4down20
Quit checking me out.
Here is "an available metric" (it is, after all, a metric and it is, by virtue of me posting it here (and in on my own website back in 2011), available) that would say that Alabama was not in the in top two at the end of the regular season in 2011.
HTML:TFS - 2.0 (College Football - NCAA and NAIA) Rank School Record Rating Schedule -------------------------------------------------------------------------- . 1) LSU (13 - 0 - 0) 114.776 91.853 . 2) Oklahoma St (11 - 1 - 0) 112.556 95.140 . 3) Alabama (11 - 1 - 0) 111.110 90.610 . 4) Oklahoma ( 9 - 3 - 0) 107.466 96.008 . 5) Kansas St (10 - 2 - 0) 105.663 93.788 . 6) Stanford (11 - 1 - 0) 104.883 87.133 . 7) Baylor ( 9 - 3 - 0) 104.857 95.024 . 8) Oregon (11 - 2 - 0) 104.455 88.724 . 9) Michigan (10 - 2 - 0) 103.358 88.358 . 10) South Carolina (10 - 2 - 0) 103.350 89.267
The real bottom line (for me as a fan) is that Alabama had a shot against LSU and crapped the bed - at home.
But don't feel too badly. I also think it was some BS when Oklahoma lost their conference championship game to Kansas State and still made it to the BCS championship game.
Added in Edit:
If you don't believe me that not "every available metric" had Alabama in the top two, check out the Massey computer comparisons following the last week of the season in 2011: College Football Ranking Comparison
I don't care about your rankings, and I have nothing to feel bad about - you do. Alabama won in 2011, I'm happy and you are still crying about it 4 years later. Even better, we got to show that Notre Dame was the team that didn't belong the next year.
The Massey composite has Alabama #2 overall. So I guess that pure ESPN marketing only worked on the majority of the computer polls?