All Things Alabama

[MNIrishman]

Mods, can we merge this fellatio fest with the main Alabama thread?

 

[Bishop2b5]

They are a very good team that is often the best, which leads to them getting the benefit of the doubt, which gives them more opportunities than anyone else, which leads to them winning more, which leads to more benefit of the doubt...

Begging the question. For example, do you really believe Bama was the best team in 2011, when LSU not only won against a much tougher slate but already owned the head-to-head coming into the game? What if we applied the same rules to OSU and Michigan in 2006? Would the winner of the rematch be the national champion?

Yes, Bama was the better team in 2011. The first game was decided by a hair. That game could've turned in either direction on any of several different plays and neither team could really claim to be clearly better after the first game. By the NC game though, Bama completely dominated LSU.

You're missing the entire point. The BCS's mission was to put the two best teams in the championship game. Whether they'd played earlier, who the division or conference champion was, or anything else didn't matter. Top two teams. They did that. Let's take a hypothetical example: If you put the Patriots and the Rams in the B1G East, only one of them could win the division and would own the regular season head-to-head. So what? Would they not still be the unquestioned two best teams in CFB?

 

[dad4aa]

That's exactly what it means. They played the game. They lost. No do-overs. If you aren't the best in your division, you cannot, in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER, claim to be the best in the nation. That's just basic logic.

The playoff is the top 4 not the best in the nation. If a team's only loss is a last second FG or a loss in OT to their division rival and they finish second...why does that mean they can't be one of the top 4 in the country?

 

[Irish YJ]

This is something I've thought a lot about. Team A beating Team B does not mean Team A is the better team. It usually does, but sometimes it just means Team A was better that day. We've all seen cases where a 4-7 team upsets a 10-0 team. Sometimes a bad call or a bad break decides the game and the better team loses. Sometimes Team A plays their best game of the year and Team B their worst. Sometimes Team A will get worse as the season goes on and Team B gets better. By the end of the season, there's little doubt that B is the better team. They just weren't 3 months before. Sometimes B is better than A overall, but A presents matchup problems. Sometimes B has 3 key players out that day or is dealing with half the team being sick with the flu. We've all seen cases where A beats B who beats C and C beats A. No logical way each is definitely better than the team it beat. Every year there are teams ranked in the final poll ahead of teams they lost to.

Yup. This year, scUM could improve and be better than ND at the end of the year. USC could improve, beat ND, then beat Stanford (a team that beat them @Stanford), and have a legitimate claim to be one of the best teams at the end of the season, even with two losses. People want to be black and white. That doesn't work. CFP's goal is to take the best 4 teams at the END of the season. While I hate that Bama went without even winning their Div or Conf, Bama proved it on the field at the end of the day via THE PLAYOFF.... which is the process we live with now.

 

[TheIrishAre#1]

Yes, Bama was the better team in 2011. The first game was decided by a hair. That game could've turned in either direction on any of several different plays and neither team could really claim to be clearly better after the first game. By the NC game though, Bama completely dominated LSU.

You're missing the entire point. The BCS's mission was to put the two best teams in the championship game. Whether they'd played earlier, who the division or conference champion was, or anything else didn't matter. Top two teams. They did that. Let's take a hypothetical example: If you put the Patriots and the Rams in the B1G East, only one of them could win the division and would own the regular season head-to-head. So what? Would they not still be the unquestioned two best teams in CFB?

I'm really not convinced that Alabama was the better team in 2011. As far as I'm concerned, because the game was a rematch of a regular season game, the series between LSU and Alabama tied at 1 game a piece that season. I understand that it was bound to happen eventually, but, prior to the "playoff" (which still doesn't feel like a true playoff) I was a big believer in the idea that the regular season was analogous to a playoff. It's also worth pointing out that the difference between #2 (Alabama) and #3 (Oklahoma State) was the smallest margin throughout the history of the BCS, so to think that the top two was unquestioned is revisionist history, at best. I really don't believe that it's clear cut that Bama was the best team that year, and I really feel that a rematch as the title game opened Pandora's box, because I truly believe LSU would have won a 7 game series against Alabama that year. That box shouldn't have been opened, because LSU "won" the series against Alabama, in my eyes.

Now that there's some sort of playoff, I'm willing to abandon the idea that the regular season is a playoff, even if it should probably be expanded if we're going to start taking it seriously. Of course, you have to expand in a way that preserves the integrity and the history of bowl games.

Other than 2011, I have no qualms with any of Bama's playoff or BCS appearances.

For the record, I hate Alabama, so I am biased. But if the season was 7 games where Bama and LSU played each other every week, LSU wins. And Notre Dame is the 1973 champion, not Alabama.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Consider this thread a prelude of whats to come:

12-1 Michigan gets the last playoff spot this year over 11-1 ND, because the committee sees them as a better team.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheIrishAre#1]

Consider this thread a prelude of whats to come:

12-1 Michigan gets the last playoff spot this year over 11-1 ND, because the committee sees them as a better team.

It's okay, I didn't need my liver.

 

[NDRock]

So any wild card team in the NFL that wins the Super Bowl doesn't count?

Depends, did the wild card team get in based on the results on the field or were they chosen by a committee based on the "eye test"?

I do love the regular season of college football but between the committee and the long gap after the season, the playoff isn't that exciting. Much prefer the NFL playoffs.

 

[irishtrain]

No ones beating this team.. first of all.

The most impressive thing is the size of these players up and down the roster. I don’t know what they’re doing (deer antler spray ) but holy hell.

We’re dealing with ELITE size and speed at EVERY position.

How are they compiling a roster unlike ANYONEelse in the nation?

Very few times in the history of a sport or sports organization has one team/university been allowed to absolutely ruin the sport. Grow some hair on your %$# NCAA and take a look at this mess.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Very few times in the history of a sport or sports organization has one team/university been allowed to absolutely ruin the sport. Grow some hair on your %$# NCAA and take a look at this mess.

I'm not looking for an argument. I'd just like to hear why you think the sport's been ruined and what Bama has done to do so.

 

[Bishop2b5]

I'm really not convinced that Alabama was the better team in 2011. As far as I'm concerned, because the game was a rematch of a regular season game, the series between LSU and Alabama tied at 1 game a piece that season. I understand that it was bound to happen eventually, but, prior to the "playoff" (which still doesn't feel like a true playoff) I was a big believer in the idea that the regular season was analogous to a playoff. It's also worth pointing out that the difference between #2 (Alabama) and #3 (Oklahoma State) was the smallest margin throughout the history of the BCS, so to think that the top two was unquestioned is revisionist history, at best. I really don't believe that it's clear cut that Bama was the best team that year, and I really feel that a rematch as the title game opened Pandora's box, because I truly believe LSU would have won a 7 game series against Alabama that year. That box shouldn't have been opened, because LSU "won" the series against Alabama, in my eyes.

Now that there's some sort of playoff, I'm willing to abandon the idea that the regular season is a playoff, even if it should probably be expanded if we're going to start taking it seriously. Of course, you have to expand in a way that preserves the integrity and the history of bowl games.

Other than 2011, I have no qualms with any of Bama's playoff or BCS appearances.

For the record, I hate Alabama, so I am biased. But if the season was 7 games where Bama and LSU played each other every week, LSU wins. And Notre Dame is the 1973 champion, not Alabama.

There's no perfect system. Everyone complained decades ago about how there were almost a dozen recognized polls, which led to several different teams being named champion. That eventually led to the AP & Coaches polls becoming the only "voice of authority" but even then they sometimes differed and there were complaints about it being nothing more than a beauty contest, not to mention the fact that at various times, either or both of them named their NC after the bowls or ignored the bowls as irrelevant. The BCS tried to use computer systems to take out much of the human error and bias, but that often led to unrealistic results and still relied mainly on the eye test. Now we have a playoff, and it has its own problems, or at least a lot of people who don't like the committee's method of determining who the top 4 teams are. A playoff somewhat lessens the importance of the regular season, especially if you expand it to 8 or 16 teams. Fewer than that, and most will complain that their team got left out. In the end, there's no system for determining the NC that's going to make everyone happy.

 

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

There's no perfect system. Everyone complained decades ago about how there were almost a dozen recognized polls, which led to several different teams being named champion. That eventually led to the AP & Coaches polls becoming the only "voice of authority" but even then they sometimes differed and there were complaints about it being nothing more than a beauty contest, not to mention the fact that at various times, either or both of them named their NC after the bowls or ignored the bowls as irrelevant. The BCS tried to use computer systems to take out much of the human error and bias, but that often led to unrealistic results and still relied mainly on the eye test. Now we have a playoff, and it has its own problems, or at least a lot of people who don't like the committee's method of determining who the top 4 teams are. A playoff somewhat lessens the importance of the regular season, especially if you expand it to 8 or 16 teams. Fewer than that, and most will complain that their team got left out. In the end, there's no system for determining the NC that's going to make everyone happy.

There's always gonna be people that are disgruntled, regardless of the process or it's overall efficiency. I believe that this is hands down the best way to determine a champion. It should increase to 8 teams though, it would be hard to argue that your team got snubbed if you couldn't crack the Top 8 teams in the country, regardless of how subjective the selection process was.

 

[Bishop2b5]

There's always gonna be people that are disgruntled, regardless of the process or it's overall efficiency. I believe that this is hands down the best way to determine a champion. It should increase to 8 teams though, it would be hard to argue that your team got snubbed if you couldn't crack the Top 8 teams in the country, regardless of how subjective the selection process was.

I think the current playoff system is better than anything we've had before. I agree with you about an 8-team field making it difficult to argue that you missed a legit chance to be champion. I'm still not convinced that expanding to 8 teams is best though, as it does reduce the importance of the regular season. Good arguments either way and I'm just undecided as of now.

 

[IrishLax]

There's no perfect system. Everyone complained decades ago about how there were almost a dozen recognized polls, which led to several different teams being named champion. That eventually led to the AP & Coaches polls becoming the only "voice of authority" but even then they sometimes differed and there were complaints about it being nothing more than a beauty contest, not to mention the fact that at various times, either or both of them named their NC after the bowls or ignored the bowls as irrelevant. The BCS tried to use computer systems to take out much of the human error and bias, but that often led to unrealistic results and still relied mainly on the eye test. Now we have a playoff, and it has its own problems, or at least a lot of people who don't like the committee's method of determining who the top 4 teams are. A playoff somewhat lessens the importance of the regular season, especially if you expand it to 8 or 16 teams. Fewer than that, and most will complain that their team got left out. In the end, there's no system for determining the NC that's going to make everyone happy.

8 teams keeps all the importance on the regular season, and in fact adds some, because of the reasonable ability to play your way in with one loss. It will get teams to stop being so scared of scheduling big OOC games.

16 is too much and I agree. You shouldn't have a bunch of 2 and 3 loss teams angling for playoff spots.

With 8, you do 5 conference champions which puts TONS of emphasis on conference races and means that those teams can schedule a big OOC game without fear of getting left out as a one-loss conference champ. Then you do next 3 at large based on resume (with one going to highest ranked champ of Group of 5 if they're undefeated).

Last year, the playoffs would've been:

Georgia
Ohio State
Oklahoma
USC (only a 2 loss team because they went to play @Notre Dame)
Clemson

Alabama
Wisconsin (undefeated until Big Ten championship game)
UCF

It's hard to make a case that all 8 didn't have some sort of logical argument for playoff inclusion.

The year before that it would've been:
Alabama
Clemson
Penn State
Washington
Oklahoma

Ohio State
Michigan
Western Michigan

The year before that it would've been:
Clemson
Alabama
Michigan State
Oklahoma
Stanford

Iowa
Ohio State
Notre Dame

In all of these instances, 8 teams seems preferable to 4. Gives the "little guy" a shot with the #1 seed being rewarded, limits the amount of semifinal snoozers by bouncing teams like Michigan State in the round of 8.

 

[ickythump1225]

Yeah 8 team playoffs are the way to go. I would prefer the BCS system with the top 8 making it over the committee. I don't trust the committee at all.

 

[Bishop2b5]

I'm not 100% convinced, but I tend to lean toward agreeing with you, Lax. I'd have no problem with going to 8 teams. I agree that 16 is too many.

If it went to 8, when would the quarter final games be, early to mid December a week or two after the conference championships, or play all three rounds after Christmas?

 

[ACamp1900]

The playoff is stupid, talk about taking everything unique and special about the sport and shitting all over it... but let’s continue to expand it more and more and further derail the bowls, regionality and such for a playoff that will never fully solve things. It’s so deflating

 

[IrishLax]

I'm not 100% convinced, but I tend to lean toward agreeing with you, Lax. I'd have no problem with going to 8 teams. I agree that 16 is too many.

If it went to 8, when would the quarter final games be, early to mid December a week or two after the conference championships, or play all three rounds after Christmas?

Good question, I tend to think they should be done 2 weeks after conference championships... so December 15th this year? ...and then Bowl Season kicks off shortly thereafter after, Semifinals around New Years, and championship a week after that.

 

[Bishop2b5]

The playoff is stupid, talk about taking everything unique and special about the sport and shitting all over it... but let’s continue to expand it more and more and further derail the bowls, regionality and such for a playoff that will never fully solve things. It’s so deflating

I get that and don't completely disagree with you, but almost everyone griped about the polls selecting a champion after the bowls, calling it too subjective and a beauty contest. There's no system that's without drawbacks and that will please everyone. What would you think about going back to the old pre-BCS bowl system and matching the two best teams after the bowls for an NC game?

 

[NDRock]

I get that and don't completely disagree with you, but almost everyone griped about the polls selecting a champion after the bowls, calling it too subjective and a beauty contest. There's no system that's without drawbacks and that will please everyone. What would you think about going back to the old pre-BCS bowl system and matching the two best teams after the bowls for an NC game?

I never really thought the +1 model really solved anything. There were plenty of years where there was one undefeated team after the bowls and several 1 loss teams. Then it becomes, "who of the 1 loss teams is really #2?". Same old arguments

 

[ACamp1900]

I thought going back to pre bcs when every big bowl mattered and was must see TV and relying on the polls was the most win/win... adding a plus one AFTER the bowls when needed, like with a spilt poll or very close 1/2 would have been me. I know with money involved that wouldn’t have happened. It’s money that’s driving this, not fairness or ‘truth’ ... playoffs rarely ever bring those... in any sport, especially once you expand them

 

[NDMIA]

Nick Saban sounds off on Alabama students for not showing up for Louisiana-LaFayette game

vs. Louisville 2-3
Arkansas State 3-2
@ Ole Miss 3-2
Texas A&M 3-2
Louisiana 1-3
@ Arkansas 1-4
Missouri 3-1
@ Tennessee 2-3

Maybe students don’t show up cause Bama plays a garbage schedule. They are definitely the best looking team in the country but I’d love to see the day where people actually rank teams based on what they’ve done this year and who they’ve played in the 2018 season. D3 rankings are the order you finished in college basketball the year before and D1 should be better than that. I’m not saying Bama isn’t the best team in the country or the most talented but I figure they should earn it by playing some people. They’ll get there by the end of the year but they shouldn’t be there now. They don’t have a good strength of schedule yet at all.

 

[T-Boone]

People are tired of you Nick.

 

[NorthDakota]

I sympathize with Alabama students. When i was in school, we won JV Natty's 4 of my 5 years at school. By the time I was a super senior, I left by halftime, if I came to the game at all. Turns out, beating the living shit out og bad football teams isn't that fun to watch.

 

[BGIF]

Nick Saban sounds off on Alabama students for not showing up for Louisiana-LaFayette game

vs. Louisville 2-3
Arkansas State 3-2
@ Ole Miss 3-2
Texas A&M 3-2
Louisiana 1-3
@ Arkansas 1-4
Missouri 3-1
@ Tennessee 2-3

Maybe students don’t show up cause Bama plays a garbage schedule. They are definitely the best looking team in the country but I’d love to see the day where people actually rank teams based on what they’ve done this year and who they’ve played in the 2018 season. D3 rankings are the order you finished in college basketball the year before and D1 should be better than that. I’m not saying Bama isn’t the best team in the country or the most talented but I figure they should earn it by playing some people. They’ll get there by the end of the year but they shouldn’t be there now. They don’t have a good strength of schedule yet at all.

But they're in the SEC!

Because Alabama and Auburn face each other in the last game of the year do you expect them to play someone like ... Navy, Sagarin's 81st ranked team, ... or 0-4 Nebraska at #83, ... or 0-4 UCLA at #84 the week before and risk screwing up the Conference's Championship/Playoff Springboard to the Title Game ?

No, Alabama faces faces The Citadel while Auburn practices against Liberty College. Sagarin lists 1aa Citadel as his 177th ranked team. Liberty an ersatz 1A team is ranked at a powerful 134th.

 

[Irishnuke]

Nick Saban sounds off on Alabama students for not showing up for Louisiana-LaFayette game

vs. Louisville 2-3
Arkansas State 3-2
@ Ole Miss 3-2
Texas A&M 3-2
Louisiana 1-3
@ Arkansas 1-4
Missouri 3-1
@ Tennessee 2-3

Maybe students don’t show up cause Bama plays a garbage schedule. They are definitely the best looking team in the country but I’d love to see the day where people actually rank teams based on what they’ve done this year and who they’ve played in the 2018 season. D3 rankings are the order you finished in college basketball the year before and D1 should be better than that. I’m not saying Bama isn’t the best team in the country or the most talented but I figure they should earn it by playing some people. They’ll get there by the end of the year but they shouldn’t be there now. They don’t have a good strength of schedule yet at all.

If that's the case then there's no point in ranking the teams for the first, what, third of the season? As far as Bama's schedule being weak, they do have a couple cupcakes and some teams that are weak, but they have to beat who is on their schedule. I understand giving them shit about Ark State and ULLLLL, but it's not their fault that Louisville, TAMU, Ole Miss, and Tennessee are mediocre or garbage. Some of those are traditional powers and some have been quite good recently. BTW I am fine with not ranking teams for the first 4 games, but that will never happen.

 

[Irish#1]

It's like the addict. For a while a single dose gets you high and feeling good. After a while you require more and more. Bama fans are so accustomed to winning they need more than a win to get excited. lol

Wish BK had this problem.

 

[RDU Irish]

I've said it before but I would be pissed if I were a Bama season ticket holder. Pay for seven games and get maybe one per year worth attending. Interesting dynamic in the playoff ticket market - seems the playoff game with Bama is much lower demand than whatever the other one is. Combo of their fans saving their wad for the Championship and the opposing team presuming they will lose.

Saban squawking at students for finding something better to do for a 100-0 romp of a junior college might be an indicator that recruits see the stands and a team like ND that has engaged fans for all six home games can be a big plus. (so why not make it 7 home games Jack!)

 

[Wingman Ray]

I've said it before but I would be pissed if I were a Bama season ticket holder. Pay for seven games and get maybe one per year worth attending. Interesting dynamic in the playoff ticket market - seems the playoff game with Bama is much lower demand than whatever the other one is. Combo of their fans saving their wad for the Championship and the opposing team presuming they will lose.

Saban squawking at students for finding something better to do for a 100-0 romp of a junior college might be an indicator that recruits see the stands and a team like ND that has engaged fans for all six home games can be a big plus. (so why not make it 7 home games Jack!)

This. This is a real issue. I spoke to a season ticket holder in my office and these tickets arent cheap. Then add in the "Saban fee" and it gets pretty steep. Then to have for two games a year really hurts. Bunch of crap in reality but Bama tickets are in supply because Bama has been so successful since they hired Saban that if people give the tickets up, there will be two more to pick them up. So Bama isnt worried about losing money.

But doesnt make it right. Until teams like Bama and OSU are punished for playing cupcakes, why shouldnt they?

 

[T Town Tommy]

I've said it before but I would be pissed if I were a Bama season ticket holder. Pay for seven games and get maybe one per year worth attending. Interesting dynamic in the playoff ticket market - seems the playoff game with Bama is much lower demand than whatever the other one is. Combo of their fans saving their wad for the Championship and the opposing team presuming they will lose.

Saban squawking at students for finding something better to do for a 100-0 romp of a junior college might be an indicator that recruits see the stands and a team like ND that has engaged fans for all six home games can be a big plus. (so why not make it 7 home games Jack!)

As one of those season ticket holders you mentioned, I despise the neutral site games and can't wait for the upcoming home and home series that's coming in the future. I, like many Bama fans, are upset at the lack of quality OOC opponents coming the Bryant Denny every year. I get no joy out of watching Bama beat a nobody and have given away my tickets for the last 3-4 years to less fortunate people so they can go to these games.

As far as everything else, it isn't Bama's responsibility to back up to any teams - especially SEC teams. It's their responsibility to catch up.