Which part of this is compelling?
“But Alabama went on the road, and in a rivalry game looked really good, especially in the first half, getting up 17 to nothing. Ran the ball well. Auburn came back at them. (Alabama) had a great gutsy call on 4th-and-2 late in the third quarter to get a touchdown, and then got the turnover late in that game. And I think that was enough to change the minds of a couple of committee members to push Alabama up ahead of Notre Dame in this week’s rankings.”
Yurachek left open the possibility that ND could jump over Alabama if the Crimson Tide lose to Georgia in the SEC championship.
What part of that makes you say: Wow! That was really impressive. They gave up a lead to a 5-7 team and needed to convert a 4th and 2 to score the winning TD.
Replies to: Which part of this is compelling?
SEC AD as Committee Chair...
(no message)
Interpreted as what B.S. can we come up with to justify guaranteeing Bama a spot.
(no message)
That rationalization makes zero sense
Alabama was supposed to win that game, and they actually didn't win it by as much as they should have. Politics > logic again.
It's neither compelling nor persuasive. The Committee makes FIFA look competent and ethical.
You left out the part where he left open the possibility that Miami could jump ND in some way, notwithstanding the fact that they neither beat nor played either of the ACC championship contenders, nor do they have any games left.
None of it...
but it is also why it was ludicrous for fans to be upset about ND giving up meaningless TDs after going up 42-3 early in the 3rd. That quote tells you that the committee was going to find something, anything, to justify doing what they needed to do in order to protect certain teams in the event no major upsets solved the problem for them. In this case, I think they are protecting Alabama and the ACC as a whole, with ND likely being the odd team out. They protect an Alabama that loses the SECCG by not bumping them for 2 teams from the B12 should BYU win. They protect the ACC from not even making the field if Puke and Texas Tech wins and at the same time, conveniently put ND and Miami next to each other in the rankings, thus allowing them to say it is too close and finally using H2H as the tiebreaker. You asked earlier why not just put Miami ahead of them now, and then answer is easy, it would look way obvious what is going on and why. With the scenario above, they have very little but some plausibility this week and next.
I would also agree that if Virginia, Georgia and Texas Tech all win, the committee can save itself once again by re-flipping ND and Alabama, with ND at 9, Alabama at 10, Miami at 11, but Virginia being the ACC representative. If Puke, Georgia and BYU all win, well, that might implode the system or force an unneeded expansion to 16 or more teams.
Indeed. They are now clearly sculpting a desired result rather than using metrics. Let’s hope that
we are in that desired result, but who has the least advocates on the committee?
This is an actual quote?
(no message)
Yes
Yurachek 's quote on why Alabama jumped ND this week.
The previous chair talked about breaking down film, data and statistics. This is a joke.
(no message)
Consent Management