What is the chance the SEC might deregulate the SEC CG

they should, but they won't.

Would require an NCAA rule change. Rule that allows a CG requires a minimum of 12 teams playing round robin schedules in minimum 6 team divisions, with the winners of those two divisions meeting in the CG.

17.9.1.2 (c) Twelve-Member Conference Championship Game. [FBS/FCS] A conference championship game between division champions of a member conference of 12 or more institutions that is divided into two divisions (of six or more institutions each), each of which conducts round-robin, regular-season competition among the members of that division;

Or, you might have a year like 2011 when Alabama doesn't make the SECCG, but LSU does.

But Alabama is ranked high enough to still make the top 2 in the BCS, much less top 4, and Bama and LSU play for the championship.

You might could argue that if might be an easier route to the four man playoff if you don't go through the SECCG is you are already ranked in the top 4 in the polls, especially if your only loss is to a highly ranked team (like Bama's in '11).

ACC new algorithm for championship game: FSU v Best of Clemson, Miami, Virginia Tech.


Edit: The problem with the ACC isn't divisions but the fact that they didn't balance their division well from the outset. Look at the SEC championship results. Yes, the West is on a dominant run with Alabama (2x), Auburn (2x), LSU (1x) since Florida won in 2008. People have forgotten that the East dominated the championship game until things evened out in the early 2000s and finally culminated in this West domination of late. 11-11 West v. East overall. The ACC also suffered with hinging an entire division on Miami and Virginia Tech being contender type programs. Both have slipped over the course of expanded ACC play in the early 2000s.

rgw said:

ACC new algorithm for championship game: FSU v Best of Clemson, Miami, Virginia Tech.


Edit: The problem with the ACC isn't divisions but the fact that they didn't balance their division well from the outset. Look at the SEC championship results. Yes, the West is on a dominant run with Alabama (2x), Auburn (2x), LSU (1x) since Florida won in 2008. People have forgotten that the East dominated the championship game until things evened out in the early 2000s and finally culminated in this West domination of late. 11-11 West v. East overall. The ACC also suffered with hinging an entire division on Miami and Virginia Tech being contender type programs. Both have slipped over the course of expanded ACC play in the early 2000s.

Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that as inequitable as these CG can be, getting the balance wrong can inherently doom great match ups and fan interest even further? But even with the balance right, like the SEC, what is the fun of a 1 loss SEC team having to stay home and watch a 3, or 4, or 5 loss SEC team from another division fight it out for the title? (2011) A few times, even a 6 loss team was playing over a top 3 BCS team from the same conference, but unfortunately different division. 3 people in the stands, and 123 watching on the tube was a dead give away something was a miss.

I still think the biggest problem with the other conferences is that they let interests hijack appropriate balancing of their divisions. The Big Ten had a problem where their two best team in-division were on NCAA sanctions. The ACC has had VT and Miami decline off their entrance expectations from the Big East. Those are the biggest non-balancing problems.


The SEC's conference divisions have balance. It sways in terms of power over time but there is a natural sway back and forth that comes over time. Another thing may be that the SEC is just blessed with more teams of merit and it makes balancing the conference easier.

I can't deny that this would have been beneficial to Alabama in 2011 and 2013 though as the SECCG would have been Alabama v. Team who beat them.

In terms of a playoff, it's actually a very bad idea to have the top two SEC teams meet in the SECCG. Think about this, Alabama is likely in a playoff last year, but if they played Auburn immediately before the playoffs? One of those two teams is likely out. In terms of getting into a playoff, it's actually a horrible idea to have your top two teams play immediately before the playoff. So, it's best when that doesn't happen.

But, one move that the SEC should consider is letting the home team host the game. That might sound "unfair", but you do not want your top team losing, once again because of the playoffs. You want to make the top SEC team getting in as much of a sure thing as you can.

capnfrog said:

The SEC has better teams overall but ever since Florida faded, it has been all SEC west. This year I expect to see the west much stronger than the east again. With the power coming from LSU, Bama and albrun. The east power should be Georgia followed up by Missouri. Mark Richt's bunch always figures a way to lose one or two games so that would leave Missouri in the big SEC game again. I would find it more entertaining to watch two of the wests best in the SECCG than any one of them playing the easts best.

Click to expand...

Re: MO. There are 128 teams in 1A in 2014. Only one, Utah State with 7, returns fewer starters than does MO with 9. Those kind of numbers do not usually bode well for a team. IMO, MO will be 6-6 at best. I have them going 4-8 (2-6).

Re: The East. I project UF, UGA, and SC to tie for first at 6-2. All three at 1-1 in their round robin. All three at 1-1 against the West. Tie will be broken by last tie breaker, whatever that may be now that there no longer will be a BCS ranking.

People are wrong to consider the Florida program under Muschamp dead in the water. At least just yet. It wouldn't surprise me if they won the East next year.

KrAzY3 said:

In terms of a playoff, it's actually a very bad idea to have the top two SEC teams meet in the SECCG. Think about this, Alabama is likely in a playoff last year, but if they played Auburn immediately before the playoffs? One of those two teams is likely out. In terms of getting into a playoff, it's actually a horrible idea to have your top two teams play immediately before the playoff. So, it's best when that doesn't happen.

But, one move that the SEC should consider is letting the home team host the game. That might sound "unfair", but you do not want your top team losing, once again because of the playoffs. You want to make the top SEC team getting in as much of a sure thing as you can.

Click to expand...

If the top two teams in each conference had to play each other, here is what would happen: The CCG is now a true playoff game. Instead of a 4 team format, you can honestly say it's 8, providing we are going with the top 4 conferences. Now think about the fan and media interest in these conference championship games? Suddenly, Oregon playing a 6-6 UCLA, Pac 12 game never happens, while a 11-1 Stanford team with a Heisman trophy candidate, Andrew Luck, sits home and watches them play for the conference title. You are simply making the CCG a true playoff game.

TUSKtimes said:

If the top two teams in each conference had to play each other, here is what would happen: The CCG is now a true playoff game. Instead of a 4 team format, you can honestly say it's 8, providing we are going with the top 4 conferences.

Click to expand...

Which, of course I think would be a terrible thing.

Here's the counterpoint. The SEC deserves at least two teams in a playoff most years (I can think of one year it probably should have been three). Of course the other conferences would love anything that makes it one SEC team out of the four, but if we are going by merit, and not some system over substance approach, the SEC deserves to be better represented.

TUSKtimes said:

If the top two teams in each conference had to play each other, here is what would happen: The CCG is now a true playoff game. Instead of a 4 team format, you can honestly say it's 8, providing we are going with the top 4 conferences. Now think about the fan and media interest in these conference championship games? Suddenly, Oregon playing a 6-6 UCLA, Pac 12 game never happens, while a 11-1 Stanford team with a Heisman trophy candidate, Andrew Luck, sits home and watches them play for the conference title. You are simply making the CCG a true playoff game.

Click to expand...

Exactly! I am still convinced this playoff crap is about conference champions. If your 11-1 team is left out of the playoff, you will want the reason to be because they lost the CCG and not because they didn't play in it.

rgw said:

People are wrong to consider the Florida program under Muschamp dead in the water. At least just yet. It wouldn't surprise me if they won the East next year.

Click to expand...

Their loss to F$U will probably cost them the tie breaker. I have UGA going 10-2 (6-2), SC 10-2 (6-2), and UF 9-3 (6-2). As stated earlier, all three going 1-1 in their round robin and all three going 1-1 against the West. Meaning the tie would be broken by the final tie breaker. I presume that will be the CFP ranking. Tie breaker rule still reads BCS standings.

ALA2262 said:

Exactly! I am still convinced this playoff crap is about conference champions. If your 11-1 team is left out of the playoff, you will want the reason to be because they lost the CCG and not because they didn't play in it.

Click to expand...

You are a wise man. Not only does this assure that the two best teams in the conference aren't left out of the big dance, but it assures that all 4 teams in the playoff had to play the same 13 game schedule. The fans win, the players win and Roy Kramer gets to finally see that his vision of a CCG is more than an extra opportunity to mess up the season. (Bama vs Florida - 1992)

KrAzY3 said:

Which, of course I think would be a terrible thing.

Here's the counterpoint. The SEC deserves at least two teams in a playoff most years (I can think of one year it probably should have been three). Of course the other conferences would love anything that makes it one SEC team out of the four, but if we are going by merit, and not some system over substance approach, the SEC deserves to be better represented.

Click to expand...

Our perception of merit and the rest of the countries perception of merit are two different things entirely. The rest of the country sees being a conference champion as merit for being in the four team playoff. That is four spots for five major conference championships and Notre Dame. The day of seeing two SEC teams in the championship game are for the most part history, unless you expand the playoff to eight which would allow for the five major conference champions and three wild cards to participate. If you are not a conference champion you do not deserve to play for the national championship.

And if an undefeated division champion happens to lose to a 2 or 3 loss division champion in the SEC championship game, chances are the SEC will not have a representative in the four team playoff at all. May not be fair or right, but just sit back and watch!