“it seems everyone wants South Carolina in the CFP except…

[18IsTheMan]

their own fans.”

Sportswriter on Twitter noting how we are the overwhelming public favorite to make the CFP over Bama, except our fans seem to the most down on the idea.

Even many sportswriters now downplaying the importance of the head-to-head when looking at all factors. Most seem to feel we’re the common sense choice.

 

[DrMickeySC]

What in the world is he saying? I mean, give me the 12th seed and a snow game in the horseshoe or in front of touchdown Jesus any day over a bowl game. I’m not slighting a bowl game, as a longsuffering Gamecock. But the playoff is the goal.

 

[18IsTheMan]

What in the world is he saying? I mean, give me the 12th seed and a snow game in the horseshoe or in front of touchdown Jesus any day over a bowl game. I’m not slighting a bowl game, as a longsuffering Gamecock. But the playoff is the goal.

He was saying that the group of people he sees offering up the most arguments for why we shouldn’t make it seem to be our own fans. I have seen that even on this forum.

 

[Uscg1984]

their own fans.”

Sportswriter on Twitter noting how we are the overwhelming public favorite to make the CFP over Bama, except our fans seem to the most down on the idea.

Even many sportswriters now downplaying the importance of the head-to-head when looking at all factors. Most seem to feel we’re the common sense choice.

If the sportswriters hang out on this forum, they would certainly get that impression.

Gamecock fans' pessimism is well-earned over the decades. It's not hard for any of us to imagine ways that we don't make the playoffs. But maybe instead of articulating every last one of them here, we should just wait and see what happens.

 

[SouthernBelly]

He was saying that the group of people he sees offering up the most arguments for why we shouldn’t make it seem to be our own fans. I have seen that even on this forum.

I’d say it’s more so why we don’t expect Carolina to get in along with some acknowledgment that head to head wins have to be the most important metric.

SC should be in over Clemson or any other ACC team, provided Clemson wins their conference (which I think they will). Gamecocks are ranked above both Big 12 title game participants, rightly so. But due to the stupid format of the playoff selection both of those conferences champions are getting in. So there simply isn’t room for them based upon current cfp rankings and automatic bids.

 

[BftCocks09]

So he’s claiming the committee wants us in the CFP as well? I thought that’s what this thread was going to say. “It seems everyone wants South Carolina in the CFP except the committee that chooses.”

 

[Island cock]

I hate the thought of Clemson winning another game ever. But maybe, just maybe, Clemson winning the acc championship, getting a birth into the CFP may look better for us and increase the chances the committee votes us in after this weekend.

 

[cockyinflorida]

I hate the thought of Clemson winning another game ever. But maybe, just maybe, Clemson winning the acc championship, getting a birth into the CFP may look better for us and increase the chances the committee votes us in after this weekend.

You don’t want that because if Clemson wins, than Eithee SMU or Miami takes the last spot most likely SMU.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I’d say it’s more so why we don’t expect Carolina to get in along with some acknowledgment that head to head wins have to be the most important metric.

SC should be in over Clemson or any other ACC team, provided Clemson wins their conference (which I think they will). Gamecocks are ranked above both Big 12 title game participants, rightly so. But due to the stupid format of the playoff selection both of those conferences champions are getting in. So there simply isn’t room for them based upon current cfp rankings and automatic bids.

Surprisingly, most sportswriters who have opined on the issue don't see the head-to-head being all that crucial. Our fans seem to be the most hung up on that. Yes, they agree it would be the deciding factor if all other things were equal, but most believe they are not.

They note we have been clearly been the stronger team the 2nd half of the season. Even the ones I've see who feel Bama should make it, concede we are the better team right now. We have as many ranked wins as Bama does. While Bama does have the loss over UGA, that is more than canceled out by the ugly losses to Vandy and OU, in games they were favored by 22.5 and 14 points, respectively. We won every game in which were favored and won some upsets to boot. They also note the committee, based on the previous precedent, has to consider our LSU loss was aided by Sellers being out in the 2nd half and that we are very clearly a different team when he is healthy.

If the committee's job is to put in the best team, then head-to-head can't be the most important standalone factor. If all they are going to do is look at head-to-head wins, what do we even need a committee for? Any average Joe fan could do that. Their job, supposedly, is to carefully consider all the factors and select the best teams.

And, frankly, if they are concerned about ratings, I think we bring more to the table. Sellers is dynamic and more exciting than anyone Bama has right now. Three-loss Bama just isn't an exciting team and I don't think many fans will be all that enthused to see a wounded Bama team limping into the playoffs.

 

[Lurker123]

Sellers is dynamic and more exciting than anyone Bama has right now.

They do have that guy, Milroe. (Sp?)

I admit to be arguing the contrarian position. But we do need to temper ourselves. We will work ourselves into a frenzy about deserving the playoffs, when every single one of us would claim it's a no brainer if ours and Bama's places were reversed.

If head to head didn't matter, why did we play? Why do conferences use that as the very first tie breaker? Isn't that "deciding it on the field"? All things we'd say if we had won the game.

Perhaps it's best summed up, hope for best, but prepare for the worst.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

If head to head were recent that would have more weight as a deciding factor, but the team which has shown the most improvement the last half of the season against ranked competition should have something to say vs teams who have had ''crap the bed'' losses against lesser competition as the season progressed and appear inconsistent with their winning momentum.

 

[Lurker123]

If head to head were recent that would have more weight as a deciding factor, but the team which has shown the most improvement the last half of the season against ranked competition should have something to say vs teams who have had ''crap the bed'' losses against lesser competition as the season progressed and appear inconsistent with their winning momentum.

That is certainly one argument. I just know how i would react to that, if it were us with the head to head advantage.

Again, I'm doing the mental exercise of putting myself in the oppositions shoes.

Otherwise everything you say is true and we had an injury lead to another loss.

 

[18IsTheMan]

They do have that guy, Milroe. (Sp?)

I admit to be arguing the contrarian position. But we do need to temper ourselves. We will work ourselves into a frenzy about deserving the playoffs, when every single one of us would claim it's a no brainer if ours and Bama's places were reversed.

If head to head didn't matter, why did we play? Why do conferences use that as the very first tie breaker? Isn't that "deciding it on the field"? All things we'd say if we had won the game.

Perhaps it's best summed up, hope for best, but prepare for the worst.

Really haven't heard that much about Milroe this season. Bama fans seem to be disappointed in his performance.

 

[18IsTheMan]

If head to head were recent that would have more weight as a deciding factor, but the team which has shown the most improvement the last half of the season against ranked competition should have something to say vs teams who have had ''crap the bed'' losses against lesser competition as the season progressed and appear inconsistent with their winning momentum.

One commentator noted, if the situations were reversed and we beat Bama by 2 points then went onto finish 4-2 while they went 6-0, Alabama would absolutely have jumped us not a word would be spoken about the head-to-head. Without question. The narrative would be "look how resilient this Bama team is! Hitting adversity by losing to USC at home when heavily favored, only to bounce back, regroup and finish strong down the stretch, going 6-0. Wonderful job of coaching by DeBoer to keep this team composed and focused in the face of adversity!"

I don't think Bama needs the Nick Saban treatment any longer. The committee pulled some mental gymnastics last year to get Bama in, but this is not a Nick Saban Bama team. They only fell 6 spots this year after losing as the #1 team and a 22.5 point favorite to Vanderbilt.

If the head-to-head was THE be-all end-all, how did 8-2 Bama end up ranked higher than 8-2 Tennesee?

 

[Lurker123]

Really haven't heard that much about Milroe this season. Bama fans seem to be disappointed in his performance.

Really? I watched the UGA game, it was insane. Perhaps it was a rare performance?

 

[Maccmaine12]

H2H isn’t that critical because we saw the committee rank teams ahead of teams that they lost too all season. We was ranked ahead of LSU a couple of weeks ago and we had the same record

 

[18IsTheMan]

Really? I watched the UGA game, it was insane. Perhaps it was a rare performance?

Yeah, saw the UGA game. Definitely crazy good there. Last year, I just heard all about him all the time. Hasn't been that way this year. Last year he had 23 TD against 6 INT. This year it's 15/10. He has run for 20 TDs this year.

I'm sure he's just as good of a player. Without following the closely, I just haven't heard as much about him. And I go by what I hear from Bama fans, who seem pretty disappointed overall. Sounds like he was trash against OU.

 

[Rhode Island Dork]

their own fans.”

Sportswriter on Twitter noting how we are the overwhelming public favorite to make the CFP over Bama, except our fans seem to the most down on the idea.

Even many sportswriters now downplaying the importance of the head-to-head when looking at all factors. Most seem to feel we’re the common sense choice.

Did the blabbering idiot happen to specify where he's seen/heard Cock fans that don't want in the playoff? I've literally seen one. An idiot.

 

[Hoganman1]

Well, there is no question that the Cocks are one of the twelve best teams in the country right now. The question is will the committee vote to put the twelve best teams in the playoff or choose some teams with better won-loss records because they played a weak schedule.

 

[18IsTheMan]

H2H isn’t that critical because we saw the committee rank teams ahead of teams that they lost too all season. We was ranked ahead of LSU a couple of weeks ago and we had the same record

Yep, and as noted above, 8-2 Bama was ranked higher than 8-2 UT, who they lost to.

Clearly, H2H isn't THE deciding factor and the committee has demonstrated that.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Did the blabbering idiot happen to specify where he's seen/heard Cock fans that don't want in the playoff? I've literally seen one. An idiot.

There are numerous ones this forum who are arguing against it.

 

[Rhode Island Dork]

There are numerous ones this forum who are arguing against it.

CALL 'EM OUT!!

 

[Lurker123]

Did the blabbering idiot happen to specify where he's seen/heard Cock fans that don't want in the playoff? I've literally seen one. An idiot.

Who doesn't want to go the playoffs? Did someone actually say that?

I remember a "what if" scenario of would you rather win a bole or lose in the first round of the playoffs thread. Was that it?

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

One commentator noted, if the situations were reversed and we beat Bama by 2 points then went onto finish 4-2 while they went 6-0, Alabama would absolutely have jumped us not a word would be spoken about the head-to-head. Without question. The narrative would be "look how resilient this Bama team is! Hitting adversity by losing to USC at home when heavily favored, only to bounce back, regroup and finish strong down the stretch, going 6-0. Wonderful job of coaching by DeBoer to keep this team composed and focused in the face of adversity!"

I don't think Bama needs the Nick Saban treatment any longer. The committee pulled some mental gymnastics last year to get Bama in, but this is not a Nick Saban Bama team. They only fell 6 spots this year after losing as the #1 team and a 22.5 point favorite to Vanderbilt.

If the head-to-head was THE be-all end-all, how did 8-2 Bama end up ranked higher than 8-2 Tennesee?

And as some commentators have noted, a precedent was set with the committee last year with FSU to ignore the record and choose a team with a better chance to win.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Well, there is no question that the Cocks are one of the twelve best teams in the country right now. The question is will the committee vote to put the twelve best teams in the playoff or choose some teams with better won-loss records because they played a weak schedule.

Isn't this the committee's ONLY job?

Last year, they voted to put 1-loss Bama in over undefeated FSU because in their estimation, Bama was the better team compared to FSU without their QB.

If you use the same line of thinking, we are clearly the more deserving team.

If all the committee does is look at W/L record and H2H, then why do we even need a committee? Literally any average fan could do that.

 

[Lurker123]

Yep, and as noted above, 8-2 Bama was ranked higher than 8-2 UT, who they lost to.

Clearly, H2H isn't THE deciding factor and the committee has demonstrated that.

True, bama had SOS and a marquee win over UT. (Just like they do us)

 

[18IsTheMan]

CALL 'EM OUT!!

I should say the point of the writer on Twitter was not that Gamecock fans didn't want us to make the playoffs (the line quoted in the OP was some hyperbole), but rather that he was surprised at the number of Gamecock fans who were conceding that Bama is more deserving, when he thinks it's pretty clear that we are the better team and more deserving.

 

[18IsTheMan]

And as some commentators have noted, a precedent was set with the committee last year with FSU to ignore the record and choose a team with a better chance to win.

Bingo.

The committee has shown their willingness to consider other factors. I'm sure they won't here, but they have in the past.

To me, it would be great if they selected us simply to put an end to the Saban-era Bama favoritism.

 

[Maccmaine12]

Yep, and as noted above, 8-2 Bama was ranked higher than 8-2 UT, who they lost to.

Clearly, H2H isn't THE deciding factor and the committee has demonstrated that.

If a 2 point loss to Bama keep us behind them then it’ll be clear that the committee just have too much love for Bama.

 

[SouthernBelly]

Bingo.

The committee has shown their willingness to consider other factors. I'm sure they won't here, but they have in the past.

To me, it would be great if they selected us simply to put an end to the Saban-era Bama favoritism.

The bolded part of your quote has been my point. It's not so much a matter of not wanting them in (I'll address that again in a separate post). It doesn't matter what arguments any of us think we have. Due to the format of the playoff, and given what the rankings have been South Carolina is not getting in. A couple of weeks ago I stated 3 things had to happen - Gamecocks gotta win out, need lots of chaos, and the committee needs to be consistent.

The first one happened. The second has happened some, but more is probably needed. There was a snowball's chance in hell the third was going to happen. What I cited at the time was that given they won out the committee would need to view SC as 10-2, essentially giving credit for a win against LSU. A combination of acknowledging the hose job by the refs and that SC was a different team without Sellers. That reasoning carries subjectiveness and speculation and I am not a fan of that, but they showed they were willing to operate by those means last year in leaving FSU out. So they could do the very same thing with the Gamecocks this year but they won't.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

There is much more conversation among fans, taking the criteria of the CFP, and stating reasons why we probably won't make it in as opposed to Bama (or Ole Miss) being chosen. But I have yet to see anyone just say Bama deserves it more, without leading with "based on CFP criteria...", "they want the Bama brand", etc.

I think he's misunderstanding the conversations being had amongst fans, or just pulling out bits and pieces that fit his narrative.

 

[18IsTheMan]

There is much more conversation among fans, taking the criteria of the CFP, and stating reasons why we probably won't make it in as opposed to Bama (or Ole Miss) being chosen. But I have yet to see anyone just say Bama deserves it more, without leading with "based on CFP criteria...", "they want the Bama brand", etc.

I think he's misunderstanding the conversations being had amongst fans, or just pulling out bits and pieces that fit his narrative.

Don't think he had a narrative. He was simply noting that general public sentiment was strongly in favor of us making it, while many in our fan base seemed to be arguing Bama should make it based solely on the H2H.

Indeed, several here have stated as such.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

Don't think he had a narrative. He was simply noting that general public sentiment was strongly in favor of us making it, while many in our fan base seemed to be arguing Bama should make it based solely on the H2H.

Indeed, several here have stated as such.

Discussing that Bama would get in based on H2H is not the same as arguing for Bama to get in. Again, people are misunderstanding conversations.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Discussing that Bama would get in based on H2H is not the same as arguing for Bama to get in. Again, people are misunderstanding conversations.

USC fans on here have argued that Bama is more deserving. Also on Twitter.

I've gotten lots of pushback from USC fans that "yeah, all that is true, but Bama has the H2H and that's all that matters".

 

[USCBatgirl21]

USC fans on here have argued that Bama is more deserving. Also on Twitter.

Please show these statements where they are saying this WITHOUT using the criteria set forth as the reason why they are saying it.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

USC fans on here have argued that Bama is more deserving. Also on Twitter.

I've gotten lots of pushback from USC fans that "yeah, all that is true, but Bama has the H2H and that's all that matters".

That is NOT arguing for Bama to get in. That's simply being matter of fact, along with what many of the national pundits, some as recent as Saturday morning, were saying.

 

[SouthernBelly]

If all the committee does is look at W/L record and H2H, then why do we even need a committee? Literally any average fan could do that.

If the committee's job is to put in the best team, then head-to-head can't be the most important standalone factor. If all they are going to do is look at head-to-head wins, what do we even need a committee for? Any average Joe fan could do that. Their job, supposedly, is to carefully consider all the factors and select the best teams.

No one is saying all the committee does is look at W/L and H2H. What we are saying is H2H should be the most important factor. The games, how they are played and the results are the reality, everything else is guesswork. I don't believe for a second that if the situation were reversed between The Gamecocks and the Tide any of us would be arguing anything above "we beat them." We might say some other things, but that would be argument #1, and it should be.

I don't know what the committee's job is. They don't either. Since the inception of this thing, they have said they have to put in the most deserving teams. They have also said they need to put in the best teams. I have no idea if they equate deserving and best. But last season, at least, showed they aren't concerned with best and most deserving. Most fans should be able to rank the 12 best teams. It's not difficult, the committee isn't full of football savants.

I'll keep beating this drum: the playoff isn't about the 12 best teams. If it were there would be no automatic qualifiers at all. This season the guarantee of the Big 12 and ACC champs getting in takes up two spots that should go elsewhere. The ACC may very well wind up with two teams in and they should not even have one. If the playoff were about the 12 best and/or deserving teams there is no conversation about whether the Gamecocks are in or not, they would be.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I don't see how the committee can overlook Bama getting absolutely mauled by 2-6 in conference play OU a mere 2 weeks ago. OU's only other conference win was a nailbiter over fellow 2-6 member Auburn.

 

[18IsTheMan]

No one is saying all the committee does is look at W/L and H2H. What we are saying is H2H should be the most important factor. The games, how they are played and the results are the reality, everything else is guesswork. I don't believe for a second that if the situation were reversed between The Gamecocks and the Tide any of us would be arguing anything above "we beat them." We might say some other things, but that would be argument #1, and it should be.

I don't know what the committee's job is. They don't either. Since the inception of this thing, they have said they have to put in the most deserving teams. They have also said they need to put in the best teams. I have no idea if they equate deserving and best. But last season, at least, showed they aren't concerned with best and most deserving. Most fans should be able to rank the 12 best teams. It's not difficult, the committee isn't full of football savants.

I'll keep beating this drum: the playoff isn't about the 12 best teams. If it were there would be no automatic qualifiers at all. This season the guarantee of the Big 12 and ACC champs getting in takes up two spots that should go elsewhere. The ACC may very well wind up with two teams in and they should not even have one. If the playoff were about the 12 best teams there is no conversation about whether the Gamecocks are in or not, they would be.

And if the situations were reversed and we had beaten Bama, then went on to finish 4-2 while they went 6-0, you can bet your bottom dollar the H2H win for us would not matter. Not one tiny little bit.

Simple fact is, the committee has clearly demonstrated in the past rankings that other factors are as important or more important than W/L record or H2H.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

I don't see how the committee can overlook Bama getting absolutely mauled by 2-6 in conference play OU a mere 2 weeks ago. OU's only other conference win was a nailbiter over fellow 2-6 member Auburn.

Because they are Bama. And no matter how hard they try to deny it, they will go for the Bama brand, if you will, before others. They know having Bama in there guarantees ratings.