Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I was reviewing the highlights of the Bama game and can make an argument that Bama would beat LSU more often than not, even on a neutral field.  Bama really made some uncharacteristic mistakes in the first half.

What's odd is Alabama still looked to have an edge on both LOS.  Not dominantly so as in the past couple years, so not a KO, but more in a winner-by-decision manner.  Usually I'd favor a team that wins the LOS and say if they lose, you could be looking for fluky stuff.  

I'm not at all sure that's what this was.  Alabama could play a cleaner game and they made some uncharacteristic mistakes.  But for every one you can name of theirs, I can give you at least one for LSU, so that's a wash imo.*

So putting aside the mistakes unlikely to be repeated by both teams, you have the LOS, which I thought Alabama "won."  Then you have Burrow and CEH, who didn't care.  Nothing about their seasons or performance Saturday suggested "fluke" and they were the biggest reasons LSU won.  So I don't know.  I tend to favor a team with better lines in general, but on the other hand the difference wasn't so much that some stellar skill player performance couldn't overcome it, and nothing about said performances was fluky.  

* things that probably don't happen again:
--Tua coughing the ball up unforced after a good drive, cost them 3-7 points, insert joke about Bama FG kicker here
--Stingley doesn't realize a play has started, gets burnt for long TD.  Yeah, that's not happening again
--Bama punter drops a well snapped ball for no reason
--LSU gives up a punt return TD for the first time in 12 years.  Waddle is a great returner, but that's not happening again
--LSU goes silent in the 3rd quarter as Burrow, not under pressure, misses open WRs on a couple plays.  I'm not so much saying Burrow can definitely do better than 31/39, but I am saying that's the first time all year I've seen Burrow have time, see his open guys, and flat miss on the throws, and I don't expect to see it again
--Kary Vincent gets hurt twice and after the second time, LSU really misses him in the slot.  Alabama wasn't doing much on offense in the first half, and later found success where Vincent was not.  Injuries happen, so is this repeatable?  I don't know.  
--Still not sure what was with the call on Bama's final TD, but Stingley definitely fell down.  Not sure how I feel about the chances of something like that happening again.  Alabama is good at quick, long strikes.  Stingley, while not perfect, is also good at not getting beat in that particular manner.  

Who knows.  I'm sure we'll find out as Alabama sits at home yet again while another team goes to do the dirty work against the East champion and the Tide goes to the playoffs anyway.  Assuming LSU can take care of business from here on out, of course.   

In my OPINION, Alabama should not get in over any one loss  conference champion.   

It is not like other years where you can say they proved it with their schedule.  

If anyone comes out of the Big Ten, Big 12 or PAC 10 as a conference champ, with one loss, they should get in over Alabama if they are not even playing in their conference champ. Those would be the 4 best teams by proof.  

In my OPINION, Alabama should not get in over any one loss  conference champion. 

It is not like other years where you can say they proved it with their schedule. 

If anyone comes out of the Big Ten, Big 12 or PAC 10 as a conference champ, with one loss, they should get in over Alabama if they are not even playing in their conference champ. Those would be the 4 best teams by proof. 

Pffft.

They didn't prove it in 2011 with their schedule.  Oklahoma State had better wins and were conference champs, and every one of the BCS computers favored OSU, but the voters decided to focus on the singular resume bullet point of "best loss."  

Alabama is the only team in the post WWII era to win an NC without winning their conference, and they've done it twice.  

Pffft.

They didn't prove it in 2011 with their schedule.  Oklahoma State had better wins and were conference champs, and every one of the BCS computers favored OSU, but the voters decided to focus on the singular resume bullet point of "best loss." 

Alabama is the only team in the post WWII era to win an NC without winning their conference, and they've done it twice. 

Except this is 2019.   They have proven little to nothing.  

Pffft.

They didn't prove it in 2011 with their schedule.  Oklahoma State had better wins and were conference champs, and every one of the BCS computers favored OSU, but the voters decided to focus on the singular resume bullet point of "best loss." 

Alabama is the only team in the post WWII era to win an NC without winning their conference, and they've done it twice. 

So you think that special rules should exist for Alabama?  Or maybe we just give them preferential treatment until they lose as a one loss non-champion four seed?

So you think that special rules should exist for Alabama?  Or maybe we just give them preferential treatment until they lose as a one loss non-champion four seed?

Ya he didn't mean it that way just pointing out what appears to favoritism.Being a Bayou Bengal I doubt he's seeking Bama getting any breaks

I think you are taking what he said 180 degrees from what he intended.

I'm pretty sure that he's saying that Alabama was rightfully placed in the playoffs despite not being in the championship game.  And the fact that they won the National Championship justifies their inclusion despite the weaker resume.

But maybe I had it wrong.