Started By
Message
re: The SEC screwed up by pushing Bama over Ole Miss
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:18 pm to lsusa
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:18 pm to lsusa
quote:
One issue that I think is very important to remind people and your post brings up is the committee decided before the conference championship week that SMU > Ole Miss, Bama, USC .
Exactly, and it was smart of the committee in that it meant that - if the game went how a lot of folks presumed (Clemson winning) - the committee didn't have to fret over a "best 3-loss team" debate or even a "2 losses with shitty SOS vs 3 losses with strong SOS" debate. They, at worst, gave themselves a 50/50 shot of punting that issue down to another season.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 7:23 pm to Shamoan
quote:
A 3 loss team shouldn’t make the playoff. Don’t want to be left out? Dont lose to Vanderbilt or Kentucky.
I’m not ready to make an edict like this.
I mean heck, the easy answer is that Clemson has three losses and absolutely should be in the playoffs, because they met the criteria established before the season of winning their conference to make the playoff.
Had Texas A&M beat Texas and UGA, they would have won the SEC and been deserving of making the playoff.
But I do think you hit the nail on the head with Bama, and it merits repeating. Their three losses are not against the highly ranked teams they played. They lost to two of the five worst teams (record wise) on their schedule.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 8:15 pm to lsusa
quote:
had a more palatable ugly loss
This is debatable.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 8:20 pm to RoyalAir
quote:
when Clemson was essentially guaranteed a playoff berth,
Clemson wasn't getting in with a loss to SMU
Posted on 12/9/24 at 8:23 pm to lsusa
I agree with this. Ole miss passed the eye ball test. I think it is easier to say a dominant Georgia win cancels a Kentucky loss than trying to justify Bama/OU 2 weeks ago.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 8:37 pm to lsusa
quote:
Clemson has three losses and absolutely should be in the playoffs, because they met the criteria
Not so fast. Dabo admitted , several times, that God helped
Clemson win the game. Does God meet the criteria when
he's not even on the roster ?

Posted on 12/9/24 at 8:51 pm to lewis and herschel
quote:
Sorry, nobody cares about Ole Miss.
I can think of about 18 reasons why you should care…..
Posted on 12/9/24 at 8:53 pm to REBEL5 AC
quote:
REBEL5 AC
quote:You are the worst LSU fan on this site.
I do.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 9:02 pm to southpawcock
quote:
well, that's a lie. I was, insomuch that it kept Clemson out of the playoffs (i.e., Bama was in with a SMU win)
There is something inherently demented about a fan base that obsesses more about their in state rival making the playoffs than their own team failing to make it. How embarrassing.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 9:37 pm to Saskwatch
Sankey hates Ole Miss punk coach
Posted on 12/9/24 at 10:06 pm to lsusa
Put in evidence. Sound testimony here.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 10:34 pm to lsusa
$$ matters—Total viewership for 2024 by team:
2024 viewership
quote:
2. Alabama — 5.44M
quote:
17. Mississippi — 2.407M
2024 viewership
Posted on 12/9/24 at 10:35 pm to timdonaghyswhistle
quote:
had a more palatable ugly loss
quote:
This is debatable.
Right, you can make arguments both ways when you consider the factors outside of the simple W and L
Loss at home < loss on road
21-point loss < 3-point loss
Loss to 4-8 team < loss to 6-6 team
Loss week 14 < loss week 5
Posted on 12/9/24 at 10:41 pm to lsusa
IDGAF who was the first 3 loss team out of the SEC in line. They were determined NOT to take a 3 loss team from this league.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 10:48 pm to Bamafig
quote:
Sankey is to blame here. He lost a negotiation in which he (and big10) had all the cards. He should have demanded 4 teams and a reseeding after the top 12 were determined. He had to know that in most years the SEC would benefit from that. He also pushes a championship game which puts players at risk and gains nothing. The committee could not split the baby so they punted to SMU. Sankey put the conference in that position. He needs to go.
I share your disdain for Sankey, but I completely disagree that any conference should be guaranteed more than one bid,
Including the SEC. I’m also totally against the idea of reseeding - upsets are part of the game. If a 12 seed beats a five - theoretically proving the seeding wrong - why should they be “punished” by having to play a tougher game?
Now, I could perhaps live with the five auto bids being guaranteed ONLY a top 8 seed where they received either a bye OR a home game.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 10:51 pm to Jeepin_Josh
quote:
I agree...his inability to recognize "bama fatigue" really cost us a spot.
Its a fair point. If it had been South Carolina or Ole Miss as next team up, one of them would have probably jumped SMU
Posted on 12/9/24 at 10:52 pm to Saskwatch
quote:
Bama was too but Bama likely got the benefit of the doubt because they were relatively heathy and everyone assumes Milroe can be a worldbeater running they ball when they decide to do it.
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away Bama led UGA 28-0
after UGA played its worst quarter in 10+ years and Jalen Milroe simultaneously put on a Superman cape and set every stat to 99 aaaaaaand Kalen Deboer blew his half a season's worth of plays....kudos to Bama it worked dammit
Posted on 12/9/24 at 11:14 pm to TideTurf
quote:
IDGAF who was the first 3 loss team out of the SEC in line. They were determined NOT to take a 3 loss team from this league.
Honestly, I disagree. Given the fact that the committee ranked Bama #11 after week 15, I think they very much wanted to take Bama. They were probably rooting hard for either SMU to win, or Clemson to blow them out.
At the end the day, I think they just couldn’t justify knocking a team that earned a spot in the regular season out, based on them losing in the extra game they earned.
I’ll also note that, for seeding purposes they stayed consistent by keeping Texas and Penn State over Notre Dame, despite those teams picking up 2nd losses in the extra games. Having SMU seeded above Clemson also tends to show that.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:07 am to GeauxTigers1410
quote:
I think it is easier to say a dominant Georgia win cancels a Kentucky loss than trying to justify Bama/OU 2 weeks ago.
What if I told you Oklahoma is the 26th ranked team by FPI, and they have the 6th ranked defensive efficiency in the country? Oklahoma is a better team than their record indicates.. Oklahoma’s losses were to (by FPI) the #1, #7, #8, #14, #17, and #19 ranked teams.
Oklahoma’s schedule was brutal. They had to play seven teams ranked in the top 20 by FPI. Of the top 9 SEC teams based on final conference standings, OU played 7 of them.
That is a flaw with the expanded SEC, schedule parity is non-existent anymore. A team forced to play 6 of the top 8 teams will likely have a worse record than a team that plays 6 of the 8 worst teams. The team with the worse record may very well be a better team. A good example this year would be Texas A&M who played only 3 of the top 9, or Texas who only played 2 of the top 9. Give Oklahoma one of those schedules and they are likely sitting at 8-4.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 1:10 am
Posted on 12/10/24 at 3:12 am to Apollo512
yeah it's a shame we didn't have your pussy-assed schedule. 

Popular
Back to top
