Bama getting no respect

[Cruloc]

Excuses.

You wanna go down this rabbit hole? Bama has a more talented roster and had plenty of time to develop Milroe, but Saban chose not to (as he always does) and in some cases couldn't put Milroe in more games last year because Saban had chosen poor coordinators - and stuck with Gol*ing long after it was obvious he was a liability.

This Bama squad is among the most talented in all of CFB history - if you cannot have them ready to breathe fire, that's 100% on the coaches.

I don't care about excuses and what-ifs. I care about the highest paid coach in CFB - widely recognized as the GOAT - who hasn't had Bama playing to their own standard for several years now.

Am I asking for Saban's job? Heck no. But he doesn't get a pass for doing a poor job just because he's the GOAT. People are scrambling to blame anyone and everyone under the sun but few seem to be looking at Saban, despite the fact it's 100% on his shoulders.

It is what it is.

This is where I am. We haven't looked like Bama in a few years. Keeping Pete so long kept the defense regressing more each year. It's going to take more than 1 year to fix that.

Having BoB calling plays for Bryce cost us as well.

Those two coordinators together cost us. Yeah yeah, if Jamison doesn't get hurt maybe we repeat in 21 and aren't having this discussion. We'll, he got hurt and we had no answer.

Saban keeping Pete for as long as he did hurt this defense....how long was Pete calling plays, 5 years? His mentality has to be purged from the roster.

Milroe wasn't developed behind Bryce. Didn't that fall on BoB? We saw what kind of game BoB called for us when Bryce was hurt and couldn't go against A&M....BoB had nothing.

Our OL development has been off for a couple of years as well, that seems to slowly be getting fixed now.

 

[KrAzY3]

Meh.

I'm not.

And apparently neither is the committee.

But they're willing to give a pass to Texas, Oregon and Ohio State.

That's where I have the issue. The argument is not that Alabama should be ahead of undefeated teams. The argument I'm countering is that Alabama is the worst one loss team.

Oregon lost as well, but who exactly did they beat?

 

[Cruloc]

Meh.

I'm not.

And apparently neither is the committee.

I remember when this playoff started, we were told by that particular committee that they'd take into account things like injuries and such. This committee however has different motives and thinking.

 

[Cruloc]

But they're willing to give a pass to Texas, Oregon and Ohio State.

That's where I have the issue. The argument is not that Alabama should be ahead of undefeated teams. The argument being made is that Alabama is the worst one loss team.

Oregon lost as well, but who exactly did they beat?

Oregon lost by 3 on the road to #3

Bama lost by 10 at home to #7

Those are each teams ceilings, with Oregon having a chance to get revenge for the loss.

Plus, this committee apparently loves margin of victory and game control more than who you've beaten. They are just looking at scores on ESPNs scoreboard.

 

[Tideflyer]

I wouldn't get my hopes up if I were you about them moving us past either Texas or Oregon (if they beat Wash).

If we beat UGA ALL of the FPI and Eff metrics and Computers would probably favor us over either or both but this committee values 'Eye Test' and Head to Head more than anything.

I mean honestly they are just a 3rd Human Poll at this point and don't seem to be putting much weight if any in the Data part of the resumes.

Plus they LOVE the PAC so Oregon could beat Wash by 1 point and to them would be as good or better than us beating UGA by 10+ points.

Texas could also win over Mullet by 1 point and stay ahead because they've made it 100% clear we will not jump them unless they lose.

We won't jump FSU either if they are 13-0

Either Texas or FSU loses or we are kept out even if we beat UGA by 40 points.

I`m in the camp that believes that your very last statement is correct, unfortunately.

 

[crimsonaudio]

But they're willing to give a pass to Texas, Oregon and Ohio State.

That's where I have the issue. The argument is not that Alabama should be ahead of undefeated teams. The argument I'm countering is that Alabama is the worst one loss team.

Oregon lost as well, but who exactly did they beat?

You guys want to continue arguing over minutae.

I don't care. Bama lost because they weren't prepared. They've looked incredibly mortal for most of this season.

The committee didn't cause this.

 

[Cruloc]

If Oregon beats Washington by two scores or more.....

And if Texas beats Okie State by two scores or more....

And FSU loses by 1 to Louisville.....

And we beat Georgia 35-17....

Be prepared to still not get in the playoff. I just don't have any good feeling about this committee.

 

[tusks_n_raider]

I`m in the camp that believes that your very last statement is correct, unfortunately.

Yeah because the thing is what they will say is..

“Well if Alabama beat them by 40 they must not have been as good as we thought”

Me personally I wouldn’t hate the thought of missing the playoffs so badly if it weren’t for the fact that our consolation prize would be Tulane in the Peach Bowl.

I mean Gag.

At least give us the Oregon/Wash loser in the Fiesta or even tOSU in the Orange or something.

We won’t give a flip about playing Tulane… the players I mean.

I just want to beat UGA tbh and whatever happens after that so be it.

 

[KrAzY3]

You guys want to continue arguing over minutae.

That's literally what rankings are. You have a bunch of undefeated teams. You can only rank them based on small perceived differences. You have a bunch of one loss teams, you can only rank them based on those perceived differences. That is the process. The only point of contention is which tiny details matter.

Bama lost because they weren't prepared.

Not targeting you in this, because you were actually more sympathetic but I do want to point out that my position here is of the same logic that a lot of my defense of Jalen Hurts was based on. Jalen Hurts had to deal with coordinator musical chairs and such and it is disruptive, he said as much in an interview.

So, I understand the argument for just win and then you don't have to worry, but sometimes you have to deal with abnormally difficult situations and failure is not always an indictment. Hurts didn't struggle because he was a bad QB, because he didn't try, or didn't prepare (he is in fact one of the best QBs in the world). He struggled because he got dealt a bad hand.

Well, Alabama got dealt a bad hand having to try to break in new coordinators and a new QB against Texas. That is a reality. It doesn't take away the loss, but it does help explain why Alabama is better now than then. Sometimes we judge too harshly when others haven't had been given sufficient ability to prepare.

 

[Power Eye]

I’m not convinced Oregon is a definite with a win over Washington if we beat UGA. There hasn’t been any real significant shakeup at the top this season, so we don’t really know yet how this year’s committee will react to #1 losing and the bump the winning team, which will have the best one loss resume by far, will receive.

 

[crimsonaudio]

That's literally what rankings are. You have a bunch of undefeated teams. You can only rank them based on small perceived differences. You have a bunch of one loss teams, you can only rank them based on those perceived differences. That is the process. The only point of contention is which tiny details matter.

My whole point is I'm done arguing / discussing these rankings as Bama had the chance to not be in this situation and blew it.

Well, Alabama got dealt a bad hand having to try to break in new coordinators and a new QB against Texas. That is a reality. It doesn't take away the loss, but it does help explain why Alabama is better now than then. Sometimes we judge too harshly when they haven't had been given sufficient ability to prepare.

Bama wasn't dealt anything - Saban chooses the coordinators (he chose poorly with both BOB and Gol*ing, as we are all aware) and even held onto Gol*ing well after most everyone who has a basic understanding of football realized he was in over his head.

I keep bringing this up because everyone seems to be looking to point fingers or make excuses. Saban is widely recognized as the GOAT and it feels like everyone wants to give him a pass in this, as if the very decisions he made aren't what caused this.

I keep posting this because it's so absurd - this is almost surely, top to bottom, the most talented football team to ever step onto the gridiron - do they look like it? Have they looked like it for more than maybe a half of a game all season (against teams with a pulse, I don't care about MTSU or UTC)?

Rhetorical questions - I've made myself clear. If y'all want to keep talking in circles while avoiding the real reason we're here, go ahead.

 

[Cruloc]

The problem this year.....lack of upsets. Usually there are multiple upsets throughout the year. This year we haven't had that.

Georgia at Auburn
Ohio State at Notre Dame
Washington in about 5 games
Texas in 3 games
Michigan vs Maryland
FSU in 3 or more games
Us vs A&M, Auburn, Arkansas

Only upsets that have happened were Texas over us and Oklahoma over Texas.

Multiple close games all have been won by those ranked above us.

 

[Cruloc]

I’m not convinced Oregon is a definite with a win over Washington if we beat UGA. There hasn’t been any real significant shakeup at the top this season, so we don’t really know yet how this year’s committee will react to #1 losing and the bump the winning team, which will have the best one loss resume by far, will receive.

Oregon is in with a win. The Pac 12 game is a play in game.

 

[Power Eye]

Oregon is in with a win. The Pac 12 game is a play in game.

If Washington wins, then yes, but if we beat UGA and Oregon wins, then I don't believe it's merely a play in game. Again, I'm not saying it's a definite we get in with a win, but I don't think it's a foregone conclusion we don't either. The only scenario I see where we are definitely left out with a win is if Michigan, Washington, FSU and Texas all win this weekend, which is a very possible scenario.

 

[timmyj3]

My take on this is the conferences. How on earth would any committee not have the SEC champion in the playoff? I would be fine with GA, ALA, OSU, MICH right now, no matter what happens Saturday. These are your 4 best.

 

[Cruloc]

If Washington wins, then yes, but if we beat UGA and Oregon wins, then I don't believe it's merely a play in game. Again, I'm not saying it's a definite we get in with a win, but I don't think it's a foregone conclusion we don't either. The only scenario I see where we are definitely left out with a win is if Michigan, Washington, FSU and Texas all win this weekend, which is a very possible scenario.

If we beat Georgia and no other upsets happen.....Michigan, FSU, Oregon and Texas are the 4.

The committee keeps saying Oregon is the beat 1 loss team. If they avenge their loss they are in regardless of anything else happening.

If we don't beat Georgia and no other upsets happen, then Texas is the first team out.

 

[cbi1972]

My take on this is the conferences. How on earth would any committee not have the SEC champion in the playoff? I would be fine with GA, ALA, OSU, MICH right now, no matter what happens Saturday. These are your 4 best.

There are 54 pages of discussion answering this

 

[Power Eye]

If we beat Georgia and no other upsets happen.....Michigan, FSU, Oregon and Texas are the 4.

The committee keeps saying Oregon is the beat 1 loss team. If they avenge their loss they are in regardless of anything else happening.

If we don't beat Georgia and no other upsets happen, then Texas is the first team out.

I just don't think it's that simple. Again, the impact of beating the #1 team will carry a tremendous amount of weight, along with being the SEC champion. The #1 team, in any poll, has not lost this year, so we have no idea how the committee will reward that.

 

[BamaMoon]

That's literally what rankings are. You have a bunch of undefeated teams. You can only rank them based on small perceived differences. You have a bunch of one loss teams, you can only rank them based on those perceived differences. That is the process. The only point of contention is which tiny details matter.

Not targeting you in this, because you were actually more sympathetic but I do want to point out that my position here is of the same logic that a lot of my defense of Jalen Hurts was based on. Jalen Hurts had to deal with coordinator musical chairs and such and it is disruptive, he said as much in an interview.

So, I understand the argument for just win and then you don't have to worry, but sometimes you have to deal with abnormally difficult situations and failure is not always an indictment. Hurts didn't struggle because he was a bad QB, because he didn't try, or didn't prepare (he is in fact one of the best QBs in the world). He struggled because he got dealt a bad hand.

Well, Alabama got dealt a bad hand having to try to break in new coordinators and a new QB against Texas. That is a reality. It doesn't take away the loss, but it does help explain why Alabama is better now than then. Sometimes we judge too harshly when others haven't had been given sufficient ability to prepare.

Whew...how does it all go back to your position on Jalen Hurts??? I just stopped reading right there, honestly.

 

[timmyj3]

There are 54 pages of discussion answering this

Hey just stating my thoughts, sorry.