Time to stir up controversy: Alabama loses to Georgia

[Churchillin]

What was the lowest rated game of the BCS era again? I forgot.

 

[Red_Alert]

ESPN might care, other people might care.

The people in the committee don't give a remote fuck if you watch.

Besides, you're all full of shit anyway. Last year everyone said they weren't going to watch because it was a SEC rematch, and I saw the majority of people who claimed that shit posting here in the thread during the game, and the actual ratings were UP 13% from the epic Alabama/Clemson game that Clemson won on basically the last play of the game.

Alabama-Georgia title game scores big audience for ESPN

Butthurt people are just loud is all, they don't really speak for most people.

And my opinion is if Alabama loses to Georgia, most likely Alabama stays home but I can see other teams shitting the bed enough to allow it, so I won't say for sure. But because Alabama doesn't deserve it, not because some dude in Nebraska says he isn't going to watch, because they do not give a fuck.

This thread has been made what seems like daily for the past 2 weeks. Alabama hasn't lost a game, so now people just dream up scenarios in which they might lose a game, just so they can bitch about what might happen. What a sad existence.

They'd care if very few watched. They'd change what they're doing real fucking quick if viewership took a nosedive. Don't be a defensive idiot.

 

[Red_Alert]

What was the lowest rated game of the BCS era again? I forgot.

Was it the Bama/LSU rematch?

I don't know, personally.

 

[4down20]

Was that supposed to be a trump card? Below the average of the relevant teams. Average compared to irrelevant teams.

It's not anything other than the current SoS rankings. I'm just trying to help you out because you said Alabama's schedule was a special kind of bad.

 

[Churchillin]

Was it the Bama/LSU rematch?

I don't know, personally.

It was at the time it was played. I don’t know for sure if there were any lower after that, but I don’t think so.

 

[4down20]

They'd care if very few watched. They'd change what they're doing real fucking quick if viewership took a nosedive. Don't be a defensive idiot.

Literally not their fucking job, but I'm defensive because you can't understand that.

Ok!

 

[Red_Alert]

It was at the time it was played. I don’t know for sure if there were any lower after that, but I don’t think so.

 

[Red_Alert]

Literally not their fucking job, but I'm defensive because you can't understand that.

Ok!

The NCAA would change what the Play-Off committee was doing if the ratings tanked. The pressure from all involved would be immense. Stop being so defensive, idiot.

 

[4down20]

The NCAA would change what the Play-Off committee was doing if the ratings tanked. The pressure from all involved would be immense. Stop being so defensive, idiot.

I'm not defensive, I'm just saying that stuff is all wrong and it's not how it works. This topic is just silly at this point, if Alabama loses they aren't the same team period. As I said, you guys are literally making up scenarios and then getting upset about it - Threatening to not watch if such and such happens. Get a fucking grip dude.

This post is at least how it actually works. That is how things would change, but the next contract isn't up until 2026, so you got about 8 years of not watching college football playoffs if you want to make that difference. Personally, I'm betting the ratings don't tank at all, and all you guys who hope college football breaks so you can fix what ain't broken to start with are just gonna have to live with it.

 

[Red_Alert]

I'm not defensive, I'm just saying that stuff is all wrong and it's not how it works. This topic is just silly at this point, if Alabama loses they aren't the same team period. As I said, you guys are literally making up scenarios and then getting upset about it - Threatening to not watch if such and such happens. Get a fucking grip dude.

This post is at least how it actually works. That is how things would change, but the next contract isn't up until 2026, so you got about 8 years of not watching college football playoffs if you want to make that difference. Personally, I'm betting the ratings don't tank at all, and all you guys who hope college football breaks so you can fix what ain't broken to start with are just gonna have to live with it.

That contract would be run through the shredder pronto if ratings tanked for more than a couple years. Contracts ain't worth the paper they're written on if all players are unhappy with them. Not only do you not know how things work, you're still being defensive.

 

[4down20]

That contract would be run through the shredder pronto if ratings tanked for more than a couple years. Contracts ain't worth the paper they're written on if all players are unhappy with them. Not only do you not know how things work, you're still being defensive.

I'll agree that is possible, but do you realize how far the ratings would have to drop in order for that to happen, and that the trend is actually going in the other direction despite everyone's claims last year?

But enjoy your protest I guess....hope you don't hold your breathe.

 

[rmilia1]

The NCAA would change what the Play-Off committee was doing if the ratings tanked. The pressure from all involved would be immense. Stop being so defensive, idiot.

NCAA doesn't own the CFB playoff . That's part of the reason the "focus" on what's important shifts every year in order to validate putting the bigger names in. Some years it's best win, other years it's best loss , some years it's winning your league , other years it's SoS and if none of that works we have the old, inarguable "eye test" ( which is basically a fancy way of saying "opinion based on no actual vefiable facts ")

 

[4down20]

NCAA doesn't own the CFB playoff. That's part of the reason the "focus" on what's important shifts every year in order to validate putting the bigger names in. Some years it's best win, other years it's best loss , some years it's winning your league , other years it's SoS and if none of that works we have the old, inarguable "eye test" ( which is basically a fancy way of saying "opinion based on no actual vefiable facts ")

The "NCAA" is just the schools themselves, but it's all the schools, not just FBS.

The CFP is done between the FBS schools(via conferences mostly) and CFP itself. So it's basically the same thing, but not the "NCAA" because it's only part of the schools, not all.

So you're just completely off base in your weird little conspiracy that tries to suggest the schools aren't being represented somehow.

 

[rmilia1]

The "NCAA" is just the schools themselves, but it's all the schools, not just FBS.

The CFP is done between the FBS schools(via conferences mostly) and CFP itself. So it's basically the same thing, but not the "NCAA" because it's only part of the schools, not all.

So you're just completely off base in your weird little conspiracy that tries to suggest the schools aren't being represented somehow.

So im right ?? Lol

It's not a conspiracy theory. It's good business . Better to have OSU in instead of Baylor /TCU, better to have OSU instead of PSU but better to have Bama than OSU. There's no shame in that as long as you make it clear it's a factor . Which they have .

 

[4down20]

So im right ?? Lol

It's not a conspiracy theory. It's good business . Better to have OSU in instead of Baylor /TCU, better to have OSU instead of PSU but better to have Bama than OSU. There's no shame in that as long as you make it clear it's a factor . Which they have .

You're not right.

Do you think Baylor and TCU would be ok with the CFP doing that?

 

[Innermind]

Don't worry about Michigan.... if the Wolverines somehow manage to get past Ohio State, they will probably become overconfident and then Fitz will take care of business in Indianapolis Dec 1st:

 

[Ojb81]

Look at the substantial decline in NFL ratings, and that was over a side-show issue. This would be over a fundamental issue. "We all know," lol. So you're in the "cause Bama" camp. Got it.

You got it?? Gooooood!! You got something! Because, Alabama IS that much better! Let me guess: you were one of those dipshits back in 2011 who were crying because the national title game featured Alabama vs. LSU, and not Oklahoma State vs. LSU?

LMAO at "substantial decline in NFL ratings over a sideshow". Pssst, hey, Weemus, listen closely. The decline hasnt REALLY been all that substantial, the NFL is still the undisputed king of American sports, and it had more to do with the application of confusing rules than anything else. Thats a fact, Jack.

Now go back to your feet stamping over college football because "Bama".

Got it??

Bwaaahahahhaa

 

[Ojb81]

Bama is better than UGA too even if they lose to them .

Eye test is fine but at some point the criteria the committee claims to use has to count for something

Bama ( if they lose to UGA ) is likely to finish the year with 1 top 25 win. 1. If none of the criteria matters just get rid of the committee and use the polls to pick the playoff teams. They're all eye test

Agreed. You know it, I know it, everyone knows Bama is better

 

[Ojb81]

This is college football, where any given saturday anything can happen. Thats why they play the game

No, thats the NFL. In college football, what we usually expect to happen, almost always DOES happen

 

[Mike A. S.]

Why would Georgia be a lock but Michigan wouldn't ?

I never understand this thinking .

Both teams would have very similar resumes at that point

Anyway what SHOULD happen is Bama should be left out. What I hope would happen is Michigan gets screwed and next year we have an 8 team playoff

Probably because Georgia would have just beaten Alabama. Not only the #1 team, but supposedly one of the greatest teams ever! Plus as mentioned, Georgia/Alabama/Notre Dame/Michigan would have played at least one game against the teams in question. Notre Dame and Georgia would have won those games. So it stands to reason that Alabama or Michigan would be the team left out.