Conference Championship Games HAVE TO GO!

I am not opposed to expanding the playoff to 8 teams if they eliminate the CCGs. I don't see it happening. The first round would have to be home games, hosted by the higher seeded teams. This means that the schools would make all of the money for these games (other than the TV money). But, more importantly, it means that the conferences lose $$$ on the TV deals that they have in place for the existing games.

Nah! .

I would agree, but some changes would need to be made to settle the conference champion issue in some cases. If the SEC stays structured as it is, you can have two 8-0 teams at the end of the year and no clear champion. Conference sizes and the splitting into divisions has created an issue where none existed before. Before too long, I expect to see the existing conferences revamped into smaller, less unwieldy divisions where there are clearer winners and losers, much like NFL divisions. If that can be done and it only adds one layer of playoffs while eliminating the conference championship games, it might work. If the CFP grows into a system like the FCS runs, it will ruin the spirit of the game as we know it.

B1GTide said:

I am not opposed to expanding the playoff to 8 teams if they eliminate the CCGs. I don't see it happening. The first round would have to be home games, hosted by the higher seeded teams. This means that the schools would make all of the money for these games (other than the TV money). But, more importantly, it means that the conferences lose $$$ on the TV deals that they have in place for the existing games.

Click to expand...

Which is why it won't happen.

Let's face it: it is all a money grab. Mostly by ESPN. But, that is another gripe for another time.

IOnlyWantRings said:

Let's get real. They are becoming more and more useless as the years go on. Everyone knows they are just a money grab. People like calling the conference games post season games but are they really? Because in the post season I envision if you lose your conference game you're out and if you win you advance. However, if Northwestern, or Pitt would have won Saturday they wouldn't have "advanced". They'd just be off to a better bowl game. The playoff expansion is coming. The question is when. Here's what I'd love to see.

Expand it to 8. Give the winner of each Power 5 a berth according to the regular season winners. Then award 3 at large teams voted in by the committee. The top 4 get home games so you're playing for home field in the 1st round through the season. Imagine if we replaced the conference championship games for these games.

UCF at Alabama
Michigan goes to Clemson
UGA goes to Oklahoma
Ohio St goes to South Bend! (Yes, I know they're not a Power 5 champ so they need to get in a conference or just pray for an at large.


Those would be fantastic games and then we'd have our 4 advance to the bowl games. You'd have so much more interest in my opinion and I see no downside to this. Down the road, I'd also like to get a college football commissioner for obvious reasons but that's a whole different topic. What say you??

Click to expand...

You don't have all Power 5 leagues represented here, as your plan calls for. The PAC12 is omitted and you have 4 conference champions of the Power 5 leagues and 4 at-large teams. I think your plan could work, but this illustrates the problem of requiring all conference champs getting in. The PAC12 champion probably isn't a Top 8 team, and certainly not Top 4.

I love the SECCG and don't want to lose it.

I mean I get that the main prize and expectation is the National Title but the SEC Title is still very prestigious and probably tougher to win now that Ties/Co-Champions no longer exist.

We are 8-4 All-Time in SECCG's and 6-1 under CNS winning the last 6 straight times we've played for it.

There have been some absolute CLASSIC moments for us.

1992 - Alabama 28 Florida 21 (Langham Pick 6)
1999 - Alabama 34 Florida 7 (Milons/Grimes/Beat CSS Twice)
2008 - Alabama 20 Florida 31 (Serving Notice - 1 Year Away from Prime-time)
2009 - Alabama 32 Florida 13 (We're BACK!!! UF Dynasty Over)
2012 - Alabama 32 UGA 28 (AJ to Coop, Ripped out UGA's Heart Part I)
2015 and 2016 - Destroy Florida and finally take the HTH lead 5-4
2018 - Alabama 35 UGA 28 (Jalen Redemption, Ripped out UGA's Heart Part III)

Good Times have been had!!!!

IOnlyWantRings said:

Let's get real. They are becoming more and more useless as the years go on. Everyone knows they are just a money grab. People like calling the conference games post season games but are they really? Because in the post season I envision if you lose your conference game you're out and if you win you advance. However, if Northwestern, or Pitt would have won Saturday they wouldn't have "advanced". They'd just be off to a better bowl game. The playoff expansion is coming. The question is when. Here's what I'd love to see.

Expand it to 8. Give the winner of each Power 5 a berth according to the regular season winners. Then award 3 at large teams voted in by the committee. The top 4 get home games so you're playing for home field in the 1st round through the season. Imagine if we replaced the conference championship games for these games.

UCF at Alabama
Michigan goes to Clemson
UGA goes to Oklahoma
Ohio St goes to South Bend! (Yes, I know they're not a Power 5 champ so they need to get in a conference or just pray for an at large.


Those would be fantastic games and then we'd have our 4 advance to the bowl games. You'd have so much more interest in my opinion and I see no downside to this. Down the road, I'd also like to get a college football commissioner for obvious reasons but that's a whole different topic. What say you??

Click to expand...

Does this apply to all other sports or just football? Without CCG then why have a conference at all? Just let the committee do all the work.

For the conference championship games to be removed, an alternative that makes each conference richer without the game would have to emerge.

IOnlyWantRings said:

Let's get real. They are becoming more and more useless as the years go on.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Let's consider the national title picture:

1992 - if Florida wins, all it does is eliminate Alabama
1993 - irrelevant (and both teams had already lost to Auburn)
1994 - this one would have mattered in the BCS era but all it did was end Alabama's title hopes
1995 - if Arkansas wins, all it does is eliminate Florida
1996 - if Alabama wins, all it does is eliminate Florida (who still only has a chance if Ohio State upsets Arizona St)
1997 - did not matter
1998 - if MSU wins, it means nothing
1999 - the end result really didn't matter except which BCS bowl the winner got
2000 - didn't matter
2001 - LSU eliminated Tennessee, but it didn't do much for LSU beyond a conference title
2002 - didn't matter
2003 - if Georgia won, it made no difference
2004 - if Tennessee won, it didn't matter
2005 - if LSU won, it didn't matter
2006 - if Arky won, it would not have mattered
2007 - if the Vols win, it doesn't matter

Gee....in the first 16 years of the SECCG, it only mattered for one team.


There's nothing new about this.

There were recent exceptions: 2008, 2009, 2012, 2017, and this year.


The reality shows that the SEC title game has actually become MORE important to more teams.

IOnlyWantRings said:

Everyone knows they are just a money grab. People like calling the conference games post season games but are they really?

Click to expand...

I would say that this is a good question - because they DO count for Heisman votes, which don't consider post-season stats so......

IOnlyWantRings said:

Because in the post season I envision if you lose your conference game you're out and if you win you advance.

Click to expand...

A fair assessment but college football has long made up its own rules as it went along, too.

IOnlyWantRings said:

However, if Northwestern, or Pitt would have won Saturday they wouldn't have "advanced". They'd just be off to a better bowl game.

Click to expand...

Which is no different than the SEC title game was pretty much every year from 1992 to 2007.

IOnlyWantRings said:

The playoff expansion is coming. The question is when.

Click to expand...

Probably - and probably to the detriment of the sport. I just can't wait to see teams like the 1983 UCLA Bruins, who were 6-4-1, in the national title game.

IOnlyWantRings said:

Here's what I'd love to see.

Expand it to 8. Give the winner of each Power 5 a berth according to the regular season winners.

Click to expand...

So far, so good......

IOnlyWantRings said:

Then award 3 at large teams voted in by the committee.

Click to expand...

Why would we even need the committee? Given that we're talking about teams 5-8 why not just use the polls?

IOnlyWantRings said:

The top 4 get home games so you're playing for home field in the 1st round through the season. Imagine if we replaced the conference championship games for these games.

Click to expand...

I'm sure the attendance during a blizzard in Camp Randall would break records. And fortunately, Alabama is one of the wealthiest states in America so many fans could plan on a one-week whim to go to Wisconsin and support the team.

IOnlyWantRings said:

UCF at Alabama
Michigan goes to Clemson
UGA goes to Oklahoma
Ohio St goes to South Bend! (Yes, I know they're not a Power 5 champ so they need to get in a conference or just pray for an at large.

Click to expand...

Uh, where would Washington go? And would Washington even be the champ since you're proposing eliminating conference title games?

IOnlyWantRings said:

Those would be fantastic games and then we'd have our 4 advance to the bowl games. You'd have so much more interest in my opinion and I see no downside to this. Down the road, I'd also like to get a college football commissioner for obvious reasons but that's a whole different topic. What say you??

Click to expand...

The downside to the entire thing is that the fans' interests fall way down the list of priorities.

The bowl games have certain criteria.
The networks make certain demands.
These schools are ACADEMIC institutions, not semi-pro sports leagues. (And if you don't believe me consider that other than football and men's b-ball, who even cares? Very few MLB players come out of college because if they're that good at 18, they play in the minors).


There are overlapping interests that prevent what you're talking about from happening.

One of the reasons it took the entire 90s to get the BCS is because the Rose Bowl and Pac 10/Big 10 had a contract through the 1998 game. This meant that if either conference had a contender, they HAD to play in the Rose Bowl. By chance, both conferences had major contenders in 1993-1997.

rgw said:

For the conference championship games to be removed, an alternative that makes each conference richer without the game would have to emerge.

Click to expand...

Bottom line is ... well ... the bottom line.

ETA (just read your post, Selma): What Selma said.

You could get every other conference to buy in b/c they don't care, but there is NO WAY the SEC (and ATL) is giving it up. They sell it out every year in June, it is a 3-4 day event no matter who is playing in the game. Next to the Super Bowl, I am not sure there is a bigger event in sports.

I agree with the OP. I would not give an automatic birth to the P5 champions. 1st it would be hard to determine who is conference champ when you have two or more teams with the same record, 2nd, the conference champ may have several non conference losses and ranked low. Have a committee select 1 through 8 and the top four play the first round at home the week after the regular season. What did we learn by watching Clemson and tOSU play unranked teams Saturday?

And the level of SECCG attendance is not repeated everywhere.

"The Huskies earned their Rose Bowl berth, but a Pac-12 championship game played in front of a half-empty Levi's Stadium did nothing to improve the conference's perception nationally."

I agree that the conferences aren't giving up the title games, especially the SEC. They are also becoming meaningless. It would have been better for Bama to not play in it. If they aren't going away they have to have more meaning. I don't like going to eight teams, but the best thing is to go to the Power 5 champs all get in the playoff, and then three at large teams. It's not perfect by any means, but it makes a conference title more important. Use the stupid committee to seed the teams and then pick the three at large. I know a team here and there will get hosed and not get in, but it will be much more rare, and even give a team like UGA and OSU a spot. I'm not saying OSU necessarily deserves it but UGA does.

Do the first round at the home of the higher seed, and then use the bowls for the rest. I don't like parts of the plan, but it preserves the money of the title games, and makes conference titles relevant again. It also gets the best teams in. I know we will have a dud in every once in a while, but just seed them 8 and make them go somewhere like Bryant-Denny, Death Valley, or the Horseshoe and get housed.

How would anyone here feel about continuing the SECCG if we lost to UGA in a close game and were ranked #5 behind a #4 ND this week? It was to ND advantage not to play a game this past weekend. Would they have won the SECCG game playing us or UGA? The ACCCG against Clemson? The BIG10CG against tOSU? The Big12CG against OU or UT? Doubt it.

Elefantman said:

How would anyone here feel about continuing the SECCG if we lost to UGA in a close game and were ranked #5 behind a #4 ND this week? It was to ND advantage not to play a game this past weekend. Would they have won the SECCG game playing us or UGA? The ACCCG against Clemson? The BIG10CG against tOSU? The Big12CG against OU or UT? Doubt it.

Click to expand...

Probably the same way Baylor and TCU felt in 2014 when Ohio State jumped them both because the Big 12 didn't have a conference championship game while the Big 10 did.

Elefantman said:

How would anyone here feel about continuing the SECCG if we lost to UGA in a close game and were ranked #5 behind a #4 ND this week?

Click to expand...

Would not have happened. If Alabama loses, you are in the playoffs along with ND, GA and Clemson. It would be the Sooners crying in their beers today. But, if it does play out like that in some future year, you act like a man and accept the loss with grace.

B1GTide said:

Would not have happened. If Alabama loses, you are in the playoffs along with ND, GA and Clemson. It would be the Sooners crying in their beers today. But, if it does play out like that in some future year, you act like a man and accept the loss with grace.

Click to expand...

Maybe not this year, but could happen to a P5 team who played their rear ends off and have the championship game as the only loss. Conference Championship games are now trap games for most CFP hopefuls and one more opportunity to injure a star player.

Elefantman said:

Maybe not this year, but could happen to a P5 team who played their rear ends off and have the championship game as the only loss. Conference Championship games are now trap games for most CFP hopefuls and one more opportunity to injure a star player.

Click to expand...

I get that, but it is the system that we have, and injuries can happen in any game. If this system helps you 5 years in a row and then it costs you one year, you are going to complain?