BamaFanAlways
Active Member
same here... ya'll outplayed us tonight.
same here... ya'll outplayed us tonight on special teams.
I just don't get it. I understand that people are obsessed with head-to-head.
You can't be serious? Team A beats B, and you would put B ahead of A because A's loss is not as good as B's loss which just happens to be to A. You are just trolling, right?So nobody has given me an actual reason why Auburn deserves to be in the title more than Bama. Anybody? And if you think head to head is a reason, isn't that putting way too much power in who manages to draw whom at home? Isn't it more fair to look at a large sample size than a single game? And doesn't the large sample size favor Bama?
No. My premise is simple. Rank teams based on their performance over 12 games. People accuse me of being a homer when I use it in Wisconsin argument.
Here is an example where I really don't have rooting interest. Tell me, why is Bama's loss @ Auburn on a last play FG return worse than Auburn's to LSU where they were getting killed all game.
Because as far as I can tell, it isn't. And people look at me here like I am crazy, but this is the exception. College football is the only sport I know of that considers head to head as more important than an entire resume. Certainly all the other NCAA sports consider a totality of a resume over head to head.
Other than the lame "because it is" response, why?
Jinx thread!
Just read my signature
Thats what I said about Cheezdik!!!
What is it with satanism and Auburn coaches?