Or Ohio State, but Alabama will be battle tested assuming we make the Playoffs.If Alabama played Notre Dame's schedule, they'd likely finish 11-1 at worst, Ty Simpson would have already locked up the Heisman Trophy, and we'd be in line for a Top 4 seed and a bye.
If Alabama played Notre Dame's schedule, they'd likely finish 11-1 at worst, Ty Simpson would have already locked up the Heisman Trophy, and we'd be in line for a Top 4 seed and a bye.
Or Ohio State, but Alabama will be battle tested assuming we make the Playoffs.
Why is it that every time the committee does/says something really stupid, Alabama always seems to bear the brunt of the nonsense?
we own it and relish the fact we are BAMA!!It's the nature of Alabama football and the state of Alabama in general: we have always had the world against us. I'm OK with that, and I've grown accustomed to it. I wouldn't know how to deal with anything else. C'est la vie.
the committee is a joke and a half and anyone that says otherwise is a fool.Shouldn’t be a committee to start with. They sold this playoff crap as ensuring the best teams played each other. If that’s the case, #1-12 Coaches poll is your 12 best teams. I knew they were lying when they were selling both the four team playoff and twelve team playoff because as soon as they got what they wanted the discussion immediately went to trying to protect conference championship games by giving the losers a spot in the playoffs, rankings be d*****.
the committee is a joke and a half and anyone that says otherwise is a fool.
bring back the BCS formula and take away the human bias. this charade has gone on far too long.

Looking over everything and considering all of it... Notre Dame and Alabama are pretty closely matched. I think the only thing that bothers us is that we played a stronger schedule and it is just ridiculous to think we could get bumped for them and some loser G5 team that has to be put in for "fairness..."
We need only worry abou one point and one point only. Beat Auburn. If they rook us for losing the SEC title game... Well... They'll be a price for that.
This is a key part of the discussion. It isn't just about who would win how many games with what schedule, but simply who has the best resume.Looking over everything and considering all of it... Notre Dame and Alabama are pretty closely matched. I think the only thing that bothers us is that we played a stronger schedule and it is just ridiculous to think we could get bumped for them and some loser G5 team that has to be put in for "fairness..."
This is a key part of the discussion. It isn't just about who would win how many games with what schedule, but simply who has the best resume.
To put it another way, imagine two employees who are similarly talented each go to work every day. Every day one does more work. Should they both get paid the same simply because we believe their talent to be equal? Or should the one that does more work every single day get rewarded?
That the committee is saying is that tough wins won't actually mean anything. That playing and beating some of the best teams in the country doesn't matter, because as long as they believe you to be of similar talent, the actual work you did is irrelevant.
I believe there is a flaw in this comparison though, because some of the computer models and polls that the BCS used no longer exist, so they can’t be input into the “bcs” calculation. We therefore can’t actually know what the BCS system would have ranked teams this season because somebody is just creating a simulacrum of the old inputs by using different polls, different models, or just not applying those inputs. Somebody correct me if I am wrong though.Everyone saying “go back to the BCS” might be disappointed that the committee’s and the projected BCS model are identical at #9 and #10
View attachment 54409