🏈 Do Group of 5 teams belong in the playoffs?

[planomateo]

Yes. G5, no.

 

[alabamajack]

Sad that it took me awhile to realize my goof but kinda glad that apparently a lot of other people did too

 

[RTB X Bot]

 

[bamafan9201]

I'm a little on the fence with this one. I felt they were stacked more to deal with our threat than Georgia's defense is. However, I felt their offense would be better than I saw tonight, too. I think they deserve a shot. Would've liked to see them get 2 quality wins before they get in from now on though. You could definitely see it in their eyes around the 2nd quarter as it ended and after their initial 3rd quarter surge. They were not ready for the physical play and the speed Bama had. Only a handful of guys on their team really caused issues. Beavers off the edge, at least I think that was his name. Gardner and Bryant did an excellent man-to-man coverage job and forced BY to throw the ball away multiple times or get sacked because nothing was there. The only offensive player was Jerome Ford, and his was more in small spurts and less consistent than the others. I didn't fear Ritter's arm or much else during the game once we got a decent lead and saw those inside defenders and offensive players with their hands on the hips. I knew we had them all gassed.

 

[94 Grad]

In all honesty… they performed better than the rest of the top 10 would have… IMO.

That’s the problem with expansion to 12 or 16. It’s rare that you have 4 teams in a year that’s really viable to win the NC, let alone 12-16. It’s just asking for for injury which leads to controversy.

In all fairness, expansion favor us and uGA the most as we most likely have the deepest benches of talent to absorb those injuries.

 

[BamaFan615]

Y’all remember when Gus said that Cincy was as good as Alabama and UGA?

LOL…good times

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

Would've liked to see them get 2 quality wins before they get in from now on though.

That will continue to be hard for those teams. I was explaining that to my wife last night when we were talking abotu how bad their schedule was and they didn't prove anything going undefeated. No team with an already hard schedule who wants to make the playoffs has any reason to schedule Cincinnati at this point. If you beat them then it is looked at as not much of a win anyway. If you lose to them you get hell for losing to a G5. Makes it harder and harder for them to schedule good teams.

 

[sean]

Could not agree more. Give them the shot they deserve if they're up there in the rankings. But if they get their ass handed to them, I don't want to hear any crying or anything like that.

And I've heard a lot of grumbling about OU and Texas moving to the SEC. Saying it's creating a super-conference that will all but guarantee an SEC team a spot in the playoffs every single year.

Well....yeah. That's kind of the point.

Ever since 1992, when Roy Kramer had the vision to create a conference championship game and pit 2 ranked teams against each other (while taking the chance that if a certain team lost, it would mean no SEC team would play for the national championship), the SEC has been building itself to be a super-conference. Dominate your opponent, and you'll assure yourself a place in the championship game.....every year. And that's what the SEC has been doing since then (with a couple down years, here and there).

But not only did it foster animosity from other teams in other conferences, at the same time it was allowing the SEC to grow into the monster it has become. Winning that game meant there were no more questions as to who was the REAL champion of the conference; there were no more co-champions. There was a definitive champion who could hoist that trophy and claim that title for the following 365 days. Then, other conferences started doing the same thing. They started adding more teams so they could get to the proverbial "12" that was needed to have a conference championship game. Then, some years later, the SEC went to 14 teams. And I heard, and read, more grumbling how the SEC was just adding more and more talent (still questionable with 1 of those teams, lol) and how they were doing it just to remain relevant. Relevant? How many times had the SEC champion gone on to play in and/or win the national championship game up to that point? Answer.....a LOT!

Now, we're growing to 16 teams. And in time, I'm willing to bet we'll see at least 2 more conferences add 2 (or more) teams to their list within the next 3 years (possible less).

The Big 12 is losing their 2 biggest players. They'll be on the brink of collapse if they don't correct whatever problems they have. Oh, and for the record, I like the idea of OU and Texas coming to the SEC. Stronger teams makes for a stronger conference. Yes, there will be some cannibalism among the teams. And, yes, one team can (and probably will) knock another team out of contention for the playoffs and/or the national championship game. But that's how the world works. Get stronger, or wither away. Big 12, we're looking at you. They're currently in the wither away stage. Now, they'll need to add 4 new teams just to be able to have a conference championship game.

And the PAC 12? They need to add some new blood, too, or they'll be a long forgotten member of a once-exclusive club. And I'll even through the ACoC in there, too. Hell, I'd love to add any 2-team combination of Clemson, FSU, Miami, or Georgia Tech. Keep building.....keep getting stronger. But not too quickly, though. Spread it out over a decade. Doing it too fast can be worse in the long run. Bring in OU and Texas, let them get their feet wet for at LEAST 6 years, then start looking for 2 more strong teams.

To be the best you have to beat the best. Beating mediocre teams gets you nothing. Ask Cincinnati.

 

[ElephantStomp]

I don’t know about every year, but UC did this year

 

[Crtuneman]

I say no. Not because of whether or not they can hang with teams like Bama and Georgia for one game, but because of their whole body of work for the year. SOS should be a major determining factor, and their SOS is pathetic. Alabama plays one or two really bad OOC games, but then they play a grueling SEC schedule (except for (Vandy). Cincinnati does the opposite. They play one or two legitimate teams and then they play a schedule filled with terrible and overrated teams. Look at Houston. They were 10-2 and were ranked number 20 in the nation, yet they barely beat a really awful Auburn team. They were overrated, because they play a weak schedule. UC played well against Bama. They were physical, they had a great secondary, but that game was over when Bama scored their first TD. UC played well, but they absolutely did not deserve to be there because of their whole body of work. Now they are going to a legitimate conference (sort of, it's the Big 12) and they are going to play good teams week in and week out. Let's see how they do with a real schedule.

 

[50+yeartidefan]

I say no. Not because of whether or not they can hang with teams like Bama and Georgia for one game, but because of their whole body of work for the year. SOS should be a major determining factor, and their SOS is pathetic. Alabama plays one or two really bad OOC games, but then they play a grueling SEC schedule (except for (Vandy). Cincinnati does the opposite. They play one or two legitimate teams and then they play a schedule filled with terrible and overrated teams. Look at Houston. They were 10-2 and were ranked number 20 in the nation, yet they barely beat a really awful Auburn team. They were overrated, because they play a weak schedule. UC played well against Bama. They were physical, they had a great secondary, but that game was over when Bama scored their first TD. UC played well, but they absolutely did not deserve to be there because of their whole body of work. Now they are going to a legitimate conference (sort of, it's the Big 12) and they are going to play good teams week in and week out. Let's see how they do with a real schedule.

And a one shot thingtoo....
Meaning....they had outstanding QB....30 seniors....
Where will they be next year...lot gone

They deserved a shot this year....but also drew the #1 team....

 

[mando]

Look at Houston. They were 10-2 and were ranked number 20 in the nation, yet they barely beat a really awful Auburn team

This was the same for Bama. Two differences of course is rivalry game played in their cow pasture but still barely beat them.

 

[BamaFan334]

I say no. Not because of whether or not they can hang with teams like Bama and Georgia for one game, but because of their whole body of work for the year. SOS should be a major determining factor, and their SOS is pathetic. Alabama plays one or two really bad OOC games, but then they play a grueling SEC schedule (except for (Vandy). Cincinnati does the opposite. They play one or two legitimate teams and then they play a schedule filled with terrible and overrated teams. Look at Houston. They were 10-2 and were ranked number 20 in the nation, yet they barely beat a really awful Auburn team. They were overrated, because they play a weak schedule. UC played well against Bama. They were physical, they had a great secondary, but that game was over when Bama scored their first TD. UC played well, but they absolutely did not deserve to be there because of their whole body of work. Now they are going to a legitimate conference (sort of, it's the Big 12) and they are going to play good teams week in and week out. Let's see how they do with a real schedule.

This is where the conference bowl record comes into question. Hate Auburn, hate Tennessee, hate Georgia? But this is where we learn where we stand, or atleast used to before opt outs and all that bullcrap.

You bring up Houston barely beating an overrated Auburn team, but that same Auburn team had us beat for 59 minutes and like 20 seconds or whatever it was.

Who else deserved to be there over Cincinatti? They pretty much dominated their schedule outside of Tulsa, and beat a Playoff contender in Notre Dame at their place. Ohio State had their chances and couldn't get it done. Same with Oklahoma State, same with Baylor, same with Notre Dame, same with Texas A&M. This year, they deserved a shot. Not saying every year, but this year they definitely did. They were undefeated, had a boat load of seniors, showed with that similar team that last year they could play well and were a well coached team. So if there was a time, it was this year.

Our strength of schedule isn't looking terribly powerful right now with Ole Miss, Auburn, Mississippi State losing and Texas A&M bailing. Not that it matters so much for us and how Georgia won, but the perception in most years matters.

 

[Secondand26]

I say no. Not because of whether or not they can hang with teams like Bama and Georgia for one game, but because of their whole body of work for the year. SOS should be a major determining factor, and their SOS is pathetic. Alabama plays one or two really bad OOC games, but then they play a grueling SEC schedule (except for (Vandy). Cincinnati does the opposite. They play one or two legitimate teams and then they play a schedule filled with terrible and overrated teams. Look at Houston. They were 10-2 and were ranked number 20 in the nation, yet they barely beat a really awful Auburn team. They were overrated, because they play a weak schedule. UC played well against Bama. They were physical, they had a great secondary, but that game was over when Bama scored their first TD. UC played well, but they absolutely did not deserve to be there because of their whole body of work. Now they are going to a legitimate conference (sort of, it's the Big 12) and they are going to play good teams week in and week out. Let's see how they do with a real schedule.

I totally agree with this!
It's not "if you can pull one horseshoe out of your ass". The best team is decided by what it accomplishes during the entire season, unlike MLB, NFL , NCAA BB, etc....
All of those championships determine the team on the hottest streak, not the best team. If that's what we want, then just let everybody in!
Everybody gets a trophy.

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

Who else deserved to be there over Cincinatti? They pretty much dominated their schedule outside of Tulsa, and beat a Playoff contender in Notre Dame at their place.

The argument against them is that their schedule is easy to dominate. They played 2 teams with 9 or more wins before the playoffs, and 4 with 9 or more losses. Their average opponent was 6.15 wins and 6.23 losses. And their average opponent is not in a good conference at all (or was FCS). Yes, this year they probably should have been in because the other conferences didn't have teams step up. But in a lot of seasons we have more one loss conference champions from teh P5 and they would usually be ahead of Cincinnati just due to strength of schedule.

 

[BAMAneck]

I dont see a talented group of 5 team being able to hang with a top tier college program.

Maybe when they expand they might be able to pull off an upset here or there but when they match up against the elite the result will be the same.

 

[94 Grad]

I dont see a talented group of 5 team being able to hang with a top tier college program.

Maybe when they expand they might be able to pull off an upset here or there but when they match up against the elite the result will be the same.

Honestly, that’s about 90% true of the power 5 teams too. Just saying.

In my opinion uC could and would have beat soundly about 90% of the power 5, maybe 95%. You hit that 95% and you’re a top 5 team.

 

[Secondand26]

Honestly, that’s about 90% true of the power 5 teams too. Just saying.

In my opinion uC could and would have beat soundly about 90% of the power 5, maybe 95%. You hit that 95% and you’re a top 5 team.

In my opinion, “opinion “ should not have any (or much) to do with it. You should have to earn it on the field . September, October, & early November should matter! It shouldn’t be someone’s opinion, or politically correct decision.
I agree with Saban. Play an all Power 5 schedule & determine it that way.

 

[mando]

Our strength of schedule isn't looking terribly powerful right now with Ole Miss, Auburn, Mississippi State losing and Texas A&M bailing. Not that it matters so much for us and how Georgia won, but the perception in most years matters.

Why does this matter for Bama? I think you are confusing Bama with other programs that need to be propped up. Sometime waaaay in the future it may matter for Bama but not most years. Like UK basketball, Bama football gets the benefit of the doubt simply based on the eye test and program history.

Honestly, that’s about 90% true of the power 5 teams too. Just saying.

Agree with this. People keep pounding on the Group of 5 schedule but Bama does this to most teams regardless of which group they are from Power 5 included. See MSU, Washington, ND etc...

 

[94 Grad]

In my opinion, “opinion “ should not have any (or much) to do with it. You should have to earn it on the field . September, October, & early November should matter! It shouldn’t be someone’s opinion, or politically correct decision.
I agree with Saban. Play an all Power 5 schedule & determine it that way.

Unfortunately, all teams don’t play each other… even in the power 5… so unfortunately, all you have is “opinion”.

In most years, after #1 and #2 there is a considerable drop off. Sometime #3 can compete with the top two, but rarely can #4 let alone #5-10.