This feels like a teaser grab by her including us in that explanation, it's already known that 12 is out with the auto bids for everyone following the projected brackets. Boise game does not impact us, they lose and they're out, and big 12 are already in bracket.
Is there a scenario where we still back into the playoffs?
- Thread starter spidermayin
- Start date
I am also not fond of giving up traditional matchups for expanded SEC
A close friend of mine (a Domer) has the simplest theory: Alabama at Notre Dame is compelling TV. Therefore it will happen…
in snow .. the whole country has prayed for SEC teams to play in snow
And we'll have to win it to get to 10 wins. I don't want that streak to end like all the others.
I love watching snow games. SEC teams should be fine, unless they handle the ball like the niners this weekend
And probably minimal pushback from Bama fans. We’re more embarrassed by the 2 bad losses than our detractors
IMO, this would be a stunning development, beyond shocking if it would happen. Miami will not make it but Alabama will. They do not want teams who have beaten no one over a team, who along with UGA, has beaten 3 ranked teams (5,14,19), more than anyone else in the country and Alabama beat them, just because they have one fewer loss.
Also, and this might be bigger: They don’t want to give the vastly inferior ACC 2 and the SEC, bulging with 7 teams at 9-3 or better, two 8-4 teams, 3 entrants. It would be colossally unfair. The SEC slaughtered the ACC in reg season play. In summary: The SEC is a 4 bid league, the ACC a one bid league in most years. (OU, Alabama’s bane, #13 in SEC standings, is #28 in Sagarin.)
Profits could drive the expansion, but this year could be a case that we already have too many teams. Other than us getting in this year, I like 12 allowing teams like our 2010 team. But except for these cases that could occasionally benefit us, I think smaller pool of teams makes more sense if best team was the goal
They are not trying to mistreat Alabama, they are taking heat for insisting on including them. They know Alabama and the SEC are more deserving than Miami/SMU and the ACC, so they’ve set it up to include them - not hurt them.
IMO, this is pure baloney. Those odds are ridiculous, no one on the face of the earth who has a modicum of sense would take those odds against Alabama as explained in other posts. SMU vs Clemson is all or nothing. The winner is in the loser is out. Alabama is in regardless of the outcome of this game.
Last edited:
If Bama gets in, we get in. If not ... "Oh well!"
If we hadn't laid a colossal EGG in Oklahoma, this discussion would be moot.
If we hadn't laid a colossal EGG in Oklahoma, this discussion would be moot.
I think pulling for Boise makes more sense. The winner of UNLV vs. Boise is in as the MW conference champion. If UNLV wins and moves from outside the current top 12 to take a spot, there would be a chance that Boise would remain in since they are currently ranked ahead of Bama. So a UNLV win would decrease Bama's chances of getting in.
Absolutely not going to happen. There is no way whatsoever that Boise St. could lose to the 20th ranked team and not move down a single spot. Will not happen, there will not be two Mountain West teams in the playoff and only 3 SEC teams. The SEC would blow up the whole thing over that sort of stupidity. Even the ESPN pundits had zero hesitation in saying that Boise State is out with a loss.
What that loss would do is make it extremely hard to keep SMU over Alabama as well if they lose. If Boise State at #10 loses (who by the way was ranked over a one loss SMU at one point) then Alabama will move to #10 automatically meaning they now only have one team (Indiana) between them and SMU. This means SMU losing to the #17 team would need to result in only dropping one spot to stay in the playoff.
For reference, Georgia was undefeated and #1 last year and they dropped to #6 after losing the conference championship game. Boise St. should end up around 14 and once that happens a SMU loss would almost certainly also drop them to #11 or lower as well.
I will be cheering for UNLV because it can only help Alabama's chances. The pundits are trying to make up a rule that conference championship losses don't count, but they've always counted, and the media threw one of the biggest college football fits ever when Oklahoma lost a conference championship game and still played in the BCSCG so they can just shut up and sit down because they're stupid and two-faced.
Last edited:
First off, the probability is based solely off the assumption SMU stays in with a loss, and then includes other unlikely scenarios that would further decrease our chances based strictly on data and not what the committee would likely do, so it’s essentially a useless metric.
As for Dinich, her assumption has the same flawed logic. Yes, it’s possible SMU could stay in with a loss but it’s not guaranteed they’re in by virtue of the fact that it would be undue punishment for losing in a championship game. I believe that’s when comparing teams from the same conference. For instance, we aren’t getting in over UGA if they lose this weekend even though we’d have a H2H win and the same number of losses. Nor do I think Miami would jump SMU. However, I don’t think that same rule applies when dealing with teams from different conferences and much much different schedules.
Agree. Any concerns anyone has about two Mountain West teams getting in can be erased. There is no chance whatsoever of that happening. Had Boise State beaten Oregon then we’d be having a different discussion.
Last edited:
New Posts
-
-
-
-
Wisconsin sues UMiami for contract interference in player transfer kerfuffle.
- Latest: AlexanderFan
-
-
Latest threads
-
-
Wisconsin sues UMiami for contract interference in player transfer kerfuffle.
- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
-
Bielema: SEC needs to have 9 conference games...because numbers matter.
- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 9