Jump to content

bullet

Full Members
  • Posts

    3184
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by bullet

  1. 42 minutes ago, blutow said:

    Not so sure, I thought Georgia looked pretty pedestrian yesterday.  I honestly haven't watched them play much this year, so maybe the last couple weeks are a byproduct of some of the injuries or just bad days.  That said, I'm certainly enjoying the desperation coming out of Georgia right now.  I guess it's Kirby's job to fight to the end, but the optics are delightfully pathetic.   

    Alabama was just hungrier.

    And it was only 27-24.  UGA did have their top 2 receivers (and difference makers) limping on the field and their #3 receiver out as well as a starting offensive lineman.  But UGA knows they are out.  Kirby is just doing his coach speak.

    Its a game of inches.  UGA had a FG bounce off an upright.  UGA had a hand on a fumble, but Alabama managed to get in a grab it, leading to an Alabama FG.  Alabama got credit for a catch that wasn't on a 4th and 4 that lead to an Alabama TD.

    If any of those 3 close things go the other way, its OT or UGA wins.  I do think Kirby's offensive play calling after the first drive (where they walked down the field) was pretty weak.  Alabama has been burned on deep balls this season and UGA almost never tried, despite two Alabama corners being out.

  2. 2 hours ago, chemHORN said:

    The same can be said for the PAC12 in my opinion.  A few were ranked high to start the season.  Nobody in the Pac 12 played anybody in OOC play and they won all of them giving way more of them lofty rankings than deserved. (Oregon Beat Tech by 1 score and probably should've lost that game). Then they just played each other with those lofty rankings and made it look like they were good.  I said it earlier in this thread but I think we will find out in the playoff that the Pac12 were frauds this year.  

     

    Edit: Utah barely slid by a bad Baylor team too. 

    Well they beat teams like TCU, Baylor, Wisconsin, etc. that weren't nearly as good as they were expected to be.  Not sure Oregon's win over Tech isn't their best ooc win.

  3. 34 minutes ago, MuellerHorn said:

    My disagreement rests with the Oregon argument. I understand an undefeated UW is a 100% lock over Texas; but how is Oregon, as Pac-12 champion, not a lock over Texas? They've already been ranked ahead of Texas week after week and their title game win would be drastically better than Texas'.

    I guess he argues that 1 in a million chance is better than 0 in a million.  Its kind of irrelevant.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  4. 26 minutes ago, ITHorn said:

    I have a feeling we may be in for some good news here.. no logic just vibes

    Bad vibes  Committee loves Oregon.  Or they have just decided to put the Pac 12 in during their final year.  UW-OR winner is in the playoffs.  So that game doesn't matter to us, no matter how big a win we get on Saturday.  We need Iowa or Louisville to win.  We should stay ahead of Alabama if they win, but that's not certain.

  5. 1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

    Yeah they should call themselves the Wildcats, Cougars, Bears, Bulldogs or Tigers. We could always use more of those in FBS football.

    Well if they changed to the Owls, they might have a shot at the AAC!

    BTW, CUSA made the announcement official.  Delaware joins in 2025.

    • Haha 1
  6. https://sports.yahoo.com/sources-oregon-state-washington-state-finalizing-scheduling-alliance-with-mountain-west-conference-180632163.html

    Pac 2 not going away just yet.  OSU/WSU about to finalize a scheduling alliance with the MWC, paying them $14 million to drop to 7 conference games and schedule one with OSU/WSU.  Because they keep existing ooc games, Washington St. will play 8 MWC games next year while MWC members will only play 7!

    Seems like a lot of trouble to go through just to pretend to be in a power conference.  They should have been talking to people instead of suing.  Don't think anyone would begrudge them power CFP money for 2 years.  And at least from public statements, it seems like the dispute with the 10 Pac is current year revenues, which the WSU president previously said HAD to be distributed ratably.

     

  7. 2 minutes ago, Texasborn91 said:

    Injuries are part of it. Nobody gives 2 Fucks about that. 

    Except of course the committee talks about how it is a factor, whether you do or not.

    Just now, Dahobbs said:

    Again, if you look at the SOS, TCU's was in the 50s (Sagarin). The other champs that made it in were all in the 20s or higher. That's a pretty justifiable reason when comparing teams with the same record and each conference champs. Who cares what the polls had? Who cares what the playoff ratings were the week before? Why should those things matter?  

    So the playoff ratings should be random from week to week?

  8. Just now, Dahobbs said:

    I don't think you're reading your own post. Those records suggest that the seeding has been accurate. The overall winning percentage follows the seeding. 

    Again, what decisions from the committee can't be justified?

    I guess you don't do math.  The #1 has only won 3 out of 9 years and those were overwhelming teams.  The #4 has won 2 out of 9.  Seeding has been pretty poor.  When Alvarez and Osborne were on the committee, #1 seed never won.

  9. 2 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

    I'm not sure how to do it easily but it would be interesting to see how SOS looked for these teams and the 2 or 3 below them.

    the committee does value conf championships because coaches value a trophy,  they value losses/wins because each game is like a little trophy.

    what they have proven time and time again they don't value is SOS(computers) because coaches love to say you can only play who is on the schedule.  AD's on the committee don't punish cheesy OOC because they want to schedule auto wins.

    Their reasoning varies week to week.  You can't justify some of their decisions.  Maybe they just outsource their decisions to 247.  Who has the best recruiting class, tempered by the number of wins and losses.

    The #1 team is only 10-6 and that's just because UGA, LSU and Alabama have been so dominant lately.  #1 was 3-5 in the first 5 years.  They've only won 3 of the 9 years.  LSU in 2019 was the first #1 seed to win.

    #2 started better, winning 3 of the first 5, but overall they are just 7-6.

    #3 is 6-8 with Georgia being the only one who won it all.

    #4 has won twice.  They are 4-7 and have lost the last 5 years in the first round.  Of course OU skews the stats.  #4s other than OU are 4-4.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  10. 4 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

    Georgia had a chance to roll Tech and couldn't do it.

    Refs called 3 UGA TDs back and overruled a catch that would have lead to a 4th.  There were a couple of replays that overturned really bad calls.  Lead ref seemed really upset that those got overruled.  Georgia had a starting OL and their top 3 receivers out.  Kirby was just trying to stay healthy.  Play calling was very vanilla.  He wasn't going to show Alabama anything.  It was still a 15 point lead until Tech scored with about 5 minutes left to make it 8.

×
×
  • Create New...