No, ND was not worthy of being one of the 4 teams. Clemson had a great game plan against Alabama but they aren't 28 points better. Things snowballed on Alabama. It was akin to the Ohio St./Michigan game where it got out of control fast and snowballed on Michigan. I understand that schemes have a way of doing that, but Bama isn't 28 points worse than Clemson.
Clemson would beat ND 10/10 times and they would beat Bama 5 or 6 out of ten in my opinion. The game last night reminded me of Super Bowls of the past when games got out of hand for teams and ended in blowouts. When you're playing for all the marbles and get behind, play calling changes, defensive players start trying to go for ball, rather than tackle and so on and so forth.
Clemson would beat ND 10/10 times and they would beat Bama 5 or 6 out of ten in my opinion. The game last night reminded me of Super Bowls of the past when games got out of hand for teams and ended in blowouts. When you're playing for all the marbles and get behind, play calling changes, defensive players start trying to go for ball, rather than tackle and so on and so forth.
Disagree. I think Clemson would beat Alabama 6 or 7 times out of 10, and beat Notre Dame 8 or 9 times out of 10. Alabama is a great team, but their defensive shortcomings were covered up some by their schedule. And I'm sure they'll be overvalued and we'll be forced to see them in the finals next season after looking at their embarrassing out-of-conference schedule: Duke, Southern Miss, New Mexico State and Western Carolina. Clemson at least plays Texas A&M and traditional rival South Carolina.
And why was Notre Dame "not worthy of being one of the 4 teams"? They were undefeated playing a tougher schedule than both Alabama and Clemson. Who else would have possibly been a better choice than them?!
You conveniently left out that Clemson also plays Charlotte and Wofford.
