SEC has 7 of the Top 15 spots in polls

[ouflak]

Then don't be a one loss team. Arguments about who is better can be settled on the field of play.

Unless ofcourse each conference produces an undefeated team and perhaps even Notre Dame goes undefeated. Then the matter will not be decided on the field. It will be decided upon by polls, computers, and just what a few people think.

[Mac94]

It's early ... 5 of those SEC teams are in the west so we'll all beat each other up and it'll all balance itself out.

I also don't think there will be two SEC teams in the playoff unless the conference champions of two of the five power conferences are really down. I think the members of the selection group are going to look hard at the five conference champions and that there will be a lot of pressure to not over represent one conference. I do think the SEC champ is as close to a lock as there is ... along with the Pac-12 champ. If FSU wins the ACC they are pretty much a lock. The Big-12 had a very good weekend this past week in relation to the Big-10 so I think right now the Big-12 champ has a huge leg up on the Big-10. Right now the Big-10 is 1-10 against the other power 5 conferences in OOC play ... and that's a hard mountain to overcome perception wise.

[BlownGP]

Shouldn't be surprised. It was like this in the BCS era, won't change now..

Like stated they will all soon beat each other up soon. Still will probably be ranked high.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

All I know is we've beaten the last 2 johnny reb teams we've played and, if necessary, we'll make it 3 in a row in January.

[badger]

I don't think the polls matter in a playoff era. I agree that the burden is on teams to win more if they don't like SEC politicking.

If there is weeping and nashing come December/January, I would like to see auto bids given to the big 5 with 3 at-large bids to be dispersed to mid-majors, other big 5 non-champs and any other team that deserves it that just doesn't want to join a conference god bless 'em. This way, team's seasons don't "end" after one loss, especially a non-conference loss.

What team wouldn't like to be in that spot after some embarrassing losses this early in the season, to come back and somehow make the playoffs by winning the conference?

[SoonerorLater]

This seems very unfair. This is the SEC we're talking about. Shouldn't they have 14 of the top 15?

[BoulderSooner79]

This seems very unfair. This is the SEC we're talking about. Shouldn't they have 14 of the top 15?

The unfair part is that the selection committee is not made up of 13 SEC former players and athletic directors. How the heck did they let that happen?

[badger]

The unfair part is that the selection committee is not made up of 13 SEC former players and athletic directors. How the heck did they let that happen?

I think every team that wins a championship during the past decade should have a seat at the playoff committee table, just like previous Heisman winners get to vote for the next Heisman winner. In other words, a lot of SEC and a lot less college football riff raff (aka not-SEC)

[soonerhubs]

This comes down to financial incentives.

1) Aside from the set of hardcore fans, there is a critical mass of fans who jump off of any said team's bandwagon once said team loses multiple times. Once a fan quits following, obviously viewership drops along with ad revenue.

2) The Southeastern Conference has identified a subset of fans who will hitch their bandwagon to whichever conference team is winning, with the excuse of "conference loyalty." Thus, a watered-down fan can continue the chest-thumping while screaming "S-E-C." Watered-down conference fan also continues to watch television, buy gear, and increase revenues.

This is precisely why 60-minutes deifies Saban and why ESPiN continues to promote the Southeastern conference.

From a financial standpoint, it's a brilliant way to exploit some bandwagoners.

[SoonerPride]

I don't think the polls matter in a playoff era. I agree that the burden is on teams to win more if they don't like SEC politicking.

If there is weeping and nashing come December/January, I would like to see auto bids given to the big 5 with 3 at-large bids to be dispersed to mid-majors, other big 5 non-champs and any other team that deserves it that just doesn't want to join a conference god bless 'em. This way, team's seasons don't "end" after one loss, especially a non-conference loss.

What team wouldn't like to be in that spot after some embarrassing losses this early in the season, to come back and somehow make the playoffs by winning the conference?

And thus the only games that "really matter" are conference games bc that pesky non conference loss OSU had to FSU really doesn't hurt their chances bc all they'd have to do us win the Big 12 and they're automatically in the final four.

Tell me again how the continued expansion of the post season doesn't lessen the value of regular season games.

I think the further you expand the post season you destroy the regular season.

[JLEW1818]

All I know is we've beaten the last 2 johnny reb teams we've played and, if necessary, we'll make it 3 in a row in January.

Heck, maybe 4 in a row. We beat a SEC team in the semis and finals

[badger]

I think the further you expand the post season you destroy the regular season.

Hell, I'd love to expand to 12 and play nothing but conference opponents all season, with a single non-conference tune up or marquee. Alas, when you let ADs barter with each other on home and homes, neutrals and the like, you get unequal scheduling on the non-conference side. While we're off challenging ourselves against Tennessee, teams like Texas A&M are wondering why their allegedly better defense can't stop worthless Rice

[Mac94]

Can't resist ... I'm predictable, lol

teams like Texas A&M are wondering why their allegedly better defense can't stop worthless Rice

Let's see ... in 2013 we gave up 31 points to Rice ... in 2014 we gave up 10. Better ... YES! That doesn't mean we're actually good, lol.

[badger]

Instead of staging a championship game, the SEC should stage a four-team playoff for its natio....errrrrrr, i mean, SEC championship. Then, the winner of the SEC championship gets an automatic bid to the nat'l title trophy. The end

[Mac94]

Instead of staging a championship game, the SEC should stage a four-team playoff for its natio....errrrrrr, i mean, SEC championship. Then, the winner of the SEC championship gets an automatic bid to the nat'l title trophy. The end

Oh ... I see you've seen Slive's future blueprints for SEC world dominance ... cool

[Temujin]

I remember when TEAMS used to play each other, not CONFERENCES. None of this ever became an issue until the SEC started whining about their conference schedules keeping them out of the NC picture. That was the excuse anyway, because they were largely irrelevant for much of the 70s through the early 2000s. So when they finally started winning, they had to convince the rest of the world that they're better just because of where they're located. They turned football into a friggin' soap opera, and it makes the sport hard to watch anymore.

Remember when the Pac-10/Big 10 didn't win a championship because they felt they were more special than the rest of the country and refused to participate in the Bowl Alliance? I think we should do something similar with the SEC, and Texas, and Notre Dame. If they don't feel like they should have to play by the same standards as the rest of the country, then fine. The remaining power conferences restructure and kick out Texas and Notre Dame, and the SEC. Divide up into 4 12-team conferences separated by region (seriously, put WVU in the ACC already). And just for kicks, and to spite the SEC, get the little guys involved as well - let them form 4 conferences as well. Then run an 8-team playoff, conference winners only.

Apply a 3-tier TV contract model like what we have now, but without the conference ties. (Maybe a 4th tier for the non-power conferences) Each network bids per tier, not per conference. Then share the TV money equally, allowing each team to make their extra money on tickets and merchandise, similar to the NFL. Give the kids a monthly stipend from the TV money pool.

As for bowls, keep em, but re-arrange them. We can still have 40 of them if the CFB world wants it. Free up the win restrictions that keep the good teams playing the FCS teams. Let each bowl bid for school participation.

I'm all for the SEC being irrelevant again. Unfortunately it'll take drastic measures to make that happen. Oh well, one can dream.

[Sabanball]

I have a feeling that Arkansas is going to get in the mix too.

[Mac94]

because they were largely irrelevant for much of the 70s through the early 2000s

Incorrect ... the SEC was out of the picture for most of the 1980's but that's about it. The 80's was a decade of the independents (Miami, Penn St, ND) and OU.

But ... Bama won or shared titles in the two main polls (AP / UPI) in 73, 78, and 79 while Georgia won the title in 1980. Hardly irrelevant.

In the 90's the SEC had Bama in 1992, Florida in 1996, and Tennessee in 1998 ... again, hardly irrelevant.

[Mac94]

I have a feeling that Arkansas is going to get in the mix too.

Maybe ... still wait and see what the Hog rushing attack can do against real defenses ... and no ... two weeks from now won't count ... we'll have to outscore them. The west is gonna be a fun race though, whoever wins it will have earned it.

[Sabanball]

I remember when TEAMS used to play each other, not CONFERENCES. None of this ever became an issue until the SEC started whining about their conference schedules keeping them out of the NC picture. That was the excuse anyway, because they were largely irrelevant for much of the 70s through the early 2000s. So when they finally started winning, they had to convince the rest of the world that they're better just because of where they're located. They turned football into a friggin' soap opera, and it makes the sport hard to watch anymore.

Remember when the Pac-10/Big 10 didn't win a championship because they felt they were more special than the rest of the country and refused to participate in the Bowl Alliance? I think we should do something similar with the SEC, and Texas, and Notre Dame. If they don't feel like they should have to play by the same standards as the rest of the country, then fine. The remaining power conferences restructure and kick out Texas and Notre Dame, and the SEC. Divide up into 4 12-team conferences separated by region (seriously, put WVU in the ACC already). And just for kicks, and to spite the SEC, get the little guys involved as well - let them form 4 conferences as well. Then run an 8-team playoff, conference winners only.

Apply a 3-tier TV contract model like what we have now, but without the conference ties. (Maybe a 4th tier for the non-power conferences) Each network bids per tier, not per conference. Then share the TV money equally, allowing each team to make their extra money on tickets and merchandise, similar to the NFL. Give the kids a monthly stipend from the TV money pool.

As for bowls, keep em, but re-arrange them. We can still have 40 of them if the CFB world wants it. Free up the win restrictions that keep the good teams playing the FCS teams. Let each bowl bid for school participation.

I'm all for the SEC being irrelevant again. Unfortunately it'll take drastic measures to make that happen. Oh well, one can dream.

Alabama was 103-16-1 in the '70's with 2 AP NC's and should have been awarded it in 1977 as well. I don't think I would call that irrelevant.