A Case for No SEC Championship Game
As is the case with all actions relating to College Football, itās all about value, or to be more specific, gaining maximum value. At this time I suspect that the SEC Championship Game (SCG) is not the wisest institution for the conference.
There is no doubt that the SCG has been good to us since 1992; financially, prestige-wise, and at times bringing a competitive edge. But advantages persist only as long as circumstance remain unchanged. Oh how circumstance have changed, and do stand to change further in the near term.
Let me lay out this argument by framing it through the Financial, Prestige, and Competitive Edge perspectives.
FINANCIAL
With respects to 1992, when the SEC expanded to 12 teams and determining our champion became a less simple undertaking, then Commissioner Kramer recognized a chance to seize a gaping hole in the television schedule between the conclusion of the regular season and the beginning of the bowl season. A single top-shelf game with virtually zero college football competition. As a product, not only did it sell, but it became the gold standard for innovation and aggressive branding of your conference. If for three and a half hours once a year, the SEC was undisputed King of College Football.
The SCG continues to be profitable to this day. But the point is not about making money, itās about making more money. Taking a one-step-back/two-steps-forward approach, I offer that ceasing the SCG (admittedly sacrificing those millions of dollars in the process) would be a step toward significant increases in revenue.
Each SCG links our two top teams. The best we have are playing in one highly watched game is the result. If these teams played that thirteenth game, but each against someone else, then there would be twice the television product. Admittedly some minor degree less sexy to the nation of viewers, but nonetheless a product worth watching.
A precedent has been set for an extra game other than conference championship games, dating back into the 1980s (Auburn/Miami ā84, Bama/Ohio St 86, Tennessee/Iowa ā87). Even before our SCG, there were the likes of the Kick-Off Classic and Pigskin Classic, but these were played at the beginning of the season. Without the precedent of these events, the first week dandies that we enjoy today would not exist. āDandiesā being the tilts in Atlanta between LSU and North Carolina, or Bama and Virginia Tech the year before. This spring has seen Jacksonville, Dallas, and New Orleans talking up their intensions to get into these matches. What stands in the way of having an SEC teams playing these four first-week games in Dallas, New Orleans, Jacksonville, and Atlanta? Simple. One SCG in December. I may be wrong, but I believe 4>1 is an accurate assertion.
These markets are interested because there is money to be made by all involved. And if this is indeed the gold mine that it appears, there is no reason to think that the flood gates for Kick Off Classics will not fling open for those willing to enter.
Question: Why stop at four teams? If marginal quality football makes 60+ bowls a booming business, the SEC could feasibly send them all. Why not? Week One is the only time when every team in America is still in the running for the Title, and every fan is at his/her most thirsty for a game. If basketball can sell Midnight Madness first practices, then College Football and sell a Opening Day. Thus, 12>1 !
Let me clarify that I donāt envision 6 conference games. Lord knows that we have enough of the beating each other up as it stands. I see 12 inter conference games, not unlike the Big TEN/ACC Basketball Challenges that already lead off the Round Ball season. Something tells me that tapping into television market footprint of two major conferences might sell some advertising time for the networks.
āBut 10 SEC bowl bids now has us going to Shreveport and Birminghamā you say. āTwelve would have someone going to Little Rock and Chattanoogaā you bellow. āThat is not growing clout in the Sexy categoryā you add. True, but there are still untapped options to consider. Jump in the Way-Back Machine with me and letās take a ride.
Remember those mid-1980s Pigskin Classics that I mentioned earlier. They took place in Giant Stadium, outdoors, in East Rutherford, New Jersey. If you squints his eyes just right, that sounds almost like a game in New York City, which is not Chattanooga if youāre keeping score. Trivia Question: How does Memphis, TN get a bowl called the Liberty Bowl? Answer: The institution that is The Liberty Bowl originated in Philadelphia, PA, where the Liberty Bell is located. When outdoor football in December failed to draw big crowds in Philadelphia, Memphis bought the franchise if you will and relocated it to Tennessee. Follow up question: What is August weather like in Philly, or New York, or Boston, or Chicago, or any other the other northern markets who have deep pockets? Answer: Mild with a strong chance of profits in the evenings. This has big potential. If Toronto, Canada rolls the dice on America College Football with a bowl game in January, how many Canadian cities would host a game during their tourist season?
So to bring the financial argument together, I submit that the SCG be scrapped and replaced with 12 inter conference Week One games at neutral-sites who are eager to pay for such event. Thus ā12>1ā.
PRESTIGE
The SCG is but a means to seek prestige for the SEC, only one among the many. Like National Title counts, Bowl Appearances, television contract, and winning percentage against other conferences, the SEC being King For A Day brings more to the table. However, it has never been the end-all and be-all. Was there not prestige before ā92? Who argues that only the SCG separates the SEC from the Mountain West Conference?
Further, think about this question; If a Conference Championship Game is so prestigious, why then has the Big XII and the Big TEN aired interest in not holding the game? Surely the networks that provide their monetary life-line would love that opportunity. And yet, these conferences still resist. This takes me back my original assertion that itās not about value, but about getting the most value. My point is that the 12>1 financial gain is more than the King For A Day prestige benefit. Sorry City of Atlanta and Dr. Pepper. But can I interest you two in an August game between the SEC and ACC?
COMPETITIVE EDGE
The SCG was/is/will be a roll of the dice. This tough thirteenth game has always been that one thing that the SEC has thrown down on the table as a tie-breaker. And it is the tie-breaker of all tie-breakers. But for those times when we have a member who finishes the season ranked in the top two, the game brings no value. Worse, it brings exposure to the chance to play themselves out of the National Championship game. If one acknowledges that the game is not needed to determine a Conference Champion, like it was in all of college football before 1992, then what is left is the doubled-edge sword of the SCG potentially helping when you need help or potentially hurting when you need to not be hurt.
I say āMan-Up!ā. If you canāt prove that you are in the top two with a 12 game season played, then you donāt deserve to play for the title. Twelve games too is equally a double-edged sword, but at least going without the SCG adds the 12>1 value as opposed to the King For A Day benefits.
What great games the SCG has been. Great in part because the teams are great, tough, brutal, physical. You canāt tell me that the rest of College Football is not watching these game like Billy Bob watches NASCAR (i.e. looking for high speed wrecks that result in someone carted off on a gurney). As a whole, the conference would be healthier rolling in to the Title Game without suffering this family feud. It turned out be something that was overcomed, but Alabama Quarterback Greg McElroy fractured a rib in the SCG against Florida. Oh how close the SEC came to not winning the National Title, all for a game that determined a Conference Champion when that Title could be awarded without risk.
Now consider this. Last year, after a full 12 game season, the SEC held both the #1 and #2 positions. What would the BCS have done if the SCG were not played? Yes, this ranking is exceptional, but it is a possibility every year. No issues to the BCS. The SEC will solve their problem by volunteering to remove one of its contenders who has out played all of college football over an entire season. Hardly seems fair with you think of it that way. Now consider that finishing #1 and #2 is just as possible for a conference without a championship game. What will happen if the Big TEN finishes #1 and #2? Will they withhold their #2 so that the #3 SEC can have a shot at the Tile? In this manner, the SCG is a competitive disadvantage.
The SCG proves to be an advantage when we play superior football. But then again playing superior football means that the SEC does not need that extra advantage. The SCG is a disadvantage when we donāt play superior. In that case, we end up getting what we earned, at best.
Conclusion
Get rid of the SCG. Iām certainly not the smartest guy on the block, but this line of thought makes sense to me. It might have been the thing to do in 1992, but that doesnāt lock us into that today. If we applied that approach to style we would be sporting a Kid ān Play High Top Fade. Word?
Peace Out.
As is the case with all actions relating to College Football, itās all about value, or to be more specific, gaining maximum value. At this time I suspect that the SEC Championship Game (SCG) is not the wisest institution for the conference.
There is no doubt that the SCG has been good to us since 1992; financially, prestige-wise, and at times bringing a competitive edge. But advantages persist only as long as circumstance remain unchanged. Oh how circumstance have changed, and do stand to change further in the near term.
Let me lay out this argument by framing it through the Financial, Prestige, and Competitive Edge perspectives.
FINANCIAL
With respects to 1992, when the SEC expanded to 12 teams and determining our champion became a less simple undertaking, then Commissioner Kramer recognized a chance to seize a gaping hole in the television schedule between the conclusion of the regular season and the beginning of the bowl season. A single top-shelf game with virtually zero college football competition. As a product, not only did it sell, but it became the gold standard for innovation and aggressive branding of your conference. If for three and a half hours once a year, the SEC was undisputed King of College Football.
The SCG continues to be profitable to this day. But the point is not about making money, itās about making more money. Taking a one-step-back/two-steps-forward approach, I offer that ceasing the SCG (admittedly sacrificing those millions of dollars in the process) would be a step toward significant increases in revenue.
Each SCG links our two top teams. The best we have are playing in one highly watched game is the result. If these teams played that thirteenth game, but each against someone else, then there would be twice the television product. Admittedly some minor degree less sexy to the nation of viewers, but nonetheless a product worth watching.
A precedent has been set for an extra game other than conference championship games, dating back into the 1980s (Auburn/Miami ā84, Bama/Ohio St 86, Tennessee/Iowa ā87). Even before our SCG, there were the likes of the Kick-Off Classic and Pigskin Classic, but these were played at the beginning of the season. Without the precedent of these events, the first week dandies that we enjoy today would not exist. āDandiesā being the tilts in Atlanta between LSU and North Carolina, or Bama and Virginia Tech the year before. This spring has seen Jacksonville, Dallas, and New Orleans talking up their intensions to get into these matches. What stands in the way of having an SEC teams playing these four first-week games in Dallas, New Orleans, Jacksonville, and Atlanta? Simple. One SCG in December. I may be wrong, but I believe 4>1 is an accurate assertion.
These markets are interested because there is money to be made by all involved. And if this is indeed the gold mine that it appears, there is no reason to think that the flood gates for Kick Off Classics will not fling open for those willing to enter.
Question: Why stop at four teams? If marginal quality football makes 60+ bowls a booming business, the SEC could feasibly send them all. Why not? Week One is the only time when every team in America is still in the running for the Title, and every fan is at his/her most thirsty for a game. If basketball can sell Midnight Madness first practices, then College Football and sell a Opening Day. Thus, 12>1 !
Let me clarify that I donāt envision 6 conference games. Lord knows that we have enough of the beating each other up as it stands. I see 12 inter conference games, not unlike the Big TEN/ACC Basketball Challenges that already lead off the Round Ball season. Something tells me that tapping into television market footprint of two major conferences might sell some advertising time for the networks.
āBut 10 SEC bowl bids now has us going to Shreveport and Birminghamā you say. āTwelve would have someone going to Little Rock and Chattanoogaā you bellow. āThat is not growing clout in the Sexy categoryā you add. True, but there are still untapped options to consider. Jump in the Way-Back Machine with me and letās take a ride.
Remember those mid-1980s Pigskin Classics that I mentioned earlier. They took place in Giant Stadium, outdoors, in East Rutherford, New Jersey. If you squints his eyes just right, that sounds almost like a game in New York City, which is not Chattanooga if youāre keeping score. Trivia Question: How does Memphis, TN get a bowl called the Liberty Bowl? Answer: The institution that is The Liberty Bowl originated in Philadelphia, PA, where the Liberty Bell is located. When outdoor football in December failed to draw big crowds in Philadelphia, Memphis bought the franchise if you will and relocated it to Tennessee. Follow up question: What is August weather like in Philly, or New York, or Boston, or Chicago, or any other the other northern markets who have deep pockets? Answer: Mild with a strong chance of profits in the evenings. This has big potential. If Toronto, Canada rolls the dice on America College Football with a bowl game in January, how many Canadian cities would host a game during their tourist season?
So to bring the financial argument together, I submit that the SCG be scrapped and replaced with 12 inter conference Week One games at neutral-sites who are eager to pay for such event. Thus ā12>1ā.
PRESTIGE
The SCG is but a means to seek prestige for the SEC, only one among the many. Like National Title counts, Bowl Appearances, television contract, and winning percentage against other conferences, the SEC being King For A Day brings more to the table. However, it has never been the end-all and be-all. Was there not prestige before ā92? Who argues that only the SCG separates the SEC from the Mountain West Conference?
Further, think about this question; If a Conference Championship Game is so prestigious, why then has the Big XII and the Big TEN aired interest in not holding the game? Surely the networks that provide their monetary life-line would love that opportunity. And yet, these conferences still resist. This takes me back my original assertion that itās not about value, but about getting the most value. My point is that the 12>1 financial gain is more than the King For A Day prestige benefit. Sorry City of Atlanta and Dr. Pepper. But can I interest you two in an August game between the SEC and ACC?
COMPETITIVE EDGE
The SCG was/is/will be a roll of the dice. This tough thirteenth game has always been that one thing that the SEC has thrown down on the table as a tie-breaker. And it is the tie-breaker of all tie-breakers. But for those times when we have a member who finishes the season ranked in the top two, the game brings no value. Worse, it brings exposure to the chance to play themselves out of the National Championship game. If one acknowledges that the game is not needed to determine a Conference Champion, like it was in all of college football before 1992, then what is left is the doubled-edge sword of the SCG potentially helping when you need help or potentially hurting when you need to not be hurt.
I say āMan-Up!ā. If you canāt prove that you are in the top two with a 12 game season played, then you donāt deserve to play for the title. Twelve games too is equally a double-edged sword, but at least going without the SCG adds the 12>1 value as opposed to the King For A Day benefits.
What great games the SCG has been. Great in part because the teams are great, tough, brutal, physical. You canāt tell me that the rest of College Football is not watching these game like Billy Bob watches NASCAR (i.e. looking for high speed wrecks that result in someone carted off on a gurney). As a whole, the conference would be healthier rolling in to the Title Game without suffering this family feud. It turned out be something that was overcomed, but Alabama Quarterback Greg McElroy fractured a rib in the SCG against Florida. Oh how close the SEC came to not winning the National Title, all for a game that determined a Conference Champion when that Title could be awarded without risk.
Now consider this. Last year, after a full 12 game season, the SEC held both the #1 and #2 positions. What would the BCS have done if the SCG were not played? Yes, this ranking is exceptional, but it is a possibility every year. No issues to the BCS. The SEC will solve their problem by volunteering to remove one of its contenders who has out played all of college football over an entire season. Hardly seems fair with you think of it that way. Now consider that finishing #1 and #2 is just as possible for a conference without a championship game. What will happen if the Big TEN finishes #1 and #2? Will they withhold their #2 so that the #3 SEC can have a shot at the Tile? In this manner, the SCG is a competitive disadvantage.
The SCG proves to be an advantage when we play superior football. But then again playing superior football means that the SEC does not need that extra advantage. The SCG is a disadvantage when we donāt play superior. In that case, we end up getting what we earned, at best.
Conclusion
Get rid of the SCG. Iām certainly not the smartest guy on the block, but this line of thought makes sense to me. It might have been the thing to do in 1992, but that doesnāt lock us into that today. If we applied that approach to style we would be sporting a Kid ān Play High Top Fade. Word?
Peace Out.
