No.
No because we still would have had to play with Joe Milton.
So you want Tennessee vs Ohio State with Joe Milton QB?
Or Clemson, North Carolina, Tulane with Joe Milton at QB?
No.
A THOUSANDS TIMES NO...
The biggest factor isn't the Hooker injury, it's losing to a team we should've beaten into chicken nuggets and giving up 63 points to an offense rated well out of the top 25.
We didn't do our job as a team and to suggest we play tricks with injuries to try to get in the CFP is as weak as it gets.
WE BLEW IT AGAINST SOUTH CAROLINA!
Stop looking for "backdoors" and BS theories that the CFP Committee hates us and man up to the fact that we had it...... and we didn't finish.
Let's look at it from a business perspective.Of course we should have beat USCe. I've seen this argument a lot and haven't seen many people push back on it. But WTH are you talking about "backdoors"?
Did we do enough to be considered for the playoffs? No. But that's not why people are upset. We accomplished more than Alabama did and yet they are still ranked higher than us. And it's not just our fanbase that's confused. Everyone from RJ Young to Dan Mullen and dozens of others in the national media agree. We were snubbed in the rankings. Everyone knows it. I have no intention of letting the committee off the hook easy.
If I'm awarding yearly bonuses I award the largest share to the employee who performed best that year.Let's look at it from a business perspective.
You have an employee who has performed well, often at the very top of production, for the last several years.
You have another employee who has performed inconsistently over the last several years but has done really well recently.
When you're ranking those employees, who gets the favorable eye from you?
I'm not arguing that it's fair, life isn't fair, but I'm arguing that consistency gives you the benefit of the doubt when things are close. That's how humans behave.If I'm awarding yearly bonuses I award the largest share to the employee who performed best that year.