Started By
Message
re: What are the SEC CG tiebreakers going to be?
Posted on 1/20/24 at 9:11 am to BlindedMeWithScience
Posted on 1/20/24 at 9:11 am to BlindedMeWithScience
Yep, there should not be an SEC championship game any longer
it's going to be a physical hindrance to players, and an unnecessary risk of injuries and ruining a team's (or two) season
The only one's pretending this is a sissy way out are fat frick middle aged roly poly keyboard warriors who never played
If you get a bye, you're still having to win 3 games to win a natty, if you don't get a bye, you're having to play 4 games conceivably
As usual, we will learn the hard way and the media will gain off the sport's loss as it's talked to death for the next half a fricking decade
it's going to be a physical hindrance to players, and an unnecessary risk of injuries and ruining a team's (or two) season
The only one's pretending this is a sissy way out are fat frick middle aged roly poly keyboard warriors who never played
If you get a bye, you're still having to win 3 games to win a natty, if you don't get a bye, you're having to play 4 games conceivably
As usual, we will learn the hard way and the media will gain off the sport's loss as it's talked to death for the next half a fricking decade
1
Posted on 1/20/24 at 9:24 am to Harry Rex Vonner
CCG is a huge disadvantage to the loser. They are 1st or 2nd place team and gets another loss while everyone else rests up. They also are the only ones that face 5 postseason games (includes CCG) to win a championship.
As someone who thinks the SECCG is the greatest atmosphere in CFB, it has been rendered completely obsolete by the 12 team format.
As someone who thinks the SECCG is the greatest atmosphere in CFB, it has been rendered completely obsolete by the 12 team format.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 10:02 am to BlindedMeWithScience
quote:
No point in the conference championship game anymore with a 12 team playoff.
You do realize that conference champions get the first 4 seeds and bye, correct?
Being conference champion is basically worth winning the first round of the playoffs since you don’t have to play.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 10:32 am to Tammany Tom
Finishing third in the SEC and missing the conference championship game will be preferable to finishing first or second.
Third place in SEC sits at home on championship weekend, then jumps ahead of the SECCG loser. Then they will most likely host a playoff game against a team outside the top 10, and the max number of games they’ll play is 16.
The winner of the sec championship will face a top 5 team on championship weekend at a neutral site, and they’ll play a max of 16 games.
the loser of the sec championship will play a top 5 team at a neutral site, then probably have to go on the road in the playoffs against a top 5 team, and to win the title they’ll have to play 17 total games.
Thanks to realignment and conference expansion the SEC (and big 10) championship games have been devalued to the point of being a negative. It’s going to be a problem.
Third place in SEC sits at home on championship weekend, then jumps ahead of the SECCG loser. Then they will most likely host a playoff game against a team outside the top 10, and the max number of games they’ll play is 16.
The winner of the sec championship will face a top 5 team on championship weekend at a neutral site, and they’ll play a max of 16 games.
the loser of the sec championship will play a top 5 team at a neutral site, then probably have to go on the road in the playoffs against a top 5 team, and to win the title they’ll have to play 17 total games.
Thanks to realignment and conference expansion the SEC (and big 10) championship games have been devalued to the point of being a negative. It’s going to be a problem.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 11:00 am to Scoob
quote:
Hell, I did a review of the schedule last season, and there's a potential for 3 undefeated teams. I think one of the combos were LSU, Tennessee and Texas (all of which would start the season ranked, so it's not a huge stretch to see it happen).
Which is why 16 teams and only 8 conference games is fricking stupid. Needs to be 9-10 conference games so you don’t have this problem and can keep more of the traditional matchups every year
Posted on 1/20/24 at 11:40 am to Kingcmo
quote:
Third place in SEC sits at home on championship weekend, then jumps ahead of the SECCG loser.
HOW does 3rd place get ahead of 2nd place?
Posted on 1/20/24 at 11:48 am to southernboisb
quote:
HOW does 3rd place get ahead of 2nd place?
11-1 is better than 11-2
10-2 is better than 10-3
(in theory)
they will probably stay ahead if they are 11-2 vs 10-2, but who knows how they will treat the loser.. losing late is usually a bad thing
This post was edited on 1/20/24 at 11:49 am
Posted on 1/20/24 at 11:49 am to Kingcmo
quote:Probably better than second, questionable on the winner.
Finishing third in the SEC and missing the conference championship game will be preferable to finishing first or second.
The playoff bye in the first round becomes somewhat irrelevant when you add a conference championship to the mix. Sure, the winner gets a game off, but they're playing a game against a playoff-caliber team to do so- and the game they remove from the playoff is a home game against an easier opponent.
Consider, if this year would be the new conferences and you get the same 12 team layout....
UGA, Bama and Texas in the SEC. Michigan, Ohio State, Washington, Oregon in the Big 12. LIBERTY as the 12 seed, as the 6th conference champ.
UGA is likely #1, but that's at risk playing Texas/Bama in the SEC Championship... it's likely Texas instead of Bama, but we already saw you can get upset by a team of that caliber, as Bama beat them in reality.
The Big Ten grinds out Washington from the top seeds before the playoff, as they can't handle Michigan.
Fla State is a Top 4 with a bye.
UGA wins the SEC, they get a bye.
Bama would be #5 at 11-1, after Washington and Texas lose in the conference champs. Slight chance of Ohio State or Oregon, but I would say Bama. They play Liberty at home, a slaughter of epic proportions, where they both rest everyone, and also practice against a live opponent any wrinkles they want to work on.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 11:51 am to Scoob
quote:
And keep in mind, in such a circumstance, the team you omit will certainly be excluded from a first round bye.
You have to eliminate the game all together. There will be instances where there is a clear #1 in the SEC and a tie breaker for the #2 spot, #2 goes on to lose to #1, misses the playoffs but the #3 team that lost the tie breaks squeezes in. Teams will get penalized for playing the game while others are rewarded for not.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 12:39 pm to ImJustaBoy
quote:Yeah, I can definitely see this happening. Look at 2022, when LSU won the West...
You have to eliminate the game all together. There will be instances where there is a clear #1 in the SEC and a tie breaker for the #2 spot, #2 goes on to lose to #1, misses the playoffs but the #3 team that lost the tie breaks squeezes in. Teams will get penalized for playing the game while others are rewarded for not.
UGA is #1, they are in. Bama and Tennessee are in at 10-2. LSU is on the margin, probably in at 10 or 11... before the championship.
They win the SEC, it screws UGA out of having a 1st round bye; and I'd need to review the actual wording as to who gets byes. I know the top 6 conference champs automatically make it, and I know the top 4 seeds get byes. But are they pulled from the conference champs, or are they JUST the top 4 seeds? Because if so, LSU beating UGA likely knocks the entire SEC out of getting a bye.
If things go as expected, UGA wins the SEC, stays #1... and the SEC loses a team (LSU) from the playoffs.
There's really no upside to keeping it, not for the conference itself (which is the entity making the call). You risk eliminating a team from a bye (and probable #1 seed) with an upset, and risk losing one of your playoff teams otherwise. Neither is good for the SEC.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 12:49 pm to Clark14
quote:
Judging from past precedents ole miss , Kentucky, Vandy and aggy are not allowed to participate in it.
STFU. You’re not allowed at the adult table. Sit over there with your aunt Sam and the kids.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 12:59 pm to BurnsideStyle
1. SECCG tiebreakers will not include relying on any ranking, CFPoll or otherwise.
2. SEC will probably use the same tiebreaker principles already agreed to for the last 20+ years.
Those are: a. head-to-head between TWO tied teams
b. head-to-head record among 3 or more tied teams
c. record against SEC teams by their final finish in the SEC. i.e. if LSU, UGA, and Texass all finish 7-1 and tiebreakers a. and b. cannot decide it, tiebreaker would be teams records versus team finishing in 3rd place, then 4th place, and so on until you get a "winner."
2. SEC will probably use the same tiebreaker principles already agreed to for the last 20+ years.
Those are: a. head-to-head between TWO tied teams
b. head-to-head record among 3 or more tied teams
c. record against SEC teams by their final finish in the SEC. i.e. if LSU, UGA, and Texass all finish 7-1 and tiebreakers a. and b. cannot decide it, tiebreaker would be teams records versus team finishing in 3rd place, then 4th place, and so on until you get a "winner."
This post was edited on 1/20/24 at 1:02 pm
Posted on 1/20/24 at 1:09 pm to BigBro
quote:
11-1 is better than 11-2
What 3rd place team will finish 11-1?
That sounds like a CG team record.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 1:11 pm to Dougiejurgens3
I have wondered this same thing. Without divisions, how are you supposed to select the two best teams from the conference ? I suppose you defer to ‘ranking’ — and that’s the current plan, correct?
But what happens when you have 3 11-1 sec teams, with no head to head matchups, or 1 11-1 and 2 10-2 teams (the latter 2 with no head to head tie breaker)? Or maybe 2/3 11-1 teams played head to head but the other did not. This might be unlikely, but it’s not impossible.
This year for example, you could have:
11-1 LSU
11-1 Texas (loss to UGA)
11-1 UGA (beats TX but loses to say Bama)
Who goes in such a scenario ? I suppose it would be UGA and LSU to avoid the rematch? But if it’s rankings, head to head might not be the only factor. What if TX blows everyone out but loses to GA close, and UGA scrapes by in a bunch of their wins?
Another example, again based on this season’s schedule it is possible to have:
11-1 Bama
11-1 Ole Miss
11-1 Texas
Who goes and based on what? Under this latter scenario, there are NO head to heads between those 3 teams this season. Not sure what the ‘tie breaker’ would be in such a scenario.
In any case, the conf champ games are undoubtedly going to lose some of their luster in this new system. It could potentially be a disadvantage to be invited and have to play an extra game. It also opens up the possibility of the same team playing two and perhaps even 3 times if they meet reg season, SEC champ game, and the playoffs. Not sure I like such an idea but it’s not avoidable.
But what happens when you have 3 11-1 sec teams, with no head to head matchups, or 1 11-1 and 2 10-2 teams (the latter 2 with no head to head tie breaker)? Or maybe 2/3 11-1 teams played head to head but the other did not. This might be unlikely, but it’s not impossible.
This year for example, you could have:
11-1 LSU
11-1 Texas (loss to UGA)
11-1 UGA (beats TX but loses to say Bama)
Who goes in such a scenario ? I suppose it would be UGA and LSU to avoid the rematch? But if it’s rankings, head to head might not be the only factor. What if TX blows everyone out but loses to GA close, and UGA scrapes by in a bunch of their wins?
Another example, again based on this season’s schedule it is possible to have:
11-1 Bama
11-1 Ole Miss
11-1 Texas
Who goes and based on what? Under this latter scenario, there are NO head to heads between those 3 teams this season. Not sure what the ‘tie breaker’ would be in such a scenario.
In any case, the conf champ games are undoubtedly going to lose some of their luster in this new system. It could potentially be a disadvantage to be invited and have to play an extra game. It also opens up the possibility of the same team playing two and perhaps even 3 times if they meet reg season, SEC champ game, and the playoffs. Not sure I like such an idea but it’s not avoidable.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 1:50 pm to southernboisb
It would have been, before the SEC expanded without adding any games. The odds of having 3 or more 11-1 teams is much higher now. It’s going to create perverse incentives.
Posted on 1/20/24 at 5:16 pm to Kingcmo
Hince why the issue of common opponents are going to come into play.
My thing is 3 teams tied with AB having 2 common opponents, AC having 1, & BC having 0.
This is why I prefer divisions because of the H2H design that prevents the new tie-breakers.
My thing is 3 teams tied with AB having 2 common opponents, AC having 1, & BC having 0.
This is why I prefer divisions because of the H2H design that prevents the new tie-breakers.
This post was edited on 1/20/24 at 5:18 pm
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News