Lane said the quiet part out loud ......

[Ned Ray McWorkher]

Evidently, more than a few coaches of winning teams have that loser mentality. The problem is that the playoff has rendered conference championships as no more than a ticket to a bye in said playoff. The reality is that the playoff is all that really matters now. You never hear anyone talking about winning the conference title, but instead just getting a good seed.

12 teams is far too many teams if the conference games don't mean anything. A good rule change would be that only the two teams who make the conference title game would be eligible for playoff considerations. That would quickly reverse the "logic" of wanting to be good enough to win a playoff but trying to avoid being good enough to play in your conference title game. Every single solitary game will absolutely be of the utmost importance under those rules.

But the real test will come when a team has a chance to throw a game to avoid making the SEC championship. That's when you'll see if they actually mean that **** or if they were just talking ****.

 

[JMSqb11]

12 teams is far too many teams if the conference games don't mean anything. A good rule change would be that only the two teams who make the conference title game would be eligible for playoff considerations. That would quickly reverse the "logic" of wanting to be good enough to win a playoff but trying to avoid being good enough to play in your conference title game. Every single solitary game will absolutely be of the utmost importance under those rules.

But the real test will come when a team has a chance to throw a game to avoid making the SEC championship. That's when you'll see if they actually mean that **** or if they were just talking ****.

Correct. We will get to a point where a 1 loss top 5 team will sit guys in the final week of regular season like they do in the pro's....

I only see wanting to go to Atlanta and win if you have a shot at 1st or 2nd seed in playoffs.

 

[sami]

12 teams is far too many teams if the conference games don't mean anything. A good rule change would be that only the two teams who make the conference title game would be eligible for playoff considerations. That would quickly reverse the "logic" of wanting to be good enough to win a playoff but trying to avoid being good enough to play in your conference title game. Every single solitary game will absolutely be of the utmost importance under those rules.

But the real test will come when a team has a chance to throw a game to avoid making the SEC championship. That's when you'll see if they actually mean that **** or if they were just talking ****.

I wouldn't agree to any playoff policy that treats the "Power 4" conferences as equals, when they clearly aren't. The gap between the SEC and the other three is huge now, and will only grow as more elite athletes see that the best football and most of the draft picks are from the SEC. To see 4-5 far more deserving SEC teams sit home while lesser schools compete for a national championship would not be acceptable.

To me, the only solution if there is to be a playoff is to eliminate "committees" and auto bids, quit pretending that FCS and Group of 5 schools can seriously compete for a championship, and just rank the top 12, 14, 16 or whatever teams using a computer formula that takes conference championships into account as a one of the parameters. Strength of schedule and "quality wins" should be highly prioritized, so as to not reward teams with joke schedules like Indiana, Penn State, and Texas.

Of course, this will never happen, as it's only about money and Sankey going into business with the Big 10 insures the SEC will always be treated as equals with a conference with two legit schools.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Lane successfully coached his way out of that game!

 

[UTFranklinVol]

Yeah, what a loser mentality to say I will pass at a chance for an SEC title because I might lose?

I've said it for the last almost 20 years. The SECCG is the dumbest football game in the world. Back then it was because the SEC was the only conference doing it and it was a huge disadvantage when teams like Ohio State just "won" the conference by having the best record and didn't have to risk a loss to an extremely tough opponent. Now, it's even more dumb because if you lose you don't just lose the SEC you lose your whole postseason. All for what? Extra money? F#ck that sh!t. Nobody gives a damn if you won the conference. All they are about is how you do in the playoffs.

If there's no risk of missing the playoffs then by all means wave your d!cks around and play the game but when the SEC is all but guaranteed 4 playoff spots the the conference championship is just background noise with zero upside and a huge downside.

IMO if you want to insist on continuing to have a conference championship then there needs to be a guarantee that BOTH teams are guaranteed a spot in the playoff.

 

[Jax_Vol]

...... as he is wont to do. The easiest call ever was that no one was going to want to play in the SECCG and risk a 3rd loss and possible injuries while other teams were resting and preparing for the playoff. Well, that seems to be the case. Sankey can't like seeing this at all.

Lane Kiffin reveals some coaches don't want to play in SEC Championship due to College Football Playoff

Ole Miss head coach Lane Kiffin explained why some coaches may avoid coaching in the SEC in the 12-team College Football Playoff era.

www.on3.com

Seems like Lane needs to do less interviewing and more practicing

 

[Sarms58]

I don't think so. The 5-12 winner plays #4, 6-11 winner plays #3, 7-10 winner plays #2, and the 8-9 winner plays #1. They don't reseed it at any point. Which makes #5 the catbird seat.

Yea, the #5 spot is what you want if you don’t get a first round bye

 

[Monkey Wrench]

Yeah, what a loser mentality to say I will pass at a chance for an SEC title because I might lose?

why play an extra game? why risk injuries? what "glory" is there in winning seccg