C
CougarbibAre they stupid? Do they accomplish anything useful? Or do they just muck things up?
I have long stated that Texas is the smartest program in college football - even ahead of SEC powers in knowing how to play the odds of the game to their favor. I give them the nod, because they have bucked the trend of gonig to 12 team or larger conferences and Conference Championship Games after having first gone there and realized the downsides outweigh the money - which seems to usually be the main upside. Yes - there are caes where it actually settles who won the conference in a situation where there is actually some doubt.
We are not talking UCLA vs Oregon State here. Not LSU vs Georgia even. In fact, while LSU who clearly deserves to be in the NC game had to take the risk of a fluke loss in an extra game, Alabama who arguably does not belong in it given thier cupcake oOC schedule, only 5 road games, and having already lost to LSU and not even winning their own division let alone conference, got to rest and prove absolutely nothing Saturday. They are the ones that should have had to play Georgia or someone to prove that they truly deserve to be in the NC after not winning their own division.
And Okie State luckily does not have to play some meaningless CCG game now and risk a fluke loss. It was one of these fluke losses for A&M or someone in the BIg 12, that opened Texas to the clear notion that Less is More in the CCG scenario.
I would guess that the ACC wishes they did not have a CCG tis year - at least Va. ech, anyway. I bet Houston wishes they had not played that one extra meaningless game. I guess it wasn't totaly meaningless since they lost - but it cost Conference USA millions of dollars - which then raises another issue when so much money is at stake will some teams roll over for their undefeated CCG opponent for the sake of BCS $. I guess So. Miss didn't get that memo. Hope nobody needed the money. And look at MWC. Anybody want to see a BSU and TCU rematch for a CCG?
Big 10, I suppose was meaningful as it was not clear who the Big 10 Champ would be otherwise.
Anyway - it can muck things up in some cases, be meaningless in others, and actually clear things up in a case like Big 10.
PAC meaningless and disatrous had Oregon had a fluke loss. Rediculous no matter how you look at it.
WAC and Mountain West and Big 12 - no CCG. And none was needed.
BIg 10 + 2. CCG was sort of needed and did clear up who is BIg 10 Champ.
Conf USA - un-needed. Stupid. Cost them millions of dollars and rare BCS Buster access.
BEAST - no CCG. They used BCS rankings as a tie breaker. There are many ways to break a tie - like head-to-head. lack of a CCG did not hurt anything here, but if they had one - it would have had some relevance.
SEC - no point to this one. LSU gets punished and has to risk loss or injury while Bama rests and gets ready for the rematch.
I skipped MAC and Sunbelt due to being too lazy to go look and due to a total lack of interest in those conferences.
I skipped ACC. OK, I will go look it up, because it seems that their 1-loss team with a small case to argue for a NC bid - and thus cause the BCS some grief - lost. Va. Tech. But then - Clemson probably thinks that game was a really good idea becasue they went from looking like a clear 2nd to being the confernce Champ with a worse record over-all.
So ACC and BIg 10 probably added some value. So Miss would argue that the CCG in C-USA added value - for them. Houston - might disagree.
Whadda you think? Should we go back to 9 or 10 or 11 team conferences where everybody plays everybody and get rid of CCGs? Or celebrate the joy of having a few more games matching mostly decent opponents to watch in early December each year.
I have long stated that Texas is the smartest program in college football - even ahead of SEC powers in knowing how to play the odds of the game to their favor. I give them the nod, because they have bucked the trend of gonig to 12 team or larger conferences and Conference Championship Games after having first gone there and realized the downsides outweigh the money - which seems to usually be the main upside. Yes - there are caes where it actually settles who won the conference in a situation where there is actually some doubt.
We are not talking UCLA vs Oregon State here. Not LSU vs Georgia even. In fact, while LSU who clearly deserves to be in the NC game had to take the risk of a fluke loss in an extra game, Alabama who arguably does not belong in it given thier cupcake oOC schedule, only 5 road games, and having already lost to LSU and not even winning their own division let alone conference, got to rest and prove absolutely nothing Saturday. They are the ones that should have had to play Georgia or someone to prove that they truly deserve to be in the NC after not winning their own division.
And Okie State luckily does not have to play some meaningless CCG game now and risk a fluke loss. It was one of these fluke losses for A&M or someone in the BIg 12, that opened Texas to the clear notion that Less is More in the CCG scenario.
I would guess that the ACC wishes they did not have a CCG tis year - at least Va. ech, anyway. I bet Houston wishes they had not played that one extra meaningless game. I guess it wasn't totaly meaningless since they lost - but it cost Conference USA millions of dollars - which then raises another issue when so much money is at stake will some teams roll over for their undefeated CCG opponent for the sake of BCS $. I guess So. Miss didn't get that memo. Hope nobody needed the money. And look at MWC. Anybody want to see a BSU and TCU rematch for a CCG?
Big 10, I suppose was meaningful as it was not clear who the Big 10 Champ would be otherwise.
Anyway - it can muck things up in some cases, be meaningless in others, and actually clear things up in a case like Big 10.
PAC meaningless and disatrous had Oregon had a fluke loss. Rediculous no matter how you look at it.
WAC and Mountain West and Big 12 - no CCG. And none was needed.
BIg 10 + 2. CCG was sort of needed and did clear up who is BIg 10 Champ.
Conf USA - un-needed. Stupid. Cost them millions of dollars and rare BCS Buster access.
BEAST - no CCG. They used BCS rankings as a tie breaker. There are many ways to break a tie - like head-to-head. lack of a CCG did not hurt anything here, but if they had one - it would have had some relevance.
SEC - no point to this one. LSU gets punished and has to risk loss or injury while Bama rests and gets ready for the rematch.
I skipped MAC and Sunbelt due to being too lazy to go look and due to a total lack of interest in those conferences.
I skipped ACC. OK, I will go look it up, because it seems that their 1-loss team with a small case to argue for a NC bid - and thus cause the BCS some grief - lost. Va. Tech. But then - Clemson probably thinks that game was a really good idea becasue they went from looking like a clear 2nd to being the confernce Champ with a worse record over-all.
So ACC and BIg 10 probably added some value. So Miss would argue that the CCG in C-USA added value - for them. Houston - might disagree.
Whadda you think? Should we go back to 9 or 10 or 11 team conferences where everybody plays everybody and get rid of CCGs? Or celebrate the joy of having a few more games matching mostly decent opponents to watch in early December each year.