Started By
Message
Why does overall SEC record determine division winners?
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:50 pm
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:50 pm
It'd make more sense to have just the division record count to see who goes to the Championship Game. Who you face from the other division isn't the same for all teams, so it'd only be more fair.
The overall SEC record should be a later tiebreaker.
The overall SEC record should be a later tiebreaker.
7
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:52 pm to The White Lobster
So interdivisional games actually mean something
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:52 pm to The White Lobster
Auburn still goes this year... 
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:53 pm to The White Lobster
No way. A team could go 4-4 (4-1 vs. the West) and go to Atlanta over a 6-2 (3-2 vs. the West) team that way.
The way it is is better.
The way it is is better.
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:55 pm to Rohan2Reed
Division record should be more important than overall SEC record in determining who wins the West or East.
Take the West this year...
1. Auburn 5-0
2. Arkansas 3-2 (6-2 overall; head-to-head tiebreaker over LSU)
3. LSU 3-2 (6-2)
4. Alabama 3-2 (5-3; eliminated from second place contention due to loss in East)
5. Mississippi State 1-4
6. Ole Miss-5
4. Alabama
If there is a round robin system in each division, why not just have that determine division champ?
Take the West this year...
1. Auburn 5-0
2. Arkansas 3-2 (6-2 overall; head-to-head tiebreaker over LSU)
3. LSU 3-2 (6-2)
4. Alabama 3-2 (5-3; eliminated from second place contention due to loss in East)
5. Mississippi State 1-4
6. Ole Miss
-5 4. Alabama
If there is a round robin system in each division, why not just have that determine division champ?
Posted on 12/13/10 at 11:57 pm to xiv
quote:
No way. A team could go 4-4 (4-1 vs. the West) and go to Atlanta over a 6-2 (3-2 vs. the West) team that way.
The way it is is better.
well, what if the 4-4 team played UK, Vandy, and USC while the 6-2 team played UF, UGA, and UT?
This way is more fair
Posted on 12/14/10 at 12:02 am to The White Lobster
One more point before I go to bed...
The current system calls for two division champions, not the two best teams in the league or even the best team from each division...if you want to have the two best teams in the league in the CG, then eliminate divisions and take the two teams with the best record
The current system calls for two division champions, not the two best teams in the league or even the best team from each division...if you want to have the two best teams in the league in the CG, then eliminate divisions and take the two teams with the best record
Posted on 12/14/10 at 12:27 am to The White Lobster
I can't think of a single sport where only divisional games count. MLB, NBA, NFL... None reduce out of division games to glorified exhibition matches.
Posted on 12/14/10 at 12:36 am to The White Lobster
The system is fine. The only people who cry are teams that lose. I don't have a problem rotating opponents in the other division opposite your team.. Until that happens stop the crying.
Posted on 12/14/10 at 8:05 am to The White Lobster
We're still willing to trade Florida as our permanent.
Posted on 12/14/10 at 8:07 am to The White Lobster
quote:
The current system calls for two division champions, not the two best teams in the league or even the best team from each division...if you want to have the two best teams in the league in the CG, then eliminate divisions and take the two teams with the best record
Go to the pac 10 and be a fan
Posted on 12/14/10 at 8:08 am to spslayto
quote:
We're still willing to trade Florida as our permanent.
yes, yes we are. BUT- they do help our SOS (usually)
Posted on 12/14/10 at 1:33 pm to The White Lobster
quote:Then the 6-2 team goes to Atlanta.
well, what if the 4-4 team played UK, Vandy, and USC while the 6-2 team played UF, UGA, and UT?
quote:All games should be at neutral sites. That way is more fair.
This way is more fair
It's fair the way it is.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News