Oregon or Utah...don't fuck up.

[Across The Field]

Actually losing to UGA in the championship game kept us out. We win that and we were just in. But by the time we made it to the SECCG we were so beat up it was tough to find starters.

What drives me nuts is we still don’t have the o-line or RB depth to make a run.

That's one of the negatives about a conference title game. Without having to play in that game in 2017, Auburn is in the playoff. Clearly they were better than Bama but didn't get the chance to play for it all.

What would drive me nuts is how you guys seem to have solid WR talent (8 WRs rated 4* from 2015-2018) but can't get any sort of passing game going. Is it coaching? Unable to develop QBs? Seems like Bo Nix could possibly get it going, but with their history, it's hard to say.

 

[The Crimson King]

Move to San Francisco or Portland.


They love their homeless.

Hell yeah...need heroin hookup

 

[Wild Turkey]

That's one of the negatives about a conference title game. Without having to play in that game in 2017, Auburn is in the playoff. Clearly they were better than Bama but didn't get the chance to play for it all.

What would drive me nuts is how you guys seem to have solid WR talent (8 WRs rated 4* from 2015-2018) but can't get any sort of passing game going. Is it coaching? Unable to develop QBs? Seems like Bo Nix could possibly get it going, but with their history, it's hard to say.

Auburn was toast regardless so it isn't a negative and I would argue it's additional insurance the teams that should be there are there. No way Auburn gets healthy enough to make a run in the playoff so we had no business going.

The negative part is that very few teams can play Georgia, Alabama and then Georgia in a month's time and stay healthy. You guys make fun of us for playing a cupcake between Georgia and Alabama but no one considers that if we didn't Auburn would literally have 3 weeks of Georgia, Alabama and then the SECCG. Nobody makes it through that gauntlet.

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

That's one of the negatives about a conference title game. Without having to play in that game in 2017, Auburn is in the playoff. Clearly they were better than Bama but didn't get the chance to play for it all.

What would drive me nuts is how you guys seem to have solid WR talent (8 WRs rated 4* from 2015-2018) but can't get any sort of passing game going. Is it coaching? Unable to develop QBs? Seems like Bo Nix could possibly get it going, but with their history, it's hard to say.

I would challenge the “clearly better” argument. They lost to an LSU team that Bama beat by 14, and beat Bama without 3 key LBs. When those LBs were back in the postseason (one was reinsured on the semi and was out for the title game), Bama was clearly a top 4 team.

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

Auburn was toast regardless so it isn't a negative and I would argue it's additional insurance the teams that should be there are there. No way Auburn gets healthy enough to make a run in the playoff so we had no business going.

The negative part is that very few teams can play Georgia, Alabama and then Georgia in a month's time and stay healthy. You guys make fun of us for playing a cupcake between Georgia and Alabama but no one considers that if we didn't Auburn would literally have 3 weeks of Georgia, Alabama and then the SECCG. Nobody makes it through that gauntlet.

The stupid part is the SECCG one week after rivalry games. It should be 2 weeks later. The season isn’t over the week of CCGs, as Army and Navy still play the following week. The Committee and bowls could wait an extra week.

 

[CaptainStubing]

Having bama at number five worries me. That means the committee is going to have to LeapFrog one of the teams behind them when one of the teams in the top four loses. I'm not sure they are going to do that unless it is an undefeated Minnesota.

As far as Baylor, I'm not sure they can even get into the top four even if they win out. They are so low right now

 

[Across The Field]

Auburn was toast regardless so it isn't a negative and I would argue it's additional insurance the teams that should be there are there. No way Auburn gets healthy enough to make a run in the playoff so we had no business going.

The negative part is that very few teams can play Georgia, Alabama and then Georgia in a month's time and stay healthy. You guys make fun of us for playing a cupcake between Georgia and Alabama but no one considers that if we didn't Auburn would literally have 3 weeks of Georgia, Alabama and then the SECCG. Nobody makes it through that gauntlet.

I'm honestly not a fan of the FCS cupcake every year before the CCG, but I'm not so up in arms over it. You're not wrong, that is a gauntlet from hell, but there'd be nothing said if you were playing Arkansas or Vandy the week before Bama, which would basically be the same.

To be fair, OSU is looking at a likely scenario where we play top 10 PSU, top 15 michigan, and (if we win those two games) top 10 Minnesota in 3 straight weeks.

 

[Across The Field]

Having bama at number five worries me. That means the committee is going to have to LeapFrog one of the teams behind them when one of the teams in the top four loses. I'm not sure they are going to do that unless it is an undefeated Minnesota.

As far as Baylor, I'm not sure they can even get into the top four even if they win out. They are so low right now

I think the way they ranked Oregon and Utah sets them up just fine to do it if Oregon wins out. If Auburn loses to UGA, they'll probably barely be a top 20 team when Bama faces them. Then they're done, and Oregon has one more game against a 7th ranked Utah team. I could easily see them going from 6th to 4th in that scenario.

 

[CaptainStubing]

I think the way they ranked Oregon and Utah sets them up just fine to do it if Oregon wins out. If Auburn loses to UGA, they'll probably barely be a top 20 team when Bama faces them. Then they're done, and Oregon has one more game against a 7th ranked Utah team. I could easily see them going from 6th to 4th in that scenario.

How about Utah? Could they also make the leap if they win out?

 

[Across The Field]

I would challenge the “clearly better” argument. They lost to an LSU team that Bama beat by 14, and beat Bama without 3 key LBs. When those LBs were back in the postseason (one was reinsured on the semi and was out for the title game), Bama was clearly a top 4 team.

I remember watching the replay of that game on like ESPNU, and it wasn't the LBs that were the problem - in fact, weren't all 3 of them back for that game? Auburn seemed to dominate that game physically. They had two sacks and nine QB hurries, and were coming up with key stops when they needed them. It wasn't like Auburn won with an amazing offensive performance.

 

[Across The Field]

How about Utah? Could they also make the leap if they win out?

It's entirely possible.

 

[CaptainStubing]

It's entirely possible.

I think the committee would have a lot of explaining to do if a one-loss power 5 champion got booted out for a one loss team that didn't even get to their own championship game

 

[Across The Field]

I think the committee would have a lot of explaining to do if a one-loss power 5 champion got booted out for a one loss team that didn't even get to their own championship game

If it's Utah not getting in, they'd point to them only having a horrible OOC and one ranked win with a loss to an unranked team. I could entirely see that happening. With Oregon though, they led for basically the entire game against a ranked Auburn OOC and lost on a last second prayer, then won their conference. With them only being one spot behind Bama, I think that would cause quite an uproar.

That said, they would be setting a really, really bad precedent putting a team in the playoff with one ranked win (over a likely 8-4 team) and no conference title game appearance over a team like Oklahoma, Oregon, or even Utah with 1 loss and a conference title.

 

[CaptainStubing]

If it's Utah not getting in, they'd point to them only having a horrible OOC and one ranked win with a loss to an unranked team. I could entirely see that happening. With Oregon though, they led for basically the entire game against a ranked Auburn OOC and lost on a last second prayer, then won their conference. With them only being one spot behind Bama, I think that would cause quite an uproar.

That said, they would be setting a really, really bad precedent putting a team in the playoff with one ranked win (over a likely 8-4 team) and no conference title game appearance over a team like Oklahoma, Oregon, or even Utah with 1 loss and a conference title.

Yep. Hopefully it will work out but it's looking like they may have some serious decisions to make

 

[Across The Field]

Yep. Hopefully it will work out but it's looking like they may have some serious decisions to make

If Auburn beats UGA and Alabama stomps Auburn, then maybe I could see Bama being 4th.

That said, Oklahoma should be #4 if they win out regardless IMO. I understand UCLA isn't elite, but they're an OOC P5 that's looked solid lately and could very possibly go bowling. Then they're likely going to end up with up to 4 ranked wins with Texas, Baylor, Oklahoma State, and whoever they face in the Big 12 CCG. Their offense is elite and also very balanced, and while their defense hasn't been great, neither has Alabama's. Even using the eye test, I can't say Bama beats Oklahoma on a neutral field right now.

 

[The Crimson King]

Auburn was toast regardless so it isn't a negative and I would argue it's additional insurance the teams that should be there are there. No way Auburn gets healthy enough to make a run in the playoff so we had no business going.

The negative part is that very few teams can play Georgia, Alabama and then Georgia in a month's time and stay healthy. You guys make fun of us for playing a cupcake between Georgia and Alabama but no one considers that if we didn't Auburn would literally have 3 weeks of Georgia, Alabama and then the SECCG. Nobody makes it through that gauntlet.

all good, next year we get LSU, bama, seccg, back to back

 

[Wild Turkey]

That's one of the negatives about a conference title game. Without having to play in that game in 2017, Auburn is in the playoff. Clearly they were better than Bama but didn't get the chance to play for it all.

What would drive me nuts is how you guys seem to have solid WR talent (8 WRs rated 4* from 2015-2018) but can't get any sort of passing game going. Is it coaching? Unable to develop QBs? Seems like Bo Nix could possibly get it going, but with their history, it's hard to say.

The passing game is all Gus’ fault because he won’t evolve and our routes are high school level and the DB’s know exactly what we are doing most of the time.

Every piece needed to make a run is on campus except for a true offensive mind that knows how to put them together.

 

[Wild Turkey]

I would challenge the “clearly better” argument. They lost to an LSU team that Bama beat by 14, and beat Bama without 3 key LBs. When those LBs were back in the postseason (one was reinsured on the semi and was out for the title game), Bama was clearly a top 4 team.

That is a terrible argument.

 

[Across The Field]

The passing game is all Gus’ fault because he won’t evolve and our routes are high school level and the DB’s know exactly what we are doing most of the time.

Every piece needed to make a run is on campus except for a true offensive mind that knows how to put them together.

Auburn needs to get out of their own way and hire a young, offensive-minded current head coach from outside of the conference. I'd take a look at Napier at Louisiana.

 

[Across The Field]

That is a terrible argument.

I just looked it up. Those 3 LBs had all returned for the Auburn game.