CFN Article - What if Bama and UGA both go 12-0?

Then we’ll beat an unbeaten Georgia team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro[emoji208]

As a Bama fan I want t get in undefeated, who we play or where we play them in layoff does not matter to me. Beat em all down and bring home NC17. What all the orhers do is up to them, win out you will get in, lose 1 and then you are at the mercy of others. Right now the top 4 control their own destiny. Now lets see which one or more can actually control the heat pressure and spotlight. My money is on Bama, we are getting used to it.

B1GTide said:

Fun thread, but I will be very surprised if GA is undefeated going into the SECCG.

Click to expand...

Most of my realistic UGA buddies here expect to drop the FL game.

Text from a friend a few days back:

I'm terrified of Florida. It is seasons like this where they crap the bed all year and then beat us by 20

Click to expand...

Tide in Athens said:

Most of my realistic UGA buddies here expect to drop the FL game.

Text from a friend a few days back:

Click to expand...

Yup......

B1GTide said:

Only because of the timing. As proof, if there are a bunch of upsets in conference championship games and a bunch of 2 or 3 loss teams win those games, how many of those teams would make the playoff? Not many, if any? Why? Because the committee has shown that they look at the entire season, not just the last game of the season.

ETA - the committee has said many, many times over the years - the conference championship only matters if ALL other things are equal. In other words, they only add weight to that game if there are 2 teams that are virtually indistinguishable when examining their seasons as a whole. Well, how often is that going to happen, if ever?

Click to expand...

B1GTide said:

You are applying some special significance to the conference championship game that really doesn't exist. Why should one game in the season matter any more than another. It is just another game when you have a playoff.

Click to expand...

I think you're missing the point IRT how the playoff committee views conference championships. They are not a be all end all but used as a differentiation factor when all other things are equal or comparable. From the playoff committee website:

Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie -breaker; apply specific guidelines)

When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:

•Championships won
•Strength of schedule
•Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
•Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)

Strength of schedule, head-to-head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie-breakers between teams that look similar.


Winning a conference championship is not just another game. It holds significant weight with the committee..

81usaf92 said:

I get the feeling that UGA is going to lose before the title game

Click to expand...

And that TCU, Bucky Badger, PsssU will lose before their title games, too. OU and tOSU hold serve the rest of the way (including their title games), which I make 10-1 against, and they're in. Likewise Clemps and obviously 'Bama - possibly even with a SECCG loss if it's to Uga (won't happen).

selmaborntidefan said:

The problem is the committee counts WINS >>>>> LOSSES.......

Clemson would also have beaten Auburn, Louisville, Va Tech, Ga Tech, NC State, and FSU and possibly a good Miami team.

Oklahoma would have beaten Ohio St, Oklahoma St, TCU, and somebody good twice. If Ohio St wins the B1G then the Sooners win looks even better.

We would have beaten FSU, Auburn, and ATM.......and MAYBE a decent or not decent LSU (who really knows?)

It's not the slam dunk if we don't win out, folks. The SEC as a whole is NOT that good this year, and we had the misfortune
to draw weak Eastern teams like Vandy and the Vols this year.


Win your games or don't complain. Been my mantra since 1978.

Click to expand...

OK, this made me smile! :biggrin2:

This whole discussion always boils down to most deserving teams or best teams. The way the playoff system is set up it should be "best teams". There is no bracket playoff set up for conference champs like lower football divisions or basketball, etc. Its a subjective ranking system to determine who the best teams are.

If Bama loses its first game of the year to the #1 overall and undefeated team then they are as good as or better than any other 1 loss team. They may not would be SEC champs but they are still one of the the top 4 teams. I want the best 4 teams in the playoff.

CrimsonForce said:

I think you're missing the point IRT how the playoff committee views conference championships. They are not a be all end all but used as a differentiation factor when all other things are equal or comparable. From the playoff committee website:

Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie -breaker; apply specific guidelines)

When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:

•Championships won
•Strength of schedule
•Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
•Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)

Strength of schedule, head-to-head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie-breakers between teams that look similar.


Winning a conference championship is not just another game. It holds significant weight with the committee..

Click to expand...

You have it right until the bottom of your post. Winning a conference championship only carries any weight - any at all - if 2 teams with the same resume are being compared.

You are suggesting that the conference championship game is given extra weight. It is not - never has been given any more weight than any other game. It becomes just a part of the resume and the winner is only given extra credit for having played in the game under the scenario outlined above - if the two teams being compared are inseparable in every other way.

So far the committee has never chosen a conference champion over a non-champion with a better resume. In fact, so far the committee has not chosen a conference champion over any other team simply because it was a conference champion. 3 years in, 12 teams chosen, not once has it happened. It may happen some day. At that point we can discuss the merits of your argument. But this committee is not doing what you think that they are doing. They are not giving that game any more weight than any other game.

It's possible that Alabama and Georgia could both be in the playoff but only if the committee was not scared off by what happened last year with Ohio State. Of course Ohio State was not the B1G champion but was included and then got blown out by Clemson. Sure, that situation may be a bit different because Penn State wasn't included there while here both Alabama and Georgia would be included. Still, if the 2nd place SEC team would lose the semi-final game you'd again have some other conference champion claim that they should have been chosen instead. The safe play for the committee would be to take conference champions only so they wouldn't be open to nearly as much criticism. They could however stick to their guns and take who they think are the 4 best teams again regardless of whether they won their conference. I don't know which way they'd go. It's a 50-50 guess at this point.

RT27 said:

Not sure why, after seeing some auburn games, mercer, lsu, I am not sure they have the stones for bama or uga right now.

Click to expand...

Perception, my friend, is a quirky thing. You can bet that the Auburn game will not only be a tough out for us but probably our most difficult game all season...same is true for dawgs.

PA Tide Fan said:

It's possible that Alabama and Georgia could both be in the playoff but only if the committee was not scared off by what happened last year with Ohio State. Of course Ohio State was not the B1G champion but was included and then got blown out by Clemson. Sure, that situation may be a bit different because Penn State wasn't included there while here both Alabama and Georgia would be included. Still, if the 2nd place SEC team would lose the semi-final game you'd again have some other conference champion claim that they should have been chosen instead. The safe play for the committee would be to take conference champions only so they wouldn't be open to nearly as much criticism. They could however stick to their guns and take who they think are the 4 best teams again regardless of whether they won their conference. I don't know which way they'd go. It's a 50-50 guess at this point.

Click to expand...

That is a thought. We won't know until such a scenario presents itself again.

B1GTide said:

You have it right until the bottom of your post. Winning a conference championship only carries any weight - any at all - if 2 teams with the same resume are being compared.

You are suggesting that the conference championship game is given extra weight. It is not - never has been given any more weight than any other game. It becomes just a part of the resume and the winner is only given extra credit for having played in the game under the scenario outlined above - if the two teams being compared are inseparable in every other way.

So far the committee has never chosen a conference champion over a non-champion with a better resume. In fact, so far the committee has not chosen a conference champion over any other team simply because it was a conference champion. 3 years in, 12 teams chosen, not once has it happened. It may happen some day. At that point we can discuss the merits of your argument. But this committee is not doing what you think that they are doing. They are not giving that game any more weight than any other game.

Click to expand...

My stance (and that of the committee) is that conference championships carry significant weight when comparing 2 comparable teams. Of course, like last year, Ohio St got in over Penn St but the 2 weren't "comparable" because Penn St had 2 losses and Ohio St only had 1. I don't think anyone is arguing that a 2 loss conference champ should get in over a 1 loss non conference champ. The committee is doing exactly what I think they are doing - using the above factors when teams are comparable. A conference championship certainly carries more weight than any other game when the 2 teams are comparable.

You're statement "so far the committee has not chosen a conference champion over any other team simply because it was a conference champion" doens't really apply because the committee hasn't had the opportunity to do so. If Penn St only had 1 loss last year they get in over Ohio St because......they won the conference championship. Pretty simple..

CrimsonForce said:

My stance (and that of the committee) is that conference championships carry significant weight when comparing 2 comparable teams. Of course, like last year, Ohio St got in over Penn St but the 2 weren't "comparable" because Penn St had 2 losses and Ohio St only had 1. I don't think anyone is arguing that a 2 loss conference champ should get in over a 1 loss non conference champ. The committee is doing exactly what I think they are doing - using the above factors when teams are comparable. A conference championship certainly carries more weight than any other game when the 2 teams are comparable.

You're statement "so far the committee has not chosen a conference champion over any other team simply because it was a conference champion" doens't really apply because the committee hasn't had the opportunity to do so. If Penn St only had 1 loss last year they get in over Ohio St because......they won the conference championship. Pretty simple..

Click to expand...

I guess my point is that if it is only broken out when needed as a tie breaker, then it isn't weighted at all until that point. In 3 years, the conference championship has been totally irrelevant and had nothing to do with the teams that made the playoff. So, again, it is not heavily weighted. In fact, it isn't weighed at all until they have no other choice but to consider it. It is like any other tie breaker - like the points scored against common opponents thing. Anyone really want to argue that this is "heavily weighted" when it is almost never used?

B1GTide said:

I guess my point is that if it is only broken out when needed as a tie breaker, then it isn't weighted at all until that point. In 3 years, the conference championship has been totally irrelevant and had nothing to do with the teams that made the playoff. So, again, it is not heavily weighted. In fact, it isn't weighed at all until they have no other choice but to consider it. It is like any other tie breaker - like the points scored against common opponents thing. Anyone really want to argue that this is "heavily weighted" when it is almost never used?

Click to expand...

Well in the ideal situation, the contenders are all going to be conference champions, so it's only used a tie breaker if one contender isn't.

RTR91 said:

Well in the ideal situation, the contenders are all going to be conference champions, so it's only used a tie breaker if one contender isn't.

Click to expand...

Yeah, was going to say, thats a bit like saying number of wins isn't heavily weighted, but all the teams chosen have one or no losses...

I still vaguely wonder if Penn State should have been in the playoff instead of Ohio State last year. Getting blown out by Michigan early in the season really hurt them I think.

B1GTide said:

I guess my point is that if it is only broken out when needed as a tie breaker, then it isn't weighted at all until that point. In 3 years, the conference championship has been totally irrelevant and had nothing to do with the teams that made the playoff. So, again, it is not heavily weighted. In fact, it isn't weighed at all until they have no other choice but to consider it. It is like any other tie breaker - like the points scored against common opponents thing. Anyone really want to argue that this is "heavily weighted" when it is almost never used?

Click to expand...

It basically is a tie breaker when deciding the last 4 teams. Generally, the top teams being considered for the playoff are so "comparable" that all these factors come into play.

I know this isn't possible at this point but it was just a few weeks ago and illustrates my point well. Say UGA had 1 loss going into the SECCG against 1 loss AU. Alabama only has 1 loss to AU but doesn't make the SECCG. Say UGA wins the SECCG so you have UGA 1 loss conference champion and 1 loss Alabama who didn't win the conference. In that scenario UGA would get in over Alabama every time. Now, depending on everything else in this hypothetical Alabama might still make the top 4 but UGA would certainly get the nod over Alabama if they were deciding between those 2 for the last spot because......UGA has the conference championship and Alabama doesn't..

RammerJammer14 said:

Yeah, was going to say, thats a bit like saying number of wins isn't heavily weighted, but all the teams chosen have one or no losses...

Click to expand...

But not really. Ohio State got in over Penn State last year despite Penn State winning the conference and winning head to head. If they weighted a conference championship all that highly then there is no question Penn State would have been in.