- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,484
- 110,938
Founding Member
How do you think its going to be settled? Voters and polls, inevitably
Should conferences get rid of divisions?
- Thread starter Zambo
- Start date
- Jun 12, 2014
- 12,924
- 32,564
Founding Member
What do you mean? It would be settled with records and tiebreakers just like it is now. If head to head matchups and certain obvious tiebreakers aren't enough to determine it then just go by the committee ranking so that the top two teams go to the game.
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,484
- 110,938
Founding Member
Without divisions head to heads wouldnt work. There is a decent chance you wouldnt have played the other team.
Committee ranking is just a nother group of people voting in a poll.
Also, games like UF/ Ugly and LSU/ Bammer would mean less if a division championship wasnt on the line.
Committee ranking is just a nother group of people voting in a poll.
Also, games like UF/ Ugly and LSU/ Bammer would mean less if a division championship wasnt on the line.
Last edited:
- Jun 12, 2014
- 12,924
- 32,564
Founding Member
So? The two plusses I can think of right of the top of my head are that the conference would have its two highest ranked teams in the game and therefor the best chance at getting one of them in a playoff, and it would be harder for any team to "clinch" a berth in the title game while the season still has 3 weeks to play due to being on the sucky side of the conference. I see what you're saying about everybody playing everybody vs. perhaps a situation where some voting is involved, but that really doesn't permanently fix the purist problem there. You still get teams in the mix who are only there because they are in the sucky division, which is no different than sending a team to the playoffs via the benefit of playing is a sucky conference.
Now, if the winner of the SECCG was going to the playoffs regardless, then I would agree with you. The divisional crown would simply be entry to the bracket, and the bracket would play out to a championship. But we aren't there yet, we still have this voting nonsense at the end of the year to deal with. Put me down as one who would much rather have seen us be able to continue with our cinderella season had we won tonight but of course with the system we have all that would have happened is the SEC gets no rep in the playoff.
- Jun 11, 2014
- 34,960
- 33,091
Founding Member
- Jun 12, 2014
- 12,924
- 32,564
Founding Member
To answer your edit, I see no possible scenario where UF/UGA or Bama/LSU loses its luster at all. You still need to win every game or damn near every game to get to the top. Add in the rivalry factor and those games will always be huge. Playoff opponents said the same thing about the regular season if a playoff were to happen and of course the regular season is still as hard fought as ever.
- Jun 11, 2014
- 34,960
- 33,091
Founding Member
It's a dumb question, because it isn't going to happen, especially as conferences continue to grow into super conferences.
- Jun 12, 2014
- 12,924
- 32,564
Founding Member
You really hate this thread don't you? That keeps me warm.
- Jun 11, 2014
- 34,960
- 33,091
Founding Member
:wobble:
- Sep 20, 2014
- 3,925
- 4,676
I don't think it would loose it's luster as long as you kept say 3 rival games constant and the rest of your schedule rotated more often. Let us keep LSU, UGA, and Tenn on a yearly basis and everything else rotate. That being said it will never happen and if anything we are going to loose a west opponent if we ever add teams to the conference.
It will be interesting how things change in the future as the playoffs and conferences expand. I would prefer the top 64-72 programs break from the FBS or even possibly the NCAA to become something else. I would even exclude the lower tier power 5 schools that just don't care. FBS would remain for those schools or they could combine with FCS and the bowls taking over as playoff sites. divide into 4 regions (North, South, Midwest, West), but play a schedule of say 4 constant rivals and 8 teams from around the country. Top 16 teams get into the playoffs based on record. if the south has 8 teams make it then so be it. Tim the fat as much as you can and force everyone to hopefully play the same tough schedule so there is no real bitching. I would even go as far to say that the bottom 25% gets demoted to the lower division at the end of the year and the top 25% gets promoted from the lower to try and keep competition at its highest.
Now that fantasy time is over lets remember that it takes the people that run college football almost as long to change something as MLB, unless there is more money involved. If the money is right they are going to be running a 16-24 team tournament using bowl sites for each location and having a NIT for any other bowl that still wants in.
It will be interesting how things change in the future as the playoffs and conferences expand. I would prefer the top 64-72 programs break from the FBS or even possibly the NCAA to become something else. I would even exclude the lower tier power 5 schools that just don't care. FBS would remain for those schools or they could combine with FCS and the bowls taking over as playoff sites. divide into 4 regions (North, South, Midwest, West), but play a schedule of say 4 constant rivals and 8 teams from around the country. Top 16 teams get into the playoffs based on record. if the south has 8 teams make it then so be it. Tim the fat as much as you can and force everyone to hopefully play the same tough schedule so there is no real bitching. I would even go as far to say that the bottom 25% gets demoted to the lower division at the end of the year and the top 25% gets promoted from the lower to try and keep competition at its highest.
Now that fantasy time is over lets remember that it takes the people that run college football almost as long to change something as MLB, unless there is more money involved. If the money is right they are going to be running a 16-24 team tournament using bowl sites for each location and having a NIT for any other bowl that still wants in.
- Jun 19, 2014
- 21,521
- 48,236
Founding Member
its not much different than what SEC basketball is doing now... i like it, would keep undeserving teams out of the conf game and ensure the best 2 play each other every year.
- Jun 11, 2014
- 22,331
- 28,422
Founding Member
Yeah, Mizzo is not needed or a good fit IMO.
- Jun 13, 2014
- 15,741
- 18,135
Founding Member
Im not a fan. Right now we need vandy south Carolina and kentucky on our schedule more than ever. Plus, why would we wanna risk making our schedule even harder? Don't wanna mess with tradition anyhow.
- Jun 12, 2014
- 12,924
- 32,564
Founding Member
Tradition? Lol, the conference changes regularly. The tradition is UGA, UT, and LSU. Seeing Mizzou in the SECCG the last two years didn't exactly conjure up images of tradition. Heck, the SEC has been one of the biggest innovators and tradition buckers in the NCAA. Double Heck the very invention of the conference title game is proof of that.
- Jul 30, 2014
- 10,131
- 16,377
Actually, I was hitting the reset button clear back to 1991 before we added arky and sc to create divisions and the first conference title game.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Sep 9, 2014
- 5,188
- 9,063
Keep the divisions but go to 9 conf games and kill the cross-divisional rival. It's stupid that you can have classes coming in year after year who will never play a team that is supposedly in their own conference. Playing a team every 6 years simply doesn't jive with considering you both in the same conference.
