Jump to content

National Championship Game | #4 Alabama vs #3 Georgia


WeaponX

Who wins?  

25 members have voted

  1. 1. Who wins?

    • #3 Georgia
      12
    • #4 Alabama
      14

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 01/09/2018 at 01:30 AM

Recommended Posts

On 1/5/2018 at 1:25 PM, BleedTheClock said:

I think it has more to do with them being a far superior team. Athlete for athlete, Bama is better than just about anyone.

I'm assuming you are mad OSU didn't get in. Compare their resume to that of Alabama's and tell me why the committee made the wrong choice. I don't want to hear the conference championship excuse--OSU got mollywhopped by an Iowa team that I'm pretty sure a FF all-star's team could have beaten. Alabama lost one time...to a team that ended the season in the top 10. OSU had multiple losses, including an unforgivable loss. The committee needs to weigh everything when deciding what teams advance. The fact that they put Alabama in...and they're probably going to win a national championship tells you all you need to know about whether or not they made the right choice.

 

This is coming from someone that hates Alabama and roots for OSU 99.9% of the time. Bama is still the most talented team in the country, as much as I'd love to tell you they weren't.

Not a fan of any team except Michigan/Michigan St., since I live close by in Canada. Just do not believe the playoffs should include anybody who did not win the conference championship, if you want the playoffs to be on an even playing field. You cannot not give a loser a bye, where they get to rest their team for a month to recover from injuries, while conference champions get beat up further in a conference championship game by a very tough opponent and expect it will not impact the playoffs.

I do not care how good Alabama is, they did not get into their conference championship game and should not get a bye and then get into the playoffs. It completely warps the playoffs and should not happen. They were actually rewarded for losing to Auburn and that's not right. Shame on Alabama!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Iamcanadian said:

Not a fan of any team except Michigan/Michigan St., since I live close by in Canada. Just do not believe the playoffs should include anybody who did not win the conference championship, if you want the playoffs to be on an even playing field. You cannot not give a loser a bye, where they get to rest their team for a month to recover from injuries, while conference champions get beat up further in a conference championship game by a very tough opponent and expect it will not impact the playoffs.

I do not care how good Alabama is, they did not get into their conference championship game and should not get a bye and then get into the playoffs. It completely warps the playoffs and should not happen. They were actually rewarded for losing to Auburn and that's not right.

But Alabama is undoubtedly one of the best 4 teams in college football. Therefore, I believe the committee got it right. I don't think wins/losses/conference titles are the be-all, end-all qualifiers for playoff teams. The committee should find a way to get the BEST 4 teams in the game. I think they accomplished this. I see your point about Alabama's loss to Auburn helping them, but the fact that they're 48 hours away from being CFB champions should erase any thoughts that they don't deserve to be there. They're the best team in college football. It would have been more of a travesty for them not to make it into the playoff given this fact, as much as I'd have loved to see them sitting at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BleedTheClock said:

But Alabama is undoubtedly one of the best 4 teams in college football. Therefore, I believe the committee got it right. I don't think wins/losses/conference titles are the be-all, end-all qualifiers for playoff teams. The committee should find a way to get the BEST 4 teams in the game. I think they accomplished this.

So do I.

But, let's be honest, if we're using THAT logic, then leaving out 2015 OSU was a JOKE. OSU had no one but themselves to blame, laying an egg at HOME against MSU. All I'm saying is, there needs to be consistency when evaluating resumes/talent. If we're going with the "eye test" at the end of the day, which I have ZERO problem with, then the committee is lacking in consistency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MWil23 said:

So do I.

But, let's be honest, if we're using THAT logic, then leaving out 2015 OSU was a JOKE. OSU had no one but themselves to blame, laying an egg at HOME against MSU. All I'm saying is, there needs to be consistency when evaluating resumes/talent. If we're going with the "eye test" at the end of the day, which I have ZERO problem with, then the committee is lacking in consistency.

Exactly, if the committee is going to do one thing or another, be consistent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MWil23 said:

So do I.

But, let's be honest, if we're using THAT logic, then leaving out 2015 OSU was a JOKE. OSU had no one but themselves to blame, laying an egg at HOME against MSU. All I'm saying is, there needs to be consistency when evaluating resumes/talent. If we're going with the "eye test" at the end of the day, which I have ZERO problem with, then the committee is lacking in consistency.

I agree with this, but the problem is that they lost to MSU, a team that, IIRC, they would have been replacing in the CFB playoff? Wasnt MSU 4? Tough to throw a team out of the playoff and replacing them with a team that you beat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

I agree with this, but the problem is that they lost to MSU, a team that, IIRC, they would have been replacing in the CFB playoff? Wasnt MSU 4? Tough to throw a team out of the playoff and replacing them with a team that you beat.

Oklahoma also had zero business in the playoff that year in hindsight. They had the same record as OSU and didn't play in the conference title game. Just arguing for the sake of consistency about the eyeball test and why it's problematic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Oklahoma also had zero business in the playoff that year in hindsight. They had the same record as OSU and didn't play in the conference title game. Just arguing for the sake of consistency about the eyeball test and why it's problematic.

ahhh that's right. I forgot Oklahoma got in in 2015 as well. MSU was a virtual lock after they beat #2 Iowa (is that right?) in the championship game that year. Would have been impossible to take them out, but Oklahoma was hella overrated in '15.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

ahhh that's right. I forgot Oklahoma got in in 2015 as well. MSU was a virtual lock after they beat #2 Iowa (is that right?) in the championship game that year. Would have been impossible to take them out, but Oklahoma was hella overrated in '15.

Yeah, Iowa was the 2015 version of Wisconsin. Undefeated in the regular season but hadn't played anyone. I just think it's hilarious that a month ago a 2 loss Auburn team was the CONSENSUS #2 team in the nation and everyone seemingly on this site and certainly on ESPN was saying that they were the "BEST TEAM IN THE NATION"...and here we are 5 weeks later. I will say this though, they are clearly the BEST 4 loss team in the country.

I'm all for the eye test as long as there's consistency with "Clearly the 4 best teams" is my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just want to go ahead and tell everyone that I love them.

I am going to be drunk tonight(obviously), and win or lose, Im probably going to say or do some very stupid things that could lead to my ban, or I might drink so much it causes me to have alcohol poisoning. 

Go Dawgs!

tenor.gif?itemid=10188229

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm getting old (38yrs) but this should be an earlier start time. Some of us have jobs and live on the east coast. It's going to be almost 12 before this game is over. That's stupid especially for a game that involves 2 SEC teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TENINCH said:

That's stupid especially for a game that involves 2 SEC teams.

I think that’s a big element. There’s a very small segment of the country (outside of Vegas) with any vested interest to stay up for this game.

Wife is tuning into The Bachelor tonight at 8. Might just make it an in-home date night and 10 o’clock bedtime, getting up at 5:30 AM. 

#dontjudge

#onlyhalfkidding

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...