How would you feel if all conferences that play a Championship game matched up the two teams with the best conference records regardless of what division they are in? Looking ahead to next weeks SEC Championship matchup triggered this idea in my head. If South Carolina upsets Auburn, who they almost beat earlier in the year, they will technically finish 6-3 in conference play while Auburn will finish either 7-2 or 8-1 (depending on what happens against Alabama). Auburn would have more SEC wins than South Carolina and a .500 record against them this season. I thought back to the 2005 ACC Championship when 5-3 Florida State upset 7-1 Virginia Tech to take home the title. Now I understand that there are some that will stand by the notion that a "true" champion would win a championship game against an inferior opponent. I understand your side; I still don't think a team that doesn't win their Conference should play for a National Title no matter how good they are (Yes, I'm talking about you 2003 Oklahoma), but it would be disappointing for a 12-1 team with one conference lost to have to call themselves the second place team when the team ahead of them has two more conference loses than they do. The divisions could still be used for scheduling purposes in this format. Just curious to see what FanNation has to say.
Start Your Own BlogStart Now
- Wiggins may have a teammate challenging him for the top pick
- UCF winning The American better for the conference's future
- Another Big 12 Champ not named Oklahoma or Texas
- Huskies to the Big 12?
- (Colorado, Utah) The birth of a rivalry?
- Shouldn't a Championship game be between the two best teams?