re: Hypothetical SEC vs. SEC BCSCG

So this..

quote:

---

B. In any playoff scenario, a non-conf champion should qualify only if the conf champion qualifies. This scenario meets that test. However, because there are only two teams that could qualify, there shouldn't be a clearly viable alternative if you let this happen.

---

Would apply to Alabama, not to us.

quote:

---

Bradford could beat Texas next weekend, and then Pelini shuts the horns down with his smothering defense in the championship game.

---

If OK beats TX, then most likely OK will play in the CG. Ok would have to lose two more conf games or there would have to be another 3 way tie with TX coming on top this time.

people would cry for years about how we have already played eachother and shite like that

What if LSU beats UF, loses to Bama. Bama beats UF in the SEC title game, and LSU wins out as a 1 loss SEC team.

Bama would be in as the undefeated team, but a 1 loss Cincy or 1 loss UT won't have the strength of schedule LSU had.

I assume they'd take a 1 loss USC team (who lost to unranked Washington), over a 1 loss LSU team who beat Washington and their only loss came to #1 Bama simply because the voters would refuse to allow an all SEC NCG.

Sucks that Bama/UF/LSU could get left out of the NC game simply because one of the others qualified ahead of them.

I don't know why it would be considered out of the realm of possibility that the #1 and #2 teams come out of the same conference or division. We've had SEC teams face off in the Final 4 before.

quote:

---

It's no matter it's interest in the SEC, the system is still logical. In the same way that a MAC team will never play in the BCSNG, a team that is at best third in its division should not be allowed the chance to compete for the title as best team in the nation.

---

A. There is nothing in the system to prevent it (see Neb in 2001 and OK in 2003). It's only unlikely to happen, but it can happen.

B. Computers don't care about any of this. In this scenario the computers would rank it either FL, AL and LSU or AL, FL, and LSU. The primary reason for AL and FL being ahead of LSU being that they played an extra game.

C. Human voters will try to prevent it, but the vast majority aren't as unethical as many here. They will vote to prevent it to the extent that it is reasonable. Like in 2003 the voters dropped OK to the bottom of the one loss teams. The only two loss team they could make a resonable case for is OK, because of Bradford. Boise's schedule is so weak, I don't believe they would elevate them either and even if they do, unless they vote them #1, that may not be high enough. I do believe they would drop AL below LSU because of the later loss.

quote:

---

What if LSU beats UF, loses to Bama. Bama beats UF in the SEC title game, and LSU wins out as a 1 loss SEC team.

---

It's the same scenario. I see us and FL dropping to the bottom of the one loss teams. Cincy is the only 1 loss team from a BCS conf that I don't know if we would drop behind.

Prior to 2007, people didn't think it was possible for a 2 loss team to make. Well the conditions necessary happened. While it is still quite unlikely, sooner or later the conditions for 2 teams from the same conf will happen.

I don't predict this scenario but it is exactly what Gary Danielson predicted in preseason.

while it would be cool i dont think it should happen. the seccg is about equivalent to the national championship. the national championship game should be against two teams from different confrences from the sense of the word. the sec champ game is just the conferences way of picking the elite of the elite to see who gets to bash up on some other conference.

unless the sec has a CLEAR #1 and #2 candidate post seccg you gotta let someone else try.

im a huge SEC guy but a SEC vs SEC (while in many cases may be a more accurate best two teams) is not desirable as a National Championship game

plus like many have said, win your conference, and then the nation.