What is the chance the SEC might deregulate the SEC CG

[Crimsongator]

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!

Whether right or wrong, gator agrees with MOAN's post

 

[Crimson1967]

An issue with one team hosting is that the high school championships are that same weekend anew either in Tuscaloosa or Barnville.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[edwd58]

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)

Have I missed where the Big 12 is expanding and playing a championship game AND that Notre Dame is a full member of a conference? Until these two things happen the playing field remains unlevel as it pertains to fairness in attaining a spot in the Top 4.

 

[JBama_in_PCOLA]

Cmon! I hope they don't!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[GrayTide]

Whether right or wrong, gator agrees with MOAN's post

While I do not approve of what Moan says, IMO he is absolutely, guaranteed, 100% spot on.

 

[KrAzY3]

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.

I can't in any way agree with that sentiment, particularly the part in bold. You are explicitly stating that Alabama should not have been champions in 2011, right? Furthermore, I find it absolutely absurd for anyone to contend that merely winning a conference somehow is more of a qualification than being for instance the second best team in the country. It should be merit based, and to go down the road of what the NCAA basketball tournament did once, which left out the #2 team because it didn't win it's conference is just ridiculous.

Have I missed where the Big 12 is expanding and playing a championship game AND that Notre Dame is a full member of a conference? Until these two things happen the playing field remains unlevel as it pertains to fairness in attaining a spot in the Top 4.

This whole thing is football socialism and I'm sad more people can't see it. The SEC has the most historically top 25 teams by a long shot. They have 14 programs, and of those 14 programs, 8 are top 25 all time.

How do the others break down?
Pac-12 has 4
Big 12 has 2
Big 10 has 6
ACC has 4

Yet, knowing full well that for instance the ACC and Pac-12 combine for as many top 25 historical teams as the SEC, we pretend that winning those conferences is somehow of equivalent merit. Despite the Big 12 only havin 10 teams, and no conference championship game, and... basically just two teams, we pretend that has equivalent merit. That's just patently ridiculous.

Here's a legit comparison, here's nearly equal merit. Winning the SEC East or West is like being Pac-12 or ACC champion... that's going by merit, but I guess the assertion is merit no longer matters. All conferences are created equal...

 

[GrayTide]

I can't in any way agree with that sentiment, particularly the part in bold. You are explicitly stating that Alabama should not have been champions in 2011, right? Furthermore, I find it absolutely absurd for anyone to contend that merely winning a conference somehow is more of a qualification than being for instance the second best team in the country. It should be merit based, and to go down the road of what the NCAA basketball tournament did once, which left out the #2 team because it didn't win it's conference is just ridiculous.


This whole thing is football socialism and I'm sad more people can't see it. The SEC has the most historically top 25 teams by a long shot. They have 14 programs, and of those 14 programs, 8 are top 25 all time.

How do the others break down?
Pac-12 has 4
Big 12 has 2
Big 10 has 6
ACC has 4

Yet, knowing full well that for instance the ACC and Pac-12 combine for as many top 25 historical teams as the SEC, we pretend that winning those conferences is somehow of equivalent merit. Despite the Big 12 only havin 10 teams, and no conference championship game, and... basically just two teams, we pretend that has equivalent merit. That's just patently ridiculous.

Here's a legit comparison, here's nearly equal merit. Winning the SEC East or West is like being Pac-12 or ACC champion... that's going by merit, but I guess the assertion is merit no longer matters. All conferences are created equal...

KrAzY, I don't think anyone disagrees with your comments and logic about teams getting into the final 4 based on merit, but I am of the opinion it simply will not ultimately be based on merit. Had this playoff scenario been in place in 2011 Alabama may or may not have been included. I have said before and still contend this move is to assure 2011 is never repeated. Had the SEC not won 7 of the last 8 BCS NCs do you think there would have been a move to a playoff?

 

[rgw]

I think we'd all agree that the best playoff format is 8-team, 5 major conference automatic qualifiers, 3 at-large bids.

 

[GrayTide]

I agree. If a playoff is mandated then, while more cumbersome, 8 teams is probably a fairer format.

 

[KrAzY3]

I think we'd all agree that the best playoff format is 8-team, 5 major conference automatic qualifiers, 3 at-large bids.

Not I. No playoff should exist without including the most worthy teams. Any automatic entries, automatically poisons the process. What you're basically saying is that the BCS bowl criteria should be playoff criteria. How did that ACC champ work out some years?

 

[TUSKtimes]

Have I missed where the Big 12 is expanding and playing a championship game AND that Notre Dame is a full member of a conference? Until these two things happen the playing field remains unlevel as it pertains to fairness in attaining a spot in the Top 4.

That's fine. Let Notre Dame pay for their stubbornness? That should matter with actual humans watching the games this year. Big 12 will find a couple more members when CCG brownie points sets in. If the CCG is going to be legit, got to clean up the clutter. Go ahead, make me king?

 

[TideMan09]

I like the idea of the "Top" two & highest ranking teams playing for the SEC Championship, instead of lower ranked team from one division, just cause they're from another division of the SEC..The SEC west division, is freaking brutal, and the top two teams in the SEC, is usually both from the west division..It's not fair to a team to be left out of the Championship Game, just cause they're from the same division, as the Top ranked SEC Team..It would only be fair, and it will give the Championship Game credibility, it is lacking, cause the SEC West teams beats the hell out of each other, and only one team can win the division itself, it would give fans a real true Championship Game & not a Championship Game based on entitlement ..JMHO

 

[BamaFlum]

I like the idea of the "Top" two & highest ranking teams playing for the SEC Championship, instead of lower ranked team from one division, just cause they're from another division of the SEC..The SEC west division, is freaking brutal, and the top two teams in the SEC, is usually both from the west division..It's not fair to a team to be left out of the Championship Game, just cause they're from the same division, as the Top ranked SEC Team..It would only be fair, and it will give the Championship Game credibility, it is lacking, cause the SEC West teams beats the hell out of each other, and only one team can win the division itself, it would give fans a real true Championship Game & not a Championship Game based on entitlement ..JMHO

Yup. Bama and LSU a few years ago comes to mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk, so my fat fingers cause misspellings and autocorrect makes my ships into...

 

[MOAN]

I can't in any way agree with that sentiment, particularly the part in bold. You are explicitly stating that Alabama should not have been champions in 2011, right? Furthermore, I find it absolutely absurd for anyone to contend that merely winning a conference somehow is more of a qualification than being for instance the second best team in the country. It should be merit based, and to go down the road of what the NCAA basketball tournament did once, which left out the #2 team because it didn't win it's conference is just ridiculous.


This whole thing is football socialism and I'm sad more people can't see it. The SEC has the most historically top 25 teams by a long shot. They have 14 programs, and of those 14 programs, 8 are top 25 all time.

How do the others break down?
Pac-12 has 4
Big 12 has 2
Big 10 has 6
ACC has 4

Yet, knowing full well that for instance the ACC and Pac-12 combine for as many top 25 historical teams as the SEC, we pretend that winning those conferences is somehow of equivalent merit. Despite the Big 12 only havin 10 teams, and no conference championship game, and... basically just two teams, we pretend that has equivalent merit. That's just patently ridiculous.

Here's a legit comparison, here's nearly equal merit. Winning the SEC East or West is like being Pac-12 or ACC champion... that's going by merit, but I guess the assertion is merit no longer matters. All conferences are created equal...

You misunderstand. I certainly believe Alabama was the best team in '11 and deserved to be in the championship game. You do realize though that with the SEC getting a rematch of an SEC game, is what prompted the four team playoff I am sure. Not that that was the main reason for it, that would be money, but that was the pretense that the college football world used to bring it about on. Or to blame it on if you prefer.

The BCS and it ways of providing the national championship game are over! Look at how many SEC basketball teams are getting in the NCAA tourney these days even with 68 participating. As long as there are conference championship games with this system, those games will be seen and used by the committee as a champions only tourney. I don't like it either but what can I do about it? The same as you, nothing! If I was a betting man I would bet the farm on you never seeing two SEC teams, one not being a conference champion, in the four team playoff. Only time will tell, but that is what it boils down to by my perception of how this went down and will play out!

 

[TideMan09]

Exactly..I agree 100% Flum..That's the year college football found out & learned the SEC Championship was being based on a flawed system to pair the teams up to play in the Championship Game..

Yup. Bama and LSU a few years ago comes to mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk, so my fat fingers cause misspellings and autocorrect makes my ships into...

 

[Redwood Forrest]

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 always thought the Big 12 CG was doomed from the start. Texas and Oklahoma in the same division? What were they thinking? I could see the South winning every game, every year ..... and that is not good for any conference. While the South did not win all the games, they did win 11 of 15 (73%). Oklahoma and Texas won 10 of the 11.

 

[TUSKtimes]

I always thought the Big 12 CG was doomed from the start. Texas and Oklahoma in the same division? What were they thinking? I could see the South winning every game, every year ..... and that is not good for any conference. While the South did not win all the games, they did win 11 of 15 (73%). Oklahoma and Texas won 10 of the 11.

It was getting Oklahoma and Texas to the big dance since 2009. Oddly, since they did away with their CCG, not a big 12 team has showed up.

 

[KrAzY3]

You misunderstand. I certainly believe Alabama was the best team in '11 and deserved to be in the championship game. You do realize though that with the SEC getting a rematch of an SEC game, is what prompted the four team playoff I am sure.

I tend to be impersonal when I reply to people on the forum, sometimes that's good, when there is strong disagreement, but it can be a bad thing when it's just opinions being exchanged. I tend to argue with statements and sentiments, and that can lead to me sounding like I'm taking exception to an individual or their opinion.

My position was that of not being in favor of a playoff because I felt the BCS put the top two teams in there a vast majority of the time (although the bowl selection was horrible). I was wary of a playoff, for some of the reasons you specified, and I became even more wary once the committee was announced.

Having said that, I just don't think capitulation is the proper response. I can hold out hope, that the committee actually puts the top 4 teams in there. I don't think that will happen, but it should. As long as that is even a remote possibility, then I would like to see focus and emphasis go on who are the most deserving teams, and the best teams, vs. who happened to meet some arbitrary criteria.

In order for playoff supporters to be right, in order for the playoff to actually improve on what the BCS did, then there's no question whatsoever that the top four teams, regardless of conference, should be in that playoff. Otherwise, what was the point of all of this? Create a playoff because sometimes #2 was left out, and then go ahead and leave #2 out, and may be #3 while they're at it?

I hope the SEC acts in good faith until that premise is proven entirely wrong. Let's see a #2 non-conference champion SEC team again, and let's see if the committee is really going to keep them out or not. Test the integrity of the process, and I hope that it does the right thing.

 

[MOAN]

I tend to be impersonal when I reply to people on the forum, sometimes that's good, when there is strong disagreement, but it can be a bad thing when it's just opinions being exchanged. I tend to argue with statements and sentiments, and that can lead to me sounding like I'm taking exception to an individual or their opinion.

My position was that of not being in favor of a playoff because I felt the BCS put the top two teams in there a vast majority of the time (although the bowl selection was horrible). I was wary of a playoff, for some of the reasons you specified, and I became even more wary once the committee was announced.

Having said that, I just don't think capitulation is the proper response. I can hold out hope, that the committee actually puts the top 4 teams in there. I don't think that will happen, but it should. As long as that is even a remote possibility, then I would like to see focus and emphasis go on who are the most deserving teams, and the best teams, vs. who happened to meet some arbitrary criteria.

In order for playoff supporters to be right, in order for the playoff to actually improve on what the BCS did, then there's no question whatsoever that the top four teams, regardless of conference, should be in that playoff. Otherwise, what was the point of all of this? Create a playoff because sometimes #2 was left out, and then go ahead and leave #2 out, and may be #3 while they're at it?

I hope the SEC acts in good faith until that premise is proven entirely wrong. Let's see a #2 non-conference champion SEC team again, and let's see if the committee is really going to keep them out or not. Test the integrity of the process, and I hope that it does the right thing.

I understand, and for the record I agree that the BCS was the best way to go about pitting the two best teams in college football against each other for a national champion to be decided. I hope I am wrong about what a committee will ultimately do in picking the four team playoff, because if I am not then I think we all gonna be howling for an 8 team playoff. Could they eventually go back to the BCS? Probably not once they get a taste of the money that the networks will be throwing their way.