Utah at USC - 8 pm on FS1

[Doc Sam Beckett 5854]

21 minutes ago, texasstrong12 said:

What does any of this have to do with this year's strength of schedule? 

Because you are trying to give a two loss non-conference champion the benefit of the doubt over a one loss conference champion who has proven to be able to handle the former's conference rather easily. It's bullshit. Clemson isn't Oklahoma, they don't sneak into the playoffs and proceed to lose every year. Win your conference or piss off. 

Vandy, Murry State, Arky State, ND, Tenn, Florida, Scar, Kentucky, Auburn, Aggy, Mizzou, GT.....two losses from that schedule is so much better than one loss from Clemson's? Better enough to leave a conference champion and defending national champion out of the playoffs? It would never happen to Bama or anyone else from the sec so it shouldn't happen to other conferences either. 

[texasstrong12 4668]

7 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

who has proven to be able to handle the former's conference rather easily.

none of this matters when looking at this year's strength of schedule. I can't help the ACC is complete dogshit. Don't lose a game and it won't even be a discussion. 

 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5854]

22 minutes ago, texasstrong12 said:

none of this matters when looking at this year's strength of schedule. I can't help the ACC is complete dogshit. Don't lose a game and it won't even be a discussion. 

 

Lulz ok, let's make it only about this year. If you can't win your conference then you don't belong in the playoffs. I can't help it if Georgia isn't good enough to win their own conference, or make it through their own bullshit schedule without two losses. Win your conference and don't lose two games and it won't even be a discussion. 

[texasstrong12 4668]

8 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

let's make it only about this year. 

As it should be. Nobody is denying Clemson is legit and has owned the SEC. None of that matters when determining this year's strength of schedule. Clemson plays nobody and they should be punished for that if they lose a game. 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5854]

Just now, texasstrong12 said:

As it should be. Nobody is denying Clemson is legit and has owned the SEC. None of that matters when determining this year's strength of schedule. Clemson plays nobody and they should be punished for that if they lose a game. 

They play 10 Power Five teams, including two from the conference you are trying to say would deserve a two loss team in the playoffs. The selection criteria isn't only about strength of schedule, and for good reason. Georgia should be punished for losing two games and not winning their conference. Remember last year when Georgia should have gotten the four seed and then got spanked in the Sugar Bowl? 

If this scenario played out, we would know that Georgia or LSU is not better than the team that won their conference, so why have a rematch when we haven't seen any of them head to head against Clemson? If it's only about this year, then a two loss team has already been eliminated by the team who won their conference. 

Also, the reason this is even a conversation is because of the bullshit inflation the sec gets. The ACC is horrible this year, I won't argue that, but it's still 2-2 vs the sec so far with one of those losses a four point loss against  #9 Gata. So maybe SoS isn't the best and only factor in deciding playoff teams. 

[texasstrong12 4668]

1 minute ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

 Remember last year when Georgia should have gotten the four seed and then got spanked in the Sugar Bowl? 

 

I remember them losing out on the 4th seed to an OU team that was top 25 in SOS at the end of the year (per Sagarin). Clemson won't even be top 50 in SOS at the end of the year.

[Hank Chinaski 6344]

2 hours ago, Burt Macklin said:

USC will not win out. lulz.

Yeah it seems very unlikely. Just saying that they aren't really eliminated yet.

[Doc Sam Beckett 5854]

13 minutes ago, texasstrong12 said:

I remember them losing out on the 4th seed to an OU team that was top 25 in SOS at the end of the year (per Sagarin). Clemson won't even be top 50 in SOS at the end of the year.

Yes, a two loss non conference champion was left out of the playoffs for a one loss conference champion in what proved to be the correct decision just like it will be every time a two loss team that can't win their conference is left out for a one loss conference champ. What a fucking travesty that would have been if Georgia made the playoffs last year. 

[texasstrong12 4668]

3 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Yes, a two loss non conference champion was left out of the playoffs for a one loss conference champion in what proved to be the correct decision just like it will be every time a two loss team that can't win their conference is left out for a one loss conference champ. What a fucking travesty that would have been if Georgia made the playoffs last year. 

It was the correct decision because OU played a tough schedule. Completely different context if we're talking Clemson this year. There was no reason to put a 2 loss Georgia team in over a one loss OU team that played a top 25 schedule. 

Edited September 21, 2019 by texasstrong12

[Doc Sam Beckett 5854]

4 minutes ago, texasstrong12 said:

It was the correct decision because OU played a tough schedule. Completely different context if we're talking Clemson this year. There was no reason to put a 2 loss Georgia team in over a one loss OU team that played a top 25 schedule. 

It was the correct decision because Georgia just fucking lost to the #1 seed in their last game and therefore eliminated themselves. 

[texasstrong12 4668]

FYI