Started By
Message
re: Current system
Posted on 12/3/17 at 8:36 am to td01241
Posted on 12/3/17 at 8:36 am to td01241
Expanding beyond the current format negates the value of the regular season matchups and more importantly, invalidates the conference championship games. We've seen how very different rematches can go, and it sucks when it doesn't go your way.
That said, there have only been 7 regular season rematches in 25 years of SECCG. To expand to 5+3 will make that sort of thing likely the norm, not the exception. You'll be rewarding not winning your division/Conference.
That said, there have only been 7 regular season rematches in 25 years of SECCG. To expand to 5+3 will make that sort of thing likely the norm, not the exception. You'll be rewarding not winning your division/Conference.
2
Posted on 12/3/17 at 8:39 am to VoxDawg
What does it matter if they're going to put Bama in every year regardless of whether they deserve it? Bama doesn't deserve squat.
Posted on 12/3/17 at 9:08 am to VoxDawg
No you are setting concrete rules. You are literally promising a reward for winning a conference which I your last sentence you said it doesn't do. I want it set in stone. Idc what they are but I want everyteam to know if you do this you are in. So make winning your conference an auto invite. That only validates the game so I can't even see how you think it invalidates. The group of 5 almost every year has a team that's somewhere from pretty good-great rarely and I want them in. The other two at larges decided by best computer model. It sets concrete rules so everyone knows what they have to do to win it all like every other sport, it allows the G5 a chance, and solves having the 2 teams from one conference with the last 2 at larges. All P5 is represented. I honestly can't see an argument I buy against this.
This post was edited on 12/3/17 at 9:15 am
Page 1 of 1
Latest Georgia News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News