Official 2017 NCAA Football thread

again, how is bama the victim when they were rewarded for a loss?

Wisconsin is the ONLY TEAM that HAD TO GO UNDEFEATED to make it to the Playoff.

 

Like I said... Not getting into the middle of this. Just wanted to call BS on UCF. That's all.

Carry on!

 

I numbered them so that I can organize my end of the conversation.


1. If you argue OSU should be in because of Conference Champ, then you're arguing that OSU should be rewarded for 2 losses, Alabama got rewarded for not only being number one all season, but also winning 11 games....not for losing 1.
2. UCF has a fairly legitimate argument.
3. I'm speaking to what every fan base expects of Bama.


If Alabama loses one game, fans of every other teams thinks they shouldnt be considered (how it feels anyway.)

Its like everyone puts this expectation on Bama to have to go undefeated. Sometimes if they have a bad game and still win, y'all are so eager to damn Bama its tossed around that Bama is overrated....lol.


Clemson doesn't think they are overrated this morning.

 

well get on outta here, you're a Bama fan so you can call BS on whatever you want and it's acceptable

 

but you literally said other teams can lose a game and it's ok, but bama has to go undefeated.

that's just a clear as day WRONG statement.

 

I'm speaking to the expectations of other fan bases.

 

This, ditto.

 

Answer me this, Mr. @stronghammer ,


Had Alabama beat Auburn, and lost to UGA in the SECCG this year, would you have put them in your top 4?

 

are you part of "other fan bases"? or is this you just feeling this way because you want to?

Are you really on such a high horse that you have to have respect from other fan bases as well as being rewarded for losses to feel like your team accomplished anything?

 

last time I checked the other 3 top 4 teams, in fact, did lose a game and it was ok for them... someone has to be on the outside, it was almost bama, but the stars aligned, just like they did when we were 1 loss NC in 11 and 12; again this comes down to bam's loss being a week earlier than the teams who were ranked ahead of them


I don't think anyone will argue that it is a flawed system, but I don't think many will argue that for the last 3 years the best 2 teams met in the last game of the year

 

Jesus, where the fuck are you going with that....lol.


I speak with lots of people from other fan bases. So, its based on actual real life experiences....and statements/comments from those people...

As far as how high I am on a horse....I can give credit where and when it's due. Can you?

 

Would I have put who in the top 4?

You seem to only give credit to Bama "when it's due". I've already said I thought Bama was one of the top 4 teams, is that not giving credit?

 

Would you have put Bama in the top 4 in that situation....


And, you've said multiple times that "they got it right" but then said Wiscy deserved it...so, I still dont really know where you stand with it....lol.

 

Would I put Bama in, let's see.

Week 13: 1. Alabama 2. Miami 3. Clemson 4. Oklahoma 5. Wisconsin 6. Auburn 7. Georgia 8. Notre Dame 9. OSU

so Alabama would've beat Auburn you say, and all other games go the same way which makes week 14 look like this instead:

1. Alabama 2. Clemson 3. Oklahoma 4. Wisconsin 5. Georgia 6. Miami 7. OSU

Then after CCG's with Alabama losing to Georgia, Wisconsin still losing to OSU, and Miami still losing to Clemson...this would be my top 4:

1. Clemson 2. Oklahoma 3. Georgia 4. Alabama

Because Bama was then a 1 loss team to only a conference champion.

 

not what you expected me to say @Roll Tide?

I would've argued weeks before that Auburn was overrated following their loss to LSU (who I also thought was overrated following losses to MSU/Troy), so therefore the loss to Auburn late in the season for Bama should've put them lower than 5.

 

No, that's actually what I'd hoped you say....


To your second statement, Auburn was #7 when #1 Alabama lost to them.....


Just like FSU was #3 when Alabama beat them.



Still, its not pretty, just like the playoff picks...but its how it goes. Alabama shouldnt fall from #1 too far losing to #7, in the best rivalry game of all of college football....

 

Right, but like I said Auburn SHOULD have been lower in the rankings (SEC bias kept them higher I believe). LSU and Auburn both sucked this year, given more credit than they deserved, which in turn gave Alabama more credit than they deserved per the rankings.

Alabama was ranked #1 off of name at the start, as FSU was #3. All opinions.

You seem to agree the system is flawed with your statement in bold, but you are only ok with it being flawed if I agree that Alabama should be the beneficiary of the flaws. Since I disagree with that, you seem discontent.

 

Auburn beat the number one team in the nation and had a close loss to Clemson and a loss to LSU (not great) but otherwise passed the eye test apparently. Might have been bumped by other teams losing that week as well....not sure. Dont remember. As far as initial rankings, I'd have to assume that they go off of the previous season with the info on returning players and the caliber of those players. I dont know this, but, I mean, hell.......what else can you do?

I couldn't care less what you agree with. This isn't a debate, its a discussion, so.....

Also, you're just mad that you dont have Saban....thats all.

 

I'm not mad at all that we don't have Saban? I don't worship football.

It also doesn't appear to be a discussion when you say BS like that lol.

You clearly could care less what I agree with since you keep having issues with what I've said.