Looks like we're getting a 4-team playoff starting in 2014

Personally, I hope we get to blow up a condom in 2014.

 

It's undoubtedly a step in the right direction. But I'm uneasy with this selection committee idea and locking in this format through 2025.

 

According to ESPN, there are 6 bowls that will rotate hosting the semi-finals. Three bowl games are already designated as "contract bowls": the Rose Bowl, the Orange Bowl, and the new "Champions Bowl" between the SEC and the Big XII. The other 3 bowls are called "access bowls" and will go to the highest bidders.

The Sugar Bowl - in order to host any semi-finals - will have to be one of the final 3 bidders for the "access bowls". I have not seen any info on how long any of the "access bowls" will hold that distinction. If the Sugar Bowl does not offer a high enough bid to become an "access bowl" then it may soon become irrelevant in that it's biggest draw probably won't even be the SEC runner up in years where the SEC has 2 teams go to the playoffs.

New Orleans is not guaranteed any semi-final games or any championship games. The SEC and Big XII have yet to name the site of where the "Champions Bowl" will be played or if it will also have a rotating yearly site based on the highest bidder.

 

Its simple really, don't lose!

 

I got a little queasy when Barry Switzer volunteered his services for the selection committee. I wonder what Gene Stallings is doing with his spare time these days?

 

There are two teams against expanding the Big12 to 12 teams again and having a conference championship game; OU and TX. I consider that to be a weak approach, one I'd almost call fearful. I remember vividly OU opening their season with a game against BYU in Arlington and losing. Stoops said they would never do that again. Why? It's because they lost. That's easy to figure out. But, it's a weak approach to the football season. It's nothing more than "lets find the easiest way to the championship." If I were a fan of OU, I'd be ashamed. In fact, I find it akin to teams like Boise State playing no one and then saying "our record as undefeated should give us a shot" when we all know other teams are better.

Now, it is possible for a team ranked in the top four to lose in the SECCG. But, if that's their only loss they'll still get their shot. The strength of schedule alone would keep them in. On the other hand, if we had a team ranked third or fourth with a loss or two already on their record and they lose again? I wouldn't have a problem with another school getting in as long as they have the resume to support their inclusion. (Let's not forget, it would put that team in a major bowl: The Champions.)

All of the schools in the SEC benefit from the SECCG. I hope we don't move away from it. It would seem like a insecure complex by our conference when we have all the reasons in the world not to feel that way.

 

It could easily be argued that Okie State's failure to accumulate brownie points from a CCG last season, has already cost them a NC game. That is why I'm a lot more comfortable with the selection committee trying to figure out SOS, then cherry picking conference champions for the big one. Texas and Okie will eventually regret that silly position.

 

I'm already tired of the playoff talk everywhere.

Now, here's something that will sure piss on any kind of good day you might be having...

You thought all the Tebow talk was bad?

Say hello to your new little friend...



I'm old fashioned, stuck in my ways. I'll keep my mute button...