But they have great OL play. So good that when Sabin leaves for the NFL (again) they have their heir apparent (and he will keep the recruiting class together) :Wink:
New poll has Bama 5th.
- Thread starter WhiteBus
- Start date
But they have great OL play. So good that when Sabin leaves for the NFL (again) they have their heir apparent (and he will keep the recruiting class together) :Wink:
Baylor isnt going undefeated... And I disagree with Pac 12 getting in. Lets just say Oregon runs the table and they, along with Bama finish with 1 loss.
Both teams would finish at 11-1 against not so great schedules.
Bama's one loss would be a one possession loss to the number 1 team in the country, while Oregon's loss would be against Auburn, who Alabama will have a win over(Assuming both teams go 11-1). I highly doubt Oregon would get in over them.
Bama defense is cold dog crap. The secondary is bad. Ohio State would run a train on them.
Technically, Oregon will be 12-1 if they run the table, defeating current #7 Utah in the Pac-12 Championship Game. Alabama has played the 80th ranked FBS schedule (it was 118th before they lost to LSU) while Oregon's is 49th. If Utah runs the table until the P12CC and Auburn loses to Georgia this Saturday, Oregon's schedule will look a lot better than Alabama (1-1 against ranked teams) and Oregon's opening day loss to Auburn SHOULD get overlooked. However, we are talking about overlooking the loss that would prevent Alabama from getting in which ESPN would not appreciate.
A
anon_ivydyf0amkzay
Guest
This is where we are at this point and why we should not have any wildcards. The playoffs are now worse than the BCS was at any point in its existence because the playoffs are much more political than the BCS was. Undefeated Baylor and Minnesota were 12th and 17th entering last weekend, which was justified because they played the 119th and 121st toughest schedules in FCS. Undefeated Alabama and Clemson were 3rd and 5th despite playing the 118th and 98th toughest schedules. We start with the assumption that some teams (Alabama and Clemson, who haven't defeated a ranked team and whose best win was against #31 Texas A&M) are worthy while others (Penn State, G5) are not.
This is where we are today (schedule strength in parenthesis).
KEY: Undefeated, once defeated, twice defeated, thrice defeated.
- LSU (20)
- Ohio State (16)
- Clemson (99)
- Georgia (63)
- Alabama (80)
- Oregon (49)
- Utah (90)
- Minnesota (95)
- Penn State (25)
- Oklahoma (98)
- Florida (45)
- Auburn (9)
- Baylor (118)
- Wisconsin (23)
- Michigan (21)
- Notre Dame (15)
- Cincinnati (48)
- Memphis (60)
- Texas (17)
- Iowa (30)
- Boise State (87)
- Oklahoma State (43)
- Navy (89)
- Kansas State (38)
- Appalachian State (123)
Minnesota should be ranked with Clemson. Penn State, and Oregon should be ranked over Georgia and Alabama. SMU should be ranked before Appalachian State. #5 Alabama, #7 Utah, #10 Oklahoma, #17 Cincinnati, and #18 Memphis should be ranked within 7 or 8 spots of each other.
We are correct that Baylor will get in before Alabama in the event they go undefeated. In fact, I'll go as far as saying that an undefeated Baylor should get in before an undefeated Clemson as they have defeated #22 Oklahoma State and #24 Kansas State and then would defeat #10 Oklahoma (once or twice) and #19 Texas (once or twice) while Clemson won't play a ranked team all season. I'd assert that a 11-1 Alabama team should get in over a 13-0 Clemson team.
If a conference championship is valued by the committee, why would Alabama get in over a 13-0 Clemson team?
Your assumption is that a conference champion has an actual value rather than an arbitrary one.
2017: We saw 11-1 and SEC West runner up Alabama get in over 11-2 B1G Champion Ohio State or *12-0 AAC Champion UCF.
2016: We saw 11-1 and B1G East runner up Ohio State get in over 11-2 B1G Champion Penn State
* The G5 argument doesn't hold weight when UCF defeated #25 Memphis TWICE while Clemson will not play a ranked team this season (unless Texas A&M wins at Georgia next week). UCF played at least as difficult a schedule as Clemson has played this season.
My post was somewhat tongue in cheek because of Alabama in 2017. However, the committee is "supposed" to value conference champions. Clemson may appear to have an easy schedule, but let's see how the rest of the season plays out. Once again, we don't really know how good the SEC is because they don't play anyone and tout themselves. A better Alabama team was destroyed by Clemson last year. As a result, Clemson should get the benefit of doubt if they go 13-0 because essentially the offense is back and their defense is ahead of schedule.
Similar threads
