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

RollTide_HTTR said:

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.

Click to expand...

RTR91 said:

Again - Penn State had 2 losses. Ohio State had one.

Click to expand...

RollTide_HTTR said:

Right. So they weigh number of losses more heavily than conference championships.

Click to expand...

CrimsonForce said:

Wrong. Conference championships never came into play because the two teams weren't comparable. 2 loss is not comparable to 1 loss in the eyes of the committee..

Click to expand...

RollTide_HTTR said:

Right. So they weigh number of losses more heavily than conference championships.

Click to expand...

RollTide_HTTR said:

You are saying having 2 losses makes them not comparable which would mean you way losses higher. How is that wrong? That's literally what you are saying.

Click to expand...

RTR91 said:

I mean... I guess you can interpret it that way, but it's pretty much a given/understood the teams with the least amount of losses are higher on the board.

Click to expand...

CoolBreeze said:

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.

Click to expand...

BamaInBham said:

IMO, if Bama plays its A game AU has no chance whatsoever, if Bama plays its B game it will most likely be a win. AU is OK, Bama is elite and will rightly be a double digit favorite.

Click to expand...

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...

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...

RammerJammer14 said:

Yeah, I've heard about 2011.

Three differences:

1) Alabama lost to LSU in the regular season, not the last game of the season just prior to the NC or playoff game, and all Okie State had to do was not lose to Iowa State to make it in.

2) The loss was a 3 point overtime loss in a game where Alabama had out-gained and out-played LSU, but the kicker missed 5 FGs and the refs ruled a contentious TD pass an interception.

3) It was a 2 team BCS format, not a 4 team playoff.

Lastly, if the BCS roulette wheel had landed with OSU #2 and Bama #3, I personally would not have complained, and Alabama would have had no real reason to call foul- we lost to LSU already and therefore didn't even win the division. We had our shot and we messed it up. Thing was, OSU lost to such a pathetic team vs Alabama's loss to the #1 team, the OSU loss was just too bad to overlook.

The way the playoff is set up now, the conference championships basically set up as a play-in game between the major conferences. To ignore one team's loss to a playoff-bound team in the conference title game is to completely invalidate that game. We might as well be playing basketball where teams rest their starters for the conference championship tournament to save them for the NCAA tournament.

I guess what I am saying is, some very special stars had to align for 2011 Alabama to get a rematch with LSU. These are not the same stars as giving any old conference championship loser a re-do just because they have 1 loss, especially when other 1-loss, conference champ teams are out there.

PS-why do I have to add extra spaces between lines now to get one space between lines...

Click to expand...

GA_Tide said:

The conference championship game determines the conference champion. The end.

The committee's primary consideration is to get the best 4 teams in the playoff.

They are not related other than the championship game contributes to each teams' resume.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

GrayTide said:

I have not read all 8 pages, but IMO if Alabama and UGA are both undefeated going into the SECC Game the winner is in and the loser gets a New Year's Day bowl game. Do not believe the selection committee is interested in putting two teams from any conference into the playoffs, especially one that would be a rematch. I realize there are numerous scenarios out there, but a one loss conference champion and, probably a one loss Notre Dame, would get in before a one loss conference runner up.

Click to expand...

CoolBreeze said:

I can dig what you are saying and I certainly am no luver of the lil bro team down south. BUT, from what I have seen on the field this year and the knowledge of home games in West Georgia I can tell you stats and record books are out. We will get all we want from them and, double digit favorites or not, our B game loses the contest.

Click to expand...

BamaInBham said:

Since this off topic, I will try to restrain myself to this post . First, my comments have nothing to do with my "love" or not for AU, it's just about facts as I see them. For the most part, the favorite almost always wins this game, especially a big or double digit favorite. The only exception I remember since the 60's is 1972, even then AU was a top 10 team. The few lesser upsets have been reasonable. I.e., it's a myth that you can "throw the record books out" in this series. Bama is 7 of 9 against AU and 3 of 4 at J-H. The only 2 AU wins were as the number 2 and 4 ranked teams in the country. Bama can certainly lose this game, but as things stand at this point, it would be out of character for this series.

Click to expand...

81usaf92 said:

You forgot 1984. Probably the only true upset

Click to expand...