30Duck Moderator No. 1 Share Posted yesterday at 12:59 AM I could not disagree more. If this was the "Jim Rome Show" Klatt has a "Terrible Take Fox Sports’ Joel Klatt pushed back against the straight seeding model for the College Football Playoff in 2025. He used a reseeded bracket for the first 12-team edition if it used the new model. Previously, the 12-team playoff ensured the top four seeds (and byes) would go to the four highest ranked conference champions. Now, that is no longer the case. “The obvious problem with the graphic that you see right over there is that Penn State and Texas, they wouldn’t have been penalized at all for losing the SEC and Big Ten championship game,” Klatt said on his podcast. “Well, that’s obviously a problem, because they’re the winners of those games. Oregon and Georgia aren’t gaining a real advantage. “Maybe you could say the seed that they’re getting is going to be better, because their potential matchup in that quarterfinal round is better. Okay, you can maybe make that argument, but really, what is the incentive of winning and playing hard in that game?” Klatt’s argument is the devaluing of the conference championship games even further. Some made the argument last season because Oregon went undefeated and won the Big Ten, earning the No. 1 seed. However Ohio State, the eventual national champion, didn’t even play for the conference crown and boat-raced the Ducks in the quarterfinals. “Now, what they have done for this season in 2025 by going to a straight seeding model, is that they have devalued the conference championship games, in particular in the two best conferences in the country where our last two national championships have come from,” Klatt said. “These two conferences, which continue to get better and better and better and house the best teams in the country, now you’ve devalued the conference championship game. “None of us like that. So while the seeding might be better for this season, and moving forward, I certainly don’t like the thought of devaluing a game that I think should be very important and should have some real meaning and consequence for the winner and the loser.” Of the four teams that earned the bye last season, none were able to win their first game. That included ninth-ranked Boise State and 12th-ranked Arizona State. It also included the top-two ranked teams in Oregon and Georgia. This comes at a time when there have been discussions about several changes to the College Football Playoff. That includes potential further expansion to either 14 or 16 teams. Those discussions also include proposals that there would be automatic bids that go along with the CFP. In one, it would include four SEC teams, four Big Ten teams, two Big 12 teams, two ACC teams, one Group of Six team, and three automatic bids. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JabbaNoBargain No. 2 Share Posted yesterday at 02:11 AM One thing he’s right about, the conference championship game is devalued and should just be eliminated. The minute the field expanded from four the conference championship games became as meaningful as bowl games, imo. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Joseph Moderator No. 3 Share Posted yesterday at 03:02 AM On 5/27/2025 at 10:11 PM, JabbaNoBargain said: One thing he’s right about, the conference championship game is devalued and should just be eliminated. The minute the field expanded from four the conference championship games became as meaningful as bowl games, imo. Amen, but broadcast partners, including one that employs Klatt, will not pay the same broadcast dollars without a conference champ game or something that replaces the champ game. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike West No. 4 Share Posted yesterday at 07:23 AM On 5/27/2025 at 5:59 PM, 30Duck said: I could not disagree more. If this was the "Jim Rome Show" Klatt has a "Terrible Take Oh wow! "Have a take, and Don't Suck". I remember when Jim Dome was in Santa Barbara waxing poetic way back in the late 80s. When he came to LA, he had regions battling each other nonstop. Listening to Cleveland and "Bugahaw"(Nebraska) to go off on each other every day was glorious. Jim Rome is a legend, and he was the one that blew up fan engagement on talk radio. That is is a beautiful take 30. And I totally agree. Expanding to 16 is ok. They just need to start the season early, and no byes. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
30Duck Author Moderator No. 5 Share Posted yesterday at 02:02 PM On 5/27/2025 at 8:02 PM, Jon Joseph said: Amen, but broadcast partners, including one that employs Klatt, will not pay the same broadcast dollars without a conference champ game or something that replaces the champ game. A shill is right, as he's completely wrong. A CCG completely devalues the regular season. At the end, one team has won the most games, last season Oregon won them all. But to "win" the championship they have to beat a team, that didn't do as well. Years ago, former Arizona basketball coach, Lute Olsen, was an outspoken critic of the Pac-12 Tournament. At the time I dismissed his objection, now, obviously I see he was right. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drake Moderator No. 6 Share Posted yesterday at 02:29 PM Conference Championship games become like the last game of the season in the NFL. Teams that clinched a spot in the playoffs may rest players, while others may still need the win. I agree a conference championship game is devalued in the BIG, or SEC. In most years, a third seeded Big, or SEC team, will be better than the ACC, or BIG 12 champion. Tough to create a perfect playoff system. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Joseph Moderator No. 7 Share Posted yesterday at 04:35 PM On 5/28/2025 at 10:29 AM, Drake said: Conference Championship games become like the last game of the season in the NFL. Teams that clinched a spot in the playoffs may rest players, while others may still need the win. I agree a conference championship game is devalued in the BIG, or SEC. In most years, a third seeded Big, or SEC team, will be better than the ACC, or BIG 12 champion. Tough to create a perfect playoff system. So many great comments, including the above comment. I don't disagree with the idea of eliminating post-season in-conference tournaments, but I believe a conference champ game in football, or a playoff play-in between team No. 3 vs. No. 6, and No. 4 vs. No. 5,, with a game played between the top two teams for playoff seeding only, is more logical today than when Bama defeated Florida in the first SEC champ game in 1992. Divisions in all of the Power 4 football conferences are gone. In the Power4, with close to half the conference teams not playing each other in a given season, the strength of schedule teams play within a conference will vary every season. Compare OBD's 2025 schedule with Wisconsin's. The Badgers have a much more difficult slate to play. It's the same for Florida compared to Missouri. Compare Stanford to Wake Forest, and CU to Houston. These are not "fair" SOS fights. This season, OBD plays two preseason ranked B1G opponents, Penn State and Indiana. Wisconsin plays five, OBD, Ohio State, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, plus a game at Alabama. If the Badgers go 7-2 in conference and OBD finishes 8-1, is Oregon ipso facto the better team? In 2027, OBD plays Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, and UW. Will a B1G team that plays two ranked teams in 2027 and finishes 8-1 be better than OBD at 7-2? With multi-millions in playoff dollars at stake, the B1G must send its best teams to the playoffs with the proper seeding. Again, in a play-in situation, the top two teams at the conclusion of the regular season are in the playoff field. Two of the teams that finished third through sixth are out unless otherwise within the top 16 ranked teams. With the House settlement on the horizon, Oklahoma has announced cuts to its athletic department. Many other schools are worse off financially than the Sooners, and there will be cuts across the board. I know Rob Mullens has said there will not be cuts to non-revenue sports, but I don't see how, with a cap on direct payment to athletes, this is possible. For non-revenue sports, play it like it lies. The schedule strength will not be equal, but networks are not paying, with the possible exception of women's basketball, for postseason non-revenue in conference tournaments. Broadcasters open their wallets for a championship football game and a men's basketball conference tournament. Money that cannot be refused without Ivy League-like reforms. It was annoying last season to listen to SEC folks and ESecPN honks talking about valuing wins more than counting losses. But the more I ponder the point, I find myself more in agreement. Many two-loss teams in college football are not as good as a number of three-loss teams. 1-loss Boise State was ranked No. 9 by the PO committee in 2024. The Broncos would have been underdogs in the majority of games played against No. 10 through No. 16 Clemson. Again, I more than understand the desire to let the regular season count in all sports, but conference schedules are not created equally. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
30Duck Author Moderator No. 8 Share Posted yesterday at 04:40 PM On 5/28/2025 at 9:35 AM, Jon Joseph said: It was annoying last season to listen to SEC folks and ESecPN honks talking about valuing wins more than counting losses. But the more I ponder the point, I find myself more in agreement. Many two-loss teams in college football are not as good as a number of three-loss teams. That is very true. Alabama lost credibility by losing to Okie and Vandy, but let's look at my favorite team, Indiana, and examine if the Tuna was right, were they good as their record said they were? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
30Duck Author Moderator No. 9 Share Posted yesterday at 05:53 PM On 5/28/2025 at 9:35 AM, Jon Joseph said: Again, I more than understand the desire to let the regular season count in all sports, but conference schedules are not created equally. They don't. But in my mind, 1 game won't clarify it. Say Team A is 8-1, Team 2 is 7-2. Team B wins, they'd both be 8-2. But Team B is the Champ because they won THAT game? No. In a playoff game, it's win or go home, that's fine. But a Conference Championship is simply a money grab that doesn't decide anything and does devalue the season. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Joseph Moderator No. 10 Share Posted yesterday at 06:14 PM On 5/28/2025 at 1:53 PM, 30Duck said: They don't. But in my mind, 1 game won't clarify it. Say Team A is 8-1, Team 2 is 7-2. Team B wins, they'd both be 8-2. But Team B is the Champ because they won THAT game? No. In a playoff game, it's win or go home, that's fine. But a Conference Championship is simply a money grab that doesn't decide anything and does devalue the season. The rub is not that these games devalue the season; they do, but not playing the games devalues the media money that will be paid out. I find it interesting that the Ivy League does not play a football conference championship but does play an 'Ivy Madness' post-season basketball tournament. Why when Ivy League schools play all other Ivy League basketball teams home and away in the regular season? I don't know whether the Ivies get additional broadcast money for the postseason CBB title. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
30Duck Author Moderator No. 11 Share Posted yesterday at 08:05 PM On 5/28/2025 at 11:14 AM, Jon Joseph said: The rub is not that these games devalue the season; they do, but not playing the games devalues the media money that will be paid out. "By Jove, I think he's got it!" Back in the day, when AP & UPI decided the winner, that was fine, sometimes controversy, finer still! Washington split a championship in '91, that was a great team. But then BCS came along, and telling, Oregon was involved in the first mess. Now, we have this. ESPN has made it clear that it's all about the money. When the format was agreed to, ACC & Big12 weren't pushing for their teams to be represented, they wanted the money being a Top seed brought. Yes, not playing the CCG's would put more value on the season, but that is not the value that matters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Joseph Moderator No. 12 Share Posted 20 hours ago On 5/28/2025 at 4:05 PM, 30Duck said: "By Jove, I think he's got it!" Back in the day, when AP & UPI decided the winner, that was fine, sometimes controversy, finer still! Washington split a championship in '91, that was a great team. But then BCS came along, and telling, Oregon was involved in the first mess. Now, we have this. ESPN has made it clear that it's all about the money. When the format was agreed to, ACC & Big12 weren't pushing for their teams to be represented, they wanted the money being a Top seed brought. Yes, not playing the CCG's would put more value on the season, but that is not the value that matters. AMEN! No one died as a result of CFB bifurcated championships. I'd love to go back to the days when it meant everything for the Pac-8 champ and the Big Ten champ to match up in the Rose Bowl. Back to when games were played in the daylight and a handful of quality teams played in the postseason. To the day when you knew who the new frosh were at the beginning of spring ball, and no recruit came in with a constellation of stars above his head. But that was yesterday, and yesterday's gone. The folks whining over assured PO bids for the Power 2 did not go Ivy League, did they? They grabbed all the money they could get and now find the Power 2 doing the same, as being against 'the good of the game.' The Pac 7 + Gonzo and the Mountain West are litigating because it's Good for the Game? Or because $$$ is involved? The above is a rhetorical question. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
