What if a Top 4 Playoff had been around since AP Poll Started?
- Thread starter BamaHoHo
- Start date
Football is a funny sport in which the best team doesn't always win. They would have had more opportunities, but they would have had to win an additional game each year to wear the crown. Maybe more, maybe less.
I was astonished by the Alabama run in the 1970s. That must have been a great time to be an Alabama fan - much like right now.
If that were the case we'd likely be in the middle of moving to a larger field for the playoff. These days people (at least the masses, not necessarily when taken as individuals) aren't satisfied to leave things alone. Constant change seems to be called for in everything and no matter what is done, it can't satisfy everyone. In football it's conference alignments and playoffs. Granted, the conferences have had some change over the years, but not as rapidly or as much as over the last 2 to 3 years.
1945, 1966, and 1977 would be justified. The barn would get beat by either Miami or Nebraska in 1983. Miami would play Washington in 1991. USC would smash AU again in 2004. Colt McCoy would not have gotten hurt.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is a great example of, "I, Aaron Brenner, can't think of anything to write about so let's just make something up."
Nobody knows - seriously.
Well I DO know one thing - the 13-man committee prior to about 1967 would have been all white and all male. That's just a statement of truth about the times - but it's more true than anything Brenner just wrote.
Nobody knows - seriously.
Well I DO know one thing - the 13-man committee prior to about 1967 would have been all white and all male. That's just a statement of truth about the times - but it's more true than anything Brenner just wrote.
He mentioned how in 1993 Auburn was ranked #5 and wouldn't have gotten in despite being 11-0. I think probation had sometjing to do with that too.
A lot of points:
1) Auburn's 1993 schedule was soft touch personified. They played ZERO teams on the road with a winning record and only two (Florida and Alabama) at home.
2) Given the fact, however, they beat BOTH teams who won the division, it's impossible to say they were NOT the best team in the SEC - because based on what they did, they were.
3) As CA noted, nobody saw them play, which has a lot to do with their ranking. If they had not had the TV ban then there is no question that even if they were ineligible for post-season, they would have been ranked probably as high as number three or even two.
4) The mere fact of their ineligibility, however, would have prevented their selection. Not only because of the post-season ban but.....do you really think the TV network is going to stand aside and let a team whose games they cannot show actually play in it?
This is one of those unique years where the SEC would have been shut out because of the crimes of the team - not all that different from 2012 Ohio State.
You can stop at "ineligible". The author looks silly without mentioning that. Nothing else needs to be said.
Also true.
But wanna know why he didn't mention it?
Simply look at his resume:
Auburn beat reporter at Columbus Ledger-Enquirer
And getting educated at Wisconsin doesn't tell you much about the SEC, either.
He's an Auburn hack (now at Clemson) which explains both his non-mention of probation and his shot at Alabama.
Last edited:
I just think it's an amazing testament to our program that we would have qualified the last 5 years in a row...that speaks volumes.
TideFans.shop - 25% off Fan Favorites!
TideFans.shop - 25% off!
Get this and many more items at our TideFans.shop!
Purchases may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
Yahoo: Jalen Milroe: 'That's why I play football, just to touch people'
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
Yahoo: David Pollack Names SEC Team That Could End College Football Playoff Drought
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0