It should be. And it could be again. Make only conference champions eligible for the playoffs. No exceptions. And no whining.
With a 3 permanent 6 rotating schedule everyone will play everyone else in the conference over 4 seasons, that is way more fair then 7 permanent and 2 rotating which WILL be used to benefit certain teams, or four team divisions which will lead to a weak ass division and a team getting a shot that doesn't deserve one. A lot of the "lost" rivalry games will be ones that aren't that old to begin with, Florida/MSU used to be a yearly rivalry game, most people don't care about it now. Besides after today we probably want Vandy off the schedule
Nope. Just been a Gator since the early 60s. Watched Wayne Peace just get nailed out of bounds at AU. No call. He complained and the SEC Refs called 15 on him. 1996 at F$U. SOS first SEC Title taken away. How many times since the split has UGA played Bama in the regular season. Just a realistic who believes that the SEC is run for 1. Bama 2. UGA 3. UT or AU 4. All other pre 90s SEC teams. 5. All new SEC teams. 678. UF
The league is constantly evolving and I would imagine it will change greatly when Texas and Oklahoma joins. Texas has always been the top dog in their conference. I get what you’re saying about the SEC favoring some schools, but I do remember getting calls when we were on top too. The league likes making money so it will protect the higher ranked teams for the most part. We just need to get back to the adult table again and be a part of that conversation.
When I posted a few weeks ago that I believe that I'll never see us win another Natty in my lifetime (I'm 57), many laughed at me. This is one of the reasons I feel this way. I think adding OU and Texas is a big mistake. Let's just make it tougher to win championships, but they're more interested in the money. Just like our administration is more interested in being the Yale of the South.
They aren't Standardized now. It has often been the case that a division winner has a weaker schedule than the number 2 team on the other side. Having an artificial division does nothing to make that fair. Sure everyone in the division plays each other so it is fair among them but that doesn't make it fair to the teams in the other division who play a harder schedule.
Personally I like the pods. It can be manipulated to keep the most important rivalries. Expand the conference schedule to 9 games, Play your 3 pod teams and 2 teams from each of the other pods assuring every team plays each other twice in 4 years. This feels like the best compromise from traditional and fairness. However, if they do decide on two 8 team divisions there is simply no way they don't get Mizzou in the west. This moves Alabama and Auburn to the East. Looking like this: East: Alabama Auburn Florida Kentucky South Carolina Tennessee Vanderbilt Georgia West: Arkansas LSU Mizzou Ole Miss Miss St Oklahoma Texas Texas AM
For sure. Moreover, the cross-division opponents make even schedules within a division slightly unbalanced. However, it’s much better than an all free for all with wildly different schedules. Tie-breakers wouldn’t even be clear under such a system.
I don't see it that way at all. Playoffs in any sport involve unequal schedules. Just the way it is. Take the NFL. Sure, you play the teams in your division but that doesn't really mean anything about schedule difficulty. Hell look at the NFC south. So to me, keeping important rivalries alive is the most important thing. Second is FAIRLY rotating through the other opponents (not the UGA TAMU nonsense). I care more about getting to play other teams like Texas and Oklahoma than playing the same 6 teams every year. Plus it is far better for the SEC brand (and tv revenue) to see Florida OU, Georgia Texas, etc. I also don't think tie breakers are a problem. There are any number of metrics which could be used one or several of which would involve strength of schedule.
I think we might be talking about two different things: what would be fun and what would be a fair way to decide a champion. It would definitely be fun to play Texas, Oklahoma, LSU, Georgia, and Alabama in the same season. But it might not be fair to lose the shot an SEC title to Tennessee, who played Vandy, Miss St, Kentucky, and Missouri that same season. I thought the idea of four 4-team pods struck a nice balance among all these concerns. Each team has three perennial opponents (toward fairness) and a host of rotating ones (toward fun). A system without any divisions would certainly present challenges of fairness, but it would really depend on the details, which we have seen.
It only presents a challenge by limiting the number of in-conference games. Dump the OOC games and play an all SEC schedule. Dump the championship game. 13 game season. Every team plays 13 games. Develop a system that you play every team in a set number of years. All the rivalries will be played with a short break every so many yrs. Make the SEC the premiere league, make being the SEC champ bigger than a national champ title.
My point is that it isn't fair now. Given that fact I'm more concerned about playing other teams. I don't think pods are more fair. Is it fair that the NFC south is so bad?
Stop buying tickets then they'll pay attention! I'm so happy that I lived during the time when players played for the love of the game and not for what the game could do for them. I'm old school no one transferred because of the loyalty to their school and teammates. Herschel and a few others also changed CFB for the worst. the no-fun-league can't let good players alone.A curse on its house.
Oh yes certainly. However, I think the variation among the pods is a bit less important than variation within the pods. If the SEC west is stronger, then it’s champion will likely be stronger as well. And at least the division champion was (mostly) decided on the field, rather than by resume comparison.
