(05-29-2019 08:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-29-2019 05:51 PM)goofus Wrote:  

(05-29-2019 12:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-29-2019 11:18 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(05-29-2019 09:45 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Most controversial scenario, and one that would happen somewhere eventually if every conference did this, is two teams that didn't play each other tying for 2nd place, and of course if two teams tie for 2nd, only one of them plays in the CCG.

And as I mentioned above, scrapping the divisions and changing schedules could turn a good record into a title-contending record (which could make these ties more likely). Last season, for example, Penn State was 9-3 with losses to Ohio State, Michigan, and Michigan State. Maybe Penn State is 11-1 if they only have to play one of those three. Maybe LSU is 11-1 or 12-0 a few more times if they don't play Alabama every season.

Before you conclude that TIEs (and therefore, Tie-breakers) are so much worse than division-winners... 2011 UCLA would like to have a word with you!

They had nothing to do with it. That was USC being on probation, per an infractions committee headed by the Miami athletic director, who brought the hammer down on USC while at the same time Nevin Shapiro was handing out money, gifts, hookers, etc. to Miami football players.

I think you just helped prove his point. With divisions, if the best team is on probation, you can end up with a 6-6 team in the CCG.

Practically the Same thing happened in the Big Ten in 2012. Both OSU and PSU on probation while 3rd place 4-4 Wisconsin made the CCG. Meanwhile 6-2 team in other division sat at home.

3rd place in the division Wisconsin won that Big Ten CCG...