Alabama fatigue is clouding people's judgement with the College Football Playoff

Alabama football has been the best program in college football over the last 20 years. Since Nick Saban first set foot in Tuscaloosa back in 2007, Alabama has won more games and more championships than anyone. Even with the Crimson Tide now three full seasons removed from its last national championship and not being nearly as dominant as they were during the peak of the dynastic run, Alabama fatigue is alive and well.

If you had any doubt about that, this nonsensical debate about South Carolina over Alabama for the hypothetical final spot in the College Football Playoff field is proof positive.

Plenty of media members are beating the drum for the Gamecocks and moving the goalposts for the Crimson Tide with arguments they used in the opposite direction last season.

As always, only Alabama is judged based on how many points they beat a good opponent by and not just the fact that they won the game. Using the fact that South Carolina covered the spread against Alabama but still lost as a potential reason they should get in the playoff is one of the most disingenuous arguments I've ever seen.

If point spreads matter, Alabama would still be favored over South Carolina on a neutral field.

South Carolina deserves a lot of credit for how they finished the season. They won six consecutive games to finish the regular season 9-3. They are playing really good football right now. But there's no argument for the Gamecocks over either of the other two three-loss SEC teams.

The goalposts always move for Alabama football

The results on the field have to matter, and the Gamecocks lost to both Alabama and Ole Miss. Remember last year when anyone dared to mention that maybe Alabama should jump Texas for inclusion in the College Football Playoff because, even though the Tide lost to the Longhorns in Week 2, Alabama's resume far exceeded what Texas had to offer?

The same media folks beating the drum for South Carolina nearly brought out the picket signs and boycotted outside the playoff committee's office. But now since that head-to-head favors the team they hate, it no longer matters.

If head-to-head means nothing, let's just use power rankings and computer-generated data to determine who should make the playoff field. Unfortunately, the computers like Alabama more than the humans do. Alabama is 4th in ESPN's FPI rankings. South Carolina is 14th.

The SP+ rankings have Alabama 5th and South Carolina 13th.

Alabama and South Carolina have similar resumes. They both have three wins over ranked opponents and roughly the same strength of schedule. Had they not played one another, then I think you could make a strong argument for the Gamecocks based off of how they finished the season. But they did meet on the gridiron and Alabama won. No amount of revisionist history is going to change that.

The argument should come down to Alabama and Ole Miss with both programs sporting wins over South Carolina. And even though there isn't head-to-head data to point to between the Tide and Rebels, there's really no debate here, either.

Alabama played the more challenging schedule and banked more quality wins. And while Alabama has a couple of bad losses on its resume, neither compare to Ole Miss' loss to 4-8 Kentucky.

There's an argument to be made to keep Alabama out of the playoff. If the Tide misses out, they have nobody to blame but themselves with three losses. But those arguments can't include either of the other three-loss SEC teams and especially not the team it beat on the field.