They were fantastic in the semi final, but this was so bad it nearly kills their once in life season. At least in the short term like the past super bowl annihilation games. Oh well
This guy's take on TCU in the title game
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
Michigan’s loss to TCU was poor coaching / lack of prep by a overrated head case coach who was spending the time before that game trying to connive his way back to an NFL job. They were overconfident and unprepared. Even with all that they still should have won if not for a bad officiating mistake. TCU was about the level of Pitt perhaps with a better QB. Never should have been ranked anywhere near there. A charity choice to avoid criticism.
Respectfully, if TCU wasn’t worthy, why would Alabama be worthy? Like you said, they had two losses. It shouldn’t just be the Blue Chip Invitational. The regular season ought to still have some meaning and importance.
Because they lost to a 3 loss team in a defacto home game in their final game. The "eye test" tells you they werent very good. As Ole Six Fiver said, they were about the level that we were this year and certainly not as good as we were last year. If you are going to be "Pitt," you cant lose your last game to a 3 loss team with Bama sitting there.
Harbaugh had them horribly ill-prepared for that game. They’re notorious for losing bad games under him. This was another one.
0 points inside the 2 twice. 2 pick 6s. TCU was lucky all year. And Michigan barely beat Illinois.
Who won the game, TCU or Michigan?
And you can be lucky for a game. Maybe 2. Perhaps 3. But you don’t win 12 games by luck.
You are kind of an if’s and but’s guy. Never let the facts get in the way of a good message board argument, right SMF?
Michigan s—t the bed is an excuse. Tcu rolled up 51 points on a defense that was stout all year, held explosive Ohio State in check.
Give the Frogs credit
Give the Frogs credit
If only there was a simple solution for Alabama to get themselves in the playoff.... oh yeah, I remember, it's called win. They didn't, too bad.
The DUMBEST idea has always been, select the 4 BEST TEAMS, meaning subjectively best, who you would bet on in a hypothetical matchup, then that divorces game results from who you would select. And the truth is that is not sports. How often do the 4 #1 seeds reach the basketball Final 4, not every time right, so in the end you usually don't get the 4 BEST TEAMS. So, what it's normal. That's where this football playoff is abnormal. A team loses their conference, or loses their championship game, or gets upset in another game, and the reaction isn't, OKAY they had their chance and blew it, its that's OKAY let's give them more chances because we know they are REALLY BETTER, any other sports league work that way?
I was just as disappointed by the NCG as the next guy but I’m not buying into this angle. Georgia beat Ohio State on a shanked field goal. Michigan beat Ohio State. TCU beat Michigan. TCU deserved to be there, they just got their a$$es handed to them. Who else should have been there? Michigan? After TCU beat them in the playoff there’s no way. Ohio State? Didn’t win their division or conference, then lost the playoff game so they should get a rematch against the team who just beat them? No. Alabama? This might be the best argument but if you let a 2 loss non-conference winner into the playoff just to have Georgia beat them again, you’d have people calling for the heads of the playoff committee even more than they are now because nobody else got a chance. Complaining about parity, NIL, recruiting etc. is on thing but I think with the current playoff format Georgia-TCU should have been the correct game.
There’s no other sport leagues like college football though.
Professional sports are a poor comparison because of the parity.
And college basketball isn’t close because of how many teams are let into the tournament, and the difference between teams isn’t as great, and the difference between conferences isn’t as great.
College football is unique among sports.
This whole thread doesn't make sense. TCU was the 3 seed. It was between Alabama and Ohio State for the 4 seed. There is no way the committee is going to elevate two teams who didn't even play in their conference championship over a one loss team who's only loss was last second in their championship game. I guess you can make an argument for Alabama over Ohio State. But assuming Georgia would have done the same thing in the end and beaten Alabama in a close game and then destroy TCU.
TCU just had a bad game at the end, and it wasn't really a great match up for them. But they did beat the undefeated #2 team in the country convincingly the week before. So they proved without a doubt the belonged.
TCU just had a bad game at the end, and it wasn't really a great match up for them. But they did beat the undefeated #2 team in the country convincingly the week before. So they proved without a doubt the belonged.
Then do something about it, break it up into smaller divisions or something? This whole thing where game results shouldn't be the #1 determining factor of who advances is ridiculous. Make FBS like high school football, break it into 4 or 6 divisions? I don't know what the solution is other than just selecting Bama every time just because.
Why would anything you’re talking about matter?
God did not say, “and thou shalt have parity in college football.”
It’s just a sport that doesn’t lend itself to what you want.
Did I say it mattered? Do I say that I expect them to do what I say? No, I haven't. I'm not even talking about having parity, I would just like OBJECTIVE ways (no eye tests) for teams to get into the playoffs, like win a conference you're in, you have 4 losses? No problem you won the conference you're in. Or if some REALLY BEST TEAM like Bama this year fails, they are OUT-it was great that they left them out, because you should be punished for losing actual games even if you are better than everyone else by 1000 miles. That's just what I would like- NOT SAYING ANYONE WILL LISTEN TO ME- DON'T THINK THAT. And it sounds like they might do that to some degree, putting conference champs in I mean. That will make it closer to being a real sport.
The real devoted fans like you who love college football will watch BAMA vs Georgia 10 years straight and actually care, and I'll just watch every Pitt game from beginning to end and rewatch the better ones, like I have for decades, no matter what they do with the playoffs.
You’re ranting too much.
I’m not advocating we use Power Polls to pick the playoffs.
But you asked why wouldn’t we do college football like other sports? Why is this “eye test” so unique to college football. I merely answered your question. One reason why this argument is unique to college football is because college football is so unique.
It’s not a sport that lends itself to balance and parity. So there is an argument to having that in mind as you judge teams.
For those who say TCU didn't play anyone here are some facts -
1. They played the most top 30 teams in the country (8)
2. They finished tied with the most wins vs. the top 30 (UGA tied with 6)
3. They played 3 top 10 teams.
4. They finished 2-1 vs top 10 teams.
TCU's resume was legit.
The issue with Bama is that when they're at their best, they can go toe to toe with UGA with a good chance to win. However, they rarely showed their best this past season. Granted, I would love to 11-2 and not be at my best.
1. They played the most top 30 teams in the country (8)
2. They finished tied with the most wins vs. the top 30 (UGA tied with 6)
3. They played 3 top 10 teams.
4. They finished 2-1 vs top 10 teams.
TCU's resume was legit.
The issue with Bama is that when they're at their best, they can go toe to toe with UGA with a good chance to win. However, they rarely showed their best this past season. Granted, I would love to 11-2 and not be at my best.
Alabama lost to LSU. That's par or worse than TCU's loss to KSU. TCU had better wins and a better record. Alabama didn't even play for the conference title and were in the weaker of the two SEC divisions. They lost to the 2nd place team in Georgia's division. There's no argument here if we're bading this results. Have you forgotten some of the other lopsided scores in other championship games this century? These are just championship games mind you... There are a TON of enormous blowouts in the playoff games since it went to 4 too.
USC 55 Oklahoma 19
Florida 42 tOSU 14
Alabama 42 Notre Dame 14
tOSU 42 Oregon 20
Clemson 46 Alabama 16
Alabama 52 tOSU 21
None quite as bad as the 65-7 drubbing but there have been plenty of complete crap, dud blowout title games in the recent past even with two blue bloods or bear blue bloods playing. Is what it is... Was a crap great. TCU played bad, UGa played great. Even if TCU played better they'd get best handily but UGa also playing great really just inflated the difference in talent.
USC 55 Oklahoma 19
Florida 42 tOSU 14
Alabama 42 Notre Dame 14
tOSU 42 Oregon 20
Clemson 46 Alabama 16
Alabama 52 tOSU 21
None quite as bad as the 65-7 drubbing but there have been plenty of complete crap, dud blowout title games in the recent past even with two blue bloods or bear blue bloods playing. Is what it is... Was a crap great. TCU played bad, UGa played great. Even if TCU played better they'd get best handily but UGa also playing great really just inflated the difference in talent.
Heck... I remember a year in the 90s in which Florida lost to FSU in their last game then played them AGAIN for the national title a month later and best them something like 56-20. Shit happens.
This year? No. I think everything went right for tOSU until the missed kick and UGa played very down and still beat them. If UGa brings their B game, no one from this year would ever beat their championship team this year. They're an exceptional team. I think same applies to the year Clemson blew out Bama and Burrows won with LSU and Bana won with DaVonta Smith. No one was beating those teams if they showed up those years. Those are just the recent ones. USC and Miami and FSU had trans like this too going back 25 years.
I would say that playoff selection should still be done like in other sports, even if better teams are left out in favor of lesser teams, because that too often happens in the other sports.
I think its great that Alabama didn't make it this year. Even more reason for a 12 team playoff. Just like the first year they went to 4 and 4 seed Ohio State won it all. You don't have enough regular season crossover to only have 2 or 4 teams in a playoff.
That’s fine.
Once again, you were asking *why* don’t people necessarily have the same mentality as they do in every other sport? Why is college football unique.
I was merely answering, not necessarily advocating. The answer is because college football is so unique amongst sports.
That's cool, I may just have a different mentality, I agree Alabama is always among the 4 best in recent years and agree they can probably beat anyone. But I'd rather see Alabama while being the best, pay consequences for losing, even if it means the playoff is not the 4 best. I don't want Alabama included just to have a more competitive game. What's the use of having a season if we know Alabama is best and if they lose that won't cost them anything?
Not quite as bad? It was the biggest blowout in bowl history, ANY bowl including the crappy ones. Its ok to admit I was right and the CFP got it wrong. I think 100% of us would have agreed that Alabama was better than TCU before the selections were made. That isn't really up for debate. Quality/talent/eye test is a factor though not THE deciding factor. TCU probably had the better resume based on B12 teams being rated higher than they deserved to be. However, I think it would have been the right decision to go with 10-2 Bama over 12-1 TCU and when they ask the director why, he says this:
"Both teams had a great season but we felt TCU had a chance to win their way in by winning their championship game but they lost on a neutral field to a 3 loss team. Alabama's 2 losses both were on the road and on the final play and we were confident that they were the better team."
Its a question of best vs most deserving. I would agree that in most cases, most deserving should go over best. But when its as close as this, and you are selecting between 2 non-champions (or 3 if you count Ohio State), you have to use common sense and go with the best teams. You simply cannot lose a neutral site game go KST on the last day.
I agree 100% ALABAMA IS BETTER than TCU, better than almost anyone! Not up for debate, they likely will kick everyone's ass! But sorry, to me the whole idea of handing them that playoff spot is WELFARE for the RICH. It's offensive to me that because they are BETTER and THEY ARE BETTER BY FAR, that when they fail they get no consequences, no punishment for what they did, which was FAILING, by losing actual games. I'd rather they be punished, and the playoffs have blowouts. I'd always go for most deserving or OBJECTIVE qualification, like automatic qualifying for ANY ALL TEAMS THAT WIN A CONFERENCE TITLE GAME, no matter how "BEST" they are, even if they push out BETTER teams, because that's real sports.
But TCU is not a non champion. They won the regular season title. Bama didn't. That is much more difficult to do than a one game playoff. I keep hearing this stuff about TCU didn't belong there crap at work. It's really convenient how people wait till the game has been played to try and re-write history just because of the outcome.
I dont’ think it’s hindsight.
I don’t think anybody thought TCU could win the national championship. Everybody thought they were a nice team that was below the powers.
What somebody thought wasnt that you still had to put them in the playoffs because they earned it. But even that was universally believed and was debated going into the playoffs.
Last edited:
TCU obviously didn't deserve it, because, well, they are TCU. Michigan obviously didn't deserve it, because they couldn't even beat TCU. Ohio State obviously didn't deserve it, because they were handled by Michigan. Alabama obviously didn't deserve it, because they lost to one of the other two loss SEC teams in Tennessee, so they shouldn't have even been ahead of Tennessee on "the list", and they also lost to a four loss LSU team. Tennessee obviously didn't deserve it, because not only did they lost to Georgia when they had the chance, they also lost to South Carolina. USC obviously didn't deserve it, because they lost to Utah twice, plus PAC12, ha ha ha ha ha. Utah obviously didn't deserve it, because they lost to a sub-.500 SEC team in Florida.
Is there anyone else we need to exclude because they obviously weren't deserving? I think they should have just had Georgia play in intrasquad scrimmage and we all could have reveled in the glory.
Is there anyone else we need to exclude because they obviously weren't deserving? I think they should have just had Georgia play in intrasquad scrimmage and we all could have reveled in the glory.
Noticed the Seahawks got pounded today. Freaking travesty the game was even played. Why not just skip to the Chiefs vs Alabama in the Super Bowl?
They sullied up 'er Super Bowl n' stuff!!!!!!!
They sullied up 'er Super Bowl n' stuff!!!!!!!
There is no Big 12 regular season champion officially so yes, they are a non-champion. And I didn't wait until the game was played. I said it should be Bama after TCU lost. That's a really bad loss in your final game. Had TCU lost earlier in the year and then won the B12CG to finish 12-1, I would say they belonged as the B12 Champion coming off a win. When you have a loss as bad as that in your championship game, you don't deserve to be in the CFP and yea I know they lucked their way into beating Michigan with 2 pick 6s and 2 failed Mich drives inside the 2. But they shouldn't have been there.
65-7. It was a low moment for college football. I was right. Like usual.
