If College Football Had a Playoff: #9 Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets @ #1 Alabama Crimson Tide
by Jeremy Mauss on Dec 28, 2009 9:00 AM PST
in If College Football Had a Playoff
15 comments
Whoops, time to fix this massive error. The first round is in the books and now of to the quarter-finals are now here. This matchup is the running option of Georgia Tech against run orientated Alabama with Heisman trophy winner Mark Ingram. This will be an interesting matchup of the Yellow Jackets speed run option against a very, very good Alabama defense.
As always we turned for guidance to What If Sports for a simulation of this game.
Alabama was the victor in this game 55-10 over the Yellow Jackets. 'Bama was able to run all over the Tech defense and slow down the Ramblin' Wreck rushing to only 214 yards on the ground. My opinion is that the score would be closer, because can Alabama really score 55 points?
Now it is time for the fan vote to decide who moves on, yes that is you. Check back daily at 12 PM eastern time to vote for the next matchup, and voting is only for 24 hours. As they say in Chicago vote early and vote often.
Alabama Stats
Georgia Tech Stats
0 recs |
15 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
I am an idiot
Just fixed it. Guess I had too many things going on at once last night while writing this.
thanks
I am baffled that I messed this up. I think when I was copying the link from the results I just slipped up somewhere.
by Jeremy Mauss on Dec 28, 2009 11:46 AM PST up reply actions
Told you it was a joke to let people vote.
As of right now: Alabama – 46 votes, Georgia Tech 41 points.
The same Georgia Tech who lost to an SEC team that was no where near the top is within 5 votes of beating Alabama. Like I said before, people are only voting for their biases. They aren’t voting for G.Tech, they are voting against Alabama simply because they don’t like them.
Same exact thing happened with Florida and the Penn St. matchup. Where Penn St. was in no way even close to being on par with Florida, but won because it wasn’t an SEC team.
Yeah I know, it’s just for “fun”. But bad jokes ain’t funny.
And yes, Alabama can score 55 points in a game. They don’t because there is no need to do so. Alabama would rather run out the clock with a bunch of rushing and be done with it. All that matters is the W. And in that aspect you are probably right, the score would be closer because Alabama would be playing 3rd string people long before it got to 55.
who cares
But I guess I win in the end since people like this and my traffic has more then doubled per day since I started this. 55 is a number Alabama could not reach against the dregs of the SEC their team is not built to score.
Thanks for the comment
by Jeremy Mauss on Dec 28, 2009 5:43 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Apparently everyone who voted cares.
And obviously they care so much as to vote based on their biases instead of getting a realistic look at what a playoff bracket might actually look like and bring.
The traffic deal is just a cop out and a defensive reaction to the criticism. If you really care about traffic, then your pages would at least be valid xhtml, rather than having 94 errors. I do this stuff for a living.
Am I wrong in saying that it’s people bias that is leading the vote results, rather than a valid argument or reason why G.Tech would beat Alabama? Or is the only problem in your opinion that I’m pointing it out?
Like I told you before, it’s just something that should be addressed. I think the idea is very interesting which is the entire reason I checked it out and gave you more “traffic”. But it’s going to suck when the results end up as nothing more than peoples biases. It’s not your fault, it’s the fault of those who voted.
Alabama doesn’t put up those huge numbers because there is no point in it. When you’ve got a lead of 14+ points, then all you do is run run run and eat up the clock. I agree, Alabama wouldn’t cover that spread, but it’s not because they aren’t capable. If Alabama won that game 55-10, then 25 of those points would have been stored by the 3rd string offense, and 10 of those scored against them would be against 3rd string defense.
Dude, you have some serious issues.
Mountain West Connection ::Above the Rest::
Bolts From The Blue "There’s a gleam men. Let’s go get the gleam! Focus and Finish!!! One play at a time!!! Let's Go!!!"
Representing the San Diego State University Aztecs, home of the 2009 College Cheerleading National Champions in the all women's division.
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Dec 29, 2009 1:00 AM PST up reply actions
AL Fans have a short memory
Tech did lose to UGA, barely… But Let’s not foget the close games with Auburn and Tenn (very close)… I think AL feels they are the best b/c they beat an over ranked FL… look at FL’s strength of schedule, I mean they’ve played two currently ranked teams and they’re 1-1 (LSU, AL). Nothing to brag about… It’s mostly hype
This game would be all about Time of Possesion… No way AL scores that much if Tech has the ball for over half the time, which is their trend… The Big D Line of AL would hold tech to some 3 and outs, but ACC COY Paul Johnson adjusts at the half to make this a hell of a game
Auburn and Tennessee were both coming off bye weeks
The Tennessee game was Alabama’s 5th straight week of SEC teams. Tennessee was coming off a bye week.
Auburn also had a bye week before the Alabama game, but Alabama had Chatt which wasn’t much to sing about(LSU the week before that). Still, Auburn scored it’s points with trick plays, onside kick in the first half and other such high risk plays because they knew it was their only chance. They sold out on the run stacking the box, which while made the game close also benefited Alabama in the long run(beyond the game itself). It was a close game that went to the end, but after the 1st qtr it was all Alabama.
I don’t know G.Tech’s time of possession well enough to comment too much on that. But Alabama does that well and I’d say at best it would be a wash. Alabama has made it a habit to shut people out in the 3rd and 4th qtrs with long 8 minute drives.
Any team can win a game however, thats why we play them. But I bet the vegas spread would be 14 points or more for Alabama. Maybe more since Alabama found it’s offense towards the end of the Auburn game(hoping it stays that way for the BCS).
Alabama’s big problem is getting more than FG’s out of the red zone. I think that would be the biggest factor if it were a low scoring game. Like the Tennessee game all 12 points were FG’s, got the ball down the field a good bit, but couldn’t punch it in.
question
How can you make ridiculous statements like Alabama opening at -14 over Tech and not even know that Tech is #1 in the country in TOP at around 34 minutes/game? You’ve probably never seen Tech play nor realize your star tight end was actually a Tech transfer (Holla McGee).
And if we wanna look at common opponents, look at VT. Both teams played VT about the same racking up around 300 yards rushing and dominating the TOP.
It’d be a tough fought game and there’s no way in Hell it’d be a double digit spread. That’s ludicrous.
You are a sad, strange little man, and you have my pity.
Alabama #3 in TOP
Alabama is #3 in TOP, less than 1 minute of difference between it and tech. Here’s a reference of the top10 for anyone interested.
1 Georgia Tech 13 34:18
2 Kansas St. 12 33:48
3 Alabama 13 33:31
4 Wisconsin 12 33:28
5 Navy 13 33:22
6 Oklahoma St. 12 32:22
7 Stanford 12 32:22
8 La.-Monroe 12 32:21
9 TCU 12 32:20
10 Arizona 12 32:18
I think such a thing would end up being a wash and would even out.
I do know about Peak, and I have watched a couple of G.Tech games this year, including the Georgia game and the Clemson game.
The reason I say 14 point spread is because of the recent rise of the Alabama offense. If not for the way they handled Florida I don’t think the spread would be as much.
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
