On another level, this year’s national champion is:
Pitt
(I was tracking that “College Football Belt”, which the Belt site has neglected this year. Clemson defended it for several games, before giving it up to Syracuse, who promptly lost it to the 'Canes, who spit up to Panthers on Pittsburgh’s final game of a five-win season. Perhaps they will put together a killer team next fall and defend the belt deep into the season. But I am skeptical.)
Speaking of the Belt… where’s Zeldar this year?
I actually like the four team playoff and believe the comittee picked the right teams. As noted the best team doesn’t always win, and the more teams you let in to a playoff the more likely you end up with a fluke result where the worse team wins. If that’s what you want (and apparently most people do since all the major pro sports and the other major college sports have large playoff fields) that’s fine. I like that there is a system that makes an attempt to determine the which team is the best and not give an inferior team a chance to get lucky on any given day (I’m looking at you 2007 NY Giants).
Except that for Alabama that conference champion thing means that a single loss eliminated them from playing in the conference championship game. In another division of another conference, a team with 2 or even 3 losses could still win its championship, which is one reason why the committee wants to consider more than just a conference champion.
Alabama did not play in a conference championship. If Wisconsin did not play Saturday they would have been undefeated. Seems like Alabama got rewarded for not being at risk.
I think they got rewarded for being a better team.
If you know of a better way to determine who the better team is than to have them play each other, please enlighten us.
Well, you could go out and ask really, really knowledgeable people their opinion, maybe even get them to rank the teams according to how good they think they are… 
For what it’s worth, though I’m fine with Alabama getting in, my assertion would be that Wisconsin deserves to be in over Alabama (marginally better one-loss season), and if Wisconsin goes before 'Bama, then Ohio St. goes over Wisconsin, because on the field results should take precedence.
Remember back to the fun old days when we’d be arguing whether or not the 12-0 UCF Knights would be deserving National Champions if they won their bowl game, or should some one-loss team get it instead? :smack:
I think a system like the NFL uses where the top two teams in each conference get a bye during the first round is a good compromise. Even then we still end up with seasons where the best team loses to an inferior team like the 2007 Giants that I mentioned. If division I college football moved up to 6 rather than 8 teams and gave the top two seeds a bye that would be better than 8 teams. Otherwise you could end up with a 3 loss team like Auburn this year getting lucky and winning a championship even though most people would agree they are not the best team.
No, they got rewarded for being a worse team. They weren’t good enough to get into their conference championship. We know Auburn beat them convincingly, and since Georgia beat Auburn convincingly, it’s very likely Georgia would have beaten Bama convincingly. So by not being good enough to play either team in the championship, Bama avoided a second loss.
And now many, many people are saying they deserve to get in because they only have one loss, while OSU, Auburn, and USC have two or more.
If Alabama had been good enough to play in the SEC championship, they would have two losses. Auburn would also have two losses, and Auburn would have two losses in close games and to good teams, and a win over Bama.
You can argue for Bama getting in for various reasons, but you can’t say they aren’t being rewarded for being worse than Auburn. Heck, they even got an extra bye week while the other teams were playing very tough opponents and getting beat up. How’s that for an unearned bonus?
Aaaand another thing.
If they HAD to put Bama in, they should have put them in the same bracket as Georgia. Bama didn’t win its conference, so they should at least have to beat Georgia to get into the championship game.
The fact that this makes it possible for an all-SEC final is even more disgusting.
Saban obviously has lots of naked pictures of a whole lot of people.
In the NFL, the two conferences have adopted differing styles of play, so the SB is partially an indication of which style is best, in any particular year. The same is essentially true of the various college conferences, but the model seems somehow not the same. Still, two teams from the same conference in the semifinals does feel wrong.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this point. But I’ll just repeat what I’ve said before: the better team doesn’t always win. I think Alabama is a better team than Auburn regardless of what happened in the Iron Bowl.
I’m not so sure; Auburn seemed to have Alabama’s number and they were playing really well until the SEC title game. But they had some injuries on offense that hurt in their rematch against UGA. I think UGA, Auburn, and Bama are the upper echelon of the SEC and any of those could win against each other on a given Saturday.
I haven’t had time to do my full analysis but if I had to pick winners right now, I’d say it will probably be Clemson against Georgia. I want to pick OU but Georgia could beat them with the running game, provided they don’t turn the ball over. If the Dawgs give OU extra possessions, especially in their own territory, then it’s a whole 'nother story.
You’re right. I was thinking about that after I posted. Before Wisconsin’s conf champ game, both teams had very similar strength of schedule (just like they do now) but Wisconsin was undefeated.
But, they did lose their final game on the final weekend of play, which “feels” like more of a problem than losing 1 or 2 weeks earlier.
It’s not logical and there is really no right answer, none of those teams have a good claim including Alabama.
Alabama got rewarded and other teams have been punished because of their reputations. I know it’s not supposed to matter what happened last year and the year before, but it’s impossible to ignore the fact that Alabama usually plays well in January games. Even if they lose, they’re usually competitive. The committee bets that even if Alabama loses, it won’t be a 30-0 shut-out like Ohio State’s embarrassing loss last year, or Michigan State’s 38-0 loss the year before. Wisconsin typically does well in January, too, but they’ve not won a national championship in recent memory; Alabama has. I’m not saying it’s right, just that the committee members are human and are influenced by things that, on some level, kinda make sense.
<boatswain’s whistle> This is the Captain: Go NAVY Beat ARMY. That is all.
Alas, it was not to be. The ground-pounders are now on a 2-game winning streak and the C-in-C’s Trophy is at West Point for the first time since 1996. Dammit.
I love the stat line from that game, Army QB is the leading passer with 1/1 for 20 yards!