The future of championship games is in jeopardy - Yahoo Sports

Donate To GopherHole
Some guy said:
They should get rid of conference championship games and bring back shared conference titles.
Click to expand...
Agreed. 100%. I have been thinking that for some time now. Conference championships are a complete waste of time. You are just asking the kids to play an extra game, which really means nothing. Playoffs and bowl games should be decided by performance during the season. Not the result of a meaningless conference championship game. Of course eliminating them would mean eliminating a revenue source so...
 

Crosby said:
Agreed. 100%. I have been thinking that for some time now. Conference championships are a complete waste of time. You are just asking the kids to play an extra game, which really means nothing. Playoffs and bowl games should be decided by performance during the season. Not the result of a meaningless conference championship game. Of course eliminating them would mean eliminating a revenue source so...
Click to expand...
So expand the playoff to make up the revenue
 

Some guy said:
Yeah and that’s fine. But that doesn’t solve the objective vs subjective problem.

A good way of doing it might be to have a coefficient rating of leagues on a 5 rotation that gives each league autobid numbers that could change each year…sort of like the champions league criteria in European leagues.

Perhaps a 16 team playoff it might look like:
SEC -5
Big 10-4
Big 12-2
ACC-2

Higher ranked team between these leagues
Mountain West-1
AAC-1
3rd big 12
3rd ACC

Other 3 in a play in 8 team bracket for final two spots along with
Conf USA champ
Mac champ
Sun belt champ
For final 2 spots
SEC 6
Big ten 5

Only thing committee does is seed
Click to expand...

This weekend instead of championship games:
2 week play in tourney for 15 seed =
8) Jacksonville state (CUSA champ) @ 1)Miami
4) army (American champ) @ Illinois (Big Ten #5)
High seed hosts second round play in

2 week play in for 16 seed =
7) Miami OH (MAC champ) @ 2) South Carolina (SEC6)
6) Lafayette (Sun Belt Champ) @ BYU (Big 12 #3)



Dec 21 weekend round of 16:
16 play in winner @ Oregon (big ten 1)
9 Indiana (Big Ten 4) @ SMU (ACC2)

13 Arizona state (Big 12 1) @ 4 Notre Dame (ACC1)
12 Ole Miss (SEC 5) @ Georgia (SEC 2)

15 play in @ 2 Texas (SEC1)
10 Boise (Mountain West Champ) @ 7 Tennessee (SEC3)

14 Iowa State (Big 12 2) @ 3 Penn State (Big Ten 2)
11 Bama (SEC 4) @ 6 Ohio State (Big Ten 3)

Round of 8, 4, and 2 wouldn’t change times/dates
 

I'd like to see Oregon vs. PSU this week play their third and 4th string guys in the Championship game. Neither need to risk injury to one of their starters or key back ups as they are in the tourney. It would give the starters a bye week or two to get ready for the CFP.

The Conf. Champ games have completely lost any luster they previously had. Get rid of them.
 

GFBfan said:
I'd like to see Oregon vs. PSU this week play their third and 4th string guys in the Championship game. Neither need to risk injury to one of their starters or key back ups as they are in the tourney. It would give the starters a bye week or two to get ready for the CFP.

The Conf. Champ games have completely lost any luster they previously had. Get rid of them.
Click to expand...

Even though your comment is fully tongue-in-cheek, it holds a kernel of truth. There's a point where the conference championship games could become a secondary thought for those with national championship aspirations. Kind of like the last games in the NFL season where playoff teams have already locked a spot.

It's possible we've already seen that in the SEC. It sure seemed like Georgia let up on the gas on Alabama in the 2021 SEC championship game then smoked everyone in the CFP.

The first round bye is still pretty good incentive for the conference championship. The CFP needs to keep a bye for conference champs as the conference championship games remain.
 


the issue - as I see it - is not "conference Championship games" per se - the issue is that the B1G and SEC are on a different level than the ACC and B12.

the runner-up in the B1G and the runner-up in the SEC are going to be in the playoffs. the runner-up in the ACC and the B12 may not make the playoffs.

so you really have three different tiers working
1. B1G and SEC
2. ACC & B12
3. G5 highest-rated conf champ

AND - don't forget about the money. the B1G and SEC conf championship games bring in significant $$ to their conferences. they are not going to walk away from that money.

the question for the ACC and B12 is this: is the money they make from conference championship games enough to off-set the risk that the loser of the game might not make the CFP playoffs?
 

If you do not win your conference, you cannot be in the top 4 and get a bye correct?
 

The only way a loss in the conference championship should hurt you is if it's a blowout. Like if Clemson beat SMU 38-10 or something, then I think it's valid. But if it's within 2 or 3 scores, it shouldn't hurt you.

With that said, I'd rather they just get rid of conference championship games and just add another week of games for everyone. Have all teams play 13 games and 10 conference games.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
the issue - as I see it - is not "conference Championship games" per se - the issue is that the B1G and SEC are on a different level than the ACC and B12.

the runner-up in the B1G and the runner-up in the SEC are going to be in the playoffs. the runner-up in the ACC and the B12 may not make the playoffs.

so you really have three different tiers working
1. B1G and SEC
2. ACC & B12
3. G5 highest-rated conf champ

AND - don't forget about the money. the B1G and SEC conf championship games bring in significant $$ to their conferences. they are not going to walk away from that money.

the question for the ACC and B12 is this: is the money they make from conference championship games enough to off-set the risk that the loser of the game might not make the CFP playoffs?
Click to expand...
SEC Commissioner was on the Network this morning. He said that the BCS changed every year. He would like to see it stay at 12 with some tweaks. He feels 12 is the number that allows you to get the most deserving teams in. He talked about putting the G5 who is ranked 20 in at 12 is justifiable, but if they are ranked lower, is it?

He would like to see it seeded like NFL where the highest seed plays the lowest remaining team in each round. So Oregon would play the worst team that gets out of the 1st round and Boise would get the best.


I like 12 and going more would only add more teams to the mix of thinking they should be in. Reseeding also would make the conference champ games more meaningful for seeding purposes. Ultimately I think all Auto bids is the way through conference play.
 




MaxyJR1 said:
SEC Commissioner was on the Network this morning. He said that the BCS changed every year. He would like to see it stay at 12 with some tweaks. He feels 12 is the number that allows you to get the most deserving teams in. He talked about putting the G5 who is ranked 20 in at 12 is justifiable, but if they are ranked lower, is it?

He would like to see it seeded like NFL where the highest seed plays the lowest remaining team in each round. So Oregon would play the worst team that gets out of the 1st round and Boise would get the best.


I like 12 and going more would only add more teams to the mix of thinking they should be in. Reseeding also would make the conference champ games more meaningful for seeding purposes. Ultimately I think all Auto bids is the way through conference play.
Click to expand...
Agree with a lot of this
 

How about just don’t lose to the one ranked team you played all year? Then you don’t have to worry about winning or losing the conf championship. How about don’t schedule Houston Christian when you play in a weak conference if you have ambitions of making a playoff?
 

btowngopher said:
How about just don’t lose to the one ranked team you played all year? Then you don’t have to worry about winning or losing the conf championship. How about don’t schedule Houston Christian when you play in a weak conference if you have ambitions of making a playoff?
Click to expand...
I agree if you are debating between another team that had a good resume.
I know Miami lost to one ranked team. Shame on them.


Bama lost to two bad teams. That’s fine though.
 



Some guy said:
They should get rid of conference championship games and bring back shared conference titles.
Click to expand...
This also makes sense in the context in the stupidity that is the divisionless schedules.
3 teams go unbeaten - 1 left out
Or
3 teams go unbeaten - share the title and all make playoff
 

Going back to an idea of auto bids for a 12 team.

3- B1G
3- SEC
2- B12
2- ACC
1- G5
1- Notre Dame or Mulligan Top Ranked Team left.

Auto bids go to the top 2 in B1G and SEC
Top 1 in B12 and ACC

Have the top 2 G5 teams play for the Auto Bid based on Ranking


Oregon and Penn State in.
Texas and Georgia in.
SMU in.
Arizona State in.

Conference Championship games now become play in games. Loser goes to a Bowl or chance at at-large and Winner to the Playoffs.
B1G: Indiana vs tOSU
SEC: Alabama vs Tennessee
B12: BYU vs Iowa State
ACC: Miami vs Clemson
G5: Boise vs UNLV
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Going back to an idea of auto bids for a 12 team.

3- B1G
3- SEC
2- B12
2- ACC
1- G5
1- Notre Dame or Mulligan Top Ranked Team left.

Auto bids go to the top 2 in B1G and SEC
Top 1 in B12 and ACC

Have the top 2 G5 teams play for the Auto Bid based on Ranking


Oregon and Penn State in.
Texas and Georgia in.
SMU in.
Arizona State in.

Conference Championship games now become play in games. Loser goes to a Bowl or chance at at-large and Winner to the Playoffs.
B1G: Indiana vs tOSU
SEC: Alabama vs Tennessee
B12: BYU vs Iowa State
ACC: Miami vs Clemson
G5: Boise vs UNLV
Click to expand...
Those games aren't Conf. Champ games, they are playoff games with the top 6 and ND getting a first round bye.
I like the auto bid idea, but get rid of the CC games all together.
Also need to go to 10 teams in each conference or division, then winner of that conf./division is the autobid. That way there aren't imbalances in the schedules of teams within a conference or division as they would play everyone within their division. 9 game conf. division schedule 1 NC game vs another Power team and 2 other games vs whomever they want to play(G5 and FCS).
ND gets in only if they play at least 10 Power Teams and go undefeated or one loss (as long as that loss isn't against a bottom dweller from a conf. - if they can't figure that out then join a conference or division, otherwise they are out.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Going back to an idea of auto bids for a 12 team.

3- B1G
3- SEC
2- B12
2- ACC
1- G5
1- Notre Dame or Mulligan Top Ranked Team left.

Auto bids go to the top 2 in B1G and SEC
Top 1 in B12 and ACC

Have the top 2 G5 teams play for the Auto Bid based on Ranking


Oregon and Penn State in.
Texas and Georgia in.
SMU in.
Arizona State in.

Conference Championship games now become play in games. Loser goes to a Bowl or chance at at-large and Winner to the Playoffs.
B1G: Indiana vs tOSU
SEC: Alabama vs Tennessee
B12: BYU vs Iowa State
ACC: Miami vs Clemson
G5: Boise vs UNLV
Click to expand...
Yup. And it’s objective. Way better.
Go to 19

4 SEC
4 Big 10
2 big 12
2 ACC (notre dame considered ACC)
3 play in spots for 5 G5 champs + ACC3

Conference play in weekend is
Big ten 4 vs 5
SEC 4 vs 5
Big 12 2 vs 3
ACC 3 vs 4
G5 championships

Next weekend is 3 play in games.
Week after that is round of 16

Round of 8 and beyond as scheduled
 

Pick the twelve, flawed as it may be. Seed the top 4, who get a bye. The other 8 draw for opponents and placed in brackets. It’s impossible to seed 12 without this kind of controversy. The top four would be seeded only for a bye with no particular #1.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Going back to an idea of auto bids for a 12 team.

3- B1G
3- SEC
2- B12
2- ACC
1- G5
1- Notre Dame or Mulligan Top Ranked Team left.

Auto bids go to the top 2 in B1G and SEC
Top 1 in B12 and ACC

Have the top 2 G5 teams play for the Auto Bid based on Ranking


Oregon and Penn State in.
Texas and Georgia in.
SMU in.
Arizona State in.

Conference Championship games now become play in games. Loser goes to a Bowl or chance at at-large and Winner to the Playoffs.
B1G: Indiana vs tOSU
SEC: Alabama vs Tennessee
B12: BYU vs Iowa State
ACC: Miami vs Clemson
G5: Boise vs UNLV
Click to expand...
Can't have more than 1 auto bid per conference. Georgia very easily could have lost to Georgia Tech last Friday which would have put them at 9-3 playing tomorrow in the SEC Championship. If A & M would have defeated Texas last Saturday they would be playing in the SEC Championship tomorrow at 9-3. If those two games went that way last weekend you would have two 9-3 teams playing resulting in one of them ending up 9-4 after the games completion. No way a 4 loss team deserves an auto bid.

20 team tourney with ALL conference champs would be my dream tourney. Give every conference champ a shot:

(1) Oregon
(16) Iowa St/ (17) Army

(8) SMU
(9) Indiana

(4) Notre Dame
(13) Ole Miss/ (20) Jacksonville St

(5) Georgia
(12) Miami (FL)

-----------

(3) Penn St
(14) South Carolina/ (19) Ohio or Miami (OH)

(6) Ohio St
(11) Alabama

(7) Tennessee
(10) Boise St

(2) Texas
(15) Arizona St/ (18) Louisiana or Marshall

** I just used the current CFP rankings for seeding. (17) Clemson, (18) BYU, (19) Missouri, and (20) UNLV were bounced by lower ranked/unranked conference champions.
 

I agree that the conference championship games have become counterproductive in the current iteration, but there has to be some way to actually decide conference champions. Preferably, that way would be on the field rather than a selection committee or just selecting the regular season winner. (And that in itself can become very tricky, as in this year's Big 12.)

If you don't decide conference champions, they really aren't conferences anymore and should cease being called as such. I guess Big Ten Scheduling Pod doesn't have the same ring to it.
 

Gophers2Omaha said:
...If those two games went that way last weekend you would have two 9-3 teams playing resulting in one of them ending up 9-4 after the games completion. No way a 4 loss team deserves an auto bid...
Click to expand...

I think this is why the CFP stipulated that the top 5 "ranked" conference champions get an auto bid and only the top 4 ranked champions get a bye. If a 3-loss champion won their Power-4 conference (highly unlikely), they probably wouldn't get a bye and might not even make the tournament depending on the other conference champions.
 

Gophers2Omaha said:
Can't have more than 1 auto bid per conference. Georgia very easily could have lost to Georgia Tech last Friday which would have put them at 9-3 playing tomorrow in the SEC Championship. If A & M would have defeated Texas last Saturday they would be playing in the SEC Championship tomorrow at 9-3. If those two games went that way last weekend you would have two 9-3 teams playing resulting in one of them ending up 9-4 after the games completion. No way a 4 loss team deserves an auto bid.

20 team tourney with ALL conference champs would be my dream tourney. Give every conference champ a shot:

(1) Oregon
(16) Iowa St/ (17) Army

(8) SMU
(9) Indiana

(4) Notre Dame
(13) Ole Miss/ (20) Jacksonville St

(5) Georgia
(12) Miami (FL)

-----------

(3) Penn St
(14) South Carolina/ (19) Ohio or Miami (OH)

(6) Ohio St
(11) Alabama

(7) Tennessee
(10) Boise St

(2) Texas
(15) Arizona St/ (18) Louisiana or Marshall

** I just used the current CFP rankings for seeding. (17) Clemson, (18) BYU, (19) Missouri, and (20) UNLV were bounced by lower ranked/unranked conference champions.
Click to expand...
That’s the issue. The rules are to have the 12 best teams. Unfortunately with rules of auto bids, that is impossible as all conferences aren’t equal.

Those of us that comment in the HS thread talk a lot about the haves and the have nots and how the state tournament takes and seeds teams. We have the same problem in NCAA. Not all conferences are equal.

There is a pecking order. SEC is king and has been for a long time. The data supports it.

Are we looking for the best 12 teams or a true representation where all 128 teams have a chance to make the tournament.

I’d like to see regular season games create the teams and not sure I care what the records are. Not all records and schedules are created equal.

If two SEC teams or two B1G teams meet for the title it will unfortunately have huge implications in next year’s iteration of the playoffs. That’s not how it’s supposed to work.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
That’s the issue. The rules are to have the 12 best teams. Unfortunately with rules of auto bids, that is impossible as all conferences aren’t equal.

Those of us that comment in the HS thread talk a lot about the haves and the have nots and how the state tournament takes and seeds teams. We have the same problem in NCAA. Not all conferences are equal.

There is a pecking order. SEC is king and has been for a long time. The data supports it.

Are we looking for the best 12 teams or a true representation where all 128 teams have a chance to make the tournament.

I’d like to see regular season games create the teams and not sure I care what the records are. Not all records and schedules are created equal.

If two SEC teams or two B1G teams meet for the title it will unfortunately have huge implications in next year’s iteration of the playoffs. That’s not how it’s supposed to work.
Click to expand...

The CFP doesn't ensure the best 12 teams are in the playoffs, but it does ensure at least the best 8 or more make the playoff (the best teams according to the CFP). Let's say hypothetically that the CFP believes the SEC has the top 8 teams in the country and ranked them that way (I know, unrealistic, but go with me), then the SEC would get the champion as an auto bid and the remaining 7 at-large spots. The other 4 spots would go to the other 4 highest rated conference champs.

I'm totally on board with that scenario. I like rewarding some, but not all, conference champions while still retaining at-large berths for very good non-champion teams that have the ability to win 3 playoff games.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
the issue - as I see it - is not "conference Championship games" per se - the issue is that the B1G and SEC are on a different level than the ACC and B12.

the runner-up in the B1G and the runner-up in the SEC are going to be in the playoffs. the runner-up in the ACC and the B12 may not make the playoffs.

so you really have three different tiers working
1. B1G and SEC
2. ACC & B12
3. G5 highest-rated conf champ

AND - don't forget about the money. the B1G and SEC conf championship games bring in significant $$ to their conferences. they are not going to walk away from that money.

the question for the ACC and B12 is this: is the money they make from conference championship games enough to off-set the risk that the loser of the game might not make the CFP playoffs?
Click to expand...
I think we need a couple years of the 12 team playoffs to see how it changes the landscape. Could be some teams rise and some fall.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Going back to an idea of auto bids for a 12 team.

3- B1G
3- SEC
2- B12
2- ACC
1- G5
1- Notre Dame or Mulligan Top Ranked Team left.

Auto bids go to the top 2 in B1G and SEC
Top 1 in B12 and ACC

Have the top 2 G5 teams play for the Auto Bid based on Ranking


Oregon and Penn State in.
Texas and Georgia in.
SMU in.
Arizona State in.

Conference Championship games now become play in games. Loser goes to a Bowl or chance at at-large and Winner to the Playoffs.
B1G: Indiana vs tOSU
SEC: Alabama vs Tennessee
B12: BYU vs Iowa State
ACC: Miami vs Clemson
G5: Boise vs UNLV
Click to expand...
I kind of like this. Makes too much sense though, so will never happen.
I could see ACC and Big 12 push back.
 

dpodoll68 said:
I agree that the conference championship games have become counterproductive in the current iteration, but there has to be some way to actually decide conference champions. Preferably, that way would be on the field rather than a selection committee or just selecting the regular season winner. (And that in itself can become very tricky, as in this year's Big 12.)

If you don't decide conference champions, they really aren't conferences anymore and should cease being called as such. I guess Big Ten Scheduling Pod doesn't have the same ring to it.
Click to expand...
I guess we could crown conference champs by just 1. Best record 2. Head to head if tied. 3. Overall record 4. Win % of opponents.
Kind of like NFL does.
 

Although I think we all believe it to be true, it is rather subjective to just say the BIG 10 and SEC are stronger conferences and deserve more teams every year.
 

If the conferences are concerned about losing revenue from championship games, they have to factor in the loss of revenue if the conference game loser gets bumped out of the playoff.

That, and the expanded playoff means even more games. So it’s possibly 12 regular season + a conference championship + playoff first round (if no bye) + up to 3 more games if you get to the championship. 17 games? That’s a lot of time, travel and wear and tear. In addition to you know, actually doing school which NFL players don’t have to do.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
That’s the issue. The rules are to have the 12 best teams. Unfortunately with rules of auto bids, that is impossible as all conferences aren’t equal.

Those of us that comment in the HS thread talk a lot about the haves and the have nots and how the state tournament takes and seeds teams. We have the same problem in NCAA. Not all conferences are equal.

There is a pecking order. SEC is king and has been for a long time. The data supports it.

Are we looking for the best 12 teams or a true representation where all 128 teams have a chance to make the tournament.

I’d like to see regular season games create the teams and not sure I care what the records are. Not all records and schedules are created equal.

If two SEC teams or two B1G teams meet for the title it will unfortunately have huge implications in next year’s iteration of the playoffs. That’s not how it’s supposed to work.
Click to expand...
Do the rules actually state the goal is to have the 12 best teams in the playoffs? I think with 128 teams and limited games between conferences, that goal is objectively unattainable. There really is no way to get a definitive answer to which teams are the exact 12 best.

I would much rather see each power conference send their champion to the playoffs, and then fill in the rest of the tournament with the topped ranked teams from a predetermined criteria. Having power conferences each get one auto bid for their champion will only make college football more entertaining by somewhat leveling the opportunity.

I realize I’m in the minority as it seems most fans seem to want to get the mythical 12 best teams in the tournament. Even the NFL can’t achieve that. I do believe having each power game conference represented in the playoffs is best for the highest level of college football.
Personally, I think the G5 should have their own tournament. There’s a wide gap between them and the power conferences, and that gap will continue to grow with nearly all TV money flowing to the P4.
 

The announcers for the ACC game just verbalized a good case for SMU to stay in the 12. They lost today? So what. They’re 11-2, Bama 9-3 and didn’t make their own championship game. SMU showed they were toe to toe with a team that will be in the playoff so they certainly would be able to compete. Sure, we know Bama can compete based on their prior years’ results but this is about this year, and they are more likely than SMU to lay an egg like they did against unranked Vandy and OU.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom