ADVERTISEMENT

Herbie rants about 'despicable lunatic' Nole fans daring to question his Bama playoff preference

LandoComando said:
To prepare you for the post season
To build your resume
Look at non-conference games in basketball. Big wins help you. Losses to great opponents don't kill you. Same with football.
A team should be rewarded for a strong schedule and as it expands to 12 they likely will be. Bama is the perfect example. I think 12-1 even with that loss is more impressive than 13-0 if you replace Texas with say Delaware or even Arizona State.
Click to expand...
They lost at home and it wasn't that close. At some point they need to be penalized for it especially with an undefeated power 5 team right there.

The committee was terrified of the stink Greg Stankey would have raised if the beloved SEC was shut out. A few stooges on that committee would have had their careers blackballed.
 
ryoder1 said:
Hell with that convoluted logic we should have been a no brainer to make it in 2017. We lost head to head to OSU and MSU but were really the better team. We was robbed! Wtf.

Also this means a team like Bama could sleep walk against a Vanderbil then not be penalized. Oh that was a fluke that they lost, who cares. I'm not saying Vandy would be the better team but there needs to be consequences for losing games.
Click to expand...
There are consequences. Seeding for starters.
 
ryoder1 said:
They lost at home and it wasn't that close. At some point they need to be penalized for it especially with an undefeated power 5 team right there.

The committee was terrified of the stink Greg Stankey would have raised if the beloved SEC was shut out. A few stooges on that committee would have had their careers blackballed.
Click to expand...
They were penalized. Had the won that they'd be ranked 1st. I think we need to accept the Big XII and ACC aren't comparable. P5 or not running the table with SOS of 55 isn't good enough with 4 spots
 
I can't seem to recall Herbie calling Texas win over Bama a "fluke" like he did when we beat Ohio State
 
LandoComando said:
It's not just about money though. I don't think anyone believes FSU is a better team than any of the P5 one-loss teams.

We've never had a P5 undefeated champ with a SOS in the 50s, that lost their QB, looked like Iowa offensively without him being compared to one-loss P5 programs with the resumes of Bama and Texas.

Fair or not, the SEC has proven since the playoff began that they're the best conference. They were never getting left out. For competitive and financial reasons.
Click to expand...
Why do you continue to rationalize the same argument of “I don’t believe anyone thinks FSU is better.” You have zero clue as to whom is better regardless of players hurt or not hurt. Put them on the field and let them play. That’s the entire premise behind sports, to determine it on the field. Not for grown ups to say, “we definitively know there is zero chance FSU is better than Bama.” Put them on the damn field and let them play. THAT IS SPORTS! Your very rationalization of “nobody believes FSU is better” has nothing to do with sports and everything to do with money. Nothing more and nothing less.

If this same “playoff field by committee approval” approach was around in 1986, PSU never would have won a national championship that year. Period! It just proves the committee is motivated by special interests, and yes, MONEY! Period!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ryoder1 and Jerry
hoflane said:
Why do you continue to rationalize the same argument of “I don’t believe anyone thinks FSU is better.” You have zero clue as to whom is better regardless of players hurt or not hurt. Put them on the field and let them play. That’s the entire premise behind sports, to determine it on the field. Not for grown ups to say, “we definitively know there is zero chance FSU is better than Bama.” Put them on the damn field and let them play. THAT IS SPORTS! Your very rationalization of “nobody believes FSU is better” has nothing to do with sports and everything to do with money. Nothing more and nothing less.

If this same “playoff field by committee approval” approach was around in 1986, PSU never would have won a national championship that year. Period! It just proves the committee is motivated by special interests, and yes, MONEY! Period!
Click to expand...
They can't put them on the field against Bama. It's not an option.

FSU not being better has everything to do with sports. Don't play the 55th best schedule.

How would Penn State not have got a shot in '86?
Also, bowls are about special interests and money as well. What's the difference.

What you want FBS to be isn't a feasible option. You can bitch or accept reality.
 
LandoComando said:
They can't put them on the field against Bama. It's not an option.

FSU not being better has everything to do with sports. Don't play the 55th best schedule.

How would Penn State not have got a shot in '86?
Also, bowls are about special interests and money as well. What's the difference.

What you want FBS to be isn't a feasible option. You can bitch or accept reality.
Click to expand...
You really are that ****ing stupid to continue that argument. You’re that guy that rationalizes everything into existence. It must suck to live or work with you. What a shitty life to live. You clai to be far right. More like far left. You’re so ****ing liberal you can’t even notice it.
 
LandoComando said:
They can't put them on the field against Bama. It's not an option.

FSU not being better has everything to do with sports. Don't play the 55th best schedule.

How would Penn State not have got a shot in '86?
Also, bowls are about special interests and money as well. What's the difference.

What you want FBS to be isn't a feasible option. You can bitch or accept reality.
Click to expand...
Your counter arguments completely miss the mark. You just want to speak to hear yourself speak. I don’t give a rats ass about FBS. I’m not arguing for FBS to be a thing. Your reality isn’t reality. You just align with ESPN and the talking heads. You’re the type of person who would never make a choice or stand firm in a commitment. You would rationalize with everything. What a shitty way to live life.
 
hoflane said:
Why do you continue to rationalize the same argument of “I don’t believe anyone thinks FSU is better.” You have zero clue as to whom is better regardless of players hurt or not hurt. Put them on the field and let them play. That’s the entire premise behind sports, to determine it on the field. Not for grown ups to say, “we definitively know there is zero chance FSU is better than Bama.” Put them on the damn field and let them play. THAT IS SPORTS! Your very rationalization of “nobody believes FSU is better” has nothing to do with sports and everything to do with money. Nothing more and nothing less.

If this same “playoff field by committee approval” approach was around in 1986, PSU never would have won a national championship that year. Period! It just proves the committee is motivated by special interests, and yes, MONEY! Period!
Click to expand...

The committee cheated FSU of the opportunity that they earned. Plain and simple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoBareFeet, knickslions, Jerry and 1 other person
hoflane said:
Your counter arguments completely miss the mark. You just want to speak to hear yourself speak. I don’t give a rats ass about FBS. I’m not arguing for FBS to be a thing. Your reality isn’t reality. You just align with ESPN and the talking heads. You’re the type of person who would never make a choice or stand firm in a commitment. You would rationalize with everything. What a shitty way to live life.
Click to expand...
I said long before ESPN said anything that FSU wasn't legit. Before Travis went down.
You're absolutely delusional with this rant.
 
LandoComando said:
It's about the best teams nothing else
Georgia should have been 3. Bama 4. Texas 5 Ohio State 6 Oregon 7 Penn State 8 Missouri 9 FSU 10.

You all put too much weight in H2H. The better team doesn't always win. A 12 team format helps this but you're probably someone that likes bowl games.
Click to expand...
So if h2h doesn’t matter why did Texas schedule to play at Alabama. If winning wasn’t important why play them.
 
knickslions said:
So if h2h doesn’t matter why did Texas schedule to play at Alabama. If winning wasn’t important why play them.
Click to expand...
Again, I never said H2H doesn't matter. I said you all put too much weight into it. It's only a portion of the resume
And you play them to add to your SOS and help better prepare you for the rest of the season
People complain all the time that other teams play a weak schedule then when they lose to a top 5 team you don't want them in the playoff because a team that played a weak schedule (55) had one less loss. Your scenario is why you shouldn't schedule them. Not mine.
 
The arguments next year for 12 vs 13 will be even more fun as the number of variables and connections will exponentially increase as we compare 2 and potentially 3 loss teams. Hopefully the SEC will increase their conference games schedule to 9 or 10 soon as they are still only 8 games, giving them a decided advantage in the era of super conferences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mufasa94
It was not about getting the four best teams in, it was about making sure the SEC got a team in, period. Picture this, what if Bama had not played Texas and lost to some other team and still won the SEC? Then Texas would have been out and FSU would have been in…so much for the four best teams argument. They had to include Texas because they couldn’t put Bama in and not Texas due to head to head. Had they not played, an undefeated FSU would have gotten in as one of the “four best teams”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95, ryoder1, Jerry and 1 other person
LandoComando said:
They can't put them on the field against Bama. It's not an option.

FSU not being better has everything to do with sports. Don't play the 55th best schedule.

How would Penn State not have got a shot in '86?
Also, bowls are about special interests and money as well. What's the difference.

What you want FBS to be isn't a feasible option. You can bitch or accept reality.
Click to expand...
Yes, they can put them on the field. Yes it is an option. They “choose” not to.

FSU playing the 55th ranked schedule is about statistics, not about sports. Scheduling rankings are statistics which are subjective. Sports are played on the field, not talked about on tv or on chat boards. Talking about an absolute outcome without allowing the teams to play on the field is speculation, conjecture, and projection. Which, again, isn’t reality.

“Tell a lie loud enough and long enough and soon everyone will believe it.”

The only way to know the outcome, absolutely, is to allow them to play on the field. Period!

Any argument outside of that is for money and only money or ignorance derived from social programming exercises.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
AWS1022 said:
It was not about getting the four best teams in, it was about making sure the SEC got a team in, period. Picture this, what if Bama had not played Texas and lost to some other team and still won the SEC? Then Texas would have been out and FSU would have been in…so much for the four best teams argument. They had to include Texas because they couldn’t put Bama in and not Texas due to head to head. Had they not played, an undefeated FSU would have gotten in as one of the “four best teams”.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Or picture the scenario posed above in the thread: suppose Alabama hadn't beaten a so-so Auburn team the week before on a last-second fluke 4th-and-31 toss into the end zone...but still won the game against Georgia.

Then the committee would have moved Georgia to #4 in the final ranking and left out Florida State...because...SEC. Evidently it's an unwritten rule: the SEC must always have a team in the playoff...regardless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoflane
hoflane said:
Yes, they can put them on the field. Yes it is an option. They “choose” not to.

FSU playing the 55th ranked schedule is about statistics, not about sports. Scheduling rankings are statistics which are subjective. Sports are played on the field, not talked about on tv or on chat boards. Talking about an absolute outcome without allowing the teams to play on the field is speculation, conjecture, and projection. Which, again, isn’t reality.

“Tell a lie loud enough and long enough and soon everyone will believe it.”

The only way to know the outcome, absolutely, is to allow them to play on the field. Period!

Any argument outside of that is for money and only money or ignorance derived from social programming exercises.
Click to expand...

How can they put them in the field against each other? There's 4 teams. They can't just add teams. They had a chance to make that happen before the season and the ACC voted against it.

It is reality and has always been reality in college football. You just don't like it.

Bowls existing is about money. If you don’t want it to be about money you should be supporting a large playoff and eliminating bowls.

Bama has a better resume than FSU and that's what matters in reality.
 
LandoComando said:
How can they put them in the field against each other? There's 4 teams. They can't just add teams. They had a chance to make that happen before the season and the ACC voted against it.

It is reality and has always been reality in college football. You just don't like it.

Bowls existing is about money. If you don’t want it to be about money you should be supporting a large playoff and eliminating bowls.

Bama has a better resume than FSU and that's what matters in reality.
Click to expand...
This not a very intelligent response, again.
 
LandoComando said:
How can they put them in the field against each other? There's 4 teams. They can't just add teams. They had a chance to make that happen before the season and the ACC voted against it.

It is reality and has always been reality in college football. You just don't like it.

Bowls existing is about money. If you don’t want it to be about money you should be supporting a large playoff and eliminating bowls.

Bama has a better resume than FSU and that's what matters in reality.
Click to expand...
Don’t worry, I haven’t given up on you. I’ll continue to challenge you until a little bit wisdom settles in on your part. 👌. This exercise will definitely take a while, but we’ll get there eventually.
 
hoflane said:
Don’t worry, I haven’t given up on you. I’ll continue to challenge you until a little bit wisdom settles in on your part. 👌. This exercise will definitely take a while, but we’ll get there eventually.
Click to expand...
Once you start to listen and accept reality we'll be good.

Who is in? FSU or Bama?
 
LandoComando said:
Once you start to listen and accept reality we'll be good.

Who is in? FSU or Bama?
Click to expand...
Again, you’re missing the entire premise of the debate. It’s obvious who was “chosen” to be in. When you eventually catch on to things I’ll acknowledge so.

You’re like the “far right” guy that drives an electric truck. Just a little confused.
 
hoflane said:
Again, you’re missing the entire premise of the debate. It’s obvious who was “chosen” to be in. When you eventually catch on to things I’ll acknowledge so.

You’re like the “far right” guy that drives an electric truck. Just a little confused.
Click to expand...
Not at all. You just don't like the system and how things have always been handled. You want things done your way.

You're the alleged conservative that likes participation trophies.
 
hoflane said:
Again, you’re missing the entire premise of the debate. It’s obvious who was “chosen” to be in. When you eventually catch on to things I’ll acknowledge so.

You’re like the “far right” guy that drives an electric truck. Just a little confused.
Click to expand...

Hof, I have a soft spot for Lando, but two things you need to know about the guy: A) he'll never give you the last word in an argument; and B) if you said the sun rises in the east, he'll spend six pages arguing that it rises in the west.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: knickslions and hoflane
ryoder1 said:
Not irrelevant. Shows why you have to play the games.

Who wins in a 7 game series, FSU vs UDub? Hint, UDub does not win 4 straight.
Click to expand...
We are playing games and I want a large playoff of 24 so we have more games that matter in the regular season and post season.

Penn State would have made the playoff that year so the example doesn't work.

Washington might win all of them but you're proving my point. Texas beating Bama months ago shouldn't rule them out.
 
Jerry said:
Agreed.

Or picture the scenario posed above in the thread: suppose Alabama hadn't beaten a so-so Auburn team the week before on a last-second fluke 4th-and-31 toss into the end zone...but still won the game against Georgia.

Then the committee would have moved Georgia to #4 in the final ranking and left out Florida State...because...SEC. Evidently it's an unwritten rule: the SEC must always have a team in the playoff...regardless.
Click to expand...
FSU gets in with that scenario. They would have been the 3 seed, UGA 4 seed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back