Conference championship games: Do they matter, or are they just a dangerous trap for Playoff hopefuls? As the College Football Playoff expands to 12 teams, the debate around these high-stakes showdowns is exploding, and it's a conversation every football fan needs to be a part of.
Think about it: a team grinds its way through a brutal season, earns a spot in their conference championship, and then...loses. Does that single loss negate everything they've accomplished? Does it unfairly penalize them compared to teams that sat at home, resting and strategizing?
This very scenario sparked outrage last season. Alabama, despite suffering a third loss in the SEC Championship Game, still made the Playoff. But here's where it gets controversial... Teams like Notre Dame, Vanderbilt, Texas, and BYU, all sitting on the Playoff bubble, cried foul. They argued that Alabama's three losses should have disqualified them. Had Alabama not participated in the championship game, they would've had a far more appealing two-loss record.
The same argument applies to BYU. They entered the Big 12 Championship against Texas Tech with only one loss – ironically, to Texas Tech earlier in the season. Without that rematch, BYU would have boasted an impressive 11-1 record, making them a shoo-in for an at-large bid. Instead, their 11-2 record relegated them to No. 12, below Notre Dame, who didn't even have to play in a conference title game. And this is the part most people miss... The very act of competing for a championship hurt BYU's chances.
So, where does that leave us?
Kirby Smart, head coach of the Georgia Bulldogs, who just clinched their second consecutive SEC title by defeating Alabama, weighed in on the debate during an appearance on the 'See Ball Get Ball with David Pollack' podcast.
Smart acknowledged the complexity of the issue. "That’s a tough one," he said. "I enjoy them and believe in them, but as the Playoff expands, it’s gonna be hard. I just don’t know how they’re going to continue to do that, and they really need to move the calendar up. That would move the championship games out completely if that happens."
Smart also highlighted the differing priorities of teams who played in championship games versus those who didn't. "You have nine games and that? Because really now, you’re talking about 10 games because you’re gonna play nine and then you’ve got the 10th for the Conference Championship. I think about the teams that didn’t play that week. I talked to a lot of them and they were like ‘we were working on the Portal and re-signing our players. We were getting healthy for the Playoffs.’ And I’m going man, we’re playing for an SEC Championship, which is something nobody will ever be able to take away from us. But, there’s an opportunity lost and cost on that.” In other words, while Georgia was battling for a championship, other teams were gaining an edge in recruiting and preparing for the Playoff.
The core of the matter? Conference championship games, while steeped in tradition and offering bragging rights, might actually be detrimental to a team's Playoff aspirations. With every Playoff spot fiercely contested, the future of these games is undeniably uncertain.
But here's a thought-provoking twist: Should teams that lose their conference championship game be penalized at all? After all, they earned the right to be there. Perhaps the committee should only consider the result of the championship game for the winning team, using it as a tiebreaker or a boost to their resume. This would remove the disincentive for competing and preserve the importance of winning a conference title.
So, what do you think? Are Conference Championship games a vital part of college football, or are they an outdated relic that needs to be re-evaluated in the era of the expanded Playoff? Should a team be punished for trying to win a championship? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
