NCAA Week 14

LSU has won 12 consecutive games against the PAC 12. Alabama was 2-0 against the PAC 12 in 2016. Auburn has won five consecutive games against the PAC 12.

Those three teams are a combined 37-8-1 all time against the PAC 12. Add Georgia, and it's 47-12-1. The Pac-12's pride and joy --- USC --- is 14-11 against the SEC. Oregon is 4-6. Washington is 1-9 (that's not a typo).
At some point, people need to realize that the tiebreaker is going to go to the SEC. And for good reason.

 

For somebody so into Russia, you have a hard time grasping that selection committees are a political process, period. Also, what happened 10, 5, or even last year has no bearing on the teams of 2019. It's new people. To return to my first point, the committee can't consistently favor one conference over the other four, whether they should or not, without the other four ganging together to get rid of or drastically alter the committee.

 

As we prepare for the Egg Bowl tomorrow night, this is always fun to revisit. The 1983 edition, decided by the Hand of God/Immaculate Deflection/What in the hell was that!?

 

What happened in the past has no bearing on 2019. If it does, then by that logic the determining factor if it comes down to Utah vs. Alabama will be the 2009 Sugar Bowl, when the Utes blew Alabama off the face of the earth.

 

If what happened in the past has no bearing on this season, explain preseason rankings.

 

You have to break a tie somehow. And history is one of the best indicators.

Don't like it? Change the history. Quit playing .250 ball against a conference you're trying to beat in a vote of panelists who don't want to look stupid by voting for a team that will lose 30-6 in the semifinals.

 

Preseason rankings have no bearing on choosing the Final Four teams. Preseason rankings are generally meaningless, but you already knew that.

You have to break a tie somehow. And history is one of the best indicators.

So, history has shown that in a head-to-head matchup between Utah and Alabama, Utah is clearly the superior program. When they meet on the field it's not even close.

 

Preseason rankings are based on nothing more than a team's long-term history, what it did last season, and analysis of recruiting that no one can know for certain whether it was successful for another couple of years. The result is skewed rankings that won't change for weeks. A preseason ranking is the key to the highway, compared to the struggle for recognition of a team that plays well but started unranked. Ranked teams lose but only drop a few places. Unranked teams win and no one notices. If they're lucky they eventually achieve "others getting votes" status. They have to stay undefeated for ten weeks before anyone acknowledges it - unless they are one of the big boys.

There should not be rankings until week four or five, after the early season straw men have been played and teams have had a chance to win or lose on the field. Preseason rankings are worthless, but they linger, while being unranked is like swimming with a concrete block tied to an ankle.

Of course there is money to be made selling preseason rankings, so it won't change.

 

Please man. Alabama beating Washington four years ago has fuck all to do with now.

There are some good tiebreakers.

More wins?
Did they win their conference?
Did they play in their conference title game?

If you want to deal with the eye test fine. My first question would be if their best player is currently on the field and available to play?

 

I'll happily settle for one SEC team in the tournament. Just not two.

 

If a conference is going to send a team that didn't win their conference to the playoff, that team should have a *lot* going for it, to the point that they clearly deserve to be there. A 'Bama team that didn't win their conference and lost to the best team on their schedule (at home!) while scheduling the Little Sisters of the Poor OOC is not that team. UA played Duke, New Mexico St., Southern Miss, and Western Carolina OOC, with three of those four games played at home.

They may actually be good enough to rank in the top four, but they didn't prove that on the field. "They ain't played nobody, Pawl".

 

Beyond that, this isn't a particularly great Alabama team. Defensively they're not going to be confused with teams from earlier in the decade and there is no question that Tua is the best player on the team and he's not going to be available. If Ohio State, LSU, Clemson and Utah win out I don't see how Alabama should get in with the exception that they have everyone at ESPN carrying the water for them.

Now if they beat Auburn and upsets happen...well that's another story.