interesting. You are so confident yet your line is less than the vegas' line.

you misunderstand my point. The ref should call it a fumble first and review for a touchback instead of the other way round because the rule changes possession. The ref shouldn't jump to touchback. refs have prescribed rules on how to make a call e.g. tie goes to the offense on a catch.

shouldn't fumble be the default call and touchback be the unusual, need really good evidence call. shouldn't the preference be to keep the team in possession in possession? on a close call shouldn't "a tie go to the offense"? if it has to be reviewed, shouldn't the review be to overturn "fumble" rather than to overturn "touchback"? unless you have an agenda-- a preferred result.

It is not that it is the worst rule in football, which it is. The issue is that the ref picks the winner on a questionable call instead of calling it a fumble at the 1 or 2 or 5 yard line. The call was close enough to be reviewed, but there apparently wasn't enough evidence to overturn the touchback call. if its a questionable call shouldn't they just let the teams play ? Shouldn't fumble be the default and touchback be the unusual call using clear evidence and not a "close call" decision? A&M was robbed. Clemson knows it. it'll come back around to them

put the crack pipe down they're hideous

amen bama=mama

the sunday morning quarterback is always full off 'but fors'. in this case but for an interception at the goal line this is a three point game. yes, bama won but a&m played bama closer than anyone this season, with a freshman backup quarterback. i would think you could at least acknowledge that david hung with goliath, got within 8 after being down 21 and made a better game of it than anyone bama has played all year. the consensus will be that a&m exposed some flaws and although the better team won, a&m is playing good ball. after all you had said after the ucla fiasco a little acknowledgement is the least you could do. and if you are after clicks it would probably generate more to discuss mama's flaws than to praise the machine

This tie breaker scenario assumes the records of KU and SC remain as they are. Admittedly it is unlikely but there is the possibility of both schools having the same record at the end of the year. KU is likely not going to beat either Georgia or Tennessee--if they do it is armageddon in the east-- and SC will probably beat Mizzou but not Fla, but this could be the year of the SEC apocalypse. There are signs.

Commenters talk about the SEC being down this year, but how would Michigan or Tosu fare in the West? really? A&M got lucky in that they faced Auburn before they got their stuff together. It would be a different game today. SEC west--still the toughest league in College football, and probably the AFC.

I'm glad someone knows the tiebreaker rules, it's all just voodoo to me. A&M needs Alabama undefeated. If they take a one loss SEC team, it's going to be Bama and they ain't taking two one loss SEC teams The alternative is Bama with two losses, ---that's not going to happen. End of the day, it will be manipulated and massaged to put Alabama in the playoff if there is a tie and if only one SEC team gets to go because A&M doesn't have the national appeal that Bama does.