Comments on: Slive Chats About Realignment, TV, Playoffs And More

By: AllTideUp

AllTideUp — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 02:25:15 +0000

@Zinhead
I agree that automatic bids would be a bad thing, but I do believe the goal of the committee will be to diversify the spots as much as possible.

One of my points was that the ACC would be left out so I agree that FSU wouldn’t have gotten a spot last year. It’s also possible that Wisconsin would have been overlooked, but that was a unique situation. Had OSU been eligible they would have taken that spot. Kansas St would have been given the nod last year as a one-loss conference champion. The Big 12 is still considered one of the top 4 so that would give them additional credibility. Notre Dame, Alabama, Kansas St, and probably Stanford would have been given the nod last year. While Oregon was one of the top teams, they still lost out on the conference championship to Stanford. They also lost head-to-head in the regular season. I don’t think there’s any way Oregon goes over Stanford in that scenario. As a rule, I highly doubt that one school will be given the nod over the champion from the same league regardless of any other circumstances. That would be like giving UGA the spot over Alabama last year.

You have to remember as well that the polls we’ve been accustomed to won’t really mean anything anymore. It will be up to the selection committee and whatever criteria they decide to use.

By: Zinhead

Zinhead — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:48:50 +0000

@AllTideUp I doubt you would have the four champions in the playoffs. This past year neither Wisconsin or Florida State were better choices than Florida, Georgia or Oregon, and everyone recognized that. Lets go back a few years and list the top 4 BSC teams and the Big 5 conference champs not in the top 4:

2012 – #1 Notre Dame #2 Alabama #3 Florida #4 Oregon are in – #5 Kansas State #6 Stanford #12 Florida State and Wisconsin (unranked) are out
2011 – #1 LSU #2 Alabama #3 Oklahoma State #4 Stanford are in - #15 Clemson and #10 Wisconsin are out.
2010 – #1 Auburn #2 Oregon #3 TCU #4 Stanford are in – #5 Wisconsin and #13 VT are out
2009 – #1Alabama #2 Texas #3 Cincinatti #4 TCU are in - #7 Oregon #8 OSU #9 Georgia Tech are out
2008 - #1 Florida #2 Oklahoma #3 Texas #4 Alabama are in – #5 USC #8 Penn State #19 VT are out
2007 – #1 OSU #2 LSU #3 VT #4 Oklahoma are in – #7 USC is out
2006 – #1 OSU #2 Florida #3 Michigan #4 LSU are in – #5 USC #14 Wake Forest are out

Since 2006, only one year, 2007, produced four different conference champions in the BSC top 4. There should be some consideration for winning a conference championship, but automatic bids would not be a good thing.

By: USCTraveler

USCTraveler — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 18:30:33 +0000

John-

I know you believe (and I agree with you) that we are eventually headed to towards a new football super-division where the Big 4 conferences will play.

Under that scenario, how do you see the playoffs evolving ?

I believe we’ll see the Rose and Sugar become semi-finals for the super-division, with the CCGs acting as a round of 8.

The money for the Rose and Sugar as semis would be astronomical, and CCGs would spike in value if they were the first round of a win or go home playoff.

Also- with only four conferences in the super-division, there will be a huge amount of pressure for each conference winner being in the playoffs. That way, every team in the super-division has a direct and legitimate shot at getting into the playoff by winning their conference, with no polls or politics to keep a team out.

“Win you conference and you’re in” is something most non-SEC fans’ want to see, and I’d think tv excs would also like to see that setup, as it would maximize ratings.

Combine that with the huge money and the New Year’s Day tradition and it seems the most likely outcome to me.

What are your thoughts ?

Keep up the great work on realignment. You’ve been on a roll for quite a while now.

Cheers,

Traveler

PS- Slive does know how to deliver a good jab. I got a chuckle out of the “Rose Bowl as a lead-in” comment. No matter which game is seen as more important in a particular year, though, the Rose and Sugar back to back on NYD is going to be great. And if the the Rose and Sugar are semis, then NYD will be up there with Super Bowl Sunday.

By: John at MrSEC

John at MrSEC — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:04:16 +0000

@Jim Z

First, that was a reference to football success in the BCS era. No leagues have put more teams in the BCS title game than the SEC and Big XII. http://www.mrsec.com/2013/01/conference-bowl-records-this-year-and-last-15-years/ That would pretty clearly make them the John and Paul of the BCS era.

Second, you might want to share with Jim Delany your views on the Southern population boom. He’s the one who’s mentioned it time and again: ”In the last 20 years there has been a clear shift of movement into the Sun Belt. The rates of growth in the Sun Belt are four times the rate in the East or the Midwest. That has demographic meaning long term for the economy, for jobs, for recruitment of students, for recruitment of athletes, for recruitment of faculty, for tax base.” http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/2010-05-18-big-ten-expansion-demographics_N.htm

Sorry if that throws cold water on your rant,
John

By: Jim Z

Jim Z — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 11:24:00 +0000

Yeah that 10 team conference with Frog Helmet, Baylor, 2 Kansas schools, Iowa State and West Virginia is really “Paul”. Meanwhile the Big Ten is George. Hmmm yeah sounds right. I mean Big Ten money and prestige and historical influence makes Big 12 look like Pete Best (I didn’t have to look it up).

Get out. Trash, trash, trash. Your gimmick rotating Sugar Bowl with Alabama beating Kansas State 70-0 in the murder capital of the South (N.O.) is not traditional and never will be. You can’t make a trashier version of the Rose Bowl and call it Paul and John. Pro-SEC doesn’t have to mean bad analogies nowhere close to accurate with ANY sample size (I know you SEC folks just love your 7 sample size and your iron clad view that this Southern population boom will continue for infinity completely ignoring the fact that is just a trend like any other).

By: AllTideUp

AllTideUp — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 07:27:01 +0000

With only 4 schools making it, I would also gamble on champions from 4 different conferences being the selections. Based on that, playing 9 or 8 games may be a moot point as the SEC will have one of the seats at the table regardless of the league schedule. I doubt they’ll ever have 2 regardless of what they do until the number of teams is increased to 6 or 8 or more. Along with that, in a 4 team scenario it doesn’t really matter whether you’re #1 or #4 because you have an equal shot either way.

Speaking of champions getting in, this is another reason the ACC is unstable actually because they will not be among the top 4 league champions on any sort of regular basis.

By: LifeLongGarnetGold

LifeLongGarnetGold — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 03:23:57 +0000

Tired of being in the Pete; time to move to John/Paul.

By: jansing87

jansing87 — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 01:40:06 +0000

John certainly does write interesting material.

By: pbrstreetgang

pbrstreetgang — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 01:30:18 +0000

I’d rather be George.

By: SouthernBoiSB

SouthernBoiSB — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 21:37:57 +0000

“Obviously, Slive is correct to “hope” that a team won’t be penalized for playing in a title game, but that’ll be up to the folks on a selection panel after 2014. And we still wonder if there won’t be members of that committee who go into the process with the goal of picking four schools from four different conferences. Slive seems to have more faith in the process and in the yet-to-be-formed committee than we do.”

I still agree to this. When you only have 2 teams (out of 14) to play in the title team, you should NOT punish the loser of the title game if their record matches the 2nd place team in their division. It was a grey area of debate this season if Georgia should have received a BCS bowl because of that exact reason.

I’m thinking that the way the playoffs will work is that they’ll choose the conf. champions in their selections…..until it expands past 4 teams.

By: The regular guy

The regular guy — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 20:55:28 +0000

@John — ACC as Pete Best! Funny, very funny. And the Big East would be Brian Epstein.