🏈 On the subject of the SEC ending the conference championship game. tl;dr

[TerryP]

I've mentioned the money aspect on more than one occasion. Let's set that aside and look at this from one more perspective—one the playoff committee chair pointed out Tuesday when he was discussing how the conference games were different when one conferences games are superior when compared to others.

And there's more than one team we can look at when considering another side of this discussion: Ohio State, UGA, Michigan, OU, and Texas just to name a few off the top of my head.

Two key words from Tuesday night: data points.

We can rail all day long about Notre Dame not having to play in a conference championship. For the Domers, there's good and bad points here. IF they weren't undefeated, they'd need a game like a conference championship. This season, since they are undefeated, playing in a championship game means nothing to their program with regard to appearing in the playoff.

It was noteworthy that the committee chair mentioned this weekends games—like the one we'll see in the ACC or PAC, don't have a lot of bearing on the playoff selections. But, they do serve as, and I quote, "another data point."

OSU, UGA, et. al, have an advantage because now the committee has that extra data point they can use to evaluate which team(s) belong in the playoffs.

There does need to be some clarity here. Conference championships don't matter. Conference championship games do matter. A strong showing by UGA—a team a lot say are out with a loss to Bama—gives the committee members another "+" in the UGA column when considering if they belong, or not.

A title as "Conference Champion" in the PAC this season means nothing. It's something they can claim, but has no bearing on whether Utah or Washington belong. They don't...in spite of one having the PACCC title.

Step into the future for a minute. Imagine Bama being a one loss team with a host of other one loss teams. Let's also assume the SEC eliminates the conference championship while the other P5 conferences continue with theirs. We could be looking at four other teams with a stronger resume than the Tide (or SEC champ) simply due to that one "data point."

It's a bit of a cliche but it's so true. What they are doing now (the SEC) works. And, it very well may be needed in the future.

 

[OldPlayer]

People seem to overlook that if the SEC didn't have a conference championship game, there is a good chance that three SEC teams could get into the playoffs.

 

[TerryP]

People seem to overlook that if the SEC didn't have a conference championship game, there is a good chance that three SEC teams could get into the playoffs.

If you're arguing two teams with the same record—that third possibility of a SEC team being one of those two—a conference championship game win would propel another school over the SEC each and every time. It's another "+" in their column for reasons to be included.

Even if we go back to the beginning of the BCS and use the playoffs as a hypothetical we're still not looking at three teams in unless we're expanding the playoffs to a large extent. And then we're in a situation looking at three loss teams being in the playoffs—where they don't belong. That's a team losing 25% of their regular season games.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Step into the future for a minute. Imagine Bama being a one loss team with a host of other one loss teams. Let's also assume the SEC eliminates the conference championship while the other P5 conferences continue with theirs. We could be looking at four other teams with a stronger resume than the Tide (or SEC champ) simply due to that one "data point."

Why would the other conferences continue to play in these nothing games? Face it bro, you are stacking the deck and trying to make a shaky point the hard way. Try this "reasonable" football senario on for size.

8 team playoff begins and the first round looks like this:

#1 Alabama vs #8 UCF
#2 Clemson vs #7 Michigan
#3 Notre Dame vs #6 Ohio State
#4 Georgia vs #5 Oklahoma

Nobody sits at home in this real world and watches others beat each others brains out. Not even Notre Dame.

Now we're having fun!!!

 

[OldPlayer]

People seem to overlook that if the SEC didn't have a conference championship game, there is a good chance that three SEC teams could get into the playoffs.

If you're arguing two teams with the same record—that third possibility of a SEC team being one of those two—a conference championship game win would propel another school over the SEC each and every time. It's another "+" in their column for reasons to be included.

Even if we go back to the beginning of the BCS and use the playoffs as a hypothetical we're still not looking at three teams in unless we're expanding the playoffs to a large extent. And then we're in a situation looking at three loss teams being in the playoffs—where they don't belong. That's a team losing 25% of their regular season games.

If the hypothetical happened today (no conference championship games and possibly 8 teams in the playoff), both UGA and Alabama would be in. UF isn't far off and neither is LSU. Depending on their schedules, these teams could be in the hunt. After Saturday, UGA would be out of the current race and Alabama might be, if either lost.

 

[TerryP]

@TUSKtimes, @OldPlayer,

You're both changing the playoffs to eight games—a move the committee said wasn't in the near future.

Yet, @TUSKtimes you're suggesting this is something that needs doing, now.

The point is still being missed. We're seeing teams that need this weekend of conference championship games to make the playoffs. Bama is immune this season. To think it'll remain that way isn't realistic.

 

[18Champs]

#1 Alabama vs #8 UCF
#2 Clemson vs #7 Michigan

Both of these games would suck. UCF doesn't deserve to be in the playoffs. They haven't beaten a ranked team all year long. Michigan has lost two games already. They don't deserve to be in either.

All we need is college football to be more like the NFL.

And this isn't even mentioning now we're adding another game to the season?

 

[JoseyWalesTheOutlaw]

If they go to the 8 Best Teams then I would have no problem if they eliminated the CG. The keyword is best 8 teams and that is what it should be. If they were to go this route then Bama will be in that 8 each year.

 

[JoshB]

#1 Alabama vs #8 UCF
#2 Clemson vs #7 Michigan

Both of these games would suck. UCF doesn't deserve to be in the playoffs. They haven't beaten a ranked team all year long. Michigan has lost two games already. They don't deserve to be in either.

All we need is college football to be more like the NFL.

And this isn't even mentioning now we're adding another game to the season?

If you expanded the playoffs you would also have to do away with conference title games.

 

[OldPlayer]

@TUSKtimes, @OldPlayer,

You're both changing the playoffs to eight games—a move the committee said wasn't in the near future.

Yet, @TUSKtimes you're suggesting this is something that needs doing, now.

The point is still being missed. We're seeing teams that need this weekend of conference championship games to make the playoffs. Bama is immune this season. To think it'll remain that way isn't realistic.

Eliminating championship games isn't in the near future either. Proponents of an 8-team playoff say that it can be done by eliminating the conference championships, so the two go hand-in-hand. Some conferences (SEC, Big10) make too much money to get rid of it. The contracts are in place and there isn't a common end date for all of them. The TV money alone that is paid to each conference is too much to walk away from.

 

[planomateo]

I'm of the opinion that if SEC keeps putting 2 teams into the CFP, it will move to an 8 game playoff. When that happens, there will be 3 SEC schools in the 8 team playoff.

Lots of butt hurt in the future...

 

[JoseyWalesTheOutlaw]

I'm of the opinion that if SEC keeps putting 2 teams into the CFP, it will move to an 8 game playoff. When that happens, there will be 3 SEC schools in the 8 team playoff.

Lots of butt hurt in the future...

But....if they move to 8 you can bet the conference brass will demand that conference champs be given a spot so their goes 5 teams of the 8. They will not go for the best 8.

 

[Sgt. Lincoln Osiris]

 

[sean]

no matter the system, no matter how many teams they put in the playoffs, there will always, ALWAYS, be one team who thinks they got left out and should've been included. there will always be doubt, mistrust, jealousy, even hatred, about which teams got in and which teams didn't.....and why. people, especially fans, will always make excuses for their team while, at the same time, saying why another team doesn't deserve to be in for **insert whatever reason here**.

no matter who the committee picks, no matter HOW they pick, someone will always feel left out. and someone will always be mad their team didn't make it in and talk shit about the other teams that did.

it will always be an imperfect system...no matter what.....PERIOD!

 

[TerryP]

Eliminating championship games isn't in the near future either. Proponents of an 8-team playoff say that it can be done by eliminating the conference championships, so the two go hand-in-hand. Some conferences (SEC, Big10) make too much money to get rid of it. The contracts are in place and there isn't a common end date for all of them. The TV money alone that is paid to each conference is too much to walk away from.

I agree wholeheartedly. To me, it seems a lot of fans simply dismiss the 'almighty dollar' without due consideration to how it impacts the strength and standings of SEC teams.

And continuing the theme of fans dismissing things few acknowledge that this weekend is the only weekend when the committee is together and watching each game as an entity in and of itself. There's a distinct value in having ex-coaches on the committee. It's magnified when you have these coaches watching games, and offering opinions, to those who haven't "hand their hand in the dirt."

On another note, and this one is strictly personal...

I'm not a fan of having the SEC title split between two, much less three teams. We've seen that in the past on more than one occasion.

 

[TerryP]

Why would the other conferences continue to play in these nothing games? Face it bro, you are stacking the deck and trying to make a shaky point the hard way. Try this "reasonable" football senario on for size.

The SEC title game is a nothing game. Not even close to the truth. It's the one game that the entire committee watches together. That's the same for all conferences. As I've mentioned when referring to that additional data point...when that one game is the game that propels a team to get a spot in the playoffs it's an everything game.

A 15 million dollar payout to the conference is a "shaky point." Again, not even close to be the truth.

Between the money and the additional resume building points there's nothing there that says this game is a bad idea or needs to be changed. The argument that the title games aren't equal are true. The notion the committee members don't realize this? Short sighted, at best.

#1 Alabama vs #8 UCF
#2 Clemson vs #7 Michigan
#3 Notre Dame vs #6 Ohio State
#4 Georgia vs #5 Oklahoma

Nobody sits at home in this real world and watches others beat each others brains out. Not even Notre Dame.

Now we're having fun!!!

Two of these games "might" be fun. Three, if you consider a Bama team rolling over a UCF team to be fun—and that would only be true for Bama fans.

It's touched on earlier in this thread and bears repeating.

What has Michigan done to deserve being included? What has UCF done?

Out of the eight you've listed, three deserve it at this point: Clemson, Notre Dame, and Alabama. Three still have something to prove and their respective conference championship games will do just that.

 

[TUSKtimes]

The SEC title game is a nothing game.

Are you just into revisionist history or do you just like to misquote folks? You can't have this discussion with me or coach Saban unless your willing to discuss context. Otherwise, you just want to debate.

For the record:

Why would the other conferences continue to play in these nothing games?

Now, what makes them tits on a bull? Alabama is undefeated in the SEC and by default deserves to present the SEC as champs.

Clemson is undefeated and has nothing to prove. They play 7-5 Pittsburgh with 2 ACC losses. Talk about bad TV? And what playoff is Pittsburgh going to be invited to if they win?

Oklahoma is 8-1 and they play Texas at 7-2. The Sooners have everything to lose and what playoff is inviting Texas if they win?

Ohio State at 11-1 vs Northwestern at 8-4 and have losses vs Akron, Duke, Michigan, and Notre Dame. Both are 8-1 in the conference. What playoff is inviting Northwestern to the dance if they upset the Buckeyes? They should be co-champs at best and move on to more important things.

Washington at 7-2 gets Utah at 6-3 tonight. Nothing to prove. Neither can get into the playoff if they beat each other by 100.

Notre Dame is in the playoff and waiting for seeding instructions. Well, that's exciting TV.

So, what are we settling this weekend that isn't already settled after week 12? Right, these CCGs are just a money grab. Get on with the 8-game playoff. At least no one can argue that every game matters.

Footnote: Seldom do I take a position on college football that isn't eventually mirrored by coach Saban. Odd, how that keeps working out. Could he too be reading my stuff?

 

[planomateo]

Footnote: Seldom do I take a position on college football that isn't eventually mirrored by coach Saban. Odd, how that keeps working out. Could he too be reading my stuff?

Clearly that's the case.

 

[saturdaysarebetter]

If they go to the 8 Best Teams then I would have no problem if they eliminated the CG. The keyword is best 8 teams and that is what it should be. If they were to go this route then Bama will be in that 8 each year.

Deservedly so. I'm ok with this!

 

[rick4bama]

Let's not forget that Pitt lost to UCF!