(05-31-2016 08:58 AM)The4thOption Wrote: [ -> ] (05-30-2016 12:14 PM)Fark Wrote: [ -> ]My problem with a championship game is this. If each team plays 8 of the other 9 teams, there is a very high probability that the championship game will be a repeat of a regular season matchup. Consider this scenario. Team A goes 8-0 and is #1. Team B goes 7-1 losing only to team A and is #2. Team B beats team A in the championship game. Both teams are now 8-1 in the conference and have beaten the other team. I know the winner of the championship game will be declared the champion but their case for being the best team in the conference is no stronger than the loser's case. Team A may have had a case for the access bowl before the championship game but not after.
Two sides to every coin.
If team A wins the game, they have another good win under their belt and the possible spring board needed to put themselves in front of others in the Access Bowl chase. At the very least, they might prevent being leaped frogged or left behind.
I think that we can't plan out of fear. We can't be scared to play another game to prove we belong. At least it helps put the future of where we go into our own hands. If we lose the ccg, we probably don't deserve the Access.
Side note: on the issue of rematches in the title game:
Nobody likes them, but they happen. But until we have 12 teams, this is part of why I like only 7 required conference games. Also, it might help to keep the two highest ranked programs on each side of the conference, off of next year's schedule of the both two highest ranked finishers from the other side. Maybe this would help our top cross divisional teams from only meeting in a ccg.
MWC has had some re-matches since they started a title game like the year Boise St went the Fiesta Bowl. SEC has had them recently as well but others like the MAC haven't had one in a while. As a fan I don't like them but we saw them often in our FCS playoff days and usually those games were attended well.
Two divisions
8 Conference games
CCG in higher ranked teams stadium.
If teams have trouble getting 4 OOC games they should be able to schedule another conference game if available.
I've not run the numbers on what happens in title game rematches, I do know that higher rated hosting cuts the chances of an upset significantly vs neutral site and lower rated hosted (which happens sometimes when you rotate hosting between divisions).
(05-31-2016 10:39 AM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]I've not run the numbers on what happens in title game rematches, I do know that higher rated hosting cuts the chances of an upset significantly vs neutral site and lower rated hosted (which happens sometimes when you rotate hosting between divisions).
I just took a quick look at the MAC Championship games (which is neutral site) and this is the results from the last 10 years.
Bold is winner - * indicates higher rated in game (more conf wins or higher ranked)
2015
Bowling Green* - N. Illinois
2014
N. Illinois* - Bowling Green
2013 N. Illinois* -
Bowling Green
2012 Kent St* -
N. Illinois (Kent was higher rated but by only 1 spot)
2011
N. Illinois* - Ohio
2010 N. Illinois* -
Miami (OH)
2009
C. Mich* - Ohio
2008 Ball St* -
Buffalo
2007
C. Mich* - Miami (OH)
2006 Ohio* -
C. Mich
So in the past 10 years at a neutral site the higher rated team won 5 times (50%) so I would think having the championship game at the home of the higher rated team would probably add at least one more win to that.
(05-31-2016 08:58 AM)The4thOption Wrote: [ -> ] (05-30-2016 12:14 PM)Fark Wrote: [ -> ]My problem with a championship game is this. If each team plays 8 of the other 9 teams, there is a very high probability that the championship game will be a repeat of a regular season matchup. Consider this scenario. Team A goes 8-0 and is #1. Team B goes 7-1 losing only to team A and is #2. Team B beats team A in the championship game. Both teams are now 8-1 in the conference and have beaten the other team. I know the winner of the championship game will be declared the champion but their case for being the best team in the conference is no stronger than the loser's case. Team A may have had a case for the access bowl before the championship game but not after.
Two sides to every coin.
If team A wins the game, they have another good win under their belt and the possible spring board needed to put themselves in front of others in the Access Bowl chase. At the very least, they might prevent being leaped frogged or left behind.
I think that we can't plan out of fear. We can't be scared to play another game to prove we belong. At least it helps put the future of where we go into our own hands. If we lose the ccg, we probably don't deserve the Access.
Side note: on the issue of rematches in the title game:
Nobody likes them, but they happen. But until we have 12 teams, this is part of why I like only 7 required conference games. Also, it might help to keep the two highest ranked programs on each side of the conference, off of next year's schedule of the both two highest ranked finishers from the other side. Maybe this would help our top cross divisional teams from only meeting in a ccg.
The bolded part is a million percent correct. If our "best" team can't get out of its conference championship game, then it wasn't our best team, and is not worthy of being in the access bowl conversation. Plain and simple. Neither is any other G5 team in their respective leagues, American included.