TGHusker
Active member
First off - do you agree with the committee? I was disappointed but not surprised by the snub FSU received and the boast Bama received.
It seems most of it had to do with strength of schedule but I also think a lot of it is tied to the politics of SEC/ESPN tie in.
Quote: Alabama had the No. 5 strength of schedule this year, according to ESPN's metrics, while Florida State's came in at No. 55. Corrigan said that was one of the biggest pieces of the conversation. “It's a factor, and it's part of our protocol as we look at it,” Corrigan said on a post-reveal teleconference.
I know part of Nebraska's appeal to the coach's poll in 1997 was as Scott Frost said at the time (paraphrased) " Who would the coaches rather play - Michigan or Nebraska?"
Bama: Struggled and really was lucky to beat Alburn - yes preparedness makes its own luck. Bama was beaten by Texas early.
FSU: Undefeated - they did all that was asked of them (as Tom said after the 1997 Orange Bowl victory) but they lost their QB. Some would argue that they aren't the same team that won most of those games. Yet they overcame and won in spite of that huge obstacle.
Me: FSU's whole body of work should have been considered. They did all that was asked of them and persevered and their D rose up to the challenge. Maybe it is Bama and SEC fatigue, but I think it is grossly unfair that FSU was left out of the mix. I'm no FSU fan - I look forward to the day that Nebraska plays FSU in the playoffs & gets to revenge the 1993 NCG when the refs stole the win from Nebraska (no resent me here
).
At this point, to answer Scott Frost's question, - yes if I was a coach, I would rather play FSU at this point than a resurgent Bama team that seems to have found its way at the right time.
My prediction is that Bama beats Michigan, Texas beats Washington. Bama gets its revenge on Texas and wins the NC.
It seems most of it had to do with strength of schedule but I also think a lot of it is tied to the politics of SEC/ESPN tie in.
Quote: Alabama had the No. 5 strength of schedule this year, according to ESPN's metrics, while Florida State's came in at No. 55. Corrigan said that was one of the biggest pieces of the conversation. “It's a factor, and it's part of our protocol as we look at it,” Corrigan said on a post-reveal teleconference.
I know part of Nebraska's appeal to the coach's poll in 1997 was as Scott Frost said at the time (paraphrased) " Who would the coaches rather play - Michigan or Nebraska?"
Bama: Struggled and really was lucky to beat Alburn - yes preparedness makes its own luck. Bama was beaten by Texas early.
FSU: Undefeated - they did all that was asked of them (as Tom said after the 1997 Orange Bowl victory) but they lost their QB. Some would argue that they aren't the same team that won most of those games. Yet they overcame and won in spite of that huge obstacle.
Me: FSU's whole body of work should have been considered. They did all that was asked of them and persevered and their D rose up to the challenge. Maybe it is Bama and SEC fatigue, but I think it is grossly unfair that FSU was left out of the mix. I'm no FSU fan - I look forward to the day that Nebraska plays FSU in the playoffs & gets to revenge the 1993 NCG when the refs stole the win from Nebraska (no resent me here

At this point, to answer Scott Frost's question, - yes if I was a coach, I would rather play FSU at this point than a resurgent Bama team that seems to have found its way at the right time.
My prediction is that Bama beats Michigan, Texas beats Washington. Bama gets its revenge on Texas and wins the NC.
Last edited by a moderator: