Toggle sidebar

The FOX meltdown from the CFP selection

KrAzY3 said:
The really stupid part is that often tie breakers decide who play for a conference champion. Alabama are co-SEC West champions, they just lost on the tie breaker. So when you go down the road of making conference championships super important, you are actually putting everyone on a stupid tie breaker. A TIE BREAKER!
Click to expand...

Wanted to make another comment, but first say while you may be technically correct about co-west champs - I won’t find myself making that claim.. but I think more to your point, it should be considered that there were three teams that finished with only 1 conference loss

Agree with many comments on here, I am completely on board with conference champions do not necessarily mean the best teams or most deserving play in games. There are going to be years with ugly losses (this year osu, last year psu)...

there are going to be years with ooc losses that leave teams winning divisions or conferences, heard on the radio today some example (if I heard correctly it involved ucla and 1983 -looked it up, maybe I missed the whole point, but they were 6-1 in conference and 7-4 overall with 3 ooc losses)

...2001 lsu...2012 wisconsin...2003 ksu...1996 texas...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Never understood why people watch or listen to Skip, all he does is troll for ratings.

The conference champion argument is silly. I understand going to it for a tie breaker. Also if you have to win your conference does that mean ND could never got to playoff?
 
carder24 said:
Wanted to make another comment, but first say while you may be technically correct about co-west champs - I won’t find myself making that claim..
Click to expand...
It's not a claim. It was a tie. Alabama is in fact co-champs of the division.

"1. Two-Team Tie: In the event two teams are tied for a division title, the following procedure will be used in the following order:
A. Head-to-head competition between the two tied teams;"

"All teams involved in the tie breaker are considered Co-Divisional Champions, and the winner of the tie-breaker is the division's representative to the championship game"

I could find the official source for the tie breaker rule, but not the one for the second quote. However, it is officially considered a tie, that much is clear. That's one of my arguments all along really, that it's so stupid to let tie breakers be a determining factor in who gets into a playoff. That's now how that should ever work, choose based on merit, not a tie breaker!
 
To Krazy's point - I was talking to a friend the other day, before the conference championship games. He (Mizzou alumnus) said that Alabama would not make the playoffs because they did not even win their division. I responded that they did win their division - that the SEC considers Alabama and Auburn to be co-champions of their division. The tie breaker is only used in deciding who gets to go to the SECCG.

So Alabama is co-champion of the SECw this year.
 
B1GTide said:
To Krazy's point - I was talking to a friend the other day, before the conference championship games. He (Mizzou alumnus) said that Alabama would not make the playoffs because they did not even win their division. I responded that they did win their division - that the SEC considers Alabama and Auburn to be co-champions of their division. The tie breaker is only used in deciding who gets to go to the SECCG.

So Alabama is co-champion of the SECw this year.
Click to expand...

I’m sure the barn will put up a banner somewhere on the pasture to help fill in some space with their accomplishments and conveniently drop the “Co” part!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
B1GTide said:
To Krazy's point - I was talking to a friend the other day, before the conference championship games. He (Mizzou alumnus) said that Alabama would not make the playoffs because they did not even win their division. I responded that they did win their division - that the SEC considers Alabama and Auburn to be co-champions of their division. The tie breaker is only used in deciding who gets to go to the SECCG.
Click to expand...

Yes we are technically but that is a thing only aubs claim, if we do not win SEC we just leave that dog sleeping.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RT27 said:
B1GTide said:
To Krazy's point - I was talking to a friend the other day, before the conference championship games. He (Mizzou alumnus) said that Alabama would not make the playoffs because they did not even win their division. I responded that they did win their division - that the SEC considers Alabama and Auburn to be co-champions of their division. The tie breaker is only used in deciding who gets to go to the SECCG.
Click to expand...

Yes we are technically but that is a thing only aubs claim, if we do not win SEC we just leave that dog sleeping.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RT27 said:
Yes we are technically but that is a thing only aubs claim, if we do not win SEC we just leave that dog sleeping.
Click to expand...
It is not a technicality - it is real. But it doesn't really matter anymore since the committee has voted and you are in.

But I agree that it should not be used in conversations with Auburn fans. They beat you head to head. They get to carry that banner for a year. Win 2 more games and you get to carry a better banner.
 
RT27 said:
Yes we are technically but that is a thing only aubs claim, if we do not win SEC we just leave that dog sleeping.
Click to expand...
The reason I belabored the point, was because if you are going to use it in terms of an argument regarding who gets into a playoff, you have to stick with the facts. I'm not celebrating it or anything, but once you get into the "didn't even win the division" stuff, that's just not accurate. I think it also underscores an important point about tie breakers. Look, Alabama lost to Auburn and none of us are complaining Alabama didn't get to go to the SECG. But here's the thing, Auburn lost to LSU. That counts to, and in fact if LSU hasn't lost to Miss. State, it would have triggered a three way tie. It just never should have been given additional value beyond Auburn and Georgia playing one more quality opponent.
 
Last edited:
What's considered a bad word in the states may not be considered a bad word here so careful now RWBTide.

Having watched the links you guys don't half tolerate some amount of 'nonsense' being spouted on TV. [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 
RWBTide said:
What's considered a bad word in the states may not be considered a bad word here so careful now RWBTide.

Having watched the links you guys don't half tolerate some amount of 'nonsense' being spouted on TV. [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Nothing bad there, O great Scotsman!!!
 
Yeah, 'nonsense' wasn't my live reaction word of choice :)

I scan other teams boards to see what their perceptions are and tbh I think the networks could produce far more informative and accurate discussions on these type of events if they contacted the more reasonable posters on various fan boards and asked them to participate.

These guys are just shouting heads trying to remain relevant by screaming controversial opinions.
 
BamaMan09 said:
And, as to be expected, it's the usual suspects when it comes to whining about Alabama. Joel Klatt, Skip Bayless, Mack Brown, Joey Galloway, Danny Kannell. Do these fools not have a life outside of trashing our program on a regular basis ?
Click to expand...

Can't believe you left out Robert Smith. He might deserve to be at the top of the list.
 
B1GTide said:
It is not a technicality - it is real. But it doesn't really matter anymore since the committee has voted and you are in.

But I agree that it should not be used in conversations with Auburn fans. They beat you head to head. They get to carry that banner for a year. Win 2 more games and you get to carry a better banner.
Click to expand...

That's fine as we don't hang a banner for SEC west co-champion. That's something another school in the state would do..
 
KrAzY3 said:
The reason I belabored the point, was because if you are going to use it in terms of an argument regarding who gets into a playoff, you have to stick with the facts. I'm not celebrating it or anything, but once you get into the "didn't even win the division" stuff, that's just not accurate. I think it also underscores an important point about tie breakers. Look, Alabama lost to Auburn and none of us are complaining Alabama didn't get to go to the SECG. But here's the thing, Auburn lost to LSU. That counts to, and in fact if LSU hasn't lost to Miss. State, it would have triggered a three way tie. It just never should have been given additional value beyond Auburn and Georgia playing one more quality opponent.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I understand your point and agree in the context of playoff evaluation
 
B1GTide said:
It is not a technicality - it is real. But it doesn't really matter anymore since the committee has voted and you are in.

But I agree that it should not be used in conversations with Auburn fans. They beat you head to head. They get to carry that banner for a year. Win 2 more games and you get to carry a better banner.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY few yrs ago aubs kept singing cowest or west champs, SEC champs matter, not division. And co champ sounds so tacky to me. They can hang west or co west banner, UGA is SEC Champ. Now all we need is to win the next 2 games and add to the trophy case, not the banner wall LOL
 
CrimsonNagus said:
Curious, how is a 3 way tie determined, who would have gone to the SECCG?
Click to expand...

The head coach from all 3 would have a thumb wrestling match LOL Honestly not sure how that would unfold, guess head to head but that would be wild in a 3 way tie. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm wonder what would have happened. Do not quote me but in a 3 way with head to head not able to decide, I think highest ranked team gets nod. I THINK not sure. Think I heard this once when it almost happened.
 
RT27 said:
The head coach from all 3 would have a thumb wrestling match LOL Honestly not sure how that would unfold, guess head to head but that would be wild in a 3 way tie. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm wonder what would have happened. Do not quote me but in a 3 way with head to head not able to decide, I think highest ranked team gets nod. I THINK not sure. Think I heard this once when it almost happened.
Click to expand...

Edit: found it

http://www.secsports.com/article/11145479/sec-divisional-tie-breaker


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back