What purpose does a Conference Championship game serve?

[Sportsbuck]

Holcutt said that what hurt Penn State was the 39 point loss to Michigan along with the loss to 4 loss Pitt. Having 2 losses to Washington's 1 is what hurt them. I have a hard time imagining Washington getting in with 2 losses on their resume, even with a PAC-12 title.

[Sportsbuck]

Quote: Originally Posted by BigDofBA

I was responding to the poster above me. I know the committee goes off what they think. I'm questioning their reasoning, logic, and point of a Confernce Championship game.

It's all about $$$. Another game of revenue coming in. Most coaches don't like them because it's another chance to lose.

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by kehlis

Not sure who you mean by "we" but the committee goes off of what they think. And that's not a secret as outlined pretty clearly.

Got it, not sure what you're looking for then since you already know the answer to your question.

[BigDofBA]

Quote: Originally Posted by kehlis

Got it, not sure what you're looking for then since you already know the answer to your question.

The main topic was the point of a Conference title game. The conversation evolved to the committee's decisions.

[Jr.]

Quote: Originally Posted by BigDofBA

I would think getting in the playoff would look better.

Maybe, but a committee's decision is outside of a coach's control. Conference championship is something they can control. It would be easy to brush that off.

Besides, your question wasn't which is better, just what is the purpose.

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by BigDofBA

The main topic was the point of a Conference title game. The conversation evolved to the committee's decisions.

Well as it sits with a four team playoff by definition it's obvious that it doesn't mean anything and you know that so I'm not sure what you expected.

I think we all agree that a four team playoff isn't ideal.

[BigDofBA]

So the two best reasons I've heard for a Conference Championship game are....

1.) Money
2.) Leverages for coaches to get more money


To me this is a problem. I love college football but teams need to be able win their way in.

If it's all about money, why wouldn't you expand the playoff and make the championship games mean something?

I don't "think" Penn State is better than Ohio State either but the best indicator of who is better is the scoreboard after a game is over. It's who wins on the field. That didn't matter with Penn State.

The committee's logic is another issue and it's all over the board.

Washington is in over USC because they won the league but Penn State isn't in.

Michigan is out because they have two losses and record is important but W. Michigan is undefeated.

I wish the committee would have some criteria so teams know what they have to do. I really wish it would just expand to 8 so every team could have a chance to win their way in.

[BigDofBA]

Quote: Originally Posted by kehlis

I'm not sure what you expected.

I expected to get several different opinions.

Obviously I already know what my opinion is. I wanted to see what other people on this forum thought. Isn't that the point of a message board? To discuss topics pertinent to the forum?

You keep saying "I'm not sure what you're loooking for" and "I'm not sure what you're expecting" which isn't really contributing to the discussion so why even bother to post in this thread?

I thought this was a message board that we used to discuss college football. I'm interested in what others think.