Bama Fan Reactions CFP Final Play

bamamc1 said:

What a time we’re living in. Let’s all enjoy because what is being done and has been DONE will never be duplicated ever in any sport. RTR.

Click to expand...

Catfish said:

Red Auerbach's Celtic and John Wooden's Bruins say hi.

Click to expand...

selmaborntidefan said:

Red Auerbach's Celtics played in an 18-team league with no free agency and were the sport's wealthiest franchise.

John Wooden's Bruins came from a time when keeping the same team together for three years was the norm.

The 1921-1964 New York Yankees played in a 16-team league where they had the most money, the minor league system was fractured, and there was no national MLB draft to offset the prospects they could find and buy.

I don't agree with the OP that this will never be done again (no way to know that), but Saban's accomplishments - given all he loses to the NFL every single year - dwarfs the rest.

Click to expand...

CoachInWaiting said:

You're 100% correct. As eras change, so change the standards of greatness. What Saban has been able to accomplish at Alabama is nothing less than astounding. It is a perfect storm in the sense that he could not (even as great as he is) have done the same anywhere else. Not at LSU had he stayed, not at Notre Dame, not at Texas, not anywhere. I think Coach Saban knew that, or at least had a strong feeling about it or he wouldn't have left Miami when he did. Even as great as this run has been, just look at what could have been, without a few last-minute heroics or fluke plays that went against Alabama. We could be talking about 7 titles in 9 seasons, or more. No, I won't say it will never be duplicated, but it won't ever become commonplace.

Click to expand...

selmaborntidefan said:

When Nebraska won 3 titles in 4 years, it was an awesome accomplishment. Keep in mind that virtually all of the "stars" from 1994 (Frazier, Berringer, Phillips, Booker, et al) were back in 1995. But it was a great accomplishment.

Alabama winning 3 in 4 years was FAR more impressive, though - even though a span of less than two decades had gone by. Nebraska SHARED one of their titles and SHOULD HAVE shared a second one. They didn't play the "other best team" in two of their three title years. They did not play in a conference remotely resembling the SEC, although the 1995 Big Eight was pretty good. Alabama won three undisputed ON THE FIELD championships, beat THREE unbeaten teams (including one in what was basically a HOME game), and knocked off #1 twice. This during an era when they continually faced coaches (Chizik, Miles, Meyer) who had won national titles.

The same is true in the NFL. I hate the Cowboys but their 1992-95 dynasty (3 in 4) was a truly great feat. However, the Patriots doing the same a decade later with the advent of free agency (remember, all of the Cowboys' big stars were on all three title winners) was MUCH more impressive - even Troy Aikman, who was calling the game admitted that himself.

Nobody should think I'm trying to diss old champions in any sport, but the context of their times means everything.

The Yankees won MOST of those titles when there were 16 baseball teams, you didn't travel further West than St Louis, and there was no free agency. The Yankees of 1996-2000 was FAR more impressive because you have free agency, extra rounds of playoffs, and more games (among other factors).

The Steelers of the 1970s were a great team in a decade of great teams, but the fact is that when they won four in six years they were (mostly) the same team every single year. There were TWENTY-TWO players on Pittsburgh who won four rings. By contrast, only SIX 49ers had four rings during their nine-year run. The Patriots had 22 players win 3 rings in those 4 years.

And remember this....Alabama competes against 127 other teams just at the highest level. Granted, the talent diffuses upward but Alabama doesn't get the break of not having to face the other best team, especially now with a four-team playoff.

This is the most stunning run of any competitive sport in American history.

Click to expand...

selmaborntidefan said:

When Nebraska won 3 titles in 4 years, it was an awesome accomplishment. Keep in mind that virtually all of the "stars" from 1994 (Frazier, Berringer, Phillips, Booker, et al) were back in 1995. But it was a great accomplishment.

Alabama winning 3 in 4 years was FAR more impressive, though - even though a span of less than two decades had gone by. Nebraska SHARED one of their titles and SHOULD HAVE shared a second one. They didn't play the "other best team" in two of their three title years. They did not play in a conference remotely resembling the SEC, although the 1995 Big Eight was pretty good. Alabama won three undisputed ON THE FIELD championships, beat THREE unbeaten teams (including one in what was basically a HOME game), and knocked off #1 twice. This during an era when they continually faced coaches (Chizik, Miles, Meyer) who had won national titles.

The same is true in the NFL. I hate the Cowboys but their 1992-95 dynasty (3 in 4) was a truly great feat. However, the Patriots doing the same a decade later with the advent of free agency (remember, all of the Cowboys' big stars were on all three title winners) was MUCH more impressive - even Troy Aikman, who was calling the game admitted that himself.

Nobody should think I'm trying to diss old champions in any sport, but the context of their times means everything.

The Yankees won MOST of those titles when there were 16 baseball teams, you didn't travel further West than St Louis, and there was no free agency. The Yankees of 1996-2000 was FAR more impressive because you have free agency, extra rounds of playoffs, and more games (among other factors).

The Steelers of the 1970s were a great team in a decade of great teams, but the fact is that when they won four in six years they were (mostly) the same team every single year. There were TWENTY-TWO players on Pittsburgh who won four rings. By contrast, only SIX 49ers had four rings during their nine-year run. The Patriots had 22 players win 3 rings in those 4 years.

And remember this....Alabama competes against 127 other teams just at the highest level. Granted, the talent diffuses upward but Alabama doesn't get the break of not having to face the other best team, especially now with a four-team playoff.

This is the most stunning run of any competitive sport in American history.

Click to expand...

Catfish said:

Red Auerbach's Celtic and John Wooden's Bruins say hi.

Click to expand...

CoachInWaiting said:

I agree that Alabama is the leader in the clubhouse up to now. On the professional level, I sometimes think the free agency issue almost balances itself out, because it is there for all to utilize. The argument against it originally was that the wealthiest teams would simply buy the best players and dominate the rest, but it hasn't really happened that way.


The luxury taxes imposed on those franchises have helped keep it in check, but if free agency had been around in the era of Ruth and Gehrig, the Yankees might have been even more dominant. Ted Williams in pinstripes might give some nightmares today, but it would have done more than that if it had happened for real. Lew Burdette would possibly have been winning 3 games for the Yanks in '57 instead of against them for the Braves.

Click to expand...

CoachInWaiting said:

It's all speculation of course, but I think the early-departure rule in college football has had more impact. When a player can go pro 3 years out of high school, including a redshirt year, he can possibly only contribute 2 seasons on the field. That is where recruiting (and Saban is not only a student of it, but the master) is the key to continued success with consistency like Alabama has shown.

Click to expand...