If a two loss Alabama would jump a one loss Big XII team that didn’t lose until OT of the Conference Championship game, then why even play the season; just slot Alabama in every year regardless of the results? We all know that UGA lost the SEC Championship game last year but still made the playoffs, which is the exact same position in which TCU is now. Also, Fowler said today that TCU beat five ranked teams this season; they clearly did enough to be there.
TCU - K State
- Thread starter The Spin Meister
- Start date
TCU isn't Georgia. We'll see if the committee ranks them ahead of Bama. Again they could still be 3. They could also be 5
This nonsense with “objective evidence”…. Talk about corporate speak.
Typical outsider's view of science.
“I have a GE black belt!”
Here, you must ask and answer honestly, “Which is most likely?”
It is more likely that Ala is a better team than TCU.
Can I prove it? No, but it’s more likely that if they were to play Alabama would beat them by 21.
Typical outsider's view of science.
“I have a GE black belt!”
Here, you must ask and answer honestly, “Which is most likely?”
It is more likely that Ala is a better team than TCU.
Can I prove it? No, but it’s more likely that if they were to play Alabama would beat them by 21.
No. Georgia is in regardless of what happens in their game.
Today's games determine only the conference champions and perhaps the pairings for the playoff.
It is truly anti-climatic. I just read an article that laments, relative to the playoffs, participants in the championship games can only lose. There is the threat of injury too.
The reality is people want to see new teams. I'd argue we should be ranked higher than TCU without a single win over a ranked opponent. We're a better team. Bana is better than us.
I believe that they’ll be kept at three. mainly to avoid a OSU-Michigan semi-final, which, IMO, would be bad for ratings because it would be too regional.
There is TCU's "by the hair of their chinny chin chin" close win over Baylor that I could see the Committee factoring in to justify jumping ahead another team. Losses (or close wins to unranked teams) at the end of season vs earlier losses where and another team gained an edge.
Right--I agree that's a possibility. They could also be 5 if they like the idea of SEC/SEC vs. Big Ten/Big Ten
Too regional? 17 million watched last week. Highest rated regular season game of the year.
There’s a guy that I work with who is the biggest bandwagon fan in the world. (He roots for the Steelers, gs warriors, astros, bama football and Duke basketball but is from Baltimore) Since he is a Bama fan he is claiming not only that they should be in after TCUs loss but that if the committee decides to keep TCU in, they should be in over Ohio State. It’s annoying as eff to listen to him so I actually hope bama gets in sn uga beats them by 40
They should be in over TCU but the Ohio State part is funny
IIRC the committee has always set things up to avoid rematches in the first round. I feel confident the opening round matchups will be UGA/tOSU and UM/TCU and the rankings be will be set up to correspond.
Georgia's making LSU look like a HS team so Michigan can't go to 1. Not dropping TCU at all could happen but would cause issues when they drop USC
Tennessee deserves it more than Bama (what with winning head to head and all)...it won't happen though.
Again, you refuse to state objective evidence.
You stating TCU would lose to Michigan is irrelevant to your statement about Bama, is subjective opinion, speculation, and is also more misdirection on your front.
Your opinion now about PSU vs Bama as far as resume also is irrelevant and has nothing to do with your original comment about Bama being better than TCU. Also, it is subjective based upon "rankings" for Texas and Miss St., two 4 loss teams compared to Purdue, a 4 loss team. You don't get to pick and choose who is a good 4 loss team. Bama lost to 2 elite teams, so did Psu. Bama also should have lost to Texas, who didn't have their starting qb, but refs clearly helped them. I believe Bama also struggled against Arkansas and A&M. Tenn is also not elite. Tennessee is a 2 loss team who went to OT with Pitt for goodness sake.
Eye test and "all that stuff" isn't objective evidence. It is your bullshit opinion. You still have cited no objective evidence to back up your opinion.
Quit acting like an authority on this board, particularly if you aren't going to back it up with anything other than your big mouth.
Don't remember team injury status being one of the criteria used by the CFP committee, but I'll trust your vast knowledge base of all things college football I suppose
How is it irrelevant? Bama is better and they have the better resume.
The whole thing is subjective but only the committee's opinion matters who you said you don't care what they think
I'm sorry you clearly don't comprehend how college football works
You realize they're ranking the current team, right?
Without Hooker they fall which they did
No way TCU should be in. They’re not the 10th best team in country.
The weak sisters need to at least win their conference title.
The weak sisters need to at least win their conference title.
USC lost by like 3 scores right? And TCU in overtime. It’s perfectly justifiable to treat them differently. Especially in regards to tOSU who has a worse record than TCU but a better one than USC now.
If Alabama and TCU are being compared none of the "listed" criteria is relevant as they both beat Texas...if anything Alabama goes for SOS
- Championships won
- Strength of schedule
- Head‐to‐head competition (if it occurred)
- Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
USC lost by three scores because their QB was injured. If Caleb is healthy for the playoffs how drastically do they improve.
Ohio State and TCU are both looked at as 1 loss teams--there's no one on the committee saying "Ohio State's record is worse"
I mean, we all know the committee is just like for March Madness right?
It's never been about the teams with the best record. They seed them based on resume.
If no one believes TCU > Alabama (which I don't think I've seen anyone say that yet) then what's the issue with Bama going?
It's never been about the teams with the best record. They seed them based on resume.
If no one believes TCU > Alabama (which I don't think I've seen anyone say that yet) then what's the issue with Bama going?
More likely based on what? Again, you are stating your opinion. Opinions are like assholes, every one has one.
So you again are resting on your bullshit opinion. "Bama is better and they have the better resume."
You sound like a 5 year old, "my daddy is better cos I said so!"
If you are going to bully people on these boards, you better have legitimate points backed by something other than how you feel about something.
Based on Alabama having far, far better recruits.
Based on TCU playing in a garbage conference.
I never had that. I heard everything the entire game. Really strange
Those recruits sure looked like world beaters against a number of 4 loss teams.
If TCU was OK, no one would be mentioning conference. Sure love to use Texas win to bolster Bama, a team from that garbage conference.
Correct but they aren't Oklahoma. Although even Oklahoma without a conference title would be nervous.
That has nothing to do with "comparable" teams
See Washington behind K-State and Utah even prior to yesterday and today
The determine who is comparable then break it down.
TCU having 1 loss puts them in a group with Ohio State AND Alabama--we all know that. The "experts" literally keep telling us that even if they're leaning towards TCU getting it--they'll be compared.
Similar threads
