I agree which is one of the reasons that ND has no business in the final 4. They play 12 games. Georgia played 13.
Last edited:
Just let me say this, UGA would kick quempsum's backside to the ends of the earth and back.
- Thread starter Freddie.B.Cocky
- Start date
Tiger, most people didn't agree that the ACC was the best conference in CFB 2 years ago. If you were that good 2 years ago, you wouldn't be cellar dwellers today. No conference goes from the best to the worst in 2 years.
Most people agreed that the ACC was the best conference 2 years ago? In what universe? 2016 the only other team besides Clemson that had a good year was Louisville, who lost to Kentucky and LSU.
I agree with you rogue but in jawga defense Clemson played like crap at times this season ie; A&M a game they should have lost, hell we had 600 yds in offense and with a little defense should have won. Why do they not seem to look at strength of schedule for instance thus Clemson draws ND instead of jawga who would stomp a mud hole in them. They have to add at least two more teams to the playoffs IMO.
not really looking for credibility, but you gotta read the entire post Dawn, not just half of it...
"Can we agree that Bama is the best team in the country, or at the very least the 2nd best? If so, then shouldn't they still go to the title game even if they lose to Oklahoma"
So , one question . If Clemson beats bama in the playoffs this year , will you rethink the perceived dominance of the 2 loss Bulldogs ?
My question, Oz, was you said, at the very least 2nd best... In that scenario, who is best??
How about this, if Clemson plays as poorly as they did in last year's playoffs should the ACC no longer be considered a Power 5 conference? Shouldn't they be looked at as comparable to the American Athletic Conference?
https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo...ings-conferences-2016-acc-sec-big-ten-clemson
I'm sure i could find more. I listen to a lot of CFB podcasts too and the general consensus was that the ACC had the best season of any conference in 2016.
FSU won the Orange Bowl over #6 Michigan that year and finished in the top 10. More importantly though, the SEC was still down in 2016. There was a huge drop from Bama to everyone else in the league.
And for the record I was talking about 1 year only. Nobody thought the ACC was in the best position going forward. It probably never will be.
I would put Georgia, Ohio St. and UCF over ND. They need to play by the same rules as everyone else. If you want to get technical, ND gets a ride because of their religious beliefs. Incoming!
So you post an article that starts by saying "technically the SEC was still the best". The article essentially says if you ignore the records and look at the great coaches just hired, the Heisman trophy and National champion, the ACC is the best conference. FSU beat Michigan by 1 point and lost to Louisville by 43 points, which at the risk of being repetitive lost to Ky. and LSU.
During 2016 Alabama played 8 conference games. 7 of those opponents were ranked in the top 25 when they played them. The SEC finished 2016 with 5 teams in the top 25. The ACC teams that had good seasons had them because they schedule teams from the ACC. Nobody that knew what they were talking about thought the ACC was the best conference.
I think you are off on a tangent...I was pointing out that most everyone can agree that Bama is the best team...right now. For those that don't, I would think they most likely would agree they are 2nd best at the very least. I don't know who would be 1st in that scenario, all depends on who you ask. But that's not even the point of my post. I was applying the same logic of those who believe UGA is still a top 4 team and should still be in the playoff...Herbstreit included. Under that same logic, if we believe Bama (or whoever) is the best team and they lose, then they should still go to the title game. Of course that question is just as much sarcastic as it is rhetorical.
It is not confusing to those of us who can walk and chew gum at the same time. With the way the playoffs are designed at this point it is a disadvantage to be in the SEC unless you are Bama. Clemson is in the best possible position. They play in an extremely weak Power 5 conference and even with that they have been afforded a loss in the past and still got in. The best team Clemson played all year was a mid-level SEC team and they were extremely fortunate to win by 2.
That wasn't a playoff game. If that is a playoff game, why is it #4 UGA had to play #1 and Clemson #2 played #40+ Pitt. Seems like a very strange "playoff" to me.
Clemson barely survived the one mid-level SEC team they played this year. Sorry, I don't believe they would have made the playoffs but MAYBE 1 time(Watson's last year) if they played in the SEC. Also, keep in mind, the reason they have been able to build what they have in such a short time is in large part due to a bad conference which afforded them a BCS bowl when they weren't deserving 6 years ago. Remember, that is why SC was left out because too many SEC teams were already in BCS bowls. Clemson has essentially been allowed to build a program in a bad conference with no powerhouse teams. FSU fell off the map and that gave Clemson the clear path. There is no clear path in the SEC.
We both know it wasn't, but essentially the committee treated it as such because UGA is not in the top 4 at this time after losing.
You and many others believe the selection committee is operating under the assumption that winning your conference doesn't matter. That's clearly not the case, even if you think that is flawed. Did Clemson have a weaker schedule this year? Yup. Did they go undefeated and win their conference? They did.
How about UGA? Did they go undefeated? No. Did they win their conference? No. Did other comparable teams do one of those two things? Yes, Oklahoma did - and also beat the team in their conf champ game by double digits, who beat them earlier in the year.
Last edited:
I would put Georgia, Ohio St. and UCF over ND. They need to play by the same rules as everyone else. If you want to get technical, ND gets a ride because of their religious beliefs. Incoming!
I think you have a personal issue with ND. Even if you count a fictional championship game loss for them they still have one loss to Georgia's two.
I don't have a personal issue with their religious beliefs. I'm a practicing Christian. Nor do I have a problem with Catholicism. What I have a problem with is preferential treatment based on your religious convictions. If ND wants to compete like the rest of the Power 5 schools, then compete like them. They shouldn't be allowed an advantage because they don't want to be in a conference that might effect their religious teachings.
How would a conference affect their religious teachings? Are religious teachings only important for football but not the other sports since ND is in a conference for all other sports?
Are you getting ND confused with BYU since BYU can’t play on Sundays and this potential scheduling nightmare made them less attractive to the Big 12 during their recent flirtation with expansion?
The year Clemson beat Ohio State in the BCS game FSU won the national title. The following year (2014) they made it to the Playoff, finishing 5th. In 2015 they finished 14th, in 2016 finished 8th. They have only recently fallen off the map, otherwise they've been a formidable opponent within Clemson's division. Clemson's only other loss that year was to a good South Carolina team who, remember, was only elevated so much because the SEC East was terrible (Missouri was the only one ranked in final poll).
Army is independent. If they have a great season, will you feel the same way? There used to be a lot more independents, I don't know that you can blame religion for ND's independence. Independence is a choice available, just like for Army. I get penalizing teams who don't play a conference championship. But I don't see how you can penalize them more than assuming that is a loss. Even if you credit (debit?) Notre Dame with an assumed loss, it still has fewer losses than Georgia. I see the logic for putting Ohio State or UCF ahead of them, just not two loss Georgia.
UGA has no one to blame but themselves for not being in the playoff, point blank period. If they don't implode against LSU they are in. If their head coach doesn't have a a brain hemorrhage and call for a fake punt on 4th and 11 from the 50, they probably win and are in the #1 spot heading into the playoffs.
I can understand the argument that OSU or OK could be ahead of Notre Dame but UGA shvt the bed when it counted and it cost them. None of the other teams did.
As for ND not playing a conference championship game, neither did Alabama in 2017 but the committee let them in because Auburn shvt the bed and had 3 losses. Auburn beat UGA and Bama and lost to LSU and Clemson in the regular season, had they beat UGA in the SECC they would have been in with 2 losses. They were left out even though they were 1-1 with UGA and 1-0 over Bama that year who both got in.
You forget that the ACC ran the Bowl Gauntlet 2 years ago.
ACC had a .750 win pct, SEC was .462 and the B1G was .300
By far the worst conference this year is the PAC 12.
How about the year before when they "curbstomped" Oklahoma? I think what you are trying to say, is that the Playoffs should really only include your big brothers in the SEC?
No what I'm saying is the ACC, excluding Clemson stinks out loud. To have a team go undefeated in the ACC should get no more currency than the American Athletic Conference. The ACC is a Power 5 conference this year in name only. Clemson and Notre Dame should not be included in the "best 4 teams in the country". They should be playing in an upper tier bowl but not the playoffs.
"Big brothers in the SEC"? Sure FSU is horrible now, but since FSU has been able to compete for the ACC championship they've won it 15 times to Clemson's 5, are they your "big brother in the ACC"?
Actually, they very much were our Big Brother for way to long. At this point, I would say that we have reversed those roles. The good news is that if Clemson takes care of business with ND, we will all get to see how your Big Brother does on the field versus Clemson.
Yeah beating ND should be big for you, since they should have lost to our "little brother", Vanderbilt, who I guess is your "BIG BROTHER" since you have a losing record against them.
You are digging the hole deeper and deeper, by your way of viewing things..you are definitely our little brother?
Did you really just pull out Clemson's record versus Vandy to make a point?
So pre World War 1 games have bearing on today's football landscape?
By your logic does this also make Davidson your big brother?
I'll hang up and listen.
Last edited:
No, you goofballs are the ones that keep using this BIG BROTHER bs. I brought up Vanderbilt because they played Notre Dame. If I was looking to make a point about you guys being Little Brothers to SEC teams, I could have used almost any SEC team, because you've got losing records to almost every SEC
team but us.
You guys talking about old records is funny, every Clemson fan can recite the series advantage of Clemson over South Carolina, even though you're 5 and 5 in the last decade, or does that 28-9 Clemson edge pre-WW2 record still have a bearing on today's football landscape.
You do know how many years in a row we played you guys in Columbia correct?
You can't have it both ways. I am sure that after we beat Alabama this year, after we have beaten ND this year...there will be another series of excuses you have that "gifted" us and "screwed" you out of another National championship
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Gamecock Scoop Podcast: NFL Draft Reaction and Baseball Breaks Through- Latest: Caleb Alexander
-
Gamecock Scoop Podcast: NFL Draft Reaction and Baseball Breaks Through
- Latest: Caleb Alexander
-
