moranis,

You left out the "other factors" portion. This is something else that MikeT23 has touched on... that is vague & can justify anything. So, why did you put that crap up there as if it does something for your argument? You didn't explain what those "other factors" are, should be, etc... so, I have my own & it favors Bama.

You even admit that you believe things can change, yet here you are arguing that because of this one head to head win... there can be no questioning Ole Miss being in over Bama. I call BS. Teams can win games that they were not supposed to win one week & then lose a game they should win the next week. That has to be a factor under "other factors" that is very important. Who would you trust more right now in a playoff situation? Ole Miss who slipped by Bama, but struggled for 3 quarters against Boise State & for a large portion of the game against Memphis? Or Bama who got slipped by on one Saturday in the SEC?

Beating Bama does not mean that Ole Miss is suddenly actually a Top 5 team... even if some rankings will say they are. That is a huge problem with how football games are evaluated... one win gets exaggerated out to mean things that they shouldn't. I'll call Ole Miss better than Bama when they prove their consistency... not just one win on one Saturday head to head.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/7/2014 6:54:00 PM (view original):
I think your problem is that you believe any statement made in September must apply in December.  It doesn't.  Teams evolve and we have more info.   I don't care if SC wins out and crushes Bama/Auburn in the SEC championship.   They have proven that they aren't ready for big boy football in the last two weeks.  One game for them means nothing.   

Of course a couple of teams on MSU's schedule might start rolling teams.  Maybe, all of sudden, MSU can get a couple of quality wins.  I don't see it but it's possible.   Now, if in December, I say "Looks like MSU should be in", you'll have a fit and quote every post where I said they shouldn't.   But that's two months from now.   Things can change. 

Had you said Alabama is the best team in September, of course that can change, but that isn't the type of statement you were making.  You were making broad statements about how home losses early with young teams can be disregarded, but only with certain teams.  A team that gets crushed at home is a team that gets crushed at home.  It is a terrible loss.  It doesn't matter if it is week 1 or week 13.  Now sure if it is week 13 you have a lot more to go on for the overall team picture than if it is week 1, but it still doesn't change the fact that it is a terrible loss.

I get that you think Alabama will prove itself to be better than Mississippi, but that certainly hasn't happened to this point in the season.  The fact that tripleh agrees with you, should tell you all you need to know.  

Posted by tripleh595 on 10/7/2014 8:02:00 PM (view original):
moranis,

You left out the "other factors" portion. This is something else that MikeT23 has touched on... that is vague & can justify anything. So, why did you put that crap up there as if it does something for your argument? You didn't explain what those "other factors" are, should be, etc... so, I have my own & it favors Bama.

You even admit that you believe things can change, yet here you are arguing that because of this one head to head win... there can be no questioning Ole Miss being in over Bama. I call BS. Teams can win games that they were not supposed to win one week & then lose a game they should win the next week. That has to be a factor under "other factors" that is very important. Who would you trust more right now in a playoff situation? Ole Miss who slipped by Bama, but struggled for 3 quarters against Boise State & for a large portion of the game against Memphis? Or Bama who got slipped by on one Saturday in the SEC?

Beating Bama does not mean that Ole Miss is suddenly actually a Top 5 team... even if some rankings will say they are. That is a huge problem with how football games are evaluated... one win gets exaggerated out to mean things that they shouldn't. I'll call Ole Miss better than Bama when they prove their consistency... not just one win on one Saturday head to head.

Do we disregard Alabama's struggles with West Virginia (just a 10 point win and within a score with just over 8 minutes left) and Florida (21-21 with just under 21 minutes left in the game), or do we not care about those.  I guess only Mississippi's close games get counted as a negative not Alabama's.  

You see this is the problem when you start to make nonsensical arguments.  Mississippi beat Alabama.  Mississippi is unbeaten.  Why is this even a discussion?

Posted by moranis on 10/8/2014 7:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/7/2014 6:54:00 PM (view original):
I think your problem is that you believe any statement made in September must apply in December.  It doesn't.  Teams evolve and we have more info.   I don't care if SC wins out and crushes Bama/Auburn in the SEC championship.   They have proven that they aren't ready for big boy football in the last two weeks.  One game for them means nothing.   

Of course a couple of teams on MSU's schedule might start rolling teams.  Maybe, all of sudden, MSU can get a couple of quality wins.  I don't see it but it's possible.   Now, if in December, I say "Looks like MSU should be in", you'll have a fit and quote every post where I said they shouldn't.   But that's two months from now.   Things can change. 

Had you said Alabama is the best team in September, of course that can change, but that isn't the type of statement you were making.  You were making broad statements about how home losses early with young teams can be disregarded, but only with certain teams.  A team that gets crushed at home is a team that gets crushed at home.  It is a terrible loss.  It doesn't matter if it is week 1 or week 13.  Now sure if it is week 13 you have a lot more to go on for the overall team picture than if it is week 1, but it still doesn't change the fact that it is a terrible loss.

I get that you think Alabama will prove itself to be better than Mississippi, but that certainly hasn't happened to this point in the season.  The fact that tripleh agrees with you, should tell you all you need to know.  

You're one dense ******.  

"You were making broad statements about how home losses early with young teams can be disregarded, but only with certain teams."   Yes, it can be disregarded with certain teams.  
In SC's case, they had GA, Mizzou, Auburn and Clemson on their schedule.   Strong showings in those games would override the loss to TAMU.  
In OSU's case, they had MSU on their schedule.  A strong showing over MSU would not override the loss to VaTech(who has since lost to ECU, who lost to SC, and GaTech).
Pretty sure I've stated this over and over and over again.   I know it doesn't fit with what you want to hear, because it says your precious Buckeyes shouldn't be in the playoff picture, but I've consistently made the same point time and again.

Posted by moranis on 10/8/2014 7:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tripleh595 on 10/7/2014 8:02:00 PM (view original):
moranis,

You left out the "other factors" portion. This is something else that MikeT23 has touched on... that is vague & can justify anything. So, why did you put that crap up there as if it does something for your argument? You didn't explain what those "other factors" are, should be, etc... so, I have my own & it favors Bama.

You even admit that you believe things can change, yet here you are arguing that because of this one head to head win... there can be no questioning Ole Miss being in over Bama. I call BS. Teams can win games that they were not supposed to win one week & then lose a game they should win the next week. That has to be a factor under "other factors" that is very important. Who would you trust more right now in a playoff situation? Ole Miss who slipped by Bama, but struggled for 3 quarters against Boise State & for a large portion of the game against Memphis? Or Bama who got slipped by on one Saturday in the SEC?

Beating Bama does not mean that Ole Miss is suddenly actually a Top 5 team... even if some rankings will say they are. That is a huge problem with how football games are evaluated... one win gets exaggerated out to mean things that they shouldn't. I'll call Ole Miss better than Bama when they prove their consistency... not just one win on one Saturday head to head.

Do we disregard Alabama's struggles with West Virginia (just a 10 point win and within a score with just over 8 minutes left) and Florida (21-21 with just under 21 minutes left in the game), or do we not care about those.  I guess only Mississippi's close games get counted as a negative not Alabama's.  

You see this is the problem when you start to make nonsensical arguments.  Mississippi beat Alabama.  Mississippi is unbeaten.  Why is this even a discussion?

Because Bama is the better team.   Do you disagree?   You didn't answer earlier so I assume you will not answer this time.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/8/2014 8:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by moranis on 10/8/2014 7:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tripleh595 on 10/7/2014 8:02:00 PM (view original):
moranis,

You left out the "other factors" portion. This is something else that MikeT23 has touched on... that is vague & can justify anything. So, why did you put that crap up there as if it does something for your argument? You didn't explain what those "other factors" are, should be, etc... so, I have my own & it favors Bama.

You even admit that you believe things can change, yet here you are arguing that because of this one head to head win... there can be no questioning Ole Miss being in over Bama. I call BS. Teams can win games that they were not supposed to win one week & then lose a game they should win the next week. That has to be a factor under "other factors" that is very important. Who would you trust more right now in a playoff situation? Ole Miss who slipped by Bama, but struggled for 3 quarters against Boise State & for a large portion of the game against Memphis? Or Bama who got slipped by on one Saturday in the SEC?

Beating Bama does not mean that Ole Miss is suddenly actually a Top 5 team... even if some rankings will say they are. That is a huge problem with how football games are evaluated... one win gets exaggerated out to mean things that they shouldn't. I'll call Ole Miss better than Bama when they prove their consistency... not just one win on one Saturday head to head.

Do we disregard Alabama's struggles with West Virginia (just a 10 point win and within a score with just over 8 minutes left) and Florida (21-21 with just under 21 minutes left in the game), or do we not care about those.  I guess only Mississippi's close games get counted as a negative not Alabama's.  

You see this is the problem when you start to make nonsensical arguments.  Mississippi beat Alabama.  Mississippi is unbeaten.  Why is this even a discussion?

Because Bama is the better team.   Do you disagree?   You didn't answer earlier so I assume you will not answer this time.

Mississippi is the better team at this point.  They proved it on the field.  Over the next 7 games that could certainly change, but as of now Mississippi is clearly the better team.  You see I actually pay attention to results.  They matter to me.

So you think the better team always wins?    Because, if you watched the game, or even looked at the stats at the end of the game, the better team didn't win.   It happens.    Once in the playoffs, it no longer matters who the better team is, the winning team advances.    That's not really the case today. 

You see, the "other factors" can be "Who is actually the better team?"     Every game isn't an elimination game.   There's no AZ over Oregon over MSU or Kentucky over SC over ECU over VaTech over OSU algorithm.    It's just not that simple.    And that seems to be how you want it to be.   Sure, if Ole Miss and Bama end up 11-1 and the committee chooses Bama, there would be a massive stink coming out of MS.   But the fact is they aren't the better team.   They just outscored BAMA on one Saturday in October.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/8/2014 10:07:00 AM (view original):
You see, the "other factors" can be "Who is actually the better team?"     Every game isn't an elimination game.   There's no AZ over Oregon over MSU or Kentucky over SC over ECU over VaTech over OSU algorithm.    It's just not that simple.    And that seems to be how you want it to be.   Sure, if Ole Miss and Bama end up 11-1 and the committee chooses Bama, there would be a massive stink coming out of MS.   But the fact is they aren't the better team.   They just outscored BAMA on one Saturday in October.

But that one Saturday in October is the only game that matters between those two.  

If they end up with the same record and there is one spot for those two teams, it will be Mississippi that gets selected not Alabama.

Mississippi is clearly the better team?  So, just so we're clear, if Bama and Mississippi were playing on a neutral field on Saturday and you were forced to place your life savings on one of them, you're taking Mississippi?

Because that would mean you think they are actually the better team.  You're talking who currently has the better resume, which has always been the disconnect between you and Mike.

Posted by moranis on 10/8/2014 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/8/2014 10:07:00 AM (view original):
You see, the "other factors" can be "Who is actually the better team?"     Every game isn't an elimination game.   There's no AZ over Oregon over MSU or Kentucky over SC over ECU over VaTech over OSU algorithm.    It's just not that simple.    And that seems to be how you want it to be.   Sure, if Ole Miss and Bama end up 11-1 and the committee chooses Bama, there would be a massive stink coming out of MS.   But the fact is they aren't the better team.   They just outscored BAMA on one Saturday in October.

But that one Saturday in October is the only game that matters between those two.  

If they end up with the same record and there is one spot for those two teams, it will be Mississippi that gets selected not Alabama.

And that game isn't the only game that matters under the playoff format.

Do you think the committee is going to say "Well, head to head is all that matters"?

Let's play a game.

Bama beats Arkansas 31-13, Ole Miss loses 14-9
Bama beats Auburn 31-7, Ole Miss wins 19-17
Bama beats TAMU 42-14, Ole Miss wins 17-14
Bama beats LSU 37-6, OM wins 7-3
Bama beats Miss State 38-31, OM wins 23-17
Bama beats TN 45-12, OM wins 13-10

OM goes to the SEC championship and beats GA 13-10.

Only one can go to the playoff because there are better options.   Who goes?

Posted by AlCheez on 10/8/2014 11:42:00 AM (view original):
Mississippi is clearly the better team?  So, just so we're clear, if Bama and Mississippi were playing on a neutral field on Saturday and you were forced to place your life savings on one of them, you're taking Mississippi?

Because that would mean you think they are actually the better team.  You're talking who currently has the better resume, which has always been the disconnect between you and Mike.

I'm talking about best based on the factors used by the committee to determine best.  There are 4 identified categories.  Strength of Schedule, Head to Head, Common Opponents, and Championships won.  They then have a catch all of unnamed categories, presumably way less important since they aren't named.  Mike keeps going to the imaginary 5th category and just ignores the first four.  The first four are the ones that matter the most.  

I have no idea who wins on a neutral field.  I do know that both teams made crucial mistakes (each team's lost fumble was devastating).  I know that Ole Miss started to find their groove in the second half (just 100 yards in the first half, they more than doubled that in the second).  Maybe because Ole Miss was at home they started out the game much flatter due to the increased pressure, but settled down at half time and the team in the second half was the real team or maybe they used the home crowd to get going and play above themselves.  Maybe Alabama let the crowd get to them or maybe they didn't.  Who knows.  What is known, is that Mississippi beat Alabama and they didn't do it on some freak play.  They didn't do it when Alabama's QB got injured.  There were no extenuating circumstances.  Mississippi is better than Alabama right now.  Just look at the criteria.  They show that.

It's not an imaginary category.  You listed it as "other factors". 

How do you know what "matters most"?    Again, do you have some inside source that no one else has?   Are you basing it on the past history of the playoff committee's choices?

Ole Miss is not better than Bama right now.   You're the only idiot outside of MS who state that.

FWIW, I think the vague "other factors" is to prevent a retarded "auto-entry".     Say GA wins the East and plays in the SEC championship against one loss Bama(who gave Auburn their one loss meaning they beat GA).  GA wins on a blocked punt after getting outplayed all day.   GA fans will be screaming "SEC CHAMPIONS!!!!"   It would be retarded to put GA in over Bama/Auburn because they won that last game.   They are not the same quality, thus far, as either of them.