Generic hypothetical - chances of two SEC teams playing for the MNC?

the ap took themselves out of the bcs process. so some people can still give that poll value, but there would be no "revolt".

 

It is my opinion that this should NEVER happen. Either you are the best team in your conference or you are not. If you are not the best team in your conference, you have no claim to being the best team in the country. It was wrong when Oklahoma played for the National Championship after losing the Big 12 title game. It was wrong when people were trying to put Michigan in the championship game last year.

If you aren't your conference champion, you have no business being given a shot to be the national champion. Period.

 

My hypothetical was based on the current process of choosing the BCS #1 and #2 teams, and not in any hypothetical changes to that process.

But I do happen to agree with you, if we're going to have just a 2-team championship system. I don't want to turn this into a college football playoff scenarios thread, but suffice it to say that unless we saw at least a 6-team playoff (with two teams getting a bye week), I think only conference champions should be in those playoffs. I'd also strongly encourage/force all teams to join a conference, and strongly encourage/force all conferences to have a championship game. This would turn the conference championship games into sort of a first-round of the playoffs. But I don't want this to be a playoff thread.

 

Yoy're assuming the "Best" team always wins and also that one conference can't have the "Best" two teams in the Nation in it- think about that.

Everyone says the SEC is THE strongest conference, who's to say, on any given year, we couldn't have the two best teams and be unfortunate enough to have to play each other b/c we are in the same conference.

 

I think the philosophy going on is that, similar to the NFL (where the AFC or NFC could theoretically have the best two teams), only one team per conference is ever going to make the Super Bowl, and winning your conference in college football should be considered such a critical thing that not doing so eliminates your chances of playing for the national championship. I personally would compromise... the top 4 conference champions would make a 6-team playoff, and then the 2 highest ranked teams that are not yet in the playoffs would make it, with whichever 2 teams out of those 6 teams with the highest ranking given a bye week. Then teams 3 plays 6, and 4 plays 5, on/near Christmas. The winners then play teams 1 and 2 on New Year's Day, and the winners of those two games play approximately a week later for the national championship. But I don't want this to be a playoff thread.

 

I don't think I'm assuming the best team wins it. I'm taking it as a given that the conferences are allowed to choose the "best" from their conference however they like. The conference champion defines the "best". If a conference doesn't like how it ends up, it should change how it determines its champion. If it wants to determine its champion by post-season vote of the conference coaches, that's fine with me. However you pick your champion of the conference, that has to be the team you're saying is the "best".

It comes from ancient warfare among certain cultures. Two sides who wanted war picked their "champion" to represent them on the field of battle. The two sides "champions" faced off one-on-one. The winner of the fight determined the winner of the war, at least for a time. Each side picked their "champion" to be their best. The champion was then the representative of that side. It's how we get the verb form of the word "champion".

In football, the champion has to be the conference's representative. If you don't like your champion, and think someone else would make a better champion, then come up with a different way of choosing your champion, but under no circumstances do you get two entries into the field just because you think you may have the two best fighters on the field.

 

And the BCS is used to determine the "Best" in the Nation. If the two "Best" teams in the Nation happen to be in the same conference, the system presents a problem.

You said, "If you aren't your conference champion, you have no business being given a shot to be the national champion. Period". I'm saying if the two best teams are in the same conference they should have a chance to play in the NC game.

 

I don't agree - a regional championship isn't necessarily linearly linked to a national championship. By using only regional data, it is possible to weaken the importance of the national regular season. Regional outcomes should not trump national outcomes.

 

NCAA rule #3162.S.2565>H.3581.I.6482T

In order to protect the integrity of college football, anytime one conference has the #1 and #2 team in the final poll of the year, the University of Southern California will be the replacement team for the #2 ranked team and will compete with #1 for the National Championship which should by all rights be theirs in the first place. (If Notre Damn has not lost more than five games, the University of ND may be substituted for #1.)