Corey, The only way we could get away from the "beauty pageant" is to play more conference games. You would really give us hell for that. The PAC 10 will get there one day as will the Big 10 when ND joins up. :wink:
Man...that makes no sense. You really would have twisted back in the day when teams could win the SEC by playing only 6 conference games and no CG. Now the SEC plays 8 games and has a CHAMPIONSHIP game to determine the CHAMPION. Most times the game is between new opponents that season and not often is a repeat game.
He's referring to the fact that a PAC10 champion is a true champion, having played every school in the conference. Unlike a SEC Champion who will not play all the other SEC teams and might get a lucky break with the schedule and not have to face one or 2 of the toughest teams in the conference.
Tenn last year did get some schedule breaks vs. the SEC West and played for the SEC championship as a result.
KP, You guys put yourself in this mess You added the SWC and ACC team. You too could solve it all the field Dave, Everyone plays everyone in the conference. That's how you do it. Instead, you scheduled yourself into an ice skating competition and want the rest of the world to follow suit. Little girls dancing for gold......... maybe we can get Greg Louganis to be your color guy on CBS besides Brando?
Hold on Corey, I agree with you as things are now, but don't forget that the PAC10 round robin schedule hasn't been around long. A champ game is MUCH better than using tie breakers when all teams have not played each other...
Well yes and no. If we are talking about maintaining the top conference teams viability for BCS games and BCS championship games then the Conf Championship game is a non-starter. You play the whole season undefeated and then play a lower ranked game in the Conf Championship game and get upset like Neb did in '96 and KSU did in 98(?) and it's all down the drain. I'd rather have 10 team conferences that play round robin schedules and leave it at that. Terry
Scott, I agree with you, and you are correct. However, with the addition of the extra game the Pac10 made the move to make it a round robin. This gives them two things. 1. A true on-field champion in which all teams have played one another. 2. A stronger SOS factor (not that it matters anymore) since that extra game now HAS to be filled by a bowl subdivision team.. It eliminates the scheduling of the Coastal Carolina's of the world in that 12th game spot. It doesn't eliminate the patsy, but it did in terms of the 12th game spot. Roy Kramer came up with the super conference and a national title format that is designed to benefit those who play in that format.. I would have respected this a whole hell of a lot more had they included the WAC. However, they did not. They chose to exclude a 'super conference' and include others not using the super conference format. People seem to forget that the Mountain West conference was born of the futility of the old super WAC. If this system wants it decided on the field, then make those teams play each other. Arkansas was not always in the SEC, as you well know...and SCAR was not in the SEC either.
We're on the same page, just being fair and pointing out that it wasn't always so cut and dried. Heck the Big 10 still uses that old crap. Sorry B10 guys, but I cannot STAND that system. The champ games are 90% about money, and 10% about crowning a legitimate champ, but at least they had to face the best from the other division... Just think how lame it would be if the SEC or Big XII didn't have the game. Ugh... now that would be wretched.
Corey, My point was that if the SEC played a true round robin now. it would all but eliminate OOC games. You would really have a field day with that. The SEC champ wins it on the field, it's just in a different format. Yes we did it to ourselves but at least the SEC made accomodations to address the lack of the round robin. One more game against a very tough foe. Should help our SOS?
Interesting question, if conference size were capped at 10 members so a round robin schedule could be played followed by a National Playoff with a 16 team format. What 10 teams would you want in the SEC? B12 could drop Iowa State and Baylor. B10 could drop? That would be very tough decision.
wendy, LOL terry, Arkansas and SCAR were added to make the SEC a 12 team league. They would be my most likely candidates. Also, I would like to see Boise State leave the WAC and join the Mountain West. I believe that would give them a 10 team slate.
That would be the deal, Cap Conference size at 10 teams, require round robin play, then last weekend in Nov is 1st round of a 16 team playoff, 1st weekend of Dec is round 2, and then 2 week layoff for finals, followed by 4th round last weekend of Dec and Championship 1st weekend of Jan. Done!!!
That's 9 games in round robin, so there's still room for 2 non-con games assuming the NCAA pulled the 12th game in favor of a playoff. I'm sure EVERYONE would line up to play tough OOC games in that case... :wink:
I say, keep the 12th game. That gives everyone the 9 game round-robin and 3 OOC games. I still believe in punishing teams for playing non-bowl subdivision opponents. Terry asked that question about Auburn earlier and I was surprised to see that, going back thru the years, they play La-Monroe so often they should be considered a rival I kid, kinda, but the fact remains... if you are playing Vandy, Baylor or even KState.. there is a chance you might catch a bottom dwelling bowl level program on the upswing. You aren't ever going to ever catch a IAA team in that situation. They may upset you, but it isn't likely.