forums

Shots fired at Bama

Advertisement
classiccane12 said:
G5 should not be automatic but you could write in provisions like if a G5 is undefeated or ranked top 15 or top 10 then they automatically get the bid.
Click to expand...

There's a bias against G5. Not saying it's always wrong, but it's there, so expecting the top G5 team to make the top 15 isn't realistic. The voters are completely capable of ranking an undefeated directional school #16...and I'm not sure they'd be wrong.

Part of this idea is to take that argument out of it. Let the top G5 team in so we can see if they're as good as the big boys. And the truth is that the last team in a 6 or 8 team playoff isn't going to win it all very often, so I'm comfortable leaving that 3rd sec team out.
 
Whose ****ing? Cali student has a hard on for UCF and the rest have it for a barren muff they are mad didn't win an election...
 
RBhurricane87 said:
Lol Bama has 11 "National Championships" prior to 1980, and 17 total "claimed" NCs.

I think the rule of thumb should be that NCs only really count if they happened after CFB was fully integrated.

This is an interesting interactive map somebody on Reddit made:

Integration of CFB Map
Click to expand...

well truth be told INTERGRATION was the reason Bama was NOT awarded the 1966 National Championship!

even though Alabama went undefeated in 1966 and had won back to back championships in '65 & 64' they didn't have any black players on the roster and because of this, the media banned them from the Polls

Nebraska the big 8 champs at the time believe it or not, were one of the few teams in college football that started black players, in fact the entire cornhusker starting defense in 66' were African Americans.

Well someone thought it would be pretty funny to match these teams up in the Sugar Bowl to teach Bama and Bear Bryant a lesson,
since the cornhuskers starting D-line outweighed Bama's O-line by 35lbs a man and machine like option attack,
but Bear Bryant and Alabama beat their *** 34-7.
so Bama went undefeated 3 years in a row, smashed Nebraska in the SUGAR BOWL but only finished #3 to 2 one loss teams in front of them, ND and MSU. for the record I hate Alabama but I do love college football history
 
Advertisement
kryptonite said:
There's a bias against G5. Not saying it's always wrong, but it's there, so expecting the top G5 team to make the top 15 isn't realistic. The voters are completely capable of ranking an undefeated directional school #16...and I'm not sure they'd be wrong.

Part of this idea is to take that argument out of it. Let the top G5 team in so we can see if they're as good as the big boys. And the truth is that the last team in a 6 or 8 team playoff isn't going to win it all very often, so I'm comfortable leaving that 3rd sec team out.
Click to expand...

The problem though is that the goal is ultimately to put the BEST teams in no matter what size the playoff is. I agree that with an 8 team playoff just give a G5 an automatic slot bc there is more than enough room with that many teams.

But with a 6 team playoff (let alone 4), an auto bid for a G5 is not living by the standard of putting the best 6 teams in. Most years, the 6 best teams are all P5. Only once every few years does a G5 team really jump up into the top 10 conversation (and stay there). So you would be completely eliminating the most likely combination of 6 best teams every year bc you're afraid voters will rank a G5 team 16 instead of 15. No matter how bias you think voters are against G5 teams, the solution is not to just give them a spot at the expense of better teams. That ruins the entire credibility of the game and the champion in an entirely different way.

I'm not saying it is easy for a G5 team to get a spot, but maybe it shouldn't be easy. G5 teams are simply not as good as P5. It's not a shock, there is just less talent to work with (for those that are so upset about our recruiting class go look at those). When a G5 team really deserves to be in the playoff they will. UCF did not deserve to be there IMO Schedule was just too weak. That was widely known as a priority for the playoff criteria way long ago. Sorry sometimes life ain't fair homie play someone better than USF
 
classiccane12 said:
The problem though is that the goal is ultimately to put the BEST teams in no matter what size the playoff is. I agree that with an 8 team playoff just give a G5 an automatic slot bc there is more than enough room with that many teams.

But with a 6 team playoff (let alone 4), an auto bid for a G5 is not living by the standard of putting the best 6 teams in. Most years, the 6 best teams are all P5. Only once every few years does a G5 team really jump up into the top 10 conversation (and stay there). So you would be completely eliminating the most likely combination of 6 best teams every year bc you're afraid voters will rank a G5 team 16 instead of 15. No matter how bias you think voters are against G5 teams, the solution is not to just give them a spot at the expense of better teams. That ruins the entire credibility of the game and the champion in an entirely different way.

I'm not saying it is easy for a G5 team to get a spot, but maybe it shouldn't be easy. G5 teams are simply not as good as P5. It's not a shock, there is just less talent to work with (for those that are so upset about our recruiting class go look at those). When a G5 team really deserves to be in the playoff they will. UCF did not deserve to be there IMO Schedule was just too weak. That was widely known as a priority for the playoff criteria way long ago. Sorry sometimes life ain't fair homie play someone better than USF
Click to expand...

This is one of those problems of bias and perception and as you point out it can't really be solved by changing the rules. Voters need to be open minded enough to honestly rank that truly good G5 team when it comes along. But that can't be legislated, you can't force somebody to have an open mind. What you can do is force somebody to put that G5 team in.

It's far from perfect.
 
ddann said:
I don't even recognize Bama's most recent title as being legit. Not after that clown show the refs put on in the title game.
Click to expand...

as someone that refused to watch that natty championship..

enlighten me
 
Advertisement
classiccane12 said:
Those NC claimed by bama were not recognized by everybody, but they were recognized by something other than themselves. Those were the times of multiple polls with no single official rankings system and split national championships. Not to defend bama, bc it is pretty lame to claim a NC from some semi-national regional newspaper in the 30s, but why so many seem to defend UCFs ridiculous self proclaimed "NC" baffles me.
Click to expand...
That happened because at the time the Coaches Poll would put there final votes in before the Bowl games and that created that mess. So even though Bama lost. The Coaches Poll had voted them National Champs for the Season and they sure didn’t fight it!!! Lol
 
Not for nothing, claiming National Titles during segregation is like Japan claiming they won WWII after Pearl Harbor.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top