would you care to weigh in your musings on a conference championship game for football?
this board is full of newbs proclaiming we HAVE TO get to 12 football playing members so we can have a championship game.
i believe it would be disastrous to have a football mirror of the anemic hot springs crowds we put on espn for our hoops tourney.
these newbs act like we're a junior sec league and we'd rock the georgia dome and we'd get so many more televizzle dollars from the espn.
you're generally regarded as the smartest guy in the room (when i'm not present).
i have to cede conference politics and finances to you. i get to keep pee wee beisbol and sun belt conference hoops in my corner. that makes us equal (in beed bizarro world)
what up? what say you?
I am definitly not ark st fan, but I think a ccg does have advantages IMO. Having a ccg would have a few positives listed below:
1. Have the game on the campus of the team with the best record. This rewards the team with the best record another home game for their fans, and the positive impact to their local community that comes with it.
2. While it may not ad many media $, it will give sb another nationally televised game on championship weekend. National tv games are something that the sb could use more of imo.
Sent from my SHARP-ADS1 using Tapatalk 2
I keep thinking about the 2008 MAC Championship game in which 12th Ranked and 12-0 Ball St. got beaten by Buffalo.
A championship game can only harm public perception of the Sun Belt by things like this happening.
(05-06-2012 08:50 AM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote: [ -> ]I keep thinking about the 2008 MAC Championship game in which 12th Ranked and 12-0 Ball St. got beaten by Buffalo.
A championship game can only harm public perception of the Sun Belt by things like this happening.
The MAC lost $$$ that year, just like C-USA did last year when Houston lost to USM. Had Houston won C-USA would have had BCS Bowl money.
(05-06-2012 08:50 AM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote: [ -> ]I keep thinking about the 2008 MAC Championship game in which 12th Ranked and 12-0 Ball St. got beaten by Buffalo.
A championship game can only harm public perception of the Sun Belt by things like this happening.
Not to mention the real possibility of having a division winner that is 6-6 falling to 6-7 and having to apply for a waiver to get into a bowl game. If it can happen in the PAC 12 (even though USC wasn't eligible) it will definitely happen to us somewhere along the road.
(05-06-2012 08:54 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2012 08:50 AM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote: [ -> ]I keep thinking about the 2008 MAC Championship game in which 12th Ranked and 12-0 Ball St. got beaten by Buffalo.
A championship game can only harm public perception of the Sun Belt by things like this happening.
The MAC lost $$$ that year, just like C-USA did last year when Houston lost to USM. Had Houston won C-USA would have had BCS Bowl money.
both of those are in the back of my mind every time someone says we HAVE TO have one.
(05-06-2012 08:54 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote: [ -> ] (05-06-2012 08:50 AM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote: [ -> ]I keep thinking about the 2008 MAC Championship game in which 12th Ranked and 12-0 Ball St. got beaten by Buffalo.
A championship game can only harm public perception of the Sun Belt by things like this happening.
The MAC lost $$$ that year, just like C-USA did last year when Houston lost to USM. Had Houston won C-USA would have had BCS Bowl money.
Yet cusa has intentionally gotten back to at least 12 in order to keep the game, and the MAC didn't get rid of theirs. I don't know what the right answer is with regard to economics, but you would have to think those two instances above are outliers.
As a fan I would like to see a game, but I am not so pro ccg that I don't see the other side.
Sent from my SHARP-ADS1 using Tapatalk 2
If you can fill up a neutral site and get a great tv deal for the game then it has some appeal.
But we get neither of those and just run the risk of knocking our champion out.
I like the 12-10 setup. Playing a 9 game round robin in football. If we go to 12 in football, WKU might not play the Cajuns which has been penciled in as a W for WKU the last few years.
Sorry, but you guys are being so short sighted. A championship game gives you a guaranteed national media game that the networks can bid on.
The more national exposure you receive the greater relevance is the conference. Play the game at the school with the better record or, on a rotating basis, at the divisions highest placed schools home (east divsion one year, west division the next). A full house is almost assured and there will be no arguement as to who goes to New Orleans.
Sure, you're not ready yet, however, as the new schools get up to speed and if App and Ga Southern come on board....wouldn't it be fun to have a conference championship game to shoot for?
This is a fan board, dream big.
I wonder how much money would be saved, if any, from having two divisions thus cutting down on travel expenses. I know TxSt would benefit from that, although I'm not sure how much of a savings it would be for the Arkansas and Louisiana schools.
If we do have a championship game then we should definitely follow the CUSA method of having it at the school with the best record.
(05-06-2012 09:49 AM)txstatebobcat Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder how much money would be saved, if any, from having two divisions thus cutting down on travel expenses. I know TxSt would benefit from that, although I'm not sure how much of a savings it would be for the Arkansas and Louisiana schools.
The Arkansas and Louisiana schools would get to skip out on a trip to Boca Raton while the East schools wouldn't have to make their way to San Marcos.
As for going to 12, I love the new SBC football lineup but its going to be 5 years before its anything other than the basement conference of FBS adding 3 FCS schools (TXST, USA, GSU). Therefore it makes sense to split the football revenue 10 ways in the interim.
I wouldn't bother adding Idaho and NMSU for a championship game. A scheduling agreement with Idaho/NMSU to play 4 SBC schools a year that might be worth exploring.
I think if the highest ranked team gets to host it at home, then it will be a success.
(05-06-2012 09:59 AM)GaSouthern Wrote: [ -> ]I think if the highest ranked team gets to host it at home, then it will be a success.
Generally there won't be a "ranked" team; perhaps an agreement can be reached among member schools that some index which ranks all 120 schools is used.
I think a rotating division winner being used would give schools time to prepare for the game. The six schools in one division would know at the beginning of the year that who ever won would be hosting the Champ game that year. Therefore divisional games would carry even more weight, right up until the end; and a heated rival who happened to be in last place could stick it to their mate with a late season upset. Giving even greater meaning to 'every game matters'.
p.s. it also assures that one hot team doesn't host 5 years in a row.
I'm not Arkstfan....though many confuse the two of us due to the quality of our opinions and posts.
Having cleared that up.....I agree with Winston.
(05-06-2012 08:50 AM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote: [ -> ]I keep thinking about the 2008 MAC Championship game in which 12th Ranked and 12-0 Ball St. got beaten by Buffalo.
A championship game can only harm public perception of the Sun Belt by things like this happening.
I hear what everyone is saying, however I think we need to keep one thing in mind. What other bowl subdivision conference doesn't have a CCG or or in process adding enough teams to hold a CCG? I am not sure the answer is to hold one, but I think it is a point we need to consider when the conversation turn to if we belong in this division.
Bottom line needs to be if it adds to our bottom line then hold one...if the networks don't make it worth it, then don't.
I also don't believe the rule is written that if you have 12 football members then you must hold a CCG. Only you are allowed to do so.
I don't think we have to have a championship game, but it would be to our advantage. Starting in 2013, every conference is set to have a championship game except us and the Big XII. Having it would give us 1 extra game on national TV. It should not be at a neutral site, but at the field of one of the participating teams. Having more teams gives us a chance to have more bowl eligible teams. It would also give us a chance to have more than 1 ranked team if that were to ever occur. Each division could have a team go 8-0 in conference, as long as they didn't play each other.
It has it's arguments either way guys. Having it gives you more of a selling point to TV networks and are you all not considering scenarios like this.
Say Troy goes 8-4 then gets matched up against a 7-6 TxSt team and both have the same conference record. Troy wins then follows with a bowl win and has a 10-4 season instead of just ending with another New Orleans bowl win and a conference championship tie. Or we can continue to be the same ole Sun Belt we have been for years...
(05-06-2012 10:56 AM)Fanof49ASU Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not Arkstfan....though many confuse the two of us due to the quality of our opinions and posts.
Having cleared that up.....I agree with Winston.
(05-06-2012 08:50 AM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote: [ -> ]I keep thinking about the 2008 MAC Championship game in which 12th Ranked and 12-0 Ball St. got beaten by Buffalo.
A championship game can only harm public perception of the Sun Belt by things like this happening.
sorry amigo but me and arkstfan go back to early 90's when we were on a sun belt board hosted on the 'prodgy' isp. i remember going from a 1200 modem to 2400.
you sir are no 'mark brooks'.
but i agreed with winston the woof as well.
And the conference championship can just be at a home team site so no one can blame anyone but themselves if they are 12-0 at home and lose. If you lose to the Sun belt runner up you probably weren't going to a BCS bowl anyway.