Are you all going to freak out

[mr. tegu]

In a few years we will finally see a real champion.

Besides I don't think there will be two SEC teams if ND loses. That would mean a team that didn't even finish first in their division plays in the title game. Since the conference championship loser will have two losses they are out, then you want to tell me the third or fourth place team in the SEC will be rewarded with a title game? I don't see it.

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

In a few years we will finally see a real champion.

Besides I don't think there will be two SEC teams if ND loses. That would mean a team that didn't even finish first in their division plays in the title game. Since the conference championship loser will have two losses they are out, then you want to tell me the third or fourth place team in the SEC will be rewarded with a title game? I don't see it.

Nope. Florida can still get in. And they won't even be playing for the SEC title.

BCS = ****ing travesty

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

This is the same dumb logic that would suggest that the AFC doesn't deserve to be in the Super Bowl because they are playing inferior to the NFC this year. Or the same dumb logic that would suggest that the entire decade from 2000-2010, the Yankees should have played the Red Sox in the world series every year.

The best two teams don't always play in championship games. In college football, there are too few games, and half of those games or more are against shitty competition. The ONLY way to compare two teams is if they are in the same conference. For a sport that already relies too heavily on opinion, why in the world would you take away the only tiebreaker that's truly objective?

It's not an objective tiebreaker when you compare conferences, strength of schedule, quality wins, and compare loss(es).

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

That would mean a team that didn't even finish first in their division plays in the title game.

That's what happened last year.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

It's not an objective tiebreaker when you compare conferences, strength of schedule, quality wins, and compare loss(es).



That's what happened last year.

Conference champions are objective tiebreakers. They either are decided by a championship game to decide the winner, or they are based on

Even if you have an opinion about whether Alabama is better than Notre Dame, you will never know because they don't play the same schedule. The SEC championship game on the other hand... you basically have a National League and an American league, and they battle it out in the SEC championship game to determine the conference winner. It is a fair qualifier and if you don't pass that qualifier, it is outrageous that you'd be considered for a national championship game.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Conference champions are objective tiebreakers. They either are decided by a championship game to decide the winner, or they are based on

Even if you have an opinion about whether Alabama is better than Notre Dame, you will never know because they don't play the same schedule. The SEC championship game on the other hand... you basically have a National League and an American league, and they battle it out in the SEC championship game to determine the conference winner. It is a fair qualifier and if you don't pass that qualifier, it is outrageous that you'd be considered for a national championship game.

Within a conference, it's objective. When you then compare winning your conferences vs not winning your conference between teams from different conferences - it's no longer an objective measure for the reasons you state in your previous post.