Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
My opinion...both Clemson and Bama got the opponent
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 27
| visibility 1

My opinion...both Clemson and Bama got the opponent


Dec 7, 2015, 9:25 AM

Most suited to their advantage. Bama would much rather face a team that tries to pound you, as opposed to one that flies all over the field. Clemson would rather play a team like Oklahoma who plays the same, more wide-open style. Same style, but the team who is better at it wins.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

the committee did not want bama to lose in the semifinals


Dec 7, 2015, 9:28 AM

so they gave them the spartans

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-willmo.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up




Cat on a tin roof, dogs in a pile,
Nothin' left to do but smile, smile, smile!!!!


It's pretty clear....


Dec 7, 2015, 9:30 AM

that they were trying to avoid sending Oklahoma to Dallas and they wanted to at least try to set-up an Oklahoma v. Bama National Championship game.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Sometimes good things fall apart so better things can fall together.


I think Mich. St. over Oklahoma is justified...


Dec 7, 2015, 9:33 AM [ in reply to the committee did not want bama to lose in the semifinals ]

I'd actually be tempted to put them #2 instead of Bama.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Do your rankings put them there?***


Dec 7, 2015, 9:53 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

No, they have them at #4, pretty much exclusively because


Dec 7, 2015, 9:57 AM

They have a significantly lower scoring margin than the others. When wins and losses only are used, my ratings would actually have them at #1. When scoring margin only used (ignoring wins and losses) Oklahoma is #1, and Mich St. is #10. Clemson is #3 both ways, and #2 overall.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I think Mich. St. over Oklahoma is justified...


Dec 7, 2015, 10:29 AM [ in reply to I think Mich. St. over Oklahoma is justified... ]

Totally agree.

Michigan St. should be #2.

Alabamas best wins don't come close to Iowa, Ohio St., Oregon, and Michigan.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

No. Their win over Iowa was unremarkable


Dec 7, 2015, 10:39 AM [ in reply to I think Mich. St. over Oklahoma is justified... ]

Iowa/MSU game was about as close as they come. Iowa was number 4. MSU should replace them at 4 or perhaps Oklahoma should have never been #3. This smells too much like trying to arrange who plays who. First the argument was Alabama should be #1. Then when that really didn't have much logic the past 2 games it switched to drop Oklahoma. I don't think Alabama could score enough on Oklahoma. We will be fine either way. We basically just played a version of Oklahoma last weekend.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The Committe Chair said the Committee looked at match-ups


Dec 7, 2015, 9:29 AM

which is total BS. The Committee's job is to rank the teams one through four based on where they deserve to be ranked and the match-ups take care of themselves.

If Bama is a nine point favorite over Michigan State, shouldn't Michigan State be the fourth seed?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Sometimes good things fall apart so better things can fall together.


I agree with you, but.. what if they had placed Bama #1


Dec 7, 2015, 9:34 AM

Clemson #2 and OK #3..
How would you have felt if Clemson had been sent to Dallas to play OK? It didn't work out that way, but I would have been furious if they had not considered that in the seeding.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


if we'd lost a game and were at #2, then I'd say we deserve


Dec 7, 2015, 10:13 AM

to have to play OU in Dallas. We should have won all our games if we wanted the preferential treatment that a #1 seeding is supposed to get. Bama loses to Old Miss, at home, and pays absolutely no penalty for it whatsoever.

Look, i think we beat OU and Bama, but since everyone knows 2-4 are really OU, Bama, MSU, in that order (OU being "punished" by the committee for not having an extra Champ game), the seedings give us the hardest path to the championship instead of the easiest. I'd expect OU to destroy Alabama, again, but hopefully they would be beat up some. Now that is going to be us.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Anybody that says Coach Brownell is the best coach to come through Clemson is going to start an argument." -JP Hall


Of the three 1-loss teams, Bama's loss was the best.


Dec 7, 2015, 10:15 AM

Mich St. and Oklahoma both lost to teams with losing records. Ole Miss finished 9-3.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Oklahoma would embarrass Alabama, again. Old Miss went 9-3 but


Dec 7, 2015, 10:18 AM

got to play in the weak SEC, so there's a little grade inflation there. Memphis proved that.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Anybody that says Coach Brownell is the best coach to come through Clemson is going to start an argument." -JP Hall


OK, maybe so.


Dec 7, 2015, 10:23 AM

Just saying, if you're going to focus in on the losses, it's pretty hard to say that their loss to Ole Miss is worse than losing to 5-7 Texas and Nebraska.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

all I'm really saying is that we should be playing MSU in


Dec 7, 2015, 10:27 AM

the Orange Bowl and Bama should be playing OU in the Cotton Bowl. The committee deliberately chose to move OU down to avoid Bama facing OU in their backyard. Plain and simple. And took the easier game away from the #1 seed in order to do it. That's BS.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Anybody that says Coach Brownell is the best coach to come through Clemson is going to start an argument." -JP Hall


I don't think MSU is an easier game for Clemson.


Dec 7, 2015, 10:31 AM

Just my opinion. I think Michigan St. has a great argument to be ahead of Oklahoma.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Memphis is also much better than Texas & Nebraska.


Dec 7, 2015, 10:24 AM [ in reply to Oklahoma would embarrass Alabama, again. Old Miss went 9-3 but ]

(I saw your edit)

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

It's like 2011 all over again. SEC teams hanging their hat


Dec 7, 2015, 10:29 AM [ in reply to Of the three 1-loss teams, Bama's loss was the best. ]

on 'quality losses.'

Who did Alabama BEAT? Florida, who has no offense? LSU, who has no QB? Where is the quality that makes people think they're the best team in the country?

They're #### lucky they got Michigan State, because they're the third best team in this playoff.

2024 student level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg2008_ncaa_champ.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-clemsonpoker489.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I don't think anyone's hanging on a quality loss.


Dec 7, 2015, 10:31 AM

We just happened to be talking about the loss (drummer brought it up). I don't think, nationally, they are boosted by losing to Ole Miss.

Bama's resume is built on depth, not flash at the top. They arguably didn't beat any elite teams. But they beat 10 teams who are going to a bowl game. No one else can say that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You're mistaken.


Dec 7, 2015, 10:47 AM [ in reply to I agree with you, but.. what if they had placed Bama #1 ]

If Alabama had the #1 seed and Clemson the #2, the bowls we each are going to would be exactly the same.

Selection is based off closest location to the highest seed in each game.

Bama is closer to Arlington, Texas. Clemson is closer to Miami, Florida. So either way, nothing of significance changes (well besides the potential change in opponent).

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You're mistaken.


Dec 7, 2015, 11:15 AM

Who cares! If we take care of business it shouldn't matter who we play.....We aint skeered....GO TIGERS!!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I agree with you, but.. what if they had placed Bama #1


Dec 7, 2015, 11:22 AM [ in reply to I agree with you, but.. what if they had placed Bama #1 ]

 photo obplayoff_zpshirk835d.jpg


it's considered and part of the why some feel the committee did not want bama playing ou in the 2 v 3 matchup.




2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Ding, ding, ding!***


Dec 7, 2015, 9:53 AM [ in reply to The Committe Chair said the Committee looked at match-ups ]



badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You got it 50% correct


Dec 7, 2015, 9:41 AM

I disagree that Oklahoma is the matchup Clemson wanted. I think OU is actually a bad matchup for Clemson. I would have preferred MSU, or Alabama. Oklahoma is a more complete team than MSU or Bama in my opinion.

Alabama definitely got favorable matchup with MSU. If they had to Play Oklahoma they don't get out of the 1st round.

In my opinion both Clemson and Oklahoma would beat Alabama anytime, any place.

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

IMHO Bama will not get out of the first round against MICHST***


Dec 7, 2015, 9:51 AM



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Honestly, these rankings make sense


Dec 7, 2015, 10:00 AM

I mean outside of us being #1, the other 3 could probably be placed in any order you wanted and make sense. We're clearly #1 due to being the only undefeated team there, but I can see the other 3 teams in pretty much every configuration. I think the biggest "matchup" issue they had was tryign to keep OK out of Dallas due to the advantage. You'd have to have them at #2 to make their advantage make sense, and if you aren't going to do that then you have to have them at 4.

I've said all along, my issue with the system is with teams getting their chance. The system worked this year and the 4 most deserving teams now get a chance to prove it.

This should be fun.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Yep, super fun.***


Dec 7, 2015, 10:03 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Yeah I think they wanted to avoid giving OU a home game***


Dec 7, 2015, 10:29 AM [ in reply to Honestly, these rankings make sense ]



2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Replies: 27
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic