(05-19-2014 02:26 PM)Rik Flair Wrote:  Why do we need one? It's not like it will vault the winner to a BCS game. The only way a team gets a BCS game is if the go 12-0 with a couple of wins against the big boys.

Actually there aint no way to get to a BCS game no more, since they don't play them no more.

And getting to the Access Bowl spot requires your champion be the best of the five, which in many years will not actually require going 12-0 with a couple of P5 wins, cause in many years you will not be competing against 12-1 schools with a P5 win under their belt to grab the guaranteed spot.

I can't give a simple answer.

If it is a neutral site game, I am opposed, 57% of the time, the higher ranked G5 team loses a neutral site title game.
If it is a road game for the highest rated team, I am opposed, nearly 67% of the time the higher ranked G5 loses a conference title game when played on the road.
If it is a system that places it at the site of the highest ranked division champ, it's worth it, 75% of the time, the higher ranked team wins a G5 title game when hosting.

The money involved is inconsequential so I don't care about the money, the money for cracking the access bowl one time would be more than we'd make off the title game in a decade, so game the system and play to the access bowl, that means highest ranked at home.

There is no assurance the title game would be on a Saturday. MAC is on Friday, two of the three Pac-12 have been on Friday. If we land on a Friday or Thursday and after to move our final weekend of regular season to Thursday or Friday I'm not so crazy about it because that's an attendance killer.

And if we play Saturday on ESPNU opposite the SEC, Big 10, Pac-12, or ACC we won't get but a few hundred thousand viewers.

Lastly depends on who we are adding.

Not interested in someone who is for sure going to be a project unless they make us better in hoops and offset the drain in football.

(05-19-2014 03:21 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The money involved is inconsequential so I don't care about the money, the money for cracking the access bowl one time would be more than we'd make off the title game in a decade, so game the system and play to the access bowl, that means highest ranked at home.

That makes sense ~ neutral site games with the MAC have been quite definitely hit and miss affairs, depending on how close the schools in the game are to Ford Field and how well their fan bases travel.

I don't view it as gaming the system so much as rewarding the best regular season school with an extra home game. The fact that the schools that are most effective at building their local support base will get the most advantage from an extra home game ... well, and so they should.

Quote: Lastly depends on who we are adding.

The original question was independent of realignment, so it would be simplest to read as "assuming complete CCG game deregulation so the SBC can set it up anyway they like and with whatever workable alignment they prefer."

(03-17-2014 08:28 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  That's a pretty vague question.

Would I want a conference championship game if it meant we pulled in a (for example) USM, La Tech, or some school like that (note: no need to discuss the likelihood of those schools being invited, I was merely using them as an example)? Hell yeah.

Would I want a conference championship game if it meant we pulled in a (for example) Our Lady of the Smelly Flowers or Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart Club university? Hell no.

I guess the championship game is a by-product. I want the right team.

Exactly. Championship vs Non-Championship? Championship.

But Championship with an inappropriate team vs non-Championship? Non-Championship.

What it does give is another boost for playing another team with a winning percentage. Whether or not you have a CCG with 11, having a CCG is going to help the higher rated team get a boost and when the other conferences are playing CCG, I think the Sunbelt will be at a disadvantage....how much I don't know, but if you're playing a 9-3 team in the CCG....it can only help.

(05-19-2014 03:56 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  What it does give is another boost for playing another team with a winning percentage. Whether or not you have a CCG with 11, having a CCG is going to help the higher rated team get a boost and when the other conferences are playing CCG, I think the Sunbelt will be at a disadvantage....how much I don't know, but if you're playing a 9-3 team in the CCG....it can only help.

A lower ranked SBC team will not help.

Too vague.

Yes - Immediately with 11 teams
No - Immediately by adding a questionable 12th team
Yes - Later by adding a good 12th team
No - Later by adding a questionable 12th team

Also....

Yes - home of the highest overall rated team
No - neutral site
No - home of non-highest rated team

Also....
Can the other division champion be jumped over for a bowl slot after losing the championship game? If so, I don't care for that. Both division champs should be in preferred position for one of the conference bowl tie-ins.

(05-19-2014 05:08 PM)OsageJ Wrote:  A lower ranked SBC team will not help.

If you have an SBC that is head to head with another Go5 school, say both are 11-1, and then that other Go5 school adds a win to its record over the second best school in its conference to go to 12-1, while the SBC school stays at 11-1, its going to help the other Go5 champion.

You can say "the higher ranking Go5 school might lose" (like #19 NIU beat #18 Kent in 2012 to rise to #16 and bust the BCS), but the problem is that there "the other Go5 champion" gets four tries, since the Sunbelt is not trying to be better than any given Go5 champion, its trying to be the best of all five. 1 best Go5 school and five third to fifth is better than six straight second place finishes.

(05-20-2014 12:41 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-19-2014 05:08 PM)OsageJ Wrote:  A lower ranked SBC team will not help.

If you have an SBC that is head to head with another Go5 school, say both are 11-1, and then that other Go5 school adds a win to its record over the second best school in its conference to go to 12-1, while the SBC school stays at 11-1, its going to help the other Go5 champion.

You can say "the higher ranking Go5 school might lose" (like #19 NIU beat #18 Kent in 2012 to rise to #16 and bust the BCS), but the problem is that there "the other Go5 champion" gets four tries, since the Sunbelt is not trying to be better than any given Go5 champion, its trying to be the best of all five. 1 best Go5 school and five third to fifth is better than six straight second place finishes.

Exactly. It amounts to not even trying.

(05-20-2014 12:41 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-19-2014 05:08 PM)OsageJ Wrote:  A lower ranked SBC team will not help.

If you have an SBC that is head to head with another Go5 school, say both are 11-1, and then that other Go5 school adds a win to its record over the second best school in its conference to go to 12-1, while the SBC school stays at 11-1, its going to help the other Go5 champion.

You can say "the higher ranking Go5 school might lose" (like #19 NIU beat #18 Kent in 2012 to rise to #16 and bust the BCS), but the problem is that there "the other Go5 champion" gets four tries, since the Sunbelt is not trying to be better than any given Go5 champion, its trying to be the best of all five. 1 best Go5 school and five third to fifth is better than six straight second place finishes.

Yep. Second place will pay no better than fifth. Ending up as the #1 GO5 team is all that will matter. If a CCG would enhance the chances of the SBC having a team win that spot, the SBC should have one. If not, then having a CCG is pointless and should probably be avoided.

(05-20-2014 06:02 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  Yep. Second place will pay no better than fifth. Ending up as the #1 GO5 team is all that will matter. If a CCG would enhance the chances of the SBC having a team win that spot, the SBC should have one.

And if pursuing that strategy, the hosting should follow arkstfan's argument and be hosted by the highest ranking school.

(05-20-2014 11:04 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-20-2014 06:02 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  Yep. Second place will pay no better than fifth. Ending up as the #1 GO5 team is all that will matter. If a CCG would enhance the chances of the SBC having a team win that spot, the SBC should have one.

And if pursuing that strategy, the hosting should follow arkstfan's argument and be hosted by the highest ranking school.

Definitely.

(03-18-2014 01:22 AM)moneymike Wrote:  Yes, otherwise it makes no sense to have Idaho and arguably New Mexico State in the belt.

We needed NMSU and Idaho only for one reason and it was not championships. It was the loss of MTSU, FAU and WKU.

My worry is that the new rule on having a CCG will not pass and we wont have the option.

We need one - without a doubt imop.

I want a true conference champion - no splits - no politics.
And I want a spring board to raise our CChamp in the polls.
It is risk, sure. But we look like we are afraid of a challenge if THAT is why we don't have one. Shying away from competition is never going to help us - I'm for putting it all on the line, letting it all hang out - anybody, anywhere - anytime! And taking that chance to put our C Champ as high up the rungs as possible.