This is fun: Historical Playoff Seedings NCAA from 1988 on

#2
#2
Just saw that article. Pretty neat.

I think I could argue we deserved a spot in a couple more years.
 
#4
#4
1989 is probably the best argument we had. 10-1 and SEC champs is pretty strong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#7
#7
85 squad when healthy and everyone was was not suspended/dismissed was as solid as any squad Ive seen.
 
#8
#8
GAVol said:
1989 is probably the best argument we had. 10-1 and SEC champs is pretty strong.
Click to expand...

agreed. and can you imagine in 96 having that loss at memphis being the reason you weren't in it? lordy....

01 could have made it.

but 95-99...all those teams would have been capable of making it for sure.
 
#9
#9
GAVol said:
1989 is probably the best argument we had. 10-1 and SEC champs is pretty strong.
Click to expand...

Yes. I think we would have been more deserving than Michigan.

Also, I think Kansas St would have gotten in over Florida in 1998. Florida had two losses.
 
#11
#11
So besides the ‘08 Tim Tebow’s our ‘98 squad had the best chance at replicating a championship. ‘01 should have definitely been in if there was a playoff. Some would say that team was more talented than ‘98.
 
#12
#12
dduncan4163 said:
Well you could argue the 99 squad was too.
Click to expand...

Or the 1997 squad. I've heard multiple members of the 1998 championship team (Al Wilson, Raynoch Thompson) say that the 1997 team was actually more talented than the 1998 team. That 1997 squad had 19 guys go on to play in the NFL. Perhaps the 1998 team had more, but I think that says something coming from guys who played on both teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#16
#16
I’m slightly surprised no one has rushed to post a complaint yet about the championship odds given to the 1997 team as a playoff team.
 
#19
#19
utvolpj said:
Easy to understand since the UT-Neb game was actually played and it wasn't close
Click to expand...

I completely agree. With the nature of how this board usually goes, though, I half expected a straight up 0% to have set someone off on a tirade despite that.
 
Last edited:
#21
#21
VolPack22 said:
So besides the ‘08 Tim Tebow’s our ‘98 squad had the best chance at replicating a championship. ‘01 should have definitely been in if there was a playoff. Some would say that team was more talented than ‘98.
Click to expand...

They would have still missed it after the SEC Championship gave them their 2nd loss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#23
#23
volholio said:
Begins in 88. I bet the 85 team would have been there.

What If College Football Hadn’t Wasted Decades On Polls And Just Used A Stinking Playoff? | FiveThirtyEight
Click to expand...

Not likely in 1985. The Sugar Bowl against Miami was a great win (don’t get me wrong), but UT was 8-1-2 going into that game.

There were too many 1-loss or less teams above them (between independent 11-0 Penn State, 10-1 Big 8 Champ Oklahoma, 10-1 Big 10 Champ Iowa, independent 10-1 Miami...9-1-1 Michigan likely would be the “first out” after those 4 based on schedule)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#24
#24
VolPack22 said:
So besides the ‘08 Tim Tebow’s our ‘98 squad had the best chance at replicating a championship. ‘01 should have definitely been in if there was a playoff. Some would say that team was more talented than ‘98.
Click to expand...
I would be one of those who think it was an NC team. Phil let this one slip away.
 
#25
#25
GAVol said:
1989 is probably the best argument we had. 10-1 and SEC champs is pretty strong.
Click to expand...

It would be tough. That season also had 11-0 Big 8 Champ Colorado, 10-1 independent Miami, 10-1 Big 10 Champ Michigan, and 11-1 independent Notre Dame. Plus 10-1 SEC Co-Champ Alabama, and 10-1 SWC Champ Arkansas (terribly weak schedule though).

-Michigan would seem to gets in on account of major conference champ and due to schedule strength that year (and that one loss was to Notre Dame).

-Colorado likely does as well between the combination of undefeated, major conference champion, and strong schedule (they beat an Illinois team that finished in the top 10, a ranked-at-year’s-end Washington, and top 5 Nebraska to win the conference).

-Notre Dame’s schedule was very strong (they beat: 10-3 ACC Champ and ranked-in-mid-teens UVA, the above Michigan team, a ranked Michigan State, 8-2-1 Pac 10 Champ and close to top 10 USC, then-top-10 Pitt (who would stay ranked all year but also lost another 2 more games to ranked teams), and a ranked Penn St. Their only loss was to top 10 Miami).


It’d have to be sorted out between 10-1 Miami (win v the ranked Pitt team mentioned above, the above Notre Dame, the ranked Michigan St team mentioned above, and loss came to highly ranked FSU), 10-1 Alabama (win v the mentioned Penn St + top 10 UT and lost to top 10 Auburn) and 10-1 UT (win v top 10 Auburn, 8-3 Duke, and lost to 10-1 Alabama... SEC was unfortunately pretty bad that year and the #6 UCLA we beat ended the year an unranked 3-win team).

In the end it would probably have to be either Miami or - if not - possibly Alabama in that last spot over the Vols.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top