I'm normally not one to make petty excuses about officiating and things like that, but when 2 touchdowns come on plays that should be penalized in addition to several no calls on blatant holds I have to say something. This is not to take anything away from Clemson, they played well, especially later in the game. Dabo does an excellent job of getting his team ready for big games. However, Alabama should have won the game, and it was clear that Alabama had the better team throughout the season. The process will continue though
While you cannot argue that Clemson played a spectacular game, anyone with even a basic understanding of football saw perhaps the most obvious "no-call" you will ever see in a game. An Alabama player was illegally "picked" in the end zone, several yards in front of the line of scrimmage. A properly thrown flag would have backed the Tigers up and forced them to attempt a game-tying field goal. Of course, there is no telling what would have happened in overtime!
While I do believe there may have been some poor calls made in the game, I do not believe that Alabama should have beat Clemenson. When it all comes down to it, the game is not decided by referees -- it is decided by the effort put forth by a team. If the referees were unfair, Alabama needed to come together as a team to step up and overcome this adversity by playing even harder to win.
No, there's no compelling reason that Alabama should have beaten Clemson. Even if referees were unfair, one team played better than the other in this particular game. That's just how things are set up. Sometimes the expected winner wins, sometimes the underdog wins. That's what makes sports so interesting to watch!
The college football national championship game turned out correct. Although Alabama players are complaining about the referees being unfair, they were beaten by the better team. Clemson has a great quarterback, and he proved it with the last drive. He led the game winning drive against a very good Alabama team.