SMU or Alabama
- Thread starter DirtyJohns97
- Start date
Bama will get in, SMU should, but Bama will get in, they always do.
Difference is they won't make noise if they do...Saban is gone.
Difference is they won't make noise if they do...Saban is gone.
Hoping SMU keeping it that close pushes Bama out the door. But you know the powers that be at ESPN and the committee won't keep a brand name like Bama out.
Sorry SMU, but this is you:
Sorry SMU, but this is you:
Bama does NOT deserve to be in playoffs. But ESPN corrupted playoff system will ensure that they are in.
The right thing is SMU but the money thing is Bama so most likely it will be Bama.
I’m not sure about that. Seems like their wet dream would be a 3-loss bama team traveling to a big ten school and winning there. Plus, the money thing. I bet bama gets in.
This. Not only will it meet their four team obligation to the SEC, but it will create a nice little controversy for their talking heads to discuss ad nauseum.
Did you watch and listen to the commentary of the SEC championship game yesterday? If you played a drinking game where you had to take a shot every time the announcers said both teams were already guaranteed a spot and they were just playing for seeding? While UGA was losing and would have had 3 losses? You'd be hammered v
I can't wait to see the thumbnail of two ESPN sports opinionists with upset faces about all of this. With a caption saying something like Stephen A McAfee disappointed by CFP decision to do the thing.
I mean, other than their 24-3 drubbing at the hands of Oklahoma two weeks ago and their loss to Vandy, their resume is solid.
Last edited:
SMU didn’t lose to multiple .500 teams, getting blown out by one most recently.
I am going to chuckle a bit if the final four is: Bama, Clemson, OSU and Texas.
The more things change the more they are the same.
The more things change the more they are the same.
Alabama has worse losses but also has better wins. SMU didn’t play any teams thst are currently ranked until last night. And in a “win and you’re in” game against the #17 team, they didn’t get the job done. Their best wins were Louisville and Duke.
Alabama played four games against teams that are currently ranked and won three of them, including the team that is currently #5 and ls probably going to move up to 2 or 3.
I think you can make a valid argument for choosing either team. But neither team can truly cry foul if they aren’t chosen because neither of then won their conference and they both have red flags on their resume.
The argument shouldn't be who is in and who isn't. The argument should be why are teams ranked before week 6? JFC, 8 of the top 10 teams in the preseason poll were from the SEC. An exaggeration, but the point remains. When you start the season ranked top 10 and you suffer a loss, how far are you actually going to fall?
One of them at least made their conference championship game. I don't believe teams should be punished because they made it to the conference championship.
They made it to the title game because they played an easy schedule. They didn’t have to play Miami or Clemson or Syracuse. No ranked teams at all. And when they finally did have to play one of those teams, they lost.
Okay TJ we are not going to agree. Can you think of another 3 loss team in the country that would be considered for the playoffs that got blown out in its next to last game to a team that had won only 1 other conference game this year?
That's fair, but SMU only had one loss on their schedule up to last night's game. Is it fair to penalize them for playing in the ACC Championship (losing by a walk off FG) by moving Alabama, who didn't play in their conference championship, above them?
I can see both sides way more for this compared to what they did to FSU last year.
Can we all take a moment to once again remember how outrageous it was they left an undefeated FSU and P4 conference game winner out last year for a team that lost a game.
No one SMU has beaten is currently in the top 25. They are meh in terms of CFP.
I understand why fans think Alabama should be out with those bad losses, but to say SMU is more deserving is ridiculous. It’s pretty much a wash IMO, but if I had to pick one I am going with the team who beat Georgia.
I understand why fans think Alabama should be out with those bad losses, but to say SMU is more deserving is ridiculous. It’s pretty much a wash IMO, but if I had to pick one I am going with the team who beat Georgia.
I cannot. Can you name any teams in the playoff who didn’t even play a ranked team all season and then blew their one chance to beat a ranked team in their conference title game?
Ordinarily I would say it’s not fair to penalize a team for losing in their conference title game, especially if fhey are playing a team they have already beat.
But SMU didn’t have to play any of the other three ranked ACC teams on their way to the title game. So the title game takes on more significance than it would have if SMU had already beaten Clemson or Miami or Syracuse in getting there.
You can only play the schedule you are given. Rankings especially early in the year are worthless. Heck Iowa was one of the ranked teams Iowa State beat because at the time Iowa was ranked.
That’s why I’m basing my comments on current rankings.
And you’re correct that you can only play the schedule you are given. But if the schedule you are given doesn’t include any ranked teams and the title game is your one chance to show the selection committee that you can beat a ranked team then you should probably take advantage of that opportunity.
Kirk and Nick are really sad that Alabama isn't in the playoffs.
