Sec Championship Game

[volfan2024]

Until all conferences start playing confernce championship games (split their teams as the sec) I wll be against them. Lsu should have been a lock for a BCS bid as well as waiting in the wings for an upset to play for the National Championship. Reminds me when UT lost to LSU and we would have gone to the national championship game without that loss. I think the Sec Championship Game is based on greed.



:bad: :banghead:

 

[RoseBowlChamps]

The Big 12 has lost like 2 or 3 National Championship appearances since '96 because of this extra game. It's really not fair for only some conferences to play them. Especially in a conference like the SEC. To get through the SEC undeafeted is quite a feat AND then one has to play an extra SEC game against (often) the 2nd best team in the SEC.

Neither TX nor USC would be undefeated if they had to play SEC caliber teams week in and week out AND then have to play in the Championship game. I'd love to see Reggie Bush prance around against the likes of a GA, TN, AUB or LSU defense....

 

[WA_Vol]

Agreed.

Until we get an actual playoff with like 8 teams we will have to continue with this nonsense.

 

[Low Country Vol]

With the conference chapmionships and the voting poll determing the bowl for the conference chamionship winner, it punishes those who have a great season. Ask LSU and Va Tech that. Looks like they will the outside looking in especially since Notre Dame has some stupid clause in the bcs. They played consistanly all year. IT is an extra game and i think those players on the team feel like they dont have to prove any more while the underdog does.

 

[RoseBowlChamps]

Don't get me started on Notre Dame. What a pile of crap setup that they have. They've already got a built-in advantage over everyone else with the TV contract. Add to that the mainstream media's constant fellatio of the Irish and they've really got it made. Hopefully, Ohio St. will slap them all over the Fiesta Bowl turf.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Originally posted by utfantilidie@Dec 4, 2005 4:56 PM
Lsu should have been a lock for a BCS bid  as well as waiting in the wings for an upset to play for the National Championship.

]Reminds me when UT lost to LSU and we would have gone to the national championship game without that loss. ​

See above. Tennessee was by far the better team that year, but they didn't take care of business. They have no one to blame but themselves.

I think the Sec Championship Game is based on greed.

On that we agree completely.
​

 

[bleedingorange]

i will have to agree on this one, all the conferences need a championship game. It isnt fair too the sec and the other conferences that have one. think about it, if the Big 10 and the Pac 10 had one you sure wouldnt see two big 10 schools in a bcs bowl. Since the sec does it knocked LSU out of the bcs picture. if the big 10 had one it would of knocked either penn st. or ohio st. out of the picture. I dont even want to talk about Notre Dame, their butts need to be in a conference somewhere like everybody else. Until there is a playoff it will be like this every year. Just my opinion though.

 

[OWB]

The Big 10 needs to add Notre Dame and split up into 2 divisions of 6 teams. Notre Dame won't ever do that though. Why leave the good life and actually earn something?

The ACC needs to mix up their divisions. FSU has it a little too easy. A 4 loss team going to a BCS is just about as laughable as West Virginia going and South Florida having a shot at it.

The Pac10 could split the conference up right now. Why don't they? Afraid?

I don't see how anyone could argue that the SEC isn't the toughest. Not only do we have quality teams, it's divided evenly while everyone else either doesn't have one or it's lopsided. Making it the toughest conference to win.

 

[volfan2024]

Originally posted by MyBloodRunnethOrange@Dec 4, 2005 6:18 PM
If LSU had taken care of business they wouldn't have that problem. Are you saying they shouldn't play because of the chance that the better team might lose? That's life.
See above. Tennessee was by far the better team that year, but they didn't take care of business. They have no one to blame but themselves.
On that we agree completely.

[snapback]208240[/snapback]​

I disagree with your first two answers. LSU and UT had nothing to gain, only to lose by playing the game.Sure they should have taken care of business but why should the SEC be one of the few conferences that bare that burden.Teams get through with their regular season and sit back and wait hoping the top sec team loses, putting their team in a more rewarding bowl, monetarily and with more prestige.

 

[WA_Vol]

Originally posted by Orangewhiteblood@Dec 4, 2005 7:56 PM
The Big 10 needs to add Notre Dame and split up into 2 divisions of 6 teams.  Notre Dame won't ever do that though.  Why leave the good life and actually earn something?

The ACC needs to mix up their divisions.  FSU has it a little too easy.  A 4 loss team going to a BCS is just about as laughable as West Virginia going and South Florida having a shot at it.

The Pac10 could split the conference up right now.  Why don't they?  Afraid? 

I don't see how anyone could argue that the SEC isn't the toughest.  Not only do we have quality teams, it's divided evenly while everyone else either doesn't have one or it's lopsided.  Making it the toughest conference to win.

[snapback]208258[/snapback]​

When Auburn goes undefended in arguably the toughest conference in the country and then doesnt even get an opportunity to play for a national championship, something is irreconcilably broken.

 

[dan4vols]

Originally posted by oklavol@Dec 4, 2005 7:09 PM
When Auburn goes undefended in arguably the toughest conference in the country and then doesnt even get an opportunity to play for a national championship, something is irreconcilably broken.

[snapback]208274[/snapback]​

I see your point and to an extent I agree with it. But Auburn was excluded because their brain trust opted to go the cheap route and not pay Bowling Green their asking price and went with ''The Citadel''....the resulting loss in strength of schedule is what kept em on the outside lookin in...IMO.

 

[volinbham]

Originally posted by dan4vols@Dec 4, 2005 8:41 PM
I see your point and to an extent I agree with it. But Auburn was excluded because their brain trust opted to go the cheap route and not pay Bowling Green their asking price and went with ''The Citadel''....the resulting loss in strength of schedule is what kept em on the outside lookin in...IMO.

[snapback]208294[/snapback]​

Even if they played BG, they would have been left out. USC and OU started out ahead of them at the beginning of the year and never lost. Auburn had to pass one of them in the polls but since neither lost, that wasn't going to happen. A change in SOS wasn't going to be enough to jump OU.

 

[volinbham]

Originally posted by Orangewhiteblood@Dec 4, 2005 6:56 PM


The ACC needs to mix up their divisions.  FSU has it a little too easy.  A 4 loss team going to a BCS is just about as laughable as West Virginia going and South Florida having a shot at it.

[snapback]208258[/snapback]​

I agree about FSU but West Virginia has a pretty decent argument for being there.

 

[CSpindizzy]

Originally posted by utfantilidie@Dec 4, 2005 7:17 PM
I disagree with your first two answers. LSU and UT had nothing to gain, only to lose by playing the game.

[snapback]208266[/snapback]​

That is true especially if the two have played each other previously in the season. We know strength of schedule, quality wins, etc. is factored in there. And we've seen where playing the same team twice can actually hurt you. Add that in with the other items mentioned here and the game is more detrimental than helpful.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Originally posted by utfantilidie@Dec 4, 2005 7:17 PM
I disagree with your first two answers. LSU and UT had nothing to gain, only to lose by playing the game.Sure they should have taken care of business but why should the SEC be one of the few conferences that bare that burden.Teams get through with their regular season and sit back and wait hoping the top sec team loses, putting their team in a more rewarding bowl, monetarily and with more prestige.

[snapback]208266[/snapback]​

I agree with the point that every confrence needs to play in a confrence championship game. I also think Notre Dame needs to join a confrence, the big 10, or be left out. But I also look at the other side too. If we had somehow pulled out the w against Auburn last year everyone on this board would think the SECCG was the greatest thing since sliced bread.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Originally posted by dan4vols@Dec 4, 2005 8:41 PM
I see your point and to an extent I agree with it. But Auburn was excluded because their brain trust opted to go the cheap route and not pay Bowling Green their asking price and went with ''The Citadel''....the resulting loss in strength of schedule is what kept em on the outside lookin in...IMO.

[snapback]208294[/snapback]​

That shouldn't matter imo. This whole argument last year of the citadel or bowling green boils down to arguing about who had the better quality cupcakes on the schedule. To say that team A's cupcakes were better than team B's, and therefore team A deserves to go to the championship game is ridiculous. More weight should be given to the number of quality wins a team has. :twocents:

 

[OWB]

Originally posted by volinbham@Dec 4, 2005 9:49 PM
I agree about FSU but West Virginia has a pretty decent argument for being there.

[snapback]208339[/snapback]​

Would you say the same thing if it was South Florida? Just curious. I guess that WVA might have an argument for being there.

Let's look at their wins....

They beat a 1-10 #113 Syracuse team by 2.

They beat a 5-5 Wofford team by 28 (good win)

They beat a 5-6 Maryland team by 11..

They beat a 5-6 East Carolina team by 5..

Beaten by Virginia Tech..

They beat a 7-4 Rutger team by 2 TD's. That was good I guess.

Beat Louisville by 2. Their only win against a decent team.

Beat a 5-6 Connecticut

Beat a 4-7 Cincinnati team.

Beat a 5-6 Pitt..

and beat a 6-5 South Florida team.....

Sorry, I just don't see it. Sure, they only have one loss but that one loss was the only real game they played.

 

[GAVol]

The game is a huge money maker. That's why the SEC took advantage of the loophole in the NCAA rules and started playing the game. It's always about the money.

...and as far as the BCS goes. Say what you want, but it served it's purpose perfectly this year. In the pre-BCS world, USC would be gearing up to play Penn State in the Rose Bowl and Texas would be locked into the Orange Bowl.

 

[milohimself]

Originally posted by Orangewhiteblood@Dec 4, 2005 3:56 PM
The Big 10 needs to add Notre Dame and split up into 2 divisions of 6 teams.  Notre Dame won't ever do that though.  Why leave the good life and actually earn something?

The ACC needs to mix up their divisions.  FSU has it a little too easy.  A 4 loss team going to a BCS is just about as laughable as West Virginia going and South Florida having a shot at it.

The Pac10 could split the conference up right now.  Why don't they?  Afraid? 

I don't see how anyone could argue that the SEC isn't the toughest.  Not only do we have quality teams, it's divided evenly while everyone else either doesn't have one or it's lopsided.  Making it the toughest conference to win.

[snapback]208258[/snapback]​

The Pac-10 can't because you have to have 12 teams for divisional play. And you also have to worry about more than just football for adding schools to a conference.

In defense of the Pac-10 however, I believe next season each team will have a 9-game schedule, meaning every team will play every other one. This pretty much eliminates the need to annex teams and get a championship game IMO.

 

[GAVol]

Originally posted by milohimself@Dec 4, 2005 11:27 PM
The Pac-10 can't because you have to have 12 teams for divisional play.

[snapback]208395[/snapback]​

Exactly . . . The SEC, Big 12 and ACC are the only BCS conferences large enough to meet the NCAA requirement for having a championship game.

 

[OWB]

Originally posted by milohimself@Dec 4, 2005 11:27 PM
The Pac-10 can't because you have to have 12 teams for divisional play. And you also have to worry about more than just football for adding schools to a conference.

[snapback]208395[/snapback]​

Oh :disappointed:

They could add two more schools if they really wanted to.

 

[volfan2024]

Originally posted by MyBloodRunnethOrange@Dec 4, 2005 10:17 PM
I agree with the point that every confrence needs to play in a confrence championship game. I also think Notre Dame needs to join a confrence, the big 10, or be left out. But I also look at the other side too. If we had somehow pulled out the w against Auburn last year everyone on this board would think the SECCG was the greatest thing since sliced bread.

[snapback]208363[/snapback]​

Why? If Auburn couldn't move up the ranks being undefeated last year , a win for UT over Auburn couldn't have been that beneficial to UT, for sure not the national championship.I'll admit that in the future UT could possibly play for the national championship by winning the sec championship given the right case scenario, but so far the sec championship game has worked against all sec teams as far as playing for all the marbles.

 

[volinbham]

Originally posted by Orangewhiteblood@Dec 4, 2005 11:01 PM
Would you say the same thing if it was South Florida?  Just curious.  I guess that WVA might have an argument for being there.

Let's look at their wins....

They beat a 1-10 #113 Syracuse team by 2.

They beat a 5-5 Wofford team by 28 (good win)

They beat a 5-6 Maryland team by 11..

They beat a 5-6 East Carolina team by 5..

Beaten by Virginia Tech..

They beat a 7-4 Rutger team by 2 TD's.  That was good I guess.

Beat Louisville by 2.  Their only win against a decent team.

Beat a 5-6 Connecticut

Beat a 4-7 Cincinnati team. 

Beat a 5-6 Pitt..

and beat a 6-5 South Florida team.....

Sorry, I just don't see it.  Sure, they only have one loss but that one loss was the only real game they played.

[snapback]208387[/snapback]​

If USF only had one loss and was ranked where WVU is, I might still say it. I agree that the Big East is a questionable conference for an auto bid. However, there is only one other one-loss team that is ranked higher than them (Oregon). WVU is ranked 11th in every poll except the Harris (12th). Bottomline, I don't see it as a major travesty that West Virginia is in the BCS as a conference winner.

 

[la.lovesorange]

Originally posted by utfantilidie@Dec 4, 2005 3:56 PM
Lsu should have been a lock for a BCS bid  as well as waiting in the wings for an upset to play for the National Championship.                                                :bad:  :banghead:

[snapback]208190[/snapback]​

LSU lost to Tennessee, they should not have had a chance at a NC.

 

[hohenfelsvol]

Having SEC Championship game is good. This is one step closer to having something resembling a playoff system which I believe is a good thing.