This hopefully puts the "Committee will be biased against SEC!" to rest.

[Quaoarsking]

3 teams in the top 4 in the initial rankings.

Also, put in 2 Mississippi schools, so the "Committee will be biased against less prestigious programs / schools that won't bring as high ratings" argument is dead too.

It's funny how everyone outside the SEC knew the Committee would probably put multiple SEC teams in the top 4, and it was just a few SEC message board heroes insisting that it wouldn't.

[IMissJack]

It really doesn't matter. All the SEC top teams are going to play each other and take out half.

[Smitty]

They are "supposedly" favoring conference champs... of which there currently are none.

[sleepy dawg]

I think it will be interesting to see how much the polls adjust to the committee, if at all.

It's still way too early for them to even release this stuff to me.

[Dawgcentral]

I'll be surprised if OM can beat Auburn. They're wounded. Malzahn is quite innovative and can move the ball within that defense. Take the bi-polar crowd out early and good things can happen.

[dawgs]

I think it will be interesting to see how much the polls adjust to the committee, if at all.

It's still way too early for them to even release this stuff to me.

Well by the time the polls have a chance to adjust, games will have been played and shit will be different.

As for the sec bias, whether for or against, is largely bullshit that's fabricated by paranoid fans.

Closest thing to a "bias" is definitely against the pac 12. And that's not a "bias" so much as 75% of the population doesn't stay up until after midnight watching night pac 12 games. And the ones that are up are probably out on the town.

[Goat Holder]

There will be exactly 1 SEC team in the playoff in December. Book it.

Any of you putting any stock in a poll this early are clueless. Sh*t, I don't want to play anyone twice (unless we lost the first time around).

[smootness]

That talk was always stupid. The head of the committee is a current SEC AD; that's ludicrous.

[TimberBeast]

Well by the time the polls have a chance to adjust, games will have been played and shit will be different.

As for the sec bias, whether for or against, is largely bullshit that's fabricated by paranoid fans.

Closest thing to a "bias" is definitely against the pac 12. And that's not a "bias" so much as 75% of the population doesn't stay up until after midnight watching night pac 12 games. And the ones that are up are probably out on the town.

Damn your pac 12 defensiveness gets annoying. They are not represented well because they aren't good, it's not because people don't stay up late enough. That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard. I was surprised they had oregon in the top 6.

[Quaoarsking]

There will be exactly 1 SEC team in the playoff in December. Book it.

The thing is -- that's just something you made up. Actual evidence suggests that the Committee has no qualms in picking multiple teams from the same conference. We already knew that they were "supposed" to be willing to do so, and tonight is just further confirmation that they aren't on some weird anti-SEC witchhunt, which a bunch of SEC message board posters for some reason assumed they would be.

Yes, your assertion could turn out to be right if we go 13-0 and every other SEC contender gets 2 or more losses, but if Auburn or Mississippi State finish with 1 loss but aren't the SEC Champion, they're in. (I don't think it's possible for any other team to do that, but if I'm forgetting someone, then them too.)

[CadaverDawg]

There will be exactly 1 SEC team in the playoff in December. Book it.

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfT5p2KYcJo/maxresdefault.jpg

[CadaverDawg]

The thing is -- that's just something you made up. Actual evidence suggests that the Committee has no qualms in picking multiple teams from the same conference. We already knew that they were "supposed" to be willing to do so, and tonight is just further confirmation that they aren't on some weird anti-SEC witchhunt, which a bunch of SEC message board posters for some reason assumed they would be.

Yes, your assertion could turn out to be right if we go 13-0 and every other SEC contender gets 2 or more losses, but if Auburn or Mississippi State finish with 1 loss but aren't the SEC Champion, they're in. (I don't think it's possible for any other team to do that, but if I'm forgetting someone, then them too.)

Exactly. Everything about tonight's poll suggests that we can, and very likely WILL, have 2 team's in the playoff unless everybody somehow ends up with 2 losses.

[TUSK]

There will be exactly 1 SEC team in the playoff in December. Book it.

Any of you putting any stock in a poll this early are clueless. Sh*t, I don't want to play anyone twice (unless we lost the first time around).

you are a phuckin criminal.

[TUSK]

I don't have a freakin' clue who the committee is gonna vote top 4 come the final "vote", but I do know this....

come the Final Four, a one loss, non-sec conference champ will get the nod over a 1 loss #3 sec team, regardless of SOS, et al...

additionally, I'll submit this: In 2014, I suspect there will be a lot of fanbases that suddenly realize that the 2011-12 BCSCG had the correct teams... (lookin at you, Goat)...

[dawgs]

Damn your pac 12 defensiveness gets annoying. They are not represented well because they aren't good, it's not because people don't stay up late enough. That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard. I was surprised they had oregon in the top 6.

PAC 12 isn't sec good, but it's clearly the 2nd best conference. I'm not sure who you think is a better conference than the pac 12. If the pac 12 ain't good then the only conference that's not bad in your book is the sec. If you only think 1 conference is good, then maybe you should adjust your perception of "good" v. "bad". There can be different levels of "good". Just because someone isn't the best doesn't mean they aren't good.

[shoeless joe]

The rankings were definitely set up strategically. The committee put 3/4 And 4/6 top SEC teams knowing that all still play each other so in the end it'll play itself out. They get to have their cake and eat it too in that since. However, IF us and auburn win out I find it hard to believe we both won't be in.

[Johnson85]

I don't have a freakin' clue who the committee is gonna vote top 4 come the final "vote", but I do know this....

come the Final Four, a one loss, non-sec conference champ will get the nod over a 1 loss #3 sec team, regardless of SOS, et al...

additionally, I'll submit this: In 2014, I suspect there will be a lot of fanbases that suddenly realize that the 2011-12 BCSCG had the correct teams... (lookin at you, Goat)...

The BCS system was pretty damn good as far as getting the best teams in the finals. If they had used the BCS system and created the playoff, it'd be much better than what we have now. I don't think the BCS ever left a team out of its top 4 that was potentially the best team in the nation. If a one loss SEC team gets left out this year, that will be a bigger 17up in the first year than the BCS had in all its years.

[dawgs]

The rankings were definitely set up strategically. The committee put 3/4 And 4/6 top SEC teams knowing that all still play each other so in the end it'll play itself out. They get to have their cake and eat it too in that since. However, IF us and auburn win out I find it hard to believe we both won't be in.

If auburn wins out but we go to the sec CG, auburn will be 11-1 with a loss @msu, and Ws @k state, v. Lsu, @uga, @bama, @om (those last 3 all in November). I defy anyone to find a team with a better 5 Ws if auburn wins out. That's an incredibly difficult road schedule.

[Goat Holder]

In 2014, I suspect there will be a lot of fanbases that suddenly realize that the 2011-12 BCSCG had the correct teams... (lookin at you, Goat)...

And they would be idiots. We're trying to determine a NATIONAL champion, not an SEC champion for the second time. Alabama being in that game was the REAL criminality, pal. TUSK, you're OK and all, so don't get all homerrific and sentimental on me. That's just keeping it real.

[Goat Holder]

The thing is -- that's just something you made up.

Of course it is. It's my opinion.


Actual evidence suggests that the Committee has no qualms in picking multiple teams from the same conference. We already knew that they were "supposed" to be willing to do so, and tonight is just further confirmation that they aren't on some weird anti-SEC witchhunt, which a bunch of SEC message board posters for some reason assumed they would be.

What evidence? The first poll? That includes teams that will likely cannibalize each other?


Yes, your assertion could turn out to be right if we go 13-0 and every other SEC contender gets 2 or more losses, but if Auburn or Mississippi State finish with 1 loss but aren't the SEC Champion, they're in. (I don't think it's possible for any other team to do that, but if I'm forgetting someone, then them too.)

No shit. The committee knows this, and they are banking on it. There is a possibility that 2 teams from the SEC get in, but that's it. And even that would be the outlier. So at the end of the day, I'm right (except with your qualifier). So what the f*ck are you arguing about? You really think they'll be 2-3 teams in the playoff in December? I hope not, because that would render you dumb 90% of the years going forward.