Started By
Message
re: Well... you have to win the ones you're supposed to win
Posted on 12/7/24 at 11:24 pm to bamabonners
Posted on 12/7/24 at 11:24 pm to bamabonners
This the coaching staff did not have the team prepared for multiple games this year. This is why we’re out out the playoff. We truly blew a golden opportunity. Because of this, CKD gets a failing grade for year one. He better get to the playoff next year.
0
Posted on 12/8/24 at 12:22 am to Bamafan4evr12
quote:
Heck just beat OU and Bama is in the SECCG today and playing for a bye
It's true. If we don't get in, that game should haunt Milroe for the rest of his days.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 6:50 am to bamabonners
This is why I'm not going to bitch and moan if we get left out. The 12 team playoff is bullshite anyway. The bottom half of if have zero business getting a shot at a NC, Bama included.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 6:51 am to imjustafatkid
OU was an SECCG play in, and we failed miserably. Maybe this will motivate next year's team to not lose by 21 points to a double-digit underdog.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 6:53 am to UltimaParadox
Not me, next year will be the real rebuilding year on offense. 3rd year is where we kick teams in their teeth.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:03 am to Chancellor
quote:
, for frick’s sake.
We’re IN. No way in hell the Committee puts SMU in with the 75th SOS and not one fricking win in the top 25.
Why not?
Prior to last night's game, the committee clearly valued SMU over Alabama to the tune of 3 spots, with both teams having played the same number of games.
Other than a 13th data point that Alabama doesn't have. What's changed?
As it stands now, they believe SMU is three slots better than Alabama with the same number of games played. Maybe a 13th data point (that Alabama doesn't have) and a close loss in a championship game changes that, but probably not.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:10 am to Pandy Fackler
quote:
Prior to last night's game, the committee clearly valued SMU over Alabama to the tune of 3 spots, with both teams having played the same number of games.
Prior to last week, the Committee clearly valued Miami over us and then dropped them behind us after a loss to 9-3 Syracuse. Why? Because they haven't beaten anyone worth a shite on their schedule.
This post was edited on 12/8/24 at 7:11 am
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:13 am to Pandy Fackler
quote:
Prior to last night's game, the committee clearly valued SMU over Alabama to the tune of 3 spots, with both teams having played the same number of games.
Prior to last night, the committee had clearly overranked SMU because of the inflated record.
We cant really complain too much because we lost 3 games and blew controlling our own fate. But we did play a tough schedule and had good wins (including the #2 ranked team).
If the committee has any integrity they’d ignore the fact that they overinflated SMU’s ranking in the first place, ignore the media and internet trolls who are clearly just hating on Bama, and take an objective look at the resume for each team (and which team do they actually think is better).
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:15 am to Pandy Fackler
quote:
Other than a 13th data point that Alabama doesn't have. What's changed?
According to Joel Klatt, what’s changed is that now SMU and Alabama’s resumes will be compared head to head. That hasn’t happened yet. So we’ll all see what the committee values the most.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:20 am to angryslugs
quote:
According to Joel Klatt, what’s changed is that now SMU and Alabama’s resumes will be compared head to head. That hasn’t happened yet. So we’ll all see what the committee values the most.
Then I like our chances of you examine the following.
Comparison
This post was edited on 12/8/24 at 7:21 am
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:27 am to RollTide1987
I think the committee will put SMU in because they want to spread the wealth so to speak. Going with a committee to determine the teams in the playoffs from the start was a mistake. The BCS system should be used. People are starting to pick up on that. I think the BCS system puts Bama in. Clemson is only there because they won the conference. Neither Clemson or SMU should be in the play offs. If the committee recognizes this they will dismiss SMU. Six of the top 13 teams did not beat any one in that group. That includes Texas and Penn State. Alabama does not necessarily deserve to be in either.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:27 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Prior to last week, the Committee clearly valued Miami over us and then dropped them behind us after a loss to 9-3 Syracuse. Why? Because they haven't beaten anyone worth a shite on their schedule.
Here's my entire quote man. The parts that matter are emboldened.
"Why not?
Prior to last night's game, the committee clearly valued SMU over Alabama to the tune of 3 spots, with both teams having played the same number of games.
Other than a 13th data point that Alabama doesn't have. What's changed?
As it stands now, they believe SMU is three slots better than Alabama with the same number of games played. Maybe a 13th data point (that Alabama doesn't have) and a close loss in a championship game changes that, but probably not".
Right or wrong. The committee believes SMU is three spots better than Alabama with the same number of games. Why would a close loss in a 13th, championship level game change that? A 13th data point Alabama doesn't have.
SMU's SOS didn't matter to the committee before last night's loss, but maybe for some inexplicable reason it'll matter now. We'll soon know.
This post was edited on 12/8/24 at 7:33 am
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:38 am to Teague
This, It will not be a damnable injustice if we’re left out.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:40 am to bamabonners
I’m over it. The horrible loss at OU and the complete I don’t give a damn attitude by some of the players did it for me. I’ve been a Bama fan for sixty plus years and worked at the University, I’m not sure what the future is for our Crimson Tide. Love the history and the university or get the hell out is where I’m at.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:53 am to dalefla
quote:
Maybe this will motivate next year's team to not lose by 21 points to a double-digit underdog.
Stop making the arguments of loser fans of other teams. No one making decisions views that as a 21-point loss. We were obviously screwed, inexplicably, out of a touchdown. We likely still would have lost, but that was a huge momentum deflator and guaranteed a OU win. That call changed the game.
This post was edited on 12/8/24 at 7:54 am
Posted on 12/8/24 at 7:59 am to imjustafatkid
Did the refs allow OU to run for over 200 yards in the first half?
Posted on 12/8/24 at 8:13 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
No one making decisions views that as a 21-point loss.
Well, they and you are in denial. The record books will forever show a 21 pt loss.
FWIW, I'm OK with where we are. You don't lose a 17-year GOAT HC and not take a step or two backwards.
My point remains, if an SECCG play in game can't motivate a team, I don't know what will.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 8:18 am to dalefla
quote:
My point remains, if an SECCG play in game can't motivate a team, I don't know what will.
We agree there.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 8:20 am to remaster916
quote:
Did the refs allow OU to run for over 200 yards in the first half?
That was another game where the defense played good enough for us to win.
Our offense should be able to score more than. 24 against anyone.
This post was edited on 12/8/24 at 8:21 am
Posted on 12/8/24 at 8:22 am to 12
quote:
embarrassed at OU
Understatement
Worst game I've seen Bama play in 25 years.
This post was edited on 12/8/24 at 8:23 am
Page 2 of 3
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News