Louisville went from unranked to No. 16 in the selection committee’s rankings after the Cardinals beat Clemson on the road a few weeks ago.
South Carolina moves up ONE spot after doing the same.
If names were reversed & Alabama hadn’t lost since Oct. 12 to South Carolina, Alabama would undoubtedly get the nod with an unrelenting national surge of positivity.
2 losses by South Carolina in November would’ve been the signed, sealed and delivered data point from the selection committee.
I keep hearing: “South Carolina lost to Alabama and Ole Miss — how could they get in the playoff over them?”
Here’s the deal: Head-to-head only matters when all else is equal. If one team has a clearly better resume, head-to-head is irrelevant.
It’s the same reason NIU doesn’t make the playoff for beating Notre Dame.
South Carolina’s resume is far and away better than Alabama’s or Ole Miss’s:
• 6-game win streak
• 4 wins over Top 25 teams
Don’t tell me head-to-head matters when:
• The committee ranked Alabama over Tennessee (despite Alabama losing to them).
• South Carolina over LSU (despite South Carolina losing to them).
The numbers don’t lie:
• Oklahoma went 2-6 in the SEC (avg. loss by 17.6 PPG).
• Vandy went 3-5 in the SEC (avg. loss by 8.5 PPG).
Alabama lost to both on the road.
South Carolina beat both on the road by 26 and 21 points.
SC’s resume:
• One bad game all year.
• Lost their QB in the 2nd half of a 3-point loss to LSU.
• Nearly won as 3-TD underdogs at Alabama.
Combined record of SC’s losses: 26-10
Combined record of Alabama’s losses: 22-14
It’s simple:
• SC is on a roll (6 straight wins).
• They’ve beaten more ranked teams.
• Their losses are better quality.
It’s down to SC vs. Bama for the final playoff spot.
The committee’s choice: brand vs. deserving.
If Josh Allen throws 3+ touchdowns and the Bills beat the Jaguars tonight, we'll give a Josh Allen autographed jersey to someone who reposts this post and follows us!