(01-10-2023 12:54 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:51 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 11:57 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 11:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think Alabama would have given Georgia a much, much better game than this National embarrassment.

Alabama was WAY better than TCU.

Better than Michigan too.

Then Alabama needs to figure out why they’re losing to multiple non-playoff teams - one ranked #17 - and why they were unable to defeat a team better than 20th in the regular season.

Alabama’s problem was Alabama.

One team Alabama lost to beat a B1G division champ 63-7 in the Citrus bowl. The other beat the ACC champ like a drum in the Orange bowl. And they lost to both at the buzzer, on the road.

I think the bowls proved that I was originally right- going 10-2 in the SEC is just simply better than going 12 and 1 in the Big 12. Or unbeaten in the B1G..

“LSU beat unranked Purdue without Aidan O’Connell and Jeff Brohm ergo Bama’s loss is excusable” lmao what is this horrific take

You can find hundreds of quo vadis posts in previous years where he argues bowls are a meaningless measurement due to opt-outs, staff changes, motivation, etc.

Alabama/LSU win bowls this year over B1G/XII teams and all the sudden he does a 180.

All I'll say is this: If Alabama had beaten both LSU and Tennessee and made it to the SEC title game, they would've been in regardless of the result of that particular game. But they didn't beat LSU or Tennessee. They lost to both of those teams. Simply put, they didn't take care of business like they should have. That's why they were left out of the CFP. It's nobody's fault but their own.

Moral of the story: Alabama, take care of your business if you want to play in the CFP next year.

(01-10-2023 01:05 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:54 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:51 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 11:57 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Then Alabama needs to figure out why they’re losing to multiple non-playoff teams - one ranked #17 - and why they were unable to defeat a team better than 20th in the regular season.

Alabama’s problem was Alabama.

One team Alabama lost to beat a B1G division champ 63-7 in the Citrus bowl. The other beat the ACC champ like a drum in the Orange bowl. And they lost to both at the buzzer, on the road.

I think the bowls proved that I was originally right- going 10-2 in the SEC is just simply better than going 12 and 1 in the Big 12. Or unbeaten in the B1G..

“LSU beat unranked Purdue without Aidan O’Connell and Jeff Brohm ergo Bama’s loss is excusable” lmao what is this horrific take

You can find hundreds of quo vadis posts in previous years where he argues bowls are a meaningless measurement due to opt-outs, staff changes, motivation, etc.

Alabama/LSU win bowls this year over B1G/XII teams and all the sudden he does a 180.

All I'll say is this: If Alabama had beaten both LSU and Tennessee and made it to the SEC title game, they would've been in regardless of the result of that particular game. But they didn't beat LSU or Tennessee. They lost to both of those teams. Simply put, they didn't take care of business like they should have. That's why they were left out of the CFP. It's nobody's fault but their own.

Moral of the story: Alabama, take care of your business if you want to play in the CFP next year.

Yep. And the other top-20 team Alabama played was a 1-point squeaker over their backup QB.

Alabama’s 3 top-20 games
#6 - Loss
#17 - Loss
#20 - 1 point squeaker over backup QB

(01-09-2023 11:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, right?

Sure. I blame Alabama for not beating the teams they needed to beat to make it happen.
_____________________

(01-10-2023 12:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  ... One team Alabama lost to fell 40-13 to Tennessee who lost as bad to South Carolina as bad as TCU lost to Georgia. ...

Now, be careful about the commutative property there ... the Tennessee that beat Alabama at home was not the same Tennessee playing South Carolina for the part of the game after Hendon Hooker went out with a torn ACL. Joe Milton III may have a rifle for an arm, but even with weeks to prepare for the Orange Bowl, he wasn't up to what Hendon Hooker had been doing.

A one-loss Tennessee losing in division to CFP ranking #1 Georgia would have been ahead of Alabama after Alabama lost its division. Likely ahead of the Buckeyes as well.

(01-10-2023 12:51 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 11:57 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 11:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think Alabama would have given Georgia a much, much better game than this National embarrassment.

Alabama was WAY better than TCU.

Better than Michigan too.

Then Alabama needs to figure out why they’re losing to multiple non-playoff teams - one ranked #17 - and why they were unable to defeat a team better than 20th in the regular season.

Alabama’s problem was Alabama.

One team Alabama lost to beat a B1G division champ 63-7 in the Citrus bowl. The other beat the ACC champ like a drum in the Orange bowl. And they lost to both at the buzzer, on the road.

I think the bowls proved that I was originally right- going 10-2 in the SEC is just simply better than going 12 and 1 in the Big 12. Or unbeaten in the B1G..

“LSU beat unranked Purdue without Aidan O’Connell and Jeff Brohm ergo Bama’s loss is excusable” lmao what is this horrific take

I would have to go back and check but I think LSU had 23 opt-outs and transfers and guys otherwise skipping the game compared to just 11 for Purdue- so I dare say LSU had a lot more Talent left off the table in that game than Purdue

(01-10-2023 01:24 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 11:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, right?

Sure. I blame Alabama for not beating the teams they needed to beat to make it happen.
_____________________

(01-10-2023 12:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  ... One team Alabama lost to fell 40-13 to Tennessee who lost as bad to South Carolina as bad as TCU lost to Georgia. ...

Now, be careful about the commutative property there ... the Tennessee that beat Alabama at home was not the same Tennessee playing South Carolina for the part of the game after Hendon Hooker went out with a torn ACL. Joe Milton III may have a rifle for an arm, but even with weeks to prepare for the Orange Bowl, he wasn't up to what Hendon Hooker had been doing.

A one-loss Tennessee losing in division to CFP ranking #1 Georgia would have been ahead of Alabama after Alabama lost its division. Likely ahead of the Buckeyes as well.

I’m just pointing out how idiotic quo is being on this issue. He’s claiming Tennessee beating Clemson counts wo Hooker.

(01-10-2023 01:05 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:54 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:51 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 11:57 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Then Alabama needs to figure out why they’re losing to multiple non-playoff teams - one ranked #17 - and why they were unable to defeat a team better than 20th in the regular season.

Alabama’s problem was Alabama.

One team Alabama lost to beat a B1G division champ 63-7 in the Citrus bowl. The other beat the ACC champ like a drum in the Orange bowl. And they lost to both at the buzzer, on the road.

I think the bowls proved that I was originally right- going 10-2 in the SEC is just simply better than going 12 and 1 in the Big 12. Or unbeaten in the B1G..

“LSU beat unranked Purdue without Aidan O’Connell and Jeff Brohm ergo Bama’s loss is excusable” lmao what is this horrific take

You can find hundreds of quo vadis posts in previous years where he argues bowls are a meaningless measurement due to opt-outs, staff changes, motivation, etc.

Alabama/LSU win bowls this year over B1G/XII teams and all the sudden he does a 180.

All I'll say is this: If Alabama had beaten both LSU and Tennessee and made it to the SEC title game, they would've been in regardless of the result of that particular game. But they didn't beat LSU or Tennessee. They lost to both of those teams. Simply put, they didn't take care of business like they should have. That's why they were left out of the CFP. It's nobody's fault but their own.

Moral of the story: Alabama, take care of your business if you want to play in the CFP next year.

Exactly a 2 loss AL should not have any consideration.

(01-10-2023 01:05 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:54 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:51 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 11:57 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Then Alabama needs to figure out why they’re losing to multiple non-playoff teams - one ranked #17 - and why they were unable to defeat a team better than 20th in the regular season.

Alabama’s problem was Alabama.

One team Alabama lost to beat a B1G division champ 63-7 in the Citrus bowl. The other beat the ACC champ like a drum in the Orange bowl. And they lost to both at the buzzer, on the road.

I think the bowls proved that I was originally right- going 10-2 in the SEC is just simply better than going 12 and 1 in the Big 12. Or unbeaten in the B1G..

“LSU beat unranked Purdue without Aidan O’Connell and Jeff Brohm ergo Bama’s loss is excusable” lmao what is this horrific take

You can find hundreds of quo vadis posts in previous years where he argues bowls are a meaningless measurement due to opt-outs, staff changes, motivation, etc.

Alabama/LSU win bowls this year over B1G/XII teams and all the sudden he does a 180.

All I'll say is this: If Alabama had beaten both LSU and Tennessee and made it to the SEC title game, they would've been in regardless of the result of that particular game. But they didn't beat LSU or Tennessee. They lost to both of those teams. Simply put, they didn't take care of business like they should have. That's why they were left out of the CFP. It's nobody's fault but their own.

Moral of the story: Alabama, take care of your business if you want to play in the CFP next year.

I would agree, if Alabama's business, their schedule, was basically the same as all the other contenders for playoff spots.

But IMO it wasn't, because Michigan, TCU and Ohio State didn't have to play Tennessee and LSU. They played a big pile of IMO inferior B1G and Big 12 teams.

I don't think Michigan or TCU lose fewer than 3 or 4 games each playing in the SEC.

(01-10-2023 09:42 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Look - we could always play the game of just anointing whoever the Las Vegas bookmakers believe are the two best teams and that could very well be Georgia and Alabama.

However, this is sports. The actual wins and losses matter (or at least are supposed to matter). It's why I hate the "eye test" so much and the totally subjective ranking systems that college football has used for its whole existence.

Alabama might be the most talented team in the country next to UGA, but Bama had their chances to get into the playoff and didn't do so.

To be sure, if we had the 12-team playoff this year, Bama would have been in the field and we could have very well ended up with a UGA-Bama championship game. However, under the criteria of the current 4-team playoff system, Bama absolutely did not earn its place to make it this year. The CFP committee rightly didn't just throw out all of the results and say, "We just think Bama is better even though they crapped the bed multiple times."

Once again, just because Vegas, recruiting rankings and the "eye test" say that you have the most talent doesn't give you a pass for not winning the games that you needed to win. We seem to understand this in every other sport, yet the history of college football always having subjective ranking systems seems to have warped our minds regarding who "deserves" to be in a championship game in college football specifically.

Actually, in the 12 team format, bama would have been the 5 seed, so they’d have faced Georgia in the semis. Assuming they didn’t have a good loss before that ofc.

(01-10-2023 02:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 01:05 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:54 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:51 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  One team Alabama lost to beat a B1G division champ 63-7 in the Citrus bowl. The other beat the ACC champ like a drum in the Orange bowl. And they lost to both at the buzzer, on the road.

I think the bowls proved that I was originally right- going 10-2 in the SEC is just simply better than going 12 and 1 in the Big 12. Or unbeaten in the B1G..

“LSU beat unranked Purdue without Aidan O’Connell and Jeff Brohm ergo Bama’s loss is excusable” lmao what is this horrific take

You can find hundreds of quo vadis posts in previous years where he argues bowls are a meaningless measurement due to opt-outs, staff changes, motivation, etc.

Alabama/LSU win bowls this year over B1G/XII teams and all the sudden he does a 180.

All I'll say is this: If Alabama had beaten both LSU and Tennessee and made it to the SEC title game, they would've been in regardless of the result of that particular game. But they didn't beat LSU or Tennessee. They lost to both of those teams. Simply put, they didn't take care of business like they should have. That's why they were left out of the CFP. It's nobody's fault but their own.

Moral of the story: Alabama, take care of your business if you want to play in the CFP next year.

I would agree, if Alabama's business, their schedule, was basically the same as all the other contenders for playoff spots.

But IMO it wasn't, because Michigan, TCU and Ohio State didn't have to play Tennessee and LSU. They played a big pile of IMO inferior B1G and Big 12 teams.

I don't think Michigan or TCU lose fewer than 3 or 4 games each playing in the SEC.

It doesn't matter. You play who is in front of you. Alabama lost to two teams. Doesn't matter if they were conference foes. THEY! LOST! TO! TWO! TEAMS! TCU only lost to one. In overtime. To a repeat opponent. And as you know, it's much harder to beat the same opponent a second time. Michigan never lost a game until TCU beat them. Ohio State almost pulled the upset against Georgia.

So I'll say once again: If Alabama had taken care of business, they would've been in the CFP. They didn't, so they were left out. Plain and simple.

FWIW, ESPN FPI ranks TCU with the highest strength of schedule of the four playoff teams...

4 TCU
8 Georgia
15 Ohio St
28 Michigan

I would caution drawing too many conclusions from one game. I know TCU was two TD dogs but sometimes it's also about matchups, limiting mistakes/turnovers and solid performance on the biggest of stages. To me, it looked like after Georgia sweated out a win vs the Buckeyes they smelled another chip and turned it up a notch against a wide-eyed TCU team that also committed three turnovers leading to three Georgia scores. Absolute credit to Georgia for playing nearly perfect football for four quarters and the final score showed it.

(01-10-2023 02:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 01:05 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:54 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:51 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  One team Alabama lost to beat a B1G division champ 63-7 in the Citrus bowl. The other beat the ACC champ like a drum in the Orange bowl. And they lost to both at the buzzer, on the road.

I think the bowls proved that I was originally right- going 10-2 in the SEC is just simply better than going 12 and 1 in the Big 12. Or unbeaten in the B1G..

“LSU beat unranked Purdue without Aidan O’Connell and Jeff Brohm ergo Bama’s loss is excusable” lmao what is this horrific take

You can find hundreds of quo vadis posts in previous years where he argues bowls are a meaningless measurement due to opt-outs, staff changes, motivation, etc.

Alabama/LSU win bowls this year over B1G/XII teams and all the sudden he does a 180.

All I'll say is this: If Alabama had beaten both LSU and Tennessee and made it to the SEC title game, they would've been in regardless of the result of that particular game. But they didn't beat LSU or Tennessee. They lost to both of those teams. Simply put, they didn't take care of business like they should have. That's why they were left out of the CFP. It's nobody's fault but their own.

Moral of the story: Alabama, take care of your business if you want to play in the CFP next year.

I would agree, if Alabama's business, their schedule, was basically the same as all the other contenders for playoff spots.

But IMO it wasn't, because Michigan, TCU and Ohio State didn't have to play Tennessee and LSU.

Michigan, TCU, and Ohio State all played - and defeated - a top-11 team. Meanwhile, Alabama lost to #17 and their best win was by 1-point over #20 who was missing their QB -- the same team TCU controlled start to finish.

(01-10-2023 02:21 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 02:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 01:05 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:54 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 12:51 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  “LSU beat unranked Purdue without Aidan O’Connell and Jeff Brohm ergo Bama’s loss is excusable” lmao what is this horrific take

You can find hundreds of quo vadis posts in previous years where he argues bowls are a meaningless measurement due to opt-outs, staff changes, motivation, etc.

Alabama/LSU win bowls this year over B1G/XII teams and all the sudden he does a 180.

All I'll say is this: If Alabama had beaten both LSU and Tennessee and made it to the SEC title game, they would've been in regardless of the result of that particular game. But they didn't beat LSU or Tennessee. They lost to both of those teams. Simply put, they didn't take care of business like they should have. That's why they were left out of the CFP. It's nobody's fault but their own.

Moral of the story: Alabama, take care of your business if you want to play in the CFP next year.

I would agree, if Alabama's business, their schedule, was basically the same as all the other contenders for playoff spots.

But IMO it wasn't, because Michigan, TCU and Ohio State didn't have to play Tennessee and LSU. They played a big pile of IMO inferior B1G and Big 12 teams.

I don't think Michigan or TCU lose fewer than 3 or 4 games each playing in the SEC.

It doesn't matter. You play who is in front of you. Alabama lost to two teams. Doesn't matter if they were conference foes. THEY! LOST! TO! TWO! TEAMS! TCU only lost to one. In overtime. To a repeat opponent. And as you know, it's much harder to beat the same opponent a second time. Michigan never lost a game until TCU beat them. Ohio State almost pulled the upset against Georgia.

So I'll say once again: If Alabama had taken care of business, they would've been in the CFP. They didn't, so they were left out. Plain and simple.

Exactly. You lose in round one of March Madness, you don't get to be in the Final Four. You lose you're out. You can cry and moan about bad seeding, which happens every year, but it doesn't change a damn thing. The team that wins becomes champion.

(01-09-2023 11:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think Alabama would have given Georgia a much, much better game than this National embarrassment.

Alabama was WAY better than TCU.

Better than Michigan too.

Vanderbilt lost to Georgia by fewer points than TCU did.

I understand your point about Alabama. But Alabama didn’t get selected for the playoffs. Do I think they are one of the four best teams in the country? I do. I could argue for them being #2.

However, it is water over the dam. “What ifs” is a Muskie thing, and I say that positively with regards to reflecting and noting mistakes during earlier days.

People referencing close calls, ref calls/no calls, weather, injuries, the flu, schedules, etc., as prejudices and biases show, don’t change official results. What’s deemed fair is subjective, and picking the “deciders” for the playoffs is not a scientific process.

My opinion is the selection committee got it 3/4ths right. Obviously, I don’t get a vote as others here don’t either.

Expanding the playoffs won’t end future controversies. Complaints will change some. Placements will be argued, matchups will get questioned, and there will be new fusses about individual game results.

(01-09-2023 11:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, right?

Nope. That would have been one of the stupidest things for college football.

"Wins and losses don't *really* matter - we want Nick Saban and all of his highly-recruited and future NFL players on the big stage...even if they couldn't win any games that really matter..." [hides clipboard that shows Tennessee and LSU scores in red ink].

"Hey, Bama beat 5-7 Texas A&M by more than a field goal." [places thumb over the 4-point win margin]. "I know that was closer than it should have been, but it was at the very beginning of A&M's 6-game losing streak! They have really good coaches and players too, just like Nick Saban and Bryce Young!" [Looks at notes and realizes that Texas A&M didn't qualify for a bowl game. Darn.]

Well, er, um, they also beat 5-loss Ole Miss by almost a whole touchdown (6 points). They have really good coaches and players like Bama too! These are SEC teams we're talking about!" [Looks at the TaxAct Texas Bowl score and realizes that Ole Miss actually LOST to 5-loss Texas Tech by 17. Shoot.]

[Reaches into magical bag of tricks and pulls out a 20-19 win over Texas]. "Hey, they also beat 5-loss Texas on a last-minute field goal, even though they played us without their starting QB for most of the game. They're the cream of the Big 12 crop!" [Peaks back into the bag of tricks and realizes that Texas did NOT qualify to play in the Big 12 championship game and then catches from the side of his eye the Alamo Bowl score that shows that Texas lost to Washington. Crap.].

"But, surely you saw the Utah State win!?" [checks the Stadium sports app and sees that Utah State lost to FCS Weber State by a 7-35 score and was embarrassed by Memphis in the First Responder Bowl.]

[Sighs and looks out the window while realizing that the CFP replaced the BCS system several years ago.]

For the record, I'd like to point out that I don't see many (any?) Alabama fans arguing this. It's all quo (who I like!) doing his thing.

Yes I believe Bama would've made a better game. But TCU won games on the field, they earned it, good for them even though last night didn't pan out.

Ohio St is a different story but I had no expectation the committee would put us in over them. Path of least resistance was to put the only four 1-loss or better teams in and call it a day.

I think most any SEC team would have given UGA a better game, but that does not mean that all of those SEC teams would have beaten TCU. It’s just the way football is.

TCU beat Michigan who pounded Ohio State. Maybe the committee got it right.

(01-10-2023 10:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(01-10-2023 09:00 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I just think about how the post-season went:

Alabama was obviously docked by the CFP for losing two games, to LSU and Tennessee. I said Alabama shouldn't docked in the CFP so much for losing to these two very good SEC teams on the road at the buzzer.

LSU? Beat B1G CCG runner-up Purdue by 56 points in the Citrus Bowl, literally the largest bowl margin in history (tied with two other teams) until last night.

Tennessee? Routed the ACC champ in the Orange Bowl by 17 points, despite not having their star QB.

Alabama? Shellacked the Big 12 champ in the Sugar Bowl by 25 points, a team that beat TCU in Dallas just a couple weeks earlier to win the Big 12.

To me, these three things add up to an "I was right" (LOL) about Alabama and what the CFP should have done. They just made the wrong call leaving Alabama out.

TCU? Beat Michigan in the CFP. To me, that proves they belonged in the playoffs, something I was wrong about.

Then, got beat by a bowl-record 58 points in the title game. That tells me they were nowhere near deserving of being in the title game. I mean, they literally lost by the largest margin in bowl history, and that's a lot of history.

IMO , playoffs should have been something like Alabama vs Michigan or Ohio State, TCU vs Georgia. Then we get the two best teams, Alabama vs Georgia, in the title game.

The CFP just made the error IMO of overrating wins in the B1G and Big 12, and underrating how much better the SEC was than these leagues.

Yet, Ohio State controlled most of the game against Georgia and the difference between OSU going to the final and UGA going to the final was a hooked field goal as time expired.

Ohio State played UGA better than anyone all year and certainly much more so than TCU. Heck, OSU gave UGA exactly the game that you're essentially arguing to justify including Alabama (e.g. they would have played UGA better). Meanwhile, Michigan crushed Ohio State in Columbus and was an undefeated Big Ten champ... yet you're saying that TCU was justified to be included because they beat Michigan in the semifinal but only one of the Big Ten teams should have made it... meaning that you'd be excluding the team that actually gave UGA the best game of the year or an undefeated Big Ten champ that went on the road and thoroughly beat the team that gave UGA the best game of the year.

The point is that the transitive property game can be skewed to get any result that you want. At the same time, the relevant information is what leads UP to the playoff. We can't go back and say, "Well, the Big Ten/ACC/Big 12 champ lost" or "Notre Dame lost" in the playoff and then say someone else should have been in their place. Alabama had their chance to PLAY themselves into the playoff many times. They already get a bigger benefit of the doubt than ANYONE. As I stated in another thread, the 12-team playoff system will give a team like 2022 Alabama another chance. However, under the criteria of the *current* 4-team playoff system, they absolutely didn't deserve to be in it (and *deserve* matters here because actual results matter).

Tit for tat Frank. Georgia missed one early. Call it the associative principle of field goal misses. Other than that, I absolutely agree. By all past standards the right 4 teams were in the playoff. As to the rest the one who had the most points on that day won. That's life. Frankly had Ohio State played Michigan and TCU had played Georgia in the opening round with a month to prepare we could easily have had a different outcome. Having just one week and a day to prepare for Georgia was apparently a lot harder for Dykes. But hooptie-do on that as well. It is what it is and it is the same for everyone.

I realize it is natural to rehash these things, but to do so as some have vehemently, makes it all more tedious than enjoyable. You certainly have not done that.

The synopsis is simple, the right 4 schools were in, you might quibble over seeding, but the committee has tried not to pair the two entrants from one conference in the first round so I have no beef with that either. Georgia won! Hail to the champions. All glory is fleeting, and we may well have a new champion next year.

Here's to 12 and 4 byes!

(01-10-2023 04:20 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  TCU beat Michigan who pounded Ohio State. Maybe the committee got it right.

The same Ohio State that should have beaten Georgia in Georgia, only a chip shot missed FG saved Georgia