forums

And So It Begins- eSECpn Can't Control Themselves

Tad Footeball

Tad Footeball

1996 Interim Big East Conference Commissioner
Joined
Feb 6, 2014
Messages
19,337
Build that narrative. Disseminate that propaganda. The earlier the better!

Screenshot_20171101-074118.webp
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
I think it's a valid question. If Georgia has one loss and it's close one to bama and notre dame wins out then Georgia has head to head over notre dame and technically the "best" loss


I don't think the committee will do it but I don't think it's propaganda for sec.. now their podcasts are unbearable and 99% SEC talk
 
All they care abo T is espousing SEC narratives and brainwashing morons into believing 2 SEC teams should be in the playoff every year.
 
407cane said:
I think it's a valid question. If Georgia has one loss and it's close one to bama and notre dame wins out then Georgia has head to head over notre dame and technically the "best" loss


I don't think the committee will do it but I don't think it's propaganda for sec.. now their podcasts are unbearable and 99% SEC talk
Click to expand...

This is the extent I'm actually going to humor this propaganda:

Bama will finish this season IF they win out and beat UGA with a win over ONE team that finished the regular season ranked. THAT should be as much a barometer as those that somehow now want to factor in "program pedigree" (of a NON defending champion!) when discussing polling and playoff slots.

Secondly, shame on you and your family for even asserting that Notre Dame might win out. Have you no shame, sir? Have you no shame?!
 
With Alabama playing LSU in the championship several years ago, the question has some precedent.
 
How can they say that an undefeated Wisconsin might have trouble getting in the playoff because they Big Ten West is so bad but Georgia is #1 despite playing the in the god-awful SEC East?

Basically a 1-point win over Notre Dame is their answer.

It's insane.
 
The Franchise said:
All they care abo T is espousing SEC narratives and brainwashing morons into believing 2 SEC teams should be in the playoff every year.
Click to expand...

I used to think they just did it as much to pander to some SEC viewership as they did to "embrace debate" and **** off the rest of the country. That's not true though. They're just lazy group thinkers in general that do succumb to the narratives pushed by their college football pundits- of which a disproportionate amount are of SEC lineage. Like I don't need to randomly tune into an ESPN college football show- not one on The SEC Nerwork- and have the talking heads be Pollack, Booger and Greg McElroy.....with a useless female moderator.....and a segment with Finebaum. I live in South Florida not THE South.
 
My main point here wasn't even going to be to get into all kinds of hypotheticals but more just to illustrate that eSECpn couldn't even wait until the first rankings were released before trying to plant the seed of the plausibility of two SEC teams getting in.

That said, wouldn't a more intellectually honest debate be "How far should Bama fall if other teams remain unbeaten too?". I want to force people to quantify now how they're giving and will give credit for historical program reputation vs the current 2017 schedule. Aren't we supposed to look at every year within a bubble of that year ONLY?
 
Advertisement
A one loss B1G champ is in. The SEC champ is in. A one loss Clemson or undefeated Miami is in. A one loss Big12 or ND is in.

There is no room for this 2 SEC teams non sense. It's pie in the sky bull**** that will not happen. Let's just stop talking about it.

The SEC championship will be a de facto playoff play in game and will be treated as such. THE END.
 
Kn[]_[]ckles3o5;3064738 said:
A one loss B1G champ is in. The SEC champ is in. A one loss Clemson or undefeated Miami is in. A one loss Big12 or ND is in.

There is no room for this 2 SEC teams non sense. It's pie in the sky bull**** that will not happen. Let's just stop talking about it.

The SEC championship will be a de facto playoff play in game and will be treated as such. THE END.
Click to expand...

This x100. This is the first week of the rankings. The entire **** season has yet to play out.

This remind me of the very first release of the CFP rankings in 2014. I believe it was Ole Miss #1 , and Miss. St. #2 . And both proceeded to lose the next week.

It'll take care of itself.
 
The fact that they will play each other the game before the playoffs begin is enough of a reason to rule one out. Treat it as an extra round of the playoffs. Nobody wants to see that matchup 2 games in a row. Give them one shot to win. Make winning your conference mean something
 
We saw the Criteria they have for the selection and Conference Championship does have priority.
People may bring up Penn State but their reasoning was that they lost 2 games while O$U lost only 1.
So if there is a Conference Champion who has the same record as UGA in this weird hypothetical I think they would have to pick the Conference Champion. I don't think the committee could wiggle their way out of it.
 
OP is very astute. This is indeed a perfect example of propaganda and pushing a narrative to drive up their own ratings.

This is why IDGAF where Gameday goes. No place for begging a propagandist for approval......
 
The only issue with assuming this corrects itself and only 1 SEC team gets in (which I too think will be the case again THIS year) is that we're basing it off all the past Playoff years where Bama dominated that conference and didn't need a helping hand to get in (and no other SEC team was remotely relative). IF that somehow changes and the SEC East becomes relative and wins that conference, do you guys really think that a 1 loss Bama is never going to be unfairly greased into a second SEC Playoff spot at least once at the expense of possibly even an undefeated conference champion? These clowns were already trying to say how a 1 loss Bama OR Georgia could have a case against an undefeated Wisconsin.
 
Last edited:
Yep they have been pushing that narrative since the beginning of the season.
Heck they would even push for a two loss sec to make it if it means two sec teams are in.
 
Advertisement
Wisconsin and their Conference would make a huge stink about it.
Which could be a catalyst to make it a 6 or 8 team tournament in future.

A lot of people attribute the LSU-Bama BCS game for being the main event to spark the invention of this Playoff in the first place. Would not shock me if having two SEC teams stirs the pot again in changing the whole post season landscape again.
 
I wonder how the ESPN narrative will fit if Bama flat out dominates UGA in the SEC title game. The competition that UGA has faced sans Notre Dame has been pretty mediocre. Kudos to them for at least blowing out their competition.
 
Colombie said:
Wisconsin and their Conference would make a huge stink about it.
Which could be a catalyst to make it a 6 or 8 team tournament in future.

A lot of people attribute the LSU-Bama BCS game for being the main event to spark the invention of this Playoff in the first place. Would not shock me if having two SEC teams stirs the pot again in changing the whole post season landscape again.
Click to expand...

This would be the only net positive from it in my eyes. To have the Big Ten fee sooooo aggrieved that they actually exercise their power to initiate change OR (less likely) for a Bama or Georgia to somehow feel screwed and then the SEC cultists jump onboard with needing an expanded Playoff of 5 conf winners + 3 at large to accommodate all of their "elite" teams.
 
Georgia and Alabama will play on a neutral field to end the season.

That's their playoff. The winner is in, the loser is out. Simple as that.

And I think the committee will see it that way too. Unless everyone else below them completely craters at the end of the year.
 
Back
Top