Bama Game Thread: CFP Selection Show details (12p-4p EST ESPN): Times, where to watch; Selection show 'game thread'
- Thread starter BamaNation
- Start date
This is hilarious...why do PSU get a pass every year...
but, Vandy started with the ball, took several minutes to score a TD, then we get the ball and promptly throw a pick six. We down 14 and the first drink wasn't even gone yet.
This is a good point. They should have one selection show after the championship games, but they won't because ESPN is beholden to the almighty dollar.
These performances happen all over the sport every week. As fans, we only notice when they happen against our teams. Yes, he had one of those days. But, as it turned out, he is actually very good at running that type of offense. Alabama was just totally unprepared.
I think, somewhere in a parallel universe, that should be construed as a compliment to BAMA.
The worst part is you have a bunch of morons that no nothing about football - (why was an ex woman's basketball player in there) - who are going, oh, look how great SMU played in the second half. Apparently they didn't realize they were watching two mediocre teams playing each other. So, bad vs bad looks like a good game. If SMU had been playing Texas or Georgia there would have been no comeback. First, Clemson clemsoned, then SMU clemsoned right back. It almost looked rigged.
They are gaslighting us.
oh yeah, and all the smack talking I heard we were doing didn't help.
But it was a good loss!
I'm literally not even upset, as the CFP invitational has already shown it's not about crowning the best team as NC. It's a joke, which sadly is what much of CFB is quickly becoming.
Yes! I hate that part of this. Nothing more than contrived TV drama.
Yeah everyone on X is going on about losing to two 6 loss teams. Nuance is never going to work with those people.But it was a good loss!
I'm literally not even upset, as the CFP invitational has already shown it's not about crowning the best team as NC. It's a joke, which sadly is what much of CFB is quickly becoming.
There was a scout on there that was talking about the reason SEC coaches are going to be so upset is that there are at least 8 teams in the SEC that would beat SMU based upon NFL talent alone. There was a response to that along the lines of, well then we are just letting the NFL draft dictate the playoff rankings. No… it literally means the SEC teams are playing an exponentially more difficult schedule than the likes of SMU.
There is no winning this debate when people are only interested in equality of results and only equality as defined by them. And when you are the hegemonic power, well good luck getting sympathy or a hint of fairness.
As I said earlier, Sankey made a deal with the devil. He expected they would be satisfied with a seat at the table. In fact now they demand equal or better treatment.
All that said, yes Alabama has problems. We need to be prepping for 2025 yesterday.
I was thinking this as well.
The committee starts to paint itself into multiple corners as soon as the first rankings of the season come out. A big chunk of the data points that they are so big on take place after the first rankings in November.
You nailed it; this is why they do it. It is hard to respect the process when they are going for TV and media ratings.
I’m just going to say this because I’m a nfl fan too. But when you are a bubble team it never fails that a FG in a random game will knock you out of the playoffs. I’ve seen my Steelers get knocked out on the last week countless years after playing a brutal AFC North schedule just because someone in the AFC West hits a FG on the last week of the season.
The thing is, living on the bubble is rarely a fair situation, and often it can be cruel in how the bubble gets popped. So it’s best not to do things yourself to find yourself on the bubble to begin with. Namely… don’t lose to people you have no business losing to.
The thing is, living on the bubble is rarely a fair situation, and often it can be cruel in how the bubble gets popped. So it’s best not to do things yourself to find yourself on the bubble to begin with. Namely… don’t lose to people you have no business losing to.
The whole idea of the playoff was to increase the odds of someone not in the SEC winning a title, letting four in is not the way to do that.
B10 gets 4 in....2 home games and 1 100 mile in State journey....nope, not rigged at all!
Haven’t read this whole thread to know if this has already been discussed, but based upon the “work” of this committee, it’s safe to assume that the oft- rumored SEC/B10 separate playoff will come to pass sooner rather than later. This year it was the SEC getting hosed - next year it may be the B10. Why let the SMUs, AZ states, Boises and Clemsons pick the pockets of much stronger teams from more competitive conferences?
The more I think about this, the more I come back to South Carolina.
Even if you were to disqualify Alabama because of the quality of their losses, what about SC then? They also have an SoS in the teens, their losses were all to good teams, and they actually beat Clemson.
Head to head against SMU there's no real comparison, vastly better schedule, better wins, better losses. The only thing SMU has is a better record, but only due to an incredibly soft schedule which is easily demonstrated.
The committee is exactly what I've been saying they are. They chose solely based on what they wanted to have happen. They put their thumb on the scale, they broke with the polls, the broke with the computers, they chose inclusion over resume. The playoffs are now also exactly what I said they would become from the very start. This is about participation trophies, as the committee itself said when they cited SMU's conference record as justification for keeping them in.
It doesn't matter if your conference is crap (unless you're named Army), win those games and you get to go to the playoff. Quality of opponents does not matter.
Even if you were to disqualify Alabama because of the quality of their losses, what about SC then? They also have an SoS in the teens, their losses were all to good teams, and they actually beat Clemson.
Head to head against SMU there's no real comparison, vastly better schedule, better wins, better losses. The only thing SMU has is a better record, but only due to an incredibly soft schedule which is easily demonstrated.
The committee is exactly what I've been saying they are. They chose solely based on what they wanted to have happen. They put their thumb on the scale, they broke with the polls, the broke with the computers, they chose inclusion over resume. The playoffs are now also exactly what I said they would become from the very start. This is about participation trophies, as the committee itself said when they cited SMU's conference record as justification for keeping them in.
It doesn't matter if your conference is crap (unless you're named Army), win those games and you get to go to the playoff. Quality of opponents does not matter.
