always mattered, and Manuel alluded to that on gameday this morning.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 10:32 am to Che Boludo
I don’t see PSU dropping behind UGA unless they get throttled
Posted on 12/7/24 at 10:44 am to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
We’d get boatraced in Columbus. Their defense is too good for us to move the ball.
I don’t know about boat raced. Their offense has issues and matches well (for Bama) to our defense. But yes our offense would have issues against their defense. Our OL would probably struggle mightily and I doubt they’d be as stupid enough as UGA and LSU to let Milroe get those outside runs. They’d take away the QB run and force him to throw the ball. Probably a low scoring game
Posted on 12/7/24 at 1:17 pm to Lieutenant Dan
Posted on 12/7/24 at 2:41 pm to 11and18gggchamp
quote:
What's funny is how they evaluate Miami and SMU and all that debate, they totally don't even mention Indiana. They have zero top 25 wins with a schedule almost as weak as SMU.
The difference is that Indiana will have no more than one loss. The question at hand involves a 2 loss SMU team.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 2:42 pm to scottydoesntknow
The SEC would be fools to go to a 9 game conf schedule. There were 7 teams with 9-3 records or better, two more at 8-4. With the way the CFPC over values few losses, again, the SEC would be a fool to add another conf game.
If Alabama were to be displaced by a two loss SMU, I would advocate for a 7 game conf schedule with the 5 OOC games being 1 MAC, 1 Sunbelt, 1 AAC, 1 Conf USA, 1 FCS.
But thankfully Alabama is almost certainly in no matter the outcome of SMU/Clemson.
If Alabama were to be displaced by a two loss SMU, I would advocate for a 7 game conf schedule with the 5 OOC games being 1 MAC, 1 Sunbelt, 1 AAC, 1 Conf USA, 1 FCS.
But thankfully Alabama is almost certainly in no matter the outcome of SMU/Clemson.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 2:42 pm to UltimaParadox
(no message)
Page 3 of 4
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News