HG73
Active Member
Yes UGA really squeezed OU by holding them to only 48 points. Baylor and Tech held them to 49.
Bowls Thread
- Thread starter RollToad
- Start date
jack the frog
Full Member
After halftime adjustments and subsequent pressure applied to Baker, OU was held to 14 second half points in regulation, averaged only 7.0 YPC, 1/2 his season average and threw for 57 yards in the 4th quarter and 87 yards the entire 2nd half. Pressure on Baker was relentless in the last two quarters and it showed clearly. That was how you wrote up a halftime game plan, at least in my day.
flyfishingfrog
Active Member
If Bama had to play in the CCG vs Auburn, they would have lost twice also - which is the point. Auburn owned them in the game they played head to head.
But since Bama got to sit on the couch and get it without the risk of a second loss - then your point is really irrelevant
Big Frog II
Active Member
OU's defense lost this game. Lincoln Riley is not much of a coach if he doesn't get rid of Stoop's brother.
Mean Purple
Active Member
Dipwad and Opie on Sirius XM trying to prop up the national title game. Their arguments are a joke.
Obvious they have their marching orders from ESPN to try and cover for a game that many will not watch.
Obvious they have their marching orders from ESPN to try and cover for a game that many will not watch.
Total conjecture. Alabama would have been favored in that game. If Bama is so average, how did they just make Clemson (a team that beat Auburn) look so inept?
flyfishingfrog
Active Member
didn't say they were average - I said that Auburn OWNED THEM during the regular season game. At no point in that game after the 1st quarter was there any question that Auburn was in control.
So therefore had Alabama had to actually play in week 13 and faced Auburn similar to UGA - there is a really good chance they would have lost AGAIN. Thus, they would have been another of the 2 loss teams that you said didn't deserve in - so the fact they only had 1 loss is irrelevant since they didn't have an opportunity to lose because they were at home on their couches.
By your logic, Auburn should get dibs on the winner of the NCG in this round robin bullship committee process where you don't actually have to play to be escalated to the next round...
flyfishingfrog
Active Member
by the way, how many "favored" teams have got their asses handed to them during the bowl season so far? a lot...
netty2424
Full Member
Off night, better game plan, out coached, better hustle, etc, etc, etc. the reasons are endless and to say because Bama won this game, that Clemson couldn't possibly ever beat them if they played again.
It's laughable that you're so determined to defend the committee.
Have you ever considered that there is actually a possibility that just because a team wasn't included in the top 4 doesn't mean they couldn't have won had they been included?
You're perpetual notion of "they got it right" is only valid because 1 of the 4 teams HAS TO WIN! It can't end in a tie. 1 of the 4 teams will end up a winner. Replace Alabama with Auburn and they win, "committee got it right!" tOSU gets in and wins, "committee got it right!"
No, it means somebodies got to win.
EDIT as mentioned above, Clemson was number 1. They got it wrong.
Moose Stuff
Active Member
They were actually held to 7.
stbrab
Full Member
Also, Alabama and the SEC (and ACC) teams only play 8 conference games vs. 9 for the Big 12, Big 10 and PAC 12 That extra game is a cupcake. IF they play the 9th conference game, they might lose and have a 2nd loss.
Zubaz
Member
I mean, that's true for ANY team. We know with absolute certainty that Syracuse could have beaten Clemson, because they did it earlier in the year. We know with absolute certainty that Iowa State could have beaten Oklahoma, they did it earlier in the year. That doesn't mean either of those teams had valid claims to get in to the playoff.
Yes, Auburn owned Alabama in the game that they played. They also owned Georgia in one of the games that they played. Most importantly, they also had a worse record. Other playoff teams had a similar issue.
These don't go together. Either Clemson couldn't possibly get by Alabama, in which case they got it wrong, or "that's why we play the game" rules apply and a minor upset happened. You can't point to Clemson getting demolished as BOTH proof that the committee was wrong but not a rebuttal that Alabama didn't belong.
What is laughable is the pivot so many people make when things don't turn out quite the way they want. I heard a million times on here on Wisconsin wasn't that good because the Big 10 sucks and they don't play anyone, that TCU should be ranked ahead of USC because the P12 sucks, that Ohio State should have been disqualified from the playoffs because they lost by 30 to Iowa!. Auburn lost to Clemson in the regular season and Georgia 3 weeks ago, not to mention LSU as well (the same LSU team that lost to Troy! Oh the horror!). Well, those are teams 5-8. Which one NOW deserved a playoff spot? The funny one is people on here now defending Ohio State's right to be in the playoff. Good god, talk about irony.
And I know there might be a possibility that a team not in the playoff could win, although I think the likelihood is extremely remote. All four of those teams above had a chance, all they had to do was win one more game. I don't understand, especially given how things turned out, how anyone can say the committee got it wrong, given the parameters they are working under. What if two SEC teams are actually the two best teams in the country? Is that even a possibility?
Mean Purple
Active Member
Very true.
Another issue out there is myth that because a team won in the playoff they were the right pick. Not sufficient. Ohio State would have played Clemson just as well. The reality is Clemson should not have been number 1. They lost to Scuse. Anybody who watched them all season can tell ya that they were not as good this year. Not nearly as good. Bama's regular season was not as strong as Ohio State's.
And I'm the last person on this board to prop up Ohio State. But they would have beat Clemson. They are as big as bama and faster.
Clemson plays two SEC teams in OOC. They don't play any more cupcakes than anyone else not named Notre Dame. This year their conference schedule set up to where they didn't get to play most of the worst teams, I think their overall schedule was one of the top ranked in the country.
Considering the source, this argument is unbelievable. Who did Ohio State beat this year? I thought the Big 10 sux? If OSU is so big and fast, how did they lose to slow, no talent Iowa by 30 points?
jake102
Active Member
Idiot
I believe the technical wording of the rule is: pics or
OU will be interesting next year. They have some weapons at RB and WR (just like we do), but are losing a first round pick at OT and a Heisman winner.
If they take a step back on offense (and how could they not, they had a damn juggernaut) and can't make some improvements on def, they are very beatable.
They better hope their 5'10" 5* QB can keep that train running.
If they take a step back on offense (and how could they not, they had a damn juggernaut) and can't make some improvements on def, they are very beatable.
They better hope their 5'10" 5* QB can keep that train running.
