They can't play a conference championship game right now, they would need to add 2 teams in order to do so. And it's easy to repsect a conference for doing things the same way they've always done, such as the Big 10 and Pac 10, in my opinion. Just because the SEC and Big 12 decided go for the big bucks by expanding to 12 teams with the conference championship doesn't mean other conferences have to follow suit.
dunno if it really matters in terrible conferences. check out the small 12 and the colorado fiasco last year. that is almost proof sometimes it is irrelevant in such conferences in any given year. big 10 still doesnt have one either. the big 12 is 0-9 against ranked teams this year as well. thank you UGA for not ruining that.
You are comparing apples to oranges. Booty has played in how many college games? I believe that Russell is gone after this year if he continues having the same success. He has all the tools and there are few pro prospects in college available for the draft this year.
I can respect the "not selling out" philosophy, but why not have the top 2 teams in the respective Conf. play a Championship game.... BTW, please dont ever take down your "signature photos".......Ever. Haven't seen a flat stomach since kid #1. :geauxtige :geauxtige :geauxtige :geauxtige
Very True... Colorado go spanked, but I think back to the "spare 12 CG" when Nebraska played Texas and UT pulled off a miracle victory.... Just adds a little excitement. What if the SEC dumped Vandy and MSU and had no SECCG... Just a thought.... :geauxtige :geauxtige :geauxtige :geauxtige
Someone was saying that to make a NCG the SEC team would have to win the SECCG. IF that is true, isn't a bit unfair that the conferences that have 12 teams are forced to win an extra to compete for the NC while other conferences with no CG are allowed to enter into the NCG hunt? That'd seem a bit stupid to me.
no, because we agreed and signed the contract for the conf championship game by choice knowing already the other conferences didnt have one in place nor with the understanding that they would in the future. we did it for money, nothing more. if it ends up costing us or our conference a NC its our damned fault. you know, the same way USC agreed to the BCS as the outright champion but wanted to change the rules after the fact? no, we aren't them.
Where is the guy that started this thread. I guess is waitng for something bad to write about, or maybe he just agrees with everyone and just dosen't see the need to say it.
Didn't the rule about having to win your conference CG come into effect after the '03 season, well AFTER we signed all the papers for the SECCG set up? No SEC team could have seen this rule change coming into effect when they signed the papers for the SECCG set up. Hence, maybe we should get a revote? There's a big difference between this and what USC tried to do. They knew full well AT THE TIME OF SIGNING what would happen in their sisuation yet still tried to change it. The rule that you have to win your conference CG game came together well after the CG's were put into place.
I'm here.....I started this thread to create a constructive debate, which is what we see here. Lots of good points. It will be interesting to see how well Booty does without Jarrett. I still stand by the fact that Russell has not progressed adequately on the mental side of the game. And the OC here is still a joke. Those are givens. By the way, speaking of our beloved OC, what exactly was our first target in the play at the 19 with 14 seconds to go? Don't know if I'm the only one who thought it was obvious to throw a fade pattern to Bowe on the very first play to give us our best chance at a TD, plus take up the least time to execute the play in order to get 3 cracks at the endzone. But I digress.
