 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
Alabama's Non- Conference Schedule: Western Kentucky, Kent State and Chatanooga lol
Yet, everyone is losing their minds about Washington.
This is not an argument against Bama ( Obviously they look heads and shoulders above everybody else).
But those three teams are equally as bad as Washington's 3. Rutgers should have been a bit better. On paper, you'd have to admit, you'd think they'd be better than WK, Kent State or Chatanooga five years ago ( or whenever they schedule these).
Unfortunately the best 4 teams are not all in the playoffs
Kent State is garbage by any standard but The Mocs are at least a strong team from that level and Western Kentucky are conference champions.
Saban went to Kent State so he's just throwing his alma mater a bone.
Which teams are willing to take Bama then in the Regular Season ?
Kinda fukks up your shot of getting in the playoffs getting your ass handed to you
You forgot to mention Bama beat USC by 46 which beat Washington , the Pac 12 champ
No team wants them on their schedule for the most part
That USC team that played Bama is not the current USC team. USC would beat Washington 7 out of 10 times. I am a die hard Bruin fan, so me mentioning anything good about USc....it's real...lolOriginally Posted by Slipknot26
at least 3 teams better than Washington...
Michigan
USC
Penn St.
and I think Oklahoma would smoke Washington too
Yea conveniently left out the mighty Trojans.
Eventually what you do on the field matters and not how you look lately. Otherwise put USC & Iowa in the playoffs. Penn State got housed by Michigan & were beat by Pitt.
Western Kentucky isn't a slouch either
Oh yea
I forgot when teams suck , it don't count
When they get better is when it counts
Bama is scary good this year, not the argument. Best I have ever seen them.
Of course I know Bama destroyed SC and anticipated someone mentioning that. Washington also played SC ( and lost).
Stupid point?
You could almost make the argument that SC was Washington's 4th non-conference game when comparing to SEC Teams.
Here's the deal, when a Pac 12 team plays three trash non-conference games. It is essentially what every SEC team does. This is just a point that has been missing in the hours and hours of playoff talk and my only real gripe. I have probably consumed 30-40 hours of Playoff discussion via TV and Radio, not to mention web articles and have not heard this mentioned once.
I know you Savants are more aware, but just amazing that nobody mentions the 3 non conference games versus 4 non-conference games. In any given year, you are likely to dodge a really good team within your own conference. If Pac 12 had only 8 games, maybe Wash doesn't play SC. They replace that with an Auburn, or Oklahoma State or Wisky and nobody is talking about SOS.
If it came down to it, Bama would have gotten a lot of credit, for playing SC. A lot of credit...
lol...the 4 teams that made the playoffs deserved it based on the entire course of the season...that isn't what im saying...
the best 4 teams are not all in the playoffs is all...the 4 who deserve it are and that's all that matters...
Oklahoma had their opportunities lol.
All those teams had 2 losses. I am actually a big fan of SOS. I hate watching all those terrible games in September. September could actually be a lot of fun for us college football fans.
We only have 4 teams make the playoffs. I would prefer 8, 12 or even 16. People say they love having only 4 because of the "every game is like a playoff game argument."
So if we are stuck with only 4 playoff teams because of this, you really shouldn't have a two loss team in there.
Right
never once said any of those teams DESERVE to be in there. Just saying there are better teams than Washington who didn't get in.
Wash deserves it
Penn St potentially did Ohio St a favor by making the championship game. If Ohio State had lost to Wisconsin, who knows what would have happened.
This argument of who deserves never goes away .
See March Madness , always whining so and so got screwed out of one of the at Large spots .
When they increase to 8 , 12 , then the whining gets worse because let's be honest . In College Football, after 6 or 8 , they don't deserve to be in it with 3 losses while 1 team bust their ass and went undefeated.
See the GOAT Pats that nobody , for the most part remembers because of the Giants .
Just my opinion , I don't want that in College Football.
Hence , win your games , not the latest games , win them all.
Then none of it matters
But the scheduling , it's not just on Bama , Washington or anyone , there's always another team that has to take it . They don't get to just choose who to play .
Also scheduling , Let's say Michigan schedules Texas in 2019 , contract signed . Can you hold it against Michigan for Texas falling off the map and dragging down their SO'S ?
Lot of variables go into it all
I've said it a million times now. Make the conference championships matter. Expand it to 8. Take the conference champs from the top 5 conferences. Take the highest ranked champ from the lower conferences. Put in 2 wild cards, and there shouldn't be any bitching.
That would work , at least teams would know what they need to do
The big issue right now , if you're a team with the same amount of losses as others , you don't know what to do to ensure in the future you get in.
Is it improve your SoS, win your conference , be the hottest team .
Right now , with this committee, it's whatever they want but nobody knows what that is because there's Zero Guidelines on how to get it except win all your games but that still didn't get Western Michigan in.
So who knows
They need to set a guideline to show teams , this is what you need to do in the future
CBB , at large teams who's lost out was told play somebody relevant.
CFB , not saying it's wrong, just put in a team who didn't play in the conference title game and lost to the team who win the Conference.
After UW beats Alabama, all this becomes a moot point
Kracken what are you smoking. They could be in the ballgame with others not Alabama
If they played next week, I'd give Washington a chance. Now Saban & company have a month to prepare and get healthy. It's not going to be pretty.
Bama is not invincible. Peterson will hold his own here and put some points up. This has backdoor cover written all over it
Peterson can hold his own. So can their D (potentially). Just not sure about their QB, Browning or the O-Line.Bama is not invincible. Peterson will hold his own here and put some points up. This has backdoor cover written all over it
What's so funny is that for every 1 or 2 5 star players who run a 4.2 40 usc, oregon, or Washington has. Alabama, Auburn, Florida st and teams from the south have 20. That's why the Pac 10 never can beat them! The first best 20 players who are gonna touch the field will play alabama. 48-20.
Reply With Quote