Pac CCG change

[Charlie]

Jon Wilner summed up the need for change this way:

Over the course of 11 years, the Pac-12 championship game has paired top-10 teams only three times and included an unranked team twice.

Had the new model been in place, top-10 teams would have squared off five times; no unranked team would have ever set foot on the field.

It would seem the change could be for the better.

[2008 National Champ]

While I like Wilner’s points for the most part, he really missed the boat on this one. UCLA got into the CCG twice because SC was on probation, were ranked, and would have been the South champ if eligible. The bigger issue is the need for a CCG at all. Using the new criteria of top two teams regardless of division:

2011: Oregon (8-1), Stanford (8-1). Rematch, no need to replay, Oregon wins conference.
2012: Stanford (8-1), Oregon (8-1). Rematch, no need to replay, Stanford wins conference.
2013: Arizona State (8-1), Oregon/Stanford (7-2). Arizona State wins conference.
2014: Oregon (8-1), Arizona (7-2). Oregon wins conference.
2015: Stanford (8-1), Oregon (7-2). Stanford wins conference.
2016: Washington (8-1, 11-1), Colorado (8-1, 10-2). Washington wins conference based on ranking, overall record.
2017: USC (8-1), Stanford/Washington (7-2). USC wins conference.
2018: Washington (7-2), WSU (7-2). Rematch, no need to replay, Washington wins conference.
2019: Utah (8-1, 11-1), Oregon (8-1, 10-2). Utah wins conference based on ranking, overall record.
2020: Blame it on Fauci
2021: Utah (8-1), Oregon (7-2). Utah wins conference.

Only twice in 10 years of full conference schedules have there been teams with equivalent conference records that did not play during the season. Each of those times, other tie-breakers would have decided the conference champ long before the need to play a CCG. And with the elimination of divisions, what is the purpose? The game doesn’t make money, is on a Friday night which keeps fans of both teams from attending – even though it is now easier to get to in Vegas -, and goes completely against all people who say too many games is one of the main reasons to not expand to a real playoff instead of the BullCrapSeries x2.

When the 2016 game would have served as an elimination game for the CFP, and the 2019 game did, show me the need for the game at all. Especially when 80% of the time, the champ had already been decided on the field.

[THEeyepatch]

Blame it on Fauci? Tell me you’re joking right?

[Johnny]

F**k, Fauci. He’s a clown who has done more damage than good. He needs to resign immediately.

[Hahnenwk]

To Johnny
1 million dead
You blame Fauci LOL

[UteThunder]

Now tell us the numbers of flu/pneumonia cases & deaths during that same time period compared to other years.

Then, follow that up with the total number of U.S. deaths for 2019 vs 2020 vs 2021.

Finish up by breaking down the number of covid deaths between those who died WITH covid and those who died FROM covid. 

[dystopiamembrane]

420 is the number of narwhals that live in the ocean of milk in my backyard.

[dystopiamembrane]

I am a fan of Gertrude Stein.

[PlainsUte]

More like Larry Scott and/or the left coast governors, led by Gov Newsom of California.

[dystopiamembrane]

I also dig Saul Bellow.

[dystopiamembrane]

I understand that Bellow is not without his retractors.

[RedRocks]

How to ruin your argument in one line…

[Stone]

Good points on the Championship games. The primary goal seems to be to boost revenue. I believe the TV rights do boost TV revenue for the Pac12 (even with low attendance – aside from last year in Vegas). But I do not know how much revenue those TV rights really add, especially after dividing it among 12 schools.

The other theoretical benefit is that a top team can get a ranking / strength-of-schedule boost. But that assumes the top team wins. As you point out, in 2019, if Utah and Oregon don’t play in that championship game, Utah may have gone to the playoffs. Instead, Utah loses, and there is no playoff rep from the Pac 12. 

Similarly, if there are re-match games, winning the re-match is very difficult (although, as Utah showed, not impossible). But even so, there seems to be minimal benefit to beating a team twice (even when ranked somewhat highly).

Finally, when pairing the two highest ranked teams, the theoretical playoff boost is only realized if the higher ranked of the two wins. If not, the playoff hopes are usually shot because the lower of the two is not likely to get enough boost from the win to qualify for the playoffs.

Of course, if there are auto-playoff bids for conference champs, then that somewhat changes things. Ultimately though, I am not a fan of rematch championship games. If you win the conference outright during the season, that should be enough to be the auto-qualifier for playoffs.

[Central Coast Ute]

Rematches are only difficult if you lose the first game. Statistics show whoever wins the first, will more than likely win the second.

[UteThunder]

Here is the need for the CCG: We don’t play a round robin schedule.  The top 2 teams can have the same record, or one of them have a better record than the other, but if those two teams didn’t play each other in the regular season or one played an easier schedule than the other; having a CCG provides the opportunity to decide who is really the better team.

[utefansince79]

CCG not going anywhere in the near future.  Lotsa $$$$ involved, especially now that it relocated to Vega$.

 

 

[Author]

Posts