Man, I love college football. Of course Auburn takes down Alabama just to make things more complicated. The downside for me personally, however, is that I've found that I have very little patience for every college football studio show or podcast devoting tons of time to conversations like this: What if Clemson beats South Carolina, but then Miami beats Clemson in the ACC title game and Georgia wallops Auburn in the SEC title game and Ohio State blows out Wisconsin in the Big Ten title game and TCU beats Oklahoma but looks terrible doing so. Does Miami get in? For one, I've just never cared for the splitting hairs debates between resumes because it bores me, but beyond that, I also just think it's a fool's errand to try to guess what a bunch of humans who can't possibly watch every second of every game or have every piece of pertinent information are going to do in the end.
This A&M/LSU game is going to have a fight break out before it's over. Tons of chirping on both sides, and every run up the middle ends with several players from each side joining the scrum late just to get some licks in.
I really don't want to see Alabama in the playoffs. If Wisconsin runs the table, they should be in it along with OK., Clemson, and Auburn, if they beat Georgia.
I'm with you and believe the Wisconsin/Ohio State matchup will determine if Alabama makes the CFP. Go Badgers!
You say that, but they are still going to be in the playoff most likely because despite getting beat up by Auburn, Bama still won the SEC West and will be in the SEC championship and if they win that, they are in the playoff. Auburn has 2 losses so they have no path to the playoff because even if Bama lost the SEC championship, it would just put Georgia in instead.
How is that the case? A 10-2 team over an 11-1 team? I could see Auburn winning the West if the two teams were tied, but that makes no sense. I checked and you are right that's what they are doing, but that seems pretty backwards. Why not just put LSU in since they beat Auburn?
Auburn only has one conference loss. The other loss was to Clemson. Bama and Auburn tied atop the West standings at 7-1, and Auburn has the tiebreaker thanks to yesterday's win.
So that means that a 4 loss team could win the SEC over a one loss team if they won all of their conference games?
Correct. Non-conference games matter to the playoff committee and to top 25 voters, but don't matter at all when it comes to crowning a conference champ.
Uh...LSU has 2 SEC losses, Auburn has 1 SEC loss, Alabama has 1 SEC loss. Auburn beat Alabama. This isn't exactly rocket science.
Colleges have total leeway when it comes to scheduling their non-conference games. You can see the problem with including those games when determining conference champs, right? They play their conference schedule on a set rotational basis. You're trying to compare this to the NFL and it's just apples and oranges.
They should still count. If your system would allow an 8-4 team to beat out an 11-1 team, then you have a terrible system.
Team A plays: Little Sisters of the Poor Houston Baptist Louisiana Directional College #3 Team B plays 3 Power 5 Teams: State School State School State School Why would you punish Team B if they finished the season with the better record among common opponents (conference games)?
And Team A loses to all of those teams while Team B beats all of those teams yet loses 1 game in conference to team A....so Team A ends up in the championship. I mean, it goes both ways. Any system that rewards teams that lose more overall is a bad system. I think conference record is an excellent first or second tiebreaker, but not as the primary criteria for who wins the division.
