Awesome Work Greg Sankey

[zjcvols]

Old Greg was mad they wouldn't make $870M in revenue instead of $850M, so now we have a potential disaster on our hands.

Right now, there are 7 SEC teams with one loss or two losses. Because our fearless leader couldn't get a couple extra bucks and doesn't care about the fans or what's best for the sport, we got eight conference games. And with these 7 teams, only two games are being played between the 7 in the final three weeks. If Georgia beats Tennessee and Texas A&M beats Texas...we could have 7 teams finish at 10-2: Tennessee, Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Missouri, Texas A&M and Ole Miss. Have fun with those tiebreaker scenarios! And imagine three SEC teams being left out at 10-2...Sankey will definitely hear it from the Presidents and AD's.

I cannot believe this moron runs the SEC man.

 

[95 Vol Alum]

None of the 2-loss teams will want to play the SECCG to risk a 3rd loss, either.

 

[DeepSpringsVol]

Old Greg was mad they wouldn't make $870M in revenue instead of $850M, so now we have a potential disaster on our hands.

Right now, there are 7 SEC teams with one loss or two losses. Because our fearless leader couldn't get a couple extra bucks and doesn't care about the fans or what's best for the sport, we got eight conference games. And with these 7 teams, only two games are being played between the 7 in the final three weeks. If Georgia beats Tennessee and Texas A&M beats Texas...we could have 7 teams finish at 10-2: Tennessee, Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Missouri, Texas A&M and Ole Miss. Have fun with those tiebreaker scenarios! And imagine three SEC teams being left out at 10-2...Sankey will definitely hear it from the Presidents and AD's.

I cannot believe this moron runs the SEC man.

Yeah as ludicrous as it sounds it may benefit all the other teams left out besides the actual champion. The loser of that games fate will be decided by if the extra games loss should be held against them versus the others that sat by and watched.

 

[knoxvol52]

9 game conference season just around the corner, just waiting for Network to pony up with the cash..

 

[DeepSpringsVol]

None of the 2-loss teams will want to play the SECCG to risk a 3rd loss, either.

The wild part is after the first rankings were released Tuesday for playoffs the committee leader acknowledged they hadn't discussed the scenarios of conference championship game losers versus ones not participating. I am paraphrasing but he said something like "We will be watching the games". To me that sounds like if it's a close game then they may still get in but if they get embarrassed they are gone. That's at face value but the skeptical side of me feels it matters who name wise it will benefit. If Alabama or Texas loses a SEC championship game then hey they played an extra. If they don't play and say Texas A&M or Tennessee or Ole Miss is in and loses well the team lost an extra game so Alabama and Texas we placed in the title game.

 

[bamawriter]

Old Greg was mad they wouldn't make $870M in revenue instead of $850M, so now we have a potential disaster on our hands.

Right now, there are 7 SEC teams with one loss or two losses. Because our fearless leader couldn't get a couple extra bucks and doesn't care about the fans or what's best for the sport, we got eight conference games. And with these 7 teams, only two games are being played between the 7 in the final three weeks. If Georgia beats Tennessee and Texas A&M beats Texas...we could have 7 teams finish at 10-2: Tennessee, Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Missouri, Texas A&M and Ole Miss. Have fun with those tiebreaker scenarios! And imagine three SEC teams being left out at 10-2...Sankey will definitely hear it from the Presidents and AD's.

I cannot believe this moron runs the SEC man.

It's not Sankey's fault. It's the entire FBS's fault for expanding the playoff. Once it went to 12, the conference title games should have been axed. There is no benefit to them.

 

[sami]

It's not Sankey's fault. It's the entire FBS's fault for expanding the playoff. Once it went to 12, the conference title games should have been axed. There is no benefit to them.

Completely agree, but they'll obviously never give up a revenue producing game like the now superfluous conference title games.

My biggest problem is still the treatment of "Power 4" conferences as if they're all equal. We could have 5-7 one or two loss teams that went through a meat grinder in a conference with no 'gimme' wins right now aside from Miss. St. or Auburn. And yet, 3-4 of those teams won't make this ridiculous playoff because the "committee" will bump them for pretenders like Penn State, Indiana, BYU, Notre Dame, and Miami, who played joke schedules in conferences with maybe a couple of legit teams.

Damn, I'd so much like to go back to the BCS, where two teams were picked to play a championship game and teams that had a 10-2 year didn't have to be seen as failures for not getting "chosen" by a bunch of bureaucrats for a stupid playoff, which at some point will be 24 teams because ... why not?

 

[95 Vol Alum]

It's not Sankey's fault. It's the entire FBS's fault for expanding the playoff. Once it went to 12, the conference title games should have been axed. There is no benefit to them.

The SEC…..it used to just mean more.

 

[Preyed_On]

Blah blah blah complain, whine, blah blah whine some more…. complain about this, moan about that, Colorado something something, playoff ruined the sport, whine about NIL. Same **** different day.

 

[95 Vol Alum]

Blah blah blah complain, whine, blah blah whine some more…. complain about this, moan about that, Colorado something something, playoff ruined the sport, whine about NIL. Same **** different day.

Lulz, OP is actually advocating for more change not whining about the changes that occurred.

 

[Notorious B.E.N]

None of the 2-loss teams will want to play the SECCG to risk a 3rd loss, either.

I don't think 1 or 2 loss teams will be punished for losing the conference championship games. Would hope not anyways.

 

[ntxVOL]

Change is coming. ESPN has to renegotiate the CFP contract after the 2025 season. May go to 14 teams or may not. It should be practically guaranteed that the SEC and B1G will get more automatic qualifiers when it's all said and done.

The SEC/B1G alredy have influence over who the committee selects. ESPN knows where their bread is buttered.

 

[hUTch2002]

Blah blah blah complain, whine, blah blah whine some more…. complain about this, moan about that, Colorado something something, playoff ruined the sport, whine about NIL. Same **** different day.

Ha! That made me chuckle.

 

[zjcvols]

The wild part is after the first rankings were released Tuesday for playoffs the committee leader acknowledged they hadn't discussed the scenarios of conference championship game losers versus ones not participating. I am paraphrasing but he said something like "We will be watching the games". To me that sounds like if it's a close game then they may still get in but if they get embarrassed they are gone. That's at face value but the skeptical side of me feels it matters who name wise it will benefit. If Alabama or Texas loses a SEC championship game then hey they played an extra. If they don't play and say Texas A&M or Tennessee or Ole Miss is in and loses well the team lost an extra game so Alabama and Texas we placed in the title game.

Let me speak committee-ese for you

“Did Ole Miss or Tennessee lose the title game? Oh they’re not in.”

“Did Alabama or Texas lose the title game? Oh they are in.”

 

[tn4elvis]

None of the 2-loss teams will want to play the SECCG to risk a 3rd loss, either.

Absolutely correct. At some point The Sec and B10 will just form their own conference and play their own ncaa championship. All the pieces and major players are already there

 

[Firebirdparts]

It's not Sankey's fault. It's the entire FBS's fault for expanding the playoff. Once it went to 12, the conference title games should have been axed. There is no benefit to them.

I agree but I was thinking the opposite angle; if you don't have divisions then you are just adding confusion to have a championship game. The important thing is to pick 2 or 3 for the playoff, so playing a game for the SEC championship is detrimental. The expansion of the SEC is the SEC's fault.

Oh, well. Expanding beyond the point where you have divisions is just so much less fun, I think.

 

[BowlBrother85]

None of the 2-loss teams will want to play the SECCG to risk a 3rd loss, either.

If I'm Missouri I would .... No way they are in consideration for an at-large bid to the CFP with that schedule, and 2 blowout losses.

 

[BowlBrother85]

It's not Sankey's fault. It's the entire FBS's fault for expanding the playoff. Once it went to 12, the conference title games should have been axed. There is no benefit to them.

I wouldn't go that far. The 4 highest ranked conference champions get a bye in the CFP. That's a benefit.

.... and how do you crown a conference champion in a 16 team league following an 8 game schedule without one?

 

[bamawriter]

I wouldn't go that far. The 4 highest ranked conference champions get a bye in the CFP. That's a benefit.

.... and how do you crown a conference champion in a 16 team league following an 8 game schedule without one?

The same way they are currently determining the CG participants.

 

[DeepSpringsVol]

Let me speak committee-ese for you

“Did Ole Miss or Tennessee lose the title game? Oh they’re not in.”

“Did Alabama or Texas lose the title game? Oh they are in.”

Exactly.

 

[BowlBrother85]

The same way they are currently determining the CG participants.

Too much possibility for ties between teams that didn't play each other. The conference championship is too consequential to have it come down to arbitrary tie-breakers.

 

[bamawriter]

Too much possibility for ties between teams that didn't play each other. The conference championship is too consequential to have it come down to arbitrary tie-breakers.

But it already is.

 

[95 Vol Alum]

Too much possibility for ties between teams that didn't play each other. The conference championship is too consequential to have it come down to arbitrary tie-breakers.

If Tennessee and A&M/Texas winner win out, then no tiebreakers needed. If Tennessee loses, it's likely going to tiebreakers amongst the 2-loss teams for the 2nd spot. If Texas wins vs A&M but drops UK or Arky OR A&M wins but loses Auburn AND Tennessee loses 1, then it will all be tiebreakers.

The last tiebreaker is random draw.

I think I have all that right.

 

[SockeyeVol]

Old Greg was mad they wouldn't make $870M in revenue instead of $850M, so now we have a potential disaster on our hands.

Right now, there are 7 SEC teams with one loss or two losses. Because our fearless leader couldn't get a couple extra bucks and doesn't care about the fans or what's best for the sport, we got eight conference games. And with these 7 teams, only two games are being played between the 7 in the final three weeks. If Georgia beats Tennessee and Texas A&M beats Texas...we could have 7 teams finish at 10-2: Tennessee, Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Missouri, Texas A&M and Ole Miss. Have fun with those tiebreaker scenarios! And imagine three SEC teams being left out at 10-2...Sankey will definitely hear it from the Presidents and AD's.

I cannot believe this moron runs the SEC man.

I've seen Sankey's resume. He seems very well qualified...

 

[sami]

Too much possibility for ties between teams that didn't play each other. The conference championship is too consequential to have it come down to arbitrary tie-breakers.

But if there are a bunch of two loss teams in the conference won't they be using those same arbitrary tie-breakers to determine the two who will play in the CCG?