Georgia's issue was that while they are objectively one of the 4 best they don't have an objectively top 4 resume and played a good but not great SoS. Combine that with no conference title and they weren't going to get in in a year like this.

Alabama (12-1), #4 SOR, #5 SOS, SEC Champ
Texas (12-1), #5 SOR, #13 SOS, BXII Champ

Ohio State (11-1), #6 SOR, #7 SOS, no champ
Georgia (12-1), #7 SOR, #37 SOS, no champ

This post was edited on 12/7/23 at 10:18 am

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by ClassicCityAlum

Palm Beach, FL

Member since Mar 2019

883 posts

Posted on 12/7/23 at 10:21 am to SummerOfGeorge

quote:
Georgia's issue was that while they are objectively one of the 4 best they don't have an objectively top 4 resume and played a good but not great SoS. Combine that with no conference title and they weren't going to get in in a year like this.

A fair counterargument, but ultimately unpersuasive. Strength of schedule is a delusive ranking that can punish teams playing in the best conferences.

The fact that Wake Forest may be ranked above Arkansas or Arizona State may be ranked above Vanderbilt skews the "strength of schedule" ranking, but is ultimately irrelevant. Would Georgia not have beaten Wake or ASU in the same way that it beat Arkansas and Vanderbilt?

Wins over ranked teams is a more appropriate evaluation of relative teams' strength. Georgia enjoyed dominating wins over #21 Tennessee, #11 Ole Miss, #9 Missouri, and lost by a FG to #4 Alabama. That is a more impressive resume than - as evidenced above - any team currently in the playoffs other than Alabama.

The fact that #8 Alabama was only granted a spot (and thus moved up four ranks) due to its victory over the #1 team proves that Georgia is indeed a playoff team. How else can one justify Alabama's rank advancement?

This post was edited on 12/7/23 at 10:25 am

2 ...

Report Post

SEC Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board